Full text of "Debates of the Senate. Débats du Sénat"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at http : //books . google . com/|

Digitized by

Google

Sarbartj College Ltftrarg.

JOHN GEORGE BOURINOT, LL.D.,

Clerk of House of Commons,

OTTAWA, CANADA.

Received /6 jd^ . / ^fl^ ^

Dijitizi

yu Digitized by CjOOQIC

Digitized by

Google I

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

DEBATES (cXTjIli^

The Senate

OF THE

DOMINION OF CANADA
1893

REPOBTED AHD EDITED BT

HOLLAND BROS.,

Officitil Re])orters of the Senate of Catwria.

THIRD SESSION— SEVENTH PARLIAMENT.

OTTAWA

PRINTED BY S. E. DAWSON, PRINTER TO. THE QUEEN'S MOST

EXCELLENT MAJESTY

1898

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

THE DEBATES

SENATE OF CANADA

THIRD SESSION OF THE SEVENTH PARLIAMENT OF CANADA, APPOINTED TO
MEET FOR DESPATCH OF BUSINESS ON THURSDAY, THE TWENTY-
SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY, IN THE FIFTY-SIXTH YEAR OF
THE REIGN OF

HER MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA

THE SENATE.

Ottawa^ Thursday, January 26th, 189S.

The speaker took the Chair at 2.30
o'clock.
Prayers.

NEW SENATORS.

The following newly appointed senators
were introduced, and having taken the oath
prescribed by law, and signed the roll, took
their seats : —

Hon. Mackenzie Bowell.
Hon. Auguste R^al Angers.
Hon. John Ferguson.
Hon. Alphonse Desjardins.
Hon. Thomas A. Bernier.
Hon. John Nesbitt Kirchhoflfer.
Hon. Clarence Primrose.

The House was adjourned during pleasure.

After some time the House was resumed.

THE SPEECH FROM THE THRONE.

His Excellency the Right Honourable Sir
Frederick Arthur Stanley, Baron Stanley of
Preston, in the County of Lancaster, in the
Peerage of the United Kingdom, Knight
Grand Cross of the Most Honourable Order
of the Bath, Governor-General of Canada,
being seated in the Chair on the Throne.

The Honourable the Speaker commanded
the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod to
proceed to the House of Commons and
acquaint that House, — " It is His Excellen-
cy's pleasure they attend him immediately
in this House."

Who being come with their Speaker,

His Excellency the Governor-General was
then pleased to open the Session by a gra-
cious Speech to both Houses.

Hotiowable Gentlemen of the Senate :

Gentlemen of the Houne of Common^i :

In meeting you at the commencement of another
session of Parliament, it affords me pleasure to con-
eratulate you on the continued progress which the
history of the past year unfolds with regard to
Canada.

The increase in trade, as illustrated by the ex-
ports and imports during the period for which the
official returns have been prepared, has been most
gratifying, and that increase has continued down to
the present time, with promise that the volume of
trade during the current year will exceed that of
any yeaV in the history of the Dominion.

The revenues of tfte country have like^dse pro-
vided for all the services for which Parliament has
made appropriation, and the operation of the
Government railways has been less burdensome, as
regards the difference between income and expen-
diture, than has been the case for a long term of
years previously.

In Manitoba and the North-west Territories the
increase in immigration has been decidedly encour-
aging, both as regards the number of persons who
have come from other countries and as regards the
number of homestead entries made by settlers of
all nationalities.

Measures have been taken to carry into effect
the agreements arrived at with the United States
on the subjects of the boundary of Alaska, the boun-
dary line in Passamaquoddy Bay, and the preven-
tion of destructive methods of fishing, and the pre-
servation and increase of fish life. With regard to
reciprocity in wrecking and towing, a correspond-
ence has taken place which indicates that privileges
are demanded tor United States vessels in Canadian
canals, which were not anticipated, but it is not
impossible that a satisfactory conclusion of the
discussion may yet be reached.

During the recess a friendly conference took place
between delegates from my Government and irom
the Government of Newfoundland on the questions
which were pending l>etween the two countries.
It is hoped and expected that the interchange of
views which then took place will be productive of
beneficial results and lead to an amicable adjust-
ment of those questioup.

Digitized by

Google

The Speech [SENATE] from the Throne,

The Statutes of 1887 relative to a Department of
Trade and Commerce and to the office of Solicitor-
General having been brought into force, the
appointments were made which were contemplated
by these Acts.

It is to be regretted that the Government of the
United States were unable to accept the suggestions
made by my Government on the subject of canal
tolls, and that the President should have thought
it necessary to impose exceptional tolls on Cana-
dians using the Sault Sainte- Marie Canal, which
has so long been free to the people of both countries.
My Government, while reatiy to consider in a
friendly spirit any proposals which may be made
by the Government of the United States, have
caused efforts to be made to hasten the completion
of the Canadian canal works, which will soon
afford to the counnerce of the Dominion a highway
within our own country.

Measures will be laid before you for the improve-
ment of the Franchise Act, for the amendment
of the laws relating to the Civil Service, and the
superannuation of civil servants, for regulating the
admission of evidence in causes and matters under
the control of the Parliament of Canada, for ex-
tending the system of voting by ballot to the North-
west Territories, and for simplifying the laws rela-
ting to lands and land transfers in the Territories.

OenHemen of the Howit of Commons :

The Public Accounts of the pcwt year and the
Estimates for the ensuing year will pe laid before
you without delay, and I trust it will be seen that
ample provision may be made for the public service
without increasing taxation.

HonouraMe Gentlemen of the Senate:

Gentlemen of the Houne of Commomi :

I have every confidence that all these matters
will receive your best attention and that your
deliberations will keep in view, above all other
considerations, the welfare and stability of the
country.

His Excellency the Govemor-Greneral was
pleased to retire, and the House of Commons
withdrew.

BILL INTRODUCED.

Bill (A) "An Act relating to Railways."
(Mr. Bowell.)

THE ADDRESS.

The SPEAKER reported His Excellency's
Speech from the Throne, and the same was
read by the Clerk.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved that the
Speech be taken into consideration on Mon-
day next.

THE COMMITTEE ON PRIVILEGES.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved—

That all the members present during this session
be appointed a committee to consider the Orders
and Customs of this House and Privileges of Parlia-
ment, and that the said committee have leave to
meet in this House, when and as often as they
please. /

The motion Was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 4 p.m.

THE SENATE.

The motion was agreed to.

Ottawa, Monday, January 30th ^ 189 S.

The speaker took the Chair at three
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

THE LATE SENATORS GIRARD,
GRANT AND STEVENS.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Before the Ordera
of the Day are called, it has been suggested,
and I think very properly, that reference
should be made to those members of the
Senate who have passed away since last ses-
sion. I can only express my very deep
regret that the first duty I have to perform
in this House should be to give expression
not only lo my own feelings but what I be-
lieve to be the feelings of every member of
the Senate who has had the pleasure of ac*
quaintance with the late hon. gentlemen,
Messrs. Girard, Stevens and Grant. Per-
sonally, I have had more intimate acquain-
tance with the fii-st-named gentleman. Ever
since he was appointed to the Senate, I have
had constant intercourse with him and I al-
ways found that the representative from
Manitoba had but one object in view, and
that was the lending and exercising of his
ability and talent, whatever they may have
been, in the interests of his country and
more particulary in those of Manitoba,
where he had lived for years. The other hon.
gentlemen are better known to you, with
whom they were associated for many years,
than to me, but knowing them casually, and
from the position that they held in the
country and in the particular localities in
which they lived, I am justified, I am sure,
in saying that all regret their death and that

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1892] Address,

the Senate has lost in them, as well as in , business relations and I knew him in social
the person of Mr. Girard, not only amiable | relations, and, as I said to his widow, on
companions but men whose great desire was . paying my farewell visit to her, when leaving
to see this Dominion prosperous. I shall not ! my native town, I wish here publicly, on the
enlarge upon this painful question, and I can ' floor of the Senate Chamber of the Dom-
only repeat that it is with very great sorrow i inion, to state that if, when my own record
and regret 1 feel that it has devolved upon * is done, if when to me the supreme hour
nie, on my tirst appearance in this House, to comes, 1 shall have retained in the same
give expression to my own feelings, and as 1 1 measure as my late hon. friend and prede-
believe, the feelings of all who" had the , cessor did,\the confidence, respect and esteem
honour and pleasure of knowing these gen- 1 of all who knew him and the love of those

who knew him best, I shall rest perfectly
satisfied. This much I deenj it my simple
duty to say in regard to my late friend.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER (in French)— As

tlemen.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — I coixlially unite in
the expression of deep regret to which we
have listened, and appreciation of the char-

actei-s of the gentlemen who are no longer | the successor of the late Mr. Girard in this
members of this Chamber, who were with us ! House, I feel it my duty, as it is my privilege,
last year and are now removed to another to say a few words on this subject. I am
sphere. Senator Girai-d, as the hon. leader j pleased to hear of the esteem in which he
of this House very properly observed, was was held in this House. Our late friend
intimately connected with all matters apper- 1 took a deep interest in everything that was
taining to the North-west. He had been calculated to benefit the Dominion and espe-
a resident of that country from an early I cially Manitoba and the North-west Territo-
period, since Confederation, and he invari- j ries. I thank the hon. leader of the Senate

ably took a deep interest in all that con-
cerned Manitoba and the North-west. The
other two gentlemen, Mr. Stevens and Mr.
Grant, were men of sterling chars^cter, men i
who were not obtrusive, who did not often '
obtrude their opinions before this House, but i
whose judgment was always regarded as
sound and useful on the committees on which -

they served. Mr. Stevens had a long and Excellency the (Jovernor-iieneral, to offer the
practical knowledge of banking, having been i respectful thanks of this House to His Excellency

intimately connected with banking institu- /^^ ^^^ CkT ^^P^^J*!,*^^- *»*" *^«" pleased to

TT c .-11 11 i make to both Houses of Parliament, namely : —

tions. He was a man of particularly well ,

balanced and intelligent mind, especially in ! T(> His Ex<Eij.KNrY the Right Honourable Sir
matters connected with finance. Mr. (^rant,

for hLs kind references to my honoured prede-
cessor in this House.

THE ADDRESS.

MOTION.

Hoii. Mr. FERGUSON moved :
That the following Address l>e presentetl to His

Frederick Arthtr Stanley, Baron Stanley of
Preston, in the County of Lancaster, in the
Peerage of the United Kingdom, Knight (irand
Cross of the Most Honourable Order of the J^th,
(fOvenior-(»eneral of Canada.

May it Ple-\se Your Excellency :
\^'e, Her Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects,

unfortunately, for many years suffered from

deafness and was not able, therefore, to join,

as he otherwise might have done, in the ,

deliberations of this Chamber, being unable

to hear at times what was going on. He

was a man always respected, however, and the Senate of Canada in Parliament assembled,

who earned the esteem of members of the | h"inhly thank Your Excellency for your gracious

Senate with whom he came in contact. I , '^P^^'^ ^} the opening of this session.

,, . . . , . . \\ e rejoice that lour hxcellency, m meetmg us

am sure we aU jom sincerely in expressing at the commencement of another session of Parlia-
deep regret at the deaths of these gentle- i ment, has the pleasure of congratulating us on the
men. I continued progress which the history of the past

year unfolds with regard to Canada.
J , ,. , I We ai^ glad to learn from Your Excellency that

1 snail aiik you i ^jjg increase in traile, as illustrated by the exports

Hon. Mr. PRIMROSE

to bear with me for just one moment while
I attempt to pay my humble tribute to my
late friend and predecessor, the Hon. Robert
Patterson Grant, of Pictou. I knew him long,
J knew him intimately, I knew him in

and imports during the period for which the official
returns have been prepared, has been most grati-
fying, artd has continued down to the present time,
with promise that the volume of tnule during the
current year will exceed that of any year in the
history of the Dominion.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

It affords us much pleasure to hear that the reve-
nues of the country have like wiseprovided for all the
services for which Parliament has made appropria-
tion, and that the operation of the (Government
railways has been less burdensome, as re((ards the
difference between income and expenditure, than
has been the case for a long term of years pre-
viously.

We are also gratified to hear that in Manitolm
and the North-west Territories the increase in
immigration has been decidedly encouraging, both
as regards the number of persons who have come from
other countries and as regards the number of
homestead entries nia<le by settlers of all nation-
alities.

We thank Your Excellency for informing us that
measures have been taken to carry into effect the
agreements arrived at with the United States on
the subjects of the boundary of Alaska, the boun-
dary line in Passamaquoddy Bay, and the preven-
tion of destructive metho<is of Hshin^ and ttic pre-
servation and increase of fish life. VVe are glad to
be informed further, with regard to reciprocity in
wrecking and towing, that though a correspondence
has taken place which indicates that privileges
are demanded for United States vessels in Cana<Uan
Canals, which were not anticipated, it is not impos-
sible that a satisfactory conclusion of the discussion
may yet be reached.

We hear with great interest the announcement
that during the recess a friendly conference took
place between delegates from Your Excellency's
(iovemment and from the (jovernment of New-
foundland, on the questions which were pending
between the two countries, and that it is hoped
and expected that the interchange of views which
then took place will \\e pnxluctive of l)eneficial
results an 1 lead to an amicable adjustment of those
questions.

We thank Your Excellency for the information
that the Statutes of 1887 relative fo a Department
of Trade and Commerce and to the office of Soli
citor General having been brought into force, the
appointments were made which were contemplated
by these Acts.

We respectfully concur in Your Excellency's
regret that the (Government of the United States
were unable to accept the suggestions made by
your Government on the subject of canal tolls, and
that the President should have thought it neces-
sary to impose exceptional tolls on Canadians using
the Sault Sainte Marie Canal, which has so long
been free to the people of both countries VVe hear
with satisfaction that Your Excellency's (Govern-
ment, while ready to couFider in a friendly spirit
any proposals which may be made by the (iovem-
ment of the United States, have caused efforts to
be ma<le to hasten the completion of the ("anadian
canal works, which will soon afford to the commerce
of the Dominion a highway within our own country.

We respectfully thank Your Excellency for
informing us that measures will be lai«l lief ore us
for the improvement of the Franchise Act, for the
amendment of the laws relating to the ('i\ 11 Service
and the superannuation of civil servants, for regu-
lating the admission of evidence in causes and
mattera under the control of the Parliament of
Canada, for extending the system of voting by
ballot to the North-west Territories, and" for
simplifying the laws reUting to lands and land
transfers in the Territories.

Your Excellency may have every confidence that

I all these matters will receive our l>est attention

' and that our deliberations will keep in view, above

I all other considerations, the welfare and stability

of the country.

I He said : In rising to move the Address
' in reply to the gracious speech of His Ex-
I cellency to both Houses of Parliament, I am
sensible ni and profoundly grateful for the
high compliment that has been paid me. I
do not, however, suppose that I have been
chosen for this honourable duty, because of
any special fitness that I possess, but because
it is the time-honoured and courteous custom
of this honourable House to grant the
favour to one of its new members, and
while I am not altogether inexperienced in
parliamentary life, I could have heartily
wished that thi«« mantle had fallen upon other
shoulders. I assure hon. gentlemen that I
approach this task with a great deal of hesi-
tancy, diflSdence and trepidation, knowing
that I am addressing hon. gentlemen here
>yho have a wide range of knowledge and ex-
I perience in all the avenues, not only of politi-
I cal but of agricultural, professional and com-
j mercial life, T therefore crave at your hands
that kind indulgence, that generous consider-
I ation which it is your custom to grant to
1 beginners. I may be permitted to say here,
that I thoroughly appreciate and very highly
I prize the great honour that has been con-
i ferred upon me by His Excellency in Coun-
' cil in granting me a seat in this honourable
House, and I hope that the appointment will
^ be as satisfactory to the country as it is
pleasant and grateful to me. I can
; assure you that the highest ambition
of my life in this new sphere will be to con-
I duct myself in such a way as not only to
give satisfaction to the country, but to merit
I the respect, good- will and personal friend-
, ship of every member of this honourable
I House. Therefore, I repeat, I highly honour,
I prize and appreciate the privilege of sitting
amongst hon. gentlemen of distinction such
I as this House holds. Before I proceed to
( the Address proper, may I be permitted to
say to you that if report be true, and we
hope that it is not true, we shall lose fi-om'
amongst us in the near future that distin-
guished nobleman who has so wisely, pru-
\ dently and acceptably presided over us for
the last five years as the representative of
Her Majesty the Queen. I think I am
voicing not only the feelings and sentiments
I of this House but the feelings and sentiments

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address.

of this country, when I say that he will
carry with him the high esteem and affec-
tionate regard and best wishes of the people
of this whole country. We would ask His
Excellency, on his return home, to convey
to Her Majesty the Queen this message :
That the people of Canada to-day are her
dutiful and loyal subjects, notwithstanding
the groaningfl and croakings of pessimists
who are among" us. They are few in number
it is true, but few in number often, like the
crickets under the fern, make a bigger noise
than the thousands of cattle that roam
its field in pe^ce and quietness. Notwith-
standing the remarks of a few pessimists
we are, to-day, her dutiful and loyal
subjects, and we have reason to suspect,
and many do suspect, that these croakers
are under the baneful influence of designing
persons having their abode in a foreign
country.

Now, the principal feature of the Address
which I have to move to-day is that para-
graph which deals with the prosperity of
this country. T am glad to say that we, with
all earnestness, not only agree with, but
thoroughly endorse the statement that the
country is prosperous. I grant you there
are isolated cases, in localities, amongst
individuals, who are not exactly prosperous,
but as a whole this country is prosperous,
and if you will permit me for a few moments,
I will adduce the evidence in order to
establish the position that His Excellency
has taken in the speech that he has
made. You know that prosperity is a
comparajbive word after all; if we are
as well-to-do as our neighbours, or
perhaps a little better ofl^, we are consi-
dered prosperous. It is not necessary to
have absolute wealth, absolute comfort,
absolute everything in order to be prosperous.
We must use the word in a comparative
sense, and in this sense I propose to use it
to-day. Why, hon. gentlemen, if we are to
be judged from the stand-point of the credit
of this country every doubt that may rest in
the minds of hon. gentlemen present is dis-
persed. The most sensitive test that can
be applied to the prosperity of any country
or to any individual, is that of credit.
Now, hon. gentlemen take our credit in
the money markets of the world to-day
and where does it stand ? As high as
that of any nation under the sun of a
thousand years of age, or perhaps older I
Why, hon. gentlemen, not only is our

credit high, not only is the interest we have
to pay low, but our securities are largely
sought after by the investors of the world.
This, I sa^, is the most sensitive test that can
be applied, and by this alone we are assured
that the progressive wealth and prosperity
of this country is beyond all disputation and
cavil. I will grant you that we are not to-
day individually piling up the large fortunes
that are being amassed by the people to the
, south of us. The wealth of this count ly
is equally distributed. The great differ-
ences between extremes of wealth and
poverty are not to be found in this country.
In this, the greatest proof of our prosperity
exists. In order to establish the position
that His Excellency has taken, if you
will bear with me for a little while, I will
give you a few percentages. I am
quoting now from the records of the
country, and those records are open to the
public. We find the aggregate trade of this
country from 1869 to 1873 increased 66 per
cent. We find, and I point this out not for
a political purpose, but for the purpose of
showing you the sensitiveness of the test —
it is as sensitive as a barometer or a ther-
mometer that hangs on the wall — that from
1873 to 1879 the aggregate trade of this
country dropped off 41 per cent. From 1879
to 1882 that trade again revived and
increased 32 per cent. The increase of the
total trade of this country from 1869 to
1892 is 70 per cent. Now, everybody will
acknowledge that we had a great depression
in this country from 1873 to 1879. I do not
say that it was because any political party was
in power. But so sensitive is commerce
that during that depression the aggre-
gate trade of this country dropped of 41 per
cent. As soon as trade revived, it again
increased in 13 years 52 per cent. Now
let me take another test : it is stated by
Edward Atkins, the gi'eatest living American
statistician, and perhaps the best authority
we have on this continent, that the
progressive wealth of a country can be bet-
ter measured by the volume of fire insurance
than any other method. What amount do
we find at risk at different periods ? In 1869
it was $180,359,809. We find that it in-
creased up to 1876, when it reached $454, 608,-
I 000. Now, the sensitiveness of this test is again
I illustrated. During the period of adversity
I in this country it fell off to $407,000,000—
I a loss of 47 millions. We find that in 1891
I it rose by leaps and bounds until the amount

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

of insurance had reached the enormous sum
of 760 millions of dollars. The increase of
the amount as risk of fire insurance from
1869 to the present day is 300 # per cent.
Measured by this acknowledged sensitive
test- - the most sensitive that can be found of
the condition of a country the prosperity of
Canada is marked. From 1881 to 189 2, in ten
years, this testapplied to the progressive wealth
of this country showed an increase of 64 per
cent, while the population only increased 12 per
cent. Now let me apply another test : that
of life insurance. The great Mulhall,
who is perhaps the greatest statistician that
the world knows and one of the greatest
financiei*s, states that no better test of the
prosperity of a country can be found than
the volume of life insurance. In 1869 we
had only 835,680,000 in life insurance in
this country. In 1874 it had increased to
$85,716,325. Now, the sensitiveness of this
test is again apparent ; and I ask you to
observe it. In 1878 the life insurance of
this country dropped off to §84,751,937. In

1890 it rose up to $248,424,576 ; and in

1891 to the enormous amount of $261,500,-
000. According to this the onward pro-
gress of tms country showed no less than
630 per cent of an increase. The increase
from 1879 was no less than 190 per cent,
and from 1881 to 1891 noless than 182 per cent.
The late Lord Derby, one of the greatest finan-
ciers England has ever seen, stated that na-
tional prosperity and progressive wealth is
shown by the consumption of tea, coflfee and
sugar, perhaps better than by any other
standards.

Now, let us apply this test of national pros-
perity, taking periods of two and three years.
From 1871 to 1873 the average consumption
of coffee in this country was 1,970,000 lbs.
From 1874 to 1879 the sensitiveness of this
test was again displayed. The average con-
sumption dropped to 1,734,000 lbs. From
1890 to 1892 it rose to 3,298,000 lbs., an in-
crease of 91 per cent. The consumption of
tea increased 22 per cent from 1879. The
combined consumption of tea, coffee and
sugar in 1879 was 15,360,320 lbs. In 1892
it had risen to 25,541,000 lbs., an increase
of 70 per cent. Now, I am satisfied that
applying these tests of national prosperity,
which are acknowledged to be the most sensi-
tive and accurate that can be found to ascer-
tain the progressive wealth of the country,
they will confirm the truthfulness of the sta-
tement made by His Excellency to this honour-

j able body and to the Lower House ; and for
this reason I use it, I have not done it for the
purpose of political effect, but when His
I Excellency, the representative of the Queen,
j makes a statement to Parliament I con-
' ceive it to be my duty to confirm that
I statement so far as it can be legitimately
j and properly done by the records before us.
I We have this prosperity in ' Canada with-
I out the appalling, hopeless and degrading
1 poverty so prevalent in the country south of
I us. This appears to Jbe a startling state-
] ment, but it is nevertheless true. I point
you to the Arena of December, pages
j 49 to 55, on the authority of Mr. McCul-
lough, one of the best authorities in the
I United States on such subjects, to show that
I the neighbouring country is not the El-
j doiado that it has been painted by some
I of our people. In the city of New York
I alone, there were no less than 29,720 evic-
tions last year, and 148,000 people homeless,
I naked and starving on the streets of New
York, while within a few blocks lived twelve
individuals whose aggregate wealth amount-
ed to no less than 800 millions of dollars. He
states that 200 wealthy people in the same
locality control the vast sum of 3,000 mU-
lions of dollars, while under their eyes starv-
ing thousands are to be found. I point this
out to show that after all the Ignited States
is not the country that many conceive it to
l>e. We find that the arrests in the city of
New York in one year ending September
last, amounted to no less than 88,152, of
I which number 24,350 were females. No such
i degrading poverty is to be found in any
other civilized country in Jhe world as is
' found in the city of New York. I state this
I on the authority of Mr. McCu Hough, who
lives there and is a close observer. What is
' true of New York is true of other cities in
I the United States. I know that it is so of
Buffalo and Chicago and oth^r centres of
I population. These vast fortunes in the
I United States to which I have referred, have
been abstracted from the pockets of farmers
I in the Western States by bulling and bearing
I agricultural products on the Chicago market.
I Will you believe me, when I tell you that
the 1 2 million families of the United States
I have nine millions of mortgages upon their
I properties and almost six millicms of chattel
mortgages on their household furniture. Fif-
' teen millions of mortgages — not money, but
I mortgages — on the twelve million families
1 in the United States. I state this on the

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address.

authority of the Arena for January. In five
states, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas and
Nebraska, we find $1,174,732,741 mortgages
due upon the lands of these states and 783
millions in chattel mortgages, making a bur-
den upon the people in these five states of no
less than almost two thousand millions of dol-
lai-s. They are mortgaged beyond all hope of
redemption ; and in support of. this state-
ment, I point you to the A re mi of Janu-
ary, pages 204 and 205. I do not mention
those things exultantly. On the contrary,
I deplore them. But as there are indivi-
duals who are trying to turn the people of this
country from their true allegiance, by point-
ing to the United States as a land flowing
with milk and honey, a veritable Eldorado,
where everybody is fed with a silver spoon
and sups from a golden goblet, I feel it my
duty, on the floor of this Chamber, to call
the attention of the people of Canada to
the fact that such is not the case, and
in support of my statement, I call to wit-
ness those great authorities from whom I
have quoted, to show that pauperism,
degraded poverty and crime are rampant in
that country and are to be found on every
hand. I call them to witness to prove that
our pessimistic teachers are false teachers
and are not conveying the true message of
hope to the people of Canada. These pes-
simistic teachers, I fear, are under the in-
fluence of designing individuals living
in a foreign country, and if such is the
case the people of this countrj*^ ought to
know it. I will now turn my attention
to another clause of the Address — that
is, the 8ault Sainte Marie canal. I con-
gratulate the Government of this country on
their foresight. They fore.saw the difficulty
that must inevitably arise in the navigation
of the lakes, and commenced the construc-
tion of a lock and canal of our own
at Sault Sainte Marie which they are
rapidly pushing to completion. ITn-
fortunately for us and for the world, to grow
great and not play the despot is a sublime
virtue not known to the people tothesouth of
us, and the only way to have enduring peace
and good-will between the two countries is
to be, so far as these matter are concerned,
independent of them ; and such was the view
of our Government. If we were not inde-
pendent, perhaps when the necessity arose
to use the Soo canal, our neigbours could at
any time cut us off, and extort double or
treble the value of the right to use the canal

in exchange for something else. Therefore,
I say it was wise and prudent on the part of
the Government of this country to com-
mence the construction of a canal of our own.
We all know that they are too liable in the
United States to allow their party politics to
enter into the consideration of international
relations ; and as they have politics on tap
there all the time, we do not know the
moment the lion's tail might be twisted and
this country deprived of the privilege of
using the Soo canal. I think, therefore, our
Government have done well to build a canal
on our own side so that we may utilize ' to
the fuUest advantage the great water route
from the Atlantic to the head of Lake Supe-
rior. I visited the Soo last summer and in
my humble judgment, and not only in my
judgment but in that of engineers and navi-
gators whom I consulted, we will have a lock
there as subs^ntial and as good, and owing to
the peculiar plan of its construction and mode
of operating, as great in capacity as that of
our neighbours — though not so large, and is
being constructed at much less expense than
theirs is. If I ma^ judge by the enormous
amount of plant that the contractors have put
on that work, and the vigour and energy with
which they are pushing it, we will have that
lock completed in a little over half the time it
took our neighbours to build theirs. It
is a matter of sincere rejoicing on our part
that the trade negotiations going on between
the Government of this country and the Gov-
ernmentof Newfoundland are likely to reach a
fair and just settlement. It is to be hoped that
the settlement of these questions will lead to
negotiations for the admission of Newfound-
land into the Confederation of Canada. We
would gladly welcome those people, who are
true and loyal British subjects into our union
in order to complete the confederation of
the British provinces of North America.
Our future is assured if we are only true to
ourselves. The gospel of hope and not the
gospel of despair is the true message to \ye
delivered to the people of Canada to-day.
Now that* we have passed the infantile stage
of national existence ; now that we have got
past the diseases to which childhood is sub-
ject, are we to falter and stated still ? I think
not. Politicians may talk, and pessimists
may ci*oak and growl, but above them all is
heard the voice of enterprise a^d progress.
I have faith and confidence in the children of
those brave, noble-hearted men who laid the
foundations of this great country broad and

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

deep, they laid them in privation and toil and
difficulties. Why cannot their children, sur-
rounded by plenty and in the midst of peace,
carry on this good work 1 They will do it. They
are prepared to do it. They have the courage
of all people who are bom in such a climate
as ours, a climate that has produced the men
who for ages and centuries have controlled
the destinies of the world. I say these men
have the pluck, the energy and the determi-
nation to carry on this great work so as to
make this country the pride and glory of the
Empire of which we are now an honoured part.
Now, hon. gentlemen, I will not detain you
longer, I apologize to you for having pro-
ceeded at such length. I have hastened
through because my hon. friend who is to
second this motion has engagements else-
where and wants to go away, and I always
endeavour to accommodate my personal
friends as far as I can. I apo\ogize to you,
as I have ^id before, for having detained
you. I thank you most sincerely for having
listened to me so long and patiently. If I
have said anything that is out of the true
lines of speech-making ii) this House, I beg
to apologize.

Hon. Mr. DESJARDINS (In French)—
I wish, in addressing this honourable House
for the first time, to expre^ss to you my ap-
preciation of the honour which has been
accorded me, not only in appointing me a
member of the first legislative body in the
Dominion, but in having for associates men
who occupy such prominent positions in the
public life of this country. I regret the absence
of our late Premier, who displayed such tact
and ability at all times, and trust that he
may soon be restored to health and resume
his place amongst us. I feel it a privilege
to follow in this honourable House a leader
with whom I was associated so many years in i
another place. He brings to this House a i
mine of information and the ready eloquence
which distinguished him in the other chamber. |
I am sure he will not lose in the Senate any .
of the popularity, the vigour and <the energy j
which he displayed as a leader elsewhere. I
Beside the hon. leader we have in this '
Chamber, I a^n happy to say, a Minister |
who speaks our language. Since Confeder- \
ation it was the good fortune of the prov- 1
ince of Quebec to have in the Senate at all
times until 1878 on the Treasury benches a !
representative of their race and language.
In the Minister of Agriculture we have a

gentleman who represents perfectly the aspi-
rations of the majority in the province of
Quebec, and one who will give expression to
our desire that justice shall be done to the
inhabitants of the Dominion, irrespective of
creed or origin. The House may feel assured
that these aspirations will not conflict with
the rights and privileges of any portion of
our people. His Excellency congratulates
Parliament on the prosperous condition of
the country. That prosperity is evidenced
by the increased imports and exports, all
showing the purchasing power of our popu
lation. This pleasant intimation of His
Excellency, in his gracious speech, is con-
firmed by the published returns of the com-
merce of the country, and there is evidence
on every side that the judicious policy of
the Government has produced prosperity
throughout the Dominion. We have evi-
dence of the vigour and energy of the Gov-
ernment in their efforts to open up new
markets for the products of Canada ;
and in securing a rapid line of steamers
to ply between our ports and the
ports of Great Britain and France, and also
in the efforts they have made through the
High Commissioner at London and our
representative at Paris to obtain for Canada
the advantage of the "favoured nations
clause " which the mother country has made
in her treaties with foreign nations. We
have every rf^ason to hope that these efforts
on the part of Canada will result in opening
up new markets and extending our triCde
relations so that we can find ready sale
for the produce of our fields, our mines and
our forests. His Excellency also expressed
his gratification to hear that in Manitoba
and the North-west Territories there has
been an encouraging increased immigration
and settlement. Canada has spent enormous
sums of money in opening up these western
territories ; we have made great sacrifices to
provide these territories with railway com-
munication, and to attract to them a tide of
immigration, but these generous measures
on the part of the central Government have
been paralyzed" by the action of the local
authorities in denying equal justice and
equal treatment to all classes of the people.
I believe I express the opinion of the vast
majority in this country when I say that
prosperity can only be maintained and pro-
gress promoted by doing even-handed justice
to all classes of the community. Many of us
who liveintheeasternprovincesareconvinced

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUAEY 30, 1893J Address.

that an injustice has been done to a certain
portion of the population in Manitoba, but
we believe our constitution is sufficiently
elastic to enable us to remedy the injustice
that has been done. It is in the interest of
all classes and of all parts of the Dominion
that this should be done in order to projaiote
good-will and good feeling, and to make our
country attractive to the migrating masses
of Europe. My hon, friend from Niagara
expressed the hope that Newfoundland
would ere long become a portion of the
Dominion. The population of Newfound-
land sympathizes with us in our loyalty to
the British flag. Certain politicians on the
other side of the line endeavoured to bring
about a rupture between Newfoundland and
the mother country, with a view of promot-
ing a movement for annexation, but New-
foundland preferred to remain under the
British flag. The disastrous conflagration
at St. John's afforded our people an oppor-
tunity of expressing their sympathy in a
practical way, with the result that we have
been drawn closer together, and since then
communications have taken place between
the Island Government and the Dominion
Government, which I hope and believe will
ere long bring about a union of the two
countries. The Islanders would derive many
benefits from the change. They would be
enabled to improve their communication
with Great Britain and overcome local diffi-
culties which they find insurmountable now,
but which could be removed by the united
action of the whole Dominion.

The other point to which the hon.
gentleman attached importance is the rela-
tions between Canada and the United
States. We have in this country restless
spirits who have no faith in the future of
the Dominion, or the stability of our federal
institutions. These people tell us that we
should join the United States or that we
should make independence an issue of to-day.
They know very well that while Canada is a
portion of the British Empire and can rely
upon the mother country for protection, it
is useless to talk of annexation, but unfortu-
nately on the other side of the Atlantic these
facts are not well understood, and the
expressions of the few restless, discontented
people here may be taken for the voice of a
large element of the population. Such
movements are ill-timed and ill-chasen. They
produce an impression abroad that there is
no stability in our institutions. We should

' apply ourselves to the development of our

great resources. By the construction of our
' public works we have promoted commerce

and industry, and we have proved our capa-
; city to manage our own affairs. I believe
' the sentiment of our people is that we should
I maintain our existing institutions and do
I even-handed justice to all classes in the com-
, munity. By this means we will ensure the
I prosperity of Canada, and remove anything

which would produce discontent in any part

of the Dominion.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. Senator who
proposed the resolution in answer to the
Speech from the Throne very properly pre-
faced his observations to this House by pay-
ing a tribute to the Governor-General. I
heartily join in the encomiums that he has
passed upon that distinguished gentleman.
His Excellency comes from a long line of
ancestry who are intimately associated with
the history of England. The Lords of Derby
appear on many pages of history guiding the
destinies of the greatest empire of the world.
Since Lord Stanley's appointment as Gover-
nor of Canada he has, I think, discharged
the duties in a constitutional manner. He
has visited the people of Canada in the vari-
ous provinces and has become intimately
acquainted with their various conditions,
has seen them in their homes, and I think we
can fairly conclude that His Excellency has
gained the esteem and respect of the people
j of this country and that when he returns,
' having completed his period of office, he will
1 be able to assure Her Majesty that the Can-
j adian people, however they may object, many
of them, to the misgovern ment, so to speak,
i for the time being of the present Cabinet, are
! yet loyal and true to the mother land. Speak-
ing for the Opposition, those who are recog-
I nized, many of them, possibly as the pessi-
mists of this country, as the hon. the mover
has termed them, I think I may say
, that they are as sound and as loyal
as the greatest Tory in the country, and I
think His Excellency will feel pleasure and
I pride in so notifying Her Majesty when the
I time comes for His Excellency to lay down
I his term of office here. We shall all wish
; him a pleasant and a happy life when he
' returns to the old land, and it may not be
I improbable that His Excellency may succeed
I to the great House of Derby and that he
I may one day or other be the Earl of Derby
I and take the position which has been enjoyed

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

by preceding statesmen of that great name.
We at all events must feel sure that His
Excellency, having gained a very intimate
knowledge of this country, will give us the
benefit of that information when he returns
to the mother land ; and here I may say that
I think it would not be proper to forget the
distinguished Lady who has dispensed the
hospitalities of Rideau Hall. She has taken
a warm and a deep interest in the people of
this country and has made herself beloved
all over the land. We shall, when the time
comes, express our great regret at their leav-
ing and one and all from every part of
Canada will join in assuring them that they
have earned the esteem and the respect of
the people of this country.

The hon. the seconder of the reso-
lution has referred to another subject that
is somewhat personal, and that is the
absence of Mr. Abbott. We all deeply
regret the cause of it. Mr. Abbott had,
in the period when he led the House, gained
for himself the regard of every Senator in
it. He had very great consideration, not
alone for the large following which he had
, in this House, but also for the very small
minority of the Opposition. He was exceed-
ingly kind and considerate, and it was very
pleasant also to have had interviews and
communications with him, either across this
Chamber or in any other way, and we hope
that his temporary sojourn abroad may
restore him to health, and that we may one
day or another see him again among us.
He may rest assured that his presence in
this Chamber will always be grateful to the
Senators who regard him so highly.

Now, before I proceed to make any remarks
on the speech which His Excellency's advi-
sers have provided for us, I wish to oifei- my
congratulations to the mover and the seconder
of the resolution. They are gentlemen of
very considerable experience, both of them
having enjoyed seats in another branch of
Parliament. They are familiar with the
great public questions which come before
Parliament and we hope to avail ourselves
of the judgment and the experience that
they no doubt will be enabled to bring to
the discussion of the various questions that
may come before us. The hon. mover of the
resolution asked for the forbearance of this
House as he was a new member. This
House is always glad to extend a cordial
welcome and its forbearance to young mem-
bers, but my hon. friend can scarcely con-

sider himself a novice at parliamentary
work, having occupied a seat in the other
j branch of the legislature for some consi-
derable time, and being familiar with the
I various questions before Parliament. He
' has given us ample proof of his skill in dis-
I cussing the various questions from his stand-
point. I was rather surprised, indeed
; astonished, at the manner in which my hon.
j friend criticized the people of this country
who were so pessimistic as to see nothing but
I misery, sorrow and misfortune. I cannot
, exactly follow him in what he says. He
tells us that there is a A^ery despondent set
I in this country who can see nothing good in
, it. I do not agree with the hon. gentleman
, at all ; I do not think the hon. gentleman's
constituents agree with him either. I think he
; had rather an apt illustration that the policy
of the Government was not satisfactory to
the people of this country at the last general
I election and the object lesson he received in
I the county of Welland ought to havf
been a warning to the hon. gentleman that
I the people of this country do not approve of
] the fiscal policy pursued by the Administra-
tion and that they do not regard this country
j as having prospered to the extent to which
' it ought to have prospered. The hon. gentle-
man is respected and beloved in his own con-
stituency ; he is universally regarded there
as a man who is worthy of the highest posi-
tion, and the hon. gentleman's county is one
of the garden spots of Ontario, the county
of Welland, one of the finest places on the
globe. I question if there are many places
I on the face of the earth with superior attrac-
tions, and yet why was it that so many
I j>eople fied from that fair county, diminishing
its population between the years 1881 and
1891 by the enormous number of 1,000
persons ? All the figures, statistics of life
1 insurance companies, fire risks and all the
I other figures which he quoted — which I do not
I propose to follow— cannot take the place of
the explanation which was due from the hon.
gentleman of the fact that the population of
I that great county was reduced in the ten
i years by over 1 ,000. That is a fact that
cannot be got over. It not only does not
hold its own, but the people fled. Why
should they flee from one of the finest pieces
of land on this globe ? There must be
I something in it. People do not get dis-
I satisfied with their homes, do not depart
' from the early associations of their lives
except for some grave cause. They love

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address,

the old flag. A hundred years ago many
of our forefathers left their comfortable
farms to the south of us, left the Ameri-
can flag, left Mohawk Valley and the
valley of the Hudson and other choice
places in the United States and came north
to a wilderness. They did not want for
anything ; they had all that. The descend-
ants of the United Empire Loyalists are
abreast of any people in the world. Then,
why was it that this terrible despair went
all over the land, and people fled from the
most attractive sections of Canada ? There
must be some cause for it. Is it not our
duty to find that cause, to ascertain the
root of it ? It cannot be accidental ; it did
not exist in Welland alone. In almost
every other portion of Canada we find the
same state of affairs. Surely this is a grand
country, and the hon. gentleman has not
painted the colours half brilliant enough ;
from my stand-point there is no place on the
globe that is superior, few are even the
ec|ual of Canada. There are few countries
that have its broad acres where we could
feed the whole of Europe, there are few
countries that have had such wealth and
still have such wealth in their forest lands.
Year by year you will see that our exports
of products of the forest through good and
bad seasons increased until they reached
between twenty and thirty millions of dollars.
Is there a country on the face of the globe
that can compare with Canada in its fish-
eries, both of the Atlantic and Pacific,
and not alone those two great oceans but of
its huge inland waters — Lake Superior,
Lake Huron, Lake Erie ? And the fisheries
of the great rivers of Canada ; I could not
enumerate them — it would take too long to
do so. Our fisheries, our forests, our farms,
are not to be exceeded in any part of the
globe, and I may also say to you, hon.
gentlemen, that our mines are second to none
on this continent — the mines not alone of the
east, but of the west more particularly. Re-
cent developments show that in British
Columbia the mines are quite equal to any
that have been discovered either in the
United States or in Mexico. Now, with all
that in view, hon. gentlemen must see that
there is something affecting this country,
something appalling, when the population
flee from it. Why do the people go away
from here? Let me speak to the hon. gentle-
men from the Maritime Provinces. Has
their population increased more than*one

per cent in the last ten years ? One Mari-
time Pix)vince has fallen back, and lost popu-
lation rather than gained. Look at the two
great provinces of Ontario and Quebec,
whose increase of population has been but a
little over nine per cent. Look at the in-
crease of other countries where there is a
natural migration also. Take England and
Wales for example. We find there a
population that cannot be supported on
the products of those countries. They are
beehives of industry that send forth the pro-
ducts of their labour all over the world. They
necessarily lose by migration, yet England
and Wales have increased in population,
(taking into account the natural migration)
over eleven per cent— two per cent more
than the great provinces of Ontario and
Quebec. I think that when that single fact
is demonstrated, when those figures are
given, we cannot deny that it is the duty of
this House, and the duty of Parliament, to
inquire honestly and fairly into the causes
that lead to such extraordinary consequences.
Here is a land flowing with milk and honey,
that can afford homes to millions, nay hun-
dreds of millions of people, and yet it is un-
able to retain its population. The people
flee from it as if it were swept by a plague.
What is the cause ? We have not far to
look to see the cause. Hon. gentlemen have
alluded to the times of depression in Canada,
going back to the years between 1874 and
1879, yet we find the population increased
during those years seventeen per cent. The
census returns show that the population in-
creased seventeen percent during those years
of so-called depression. I say the cause is
n^t far to discover. It is this unfortunate
policy of the Government.

Hon. Mr. READ — They go to a country
where the taxation is double.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I am speaking of the
fact that they leave Canada.

Hon. Mr. M ASSON— Will the hon. gentle-
man make a comparison between the increase
of population in our provinces and in the
adjoining states ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— You ask me to give
you a comparison of the increase of popula-
tion between the United States and Canada.
Let us compare them together and we will
see. Now, I will take the province of Ontario

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

and I will take the state of Michigan. They
are under conditions very nearly similar,
Michigan on the one side and Ontario on the
other. In 1880 the population of Michigan
was 1,636,937. It had increased in 1890 to
2,093,000. The population of Ontario in
1880 was 300,000 odd more than the state
of Michigan, yet at the last census it was less
than 7,000 more than the state of Michigan
— that is, the state of Michigan had increased
300,000 more than the province of Ontario.
Now, I will take ths province of British Col-
umbia and I will take the state of Washing-
ton.

Hon. Mr. MASSON — I am speaking of
old Canada.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Why confine the
comparison to old Canada ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I will give the hon.
gentleman all the figures he wants and per-
haps more than he would like, but he asked
me to give him the population of those states
that were bordering our country and com-
pare the increase of population on each side
of the line. That would be a fair standard
to judge by. Nothing could be more simple
or reasonable. Washington occupies one
side of the line, British Columbia the other
of the 49th parallel. British Columbia had
a settlement a quarter of a century in ad-
vance of Washington. That is, there was a
population there.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD <B.C.)— That
is not correct.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I am aware that
John Jacob Astor established a fur trade
there.

Hon. Mr, MACDONALD (B.C.)— Parts
of Washington were settled long before there
was any settlement in British Columbia.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I will give you the
population as it was. The population of
British Columbia in 1880 was 49,000. The
population of Washington in the same year
was 75,000. The population of British Col-
umbia at the last census was 92,000, while
the population of Washington was 349,000.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— The hon. |
gentleman has made a slight error in the
figures he has given. The first return gave I
92,000, but later returns made it 99,000. |

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-^That would give an
increase in British Columbia of 50,000 and
in Washington an increase of 250,000. The
conditions of the two countries are very
nearly similar, the quality of the land about
the same and the mineral development about
equal. I do not know if the mineral develop-
ment is more advanced in British Columbia
than in Washington. Now, I will take Mani-
toba. We were told that Manitoba in ten
years would have at least a pop ilation of
half a million. Its increase, however, has
been less than 100,000, while the Dakotas
immediately south of Manitoba, not certainly
possessing as fine land, not certainly as
attractive for settlement, not certainly pos-
sessing the many advantages that Manitoba
possesses, have increased from 135,000 to
510,000. Now I think these figures are signi-
ficant.

Hon. Mr. ALMON -Will the hon. gentle-
man give us the figures of Vermont and
other eastern states and of our eastern pro-
vinces ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— We are looking for
a greater growth in the west than in the east,
and it was the great west that was to build
up this country. We have spent a very large
sum of money in it and no doubt it is coming
up rapidly to the high level that we hoped
it would enjoy, but I hold that it would,
under better conditions, have grown more
rapidly than it has. I say that it ought to
grow more rapidly. No one can deny that. I
cannot be challenged as being pessimistic be-
cause I call attention to these figures. I know
it is quite usual, if a man questions the policy
of the Government, to put that man down as
disloyal. I think it is exceedingly unfair
and improper that gentlemen cannot call
attention to and illustrate the position of
this country by comparisons with other
countries without being called disloyal. Now,
as to this marvellous development and pros-
perity, I would like to draw attention to one
or two more facts.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— May I ask the
privilege of the hon. gentleman from Ottawa
to interrupt him for a moment. If he will
remember, I said that the pessimists were
few in number but like the cricket made a
bigger noise than many.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I had not the hon.
genfteman in view at all when I spoke. I

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address.

know it has been the fashion for Grovemment
organs and Government speakers on various
platforms to denounce the Opposition as
being despondent and given to crying down
the country b^icause they give true illustra-
tions of Canada and the United States. I
acquit my hon. freind entirely of any such
intention and I did not have him in view
when commenting on the course of other
l^entlemen. Now we are asked to congratu-
late ourselves upon an increase in trade. I
desire simply to call attention to the fact
that as far back as 1873, 1874 and also 1883
we were rich enough to buy a very much
larger amount abroad than we were able to
buy last year. The value of our imports
during the last year was 127 millions in
round numbers. In 1873 our imports amount-
ed to 128 millions. Again in 1874 they
amounted also to 128 millions, and in 1883
we brought as much as 132 millions worth,
five millions more than last year. The
export last year was no doubt large and gra-
tifying. I wish, however, that it had been
much larger and I think that if a different
policy had been pursued it would have been
much larger. To what was that large export
due? It was due entirely to the farmers of the
North-west. It was largely due to the great
crops with which Manitoba and the North-
west were blest last year. It is due also to
the increase of two millions in the products
of the forest; it is due also to the cheese
industry of Ontario and Quebec, one of the
great industries of this country. That is
what it is due to, and although very grati-
fying, and I am glad to recognize that it- is
so, I think under other conditions it might
have been very much greater than it is. I
notice that our exports of manufactures have
increased. I was rather curious to know in
what way the exports of manufactures had
increased, and on turning up the page I was
surprised to find that over one million of
our exports of manufactures was due to the
exportation of the household effects of set-
tlers. Over one million of the total exports
was made up of the effects of settlers going
to the United States. That branch of it
was not a subject for congratulation. I
find that during the year preceding the
household effects of settlers who went to the
United States was about the same figure. I
do not think we can take very much credit
to ourselves for having exported as manufac-
tures the household effects of the people of
Canada who have had to fly to another land.

We are asked to thank His Excellency for
informing us that measures have been taken
to carry into effect an agreement between
the United States and this country in re-
gard to the boundary of Alaska. This
boundary of Alaska is a very old subject.
It crops up periodically. It was up some
fifteen or twenty years ago, and at several
periods since. Alaska, as hon. gentlemen
probably know, is that part of the country
ceded by Russia to the United States on
this continent. By the treaty between
Great Britain and Russia in 1825, a boun-
dary line was established between British
territory and Russian territory on the west-
em side of this continent, and I am sorry to
say that, as in the case of a great many other
treaties where the lands of Canada were
made the subject of treaties by plenipoten-
tiaries from the mother country, Canada got
the worst of it. If any one looks at the
map he will see ho¥( very illogical it is to give
away, or to consent to a foreign country
occupying so much of the coast line of this
continent as Russia then insisted upon
occupying of our Canadian territory on the
north-west. But the boundary line between
the two countries was made rather a puzzle :
Prince of Wales Islands (strange to say, one
would have thought the very name would
have saved it as a possession of the British
Crown) was freely given away to Russia, and
the line was then run to the head of Port-
land channe^and by a devious crooked line
to Mount EUias. It is that very devious
crooked line that is now engaging the atten-
tion of the two Governments. If I had any
advice to offer to the two Governments, I
should say adopt a true line running straight
I north, wholly irrespective of the height of
j land mentioned in the treaty. Under the
I treaty the line was to follow the height of
! land. Where the height of land was more
, than ten marine leagues distant from the
' shore, then a line running parallel to the
\ shore and ten leagues from it was to be
I followed. The mountains of course do not
I follow the coast in a dii^ect line, they bend
towards the shore, and they bend inland,
I and so the line is an exceedingly difiicult
I one to draw. I think, therefore, that the
two Governments ought to agree upon a
degree of longitude, a straight line which
would run north to Mount Elias.

; Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) -That
I has been proposed.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The correspondence
came under my own observation many years
ago, when I had to do with these questions,
and that was my idea. The estimatesof the
cost are, for the United Stat s portion of the
work of surveying the line, $1,500,000 ; for
our portion of the work according to General
Cameron, something over a million dollars.
That would be a total of at least two and a
half millions spent in defining a compara-
tively short line. It may be that the country
is worth such a great expenditure. I have
no doubt it has its value, but between
two sensible neighbours, the best way to
settle the matter would be to fix an absolute
boundary, irrespective of the height of land.
I am glad to hear that a friendly conference
has taken place between delegates from this
Government and delegates from Newfound-
land, and I sincerely hope that all causes of
difficulty between the two colonies will cease.
I think we ought to d^l rather tenderly
with Newfoundland. It is a weak and a
poor sister, and Canada can afford to be gen-
erous. I did not myself approve of the policy
which was adopted two years ago in reference
to that colony, I need not now discuss that
question ; it is perhaps not germane to the
matter at present under debate, and therefore
I will not further allude to it, but I cannot
certainly join in the hope expressed by the
hon. the seconder of these resolutions, that we
may round off confederation by bringing
in Newfoundland. I think the confederation
is already rounded off sufficiently, leaving
Newfoundland out, and it would be better for
both Newfoundland and Canada that the
former should remain outside of the union.
It is not easy to govern a country whei-e cir-
cumstiances are so dissimilar to ours as they
are in Newfoundland. 1 think they could
take much better care of themselves while
remaining a separate colony than by joining
the Canadian Confederation. We are asked
to concur in His Excellency's regret that the
Governmentof the United States wer^ unable
to accept the suggestions made by the Gov-
ernment of Canada on the subject of the
canal tolls, and that the President should
have thought it necessary to impose excep-
tional tolls. I t-ake issue with the hon.
mover of the resolution in the observations
he made upon this subject. I think that
anybody dispassionately looking at this sub-
ject, would have said from the beginning
that the Govemn>ent of Canada were entirely
in the wrong. I should have said so last

year, when the papers were moved for ; but
I felt then that if I did so, I should be
accused of playing into the hands of the
United States. That is the line taken to seal
the mouths of gentlemen who desire to give
their advice to the Government and to ex-
press their judgment on the various inter-
national questions which arise from time to
time between the two countries. Hon.
gentlemen are aware that the use of the
canals by the two countries has its origin
in the Treaty of Washington. Under
the twenty-seventh f^rticle of that treaty
we were to secure to the citizens of the
United States the use of the Welland,
St. Lawrence and other canals on terms of
equality with our own people. That was
what we agreed to do — that they should
enjoy these canals on terms of equality. We
did give them that privilege for some years,
but unfortunately political influences were
at work to secure some advantages for the
people of Kingston, and an Order in Council
was prLssed giving Kingston the advantage of
transhipping grain to Montreal, and the
grain transhipped at Montreal got a rebate
of eighteen cents per ton. On all cargoes of
grain coming from the west of Canada there
was a charge of twenty cents per ton, and a
rebate of eighteen cents was granted to ves-
sels loading at Montreal. It is quite true
that there was no discrimination against
vessels, but there was discrimination against
the people of the United States. We dis-
criminated against Ogdensburgh, and in dis-
criminating against Ogdensburgh we discrim-
inated against the people of Ogdensburgh,
and in my judgment Canada failed to observe
the conditions of that portion of the Treaty
of Washington relating to this question.
Now, I think that in regard to treaties we
ought to follow the example of the mother-
land. England has been exceedingly sensi-
tive on this question of treaties with foreign
powers. Wherever there was a doubt, un-
less in matter of very gi'ave importance, the
desire and disposition has been rather to
give the case away than make a casus belli
of it — to have no friction with a foreign
country in any small or unimportant matter.
Yet here we And that Canada, in order to
favour a few ti-aders, possibly not more than
a dozen persons, imposed a discriminating
tariff against the people of United States of
eighteen cents on every ton of grain going
through the canals. Our attention is called
to it and what do we do ? In the presence of

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address.

one of the gentlemen who carried on the
negotiation on our side, I do not desire in any
way to increase the friction by referring to
my views of the situation. As reported
through United State sources it is very
unfortunate that when the attention of the
Government of Canada was called to it, the
course that they proposed to pursue was a
matter of dispute, to use the mildest term
— that the statement of Mr. Blaine, whose
recent death we must all regret, and of Mr.
Secretary Foster, of what took place at the
conference was different from that of our
own ministers. However, that is entirely
immaterial and I allude to it simply as
showing that in the minds of the American
people there was u belief that Canada was
going to remove the cause for dissatisfaction
that had existed for some antecedent years.
Canada did not remove it last year, and
the situation became graver. What the
Americans say, and I think it cannot be
contradicted, is that in granting a rebate of
eighteen cents per ton on all the grain coming
into Montreal we sinned against that parti-
cular clause of the Washington Treaty which
governed the subject, in three different ways :

(1.) In that it makes the toll on grain for export
from Montreal and other Canadian ports east of
Montreal two cents per ton while the toll on grain
for export from American ports is twenty cents per
ton : that is to say, that grain coming through the
Welland Canal and shipped to Ogdensburgh would
pay twenty cents per ton, whUe if shipped to Kings-
ton and reshipped to Montreal it would only pay
two cents per ton.

In discriminating against Ogdensburgh we
surely discriminate against the people of the
United States. They do not enjoy the privi-
leges of the canals on term of equality with
us if we make the grain dealers of Ogdens-
burgh pay eighteen cents more than Canadian
dealers who carry the grain to Montreal.

(2. ) In that even the lesser rate is refused on grain
for Montreal and ports east of it has been tran-
shipped at an American port, while it is allowed if
it has been transhipped at a Canadian port.

If the grain even were going to Montreal and
it were transhipped at Ogdensburgh, it would
still be charged twenty cents per ton, although
if transhipped at Kingston the charge would
only be two cents per ton, a clear discrimina-
tion. No man can defend or justify it. At
all events, the thing is not worth defending.
Why should we have this difficulty with the
great nation to the south of us about a small
matter of this kind, affecting the whole of
2

the United States, for the benefit of a few
elevator men at Kingston ? It is a pity that
all this friction should arise over so insignifi-
cant a matter.

(3. ) In that the two cent rate is only levied on
Krain from Montreal and ports east from any Cana-
dian Lake Ontario port, while the twenty cent rate
is exacted on grain for the same destination from
American Lake Ontario ports.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— WiU the hon.
gentleman kindly tell me what he is read-
ing from?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I am reading from
*' The President's message on the canal ques-
tion," a United States document.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-
words of the treaty ?

-What are the

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I will give the words
of the treaty :

The Cxovemment of Her Britannic Majesty
engages to urge upon the Government of the
Dominion of Canada to secure to the citizens of
the United States the use of the Welland, St.
Lawrence and other canals in the Dominion on
'term of equality with the other inhabitants of the
Dominion.

The contention of our Government is this,
that they discriminate only against ports —
that they discriminate in favour of St.
Lawrence ports to the extent of eighteen
cents per ton. I say that they have no
power to do so under the treaty. It is in
direct violation of the terms of the treaty.
No nation sensitive about its honour ought
to construe treaties otherwise than fairly
and liberally towards its opponent, unless
in a matter of very grave importance. I say
the fair and honourable course on the part
of the Dominion would have been to refer
the matter to the gentleman who was present
when the Washington treaty was framed, to
have referred it to a statesman who is now
a member of Mr. Gladstone's Government —
the Earl of Ripon. That would have been
a very fair course. Canada might have
stated the question and asked, "what is
your version 1 " Would you consider
that we were violating the terms of the treaty
by taking this action ? Instead of this the
Canadian Government set up its own opinion.
It acted in a very independent way towards
the United States, and a great portion of
the people of Canada choose to remain silent
rather than to place this government in a

Digitized by

Google

The rSBNATB] Address,

position of indelicacy, biit I say boldly no
fair-minded man could read the twenty-
seventh section of the Washington treaty
and justify the course that our Government
took in reference to this canal toll question.
I can invoke supporters of the Government
to confirm this statement. I am quite sure
a very large number of men in either branch
of the legislature, if asked outside of the
political arena, what is your view ? — do you
think it was a violation on the part of Canada
of the provision of the Washington Treaty ?
— would freely say yes, but they do not want
to place the Government in the uncomfort-
able position of appearing to be in the
wrong, and therefore defend the Government.
I hold in my hand here the utterances of a
pretty good authority, a gentleman editing
one of the leading newspapers of this country,
and one of the warmest supporters of this
Government, who has always stood by them
through good report and evil report. That
gentleman undertakes to write an article for
an independent magazine on this question.
Here is what he says :

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-
writer ?

-Who is the

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — I am now reading an
article oi> the canal tolls question by a dis-
tinguished member of the other House, a
warm supporter of the Administration. His
habit has always been to speak in a direct
way and from a judicial stand-point for the
whole people, not alone for the people of
Canada but as well for the people of the
United States. He takes a fair broad view
of the whole subject ; let us hear what his
conclusions are :

Finally, let us briefly consider the character of
the reprisals to which the United States has
resorted at the Sault Ste. Marie canal, hitherto
free to all vessels irrespective of nationality
or destination. A toll of twenty cents per ton
upon freight is levied under certain conditions.
The proclamation of President Harrison imposing
the tolls in accordance with the act of Congress
reads : '* Provided that no tolls shall be charged or
collected upon freight or passengers carried to or
landed at Ogdensburgh and south of a line drawn
from the northern boundary of the state of Xew
York through the St. Lawrence river, the great
lakes and their connecting channels to the northern
boimdary of the state of Minnesota." In this way
our neighbours have copied our example and rendered
the occasion for complamt on our part somewhat
dubious. Canada grants a rebate of tolls on all
cargoes bound for Montreal or a port east of
Montreal, whether the vessels be British or Ameri-
can. The United States grants exemption from

tolls to all cargoes though the Sault caual boimdto
Ogdensburgh, or any American port west of Ogdens-
burgh, no matter what the nationality of the vessel.
Just as the full tolls are exacted by Canada on all
cargoes through the Welland Canal to American
ports so are full tolls exacted by the United States on
all cargoes through the Sault canal bound to Cana-
dian ports. There we have what Secretfl,ry of State
Foster calls ** parity of conditions," and it is really
somewhat difficult to discover in the conduct of the
United States any justification for threats and
denunciations on our part. Instead of either whin-
ing or menacing, the common sense course is to
frankly admit that the Americans have merely
taken a leaf out of our book ; to recognize that the
policy of reprisals is neither dignified nor profit-
able ; and, conscious that two can play at the eame
of fence, to honestly seek to establish a Targe
measure of reciprocity in the carrying trades.

Hon. Mr. BOWELI^-Who is the gentle-
man?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Mr. White, of Card-
well. I will now read from an oflScial source
the proclamation of President Harrison under
which the twenty cent toll was levied, and I
think it is about as diplomatic a paper as I
have ever read ; I think he took the language
of our Order in Council and just applied it
under the same conditions.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL^No.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— He says, after reciting
the fact that we were discriminating by giv-
ing rebates of eighteen cents per ton on all
grain passing through the Welland Canal
destined for Montreal :

Now, therefore, I, Benjamin Harrison, Presi-
dent of the United States of America, by virtue of
the power to that end conferred upon me by said
Act of Congress, approved July 26th, 1892, do
hereby direct that from and after September 1,
1892, until further notice, a toll of twenty cents
per ton be collected, levied and paid on all freight
ol whatever kind or description passing through
the St. Mary's Falls Canal m transit to any port
of the Dominion of Canada, whether carried in
vessels of the United States or of other nations;
and to that extent I do hereby suspend, from and
after said date, the right of free passage through
said St. Mary's Falls Canal of any and all cargoes
or portions of cargoes in transit to Canadian ports.

Now, I think I have proved very success-
fully, from the writings of a distinguished
supporter of the Government, who probably
in the other House may have justified their
course from a political stand-point — I have
proved from his own language what his
opinion was ; it corresponds with my own.
I thought all along, and I think now that
we did make a great mistake in spending so

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUAEY 30, 1893] Address.

many millions on building a Sault canal on
our side. I think that the sensible course
for two neighbours was to abide firmly and
liberally by the treaty of Washington, and
enlarge it from time to time as no doubt
friendly relations would enable us to do.
We pass through the Sault Canal on the
United States side a very small fraction,
not quite three per cent of the whole traffic.
So it was a comparatively small amount.
Our vessels passed through that canal not as
American vessels pass through the Welland
Canal paying a toll — they passed through the
Sault Canal paying nothing. Our vessels
came through in their turn ; they never were
put to any disadvantage. I have passed
and re-passed many a time myself up and
down this canal, and I know whereof I speak.
The American officials took all the trouble,
supplied the lights, and rendered assistance
in every possible way, and not a farthing
was ever charged, and remember the
Sault Canal was not among the canals that
were mentioned in the Treaty of Washing-
ton. The United States had not at that
time acquired the Sault Canal ; it was the
private property of the state of Michigan.
The United States some years afterwards
acquired the canal and spent large sums on
it and threw it open to Canada, as it was
their duty to do, but it is something in our
days for a nation to do its duty. So we con-
tinue to enjoy it and I think that it was
wholly unnecessary expense that we should
go to in connection with the new canal. It
amounted to a menace to the United States ;
it was tantamount to saying that we should
be independent of them, that we did not pro-
pose to be dependent on them. I say neither
the United States nor Canada can take that
position ; I say they are both in a degree de-
pendent on each other. They occupy con-
tiguous territory for 4,000 miles, and we have
in common, water ways of great extent, very
much more than is the ease in any other
countries in the world, and it is our interest,
as well as our duty, to preserve amicable
relations. They are people akin to us in race,
language and laws. Do you for a moment
believe that if the administration of these mat-
ters had been in the hands of British statesmen
that this condition of affairs would have arisen?
Would thejihave allowed this petty collision
to occur on a comparatively insignificant
matter ? The heads of this Government did
not choose to come down from their high
pedestal, and acknowledge that they were
2i

in the wrong, when over and over again we
were told by the United States, " cease your
discrimination; abide by what you assured
us you would do when you met us at Wash-
ington last, or we shall impose a tax on your
grain and cargoes going through the Sault
Canal." What was our position ? We took
the high and mighty course ; we snapped our
fingers at them and^said " you may do as you
please, we will be independent ; we can affi)rd
to pay the tax to the United States Govern-
ment," and therefore we occupy this ridicu-
lous position, that we paid thirty or forty
thousand dollars from Septeinber last to the
close of the season to swell the treasury at
Washington, simply because our pride would
not allow us to admit that we had made a
gross error. In the interpretation of treaties,
it is the duty of all high-minded, honourable
people to be liberal, and if we followed the
course pursued by British statesmen, we
would have admitted that we were wrong ;
we would have apologized and occupied a
much stronger position to-day than we now
hold. I have no doubt the Government will
remove the discrimination before this sea-
son begins. They do not propose to go
on, I trust, in the foolish course of con-
tinuing to pay tribute to the United States
treasury when it is wholly unnecessary.
All they have to do is to say : " We will
go back to the treaty and abide by it." I
would have spoken last year, but had hoped
from day to day — we know that the Onier
in Council hung fire for considerable time —
that the Canadian Government would have
acquiesced in the very proper suggestion
from Washington that they were trans-
gressing an article of the treaty and request-
ing them to withdraw the Order in Council
under which the discriminating tolls were
enforced ; but it is all of a piece with the
mode of carrying on the government in this
country — it is carried on for individuals and
not for the masses. The hon. gentleman
who introduced these resolutions pointed to
the millionaires on the other side of the line.
Have we made no millionaires in the last
fifteen years? Has not the disparity be-
tween wealth and poverty been more marked
in the last ten years than in any former
period in the history of this country? I say
it has. It would be a matter of indelicacy
to name individuals who have grown rich
on the subsidies that the people of the coun-
try have been obliged, under Act of Parlia-
ment, to pay to the favoured few. Million-

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

aires have been created in this land, too,
and the money they have got has been
taken from the great body of the peo-
ple, where it fairly and properly belonged.
I desire to call the attention of the House,
as illustratihg in some degree the line of
action we have adopted towards the United
States, to the question of wrecking. As far
back as 1878, at the time of the change of
government in this country, Congress placed
on record a statute in which they offered to
Canadian tugs the right to give assistance to
American as well as Canadian vessels in
United States waters, provided Canada did
the same. Here was a very fair offer. Of
all questions for reciprocity, surely that of
rendering assistance to vessels in distress
was the most reasonable and natural one,
which ought to be first taken up by an in-
telligent and friendly people, yet year by
year went by, and one cause or another has
prevented the Canadian Grovernment from
acquiescing in the proposals from the United
States. The pressure became so great, that
in 1888 a loading gentleman belonging to the
Conservative party — it was useless for any-
body else to propose such a thing — the mem-
ber for !Frontenac, now Lieutenant-Grovemor
of Ontario, brought in a bill authorizing the
Government to issue a proclamation placing
the wrecking question on both sides on a
reciprocal basis. The Opposition, with one
or two exceptions, supported the measure.
However, the hon. gentleman who had
charge of the bill was unable to divorce from
the Government following a sufficient number
to carry the bill with the assistance of
the Opposition. The following year the bill
was introduced again, and the next year as
well. In 1891 they did succeed in getting
it through the House of Commons and it
came to this Chamber. I am sorry to say that
the Senate failed to respond to the advanced
public opinion of this country, which consi-
dered the subject of wrecking was one that
should be put on a reciprocal basis. I will
not go now into the object lessons which
were given on that occasion, pointing out
the serious injury and difficulty caused by
the absence of such a law, but I again express
my regret, as I did when the bill was before
this chamber, that this House did not res-
pond to the advance of public opinion on
this question. And for whom, pray, were
we keeping up these laws that were certain-
ly not in harmony with the spirit of this
age ? Not probably more than five persons

were interested in tugs, but for the sake of
less than half a dozen persons, Canada had
to be placed year after year at this great
disadvantage of refusing the olive branch
held out by the people of the United States.
In 1892 the Government didtaJce it up. My
hon. friend, the leader of this House, gave
it his- assistance, and with that aid it went
through without any difficulty. I do not
think there was a vote on it. The measure
came to this chamber and although this is
purely a non-political House, when it was
supported by the Government, its chances, as
the sequel proved, were very much better
than when it was an independent measure.
The moment the Government lent its aid the
bill went through. We were in hopes that
a joint proclamation would issue on both sides
and that wrecking would be made mutual.
In the issuing of the proclamation on the
other side, however, the President named in
connection with the waters open to the tugs
of both countries the various canals. Very
naturally he regarded the canals as part of
the waterways. Although there would seem
to be very little probability of accidents
happening to vessels on them, yet our Gov-
ernment, with the short-sighted policy they
seem to pursue, carped at the language of the
proclamation and declined to accept it, say-
ing it was a departure from what was in-
tended and they did not propose that there
should be any reciprocal aid given to vessels
in distress on the canals. They did not say
that it was improbable that there would be
many cases of that kind and for that reason
the matter should have been passed by. It
is unlikely that vessels will be wrecked in
the canals, but if they should be, surely if
we are acting in a spirit of friendliness to an
adjoining nation, we ought not to carp at so
insignificant a point as that the wrecking
privileges in question were not contemplated
on our side to apply to the canals. There
the matter stands to-day. I suppose there
is influence at work somewhere or other to
keep it back in order that one or two Cana-
dian tugs may enjoy for another season an
advantage, and that Canadian vessel owners
shall be obliged to seek our favoured tugs
for assistance. It is just of a piece with the
whole policy of this country. The next
paragraph in the Address asks us to
respectfully thank His Excellency "for in-
forming us that measures will be laid before
us for the improvement of the Franchise
Act." Well, I am glad to find that the

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 30, 1893] Address.

Government, even at this late day, are alive
to the fact that the Franchise Act needs
amendment. In my judgment it needs
sweeping away. If it had not been for the
Franchise Act and the fiscal policy of the
Government, my hon. friend from Welland
would not have had to make the observa-
tions that he did in the introductory part of
his speech to-day. We all muse recognize
that there is a spirit of unrest in this coun-
try— that, although the great bulk of the
population, nine-tenths of the people, are
loyal to the Crown, yet there is an element
that is outspoken in opposition. The causes
that create that spirit, I will not say of dis-
loyalty, but of dissatisfaction, with the exist
ing conditions which is illustrated by the
flight of so many thousands of persons from
this favoured land, all has its origin in the
Franchise Act, the fiscal policy, and just such
kinds of legislation. Give the people fair-
play in the election of their representatives,
and they will cure all the rest. When recently
the Republican party in the United States,
who occupy very much the position of the
Tory party in Canada, who regard them-
selvesas the natural ownersof the country, and
as having the right to control its destinies,
and as the born legislators of the country —
when the Republican party sought by an act
• of Congress to become a permanent fixture
in the controlling influence of that great
country by means of the Force Bill, — when
they sought to take possession of the electo-
ral franchise of the United States, the people
rose in their might and told Congress " we
will never submit to it : we have had a
rebellion in the south about the slaves, we
will have no rebellion about the Force Bill."
Not only the south but the people of other
parts of the Republic rose in their manhood
and said : " It is true the Republican party
may carry that in Congress, but they cannot
carry it if they appeal to the country —
there will bt a disruption if they do." Had
the electorate, when the Conservative party
in this country robbed them of their fran-
chise, risen in their might, our people to-day
would be more contented. You cannot point
to any other democratic form of government
where there has been so large an infraction
of the rights of the people as in Canada.
The Government have taken possession, I
say, of the representation of the people.
They first appoint an officer who says who
shall be put on the voters' lists. He is their
own creature, selected by themselves. Having

obtained the lists, what is done ? Do they
trust them to be examined in their own
counties? No, they bring the lists to Ottawa,
to the Printing Bureau, and print them
under their own direction. I may be told
that I must not make charges. Do you
think you can gag the people of Canada
by any such remarks, when they know
and have proof of so many dishonest
things in connection with the representation
of the people ? I say the Government
should place itself beyond suspicion. I do
not mean to make any charge, but the Gov-
ernment capnot be surprised that charges of
that character are made when we know the
lengths to which they go in order to secure
the return of their own candidates. Having
framed the lists, having carved out consti-
j tuencies as they have done every ten years
I to suit their own people, they appoint the
I returning officers, and so practically what is
! known in the United States as the Force
I Bill has been in existence in the Dominion,
, and that is the cause of the unrest and the
I dissatisfaction, and the reason why so many
j people are threatening to leave this country,
I and why so many have left the Dominion —
; because they think the Government have
i seized on the rights of the people and have
I taken control, in a tyrannical or arbitrary
way, of the representation of the people in
! Parliament. The Government dare not trust
I the people. Surely, if they enjoyed the con-
' fidence of the majority in this country, they
I need not fear to let the people of the various
' localities make their own lists. Are the
I Conservatives in the electoral divisions not
I equally as intelligent, on the alert and keen
for success as are their neighbours, the
! Reformers ? They are on the same parallel,
only the Conservatives have friends at
' court, and the Reformers have not.
I If you want to secure peace and good feeling
' in this country, you have to put the represent-
I ation of the people on a more just, fair and
equitable basis than it is. Do that, and in
my humble judgment you will remove one of
I the great causes of dissatisfaction and stop
j the exodus. You will find in the next ten
I years our population will have grown — that
\ we will haVte attracted population from the
I other side of the line. As I said before,
I Canada is a grand country, it has a magnifi-
' cent North-west, and it is our duty to take
I care of it and to hand it down to posterity
! as we received it from those who preceded us.
I If we pursue a fair, just and reasonable policy,

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

one for the benefit of the masses and not for
the benefit of the classes, we need not employ
agents abroad in the various parts of Europe
to hunt up settlers for our North-west Terri-
tory. We need not pay a per capita allowance
for those who come over to seek homes here.
We will attract population without any such
things and sufficient people will settle in our
country to develop its resources. Do that,
and you will receive the gratitude of the
people and there will be no more dissatisfac-
tion or distrust of the Government in this
country and the exodus to the United States
will cease.

Hon. Mr, BOWELL— I propose to follow
in this House the course that is generally
pursued in the other chamber — that is, after
the mover and seconder of the address have
delivered their speeches and the leader of
the Opposition has spoken, the leader of the
Government always replies. Of course I am
not well acquainted with the procedure of
the Senate, but I have no objection, person-
ally, to wait and hear the whole discussion if
the House prefer it. At this hour, and it
having been intimated to me that a number
of gentlemen have engagements to-night and
do not wish to return after six o'clock, I am
willing to move the adjournment of the
debate. If, however, it is the desire of the
House that the discussion should go on, I
shall be very glad to answer my hon.
friend from Ottawa. I would say this, how-
ever, before sitting down ; when I entered
this House I was cautioned that I must
pursue a different course here from that
which is generally adopted in the other
House — that is, that I must not indulge too
freely in political discussions. Although the
hon. gentleman from Ottawa intimated that
the Senate is not a political body, after
listening to him I began to think that I was
mistaken and I believe that the field is as
wide, in the Senate of Canada, for the dis-
cussion of the great questions that are before
the people and the fiscal and other policies of
the Government, as in the House of Commons,
and that they may be dealt with as freely
and frankly here as in the other branch of
the legislature. The hon. gentleman will
excuse me, if, when I have the honour of re-
plying to his remarks, I deal with them in
very much the same spirit that he dealt
with them to-day ; and I am very much in-
clined to think that he will be apt to say of
me what I shall not in any spirit of disres-

pect attribute to him — that I am just abc
as much a partisan as he is. Howev
apart from that, permit me, before I
down, to reciprocate to the fullest possi
extent the remarks that have been made
the seconder of the resolution and the lea(
of the Opposition — that is, my deep reg
personally, and very much more politiea
of the causes which have led to my occu
ing the position that I do to-day. I dee
regret with them, as I am sure every m<
ber of both Houses does, and I think I n
safely say the people of Canada — the ca
which led to the resignation of the late I
mier and leader of this House. I do h
that he may return to Canada with renei
vigour and better health ; and that we i
have the pleasure of seeing him agair
this House taking a prominent part in pu
affairs. Whatever my course here may I
shall endeavour to emulate, as far as I
sibly can, those qualities to which the lef
of the Opposition has referred ; that ii
endeavour to be courteous to all memben
matter whether their political complexic
the same as mine or not. Having said
much, I shall, with your permission, d
the adjournment of the debate until
morrow.

The motion was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 5.40 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa^ Tuesday, January Slst, 189

The speaker took the Chair
o'clock.

Prayers.

THE ADDRESS.

THE DEBATE CONTINUED,

The Order of the Day being read :

Resuming the a<ljourned Debate on the con
ation of His Excellency the Govemor-Gei
Speech, on the opening of the Third Session
Seventh Parliament.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL said :— I coi
notwithstanding the fact that I am some
of an old parliamentarian, having occ
a seat in the other House for over 25 -<

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address.

that I feel a delicacy in rising to address the
Senate on this occasion. Knowing that I
am following a gentleman whose intellec-
tual ability, and whose position in the
country as one of our most eminent lawyers,
and a former leader of this House, makes
him eminently above and beyond me in
eloquence and ability, I therefore feel some-
what diffident in attempting to fill the
place he so worthily occupied in this House.
Notwithstanding that, I have learned during
my political career that whatever position in
life I might be called to fill, I should attempt
to do my duty to my country first and to
myself afterwards. I have to congratulate,
and I do so sincerely, the mover and
seconder of the Address on the ability which
they displayed in dealing with the questions
now before the country. The mover pi*esen-
ted to the House many facts, which were
not only interesting to those who listened to
him, but will be instructive to those who read
them in the public press. My own impres-
sion is that those facts were of a character
which deserved much more consideration,
and that too of a favourable natiire, than
they received from the hon. gentleman
who replied and who holds the position of
leader of the Opposition in this Chamber.
It seems to me that the hon, member
from Welland, quoting as he did from
the foremost statisticians of the world,
and drawing his deductions from the
figures which are presented to the country
through the medium of the Trade and
Navigation Reports, might at least have had
his remarks accepted as carrying with them
that weight which such statistics should
carry and not have been treated in the
flippant manner in which they were,
with mere formal generalities such as we
read every day in the smallest village news-
paper in the country. I say this with all
respect to the gentleman whom I am follow-
ing, but I cannot help- thinking that in a
body like this, in dealing with great ques-
tions of state and the position of the country,
we should try and draw our conclusions from
facts as they are presented to us rather than
repeat the stale platitudes which we hear and
read every day in the week. ' I am also in-
clined to think that the hon. gentleman
opposite, in his references to the remarks
made by the hon. Senator from Welland re-
garding what he termed the pessimistic ideas
of politicians and others in Canada, would
have done better had he dealt with the

real questions at issue rather than to
fall back upon the ground that the hon.
Senator from Welland had attacked the
loyalty of the party which the hon. gentle-
man opposite so worthily leads in the
Senate. I was delighted to hear from
the hon. gentleman that the party which
he leads, and to which he belongs, is
not disloyal. No one, I think, said that it
was. But to say that there are disloyal
men in that party, to say that there
are men connected with that party who
have proved themselves traitors, is not to
j accuse the whole party of being traitors. I
was pleased also to hear him say that nearly
j the whole of his party were as loyal as the
I most loyal Tory in the country. Well, if
that is so, Canada is safe for some time to
come against any progress towards the an-
nexation of this country to the neighbouring
Republic. The hon. gentleman was follow-
ing in the footsteps of his Ontario leader,
when the latter stated, at the Board of
Ti'ade banquet the other day, that he knew
of but one man who avowed himself in
favour of annexation to the United States,
and that he was very glad to know that that
one did not belong to the Liberal party. I
have a distinct recollection, and I have no
doubt the hon. gentleman to whom I refer,
the Premier of Ontario, also remembers,
that when he occupied a seat in the
old Parliament of Canada there was
a gentleman who represented the then
town of Brock ville, who uttered the
same sentiments in the old Parliament of
I Canada that had been uttered by the local
' member for Essex, and I am glad to know
I that he did not belong to the Conservative
party. I am also reminded, and must be
i led to the conclusion — and I presume the
, House and the country must also come to
I the conclusion — that the hon. leader of the
j Opposition is in unison with the Premier of
! Ontario, and that he is not in unison with
and has no belief in the sentiments uttered
I by a late editor of the leading paper which is
I supposed to echo — nay, not only echo, but
' utter the sentiments of gentlemen oppo-
j site. It will be remembered that the writer
! of the famous letter to • Mr. Hitt of the
' United States, told the people of that coun-
I try that every man of the party with which
j he was connected, and for whom he was
writing in a leading newspaper of this
I country, preferred annexation when he
I preached commercial union, and that the

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addre^.

party to which he belonged was virtually
wearing a mask. If the hon. gentleman's
statement which he gave us yesterday is to
be accepted we must take it as the expres-
sion of a- sentiment coming from an indivi-
dual, and not from the party. The writer to
whom I refer said further, that " we " — the
Liberal party — "had better make for annex-
ation at once instead of making two bites
on the cherry." Now, it is gratifying to
know

•Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The paper never en-
dorsed these views of Mr. Wiman's. Mr.
Wiman was never editor of the Globe.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — lam not aware that
I mentioned Mr. Wiman's name. I regret
that the hon. gentleman's comprehension
and knowledge of political a^airs of this
country did not suggest to him that I was
referring to the late editor of the Globe.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Mr. Farrer was eject-
ed from the Globe, perhaps for that very
reason. Mr. Wiman has been a contributor
of the Globe for many yeai-s.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-^I am glad to learn
the fact that he is a secret editor of the
Globe. This country has never before been
informed of that important fact.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentle-
man has no right to misunderstand me. I
stated that Mr. Wiman occasionally contri-
buted to the Globe. He always wrote over
his own name. That fact did not make the
Globe or the party responsible for his views.
I do not propose that the hon. gentleman
shall misrepresent me in this manner.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Neither do I pro-
pose that the hon. gentleman shall inter-
rupt me in such a manner or put me
off the line of my argument, nor do I pro-
pose that he shall draw a herring across the
track to put me out. Mr. Wiman, who is living
in another country, may have uttered the sen-
timents to which he has referred and I might
also hold the hon. gentleman responsible for
Mr. Wiman's opinions, he being in accord
with the sentiments which have been
uttered by Mr. Wiman in favour of commer-
cial union or unrestricted reciprocity, either
of which, to my mind, mean nothing more or
less than annexation to the United States.
I wish the hon. gentleman to bear in

mind that I have no desire to misrepresei
him. I have no desire to do so, nor do
propose to let him, if I can prevent it, si
that I wilfully misrepresent him. I rep
diate it : I have no desire or intention to c
so. I was referring to Mr. Farrer. Tl
hon. gentleman says Mr. Farrer w;
ejected from the Globe, When was he sei

I from the Globe ? It is only a few montl
ago. He was retained on the staff of tl
Globe for about two years, after it was prov<
he wrote letters to leading statesmen of tl
United States pointing out to them he

I they could strike the most fatal blow
Canada, he was not repudiated by the Glol

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The Globe is not t
organ of the Liberal party, and I am n
responsible for its opinions.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I am very glad
hear the hon. gentleman say so.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The Globe does ii
profess to be the organ of the Liberal pari

Hon.' Mr. BOWELL— We have anoth
** revelation" here to-day, and that too fr(
the leader of the Opposition, to the effect tl:
the Globe, the Toronto Globe — the Gh
that was instituted and established by t
late Peter Brown, and conducted with
much ability by a member afterwards
this House, the late Hon. George Brov
and since by a combination of the par
under the control of the party, and unc
the pay of Sir Richard Cartwright, IN
Edgar and others, is not the organ of t
Liberal party. If the Globe does not ut
the sentiments of the Liberal party,
is a great pity that they did not, wh
they met in convocation, repudiate i
Globe. I tell the hon. gentleman tl
neither he nor the party to which he
longs dare repudiate the Globe in the p
vince of Ontario, or say that it does i
utter the sentiments of the party w
which he is at present connected.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Not always.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL.— My hon. frie
says " not always," I do not pretend to s
that any newspaper utters the sentime;
or expresses the opinions in every partieu
of each individual member of the party
which he belongs or which he leads. Hun
nature is not so constituted that that

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Addre^.

possible, and the mere attempt to hide the
fact that the Globe is the leading organ of
the party, and that he with others is not
responsible for its utterances, will hardly
succeed. I had no desire to occupy so much
time upon this point, nor should I have done
so if the hon. gentleman had not inter-
rupted me.

Hon. Mr. POWER. —There is plenty of
time

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man says there is plenty of time. With your
permission, then, I will occupy it. Perhaps
if the hon. leader of the Opposition continues
his interruptions when I do not say that
which strictly merits his approval, I shall
occupy more time than I had intenderl. I
listened to the speech of the hon. gentleman
yesterday for three-quarters of an hour, and
I do not think I felt any more ple^ased at his
utterances than he is just now at mine, but
I had sufficient courtesy not to interrupt
him or interfere with the course of his
remarks, reserving to myself, as a mem-
ber of this House, the right to reply if not
in the same spirit, at least in as forcible a
manner as I could command. The hon. gen-
tleman rather ungraciously referred to the
defeat of my hon. friend from Welland, and
gave that as evidence of the fact that the
fiscal policy of the country was not what it
should be. If he had been as fair as I think
he should have been, he would have told this
House the means by which that hon. gentle-
man was defeated. He might have informed
the House that the gentleman who defeated
him had been disqualified by the courts of
his country for seven long years, not only
for the bribery of his friends, but for his
own personal bribery ; and that he carried
his case to the Supreme Court — the highest
court in the Dominion of Canada — where
the decision of the lower courts was con-
firmed. Those " human devices " which the
hon. gentleman knows so well are used by
his party in elections were the principal
means by which the hon. gentleman from
Welland was defeated. I know also from the
position that I held at the time, that of
Minister of Customs, that large petitions
flooded the department asking for the
reimposition of the duties upon fruit and
the products of that particular section of
Canada, and when they were reimposed in
accordance with their wishes — believing as
the Government did at the time that it was

the desire of the south-western peninsula of
Ontario, the fruit-growing section of the
country, the duties should be reimposed in
order that their markets might not be
destroyed by the influx of earlier fruits and
by the surplus of the United States — they,
like many of the party to which they
belong, as soon as an election arose, showed
their appreciation by voting against the
gentleman who had been successful in hav-
ing their request complied with. He might
also have told the people that after they
had lost the means by which they carried
many constituencies in the general election,
the people, in the by-elections not only
I reaffirmed the confidence which they had in
the Government of the day and in its policy,
but they returned, after a number of Liberal
members had been unseated, a sufficient
number to the Commons of Canada to give the
Government as they have to-day, a majority
of 70 instead of 29 or 30 at the termination
of the general elections. Does the hon. gen-
tleman desire figures in order to show that
the statements I make are correct ? If he
does he will find the Conserv'ative majorities
have been increased in the by-elections, as
the following statement shows : —

1891. 1892.

North Lanark •. . . 301 431

(ilengarry .321 374

Laval, Q«e 534 Accl.

Halton 1()4 144

East Middlesex ir>4 483

South Victoria 2r> 2.51

Prince Edward ;«) 212

East Elgin 4(i 598

Quebec West 53 389

Two Mountains 287 555

Richmond, N.S 1(>2 310

Montcalm 170 330

Bronie 1 AccL

The above are a few of the constituencies

which the Conservatives held, and the follow-
ing seats were won from the Liberals, and

the figures show the revulsion of feeling on
the part of the electorate :

(irit Con.

maj. maj.

1891. 1892.

Lennox 57 31

East Bnice 114 13

North Victoria 502 240

Soulanges 39 UK

Vaudreuil 98 .35

South Perth 177 18

Montmorency 50 Accl.

East Hastings 54 423

South Ontario 33 157

East Simcoe 207 15

West Huron 379 25

Monck 260 327

West Northumberland . . .. 37 55

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

Is this not evidence that after mature
deliberation, after a cahn consideration of
what is called the national policy and the
action of the Government in the past, in
reference to the whole policy of this coun-
try, the people of Canada not only reaffirmed
the opinions which they had formerly ex-
pressed, but increased their majorities in
every single constituency 1 Soulanges, which
had formerly a Liberal majority of 39, was
subsequently carried by the Conservatives bv
118.

Hon.
canal.

Mr. POWER— Carried by the

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Carried by the
votes of the people. My hon. friend sug-
gests that it was carried by the canal.
There is no water in the canal yet, so that
it could not carry anything, as it is not navig-
able. I hope it may be at no very distant
date when that canal will be in such a shape
as to place us in precisely the position that
the leader of the Opposition intimated to the
House that we had very improperly told the
people of the United States we wanted to
be totally independent of them.

The hon. gentlejnan referred to the ques-
tion of the exodus in this country, and he
told us that there must be something appal-
ling in the policy of the Government. He
said that the people were fleeing away from
the country as if from a plague. I think
there is an explanation why the hon. gentle-
man's party occupy the ground they do
to-day in this country- -that is, the hopeless
minority in which they are placed. The
people have been led to believe, by just such
speeches as were made in the Senate yester- 1
day by the hon. member, and such as perhaps |
we may hear again, not only in Ontario but !
in other sections of the Dominion, that i he ,
country was going to decay and ruin ; while 1
the plague from which they really flew was '
such utterances as the hon. gentleman '
addressed to us yesterday. The hon. gen-
tleman also drew a comparison between the '
progress made by the state of Michigan and I
the state of Washington, and our own coun- '
try. It was convenient to him to refer ,
almost exclusively to those two states of the '
Union as against the Dominion. i

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — Michigan as against
British Columbia. I

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— A very pe
question was asked by the hon. gen
on my left, when he asked the hon. k
to compare other sections of the
States with adjoining parts of C
That, however, was not convenient
hon. gentleman opposite, and consec
he slid away to the Pacific coast an
pared Washington with British CoIud

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I compared ]
with Manitoba.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— And Dakot
from which territory, I am very glad t€
thousands who have been misled in tl
by just such utterances as we have
here are flocking back into our own cc
into the North-west and Manitoba, as i
as they can. In connection with thi
reminded of a statement which I have
hand, obtained from the Minister of In
in which he gives the figures si
that during the past year over 14,00(
gone into the North-west and Manitol
a large proportion of these have been
who were misled by the utterances <
tain parties in this country to move to I
and who are now glad to get back intoCi
where they can live and prosper bette
in the United States. Had the hon. {
man referred to Maine, Vermont a
number of other states

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— And Massachus(

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— If he had
pared those states with Canada the f
would not have been quite so suitable 1
purpose. American statistics prove b
a doubt that the depreciation of the
of land, and the number of mortga^
some of those eastern states are
greater than in Canada. The raortga
debtedness is much greater than ir
portion of Canada. This is prove
the late census beyond a peradvei
They have steadily decreased in popul
while the province of Quebec, whicl
been looked upon as a standstill pro
has rapidly increased, and if hon. gentl
want a few facts in connection with this
ment, I will give them. I find by son
ures which have l)een placed in my 1
that the decrease in the rural sections of
eastern states is about as follows — I am s
ing now of the census of 1892. Here

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Addre8$.

result of the census in the following states
and rural districts :

Rural.

Coun-
ties.

Decrease.

Increase.

Decr'se.

Massachusetts . .
M.aine

1892.
67,034
19,486

146,963 20,271
21,206
12,001
12,264
17,049

New York State

Ohio.

Dlinois

Vermont . .....

Maryland

Rhode Island. . .

8
9

248

34,216

187,260

Indiana.

Michigan. ....

Iowa.

Kansas.

Kentucky.
Tenn^tsee ... .

11
27
22

Mississippi

Texas

Virginia

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— They move from one

part of the country to another. I did not

give the exodus from the rural parts. I

gave it from the whole territory. The hon.
gentleman is misrepresenting me.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL—I object to being
accused of pursuing the line of argument
which was adopted by the hon. gentleman
yesterday.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I have misled no-
body. I did not misquote them. The hon.
gentleman is quoting figures referring to the
rural parts and applying them in contradic-
tion of my statement relating to a whole
state.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Did I not tell the
House what was the character of the state-
ment ? I am inclined to think hon.* gentle-
men of this House are just as capable of
understanding me as the hon. gentleman
opposite, and if I make any improper
deductions from his remarks they will be
able to appreciate them. Passing from these
eastern states to Washington Territory, the
hon. gentleman's arguments or statements
were as delusive as were the arguments
which he applied to the eastern states ; for
this reason — when he told the House that
British Columbia had been settled for a
number of years, every man in this House
knows, every schoolboy in the country
knows, that for years and years, for scores

of years, that country was known to the
outside world merely as a fur country, occu-
pied by the Hudson Bay Company ; and sub-
sequently, after the discovery of gold, by
a mining population. Every one knows
that it was in such a geographical position
that it was impossible to reach it except by
the overland route or by Cape Horn and the
Pacific in less than five or six months' travel.
Does the House need to be told this? Yet
we are told that the state of Washington,
lying to the south of it, in close proximity
to Oregon and California, that had been
flooded with immigrants for years before, has
shown a greater increase than British Colum-
bia. It was just so in reference to Dakota,
Minnesota and Michigan, and many of those
states which had been accessible by railway
for fifteen years before there was any means
or possible way of reaching Manitoba, the
North-west country or British Columbia,
except by the route indicated above, for
it is only within the last five or six years,
since the construction of the Canadian Pacific
Railway, that the great resources of those
countries are beginning to develop. I think
I may safely predict that in less than ten
years a marvellous increase, not only of the
population of this country but in the develop-
ment of the mineral resources of British
Columbia will have taken place, and I look
forward with pride, as a Canadian, to the
rapid development of that great west. We
know it would be in the same state of isola-
tion to-day that it was fifty years ago, if the
hon. gentleman who leads the Opposition in
this House and his followers had been con-
ducting the Government of this country.
Why, the great Canadian Pacific Railway
would never have been constructed. We
have been condemned for the manner in
which we prosecuted that project, but the
time has arrived when in this, as in other
mattei'15, we find that gentlemen who formerly
opposed the expenditure in connection with
that great enterprise, and who predicted the
destruction of the credit of this country, are
now most ardent admirers of it, for reasons
best known to themselves. T believe the
same result will flow from the comple-
tion of our great canal system that has
followed from the construction of that and
other railways which are developing the
resources of this country at a rate of which
every Canadian ought to be, if he is not,
proud. In addition to that, the hon. gentle-
man, with a fairness which he has accused

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

me of not possessing, referred to the Trade
and Navigation Returns as evidence of the
exodus from this country of its inhabitants.
He turned to the return with a great deal of
gusto — I do not use that word disrespectfully
— with a good deal of pleasure, and he pointed
out that in the articles of export there were
settlers' effects to the amount of over a
million dollars ; from that fact he drew
a most doleful picture of the condition of
the country. He told the House that there
was 81,110,854 worth of household effects
exported during the last year. The moving
backwards and forwards to all sections of the
country has been going on continuously ever
since I was a boy, and as long as the Anglo-
Saxon race exists that will continue. Look
at the present moment at the islands in the
Pacific Ocean. Who are the people that are
developing the resources of those islands ?
Who is governing them ? The people of the
United States and the people of our own
Canada. The watchword has been, and will
continue to be, "westward," and if you
apply the same argument and the same logic,
if I may misapply the word in connection
with statements of this kind, that has been
used in explanation of the exodus from
Canada, you would have emptied the United
States . I might call the hon. gentleman's
attention to page 332 of the imports and he
will find that in this, as in all the other
branches of trade — if I may call such exports
and imports a branch of trade — that the
household effects which were imported into
Canada last year exceeded the exports by
nearly half a million dollars. T have no doubt
that was a matter of very great regret to
the hon. gentleman.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— No.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL Well, if it were
not a matter of regret why did he not tell
the House that while they had been export-
ing household effects which represented, as
he says, an exodus of the people from this
country, that the importation by immigrants
coming into Canada was much greater than
the exports ? If he desired to be fair — if he
did not desire to misrepresent — if he did not
desire to lead the people of this country to
believe that the policy of the Government
was to drive all the people out of the coun-
try, he would have told them this side of the
quastion as well as the other one. From the
IJnited States alone, the importation of

household effects for the same year amount

to $1,651,972, so that in this particul

small though it may be, it is another e

dence — I will not say of a desire, but

evidence — of the manner in which the peo

of Canada artf misled in reference to aim

every matter affecting the country. Havi

dealt with this horrid exodus and the pla^

which exists in this country in the way

our state policy, the hon. gentleman drif1

into the Trade and Navigation Returns a

attempted to draw conclusions from th

which very few will be enabled to dr

from the facts and figures there j

sen ted. The hon. gentleman took the Tn

and Navigation Returns and holding them

to the gaze of the members of the Sen

read the figures for two or three years, pi

ing out one year here and another year the

and then saying, " see what was done dur

these periods.'' T have noticed in aim

all discussions upon the same question t

those who oppose the present policy do not t;

the average of any four or five years and

what the result was. If you take tli

very years to which the hon. gentlen

from Ottawa refers, you will find that

' 1874 — and that is when the hon. gentlen

j had the honour of being one of the ad vis

of Her Majesty in this country — the t(

exports amounted to $89,351,927 ;

, when they left office in 1879 — T am tak

I the year after the hon. gentleman and

' party assumed the control of affairs in \

I countiy, and the year after they left ofi

' because the policy of the present Grovc

I ment could not by any possibility have

any effect at all until about 1880, 1881 ;

I 1882 ; hence I take the year 1879. W

his part}^ left office the total exports

I fallen to* $71,491,000, a decline of no

'than $17,860,703; yet the hon. gentler

tells U9 that if another policy had been ]

sued the exports and imports of this ct

I try would have been much greater than t

were in 1892. How was it with the im

tations ? When the hon. gentleman

his party assumed office the importat

were $128,213,582. When they left t

I had dropped to $81,964,427, a falling of

' the extent of $46,249,155 within those

years of Liberal rule, with that pci

I that they are now holding out to

! gaze of the rising generation of Cam

I in full force. Compare it with

present year, and take the whole ag

I gate of trade, and we find that w

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address,

they held office the aggregate during
that period was $217,565,510. When
they left office the aggregate was $153,455,-
682, a falling off to the extent of $64,109,-
828 ; so that you may take the whole trade
of the country and you will find that the
statements I have made will bear out all and
more than we have claimed, and more than
the party to which I belong have claimed for
it. Look at the trade so far as it affects the
farming industry — represented by a large
class of people who have been lately taken
under the special care and guardianship of cer-
tain hon. gentlemen — and what does it show?
The exportation of farm products to Great
Britain in 1891 was $24,264,272 and last
year it amounted to no less than $36,091,589,
an increase of $11,827,367. It is true that
the hon. the leader of the Opposition yester-
day stated, when he referred to the increase
of trade last year, that it was the result of
the large output of the North-west and the
farming community. If the farming com-
munity in this country has so progressed in
the production of cereals, animals and other
products of the farm that they had nearly
twelve millions more to export in 1892 than
the year before, it certainly is not an evi-
dence of their deterioration either in §kill nor
industry, or that they are becoming poorer
under the fiscal policy of this Government. It
is an evidence of this, however, that they are
growing in wealth. In the aggregate they
are better off than they were before. There
may be isolated cases, there may be certain
sections of the country, and we all know
it, in which the farming community like
others are not as well off as they
should be, but it has led intelligent
farmers in the country to the conclusion
that they must change their agricultural
methods to meet altered conditions. I re-
member when the treaty of 1854 was abro-
gated, in my own section of the country
whenever you saw a Yankee drover, as we
called them, coming into the district to buy
the settlers' cattle, the farmers were glad to
take $10, $15, or $20 per head for tWr
stock, and if they got $25 for a cow they
thought they were rich. At that time the
farmers were devoting their whole time and
energies to the growing of coarse grains
which found a market in the United States.
When that market ceased, they turned their
attention to other branches of farming. I
see an hon. gentleman opposite tome who was
one of the first to visit the United States

and study their dairying industries and the
mode and manner in which they were car-
ried on, and he came back to his' county
and established the first cheese factory in
the eastern section of our country. The re-
sult is to-day that the farmers have turned
their attention to dairying and stock raising,
instead of to growing coarse grains. I refer
particularly to the hon. Senator from Quints
(Mr. Read) and to the county of Hastings.
We have now over forty cheese factories in
that district, and they are beginning to
establish creameries under instructions from
the Experimental Farm — over w^hich my
hon. friend to my right (Mr. Angers) pre-
sides. I look forward to the time, at no very
distant day, when our butter will occupy as
prominent and profitable a position in the
English market, as the cheese does to-day.
We exported last year cheese to the amount
of $11,000,000. It may not be grati-
fying to the gentlemen who desire com-
mercial union, continental union, or un-
restricted reciprocity — which that able
but erratic writer, Mr. Goldwin Smith,
says, mean one and the same thing —
to know that the McKinley Bill, instead of
destroying the trade of this country, has only
diverted it from the United States to England.
The Tradeand Navigation Returns show that
whDe our trade with the United States is
falling off through the operatiQn of their
policy, it is increasing with England. Our
neighbours are cutting off their own noses to
spite us. The export of the products of the
farm to the United States in 1891 was $10,-
188,760, being $14,075,462 less than to Great
Britain ; while last year it had fallen through
the operation of their own tariff, and from the
fact that there is a better market in England
than there is in the United States,to $7,235,-
012; and I am convinced, from a careful
study of this question and from practical
experience of the tariff during the period I
have held a position in the Government of
Canada, that the whole trade of this country
is gradually going to England and to Europe,
where we find the consumer, rather than
passing through the United States, where
our products are purchased by the mid-
dleman, who exacts his profit and then
sends the goods on to England. It is
nonsense to suppose that a country that
exports as does the United States is our best
market. Take the articles of ham and pork
as an illustration. I have the President s
message in my hands stating the figures.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

In one month alone, last year, they
exported over 94 millions of pounds of the pro-
ducts of the hog to the European markets. Yet
we are told that we ought to take the duty
oflfpork from the United States by means of
unrestricted reciprocity, and that it would
have the eflPect of pro viding a profitable market
for exporters from Canada. That may be so,
but I am unable to draw any such conclusion
from the facts as they exist. This trade ques-
tion, I admit, is one that is very prolific of
argument. I might occupy your time for
hours in discussing it. It is worth studying,
and while I ask the forgiveness of the
House for referring to it at the length I
have done, I may explain that I should not
have done so, had it not been for the remarks
of the hon, gentleman opposite yesterday.
Departing a little from the line of argument
which I have just been following, if you
will examine the following table showing the
aggregate trade with Great Britain and
United States for the last five years, you
will find that the conclusions I have indicated
are absolutely warranted by the figures : —

With With

(ireat Britain. United States.

1888 % 79.383,745 91,053,913

1889 80,422,515 94,059,844

1890 91,743,935 92,814,783

1891 91,328,384 94,824,352

1892 106,254,984 92,125.599

Last year, the tide was taking a turn and
our trade with Great Britain exceeded our
trade with the United States by over four-
teen millions. I know it has been said that
this is not a matter for congratulation, that
if the* farmers had the nearer market which
some are clamouring for, the trade would
not be flowing to England, but would be
going across the border. I admit that that
may be so to a certain extent, but if it
were so, the profit derived by those who are
exporting to a foreign country would not be
so great as it is to-day, from the simple reason
that our products would be purchased by
middlemen in the United States, either for
purposes of exportation or to take the place
of products of the United States which had
. been exported ; consequently, the pur-
chaser in this country would be minus just
the difierence between that which he would
receive from the middleman, and that which
he would receive from the consumer himself.
The hon. gentleman said also, that we had not
progressed in our exports or in our imports
as was indicated and claimed by the party

in power, that is to an extent which adde
to the material prosperity of the countr;
If he will look at the mining industr
although that is comparatively in its infanc
he will find that we exported last year 137,9^
tons of coal in excess of the year before. W
exported 9,880,975 pounds of nickel, the pr
duct of the mines of the northern section ^
the country, more than was exported tl
year before. That industry is just beginnii
to develop, and I hope that at no very di
tant day, instead of exporting the matte, <
ore, from this country, we shall have indu
tries established and factories in operatio
so as to produce the pure article, and n
enrich the United States by the cost of tl
labour employed in bringing the metal
a perfect state. If you will look at the ii
portation of raw materials, you will find tl
same result. We imported of cotton, tobac
leaf, raw silk and wool, 2,068,985 poun
more than the year before. If we import
that quantity of these materials in the re
state more than we imported during t
previous year, it is an evidence that the i
dustries in this country are increasing the
output to that extent precisely, and if t
industries are increased to that extent in t
use of that enormous quantity of raw mal
rial, then the labour, in order to manufactu
the articles, must be greater, and wages
better than the year before ; and so on
almost every vocation of life. Referri
again to the amount of exportation, we <
ported last year leather goods, ships, cottoi
implements and carriages (this does r
include the settlers' eflfects to which the h(
gentleman referred yesterday) $732,4
worth more than we did the year befo
In addition to this, as the speech refers
the continued progress of the country, I w
oflfer a few figures as to what the result
the last six months has been, the six mont
ending on the 31st December last. Duri
the six months ending on the 3!
December, 1891, the imports amounted
$59,615,848 and during the last six mont
of 1892 they had risen to $60,322,0(
The exports for the last six months of t
year 1891 were $71,738,049, and for t
last six months of the calendar year whi
has just ended, they were $74,256,707. T
increase in the imports was $506,875 ; a
it is a gratifying fact that the exports
this country, of all classes of goods, increas
during that six months (and were by
the largest exportation during any corr

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUAEY31, 1893] Address.

ponding period in former years) by $2,518,-
658, so that there is every prooability that
at the end of this year we will show a much
larger export trade, as well as a much larger
aggregate trade, than that for the year end-
ing the 30th June, 1892. The most grati-
fying fact of all is that these exportations
are principally the products of the farm, the
forest and the mine. My hon. friend men-
tioned the question of cheese and butter.
There was exported for the year ending
30th June, 1892, from the United States of
the product of the dairy (which includes
cheese and butter, and to the latter of which
we have not devoted our attention at all
until of late) $11,038,884. I may -mention
that this has added to it oleomargarine,
which should not be included in the pro-
ducts of the dairy, and therefore, Canada
stands pre-eminently in a better position in
that respect. We exported of the products
of the dairy in the same year $12,708,470,
showing that in the last decade — not alto-
gether within the last decade, but certainly
since the repeal of the old reciprocity treaty
— we have changed our position in Canada
from being importers of these articles to a
large extent from England and the United
States to being larger exporters of dairy
products than the whole 65,000,000 of peo-
ple in the neighbouring country. With
5,000,000 of a population, we send more
dairy products out of Canada to the English
market than our neighbours do from the

whole of the United States.

Hon. Mr. READ — I may say that we
are only just commencing.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I quite concur in
the opinion of the hon. member from Quints.
We are only just commencing. The indus-
try is just in its infancy, and I look forward
to a period at no very distant day when the
product of the creameries of my own province
and the other provinces in this Dominion
will quite equal that of cheese. There is no
reason why it should not do so, and , the
trade will increase. People will ask : " Oh,
where can you dispose of the vast quantities
that you are producing?" In reply, TiOok
at the trade returns of England and see
the amount of money paid for these two
articles every year, and you will find that
the market within the bounds of those little
islands of Great Britain and Ireland will be
quite sufficient to absorb all that Canada

and the United States can produce for the
next twenty-five years.

We have heai^ a very great deal of the
change of th^ features of trade in this country
with the United States. We have been told
that we have been legislating against the
interests of the mother land, that our whole
policy was a discrimination against England
and in favour of the country to the south of
us. Do the facts and figures prove these
statements 1 I have an interesting table be-
fore me, running down from 1868 to 1892,
showing the percentages of the trade of
Canada which went to Great Britain and
the United States respectively. It is as fol-
lows : —

EXPORTS OF PRODUCTS OF THE FARM.

Per cent exported to Per cent ezi>orted to
United States. Oreat Britain.

1868 60-36 34-31

1869 67-70 33-23

1870 58-00 37-67

1871 -. . 58-82 36-00

1872 5412 40-36

1873 44-46 5028

1874 42-16 53-58

1875 43-72 56 03

1876 47-88 4685

1877 43-69 51*07

1878 35-78 5978

1879 38-91 56-83

1880 35-34 59-54

1881 37-90 58-22

1882 4811 47-79

1883 43-00 52-43

1884 3902 57-00

1885 38-09 58-91

1886 39-01 56-76

1887 35-42 5979

1888 44-58 51-95

1889 43-58 5334

1890 36-50 60-08

1891 29-28 66-21

1892 16-78 77-28

I am sure that everylxxly who will take the
trouble to read these figures and study them
will come to the conclusion that England is
the natural market for the products of this
country, and as our people begin to under-
stand it — the change is taking place so
mpidly that people can scarcely apprehend
the fact — they will adjust themselves to the
new conditions of trade. These figures show

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATEJ Address,

the indisputable fact — say what you will of
the McKinley Act — that if its operation has
been injurious to any class, it has been to the
interests of the people of the United States
themselves and not to the people of Canada.'
I repeat, our trade being direct with England,
instead of through the United States, gives
the best possible evidence that we are reap-
ing a great benefit financially and pecuniarily
from the operation of the McKinley Act, to
the loss and detriment of the people engaged
in trade in the United States. If this is
satisfactory to the people of that country,
we certainly can have no cause to complain.

Hon. xMr. BOULTON— That is the differ-
ence between free trade and protection.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Precisely, so far as
affects the United States, but not in the sense
in which the hon. gentleman intended to
apply it. I probably may have something to
say at some future time with regard to this
question of free trade versus protection. We
have it constantly stated that our policy
taxes the importations from England at a
much greater percentage than the goods we
import from the United States, and that
therefore we are discriminating against
England because we import a greater quantity
of English goods which pay a heavier percen
tage of duty than those which come from the
United States. Had any one of these gentle-
men, who have so freely and so often spoken
upon this point in connection with the trade
of the country, taken the trouble to cal-
culate the percentage of duties paid upon
goods imported from England in 1878 and
1892 — the one being under what was termed
the revenue trade policy of the hon. gentle-
men opposite, and the other under the pro-
tective or National Policy of the present Gov-
ernment— they would have found that the
relative percentages are so nearly alike that
there is scarcely any appreciable difference
between them. I will give you the percent-
ages, that the electorate may know when they
hear this statement again that, even if the
hon. gentleman who leads the Opposition
should unfortunately for the country find his
way to the treasury benches and return
to the old policy and reduce the tariff to one
for revenue purposes only, the same results
would f ol low that which flowed from thei r tariff
in 1878. I have had this calculation made very
closely and accurately. It is as follows : —

5
&

C Cat^ N

feoo
cTtC

^-1

•is

Wlien you consider this important f
connection with our importations from
Britain and the United States you w
the statement of the opponents of oui
policy, so far as its affects British trade
If you consult the Trade and Navi
Returns you will find that a large proj
of the duties paid on articles coming
England are collected on wines, liquoi
and other luxuries which are used
wealthier classes of the people. Take 1
for instance, the duties imposed on
average from 1 00 to 1 50 percent. Liquor
principally from Great Britain, not fr<
United States ; and if you deduct th<
paid on sil ks, satins, 1 iquors and wines im]
from Great Britain, from the aggregate
of the country you will find that theperw
would be lower upon the articles im]
from England than those upon goods
the United States. Yet we hear the stat
constantly made that we discriminate a
Great Britain and even see it repeated in I
published over their own names, in
newspaper reports, and in their editorii
the same subject, that we are discriniii
against Great Britain, from the fact
taking the percentage based on the im

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address,

tions from these two countries we collect more
on goods from England than on goods from the
United States. I have shown that under
their own tariff and management the diifer-
ence was about the same as it is at the present
time. I have another table here which should
l)e placed before this country. We hear at
the present time a good deal about tariff
reform. We are told that, because a change
of political parties has taken place in the
United States, therefore we must change
our whole policy — that they intend to reduce
their duties. I hope they may. I hope they
may go so far as to place Canada towards
the United States in precisely the same
position that Canada occupied for years and
years to the United States. I should like
them to reduce their tariff as low as ours was
while the hon. gentlemen opposite were in
power and we keep our own where it is, or
nearly so, that we might get into the United
States and flood their markets with the
products of our industries as they used to
flood ours. When that time arrives I shall
not only be glad to see it but hail with delight
any change that they may make: If any
hon. gentlemen will take the trouble to read
an article in the Forum for February written
by Mr. Wells, who is certainly a good author-
ity upon matters of this kind, he will learn
that Mr. Wells points out that it is utterly
impossible for the United States to reduce its
tariff below 25 per cent, leaving aside such
articles of luxury as liquors, tobaccos and
articles of that kind. That is much higher
than our own, taking out these articles. Ours
averages not more than seventeen and a half
per cent. Now, has not the policy of the
Government during the last ten years been |
to reduce the taxation upon the people of this I
country whenever an opportunity presented
itself and the revenues of the country j
would justify it? When we came into i
power in 1878 we found deficits of'
millions and millions year after year. These I

deficits had to be made up by borrowing
money from England, and we found that
the debt was increasing just in proportion to
the ajnount of each deficit, but just as soon
as a change of policy took place the revenue
began to rise, and just in proportion to the
increase of revenue the people were relieved
of such taxation as bore directly on the
masses ; so that tariff reform has been carried
on from the very moment that what is
termed the National Policy was adopted by
this country. I will show you the extent to
which that reduction has taken place, con-
fining myself, mark you, only to a very few
articles. iWhen the Refonn party came into
power in 1874 we found that in order to
raise money a great scheme was brought
forward by the Finance Minister of that time
— something I suppose which must have l)een
astounding to men like Gladstone, Disraeli,
and those who had dealt with finan-
cial problems in the old country. We
know — those of us particularly who were
in Parliament — that we first had a tariff
brought down, of an incongruous character,
which satisfied nobody. Then we had that
magnificent stratagem of raising the whole
tariff two and a half per cent, which was
certainly one of the most remarkable evi-
dences of statesmanship and financial ability
ever presented to the country. In addition
to that they placed a duty on tea, coffee and
other articles from which it had been removed
by the Government of Sir John Macdonald
previous to going out of power. Now, if
you take the duty on the articles of tea,
coffee, and tin, together with bill stamps
and newspaper postage, which have ^l)een
removed by the present Government, and
add to them what has been saved in the
way of taxes upon coal and sugar you would
be surprised at the amount of which the
people of this country have been relieved
since 1883 to 1892 inclusive. The figures
are as follows : —

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

YcAr.

Tea.

Coflfw.

Coal.

Tin.

Sugar.

Bill
Statu I iH.

1882 i 682,3(K»

1883 1>99,571

1884 81)5,933

188.'> 1,032,040

1886 I 1,275,670

1887 1,020,313

188S !»55,361

1880 1>51,417

1890 1,004,149

1891 978,977

1892 1,257,966

Total 11,063,697

36,344
37,076
32,456
51,988
24,082
24,106
42,6(J2
52,420
56,157
60,642
60,894

312,360
1,068,652
638,043
600,r>67
699,533
739,553

57,480

103,848

84,025

91,402

97,805

104,094

106,967

115,038

120,(>71

116,049

155,646

4,500,000

180,000
181,000
182,0(K)
183,000
184,000
185,000
186,000
187,000
188,000
189,000

478,827 4,058,808 1,152,025 \ 4,500,000 1,845,000 i

Making a total Having in these twelve years of ^23,773,357.

In addition to the articles enumerated in the '
table which I have just read, there are on i
the free list to-day 113 articles more than
there were in 1878, when the National!
Policy was first introduced, showing that
the Conservative party did not lose sight of j
tariff reform, when such reform was neces- ]
sarj' in the interests of the people. I
notice that these gentlemen whenever they
talk to the people of the country make no
reference to the fact that in proportion to
the increase of the revenue the Government
have never lost sight of the important fact |
that they should relieve the people of duties
upon articles which go into general consump-
tion, and which the poorest person in the
land has to buy, while keeping the duty as
high as it ever was upon such luxuries as
liquors, silks and other articles of a similar
kind. I have dealt with this question
of trade at sufficient length and shall now
confine myself to a few remarks in reference
to the criticism of the hon. gentleman upon
the canal tolls and the construction of the
8ault Ste. Marie Canal. T was surprised --
well, hardly surprised — at the eulogy passed
by the hon. leader of the Opposition upon
President Harrison's message to Congress
in reference to the imposition of canal tolls.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— T passed no eulogy.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman would allow me to explain what
r considered was a eulogy.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT- I said that his pro-
clamation was copied from yours,

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That wasa compli-
ment to us. The hon. gentleman said that

it was the most masterly piece of dipl
that he had ever read. Then he sai(
it was an exact copy of the Canadian
in Council.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-
same -lines.

-T said it was <

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. ^
man paid us the compliment of sayin
it was a masterly piece of diplomac}
that it was on the same lines as the
dian Order in Council, but if he had si
the question, and he will permit me \
so very respectfully, he would have le
that it was not on the same lines f
Order in Council issued in Canada, an(
its provisions are not the same as oui
it applies to all vessels passing throu^
Sault Canal bringing articles to any p<
Canada, no matter for what purpose,
is no such regulation and no such pro
in the Order in Council passed by the
ernment of Canada, and if the hon. g
man had referred to the report made b
Interstate Committee, or committee c
House of Representatives or of the S
(I am not sure which), on the trade reli
between Canada and the United Stat
would have learned that that report
distinctly and positively that the 27th (
of the Washington Treaty was repeah
the Government of the United States
they repealed the other clauses of the ti*
and consequently, no matter what we
have done in reference to the cana
was not an infringement of the ]
sions of a treaty which had no exisi
accoi-ding to the rej)ort of that conmi
I can t^ll the hon. gentleman further,

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUAEY 31, 1893] Address.

if he has not read it, he ought to have read
it l:»e£ore he came to a conclusion — and should
study it before he attempts again to lecture
an intelligent body like this, and the
people of this country — that the most emi-
nent members of the bar in the United States
have given the same opinion and I know
that some of the most prominent members of
the bar in this country hold the same
opinion in reference to the repeal of that
section of the treaty. I am not speaking my
own individual opinions. In the negotiations
with the late Mr. Blaine and Mr. Foster,
the present Secretary of State, I read that
report to them and stated that if the opinions
expressed by the gentlemen who composed
that committee — and they were the most
eminent men representing these bodies in
the United States — were correct, the United
States Government had no right to find fault
with anything we might' do in reference to
the management of the tolls of our canals.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I have never heard
before that this Government supposed that
the clauses had been repealed.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There are a great
many' things the hon. gentleman, I was con-
vinced from the speech that he made yesterday,
had not read and does not know. I am tell-
ing the hon. gentleman the views taken on
the subject in the United States, and I am
telling this House the views that are enter-
tained by eminent legal gentlemen in this
country. It is true, we have not acted on that
view, but I say that if leading statesmen in
the United States hold that view on this parti-
cular question — they have no right to find
fault with any action that we might take,
even if we were to shut up the canals. That
same report used this language, as near as I
can recall it — that they were using Canada's
canals at the sufferance of the Government
of Canada. It is not our policy, it was not
our desire to deprive the United States of
the use of these canals. We are not obli-
Wous of the fact that we have interests at
stake just as great as they have ; nor are
we forgetful of the advantages that accrue
from the use of all these canals on terms of
equality, both by the United States and by
Canada. The hon. gentleman, unintention-
ally, I think, misled the House.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-
the House.

-No, T did not mislead

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That infers that
the hon. gentleman knows what impression
was left upon the minds of the members of
the House, when he made his speech. He
may be a clairvoyant for aught I know, and
able to read the minds of others, and thereby
know the views and sentiments held by each
member of the Senate, but I repeat the im-
pression left on this House, I will not say
that it was left on the House, because I think
the House too intelligent — but the impression
attempted to be left was that we gave no
rebate upon American vessels passing through
the canals discharging at Ogdensburgh, while
a Canadian vessel did get the rebate, even if
she discharged her cargo there.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — I made my remarks
as clear as possible.

. Hon. Mr. BOWELL- The impression
was left on the minds of members as I have
indicated. What are the facts ? If an Ameri-
can vessel passed through the Welland Canal
and goes direct to Montreal with her cargo,
even though she discharges or tranships it at
Kingston, and that cargo is exported from
Canada, she re>;eives the eighteen cents
rebate.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT I stated so positively
over and over again.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That may have
been the intention of the hon. gentleman,
but I repeat it, a different impression was
left on the House, and T am stating what
that impression was.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentleman
must not misrepresent me. I am not accus-
tomed to being misrepresented in.the manner
in which the hon. gentleman has tried over
and over to do it to-day.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I have no desire to
misrepresent the hon. gentleman. I am not
doing it intentionally. I appeal to the judg-
ment of this House as to whether I am mis-
representing him by what I have said. If
the House says that I have misrepresented
him in any particular, I shall readily apologize
for having done so. It would be improper for
me todoso under any circum8tances,and partic-
ularly so now, this being the first opportunity
that I have had of addressing this honourable
body. I desire to place before the House and
the country the facts as they really exii*t :

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

If a British vessel came througl^ the Wel-
land Canal with a cargo of grain and took
it to Montreal for the purpose of export, a
rebate of 18 cents per ton was paid. If a
United States vessel came in the same way,
it was treated in exactly the same manner
and received the same rebate. If a British
vessel, after passing through the Wei land
Canal with its cargo, transhipped it at King-
ston or any other Canadian port for export
at Montreal, a rebate was granted as before.
If a citizen of the United States treated his
cargo in the same manner he received the
same rebate. If a Canadian vessel discharged
its cargo short of Montreal, without tranship-
ment thereto, it paid the full toll of 20
cents; and a United States Vessel tranship-
ping its cargo in the same way also paid the
full toll of 20 cents. If a British vessel
brought its cargo to a United States port,
east of the Welland Canal and transhipped
it to Montreal for export, it received no
rebate, but paid full toll ; and a United
States vessel treating its cargo in the same
way paid the same full toll. Local Cana-
dian cargoes shipped from ports east of the
Welland Canal, for Montreal, paid full toll
on the St. Lawrence Canals ; United States
cargoes shipped from points east of the Wel-
land Canal to Montreal, paid the same t<jlls.
So that in all respects the same treatment was
given in the Canadian canals to United
States citizens as to subjects of Her Majesty.
The regulations that were passed and
adopted by the Government apply with the
same force to all vessels. We admitted in
our negotiations with Mr. Blaine, that it was
a discrimination against a route ; and if it
were not so, what would be our position, or
what does the hon. gentleman desire that
this Government should do, or what would
he do if he were in power ? If his views
were adopted,an American vessel which passes
through the Welland Canal, and proceeds
to Ogdensburgh and tranships, she would re-
ceive 18 cents rebate on each ton of her
cargo ; but if a Canadian vessel passed through
the Welland Canal and proceeded to Pres-
cott, a Canadian port, opposite Ogdensburgh,
and unloaded her cargo of wheat, the ulti-
mate destination of which might be Ottawa
via the St. Lawrence and Ottawa Railway,
for the mills there, for consumption in Canada,
she would pay the full amount of 20 cents
per ton ; so that there would be an actual
discnmination against every consumer in
Canada of 18 cents per ton on the bread-

stuffs brought through the Canadian (

I and discharged in the manner I ha

I scribed. That is the policy that thi

! gentleman would like tohaveinaugui**

this country. It is quite equal to the

they pursued in 1878, when theoperai

their tariff, and their whole policy, bi

I the country to the verge of bank

I and ruin. I have stated the positioi

. which we hold in reference U

I canal question. The hon. gentlemai

j that probably we would continue it

I year. I have no doubt that he i*ea<

I newspapers and probably has seen tl

' patch which was published and sent

j United States, stating that while we 1

1 the right as Canadians to legislate up«

question, in the lines that I have inc

we have done, we do not propose to oo

it after this year, pi*oviding that they

not impose a tax on vessels passing tl

the Sault Canal. However, they d

accept that as sufficient. On the co

they said that we pr-omised them duii

negotiation last February to remove thi

and here, again, I think the public i

Canada have just cause to complain

acbion of those who are opposed td

politically. Whenever the question

acity arises between American diplon

statesmen and ours, or whether it

American newspapei-, it matters n<

high or low it may stand in public o]

they always give the preference t

American version of the affair, and int

as tlie hon. gentleman did yesteixlay, tl

•statements made by Sir John Thompsc

Foster and myself were not correc

that the version given by Mr. Blair

Gen. Foster was the correct one, and t

had not told the exact truth in the r

Fortunately, a despatch which was vi

from General Foster, now Secretaiy o;

of United States, not ten days ago, si

the statements which we made on our

to Canada, after our interviews. Tl

patch verified every word we utte

reference to our mission. What n>

them in our negotiations was, that we

upon our return to Canada, consid

question fully, with a view to removin

were found to be contrary to the treat}

lations, any misconception that migli

arisen upon this question. That is w

stated when we returned. The ^

given by Mr. Blaine and Mr. Foste

I that we had promised to remove tlie di

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address.

nation (a« they termed it) in connection with
the canal tolls so far as transhipment at
Ogfiensburgh was concerned. What we did
state, and I repeat it here on my responsi-
bility as a minister of the Crown, apart
altogether from my own position, personally,
and in defence of my own and colleagues
honour, that we made no such promise. I
ha^•e in my hand an extract from
this despat<5h in which it is acknow-
ledged, unintentionally perhaps, that the
statements which we made on our re-
turn were literally true. But General
Foster goes on to say that they, Mr. Blaine
and himself, drew certain inferences. I, nor
my colleagues are responsible for any in-
ferences that Mr. Blaine or Mr. Foster may
have drawn from any remarks we made on
that occasion. We are not in the habit of
expressing our views in such a manner
as to lead to any misapprehension. Mr.
Blaine paid me the compliment of say-
ing : " You are an Englishman, and a
frank man." I admitted it. I was
neither ashamed that I was born in England
nor of being frank and outspoken in any
opinion that I had to express to him, or jn
any other matters, particularly, where the
interests of my country were at stake. I
added that I had been a resident of Canada
for about sixty years and thought I might lay
claim to being a tolerably good Canadian by
this time. I was surprised at the position
the hon. gentleman took in reference to the
Sault Canal. There was one remark he made
which was true, and with which I am. fully
in accord. He said that the Government of
the day seemed to act with a good deal of
bravado, or words to that effect, and to boast
that they would be independent of the
United States. I hope I may live long
enough to see the time — though I am now
pretty well advanced in years — when we will
l>e under no obligations to the United States j
in trade relations, or in anything else. It is i
my desire to have, if possible, the most
friendly relations with the United States
and all the rest of the world. It is my
desire to see free intercourse, as far as is
consistent with tbe protection of our own
interests ; but I do not wish to be placed,
nor do I believe that any patriotic Canadian
wishes to be placed in the position— if I may
use the term — of playing second iiddle to, or
being dependent on, any foreign power in
order to get to market with the products of
our country. With respect to Mr. Blaine —

I speak respectfully of him, because our
intercourse with him was such as to make
me — while I differed materially and essen-
tially from the position he took — admire the
man for the frankness with which he gave
expression to his views. I like to discuss
qu^tions with a man who speaks frankly
and openly, and when he turned around
upon us and put almost the same question
that the hon. gentleman put in this House
yesterday — " what do you want to go to th'e
expense of constructing that canal for ?" I
simply replied, " to be independent of you,
Mr. Blaine. You forget, perhaps, that your
predecessor recommended to Congress the
adoption of a policy of non-kitercourse
with this country. You may not bear in
mind, in all probability, what the effect
of non-intercourse would be. The only
means we have of outlet at certain
seasons of the year for the products of our
great North-west, which are yearly swelling
by millions of bushels, is by the railway. We
are but tive millions, and you are sixty-five
millions, and we cannot afford to be at your
mercy to shut any outlet we may have now,
or hereafter, in order to cripple the trade of
our country ; and by that threat of yours of
non-intercourse,you have put us to an expense
of over $3,000,000, but we have readily spent
it. Being an independent people, we pro-
pose to govern ourselves, amicably with you
if possible, but if not, we will do it alone."
That is precisely our position. I must con-
fess that I was sui'prised to hear the leader
of a great party in this country give expres-
sion to a regret that we had spent money in
the construction of that canal. It was a
fatal mistake that was made by the late Sir
Francis Hincks (then Mr. Hincks), when
he did not seize the opportunity origi-
nally of having the canal built on the north
shore of the Sault instead of allowing the
Americans to build it. My hon. friend is
old enough toijemwnber the discussions which
took place at that time, but unfortunately, there
were politicians in that day who entertained
views similar to those held by some hon.
gentlemen at present, and they were willing
to sacrifice their own country and let the
Americans get control of the carrying trade
and the means of outlet and inlet of our great
North-west at the expense of their own
country. I was a young man at the time,
but I remember distinctly taking the same
view then that I do now — that a fatal mis-
take had been made. The hon. mover of the

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] AUress.

Address said we intended to have a lock similar
to that of the United States. That was the
original intention, but after the death of our
lamented chief, a change was made in the
plans of that canal, w^hen I visited the works
in company with my hon. friend on my left
(Hon. Mr. Smith), to whom I must give credit
for assisting materially in changing the plans.
Of course we did not view the situation from
an engineering stand-point, because neither
cff us is an engineer, but we lay claim to that
quality which enables men to get through the
world successfully, the quality of common
sense. We found that the Americans were
building a lock 600 feet long, 100 feet wide
and twenty feet deep. It will be easily
understood that with a lock one hundred
feet wide, each halt gate must be in the
neighbourhood of sixty feet wide. The pres-
sure must be tremendous, and the difficulties
in working the gates very great, hence we
came to the conclusion, after consulting our
engineer, that a lock sixty feet wide, nine
hundre<l feet long, and twenty feet deep,
would be much more practical and much
easier worked, than one of the dimensions
built by the United States ; I am glad to
know that the engineers, who ought to have
better ideas on questions of this kind than
two laymen, approved of this; and when in
Washington we pointed this out to the United
States people, that we would not only have
a canal better than theirs, which could be
worked easier and cheaper, but that it was to
be built on a plan which would enable us to
duplicate it whenever the trade of thecountry
shall require it. Theentranceto the canal from
the Sault River is wide enough for two
locks, and the north wall is being so built as to
enable us to construct a similar lock to the
north of it, when vessels will be able to go
east and west without interruption of trade.
I say, with all respect, that any Canadian
who grudges the expenditure on that work
and thinks it unnecessary, ij^ my opinion,
has very little regard for the greatness and
the future prosperity of his country. The
same remarks apply to the negotiations
with Newfoundland. The hon. gentleman
thought that Confederation was rounded off!
sufficiently as it was, and that Newfound-
land ought not to be brought into the con-
federacy. I differ from him in toto upon
that question. T look upon the isolation of
Newfoundland, in the present state of
affaii's, as one of the most serious menaces to-
wards the peace and harmony of this coun-

try, not only as regards the United
but with respect to other countries ii
Every few months, or every few year.^
thing arises in which the people of Ne^\
land are deeply interested, and would
get a connection with the United
no matter at what expense to C
thereby placing Canada and Canadia
ermen at a disadvantage in the mar]
the world. Take the present Bond
as an example, and what would its
be ? Every quintal of tish taken b;
foundland fishermen would be relie
the tax of 75 cents imposed und
United States tariff, while every <
caught by Canadian fishermen in th*
waters would be under the disadvani
paying a tax of 75 cents in the same n
That is Mr. Bond's interpretation
treaty. When the papers are laid be
you will see that the Canadian delega
sented from such an interpretation, and
hon. gentleman says that he was opp<
the policy of the Government last ye
from patriotic motives did not so <
himself at the time, for fear he mi
accused of advocating a policy which
be detrimental to Canada, or of inte
with the negotiations then going on
hon. gentleman's colleague in the
House — the member for Both well — \n
so delicate. He laid down the broa
ciple that it was an impertinent inter
on the part of Canada to pmtest agaii
treaty being negotiated between Nev
land and* the United States. The (
ment saw the effect which the sane
of that treaty by England would hav
the fishing industries of our Atlant
coast, and it was the duty of the Ca
Government, who were watching th<
ests of Canada on all points, whet
minor details or in the case of the
fishing industries of the Atlantic sei
to intervene and prevent the ratifica
such a treaty if possible ; and I am i
say that they were successful in pre^
the ratification of a treaty which wou
been so disastrous to our fishing inter
the Atlantic coast. I hope that at r
distant day the people of Newfoundla
see that it is to their interest to come
this confederation, and T also hope t
is not far distant when there shall
a single foot of British North A
that is not under control of the ]
ion. It mav cost a little mone

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUAEY 31, 1893] Address.

the fact of its costing a little more than
we would get directly in return, would be a
thousand times over compensated for by the
fact that we should remove all those diffi-
culties with the United States which are
constantly arising, as well as many other
perplexing questions which now exist in the
political arena. Another important ad vantage
would be this : It would enable us to negotiate
with still more force and powers with our
neighbours across the border by having but
the one interest, instead of two, to be repre-
sented at the conferences. It would also re-
lieve the mother country from many of the
vexatious negotiations and much of the
trouble and annoyance which is given to her
by the constant friction existing between
these two portions of her dominions. For
these and many other reasons, I favour
union with Newfoundland. When the
papers are laid upon the Table, hon. gentle-
men will have a better opportunity of learn-
ing what position we took upon that and
other matters, more particularly upon the
question of union. I can only hope, and I
say it with all sincerity, that we may all
live to see that island a part of this great
confederacy, and that we shall go on pros-
pering in the future as we have in the past.
There is one other question to 'which I
desire to call the attention of the House.
The leader of the Opposition condemned the
Grovernment for the position it has taken on
the question of wrecking salvages and tow-
ing. It is true, an arrangement was entered
into between the United States and Canada,
to reciprocate in these matters, but it was to
be confined, as the Canadian delegates under-
stood it, to waters contiguous to the United
estates, for Canadian vessels ; and to waters
contiguous to Canada for United vessels.
It was never contemplated that this
privilege should extend to the Welland
Canal. The House will readily under-
stand the position Canada would be in,
were the privilege of wrecking extended
to the canals. An accident might
occur to a United States vessel in the canal
and the owners might insist upon waiting
for assistance until wrecking appliances
could be procured from Buffalo or Chicago,
thereby stopping the whole trade of the coun-
try in order that the work might be given
to an American company, which in all pro-
bability had an interest in the vessel wrecked
or injured. The con-ectness of the position
the Government has taken does not admit of |

a doubt, and therefore, not debatable, except
for the unlaudable purposes of carping and
finding fault. To show the claim of the
United States Government is of no con-
sequence tp thase interested, I quote a short
extract from the " Annual report of the
Board of Managers of the reorganized Lake
Carriers Association" of Cleveland, Ohio,
of January 2nd, 1893. These gentlemen,
among other things, say : —

As the l>enefit8 of reciprocity in wrecking
would larcely fall to American veseel owners, and
further delay would be greatly to their disadvan-
tage, and as the privilege of carrying on American
wrecking operations in the Welland Canal is not
regarded as important, the Board of Managers
have recently called the attention of the American
Department of State to this subject, to the end thai
the American Act of Congress may, if necessary,
be amended at the present session by striking out
the reference therein to the Welland Canal, thus
making possible immediate proclamation of reci-
procity m wrecking by the President of the United
States. The Department of State is fully advnsed
of the importance of securing this aid for Ameri-
can wreckers and vessels owners, and we are satis-
fied that by the opening of navigation this privilege
so long sought will be an accomplished fact.

With these remarks, I leave the question for
tht. consideration of those w^ho view ques-
tions of this kind from a Canadian, rather
than a party stand-point. I have just one
word to say in reference to this country and
its prosperous condition, and I will have
done. I must first apologize for occupying
your time so long. The hon. gentleman
drew a most painful picture of the state of
this country. Horror and dismay were
depicted in every sentence he uttered. Plague
and pestilence and war, and almost every-
thing that could devastate a country, must
have been paramount in his mind. I think,
I can give him a recipe for all the diflScul-
ties, so far as he is concerned. If the people
would permit him to occupy my seat for a
few years, you would find he and his col-
leagues would begin to extol the country
and to aflirm it to be the brightest gem in
the crown of Great Britain; and that it
Ls prosperous beyond any other country
in the world. Unfortunately, however,
for him and his co-workers, the people
of Canada have not sufficient confi-
dence in them to trust them with the
management of their affairs. Let me
before closing observe that the hon. gen-
tleman called to his aid the statement of
Mr. Robert White, M.P.,in an article which
that gentleman published in the Lake Maga-
zine, on the canal tolls quastion, as an

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addras.

e\ddence that we must be wrong, because he
(Mr. White) happened to differ from us on
that one question. Perhaps the hon. gentle- 1
man would permit me to call his attention i
to one or two utterances by representatives ,
of his own party on the condition of this
country and I, on my part, would advise
those who have not read that paper of Mr.
White's, to read it carefully. It is an able
document — though I do not agree with the
conclusions that he drew — and worthy of the
gentleman who wrote it. He has done in
that paper precisely what the hon. gentleman
did in addressing this House. He has for-
gotten to point out that in dealing with the
question of the rebate of tolls, the same rule
applied to Canadian ships as the United
States vessels. Perhaps the hon. gentleman
would accept, after his remarks to-day I do
not know that he would, a short extract
from the Globe, written some time since, as a
fair statement of the condition of this coun-
try. As he has repudiated the Globe, I
read it for the benefit of those who put
more faith in its utterances than he does. A
short time ago that journal — and it is a very
able journal we all admit, although on most
questions fearfully wrong in its deductions,
though sometimes by accident it stumbles on
the truth published an article on Canada's
credit, in which it said : —

A very valuable table in the Lomlon EvonomUt^
the compilation of which mu»t have taken days of
somebody's time, is devoted to showing the decline
of the yield to the investor from tirst-ulass securi-
ties during the last twenty years. Beginning with
consols, it shows that the income from £10() has
fallen from £3 4s. 6d. in 18(39 to £2 ISs. 6d. in
1888. The fall in the yield from other first-class
securities has been even more than proportionately
great, and it is very satisfcictory to note that the
tall has been greatest of all in the yieht from Cana-
dian securities. In 1869 CI 00 of Canadian (Gov-
ernment bonds yielded £5 Ts. 9d. In 1888 £100
of Canadian securities yield only £3 Ss. 6<l. -a de-
cline of 37 per cent in the burden of $100 of in-
debtedness upon the Canadian tax-payer— a boon
which the rapid increase of the debt, however, has
prevented the tax -payer from enjoying. Compared
with other British ana Colonial stocks, the advance
in the credit of Cana<la has been most marke<l and
gratifying, as the following table will show :- -

Annual yield per £100 from each security.

1869.

1887.

£ s. d. £. 8. d.

Consols 3 4 6

India 3 17 0

Canada 5 7 9

Cape 5 0 0

N. 8. Wales.. 5 3 0

Victoria 5 0 0

Decline.

£ 8. d.

2 18 6 6 0

3 ,1 9 11 3
3 8 6 1 19 3
3 14 3 15 9
3 10 3 1 12 9
3 9 3 1 10 9

Thus not only has the credit of Cansuii
more than that of any other colony or tha
even of England herself, but the credit of <
actually stands to-day on the British marke
to that of India, which is to some extent guar
by Britain.

In the face of such facta it is idle for any
preach despair to Canada. The country i
able to get along and with good govemmen
prosper exceedingly, even though the Conin
Union agitation come to naught.

These are sentiments with which 1 full
cur. It is also only a short time age
the hon. leader of the Liberal part
Ontario wrote to Mr. Blake, a letter >
I commend to the serious consideratii
the hon. gentleman from Ottawa who
the Opposition in this Hoube, and to
who believe as he does. Mr. Mowat, i
ring to the condition of Canadians, spo
follows : —

It is quite certain that the farms of the t
States are heavily mortgaged, as well as Can
farms ; and we have no solid ground for assi
that they are less heavily mortgaged than oui
farms. 8o our farmers as a class, our meet
as a class, our labourers as a class, whateve
reasons may be, are not less comfortable oi
whole than the farmers, mechanics and labo
of the United States appear to be, though
are harassed by no McKinley tariff, and by m
obstruction to the deaUng of the states witl
another. ^ Three years ago, Mr. Mowat also i
A comparison of the statistics of both coui
for the past half century would show that th€
centage of increase in every department was gr
in Canada than it is in the aggregate in the U:
States, and as Canada has prospered in the pa
she would in the future.

With these sentiments the majority of
people of Canada are in full accord
evidenced by the votes that they have g
and the large majority which they 1
placed at the back of the present Premii
this country. I trust that whatever
differences may be in reference to the ti
policy of Canada, we may act in harmon
future for one great object — the progress
prosperity of the Dominion ; and I have
doubt, that if the whole of the people p
a little more faith in the country in which t
live, believe more in its resources, have
to say about the greatness of the count r
the south or south-west of us, the bett€
will be for Canada and its people as a wh
and the greater will be the proportion
progress in the country, until we may be
the future, as we have been looked upoi
the past, as the most prosperous \
powerful of all Her Majesty's possessi(

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I wish to j
with those who spoke so feelingly of

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address.

hon. gentlemen who have left us since we
met here last year, and to express my ex-
treme sorrow and regret that they should
have been removed by death, and that the
country should have been deprived of the
benefit of their valuable experience. Natur-
ally, the Senate is composed of a class of
men who more or less every year will find
their ranks thinned ; but notwithstanding
that, the subject is one of regret that we
cannot all help uniting in. I regret also
the loss we have sustained in the resignation
of our late hon. leader, Mr. Abbott, through
declining health, who for so many years
has sat at the head of this House and con-
ducted its affairs as its leader in a manner
that won the respect of this House. I
regret myself that on the general policy of
the Government I felt it my duty to disagree
with him on very many points, but not-
withstanding that, I have the warmest
regaiti for him as a personal friend and
as a Canadian. I can also unite with
thase who have referred to His Excellency
and the probability of his departure from
Canada l^efore the next session of Parliament
meets. I may say that it is an interesting
fact to me that His Excellency and I com-
menced life together in 1858,^ the School
of Musketry at Hythe, when first we entered
the British service in our respective regi-
ments. Since I left the British service I
have s]r>ent most of my time in the back-
woods of Canada, or upon the broad prairies
of the west, from whence I have been called
to a seat in this honourable House to par-
ticipate in and bring my practical experience
to assist in its deliberations. His Excellency
has l>een brought up in the great and wide
arena of Imperial politics, and we have the
privilege and benefit of his (experience and
ability gained in that greatest of all
fields of constitutional legislation, the Im-
perial Parliament. AVe have the benefit of
hui experience and abilities as our consti-
tutional head, which forms also the consti-
tutional link between the mother country
and the Canadian people and the link that
guarantees our independence, that insures
this young country its protection. I trust that
that link may never he broken, and that we
may always have a man of the ability and
experience of His Excellency to form that
constitutional link between the Crown
and the Canadian people, and that he may
cany with him the practical experience
>?ained in our democratic field of politics for

the benefit of the British Empire at, large.
We have had added to our House seven
new Senators, and I may say that I have
great pleasure in congratulating the Govern-
ment upon the selection of those gentlemen
who have been appointed to sit in this
House. They come from all parts of Canada
from Manitoba, New Brunswick, Ontario,
Quebec and Nova Scotia ; they are all
gathered here to bring the benefit of their
experience and assist the Government to
carry on its work successfully with that
mature experience which the years they
have attained enable them to give.

I do not know that I can congratulate
the Government upon its reconstruction. I
feel that we are to be congratulated in so
far as the Government has appointed two
such distinguished Canadians as the hon.
Minister of Commerce and the Minister of
Agriculture to sit in the House and become
part of the Senate. But I entertained the
hope that when a new departure was taken
in the reconstruction of the Government and
that when appointments were made similar
to that of the Under Secretaries in the Bri-
tish House of Commons, they might have felt
that it was advisable to increase the number
of the advisers of His Excellency from the
Senate and that they might at least choose
one gentleman from the Senate in the re-
construction of the Government. It is not
a high compliment to this House to realize
that there was apparently no one in it of
sufficient weight and ability to become an
adviser of His Excellency, and that the Se-
nate has got to be satisfied with only two
members of the Cabinet and with our old
and valued friend who sits there free of cost
to the country. The object, I believe, of ap-
pointing Under Secretaries in the British
Parliament is that ministers of the Crown
may sit in the Upper House, still leaving
a representative of every department to
speak for the Government in either House :
and I had hoped that the departure on the
lines they have taken was for the purpose
of increasing that representation in this
honourable House and thus raising its charac-
ter before the country ; for that reason I say
that I cannot congratulate the Government
upon its reconstruction.

Now, hon. gentlemen, we have been dis-
cussing the Address that has been rea<l to
us by His Excellency as a bill of fare to
digest and pronounce upon the policy of the
G<)vernment in the past and the prospects of

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

the country in the future. We have had a
most interesting address from the mover and
secfonder. And I have great pleasure in
welcoming them to this House and in con-
gratulating them upon the manner in which
they have addressed us and the ability and
weight they possess. I feel, however, that
the hon. gentleman who moved the Address
and who is an old and experienced parlia-
mentarian, realized, when the duty fell upon
him to show how the country had prospered
and progressed under the policy of the
(Government, that he had a very weak case on
hand to deal with. There is, I believe, an
understanding among lawyers that when a
counsel has got a bad case, the best thing
for him to do in order to strengthen himself
is to abuse the plaintiffs attorney. And in
the same way the hon. gentleman apparently
felt that as his case was such a weak one he
had to strengthen his position by adopting
the principle of the lawyers and abuse his
neighbours. The fact of the people of the
United States not being in a such a pros-
perous condition as the people of Canada I
do not consider is a matter for discussion
here. So far as the prosperity of the United
States or Canada is concerned I believe
myself that it can be measured by the dif-
ference of the high protective duties existing
between the two countries. I l)elieve that
the tariff in the United States is something
like 45 or 50 per cent, while ours is 30 or 33
per cent ; to the extent of that difference in
the protective wall, I am willing to accord
the palm to Canada. But it is not a question
of comparative prosperity between the people
of the United States and the people of
Canada. With the resources that we have
at our disposal, with the intellectual and
physical ability and power of our people,
can we not be more prosperous than we
have been or than our census returns
show us to have been in the past ten
ye^rs 1 It is to that we should confine
our deliberations rather than seek to
show that because we are more prosperous
than the people of the United States we
should, therefore, Ije satisfied. We should
never be satisfied until we have reached that
pitch of prosperity that our own intelligence
and physical power show us to be capable of.
The hon. leader of this House has found
fault with the hon. leader of the Opposition
for being pessimistic and for not being pre-
pared to accept statistics that are handed to
him for discussion. And he made use of

j woixis in the course of his remarks to the
effect that we should all be prepared to ac-
I cept as facts, figures that are handed to us
1 through the census returns and through the
' statistics of the country, as a basis for dis-
cussion. I quite agre^ that in order to ap-
I preciate the commercial position of an indi
j vidual or of a country we must look to our
book-keeping in order to guide us as to the
I wisest course to pursue in our commercial
I life, and as to what is necessary to rectify or
I redress the profits or losses as they may oc-
cur, but at the same time we want to realize
' that that book>keeping is done with a de-
I gree of intelligence and care that will give
I us the facts as they are. It reminds me of a
I story of a gentleman who was a rancher, like
our friend here (Mr. Cochrane), on the great
I ranches of Montana. He had sold out his
' large herd and retired with a very handsome
I competence. He was asked by a friend how
t he had been so successful and made such a
very large sum of money through his ranch.
W^ell, he said, I always kept my books very
carefully. I sold my herd through my books.
I was always careful to put down the per-
centage of loss through storms, the percent-
age of increase, the percentage of sales and
so on. I did not rely upon my cow-boys'
count— I relied upon my books, and when I
sold them I disposefl of them as they stood
through the books instead of on the prairies.
Well, Sir, that is the class of book-keeping
that brought prosperity to him and enabled
him to retire with a handsome competence.
That is hard on the ranches, some one says.
Well, Sir, that is only an individual instance,
but it is an instance of how book-keeping
can be made to meet any exigency, and that
unless the balance sheet tallies with actual
facts the result will not be satisfactory to
one of the parties.

I do not wish to cast the slightest refiec-
tion upon the Government or to say that
they are wilfully misrepresenting the facts
in the census returns. But I do say there
is a good opening . for the formation of a
Royal Statistical Society to assist in placing
the statistical returns of the country before
the people in an intelligent and *accui*ate
manner. We cannot always rely upon blue
books and returns to arrive at accurate con-
clusions as to the condition of affairs exist-
ing in the country unless they are criticised
very closely from year to year. Now, hon,
gentlemen, the figures that have been put
into the hands of the leader of the Govern-

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Addrm.

meiit in regard to the census returns were
given by him at a public meeting in Toronto,
and they were brought out again, I see,
yesterday, by the mover of the Address in
the House of Commons. In those statements
it is set forth that there was an increase in
the operatives of manufactures of 1 1 2,000
hands during the past ten years. Now, Sirs,
I am inclined to doubt the correctness of
these figures and I am inclined to think that
there is a mistake, not wilful but a mistake
nevertheless. The census returns show that
there are engaged in fish curing and canning
29,000 operatives. I do not think these can
be properly classified as manufactures, but
they are so classified. I have looked at the
census returns for 1881 and cannot find that
these people were so included as among the
manufacturing class, and unless it can be
shown that these appeared under some other
heading this would account for nearly
30,000 of the 112,000 now appearing
in the census returns as an increase. In
the same way in the present census returns,
14,646 establishments employing 51,494 ope-
ratives are classed as other industries not
enumerated. It is impossible for us from the
census returns to tell what the occupation of
these 51,000 are and whether they were
returned in the census of 1881 or not. You
will observe that 51,000 in 14,646 establish-
ments represent about four in each establish-
ment and, therefore, it may be presumed that
the industries are not of a very important
nature, but whether important or not it is
quite possible that a very large number out
of these 51,000 may f^o to make up a falla-
cious increase of 112,000 operatives that
have been pointed out to us as being an evi-
dence of the increase in the industries of the
people during the past ten years. We all
recollect, hon. gentlemen, that during the
past ten years we were presented annually
with the return of the immigration coming
into the country of the number of people
being added to the population. I accepted
these as facts. I thoroughly believed that the
National Policy was accomplishing the re-
sult that these returns would lead us to be-
lieve, but, hon. gentlemen, when the census
returns were brought down and presented
to us and an accurate account made we found
that the returns given to us previously were
inaccurate and that we were not justified in
considering or framing any measures upon
the growth of the population as shown to us
during that period. I merely mention these.

facts in order to show you that the hon.

I leader of the House must not find fault with

all of us if we do not accept as absolute facts

I what the census returns have shown, because

I I believe myself that we should always try

and ascertain the truth and the accuracy of

such statements by inquiry as to whether

the facts are as represented or not, or at

any rate they should be in such a form as

will enable us to ascertain, by comparison,

how far any variation has been made from

the usual course.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL--I did not deal
with the census returns at all.

Hon. Mr. BOtlLTON— No, Sir ; it was
the hon. mover of the Address, but you told
us that we should accept as facts statistics
that are given to us, and I am merely giving
reasons why it is not always wise to accept
as absolute facts what is stated in the course
of argument, and I am showing wheie I
found a discrepancy, and a great discrepancy
too, as regards the increase of the number of
operatives in the country. I pointed out
that there were engaged in the fish canning
and curing,29,000 persons which were class-
ed as operatives in 1891, but which were
I not so classed in 1881, and that there is an
item in the census returns of 51,000 opera-
I tives engaged in 14,464 industries which are
I returned as unenumerated, so that we cannot
j tell what kind of establishment they are work-
I ing in. That is avery large number of men and
a very large number of industries, but we
I cannot tell what they are working at, there-
I fore it is open to doubt as to how far they
' help to swell the numl^er or whether the
I same principle was adopted in getting out
] the census returns for 1881 in regard to
I those unenumerated industries.

I An hon. .MEMBER— Are they all in-
cluded in the 112,000?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON—Yes, they are all

included in the 1 1 2,000. Now, hon. gentle-
I men, the increase in trade has been illustra-
' ted to us by the exports and the imports
during the period for which the oflicial i*e-
I turns have been prepared, and they are de-
scribed as most gratifying. I do not know,
I hon. gentlemen, if we inquire into the facts
, of the case, so far as the exports and im-
I ports are concerned, that we will find them
as gratifying as His Excellency in his ad-
I dress leads us t<:> hope and expect. I have

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

taken the list of the exports actually as they
are, that is to say, the exports which are
the produce of Canada, because you must
understand that in the figures given to us
in the Trade and Navigation Returns, a large
amount of foreign trade is included, that is
to say, trade coming from the United States
and passing through Canada. In 1892 that
amounted to ^13,000,000 out of the exports
of the country. The actual exports of the
country which are the products of Canadian
labour, as taken from the Trade and Naviga-
tion Returns, is §95,684,000, and the ex-
ports of the previous year were $85,000,000,
so that there has been an increase of ex-
ports which are the product of the industry
and the labour of the people of Canada to
the extent of 310,000,000, that is the in-
crease for one year. Now, of that increase
in the Maritime Provinces, there has been
absolutely no increase in the exports at all.
There has been a decrease in the exports
from Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and
Prince Edward Island, as I say.

Hon. Mr. K AULBACH — In values or in
quantities ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— In the values. Of
course it is only the x'alues that are given to
us. If you take the Maritime Provinces to-
gether you will find that there is an actual
decrease of 8200,000.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentle-
man's statement is correct as to the aggre-
gate of the lower provinces, but not as to
Nova Scotia individually.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I was speaking of
the Maritime Provinces as a whole. I say
there is a decrease in New Brunswick which
is balanced by an increase in Nova Scotia.
There is an actual decrease in the Maritime
Provinces taking Nova Scotia, New Bruns- 1
wick and Prince Edward Island together, of |
6200,000. Now what is the reason that!
there is that reduction in the exporting I
power of the Maritime Provinces ? Be-
cause the labour has left the country, be-
cause there is not the labour there to
produce. You cannot have exports unless
you have got labour to produce the arti-
cles that will enrich the country through
their exportation. The census returns have
shown us that there has l>een an absolute
standstill in the population of New Binins-
wick and there has been a very slight in-

crease in the Province of Nova Scotia and a
standstill in the Province of Prince Eldward
Island.' That is what the census returns show
us and therefore, if the population is at a
standstill you must expect the exporting pow-
er, notwithstanding the varied resources at
their disposal, in the Maritime Provinces or
the Dominion of Canada, to stand still to the
extent that the population itself stands still,
because it is perfectly evident to everyone
that without labour it is impossible to pro-
duce in a country like Canada or any other
country in order to increase the exports or
to increase the wealth of the people. With
regard to the 10 millions of exports shown
here in the Trade returns — where does that
10 millions come from ? As the hon. leader
of the House to-day has told us, $650,-
000 of that is from an eiltirely new in-
dustry developed in our northern regions
— the nickel regions. This 10 millions
of an increase has almost altogether gone
through the port of Montreal which shows
that the Canadian Pacific Railway has been
bringing down from the new districts deve-
loped north of Lake Superior, in Algoma and
from our Great Western Prairies and pouring
the trade of those new districts out through
the port of Montreal. That this great in-
crease of export cannot be attributed to the
increase of the prosperity of the great mass
of the population of Canada, nor to the in-
creased industry of the Province of Ontario
or Quebec, or as I have shown of the
Maritime Provinces. Then again, there is
another feature with regard to our exports
that is worth considering, and it is absolutely
necessary to consider, and that is the value
of our imports in their proportion to our
exports. Our importing power is our pur-
chasing power. The value that we get for
our exports or the economy with which they
are produced is a measure of our ability to
import, and the purchasing power of the
people should be shown through our imports.
Great Britain imports very nearly double
what she exports. Why? Because her wealth
is so great she is able to purchase those im-
ports— those articles that come into the
country in consequence of her wealth. We,
in Canada, in 1871, 1872, and 1873 imported
32 millions of dollars, 46 millions of dollars
and 54 millions of dollars worth more than
we exportecl, or an excess of imports over ex-
ports of about 75 per cent: in 1871 weitnported
32 millions of dollars more than we export^,
and in 1873, 54 millions of dollars more than

Digitized by

Google

The [JANUARY 31, 1893] Address.

we exported, with an aggregate export of
8189,000,000 in those three years, but in 1892
with a vastly increased population, with a
greater diversity of facilities through the
Canadian Pacific Railway and the develop-
ment of our canals, we are only able to import
20 millions of dollars more than we exported,
and in 1891 we imported 28 millions of
dollars more than we exported. Now, it is
one of the principles of trade between nations
that their trade is carried on by means of
barter. There is no such thing as money
passes between one nation and another. If
we export, it is paid for by imports, if we
import it of necessity calls for the production
of labour from some source from the import-
ing country to pay for it by exports, and the
evidence of that can be seen by studying
the statistics, seeing how much bullion
we export, and how much we import.,
and which is only imported or exported in
order to rectify the small balance that
exists between the exporting and importing
power. When we borrow money in England
that money comes out to us in the shape of
commodities. We floated a loan in England
this year ; I do not know whether it was
ten or twelve and a half millions of dollars.
The money that loan represents comes out
to Canada in the shape of commodities, and
swells our imports. Last year, through the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company and the
Grove rn men t of Canada, we have increased
the liability of the country by twenty-five
millions of dollars by the sale of their stock
and the sale of Canadian bonds. The value
of that money will come out to us or what-
ever portion of it comes to Canada, will come
in the shape of commodities, and should
swell our imports to that extent. It does
not come out in sovereigns, specie, or bullion.
It comes out in material — it comes out in
kind. Now, notwithstanding that we bor-
rowed to that extent to the amount of
twenty -five millions of dollars, while in 1873,
1872 and 1871, three years when we bor-
rowed very little money indeed, the imports
exceeded the exports by fifty-four millions
of dollars, forty-six millions of dollars and
thirty-two millions of dollars, respectively.
We have to inquire how it is that those im-
ports do not keep pace with our exports as
they should do, in order to indicate the
prosperity of the people. What is the
reason of that 1 Well, the only reason that
I have to give is the fact that the liabilities
of the country have grown tf> that extent

that the exports of the country are absorbed
in order to pay the interest that we have to
remit abroad to meet the interest on those
liabilities, and that in consequence of the

I taxes, or, perhaps, I should say, the mode of
taxation, the profits or the purchasing power
of the people is reduced. There are the net
earnings of eight millions of dollars for the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company. There
are nine millions of dollars a year interest
to be remitted by the Canadian Government,
and there is the interest on real estate
loans which amounts to one hundred
and six millions of dollars, the interest
on which at five or six per cent
will be five or six million dollars a year.
These large items which can be supple-
mented by other items, such as municipal
and other loans swell the amount to twenty-
three miHions of dollars a year. It is the
necessity which rests on the people of
Canada to remit that twenty-three millions
of dollars every year, that changes the
features of the imports and exports in the
manner I have indicated. Now, if the
country was prosperous — if we did not bor-
row money in order to develop its resources
— which was the object we had in borrowing
that money, and I for one do not find fault
with the Government for borrowing that
money or investing it in the manner they
have done to give it to the Canadian Pacific
Railway or to the public works and canals
that are essential to our development and
prosperity — I say they have acted wisely in
bringing to completion those great works
which stand to the credit of the country,
but I do say when the money has been bor-
rowed and those facilities have been afforded
to us, the prosperity of the country can only
be gauged by what we can export to the
outside world and import from it over and
above supplying our own necessities, and
when we do borrow money in order to do
that, we should be able to make a better
showing than is now done. If a man bor-
rows two thousand dollars on his farm, he
does not borrow it for the purpose of merely
spending that money or the pleasure of pay-
ing interest at i^xe per cent or seven per

j cent as the case may be to somebody who
lends it him, but he borrows it for the pur-

I pose of increasing the productive power of
that farm. He hopes to be able to pay five

j or six per cent to the man who lends and

I make five or sir per cent in addition on the
transaction. The statistics handed to us do

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

not show that we are making that profit but
they show that both the productive power,
and the purchasing power of the people, has
been restricted, notwithstanding our in-
creased facilities. I believe, hon. gentlemen,
it is the commercial policy of the country
that is preventing the Maritime Provinces
from increasing their exports and from main-
taining the natural growth of their popula-
tion, and the same policy is effecting every
part of Canada in a like manner.

At six o'clock the debate was adjourned
until tomorix)w and the Senate adjourned.

THE 8ENATE.

Ottawa, Wednesday, Fehvaary l»t, 189^.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.
THE ADDRESS.

THE DEBATE CONTINUED.

The Order of the Day being read —

Resuming the adjourned debate on the con-
sideration of His Excellency the (iovernor-Gene-
ral's speech, on the opening of the Third Session
of the Seventh Parliament.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Hon. gentlemen,
I concluded my i*emarks yesterday by saying
that I believe it is the commercial policy of
the country that is preventing the IMaritime
Provinces from increasing their exports and
maintaining the natural growth of their
population, and the same policy applies gen-
erally throughout Canada in the same man-
ner. I notice that the hon. mover of the
Address in the House of Commons, Mr. Mc-
Inerney, referred particularly to the province
of New Brunswick in order to justify the
existence of the National Policy and convince
the people of Canada of the prosperity of the
Dominion, especially from New Brunswick.
Now, I think he selected the most unfor-
tunate province, in order to prove that case,
that he could have found in the whole Do-
minion, because the census returns have
shown us that the increase of population in
the pro^'ince of New Brunswick is absolutely

nil in the past ten yeai*s ; that is to say,
every young man or young woman who has
come to man's estate and woman's estate has
left the country — that there is no natural
increase there.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— Are there no deaths
here ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Well, we all hope
that in a country like this the births will
exceed the deaths. It is certainly not a good
showing compared with the average of the
world. India ha^ incre^ed 29,000,000,
Great Britain, 2,000,000, the United States,
12,000,000 during the same period. He
pointed out, however, that the industries of
New Brunswick had nearly doubled in ex-
tent during the past ten years, and he pointed
out that the number of operatives employed
in manufactures in New Brunswick had in-
creased from 1 9,000 to something like 26,000.
Now, I find exactly the same fault with the
census returns in New Brunswick that I
pointed out yesterday in I'egard to the in-
crease in the number of operatives. In the
census return — I have it here, bulletin No.
8 — in the province of New Brunswick there
are put down as engaged in fish curing and
canning 4,750 hands. When I refer to the
statistics of 1881, I do not find those oper-
atives engaged in those industries returned
as a manufacturing population. Whether
they are returned or not in some other form,
I cannot say, but I cannot trace in the
census returns operatives under that head,
and therefore, there are 4,750 operatives in
that list that would apparently account for
the increase between 19,000 and 26,000, the
figures he gave. I do not think that fisher-
men and fisherwomen who are engaged in
drying, salting and putting fish into barrels
should be classed as manufacturers ; but
they are so classed here, to the extent of
4,750, and therefore, the figures that were
presented on that occasion I do not think
are borne out or justified by the actual facts
of the case. I would draw your attention,
however, to what has taken place in the
province of New Brunswick, so far as the
last ten years are concerned, and so far as
the industry of the people and their capa-
city to produce is concerned. The natural
industry of the people of the Maritime Pro-
vinces, which they have inherited from gen-
eration to generation, and in which they
display ability and- knowledge, is the build-

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBKUARY 1, 1893] Address,

ing of ships and boats, in order to get on
the ocean and carry on the trade of iishing
or trading with foreign ports. I find, on
refei-ence to the census returns, notwith-
standing that knowledge and ability and
the needs of the people of New Brunswick,
that the population engaged in the building
of those boats and those ships has decreased
from 1,084 in 1881, to 500 in 1891, and
those men, possibly, who have been engaged
and who were able to build those ships for
the benefit of the country in order to in-
ci-ease the carrying power and the maritime
strength of the country, have been drawn
from those industries to the manufacture of
cotton, which is not one of those natural
industries that our people are bred and
reared to, not one which they understand
and have the same capacity for.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— What propor-
tion has that to the decrease in tonnage
from 74 to 78 ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON -That does not
come under the question here, but so far as
the decrease in tonnage is concerned, I may
tell the hon. gentleman that the figures in
connection with tonnage since 1868, are not
to the credit of the country. There has
been an actual decrease in registered tonnage
of Canadian ships in the past twenty-four
years. That the tonnage of vessels built or
owned by Canadians has been gradually de-
creasing under the protective policy in 1878.
Such tonnage amounted to 1,333,000 tons,
in 1891, to 1,005,000 tons, gradually decreas-
ing year by year. Tl^en, again, I take the
tanneries. The manufacture of leather is
f)ne of the natural industries of the country.
We have hemlock tanbark, the natural
facilities and the capacity for making good
leather. The province of New Brunswick
is situated upon the ocean. It can trade
with the South American countries where
the raw hides are drawn from. There is a
market for leather to any extent. There is
an open market in Great Britain for leather.
It is a market free to the competition of the
world, and England purchases annually,
according to the British Board of Trade re-
turns, $35,000,000 worth of leather, wholly
or partially prepared. There is New Bruns-
wick on the ocean, on the direct highway to
enable her to transport that leather from
her manufacturers to the open mar-
ket in Great Britain ; but what is actually

I the result of the case in the last
ten years, so far as the industry in question
I is concerned ? The people engaged in the,
tanneries of New Brunswick have been
j reduced from 355 to 249 employees. Now,
I that is not a very creditable showing for the
I commercial prosperity or the manufacturing
power and ability of the people of New
I Brunswick, when the natural facilities are
I at their disposal to increase their employ-
ment in the tanneries, treble or tenfold, in-
stead of presenting to the country an actual
reduction,- it is not their fault, it is the fault
of the commercial policy which holds them
down. Then take the saw-mills of the pro-
vince ; I find a reduction in the number of
men engaged in the saw -mills from 7,167 to
6,821. So far as the manufacture of boots
and shoes is concerned, I do not know what
factories there are in New Brunswick, but
the number of establishments is set down at
337 and the employees at 809. I think they
must be mostly shoemakers' shops. I see liy
the iigures of the census of 1881, that the
number of employees engaged in those trades
was 911, so that in the ordinary shoemakers'
shops there has been absolutely a decrease
in the number of the employees working at
those trades. Now, when those figures are
presented to us in that way, when it is shown
that the natural industries of Canada, the
products which the people of this country
are capable of preparing for export, that
there is a decrease in the power of the people
to export and a decrease in the number of
operatives at work in those industries, no
one can put forward statistics and claim for
New Brunswick that there is the prosperity
in that province that we are led to expect.
I would apply another test to the same posi-
tion and that is. I have divided the number
of operatives in the province of New Bruns-
wick into three heads. I have taken those
men who are engaged in preparing our own
raw material for the market and those who
prepare raw material imported for manufac-
turers— all the natural industries, boat-
building, ship-building, fish curing and can-
ning, bakeries and confectioneries, <fec.,
natural to the country —and I find that there
are 18,000 operatives in New Brunswick
engaged in prepaiing the raw material of the
province for the market at home as well as
for export to the markets abroad. 18,000
operatives are engaged in the manufacture
of our own raw material, and only 3,572 are
engaged in the manufacture of impoi*ted

Digitized by

Google

Tlie [SENATE] Address.

luw material ; those men engaged in the
manufacture of cotton and woollen goods,
^ugar refining, tanneries — all these indus-
tries put together, only employ in New
Brunswick 3,500 hands, while there are
18,000 engaged in preparing the raw ma-
terial of the country, in cutting up saw-logs,
sawing them into lumber, building boats,
&c. Now, I would ask you candidly to
apply your intelligence to this broad fact :
What protection is there necessary or need-
ful to the people of New Brunswick or
Canada in order to enable them to manu-
facture their lumber and sell it for a good
price ? What protection is there needed to
do that ? Will not free trade — that is, will
not the remission of all duty on everything
that enters into the industries of the people
engaged in saw-mills, grist-mills, tanneries
and industries of that kind conduce to a
more economical working up of our own
material ? My hon. friend here on my left
smiles at that position, but I say there is
not a shadow of doubt about it that taxa-
tion as levied under our protective policy is
taxation on the industry and labour of the
people of Canada and its prosperity, and
if you lift taxation off the lalx)ur and
industry of the ptople you release them
from a bond binding them down and pre-
venting them increasing their numbers and
consequently their exports, and you would
enable them to work under more economical
conditions at home, and in consequence of
that when they come to purchase they can
purchase more largely abroad what they re-
quire for their comfort and use. It cannot
be denied by any single member of this
House that the manufacturers and the people
engaged in those industries that are returned
in this bulletin, No. 8, no matter what class
of manufactpry it may be, must be benefited
by removing the protective taxation from
those industries and placing it elsewhere.
Now, that is what I call free trade. I am
frequently met with the query, would you
destroy all the capital invested in our
manufactures ? T can say this, with the
utmost confidence, that if any manufacturer
is afraid of the competition he would be
subjected to under such a policy, there will be
plenty of capital forthcoming to purchase out
his interest at a handsome advance, removing
the burden of taxation from the shoulders
of the labourer and from the shoulders of
the industries of the country, and placing
it upon shoulders that can better afford to

pay it, putting the labouring population in
a position to create better results for the
country generally. That is my interpreta-
tion of the benefit of free trade. My inter-
pretation of protection is : when the revenue
is so placed that it protects industries and
enables the employers to charge for their
products a much higher price than they could
obtain in open competition, reverse the con-
ditionS and Biitish capital and American
capital will flow in to take advantage of the
economic condition of Canada to manufac-
ture for the world's market. The consequence
of our present policy is to hold down the
country and prevent the successful extension
of its industries and manufactures, and when
we see in the province of New Brunswick
that there are 18,000 operatives work-
ing to produce and prepare raw mateiial
of the province for export to the out-
side world, or for consumption at home,
while only 3,500 are engaged in the
manufacture of raw material brought from
abroad. I say those 18,000 men that are
engaged in preparing our own raw material
for market are held down for the assumed
Imnefit to 3,500 operatives, brought into
existence by artificial legislation, who wilt,
however, themselves be benefited by a
changed condition of taxation. It is a
knowledge of that fact that has caused me
to take up the question so warmly in the in-
terests of the people of Canada, that greater
prosperity, greater growth and development
in the magnificent resources at our disposal
shall take place in the next decade than in
the past, because all the figures brought for-
ward to pi-ove the prosperity of the people
and the growth of the country do not show
that the National Policy has effected the pur-
poses for which it was intended. I do not
allow for one moment that the National
Policy was imposed merely to create the
wealth of individuals in the country, but
rather to benefit the country at large, to
keep its population at home and to bring
people from abroad and increase the
national progress of Canada, but I say
that the figures presented to us by
these returns do not show that that has
been the case. 8o far a« the question of
our importations is concerned, I would just
refer again to the purchasing power of ex-
ports as compared with the purchasing
power of these importations in the earlier
period of our history. As I pointed out
yesterday, in 1871, '72 and '73 the impor-

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

tations were 75 per cent higher than the
exports —that is to say, we imported 75 per
cent more than we exported. To that ex-
tent the general wealth of the country was
increased, while in '92 that condition has
not been maintained. While the increase
in our exports has been $10,000,000 in the
last year, there has only been an increase
in our imports of J3,000^000. Now, what
I say is that that shows a decrease in the
purchasing power of the people of Canada.
If it shows anything it shows that they are
not able to purchase, for some cause or
other, by $7,000,000 in proportion to the
amount that* they exported. As I stated
yesterday, the exports and imports go back-
wards and forwards purely in the shape of
commodities. No gold passes between na-
tions. The whole bulk of the trade of Can-
ada is carried on by the movement of about
IJ per cent in bullion to regulate it, and
therefore, if there is a deficiency in the im-
ports year after year, it shbws that the
country is not prospering so far as the
value f)f the exports is concerned. And
it is necessary for us to think that
question out ; it is necessary for us to
realize the economic position I have pre-
sented for your consideration. It is not
every one who can realize it at once, but it
is right that we should apply these facts and
figures, in order to see what path we are
treading. I stated yesterday that we bor-
rowed $25,000,000 through the Canadian
Pacific Railway and the Canadian Govern-
ment. That $25,000,000 comes back to us
in the shape of commodities ; it does not
come back in gold. We have added that
amount to the liabilities of the Dominion,
and the trade of the country has to earn the
money to remit the interest annually upon
those amounts, and the actual bulk of those
amounts comes to us in the shape of impor-
tations. Now, notwithstanding the fact
that that liability has been added to the in-
debtedness of the country, notwithstanding
the fact that we had borrowed that money,
yet the fact presents itself to us through the
statistics, that we have only increased our
imports by $3,000,000, while we have in-
creased our exports by 810,000,000. If we
go on at that rate, what is the next ten
years going to bring us to ?

Hon. Mr. HO WLAN —Wealth.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— We would hold the
gold of the world.
4

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— There is no gold
in the world. The amount of gold in pro-
portion to the volume of trade is nothing at
all — only about five or six per cent of the
whole trade of the world. There is no such
thing as gold passing between nations ex-
cepting merely to balance the accounts, the
same as the clearing-house in New York or
in London will find it necessary to balance
probably transactions amounting to 20, 30
or 40,000,000 pounds with a cheque for
three or four hundred thousand pounds. The
gold is merely used to rectify the balance
and to provide for the currency of the peo-
ple at home — the great trade of the world
is carried on by barter, and I would ask my
hon. friend, can we live on gold ? Must we
not export it again ? Gold is only a measure
of value. If hon. gentlemen will look into
that matter they will find that I am correct —
that if the importing power of the people is
decreasing, their wealth is diminishing.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— But their ex-
' porting power must be increasing.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, if you do not
get back something for those exports you
are getting poorer. I showed yesterday that
through the Canadian Pacific Railway there
was eight millions of dollars in net earnings
that had to be remitted abroad, that the
Dominion Government have to remit nine
millions of dollars interest on the public
debt and there is interest on 106 millions of
dollars of loans upon real estate, shown at
present by our statistics and that interest
has to be also remitted. These sums amount
altogether to between 22 and 23 millions of
dollars. Now, the exports which go to Europe
or to the United States are absorbed in order
to pay that 23 millions of dollars which
has to be earned out of the trade and
industry of the country. If we increase
that to 40 or 50 millions of dollars, of course
we are going to labour under so much more
difficulty, unless there is a corresponding in-
crease in the labour that is brought into the
country to create the wealth in order to
produce that exporting power and when we
have brought that labour into the country
our commercial policy must be so framed
that the people will make a fair profit out
of their labour after having helped to con-
tribute to the payment of this debt for
Canada. I think that is as clear as —

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— Mud.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON-7-As clear as any-
thing can be, although it may be still muddy
in my hon. friend s mind. Of the exports
from Canada, the result of the labour of our
people, 23 millions of dollars is absorbed in
order to meet the interest that we have to
send abroad. I should like to ask hon. gen-
tlemen from what other source that 23 mil-
lions of dollars is to be paid to meet the
annual liability, if it does not come out of
our exports ? Our power to import is reduced
exactly by the amount we have to remit in
the shaj^e of that indebtedness. When we
borrow we hope to make a profit upon that
borrowing. We have buOt the Canadian
Pacitic Railway. It extends for six thousand
miles through the various parts of Canada
and where are th^ evidences in our exporting
and importing power that the people of
Canada are reaping that profit out of the
liabilities they have incurred ? That is what
I want to ask and the only evidence of that,
that can be shown to us, is by an increase
in population and an increase of the
exporting power of ^ Canada. Now, I want
the hon. gentlemen who do not agree with
me in my facts and figures to show me in
what way this is to be brought about, if the
present attitude of affairs has not produced
it ? If our present protective policy has
failed to realize that result for us, what
policy should we pursue in order to rectify
that unfortunate state of affairs, because I
say it is an unfortunate state of affairs. If
a man borrows on his farm, we will say $2,000
to increase the productive power of that farm
unless he can increase the productive power
of that farm and make it pay the interest
and capital, he will find that his farm will
at some future time go to the mortgagee and
he is going to be left without his home. He
has got to see for himself how he is going to
pay off that mortgage and save his home
for his family, and it is that problem that we
have to sit down and solve for the people of
Canada, or I believe they will lose their heri-
tage and birthright if we do not pursue a
more intelligent policy than the practical
evidence that has been brought to our minds
by the statistical returns furnished to us.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH—My hon.
friend explains that that can be done by
purchasing more and selling less.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— You do not buy
more. You get for your $100,000,000 of

export §150,000,000 of imports. You are
getting a higher piice, that is all. It is a
mistake to think you are buying more — you
are getting a higher price for the articles
you have to sell, whether it is cattle, wheat
or anything else.

Hon. Mr. COCHRANE— According to
the hon. gentlemnn's argument, if a farm
produces two or three thousand dollars a
year, and the farmer only wants to buy a
thousand dollai's, he is getting poorer in-
stead of richer. In other words, if his farm
produces three thousand dollars he has got
to buy to that value or more to make money
— that is the hon. gentleman's argument.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON~No. What I say
is this, if a farmer's output every year from
his farm is $2,000, and he borrows S2,000
on that farm, his purchasing power is re-
duced to the extent of the interest he has to
pay for that. We will assume that it is
eight per cent interest. His purchasing
power is reduced by the $160 interest he has
to remit. Now, he wants to show that that
$2,000 is going to produce enough for him
after he has expended it on his farm in order
to reduce the cost of labour or to drain it,
or something of that sort — he wants to be
able to show that the farm is going to produce
as much as the $2,000 a year before, plus teh
interest and plus a profit u^n the borrowing.
That is the way I put it. It is not that he
is going to buy less, but that farmer wants
to realize that that $2,000 which was the
productive power of his farm before he bor-
rowed is still the same, plus the interest he
has to pay. If he has to reduce the comforts
of his family by the $1 60 a year interest — if
he has to take it out of the $2,000 income,
then he is impoverishing his family by bor-
rowing that money, but if he is still able to
maintain the comfort of his family by the
$2,000, plus the interest he has to remit, and
possibly some advantages through borrowing
that money — that is the position I would
present to my hon. friend. I think if you
will apply that simple argument to the whole
of the Dominion and consider that we are
one family and that our Canadian home is a
large family, you will have some light thrown
onthegreat question I am bringing before this
honourable House — the question of the altera-
tion of our commercial policy for the benefit
of the people of Canada. Our hon. leader is
half way to that very free trade policy that

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

I am arguing for. In a speech that he made
in Toronto during the public meeting of the i
Conservative Association he used the words
protection to the people as the result of the
remission of taxes — that is to say, he claimed
that he had remitted certain taxes and by
that explained he had protected the people or
industry that were i-eceiving the benefit of
that remission.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— No.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, I will read
your words, sir, uttered in Toronto. " Next
we come to the article of tin which is used
in the manufacture of almost every article
used in the household and by the repeal of
that duty gave an additional protection to
the tish and fruit canning industry." Now,
that is what I call free trade. He remitted
the taxes on tin in order to benefit those in-
terested in the fish and fruit canning in-
dustry.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— The hon. gentleman
has it quite correct in the quotation which he
has made, but he must be reminded that in
Canada we could afford to take the duty off
raw material thereby giving additional pro-
tection to the canners.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That I thoroughly
understand. That is the protective argu-
ment, but if the remis.sion of the duty on tin
is going to be a protection to the people who
carry on the business of canning, why is not
the remission of the duty on binding twine
going to be a protection to farmers, or the
remission of the duty on anything at all
going to be a protection to the people of
Canada at large ?

Hon. Mr. GLASIER— Why
binding twine in particular ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Binding twine is
a very serious impost on the people of Mani-
toba.

Hem. Mr. GLASIER~Why does the hon.
gentleman select the province of New Bruns-
wick as an illustration for his argument?
How are you going to raise the revenue ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I will reply to the
question of revenue in its proper place. 1
did not mean to give any offence by select-

do you take

ing the province of New Brunswick. I was
correcting the figures that were brought for-
ward by the hon. gentleman in the House
of Commons from New Brunswick to whom
I have already alluded, and I wish to point
out to this House the necessity to the people
of New Brunswick, the necessity for a change
in the commercial policy of the country —
that if they adopt a different commercial
policy, in conjunction with the rest of the
country, there will be a very different show-
ing in ten years from now in the statistics
referring to their province. It is in the inter-
ests of New Brunswick and in the interests
of Canada generally that I am speaking, and
not in the interests of any one province or
any one section of the country. I wish to
point out that the hon. the leader of this House
himself has taken the broad ground that by
the remission of the duty on tin he was
thereby protecting the fishing and canning
industry. And how have we protected the
fishing industry? By taking off the duty
on rope and the duty on twine used for nets,
that is how we are protecting the fishing
industry. If it is wise in the interests of
the fishermen to take the duty off rope and
off twine, then why is it not in the interest
of every industry of the country engs^ged in
the preparation of raw material for export
abroad, that all the duties should be remitted,
and reimpose the taxation on the country in
a manner which would not press ifjx>n the
labour and industry of the country. That
is the broad position I take.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— Direct taxation.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Not one single
penny of direct taxation is necessary, and if
hon. gentlemen are anxious to hear a little
more about the revenue, I am quite pre-
pared to introduce that branch of the sub-
ject at this particular moment, I would
refer to the duty on coal oil. Well, sir, we
consume in Canada 15,000,000 gallons of
coal oil yearly, and we pay a duty on the
imported coal oil which amounts to about
5,000,000, or about eight or nine cents a
gallon, but in consequence of the imposition
of that duty, it costs the people so much
more to purchase the coal oil produced in
the country, and T say, hon. gentlemen,
that it can be shown fairly that the cost to
the people of Canada upon the purchase of
15,0l00,000 gallons of coal oil is about
$1,400,000 more than if the markets were

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] AddresB.

open, and if we were able to purchase it
free to the competition of the world. In a
free market, Russia might send us coal oil,
and compete with the United States, while
she could not afford to send it to a pro-
tected market. Ask yourselves what you
pay for it in your own homes, and realize
the price the imported article is delivered
at our boundary for, namely, 8| cents per
gallon, and you will be able to prove your-
selves that my figures are correct. The
Government, however, only get the benefit
out of that $1,400,000, of about $425,000.
That is all the benefits the revenue gets
from the coal oil. I think you will admit
that if the free import of tea can be
considered a free breakfast table, the
free importation of coal oil would
form what might be called a free
tea table, as coal oil is necessary to light
our tea table and both these articles can
be put on a par with each other. Except
in this, that coal oil is the light used by the
labouring classes, electric light and gas being
used by the wealthier classes, and to that
extent it is unequal in its imposition, and
partakes of the character of the window tax
that Great Britain found it necessary to
impose in the days of protection, a century
ago. Now, hon. gentlemen, what is the
condition of the tea trade 1 I think it was
stated yesterday that we import twenty-two
million f)ounds of tea from abroad, consumed
in the country and the placing of a tax of
six cents per pound, one penny less than
the English people have to pay, will raise
the revenues by the handsome sum of
1,300,000 dollars, every penny of which goes
into the Government treasury. Now, there
is one way in which a revenue can be raised
without increasing the taxation of the people
one dollar. The people are taxed, as I
showed you, upon the total consumption of
coal oil a sum of one million four hundred
thousand dollars, of which the revenue only
gets the benefit of four hundred and twenty-
five thousand dollars. Now, Sir, it would
not be necessary to put one penny more on
the burdens of the people, but by placing the
tax on tea and taking it off coal oil the
treasury would get the benefit of nearly one
million dollars. It is only applying that
principle throughout in your taxation, taking
it off all those articles which permit or allow
any individual in the country, in consequence
of that duty, to charge a higher price than
if the article was open to the competition oi

the world. This would give the importers
and purchasers of the country the fullest
benefit of being able to purchase their sup-
plies in the cheapest market and by accom-
plishing that result, you will then find that the
productive power of the country will increase
by leaps and bounds as it did when Great
Britain reversed her commercial policy in
1846, but hon. gentlemen, as I have intro-
duced a resolution which will deal with these
questions, and which will come up for dis-
cussion within a week or ten days, it is not
necessary to go fully into these details at
the present time as I may test the patience
of hon. gentlemen too severely. I can
thoroughly realize that when I am present-
ing facts and figures that are unanswerable
and which cannot be refuted, I certainly
rouse an irritation in the minds of some of
those hon. gentlemen who are touched a
little in the raw in consequence of the truth-
fulness and force of these facts and figures,
and thereby it gives me a little encourage-
ment to see some signs of discontent and
irritation. As long as a man proves nothing,
nobody is offended and everybody feels
satisfied, but begin to prove your arguments
and you see

Hon. Mr. READ — Go on, you are not
hurting anybody.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— This is a free
country and you should not harry any mans
cattle. Now, hon. gentlemen, His Excellency
in his speech at the opening of this Parlia-
ment is pleased to refer to the revenues of
the country. So far as the revenues are con-
cerned, I have touched upon that question
slightly and will not refer to it again, but I
certainly think that the Minister of Rail-
ways is to be congratulated upon the fact
that he has proved to the country his ability
to manage the Intercolonial Railway upon a
business basis. Instead of the management
costing ^ye or six hundred thousand dollars
over and above the running expenses, he has
brought the management of that road up
until it is now nearly paying the running
expenses. I say it is a matter for great con-
gratulation to the people of Canada that we
have the intelligence and ability to manage
our public works upon a business basis, anti
not upon a political basis. I would point
out that this means a clear saying of 600
thousand dollars to the revenue of Canada.
I might say that our public works cost us

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

53 •

four millions annually to run, while we only
get a revenue of three millions, that is to
say, our public canals and those railways
managed by the Government are an actual
loss to the country of one million dollars a
year in its revenue. I certainly think that
those people who make use of the canals and
of the railways should be able to bear the
burden, at any rate, of paying the running
expenses. Without taking into consideration
at all the question of the value of these roads,
so far as capital is concerned, I think that
the wheat that passes through our canals
should pay the expenses of moving it through.
That would be only managing our canals and
railways on a business basis, and the Minis-
ter of Railways, as I said before, is to be con-
gratulated that he has proved to the country
that this can be done so far as the Interco-
lonial is concerned. I regret to have seen a
reference in the public press to the eflfect
that it is possible that this road may be
handed over to the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company, who have, it is true, shown
their capacity to manage their own line upon
a thoroughly business basis. It has been
urged that it would be better to transfer to
this Company this incubus as it has been des-
cribed, which has hitherto been costing the
country about 600 thousand dollars a year,
but I say, hon. gentlemen, that we would not
be doingourduty to thecountry if we allowed
such a valuable asset, the first cost of which
was 40 or 50 millions of dollars, to pass out
of the hands of the country. If we were to
adopt a different commercial policy and
thereby build up the Maritime Provinces and
the provinceof Quebec, and the industry, and
trade of the whole country, you would find
that the first cost of this road, forty or fifty
millions of dollars would be returned to the
treasury of thecountry, within ten years, either
by making it productive ourselves or find-
ing a company which would purchase it from
the Grovemment, and instead of having cost
the country forty or fifty millions of dollars
of the people's money by adopting a different
policy and improving and increasing the
trade of the country, you will make this road
a valuable asset. T say it would be most
unwise for us to take any such step as to give
ui> that road, and to part with the franchise
by which this valuable asset is created simply
because we have failed to manage the road
upon a business basis in the past. For that
reason alone the hon. the Minister of Rail-
ways is to be congratulated in the effort he

has put forth and the success with which
he has met in proving to the country, that
the road can be made to pay, and that it is
not necessary to make this road a free gift
to any corporation because it is an incubus.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Is that
shown by his last annual report ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I understand that
is the fact, but I am simply going by what I
see in the public press. I understand that
the deficit has been reduced to seven
thousand dollars.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— Does that include
the deficit of the Prince Edward Island Rail-
way ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I do not think so
— merely the Intercolonial Railway. How-
ever, the facts and figures will, I pi*esume, be
presented when the report for 1893 comes
down. The hon. the leader of the House
referred in his speech in Toronto to the fact
that Canada has expended her treasure in
the development of these resources, in the
construction of the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way and the construction of the Intercolonial
Railway, and the construction of our canals.
Well, hon. gentlemen, I take issue with him
in that statement. We have borrowed
money which has still to be paid back, we have
not expended one single dollar of our own,
but we have borrowed to build the Canadian
Pacific Railway, and to build the canals and
all the other public works, and every dollar of
that debt is still upon us, and we have in-
creased that debt by $3,000,000 in the past
year. The debt of the. Intercolonial Rail-
way is still upon us and it is not the treasure
of Canada that has been poured out but the
credit of Canada that has been pledged to
construct these public works. What we
want to look forward to, is to try to arrive
at a policy that will give us the power to
meet these liabilities and wipe them off in
the course of time, and to meet the annual
interest without burdening the trade and
industry of the country at all. That is what
we have to apply our minds to. It is not
that we have expended our treasure, but
we have borrowed and the .country has to
pay the annual interest and this has to be
met out of the industry and trade of the
country. For that reason, I say the day.may
not be far distant when that Intercolonial

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

Railway may possibly be given up as a Grov-
ernmeiit work, if advisable, but given up
only by getting business men to take pos-
session of it and pay us back the original
cost of that railroad. A clause in the Address
says " that during the recess si friendly con-
ference took place between the Government
of Canada and the Government of New-
foundland." We had an interesting discus-
sion on Newfoundland matters in this House
last year, and it is a matter of congratulation,
I think, to the whole country, that the
differences and difficulties that did exist
between the people of Newfoundland and
ourselves have been so happily adjusted
or are in process of adjustment
as His Excellency in his speech to this
House has shown them to be. So far as
Newfoundland is concerned, of course, noth-
ing would give greater pleasure or satisfac-
tion to the Canadian people than to tind that
they were prepared to unite their forces with
us and that we were in a position to make
such satisfactory terms with the people of
Newfoundland as would enable them to do
so. I may also congratulate the late Minis-
ter of Customs on the vigorous efforts he put
forth to stop the smuggling in the Gulf of
St. Lawrence, that was shown to have existed
there by the reports produced in this House
last year, quotations from which were read.
At the same time there is a great deal to be
done in that direction still. It is an evil, an
injustice to the country that smuggling
should be permitted to exist, and that it
does exist there, I think, was clearly proved
by the operations of last summer. I would
draw the attention of the House and of the
leader of the Government to the fact that
smuggling is to a ce^jtain extent helped and
assisted in a manner by the fines which are
given to officials. It is quite possible under
the present policy of dividing the tines with
the officials for discovering the smuggled
goods, to bring from the United States dis-
tilleries as well as from the Islands of St.
Pierre and Miquelon, a quantity of liquor
free of duty, and permit it to be seized, and
the informer and the man who smuggles can
thus divide the profits evenly and still leave
a sufficient sum to pay for the whole cost of
the voyage. If I am correct in that state-
ment, I say that condition of affairs should
be stopped and no premium should be
offered to the officials of the country to leave
rooiu for suspicion that such a thing can be
done.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— How can that be
stopped without lowering the duty ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That is the only
way it can be done.

Hon. Mr. Mc MILI^N— You would take
off the duty entirely ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No. I would not
take the duty off spirits. I am speaking
now of our public servants. It is an in-
justice to them to put temptation in their
way, and an injustice to the country if such
a system prevails as would enable those
officials to do such a thing as I have de-
scribed. It is to be hoped that the same
vigour will be used in checking smugijlinju:
into the country as the late Minister of
Customs put forth. As the hon. gentleman
opposite has said, free trade will remedy that
by confining smuggling to spirits and wines
and luxuries only.

Hon. Mr. READ— Not free trade in
whiskey ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I was goin- to
say that if we did adopt free trade as my
hon. friend very properly says, not free trade
in whiskey, therefore, as long as the duties
remain on the spirits that same disposition
to smuggle will prevail.

Hon. Mr. READ— I think the h(.n.
gentleman is getting towards direct taxation
very nearly.

Hon. Mr. BOWELI^-He is there al-
ready.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— There is one im-
portant question which received no attention
from His Excellency, and that is the !Mani-
toba school question, which has create<l a
great deal of interest in the country. It was
referred to by the hon. seconder of this
Address. He said that while he wasanxious
to see the country prosper, and its develop-
ment go on— to see the great West built up,
he hoped the people there would act in a
liberal manner in their legislation. That, I
take it, was a reference to the school ques-
tion. Now, I entertain my own views with
regard to that matter — a view, perhaps, that
many might expect me to differ in. Personally,
as a private citizen, I believe that if our

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893J Address.

Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen desire
to educate their children apart they should .
be permitted to apply their taxes to that
purpose, until they themselves realized the :
advantages of public education. But of
course, the question that comes before us
here is a constitutional one, and it is from
the broader stivnd- point we have to judge it.
So far as the liberality of the people of Man-
itoba is concerned I do not think that it
can be questioned. They did not pass their
school law for the purpose of injuring any of
their feUow citizens. They are peculiarly
placed. Their population is very sparse.
Every man owns from one hundred and sixty
to three hundred and twenty acres of land,
the odd sections are vacant and the distances
between houses is great, in consequence ; the
object of the school law was to reduce the
burden of taxation to the lowest limit and
enable the people to educate their children,
by making ratepayers of all denominations
to contribute alike. At the same time, they
have altered the law upon which school mat-
ters rest and created what is called anational
system of education. That is to say, that
all education will be under the state, but
without separating religion from education.
Well, that is an experiment they are trying,
which may not last for all time or may be
perpetual. Roman Catholics of New Bruns-
wick petitioned against a similar law. They
expressed a desire ' to retain the separate
schools and petitioned against the legislation
of the local legislature, which, however, was
declared to be constitutional. You do not
hear Roman Catholics of New Brunswick
now expressing any desire to change the pre-
sent system. The people of Manitoba, said
if that is the case in New Brunswick, it is
quite possible that the experiment may pro-
duce beneficial I'esults to the whole popula-
tion in our province, and in the end all may
unite in admitting that it is the best way.
If, on the other hand our French Canadian
fellow-countrymen feel that it is an injus-
tice to them, all they have to do is to press
the matter in local contests and attract their
fellow-countrymen from the province of
Quebec to ' help them and in that
way without any aid from the
central Government they will be able to
accomplish all that they desire in a con-
stitutional and self-reliant way. It would
he very unwise for the Government at
Ottawa to attempt to restrict the power of
the people of Manitoba to legislate in their

own school matters as they see best for
themselves. It would be most unwise for
us to interfei'e with the constitutional liberty
of the provinces, as they exist or new provin-
ces as they may exist in the future. The con-
stitutional liberty of the people of Canada is
the dearest heritage that we can hand down
unimpaired to future generations. Consti-
tutional precedent is the principle on which
our constitutions are based and we should
be cautious how we establish any precedent
which may be construed in the future as a
restriction of the liberties of the people to
carry out the Canadian Confederation and to
build upa Canadian nationality on this conti-
nent on the safe and sound principles of
constityjbional liberty in every part. That
is my view of the position so far as the school
question is concerned. I recognize the fact
that in 1869, before the North-west country
was transferred to Canada by the. British
Crown, there was an uprising of the people
in the Red River settlement because their
rights had not been adjudicated upon before
the country was transferred. A delegation
was invited from Manitoba to visit Ottawa
and arrange the terms upon which the pro-
vince should be added to the Confederation.
The delegation had a conference with the
Government and the result was that a small
province, I believe only sixty miles from
north to south and one hundred from east
to west was created, and I believe it was
the intention of the Government at that time
and of the delegation that interviewed the
Government, to erect such barriers that the
existing population there would be protected
in the same manner of conducting their
schools as had prevailed before Canada
assumed control of that country. I believe
that was fairly and honestly the intention
between the two parties -that the one
desired and the other intended to convey it.
However, an appeal to the highest constitu-
tional authority in the Empire has decided
that so far as the province of Manitoba itself
is concerned, it possesses a perfectly con-
stitutional right to legislate on school matters
in accordance with the views of the majority
of the people. Therefore, if it is still felt by
our Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen in
the province of Manitoba that an injustice
has been done them by the legislation, to
the extent that they may be deprived of
public money by that legislation in the
separate school in those settlements that
existed at the time that this compact was

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

made, to that extent the Dominion Parlia-
ment could justly be asked to assist finan-
cially in order to place them in no worse
position than they would have been had the
action of the Manitoba Legislature not
deprived them of the financial benefit of
separate schools. To that extent I think
justice should go, but the very fact that that
compact was entered into in 1870, between
the delegates from Manitoba and the general
Government — the fact that they went back,
and the bargain made at that time referred
only to that small tract of country which
confined the existing settlement of 1870,
shows that there was no intention • and no
desire on the part of the delegates or on the
part of the general Government to make any
compact that would be binding upon the
development of that great territory and
upon the people who might occupy it in the
future. To that extent, I think it would be
wise for us to review the matter. The people
of Manitoba would be as desirous of doing
justice to their French Canadian fellow-
countrymen and to extend to them as warm
a welcome as settlers as they could desire,
for that reason I think it would be most
unwise for us to do anything that would
impair the liberty of the people, whether it
should establish a precedent that is likely
to impair the rights of the provinces as
they exist or of the new provinces to be
created hereafter. For that reason and to
that extent I sympathize with remarks made
by the hon. seconder of this Address in
regard to this question, but T can assure him
that there is no desire or intention on the
part of the people of Manitoba, from my
knowledge of them, to be in the least degree
illiberal or unjust to their fellow-country-
men in the matter of separate schools. There
is one moi^e reference that is made here that
I should like to deal with and that is the
following : —

We are also gratified to liear that in Manitoba
and the North-west Territories the increase in
immigration has been decidedly encouraging, both
a» regards the number of persons who have come
fiom other countries and as regards the number of
homestead entries made by settlers of all nation-
alities. • ,

Now, it is a matter of congratulation to
those that live there and to the country
generally, to feel that the increase of pop-
ulation is progressing satisfactorily in our
waste temtory — that those homesteads are
being taken up. I live there, and I feel that
it is quite as impoi*tant to keep those people

on their homesteads, after we have got them
there, as it is to put forth exertion to bring
them to our country. Our conditions are
such that they are not all being kept there.
The trade policy of the country is pressing
upon them and the heavy freight rates to
which we are subject in bringing our produce
to market is burdensome. Our ability to
produce is being checked and the country is
being weighed down by those two burdens.
T would read to you some verses that were
put into my hand, which perhaps may be out
of place here, but as they are more eloquent
than any words I can give you to show the
feeling that does exist among many of those
who have to produce from the soil, and find
a market for their produce by exporting it
through the ports of Canada to the markets
of world. The following is the sentiment of
a settler who has been there seventeen years,
and is conveyed to this honourable House as
it was conveyed to me : —

Will you walk into my country, says the bright

Canadian fly,
Tis the very finest country you ever yet did

8py»

We'll give you land for nothing, don't even ask a

rent,
But from ever}' thing you buy here we've twenty -

five per cent.

You see we've got a family and so we must be

doing.
And tho' we do our level be$t we cannot keep them

going.
With salaries and subsidies, interest on money

lent,
Even then it does not seem to do on twenty-five

per cent.

Our eldest lx)y, ** a darling," we christene*! him
N. P.,

His constitution's undermined, or so it seems to
me;

We've fed him upon luxuries to a terrible ex-
tent,

But still it does not keep him up this twenty-five
per cent.

We swathed him up in cotton, a most tremendous
coil.

We gave him steel and iron and rubbed him with
coal oil.

He has been taking )x)odle drops as an emolient,

But nothing seems to keep him up, e'en twenty-
five per cent.

We let him play with implements and Uiany other
toys,

Electric light and telephone, that pleases other
l)oy8 ;

But spite of all that Me can do, he does not seem
content.

He grumbles, grumbles, for still more than twenty-
five per cent.

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBBUABY 1, 1893] Address.

I'm afraid we'll lose that baby ; we cannot keep

him here,
We must submit to Providence, tho' he is so very

dear ;
You see he cannot walk alone tho* fourteen years

he's spent ;
He seemingly needs more support than twenty-five

per cent.

Our other boy. ** a whopper," we called him
C. P. R.,

Tho' weak at first, he's stronger now, and beats the
other far, •

Has a stomach like an ostrich, his health is excel-
lent, '

He's thriving like a mushroom, upon twenty-five
per cent.

It takes a lot to keep him np, with coronets for

tiles.
His suits they take a lot of stufif to clothe 6,000

miles.
He eats up all he comes across, does this voracious

gent ;
He takes a branch line for his lunch, ** sauce"

twenty-five per cent.

In fact he's grown so very strong, we «lare not say

him nay.
For fear he kicks us out of doors some bitterly cold

day.
He has us all upon a string, we go where we are

sent.
He'll gulp the lot, he will not leave even twenty -

five per cent. •

You say you don't believe it, you think this can't

l)e true.
There's parliamentary papers for't. Indeed 'tis

uothinff new,
ne has Tasted
have been spent.

The thine has Tasted fourteen years, and millions

Upon these infant industries, at twenty-five per
cent.

How

lonff will you folks stand this ? How long
is't going to last ?

The census shows it will not do, by the ten years
that are past.

The young men are all leaving us, they can't find
aliment.

It sucks the country's life blood out, this twenty-
five per cent.

■ Now, that is a message from a settler in
the North-west and I think, as I said before,
that it is more convincing and certainly
more entertaining than any remarks I can
make or continue to make before this
honourable house.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL— Surely the name
of the author should be handed down to
posterity.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— We may want
him to produce something more of the same
character.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Does my hon.
friend father that ?

Hon. Mr. DEVER— He need not
ashamed of it.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I could not begin
to express anything so eloquent as he has
expressed in this poem.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— And truth-
ful too, I suppose.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, and truthful
too. We are producing up there our grain
and crops and we are selling them to the
outside world — that is to say the surplus
that we do not want at home and the people
who are alongside of me — and I suppose it is
general throughout the country, are selling
oats for which we only get 13 cents a bushel
this year and the Canadian Pacific Railway
is charging 20 cents for carrying them to
market. We get on an average 25 to 50
cents for wheat and the Canadian Pacific
Railway charges 30 cents per bushel for car-
rying the same to market.

Hon. Mr. COCHRANE— 30 cents per
100 pounds.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, 50 cents per
100 pounds.

Hon. Mr. COCHRANE— I think the
hon. gentleman is mistaken about tho freight
rates — it is 30 cents a 100, I understand.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, it is 50 cents
a 100.

Hon. Mr. COCHRANE— I had it from
Mr. White, the superintendent, the other
day.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I have given the
regular rate. The rate the hon. gentleman
cites is to Fort William. It is facts like these
that press upon the people of the country.
How does the 25 per cent come in so far as
the National Policy is concerned.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^)— Do I under-
stand the hon. gentleman to say that the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company charged
20 cents for 34 pounds of oats to take the
grain to market ?

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Ad^iress.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, and all that
it is selling for in my neighbourhood is 13
cents per bushel and I can give you other
facts and figures about the rates.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)-From
what point is the hon. gentleman quoting
rates ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Well, the place I
speak of is where T live, 275 miles north-west
of Winnipeg on the Manitoba and North-
western Railway.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— To
where ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— To Montreal.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Does the hon. gentle-
man know that oats have been sold in Ontario
for 12^ cente ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, but not in
our time.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— So, it would go by in
the North-west also 1

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— What would
^ they be worth if you had not the Canadian
Pacific Railway ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— We would not be
there, but since we have gone there the people
who live in that country have a right to come
down here and tell what is pressing on them
and see if a remedy can be applied in some
manner or other. We know perfectly well
by the published reports what the earnings
of the Canadian Pacific Railway amount to
and we want to see that the tarifi^ that real-
izes these dividends should be imposed in an
equitable manner, and that they should not
exceed the legitimate profits of capital, to
assist the people of this country instead of
impoverishing them so that they cannot
make fair headway. Many of them become
disappointed and some of them do move from
one point to another.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Will the
hon. gentleman inform the House what the
Canadian Pacific Railway charges are per
100 on wheat from St. Paul or Minneapolis
to Montreal ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, I cannot ii
form the hon. gentleman what those rat*
are, but I have asked for certain papei*s wil
regard to the Canadian Pacific Railway ai
the increase of its capital stock, and I pi
pose to tr}' and deal with the rates as th(
are presented there, in order to show th
there is an injustice in that free count
that is so thoroughly dependent upon ra
way communication. Recollect, we have
water communication, we are without co
petition, and we are entirely dependent up
railway communication, chiefly furnished
the Canadian Pacific Railway. We want
see that railway communication managed
that something like justice will be done
the people who are pursuing their indus
in that western country for the benefit
themselves and the country at large,
they are borne down by heavy taxat
through Government sources, if they
borne down by excessive rates charged
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company
will certainly retard the development
that magnificent country for an inc
nite period, to the detriment of Can?
So far as the taxation of the Govi
ment is concerned, what is the actual <
dition ? It is this : If we send out
millions of produce, what do we get bad
pay us for it ? We do not get back moi
hon. gentlemen, as I explained before,
comes back to us in the sugar, in the cot
in the coal oil, in the nails and the iron,
in every single thing required for the us
the people of the west. And when it cc
back to us it comes back with 25 per
for the duties added to the cost, and we
get back in the export of $10,000,000 w
of produce from Manitoba and the N«
west, goods to the value of $7,500,00
consequence of the imposition of an avt
rate of 25 per cent in the duties. In
same way the rates of the Canadian Pj
Railway press heavily upon the country
you want to see Canada grow and be
great and the National Policy fulfil its \
I say, hon. gentlemen, a differentconmu
policy should be adopted in order that
people may reap to the fullest exteni
advantages to be found in Canada fo
creasing their individual prosperity, an
building up the country generally.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Hon. g
men, I do not intend to make any rei
on the resolutions which are being disci

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

and which are intended to be the basis of an
answer from this House to His Excellency's
Speech. The different subjects of that Speech
have been sufficiently discussed during this
debate by both sides of the House to
enlighten the Government and show them
what the views of the people of this country
are regarding the financial and commercial
afiairs of the Dominion. Arguments have
been advanced for and against the statement
that this country has made material progress.
It seems to me there can be but one opinion
as to the great advance that this Dominion
has made during the 30 years of its exist-
ence : but it cannot be denied that at the
present moment and for some time past
something has been wrong. It cannot be
denied that the National Policy has done
much good, but I believe that at the present
moment some change is necessary. The
manufacturers got the l>est of this policy,
and in my opinion the time has come when
the farming community should have their
turn. Some changes in the tariff would
probably improve the situation as far as it
possibly can be improved under the circum-
stances in which we are now placed, and
these changes would no doubt satisfy the
people. It seems that the Government have
been aware of this, if I have rightly understood
the speeches made during recess by a certain
number of Ministers. Such being the case, I
do not see the advantage of discussing those
important questions at the present moment.
It Ls only occupying the time of the House
to no good purpose, since more advantageous
opportunities will be given during the ses-
sion for the discussion of the different sub-
jects and measures foreshadowed in the
Address, or announced in the • speeches I
have referred to. I think the best thing
for independent members of this House to
do is to wait until these measures come up,
and give the Government time to develop
their policy and show what they can do. I
consider it would be utterly wrong on my
part if I allowed this opportunity — the first
I have had since the reconstruction of the
Cabinet — to pass without congratulating
the lion. Premier on his choice of the late
Lieutenant-Grovernor of the Province of
Quebec — the Hon. A. R. Angers — to re-
place the late Hon. Dr. Paquet as Senator
for the division of de la Valliere, and to fill
the honourable position of Minister of Agri-
culture for the Dominion. By this action of
the Premier, the French minority have now

a representative of their own on the Trea-
sury benches, and a leader speaking their
own language in this House. A better
choice could not have been made. Though
quite a new member of the Federal Parlia-
ment, the Hon. Mr. Angers is well-known
for his talents, ability and energy. He cer-
tainly will be an ornament to the Senate,
and will, no doubt, be an honour to his pro-
vince. I also congratulate the hon. Minis-
ter of Trade and Ck)mmerce on his appoint-
ment to this House, and to its leadership.
No doubt the loAg parliamentary career of
the hon. Minister will be of great advantage
to the Senate ; and, as an old colleague of
his in the House of Comm(>ns, I beg
to tender him and the hon. Minister of Agri-
culture also a colleague of mine in old
times in the Local Assembly of Quebec — a
hearty welcome. I propose to deal more
particularly with the necessity which exists
for the Senate having a certain number of
the advisers of the Crown chosen from among
the members of this House, and occupying
seats in this House. This proposition not
being, strictly speaking, a constitutional one,
as is that of having French speaking Min-
isters, I intend to give it a little more atten-
tion. It is now nearly fifteen years since
the late Right Honourable Sir John A.
Macdonald resumed the position which he
held to the day of his death. It is also
fifteen years since the French minority in
the Senate were deprived of their constitu-
tional right to have a member of the Cabinet
speaking the French language sitting in this
House. It is also fifteen years since the
late Sir John A. Macdonald took his first
step towards depriving the French speaking
people of their right to be represented in
both Houses by Ministers of the Crown
speaking the French language. To-day I
am happy to congratulate the present Gov-
ernment upon having righted this wrong.
From the very first day when the Confedera-
tion Act was put into force in 1867, until
1878, when the late Sir John A. Macdonald
took office a second time, this House had
never less than two of its seats occupie<l
by ministers, and one of those always a
Senator speaking the French language. But
ever since 1878 till the date of the action
of the present Government which T have
just commented on, this constitutional light
of the French minority was ignored by both
leadere of the two preceding administrations.
In vain did the French members of this

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

House protest year after year agamst such a
course being followed by the Grovernment.
Ill vain did they rise against such an ap-
parent contempt for the constitution. Their
voices were heard, but they had not even the
satisfaction of hearing hon. gentlemen com-
posing the majority of this House echoing
their sentiment to show that they would not
allow such a course to be followed by the
Government. We, the French minority,
were left unrepresented. We were abandoned
by our colleagues of another nationality whc
took no interest in such a^ violation of the
constitutional law. Some of our compatriots
did no better, it is true, but to them I have
nothing to say. It is a sufficient punishment
that they are known, and that posterity will
hold them responsible for all the evil to come
and the consequences of the course they have
followed. What would be the use of trying
to stimulate their patriotism now when they
could not be inducied at the proper time to
imitate our predecessors, who fought to the
last for the enjoyment of the privileges
which they finally secured, and succeeded
in preserving and transmitting to us and
to our care 1 Such an indifference as
that shown by this House in not forcing the
Government to respect the constitution could
not be expected to bear anything but mis-
chief. It did bear mischief. The whole
Senate was punished by the very same wrong
of which the hon. members had indirectly
approved by the silence they kept when the
French members of this Hou.se had called
for their help. Sir John Macdonald, having
succeeded so well in depriving the minority
in this House of their constitutional right
to a French speaking Minister, thought fie
might safely go a step further, and did not
hesitate to advance his own interests at the
expense of this House, convinced that there
was not sufficient independence in Parlia-
ment to force him and his Government to
respect the agreement made at confederation
and act in the spirit of the constitution.
Let me review briefly the events which have
occurred since the 1st of July, 1867, when
the British North America Act came in
fiu'ce. In conformity with an honest inter-
pretation of the new constitution, the late
Right Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald, having
Ijeen the first Pi'eniier charged with forming
an Administration under the new regime,
called from the Senate no less than five of
his Ministers, amongst them one or tw^o
French speaking Senators, and all of them

holding portfolios. True, at that time Sir
George Cartier was alive, and the recog-
nized leader of the province of Quebec.
At that time Sir John A. Macdpnald would
not have dared to attempt what he subse-
quently did, but after the death of Sir
George Cartier, which took place a few
months after Sir John A. Macdonald's Grov-
ernment was forced to resign, the Macken-
zie Administration took office, and gave this
House two Ministers, one of whom repre-
sented the French minority. In 1878 the
Mackenzie Government was defeated, and
Sir John A. Macdonald was again called
upon to form a Cabinet. At that time two
English-speaking Senators were made mem-
bers of his administration. Later, a third
English-speaking Minister without portfolio
was given to this House. If my memory
serves me right this occurred in 1880. This
state of things continued until 1887, when
we were left with but one Minister, an Eng-
lish-speaking Senator without portfolio. He
alone was left to occupy the Ministerial
benches in this House. In 1888 a second
English-speaking Minister without portfolio
was appointed, giving to this important body
but two English-speaking Ministers without
responsibility, being without portfolio. One
of these two Ministers was in 1891 appointed
President of the Council, and in that position
affairs stood in this House until a few day sago,
when the late Premier, Sir J. J. C. Abbott,
resigned. Now, there is not a member of
this House who could rise in his place and
state that the course pursued by the late
Premier and his predecessor was in any way
in accord with the practice in England, or in
conformity with the principles enunciated
by authorities on Parliamentary Govern-
ment, or with the parliamentary practice in
England or in any of her colonies. None
of us, I am sure, would ignore the fact that
in England a considerable number of the
Cabinet Ministers, when not a majority of
of them, have their seats in the House of
Lords. In our sister colonies the principle
to which I have referred has always been
followed or advocated in Victoria, New
South Wales, New Zealand, &c. Let me
refer to a case in point in the colony of Vic-
toria. The Victoria Government some years
ago entered upon the same course that Sir
John A. Macdonald pursued here. Formal
complaints were made by the Legislative
Council but no attention was paid to them by
the executive. At last both Houses rose in

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBfiUARY 1, 1893] Address.

their might and appointed a joint committee
on constitutional reform, whose reportshowed
the necessity of having constantly in the
Upper House at least two, an'd if possible
more, responsible nnnistei-s. I find on refer-
ence to the various authorities whose works
are in our Library that this principle is
clearly laid down. Even our own Canadian
authority, Mr. Todd, in his " Parliamen-
tary Government in the British Colonies "
writes: —

A patriotic statesman, filling the honourable
position of Premier, will readily apprehend that it
is in the interest not to say the paramount duty of
every minister so as to shape his course as, if pos-
sible, to keep the two Houses of Parliament in
harmony, ana not to throw himself absolutely and
entirely into the hands of one branch of the legis-
lature, regardless of the wishes and feeling of the
other.

Such is the practice in England, such also
are the principles advocated in her colonies,
such also has been the coui*se followed by
the two late administrators who have ruled
over Canada during the last fifteen years, so
far as the question I am dealing with is con-
cerned. Who could believe this history of
the last fifteen years to be true except he
had been, as members of the Senate have
been, a witness to the different facts I have
related? Indeed, how could any man believe
that the Government had acted in this way
and be allowed to continue in their evil
course from year to year ? It is true mem-
bers of this House have repeatedly com-
plained of such a state of things. I know
that some of our colleagues privately remon-
strated with the Government on the sub-
ject. It is also true that many of them met
together and determined to put a stop to such
an injurious course on the part of the executive,
and that some steps were privately taken to
carry such a determination into efl^ect.
But what have been the results? What
have those secret efforts done ? Nothing,
except to convince the existing Government
that they were all right, that they had noth-
ing to fear, that the Senate would not rise
against them, and they could continue with
impunity in their evil course. So they did
until the time — a few days ago — when the
present Premier was called upon to form a
new Cabinet and set things right. Could
those two previous administrators have done
anything better calculated to throw discredit
<m the Senate and ruin its influence ? Yet
the majority of this House kept quiet. They

submitted for fifteen years to such treat-
ment. Nay, by their silence hon. members
have encouraged the Government to ruin
this House in the opinion of the people at
large. The Senate allowed the Government
to take its own course, and to trample upon
the great charter of the rights and privi-
leges of the people of this Dominion. What
necessity then for a constitution ? What is
its use, if in spirit as well as in letter it can
be set aside with impunity ? What advan-
tage is there in having a Senate and a
House of Commons, if their members are so
partisan or so dependent on the executive as
to fear to force them into conformity with
the sacred law, the fundamental law of our
country, in accordance with the letter as
well as the spirit. What a difference there
is between the course which we have
followed here and the manly and patri-
otic stand taken by our fellow-subjects
of Victoria. What is the reason of this
difference? Do those people understand
better than we do the Constitutional Gov-
ernment under which we live? Are they
less partisan than we are? Are they of
more independent temper than it is possible
for us to be ? I will not undertake to say,
but the facts are there, and facts are stub-
born things. T renew, gentlemen, my con-
gratulations to the Premier. I congratulate
the whole Cabinet on the step they have
taken, a step by which they have shown
their determination to do what is right, and
to show their respect for the constitution,
The noble conduct of the present administra-
tion in recognizing the right of the Senate
to have a fair number of Cabinet Ministers,
and of the French minority to be repre-
sented on the Treasury benches in this
House is, in my opinion, of such importance
that, although a majority of the present
administration were membei*s of the two
preceding governments, those who, like my-
self, were dissatisfied with their past conduct
might readily forgive and forget the past,
and give the present Government a fair sup-
port. This I am ready to do as far as I can
without sacrificing those principles which
have guided me in the past. I shall
always be true to sound Conservative
principles, maintaining perfect independence
in dealing with men and measures. Before
I sit down, gentlemen, I beg to offer my
compliments to the hon. gentleman who
preceded me, in reference to what he has
said as to the school question in Manitoba.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

I cannot let his remark pass without ten-
dering him my thanks. I hope that the
great majority of the people of this country
will understand that in order to continue
on good terms with each other, and in
order that the different nationalities may
live together in harmony it is very desir-
able to respect the convictions of eveiy man.
It is well known that the minority of people
in this country hold such principles on this
question that they cannot conscientiously
give way, while on the other hand, even if
there were a conviction that another kind
of school would be better, T should think
that patriotism would enable the majority
to allow their fellow-countrymen to follow
their views in reference to this (question, and
keep for themselves the definition of what a
school ought to be. This I hope will be the
case. Until to-day I thought that the hon.
gentleman from Marquette was opposed to
the system which we advocate, but I am
glad now to see that he thinks we are cer-
tainly right in asking for our rights on this
question. There was something in the
remarks of the hon. member on this subject,
in which I cannot concur, but I leave it to
representatives from that section of Canada
to express their dissent.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— My first duty on
nsing is to claim your indulgence for the
imperfect manner in which I address the
House in English. I hope you will grant
me this indulgence, as being also a new
member of this honourable body. I must
oflFer hon. gentlemen my thanks for the
courteous manner in which they have re-
ceived me, and the great friendship which
has already been extended to such a new
member. I must also thank the hon. gen-
tlemen who have addressed this House for
the kind sentiments they have expressed to-
wards their Excellencies who will shortly be
leaving Canada. As a member of the Gov-
ernment, who is supposed to express the
views of the representative of the Crown in
this House, I must tender you their thanks.
It has been my good fortune to have fre-
quently been brought into communication
with their Excellencies during the last five
years, and I have often been afibrded oppor-
tunities of judging of the great love which
they bear to Canada, and I am sure that
when they leave us they will not forget us.
I also take occasion to express on behalf of
the people of my own province the great res-

pect in which they hold His Ebccellency on
account of his high and straightforward
stand on constitutional Questions, and be-
cause they have seen in him the repre-
sentative of the Queen — the Queen
who has given us during her reign
the institutions which we now enjoy.
I must also thank th*e hon. member for
Marquette who has referred to my colleague
and myself in courteous terms as members of
the Senate. He has made only one reserva-
tion— it is that we should be members of the
Senate, but not both of us members of the
Government — that members of the Govern-
ment should have been chosen from the
Senate as it was previously composed. Up-
on this point, in so far as I am concerned, I
agree with the hon. member from Mar-
quette. I am here, not by own preference,
and the hon. member himself has deprived
His Excellency of the exercise of his free
will, because this not being a coalition Gov-
ernment, he could not call upon the hon.
member to occupy a seat^on the Treasury
benches. I might add that the hon. gentle-
man's views were at one time in accord
with those of the Government, and I have
not lost the hope that in the future we may
find him again agreeing with us. I also
thank the mover and the seconder of the
address, the hon. member for Welland, and
the hon. member for Delorimier — they have
both spoken in a manner that entitled them
to congratulation. The mover endeavoured
to show that the United States is not a desir-
able country to which Canadians should
emigrate. He has proved that by showing
the number of evictions which have taken
place lately in the city of New York. He
has proved conclusively that this country
is in a prosperous condition. He has esta-
blished it by applying two of the tests that
are generally accepted by statisticians In
his argument on that point he displayed no
party feeling whatever. He did not refer
to either side of the House, and I was sur-
prised to find the leader of the Opposition
attacking my hon. friend and telling him
that the Government was losing the con-
fidence of the people, and citing in proof of
it that the hon. gentleman's presence in
the Senate was due to a previous defeat in
his constituency. I was sorry to hear those
remarks, and I was surprised a few hours
afterwards to hear from my hon. colleague
here, who is better informed than myself of
the facts, that the hon. member was never

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

defeated in Wellarid County. It was estab-
lished that his county had been usurped ;
the usurper was brought before the courts
and branded with bribery and corruption
and deprived of his political rights for seven
years. I do not call that a defeat. I am
convinced from what I saw myself in the
Niagara District recently that the hon. gen-
tleman would have been returned for his
county had he not, for some personal reason,
refrained from entering into the contest. Of
coui-se this attack by the le^er of the Oppo-
sition was made in the most courteous lan-
guage, and with the skill of a master in
eloquence. The attack was directed at
my hon. friend's breast, but the blow
struck him below the belt. I fancy that
the hon. leader of the Opposition must
have had some reason to be displeased \vith
the people of Welland, because he made an
attack upon that county, and stated that it
had lost a thousand of its population accord-
ing to the last census ; and he made an
appeal to the descendants of the tT. E.
Loyalists not to desert the district in which

their forefathers had settled. Now, I do not
think there was any need for such an appeal.
According to the census returns, the popula-
tion is really not deserting the peninsula of
Niagara. True, Welland itself has lost a
thousand of its people, but it has only been
a shifting of the population. The adjoining
counties and the city of Hamilton have in-
creased. Toronto has increased by 85,000,
Hamilton by 12,000, Nipissing by 11,000,
and Manitoba by 90,000. In all these sec-
tions of the country you will find settlers
from the district of Niagara. From the hon.
gentleman's remarks about the Niagara Dis-
trict, you would think that the garden of
Canada was being abandoned by its popula-
tion. It is only necessary to refer to the
figures which I am about to read, taken
from the last census, to show that the pro-
ductions of the farms and orchards of that
section of the country have ' immensely in-
creased and represent an enormous value in
money. The statement following shows that
the industries of that section of the country
have also developed to a great extent : —

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

P-i

a?
IS

i I

'5 0 C 0- ®

J.I
^=1

O CO t«" CQ ?l

\mM\

«> gsgig

^^51'^ 11

o=^

O X O 1 t>- I

^ • CO t

iilii

xP§

sS^gs^

t^ CO C^ X C5

•8!|iwuiqsiiqtr)«[kf jo a^K^mn^

2 c OS a

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

Surely nobody can believe, in the face of
those figures, that the Niagara District is

Vermont, which also adjoins the province
of Quebec, there was a decrease of two-

being deserted ; and therefore I say it was , hundr^ths of one per cent, so I do not think

unnecessary to make an appeal to the loyalty
of the people of the Niagara Peninsula. The
hon. gentleman said also that the Franchise
Act and the misgovernnient of the country
had caused this emigration. I cannot under-
stand how he makes use of such an argument.
He represented to us that the people were
leaving the country because they had been
robbed of their rights through the appoint-
ment of revising barristers under the control
of the Government, and, what was worse,
because the lists, after being made out, were
printed at the printing bureau in Ottawa.
Now, when the laws of this country are made.

that much importance can be attached to the
hon. gentleman's argument. The hon. gentle-
man from Marquette stated that the census
returns relating to industries gave erroneous
figures. In the last census a distinction is
made between industries and industrial
establishments, and there is no ground for
the complaint which we have heard from the
Opposition. None of diose small factories
that the hon. gentleman has referred to as
employing only three or four hands are
included in the industrial establishments.
They have all been omitted from the returns,
and I think that the hon. member has

who prints them — is it not the Government? founded most of his complaint on an article
Did it ever occur to any member of this I recently published by the Globe, A reply

House, or any man in this country to ques
tion the correctness of the laws, because they
are printed by the Grovernment ? Now, the
revising officers are not under the control of
the Government. They are appointed by
the Governor-General in Council, it is true,
but they are as free from Government con-
trol after their appointment as are the judges
of the land. If the hon. member, had re-
ferred to section 11 of the Franchise Act, he
would have seen that none of them can be
removed except by Parliament.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— In Prince Edward
Island they are judges.

Hon. Mr.
everywhere.

VIDAL — So they are nearly

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The hon. gentle-
man and the hon. member from Marquette
referred to the census returns and made
comparisons, to the disadvantage of this
country, between the increase of population
in some of the neighbouring states and in
Ontario. It has already been shown that
the bases of this comparison were not correct.
It is true that a portion of Canada has not
increased in the proportion that everybody
anticipated, but the increase has been about
twelve per cent. We find that in the neigh-
bouring country there was a good deal of
disappointment at the result of their last
census — the population had not increased to
the extent that they had looked for. In the
state of Maine, for instance, which is pretty
nearly similar to the province of Quebec,
the increase was only 1*75 per cent. In
5

was sent to the (rlobe for publication, and
although several days have elapsed since
then it has not yet appeared in the columns
of that paper.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON--I think the hon.
gentleman is not quite correct in his state-
ment, because there appears in bulletin num-
ber 8 a reference to an establishment in
which only one operative is engaged.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Some of those bul-
letins were prepared with very great haste
and were revised since, and when the hon.
gentleman gets the. revised edition of the
census he will find that no establishment so
small as that is included in the industrial
establishments. But it was pointed out that
there was a decrease in the population of the
Maritime Provinces. I must draw the atten-
tion of the House to the fact that immigra-
tion is not exclusively under the control of
the Government of Canada. The Local Ciov-
ernments have also something to do with
the matter, and if there is to be blame at-
tached to any one, at least it should be shared
by the local administrations of the provinces
that have been mentioned. If New Bruns-
wick has not increased in the proportion an-
ticipated, perhaps the hon. gentleman might
address some of his reproaches to the Liberal
Government who are governing that pro-
vince.

Hon. Mr. POWER— They have not had a
Liberal Government in New Brunswick since
Confederation.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Well, what is it?

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. POWER-
majority Conservative.

-A coalition, with the Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The vessels do.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I understand the ■
Liberal Premier strengthened his Govern-
ment by drawing some members from the
Opposition, but the Government of New
Brunswick has always been known as a Lib-

eral Government.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— The Halifax Chron-\
ich has frequently claimed that New '
Brunswick has a Liberal Government. The
hon. gentleman from Halifax Avill not deny
the Chronicle as the hon. member from
Ottawa has repudiated the Globe.

Hon. Mr. POWER All the early Gov- '
ernmeiits after Confederation were Conserv- 1
ative (Governments. The present Govern- ^
ment of New Brunswick is recognized as a
coalition Government.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— But the Chron-
icle says that the New Brunswick Govern-
ment is Liberal.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS Coming back to
what was called discrimination against the
United States on the canals, I was surprised
to hear the hon. letider of the Opposition
qualify the action of the Government in
this matter as unworthy of British statesmen.
Now, T do not agree with him in this, and I
believe T can show hiln that the statesmen
of the United States do not agree with him
either. I say that there never has been any
discrimination against United States vessels
navigating the St. Lawrence canals.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT -That is correct. I
agree with the hon. gentleman : it was ports
I said.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— What is the pri-
vilege granted by the treaty ? The privilege
is not one granted to a territory, or to a
special state : it is a privilege grante<l to the
flag carried by the vessels.

Hon.
people.

Mr. SCOTT -The citizens -the

- Hon. Mr. ANGERS — No, it is granted l
to the vessel, and T say that an Americiin
vessel fulfilling the conditions imposed on a |
Canadian vessel, gets exactly the same ,
rebate that our own vessels get. '

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The citizens also get
the same advantage, because the vessel must
be owned by an American citizen. An
American vessel loaded on its way to
Montreal with grain for export gets the
relmte. A Canadian vessel bound on the
sime course loaded with grain for export
gets the rebate. The two parties are equal
in this regard. Any Canadian vessel loaded
with grain and landing it short of Montreal,
for the purpose of consumption in the
country, does not get the rebate, and
why should an American vessel, doing what
a Canadian vessel cannot do, get a rebate ?
That is exactly the position. The hon. gen-
tleman wishes us to grant an American ves-
sel a privilege that a Canadian vessel is
denied. Now, if these were my own opinions
merely, I would not expect the House to lay
much stress upon them, but this has been
the interpretation and construction put upon
the treaty by the United States themselves
in all their statements for eight years. Let
me recall the date when this wheat rebate
was first established by an Order in Council.
It was on the 26th August, 1884, and on the
4th July, 1885, that this rebate was granted,
and never was there a protest or a complaint
of undue treatment or unfair interpretation
or illegal interpretation of the treaty during
all that time. Now, would the hon. gentle-
man aflirm that Mr. Bayard and Mr. Blaine
were so obtuse, so unskilful, so unmindful of
United States interest that they would not
have immediately protested against this
state of things which lasted for eight years ?
and yet it was only last September that they
gave any shape at all to a protest.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT - Do I understand the
hon. gentleman to say tliat vessels carrying
grain, either American or Canadian, where
they tranship at Ogdensburgh, but intending
the grain to go to Europe, would get a
rebate ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS —Certainly not, and
the reason is plain. How could the hon.
gentleman expect us to follow strain through
American territory to ascertain whether it
is exported or not ? Would they grant us
the privilege of entering their custom-houses
and examining their officials to see whether
the grain was exported or not ? We granted
them the privilege of coming to our ports, if
they chose, and we could not give them a

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 1, 1893] Address.

privilege over grain that we could hot con-
trol. Now, I say that the construction put
upon the treaty by the people of Canada
has been in accord with the interpretation
put upon it by the people of the United
States for eight years. Tf I am not wrong,
the suggestion of the grievance came from
this side of the line to furnish the Americans
with a new opportunity of putting the
screws on the people of Canada.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I want to ask a ques-
tion, as a matter of information, when was
the Order in Council passed, or the regulation
made, granting a rebate ? Tt was then that a
grievance arose I understand.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The first Order in
Council was passed on the 26th August, 1884.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— That did not affect
Ogdensburgh.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It affected every-
thing. The second Oitier in Council is dated
July 4th, 1885. There was a change in the
rate but there was no change in the right.
The hon. gentleman told us that last year
upon this point he had resisted temptation,
and did not wish to bring a discussion before
the House on this point. Well, I am very sorry
to see temptation gaining strength against
him. The hon. member should be more free
from temptation this year than he was last
year, since he is so much older. Now, I am
sorry that he did not resist the temptation
of showing that, in the Senate of Canada,
the pretension of the United States was
supported in opposition to Canadian interests,
because you all know that this is an open
question, and one which is within the scope
of diplomacy, and it is not right, that we
should discuss a question upon which the
Government have not come to a conclusion ;
so that I think the temptation should have
been resisted.

The hon. gentleman who leads the other
side of the House showed, or attempted to
show, that this country was going to ruin,
owing to misgovernment and a defective
fiscal policy. Now, I wish to show, and re-
assure him upon this point, if there is, any
doubt about it, that we are not going to ruin,
and that the fiscal policy of the Government
is not defective. If you want to have an
idea of the progress of the country, I think
one can refer with reliance to the shipping
employed for the business of this country
5J

and to the progress we have made in that

respect. I shall compare two years as fol-
lows : —

1878. 1892.

Tons of shipping em-
ployed 23, 102,551 43,802,384

Bank note circulation.. $20,215,020 33,788,679

Production of coal, tons
(1891) 1.152,000 3,623,076

Value Exports of Cana-
dian cattle $1,152,334 7,748,949

Value Exports of Cana-
dian cheese $3,997,521 1 1,652,412

Value Exports of Cana-
dian sheep $699,337 1 ,385, 146

Value Exports of Alanu-
^ factured wood $13,908,629 19,802, 165

Value Exports of Home
manufactures '. . $17,780,776 26,843,153

Imports raw. cotton,

pounds 8,01 1,759 46,322,525

817.559 3,673,933

V^alue products of Cana-
dian Fisheries (1891). $13,215,679 18,978,078

Value Exports of pro-
ducts Canadian Mines $2,816,347 5,906,471

Value Exports products
of Canadian Farms... $32,028,321 50,708,134

Barrels Exports Apples
Number 53,213 690,951

Value Exports Apples. . $149,333 1,444,883

Dominion note circu-
lation $3,120,127 7,214,953

Consumption of coal, tons

(1891.) 1,665,814 5,885.894

An increase of 4,220,000 tons.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The winters are
more severe.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS.— I can find for
the hon. gentleman a better explanation
than that. The coal is being used as a re-
sult of the National Policy. It is being
used in the spinning of cotton in cotton
mills, in the iron industries, and in a hun-
dred other ways, and the hon. gentleman is
wrong, I think, in referring to the winters
as the cause of the increased consumption.
We left the glacial period of 1 878. We have
come into a much more moderate climate,
where everything expands and blooms. Now,
I will refer to what T think is a very safe
test to show the prosperity and the credit of
the country. It is the discounts by charter-
ed banks. In ^878, the discounts were $124,-
886,552. In 1892, they were $210,234,377.
But there is a better test than that ; it is
the business failures. Now, if we compare
the glacial period of 1878 with 1892, we
have the following result : The failures in
1878 amounted to $23,908,000, and in 1892
to $13,703,000. The over-due notes in banks
is a very good test also to show whether we

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

are going to ruin or not, and to show whether '
the fiscal policy of this country is so very
vicious. The over-due notes in banks on
each ^100 borrowed in 1878, was S4.56.
What do you think it was in 1892 ? $1.03.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman will excuse me, I am very sorry
to interrupt him. Before he lays that state-
ment down, would he be kind enough to tell
me the exact meaning of. the statement
which he made in the first place — the
shipping employed. That means the ton-
nage inward and outward ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS- -Yes, the tonnage
inward and outward. The claim is made
that everything in this country is taxed and
over-taxed. Well, I will show the House
the statement of imports divided into free
and dutiable goods for seven years. The
division shows that during the 7 years, 1868-
74, the yearly average of imports was :
dutiable goods, $58,020,000, and of free
goods, $36,300,000.

Dutiable. Free goods.

1875-79 §«2,902,250 §33,538,437

1880-84 76,632,000 25,000,000

1885-91 74,000,000 32,700,000

1892 69.16<J,737 47,818,206

In the first period, the free goods were 62
per cent of the dutiable. In the second, 53
per cent. In the third, 32 per cent. In
the fourth, 44 per cent, and last year over
69 per cent. Last year the free goods bore
a larger proportionate rate to the dutiable
goods than during any period since Confede-
ration. In the period of the Opposition,
they were 53 per cent of the dutiable goods ;
last year they were 69 per cent. The Oppo-
sition do not stand on a sound basis of fact
when they affirm that under the National
Policy everything is taxed.

At 6 o'clock the debate was adjourned.

The Senate adjourned at 6 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Otimva, Thursday, February 2nd, 1803.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3 o'clock.
Prayer and routine proceedings.
THE ADDRESS.

THE DEBATE CONTINUED.

The Order of the Day being read,

ResuininK the adjourned debate on the consider-
ation of His Excellency the Governor-Generars

speech, on the opening of the Third Session of the
Seventh Parliament.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I was endeavour-
ing, when the debate was adjourned yester-
day, to show the great progress the country
had made in developing its industries, and I
compared the period of 1878 with 1891-92.
To make this argument stronger, I shall now
draw your attention to the list of partially
manufactured articles, and manufactured ar-
ticles, being goods used in the manufacture
of articles in Canada and not themselves
manufactured in Canada. We find that of
this class of imports there was admitted
free, in the period of 1879 to 1883, an aver-
age of §8,240,000 a year. In the period of
1884 to 1888, an average of 89,560,000, and
in the period of 1889 to 1892 — three years
—an average of 813,167,000. There has
thus been a constantly growing amount of
I goods entering into our own manufacturing
I brought in without duty. Again and again
1 we have said to the manufacturers, We will
enlarge the free list for the articles you need,
so that you may be able to produce cheaper
and cheaper, and thus supply the consumer
at the least possible cost. In this way a
large amount of taxation has been, remitted
to the people, as in placing tea and sugar on
the free list, as well as striking oflf the stamp
tax. The percentage of customs duties on the
total value of goods entered for home con-
sumption in 1879, was 16*10 per cent, and
in 1892, 17-56 per cent; this is SI. 46 on
each one hundred dollars more in 1892
than in 1879. Yet, in the interval
we have extended our railway system
by 8,500 miles and increased the amount
of goods carried by them from 7,883,-
000 tons to about 23,000,000 tons, and in-
creased the passengers carried from 6,444,-
000 to nearly 14,000,000, having expended
on these great aids to cheap transportation
and improved interprovincial interchange
.^78,356,935. We have developed and im-
proved our canal system and have expended
thereon since 1879, the sum of $3,658,984.
We have erected all over the Dominion pub-
lic buildings at a costof nearly $10,000,000,
giviiig increased facilities to the public in
doing their business at the post offices, cus-
tom-houses and other public buildings, be-
sides other expenditures, making a total of
$1 28,000,000. All these services have been
performed. The country has been provided
with cheapened means of transportation and

Digitized by

Google

The fFEBRUAKY 2, 1893J Address,

greater facilities for doing business ; and yet
in 18^92, the burden of taxation, as indicated
by the customs tariff, was only $1.50 more
on each $100 of the imports than it was in
1879. In the meantime, the cost of trans-
portation has been greatly cheapened. It is
also due to the improved credit of the country,
under the National Policy, that our intei'est
charges ha\e been greatly reduced. Now, I
wish to refer to the argument made by my
hon. friend from Marquette, when he stated
to the House that we had exhausted our pur-
chasing power and borrowing capacity and
our credit, and that it was impossible for
the Dominion to further increase its indebted-
ness without going to ruin. He founded his
argument on the fact that the imports had
not nsen in proportion to the exports. I say
that this is not a sound argument. Exports
>vill make a people rich ; imports will also
make a people rich, but T must make a dis-
tinction. It depends on the nature of the
imports that you are bringing into the coun-
try. If you bring in imports that are the
necessaries of life, such as butter, cheese,
bacon, ham, <fcc., how much richer are you in
the end 1 If you bring in imports of raw ma-
terials— things to which you willgive greater
value — then you may become rich ; but if
you only import things that are perishable,
you are getting poorer and poorer every day.
Now, upon this point I will show the hon.
gentleman why the imports have been less
in proportion to the exports. There is
a very good reason for it. It is l)e-
cause the Government introduced a policy
which was calculated to diminish the
imports. The National Policy was introdu-
ced, and consequently we have a decrease in
1892, of $25,450 in the quantity of butter
brought into the country as compared with
1891. In lard we have a decrease of 818,-
432 in the same year ; Imcon and hams de-
creased $113,327 ; beef, salted, $3,140 ; fluid
l)eef, $5,220, and of pork - this is an item to
which I believe it is right to refer tlie farmer
— we have imported $111,686 less in that
year ; poultry and dried or smoked meat and
other meats, altogether in the few items I
looked through, and which only refer to the
farmers, we have a total deci^ease of $306,-
498. Perhaps this would l)e an acceptable
explanation for the hon. gentleman why his
expectations were not realized, when he found
that our imports were lower in proportion to
the exports.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— How is it the
revenue has gone down ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The revenue from
customs.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— How is it we pay as
many duties as formerly ?

Hon. Mr. A'N'GERS— You pay such duty,
because, instead of importing perishable
goods, we are importing raw material, which
mateiial, when it falls into our hands,
acquires a greater value. The hon. gentle-
man was also very much alarmed at the fact
that we had exhausted our capacity for
borrowing and that our credit was really
going down. I shall draw his attention to
the fact that ifi 1887, the debt of the Domi-
nion was $227,314,775 ; the interest on that
was $8,692,042. In 1892, the debt was
$236,493,600 but the interest is only
$8,677,558. The interest on the whole has
diminished by $14,484. As my hon. friend
says, that is not a bad credit when you come
to borrow eight and a half millions and pay
less interest than you paid when you did not
owe that capital. According to the Liberal
party, the fiscal policy of the Government is
a defective policy. They say that protection
is only for the benefit of monopolists and
that those men are growing rich on the hard
toil of the people, and that we have mil-
lionaires. These men that are getting rich,
they say, are crushing down the people
and sucking the blood fi*om their veins,
that they wear them out in work and do
not feed them. That is the argument
they use every time they appear in
public. The Census returns indicate that the
labourers' wages have increased by 16 per
cent. Now, does that show that the men
who are at the head of the industries of
this country, are taking such advantage of
the toilere that they will not allow them to
live? I have shown here, by official docu-
ments, that the wages of the toiler have in-
creased by 16 per cent. The price lists of
the great markets show that all the neces-
saries of life — food and clothing, and so on —
are cheaper than they were — that in fact
everything the family needs is cheaper, ex-
cept shelter ; and house rent is higher, be-
cause the masses demand better accommo-
dation than the people were contented w^ith

Digitized by

Google

7«)

The [SENATE] Address,

twenty years ago. Now, of course, this con- i
dition of things can only suit one party, and
that is the Conservative party ; because
over and above everything, over and above !
the closest ties, our attention and our ener- j
gies are devoted to the development of
Canada ; and it is not to be expected, con-
sidering this feeling — ^judgingfrom the argu-
ments used on the other side and from the ]
steps they have taken to defeat th^ Govern- 1
ment, and the policy that I have been laying '
down before you — I say it is not to be ex-
pected that their sentiments are likely to be
in accord with ours. It has been very
disagreeable for them- I do not mean by
this, members of this House, I mean the Lib-
erals out of this House — and they have
undertaken to defeat this policy. They went
over the country and cried out that Canada
was going to ruin ; that the National Policy
was making a few people rich and making
the masses poor. This did not take very well
with the people. It did not suit the purpose.
The Libei-als required some other cry for
the position they were seeking, and they
said that the true policy for Canada was^
Commercial Union. That did not take very
much with the people either. They then
got another name ; they called it Continen-
tal Union. That did not seem to suit either.
The people were not carried away by these j
promises. Then, not having sufficient sup-
port in Canada, they went to the United
States, and there they formed a combine with
men who were determined todefeat the jx)licy
of Canada and turn the country against the i
Government for the purpose of — what ? For I
the purpose of annexation. They entered
into partnership there. They had meetings
with Mr. Hoar. They had meetings with
Mr. Wiman, and they concocted the project i
or plan by which this country was to l>e
ruined ; and they proposed that steps should
be taken to force Canada into United States
Territory. ,

** They are all, all honourable men," so was
Brutus an " honourable man." They used
Mr. F.irrer as their precursor.

And Farrer " is an honourable man."
He had associates on the other side.
Mr. Wiman gave him all his support.
And Mr. Wiman *' is an honourable man."
He had associates in this country who
went through the length and breadth of the
Dominion to induce tlie people to accept the
policy which would suit the United States i
better than it would suit Canada.

So are they all — all honourable men:

They were disapointed in this, and the
Liberal party had to wear a mask. Mr.
Farrer described them so.

Yet Farrer is an honourable mAn.

He saw that this was not taking with the
people, and he had to find an excuse to
satisfy his associates on the other side of
the line. He said, "my friends, there is
no possibility of annexation till the old man
dies, and we will not be able to cut the
halyard that hoists the British standard
till then. He is seventy years old."

Yet Farrer is an honourable man.

They look for some other scheme to create
dissatisfaction in the peoples' minds against
the Government. Of course I always mean,
when I say Liberals, those outside this
House. The people of the United States
were told by those gentlemen that if a tariff
Wiis adopted which would cut off Canada
from the United States markets, a reaction
would take place in this country. The
McKinley tariff was framed. They rejoice<l
in the McKinley tariff, and in their glee
they said to themselves. We have found the
nxl of Moscrt, and the Canadians will starve
wnth their granaries full the fruit on the
trees will rot, the barley in the soil will not
rise, by the force of this Moses's ro<l. The
milk in Canada will turn into water. The
blow has had the reverse effect. The milk
was turned into cheese. While in 1891, the
export to England was $9,481,373, in 1892
it rose to 81 1 ,593,690. The cream of Canada,
they said would not churn by the force of
this Moses's nxl. In 1891, the value of the
butter exported from this country to England
was 8440,060; in 1892, it was 8877,4.*).3.
There was to be a mightier blow than that
given by the force of this rod of Moses -
the hens of Canada were to l)e turne<l into
r(K)sters, and the roosters into capon.-, and
the egg trade of Canada wiis to be destroyed.
The blow again hjul the reverse effect. In
1891, the e^g trade of Canada with England,
was 883,589; in 1892, it was 8592,218.

Hon. Mr. POWER -I do not think the
hon. gentleman will tind those figures in the
Tnule Returns.

Hon. Mr. AGGERS Certainly I do.

Hon. Mr. POWER I would be glad to
have the page then.

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893 J Address,

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I have not the
page for the hon. gentlemen here, but if he
wiU do me the honour to call at my office,
or to appoint a place where I can . see him,
I will give him' the page.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I cannot find it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — There may be some-
thing else in the" official returns which the
hon. gentleman cannot find. Now, the effect
of this blow through the McKinley tariff wais
a diminution of trade with the United
States, but there again the Liberal party met
wi£h a deception. True, there was a reduc-
tion of trade with the United States to the
extent of 82,150,668 in our exports, but it
was fully made up by new trade. Instead of
the produce of this land being wasted— in-
stead of the fruit rotting on the trees and the
milk turning into water — we have had an
UKjreaseof trade of $17,919,592. I think
that was a fair compensation for the loss by
the McKinley tariff. We lost $2,373,51 3 on
the one hand, and we had an increase of
trade on the other of $17,919,592. On the
whole, the blow, deducting the loss by the
McKinley tariff, resulted in a net gain of
$15,546,079 in our export trade, in conse-
quence of the McKinley tariff. I say in
consequence of that tariff, because it was cal-
culated to ruin Canada, and it proved to
be a blessing, raising us to our proper level.
It has awakened in us the British spirit that
perhaps was dormant before. We had a
market near us and access to it without exer-
tion, and we waited untilour neigh hours came
for our products. That was not the position
that Canada should hold on this continent,
and the McKinley tariff had the effect of
arousing us to action. The result is that the
eyes of European countries have been more
aud more turned towards Canada. Holland
alone purchased from us last year $553,138
of our products in exce-ss of the preceding
year. I repeat, therefore, that the blow
which was intended for us has pn)ved a
blessing in disguise. Perhaps I should not
leave this part of my subject without thanking
the Liberals of Canada, who, in exertingthem-
selves to bring about annexation by cutting
us oft from the United States markets, were
the means of expanding our trade. I feel
that, as a new member of this House, I have
perhaps taken an undue advantage of your
kindness, and that it is perhaps contrary to
courtesy, on the first occasion of a member

addressing this honourable House, to occupy
so much of time. I must apologise if I have
done so, but perhaps you will accept from me
an excuse. I heard a voice within me saying,
" assist, assist as much as you can to protect
the country and to continue the National
Policy." This voice was that of a man de-
scribed by the eloquent leader in the other
House as a portion of the institutions of
Canada. This voice was that of the late
chieftain. I heard more — I heard the parting
words of his noble widow. They have been
ringing in my ears while I have been address-
ing you here, " Tell my husband's friends at
some time,whenall can hear, thatjl, his widow,
and broken hearted in my loneliness and deso-
lation, venture to ask from them a last and
lasting tribute to my husband's dear memory.
I ask that that tribute shall be a firm and
united support to the policy and principles
that our great leader lived and died to main-
tain and carry out." Those were the words
that were ringing in my ears when I
addressed you and I offer you their teachings
as my excuse for detaining you so long.

'Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)- T think this
House is to be congratulated on its accjuisition
of the two hon. gentlemen who represent the
Cabinet here. For my own part, I think the
(lovernment have only done what many of us
have been complaining for a number of years
that they had failed to do. This House has
been left for y^i-s without Ministers holding
portfolios, without the representation that
its importance in the country demands. The
Government in its reconstruction, has done
us justice — partial justice perhaps, not too
much by any means, if we are to be a tran-
script of the British constitution. You find
in England that a very considerable propor-
tion of Ministei*s have seats in the House of
Lords. It has been a complaint by me in this
House that the 8enate has not been treated in
themanner that it should demand. However,
as this (Government in its reconstruction has
so far considered us, I have to congratulate
them and the country, and the House will
no doubt feel that they have a great
acquisition in the two gentlemen who hold
portfolios in the Government of the day. I
venture to say a few words to the House at
this particular juncture, and if I travel a
little out of the line of what is really the
matter under discussion, it is allowable.
Every question may be brought up in the
debate on the Address. There seems to

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

be hardly any question that should be
omitted from it, and \\s there are some
matters I should like to say a few words
upon, I am to be pardoned for doing so.
A great deal has been said about the National
Policy in this debate. Tt brings to my
mind the incidents of 1877, when I
• moved the resolution affirming the National
Policy. Great things have come out of it.
At that time I could not find a seconder for
my resolution in this House. After a long
time I did lind one man to say, " Read, I
will not allow your motion to go without a
seconder." I may as well read the motion
which I moved in 1877, to show how neces-
sary it is for us to change as we go on.
Events move rapidly in a new country. My
resolution wap as follows : — " That in the
opinion of this House the present and the
future interests of the manufacturing and
agricultural industries of the Dominion call
for the adoption of a National Policy by
which either reciprocity of trade with the
United States is obtained or a reciprocity
of tariffs is established by Canada." That
was the first resolution moved in Canada in
favour of the National Policy. For two
weeks I had it on the notice paper. As I
have said, a friend agreed to second the
motion, but he thought better of it, anfl
backed out. However, a gentleman who is
no longer with us, came to my relief and
seconded the motion. Things have changed
very much since then. I coftld easily get a
seconder to-day for a resolution of that sort.
As matters went on it was found that the
principle of protection was popular, and it
was on that issue that the Government of
Sir John Macdonald was returned. Then the
people were told we should have something bet-
ter and that something better was commercial
union with the United States. I very well
know that hon. gentlemen say they did not
propose commercial union. T know Mr.
Wiman came to a place called Napanee.
Although the Govenmient had not spoken
out on the question at all, I went to the
meeting to hear what he had to say about it.
I took the ground at that meeting that it
would be disastrous to the financial inter-
ests of Canada. After a while he held
another meeting in Picton : I met him.there,
and although I had been returned for that
part of the country, I could scarcely get a
hearing. The place was packed with Lil)er-
als. I there combatted, as well as I could, Mr.
Wiman's scheme, so that hon. gentlemen need

not say they did not adopt commercial union.
They did adopt it, and we had to meet it
every place we went. They found it would
not do, and then they took up unrestricted
reciprocity. Well, what does that mean?
We hardly know what it means. Does it
mean free trade with the United States?
They tell us the American market is our
natural one. I know it is convenient to go
across the way and sell a man something I
have got to sell, and buy something he has
got to sell. I have done it a hundred times
myself, but as to the United States being
our 'natural market, our neighbours are large
exporters of the very articles that we "pro-
duce. The main articles that we produce

! they export to the markets of Europe, as is

I shown by the following list : —

Animals 8 32,0(K),(KK)

I Breadstuffs Io2,00(»,00()

I Apples, fresh, dried, canned

I and preserved fruit .S,0()0,(MX»,

Cotton oil and other oils. . . . 4,00U,(KK>

I Farm products 84,000,(XH)

Meat 45,()00,(KM)

Dairy products 9,0(K),0()()

Vegetables 1,:«)0,0(K)

I think I have gone through what is
generally produced on the farm. I know
what is pr(xluced on the farms of this c*oun-
try, having had a great deal to do with
purchasing and raising farm products. We
expoi-t barley to the United States. I
admit there was i\ lime when that barley
trade was important to us. I have been in
it twenty-five years and ought to know some-
thing about it. Before the great civil war
in the United States, barley was cheap. I
have bought continuously for a whole setison,
and in large quantities, barley at 41 cents a
bushel. That was the highest price when
there was no duty on barley entering the
United States. After the repeal of the
Reciprocity Treaty, after the war in the
United States, I sold barley at $2.45 a,
bushel. It was a depreciated currency, it is
true, but I sold the same day a large quantity
in the warehouse at §1.65 gold, when there
was a duty on barley going into the United
States.

The Americans after the war began to
grow barley for themselves. Of course the
duty they imposed was a great drawback,
and we have not been able to produce bar-
ley to sell them to any extent. The Mc-
Kinley Bill increased the duty to 30 cents,
and of course we do not sell them any bar-

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBEUAEY 2, 1893] Address.

ley now. The part of the country which I
come from is famous for its barley, and I
found it a profitable trade. I have loaded
ten vessels at one time with barley in that
part of the country, but the United States
put this duty upon it, and we have had to
submit to the consequences. If the duty
was removed, I think, probably, we could
grow barley at a profit; but as things change,
the farmers, like other people, must change
also, and I do not hesitate to say that they
have l>een slow to change. However, they
are driven to it now and they must meet
the emergency. They must think and
act according to circumstances. Our
country lies in the temperate zone and in
future the general agricultural exports of the
country must be the cow and her products.
I mean by that pork, butter and cheese.
With regard to the butter industry, I think
the people must move ; and thanks to the
Government, they have moved. The Govern-
ment are doing a great work, they are mov-
ing the farmers in the right direction, in a
way that they will not exhaust the soil,, but
will preserve the fertility of the land. We
have not many new fields now. I am speak-
ing of the older parts of the country, parti-
cularly the thickly-settled parts. We have
not new fields to break up and we cannot be
sending away the farms, because that is
what it means. We cannot afford to exhaust
the soil, because we would then have to
purchase fertilizers. Now, what is the coun-
try going to do ? There Ls no man, in my
opinion, either in the inside or outside ser-
vice who has done and is doing this countr}'
so much good as Prof. Robertson, the Domin-
ion Dairy Commissioner, and I doubt
whether any Minister of the Crown has
rendered half the service to the country that
he has done. I wish to draw the attention
of the Minister of Agriculture to the fact
that Prof. Robertson has not only educated
the fanners ; he has in the last year or two,
by his work, brought this country before
the great merchant princes of the world in a
manner that scarcely any other man could
do.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — He is educating me
also.

Hon. Mr. READ— If you follow his
tuition I warrant that you will move in the
right direction. Professor Robertson has so
aroused the people of England that even the

' Liberal press is eulogising the Government of

I Canada and telling the landlords that they

I should follow the action of the Government

of Canada. They say : Why are you not

educating your farmei-s and helping them

I along as the Government is helping the

' farmers of that country ? When you get the

great press of England to give a column or

I two of a lecture given by a Canadian civil

I servant, you are doing a great deal. In

j England they have asked Professor Rol)ert-

I son to address them and asked him what he

I thinks should be done, and he has advised

them wisely. I feel that it is my duty,

I knowing him so well, to say that there is no

man in this country whose work is resulting

I in greater good. The Grovernment are

I establishing model creameries in Canada. I

I visited one a few days ago for my own satis-

I faction, and I saw a number of men and

j women there. I wondered who and what

they were. It turned out that they were

cheese makers, getting an education free of

cost in the best methods of producing butter.

Three^such establishments are in Ontario, I

believe, to-day. In the British Trade and

' Na\igation Returns up to December last I

find that w« are increasing in the manufac-

j tui-e of butter in a short time. Last year

I there were two experimental creameries in

' Ontario. I do not know what there was in

lower Canada. In 1891, we sent to England

£174,043 worth of butter. In 1892, in eleven

months, we sent to England £239,580 worth.

I The British Trade and Navigation returns

j are from the 1st of January to the 1st of

January, while ours are from 1st July to

I 1st July. Consequently they will not exactly

' compare. But the increase according to

those returns Ls what I have stated in exports

of butter for 11 months last year. Then

with regard to cheese, I see that we have

I sent a little more, speaking from the English

'returns, in the 11 months, namely

$11,600,000.

i Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I have $1 1,593,000
— that is pretty close.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I would draw the
hon. gentleman's attention to a piobable cause
of the difference between the British I^ard
of Trade returns and our own returns. In
the former articles which are not the produce
of Canada, though exports of Canada,
would be included. We distinguish in
our own returns between exports that are

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

the produce of Canada and those that are
not the produce of Canada.

Hort. Mr. ANGERS— What I have given
you is the produce of Canada.

Hon. Mr. POWER
says.

-That is not what he

Hon. Mr. READ -He did not say
so many words.

it in

j Hon. Mr.
! oflf coal oil.

POWER— He said to take it

Hon. Mr. READ — He said, to put it on
tea. That is to do as the British people do.

Hon. Mr. ANGER8— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. READ— The experimental farms
have done a great deal for the farmers. They
have shown the farmers, by their experi-
ments, what it costs to produce a pound of
grain, which grain is worth the most money,
and how much skimmed milk is worth for
feeding purposes. We may guess at these
things, but the experimental farms have told
us for a fact how many j)ounds of grain it
takes to make a pound of pork, under various
conditions. These things, I repeat, teach
the farmers, who have not had an opportun-
ity of learning how to feed stock properly.
•Professor Robertson has been issuing bulle-
tins on silos; and I think that is the ground
work of the dairy. It is the ground work,
because it gives you the best quality of food
for stock at the cheapest possible rate. En-
silage costs about $1.50 a ton put into silo
ready for feeding. There is no other food
that can be fed so cheaply to animals and at
the same time can be produced in such
quantities. Professor Robertson is going to
keep twenty-eight head of cattle on forty-
eight acres of land. Here, on the Experi-
mental farm at Ottawa, he has naturally a
good many appliances. He has the city
close by from which to get manure, and no
fences. These lessons, I repeat, help to
raise the farmer out of the rut into which he
has fallen. At present grain cannot be
grown at a profit. I think I have said (juite
sufficient on that question. I will say a few
words about the trade j)olioy of my hon.
friend from Manjuette. He has pictured
the British tariff as being everything to be
desired. He tells us to take the duty off
silks and satins, broad doth, feathei's, \yoi\-
nets, laces, and things of that nature and
put it on tea.

Hon. Mr. READ — There may be a few
boxes of cheese going down by way of Mon-
treal. This trade, in my opinion, is as yet in

its infancy, and I must thank the hon. ^

Minister who had a seat in this House, Mr. i rp^j^^ it'off thepwr man^s b^r and p«t it
Carling, and give him credit for inaugurating I ^^ ^li^ ^ea. That is what the British people
this system of educating the public, to a cer- 1 ^^
tain extent. .

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— They have it on the
beer too, have they not ?

Hon. Mr. READ- No, not for the poor

I man. Allow me to tell you that the poor

man's beer in England is not ta\ed. When

, a man lives in a house for which he pays £10

I sterling a year he is at liberty to brew beer

for his own use without paying a license or

taxes, and can brew for a neighbour without

I paying a license or taxes ; and consequently

I the conclusion is to take the tax off beer to

I that extent and put it on tea. Now, I do not

think that our people would like to have

the ladies go an)und in silks and satins and

! the gentlemen in brofwl cloth and deprive a

breakfeast table of free tea, coffee, fruits of

! all sorts, prunes, raisins, currants and all

such goods. There is nothing in this list

, about silks, satins, velvets, laces or any of

; those luxuries that the rich wear. The

tariff question is a very wide one, and T

might detain the House for a long time, but

the general wish is to conclude the debate on

I the Address to-night, so I will say nothing

further. T do not know that it would be out

( of place to ask the Minister of Agriculture

whether the British Government have been

I invoked to send U^ this country experts to

! see whether pi euro-pneumonia exists in this

country. If they have not l)een invoked in

that direction 1 think tliey should be at

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -I can give the hon.
gentleman the information which he requii'es.
The (iovernment of Canada have solicit^
the Board of Trade in England to send ex-
perts here to visit Canada from Halifax to
British Columbia, to ascertain whether there
was any pleuro-pneumonia in the Dominion,
and although England is very rich we offered
to pay the expenses.

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

Hon. Mr. 'READ- I am very pleased to
know that the Government has been alive
to our interests in relation to this industry —
an industry of $9,000,000 exports a year.
That trade, too, is in its infancy. Our great
North-west, which is calculated to produce
enormous quantities of cattle, must find a
market. It is claimed that the natural
market is the United States. They sent
over 400,000 head last year to England alone,
speaking roundly. That trade has only been
in existence for a short time. A friend of
mine sent the first load that was shipped to
England. I recollect he sent 45 head and
he thought it was a wonderful thing. But
the trade is progressing now, and we must
depend on the cow and her products for
agricultural exports. You cannot make
money now by growing grain and selling it.
But there is money to l>e made in the other
direction. I have handled cattle in this
country from 1836 to. the present day conti-
nuously. I have never been troubled with
any disease among the cattle. I recollect
well when the rinderpest was raging and I
had 500 head of oxen tied up, I used to go
in among them and think to myself what a
havoc there would be if that disease broke
out. But we never had any disease among
the cattle.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) -What is the |
necessity -of getting a veterinary surgeon to ,
come over from England when we have ex- 1
perts here?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — No, there never was,
and we were so sure of the fact that we chal-
lenged them on the other side to send across
a surgeon for themselves if they did not
wish to take our word.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I think our
veterinary surgeons should be good enough
for that.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man must understand this fact, that there
wei'e two of the cattle in a cargo sent from
this country that were found to have a dis-
ease of some character or other, or it was
pretended that they had. And the veteri-
nary surgeon of the Board of Trade in Eng-
land reported to the Board that it was
pleuro-pneumonia. He persists in that state-
ment to the present day, notwithstanding
the fact that we sent our veterinary sur-
geons from one end of the country to the
other, in order to ascertain if there was a
possibility of the existence of that or any
other disease. Notwithstanding that, whether
it be in the interests of the home producer
or not I do not say, he still persists in it.
Then my hon. friend suggests the propriety
of inviting that very gentlem \ n to Canada
to make an examination. Surely my hon.
friend from the Pacific coast would not find
fault with the position taken by the Govern-
ment of Canada in order to prove beyond a
doubt the correctness of our statements, and
for that reason we offered to pay the expenses.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN- -They want to le
convinced on their own evidence.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) Is the word
of a veterinary surgeon in Canada of so
little account that it will not Ije taken in
England ?

Hon. Mr. READ John Bull takes no- ,
thing for granted. You have to satisfy him. j

Hon. Mr. ANGERS We offered to have '
the experts of England visit this eounti-y to I
see whether there was any pleuro-pneumonia ,
in it. Not that we did not rely on the evi-
dence of our veterinary surgeons, but to show ]
the people of England that we are not
afraid of investigation.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) -There never '
as any pleuro-pneumonia in Canada. ,

Hon. Mr. McINNES, (B.C.) I may say
that r saw in the public press a statement
that it was satisfactorily proven that the
cases referred to were not pleuro-pneumonia.
According to what the hon. gentleman has
I said, that information that J .4aw in the
I public press was not correct. Of course I
accept the hon. gentleman's statement.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — We are convinced
that it was not.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL The hon. gentleman
is quite correct in the statement that he
made, still that did not change the opinion
at home and we desire to convince him also.

Hon. Mr. READ I see that the hou.
gentleman from Marquette has just come in,
and I will refer a little to his policy. He
wants the tariff* of England he wants to

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

revive the Stamp Act, and adopt similar
means to raise a revenue. Now, if I have to
take a receipt T do not want to have to run all
through the country to get a stamp to make
that receipt valid.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— T, as a farmer, do
not want to pay 8 cents a gallon on coal oil.

Hon. Mr. READ — If I owe a man a
dollar or two, and have to give him a
cheque, I do not want to have to put a
stamp on that checjue. We had some ex-
perience in this country of the Stamp Act.
We know it was the lawyers' harvest.
Thei^ was a law suit about almost every
other bill, because the man only put 3 cents
on it instead of 6 cents, or he did not mark
them off, or he failed to do something that
the law required him to do. I do not want
that in this country again, and I w^ould
rather pay a little extra on my coal oil
than have to stamp every cheque and re-
ceipt that I gave.

too much money, but how could we have, in
so short a time, large accumulations of
wealth ? Where I am standing now was a
wilderness within the memory of men yet
living. Our people have had to clear the land,
erect buildings, construct roads and bring
the soil under cultivation, and we cannot
expect in so short a time to have a large
accumulation of wealth.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE—What does the
hon. gentleman consider the value of lands
in Canada to-day as compared with their
value ten years ago, in the district with
which the hon. gentleman is acquainted f

Hon. Mr. READ— T think land has de-
creased 30 to 40 per cent in value ; but has
it not decreased all over the world ? Has it
not decreased in the state of New York ?

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— It has not
decreased in British Columbia.

Hon. Mr. READ- Biitish Columbia Ls

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Perhaps the hon. . all rocks,
gentleman uses the electric light.

Hon. Mr. READ — A good deal has been
said about the condition of affairs in the
neighbounng country. Recently the Globe
sent commissioners to interview the farmers
in this country, and they subseijuently visit-
ed the United States for the same purpose.
Here is the opinion of a farmer in Orleans
county, one of the finest parts of the state
of New York, He says : — " I could have
sold my farm ten years ago for SI 50 an acre,
to day T could not get $100 an acre." Then
he speaks of the price of binders, " I have
to pay $125 for a binder." We can buy one
here for less. He says, " I pay S55 for a six-
feet mower." We can buy one for consider-
ably less than that here. He speaks of
other implements all of which we can buy
in Canada at lower prices. Another farmer
says that a great portion of the farms are
more or less mortgaged. Tn fact, everybody
admits that agriculture is seriously depress-
ed all over the world. If we were in a
worse position— I say " we " because I live
on a farm — than other people, I would
think there was something wrong either
with the Government or with the country,
but we find that we are better off than most
people. No people in the world live better
than our own. It is true we have not any

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man would not say that if he would Wsit
British Columbia.

Hon. Mr. READ — Our lands have depre-
ciated in value, it is true, but so have lands
everywhere else. Recently land twenty
miles from London, Eng., was sold for £10
per acre. Within my time it would not
have been considered dear at £60 or £70 an
acre. I hope that my hon. friend from Mar-
(juette will some time have a better scheme
to present to us than the adoption of Eng-
land's tariff policy.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER- Being a new mem-
l)er of this honourable House, it was indeed
very far from my intention to take part in the
debate on the Address, but the reference
made by the hon. gentleman from Marquette
to the school question of Manitoba seems to
impose upon me the duty of making one or
two remarks, for which T request the indul-
gence of this hcmourable House. I have first
to acknowledge the liberal spirit with which
he has dealt >vith the question, but the hon.
gentleman has gone a little further than the
mere expressicm of sentiment. He has stated
facts and has given vent to opinions from
which very important inferences are to be

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUAEY 2, 1893] Address,

made. He has said that the difficulties now
existing as to scBool matters in Manitoba
could not be settled except in a constitutional
way. In that I quite agree with the hon.
gentleman. Tt must be well understood all
over the land that the Roman Catholics do
not claim extra constitutional privileges.
They want nothing else than the fair appli-
cation of the constitution to their case. The
hon. gentleman has, moreover, said most dis-
tinctly that there can be no doubt that the
intention of the Parliament in giving a
constitution to the province of Manitoba,
was that the minority, whatever might
be its complexion, should have its separ-
ate schools and enjoy all the franchises
accorded to British citizens in the way of
taxation and in sharing the educational
grants. Now, I say, since it was the un-
doubted intention of Parliament to grant
such a franchise, then it becomes a mere
question of honesty to construe the constitu-
tion, so as to give effect to that intention
and not to take advantage of some ambiguity
which may exist in the minds of some people
with regard to the text of the Manitoba Act.
Honesty is the best policy, says a maxim.
And this maxim is not only true, but also a
.most constitutional one. The hon. gentle-
man from Marquette having stated that
according to the true intent of the constitu-
tion, the Roman Catholics had a guarantee
that they would not be dispossessed of the
management of their schools nor ot their share
of the public moneys appropriated to educa-
tion, he goes further and says that according
to his mind, it would be fair for the Can-
adian Parliament to render them justice, at
least for a portion of the province. And
justice in tilis matter cannot mean anything
else than the restoration of the status the
Catholics had in the province previous to the
legislation of 1890. It is a great satisfaction
to me to be able to agree with the hon.
gentleman in all these utterances. But
where I cannot agree with him, is when he
makes a distinction between that portion of
the province as originally constituted and
the portion added afterwards. He is quite
willing that justice be rendered to the Catho-
lics living within the original limits of the
province, but- he contends that those living
outside of such limits have no claims, because
that portion of the territory was not contem-
plated iti the promises made to the ndnority,
or in the agreements entered into at the time
of the creation of the province. I believe

that the hon. gentleman is quite mistaken
in his contention. I do not want to enter
into a full discussion of whether the added
territory comes within the operation of the
Manitoba Act or not. But I say this : This
added territory comes within or without the
operation of the Manitoba Act. If it comes
within, then the same justice that the hon.
gentleman is prepared to extend to the old
province must also be extended to the added
territory. If on the other hand, it does not
come within the operation of the Manitoba
Act, it must come within the operation of
some other Act, and most assuredly there is
no other Act that could apply in that case
than the Confederation Act itself. Now, the
Confederation Act says most distinctly that
in each case when any province of the Confed-
eration shall have established a system of
separate schools after the Union, then there
shall lie an appeal to His Excellency the
Governor-General in Council against any
trespass on the rights or privileges of the
minority, which is equivalent to saying
that the province shall then l>e debarred of
the power to do away with that system. As
a matter of fact, the province of Manitoba
has established in the added territory a sys-
tem of separate schools after the Union, and
I say that even taking the view that the
promises and agreements which were in-
tended to be embodied in the Manitoba Act
could not apply to such territory, the Roman
Catholics living in that part would still,
without any question and even a fortiori,
be entitled to justice and protection. In
conclusion, I would say that whenever the
Parliament of Canada is prepared to render
full justice to the minority in the province
of Manitoba, the stand taken, in the main,^
by the hon. gentleman frgm Marquette,
shows that their action will commend itself
to the good sense and fairness of the people
at large.

Hon. Mr. POWER — The discussion upon
the Address in reply to His Excellency's
speech has taken a much wider scope than
usual this session, and I must say for myself
that I have been placed at a disadvantage.
I supposed that we were going to have the
usual running commentary on the paragraphs
of the Address which had been the custom in
this House, and did not calculate upon the
prolonged debate upon the trade question
with which we have been favoured. I do
not feel prepared to enter into a discussion

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

of the trade question at any length. At the
beginning I should like to ask a question of
the hon. Minister of Agriculture. If I un-
derstood him rightly, he stated that the ex-
portation of eggs from this country during
1892, was greater than during 1891.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Certainly.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Then that relieves
my mind very considerably, because it shows
that I was right when I intimated that I
had some doubts as to the reliability of the
statistics of which the hon. gentleman gave
us so many.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -The general export
of eggs has increased in the proportion that
I have mentione<l.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I stated that I hardly
thought that the public records bore out that
assertion. I wish to show that I was cor-
rect in what I said, and that my hon. friend's
informant misled him. Of course, T do not
suppose that the hon. gentleman is respon-
sible for the figures that he uses : they are
furnished by the officers of his department.
If we find that in one particular the hon.
gentleman's figures are unreliable, it naturally
shakes our faith in all that he has submitted.
I take the Trade Returns for 1892, page 435,
and I go to the item of eggs, and find that
the total export of eggs, the produce of Can-
ada, was 7,931,204 dozen, and their value
was $1,089,798. I turn to page 433 of the
Trade Returns for 1891, and I find that the
total quantity of eggs exported was 8,022,-
935 dozen, that is some 100,000 dozens more
than in the succeeding year, and that the
value of the eggs exported was $1,160,359.
that is al>out $70,000 more than in the pre-
vious year ; so that instead of 1892 being a
better year for eggs than 1891, it was not
quite so good.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I wish to say that
I mentioned that this result was under the
McKinley tariff.

Hon. Mr. POWER -That does not make
the slightest difference. The hon. gentle-
man said that the export was greater in 1892
than in 1891.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — Certainly, in foreign
markets other than the United States.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
stated that the total export for 1892 was
greater than the export for 1891 : the Trade
Returns ^how the reverse. The hon. gentle-
man's inaccuracy on this point throws doubt
upon all his figures. Now, I shall proceed to
say a few words directly on the Address. The
first paragraph to which I shall refer is the
following : —

I VVc are glad to leam from Yt»ur Excellency that
I the increase in tracle, as illustrated b} the exports
j and imports during the period for which the omcial
returns have been prepixred, has been most gratify-
ing, and has continued down to the present time,
with promise that the volume of trade during the
current year will exceed that of any year in the
I history of the Dominion.

I do not raise any question about the total
volume of trade. All I cah say is the in-
crease of trade to which His Excellency re-
fers has not extended to the Maritime Pro-
vinces, and the trade returns show that, both
as to exports and imports, the trade of the
Maritime Provinces was less last year than in
the previous year. Judging from what I
hear from my business friends, the falling off
since the 1st of July last, is in greater pro-
portion than in the year for which we have
the returns. As so much has been said about
the trade question, I may be pardoned for
saying a few words on the subject. It pre-
sents itself in a different way to Parliament
this year from that in which it was presented
j last year. In the first place, we have had a
complete revolution in the neighbouring re-
public, which was the great stronghold of
' protection on this continent, a country whose
; example we followed by enacting a protective
tariff and whose example we have since fol-
lowed to a certain extent in partially doing
away with the protective tariff. When the
United States took the duty off sugar, their
example was followed here ; and I think
it is only fair to assume that when
the people of the United States have
come to the conclusion — they are a people a
good deal like ourselves, and, T presume,
almost as intelligent as we are and fully
alive to their own interests — when they
have come to the conclusion, by so large a
majority, that they do not any longer want
pi'otection, it is not unnatural to expect
that our people will come to the same con-
clusion. There are also indications in
Canada #hat this policy which has l>een
boasted of so much for so many years and of
which we have heard a good deal of praise

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

in this House during the past two or three
days, that even here in Canada and amongst
the members of the Conservative party, that
policy is becoming discredited. Although
the hon. gentlemen who represent the Gov-
ernment in this House have talked protec-
tion pretty strongly and boldly, we tind in
the other House of Parliament that Minis-
ters talk in a different strain. For instance,
yesterday, when the subject of binder twine
was under discussion, the Minister of Fin-
ance intimated that a change would be
made in the tariff and that the duty on
binder twine, which has been complained of
so long by the farmers of the country, would
be removed or reduced ; and I think we
shall find the hon. gentlemen within two or
three years on our side, so far as the tariff
theory is concerned. My statement being
that of an unreconstructed Liberal, might
be taken perhaps as not worth very much,
but I can produce a statement made by
a gentleman who has, until a very recent
period, stood high in the councils of the
Conservative party, and who, according to
his own statement, has been consulted in all
the important changes of government made
during many years. That gentleman, the
member for North Simcoe in the other
House, made a speech at Stayner, in his own
constituency, the other day, and said a great
many things which, I think* bear the im-
press of common sense — things which, while
he reitiained a follower of hon. gentlemen
opposite, he could not very well say, but
which, now that he is unshackled, he is able
to say, and he tells the truth. This is what
he says about the protective policy :

I never proposeil that tlie great masses, the great
consuming masses of this country, should be for ever
burdened Dy an enormous tax, which it was neces-
sary to impose for a time to protect infant indus-
tries. But, gentlemen, these industries are not
always infants ; they ought to grow up and do
something for themselves. We cannot afford to be
always spoon-feeding. (Hear, hear ) The (juestion
now is, has the time arrived when these little tot-
tering things should get out an«l walk alone ?
^Laughter.) Now, so far as the mother country is
concerned, she acts as she considers best in her ow»i
interests, and we for our part are bound to act in
our own interest and for our own good. If we can
do well without infringing on the mother country,
we should, but if we cannot do well without in-
fringing we must do it, for our own interests must
be the first consideration. But let me tell you
that we have imposed upon K^ods of the mother
country a much larger duty than we have imposed
upon goods coming from the United States, her
great competitor. Almost 44 per cent of the im-
portations from the States are free goods, some-

thing we do not do to please them but to lienefit
ourselves, while only 25 per cent are free from the
mother country, for the same reason ; but if you
take both, we impose a duty of 29 per cent on
Great Britain to 25 per cent on the United States,
and if }ou take the whole list, free and dutiable,
you will find the duty is 21 per cent to (ireat
Britain and 14 per cent to the United States. I
do not ask you to change the policy on that account,
but draw your attention to this to show you how
we stand. The duty at present runs all the way
from 5 to 100 per cent, nay, more in some cases.
Do } ou understand what this means ? It means if
you buy $10 worth of goods you pay f20 for it.
This is not a tariff for revenue purposes, it is a
tariff designed to prevent importations and to pro-
tect the home manufacturers.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— On what classes of
goods is there fully 100 per cent duty
charged ?

Hon. Mr. POWER -There are some im-
ported articles which are doubled in price
when the duty is paid. Mr. McCarthy
refers to the McKinley tariff, but does not
take the strange gound taken by the
Minister of Agriculture, that this was
framed at the suggestion of Canadians, and
for the mere purpose of worrying Canada..
He goes on towards the end to say :

But I am concerned at present more w^th the
effect of the trade policy which now prevails upon
the other industries of the country, exceptmg from
that consideration the manufacturers tnemselves.
In other words, it is the farmer, the lumberer, the
fishermen and the other consumers, forming the
great bulk of the community, whose welfare re-
quires consideration at this moment. It is unde-
niable that the tariff is exceedingly burdensome,
unnecessarily so, if it be considered merely from
the stand-point of a revenue-producing tariff.
When it is considered that the taxes range all the
way from 20 to 100 per cent, it is idle to preteml
that such a scale of taxation is necessary for
revenue purposes. But is it not also true and
capable of demonstration that the indirect tax, or,
to put it in other words, the increased price of the
articles which are manufactured owing to the high
tariff, adds very considerably to the burdens of the
consumers, and brings up in the plainest possible
manner the question whether the time has not
now come for the consumers to say to the manu-
facturers :—** You must either carry on your
business on more e((ual terms or you must cease to
carry it on at all. You have been supported in
your infancy, you hav^ been permitted an oppor-
tunity of establishing your industries at the ex-
pense, more or less, of the vast bulk of the people,
and you ought now to be prepared to stand alone
and to withstand the ordinary competition to
which your business, like that of all other occu-
pations, may be exposed. '' It must be remembered,
too, that some of these manufacturing industries
have formed combinations ; the competition which
it was hoped would regulate the price of the home
n»arket does not prevail, and that the tendency

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

towards combinations amongst manufacturers is
becoming more evident every day. We have all
the cotton industries of the country under one
management. The same may be said in connection
with the* manufacture of agricultural implements.
These considerations have led me to the conclusion
that the time has arrived for a complete rexdsion of
our custom laws. They should be simplified,
equalized, and, what perhaps is more important,
or certainly not less important, the duties should be
materially reduced.

Whether it was dissatisfaction with the
tariff policy of the Government or some
other cause which induced the hon. gentle-
man from North Simcoe to withdraw his
support from the Government, I do not pre-
tend to say ; but, no doubt, he speaks there
the language of truth and wisdom, and the
indications which we had in the other branch
of Parliament yesterday go to show that his
speech really points the direction in which
our policy is to trend for the future. I do not
propose to deal at any great length with the
Trade and Navigation Returns. I make this
general remark with respect to the returns.
The hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce,
and, I think also, the hon. Minister of Agri-
culture, laid stress upon the fact that our
exports had increased considerably since
1878. That is perfectly true; but these
hon. gentlemen did not go further, as they
might have gone, and point out that the in-
crease had taken place altogether in the pro-
ducts of the forest, the farm and the mine ;
because if they had taken pains to point that
out, every one could have seen that the lum-
berman, the farmer and the miner could not
be benefited by a protective tariff, the only
effect of which was to make his necessaries
of life dearer. Our exports of manufactures
have practically not increased at all ; and
the National Policy, so called, has failed al-
together in its object. The great object was
to make Canada a manufacturing country.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think the hon.
gentleman will remember that I did refer to
the exportation of the products of the mine
and also the increase of the exportation of
our manufactures.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The increase of ex-
ports of manufactures is infinitesimal —
something not worth mentioning. .

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Still it is an in-
crease.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It does not form any
important item in the increase at all.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — My only object in
calling the attention of the House to it, is, I
understood the hon. gentleman to say that
neither the hon. Minister of Agriculture nor
myself had referred to the exports of the
mine and forest.

Hon. Mr. POWDER— I meant that they
had not called attention to the fact that the
manufacturers did not tend to materially in-
crease the exports. Take the dairy industry
of which the hon. member from Quinte has
spoken. No one will pretend to say that
the duties tend to increase our exports of
butter, cheese or cattle.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The duty is the
same as it was when the hon. gentlemen's
friends w^ere in power on those articles.

Hon. Mr. POWER -On which articles ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Butter and cheese.

Hon. Mr. POWER— But we do not im-
port them. Our export is not increased by
. any tariff. We are sending away enormous
, quantities of dairy products, and consequent-
ly the tariff does not affect ' them, while it
does increase the cost of articles which make
the raw material of the farmer. The hon.
gentleman laid a good deal of stress on the
fact that the raw materials of certain manu-
facturers were allowed to come in free. ' Now,
why should the manufacturers be selected
for that sort of favour ? Why should not the
necessaries of life which are the raw material
for the farmer come in free just as well?
The Minister of Trade and Commere, and, I
think also, the Minister of Agriculture, re-
ferred to the fact that the Government had
taken the duty off tin and sugar. That is
perfectly true, and the Government, so far,
did well. When the Government put the
duty on tin it was a good thing, and when
the Government put the duty oA sugar they
claimed it was an admirable thing — that it
showed wonderful statesmanship. When they
took the duty off again it is a still more
admirable piece of statesmanship. *' Now,
you see it and now you don't." It was a
magnificent thing to put a duty on cordage,
and when, before the end of this session, the
duty- is taken off cordage, we shall be
called on to admire the wonderful states-
manship of the Conservative Grovernment.
If it is a good thing to take the duty

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUAEY 2, 1893] Address.

off tin — and I think it is — how about
the duty on iron ? The excessive duty
on iron did not form a part of the ori-
ginal National Policy. The hon. gentle-
man who IS now acting as High Com-
missioner in Europe, acted for one session
as Finance Minister here, and he placed the
duty on iron. Iron enters into the manu-
facture of almost every implement used by
the working people of this country. If it is
a good and statesmanlike thing to take the
duty off tin, as it is, then it would be a still
more statesmanlike thing to take the duty
off iron ; and I hope the Minister of Trade
and Commerce will submit for the approval
of this House — if not this session at least
next session — a measure reducing the duty
on iron to a reasonable tigure ; and if he
claims for that measure that it is statesman-
like, I, for one, shall be quite prepared to
acknowledge the justice of the claim. But
it is rather difficult to argue with people like
the Liberal-Conservatives. We were prepared
to contest their allegation that protection on
sugar was a good thing ; but when they
take the duty off sugar we have to agree
with them when they say that their doing so
is a good thing. It really comes down to
this : The thing which I have always said
about the Lil»eral-Conservative party— they
are just the same under their present leader
as under their former leader — is that the one
great end of statesmanship is that the Liberal-
Conservative party shall be in power. The
Liberal-Conservative party are prepared to
sacrifice principles, if they have any, con-
sistency, everything, provided they can
remain in power ; and possibly after all it is
only a waste of valuable breath to undertake
to discuss their policy.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL—That is what the
people think.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I find in the next
paragraph of the speech :

It affords us much pleasure to hear that the
revenues of the country have likewise provided for
all the services for which Parliament has made
appropriation, and that the operation of the Govern-
ment ntiltvays has been less bunlensome, as regards
the difference between income and expenditure,
than has been the case for a long term of years
previously.

Now, I hope that statement, which refers

to the Intercolonial Railway, is correct in

the ordinary meaning of the words. I notice

that the Minister or Railways stated in

another place yesterday, that for the six
months ending the first of January, the defi-
cit in the operation of the Intercolonial
Railway, was only !82,700. I hope that that
statement is perfectly correct and reliable.
It may seem* ungracious for me to express
any doubt whatever about the matter ; but
I cannot help, remembering that a good many
years ago — as many as ten years ago at any
rate — when the hon. gentleman who is now
High Commissioner at London was Minister
of Railways, it was announced to Parliament
that the deficit on the Intercolonial Railway
had been got rid of, and that there was a
small balance pn the right side, that balance
was secured largely by modifications in the
method of book-keeping in connection
with the Intercolonial Railway, and to
a considerable extent by allowing the
rolling stock and road-bed and the staff to
get below the position at which they should
have been maintained. I trust it is not the
case in the present instance. I have no doubt
that by proper business management the
Intercolonial Railway can be made to pay ;
and I am disposed to think, as far as I can
judge, that the present Minister of Railways
is dealing with the road in a business-like
way, and that the era of deficits on the In-
tercolonial Railway is nearly at an end. I
may say that we had a discussion here last
session on the Intercolonial Railway, and I
took occasion to express an opinion with re-
spect to certain changes which might be made
in its management with advantage, and lam
glad to see that one of thesechanges has been
made by the Government- -not of course on
my recommendation —but simply because on
looking on the thing as business men, the
Minister of Railways and the other members
of the Grovernment were satisfied that it was
desirable. The manager of the Intercolonial
Railway, is now stationed at Moncton on
the road, and not at Ottawa, some 300 miles
from the western terminus of the road ;^ and
I am satisfied that if Mr. Pottingeris allowed
a suflScient liberty of action — if he is not
cramped and interfered with too much by
the deputy head or the Minister — we shall
have more satisfactory reports from the In-
tercolonial Railway, in the future. I rejoice
at this fact, not merely because it is a satis-
factory thing that the public works of the
country should not lose money for the coun-
try, but because of the fact that the Inter-
colonial Railway, if even self-sustaining, takes
away the only argument in which there was

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

any force for handing over that great public
work to any private company. I am glad to
find that the rumours which were current that
it was proposed to transfer the Intercolonial
Railway to a private company, have appa-
rently had no foundation in fact. I know
the feeling throughout the Maritime Pro-
vinces against the proposed transfer was
almost unanimous ; and I am pleased to
gather that our fears were unfounded.

The next paragraph in the Address is as
follows : —

We are also gratified to hear that in Manitoba
and the North-west Territories the increase in
immigration has been decidedly' e^courasing, both
as regards the number of persons who nave come
from other countries and as regards the number of
homestead entries made by settlers of all nation-
alities.

That announcement is a very satisfactory one,
if the immigrants who go into that country
are of good character, and come from abroad.
For my own part I cannot rejoice at any
transfer of the people from one section of
Canada to another. I think that the Lower
Provinces, taken together, are Just as good
a country, if not better than the North-wast,
and I cannot rejoice at the fact of people
leaving Nova Scotia, or New Brunswick, or
Prince Edward Island to go to Manitoba.
As a matter of fact, I am afraid that only a
small proportion of the people who do leave
the Maritime Provinces go to the North-
west. Of course, it is better that the people
who leave the older provinces should go to
the western part of our own territory rather
than to a foreign country. I trust that the
meaning of this paragraph is that we are
getting in good immigrants from abroad,
and that the people who are leaving Ontario
and the other older provinces are going
in a larger proportion to our own North-
west than they have in the past. I have
laid a good deal of stress upon the desira-
bility of having a good class of immigrants
from abroad. That remark applies not only
to the North west but to the rest of Canada,
and my attention has been particularly
directed to it by a passage in the report of
the Minister of Justice upon the Peni-
tentiaries. I find at page 7, in the intro-
duction to that report, a passage written by
the Inspector of Penitentiaries, which de-
serves the attention of the Government, and
more particularly of the Minister of the In-
terior. It is as follows : —

Of late years, our penitentiaries have ha<l a
most undesirable, because a most hardened and

irreclaimable class of criminals added to their
numbers. This is particularly the case at Kihffston
and St. Vincent de Paul, where those cockney
sneak thieves and pickpockets, referred to, are
numerous. These pests, >^thered from the slums
of St. Giles and East London, after short terms of
so-called probation, in a certain notoriously mis-
managed refuge, are periodically shipped out to
Canada, as immigrants deserving of encouragement
and support. V\ ith very few exceptions— as the
police of our cities and towns know — these street
Arabs from Whitechapel and Rotherhithe and
Ratcliff and other like haunts of vice, speedily
return to their old habits, on arriving in Canada,
and, as a consequence, become a burden and an
expense upon the tax-payers of the Dominion, in
our reformatories, jails and penitentiaries. Steeped
as they have been in crime, from infancy, because
inherited, they are found to be the most trouble-
some and worst conducted convicts that reach our
])enitentiaries. Their evil influence in corrupting
others is potent and pernicious. The general ver-
dict of the chaplains and the other prison officers,
reKarding those youthful imitators of Fagin and
Bill Sykes, is most unfavourable. They consider
them dea<l to all good influences and that their
reformation is hopeless. In order to protect the
community, against the depredations of such
thoroughly trained malefactors, and our youth,
especimly, against the evil effects of their example
and influence, it were advisable that effectual
means be adopted to prevent mistaken philan-
thropists, abroad and at home, aiding and encour-
aging the transplanting to Canada of exotics so
upas-like and so unsuited to the soil and moral
atmosphere of the coimtry.

Just one other remark upon this para-
graph, hon. gentlemen ; I think that if we
would try to make Canada a cheap country
to live in, and adopt a policy which would
bring about that result, we should not only
keep our own people at home, but we would
bring in outsiders of a desirable character.

Something has been said, hon. gentlemen
— in fact a good deal has been said — about
the exodus. There are some remarks which
I should like to make upon that subject, even
though I have already spoken for some time ;
and I think that inasmuch as other hon.
gentlemen have dealt with the question, I
may as well say a few words. I think that
there has been a great deal of exaggeration
and rather wild talk, if I may say so, from
both parties in connection with this subject of
the exodus. It is perfectly reasonable and
natural that there should be a certAin move-
ment of population from east to west, at *iny
rate until we get to the shores of the Pacific ;
whether our worthy friends in British
Columbia will move out to the Sandwich
Islands or not I do not know ; but up to that
limit I think it is natural there should be a
movement from east to west. It is perhaps

Digitized by

Google

The fFEBRUARY 2, 181>iJJ Addrm.

not unreasonable either that there should be
a certain movement of population from north
to south ; that is, from a very severe climate
to a more moderate one. And, hon. gentle-
men, that exodus, or that change of popula-
tion I think, has gone on almost from the
beginning ; that is, it has been going on
more or less for the last 40 or 50 years. The
hon. gentlemen opposite seem to think it
very unfair and unreasonable that any re-
ference should be made by gentlemen on this
side of the House to this exodus, and that
the Government jshould be held in any sense
resp)onsible for the exodus. Well, if the
Liberal-Conservatives of former times had
not held the Liberal Government of that day
responsible, these gentlemen could appeal to
us with a very much better grace ; but the
fact is that when, under the administration
of Mr. Mackenzie, an exodus much smaller
in volume than that which we have had
during the past few years was taking
place, our Liberal-Conservative friends arose,
not only in Parliament, but all over the
country, and denounced the Government
afl being the authors of the exodus and gave
the people to understand that if they were
only put into the places of those miserable
" flies on the wheel " they would keep the
population in the country. Now, hon. gentle-
men, you see those rash, unscrupulous and
reckless statements come back again, like
chickens coming home to roost. These state-
ments are now coming back to the hon.
gentlemen, making them feel uncomfortable.
I fancy the result of the last census caused
more discomfort in the ranks of the Conser-
vative party in this country than any publi-
cation which has taken place in the last 20
years. In order to show that I am not
drawing upon my imagination, I find that,
in the House of Commons, it was moved by
Sir John A. Macdonald, that was when Mr.
Mackenzie was in power, "That this House
is of opinion that the welfare of Canada
requires the adoption of a National Policy
which by a judicious adjustment of the
tariff, will benefit and foster the agri-
cultural, mining, manufacturing, and other
interests of the Dominion ; that such a policy
will retain in Canada thousands of our fellow-
countrymen now obliged to expatriate them-
selves in search of the employment now
denied them at home." That was the origi-
nal National Policy. The exodus was to be
stopped by the National Policy ; and there
is an extract given in this paper from a speech
6J

made by Sir John A. Macdonald at Parkdale
to the same effect. Now, hon. gentlemen, the

I exodus has not stopped ; it has increased, and
the hon. gentlemen are made uncomfortable

I by it. While on the subject of the exodus,
although perhaps it does not come in very
properly here, I cannot help making an
observation on the rather extraordinary
logic of the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

I The hon. gentleman from Ottawa in his
speech upon the Address made a reference to

I the fact that the papulation of the county of
Welland, one of the most favoured spots

! upon the earth — I think one would be safe in
saying that — had fallen off by one thousand

I during the decade from 1881 to 1891 ; and

I the hon. Minister of Agriculture undertook

I to dispose of that fact. That falling off

i would strike one as a very remarkable dr-

i cumstance.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -I stated that they
went to Hamilton, Toronto, Algoma, Nipis-
sing and Manitoba, and that they were not
all gone to the States.

Hon. Mr. POWER —Exactly ; that is
the logic. It struck me as very remarkable.
I have no doubt some of these people who
left the county of Welland did go to other
parts of the Dominion ; it would be very
sad if all the people who left any part of
Canada went to the United States ; and I
should admit that there was some show of
logic in the argument of the hon. Minister,*
if he had been able to show that the papula-
tion of the country, as a whole, had kept up ;
but the fact is that the population which had
increased 17 per cent betwen 1871 and 1881,
I increased only 11 per cent between 1881
I and 1891, in face of the fact that the returns
i of the Agriculture Department showed that
j nearly 800,000 people had come here from
I outside ; so that we had lost not only a
I good portion of our natural increase, but
I had lost the 800,000 who came in besides.

' Hon. Mr. ANGERS— No ; if the hon.

1 gentleman will allow me, I wUl give him an

j explanation right off on this p)oint, and I

I expect I will be called soon to discuss the

very question he is raising now. I want

to inform this House that the basis of the

last census and the basis of the previous

census are not the same.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Oh well, that is
nothing new.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address,

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I beg pardon,'
there is a good deal in it. In the census of !
1881 all the absentees, whether they had
been out of the country for 4 or 5 years,
were included in it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If the hon. gentle-
man will allow me, that explanation has ;
been made already in another place, and
while I am willing to give way for anything
new, I do not feel disposed to give way for
that, if he will excuse me for saying so.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It has not been
made this session.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If I am not mis-
taken, the Prime Minister made that state-
ment in the House of Commons a day or two
since.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— No.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I will give the hon.
gentleman and the Government the benefit
of it. These hon. gentlemen controlled the
censuses of 1871, 1881, and 1891 ; if the
census of 1881 was a fraudulent one, as the
hon. gentleman seems disposed to state now —

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— No.

Hon. Mr. POWER— and calculated to
mislead, to make people believe the exodus
was greater than it was, who is to blame for
'it?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It was not fraud-
ulent.

Hon. Mr. POWER— With respect to the
census of 1891, it may be they did not take
as much account of the absentees as they ,
did in the previous census ; but I am satis- ,
fied as to this : the census as to manufactures, '
in 1891, is as misleading and unreliable as
possible, and I am satisfied that the bulletin
with respect to manufactures was put into
its present shape simply in order to try and
get over to some extent the bad feeling ,
caused by the result of the census as to ,
population. I

The next paragraph which I propose to j
say a word alx)ut, is the paragraph with res-
pect to Newfoundland. I am very glad
indeed that the relations between the Domi-
nion and Newfoundland are apparently not
quite as strained as they were a little while
ago. With respect to our difficulties with

Newfoundland, I think it only fair to myself
perhaps to say that, last session when this
matter was under discussion, I took the
ground that the Government of Canada
were justified in the course which they took
with respect to the proposed treaty between
the United States and Newfoundland. The
position I took to be this : it was not our
duty, it was not the duty of the Government
of Canada to look after the interests of New-
foundland ; it was the duty of the Grovem-
ment of Canada to look iifter interests of
Canada and the people of Canada, and there
is no doubt that the treaty, the protocols of
which were arranged between Mr. Blaine
and Mr. Bond, would be most injurious to
Canada and in my humble opinion exceed-
ingly injurious to Newfoundland. Our
Government looked after the interests of
Canada and the Government of Newfound-
land looked after her own interests, I pre-
sume; and the umpire between the two par-
ties was the British Government. The Bri-
tish Government decided infavour of Canada,
and I think that probably the people of New-
foundland, before very long, will rejoice that
it was so ; but there is just one point with
respect to Newfoundland as to which I
cannot agree with the hon. Minister of
Trade and Commerce. In fact the hon.
gentleman's language may be looked up>on
as indicating that the Government had
made up their minds that they were
prepared to take Newfoundland into
Confederation. I do not know whether he
spoke the sentiments of his colleagues, or
whether he simply expressed his own opi-
nion in that matter ; but, hon. gentlemen,
there is just one thing which I think the
Government should see to before they take
Newfoundland in ; they should see that the
question of the French shore is settled.
We have a number of difficult questions to
deal with as it is, and that question of the
French shore of Newfoundland is a most
difficult one ;' it involves England in diffi-
culties with France continually. And if
England, with all her naval strength, is not
able to secure a satisfactory settlement of
the French shore difficulty, how are we
going to do it ? Where is our navy ? Do
the hon. gentlemen propose, if they take in
Newfoundland, to establish a navy and send
war ships down to guard the interests of
Canada on the French shore? I think it
would be the height of folly for Canada to
take Newfoundland into Confederation until

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUAEY 2, 1893] Address,

that question has been settled. I fancy
from what one rec^is in the papers that, as a
nursery for French seamen the Newfound-
land coast has become of less value ; and it
is possible that, before long, England may
be able to secure a settlement of the French
shore question, and then we could consider
dispassionately the question of taking New-
foundland into the Confederation.

The next paragraph refers to the fact that
the statute of 1887, relating to the Depart-
ment of Trade and Commerce, and to the
office of Solicitor-General having been brought
into force, the appointments were made
which were contemplated by that Act.
Now, hon. gentlemen, I do not wish to be
ungracious, because, possibly if it had not
been for the passing of these Acts we should
not have had the Minister of Trade and
Commerce here, and I think we are all glad
to have him here, and if we had to have a
Conservative brought in, if we were to have
a Conservative to come in from the other
House, I do not know of any one we would
have preferred to have rather than the hon.
gentleman. I do not think the bringing
into operation of those Acts is a matter of
congratulation. Those Act« were passed in
the session of 1887, for some political end.
Just what the end was I do not know ;
probably the hon. Minister of Commerce
knows. It was felt after they had been
passed that the occasion which called for
their passing had gone by, and although Sir
John A. Macdonald allowed those Acts to
remain on the Statute-book, he did not put
them in operation, and I must say that I
think now that they have been brought into
operation ju^t for the same reason for which
they were passed — for some political end.
It was well enough, perhaps, to substitute
Comptrollers for Ministers of Customs and
Inland Revenue, but I do not think there
was any necessity for creating a Minister of
Trade and Commerce. Those Comptrollers '
might have been put under the supervision '
of the Minister of Finance, or, we mieht
have had a Minister of Trade and Com-
merce, and there would have been no neces- 1
fiity for those Comptrollers ; the Minister of j
Trade and Commerce with his ordinary per-
manent deputies could have attended toall the
work. It would puzzle the most astute lawyer
or the most astute politician to tell just what
particular useful function the comptrollers of ;
Customs and Inland Revenue are now dis- 1
charging, what work they are doing which |

could not be done by the Minister of Trade
and Commerce, without their help, and with
the help of his permanent deputies. The
hon. gentleman from Victoria reminds me
that this was explained in the House of
Commons. That is hardly correct, one of
the comptrollers stated he was about introduc-
ing a bill for the inspection of electric light
plant ; and I think it was stated subsequently
that this bill had been prepared in the depart-
ment the year before. It was not necessary
to create a comptroller, a permanent officer,
with a salary of $5,000 a year, for the pur-
pose of doing a work of that sort. This,
hon. gentlemen, calls my attention to the
fact that we have already too many heads of
departments. I think that now there are
either 14 or 15 members of Government in
Canada, and that all, with the exception of
one or two — I do not know which, a^ I am
not sure whether the hon. gentleman who
was formerly Minister of Agriculture is still
in the Government or not ; but there are one
or two without office, and there are 13 or 14
with offices/ Now, hon. gentlemen, I think
it is perfectly absurd that there should be
so many heads of departments in a country
with a population of only 5,000,000. In the
United States, where they have a population
of about 65,000,000, they have only 8 heads
of departments. I am taking our own con-
tinent. In Mexico where there is a population
of eleven and a half millions, there are only 7
heads of departments ; and I think one can
search the world through, go through all the
British colonies, through all the independent
republics, and even through the kingdoms
on the continent of Europe, and not find a
country where there are so many heads of
departments as in Canada. Now, at a time
when the Minister of Finance, is advocating
economy in every department, it would have
been much better policy not to have in-
creased the number of heads and quasi-heads
of departments.

One paragraph which has led to a great
deal of discussion is that with respect to the
difficulty on the subject of canal tolls. I
have not very much to say about that. I
think it is very much to be regretted that
two countries which are supposed to be in
the van of civilization, two countries like the
United States and Canada, should be squab-
bling over such small matters. I think that
it is very much to be regretted that these
difficulties could not have been adjusted
without any serious irritation.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. POWER— As to the merits of
the difficulties, I do not feel that I am pre-
pared to speak ; but I believe in giving the
benefit of the doubt to my own Government,
and I hope that, having taken a decided
attitude, they will maintain it, and that
they will not retreat from the position
which they have taken, in the same way
as has been done in certain other cases.
There was one matter which, i had almost
overlooked, hon.«gentlemen, and I daresay, a
good many hon. gentlemen may think that
it is a pity I had not ; I know my junior
colleague will, and that is, that there has
been a good deal said during the present dis-
cussion about the Liberals running down the
country. I thought we had heard the last
of that; we have had more than one
discussion on that subject here, and hon.
gentlemen of the Conservative persuasion
have been quite unable to point to any
instance where Liberals have run down the
country. To say that the Government is
not what it ought to be, and that this.country
has not made the progress which it ought to
have made, looking at its resources and the
energy and intelligence of its population, is
one thing, but to run the country itself down
is another thing. I do not think we are
bound in any way whatever to maintain that
this country is the best governed in the
world. It may be the finest country under
the sun ; but we are not bound to believe
that the Government is worthy of the coun-
try ; and I am inclined to think that if we
had had a better Government for the last ten
years we should have had a much better
record both in the way of trade and of popu-
lation. I suppose it may be looked upon as a
rather presumptuous thing in me to say any-
thing of a little difference that arose between
the hon. gentleman who moved the Address
and the hon. member from Ottawa. No doubt
I may be told that these hon. gentlemen can
settle the matter for themselves, but as a
more or less disinterested bystander, I think
I may state that there was a little mistake
on both sides. The hon. member from Welland
did not speak, as he was understood by the
hon. member from Ottawa to have spoken, of
all Liberals as being pessimists and guilty of
all those offences of which he spoke ; but
there is no doubt that the language of the hon.
gentleman from Welland, if one did not hear
every word that he said, was liable to that

construction ; -and if I had not been paying
very marked attention to the words he used
that would have been the impression left on
my mind as it was the impression made on
the minds of the hon. member from Ottawa.
Violent and extreme language which may
possibly be allowed on the platform, or even
in the other branch of Parliament, is better
not used here, where we are in the habit of
being very quiet and calm. This little dif-
ference led to the use of very vigorous lan-
guage by the Minister of Trade and Commerce
with respect to the hon. gentleman from
Ottawa, and he was followed by the hon»
Minister of Agriculture in equally strong
language.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I never said any-
thing that was violent at all. I complimented
the hon. gentleman from Ottawa on the style
in which he made his thrust at my hon.
friend from Welland.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman did not appreciate the force of
what he said.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I fully take in the
sense of every English word that I use,
though I may not pronounce the language
well.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
speaks English perfectly. I did not refer
to that at all. There are numbers of
English-speaking people who do not realize
the force of the language they use. I think
I have been sometimes accused of that
myself.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS
yet, and when I say a
it.

—I nevef was myself
thing I really mean

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B. C.)— Then it is
to be regretted.

j Hon. Mr. POWER--! knew the Minister
I of Trade and Commerce was straightfor-
ward and outspoken and meant what he
j said : I am glad to know that we have
, another Minister of the same kind in this
j House. It occurred to me that, considering
that the hon. gentleman from Ottawa has
I sat in this Senate for 19 years, and never in
' that time had a serious quarrel with any
I member of the House, that he has never as-
far as I know said a disagreeable or unplea-
I sant thing to any senator, it was on the

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBEUAKY 1, 1893] AddresB,

whole rather unseemly that two gentlemen
who had just come into the Senate should
undertake to lecture him on his deportment
as a member of the House. That was my
impression. I do not think it was alto-
gether seemly.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— We only protested
against the erroneous statement that the
hon. gentleman made.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-
statement.

-Name the erroneous

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The hon. gentleman
said that thp hon. member from Welland
had been defeated. I said that his seat had
been usurped.

Hon. Mr. POWER -The whole trend of
the hon. gentleman's language was as I have
indicated. With respect to the county of
Welland, the statement of the hoii. gentle-
man from Ottawa was quite correct. The
hon, member who moved the Address ha<l
been defeated in Welland ; that is no dis-
credit to him at all ; many a good man has
met with the same fate. It is true that the
candidate who opposed him was unseated.
There was a new election and the Liberal
candidate was returned, if I am not mis-
taken, by a larger majority than the gentle-
man who was unseated. That bears out
the argument of the hon. gentleman from
Ottawa that the people of Welland did not
see eye to eye with the hon. member who
moved the Address.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— I was not really
defeated. My opponent was elected by cor-
rupt means. I exposed those means and
consequently I had the privilege of running
again, because the election at which I was
supposed to be defeated was irregular, illegal
and wrong.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The question was
what the attitude of th^ electors of Welland
was towards the present administration.
W^hat the hon. gentleman says may be per-
fectly correct ; but there was a subsequent
election and the Liberal-Conservative candi-
date was defeated by a very large majority.
It bears out the view that the hon. gentleman
from Ottawa took.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— I was nine years
a member of the other House and I never

had an insulting word said to me while I

was there. Thei-e is not a member of that

body on either side that is not a personal

friend of mine. I have never given cause for

offence in that Chamber : I think I gave no

cause for offence in this honourable House.

I thought I was entitled to all the courtesy

that any new member of the Senate should

I receive. I was born and bred and I have

lived my life in this country, with a character

unimpeachable, and if I was defeated I fell

with my face to the foe, what every hon.

I member cannot boast of. When I came to

. this House I presumed I would be treated

I with that courtesy and respect that was due

I to a senator, and I was more than surprised

when the hon. member from Ottawa, the

leader of the Opposition in this House, that

I have known for years, rase and personally

attacked me.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentleman
entirely misunderstood me. I did not assail
hiih.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON-I said when I
was closing my speech that I was unaccus-
tomed to speaking in this House and I
apologized if I had said anything that was
out of the way, and therefore, I think, I was
not deserving of the personal attack that the
leader of the Opposition made on me.

Hon. Mr. POWER- I did not under-
I stand that there was a personal attack.

j Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I think it is only fair

; and due to myself after the speech that the

\ hon. gentleman has made, that I should be

permitted to make an explanation. I have

not seen the report of my remarks, but I am

quite sure that no statement made by me

I was open to the charge to which we have

I just listened. I stated that the hon. gentle-

j man was one of the most honoured and

I respected men in the county of Welland —

those are the words I used or something

similar. It was a perfectly fair matter for

criticism that the hon. gentleman had not

, succeeded in the late election, and I very

charitably ascribed it to the fact that owing

to the fiscal policy of the Government many

of his friends had gone elsewhere. Surely

I there was nothing wrong in that. It was a

perfectly fair argument to use, and I added

I that he was one of the 'most respected men

in the county of Welland.

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The hon. gentleman
also added that if the hon. gentleman had
not been defeated, he would not have been a
member of this House. That was the most
offensive remark that he made.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— It was our good for-
tune that he was defeated.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— If I thought
that my defeat in Welland county had dis
credited me in the estimation of my fellow-
countrymen, I should never have accepted a
seat in the Senate. To show that the hon.
member from Ottawa designed an attack on
me, he came prepared with figures to show
that there had been a loss of population in
the county of Welland. When I rose to
apologize and told the hon. member that I
had no reference at all to the Liberal party
when I spoke of the less than a score of
pessimists in the country, and that I
referred entirely to a few annexationists, the
hon. gentleman waved me off with his hand
in a most contemptuous way.

At six o^clock the Speaker left the Chair.

After Recess.

Hon. Mr. POWER resumed his speech.
He said : —

The hon. gentleman from Quints, and I
think some other hon. gentleman, referred in
terms of satisfaction to the fact that we had
now two ministers in the Senate who are
heads of departments. I think the hon.
gentleman from Delanaudiere expressed sat-
isfaction— a qualified satisfaction — at that
position of things. I quite concur with
those two gentlemen in thinking that it is a
matter for congratulation that we have two I
departmental officers in the Senate ; and 1 1
quite agree with the hon. gentleman from
Delanaudiere that the late Sir John Mac- i
donald did not show the consideration for '
the Senate which might have been expected.
I do not know that I quite concur with the
hon. gentleman from Delanaudiere and
Quints in thinking that the Senate has very |
much reason for congratulating itself upon
the lines adopted by the present Administra-
tion. We have no fault whatever to find
with the two hon. gentlemen who have been t
placed in the Senate as ministers ; but I do
think that, considering the fact that this |
Senate has almost ever since Confederation I
been a Conservative body — that it has faith- 1

fully followed t he Conservative leaders and
has voted as the Conservative leaders wished
it to vote

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No.

Hon. Mr. POWER— As a rule. There
were one or two exceptions which simply
make the rule clearer ; and I suppose that
even a Conservative leader would not object
to about one vote in a hundred being given
differently from the way proposed. I say,
considering that fact, it seems a little sing-
ular that a Conservative Premier should not
have found in the Senate which had followed
his party so faithfully and so long, gentlemen
who were deemed suitable to take charge of
the Government business in this House. It
is not a matter which concerns the Opposi-
tion ; but I am a little surprised at the fact
that things are so, and I should say that
with its record the Senate had deserved
something different.

A great deal has been said about the
census. It has been referred to by different
speakers and before recess I made some
reference to it myself. I said it was to be
expected that there would be a movement
of population from east to west, and also a
certain movement from north to south. Of
course it was understood that the movement
would be within reasonable limits. There
has been a very considerable movement
from England to the West ; but if you will
look at the last census returns you will find
that the population of overcrowded England
has increased during the decade at about as
rapid a rate as that of young and sparsely
peopled Canada ; and I do not think you
will find any large section of Great
Britain where the population has been
stationary as it has been in the Maritime
Provinces of Canada. I have already
pointed to the fact that the policy of pro-
tection as introduced by Sir John Macdonald
had for its avowed object the keeping of our
people at home. When one looks at the
census returns given in the official records of
Canada, one finds that whereas the increase
between 1871 and 1881 was 18-97 per cent,
it was only 11-74 per cent in the following
decade. I am not going to say very much
about the census generally, but I find that
in the three Maritime Provinces there has
l)een substantially no increase. In Prince
Edward Island the increase was only 0*17
per cent; in New Brunswick there was no

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address,

increase ; and in Nova Scotia the increase
was only 2*22 per cent. That is not a very
cheering record ; and, it does not matter
what errors may have been made in the
census of 1881, hon. gentlemen who come to
this House from the Maritime Provinces are
perfectly aware that the population of that
part of the country is not increasing — there
is no appreciable increase. In order to
break the force of that fact, hon. gentlemen
tell us that there are certain states in the
neighbouring Union where the same con-
dition of things exists. The percentage of
increase in the population of the United
States as a whole in the decade between
1880 and 1890, was 24*86. The increase in
the North Atlantic states during that decade
was 19*95 per cent.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— What do you call
the North Atlantic States ?

Hon. Mr-. POWER- 1 shall give the
details of the New England States :

p.c.

Percentage of increase in Maine 1 "87

do do New Hampshire.. 8*51

do do Vermont 0-04

do do Massachusetts... . 25*57

do do Rhode island 24*94

do • do Connecticut 19*84

I should be ashamed as a Canadian to
institute a comparison between the neigh-
bouring provinces of Canada and the three
northern New England States. One might
as well compare the Lake St. John country
with Labrador as compare the fertile plains
of Quebec with the rocky hills of New
Hampshire and Vermont. These states
possess almost no natural advantages. Th^
hon. gentleman asked me to compare the
provinces of Nova Scotia and New Bruns-
wick and Prince Edward Island, gifted by
nature beyond almost any other part of
America, with those states. It is absurd.
I am only surprised that the population of
New Hampshire and Vermont has not
fallen off very considerably in view of the
very easy means of escape from these states.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— What about
the state of Maine ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— The increase in
Maine was nearly as large as in Nova Scotia.
I am quite satisfied that the hon. gentleman
from Lunenburg will not undertake to com-
pare the state of Maine, in the matter of
natural resources, with his own province.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— It
is a large manufacturing state.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I was not aware that
Maine was a large manufacturing state. I
should like to know from my hon. friend why
New Brunswick or Nova Scotia, is not a
manufacturing province. We have certainly
in Nova Scotia a great many more of those
resources which go to constitute a manufac-
turing country than they have in the state
of Maine. We have coal and iron as the
hon. gentleman knows, while Maine has not.
I should not think of comparing the pro-
vince of New Brunswick with the state of
Maine. In the old times when America
was first settled, there were settlements
in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and
Maine was looked upon, I shall not say
as a god-forsaken wilderness, but as some-
thing very like that. I am surprised that
those hon. gentlemen who are continually
giving us lectures on patriotism would
undertake to institute comparisons between
the northern New England States and our
own provinces. Before I leave the census,
I should like to say a word as to a statement
made by the hon. Minister of Agriculture.
The hon. gentleman from Shell River raised
some question as to the value of the bulletin
No. 8, " Manufactures," and it was said that
very small establishments appeared in the
bulletin. The Minister stated that there
were no small establishments in the industrial
bulletin, and I think he intimated that as a
rule no place which employed less than 100
men.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Oh, no, not 100
men; I spoke of the capital. •

Hon. Mr. POWER— Capital of $100.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS —That's what it is.

Hon. Mr. POWER— An industrial ins-
titution with a capital'of $100 would not be
extensive.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS- That is the
minimum.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The point about the
industrial census is this, that this bulletin
has been compiled in suoh a way as to in-
clude under the head of manufactures a num-
ber of occupations which are generally not
regarded as being manufactures at all, things
upon which the National Policy, so called,

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Addrm.

has had no beneficial effect, and occupations
which it was not intended to benefit. For
instance, take coopers, carpenters, joiners,
blacksmiths and so on — these are all
included in this bulletin, and it is not
pretended that the National Policy was
intended for their benefit. I do not propose
to take many items, but I find set down in
British Columbia an item "gunsmiths."
There were two estabHshments ; their plant
and tools were worth $1,350, and there were
three employees. No one would think of
calling these factories. Those are simply
two gunsmiths' shops, one where the man
was alone and the other where he had a boy
with him, I presume. These little estab-
lishments figure more in the lower pro-
vinces than anywhere else. Here is an es-
tablishment in New Brunswick, there is
only one of the kind, the value of the ma-
chinery and tools is put down at 8^00, and
the number of employees, one. That is
simply a man working by himself at his
trade. Now, here is an e,stablishment which
does not come even within the very modest
limit fixed by the Minister of Agriculture.
Under the head " carving and gilding *' is
one establishment ; the value of the machin-
ery was $16 ; number of employees, one.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— That is not put
down as an industrial establishment.

Hon. Mr. POWER — Oh, yes, excuse me,
it is. I am reading from an otiicial bulletin,
and perhaps the hon. gentleman is going
to

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -To revise it.

Hon. Mr. POWER- Perhaps he proposes
to revise it.

• Hon. Mr. ANGERS—Certainly.

Hon. Mr. POWER -But at present we
have to take what we have got ; we cannot
tell what is in the hon. gentleman's mind.
It may be that he sees the absurdity of
these figures, and may propose to have the
returns revised. It is very much to be re-
gretted that he is not in a position to revise
the returns of population in a satisfactory
way too, although I do not see how he
is to go back now to 1881 and find out just
how many people who were in the United
States and had been there five or six years
were taken in that census. The only way is
to do it in the sensible and honest way in
which the census is taken in England — take

the people who are on the spot when the
census is taken ; that is the only sensible
and reliable way. I find in New Brunswick
a manufactory of agricultural implements ;
there are two of those factories, the value of
the tools, $50, and the number of em-
ployees two. Just fancy calling that a
factory, where there is only one man, and
where the cost of his tools and machinery
is $25 ; there is only himself ; he has
no employees at all. Then here is a
factory for making washing machines
and wringers ; there is only one fac-
tory and they have not given any value
of th^ tools at all, and there is only one
employee. One can form a fair idea of what
the nature of thcv^e retarns is from these
samples I have given. I have of course
selected the small ones ; there are some large
ones no doubt. Hon. gentlemen, we have
had a good deal from the Trade Returns. I
do not propose to say very much about the
Trade Returns, but I think it would not be
courteous to the hon. Minister of Trade and
Commerce, and the other hon. Minister who
dealt pretty largely with those returns, not
to say a few words. The hon. gentleman
from Shell River, if I remember rightly,
took the ground, and so did the hon. gentle-
man from Ottawa, that the trade of Canada
had not increased in the proportion in which
it should, and I think it was the hon. gentle-
man from Shell River who said that sub-
stantially there had been very little increase
in the commerce of Canada during twenty
years, that in 1873 the commerce was nearly
as great as it is now. On referring to the
Trade Returns, I find that the hon. gentleman
is not very far wrong. In 1873 the exports
were a trifle less than $90,000,000, and the
total imports were $128,000,000, and the
duty paid was $1 3,01 7,000. Later on, times
were bad, there was a depression all over the
world, and Canada suffered from that depres-
sion just as other countries did, and the im-
ports and exports of this country fell off
about 1877, 1878 end 1879, and the hon.
gentleman, the Minister of Agriculture, and,
I think, his hon. colleague, attributed that
falling off largely to the blighting influence
of the commercial policy of the Liberal party.
Now, hon. gentlemen, it must be remem-
bered that tiie trade of Canada had increased
between 1869 and 1874 to a very consider-
able extent, and it did that under the
identical policy which continued in force
until 1879, with the exception, I think, that

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUABY 2, 1893] Address.

in 1876 there was an increase of 2^ per cent
made in the tariff. That was in the direc-
tion of the present tariff. So that the
old policy of the Conservatives before 1873
and that of the Liberals up, to 1878 was
practically the same, and * the policy —
that is the tariff policy — could have had
nothing to do with the rise or fall of the
trade. Then the new policy came in, and
there was after a time an increase in trade,
not on account of the policy, I fancy, but
because prosperity returned to Cansbda as
well as to other parts of the world ; and I
find that in 1882 the total exports of Canada
were $102,000,000 and the imports $119,-
000,000 ; and in the next year, 1883— ten
years ago — the exports were $98,000,000,
and the imports $132,000,000, and the
figures are very nearly as high as the figures
of last year, which were $1 13,963,000 exports
as against $1 27,406,000 imports. The Trade
Returns fluctuate a little, but there is this
about our Trade Returns which you will not
find in the Trade Returns of the mother coun-
try, old country as she is, that the increase
in our trade during 20 years has been com-
paratively nothing ; and if we took away
the large additional exportation arising from
the grain of the North-west, the exports of
the old provinces which were exporting in
1878 would not be any greater than they
were, or very little greater than they were
then. I notice that the hon. Minister of
Agriculture gave us some carefully prepared
statistics with reference to the duty, and he
pointed out that we were paying almost no
more duty to-day, no higher percentage,
that is the way in which he put it ; the per-
centage of duty now was no greater than it
was in 1 878. Hon. gentlemen, I think that
percentages are a very " kittle kind of
cattle," and I think the better way is to
take the whole burden. In 1878 the total
amount of duties taken out of the people of
this country was $12,795,000 ; in round
numbers $12,800,000. In 1891 the total
amount was $23,481,000 ; that is almost
$11,000,000 more. Last year it was not
quite so much as in 1891. The remission of
the duties on sugar had its effect on the
duties of last year.

Now, hon, gentlemen, considering that
our population has increased by a very
small fraction indeed, what are we to
think? We find that the ducies paid by
this small population have risen from
$12,750,000 in 1878 to $23,500,000 in
1891. Can any system of percentage or
per capita, or any other sort of necromancy
do away with this fact, tha4> the population
of this country, only half a million more than
it was in 1878, paysnearly $11,000,000 more
of taxes in the shape of customs duties than
it paid in 1878 ? Hon. gentlemen try to per-
suade us that our burdens^have not increased.
The hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce^
who, while he has the merit of being straight-
forward, has still along with the simplicity
of the dove, just a little of the guile of the
serpent, undertook to persuade this
House from the consideration of the
Trade Returns, that' under the National
Policy our dealings with the United States
were falling off, while our dealings with Eng-
land were increasing. Now, hon. gentle-
men, I look at the Trade Returns and I find
that in 1873 our aggregate trade, both im-
ports and exports, with England was $107,-
266,000.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Next year you will
see it was larger.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Yes, next year, 1874,

it was larger. I will read the whole list

down, I am not wishing to beguile the

House, like the hon. gentleman. In 1873

I our dealings with the United States were

' $89,808,000. For the succeeding years the

I figures are as follows : —

Fiscal Year ended
30tb June.

(ireat
Britain.

United
Stat^.

1874.
1875.
1876.
1877.
1878.
1879
1880
1881.
1882.
1883

42
59

37 I
[)8
19 I

18 I
^ I
78 I
[)2 I
32 !

Hon. Mr. DEVER-
make it about even.

- Hon. Mr. POWER— Probably the excise
would make it even ; but there is the fact that
the increase of duties is about $10,000,000.

1884 1 »/,iM,z42 I

I 1885 83,2^,482

The excise would ' 1886 82,143,828

1887 ' 89,534,079

1888 I 79,383,705

1889 1 80,422,515

1890 1 91,743,935

1891 * 91,328,384

$
90,524,060
80,717,803
78,003,492
77,087,914
73,876,487
70,904,720
62,696,857
73,.570,337
96,22t),763
97,701,056
89.333,366
86,903,935
81,436,808
82,767,265
91,053,913
94,059,844
92,814,783
94,824,352

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Go on; do not
stop.

Hon. Mr. POWER— No, I shall not stop.
I know it is not pleasant to have the hon.
gentleman's attention called to the serious
mistakes he laboured under. Then the Mc-
Kinley tariff came in in 1892, and our deal-
ings with England were $106,000,000, in-
cluding those eggs, and the dealings with
the States $92,000,000. I do not think that
the Trade Returns quite bear out the view of
the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD— (B.C.) If we
have the trade it does not make much differ-
ence where it is.

Hon. Mr. POWER— My hon. friend from
Victoria points out that if we have the trade
it makes no difference where it comes from ;
but if the hon. gentlemen opposite make a
point of it, why should not we ? The hon.
Minister of Agriculture made some reference
to the discounts in chartered banks being
largely increased. I am not going to argue
much about that point, but I just wish to
call attention to one fact ; I find that the
county of Antigonish, the county represent-
ed in the House of Commons by the hon.
leader of the Government, had a loss of
population in the decade ending 1891 of
nearly 2,000 ; that is 10 per cent. The pop-
ulation in 1881 was 18,000 and in 1891 it was
only a fraction over 16,000. Now, I should
be disposed to wager that the discounts
in that county are larger now than they
were in 1881, and I think there is one bank
agency more there now than there was at
that time ; I am not quite sure, but I think
there is ; and I am satisfied that the county
At the present time is decorated with a great
many more mortgages and things of that
flort than it was 20 years ago.

The hon. Minister of Agriculture made a
reference to the shipping. I believe the
hon. gentleman spoke of the total tonnage
inwards and outwards for 1878 and 1892,
and certainly the tonnage shows a very con-
siderable increase ; but, hon. gentlemen, it
must be borne in mind that in the interval
between 1878 and 1892 sailing vessels had
largely given way to steam. The steamers
which come to our country as a rule are
steamers of very considerable tonnage.
Take the port of Halifax ; rf steamer of
4,000 tons calls in the port of Halifax and

remains for an hour and lands a few passen-
gers and the mails and goes on to land her
freight at Portland, or Baltimore, or some
other point : and she is rated as 4,000 tons
entered and 4,000 tons cleared at Halifax.
That is one of the ways in which this enor-
mous tonnage is made up. That has to be
borne in mind ; and this also has to be
borne in mind that, if the hon. gentleman
will look at the Trade Returns, he will find
that the amount of tonnage carried in Cana-
dian bottoms is now less than it was in
1878; and if he turns to the report of the
Minister of Marine and Fisheries, he will
find that, on the 31st December in 1873, on
the register books in the Dominion of Canada,
the number of vessels was 6,783, and the
tonnage was 1,073,718; and he can follow
that up year after year until he comes to
1878, and He will find that in 1878 there
7,469 vessels with a tonnage of

1,333,015 ; and the next year, 1879, which
is credited by the hon. gentleman to the
Liberal Administration also, there were
7,471 vessels, of a tonnage of 1,332,094 ; and
if the hon. gentleman will look carefully at
this return he will find that, year after year
from 1879, when the National Policy began
to get in its deadly work down to the pre-
sent day, the registered tonnage of Canada
has fallen ofl^ and that in the year 1890 the
number of vessels had dropped to 6,991,
and the tonnage had fallen off something
over 300,000 ; the tonnage had come down
from 1,333,000 to 1,024,000.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Will my hon.
friend find from that book the tonnage built
in Canada from 1874 to 1878 ?

Hon. Mr. POWER -I did not go into
that particularly.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— It isdiminished
by one-half.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I take the tonnage

registered in Canada year after year, and I

find it increased year after year to 1879 ;

that covers the tonnage built in the country,

I does it not ?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No. The ton-
nage built in Canada from 1874 to 1878 fell
off very nearly one-half --vessels built in
Canada.

\ Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. member
I can perhaps explain how it is that if the

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

tonnage built fell off, the registered shipping
continued to increase.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Does my hon.
friend want me to tell him now ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— Yes, I shall be very
glad to hear it.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No, I shall
reserve it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not care to go
into all those criteria of prosperity brought
to the notice of the House by the Minister
of Agriculture ; he talked about the fact
that there had been more failures in 1878
than last year. If the hon. gentleman had
been perfectly candid he would have said
there had been more failures in 1879 than
any previous year. The fact is that now we
have no Insolvent Act, and people do not
fail ; it does not pay as well.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— It was the
fault of the Administration just previous to it
— the poverty and depression caused by it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The overdue notes.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Those are criteria
that I, for one, do not care to go into.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The overdue notes
particularly.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I try to have as few
of my own overdue as possible. One state-
ment made by the hon. Minister of Agricul-
ture struck me as illustrating one practice of
the hon. gentlemen opposite ; he said that one
of the objects of the National Policy was to
diminish imports ; there was one year when
the imports fell below the exports, and imme-
diately all the Conservative papers, and num-
erous Conservative statesmen like our friends
opposite, began to boast that now the Nation-
al Policy was getting in its work, and that
the imports had fallen below* the exports,
and the next year the exports went up, and
the same gentlemen triumphantly told us the
country was prosperous. It does not matter
which way the thing works, you see it always
suits them. The hon. gentleman did use
some arguments which struck me as being
rather peculiar. One was that the policy of
the present Administration was to make raw
materials free, and he pointed out what a
vast quantity of goods came into this coun-

try free because they were raw materials of
manufacture ; but just a little while after-
wards the hon. gentleman gave us to under-
stand that the necessaries of life were not
taxed very much, but the duties were got off
raw materials. Well, if the raw materials
were free there could not be any duties off
them, and if there were duties off them they
were not free.

. Then the hon. gentleman pointed out as an
indication of prosperity that the wages of the
toilers in Canada increased, and that as a
rule the wages were higher now than they
had been in former times. Inasmuch as
such a very large proportion of toilers left
the country, I suppose those who remained
behind would naturally expect to get a little
higher wages. Then the hon. gentleman
began — and I regret that upon his first com-
ing into the Senate, the hon. gentleman
should have thought it proper to get down
from the elevation upon which I think a
minister, particularly a minister in the Sen-
ate, should stand — he began to talk about
commercial union and a combine with the
United States. The policy of a party, I
take it — that is the way we deal with the
Liberal -Conservative party — the policy of a
party is to be gathered from the statements
of its leaders made in Parliament or made
through the press by the authority of the
leaders, and avowedly with their authority.
It will not be found on inquiry that the Li-
beral party ever committed itself to com-
mercial union. That never was the policy
of the party. I venture to say that I have
some idea of what the policy was ; and I say
that that never was the policy. There were
some members of the party who thought
that commercial union was a desirable
policy; but the majority of the party never
thought so, and the hon. gentleman will
find that in the policy of the Liberal party
as laid down in Parliament, there was no
mention of commercial union. The reason
why the Liberal party did not adopt
commercial union was that it would have
deprived Canada of the control of her own
tariff. The only essential difference be-
tween unrestricted reciprocity and commer-
cial union was just this — that under unror
stricted reciprocity Canada would have had
control of her own tariff, and under commer-
cial union she would not. The hon. gentle-
man closed his speech, which was an able one,
by a sort of declaration that the policy of
the Liberal party was annexation. I do not

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATEJ Addrm.

think that a statement of that sort is credit-
able to a gentleman holding such a position
as that, of the Minister of Agriculture. That
there are a few annexationists in the Liberal
party is true, as it is also true that there
are some in the Conservative party ; but we
would not hold the minister responsible for
the proceedings of Solomon White and a
few other hare-brained people in western
Ontario, who happen to belong to the Conser-
vative flock ; and the hon. gentleman will find
it just as hard to discover any considerable
number of Liberals who are annexationists
as he will to discover any considerable num-
ber of Conservatives who profess those views.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I made an excep-
tion when I spoke. I said I referred to Li-
berals outside of this House.

Hon. Mr. POWER- The hon. gentleman
had no right to make such a statement. There
was no shadow of foundation for it — he had
no right to say that the Liberals are in any
sense annexationists. There was a good
deal said about Farrer, Wiman and Goldwin
Smith. Who is Mr. Farrer ? He is a man
who edited the Mail newspaper when it was
the Conservative organ. He is a free lance.
He afterwards went to the Globe, because
the Globe offered him a larger salary than
the Mail paid him. He has since left the
Globe and is now I believe in the United
States. He had no stake in Canada and
was responsible for no one but himself. Mr.
Wiman is a man of considerable ability. I
am not aware that he has advocated the
annexation of Canada to the United States —
I think he has taken another line. I never
saw Mr. Wiman but once and then only for
a very short time, and he did not then say
anything about annexation, and as far as I
know, he is not in favour of annexation.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-I think my
hon. friend recognizes Count Mercier as one
of hiq friends in politics.

Hon. Mr. POWER— No.

Hon. Mr.KAULB ACH — He is recognized
as a leading Liberal and he says that two-
thirds of the people of the province of
Quebec are in favour of annexation.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
makes a statement that is not correct at all.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— If the hon. gentle-
man will refer to the speech made by Mr.
Wiman in Minnesota, and also his evidence
before the Committee on Trade Relations
between this country and the United States,
he will find that Mr. Wiman has stated
clearly that the adoption of commercial
union must of necessity lead to annexation,
and that the Americans who were opposing
it were opposing annexation and that they
had better adopt the principle which he laid
down to bring about that result. I have
half a dozen other extracts from his speeches
in different parts of the country, not only in
Canada but in the United States, which
prove beyond a doubt that his object was
annexation, although he denies it I admit.

Hon. Mr. POWDER— All I can say is
that Mr. Wiman appears to be a gentleman
whose versatility would qualify him for a high
position in the Conservative party. He can
apparently be whatever suits him at the
time. He was not an avowed annexationist
when he was in Nova Scotia, and I do not
know that he ever posed as an annexationist.
My own opinion about Mr. Wiman is that
he is a gentleman who has made a good deal
of money and is anxious to make himself
known. T do not mean to make himself
notorious, but to make himself a reputation
as a public man ; and that he thinks he sees
a chance to do so by discussing the relations
between the land of his birth and the land
of his adoption. Mr. Goldwin Smith is an-
other gentleman spoken of as a person for
whom the Liberal party are responsible. I
think that is exceedingly unfair. Goldwin
Smith came to this country ^ome years ago.
He is a man who has a faculty for becoming
dissatisfied with his surroundings wherever
he is. He became discontent^ with his
position in England, and went to the United
States, where he remained for a short time.
He then came to Canada and was for several
years an intimate friend of Sir John A. Mac-
donald and a*supporter of the Liberal-Conser-
vative party. I presume he became dissatisfied
with them as he became dissatisfied with
everything else. He is not now in harmony
with the Liberal party, but appears to be at-
tempting, with no mandate except from him-
self, to bring about the annexation of this
country to the United States. I presume
his efforts in that direction will be about as
successful as in other directions. I do not
think there is any danger of his bringing it

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Addrm,

about ; but I tell Hon. gentlemen what, danger
there is. The real danger in our relations
with the United States, as I think the most
serious danger, arises from the fact that
gentlemen, occupying positions like that of
the hon. Minister of Agriculture can rise in
their places and talk of a large proportion of
the people of Canada as being annexation-
ists. That is what i? going to make our re-
lations with the United States difficult in the
future. We find now that it is claimed in
the United States that there is a large pro-
portion of our population in favour of annex-
ation, and that the right thing for the United
States is to hold on and refuse to give the
Dominion ' favourable commercial relations,
and thus force Canada into the union. The
hon. gentleman, and the men who talk with
him in that way, are doing the country more
harm than all the Globes and other Liberal
papers in the Dominion.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— Before I proceed
to answer the hon. gentleman from Halifax,
let me congratulate him upon the temperate
and moderate style in which he has addressed
the House. Whether it was the convincing
proofs placed before him by the hon. gentle-
men who occupy the Treasury benches or
not, I cannot state, but I must do him the
justice to say that he has considerably
modified his views, and I think for the
better. I congratulate him that he is
coming to see Canada with perhaps more
patriotic eyes than before. The most extraor-
dinary fact to me is this, whilst the rea-
soning of the Opposition seems to be that
the population has grown no larger, no one
denies that the volume of trade into and out
of the country has increased. It takes more
money in the banks and a larger number of
hands to do the business ; larger sums of
money are deposited in the savings banks,
and I cannot understand, if the contentions
of the Opposition are correct, how that
happens. It seems strange that while popula-
tion has grown no larger, the trade of the
<Jountry has increased by some $100,000,000.
If we are doing that much more business it
is evident that we must be earning more. If
you discuss the matter with bankers they
will tell you that more money is required to
do the business of the country. If you
make inquiries at the customs office you
will find that the imports and exports are
larger. If you investigate the character of
the articles which make up the imports of

I the country and are consumed in the

' Dominion, you will find that they are

of greater value : yet we are told that the

1 country is not progressing. As my hon.

! friend from Marquette remarked, it is very

I hard to understand these figures. I desire

to congratulate the Government on having

I given this branch of Parliament two of the

most important portfolios in the Govern-

; ment ; and I think the supporters of the

Administration in this House must agree

j that the Senate of Canada has in the person

of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, a

j man who has proved himself in the different

public positions he has occupied, worthy the

I confidence of the country and of the Senate.

.The Minister of Agriculture cannot come to

] us as a Minister of green things, for we are

not very green here. He occupies a most

j important position. Agriculture forms one

i of the largest items of export in Canada.

I Whatever ground for grumbling there may

. have been in the past with regard to the re-

I presentation of the Government in this

j House that is done away with, and I think

j the Government have more than made up

I for any remissness in the past, by sending us

! two such able and distinguished gentlemen

I as the Ministers of Trade and Commerce and

Agriculture. I wish to say one word with

regard to my old leader, whose health, I hope,

is recovering. I wish to thank him for his

universal courtesy, his great ability and his

extreme modesty on all occasions while he

was leader of this House, and I can tell the

I hon. gentleman who follows him that he will

I find it difficult to make such a record as Mr.

Abbott did and merit such popularity. Our

I late leader left this House followed by the

good wishes and the good opinions of those

I who remain behind him. The gravamen of

. the charge against the Government may be

I placed under three heads — first, that it is

; misgoverning the country. That charge was

made from every platform and through the

Opposition press by able men throughout

the country, and the question was discussed

I by both sides before the public. What was

the reply ? It is true we were told at the

close of the general election that the verdict

of the people was only given by what one

\ leading member of the Opposition was

pleased to describe as the " runts and patches

I of the Dominion."

I Hon, Mr. POWER— If the hon. gentle-
I man wishes to quote the member for Oxford

Digitized by

Google

The [SENATE] Address.

he should do so correctly ; the expression ' stated here to-day the Government took the
used was " shreds and patches." duty oflf tea, coffee and sugar, and repealed

the stamp duties ; and I suppose from time
Hon. Mr. HOWLAN — Well, I can say ; to time, as the exigencies of the country re-
for the " shreds and patches " of the Do- quire it, they will continue in the same course,
minion that we helped to preserve the con- To do more than that would be to ruin our
stitution of the country. We are ■ on the | credit. No one has attempted to gainsay
frontier, and we discharged our duties and ! that the credit of Canada stands higher than
held the fort, whilst the remaining portion i that of any other colony of the Empire. Nay
of the Dominion proved conclusively that ' more, she is taxed less. The Conservative
the heart of Canada beat in unison with the I party of Canada has accomplished what no
shreds and patches. Now, what do the Op- other portion of Her Majesty's Empire has
position propose 1 Do they suggest an altera- j ever undertaken^ — what not even the Empire
tion of the platform by which this country I itself has attempted. Five millions of people
was carried in the last election 1 What do I grappled successfully with the problem of
their leaders say ? Protection was the one I building 6,000 miles of railway across the
great issue in the appeal to the people ; our continent, through a country the greater part

opponents said it would be impossible to
carry on the business of the country if any
important change was made in the policy

of which was without a settlement and much
of which was an unexplored wilderness, and
at the same time retained their credit unim-

under which we live to-day — that it would paired. How often have the older members

interfere with the monetary and banking
institutions and land the Dominion in ruin
within six months after its adoption. They
say : " We do not propose to do that ; we
propose to let down the bars quietly one by
one." It puts me in mind of an old story
about a gentleman who lived in the Southern
States and owned a dog with a long tail.
He said to one of his servants " I want you
to take out that dog and cut off part of his
tail." Next morning he heard cries of dis-

of this House heard the prqject of the Canadian
Pacific Railway condemned. We were told
that to undertake to build such a railway
was " midsummer madness " — that the older
provinces would be taxed beyond endurance
and that the end would be the destruction
of the Confederation ; but when ths^t policy
proved to be a successful one — when it was
established beyond a doubt that the pros-
perity of the Dominion was increased and
that the railroad was a success from the

tress from the dog and supposed the opera- i beginning — that the exports and imports
tion was performed, but the next morning ! continued to mount up, what did we see ?
there was a repetition of the noise, and ' With. a country prosperous, with a treasury
again the following morning. He asked I overflowing and everything going on quietly
the servant what was the matter, ' and ! but surely, as is proved by the increasing
the reply was, " Massa, I was afraid to I exports and imports, the Opposition, finding
cut off too much, so I cut it off piece ! that they could not destroy the Dominion
by piece." The policy of the Opposition in any other way, abused the land which
is to cut off the tariff piece by piece. Have gave them a living, ran it down and belittled
they made any proposition beyond that ? it in the eyes of the world as far as
Some of them talk about free trade — how they could ; yet they ask the people of the
could we have free trade in this country ? Dominion to believe that they are Canada's

How can any Government hope to remain in
power that proposes to adopt free trade where
we have $12,000,000 or $13,000,000 interest
to pay on our debt ? It is impossible to dis-
cuss the question from that stand-point. We
have heard it stat<ed here that the Conserva-

friends. We had from the hon. member
from Marquette a parody on Tom Hood's
" Song of a shirt," the refrain of which was
twenty-five per cent. You would have
thought from the manner in which he read
that song that outside of Canada there was

tive party is learning — learning from whom ? no twenty-five per cent, that all was free

From the Liberal party the hon. gentlemen
say. The Liberal -Conservative party have
been carrying on the business of the country
and as its revenues increased and were found
more than sufficient to meet the expenditure,
taxation has been reduced. As has been

trade. He forgot to tell the people of
Canada and this House, and he forgot to
inform himself of the fact, that there was no
twenty-five per cent refrain across the
border. He would find, if he lived in that
Eldorado, that the refrain would be some-

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

thing diflferent, that it would be something
like sixty-live per cent. We have on the
authority of Congressman J. D. Warner, of
New York City, a published list of one
hundred huge trusts now in operation in the
United States of which the following are a
few specimens :

Name. Duty.

Axe Tnist 45 per cent

Borax Trust 3c. per lb

Broom Trust 40 per cent

Button Trust 25 to 400 per cent

Cartridge Trust 45 per cent

Casket Trust 45 per cent

Castor Oil Trust 80c. per gal

Cordage Trust A to 24c. per lb

Cottonseed Oil Trust 10c. per gal

Envelope Trust 30 per cent

Glove Trust 70 per cent

Harvester Trust 45 per cent

White Lead Trust 3c. per lb

Linseed Oil Trust 32c per gall

Oatnteal Trust Ic. per lb

Paper-bag Trust 25 per cent

Plate Glass Trust Av. 100 per cent

Pocket Cutlery Trust 74 to 116 per cent

Rice Trust 2c. per lb

Sanitary Ware Trust 55 per cent

Saw Trust 30 to 40 per cent

Soap Trust. 20 to 40 per cent

Steel Rail Trust $13.44 per ton

Sugar Trust 1 3c. per lb

Teazel Trust 30 per cent

Wall Paper Trust 25 per cent

Window Glass Trust 68 to 132 per cent

Wire Trust 45to60 per cent

Wool Hat Trust 66 to 112 per'cent

Wrapping Paper Trust 25 per cent

I am sorry that my hon. friend is not here
to-night with his twenty-five per cent. He
says that the National Policy has not in-
creased the business of the country. No
better evidence to the contrary can be found
than the following statement from the official i
reports of the aggregate trade of Canada '
from year to year : —

Millions.

131

131 !

148

1868.
1869.
1870.
1871.
1872.
1873.
1874.
1875.
1876.
1877.
1878.
1879.
1880.
1881.
1882.
1883.
1884.
1885.

170
194
218
218
201
174
175
172
153
174
204
222
230
208
198

Millions.

1886 190

1887 202

1888 201

1889 ■ 204

1890 219

1891 218

1892 241

A man who travelled through Canada twenty
years ago, in travelling through it now must
be very dull indeed if he cannot see evidences
of prosperity everywhere. Every one of us
must have observed in this very city of
Ottawa the steady growth of the prosperity
of the people. I was surprised to hear my
hon. friend from Halifax say that the Mari-
time Provinces had not increased in twenty
years.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I did not say they
had not increased in twenty years, I said in
ten years.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— Well, let us see
how much truth there is in that statement.
Take New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and
let us see what the figures show, arranged
upon a per head basis, as to the amount of
money invested in manufacturing :- —

N.B. N.S.

Invested in land ^ 3.00 ^i.70

Invested in buildings 12.80 8.60

Invested in machinery 17.00 10.40

Working capital 19.00 19.50

Output 1891 73.70 67. 10

Output 1881 57.40 42.10

Capital 1891 invested 51.70 42.20

Capital 1881 invested 26. 10 23. 10

Increase capital invested, 98 per cent 82.6 per
cent.

Increase output over 1891 28.2 59.3

Yet my hon. friend says there is .no change
— no improvement. It is a fact beyond any
question that with regard to the Maritime
Provinces trade has changed and gone into
different channels, but there is another
branch of trade which is never found in
these books, though it is very large, and
that is the inter-provincial trade. This is
the solution of the apparent falling off in the
shipping. My hon. friend talks about the
ships of twenty years ago and compares
them with the ships now. Twenty-five
years ago we were building ships in the
Maritime Provinces to send abroad for sale.
Now we are building them to own and run
them, and we have one of the finest fleets of
fishing vessels in the world. Even the
United States hap nothing to equal our fish-
ing ve

Digitized by

Google

. The [SENATEJ Address.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Why do they not
register thera ?

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— They do register
them.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Not according to
the Trade Returns.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— My hon. friend
must know about these vessels when he sees
them at home. A large amount of the busi-
ness is done in the city of Halifax. The
vessels have grown double in size during the
20 years. The bank fishing was done 20
yeare ago in vessels of 70 tons ; it is now done
in ships of 1 40 tons, and there are no finer
vessels afloat. My hon. friend spoke about
vessels entering at night and going out in
the morning — vessels of 4,000 tons. One
would think that that was a new departure.
That has been the custom and manner in
which all these records are kept. It is the
same way wherever records are kept, and
here at a meeting of the Toronto Board of
Trade less than 20 years ago we were re-
minded— in speaking of shipping owned in
the Maritime Provinces and claiming that
we owned 44 tons or 45 tons for every man,
woman and child in the Maritime Provinces
- -that there was more shipping entered and
cleared from Toronto Harbour than all the
ports of the Maritime Provinces. I was
puzzled to account for it at the time, but it
was explained that even the colliers running
between Rochester and Toronto were put
down every trip. Is any one who knows any-
thing about the lake business of the upper
lakes prepared to state that there are not
more vessels on the lakes now than there
were 20 years ago ? Is he prepared to state
that there are not more tons of shipping on
the upper lakes, thatthereis not more freight
carried ? I think not, l)ecause if he does, the
recordshere would show that he is mistaken.
The lake trade shows that the tons of freight
carried in and out by vessels in 1878 amount-
ed to 2,178,646, while 14 years afterwards,
in 1892, it amounted to 2,791,552 tons, or
an increase of 612,906.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— What is
the hon. gentleman quoting from ?

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN — From a memo-
randum taken from the blue books.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) -What blue
books — Trade and Navigation Returns ?

Hon. Mr. HOWXAN— Yes. It must be
borne in mind, in connection with this state-
I ment, that we have increased our railway
i accommodation very much in that period.
In addition to the Canadian Pacific Railway,
there are several other new roads in exist-
ence now, aiding and assisting in doing the
business of the country, and the Grand
Trunk Railway has doubled its track.
With regard to the ocean tonnage, take
the tons of shipping, seagoing, with cargoes.
In 1884 there came in and went out of
Canada 4,912,455 tons, while in 1892 the
amount was 7,942,718. Taking the tons of
merchandise brought in and taken out,
in 1878 there were 6,666,538 tons, while in
1892 there were 8,585,944 tons, or nearly
two millions of tons more. Here are facts
which cannot be gainsaid. With regard
to the next point, we are told that Canada
is a dear country to live in, that the taxe^
are driving the people away to the United
States, and that strangers are coming in to
take their place. That is a statement which
has been made in this House within the last
two or three days. Is it true that Canada
is taxed more per capita than other coun-
tries? Let us look at the facts. The following
is a statement of the equivalents of taxation
per head last year in the chief English-
speaking countries : —

IJuited Kingdom $ 9.47

Western Australia 20.68

Queensland 20.33

New Zealand 16.32

Victoria 14.05

Tasmania J3.68

New South Wales 12.26

Newfoundland 6.40

United States 6.21

[ Canada 6.a^

Jamaica 4.03

. Cape of Good Hope 3.73

Now in the face of these facts it is extra-
ordinary to hear hon. gentlemen decrying
their own country and representing thai it
is going to ruin. Now, let us take the taxa-
; tion per head last year in European coun-
tries, and compare it with the taxation in
Canada :

; France %\X 1 1

Netherlands 9.04

, Italy 8.22

Spain 8.05

Portugal 7.35

j Austria-Hungary 6.24

The taxation of Canada was less than in any

of these countries. I was surprised to l^ear

I the remarks of the hon. gentleman from

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

Marquette about the lower provinces and
especially New Brunswick. With a grand
flourish he told us that the saw-mills and
tanneries in New Brunswick had diminished
in number during the last twenty-five years.
The explanation of the apparent decrease is
easy. Twenty-five years ago there were a
great many small saw-mills in New Bruns-
wick along the rivers and creeks where tim-
ber could be had, but now the lumber busi-
ness is done in very much larger saw-mills,
run by steam, and I have no doubt that if
we had the statement of the number of hands
and the capital employed in New Brunswick
in the lumbering industry, it would be found
that there was an increase instead of a
decrease.

Hon. Mr. DEVER~-I do not believe
there is one-third as much. Take, for in-
stance St. John, how many are there in St.
John now ?

. Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— Well, Mr. Gibson
has a pretty good one. Then about the tan-
neries, we know that there are some tan-
neries that were not in existence in New
Brunswick twenty -five years ago, and in that*
instance also it would be found on examina-
tion that while there may be fewer tan-
neries there are more hands employed, and
a larger amount of capital is embarked in
the industry. It is absurd to say that there
is less money invested in manufacturing in
this country to-day than there was twenty-
five years ago, or at any time in the past.
Every one who hears me must know that
such a statement is not capable of proof. I
believe that there is more manufacturing
in the city of Montreal alone to-day than
there was in all Canada twenty years ago. We
have heard a great deal of talk with regard
to the position in which Canada stands, and
of renouncing the ideas and opinions put
forth with regard to annexation. Any one
who took an active part in the last general
election knows that everywhere throughout
the Dominion, on the platform, through the
press, by circulars, and in every way the
idea of annexation was promulgated. We
know that men in Boston met representa-
tives from Canada and discussed the question
openly. More than that, we know that one
or two gentlemen were taken in a pullman
car from Boston to New York, Baltimore,
Philadelphia, Washington and Richmond, to
further the movement, and the press rang

with the subject. No One could help hear-
ing it. In the hotels, eveiywhere, one
could hear the statement made that if the
people of Canada had an opportunity to
vote, and were not kept down by Govern-
ment bayonets, they would register their
votes in favour of annexation. It will never
be known, until the present generation passes
away, and the correspondence is made pub-
lic, how far the movement was carried. It
will then be known what the men who com-
pose the Government of Canada to-day had
to endure to save the country. We hear
the Opposition to-day repu'iiating Farrer,
but the repudiation comes late ; Mr. Farrer
has gone across the border. How is it that
thrjughout the length and breadth of the
United States, go where you will, if you
have a confidential friend, he will write you
to know if there is any alteration with regard
to those ideas and opinions which prevailed
in his early manhood — that he has been told
that we are all ready for annexation. Who
told him the story ? Was it the Liberal -
Conservative party of Canada ? Not a man
of them would do it. Let me give you a
sample of something only a few days old. It
is as follows ! —

CONTINENTAL UNION.

It is uow apparent that the movement in the
Dominion of Canada toward casting its lot with
the continent to which it belongs, has begun in
earnest. It is spreading alike to the country dis-
tricts, and to tne towns and cities throughout
Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, and also in the
Maritime Provinces and adjacent islands. It is
supported by statesmen and political leaders of all
graaes and parties, and finds its adherents in all
occupations and callings without reference to orgiii
or race. Similar movements have been begun
before, and more than once they promised to result
in the independence of Canada and its amalgamation
with the United Statfes ; but none of them ever
became so general as the one now claiming our
attention, or reached such magnitude in so short a
time of renewed agitation.

We are here in a representative capacity in
this House. Can any man enunciate such
sentiments publicly in Canada and be
elected 1 Still, it is being spread abroad as
the views of our people. I honour the man
who is honest enough to openly advocate
annexation if he believes in it, but he has
no right to belie me and my family and my
reputation for loyalty.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Who is the
authority ?

Digitized by

Google

100

The [SENATE] Address.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— It is the New
York Sun,

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— By whom
was the articte written ?

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— It is an editorial
in the New York Sun. I have here a letter
from Toronto, written by Mr. Farrer to Mr.
Wiman. It is as follows : —

Toronto, 22nd April, 1889.

My Dear Mr. Wiman, — Our Ottawa man will
send a good summary of your speech, so that on
our account you need not go Xjo the trouble of pre-
paration. At present the commercial union move-
ment is at a standstill. First of all, the Jesuit agi-
tation, which is here to stay, has to some extent
supplanted it. Secondly, the general belief is that
the Republicans would not listen to any such
scheme. Thirdly, a very larse number of people
are inclined to think that we had better make lor
annexation at once, instead of wasting two bites on
the cherry. Lastly, the old parties here are rapidly
breaking up, and when Sir John goes we shall be
adrift without a port in sight, save annexation.
Moreover, although the Liberals have taken up
commercial union, they are not pushing it witn
any vigour. For these reasons the Mail has, in the
slang of the day, given the subject a rest. There
is really no use talking it up to a people whose poli-
tics are in a state of flux, and whose future is
wrapped in doubt. I saw Mr. Hoar, while at
Washington, and told him just what he says I did,
namely, that the smaller forces favour annexation
and will favour it all the more if commercial union
be withheld. It seems to me, and I have talked
the thing over lately with maritime members as
well as with Manitobans, that commercial union
would only delay the coming of the event those
people most desire. Hence, in the provinces refer-
red to, commercial union does not take hold,
whereas annexation will always demand a hearing.
In Ontario the Jesuit campaign has brought that
aspect of things homo to thousands who would not
look at commercial union. The littleness and half
heartedness of the Liberals is also very dishearten-
ing. Then, again, the truth is that every man who
preaches commercial union would prefer annexa-
tion, so that the party is virtually wearing a mask.
Can't you come round this way and have a talk ?
Yours very truly,
(Signed.) K. FARRER.

Here is the answer : —

House ok Representatives,

Washington, D. C, April 25th, 1889.

Erastus Wiman, Esq.,

314 Broadway, N. Y.

Dear Sir, — I am greatly obliged to you for send-
ing to me the proof -slips of the '* North American "
article, and have been much interested also in Mr.
Farrer 's letters which surprised me somewhat as I
did not think from his conversation, which gave me
a very favourable impression, that he would be so
easily discouraged. The reasons he gives existed
before the commercial union began with greater

force than to-day. The Republicans as protectionists
it was apprehended would be against it. They are
not. Their representative vote for it, their news-
papers have received it kindly, and often with warm
approval, the Jesuit agitation, which has taken the
place of commercial union in his mind, is largely
sentimental and will probably not last lon^. The
other, conmiercial union is a business question that
concerns each citizen, and in a way which he does not
understand at first, but sees more and more clearly
the more he talks intelligently about it. There is
some logic in what Farrer says of not making two
bites of a cherry, but going for annexation at once,
but I think he is misled on that point in a way
that often occurs. Where a man is thinking much
on a point and discussing it, he is liable to narrow
his horizon to those within his reach ; and his own
mind, and perhaps those he meets having passed
on by discussion to distant results, he takes it for
granted that the wide world which is so wonder-
fully slow, has kept up with him and has the
same results in sight. We must be very patient
with the slow moving popular mind. If the
Canadian public of farmers, artisans, lumbermen,
miners ana fishers can be in three years arcued up
to the point of voting commercial utiion ana giving
sanction to the movement in Parliament, it will be
great progress, slow as such movements are, the
comforting thing is that they never go backward.
To you personally it ought to be in your moments
of reflection a consolation that long hereafter, when
this ball which you set rolling hsts gone on and on
and finished its work, every one may then look back
and see and appreciate the service done to mankind
by the hand that set it in motion. I shall look
with interest for what you say in Ottawa. ** The
North American Review " article will have a
powerful tendency to keep our public men from
scattering away on annexation next winter, and I
hope we can get the offer of commercial union
formulated into law. I return the proof slips of
the article and the letter of Mr. Farrer.
Very truly yours.

(Sgd.) R. R. HITT.
P. 8. — Just received yours of yesterday with
Goldwin Smith's ; it reads admirably.

That shows exactly where the stream of
opinion comes from ; it shows just how these
articles are formulated. You would think
from the way our neighbours speak of Canada
that they have nothing to do but to come
over and buy the whole place. The article
in the New York Sun from which I have
already quoted continues : —

And why should not every American citizen
approve, work for, and welcome the accomplishment
of such a destiny for the whole of the continent
north of the Guli of Mexico ? Considered from a
purely selfish point of view, the advantages to be
gained by the United States would appear to be
; enormous. So rapid has been the increase of our
i population, that nearly all the arable public land
within our borders has been taken up and brought
under cultivation. There is but little more that
can be utilized, except by the aid of irrigation, and
the preparation of works for that service is slow
and costly. Already our people are pressing against

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

101

the borders of Manitoba and looking upon the
plains that lie beyond.

The area of Canada is fully three and a half
million square miles, or almost as much as our own,
including Alaska. Of this vast expan^, 1,300,000
square miles have been officially reported to the
lX[>miniou Government as suitable for growing
wheat and barley, 500,000 suitable for Indian corn,
and much of the rest for grasses. It contains 130,-
000 square miles of coal lands, besides vast areas of
forest, and of iron and other mineral deposits.
There can be no doubt of the value or producti-
veness of the Canadian possessions or of the health-
fulness of the climate, and yet after more than a
hundred and thirty years of colonial life the whole
of British America contains a population of less
than five million souls.

So it goes on through this able article of
three columns. Where does all this informa-
tion come from ? Has it been sent to the
New York Sun by any member of the Lib-
eral-Conservative party? Not likely. Then
how do they get our household secrets]
There must be some secret way by which
this is going on.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Probably Farrer is
a Tory einissary in disguise.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— The hon. gentle-
man know^s more about him than I do. In
this article the writer speaks in a familiar way I
of Canada, and points out its vast wealth '
and importance —you would think he was
advertising the country for sale. Let me
tell you one thing — in my humble judgment
it will be a long time before the flag is
lowered in Canada. If England were to lose
Canada she would soon lose Australia, and
the loss of Australia would be followed by
the loss of India, and England would soon
be humbled to the position of a fifth -rate
power in Europe. That is something which
no man who looks forward with hope to the
future of the human race would like to see.
It would be one of the greatest misfortunes
that could occur to mankind. England's
policy is to confederate all her possessions
and make them one, unite the empire
and then we will not have our neighbours
talking of coming over here and taking pos-
session of Canada as if they had nothing to
do but to buy it. Our duty is to hold this
country and develop our North-west with
people from the older countries. I was glad
to hear my hon. friend from Halifax say
that he would be pleased if the people of the
Maritime Provinces, who leave their homes,
as men of the Anglo-Saxon ra^e are inclined
to do, would go to the North-west part of

our Territories and settle under their own
flag and institutions. I was glad to hear
him express those patriotic views. The duty
of every patriotic Canadian is to unite on
some immigration policy that will people our ^
North-west Territories. There is no such
land in the United States as we possess.
We have the only lands which can be offered
to the people of the world ; and, I repeat,
our duty is to open up our western country
for settlement and fill it w^ith a population
that will trample down those ideas of annex-
ation and those unpatriotic sentiments, so
that Canada will be respected at home and
abroad, and occupy that position which God
and nature intended her to fill.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH -I have been
consulting with some of my friends, and
looking at the voluminous notes which I
have here, and understanding the Govern-
ment is desirous that this debate shoidd
close to-night, I am doubtful whether ,1
should inflict upon the House such a long
discussion as my figures and papers would
necessitate. They say that at tinies I am
pretty long winded and when I rise to speak
I never confine myself to the time allotted
to me ; therefore, I think I am meeting the
wishes of the Senate — which I generally
like to conform to — when I state that, instead
of going through the arguments of the
various gentlemen, I will defer my remarks
until the question will come up in a broader
way. I believe the hon. gentleman from Mar-
quette has a notice on the paper of a
motion to discuss the trade policy of the
country ; therefore, I shall not trouble the
House to-night, except to say that I am
quite in accord with all that has been said by
my hon. friend who has just taken his
seat, and I believe we have got one of
the best and noblest countries on the
face of God's earth — a noble heritage if we
take care of it and are patriotic. This coun-
try has great resources, which we can
develop, and make Canada as prosperous as
any portion of the British Empire ; but we
are not to be governed by the pessimist doc-
trines laid down by the Opposition, who
desire to belittle the country and belie it ;
and I think it would be a sad day if they
got in power again. They have a record ;
it is before the people, and the people know
to what a slough of despond they brought
the country. I hope the day will never come
when they will be at the head of affairs. I

Digitized by

Google

102

The [SENATEJ Address.

am reminded, by the record of the Grit party
in Parliament and the country, of the lines
of Dr. Tsaac Watts :

Each travelling in a different way,
But all the downward road.

That is the path they are in ; I know
the people of this country feel it ; and they
believe that their only safety is to stand by
the party that has carried them so far to
prosperity, and will carry them still further
on the same way in the future.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B. C.)— I believe
every province of the Dominion has been
heard from in this discussion but the Pacific
province, and I think it is only fit and
proper, coming as I do from British Colum-
bia, that her voice should be heard on the
floor of this Parliament on this particular'
occasion. I will not attempt to follow in
the footsteps of a great number who have
preceded me in talking stale, worn-out poli-
tipal i-sues of the past — issues that have been
dead and buried a quarter of a century ago,
but will briefly deal with a few living and
practical questions. I am proud to stand
hero and say that the province from which
I hail is increasing and is prosperous. It is
prosperous, highly prosperous when com-
pared with the eastern provinces of this
great Dominion of ours. It has prospered
for the last 15 or 20 years, especially for the
last 10 years, at a greater ratio than any
other portion of the Dominion ; and I verily
believe it will continue for years to come to
develop much faster than any other portion
of Canada. Yet, T am sorry to say that ]
am forced to state that she is not pros
pering as she should ; she is not making
those rapid strides, either in population
or in developing the vast and varied resour-
ces of the province that she should do. She
is prospering, not in consequence of the fiscal
policy of the Government but in spite of the
many obstacles thrown in her way — the
niggardly and unjust treatment of the Gov-
ernment. The leader of the Opposition in
this House a few days ago compared several
of the provinces with adjoining states of the
Union. In making those comparisons he
compared the new state of Washington with
British Columbia. Now, in the last ten
years, although British Columbia possesses
probably more natural and undeveloped
wealth and greater opportunities for deve-
lopment and attractions to immigrants, yet
she has fallen short I believe, by 200,000 in

the population she should have had. I
regret to say that nearly every time that I
wend my way westward over the Canadian
Pacific Railway, or over the Northern
Pacific Railway, the Vast majority of the
emigrants who pass over the great .province
of Manitoba and the North-west Territories
through to British Columbia and the coast,
immediately step on board of the steamer at
Vancouver or take the railway at Mission
City and pass down to the Pacific states of
the great Union ; and it is only a small
portion that remain in Manitoba, the Terri-
tories or in my province. The question may
be asked why is such the case when our
natural resources and tempting inducements
are h^d out to intending settlers to settle
in our province and develop our vast resour-
ces which are equal, if not superior, to
those south of As, when our climate
is equally g<X)d, if not superior, — the
question then arises, what is the reason that
this vast tide of emigration flows through
our own country and passes to the gi^eat
country to the south of us ? The only reason
that I can assign for it, hon. gentlemen, is
this, the unwise, the oppressive tariflf, which
^ars more largely, more heavily, more seve-
rely and more cruelly on the people of our
province and the North-west generally than
on any portion of the Dominion. In order
to prove that I am speaking by the book I
will refer hon. gentlemen to the Trade and
Navigation Returns. I am assuming — and
I think the assumption is correct — that we
have 100,000 of a population, although there
was a little less than that given in the census.
I find that that 100,000 people in British
Columbia pay no less than .SI, 600, 000 into
the Dominion Treasury. In customs alone
this last year we paid $1,412,878, and, inclu-
ding excise, it amounts to nearly $1,600,000.
Well on to a million and three-quarters paid
by a population of 100,000, which includes a
population of from 25,000 to 30,000 Indians,
and a very considerable Chinese population ;
I think I am within the mark when I say
that the white population of the province
of British Columbia to-day does not excee<i
75,000. Even including the Indians and
the Chinese, we pay into the Dominion
Treasury per capita over $16, and if we ex-
clude the Indians, we pay over $21 per
capita. Just imagine hon. gentlemen, what
it amounts to ; take a family* composed of
five ; they have to pay from $80 to $105.
That is one of the reasons why I say that the

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Addrm.

103

province is not increasing and prospering as
she should. Another reason is this — and I
have more than once called the attention of
this House and the Government to it— that
one of the great industries of our province
is mining, and notwithstanding that all the
representatives from British Columbia, those
in court and those differing with the Govern-
ment, hare urged, year after year, to admit
all mining machinery free of duty, it was
only about two and a half years ago that we
linally succeeded in prevailing upon the Gov-
ernment to admit free such mining machinery
as was not manufactured in Canada. Only a
very small portion indeed of the machinery
that is suitable for developing the mines in
that country is manufactured in any portion
of the Dominion ; and the consequence has
been that nearly all the mining machinery
that we use there in developing our gold
and our silver mines has been brought from
the United States and a very heavy duty
paid on it. The high duty has been a wet
blanket over that industry — an industry
which I have no hesitation in saying I believe
will within the next five years, in the produc-
tion of silver alone, astonish the world. There
is one district of our province, the district
of Kootenay, around Lardeau and Slogan,
where there are more rich ledges of silver,
some of them carrying a large percentage
of gold, sufficiently developed although only
discovered a few months ago, than are to be
found on this continent. They are away 40
or 50 miles from any navigable waters ; and
after mining the ore, placing it in bags, taking
it on mules' backs or on sleighs 40 or 50
miles, and then by water 40 or 50 miles more
in small boats before they find a railway, —
yet that ore is shipped in the manner des-
cribed several hundred miles into Idaho and
down to Tacoma, to the smelting works there,
yet in many instances notwithstanding the
enormous cast of transportJation, there is a
net return of $500 to $600 per ton. The
people of British Columbia complain, and I
think very justly, that they have not had
that encouragement or at least the fair-play
that the Government ought to extend, in a
new country such as theirs, to a compara-
tively new industry, and one that promises to
do so much, not only for British Columbia,
but for the whole Dominion . There is an-
other matter that occurs to me at the present
time, and to which I desire to refer for a mo-
ment or two which is this : Last year my
hon. friend from Calgary, doubtless at the

instigation of a combination of cattlemen
of the North-west Territories, and British
Columbia, made such representations and
brought such influence to bear upon the
Government that they applied to have the
quarantine regulations that existed in all the
rest of the Dominion of Canada to apply to
British Columbia, under the pretext that
pleuro-pneumonia might be introduced into
British Columbia and that it might affect
detrimentally our exportation of cattle tp
the English market. I pointed out at the
time, as I point out now, that British Colum-
bia is not a cattle exporting country ; it has
never been such, it is not likely to be ; and
that it was merely for the benefit of a few
stock raisers in the North-west Territories,
and in British Columbia, that that additional
hardship was placed upon the consumers in
that part of Canada. In the month of Nov-
ember or December last — probably the Min-
ister of Trade and Commerce will correct
me if I am wrong — probably he is aware of
what T am about to call his attention to— I
saw it stated, and I believe truthfully stated,
in one of our papers that cattle were brought
in from the American side to the mining dis-
trict 1 was describing a short time ago ;
they were brought in without paying the
duty, brought in alive, and taken to the
place where they were to be slaughtered and
consumed during the Christmas holidays by
the hard working miners who were, in all
probability not too liberally supplied with
actual necessaries of life, and the customs
officer was cruel enough, when beef was 30
and 40 cents a pound, acting under the in-
structions of the Government, to cause those
animals to be driven back into the United
States Territory and slaughtered there, and
the carcases brought back, before those poor
miners were allowed to get fresh meat. That
was a cruelty and hardship and I sincerely
trust that, as we have the Minister of Agri-
culture in this Chamber, he will see that
another such outrage will not be repeated.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL- -Why was that?

Hon. Mr. McINNES -In order to carry
out these quarantine regulations which were
in force about a year ago, at the instigation,
I believe, of the cattle dealers in the North-
west.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— You are entirely
mistaken. The regulations respecting Amer-
ican cattle were put in force to prevent

Digitized by

Google

104

The [SENATE] Address

Canada from being scheduled in England.
However absurd the hon. gentleman may
think it is, the importation of cattle from
Oregon or Washington Territory to British
Columbia, would affect that tra^de, and the
Government had to protect that great inte-
rest of Canada, the cattle trade with Eng-
land and therefore had to put the regula-
tions in force in all parts of the Dominion.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— It had been ne-
glected a very long time ; either the Govern-
ment had been doing their duty previous to
that or they had not.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man is hard to please. The Government did
not desire to interfere with the trade then
going on with British Columbia until com-
pelled to do so to protect the trade of this
country.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— What compelled,
or who compelled the (Tovemment to place
British Columbia in this particular on the
same footing as the eastern provinces when
our province was a non-exporter of cattle ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Certain regulations
prevail in England in reference to the im-
portation of Canadian cattle. The people
of England do not stop to ask the question
whether the cattle come from British
Columbia or the province of Quebec ; the
fact that they come from Canada is sufficient
for them to know, and then they insist upon
the regulations being carried out, or ha\4ng
the cattle scheduled, as they are now.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— Were those Eng-
lish regulations new regulations?

Hon. Mr.^ BOWELL— Certainly not, but
the English people found out the cattle were
not scheduled, or rather, the quarantine
regulations were not enforced, and we have
been as liberal as possible with our regula-
tions for the North-west and Manitoba until
the present time. If we desire to maintain
the advantage Canada has at the present
time over the United States, we will have
to enforce the regulations in the North-west
and Manitoba, however objectionable it may
be, and in the interests of emigration into
that country we recognize that great fact..

Hon. Mr. McINNES- If such is the
case — and I must accept the hon. gentleman's

statement — then it must be owing to repre-
sentations made by those persons interested
in stock raising.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I do not know.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— It must be through
them.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman is right in that.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— But the hon.
gentleman must bear in mind that, not-
withstanding that, our cattle have been
scheduled in England, and that they are not
to-day, as I understand it, on a different
footing from the cattle sent from the United
States. I think I am right in that.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I do not know
that we desire to discuss that question. It
was fully discussed half an hour ago, and it
was stated that we were trying to get the
embargo removed, and the hon. gentleman's
argument, if it goes to England, will only
induce them to be more rigid than they
have been.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— I am merely stat-
ing the fact as it was represented and believ-
ed in the province from which I hail ; and
I certainly think that it was a harsh act.
Any one possessed of the slightest feeling
must see that a great hardship and injustice
was done those hardy and enterprising
miners that went into that region, who were
not too well supplied with the actual neces-
saries, to say nothing of the luxuries of life.
It was especially hard during the Christnias
holidays to be deprived of one of the main
necessaries of life. Now, hon. gentlemen,
whatever benefits, if any, have been derived
from the present tariff in the eastern prov.
inces, it has proved to be an unmitigated
evil to the province of British Columbia. I
will quote a few figures from the Trade and
Navigation Returns, and allow hon. gentle-
men to draw their own deductions. These
reports have been very freely quoted, and I
want the hon. gentleman to refer to certain
pages U\ see that I am quoting correctly, as
I am sorry to say that certain quotations
have been made by more than one hon. gen-
tleman, which I will refer to later on, that
were not exactly in accordance with the
book that I have before me. In the province
of British Columbia, as I have already stated,

Digitized by

Google

The [FBBEUARY 2, 1893] Address,

105

with a population, according to the last cen-
sus, of 98,9(X) souls, we have paid into the
Dominion Treasury $1,593,343 in customs
and excise duties, which amounts, p«r cn/ntcL,
to $16.25, or four times as much per capita
as the rest of Canada. The following is a
statement showing the population of each
province, the amount of customs and excise
duties collected in each province and the
amount paid into the Dominion Treasury in
customs and excise duties per capita : -

Onumo

<^uebec

>ova Scotia

New Brunswick. .

Manitdha.

British Columbia. .

Population.

2.112,989

1,488,586

405,523

321,294

154,442

98,896

Customs '
and Excise t
duties.

Per

Capita.

$8,346,201
7,669,421
1,328,976
1,030,865 I
780,033 I
1,593,344 I

$3.93
5.15
3.25
3.20
5.00

16.28

It will be seen by these figures that British
Columbia stands third among the provinces
of Canada as a revenue producer. The port
of Victoria alone has contributed to the Do-
minion Treasury $1,033,000. I may also
state, without wearying the House by giving
figures, that at the port of Victoria the en-
tries and departures of ships are more than
350,000 tons greater than any other port of
the Dominion of Canada.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— Tons?

Hon. Mr.McINNE8— Yes. I will give the
hon. gentleman the exact returns for a few of
the pi-incipal ports. T will speak by the book.
I referyou to the Statistical Year Book of 1891,
the last published, and T find that at the port
of Victoria the tonnage of the vessels entered
and cleared was 1,631,225, and the next
highest is Montreal, with 1,262,561, — over
368,000 more* tons entered and cleared at
port of Victoria than even at the great com-
mercial port of Montreal. Next to that is
Halifax with 1,234,012; Quebec, 905,858;
8t. John, 1,146,533. St. John stands fourth
on the list, and then they dwindle down to a
few hundred tons. I may say here in passing
that out of the first seven highest, British
Columbia claims three, viz., the ports of Vic-
toria, Vancouver and Nanaimo. Now, in
that connection I have another remark to
make, which may, perhaps, surprise this
House. The tonnage of the British ships
that entered and cleared at the port of Vic-

toria was only 54,252, and number 213 ; the
number of foreign vessels was 1,821, with
an aggregate tonnage of 1,577,013; whereas
at the port of Montreal there were 66 foreign
ships, with only a tonnage of 82,845. This
brings me to another point, and I am glad
that the hon. Minister of Agriculture is in
his place, so that I can show him the abso-
lute necessity of immediately going to work
and establishing one of the best quarantines
that it is possible to establish in this or any
other country. I have shown from the Gro-
vernment records that my province is bear-
ing more than four times, per exipita^ the
burden of taxation of- any other portion of
Canada. That as the Grovernment is plun-
dering our pockets, they should at least make
an honest effort to protect the precious lives
of our citizens by building a proper quaran-
tine station and thereby prevent the intro-
duction of cholera, small-pox and other
dreaded diseases ; no matter if it cost
$100,000 or $200,000 to do so. Expense
should be the least consideration. I am
sorry to say that the people of my pro-
vince, and of my city in particular, are so
enraged and annoyed that there is a great
strain, to use the expression employed by an
honoured member of the British Columbia
Board of Trade, put upon their loyalty, and
a very good Conservative that gentleman is.
We are all aware that cholera, that fearful
scourge, worked its way from Asia to the
western portion of Europe last year, and was
only checked by the winter cold. We are all
aware that there are lingering cases of it in
portions of Germany and France and that
according to a report I saw a few days ago
made by one of the professors there, the water
of a certain river which supplies water to an
insane asylum was largely impregnated with
germs of cholera. Such being the case, I do
not think there is a shadow of a doubt that
when the warm weather sets in there will
be an outbreak of cholera in Western Europe
and it is almost certain to find its way to
New York and to this country through the
ports of Quebec, Halifax, St. John and other
sea-ports. While extensive preparations are
being made to guard against the possible
introduction of cholera by the St. Lawrence
and other ports, further down, yet up to the
present time there has l>een absolutely
nothing done, so far as I am aware, towards
establishing a quarantine for the Pacific pro-
vince. I understand the selection of a new
site has been made, but so far as anv actual

Digitized by

Google

106

The [SENATE] Address,

work is concerned, nothing has been done,
although it must t**ke not merely weeks but
months to erect new buildings, wharfs and
other necessary accommodations. The present
one is a disgrace not only to the province
but to the Dominion. While there is
imminent danger of the cholera being intro-
duced on the eastern side of Canada, I claim
there is as great, if not greater, danger of its
introduction by the Pacific gateway of this
Dominion. Any one who has the least
knowledge of the history of cholera must
know that Asia is the birthplace and the
home of cholera. We have not only one line
of steamers plying between British Colum-
bia and Asiatic countries, but we have two.
The first is the Canadian Pacific Railway
line of steamers, the second is the Northern
Pacific Railway line of steamers, and those
lines of steamers enter at Victoria on their
way up the Straits of Fuca to the head of
Puget sound to Seattle and Tacoma and
Vancouver, landing passengers and freight
on their inward and outward trips. There
is also a line of steamers plying between
Seattle and Tacoma, Victoria, and the Sand-
wich Islands. I fear, therefore, that there
is as much danger if not greater danger of
the introduction of cholera on the Pacific
side as there is on the Atlantic side. I
sincerely hope and trust that the Minister
of Agriculture will use every effort possible to
attend to that side of the Dominion imme-
diately.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — It is being done
already.

Hon. Mr. McINNES Precious time has
been lost already. To give some idea of the
state of feeling in British Columbia with
respect to this subject I will read a few
extracts from the Dominion Government
organ in Victoria, the Daily Colonist.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— I think the hon.
gentleman has a notice of motion for Tues-
day relative to this very subject, which I
am exceedingly glad to see, but really if we
begin a debate on the subject to-night we
shall never get through.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— The hon. gentle-
man from Albert a little while ago said he
would not make two bites of a cherry. I
propose to deal with that subject in the
same spirit, and dispose of it now. It

is just as well, and I shall be quite in
order, to discuss the whole matter now.
It should be a subject of interest to every-
body here to preserve the lives of our
people. We have none to spare. I find
the following report of a recent meeting of
the British Columbia Board of Trade in the
Victoria Colonist of 7th January : —

Mr. H. E. Connon, representing the Northern
Pacific Steamship line, drew the attention of the
Board to the wretched quarantine facilities afford-
ed in this port. The quarantine station, he said^
was altogether inadequate, and in the recent case
where some Chinamen were taken from one of the
ships of this line, it was found that there was no
accommodation whatever for them at the station.
In fact, a landing could scarcely be effected, as the
wharf was in a wretched condition. Whei^ the
unfortunate men were put ashore they were with-
out shelter or food, or any means of cooking food.
He was oblige«l to send over lumber to erect a tem-
porary shed, to supply the men with food, and to
furnish guards. All this, he contended, should
have been provi«led by the Dominion Government.
Such a condition of affairs was calculated to do the
port great harm. It was not fair that the (Jovern-
ment should levy a rate on all vessels entering and
then call upon tne owners to bear all the expense of
a quarantine which the (Government imposed. The
cost to his company would be ver\' serious, and if
there were to be a repetition of this sort of thing
their vessels, as well as others, would he obliged to
shun this port.

Mr. Brodrick corroborated the statement of Mr.
Connon. When the Chinese cases were landed,
there was no provision whatever for them, and
eight men were enjploye«l as guards to look after
them.

Mr. Connon — Even the guards have to put up in
a poor shed, more resembling a ptable. It is a
scandalous state of affairs.

The Chairman — If Mr. Connon's statement be
correct— and there is no reason to doubt it — it is a
grave injustice to his company. If a ship be ordered
into quarantine there certainly should oe some pro-
vision made, and her owners should not be called
upon to pay the expense. I quite agree with Mr.
(yonnon that it is calculated to injure the trade of
the port.

Mr. Prior said that he had frequently brought
this matter under the notice of Jtne (iovemment,
but could get nothing done. With Mr. E^rle, he
had interviewed Sir John Thompson and other
members of the (Jovernment on the point, and
while they were promised that matters would be
improved, nothing had been done. Mr. Gamble
had made a report on the matter, and two months
afterwards, when another effort was made to press
the necessity for the work, a telegram was received
from Ottawa, asking: " Why don't you report?'*
When the lady was taken from One of the Em-
presses, some time ago. Dr. Jones said that the
quarters she had to occupy were not fit for an In-
dian. The Government would spend any quantity
of money on the quarantine station at (irosse Isle,
but as soon as anything was asked for British
Columbia, they were found to l)e the most cheese-
paring set living. Resolutions had been passed by

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Addresi,

107

the BcMird of Tnuie, the Local (government, and
other public bodies calling upon the Dominion
(iovemment to do something to improve the qua-
rantine station here— but all to no effect. Some-
thing would ultimately be done, but when he had
no icfea. He thought a strong resolution from the
Board might possibly strengthen the hands of him-
self and Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gray said he observed from the newspapers
that while Premier Davie was in Ottawa he had
been promised that a quarantine station would be
at once erected at William Head. The premier had
brought the matter to a focus.

Mr. Prior — We wure promised the same thing
over and over again, and yet nothing has been
done. It should be done at once, as the cholera
may be with us in the spring.

The Chairman suggested that Messrs. flarle and
Prior telegraph to Ottawa, pointing ont the neces-
sity of immediate action.

Mr. Todd — It is pretty hard work for one to
keep his temper in discussing matters of this sort.
We are so constantly snubbed and bluffed by the
Dominion Government that it is a tension on our
loyalty. We tried them over and over again, but
they pay no attention to us.

Then a resolution was passed urging Col.
Prior and Mr. Earle to report the case again
to the Dominion Government.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Perhaps it would
be gratifying for the hon. gentleman to know
that the people of Quebec have used equally
strong language against the Government for
not proceeding there.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— Am I to infer
from that remark that that is the only
means of obtaining justice ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL -They are as much
mistaken as the people of British Columbia.
TMe Government are doing all they can in
the matter.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I hope the hon.
gentleman will be perfectly satisfied when
he brings up his motion, and I am afforded
an opportunity of informing him and the
House what is being done at the present
moment.

Hon. Mr. McINNKS -If the hon. gen- 1
tleman will permit me to say, I am not press-
ing for an answer now. I am merely placing
these facts before the House ; and I will
spare the hon. gentleman and the House the
trouble of listening to a speech when I
move for the papers. I will promise the
hon. gentleman that I will merely mo\'e for
the papers wl^en making my motion.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I have no objec-
tion at all to hearing the hon. gentleman
now.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— Here is an edito-
rial in the same paper — the Government
organ :

The language use^l by members of the Board of
Trade at the meeting of that body on Friday may
appear strong, but it was not stronger than the
circumstances warranted. It must be ^-emembered
that the speakers were men who would not, uidess
they considered it absolutely necessary, say one
word against the Dominion Government. They
have been all supporters of the present A«lminis-
tration and they all, as far as we are aware, approve
its general policy. Every one knows how faith-
fully Colonel Prior has supported the Government,
yet the bad treatment which this city has receivecl
and is receiving from the departnients seems to
have exhausted his patience, for his protest was
perhaps the most emphatic that was made. He
mformed the meeting that he and his colleague,
Mr. flarle, had freouently brought the subject of
the disgraceful conaition of the quarantine station
under the noti<;e of the (Government, yet they had
never succeeded in getting anything done. Sir
John Thompson had been interviewed on the sub-
ject, and Mr. Gamble, the resident engineer, had
reported on the matter, yot the quarantine was
allowed to remain in its shamefully inefficient con-
dition. ,

Mr. Connon's description of the condition of the
station at Albert Heaa is calculated to excite alarm
as well as indignation and disgust. The station
which is intended to acconuno<late the crews and
passengers of vessels arriving at this port with
persons afflicted with dangerous contagious disea-
ses on board cannot give even sufficient shelter to
civilized men and women, and it is absolutely des-
titute of everything necessary to make their stay
anything like comfortable. There is no wharf at
which they and their luggage can be landed ; there
is not even a fair supply of gooil water ; there are
no arrangements for cooking ; the quarters pro-
vided for the persons who may be detained are, as
the port doctor describes, not fit for an Indian. As
for apparatus for disinfecting clothes and baggage,
no one in authority seems to have thought that
they would ever be required. Such neglect is
almost incre<lible.

Then it goes onto deal with the complaint
and endorses it in a very emphatic manner.
I Further down it says :

I The neglect is the more surprising as quaran-

I tine is a matter which affects not this province

' alone, but the whole Dominion. Victoria is the

I western gateway of Canada, and as against cholera

' or small-pox it is absolutely unguarde<l. The Dom-

' inion (iovemment has evinced the most nig^rdly

I spirit in taking precautions to prevent (iiseases

I entering the countrj' from this side of the conti-

. nent. The station cannot be said to be e<juipped

at all. It has the name of a quarantine station, out

it no more deserves the title than a Si wash shanty

deserves to be called a palace.

Digitized by

Google

108

The [SENATE] Addrm.

Now here again is another matter to which
I hope the hon. Ministers will direct their
attention :

The marine hospital is alDiost as defective iu
all its arrangements as is the quarantine station.
It is 'lescribed as having none of the appliances of
a hospital, and it cannot afford sufficient accommo-
dation to make a sick mariner even comfortable.
Not only is the accommodation wretched, but its
keeper is miserably paid. The superintendent of
a hospital of any kind should be a person of hieh
character and superior intelligence, yet the only

Provision made for the superintendent of the marine
ospital of Victoria, is a beggarly five hundred
dollars a year and what he can mjueeze out of the
patients, for whom he provides attendance and fooil
for the magnificent sum of five dollars a week. The
custom of farming out patients is even worse than
that of farming out lunatics and paupers. It is
c(mdemned by all enlightened men, and should be
abandoned by all civilized communities. It holds
out temptations to the farmer that are seldom
resisted. We are surprised beyond measure that
so barbarous a custom is countenanced by the
Government of this Dominion, and that sick
mariners are made its victims. Every humane
man and woman in Victoria should vigorously pro-
test against its continuance.

The heartlessness, the ignorance and the narrow-
mindedness exhibited by Deputy- Minister Smith
when Mr. Earle represented to him the inadequacy
of the keeper's pay and the necessity of providing
the hospital with water, must make intelligent
people won«ler how a man of such a nature and
with such ideas, should ever have l>een placed in a
position of authority.

What makes the neglect in this case worse than
ordinary instances of departmental negligence and
carelessness, is that the Government is bound in
common honesty to keep the marine hospital in
an efiicient condition. It is paid in hard cash for
this specific service, and it is paid beforehand.
Vessels that enter this harbour are obliged to pay
towards the Sick Mariners' Fund, and no doubt
the authorities do not neglect to collect the tax.
The money is collected, but the sick sailors are not
attended to. Even the " c^pof cold water " is not
prcjvided for the sick and suffering mariners. It is
to l>e hoped that the Minister of Marine, himself,
will give this matter his attention and not allow a
state of things that is a positive disgrace to Canada
to continue.

Now, hon. gentlemen, I think that that is
a vigorous protest coming from not merely
one, but two members representing that
province, and unswerving supporters of the
Government, and also the leading organ of
the (rovernment, the Victoria Colonist, a
newspaper which occupies a position, with
regard to the Dominion Government in
British Columbia, similar to that which
the Empire does east of the Rockies. I say,
such a strong protestation coming from
such a source ought to be enough to con-
vince the Minister of Agriculture and the
Dominion Government that they should do

something like justice to Victoria and the
other ports of British Columbia in the
direction I have indicated. Before I re-
sume my seat I may say this — I do not wish
to make any charge at present, but last year
I verily believe that the introduction of
small-pox is attributable to one or more
causes that I will not mention at the present
time. It entered Victoria, and Vancouver,
I and New Westminster. Victoria for three
months was in a state of siege. Business
I was nil. A great number of moderately
I prosperous traders were forced into bank-
ruptcy in consequencer of being excluded
from the trade of the outside world. The
city of Victoria alone had to pay out its
hard cash, and the mildest expression I can
use is that through the neglect, or ignorance,
or both, of some person or persons, the
city of Victoria had to pay out $60,000
in hard cash to provide^ accommodation for
the small-pox patients and those who were
placed in the suspect house and other ex-
penses. Not only that, but between thirty
and forty deaths, I am sorry to say, are
attributable to the negligence of someone.
I am informed that the steamer which
brought small-pox intx) British Columbia,
came in flying the yellow flag, and in the
course of six hours after landing a large
portion of her passengers that vessel was
allowed to proceed to Vancouver to spread
disease and death throughout the country.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— That
was the health officer.

Hon. Mr. BOWELLr- Allowed to proceed
where — out of port ?

Hon. Mr. McTNNES— From the port of
Victoria to the port of Vancouver. I am
told she first made her appearance flying
the yellow flag.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— What ship was it ?

Hon. Mr. McINNES- Tt was one of the
Empresses — I forget which. 8mall-pox was
brought in by those steamers twice, in May
and again in June. On ray return from Par-
liament laMt summer it was with the greatest
difficulty I could get to my home in Victoria.
The vessels plying between Vancouver and
Victoria were withdrawn. I had to take the
little steamer to the port of Nanaimo and
there I had to run the gauntlet, show my
arm to prove I had been vaccinated and was
unnecessarily delayed for one day.

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address.

109

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— You do not com-
plain of that do you ?

Hon. Mr. McINNES— I would as longas
I was capable of doing it myself. I would
allow no man to vaccinate me unless I knew
the lymph is pure bovine.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The Ontario Gov-
ernment put doctors on every train coming
from Quebec into Ontario at the time of the
small-pox epidemic some years ago and com-
pelled everybody to strip his arm and be vac-
cinated unless he could prove that he had
been recently vaccinated. I had to produce
my certificate, I know. The hon. gentleman
complains of regulations which were neces-
sary for the protection of the country.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I am not
complaining of the Federal Government in
that particular — but I am complaining and
justly so that they did not take necessary
precautions to prevent the introduction and
the spread of the disease. I am making the
statement that Victoria and Vancouver have
recently complained that it was thix)ugh
the negligence of some person or persons that
the dreaded and loathsome disease was in-
troduced in those citiestwice during the sum-
mer of 1892. I have only one other remark
to make before I resume my seat and it is
this : there is a paragraph which promises
that the ballot shall be extended to the
North-west Territories. I am very glad of
it. I have no doubt the hon. gentleman from
Sarnia is also pleased, because he supported
me very strongly when the North-west Ter-
ritories bill was before this House some 5 or
6 years ago. I moved then that the bill be
amended so as to extend the ballot to the
North-west Territories, the same as to all
other portions of the Dominion. He saw the
common justice of it, and other hon. gentle-
men who were strong followers of the Govern-
ment also supported my amendment. I con-
gratulate the Government that they have at
last seen fit to do justice to the North-west
Territories in that regard.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— I have
no wish to follow the hon. gentleman from
Victoria who has spoken this evening ;
first, because I think the trade question
should not be brought up at aU, and, second,
because he has spoken so favourably and so
conclusively of the wealth of our province.

I fully concur with him in what he said in
that respect. If his intention was to assail
the Government, I think his remarks instead
of being a curse, have turned to be a bless-
ing. The hon. gentleman has spoken of the
enormous natural wealth of the province and
has illustrated its wealth by stating what the
people have been able to pay per head and
yet continue to be in a prosperous condition.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Perhaps I
forgot to mention that the province is pro-
gressing in spite of the burden placed upon
it by the Government.

Hon. xMr. MACDONALD (B.C.)- -The
tariff presses more on British Columbia than
on any other portion of the Dominion, for
this reason — we do not manufacture ; what-
ever we consume we get from the eastern
provinces of Canada, from the United States
or England, and we have to pay large amounts
of freight upon it. Our people, although
they have been loyal to the Government and
paid their taxes regularly, will be glad at
any time to have a little relaxcCtion from the
tariff in many respects. With regard to im-
migration and immigrants passing through
our province to go to the state of Washing-
ton, I would far rather have a moderate
number of people coming into our province,
that we can absorb in a comfortable way,
than have a large number of idle men on our
streets. With the increase we are having
now, year by year, I am perfectly satisfied,
and I know we will have a considerable num-
ber from time to time, as fast as they can
be absorbed. Even now, in some of our
towns, we have idle men that I would rather
not see there unemployed. I would rather
have work for all who come and have every-
body prosperous. With* regard to the marine
hospital, I do not rise in its defence, but T do
wish to say a word on behalf of that excellent
public servant, Mr. William Smith, of the
Marine and Fisheries Department. He has
been accused of saying that the people should
catch the rain to supply themselves with
water, and that they could add to their
income by catching fish. There is nothing
wrong in either of these suggestions.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I wish to
explain that I was not speaking my own
sentiments on that subject ; I was merely
reading an extract from a newspaper, show-
ing the feeling that was produced there by

Digitized by

Google

110

The [SENATE] Address.

the statement. I have nothing to say
against Mr. Smith ; he is a friend of mine,
and I believe, a good officer.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— I do
not believe in farming out the patients at
the marine hospital. If a man can make
money boarding them at $5, the Govern-
ment could do it as well, and the patients
should not be charged for supplies. I hope
that is one of the things that will be seen to
at once — that and getting a supply of water.
There is abundance of water close by the
hospital, and it would not cost much to
furnish it to the institution. With regard
to the quarantine, it has been a burning
question for the last year. Until lately we
did not want quarantine. In the twenty-
two years since we entered the Confedera-
tion, we had only one small-pox scare.
Quarantine has now become a burning ques-
tion, and the Government admit that the
accommodation is inadequate. T am glad
to hear that the Government have taken the
necessary steps to furnish the accommoda-
tion. They have invited delegates from all
the provinces to confer on the question of
quarantine, and I hear that there is to be a
large expenditure in British Columbia to
purchase a new site and erect new buildings.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— And a new wharf.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— Yes,
and a new wharf which is much needed.
There are large steamers calling at our ports
now from China and Japan, and they may
bring disease into the country at any time.
I believe that the people will be satisfied
with what is being done by the Government.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— This discussion
has been protracted very considerably,
altogether owing to the course pursued by
the gentleman leading the Opposition in this
House. I may say that this is one of his
usual attacks of a chronic disease ; every
year we hear from him the same tirade of
abuse against any Government measure that
is intended to have a beneficial effect on the
country. I am not surprised myself that he
has taken his usual course in this instance,
because on previous occasions he has acted
in a similar way. I have actually known
thut hon. gentleman to oppose measures
before he himself underst(X)d their provisions.
I must, in the first instance, join with the

hon. gentlemen who have eulogized the
Governor-General ; he has discharged his
public duties creditably and constitutionally.
I also concur in all that has been said by
the hon. gentlemen who proposed and
seconded the address with reference to our
late leader. I know that Mr. Abbott
assumed the position of Premier with every
intention of doing all that he could to per-
form the onerous duties of the office ; but,
owing to ill-health, he was obliged to abandon
his position. I regret at the same time that
my confrere thought proper to attack the
hon. member for Wei land. I only wish the
hon. member from Ottawa were here, in
order that I could tell hin\ that the hon.
gentleman from Welland fought the battle
of his party like an honourable man ; he
fell in a noble cause ; he did not betray his
party.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)™The hon.
gentleman will pardon me if I interrupt
him, but I appeal to his sense of fairness :
would it not be better to reserve those per-
sonal remarks alK>ut the hon. gentleman
until he is here?

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW -T do not think
there is anything very personal about it.

Hon. Mr. McINNES -I think it would
be better if the hon. member were here
himself.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW -I do not think so.
Let him be here to attend to his duty.
A certain retraction was made to-day, but
in the usual Grit way with which readers
of Grit papers are familiar, they publish a
falsehood, knowing perfectly well that that
falsehood will be circulated, and that the
retraction, when it comes, will never reach
the same class of people who saw the original
article. That serves their purpose. I sup-
pose the hon. member for Ottawa considers
that making a certain retraction to-day was
I a sufficient excuse, but if he considers that
I the hon. member from Wei land received an
ovation, after hLs defeat, from his friends
{ and admirers in the county of Welland, as
a substantial memento of the esteem in
which they held him, I think it should suffice
to prevent him from making unpleasant
comments. I shall say a few words
with reference to the Speech itself.
A great effort has been made by a few
parties in this House to convince the

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUAKY 2, 1893] Address.

Ill

j)eople that this country is not prosperous.
Statistics have been brought to our recollec-
tion and notice to establish the truth of the
statement. We have also had statistics to
prove the contrary. I hardly think that is
necessary, because every man of us in this
House of mature age, as I am, must know
of his personal knowledge that this country
is prospering, and prospering marvellously.
Ii does not require statistics to prove an
ob\ious fact, although there was one man
who stated he would not believe statistics of
any kind ; that is the hon. member from
Marquette. If these statistics are worth
anything^ I think they should be accepted
without question, and I believe they have I
been compiled in a reliable manner. I do
not think that it is necessary to refer to sta- 1
tistics to prove that the country is prosper- 1
ing, because every man in this House must
know and acknowledge that it is. I was at ,
the opening of the first railway in this coun-
try ; I have seen this country prosper and
grow from a very small beginning to the i
proportions it occupies to-day ; so that I feel
satisfied from what I have seen with my j
own eyes, that the statement in the Speech
from the Throne is perfectly true. Last year \
the timber business of this section of the coun-
try was certainly marvellous : and I may tell
you that for the ensuing year every solitary ;
stick of timber has been sold in advance at i
a large remunerative price over previous
years ; and we expect a large trade exceed- 1
ing that of every previous year. These are ]
facts which cannot be gainsaid, and therefore, i
I do not think it is exaggerating to say that
we are prosperous. I heard a good deal
during this debate with reference to the ,
position the Government took in reference ,
to the canal tolls. There nmst be a very ;
great deal of sensitive feeling with reference \
to the American people. I remember the
time when our neighbours were not very sen-
sitive respecting solemn treaty rights. They
agreed to give us the use of their canals
putting us on the same footing as their own
people. We trusted in their good faith ;
but we found our great mistake at that '
time. Our neighbours were treated with j
every consideration by the Government of '
this country. Although the Government of
this country at that time had no power to I
give them authority to use our canals
between Lake Champlain and Ottawa, yet,
acting without law, you may say, though in
a proper manner, they gave them the oppor-

tunity of using our canals— a privilege to
which they were not entitled. What I am
finding fault with is the fact that some of
our people evince a disposition to endorse
everything that Americans say or do, no
matter what it may be, if it is antagonistic
to the feelings and statements of our own
citizens. For my own part, while I have
nothing to say against the American people,
I would certainly rather take the statements
given to me by our own friends, the people
of this country, than I would the statements
made by the Americans. As far as our
Government are concerned they have acted
in a straightforward manner in reference to
the canal tolls question ; there was no dis-
crimination against the American people ;
the Government were perfectly right, and if
we are to encourage our own trade, I
do not see what other course could
have been pursued, under the circum-
stances, than the course they followed.
I heard some hon. gentleman — I do not
know whether it was the hon. member for
Ottawa or not -condemning the Govern-
ment, or pretending to condemn the Govern-
ment because they had undertaken the
construction of the Sault Ste. Marie Canal.
If there is one measure more than another,
for which the people of this country feel
under a lasting obligation to the Govern-
ment, it is the measure they adopted with
reference to the construction of the canal. I
endorse the saying of the Duke of Welling-
ton "In time of peace prepare for war."
Having that canal built, we will be inde-
pendent of the American people and able to
manage our own affairs in our own way ;
and if any international dispute should arise
in the future, we will have this canal of our
own to depend upon. I believe further that
this canal will be a necessity before long.
The present canal at Sault Ste. Marie was
fully occupied last year ; I believe vessels
had to remain there sometimes 48 hours
before they could get through. Our canal
will therefore be a necessity, and I think the
Government have acted wisely in undertak-
ing to construct it. 1 hope they will push
it to completion at the earliest date possible,
for the purpose of giving this country the
advantages that the canal will afford. Of
course, as you know, there are people in this
country who are dissatisfied with everything ;
no matter what course you pursue you will find
a certain number of people who will find fault
with it. Objection was taken to the carry-

Digitized by

Google

112

The [SENATE] Addre^.

ing out of the Act passed some years ago
with reference to the Trade and Commerce
Bureau. I think that it is an Act that
will redound to the credit of the 'Govern-
ment. It will place the important affairs
of trade and commerce in a different posi-
tion from the one they formerly occupied.
Our present leader of this House will give
this matter every consideration; and I
prophesy before very long that we will find
beneficial results from having the charge of
this department in his hands. He will have
an opportunity of ascertaining from actual
observation what is necessary and how we
can increase the volume of trade of this
country. Hitherto he was engaged with
minor matters, with a small matter probably
involving $20 or $30, and he had not the
time or opportunity to give such attention to
the larger question as he will have in the
future. These comptrollers will also, I believe,
greatly facilitate the business operations of
this country. They have already, as you
know, visited several of the principal points ;
they have had interviews and exchanged
sentiments with the commercial men of this
country, and this will enable them to come
to a conclusion in many matters which
they will report to the head of the depart-
ment ; and it will have a beneficial effect in
that respect, and also in reference to many
other points that formerly had to be ad-
judicated by legal process, which entailed
a great deal of time and a great deal of
expense. This, to a very great extent, I
Ijelieve, will be obviated in the future by the
action of the Minister of Trade and Com-
merce. Therefore, under all the circumstances,
the Government certainly have acted in the
best interests of the country. I am glad
to find such unanimous feeling expressed in
this House in reference to the appointments
they have made of two gentlemen in the
Senate. T do not think that they could have
acted in a manner that would be more ac-
ceptable to the people of this country. A
regret has been expressed that some gentle-
men already in the Senate itself had not
been appointed. That is a selfish view to
take of the matter. The Government have
made a judicious choice, and the future will
show that in the hands of our leader and his
hon. colleague, their respective duties will
be performed in such a way as will redound
to their credit and to the benefit of this
country. Under all the circumstances, we
can congratulate ourselves that after the

departure of our late Premier, Sir John
Abbott, the office is now filled by a gentle-
man who will perform the duties with satis-
faction to all. No one deplores the depar-
ture from this Chamber of our late Premier
more than I do. I had the honour of know-
ing * Mr. Abbott for a great many years,
and I always found that he did everything
in his power to promote the best interests
of the country. But his mantle has fallen
upon a man who, I think, will perform the
duties in a way th^at will give equal
satisf suction. I believe that at this time
the country are perfectly satisfied that
the choice has fallen upon Sir John
Thompson. We have every cause to feel
that the affairs of the country will be well
administered by the gentleman we have now
at the head of affairs. A great deal has
been said during this debate with reference
to the course that will be adopted in the
future. The National Policy has, I believe,
played a great part in the advancement and
prosperity of the country. Without the
National Policy I do not know what would
have become of the country. At that time
you all knew that the country was on the
verge of ruin ; it was almost impossible for
a man to live and remain in this country.
Some remedy was needed ; they applied the
remedy, and we have had the beneficial re-
sult for the last twelve or fourteen years. I
do not pretend to say that some modification
of the tariff is not necessary ; I do not mean
to say that some change may not be re-
quired ; but I am surprised, under all the
circumstances, that the National Policy has
worked with so little friction, and that it
has rendered such service to the country. I
have no doubt, when the subject is fully
considered by the authorities and by the
people, who are particularly required to look
into these matters, that they will make all
the investigation required, and that they
will legislate, and will cany out a policy
for the benefit of our country alone. We
are told that there will be a change of
policy upon the other side of the line. That
may be very true, but I think myself that
we ought to pursue our own course, and
carry out our own policy, and that we ought
to act independently of any other country.
We should do as we have done in the past,
try to live among ourselves, to support our-
selves, to advance as we have advanced in
the past. We are a progressive people ; our
trade is increasing from year to year, and

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Address,

113

we have opportunities of extending it to a
very much greater extent. That has been
shown to you by figures and statistics during
this debate and it is unnecessary for me to
dwell upon the subject now ; but T will say
that with a sftlf-reliant population possessing
the powers that we do, with a young and
virgin country, with the Morth-west now
opening up a field for oiTr young men, in a
very short time we will b« enabled to com-
pete with any other section of the world.
They tell us our census shows that our popu-
lation has not increased in the proportion
that it should have increased. It may not have
grown in the same ratio but at any rate we
have made adecided advance in other respects,
I believe, to a greater extent than almost
any other country on the face of the globe.
When you remember that we have only had
the opportunity of settling the North-west
for the last five or six years. I do not think
it can be said with any degree of truth that
we have retrograded. We have increased,
and we will increase ; and with these facili-
ties which are now being offered, I believe
we will have a large settlement in the North-
west before very long; and then we will be
able to supply the world with all the food
products that they require for their consump-
tion. Then we wiH realize the benefit arising
from the Canadian Pacific Railway. We
cannot expect everything in a day. The
United States territory has been filling up ;
that country is pretty well filled at the pres-
ent time, and now it is our turn. We are
offering inducements to settlers ; we will do
everything in our power to secure a class of
people that will be a benefit to the country,
and who will be sure to remain with us as
British subjects. T believe, that there is no
fear of annexation or commercial union, or
anything else of the kind. The people of
this country are loyal and are determined to
remain a part and parcel of the British
Empire. T believe that nothing can seduce
them from their allegiance to the Queen and
their country.

Hon. M. ARM AND -Honorables mes-
sieurs, en debutant dans la discussion sur
I'adresse, en r^ponse au discours du tr6ne,
je regrette que la sante n'ait pas perm is au
vaillant baronet de rester au timom des affai-
res de son pays, car j'ai confiance dans son
esprit de justice, dans son esprit de probite,
dans son amour du travail pour I'expedition
des affaires, autant que j'avais dans les vail-
8

lants baronets qui I'ont proc^de, autant que
j'avais dans sir Louis Hyppolite Lafontaine,
dans sir George Etienne Cartier, dans sir
Etienne Pascal Tache, d'autant plus que,
com me eux, il est enfant du sol, notamment
de la province de Quebec, et que, com me
eux, il parle franc^is et que pour cela il a
fait ce que font une multitude de savants du
plus glorieux, du plus brillant, du plus puis-
sant empire, qui ne voit jamais coucher le
soleil sur ses possessions, et qui disent que :
s'ils ne savaient pas le f ram^'ais, ils ne se con-
sidereraient pas pour instruits. Aussi je lisais
dernierement, avec orgueil sur les jo'urnaux
des Etats-Unis, que le distingue, quele savant,
que le brillant eveque d'Ogdensburgh disait :
que la langue fran<^aise est non seulement la
langue officielle des gouvemements civilises,
mais qu'elle est encore Tune des deux lan-
gues de la diplomatic de I'Eglise de Rome.
Vous voyez, honorables messieurs, que ceux
qui parlent fran9ais sont en bonne compa-
gnie ; vous voyez que nous sommes noble-
ment veng^s de ces eteignoirs fanatiques qui
voudraient non seulement prohiber I'etude
du fran^ais, mais encore prohiber la connais-
sance de Dieu dans les t^coles d'une certaine
partie du Nouveau- Monde, notamment dans
Manitoba. Aussi, je suis heureux de voir
qu*un des items du programme electoral du
futur president des Etats-Urus, dit : que
pour lui, il ne permettra jamais que les peres
de famille, rel^tivement k IVducation de
leurs enfants, soient tyrannises et qu'il en
sera ainsi pour la liberty civile et religieuse
de tous ceux qui voudront venir vivre, crol-
tre, grandir et respirer Tair de la liberty de
la ft^publique Am^ricaine. J ai la douce
esp^rance qu'il en sera ainsi pour le parle-
ment de la Puissance du Canada et que les
aviseurs du representant de notre auguste,
notre gracieuse et bien-aim^e souveraine
rimperatiice des Indes, celle qui preside si
dignement aux destinies d' Albion, en feront
mutant pour la liberte des peres de famille
du Manitoba, relativement k T^ucation de
leurs enfants. D'autant plus que cette ques-
tion des ecoles s^par^es a ^te une des ques-
tions sine qiMi non de la Conf deration,
comme I'a judicieusement proclam^ derniere-
ment, rhonorable William McDougall, qui
est, incontestablement. Tune des plus belles
intelligences du barreau d'Ontario. Qui a
ete, tour k tour, ministre, membre du parle-
ment et lieutenant-gouverneur et qui est un
des derniers survivants des p^res de la Con-
f^^ration.

Digitized by

Google

114

The [SENATE] Addrm.

Honorables messieurs, je dois f^liciter le
present leadei' du gouvernement de ce qu'il a
imit^ laconduite de son illustre pr^^esseur,
car tons deux, k leur av^nement au pouvoir,
se sont r^v^les diplomates distingu^s. A Tar-
riv^e de Vex-premier, nous n'avions plus au
Senat de ministres responsables k la Cou-
ronne. Nous avions que des rainistres sans
portefeuille. Nous n'avions plus de leader
accr^it<?, nous avions que des leaders impro- j
vis^s. Le present leader du gouvernement |
nous a donne un ministre fran^ais pour etre
Torgane de ses nationaux ; ministre qui nous
a i%^ enleve depuis la resignation de Thono-
rable ministre Chapais. Durant la vacance
il a cireule une rumeur, .qui disait que le pre-
sent gouvernement voulait soumettre aux
chambres le transfert du chemin de* fer In- \
tercolonial, k cette puissante compagnie qui
a (^merveilie le monde de ses succes et qui a
raystifie nos intelligents et industrieux voi-
sins, qui disaient, dans leurs journaux du
temps, que le parlement canadien allait se
bruler les doigts dans la construction deleur
chemin de fer du Pacitique, car pour eux, ils
en avaient eu tout leur roide, et qu'il leur
avait fallu succomber dans la construc-
tion de la leur. Vous savez, honorables mes-
sieurs, que la construction du chemin Inter-
colonial a ete une des conditions sine qua
non de la Conf^^ration. Sa construction,
son entretien et son administration ont ^t^
com me un chancre aux flanes de la Conf^e-
ration. Honorables messieurs, c'est ma con-
viction que la puissante Compagnie du Paci-
fique, avec son esprit de finance, d'adminis-
tration, avec ce que les Anglais appellent,
dans leur esprit pratique, son go-ahead, ferait
une affaire payante pour sa compagnie. Oui,
c'est ma conviction que le Pacifique, avec sa
puissante rivale, la compagnie du Grand
Tronc, qui elle aussi, a (^merveill^ le monde
par la construction de son immense voie fer-
ric et par la solidity de ses travaux, tel que
la construction du pont Victoria qui a ^te
dans le temps, non seulement une des mer-
veilles du Nouveau-Monde, mais encore une
des merveilles des temps modernes. Je suis
certpin que ces deux putssantes compagnies
aidees des diff^rentes compagnies de la Puis-
sance, feront des communications si nom-
breuses et si faciles qu'ils mystifieront de
nouveau nos intelligents voisins, en rendant
illusoires, ce mur de Chine qu'ils ont pre-
tendu ^riger sur les confins de la Puissance
du Canada. Ici, honorables messieurs, il ne
faut pas s'illusionner, notre commerce natu-

rel est avec la m^re-patrie, est avec I'empire
britannique, est avec Albion, cette nouvelle
Tyr des temps modernes. Oui, Albion, avec
son ile, sumomm^ Tile des Saints, avec ses
millions d'habitants, saura bien disposer de
nos grains, avec sa flotte qui sillonne les
mers, qu'arrose les parties du globe habite
j usque dans ses limites les plus recul^es. Oui,
Albion, saura bien par une union commer-
ciale avec ses nomb reuses et im menses colo-
nies d^verser le surplus de son or, notam-
ment dans la Puissance du Canada, qui est,
incontestablement, Tun des plus beaux dia-
mants de sa couronne. Honorables mes-
sieurs, maintenant je vais vous dire, sans
arriere-pensee, en vertu d'un principe memo-
rable, qui dit : " que tout homme doit ^tre
libre de dire son opinion, sinon il ne merite
pas de porter le glorieux nom d'homme.'' Je
ne puis pas comprendre, je ne puis pas m'ex-
pliquer, je ne puis pas concevoir pourquoi
les gouvernements monarchiques l^sinent
tant a payer les d^legu^s de la nation, sur-
tout quand je vois des gouvernements
d^mocratiques se faire un devoir de les payer
g^n^reusement bien. Oui, en effet, vous voy ez la
Republique Fran9aise, la R^publique Am^-
ricaine, ces deux plus vastes, ces deux puis-
santes r^publiques des temps modernes. La
Republique Americaine paie $5,000 par
ann^e k ses deputes, avec bien des accessoi-
res ; les frais des deputes sont pay^s durant
tout le temps de leur mandat. Cette ques-
tion du salaire des deputes f^d^raux n'est
pas une question nouvelle, je puis vous en
parler savamment, avec connaissance de
cause, j'en connais quelque chose ; mais avant,
laissez-moi vous dire que je suis dans la vie
publique depuis 1858. tf'ai vu se d^rouler
bien des parlements ; j'ai vu se succ^der
bien des minist^res. J'ai toujours observe
que chaque gouvernement, qui avait de gran-
des mesures k presenter, commen^ait par
j voir ses amis, par s'assurer de la majority de
ses partisans, et qu'ensuite il marchait sans
s'occuper des qu'en dira-t-on ; sans s'occuper
de ces braillards pharisaiques, mais je ne
pourrais pas en dire autant de I'ex-gou-
vernement, car durant les deux derni^res ses-
sions il lui a ete intime que c etait le d^sir
des membres, vu les d^penses considerables
dans lesquelles ils etaient entratnes, par la
duree et la longueur des sessions qui se pro-
longent j usque dans la belle saison avancee,
dans le temps des affaires commerciales et
agricoles. Vous le savez, honorables mem-
bres, que Tagriculture et le commerce, sur-

Digitized by

Google

The [FEBRUARY 2, 1893] Addrm.

115

tout dans ce pays, sont la base n^cessaire
et le levier le plus puissant de la pros-
perity des peuples. Je sais, honorables
membres, qu'il y a eu des dissidents, mais ces
dissidents etaient dans une si intime mino-
rit«^ que ce n'aurait pas ^fee, de la part de
de Tex-gouvernement, manquer de courtoisie
que de passer outre. SHI m'^tait donn^ de
soulever le voile qui cache le d^int^resse-
ment de quelques-uns des dissidents, je trou-
verais, je ne dis pas que je trouverais des
desirs de hoodlage et de jobbage, si malheu-
reusement familiers a nos municipalit^s de
villes et de villages, mais j'y trouverais un
d^sir bien prononc^ d'^loigner de la vie pu-
blique, ces d^put^s qui out quitt^ le toit
patemel, n'ont apport^, pour tout patrimoine,
que leur plume derri^re I'oreille et que de-
puis ils ont d^montr^, k I'^vidence, k la
jeunesse industrieuse et laborieuse de leur
pays toute la v^racitt^ de cette parole qui dit :
" qu*il faut vouloir pour pouvoir"; qu'avec du
travail, avec du courage,avecder^nergie,avec
de la perseverance on pent toujours acqu^-
rir Fhonneur, la gloire et la fortune ; on pent
toujours gravir les degr^s de r^chelle sociale.
Je connais plusieurs deputes qui appartien-
nent les uns k la profession du droit et de
loi, les autres 4 la medecine, au commerce et
k Tagriculture qui me disaient : Monsieur,
quand je suis entr^ dans la vie publique, je
m'etais fait une belle clientele, je m'^tais
acquis une honn^te et legitime aisance, mais
je vous avoue que mon mandat termini je
suis bien decide de rester chez moi, car je
ne veux pas imiter la conduite de plusieurs
de mes pred^cesseucs qui, pour s'^tre cram-
ponn^s k la vie publique, ont laisse leur
veuve et leur famille dans I'indigence, car vu
leurs absences souvent renouvel^es, leurs
clients les avaient abandonn^s parce qu41s
n'avaient pas confiance dans leurs associ^s.
Quand je pense que des avocats comme sir
Louis Hyppolite Lafontaine, sir George
Etienne Cartieretsir Aime Dorion qui Etaient
consider^s comme des fleurs, comme des prin-
ces du barreau de leur province, ont laisse
leurs veuves et leurs famDles, non pas dans
rindigence mais a peine dans une honnete et
legitime aisance. J'ai souvenance qu'un voya-
geur distingue, faisait son tour d'Europe,
passant devant la residence de Lady Cartier,
arr^ta pour la saluer et enfaisantses adieux
lui dit : My Lady, est-ce que nous n'aurons
pas le plaisir de vous voir revenir vivre dans
Qotre pays. "Oh I non, monsieur, je suis trop
pauvre pour retourner vdvre dans mon pays

et y maintenir la position qu'y a faite mon
mari." Quand je pense qu41 en serait ainsi
de la baronne lady Macdonald, si des amis
fortunes ne fussent pas venus a son secours.
Je vous ai dit, honorables membres, que cette
question du salaire des membres fed^raux
n'etait pas une question nouvelle. Au
debut de la Confederation je recevais une
lettre du dernier premier ministre de
I'union des Canadas, et celui qui succedat
au president des peres de la Confedera-
tion, le vaillant baronet sir Etienne Pas-
cal Tache. Dans cette lettre, le dernier
premier ministre me disait : " Des necessities,
des exigences politiques demandent k ce que
vous cediez votre si^ge de la division d'Alma
pour celui de la division de Repentigny,
d'autant plus que Ton me dit que vous ^tes
qualifie dans cette derni^re division (la qua-
lification d'alors etait de $800) et dans le cas
que vous ne seriez pas qualifie, vous devriez
le faire, car la chose en vaut la peine, le
salaire des membres federaux sera k I'avenir
de $2,000 par annee. Je lui repondis :
" que pour aucune consideration je ne c^de-
rais mon si^ge de la division d*Alma, division
que je tiens, je pourrais dire comme le grand
roi " et par droit de conqu^te et par droit de
naissance," cependant, dans les circonstances
presentes je me ferai un devoir de le ceder
en faveur de ce venerable vieillard, qui a
toujours marche dans les rangs du parti
canadien-fran^ais, qui a ete un des bras droits
du gouvemement Lafontaine-Baldwin, qui,
pour ^tre utile k son parti et a ses amis,
voyant que sa vigueur juvenile disparaissait
avec Vkge, c4da, son portef euille de secretaire
provincial et son comte de Verchferes en
faveur de ce jeune homme qui etait plein
d'avenir et qui realisa les esperances que ses
compatriotes formaient sur lui. Ce venerar
ble vieillard ayant eprouve des revers de
fortune manifesta le desir de se retirer de la
vie publique, mais il avait compte sans Tha-
bitude qui devient, comme vous le savez,
une seconde nature, ce qui a eu lieu pomr
lui. Ce venerable vieillard voyant que le
parlement federal allait ^tre convoque, voyant
qu'il ne serait pas appeie a y prendre part,
se trouva epris d'une peine et d'un chagrin
qui empoisonnaient ses jours. Sir George
Etienne Cartier en etant informe, lui ecrivit
de suite et lui dit que puisqu'il desirait
mourir sous le harnais de la politique active,
il trouverait bien, parmi ses compatriotes,
un quelqu'un qui lui serait agreable, ainsi
qvCk ses amis et a son parti. Ce son^ la,

Digitized by

Google

116

The Standing [SENATE] Committees,

honorables messieurs, les considerations qui
m'ont engag^es de ctkler mon siege pour la
division d'Alma, pour celui de la division
de Repentigny ; je ne m'en repens pas.
J'ai ^te heureux de faire connaitre a mes
concitoyens d'origine etrangere, que si les
Canadiens-franc^ais savent qu'il y a un temps
pour resister, ils savent aussi qu'il y a un
temps pour ceder quand il y a de nobles
exceptions, telle que dans la personne de ce
v(5n(?rable vieillani, Thonorable James Leslie,
qui avait toujours ^t^ incorruptible, inebran-
lable a I'instar de ces vieilles roches qui ne
reument pas et sur lesquelles la mousse ne
disparait jamais. Je termine, honorables
messieurs, mais avant que de prendre mon
siege, avant que de m'asseoir je dois avertir
le present gouvernement et les gouverne-
ments immediats de bien r^flechir sur la
legitimiti^ du salaire des membres, car nous
ne sommes plus a I'^poque de ces gou-
vernements oligarchiques ou il fallait aux
dt^put^s d^l^guer quelques-uns d'entre eux
en Angleterre pour avocasser au pied
du Trdne la legitimit<5 de leurs demandes
et de leurs droits meconnus, ca'r de cette
opposition il pourrait surgir des complica-
tions s^rieuses qui demontreraient que cette
obstination avait ete une aveugle et mal-
heu reuse obstination, car les enquetes qui ont
eu lieu durant I'ann^ qui \ient de s^^couler,
tant au f^d^ral qu'au local, demontreront k
I'evidence que si la probity n'est pas encore
disparue de la politique, du moins la vie fru-
gale, la vie d'abn<?gation, de desinteresse-
ment n'est plus ce qu'elle ^tait autrefois,
n est pas ce qu'elle etait dans ces anciens
citoyens de I'empire romain. Vous connais-
sez, honorables messieurs, cette Episode de la
vie domestique de ce citoyen, de ce cultiva-
teur, je pourrais dire de ce heros romain,
qui, le lendemain d'une grande bataille, rem-
portee par une victoire signal^e, fut trouv^
dans son champ, mangeant appuy^ sur les
manchons de sa charrue.
i

The motion was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 11.10 P.M.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Friday y February Srd, 18Ui,
The SPEAKERtook theChairat 3 o'clock.
Prayers and routine proceedings.
THE STANDING COMMITTEES.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL moved the appoint-
ment of the following committees : —

LIBRARY COMMITTEE.

Hon. Messrs. Allan, Almon, Botsfor<l, Bouoher-
ville <ie, Drumuiond, (iowan, Landry, Maclnnes
(Burlington), Masson. McClelan, Miller, Murphy,
Poirier, Power, Scott, and Wark, a Committee to
assist His Honour the Speaker in the direction of
the Library of Parliament, so far as the interests
i of this House are concerned, and to act on behalf
' of this House as members of a Joint Committee of
l)oth Houses on the Library.

The motion was agreed to.

1 PRINTINCJ COMMITTEE.

' Hon. Messrs. Bernier, Casgrain, Desjardins, l)ever,

Dobson, (lowan, Gut^vremont.Kaulbach, rx>ugheed,

McClelan, McKindsey, Macfarlane, Otrilvie, Per-

, ley, Pelletier, Power, Primrose, Read (Quinte),

, Sullivan, Vidal, and Wark, a Committee to super-

; intend the Printing of this House during the pre-

i sent session, and be instructed to act on behalf of

' this House with Ihe C<»mmittee of the House of

Commons us a Joint Committee of both Houses on

the subject of Printing.

I The motion was agreed to.

I COMMIITEE ON BANKING AND COM.MERCE.

I Hon. Messrs. Abbott (Sir John Caldwell), Allan,
I Bellerose, Botsford, Bowell, Boyd, Chaffers,
I Clemow, Cochrane, Desjardins, Dobsou, Drum-
I mond, Ferguson, Lewin, Lougheed, Massou,
j McCallum, McLaren, McMillan, Maclnnes (Bur
I lington), Macpherson (Sir David Lewis), Miller,
i Montplaisir, Murphy, Price, Prowse, R«id (Cari-
, boo), Robitaille, Sanford, Smith, Sullivan,
Thibiiudeau, Vidal and Wark, a Committee on
j Banking and Commerce for the present session, to
I whom snail be referred all Bills on these subjects,
I anci that for the purpose of organization only,
j thirteen members of the said Committee shall be a
! quorum thereof.

I Hon. Mr. BOWELL said : I was inform-
* ed by the Clerk that it was thought advis-
able last year, although there is nothing on
j record to show it, to specify that, for the
I purpose of organization only, thirteen mem-
1 hers of the Committee should be a quorum.

Digitized by

Google

Divorce [FEBRUARY 3, 1893] Committee,

117

Hon. JVlr. SCOTT— It has been the custom
in this House that each Committee should
regulate its own quorum.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There must be a I
majority of the Committee present for the ■
organization ; then, after the organization, \
the Committee can decide what its own
quorum should be.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— It is entirely new,
except as to the action taken by the House '
last year. Up to 1892 no such qualification
appeared upon the resolution. For the first
time in the history of this House it was done |
last year and made applicable to three of the
largest Committees, the Committee on Bank-
ing and Commerce, the Committee on Rail- !
ways and Canals and the Committee on
Standing Orders and Private Bills. As far
as 1 can recollect, and as far as the Debates {
show, it was made without any explanation
to the House. I imagine it was intended to
l)e a qualification of the general rule of this !
House, which fixes the majority of each Com-
mittee as a quorum unless the House shall |
otherwise direct. We have always acted upon |
that, and I imagine that in all cases there has !
been that majority. The first meeting of the
Committee is generally the most largely at- ,
tended. For my own part, I think the reso- '
lutiou as it stands is quite ri^ht, and I only
refer to it as being a change in the practice
which obtained for 24 years. The effect of
it is this : take for instance the Committee
of which I have been for a long time chair-
man—the Committee on Railways — com-
posed of 43 or 45 members : it would require,
for the purpose of organization, a majority of
that Committee, but afterwards the Com-
mittee could ask the House for permission to
reduce its quorum to any number that might
be thought advisable. In most instances a
reduction has been made to a quorum of nine,
and that has been found to be convenient,
because during the meeting of the Committee
some of the members, from want of interest,
leave and we should be left without a quorum
for the transaction of business.

The motion was agreed to.

THE RAILWAYS, TELEGRAPHS AND HARBOURS
COMMITTEE.

mond, Ferguson, Howlaii, Kaulbach, Kirch boffer,
Landry, Loughee<l, McCallum, McClelan, Mc-
Donald (C. B.), Maclnnes (Burlington), McKay,
McKindsey, McMillan, Macdonald (B. C), Mc-
Innes (B. C), Montgomery, Miller, Murphy,
O'Donohoe, Ogihie, Perley, Power, Price, Robi-
taille. Read (Quinte), Reid (Cariboo), Sanford,
Scott, Smith, Snowball, Sutherland, Tass^^ ami
Vidal, a Committee on Railways, Telegraphs and
Harbours for the present session, ^o whom shall be
referred all Bills on these subjects, and that for
the purpose of or^nization only, thirteen'members
of the sai<l Conimittee shall l»e a quorum thereof.

The motion was agreed to.

CONTINGENT ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE.

Hon. Messrs. Ab)x)tt (Sir John Caldwell), Allan,
Armand, Botsford, Bowell, Chaffers, DeBlois,
Dickey, Dobson, Drummond, Flint, Howlan,
McClelan, McDonald (C.B.), Mclnnes (B.C.),
McKay, Maclnnes (Burlington), McMillan, Mac-
farlane, Macpherson (Sir David I^wis), Miller,
O'Donohoe, Ogilvie, Pelletier, Perley, Poirier,
Power, Prowse, Read (Quint^), Robitaille, Sanford,
Scott, Smith, Snowball, and TasB^, a Committee
to examine and report upon the Contingent
Accounts of the Senate for the present session.

The motion was agreed to.

8TANmN(; ORDERS AND PRIVATE BILLS COM-
MITTEE.

Hon. Messrs. Almon, Angers, Armand, Belle-
rose, Bernier, Bolduc, Botsford, Boulton, l>eBlois,
Dev^r, Flint, Glasier, (iowan, (iu^vremont,
Howlan, Kirchhoffer, Landry, Lougheed, Masson,
Mclnnes (B.(\), McKay, Mcl^ren, McMillan,
Macdonald (B.C.), Macdonald (P.E.I.), Mac-
farlane, Merner, Miller, Montgomery, Montplaisir ,^
Murphy, O'Donohoe, Ogilvie, Pelletier, Poirier,
Power, Primrose, Prowse, Read (Quint^), Reesor,
Scott, Sullivan, Sutherland, and Tass*^, a Commit-
tee on Standing Orders and Private Bills, with
power to examine and inquire into all such matters
and things as may be referred to the said Conimit-
toe, to report from time to time their observatious
and opinions thereon, and to send for persons,
papers and records, and that for the purpose of
organization only, thirteen members of the paid
Committee shall oe a quorum thereof.

The motion was agreed to.

DIVORCE COMMITTEE.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved :

That the Hon. Messrs. (iowan, Kaulbach,
Lougheed, McKay, McKindsey, Macdonald (B.t\),
Ogilvie, Read (Quinte), and Sutherland, l>e
appointed a Committee on Divorce.

Hon. Messrs. Abbott (Sir John Caldwell), Allan, ^. ' *j . -^l j ^ ^u

Almon, Ancers, Bellerose, Boucherville de, Boul- ' gestions made to me with regard to the
ton, BowelT, Clemow, Cochrane, Dickey, Drum- 1 constitution of this Committee. I would

Digitized by

Google

118

Divorce [SENATE] Committee,

prefer leaving it altogether in the hands
of the House, from the fact that they must
have, from a long acquaintance with the
different members, a better knowledge of
the requirements of the case. I understand
that many questions arise in that Com-
mittee which render it advisable that there
should be a physician among its members.
I shall be glad to accept any suggestion from
the House.

Hon. Mr. McKAY — I should like to have
my name omitted from the list.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Although I have not
been on the Committee, I know that the
opinion of its members is that the hon. gen-
tleman from Truro was one of the best and
most attentive of the members. I think it
would be a mistake to drop his name from
the list. I quite agree with the leader of
the House in thinking that the constitution
of this Committ.ee may be modified with
advantage. I have not a word to say against
any hon. gentleman whose name is included
in the list ; but every one knows that the
duties of the Divorce Committee are of a
very important nature and that it really
constitutes and was intended to constitute a
court, and that the proceedings are supposed
to be conducted in accordance with the
practice of the courts of law. It is desirable,
therefore, that it should be as strong profes-
sionally as possible. Last year the hon.
gentleman from Amherst, who had for a
great many years been chairman of that
Committee and had always b3en one of its
most valuable members, felt himself obliged
to retire. Since last session we have been
fortunate enough to have added to our num-
bers a gentleman of the legal profession in
the vigour of youth — the Hon. Mr. Kirch-
hoffer. The suggestion might as well come
from a member not interested in the Com-
mittee as from another, that the hon. gen-
gleman should be added to the Committee.
I also approve of the suggestion made by
the leader of the House, that there should
be a physician on the Committee. Either
my hon. friend from British Columbia
(Mr. Mclnnes) or the hon. gentleman
from Welland (Mr. Ferguson) should
be on the Committee. By our rule the
number of the Committee is limited to
nine, and therefore it would be necessary
that one or two of those who are now on the
list should drop out and that pi*ofessional

gentlemen should be appointed in their
places.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY — I rise to express
my entire sympathy with the views expressed
by my hon. friend from Halifax. I think
they are entitled to quite as great considera-
tion as if they came from a member of the
House who does not entertain the conscien-
tious scruples with regard to the subject of
divorce that he does. I rise because my
hon. friend has referred to myself as having
been once connected \vith that Committee.
That is quite true, and it is equally true
that I felt bound to retire from the Com-
mittee because it was inconsistent with the
proper discharge of my- duties as chairman
of one of the hardest working committees of
the House and for other reasons. It is
quite true also that the Divorce Committee
is eminently a judicial tribunal, performing
judicial functions in hearing evidence, decid-
ing upon it and reporting their decision to
the House for final adjudication. Under
these circumstances, I think even those who
feel those conscientious scruples to which I
have already adverted, will admit that if
this is not to be a mere farce and sham, it is
quite necessary that all the different ele-
ments should be represented for the purpose
of arriving at a proper decision in settling
cases of that kind, and it is certainly neces-
sary that the judicial element should be
strongly represented. As the matter has
now taken a position before the House
which calls for putting on or off — because
as my hon. friend has truly said the num-
ber of the Committee is limited to nine — the
only question to decide is what members
would best represent the House in that
j preliminary function and arrive at the best
, decision for guiding the House in dealing
with these (questions. I hope it will only be
necessary to consider who those should be to
take the places of any gentlemen who are
anxious to retire.

Hon.Mr. MACDONALD(B.C.)— Iwould
suggest that Dr. Mclnnes should be placed
on the Committee instead of myself. He is
a physician and has been on the Divorce
Committee before. The present system, in
my opinion, is unsatisfactory. Here are a
number of gentlemen sitting in a quasi-judi-
cial positit)n to take evidence and report it
to the House. Their report goes to what
you may call a jury of this House. Now,

Digitized by

Google

Divorce [FEBRUARY 3, 1893] Committee.

119

the Senate does not always listen with the
attention that it should to the details of these
cases, and I think every one will agree with
me that cases have often been carried in this
House by haphazard. There has been a great
deal of lobbying, and members have been
carried away, perhaps, more by their sym-
pathies than by the merits of the case. If
the Grovemment can see its way to establish
a divorce court, that is the proper way to
dispose of such cases. This session already
there are eight cases in sight, and there may
be three more, and it is throwing more work
on a Committee of this House than can
properly be attended to in adcKtion to the
work of the other Committees. It often takes
days, and sometimes weeks, to carry a case
through the Committee. After that it has
to come before this House, and if the Bill
succeeds here it goes to the other House to
be dealt with by 200 members who are still
further removed from the impression created
by hearing the evidence. The decision is
often arrived at by chance or accident. We
know that a great many of the members of
both Houses are entirely opposed to divorce,
and probably if they were in the majority
they would grant nothing more than is recog-
nized in the province of Quebec — a separa-
tion. I think the question ought to be
removed entirely from this House. The
present system is most unsatisfactory.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I am not at
present prepared to express an opinion on
the issue raised by my hon. friend. I think
it is rather premature, and that this is not
the best time to discuss it. We are now
simply dealing with the personnel of the
Committee. I agree with those who say
that the Committee can be improved — I will
not say the judicial part of it. It may not
be quite appropriate for me to speak of the
professional part of the Committee, but I
agree with the opinion expressed, that there
should be a medical man among the number.
I know we have often felt the need of the
advice and assistance of a medical man, and
I have had, myself, to apply for information
to physicians outside of the Committee.
Therefore, I think that an improvement can
be effected in that direction. The Commit-
tee should be stronger in both professions
than it is now. Beyond that, I have noth-
ing to say about the personnel of the Com-
mittee. I have peculiar views on the sub-
ject, but I shall say nothing further on that

point. I should be sorry to see* the hon.
member from British Columbia leave the
Committee, he has been one of its most at-
tentive members, and although not a mem-
ber of either of the professions referred to, he
has a judicial mind, and generally concurs
in the view of the majority. Unfortunately
for myself, I am frequently with the min-
ority.

Hon. Mr. SUTHERLAND— I have been
a member of that Committee and as I do
not claim to possess any. judicial experience,
I should be most happy to give way to some
one better qualified for the position than
myself.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I am very
sorry indeed that my colleague wishes to
retire from the Divorce Committee. I was
a member of that Committee for a number
of years, and I can say conscientiously that
a better member than my hon. friend (Mr.
Macdonald) could not be found, and I regret
to learn that he desires to retire. I may also
say I have no desire to become a member of
that Committee again, because it is one of
the most responsible Committees of the
House, and makes larger demands on the
time of its members, probably more than all
the other Committees combined. However,
I have never shirked a duty that devolved
upon me as a member of this House, and
will not in the future, and if the House so
desires I shall consent to become a member
of that Committee on one condition — that
is that the Hon. Dr. Ferguson, who has just
become a member of the Senate, shall also
be added to the Committee. On one or two
occasions while I was a member of that
Committee medical questions arose, and the
whole burden of dealing with one or two
cases was placed on my shoulders. Of course,
I had the valuable assistance of Senators
belonging to the medical profession who
were not members of the Committee, but I
would have preferred to have one or two
other medical men with me on the Com-
mittee. The medical training and long Par-
liamentary experience of the hon. member
from Welland highly qualify him to be a
very valuable member of the Divorce Com-
mittee.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH T shall not sug-
gest who should retire from the Committee,
but as the hon. Senator from Brandon is a

Digitized by

Google

120

Divorce [SENATE] Committee.

member of the legal profession and his name ' Hon. Mr. ALMON— T should l>e sorry to
has been suggested, it would necessitate the see Judge Gowan dropped from the list. He
retirement of three of the old members. I Was the author of the present system, and it

I would be worse than divorcing a wife from
Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)-I am ! a husband, to permit him to retire from the
glad that my hon. friend consents to my , ^.^V"/^^^:;'^ ^^"'^'^ ^ ^'^^ separating a

name being dropped from the Committee.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN — I have been for some
four years a member of that Committee, and
I can say that upon no occasion was there
any remissness on the part of any of its |
members in the performance of a most unpleas- i
ant and most painful duty. I should be
sorry to see any of the gentlemen who com-
pose the Committee removed, as it were, but
I can understand that if representations
have been made to the leader of this House
he would very naturally desire to act upon
the advice of the Senate rather than upon
his own motion. I am not one of those
who spoke to him on the subject, nor did he
speak to me, but I think it would be a very
invidious thing to remove any one from the
Committee, which is limited to nine mem-
bers, unless there was some cause for removal,
or unless a member himself desired to be re-
moved from the discharge of the very unpleas-
ant duties of that Committee. It must be
very obvious to every one that there ought
to be a certain number of professional men
on that Committee, not merely because it is
a fact-finding body, but because there are
preliminary proceedings, questions with re-
gard to service, procedure, eto., of a purely
technical character that professional men
are best qualified to form an opinion upon.
As a mere fact-finding body, I think that
laymen, as a rule, are quite as competent to
draw correct conclusions on the facts, as a
doctor or a lawyer could possibly be. To
enable the House to act with freedom in
the mattor, and to give them a larger
margin, I would myself say that I have no
desire whatever to remain on the Commit-
tee, and if the House will appoint another,
I shall be very glad to withdraw from the
discharge of a duty which I have always
looked upon as a very painful one. If the
House desires to have a larger hand, with-
out any feeling of delicacy in reorganizing, I
should be glad to retire.

Hon. Mr. POWER~I would suggest to
the Premier to take a vote on all the names
of the committee men.

child from its parent.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY —As it has been sug-
gested that there should be at least two
changes, it would be better to take the
names, and then the Committee could be
framed from them afterwards.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— There are three of
the members willing to resign, and if they
retire I should like to see two medical men
on the Committee. I have always taken a
great interest in the proceedings of the
Divorce Committee. I remember one in-
stance in which legal gentlemen alone could
not have decided the case. It was only
when three medical men were called upon
to advise them that they were able to do
justice in the case. I would therefore pro-
pose that Dr. Mclnnes be added to the Com-
mittee.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^) — As a member
of that Committee for a number of years I
must say I think their judgment must have
been in accordance with the evidence given,
because their decisions had to be endorsed
not only in this House but in the House of
Conmions. The proceedings of the Com-
mittee have always indicated the greatest
regard for justice, and I have never seen an
instance of partiality. While speaking on
the subject I do not think that members
should be appointed to that Committee who,
on principle, have any objection to divorce,
as I know the hon. member for Welland has.
The members of the Committee should be
unbiassed in their judgment. We must
remember that there is a solid phalanx who
vote, not on the merits, but vote conscien-
tiously against divorce irrespective of what
the merits are ; and having that in view, it
is quite evident to my mind that the Com-
mittee must be composed of men who are
unbiassed. Otherwise no case could be fairly
decided with that solid phalanx coming up
and, no matter what the evidence may be,
religiously voting— not refrai ning from voting
but religiously voting against it in both
Houses. I think only such members of this
House should be appointed t-o that Com-

Digitized by

Google

Divorce [FEBRUARY 3, 1893] Gommittee.

121

mittee as are not prepared to say " I am
against divorce under any circumstances/'
They should be ready to do justice to all
parties whose misfortunes may oblige them
to come before the Committee. I would be
very glad to be relieved from serving on the
Committee. I have acted upon it* for many
years. I know there was a little trouble on
that Committee and my hon. friend from
Amherst did not have everything just his
own way, and of course he left it. But there
was no farce about the decisions of the Com
mittee ; it was solid sound judgment.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— I desire to say
that I have strong opinions on the subject of
divorce. I believe that the marriage con-
tract is one that every one ought to be com-
pelled to keep, as they are compelled to
respect any contract under the civil law.
Holding these opinions I may say that I
have no desire — on the contrary, I hav^ an
objection -to go on the Committee. However,
whatever this honourable House feelsdisposed
to do, I think I have sufficient sense to judge
of every case on its merits and according to
the evidence given. I have strong opinions,
and always have had in the lower House 3n
the subject of divorce cases. I daresay that
I voted against nearly all the Bills that came
to us, because I had not the privilege of read-
ing the evidence. It was generally volu-
minous and it came to us there with only a
few hours' notice, but as I said before, I have
very strong opinion upon the marriage con-
tract, which I think is almost a sacred con-
tract, if not entirely sacred, and should be kept,
just the same as a contract made under the
civH law from which no man has a right to
come to Parliament to ask to be relieved.
And I believe, judging from the places I have
visited in the United States, more particu-
larly in the state of Illinois, that the easier
you make the relief from this contract the
more applications you will have for divorce ;
therefore I havestrong opinions on the matter.
At the same time, I am willing, as a member
of this House, if the House so desires, to obey
the command of this honourable House, though
T shall do so reluctantly ; and I do not think
I am so prejudiced that I would be unable
to decide according to the evidence. While,
I would be very much obliged to the House
if they would relieve me from the responsi-
bility of going on that Committee, as a young
member I have always felt it my duty in
every sphere of life to assume that responsi-

bility which may surround the position in
which I am placed and I am willing to respect
1 the wish of the Senate.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— As a member
of the Committee, I have no disposition to
press my claim to remain one of its mem-
bers. I am like the other members who
have sought an opportunity of withdrawing
from that Committee. It would appear
now that nearly every gentleman on this
Committee has expressed his desire to be
relieved. I would suggest, therefore, that
these names be left entirely out of the ques-
tion, and that a committee be appointed
singly, one by one, of any members of the
House who may be named. That would pre-
vent any one being offended if he happened to
be left off. For my part, I shall not be offended
if I am dropped. I have no desire to be on
the Committee at all. I quite agree with
the hon. member from Amherst who stated
that a certain numl)er of the legal frater-
nity should be upon that Committee, and I
I quite agree with Judge Go wan, who says he
I is willing to leave the matter with the
I House. I am strongly of opinion that it
I should be a mixed Committee. There are
I laymen who can decide on matters of fact
I with as great a degree of certainty, pro-
bably, as legal men. We have had a great
deal of conversation about it, and it seems
that almost every gentleman on this Com-
mittee is quite willing to retire, and I think
that should be considered ; and the House
might name eAch individual to go upon the
Committee. This discussion has taken
place because of the necessity of having a
medical man upon that Committee. I think
all who have spoken have expressed a desire
to retire from the Committee, and we might
take them at their word and appoint a new
Committee. If that course is adopted, I have
great pleasure in moving that Judge Gowan
be a member of this Committee.
The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) moved that
Mr. McKindsey be a member of the Com-
mittee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN moved that Mr.
McKay be a member of the Committee.

Hon. Mr. McKAY — It looks to me as
though, out of compliment to the members

Digitized by

Google

122

The Manitoba [SENATE] School Act.

of this Committee, they are all going to be
reappointed, which I do not think is
proper. Perhaps we might resort to some
of the original men on this Committee, and
I would therefore move that Hon. Mr.
Dickey be a member of this Committee in
place of myself.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN— I may say I
have served on this Committee, and on my
application to the late leader of this House,
Mr. Abbott, he kindly consented to appoint
a gentleman m hom I recommended, and I
have since been informed that that gentle-
man has been a very conscientious and pains-
taking member, and it is wholly on that
ground that I hope he will continue to
serve.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. McTNNES (B.C.) moved that
Mr. Ferguson be a member of the Com-
mittee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved that Mr.
Kirchhoffer be a member of the Committee.

The motion was agi^eed to.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY moved that Mr.
Lougheed be a member of the Committee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DEVER moved that Dr.
Mclnnes be a member of this Committee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) moved
that Mr. Kaulbach be a member of the Com-
mittee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved that Mr. Read
of Quints be a member of the Committee.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— I will do ray
duty if the House desires me on the Com-
mittee, but I think I have served long enough.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That is nine mem-
bers. The Committee will therefore consist
of the following gentlemen : — The Hon.
Messrs. Gowan, McKindsey, McKay, Kirch-
hoffer, Lougheed, Mclnnes (B.C.), Ferguson,
Kaulbach and Read (Quint^).

THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY
COMPANY'S STOCK.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON moved :

That he vnW ask the Government to cause to be
laid before this House, a copy of all Orders in Coun-
cil authorizing an increase in the capital stock of
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, since the
passage of the Act of 1892, authorizing the company
to increase its capital stock subject to the approval
of the Oovernment.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I may inform the
hon. gentleman, unless he desires to make a
speech on this motion, that no application
has been made on the part of the Canadian
Pacific Railway for an Order in Council under
the Act to which he refers, and therefore
there will be no papers to bring down; so
unless he desires to address the House, he
might allow the matter to drop.

The motion was allowed tO' stand.
THE MANITOBA SCHOOL ACT.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER moved

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the (TOvemor-(Jeneral ; praying that His
Excellency will be pleased to cause to be laid l>efore
this House : —

1 . A copy of the deliberations, resolutions and
ordinances of the former Councilof Assiuiboia, rela-
ing to educational matters within its jurisdiction as
it existed on the banks of the Red River l>efore the
creation of the province of Manitoba.

2. A statement of the amounts paid by the said
Council of Assiniboiafor the maintenance of schools,
showing the persons to whom such payments were
made, the schools for which such amounts were paid,
and the religious denomination to which such
schools belonged.

3. A statement of the amounts paid by the Hud-
son's Bay Company, or by its agents, to the schools
then existing in the territories forming to-day the
province of Manitoba.

4. A copy of all memoranda, and instructions
serving as basis for the negotiations as a result of
which Manitoba became one of the provinces of the
Confederation ; together with a copy of the minutes
of the deliberations of the persons charged, on both
parts, to settle the conditions of the creation of the
province of Manitoba and of its entrance into the
Confederation ; and also, a copy of all memoranda,
returns an<l Orders in Council, establishine such
conditions of entrance, or serving as a basis for the
preparation of '* The Manitoba Act."

5. A copy of the despatches and instructions
from the Imperial Oovernment to the Government
of Canada on the subject of the entrance of the pro-
vince of Manitoba into the Confederation, com-
prising therein the recommendations of the Impe-

Digitized by

Google

Heward [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] Divorce Bill.

125

rial (foveniment concerning the rights and privi-
leges of the population of the Territories, and the
guarantees of protection to be accorded to the
acQuired rights, to the property, to the customs
ana to the institutions of that population by the
(lovemment of Canada, in the settlement of the
diflSculties which marked that period of the history
• of the Cetnadiau West.

6. A copy of the Acts passed by the Legislature
of Manitooa relating to eaucation in that province,
and especially of the first act passed on this subject
after the entrance of the said province of Manitoba
into the Confederation, and of the laws existing
upon the same subject in the said province imme-
diately before the passing of the Acts of 1890,
relating to the Public Schools and relating to the
Department of Education.

7. A copy of the Acts passed by the said Legis-
lature of Manitoba in 1890, on the subject of edu-
cation and the organization of the Department of
Education.

8. A copy of all regulations with respect to
schools passed by the Government of Manitoba or
by the Advisory Board in virtue of the laws passed
in 1890 by the Legislature of Manitoba, relating to
Public Schools ana the Department of Education.

9. A copy of ^all correspondence, petitions, memo-
randa, resolutions, briefs, factums, judgments (as
well of first instance as in all stages of appeal),
relating to the school laws of the said province of
Manitoba, since the Ist June, 1890, or to the claims
of Catholics on this subject ; and also, a copy of all
reports to the Privy Council and of all Orders in
Council relating to the same subject since the same
date.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There is no objec-
tion to the address.

The motion was agreed to.
A PROPOSED ADJOURNMENT.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL called the attention
of the House to certain requests which had
been made for an adjournment. Without
expressing an opinion as to the propriety or
impropriety of adjourning, he thought there
would be no objection on the part of the
Crovernment to an adjournment at this .
period of the session, for the reason that |
there was no work at present before the >
Senate, and no likelihood of there being any '
for some days. The length of the adjourn- !
ment would be for the House to consider.
It would be some days before any bills were I
sufficiently advanced in the lower House to i
enable them to come up before the Senate. ;
That was more likely to be the case, because
of the new procedure adopted in the Com-
mons for the last two or three years, of going
into Committee of Supply immediately after
the adoption of the Address. Under the
circumstances, an adjournment for a week or

ten days, or even twelve, would not at all
impede the business of the country, unless
the Committee on Divorce, which evidently-
had a good deal to do, would like to have a
shorter adjournment in order to get to work,

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I give notice
that I will move that when this House
adjourns on Tuesday next, it stand adjourned
till three weeks from Monday.

BILLS IN THE SENATE.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— Is it
the intention of the Government to bring
down Bills to this House to give us work to
go on with? They have sent Bills down
from time to time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think there may
be a few ; in fact I have already spoken to
the Premier upon the subject, and as many
as he can possibly give us will be laid before

The Senate adjourned at 4.30 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa^ Monday, February 6th, ISU.i.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
HEWARD DIVORCE BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN, from the Select
Committee on Divorce, to whom was referred
the application of Edmund HolyoakeHeward,
for relief, presented their first report and
moved its adoption. He said : In this case
we found the papers all regular, the publi-
cation duly made, the service not personal,
but the terms of the rule had been complied
with. The papers had been served on the
father of the respondent. She was at the
time supposed to be living in Chicago. He
promised to give them to his daughter.
Afterwards, another copy was served upon
the mother of the defendant, who declined to
say where her daughter was residing. Every
effort was made to comply with the rule,

Digitized by

Google

124

The Census [SENATE] of 1891.

and as a substitutional service was made, I
think such service should be accepted as
sufficient.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW presented BUI (A)
^* An Act for the relief of Edmund Holyoake
He ward.''

The Bill was read the first time.

THE HEBDEN DIVORCE BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN, from the Select
Committee on Divorce to whom was referred
the appHcation of Robert Young Hebden
for relief, presented their second report and
moved its adoption. He said : In this case, as
in the last, all the papers were regular, the
publication was duly made in the local
papers and in the Canada Gazette. The
service was not personal as the residence of
the respondent is not known. However, the
parties, acting under the rule, made the best
service they could. Every effort was made
to comply with the rules and to bring the
application to the notice of the respondent.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW presente<l Bill (B)
** An Act for the relief of Robert Young
Hebden."

The Bill was read the first time.
THE BALLANTYNE DIVORCE BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon Mr. GOWAN, from the Select
Committee on Divorce, to whom was refer-
red the application of Martha Ballantyne for
relief, presented their third report and
moved its adoption. He said : In this case
all the papers were regular, and notice
was served upon the respondent personally.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon Mr. CLEMOW^ presented Bill (C)
" An Act for the relief of Martha Ballan-
tyne."

The Bill was read the first time.

THE. EXPERIMENTAL FARM.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved :

That an humble address be presented to His
Fxcellency the (Tovemor -General, praying that His
Excellency ^^ill please to cause to be laid before
this House, a list giving the names of all persons
employed at the Experimental Farm at Ottawa,
with the age, nationality, religion, salary, occupa-
tion, title, and date of appointment of each such
person.

The motion was agreed to.

THE CENSUS OF 1891.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. TASSE moved :

That an humble address l)e presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General, praying that His
Excellency will cause to be laid before tliis House,
information, accompanied with full explanatory
remarks, from the officer in charge of the direction
and superintendence of the last C^adian Census
of 1891, on the following points : --

1. Was the enumeration of the French element
of the population, in the taking of the Census of
1891, intended and carried on to convey the same
information as was furnislied by the previous Cen-
sus of 1851 and 1S61, of the former proWnce of
Canada, and of the Canadian Census of 1871 and
1881 ?

2. What was the meaning intended and the in-
terpretation given, in the taking of the Census of
1891, to the words French Canadian and Canadian
French as hemling of one of the columns of Census
.Schedule No. 1 ?

3. What is the pt*eci8e meaning and what is to
be understood by the various words made use of in
the Census Bulletin No. 1 1, signed Geoi^e Johnson,
statistician, namely, the words Nationaiities^
Nationality'*, French -speakinff, English-speaking,
Canadiens-Anglais, as part of the new nomencla-
ture adopted ?

4. Weve there people of French nationality, real
Frenchmen, excluded from the registration of the
French element of the population on account of
\mng bom outside of Canada, and were there
French people included among the English-speak-
ing on account of being able to speak the English
language ? Is thei*e any connection between such
cases and the nomenclature of Bulletin No. 11,
and if not, why is it that the simple word French,
formerly used as meaning the French clement, was
abandoned, to bo Nariouslj' replaced by the words
French-speaking, French Canadians, and so forth ?

5. What were, in addition to the pointed in-
structions, the practical explanations and direc-
tions given to the officers, commissioners and enu-
merators, as regards the registration of the French
element of the population, or persons of French
origin or nationality 1

H. Was the actual enumeration of the French, in
1891 uniformly carried on throughout, in the
various census districts, sub-districts and divisions?

7. Are there reasons to apprehend, from direct
investigation, personal knowledge, or statistical

Digitized by

Google

The Census [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] o/18!H.

125

criticism, that the figures given as representing the
number of French people, are noiably deficient in
some or many returns of the enumeration of 1801 ?

8. Were the returns delivered by the enumera-
tors examine<l by the commissioners, the otficers,
and at the central otfice under the supervision, the
responsibility of the superintendent, in view to test
their accuracy and to correct apparent errors ?

9. Was it noticed by some of the otficers or the
superintendent, that very serious discrepancies
existed in the return oi the French between the
census of 1891, and the statistical series of previous
censuses, and was thereby trouble taken to investi-
gate the serious question raised by the very striking
want of concordance ?

10. Is there any rational explanation of the
returns of 1891, by which the French appear to
have met abnormous losses in their number, espe-
cially in Nova 8cotia, Ontario and the Territories ?

1 1 . Are there local or accidental causes capable
of explaining the vast differences in the multipli-
cation of the French which would have taken place,
if the figures of the Census of 1891 were correct,
between Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick
and Nova Scotia, for instance ?

12. Was there, at any time, steps taken to ascer-
tain the cause and extent of such extraordinary
returns ; if not, what was the cause of that omis-
sion ; if so, what 'were the proceedings adopted,
and what the results ?

1 3. Has the Superintendent of the Census of 1 891 ,
taken notice of the very determined objection to
accept the extraordinary figures of 1891, as repre-
sentmg the actual number of the French in Canada,
and has any serious investigation of this important
question been undertaken by him ; if so, what are
the conclusions arrived at including the statistical
criticism involved.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -The Government
has no opposition to ofier to the motion. I
think it is a very proper motion and one
which may throw considerable new light on
the census. It will furnish an opportunity
to the officers who have been in charge of
this important work to show the public the
bases upon which they have acted. It has
been stated already, perhaps, in this House,
although not during this session, that the
bases of the present census are not the same
as of the census of 1881. One reason for
this is, that in 1881 we were not so particular
about leaving out the absentees. A man
might have been absent from Canada for
two, three or four years, and still he would
be recorded as a Canadian. It has now been
limited to a much shorter absence. Some
other inaccuracies may have occurred in
1881, owing to the fact that a man might be
registered in his family and might also be
registered at the very place he happened to
be when the census was going on. It may
have occurred — and did occur in some in-
stances— that the same person was registered
twice. It has also been pointed out — and

this motion has this important point in
view — that the French Canadians have not
progressed of late in 'the same proportion as
they have in the past. I think some misun-
derstanding may have occurred as to the way
they should have been registered. Now, re-
feriing specially to New Brunswick, I have
no doubt that a number of people of French
descent may have been entered there under
another nationality, and my reason for so
stating is this, from the closest study that 1
could make of the history of the Acadians
of that province, under the French regime, I
find that the people of Acadia never would
acknowledge themselves as Canadians. They
were a separate people ; they called them-
selves Acadians under the French, and to-
day they pall themselves French- Acadians ;
but they would not register as French-Cana-
dians, and I could not blame them upon this
point. They have a history of their own ;
they have a glory of their own, and they
have a martyrdom of their own. They
would not renounce that for fear of losing
the name of Acadian. This is one of the
reasons why they did not perhaps acknow-
ledge the name of Canadian. It is very dif-
ferent with us in the province of Quebec,
since we have been fortunate enough to
extend our own name over the whole
Dominion, which is called Canada, and it has
not been the lot of the Ac^ians to have the
Dominion called Acadia.

Hon. Mr. TASS^— I would like to ask
the hon. gentleman how they have been
registered — as Canadians ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — In ans>ver to the
hon. member's address, I hope the depart-
ment will be in a position to state how they
have been registered. Perhaps they have
registered themselves under a nationality
which was not really their owp. The re-
turn, I presume, will show that. Now, I
w^ill give another instance of inaccuracy
which may have occurred : I do not admit
that any of these inaccuracies existed, but
' is is my duty to point out how inaccuracies
j might occur. A Frenchman married an Irisli
I woman, or a Scotchwoman ; the person taking
. the census comes to the house and inquires
1 from the woman what her nationality is ; she
j says she is Scotch or Irish, as the case may
' be, and that she has got five children ; she
j cannot understand that her children are not
[ Scotch or Irish and she would register them

Digitized by

Google

126

The Census [SENATE] of 1891.

immediately ae seven young Irishmen or
Scotchmen, though the father, a Frenchman,
should under the law determine the national-
ity. It is agreat pity that he was not at home
to make the law quite clear to his wife. Such
inaccuracies may have occurred ; and I, for
one, as a French-Canadian, suffer a disap-
pointment in examining the census, as we all
do ; however, I repeat, after pointing out at
first sight what might be accepted as a con-
soling explanation for the disappointment
we have suffered, the return will be brought
down and I hope will satisfy the House and
the people of Canada in general. It is the
intention of the Government to have some
note or remark made in the preface of the
census to prevent any misunderstandings or
to prevent calculations being based on such
statements that might be inaccurate and
prejuidcial to any class of Canadians in the
Dominion.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Would it not
be well to frame this motion so that it
would apply to other nationalities as well as
the French ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS- -It might.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I know that
the basis of the census in many provinces is
not the same as it was in the previous cen-
sus. Many were left off the last census who
had previously been on the list. I would
suggest that this should not be confined to
French, but should apply to other nationali-
ties.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Perhaps it would
be as well not to mix the two questions. If
the hon. member from Lunenburg wishes to
have information on another point, he might
move a motion to that effect. I should like
to have the return brought down to answer
as fully as possible the motion of my hon.
friend on the other side.

Hon. Mr. TASS:^— If I am to accept the
explanation of the hon. Minister of Agri-
culture, a great many of the husbands must
have been absent when this census was
taken. At the same time, I must say that
last year, at the very laut day of the session,
I asked for some information in connection
with the instructions that had been given by
the Department of Agriculture to the cen-

sus enumerators and these instructions have
not been laid before this House. Can the
hon. gentleman inform me when they will be
brought down ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I shall take a note
of it and make an inquiry. I will have it
brought down as soon as possible.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT—To make the return
more intelligible and satisfactory, I presume
the hon. gentleman will have no objection to
accompany it with a copy of the instructions
given in 1881.

Hon.
for.

Mr. ANGERS— It is not asked

Hon. Mr. SCOTT -The other would be
valueless without it. If there is a differ-
ence between the two years, I think it is
only fair that the House should understand
it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS —The motion of my
hon. friend will have to be amended to cover
it.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-
to amending it ?

-Is there any objection

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I have no objec
tion ; I do not know whether the mover is
content.

Hon. Mr. TASSE — I have no objection.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I propose that the in-
structions given to the census enumerators
in 1881, should also be returned at the same
time.

Hon. Mr. TASS^— May I know from the
hon. gentleman when I can expect to have
the information asked for in my motion ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I could not fix the
date now. It is very hard to state when the
papers will be brought down, but I hope the
House will rely upon my word when I say
that they will be brought down as soon as
possible.

The motion as amended was agreed to.

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Bailway [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock. 127

CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY
COMPANY'S CAPITAL STOCK.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON moved—

That he will ask the Goveniment to cause to be
laid before this House, a copy of all Orders in Coun-
cil authorizing an increase in the capital stock of
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, since the
passage of the Act of 1892, authorizing the company
to increase its capital stock, subject to the approval
of the (iovernnieut.

He said : — Hon. gentlemen, I have asked a
question in regard to the increase of stock
in the Canadian Pacific Railway. The reason
I have for asking this question is on account
of the Act that was passed in 1892, relative
to an increase of stock in the Canadian
Pacific Railway. Hon. gentlemen will recol-
lect the Act that came before this House,
a short Act which provided for an issue of
ordinary stock in lieu of consolidated deben-
ture stock. A further issue of capital stock
and an issue of consolidated debenture stock.
When that Act appeared in committee last
year, which was the first time I had cogniz-
ance of it, I took objection to the Act, and
I thought unusual powers were being
conferred upon such a powerful com-
pany as the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany, that would permit them, without any
limitation, to increase their capital stock. I
was told in defence of that that it was sub-
ject to the approval of the Canadian Gov-
ernment, and that therefore all the safeguards
that were necessary were erected. The com-
mittee were satisfied with that, and I was
satisfied also. I see now, however, that the
authority to issue consolidated debenture
stock without the authority of the Govern-
ment, would enable them first to issue con-
solidated, then exchange for ordinary stock,
then bond the new lines relieved from the
fixed charge of consolidated stock, and then
increase the capital demanding dividends.
This leads, hon. gentlemen, to one of two
things. Either the people must bear the
rates or the credit of the country suffers by
a failure to pay dividends. Immediately
after the passage of this Act there was an
issue of stock of the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company, and it was with the know-
ledge of that increase of stock, immediately
after the passage of this Act, that caused me
to put my notice upon the motion paper, to
inquire what amount of stock had been
issued, and whether the necessary authority

had been obtained from the Grovernment of
Canada in regard to the issue of this stock.
The hon. leader of the House told me on
Friday last that no application had been
made by the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany and that therefore, presumably, the
necessity for the question did not exist any
longer. Well, hon. gentlemen, I feel that
the public interests at stake in regard to this
matter are so great that I could not avoid
explaining the reasons why I put the
motion upon the paper, why I had given
vent, as some people might say, to my poetic
imagination as I did last Wednesday, in
the debate on the Address. I live, as
you all Icnow, 1,600 miles from here in
the province of Manitoba, and I live in
the interior of the country among the
farmers. We have been a little unfortunate
this year with a short crop and low prices,
and all the winter the price for our oats has
ruled 13 cents a bushel ; although it has not
always been quite as bad as that The price
of our wheat varies from 25 to 50 cents a
bushels, and we have to pay for coal oil 45
cents a gallon. The reason that our oats
only bring 13 cents a bushel is because the
rates on the Canadian Pacific Railway absorb
a very large portion of the merchantable value
of it in the rates. Oats is a good crop with us
generally, and if plump and heavy, will find
a market in England, but if light will have
to be sold in Montreal for about 33 cents. A
buyer informed me that the rate on oats to
Montreal is 20 cents a bushel, and on account
of dry weather our crop was light in yield and
weight. The reason that our coal oil is so
dear, as I explained to hon. gentlemen last
week, is because the duty put upon coal oil,
and the rates charged by the Canadian Pacific
Railway to convey that coal oil to us are so
great, that when it arrives in our neighbour-
hood it costs us 45 cents a gallon. Hon.
gentlemen will understand that if you only
receive 13 cents a bushel for your oats, which
is your staple, or 25 to 50 cents for wheat,
which is your staple, and have to pay 45
cents a gallon for coal oil, and have to pay
for everything else in proportion, it must
bring hardship. If that hardship is un-
avoidable we can bear it, but if it is not un-
avoidable we want to see our way out. I
will acknowledge that coal oil is a difi&cult
thing to convey, and the rates, of course, are
more on coal oil than on sugar or nails ; but
the inequality between the value of our labour
in the sale of oats and wheat, and the value

Digitized by

Google

128 Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Gompanifs Capital Stock.

of our purchasing power in the matter of
coal oil, &c., and the dividends that the
Canadian Pacific Railway is earning out of
the industry of the country is of such a char-
acter that it cannot be said there is an equit-
able distribution of the profits of labour ; for
that reason, hon. gentlemen, I watched care-
fully the purpose of the Act of last year and
became seriously alarmed at the increase of
capital stock of the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way. Since the hon. leader of the House
told me that no application was made to the
Government, T had the opportunity of asking
one of the leading oflicials of the Canadian
Pacific Railway with regard to the issue of
stock, and he told me that the' debenture
stock is a first charge, a fixed charge upon
the road, differing in that way from the ordi-
nary stock ; but this Act that was passed last
year gave power to the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way to exchange its ordinary stock for dei
benture stock- to change backwards and
forwards. Well, apparently the Act does
not prevent the Canadian Pacific Railway
increasing its debenture stock while it con-
trols its issue of ordinary stock so far as the
approval of the Dominion Government is
necessary to allow it to do so. I think my-
self that the same thing ought to have been
done with regard to debenture stock as has
been done with the ordinary stock ; and that
the control of the Government should have
been exercised in both cases.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— For fear there
might be a misapprehension, I may repeat
what I stated — that no application had been
made by the Canadian Pacific Railway direc-
tors for an increase of their stock. I gave
no opinion as to what they had done in
reference to the change of one stock to
another.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I am quite aware
of that. It is in consequence of your saying
that there was no application made that I
am now endeavouring to see whether I was in-
correct in regard to the position T had taken,
and I find that I was mistaken in this, that
the issue in July of last year, was consoli-
dated debenture stock and not ordinary
stock. The traffic returns of the railways of
Canada are presented for the information of
the people of Canada through the Statistical
Year Book, which is a compilation of ordinary
statistics, including the returns handed over
to the Government by the private companies

and corporations as required by the Govern-
ment, who hand them in turn to the public
I through these channels, and by the Statistical
I Year Book of Canada, page 457, 1 see in 1890,
that there was 5,085 miles of railway of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company in oper-
ation, and that the capital paid up was
$255,854,948. A little lower down I see
that the New Brunswick system, which is
part of the Canadian Pacific Railway system
I — although I believe only a leased part of it
I — was 415 miles. The capital paid up was
$15,424,496 on this system. Then I see a
year later, in 1891, a foot note and asterisk
where the New Brunswick system was en-
tered the year previous, the foot note saying
" included in Canadian Pacific system."
Therefore, that has increased the mileage of
the Canadian Pacific Railway system from
5,085 miles in 1890, to 5,537 miles in 1891 ;
but the capital returned as capital paid up ha^
increased from $255,000,000 in round num-
bers to $279,000,000 in round numbers, or
in other words, when the New Brunswick
system was by itself, the capital paid up was
returned as $15,000,000 ; when it is absorbed
in the Canadian Pacific Railway system it
becomes $24,000,000.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I beg the hon. gentle-
man's pardon for interrupting, but I think
the figures are very misleading indeed. That
could not possibly be paid-up capital. I have
been trying to make out what these fijfures
are. I think it is the total cost of all the
railways and the rolling stock. It certainly
is not capital account.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I give it as it is
retunaed here.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— This is not a return
for which there is any authority. It is not
possible — they have only a capital of $65,-
000,000.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is very impi-o-
per that such a return should appear in our
statistical reports.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Oh, yes, it is wrong.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON- It is on page 247,
and the return is in reference to several rail-
ways : Canada Atlantic, $3,000,000 capital
paid up; Canada Southern, $4,000,000;
Canadian Pacific Railway, $255,000,000

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBRUARY 6, 1893J Company's Capital Stock. 129

paid up ; and so on. Now, these returns
must come from the railway company. They
cannot be the imagination of the Govern-
ment.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— It must be wrong;
the Canada Atlantic have not any such capital
paid up. That is more than the whole value
of the railway — bonds, rolling stock, capital
and all.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON — I am quite aware
of that. If you give me time I will come
to these points ; but what I wish to point out
is, that it appears in the public returns of the
country that the capital paid up of the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway in 1890 was §255,000,-
000, and the following year $279,000,000—
there is the country's authority for the state-
ment— and it is natural to suppose that,
under the Act of 1892, passed last year,
whatever capital stock may be at the pre-
sent moment claiming dividends, they have
the power to increase it up to $279,000,000
if they choose to do so by a vote of their
shareholders. At any rate, hon. gentlemen,
you will admit that we, who have to judge
of these things from a public stand-point,
have only got this material to work with.
I have here the Canadian Pacific Railway
account — their annual report — and I have
the statistics given us from the Year Book,
and I see that the capital stock has been
increased by $24,000,000 between 1890 and
1891, simply by the absorption of the New
Brunswick system, which, when it was by
itself, was only $15,000,000, and therefore
I should imagine the transaction was a sale
of the New Brunswick system for $15,000,-

000 and a transfer to the Canadian Pacific
Railway for $24,000,000. That, I presume,
is the nature of the transaction that has
occasioned this increase. Of course, it is
quite capable of explanation if it is wrong ;
if it is improper, and if it is not a correct
presentation of the case, it should certainly
disappear from the statistics of the country,
which are most misleading to us when they
are not correct. The hon. leader of this
House asked us last Wednesday to accept
as actual facts the statements given to us
for our information through these statistics,
and therefore, accepting them in that spirit,

1 can only take it for grants that there is
a foundation for the return on this page.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I sent for the return
while the hon. gentleman was speaking.
9

There is an official return, published by
authority, a summary statement of the capi-
tal of all the railways I have it in my
hands ; and my hon. friend is in error. This
report by the Bureau of Agriculture is not
authentic, and it is entirely wrong. It is
absurd to talk of $15,000,000 for the New
Brunswick system.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— T would refer the-
hon. gentleman to another return on page
463, entitled the actual and theoretical
cost of the principal railways in Canada.
There the Canadian Pacific Railway is re-
turned as 5,537 miles ; the theoretical cost is
put down as $186,000,000, and the actual
cost returned as $279,000,000 ; cost per mile
$50,433. This return shows us that the
actual cost of the Canadian Pacific Railway
is $279,000,000, $8,000,000 a year is three
per cent interest on $279,000,000 ; on 6,000
odd miles of road, at $50,000 per mile : the
safety of the company or the credit of the
company does not demand dividends on such
an excessive cost.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— That is the cost of the
railway — not the capital account.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— These figures tally
with the figures on page 457, where it is
represented as $279,000,000, capital paid up.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Does that include
the subsidies ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I do not think it
includes the subsidies. That is just the very
point I wish to arrive at. If the Canadian
Pacific Railway are going to claim dividends
on the subsidies as well as on the outlay of
their own capital, I say the greatest injustice
would be done to the people who have to
support the Canadian Pacific Railway ; and
if this Act was passed last year for the pur-
pose of working up that $279,000,000 and
getting the three per cent dividends for that
amount for all time to come, a great injustice
is done to the industry of the country whose
earnings have to support the Canadian Pacific
Railway and pay whatever dividends are
returned as part of the profit of the road ;
and I wish to bring to the notice of the
people of the country that these dividends
are excessive and that they are pressing upon
our industries and with the protective tariff

Digitized by

Google

130

Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company's Capital Stock.

are restricting the development of the whole
country ; and for that reason it is well for us
to understand exactly what we are doing in
regard to this matter. I have heard it stated
— I think by Mr. VanHorne — that one-third
of the earnings of the road come from our
western country. The earnings last year
according to the Canadian Pacific Railway
report were $20,000,000. One-third of that
is nearly $7,000,000. Now, hon. gentlemen,
if we contribute $7,000,000 to the earnings
of the Canadian Pacific Railway, you will
grant that at any rate we should have some
voice in saying whether the policy that is
governing the great and powerful corporation
is a just one to all who are connected with
the country at large, and to us particularly
in Western Canada, who have to pay exceed-
ingly long transportation rates in order to
market our produce and get our returns, and
it is that fact, that we have to contribute so
much to the Canadian Pacific Railway, that
justifies me in coming before this honourable
House and asking these questions and placing
these facts before the House. Now, the
Canadian Pacific Railway report is given to
us ; it is courteously sent around to every hon.
gentleman. Every year we get one of these
reports and we are at liberty to examine it
and find out for ourselves exactly what the
operations of the company are, and now I
come to the actual cost as shown through their
balance sheets. The actual cost of the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway as shown by the
balance sheet of 1891 is as follows : —

Main line $130,499,104 90

Lines acquired or held un-
der perpetual lease .... 18,818,912 80

Branch lines 10,000,000 00

Rolling stock 14,(K)0,000 00

Shops and machinery. . . . 1,228,000 00

Atlantic and North-Nvest-
ern Railway, o per cent
bonds 3,240,000 00

Columbia and Kootenay
Railway, first mort-
gage 693,500 00

Advance on lake and ferry
steamers 652,000 00

Now, that is given to us in this balance
sheet as the cost of the road, and those
figures total up $180,000,000 altogether. I
am not reading all the figures in that report.
There are other items such as the China and
Japan steam-ships amounting to §3,471,000.
I have not included that, because, of course,
that is represented by the steam-ship com-
pany. Nor have I added supplies and ma-

terial on hands, $2,524,000. Then the
Dominion guarantee funds for the dividends,
$3,712,000, I have not added, although it is
part of the dividends and might properly be
added to the cost of the road, because it is
interest provided for the capital during con-
struction. However, I have not included
those three latter items. It appears in the
balance sheet altogether, including all the
items, that is, temporary loans on security,
cash in treasury, etc., that the total amount
is $206,524,000, so that the hon. gentleman
from Ottawa may see that it is working up
towards the $279,000,000.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT -Cost, not capital.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The actual cost is
working up to $279,000,000. Thei-e is the
I item of the lines built by the Government,
$35,000,000, which is not included in this
estimated cost — the lines between Lake
Superior and Winnipeg and the 200 miles in
the Rocky Mountains and the Pembina
Branch which were made a free gift ; also
15,000,000 acres of land unsold, which at the
average per acre of last year's sales, according
to their own account, would realize $62,-
640,000. Now, the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company might feel that they were
entitled to get dividends on that $35,000,000
worth of. railroad that the Government pre-
sented to them and on the $62,000,000 worth
of land that the Canadian Government gave
them. I am showing in what way it might
be increased to the $279,000,000. At all
events, the balance sheet shows the actual
cost as $206,000,000. Now, on the other
side of the balance sheet you will S3e where
the money came from that provided this
$180,000,000.

Mortgage bonds sold . . $47,956,000

Four per cent consolidated de-
benture stock 19,770,000

That is prior, I suppose, to the issue of con-
solidated debenture stock last vear, which I
think was $12,000,000.

Land grant bonds $18,426,000

(Tovernment subsidy 2.'»,000,000

Lands sold 19,558,000

j That includes $10,000,000 worth that the
Dominion Government bought back of the
subsidy of 6,500,000 acres at $1.50 per acre,
when the company were financing for con-
struction.

Townsitesales ... $2,183,000

Bonuses from municijwilities. . 348,000

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FKBEUARY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock, 131

Hon. gentlemen will see that these are all
securities that have been sold, that are fixed
charges against the road, that total up alto-
gether $133,244,531, as money that has been
provided by the sale of these securities, and
which have become fixed charges by the
company, and under bonds authorized by
the Canadian Parliament. Then, after that,
they have on hand, accoi'ding to their own
statement, 1 6, 1 1 1 ,000 acres of land. I have
put the value of that land at $2 per acre.
The selling price at present realizes from $4
to $4.75 per acre, according to last year's
sales, so the land is becoming a valuable
asset, and I have put it down at $2 per
acre, so that it may represent a good, fair
cash asset, if the development of the country
goes on as it is doing at the present mo-
ment. Add that $33,000,000 to the $133,-
000,000 of the ^)onds that they have sold, the
proceeds of which have gone to the construc-
tion of the road, and then deduct that from
the other side of the balance sheet, and it
leaves $22,700,216.45 as an actual asset
which might be represented by the money
paid in by the shareholders. I see that
a letter has appeared in the New York
Tii)ies and in one or two other newspapers
which evidently are not very friendly to the
company. In that letter it is represented
that the amount really contributed by the
Canadian Pacific Railway shareholders did not
amount to twenty-two millions of dollarsatall.
However, I do not propose to go into that
question, I am simply taking this balance
sheet just as it is presented to us to show,
according to the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company's own showing, what the cost of the
road has been, and to show according to their
own statement where the receipts and moneys
have come from and what the cost of con-
struction and what amount, adding the
assets of land grants, the Dominion Govern-
ment has given them. That leaves twenty-
two millions of dollars. The annual earning
power of the Canadian Pacific Railway as I
explained last year, amounts to $20,241,000
and the working expenses to $12,231,000,
leaving the net earnings $8,009,659. The
fixed charges are $4,644,493 and the surplus
was 83,345,166, which is the dividend paying
power of the Canadian Pacific Railway stock
apart from the guarantee fund that was de-
posited with the Dominion Government of
three per cent for ten years. Now, what I
contend in all fairness to the people of Can-
ada, who have to work hard for the produce

that they raise in order to pay their way,
is that $3,345,000 which represents a portion
of their earnings, is out of all proportion for
interest upon the twenty-two million dollars,
comparing it with the prices farmers realize
for their produce. If we had free trade the
volume of business would increase under it,
and I venture to say, without pressing
unduly upon the industry of the people, the
profits of the Canadian Pacific Railway would
be more than they are to-day, notwithstand-
ing the power of extraction both the Govern-
ment and the Canadian Pacific Railway
exercise. •

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The stock
sixty-five millions of dollars.

proper is

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— According tothis
statement. Sir, I contend that somewhere in
the neighbourhood of $22,000,000 represents
the money that was paid into the work, in
addition to the bonds that were sold, in ad-
dition to the consolidated debenture stock
sold, in addition to the cash subsidy given
and so on, represents the capital that may be
claimed to have been paid in by the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway shareholders them-
selves— the originators of the company.
Now, five per cent interest on that $22,000,-
000 is in the neighbourhood of $1,000,000
and every hon. gentleman will acknowledge
that five per cent interest is a very good
rate indeed for a permanent investment such
as the Canadian Pacific Railway Company
is likely to prove. But the dividend that is
being taken and charged through the rates
is three and a half millions of dollars
nearly — that is two and a half millions
of dollars in excess of what is reason-
able and fair for the capital that has
been invested in that line. The con-
cession of half a million dollars to the
people of western Canada, when the crop
was poor and the prices for their wheat and
oats were low, would make all the difference
of prosperity or difficulty and trouble, and
yet, notwithstanding the fact that those
dividends are heaping up and as we have
been given to understand, while the dividend,
or rather net earnings last year were eight
millions of dollars — they have been increased
this year, I understand, by about a milHon
— notwithstanding that increase of dividends
and notwithstanding the fact which the
company knows perfectly well, that we have
had a hard season in consequence of difficul-

Digitized by

Google

132

Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company's Capital Stock.

ties over which we have no control our-
selves, that we have those rates to pay, a
concession of half a million of dollars
last year would have made all the difference
in the world to the people of our western
country in the success of their operations,
and it is with a knowledge of the fact that
there has been no diminution of the freight
rates that I bring up this subject. The
freight rates have been going on and keeping
up just exactly in the same proportion. I
will read from their report what their rates
are. The earnings per ton per mile in 1889
were 91 cents ; in 1890 they were 84 cents ;
in 1891 they were 91 cents again, so that not-
withstanding the fact that the company has
been exceedingly prosperous and that the
country has supported the railroad in a most
unusual and excessive degree, there has been
no concession in the diminution of the rates
which are charged to the people of the coun-
try for the carrying of their produce. I am
quite willing to accord to the Canadian
Pacific Railway the credit that they are de-
serving of for the successful management of
their line. I do not think there has been
any parallel to it. The administrative ability
at the head of their management and the
administrative ability at the head of their
departments is most excellent and very large-
ly contributes to the success of the railroad.
It must not be forgotten, however, that the
geographical position of Canada, the unusual
advantages that Canada offers for a trans-
continental line, also contribute very largely
to the success of the enterprise. They are
indebted also to the people who live along
the line, and who, by their industry, have sup-
plied the traffic and produce that enable the
company to earn these large dividends. Now,
let me quote from page 26 of the report, to
show exactly what the company carried to
earn their income. The quantities were in
1891, as follows :—

Flour 2,318,000 brls.

(irain -24,894,000 bush.

Live stock .309,(KK) head.

Luml)er 6.30,000,000 feet.

Firewood 121 ,000 cords.

Manufactured articles. . 985,(KK) tons.

All other articles 860,000 tons.

Hon. gentlemen will see that it is our lumber,
our flour, our grain, our live stock, our general
merchandise that contribute to this income.
The people have to buy their general mer-
chandise, and have to sell their lumber,
grain and flour, and it is out of the earnings

of the people in that way and their passen-
ger travel that the earnings of the company
are made up. The Canadian Government
! has also been liberal to the railroad in their
mail carriage. They earn $516,098.45 a
year for carrying the mails, and in addition
to that they have been treated most liber-
I ally in the gifts which have been given to
i them, and which have imposed on the people
of Canada a heavy liability which has yet to
be paid off and the interest on which has to
be met. The gifts by the Canadian people
j to the company amount to $116,603,493, as
, follows : Cash subsidy, $25,000,000 ; cash
I for land purchased, $10,189,521 ; 650 miles
j of railway built in the most difficult part of
the line, $35,000,000 ; 30,000,000 acres of
I land, less amount repurchased, 23,000,000
[acres at $2, $46,000,000— those are the
I gifts, and to that extent we can fairly claim
I to be sleeping partners, with the privilege
! of waking up now and then. All that has
I been made a free gift to the company, and
it is with the knowledge of these facts that
I have brought the subject to your notice.
So far as the rates are concerned they are
not equitably levied — they are not levied
with the idea of developing the industries of
the country to the fullest extent. The rates
press upon our produce.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)—
Would the hon. gentleman be surprised to
know that the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company's rates to the Atlantic seaboard are
3i to 40 per cent lower than any of the
American lines and during open navigation
vid Montreal, the advantages to the Cana-
dian farmer are increased from 17 J to 47i
per cent.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I took the ground
in my remarks on the trade question the
other day that the material prosperity of
Canada as compared with that of the United
States was not the ^question that we had to
deal with -it was whether we could have
more material prosperity in Canada by the
adoption of a different policy. The question
' of what the freight rate^ are in the United
I States has nothing whatever to do with us.
Can we not get better freight rates than the
people of the United States ? Are thei'e not
conditions existing in the United States such
as we complain of at the present moment in
Canada — have not railroads in that country
heaped up their capital account, heaped up

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBEUAEY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock. 133

the dividend earning demands of their rail-
ways to such an extent, that in order to meet
the excessive demands of capital in that
countiy they cannot bring down their rates?
The proposition that we, who have been so
liberal to the Canadian Pacific Railway, should
keep up our rates as they are kept up on the
other side of the line is not the question at
all. I am not discussing the question of rates,
but I am explaining how the rates are levied
so far a6 they press upon us. What I am
discussing is the fact of the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company's dividend of $3,500,000
on r^2 2,000,000 capital being oul of propor-
tion to the earnings of the people.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The hon. gentle-
man's contention is that the Railway Com-
pany is getting 15 per cent.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, sir ; I have
shown by the figures here that the original
outlay of the Canadian Pacific Railway share-
holders was twenty-two millions of dollars.

Hon. Mr. McMILLaN — Are you quoting
from the outrageous reports that appeared
in some American newspapers recently ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, I never saw
the article to which the hon. gentleman
refers until some one pointed it out to me
after I had put my motion on the paper. I
am quoting from the report of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company itself.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (BurUngton)— I
see the hon. gentleman has the report of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company under
his hands, how then can he say that the
capital of the company is only twenty-two
millions of dollars ? He evidently does not
understand the report, or he is misleading
the House. I will tell the hon. member from
^Marquette what the facts are about the
capital stock.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON —What is the his-
tory- of the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany as far as the capital stock is concerned ?
The original stock I believe was five millions
of dollars. Then there was a share dividend
which increased the capital stock to twenty-
five millions of dollars.

Hdh. Mr. SCOTT— It was originally twen-
ty-five millions of dollars.

Hon Mr. BOULTON— It was originally
five millions of dollars and was afterwards
increased to twenty-five millions of dol-
lars. Then under the General Railway
Act which gives the railway companies
free license to increase their capital stock,
it was increased from twenty-five mil-
lions of dollars up to one hundred millions
of dollars. Then Sir John Macdonald, when
he was arranging with the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company to make a loan in 1886,
required that the Canadian Pacific Railway
should pull down that stock from one hun-
dred millions of dollars to sixty-five millions
of dollars, or just exactly the cost of the
roads that were made a free gift by the
Canadian Government, and to-day their
stock stands at sixty-five millions of dollars.
I am explaining in what way it came to be
sixty-five millions of dollars.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I have the original
Act of the company here and it says that
" the capital stock shall be twenty-five mil-
lions of dollars." That was the original
capital, and it was afterwards increased to
sixty-five millions of dollars, with the right
to incretise to one hundred millions of dol-
lars, but it has never been increased to one
hundred millions of dollars.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I think I am not
mistaken when I say that he required that
it should be reduced to sixty-five millions of
dollars. It had either been increased to one
hundred millions of dollars or it was in con-
templation to increase it to that amount.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— While that loan exist-
ed they were prohibited from issuing more
than sixty-five millions of dollars stock.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— When the hon.
gentleman says that the capital stock is
sixty-five millions of dollars I am showing
that the capital stock should not be
sixty-five millions of dollars, so far as
the money that was put into the road
by the original shareholders is con-
cerned. I am trying to get an equitable
arrangement between the people who are
supporting that line and those who are
reaping the profits from their earnings.
You know the same contest is continually
going on between companies and the public
everywhere. What I contend is, that our
western country is heavily handicapped by ex-
cessive freight rates. A friend of mine who

Digitized by

Google

134 Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company* s Capital Stock,

is engaged in mining at Rat Portage, an Ameri-
can who lives in Wisconsin — was visiting
his mine the other day and I was travelling
with him. He told me that he wanted to
get some wire nails, and that he called at
Winnipeg to purchase them, and found that
the price was six and a half cents per pound.
He told me that at home in Wisconsin he
could get the same nails delivered at his
mill for two cents a pound, purchasing them
in five keg lots. He said to the merchant
"Surely you never can charge 6J cents
for those nails in Winnipeg. Show me your
invoice." The merchant showed him the
invoice and he found that the price of the
nails in Montreal was 3f cents per pound
and the railway rate was 1 -40. I am inclined
to think that there must be something wrong,
because that is an excessive rate on nails.
However, I give his statement, his name
is P. Semple, of Oskosh, Wisconsin. The
merchant in Winnipeg was selling those
nails at 6 J bents per pound for the develop-
ment of our mining interests at Rat
Portage, while the miner from Wisconsin
could purchase the same nails at home
for 2 cents a pound. He also told me he
had to pay 40 cents a gallon for coal oil by the
barrel. The distance between the two places
is only some 500 miles, and it is difficult to
understand why there should be such a
difference in prices.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— That is the coun-
try to live in— -they have rattle-snake fed
pork there too.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The fact that
they can purchase the nails at 2 cents per
pound while we have to pay 6J cents is cer-
tainly a great advantage in their favour, and
if we throw down our barriers we will either
require the manufactures in Montreal, or in
England to manufacture as cheaply, or we
will get our wire nails at that low rate.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The raw iron
is worth more than that alone.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON~If I have made a
misstatement I am only quoting the words
of the gentleman to whom I refer. He is
engaged in mining at the Lake of the
Woods and his figures are open to verifica-
tion. He also told me that coal oil was
delivered at his house and put into his tank
for eight cents a gallon. Take the freights
on lumber. Where there is competition on

the Canadian Pacific Railway the freight is
very much lower than where there is no
competition. We have no competition in
the North-west, consequently the freight
on lumber from Keewatin to Winnipeg
j is far greater than on other portions of
, the line where there is competition. Hon.
I gentlemen will realize the power of theCana-
I dian Pacific Railway which extends for six
I thousand miles through Canada. It is not
possible for the Canadian people ever to
construct another line of railroad to compete
with it. No private company in any district
can raise its head as I told you 'in my poetic
license, while it takes a branch line for its
lunch it is now preparing to dine off the
Intercolonial with a very tasty sauce in the
shape of a subsidy for a fast line of steamers.
What for ? To benefit Chicago, to benefit
wealthy American centres and compete for
their traffic. If a subsidy was given to a line
of steamers to South America under a free
trade policy, the trade of the country would
expand, and both the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way and the people of Canada would derive
more benefit than from a fast line of steamers
to accommodate travel. Now, hon. gentle-
men we have to ask ourselves, since we have
created this powerful company, are we,
through the Government of this country,
going to have safe-guards erected for the
people ? At the present moment that com-
pany has unlimited power to'raake or unmake
towns, and to make or unmake individuals
merely by the question of rates. If a man
has an industry there, it can either be pro-
moted or ruined by the company. Let me
give you an instance toshow how these things
can be done. In the Indian agencies, north
of Prince Albert and Battleford, flour and
supplies of various kinds are required. If you
will look at the returns you will find that
there is a considerable amount of flour ship-
ped in over the Prince Albert line to supply
the Indians in those districts. That flour
we will say is shipped from the Lake of the
Woods mill. That mill is supplied with
wheat from Brandon or Moosomin. It is
shipped to the mill, 200 or 300 miles, ground
into flour and carried back some 500 miles
to Prince Albert to supply the Indians. The
people of Prince Albert gat 40 cents a
bushel for their wheat, but to get it they
have to ship it out of their district to the
eastern market. If they could have that
flour ground at Prince Albert they \vould
save what it has cost to ship the grain to

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock, 135

Lake of the Woods and have it returned
in the shape of flour to their own
country. What I contend is, that there
should be some safeguard to prevent the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company dictating
terms to the people and to protect the pub
lie interests. An hon. gentlepian says it is
absurd, the interests of the Canadian Pacific
Railway are bound up in that country, they
would not do anything to oppress the peo-
ple. Hon. gentlemen, if the Canadian Paci-
fic Railway can get two rates instead of one
they will take the two rates every time, no
matter what the peoples' interests may be.
We had last year, and we have had all win-
ter, an illustration of how a town can be in-
jured by a railway company. The people of
Fort ^IcLeod are called upon to leave the
homes which they have occupied for Tien or
twelve years and build a new town at a site
selected by the railroad company. The his-
tory of Fort McLeod is this • When the
North-west Mounted Police went there in
1873 a post was located. A number of people
followed the police to furnish supplies to the
post and a village sprang up. It became ne-
cessary in consequence of the growth of the
country to build a new post, and the Govern-
ment selected a place some three or four
miles from the original location, because it
was a better place for the town that would
ultimately grow up. This was some years
ago. The people moved to the new site and
settled there and a town was built up, and
farmers settled near it. The Government
surveyed the town on their own land and
sold the people lots and took their money,
and finally a railway comes along subsidized
with 6,400 acres per mile and $80,000 a
year, and instead of serving the town already
established there, this company establishes a
town site three miles west from Port Mc-
Leod and is now endeavouring to force the
people to change from their present resi-
dences. That fight has been going on all
winter. The people refuse to budge and they
have not yet given in, but of course it is im-
possible for them to continue the fight sin-
gle handed. They will have to give in be-
cause they cannot continue where they are
— they cannot continue to drive three miles
in order to get to the station. I drew the
attention of the hon. leader of this House to
the matter last year before construction was
completed, when there was time to remedy
it, bat no notice was taken. Is it fair to
the people in that western country who use

their intelligence and enterprise, to locate
where they believe a town is to grow up, to
treat them in that way when they have
the whole country to choose from? Is
it fair to rob them of the fruits of their in-
telligence and their enterprise as this rail-
way company is doing ? The same company
is doing a similar thing at Edmonton, and it
is with a knowledge of these facts and of the
great power a railway company possesses in
that extensive country, and of the weakness
of the people that I bring this subject before
the House. Individually, they can do no-
thing ; it is only through the G^ivernment
that the interests of the people can be pro-
tected in the matter of rates and locating
centres which shall be served by the rail-
ways, and if a people are a free people it is
only through their Government they can assert
their freedom. We saw the people of Re-
gina coming down last year in regard to the
location of a new line in their part of the
country. They went to Mr. Van Home. I
say they should have come to our Govern-
ment here — to our railway commission, and
shown the position in which they stood. The
company proposed to start a junction fifteen
miles from Regina, though Regina is the
capital of the country. The people want to
know what are the physical or geographical
reasons why the capital of the Territory
should be ignored by starting an important
junction fifteen miles away. Those repre-
sentations should be made to the Govern-
ment, and if the Government cannot inter-
fere between the companies and the people,
then we should have a commission clothed
with powers similar to the interstate com-
mission in the United States, to guard the
interests of the people in their public and
private dealings with the railway companies.
What are the reasons why we should not
start from Regina? Why do you start
fifteen miles further on ? Because probably
starting fifteen miles further on, the inter-
ests of a new town site would be served and
money made out of it. There can be no
other reason at all. There are no physical
difficulties in that country whatever ; but
hon. gentlemen with a knowledge of these
facts, I, who reside in that country, am merely
raising my voice for the people of that
country and pointing out to the Government
here that they should stand between the
people and that powerful railway company
when it comes to a question of imposing too
heavy freight rates, or dealing with matters

Digitized by

Google

136

Canadian Pacific JRailway (SENATE] Company's Capital Stock.

such as location or construction or anything
of that kind in our western country.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I should like to ask
whether the hon. gentleman has put his
motion in proper shape. It really is not an
inquiry because he does not ask a question.
He asks the Government to bring down
certain papers. I think it should be
amended and put in the shape of an address
asking for the papei'S to be brought down,
and not left as it stands now.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — I suppose he can put
it in the form of an address ?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not pro-
pose to follow my hon. friend in this
matter, because he is more conversant with
the subject than I am, and I have not the
facts and figures before me that would be
necessary in order to deal extensively with
the subject. But my hon. friend would lead
us to suppose that this railway is a gigantic
monopoly, terrorizing the people and de-
pressing the industries of the North-west.
I remember the time when it was feared
that the company would become bankrupt
and the road would fall into the hands of
the Government, and the Government would
not be able to run it. Now, when we find
men possessing the enterprise, energy and
courage of the Canadian Pacific Railway
officers managing this concern as a private
company, I think they have certainly a
light to do as they please. It is not to
their interests to oppress the people of the
North-west and ruin that country. Their
object is to develop the North-west and
fill it with settlers ; and if the policy of the
Canadian Pacific Railway was, as my hon.
friend desires to represent it, namely, to
drive the people from the country, it would
be suicidal — it would be killing the goose
that laid the golden egg. At one time
the railway terminus on the Pacific coast
was fixed by Act of Parliament at Port
Moody and I had lands there, private
lands. It was in the interests of the com-
pany that they should get 'certain subsidies
and they proposed to go twelve miles further.
Did I say that they should be confined to
that terminus, or that they should not go
further? When it was the interest of the
company, as I believe it was the public
interest, to extend the line twelve miles
further, did I ask the legislature to prevent

them going further, although T, with others,
lost thousands of dollars by the change of ter-
minus ? I do not think the Government should
take control of a private company and tell
them how far they should extend theirlineSjOr
where the town sites should be, or what the
freight rates should be ; in doing that the
Government would be taking a power which
they have never yet ' assumed. Now, as to
the interest and capital, the hon. member
must be mistaken : I think they h"!ave actu-
ally spent more than double $22,000,000.
My hon. friend has actually taken the value
of lands yet unrealized upon — because the
lands are there yet. Now, if my hon. friend
can show that this railway company is a
tyrant and asking excessive rates, then
there might be something in it, but my hon.
friend has failed to do that, and I do not
see why the Gtjvemment should ask this
company to reduce its rates. Then ray hon.
friend speaks of oats being worth only
13 cents a bushel. An hon. gentleman
beside, me suggests that he is sowing his wild
oats. I think he had better give his oats to
the hens or cattle. That would be much
better than bringing it fifteen hundred miles
for sale in competition with the oats of this
part of the country : it cannot be done to
advantage. If those farmers in the western
country understand their business they will
not bring the coarser grains, which are of
little value, down here. They should be
fed to the cattle in that country. It is very
unwise to raise oats in that country when
such grain is worth only fifteen cents a
bushel, bring them over the railway that
long distance, and expect to make money
on them. Now, the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way have done a great deal for this country
and I believe their interests are the interests
of this country, and their prosperity is depen-
dent upon the development of the country,
and that they will do nothing that will tend
to delay the progress of the country in the
North-west. Their interests are so thoroughly
identified with the progress and develop-
ment and settlement of that country that
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company will
never attempt to tyrannize over the people in
whose interests the railway is attempted to
be run.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I do not propose to
follow the hon. gentleman who brought this
motion before the House through the various
figures he treated us to : but when I learned

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBEUAEY 6, 1893J Company's Capital Stock. 137

to-day that he was to bring this motion up,
I had a telegram sent to Mr. Drink water,
the secretary of the company, asking whether
the company had availed itself of the right
to issue stock under the Act of last year, and
I received the following answer : " There
has been no issue of ordinary stock under
the Act of last session." The first clause of
the Act of last session authorized the com-
pany by a vote of at least two-thirds of the
sharehoJaers present, to issue capital stock
in lieu of debenture stock. It appears there
has been no ordinary stock issued, people
holding debenture stock would not exchange
it for ordinary stock unless they were secured
in some way. Debenture stock is a security
on the assets of the compaay and with the
ordinary stock the stockholder takes his
chance. Some persons might be so enthus-
iastic about the success of the railway that
they would imagine that ordinary stock would
pay better in the future than debenture
stock, and if they liked to speculate it would
be fair to give them a chance ; but at the
present and for some years it is not likely
that people will changfe what is a bona fide
real security for one that is to some extent
problematical.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— This Act provides
for the exchange.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Then the next clause
provided that in addition to the capital stock
at the time of the passing of this Act, and
which may be issued under the authority of
the next preceding section, the company
being authorized to so do by a vote of at
least two-thirds of the shareholders present,
may issue capital stock for any purpose
for which the company may require it,
w^ith the approval of the Governor in
Council. It appears there has been no
issue of ^tock under that section. I under-
stood from the hon. the leader of this ;
House a day or two ago. that there had been
no application for the issue of stock under
that particular clause. My bon. friend has
evidently been misled by the work from
which he first quoted. That professes to
give a summary of the financial position of
the various railways, and when I saw the
authority he was using, I endeavoured to look
up the source from which the figures have
been obtained, and I find they are taken
from the railway returns. The cost of the
Canadian Pacific Railway, according to this

I return, was $207,000,000 ; that is the total

! property including rolling stock, and then

I there are the lines since acquired by the

j Canadian Pacific Railway, namely the Atlan-

I tic and North-western, the Manitoba and

South-western, the St. Lawrence and Ottawa,

the Toronto, Grey and Bruce, and the other

lines forming the Canadian Pacific Railway

system. They would amount to — hastily

running up the figures — sDmething in the

neighbourhood of $260,000,000; so that Isup-

pose $272,000,000 would represent what was

the original total cost of all those railways.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— If the hon. gentle-
man would refer to this report, this balance
sheet, he will see that the aggregate cost of
all those railways is included in the return.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— If they cost the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway that amount, then,
according to the official returns, the com-
pany would not be earning a dividend suffi-
cient to pay three per cent on that aggre-
gate.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is just three
per cent on seventy-nine millions.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT- Some of the roads
taken over were at the time in an insolvent
position ; for instance, take the road running
south from Ottawa: the Canadian Pacific
Railway did not undertake to pay six per
cent on their bonds; they only agreed to
pay one per cent; it was not earning any
more than that, and they would not under-
take to guarantee any more, and so with
other roads. That road came under my
observation, because I happened to be fam-
iliar with it. Well, now the dividend which
is referred to in the return of the company
is the dividend on the $65,000,000, the
capital stock of the company. The interest
on the charges on the other roads is
given at page 19 of this report. There
is a long list of railways in that page,
the company have guaranteed, either the
original interest, or a part, at all events,
from the time the roads were transferred to
them. Well, without going over all the
roads, the total charges amount to $4,664,-
000. The net earnings of the railway were
$8,000,0Q0. The fixed charges that I have
just referred to, before anything can be
allotted to the ordinary stock, are $4,664,-
000; surplus, $3,345,000. Out of that 2

Digitized by

Google

138 Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company's Capital Stock.

per cent has been deducted for two supple-
mentary dividends ; the company have been
paying 5 per cent on its stock. Hon.
gentlemen will recollect, perhaps, that in
1882 and 1883, when the company were
endeavouring to establish a credit for the
railway, and in order to give a value to the
stock, they deposited with the Government
an amount sufficient to pay for ten yeai-s
3 per cent on the stock of the company.
That was deposited with the Government.
The company applie<l the 2 per cent out
of earnings towards dividends. The 2
per cent and the 3 per cent together
made the 5 per cent. We all know very
well that notwithstanding that deposit of
3 per cent guaranteed by the Govern-
ment for ten years, the company's stock in
1883, 1884 and 1885 was down very low,
among the forties ; it was open to the world
to buy it ; it was on the Stock Exchange in
London, New York and Paris.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It only cost
twenty-6ve per cent.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— That was a privilege
to the original shareholders who deposited
the security to build the road.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— To what amount?

Hon. Mr, SCOTT— I am not sure; I
think to $5,000,000. The stock had to be
put on the market, and in order to give it
value, the interest at 3 per cent for ten
years was deposited with the Government.
Holders of shares were at all events certain
of getting 3 per cent on the stock for
ten years. Even with that attraction, in
1884 and 1885, during the time the com-
pany were sustaining severe reverses in the
money market, in those years they had to
apply to the Government to borrow money,
the stock was on the market low down in
the forties, 43 and 44 cents on the dollar.
I remember trying to induce a friend of
mine in New York to buy the stock, but
he would not ; he had not confidence enough
in it ; and he felt greatly disappointed in
after years, as many others did. It was not
realized, even by the promotors, that the
success of the company would have been as
great as it has been. The ten years, I
believe, expire in August next. The com-
pany have been enabled to pay 2 per cent
with the 3 per cent that was paid out of

the original deposit. Now, this surplus
that the hon. gentleman has drawn the
attention of the House to, will show the
prudent policy of the company. If they
are to keep up the stock at its present
value, they must be prepared to show that
the company, from its earnings, and by the
accumulation of moneys that have been
reserved, will be able to sustain the
credit of the stock. I suppose it will
be admitted that Canada now is very
much interested indeed in the good name
and the credit of the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way. I thiak that it is admitted by all sides
and by all parties, whatever our views may-
have been at the beginning ; we are all now
interested in the success of the company,
and we are glad to notice that the company-
is adding considerably to its mileage in the
North-west. I see in this report reference
is made to a number of railways ; the exten-
sion to the coal fields of the Souris district,
and the connection of the branch at Delo-
raine, and several others. A number of
lines are being built, and that my hon.
friend will admit is' beneficial ; it is better
to have a railway in the North-west with
high charges than not to have roads at all ;
there is no doubt about that. The company
naturally are most interested in the low rates
of freight in order to attract traflic and set-
tlement, provided they can get enough traflic
to keep up the credit of the company and to
pay interest on the stock. I think we may
lay it down as a principle that it would be a
great misfortune if from any cause the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway stock should begin to
fall in the market. It would have a serious
influence on the credit of Canada, and it
would be said that we were retrograding.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON—It is the increas-
ing of the stock that is the basis of my objec-
tion. *

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I say the stock has
not been increased. The hon. gentleman
started out on these premises and he failed
to give us any proof of the fact whether the
company availed themselves of the Act of
Parliament authorizing the issue of capital
stock under the Act of last session. I inquii*ed
if they had and T received the answer, ** We
issued no ordinary stock." Then the second
clause of that Act authorized the company on
certain conditions to issue stock with the
approval of the Governor in Council. My

Digitized by

Google

Cnnadian Pacific Railway \FEBBXJARY 6, 1893J Company's Capital Stock. 139

Hon. friend is satisfied with the statement of
the leader of this House that there has been
no such stock issued. He knows very well
the company would not issue stock subject
to such a condition unless that condition
had not been fulfilled.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I knowthat $10,-
000,000 fixed charges have been added since
last year.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The company are buUd-
ing railways all the time; he has failed to show
us where the increase comes in. I have the
official return, and it brings it up to be-
tween §260,000,000 and $270,000,000. Those
figures that my hon. friend has given us from
the Statistical report are misleading, because
that is not the capital paid up ; the figures
represent the whole cost and charges of the
railway and of the other lines connected with
it, including rolling stock andevery liability.
That is evidently what that is ; it is not the
capital stock.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Does that include
the Government subsidy 1

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-^No, simply what the
actual cost of the roads has been — what has
been expended. The hon. gentleman will
see that the surplus to which he alludes is
not the surplus of last year, but an accumul-
ated surplus that the company has been
putting up to meet the contingency which is
going to arise in a very few months. Suppos-
ing the company had not arranged for this
amount of money to be held in reserv^e in
case of reduction of traffic, what would be
the eflfect? Why their stocks might come
down. The company have only paid out of
their earnings this 2 per cent ; the other
3 per cent has come from the Govern-
ment deposit. When that is exhausted, how
will they make up the necessary amount 1
The company naturally and properly say,
'* We have been preparing for that contin-
gency ; we do not allow ourselves to be
caught in such a serious financial crisis as
that, and we have reserved for the benefit
of that stock a sufficient amount to continue
paying fair dividends ; the reserve now
amounts to nearly five millions of dollars.
We hold that sum to the credit of the stock.
If we had not that reserve there might be a
fall of the Canadian Pacific Railway stock
in the market." What would be the effect ?

They could not go on in the construction of
lines in the North-west, and that would be
a national calamity, there is no doubt about
that. If the Canadian Pacific Railway
require money to build a railway, or to
perfect one that has failed in its construc-
tion, they are enabled to do so ; and it is a
matter of notoriety that a great many roads,
after commencing construction having failed,
have applied to the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way to take them up and they have taken
several roads over under such conditions ;
and the Canadian Pacific Railway hasenabled
those railways to be completed, much to the
advantage of this country ; it is, therefore,
of the first importance that the Canadian
Pacific Railway should seek to maintain the
high credit at which it now stands, and it
would have been a great mistake if the
company had not taken those proper pre-
cautions, so that in the future their stock
would be held up as high as in the past ;
and, having confidence in the future of the
road and their power of earning money, they
ask Parliament to allow the holders of
debenture stock to exchange their stock for
ordinary stock and take their chances of the
future. I have no doubt they may in future
years be induced to do so, because many of
the debentures are not bearing more than
4 or 5 per cent ; and the holders of this
stock would say, " I think the Canadian
Pacific Railway will be able to pay five or
more, and I will take chances " ; and so an
exchange would be made. It is in the
interest of the company to maintain its
high credit. If they were to adopt the
proposition of my hon. friend that their
earnings should be reduced, they would
not be able to build additional roads.
To establish his statement that they are
taking more from the people than is neces-
sary for the financial credit of the company,
he must show that the tariff of rates takes
from the people a larger amount than is
necessary to pay interest on the fixed
charges, and a reasonable dividend on the
stock. That is the fair criterion by which
the rates must be tested. It is not pre-
tended that you can alter the payments of
interest on the fixed charges. Under the
authority of Parliament certain mortgages
and debenture stocks were created, not only
on the main line of the Canadian Pacific
Railway but on various other roads acquired
by the company, and responsibilities have
been assumed which must be met or tlie

Digitized by

Google

140

Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company's ^Capital Stock.

credit of the company affected, and so the
fixed charges at present that are immutable
are the $4,600,000, leaving only out of last
year's earnings $3,000,000 odd to pay the
2 per cent that the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way pays its own shareholders, the balance
being calrried forward with the balances that
accumulated in former years as a reserve,
lest the earning power of the road in the
future should not be sufficient to pay the
oi*dinary shareholders a treasonable dividend.
That is a simple fact and those figures fully
bear out and confirm what I have said. I
do not propose to discuss this question of
rates, because I am not in a position to do
so, except to say that from the inquiry I
have been able to make, I understand that
the rates on American lines from Minne-
sota to the seaboard are higher than the
rates from points north of the 49th parallel
to the seaboard. Of course that is impor-
tant : it shows that with the monopoly that
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company at
present enjoys, at all events, to a limited
extent, the rates are no higher in Canada
than they are on the other side of the line,
where there is to a certain extent competi-
tion between the Northern Pacific, the
Union Pacific and other lines centering at
Chicago and which extend to the seaboard.
I am assured that this is really the fact,
that the rates are lower from points in
Manitoba and the North-west to the
seaboard, than the rates from corresponding
points in the United States to the seaboard.
I say this fact is important as showing that
the Canadian Pacific Railway have not im-
posed higher rates than those which prevail
on the other side of the line, where compe-
tition exists and that the rates are not
higher than are necessary to maintain the
credit of the company. When the hon.
gentleman first brought this question up he
|X)inted out that the rates from Minneapolis
to Montreal were less than they are
from Winnipeg to Montreal, but he forgot
to inform the House that the distance is
over 300 miles less from Minneapolis to
Montreal than from Winnipeg to Montreal,
and there would, of course, be a consider-
able difference on that account. I do not
pretend to speak of the rates in detail, be-
cause I know nothing about them, but I was
anxious to give the House those figures, and
looking over the statement from which the
hon. gentleman has quoted, I am quite con-
firmed in the view which I expressed, that

the $270,000,000 that my hon. friend ad-
: verted to is made up in the way I have in-
dicated, as the cost of the Canadian Pacific
Railway and the subsidiary lines, and if they
I were really paying the dividend on the
I $270,000,000 at 5 per cent, it would
I amount to about $13,000,000. My hon.
friend will see, therefore, that the dividends
are not paid upon the total cost of the rail-
, way and branches. The amount on which
I they are paying dividends is a very much
I smaller figure — it is on the mortgages and
' on the $65,000,000 stock only. The 2 per
! cent on $65,000,000 is just $1,300,000.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The hon. gentle-
man will realize that what I was dealing
with was the fact that this Act was passed
last year, giving the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way power to increase their stock — that the
statistical returns show that there was an
intent to increase it, and if the eeu-nings did
come up to $13,000,000 there would be a
justification for that increase.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— If the hon. gentlemaji
will look at the date of this statistical return
he will see that it was actually published
before the passing of the Act—it was the
year before. The Act was passed in 1892,
and this return which he has read from was
published in 1891. His conclusions are not
therefore correct.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The hon. gentle-
man has brought a return to show the
actual cost of the road is $279,000,000.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— That includes cost of
the main line and of all those railways that
I have spoken* of, the Atlantic and North-
western, the Manitoba and South-western,
the St. Lawrence and Ottawa, and others —

I two or three dozen railways.

j Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Tt includes the
! whole system.

I Hon. Mr PERLEY— Since my hon.

I friend has posed as the champion of the
North-west Territories, perhaps it would be
as well for me to say something now. I shall
not deal with the financial position of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, or the

i policy of the Government, further than to
say that I am sure both have met with the
strong approval of every man in the North-*
west Territories ; and if the hon. member

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock. 141

desires in any way to frustrate the building
of the road from the national boundary to a
short distance west of Regina, his opposi-
tion will meet with the disapproval of a very
large portion of the people in that part of
the Dominion. Besides, I do not think for
one moment that the object of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company, is to change the
terminus of the line from Regina for the
small penurious consideration of what they
might get out of it. The object is to get
the shortest possible line from ocean to
ocean. The hon. gentleman has found fault
with the excessive rates charged on the Can-
adian Pacific Railway. In some respects I
think the rates are too high, but that is not
the great trouble with the North-west Ter-
ritories at present. The depression in that
country arises from another source altogethei^.
I understand that the freight on a car load
of beef from Calgary to Montreal is $500 ;
that is about a cent and a half per pound.
Now, I think that is too high a price.

Hon. Mr. READ(Quint^)— laminformed
by Mr. Cochrane that the rate charged him
is one cent per pound ; he tells me that he
has had several loads carried at that figure.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— I understand that
we was allowed to send one car load at that
rate, to see how it would work ; but other par-
ties have to pay one cent and a half and that
is equal to $500 per car load from Calgary to
Montreal. I know from my own district the
freights to Montreal are very high, and peo-
ple are complaining of them, and it is a mat-
ter which the Government may take into
consideration, inasmuch as the Government
has subsidized the road largely. Now that
the Canadian Pacific Railway is in a paying
position, the rate should be lowered.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)—
What is the distance from Calgary to
Montreal 1

Hon. Mr. PERLEY-
I think.

-About 2,100 miles.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I might inform
the hon. gentleman that, while it costs one
and a half cents to carry beef from Calgary
to Montreal, it only costs a cent and a quar-
ter to carry tea from Yokohama to Chicago
or Montreal, or $335 per car load.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY — This year our wheat
has commanded a very low price, and there
has been some complaint on the part of the
farmers that they have been charged the full
rate, although the price is low. There is a
feeling amongst them that when they cannot
get good prices for wheat and the yield is
small, the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany should make some small reduction and
help them to bear the burden ; but with all
that, I have not much fault to find with the
company ; the people are largely at fault
themselves. In many instances, they are
pursuing a wrong coui-se. My hon. friend
spoke of the low price of oats. I think it
would be wrong to let the impression go
abroad that oats cannot be sold for more
than the rate he mentions. I know in my
own town, I saw 25 cents per bushel
offered for 3,000 bushels the night before I
left for Ottawa, and I believe to-day they
are worth 23 cents a bushel anywhere in
that section of the country. With regard
to the frozen wheat, if the proposition came
up to make the freight rates lower than they
are upon it, I would be inclined to oppose
it, because there could be no greater mistake
than to send frozen wheat out of that coun-
try, or to sell oats at 14 cents per bushel,
because, as I have contended many a time^
any farmer can make double that amount on
it by feeding it to cattle and hogs. I was
told to-day at noon that a merchant in
Mitchell, Ont., had shipped one car load of
hams to Winnipeg at a large price. Now,
in that country there are millions of dollars
worth of poor wheat that have virtually
been given away this year. Many farmers
refused $50 a car load for it, and the
consequence is they have had to keep it and
it is spoiled — they have no stock to eat it.
There is no profit in raising wheat to export
it for the price that has been offered. When
I was coming down the other day, I was
told that four car loads of poultry had been
brought to Winnipeg to be sold, and yet
the people grumble at the Canadian Pa-
cific Railway Company and the Govern-
ment, when the faidt is largely their own.
Why do they not raise poultry themselves ?
The other day the subject of the price of
coal oil was discussed in caucus. I have
not bought a gallon of coal oil in the North-
west myself at less than 40 cents a gallon,
but I can get it in Winnipeg for 18 cents a
gallon. Now, in that country, when the
farmers grumble about the high prices, the

Digitized by

Google

142 Canadian Pacific Railway [SENATE] Company's Capital Stock.

merchants are in the habit of blaming the
Canadian Pacific Railway, or the tariff for
the rates which they have to charge. I
unhesitatingly say, and I say it from my
place in Parliament, there is no country
that I have ever read of, or seen, in which
the farmer has such golden prospects ahead
of him as in the North-west Territories,
^ even with the rates charged by the Canadian
Pacific Railway, and the duties on im-
ported goods. Our grasses are valuable and
abundant, and cattle can be raised at very
low prices. I want the statement that I
am about to make to go to the world,
because I have proved it beyond a doubt — I
raised nine head of cattle myself for $11 each.
That includes every charge for labour, feed,
et<;. I sold them for $35 apiece. Of the
81 1 per head that I estimate as their cost to
me, only $5 represented money I had to pay
out. If people would go into mixed farm-
ing and use the straw stacks that, I am
sorry to say, are being burned up to-day,
they would not have to complain of the
Canadian Pacific Railway rates. If they
would form a combination and buy their
coal oil at 18 cents per gallon, they would
not have to pay from 40 to 45 cents for it.
In many respects the farmers themselves
are to blame for their want of prosperity,
because they have confined their operations
to raising wheat from year to year, and I
say that wheat is not a safe crop every
season. Even this year wheat will pay twice
over the market price if it is fed to stock ;
and when farmers learn to diversify their
industry they will find it much more profit-
able, and they will not have to complain of
excessive freight rates.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— I
just desire to add a few wordis to what
lias been so well said by the hon. the
leader of the Opposition, and in r^ply
to the hon. member from Marquette. The
financial accounts of the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company are published every
year and distributed broadcast throughout
the country, so that if any one is not in-
formed concerning the financial condition of
that railway it is his own fault. It would
not be at all surprising if any one were con-
fused as to its financial condition after list-
ening to the speech and extraordinary state-
ments made by the hon. member from Mar-
quette. I wish to say this much with i
reference to the Canadian Pacific Railway |

Company. It is their policy and their in-
terest to so conduct their business that farm-
ing can be successfully pursued anywhere in
the North-west, and the theory upon which
ths rates applicable to the products of Mani-
toba and the North-west Territories are framed
is to make it possible for farmers wherever
located, to grow produce for export to distant
markets. That is the policy and the practice
of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.
I have been very much amused at some con-
tradictory statements made by the hon. mem-
ber for Marquette. On a previous occasion,
he favoured us with a long array of figures
to show that the country is not progressing
and the depressed condition of all its inter-
ests. He has told us to-day that his valua-
tion of the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany's lands is $2 per acre, but that he
expects that in a very short time they will
be worth $4 per acre.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I said that was
what they were getting for them.

Hon. Mr. MAcINNES(Burlington)-With
reference to the Act of last session which has
been alluded to, most of you are aware — that
when the Canadian Pacific Railway Company
some years ago were in a position to require
assistance from the Government they did get
that assistance and gav« the Government se-
curity on every mortal thing they had, and
one of the conditions imposed by the Gov-
ernment on the company was that they
should not increase the capital stock beyond
the amount at that time— $65,000,000. That
loan, amounting to $30,000,000 has since
been repaid to the Government with inter-
est— every penny of it. When it was so re-
paid the company considered that the
condition imposed upon them not to issue
any more stock should be done away with,
and asked Parliament to be placed in the
same position as any other railway company
on this continent. I should like if any hon.
gentleman can point out a single railway
company that is forbidden to issue stock to
any extent that the public may take or the
shareholders may authorize. I recollect well
when the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany repaid this loan to the Government
how the United States press thought what a
simple minded class of people the stock-
holders of the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company were, in paying a debt to the Gov-
ernment. The integrity of its dealings ap-

Digitized by

Google

Canadian Pacific Railway [FEBRUARY 6, 1893] Company's Capital Stock. 143

peared to them so incredible, that they
refuse to believe it even to this day — and
they are constantly harping on its being such
a highly subsidized road. I think that the
Canadian Pacific Railway Compcuiy's policy
and conduct do not require any defence from
me or from anybody else, and the best possible
thing for the company is that the truth con-
cerning it should be made known to the pub-
lic everywhere.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I presume that, after
the discussion, and after stating the fact
that no Order in Council has been issued
and no application has been made by the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, the
hon. gentleman • will allow his motion to
drop. I would, however, take this opportu-
nity to say that there is a good deal of
force in the point raised by the hon. gentle-
man from York, in reference to the discus-
sion of matters of this kind. No one read-
ing the motion on the paper could conceive
that it would lead to a discussion on the
management and the freight rates of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company. It is
springing a question on the House which
they are not prepared to discuss. That is
evident from the remarks made by the leader
of the Opposition. While he was prepared
to discuss the question really involved in the
motion — that is, as to the issue of stock and
the stock capital of the company — he was
not prepared to enter into the minutia?, as I
am sure I was not, of the freight rates on
the road. I might add one other word — I
think the course pursued by the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company in asking for the
passing of that Act was not only in accord
with correct policy, but was one which any
Parliamentand any Government would grant,
and for this reason : They are constantly
extending their operations ; they are build-
ing branch lines through nearly the whole
of the North-west Territories, and it is not
to be supposed that they would build those
lines out of their individual pockets, or build
them out of the profits arising from the
working of the Canadian Pacific Railway
proper. Hence it would be evidently neces-
sary to obtain power to increase the capital
stock to enable them to go on with those
extensions. Those who live in that country,
and in the east — whose money to a very
large extent has been expended in the con-
struction of that road — certainly will agree
with the hon. member from Assiniboia when

he says that the investment of money in
making these branch lines, whether it be to
connect with the south or to run to the north,
is one which that country at least, and the
whole of us, will approve. The success and
prosperity of the farmers in the North-west
is as much to the interest of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company as it is to every
individual living in the country, because the
investment which they have made in the
construction of these roads would be utterly
valueless if there was no freight produced
for them to carry. Whether they are charg-
ing too much or not I am not going to discuss
at present, but from the remarks made by
the hon. gentleman from Burlington (Mr.
Maelnnes), there is no doubt of this fact,
that the rates that are being charged by
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company
where they have no competition, are lower
than the rates on American railways similarly
situated. I can understand that they would
lower the rates from Minnesota, because in
carrying flour from that point to the sea-
board they have to come into competition,
as the leader of the Opposition very properly
said, with a number of old established lines
running fi*om Minneapolis and St. Paul to
Chicago and eastward to the seaboard. So
long as the railway companies are free to
charge rates, just so long will they make
them as high as possible, whether properly
or not I do not say.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— The
Canadian Pacific Railway's rates from Min-
neapolis to the seaboard are quite as low as
from Winnipeg to Montreal per mile.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL — I am sure my hon.
friend knows better than I do — he has been
over the western and south-western railways
from the Pacific to this part of Canada —
that where those roads have no competition
they charge extremely high rates, and it will
be a question for the Government hereafter
to decide whether a railway commission
should lye appointed, as has been advocated
for some time, the same as exists in England,
to regulate rates.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I regret that the
hon. gentleman from Shell River put his
notice on the paper in the form in which he
did. I understood that the hon. gentleman
proposed to ask the leader of the Govern-
ment a question, and consequently I thought
that we should simply have a few remarks

Digitized by

Google

144

The Balfour [SENATE] Divorce Bill.

from him and a reply from the leader of the
'Government. When I come to examine the
notice, I find that, although it begins with a
question, it is really a motion for papers. I
think it is unfortunate that we had not pro-
per notice, so that we might be prepared to
discuss the question. I will call the atten-
tion of the Minister of Agriculture to the
very serious task which presents itself be-
fore him. I understood him to say that he
proposed to correct the errors in the census
returns which are the work of the Dominion
Statistician. I learn now from the hon.
gentleman from Ottawa that the Dominion
Statistical Record, which is an official publi-
cation of the Department of Agriculture,
and which is prepared by the assistant sta-
tistician, is as unreliable as the census re-
turns. I think it is a most unfortunate
thing for the country that the impression
should get abroad that all our statistics are
unreliable. I hope that under the rt^gime
of the hon. gentleman we shall have nothing
of that sort to complain of in future. I do
not think any volume should go out with
the iuiprimatur of the Government of Can-
ada containing figures which are calculated
to mislead, as these statistics have been shown
to be.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It is evident that
the motion of the hon. member from Mar-
quette was impi'operly drafted, and we have
proof of it in the discussion that it has pro-
voked. From this question of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company we have now
entered into a discussion of the census and
from the census we are led into the book of,
statistics published by the department. The
hon. member for Halifax said that I had
undertaken a very arduous task. That may
be, but I never said that I intended that the
census should be made over again, and I
never admitted that there had been any errors
in the census from the official source. I
said that perhaps people, in recording them-
selves as. to nationalities, had been misled,
that they had misunderstood the questions.
That is all T said. Now, as to that book of
statistics, which represents the capital of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company to be
$279,000,000, 1 do not think that that state-
ment is erroneous. If it was, it would not
be there. I will explain what I understand
by the ?279,000,000 ; the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company have built their road with
a given capital \ they have acquired other

property which had also cost large amounts
of money, and when they purchased those
roads they put the value of them at the
cost. Why should they decrease the value
of their property because they purchased it
at le,8s than cost ? I believe that this amount
of $279,000,000 is made up of the cost of
the roads and property owned by the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway Company.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I pointe<l out that
they purchased the New Brunswick railroad
for $15,000,000 and when it was absorbed
it was put at $24,000,000.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I say they may
have bought roads cheaper •than the cost,
but in making up their inventory they were
not bound to put the value at less than the
original cost.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The question
having been answered, I ask permission to
withdraw my motion.

The motion was withdrawn.

The Senate adjourned at 6.05 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tuesday, February 7tli, IS'hi,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayera and routine procee<lings.
THE BALFOUR DIVORCE BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN, from the Select Com-
mittee on Divorce, to whom was referred
the petition of James Balfour for relief, pre-
sented their fourth report and moved its
adoption. He said: All the papers in this
case are regular and complete. The notices
were given in the Canada Gazette and in
the local paper, and the service was pei'sonal.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW introduced BiU (D)
" An Act for the relief of James Balfour."

The Bill was retul the fii*st time.

Digitized by

Google

An [FEBRUARY 7, 1893] Adjournment

145

THE DORAN DIVORCE BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon, Mr. GO WAN, from the Select Com-
mittee on Divorce, to whom was referred the
petition of James Frederick Doran for relief,
presented their fifth report and moved its
adoption. He said : In this case the com-
mittee found all the notices published as re-
quired and the service sufficient, as proved
before the British Vice-Consul in Paris,
where the respondent is now living under
an assumed name — a French name. The
committee have made a special recom-
mendation, with a view to prevent the pos-
sibility of the case lying over. They have
recommended that the telegram of the Brit-
ish Vice-Consul or Consul in Paris be re-
ceived as sufficient for the second reading
of the Bill, but that the evidence is to
remain over and the committee are to await
the regular papers proving the service in
the usual' manner, the object being merely
to facilitate the reference to the committee
after the second reading.

Tke motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW introduced Bill (E)
" An Act for the relief of James Frederick
Doran."

The Bill was rea/1 the firat time.
THE DIVORCE RULES.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN, from the Select Com-
mittee on Divorce, presented their sixth re-
port, recommending the purchase of twelve
copies of GemmilPs " Practice of the Parlia-
ment of Canada upon Bills of Divorce " and
moved its adoption. He said : The edition
of the rules published some time ago has
been exhausted, and there is not sufficient
to supply the Committee. To have the rules
specially printed would involve a good deal
of expense, and it occurred to the Committee
that they could get the rules in printed form
in this treatise, with the additional advan-
tage of having before them a note of all the
cases that have been before Parliament from
the very first, find notes and comments that
cannot fail to be of value to the Committee.

The motion was agreed to.

BILL INTRODUCED.

Bill (F) "An Act to amend the Act
respecting the Nova Scotia Permanent Bene-
10

fit Building Society and Saving Fund " (Mr.
Almon.)

QUARANTINE STATION IN BRITISH
COLUMBIA.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. McINNES moved :

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Govemoc-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid blefore thii*
House, copies of all letters, communications and
telegrams between the Minister of Agriculture, or
any official under him, or any other Minister or
official of the Dominion Government, and the Gov-
ernment of British Columbia or any official thereof,
the British Columbia Board of Trade, ancl the local
Dominion Engineer, relating to the erection of a
proper quarantine station at Albert Heail or \V il-
liam Head, British Columbia.

The motion was agreed to.

AN ADJOURNMENT.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved :

That when the House adjourns to-day it do
stand adjourned until Monday, the 27th instant,
at eight o*clock in the evening.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not sup-
pose that my hon. friend is serious in ex-
pecting this House to adjourn for that length
of time. When the hon. gentleman asks for
an adjournment he generally expects it to
be for about half the time called for by his
motion, and I suppose that is the case in the
pi'esent instance. Of course the Government
will be consulted with regard to the state of
the public business, and whether the adjourn-
ment will interfere in any way with it. I
generally oppose adjournments in this House,
yet if the Government think that the pri-
vate interests of parties will not suffer, and
that the public business will not be impeded,
I make no objection. For my part, I think
this is the proper place to be during the
sitting of Parliament. I was under the im-
pression that the Government were intend-
ing to make a new departure in the mode of
procedure in the other House, and that busi-
ness would be sent in to us so that there
would be no delay. I thought that this House
would have a share of the public business.
We were delayed last year with the Crim-
inal Code, which many of us opp>osed as
coming up too late in the session, and it was
with great reluctance that we passed that
measure. We have a leading member of
the bar in this House — the Minister of

Digitized by

y Google

146 The Small-Pox Epidemic [SENATE] in British Columbia.

Agriculture — and I think he should be able
this year to give us the re\4sion of the
Criminal Code. I do not see why, with my
hon. friend at the head of the House, we
could not have that Bill or some other
Bill during the session. I do hope that the
Government will not agree to this long ad-
journment, which certainly must be preju-
dicial to the House. Last year, when we
had our first adjournment, we were promised
that that would be the only one, but we
had other adjournments. There will be a
holiday next week — Wednesday, 15th — and
I move in amendment that when the House
adjourns, if the Government considers that
it can adjourn at all, that it stand adjourned
until the 16th instant.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — It has been the in-
variable custom in this House, and a custom
from which I think it would be unwise to
depart, that before we enter upon a discus-
sion of this question, we should have from
the members representing the Government
of the country an intimation as to whether
the public business would be at all incom-
moded or delayed by the proposed adjourn-
ment. Very often the leader of the House
has left it to the Senate to decide the length
of the adjournment ; but invariably we have
first ascertained, before entering into a dis-
cussion, that the adjournment might be taken
without injury, to the public interest.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I was about to rise
when the motion was first proposed by its
mover, but other gentlemen, who were a little
more active than I was, secured the floor.
Those who know n^e understand my exces-
sive modesty ; I did not like to interfere. I
was about to say that I had consulted the
leader of the Government and that he saw
no inconvenience in an adjournment of ten
or twelve days, for the reason that the time
of the Commons has been occupied to a very
great extent since the opening of Parliament
in discussing the Estimates. You are all
aware that it requires some time, and delays
will take place, before the bills can be proper-
ly put before the House of Commons. 1
hope inthe future that the intimation thrown j
out V)y the hon. member for Lunenburg may
be carried into practical operation ; at any
rate, it will be my endeavour — and I know
that it is the endeavour of my colleagues — to I
to see in future sessions that this House is fur- ,
nished with a certain proportion of the legisla- 1

tion that is to take place. It will require the
adoption of some rules, of course, by which
those who desire legislation on particular
questions may have their Bills initiated in
either one House or the other. At present,
it is at the option of any company or any
gentleman desiring the psissage of a Bill
affecting any interest of the company with
which he is connected, to select the House
in which it shall be introduced ; and so far
as the Government are at present concerned,
they could only have direct control over the
Government measures. I have been prom-
ised, as I intimated the other day, some few
of those measures, and I hope to be able to
lay them before the House at the very
earliest possible moment after the adjourn-
ment. I think, however, that the length of
time asked for by the hon. gentleman for the
adjournment is too long. Our impression
was that Monday, the 20th, would be quite
long enough ; but others have intimated
that it would be difficult for them to reach
here on Monday, unless they travelled or
left home on Sunday ; so that it would be
better to say Tuesday, the 21st. By Chat
time I hope that the business of the other
House will be sufficiently advanced to enable
us to proceed here.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— If the House
will allow me I will say Tuesday, the 21st
instant, at 8 o'clock in the evening.

The motion, as amended, was agreed to.
The Senate adjourned at 4 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tuesday, February 21sty 189 *i.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 8 p.m.
Prayers and routine proceedings.

THE SMALL-POX EPIDEMIC IN BRIT-
ISH COLUMBIA.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) moved :

That an humble Address l)e presented to His
Excelleucy the Governor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to Im? laid before this
House, copies of all letters, comniunicatious and
telegrams between the Minister of Agriculture,
any official under him, or any other Minister oi

Digitized by

Google

Mlitia Land Grants in [FBBBUARY 22, 1893] the North-west Bill.

147

official of the Dominion Government, and the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, the British
Columbia Government, the Mayors of the cities of
Victoria and Vancouver, the Dominion health
officers of the ports of Victoria and Vancouver,
relating to the introduction of small-pox into Vic-
toria and Vancouver in May and June, 1892, by
the mail steamers from Japan and China.

He said : I do not propose to make any
remarks on this subject until the papers are
brought down.

The motion was agreed to.

MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES IN
CANADA.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved:

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellencv the Govemor-Genersil ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, a list, as nearly as can be obtained, of all
the manufactories in operation in Canada, with
the number of operatives employed, together with
the amount paid for wages for the years 1878 and
1891 respectively.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I should like to call
the hon- gentleman*s attention to the fact
that his motion is likely to involve a great
deal of trouble and considerable expense.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The information
cannot be furnished.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I was about to say
that it could not be done. I would suggest
to the hon. gentleman that he should substi-
tute 1881 for 1878 in his motion, and then
there might be an opportunity to make an
approximate comparison, but it would be
almost impossible to get the returns for
1878.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I was about to
make the suggestion that the hon. gentle-
man should amend his motion, and make it
read " 1881 and 1891, respectively." There
are no records for 1878 and consequently
we should have to take the returns for the
year 1881.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN — I have no objec-
tion to amending the Address. I took 1878
because it was the year immediately pre-
ceding the adoption of the National Policy.
I have taken care to say in the motion " as
nearly as can be obtained." I am willing
to have it changed from 1878 to 1881.
lOJ

The motion was amended accordingly and
adopted as amended.

^TARIFF CHANGES SINCE 1879.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved :

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, a copy of ajl the changes that have been
made in the tariff since the National Policy became
law ip 1879, giving the name of each article, show-
ing the original duty imposed thereon, the amount
of increase or reduction subsequently made, or
placed upon the free list, together with the date of
all such alterations in the tariff.

The motion was agreed to.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (H) " An Act to amend the law relat-
ing to holidays." — (Mr. Angers.)

Bill (I) "An Act to correct a clerical
error in the Bank Act." — (Mr. Angers.)

MILITIA LAND GRANTS IN THE
NORTH-WEST BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL presented Bill (G)
" An Act to make further provision respect-
ing grants of land to members of the
militia force in active service in the North-
west." He said : — I may mention that the
object of this Bill is simply to extend the
time, which expired at the close of last year,
for the issuing of land grants to those who
have obtained the proper scrip and have not
yet located.

The Bill was read the first time.
The Senate adjourned at 8.30 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Wednesday^ February 22iid, 189S

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o'dock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (D) " An Act for the relief of James
Balfour." (Mr. Clemow.)

Digitized by

Google

148

Nova Scotia [SENATE'] BtUlding Society.

Bill (A) " An Act for the relief of Edmund
Holyoake He ward." (Mr. Clemow.)

Bill (B) " An Act for the relief of Robert
Young Hebden." (Mr. Clemow.)

Bill (C; " An Act for the relief of Martha
Ballantyne." (Mr. Clemow.)

NOVA SCOTIA BUILDING SOCIETY.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ALMON moved the second
reading of Bill (F) " An Act to amend * An
Act respecting the Nova Scotia Pennanent
Benefit Building Society and Savings Bank
Fund.'"

He said : The No vaScotia Building Society
had a charter from the Nova Scotia Govern-
ment forty- three years ago, during which
time I have been one of the trustees. We
had a charter about two years ago from the
Dominion Government and these charters
appear to conflict with one another. This
Bill is to make the two charters more in
unison and for other purposes. I think, how-
ever, that that matter will be discussed more
fully when the Bill comes before the Com-
mittee on Banking and Commerce. I move,
seconded by the senior member for Halifax,
that this Bill be read a second time.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Thehon. gentle-
man from Halifax does not think it wise to
explain the Bill fully. I hope it is not to
wipe out the mortgagors in a quiet way.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There is no ob-
jection to the second reading of this Bill
being passed, but there are amendments I
think it would be necessary for the hon.
gentleman to suggest when it goes before
the Committee on Banking and Commerce.
The proposition in this Bill is to change and
amend the law passed in 1887 by the Parlia-
ment of Canada at the request, and at the
instance of the society itself, and at that
time the principle was laid down in the
General Incorporations Act, of limiting the
time for the sale of property which may come
into their hands to seven years ; this Bill
asks that it be changed to twelve years, and
it also asks that, in case the property is not
sold by that time, it should revert to and be
vested in the Crown, instead of, as is pro- 1
vided in the General Incorporations Act,
that it shall revert to and be vested in the
original owners ; why that change is made

I am not at the present moment able to ex-
plain. That will be explained, I presume,
by the hon. gentleman when it goes before
the committee. It is also proposed in this
Bill to exempt from the limit of time, the
sale of property which has come into the
hands of the society, which was acquired
prior to the passing of the Dominion Bill ;
so that they could, if this becomes law as it
is introduced, hold the property which they
may have acquired prior to that time for
ever. I simply make these explanations
because it may be necessary, when it comes
before the Committee, to so amend the Bill
as to make it in accord with the General
Act which governs all societies of this kind,
unless this building society can show good
and suflicient reasons why they should Ije
exempt from its operations.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I think the hon.
leader of this House should have made him-
self better acquainted with the facts before
making such statements. I think it is very
unfair to bring it before the House at this
time. The proper time, to my mind, to dis-
cuss it will be when it is before the com-
mittee. The hon. gentleman has made a
remark which I think no lawyer in this
House can concur in, that the Act which
was passed by the Dominion Government
had a retrospective effect. By the charter
under which this society acted for over forty .
years, they had the right to keep the land
in their possession as long as they liked and
to sell when they thought it was in their
interest to do so ; the hon. gentleman's
statements will conflict with the opinions of
all the lawyers whom I have heard speak
about it, except one or two pettifoggers
^-who wish to get lawsuits, and who live on
exacting money from corporations), who
have agreed with the hon. leader of this
House, but I do not think any sound lawyer
would ever say such a thing.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think my hon.
friend has misunderstood altogether w^hat I
said. I gave no opinion upon the point of
law, either directly or indirectly. I merely-
pointed out what the provisions of the law
were, and showed, if passed, what the effect
would be. I know nothing about the law,
and it would be presumption on my part to
attempt to give an opinion upon a point of
law. I have consulted the Minister of
Justice on this point and know what his

Digitized by

Google

Nova Scotia [FEBRUARY 22, lSd3'\ Building Society.

149

opinion is, but I do not desire to express
it here. Perhaps I should have said that in
the-last clause of the Bill it provided for the
i^etention of that property, or that they
wanted to have it so explicit that the petti-
fogging lawyers to whom my hon. friend re-
fers could not by any possibility take ad-
vantage of it and thereby create litigation to
the cQsadvantage of the society, but I
assure the hon. gentlemen I gave no opinion
whatever ; but as the question was asked «^
to the effect of this Bill, and as the rules of
this House, as I have read them, say that
the principle of a Bill is affirmed on its
second reading, I do not think I was out of
order or in any way out of place when I
stated the character of the Bill to the House.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I was rather sur-
prised at the fault found with the action of
the leader of this House, because from the
very outset of our proceedings, and during
the whole time I have been in the Senate, I
know it has always been the practice, where
any objection or any suggested amendment
was to be made to a Private Bill like this,
the proper time to make it was before it
went to the Committee in order that the
Committee might inquire into it. That has
been found a very convenient practice ; at
all events, it has been the practice. I do not
at present say whether I shall object to the
Bill or not, because we are unfortunately
placed in a position at present of not know-
ing what the Bill contains. It is getting a
step by the courtesy of the House, contrary
to the rules, in being read the second time
without the members of this House know-
ing what the Bill contains, and it is there-
fore the more necessary that the leader of
this House should, in his capacity as such,
bring before this House any suggestions he
may think proper to be considered by the
Committee. Therefore, I have no sympathy
with the attack that has been made upon
the Minister for his action, but the contrary,
although I come from Nova Scotia, from the
broad acres over which this building society,
I am sorry to say, in a great many cases, has
had junsdiction.

Hoa. Mr. POWER— I think the hon. gen
tleman from Amherst was slightly in error
in stating that the Bill was being passed by
the courtesy of the House. I fail to see that
there is any unusual court-esy extended to

the Bill, because it has been printed and
distributed in the usual way.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I have not seen it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am sorry for that,
but it does not alter the fact. Now, I do
not agree with what was said by my hon.
colleague with respect to the course taken by
the hon. leader of the House. I think the
course was perfectly sound, and just the
right course to take, because the hon. leader
of the House, by the course he adopted, gave
my hon. colleague and any other gentleman in-
terested in the passing of the Bill, notice
that amendments would be offered in Com-
mittee, and it is much better that my hon.
colleague should have this notice than that
he should be taken by surprise when the Bill
came up for consideration before the Com-
mittee on Banking and Commerce. I think
my hon. colleague was under the impression
that the hon. leader of the House was mani-
festing a spirit of hostility to the Bill ; I did
not so understand it. The course taken by
the leader of the House is the usual and
proper one. At the same time, the observa-
tions made by the hon. leader of the House
might, unless there was some little ex-
planation given of the peculiar position
of the Association which asks for this
Bill, perhaps lead to a misapprehension
of the exact position of affairs. The 11th
section of the Act of 1887, which this
Bill proposes to amend, was not asked
for by the promoters of the Act of 1887.
This 1 1th section was inserted in the Bill in
Parliament here, and it was done, I think,
at the instance of gentlemen who were more
familiar with the loan societies of Ontario
than with the Nova Scotia Benefit Building
Society, and that is one point that should be
borne in mind. It would look unreason-
able that the Nova Scotia Benefit Building
: Society should come here and ask that the
j legislation which they secured in 1887 should
be amended to-day. That is not the fact.
I They ask that a section, which was inserted
! in the Act without their request, should be
amended so as not to do them serious mis-
chief ; I do not think there is anything un-
reasonable or improper in the mere fact of
their coming here for that purpose. The
hon. gentlemen of the committee might bear
this in mind ; as I understand, in the pro-
vince of Ontario the loan societies take
possession of the lands on which they hold a

Digitized by

Google

150

Kova Scotia [SENATE] Building Society.

lien without any suit.* In Nova Sctotia,
the Nova Scotia Permanent Benefit Build-
ing Society do not do that ; they acquire
possession of the land after a regular suit in
equity and a judicial sale by the sheriff; and
under the law of Nova Scotia that judicial
sale by the sheriff gives the purchaser a
perfectly good and valid title, and conse-
quently the society, the morta:agees, under
our Nova Scotia law, have the same right to
buy in the market as any other persons, and
under our law if there is no flaw in the
title previous to the mortgage, the sale by the
sheriff vests a perfectly good and absolute
title in the purchaser. The hon. gentlemen
of the committee require, I think, to bear
that fact in mind. It places the lands
acquired by this society in a different
position from lands acquired by the loan
societies of Ontario. The details of the
matter, of course, can be very much better
discussed in Committee here ; but I think it
is only fair to my hon. colleague and the
promoters of the Bill to say a few words in
explanation.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — The discussion shows
the propriety of attention having been called
to this matter by the leader of the House.
It must be admitted by the hon. members
that it is the bounden duty of the leader of
the House to keep his eye on all legislation
here ; and if there is anything in any Bill
introduced here which requires careful atten-
tion on the part of this House and careful in-
vestigation, he would be derelict in his duty
if he did not call attention to it before the
Bill went to the Committee. So far from
being liable to censure for doing so, he has
simply discharged a duty devolving upon him,
neglect of which would expose him to censure.
I think the remarks of my hon. friend from
Amherst are scarcely fair. When he spoke
of the courtesy of the House he was quite
aware that the Bill had been printed.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— No.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — Is it not an admitted
fact that when a Bill is presented to this
House a second time, if there is any leading
feature requiring explanation, the hon. mem-
ber introducing that Bill gives the House an
explanation of the changes, and makes it
clear and distinct ? Then the principle of the
Bill is either accepted or rejected by the Bill
being passed or thrown out. I think nothing.

at all out of the way was said when it was
mentioned that the courtesy of the House
was being extended in allowing this Bill to go
to second reading without any particular ex
planation of it.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read a second time.

THE PRINTING OF BILLS.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the adjourn-
ment of the House, and in doing so said : I
have a suggestion to make which I think
will be valuable if adopted. It is that after
each Bill in the Orders of the Day there
should be something to indicate whether it
has been printed. That is the system that
is pursued in the House of Commons. If a
Bill is printed in English only, there is a
letter E after it ; if in French, the letter F ;
if in both languages, E-F; if in neither
language, no letter appears. When an order
is called, if neither letter appears the mem-
ber who has it in charge simply says, " not
printed," and it stands as a matter of course.
If this suggestion meets with the approval
of the House, I think it will be found to be
a great convenience.

Hon. Mr. McKAY — I think the sugges-
tion would not result in convenience at all
times. For instance, sometimes Bills are
not distributed until after the Orders of the
Day are printed, and in such cases they would
have to lie over.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— That might be a
strong reason for delaying the reading of the
Bill.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I am not so familiar
with the practice of the House in this
particular as other members are, but I know
in the House of Commons a Bill cannot be
proceeded with, unless it has been printed,
without the consent of the House. In some
iristances where a Bill is not of any impor-
tance it is just laid on the Table of the
House, and with the consent of the House,
proceeded with. I make this suggestion
with a view to preventing disputes as to
whether a Bill has been printed or not.

The motion was agreed to, and the Senate
adjourned at 4.05 p.m.

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FEBRUARY 23, 1893] Oommission.

151

THE SENATK

Ottatvay Thursday, February 2Srd, 1898,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o^clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (J) " An Act for the relief of John
Francis Schwaller." (Mr. Clemow.)

Bill (K) " An Actfor the relief of Annette
Marion Goff. (Mr. Clemow.)

THE PROHIBITION COMMISSION.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL moved :

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House:

1. A copy of the commission appointing and con-
stituting certain persons a Royal Commission to i
obtain reliable data respecting the operation and
effects of legislative prohibition of the traffic in in-
toxicating liquors.

2. Also, a copy of any and all instructions given
for the guidance of the said Royal Commission by
or under the authority of the Government.

3. Also, copies of any and all documents and
statistics furnished to the said Royal Commission,
by any of the Departments of the Civil Service, or
any officer of the Government, embodying infor-
mation or suggestions in relation to the subjects
which the said Royal Commission was appointed
to examine and report upon.

He said : — In proposing, for your adop-
tion, the motion for the Address which we
have on our minutes, I think it desirable to
explain why I ask for the information in
this public and official manner. Of course,
I could have gone personally to the different
departments and obtained all the informa-
tion which I require, did I need this infor-
mation for my own satisfaction. It is not,
however, for my own personal satisfaction
that I make the inquiry : it is in order that
the answer which will be given to thciso in-
quiries may have an official stamp, and may,
therefore, be recognized as having due
authority by the wide circle of persons in-
terested in the great cause of prohibition.
It will, of course, be understood that while
it is rather on behalf of others than for my-
self that I move for this information, I do
not assume to have any authority whatever
to act for or on behalf of any other indi-

vidual or body. I alone am responsible for
any statements that I may make, any opin-
ion I may give, or any argument I toay pre-
sent to the House. I should like that to be
clearly and distinctly und«^rstood. It is ob-
vious that unless I proceed in this way, any
information which I might obtain personally
and convey to my friends, would lack that
stamp of authority which alone gives it
value to those who are disposed not to re-
ceive very freely and trustfully any such
answer as I might be able to make to them.
Various opinions have, of course, been en-
tertained by the friends and opponents of
the Government, with respect to the course
that has been pursued in this matter.
It is partly with the view of removing wrong
impressions which I know to prevail, that J
seek the inquiry in this formal manner, and
partly also to obtain information which I
desire for my own personal use with respect
to the matter which comprises the third
paragraph of the Address which I propose
shall be sent. Of course my request must
not be considered by hon. gentlemen as in-
dicating any want of confidence in the Royal
Commission which has been appointed, or in
the result which may be obtained by their '
investigation. I am fully aware that such a
course would be exceedingly improper and
unfair. We must wait until we receive the
final report of that commission before we
can with any propriety pass judgment upon
the course pursued or the results attained by
them ; but while I think that they should be
exempt from any censure, or any harsh or un-
justifiable remarks, I think at the same time
that there is nothing improper or unjust in
my making observations or comments upon
what has appeared in the public newspapers
with respect to the course which they have
pursued, the inquiries which they have
made, the persons they have had before them
to give evidence, and the character of that
evidence. These things, I think, are fairly
subjects of comment ; and I may add that
in making some of the remarks which I pur-
pose to offer, I think my doing so is in the
interests of that Royal Commission and may
prevent them from doing what, in my
judgment, would be an erroneous act,
one not contemplated by the authority
which called them into being, and which
would not fulfil the end for which Par-
liament asked that the commission should
be appointed ; so that it is not in a
spirit of fault-finding or in opposition

Digitized by

Google

152

The Prohibition [SENATE] Commission,

to the Commission that I make any re-
marks, though some of them may seem to
imply censure on their proceedings. Hon.
gentlemen will probably remember that when
the House of Commons in 1891 passed the
resolution suggesting the propriety and neces-
sity of the appointment of this Royal Com-
mission, 1 ventured from my place in the
House to express my satisfaction with the
step which had been taken, although I well
knew that on the part of a large number of
those associated with me as fellow-workers
in the great cause of prohibition, a very
different view was likely to be entertained.
Now it would be well, I think, in order to
refresh our memory with reference to this,
that I should occupy the time of the House
for a few minutes in reading the resolution
which was adopted. It brings the question
before us in its primitive condition and in
its great simplicity. The resolution reads : —

In the opinion of this House it is desirable with-
out delay to obtain for the information and con-
sideration of Parliament by means of a Royal Com-
mission, the fullest and most reliable data possible
respecting ;

1. The effects of the liquor traflSc upon all inter-
ests affected by it in Canada ;

2. The measures which, have been adopted in
this and other countries with a view to lessen,
regulate or prohibit the tratfic ;

3. The results of these measures in each case ;

4. The effect that the enactment of a Prohibitory
Liquor Law in Canada would have in respect of
social conditions, agricultural business, industrial
and cofitmercial interests, of the revenue require-
ments of municipalities, provinces, and the Do-
minion, and also as to its capability of efheient
enforcement ;

5. All other information l)earing on the question
of prohibition.

N^ow, I took occasion when the subject of
prohibition was before the House in con-
nection with the appointment of a committee
of this House to look into the petitions which
had been presented, among other obser-
vations to make these remarks upon this
particular matter : "Of course I have no
authority to speak for any one but myself,
but personally I have no hesitation in say-
ing that I think the action taken in the
other House has been the gre^itest step for-
ward that has been taken for the cause of
prohibition for many years. My opinion is
that the apprnntment of this Royal Com-
mission is really an acceding to some ex-
tent to the request of the petitioners for the
enactment of a prohibitory law, as far as can
be done at present. It appears to me to be
a desirable and necessary step that Parlia-

ment should be furnished with reliable and
authentic information on the matter, in
order to act intelligently. Then it must be
remembered that the framing of an act of
this kind, making such important changes,
particularly in the revenues of the provinces,
as well as the revenues of the Dominion,
should be done with care, and with an
accurate and full knowledge of the results of
such legislation where similar enactments
have been passed in other countries. There-
fore in my humble judgment the a<;tion
which has been taken instead of being look-
ed upon as an attempt to burke the ques-
' tion, should be regarded as a necessai*y step,
I taken honestly, in the advance, and for the
; promotion of the interests of the country in
I this direction." Those were my sentiments
' at the time that was passed — sentiments for
which I was called to account by a great
many of my co-workers ; but most of them
were subsequently satisfied with the expla-
nation I was able to give them. Now, I
still adhere to the ^^ews which I expressed on
that occasion, although I must confess that
a considerable measure of disappointment
has been felt by me as I have carefully
watched the proceedings which have been
taken by the commission, and the character
of the evidence which they have collected.
It is quite true that some of this evidence
is exceedingly valuable, and the kind
of evidence which they were appoint-
ed to collect; but I venture to think
that the larger part of it is, and the
greater part of their time has been wasted
in obtaining, what Parliament did not re-
quire, and which under the instructions in
the commission from Parliament, they need
not have troubled themselves about, as they
have done. A very large amount of labour
I has been expended in the collecting of peo-
j pie's opinions. Now, I do not understand that
I Parliament desired the collection of opinions
j of anybody on these matters. My idea is,
' that Parliament, in authorizing that commis-
. sion, intended that they should gather facts
I upon which Parliament should found its opi-
nion. Now as a matter of fact, if any of you
I have followed up — T have no doubt many of
j you have — the examinationswhich have taken
j place, you must have seen what appears to
! me to be a very absurd proceeding with re-
j ference to the obtaining of these opinions.
I For instance you find persons engaged in the
I liquor traffic called in and asked very
I solemnly and very carefully if they think a

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FEBRUARY 23, 1893] Commission.

153

prohibitory law would be better than the
license system. You find them asked their
opinion if a prohibitory law could be
enforced, and questions of this kind. Of
course, it is perfectly absurd to ask such
questions of such people. You might just
as well ask a wolf if the fold was any protec-
tion of the lambs of a flock. And T find a
very large proportion of the time of the com-
mission has been taken up in collecting these
opinions. It is with this object, in order
that I may see whether the intention of
Parliament was rightly apprehended and
carried out by the commission and instruc-
tions issued for their guidance, that I ask in
the Address that information , shall be given
by furnishing us with a copy of the commis-
sion, in order that we may see that that
commission in its terms corresponds with the
resolution which was passed by the House
of Parliament, and further, a copy of any and
all instructions given for the guidance of the
commission in order that we may see that
those instructions were in harmony with
the objects sought to be obtained by
the appointment of the commission. I
have not in my own mind any doubts
in this matter, but I have heard on
all sides, from people not friendly inclin-
ed towards the Government, strong suspi-
cions and doubts as to whether the inten-
tions of Parliament had been fairly carried
out. Now those instructions given to this
commission will be furnished, and I am sat-
isfied in my own mind, although I have not
seen them, that they will harmonize with
the views of Parliament in having the com-
mission appointed to obtain the information.
It is quite true the general terras used in
that resolution will cover a great deal of
evidence which has been collected and
which is, in my judgment, unnecessary.
There has been a great loss of time and ex-
pense in having it all taken down by short-
hand writers, which will be increased by
having it all printed, as I suppose it will be,
and forming a very voluminous report ; and
while I believe and know that amongst all
this information are some very important
and very valuable facts, calculated to guide
us in our deliberations upon this great and
important question, I feel at present
rather alarmed at the amount of difficulty
we shall experience in getting at these
jewels. I am afraid they will be so deeply
buried by the rubbish which surrounds them,
that it will take a good deal of patience and

time to arrive at the discoveiy of the im-
portant facts which we have to act upon.
Whether it will be possible in the future
examination which will take place by the
commission to reduce this kind of gather-
ing of opinions, I know not ; perhaps after
hearing the remarks made by' myself and
others on the point, it may have the effect
of lessening this evil. It is admittedly an
evil that time and money should be spent in
the collecting of opinions which are of no
value whatever. I admit fully and frankly
that some opinions are exceedingly valu-
able : they are worth obtaining, and they
are reliable. I refer, for instance, to the
opinions of judges, I would consider their
opinions of very great weight — men of ex-
perience in dealing with the criminal class,
can form reliable opinions. I would think
the opinions of keepei-s of lunatic
asylums and keepers of jails or of peni-
tentiaries useful, for they would be capable of
forming opinions which might be of value,
but the idea of summoning interested per-
sons and asking opinions as to whether
such a law could be enforced appears to
me to be manifestly absurd. The very idea
of asking ^n a land like ours with a law-
abiding people, whether a law of the Domin-
ion can be enforced appears to me to be very
foolish. Any law of our country can be en-
forced and generally contains within itself
provisions for its enforcement, so I consider
that time is entirely lost in asking questions
of that kind. I notice also questions about
compensation. That is a very important
question in the minds of some, but at the
same time hon. gentlemen will see that the
question of the prohibition of the liquor
traffic and the question of compensation
being given to those whose business may he>
destroyed by the prohibition, are two totally
distinct questions. There is no necessity
whatever for their being taken into consid-
eration at the same time or for the one hav-
ing any influence on the other. If the pre-
servation and promotion of the peace, happi-
ness and well-being of our people demands
of us that we should have a prohibitory law,
then after it is passed we may very safely
and very wisely decide what compensa-
tion, if any, should be given to those whose
business has been interfered with. First
settle the question of prohibition on its
merits, and then on its merits take up the
question, if any compensation be due to
any body, to whom and how much. The Par-

Digitized by

Google

154

The Prohibition [SENATE] Commistion,

liauient of Canada may be .';afely relied upon
if a man's vested interests are encroached
upon in any way for the public gQod, to
compensate him if reasonable proof can be
adduced that such compensation should be
granted. The present is not the time to
discuss such a question, but I venture to
make the remark that when the question of
compensation comes to be decided it must
be remetabered that there are two sides to
the question. I am strongly of the opinion
that the compensation should be all the
other way- — that it should come out of the
pockets of those who through the liquor
traffic have been enabled to roll in wealth
and enjoy the largest amount of luxury and
ease at the expense of the poor people
whose want of bread and clothing has
contributed to that wealth. There is room
for argument as to which side should have
compensation, and it will be quite time to
discuss that question when the first and
primary question is decided, shall the coun-
try have a prohibitory liquor law ? I am not
at this time, of course, going into the gen-
eral question of prohibition; my object is
simply to obtain the information which I
desire. There is another point to which I
have not yet referred, and that is embodied
in the third clause of my request asking for
a copy of all the documents. My reason for
making this request is that on reading the
proceedings that have taken place, I notice
one of the commissioners stated that he had
an official document. He was questioning a
witness, and on receiving an answer, he re-
marked that it was not consistent with the
information contained in an official docu-
ment, some table of statistics by which he
was trying the evidence that had been given
him. If such a document has been fur-
nished to that commission, it is only fair and
right that we who are interested in it should
have some knowledge of it — that it should
be a public document to which we should
have access as well as the commissionei*s, in
order that we may ascertain its character
and see that it is fair and just. Now, with
reference to the personnel of the commission
I have not a word to say against . any of
them. Those of them whom I know, I have
great confidence in and esteem very highly ;
at the same time, with reference to the
appointment of commissioners, I understood,
and I believe it was the real meaning of the
Government, that we should have what
might be called a fair commission. I under-

stood that there would be two representatives
at least, of those who are known to be
friendly to prohibition, two of those who
are known to be adverse to it, and the third
should be as impartial a man as could be got
— a man of business. I understood that
that was to be the character of the com-
mission. Now, in watching the proceedings,
I have come to the conclusion, by consider-
ing the questions asked and remarks made,
and I do not think it is a conclusion which
can be gainsaid, that four of the five are
anti-prohibitionists and what sort of a
report we are likely to get I do not know
— I will not judge it until I see it.
j All the commissioners are unquestion-
I ably upright and honourable men, and
will no doubt give us the facts as they re-
ceived them. It is remarkable that no ad-
vocate of prohibition, so far as I know, was
asked at all what his opinion was of these
' commissioners before they were appointed.
I do not like to thrust myself forward or
make any claims whatever, but it struck me
that it would have been a very natural
thing indeed, when it was known, through-
out the country, known to Parliament and
the Government that I was president of the
Dominion Alliance, an association that has
been in existence for eighteen! or twenty
year for the purpose of obtaining this pro-
hibition, and which it is well known, is a re-
presentative body of the temperance element
throughout the whole Dominion, represent>-
ing churches, temperance societies and all
organizations taking an interest in this great
work — under these circumstances I think
mere courtesy and a desire to do a fair
thing would have suggested that the names
of the commissioners should have been sub-
mitted to me or some other representative
of the temperance people, simply to learn
that no valid objection was made to them.
Consequently, the prohibitionists are not
in any way responsible for the work
that has been done, whether it is well
or ill done — we are entirely free from
that. I am of opinion that great good
will result from it. My only fear is that
it will involve a great deal of expense
to the country. If it is considered ne-
cessary to publish all the evidence that
has heen collected it will make a huge
volume and I doubt if any one will have the
time or patience to go through it. Some of
us will read and select portions of it.
Some of it, I know, is exceedingly valuable

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FEBEUAEY 23, 1893] Commission.

165

and important. I have not read the whole
of it, but I have read it very largely and in
my opinion the great weight of evidence is
rather favourable to the view that I enter-
tain than opposed to it, notwithstanding the
curious questions which have been sometimes
put, and notwithstanding that I think either
the commission has misapprehended the re-
quirement of Parliament or that the com-
mission itself and the instructions given have
not been sufficiently clear to make them un-
derstand what it was desired should be ob-
tained, namely, "reliable data upon which
final action might be taken by Parliament.
I shall not further trespass on the time of
the House, but now move the Address as it
is printed in the Minutes.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— I wish to say a
u;ord or two in respect to what has fallen
from my hon. friend beside me, with whom
I am usually in entire accord. I am in full
sympathy with the earnest workers in the
cause of temperance all over Canada and
having said that, it is as far as I can go in re-
spect to the present object that they aim at.
I heard what my hon. friend said about the
objections to taking individual opinions as
to the propriety of passing such a law. For
my part, I differ from my hon. friend who
has so zealously, earnestly and for years ad-
vocated the cause of temperance and prohi-
bition— I am sorry to differ from him, but I
may say I entirely disagree with the position
that it is not proper to ascertain the drift of
public opinion with regard to any measure
that is intended to be followed by an enact-
ment. We all know, looking at the history
of every movement touching the habits
and manners of- the people, that unless it
is in accord with public opinion it must
necessarily fall to the ground. I myself
have had a good deal of judicial experience
in respect to the temperance question and
prosecutions under existing laws, and have
often been painfully struck with the manner
in which witnesses gave their evidence — men
of undoubted general veracity, of good cha-
racter and good standing in society, willing
andanxiousto avoid a conviction, and to evade
any question that would bear against a person
charged with violating the law. That struck
me, and I have had a pretty large experience
on the subject, as a very significant point and
confirmed my view that any legislation in
advance of public opinion is worse than use-
less. It is worse than useless in this parti-

cular, for if you teach men to violate a plain
law with impunity, you weaken respect for
laws in general, and thus to a large extent
paralyze the arm of the law, for when men
begin to violate one law and soothe their
consciences, they gradually teach other men
to do the same thing who are less scrupulous
than they are, and you encourage men to the
commission of what is plainly and palpably
a crime. If we look at the history of legis-
lation in respect to matters pertaining
to morals and manners, what do " we
find ? We know that on the statute-
book ever since the reign of James, I think^
there was an enactment authorizing a fine
to be imposed upon any one who used a
profane .oath, and if we look at the history
of the times, particularly the time of the
Regent, men were not considered fashion-
able, or to come up to the mark as young
bloods, or society men, unless they could in-
dulge in some new and strange oath. That
law, therefore, was for many years violated
with impunity. At one time it fell into
almost entire disuse, and no one thought of
prosecuting under it. Let us look at an-
other law — one that my hon. friend the
leader of the House would be most anxious
to have fully obeyed — ^^the law with regard
to customs and smuggling. Eveiy one ac-
quainted with the history of the people of
Europe knows that there was a time when
it was not thought any crime, or infringing
at all upon morals, if people did a little
in the way of smuggling, and my lord
in his mansion and the poor fisherman
on the seashore all smuggled. My lord
smuggled his wines from France and my
lady smuggled her laces, without in the
slightest degree feeling that it touched
their conscience, while the poor man was
glad to get his gin, his rum, and other
things that lay in his way, and more suited
his tastes, in the same manner. Therefore,
that law, until very recent years, notwith-
standing the severity of the enactment then
on the statute-book, was not observed, and
therefore an injury was done to the law in
general, because it was violated with impu-
nity and without any feeling of self-reproach
— without any feeling that the offender's
conscience was wounded. Then let us come
to a later period. You all know that from
the earliest times by the common law killing
was murder, in case of a duel, and we
know that until a comparatively i*ecent
period — up to the time of the Duke of Wei-

Digitized by

Google

156

Th^ Prohibition [SENATE] Commission.

lington, certainly — men dare not refuse, so
strong was public opinion, to meet their ad-
versaries when challenged. Now, there was
a law in force touching life, and yet it was
violated with impunity. If everything was
done according to the law of the duello,
no jury could be got to convict any
one who killed his adversary in " a fair
fight." So strong was that feeling i
that, if my memory serves me, in a case
where it was proved that the code had been
strictly observed and the prisoner had killed
his adversary after the most approved manner
and method of the duel, the judge (who had
** been out " more than once himself) when
he came to charge the jury said " Gentlemen
of the jury, if you believe so and so I am
]x)und to tell you that according to the
laws of England the offence amounts to
murder, but so help me — gentlemen, a fairer
thing I never heard of." You cai^ easily
understand how a jury would act under
circumstances of that kind. That is the ■
teaching of history — and history ought not j
to be like the stern lights of a ship illuming
only the track that is past, but should
guide us in the future. I have long been
strongly of the opinion that any law in ad-
vance of public opinion will not be obeyed,
and therefore I am sorry to differ from my
earnest and hon. friend beside me. I do not at
all agree with him that the commission erred
in getting opinions from intelligent men in
all quarters. According to my opinion, that
portion of the inquiry was a necessary and
most desirable one, and any one who reflects
on the subject will see the danger of putting
a law on the statute-book that will not be
obeyed. How are we to ascertain whether
the law will be obeyed or not unless we col-
lect evidence to show public opinion on the
subject 1 There are various ways of collect-
ing public opinion — you can get it from the
newspapers, or from talking with people, or
from examining witnesses as was done by >
this commission, and you can ascertain pretty
much the drift of public opinion by the ex-
tent and work of the various organizations
in a particular direction. These are amongst
the sources from which the drift of public
opinion can l>e ascertained. Therefore, on
that point alone I differ from my hon. friend.
I think that it is one of the most valuable
modes of ascertaining whether, if Parliament
should be disposed to do so, an Act should
be passed to prohit the liquor traffic. I can-
not but think it would, and therefore, almost

doubting my own opinion, seeing I differ
from my hon. friend beside me, I must say
that I cannot accept the view that public
opinion Ls not to be ascertained in the way
that the commissioners have thought fit to
collect it.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— The Manitoba s}^-
tem is a better way.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am rather sur-
prised that the hon. leader of the Govern-
ment has nothing to say upon this question.
It would be expected that we should have
some declaration from him wath respect to
this matter. Looking at the attitude as-
sumed by the hon. gentleman from Sarnia,
two years ago, when this commission was
proposed ; one would naturally feel surprised
that the hon. gentleman — who at that tinle
had expre^ssed such entire confidence in the
intentions of the Government, in the charac-
ter of the commission, and in the satisfactory
results of its labours — had put a notice on
the pai>er which seemetl to indicate a feeling
that everything was not going on jilst as it
blight do under this commission. I myself, as
an admirer of the hon. gentleman from Sarnia,
felt somewhat pained that the hon. gentle-
man's confidence in the commission had been
shaken ; but my mind was relieved when
the hon. gentleman in the course of his re-
marks said that as far as he was concerned,
he quite recognized the virtue of a Royal
Commission, but that there were certain un-
godly people outside who, while they were
temperance men, were not perhaps as strong
supporters of the Government as my hon.
friend and who began to blaspheme against
the commission. I think that the hon. gen-
tleman, although he reiterated his expression
of confidence in the commission, gave utter-
ance to some sentiments which would rather
lead an impartial listener to believe that his
own confidence had been somewhat shaken.
He criticised, in a very gentle way of course,
the line of action followed by the commission
and the composition of the commission; and
the hon. gentleman seemed to doubt whether
the intention of Parliament had been carried
out in the instructions given to the com-
mission and in the line of conduct which
they had adopted. Now, if Parliament had
been composed of gentlemen who entertained
the same sentiments on the subject of pro-
hibition which are entertained by the hon»
gentleman from Sarnia, I think probably the

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FEBRUARY 23, 1893] Commission.

157

hon. gentleman would have been right in
thinking that the intention of Parliament
had .not been carried out ; but what was
really the intention of Parliament ? I do
not wish to be disrespect^ful to Parliament ;
but I have a very strong impression that a
great many of the gentlemen who voted
for the appointment of a Royal Commission
did so with a view to shelve a disagreeable
question and get it out of Parliament to
some other place Vhere it would not trouble
Parliament for some time.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. POWER— And I think the hon.
gentleman must feel that that end has been
attained to a very considerable extent. One
of the faults the hon. gentleman found with
the mode of examination pursued by the
commission was that they asked whether in
the opinion of the witnesses a prohibitory
law could be enforced. Now, I think that
that was a very practical, reasonable and fair
question, and the hon. gentleman from Barrie
has indicated how reasonable and proper a
question it was. I do not think, that the
hon. gentleman from Samia, with all his
experience and with his knowledge of every-
thing which relates to the questions of tem-
perance and prohibition, can point to any
community of anything like the population
and territorial extent of Canada where a
prohibitory law has been satisfactorily en-
forced. We all know that in the state of
Maine, which is a much smaller region than
Canada, and where the public sentiment was
supposed to be overwhelmingly in favour of
prohibition, prohibition has certainly not
been by any means thoroughly enforced.
One can get dr^nk in the state of Maine
just as readily and upon just as bad liquor
as he can get intoxicated anywhere else :
and men do it there. However, I do not
want to go into a discussion of the questions
of temperance and prohibition and non-pro-
hibition. I think that it will be time enough
when this commission reports, which will
probably l>e some time after the next general
election, for us to discuss the question of
the possibility of carrying out a law of that
kind, if the commission should recommend
the adoption of a prohibitory law. The hon.
gentleman said also that the question of
compensation should not be considered. Now
I think that the hon. gentleman was hardly
consistent with himself in taking that ground.

I understood the hon. gentleman to say that
the space of two years or nearly two years
which had elapsed since this commission was
appointed, was quite long enough to have
brought us some definite report from the
commission ; but the hon. gentleman will see
that if the commission did not deal with the
question of compensation, that question being
a difl&cult and trying one would, as a
matter of course, be referred by this
Government to another commission, and
no further action could be taken in the mat-
ter until that question was reported upon ;
and the question of compensation being a
difficult and trying one, it would probably
call for a very extended inquiry by this
new commission ; probably the commission-
ers would feel it their duty to go over to
Great Britain and sit there, because the
question of compensation has been consi-
, dered there ; and I think the hon. gentle-
man from Sarnia must see, that if he is in a
hurry to have a prohibitory law, or if he is
in a hurry to get the report of this commis-
sion— a final report which will dispose of
the whole matter — he had better let them
deal with the question of compensation, and
we shall have the whole matter before us at
once, and he be in a position to decide whe-
ther or not we shall have prohibition. Then
the hon. gentleman criticised the personnel of
the commission. He admitted that the gen-
tlemen who composed it were all respectable,
and I do not think any one has raised any
question about that.- I understood him to
say that four out of five were opposed to
prohibition, as far as he could judge from
the questions which they asked. Well, that
may or not be the case ; but, after all, hon.
gentlemen, the great point about this com-
mission and every other commission which
this Government appoints is this, that the
commissioners are all good Conservatives ;
that is the important point. The public
money is going to gentlemen who have done
good service for the Conservative party. It
may be that there is one exception : perhaps
that one temperance man is not a Conser-
vative; I do not know; but I think that the
commissioners and the employees of the com-
mission are nearly all good Conservatives ;
and the giving of merited reward to
good Conservatives for their services to the
party is one of the casual advantages of the
Royal Commission. The important object,
of course, is to relieve the Government from
the necessity of dealing with the question

Digitized by

Google

158

The Prohibition [SENATE] Commission.

of prohibition. The secondary object is to
afford pleasant employment, at remunerative
rates, for gentlemen who have fought and
bled for the good cause ; and that has been
done. I am surprised that the hon. gentle-
men from Sarnia should raise any question
about the personnel of the commission.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — I did not raise any
question about it at all.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. member
from Quintj^ suggests that the reason why the
hon. gentleman from Sarnia was not satisfied
with the personnel of the commission, was
that he or his temperance friends has not
been consulted.

Hon. Mr. VIDALr-No.

Hon, Mr. POWER— There is something
in that, looked at from the hon. gentleman's
point of view ; but from the point of view
of the Goremment there is not so much in
it, because the Government were best
able to judge what gentlemen most deserved
something from the Government. Now, I
beg to say that in my humble way I quite
concur in the observations made by the hon.
gentleman from Barrie, with respect to the
question of a prohibitory law ; but I think
the hon. gentleman to a certain extent an-
ticipated what might be contained in the
report, and his remarks were, perhaps, not
altogether relevant to the motion made by
the hon. gentleman from Sarnia. 1 am
sorry that the hon. leader of the Govern-
ment did not express the views of the Gov-
ernment on the question. I do not know
whether the hon. gentleman is in a position
to tell us when this commission is likely to
report or not. If he is, perhaps he will be
kind enough to take the House into his con-
fidence to that extent.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN — In making this ,
motion I think it certainly was not the inten-
tion of the hon. gentleman from Sarnia to
introduce at this time in this House a dis-
cussion of prohibition upon its merits.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN— But I have been
very much surprised indeed to find, as the ,
hon. member has stated, the hon. gentleman i
from Sarnia criticising the course that the I

Government has taken in this matter. At
the time the resolution providing for this
commission was under discussion, my hon.
friend from Sarnia approved of the course
then proposed. I was surprised to hear him
state that in his opinion it was about the
best course that could be taten to meet the
wishes and prayers of a very numerous body
of petitioners who approached this Parliament
on that question. The prayer of the peti-
tioners read before the both Houses of
Parliament indicated, as plainly as the
English language could indicate, that
they wished the Parliament of the country
to pass a prohibitory law immediately :
there was no application or prayer made by
these people from all parts of Canada for a
commission to inquire and see whether the
time has arrived for a prohibitory law to be
enacted in his country ; and yet at the time
I remember, distinctly remember, hearing
my hon. friend from Sarnia rise in his place
and state that it was quite in accord with
the prayer of the petition, and he also made
the observation at the time that he had the
honour of being the president of the Dominion
Alliance. Now,.! for one cannot agree with
the expression on his pai*t to-day of dis-
appointment. I think that the object of
Parliament and of the Government on the
occasion of those petitions being presented,
must be obvious to everybody. The object
and intention was, to adopt an adage which
prevails with all Governments, that when
an urgent and di^cult moral question is
presented for their consideration, the very
best way of disposing of it is to appoint a
Royal Commission and place the report there-
on among the blue books. I think that \i411
be the result in this case, and no other result
will follow. It matters little, excepting in
the item of expense — and as my hon. friend
has said, the expense comes out of the
people of this country and will be distributed
among friends— it matters little whether
the report comes this year or next year or
the year after.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Or not at all.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN —It matters little
when this report comes, the result will be
the same ; the prayers and expectations of
those petitioners will not be answered.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not agree
with all that my hon. freind who has just

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FRBEUARY 23, 1893] Commimon.

159

taken his seat has said with reference to
this matter. We all know pretty well the
nature of these petitions ; they all seem to
be largely in the handwriting of two or three
individuals, they are stereotyped petitions,
and it is the easiest thing in the world to get
them signed and, after all, the petitions are
only a very small minority of the people of the
country. The petitions are got up, by people
employed by the different associations ; of
course they have an immense f)ower at their
back, but after all they ^re but a small
minority. As regards the personnel of this
commission T know nothing : and I know
nothing as regard their antecedents, their
predilections as regards temperance or other-
wise, neither do I know whether they are sup-
porters of the present Government or whe-
ther it is for meritorious service they have
been appointed. I think it is a matter of
imagination purely with my hon. friend as
regards that point. With reference to the
question of how they should act and what
evidence they should t^ke, I think the com-
mission will be governed entirely by the
power given to them under the commission
from the Parliament. I presume that those
instructions are fully contained in it and
that beyond that they will not go. It seems
they are empowered to take opinions upon
all subjects respecting the matter of prohi-
bition : and I think they will not extend
beyond that. Neither do I wish to antici-
pate the result of the evidence, nor what
effect it will have on the public mind and on
Parliament. I think the hon. member from
«Sarnia has rather prejudged the case. He
believes there is sufficient in it to justify
Parliament in passing a prohibitory law. I am
not passing any opinio^i upon that at all,
although I have a very strong opinion with
reference to it. Then my hon. friend says we
could pass any law and it could be carried out
in this country. I say no. You must have a
large backing in favour of any legislation
before you can have it executed and carried
out. With regard to temperance law, we know
well enough how it works. In my own
country there is a provincial law and there
B,ye men selling openly before the public
«very day ; and not one violation in a thou-
sand has been punished. Vigorous and
zealous men have been appointed to carry
out that law ; they have saddled the country
with large sums of money, ten times more
than the fines would come to ; and the result
is that more liquor is sold. I say that the

moment we go beyond moral suasion, the
influence of the churches, societies and
temperance organizations, we defeat our
object. The churches and societies have
more beneficial effect upon the public than
all the legislation that we can enact. You
will never make a man moral by 'Act of
Parliament.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I did not propose
to make any observations on the question,
because I thought the main proposition in-
volved in the duty of the commission was
not really before the Chamber ; and it is
rather permature to discuss the question of
prohibition at the present moment ; but I rise
to prevent the i^npression going abroad that
it is the opinion of this Chamber that a pro-
hibitory law is asked for by a very small
minority of the people of Canada. Over
twenty years ago, I can very well remember
that petitions poured in from all parts of
this country praying for the adoption of
some law that would to a certain extent
limit the consumption of alcohol and lessen
the drinking habit. That public opinion
which found expression in petitions twenty
years ago, has I think, been growing rapidly
during that interval, and to-day Canada
stands in about as advanced a position on
the temperance question as any other country
in the world — certainly in advance of any
country on the other side of the Atlantic, and
quite abreast with some of the neighbour-
ing states, even though what is known as a
prohibitory law has actually been adopted
there. The temperance agitation in Canada,
whether due to restrictive laws or whether
due to our license system, or to the
influences from the pulpit, benevolent people
and philanthropists, has been productive of
an immense amount of good, and anybody
who has given thought or attention to the
growth and development of the temperance
movement in Canada, must see that in the
last twenty years a marvellous stride has
been taken. In reference to this particular
commission, I do not propose to offer any
comments. At the time it was appointed I
thought very little of it, because I know
that the method usually adopted in taking
evidence before a commission of this kind,
must necessarily result in practically noth-
ing. I have not read all the evidence.
From time to time I have gone over a
column or two of it in the newspapers as it
appeared, and I came to the conclusion that

Digitized by

Google

160

The Prohibition [SENATE] Commission.

the commission generally called forward six
persons in favour of prohibition, and six
who were against it, and they got their
views. They were taken down in writing
and given to the press. It left the question
just where it started, and I do not think
any sensible person, any person who has
given any thought or attention to the sub-
ject, or whose judgment on the ques-
tion is of the smallest weight and import-
ance, would be guided in any degree by the
result of the commission. From my stand-
point it is a perfect farce — an absolute
farce. Here are some tens of thousands of
witnesses called before this commission,
some voluntarily and some under a request,
and they have simply spoken their own
feelings, honestly, no doubt. * The man who
deals in liquor believes a prohibitory law is
absolutely impossible. The man who is in
favour of a prohibitory law is just as firmly
convinced that it can be enforced, and that
it is the best thing for the country. He
speaks from his own stand-point. I ask any
of you, gentlemen, who have thought over
this question in the last ten or fifteen years,
whether you do not find society is divided
into two camps 1 The temperance camp is
the one that is increasing, I am happy to
say — that is, those who are in favour of in-
creased restriction — I will not go so far as
to say absolute prohibition, but in some
degree reducing the facilities for people
destroying themselves and the happiness
of their homes. The movement has
been going on steadily year by year, the
number of licenses has been year by year
restricted. All these things tend to the edu-
cation of the people ; they all lead in the
proper direction ; and this commission, if it
serves any purpose at all, is useful only to
this extent, that public opinion is directed
to a most important question, namely, the
best method of restraining the people in their
drinking habits. As I said before, I am not
going into the main question : it is prema-
ture. It is important we should have those
instructions which have lieen given to the
commission. I only wish my hon. friend
had been equally thoughtful two years ago.
We could then have known whether those
instructions were in the right direction. The
public would have criticised those instruc-
tions and the press would have commented
upon them ; and it would have been very
useful and very valuable; and probably have
formed in some degree a guide to the com-

mission as to the methods on which they
ought to proceed. The result of this com-
mission will be huge volumes of material
that would be absolutely useless as a guide.
While on this subject I may here say that
the opinions differ according to the localities
just as it is apparent that prohibitory laws
and restraining laws can be enforced in one
locality and not in another. An attempt to
' enforce a law in British Columbia might be
useless, but in the other end of the Domi-
nion, to enforce it in Prince Edward Island
might be perfectFy feasible, owing, perhaps,
to the difference in the character of the two
people and educational advance on this ques-
tion. I am glad to know that in large num-
bers of the provinces. New Brunswick and
Nova Scotia, tfec, the temperance feeling
is so far advanced that even a prohibi-
tory law might be carried out. There is, of
course, in other pnwinces an opinion that is
so hostile and adverse that it would be per-
fectly futile to attempt to enforce prohibi-
tion In several parts of the Dominion, in
the western provinces, where the consump-
tion is six times as much as in the eastern
provinces, it would be absolutely absurd to
attempt any such system.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — The hon. gentleman
from Sarnia, knowing as we all do the very
deep interest he has taken in this question
all his life, is to be congratulated on the
temperate manner in which he has brought
forward his resolution. I see nothing incon-
sistent in his action to-day with the action
he took on this question when the commission
was first appointed, but I do take issue enti-
rely with my hon. friend from Ottawa as to
the value of this commission. I do not agi*ee
with him that you can draw a hard and fast
line as between two classes in the comnmnity
— the one temperate and the other not tem-
perate. There are large numbers of people
in this community who are strong advocates
of temperance -I do not say of prohibition —
who have all their life long done everything
in their power to advance the cause of tem-
perance, but have very great doubt indeed
as to whether that cause c©uld be best
served by attempting to enforce a prohibi-
tion law, and I think the object of this
commission is to endeavour to lay l>efore the
public information which will enable them
to form a correct judgment on the subject.
The point was well taken by my hon. friend
from Barrie, that it was of very great impor-

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition fFEBRUAEY 23, 1893 J Commission.

161

tance, from that view of the case, to ascer-
tain the opinion of the people as to how far
it was possible or feasible to carry out such
a law. Now, I happened to have attended,
some few years ago, a temperance meeting
that was held in Toronto, under the auspices
of a Prelate of the Church of England, who
had always been a strong advocate, not only
of temperance, but of prohibition. At the
same meeting there was present the secretary
of the largest temperance organization in the
United States, and one piece of advice which
he gave to his audience was ** Whatever you
do, do not go in advance of the convictions of
the people — do not attempt to carry out a
law that their convictions do not approve of
and which will only result in breaking the
law and in that way will have a very injur-
ious effect from a moral point of view."
Now, as T said before, there is a large
number of people, not prohibitionists, who
are strongly interested in the temperance
cause and heartily desire to promote it, and
it is only right that they should be given
an opportunity to express their opinion on
this question. I happened to be in Mont-
real when the commission was sitting there
and had a conversation with Judge Macdon-
ald, of Brock ville, and the evidence which J
heard there and much of it that was com-
'municated to me was, I think, exceedingly
interesting and of very great importance
and could not fail to have a good influence
in helping people to form a correct judgment
as to the best course to l)e taken. The Gov-
ernment are not likely to refuse to answer
the questions on the paper, and I quite agree
with my hon. friend in thinking that the
public are entitled to the fullest informa-
tion as to what the commission is doing and
propose to do.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED I had an op-
portunity of observing to some extent the
means adopted by the commission in question
in conducting their examination in the mat-
ters referred to them particularly in the
North-west Territories, and it was by reason
of that observation that T venture to express
myself on this occasion in reference to the
matter brought before this honourable House
by my hon. friend from Sarnia. It appears
to me that if my hon. friend had limited
himself to takinij exception to the delay
which had been exercis^ by the commission
in the preparation of their report and the
submission of it to Parliament, he might
11

have been justified, but I think he is adopt-
ing an indefensible jiosition in attacking the
method pursued by tlie commission, and an-
ticipating the report which in the near fu-
ture they may suljmit. My hon. friend
appears to overlook the fact that this^ to a
very large extent, is a judicial body. As I
understand they are invested with all the
powers of a judicial body. It has been
given to them to -make an investigation into
a most important subject, a subject which
affects every individual in this Dominion to
a greater or less extent, and judicial powers
are given to them in respect to the summon-
ing of witnesses and in respect to arriving
at a particular judgment as to the result of
that investigation. Now, my hon. friend
would not have been justified for a moment in
anticipating the result of what a judicial body
might find in respect to a particular investiga-
tion ; why, therefore, would he be more jus-
tified in anticipating the result of this com-
mission on this subject, one which is of quite
as much importance as any that can come
under the delil)eration of a judicial body ? I
observed, as stated before, the method of
procedure adopted by this commission when
sitting in the North-west Territories, and if
my hon. friend had acquainted himself, as he
possibly may have acquainted himself, with
the methods adopted by that commission in
pursuing the investigation, I am satisfied he
would not take the exception which he has '
taken to the methods adopted. That com-
mission, on the occasion to which I have re- •
ferred, issued subp<pnas summoning before
them the various judicial and federal officers
within the teiritory, and also the various
ofiicers of the North-west Government,
that these ofiicials might give their views in
respect to the matters before the commission
] as well as of the feasibility of carrying into
; operation a prohibitory liquor law. My hon.
I friend is fully aware of the fact I presume,
that for* some years we had in the North-
I west Territories the closest approach to a
j prohibitory liquor law that has yet been ex-
I perienced in aoy part of Canada, and it the're-
j fore became a matter of very great value to
I the people of the entire Dominion that these
opinions — the opinions of all cliusses of the
I community within the territory should be
obtained as to the feasibility of the proposed
prohibitory liquor law, which the commission
I is now considering. How was it possible,
I therefore, to obtain a proper consensus of
I opinion within the territory as to the matters

Digitized by

Google

162

The Prohibition [SENATE] Gomrmsion.

referred to in the commission ? My hon.
friend would not expect that the commission
should contine itself to examining before it-
self those who are entirely in favour of a pro-
hibitory liquor law. My hon. friend surely
would not propose so narrow and limited a
sphere as that — he would not limit the evi-
dence to the particular class which would
unhesitatingly say that a prohibitory liquor
law should be adopted and that it could be
successfully enforced. Now, the Dominion
Alliance, of which my hon. friend is so
worthy a representative, was represented at
that commission by one of the ablest repre-
sentatives of the Alliance — I allude to Mr.
Spence. I venture to say that there is no
one in the Dominion of Canada who is more
enthusiastic or energetic or better qualified
to discharge the duties pertaining to that
position. On the other hand those who
opposed the adoption of a prohibitory liquor
law were represented by a gentleman well
known here — I refer to Mr. Kribbs. Facili-
ties were given to these gentlemen to ex-
amine before the commission the various
parties in the territories who might be
deemed to have some knowledge in respect
to the matters in question. ' This was done ;
the commission examined before them the
judges and officers that T have before
mentioned, and the other two gentle-
men examined the various witnesses called
before them by those respective parties.
Therefore a method was adopted to
obtain every shade of opinion touching
the advisability of passing a prohibitory
liquor law and the probability of its
being enforced. As T have already stated,
for some ten or twelve years we had a
very close approach to a prohibitory liquor
law in the Territories. It was absolutely
prohibitory so far as the sale was concerned,
and absolutely prohibitory so far as the im-
portation of liquor into the Territories was
concerned, with this exception — power was
given to the Lieutenant-Governor to issue per-
mits to those who might desire to bring in
liquor for domestic or medical uses. It must
necessarily be of very great value to the find-
ing of that commission, that evidence with
respect to the operation of that law in the
Territories should be discussed in every pos-
sible phase and that every class of opinion
should be ascertained to enable them to
come to a proper decision as to whether that
law was a success and whether it could l)e
properly carried out in the shape of a gen-

eral prohibitory liquor law. I am, therefore',
of the opinion, that under these circumstances
the commission is not at all blameworthy
in adopting the procedure which has been
adopted, particularly as the composition of
it appears to have been approved of by the
hon. gentleman from Sarnia, and so far as I
am aware by both branches of Parliament.
It would be more beneficial to the cause of
temperance if the commission should be sup-
ported in the procedure it has adopted for
the proper investigation of the subject, so that
when the i-eport is submitted to Parliament
we shall have before us every phase of opi-
nion throughout the whole country and we
shall thus be placed in a better position to
arrive at a- proper conclusion on the subject,
than if a more limited plan'had been. adopted
in carrying out the investigation.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — Does the hon. gen-
tleman know the numberof witnesses exami-
ned in the North-west investigation ]

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— In the town of
Calgary, the largest town in the Territory,
the commission sat a day, probably six or
seven hours, and it is quite possible that as
many as twenty witnesses were examined in
Calgary. That probably would be the lengtK
of time which they sat in each of the other
centres of settlement in the Territories.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— Do you think that
the statements of the witnesses who gave
their testimony might be taken as an indi-
cation of the opinion of the whole of the
Territories ?

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— The various
witnesses called in the town of Calgary and
other centres of settlement in the Territories
were fairly representative witnesses of all
the shades of opinion which prevail in the
Territories.

Hon. Mr. SANFORD— I am thoroughly
in accord with the last speaker in thinking
that the report of the commission will be in-
valuable to the temperance organizations. I
think that it will show that prohibition in
the present state of public opinion will be
an impossibility. It has proved an impossi-
bility in every section where it has been
adopted. It will educate our temperance
friends to tight the battle on another line.
When in Norway, three years ago, I was very

Digitized by

Google

The Prohibition [FEBRUARY 23, 1893] Commission.

163

much interested in the policy adopted in
that country to free the people from a habit
which wa8 simply destroying them. In Nor-
way drunkenness was the prevailing vice. It
was degrading the people in all directions
until it reached a point where legislation was
deemed absolutely necessary and something
like local option was introduced thirteen or
fourteen years ago. If I had anticipated this
discussion to-day, I should have placed before
the House the Government returns for the
ten years during which the system had been
in operation in Noiway.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — We are not discuss-
ing prohibition, we are only getting informa-
tion about the commission.

Hon. Mr. SANFORD- J think I am
quite as near the line of what we are discuss-
ing as the other members who have spoken.
I was exceedingly interested in the remarks
of my hon. friend from Sarnia. T know he
always keeps within five or six miles of the
question before the House. Wherever prohi-
bition has been adopted up to the present time
it has proved a failui*e. You must educate the
people through some such policy as that which
was adopted in Norway for that purpose and
which proved most satisfactory. The local I
option applied to cities, towns or counties as I
might be selected. Take for instance a city i
like Ottawa : a party of gentlemen, the re- !
presentative philanthropists of the city, or- i
ganized a joint stock company. They went '
to the city council and took every license at I
the regular rate, engaging to carry out liter- j
ally the law with regard to the hours of clos- 1
ing. They engaged further, and found it in
their interest to do so, to give better quali- 1
ties of liquor. They did not allow in any in- 1
stance a boy under eighteen years of age to I
have a glass of liquor. No child, boy or girl, t
was permitted to enter a saloon and the \
drinking places were closed promptly at the
hour named in the law. Whatever the result
might be financially was divided in this way :
— 6 per cent to the investors for interest on
their investment, 5 per cent as a reserve
to meet their expenditure for the outfit of
the saloon, and the balance was divided
among such local charities as were sustained
by the local philanthropic people of that city.
The result, as I carry it in my mind, at the
end of ten years was that the consumption
of liquor was reduced one-half, and something
like £240,000 was given to support

the local charities throughout Norway.
The habit of drinking, which had been the
prevailing habit of the people, was then a
matter of indifference, because if a man felt
a desire to get a glass of liquor, he drank it,
paid for it, and immediately left the place.
There was no spot for him to lounge about,
no electric lights, no easy chair, he simply
took his liquor and went away. That
general habit of treating soon fell into
disuse, and why 1 In the hotels, on the
railways, and on the different steam-ships,
wherever you travelled, you always had
liquor at your disposal — you had only to go
to the table and help yourself. People
became indifferent to it, and the privilege
was availed of by only a limited number.
The system has proved most satisfactory to
Norway. It was also satisfactory in Sweden
up to the time that the Swedish Govern-
ment decided to use the revenue not for
charitable purposes, but for the general
purposes of the Government. Naturally,
the result was most unfortunate. If our
temperance people will take up the question
of local option, such as I have- described as
existing in Norway, and will introduce it
in this country, most satisfactory results
will follow. A reference has been made
to vested rights. That question was con-
sidered also, and it was decided that the
liquor dealers had no vested rights. They
got their licenses from year to year, and at
the expiration of the current license they
had no further claim on the community.
The organization to which I have referred,
said : ** W^e will buy out your outfits so that
you will sustain no loss." I should be very
glad to place before my hon. friend from
Sarnia the figures upon this matter. I have
them at my disposal, and I think it would
be a convincing argument that we would be
pursuing a mistaken policy in seeking to
enforce prohibition in any part of the
Dominion.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There can be no
possible objection to bringing down the
papers asked for in this motion. I see
nothing in the resolutions calling for an ex-
pression of opinion from the Government
either upon the question of prohibition or
the manner in which the commissioners have
transacted their business or made their
investigations. I notice, however, that the
hon. member from Halifax is exercised
on that point, and that he is somewhat

Digitized by

Google

164

The ProhMtm [SENATE] Oommimqn.

surprised that an opinion tas not been given
by the Government upon this very important
question. J notice also that during his
remarks he very dexterously avoided giving
an opinjion of his own. iLefibding, as he does,
oixGf of the great sections or parties in this
country, one would have supposed that he
had an opinion upon this subject and that
while asking for the opinions of others he
would' have volunteered his own for the
purpose of convincing them that they should
adopt his view. The only opinion that he
gave, and which was endorsed by his leader,
was that the Government deserve censure
for the course they have pursued with refer-
ence to this question. That of course was
not at all objectionable : we could have
expected no other utterance from the hon.
gentleman even when dealing with a question
of such momentous character as that of
prohibition. However, there is one point
on which I venture to differ from the
opinions expressed by the hon. gentleman
from Samia, and which was treated very
fairly and logically by the hon. member
from York- -that is, as to the value of any ';
report that may be made by this commis- !
sion. The hon. member from Sarnia says it
was useless to ask those who dealt in
intoxicating liquors and made their living
out of the traffic, what their opinion might
be as to the propriety of enacting a prohibi-
tory liquor law or the possibility of its
enforcement. I think it would be equally
absurd, if that is so, to ask the opinion of my
hon. friend who has made the motion before
the House. We all know what his opinion is on
this question, and consequently it would be a
wates of time to seek through the commission
his opinion on the subject. But there is a
different class in this country — ardent temper-
ance people, men who would, if the facts jus-
tified it, lend their aid and give their votes
for prohibition — who would support such a I
measure if they felt it was at all practicable
to carry it out. It is this class of people in
the countiT that will have to be reached and
convinced of the propriety or impropriety of t
enacting in this country a prohibitory liquoiti
law. The hon. leader of the Opposition was '
singularly unfortunate in taking Prince Ed- j
ward Island as an illustration of what could '
be done in the way of enforcing the prohibi-
tion principle. If there is any part of the
Dominion where such a law could be en-
forced it is that particular province. In
every part of the province the Canada Tem-

perance Act, generally known as the Scott
Act, was adopted, yet any one who has vis-
ited the Island must have been struck with
the fact that liquor could be procured any-
where in the province in any quantity that
one might desire. I do not intend to discuss
the principle of prohibition, but I could not
help referring to that fact — that the hon.
gentleman was singularly unfortunate in his
reference to Prince Edward Island. The
hon. member from Calgary has given some
practical hints from his experience in a
country where a prohibitory liquor law was
enforced for some years. However, I shall
not dwell upon the question. The hon. mem-
ber from Sarnia complained a little of the
composition of the commission. I know from
my personal knowledge at the time the
commissionei<s were selected that the Gov-
ej'nment endeavoured, whether successfully
or not, to select gentlemen of undoubted
probity of character, men in whom the
country would have confidence, and if it
were their good fortune all to be Conser\'a-
tives, that was the best evidence they would
be honest in any opinion they gave. Sir
Joseph Hiokson is well known to the people
of Canada. I do not say that he is a
teetotaler, or that he is in favour of the
principle of prohibition, but from the
standing that he holds, his opinion would
be accepted by the people as an hon-
est opinion. Next we have ex-Mayor
Clarke, of Toronto. He was elected for four
terms I think to the position of mayor of
that city : he is a gentleman who stands
high in the public estimation and whose
character is unimpeachable. I do not say
that he is a prohibitionist or teetotaler.
Then we have Judge Macdonald. I know
that he was a very ardent temperance man.
I have been personally acquainted with him
for a number of years. Whatever his opi-
nions may be now, since he has been con-
ducting this investigation, I know that he
has occupied a very prominent position
among the temperance people of Canada and
his reputation for honesty is well known.
Then we have the Kev. Dr. McLeod, of New
Brunswick. He is not only an ardent tem-
perance man, but a teetotaler and a prohi-
bitionist of prohibitionists, and he stands
high in the estimation of the people. He is
a man of education and ability and I believ»e
has the confidence of every one who knows
him. The fifth gentlemen is Mr. Gigault,
with whom I have had the honour of being

Digitized by

Google

The Marine Hospital [PBBBtJARY 24, 1893] at Victoria.

1(1*5

associated in Parliament for a number of
years. I know from personal experience
that if there is a decided temperance man
in the- province of Quebec he is that man.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — An intemperate
temperance man.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— As my hon. friend
says an extreme — an intemperate one. Tak-
ing the whole of them, from their standing
in the community I think the temperance
people of this country should have confi-
dence in their impartiality and have no
ground for finding fault with the Govern-
ment for the selection they have made.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — I have never heard a !
complaint. - I

Hon. Mr. HOWELL— The leader of the .
Opposition says that the appointment of this i
commission was an absolute farce, and that i
the result would be useless. Time mtist an-
swer that question : I do not propose to dis-
cuss it just now, but I am quite satisfied
that their report when laid on the Table will
give such information as will enable the peo-
ple of Canada to arrive at a correct conclu-
sion as to the propriety of adopting a prohi-
bitory liqvior law, and the feasibility of carry-
ing it out in case it should be adopted by
Parliament. I can only tell the hon. gen-
tlemen from Sarnia that at the very earliest
moment that we can prepare this return it
shall be laid before the House. I do not know
exactly what he means by this portion of
the third paragraph " Copies of any and all
documents and statistics furnished to the
said RoyalCommissionby any of the depart-
ments of the Civil Service or any officer of
the Government." Documents issued by a
department of the Civil Service would ne-
cessarily be official Probably the hon. gen-
tleman means some of the officials of the
Civil Service. If he means that it will be ne-
cessary to change the language of the clause.
If his desire is simply to obtain orders issued
by the Govermnent by authority of the de.-
partment they will be brought down. There
may be some, and if there are they will be
laid before the House.

The motion was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 5.12 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa^ Friday^ February 2ithy 1893,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayei*s and routine proceedings.

THE MARINE HOSPITAL AT
VICTORIA.

INQUIBY.

Hon. Mr. M ACDON ALD (B.C.) inquired :

Is it the intention of the Government to put the
Mftiine Hospital »t Victoria in such a state of re-
pair as will afford more comfort to the patients
and. better accommodation for medical men at-
tending the hospital, and whether it is the inten-
tion to introduce a supply of good water without
delay ? Also, whether any change is contemplated
in the present mode of feeding the patients ?

He said : In asking these questions I do not
propose to say much. I believe the Govern-
ment know, as well as I do myself, that this
hospital is not all that it ought to be. It re-
quires repairs to make it more convenient
for patients and medical men attending the
hospital. It requires a supply of pure water,
the lack of which has beien badly felt.
There is now a supply of good water with-
in a mile of the hospital — a supply of
the best water to be had anywhere. I hope
the Minister will tell me that the Govern-
ment are going to do all these things sug-
gested in the inquiry. With reference to
the mode of feeding the patients, the pre-
sent system is to farm them out, which is
not the best plan I think.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— In reply to the
question put by the hon. member for Victoria,
I have to inform him that it is the intention
of the Government to put the Marine Hos-
pital at Victoria in first-class condition, so
as to afford every comfort to the patients,
and proper accommodation for the medical
officers attending the haspital. It is also the
intention of the Government to introduce a
plentiful supply of good water without delay,
|rom the Esquimalt Water Works. No
change is contemplated in the present mode
of feeding the patients. I may further add
that the repairs which have been going on
for some time, have been conducted under
the superintendence of Mr. Gamble, the

Digitized by

Google

166

The Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

engineer of the Public Works Department at
Victoria, w^jo has reported that the repairs
are nearly completed, and that new closets,
baths, lavatories, new floors, painting, drains,
etc., have all been supplied. The only thing
remaining to be done is to lay a pipe from
the Esquimalt Water Works Company's pipe,
on the main road between Esquimalt and
Victoria, to the Hospital, through the
Indian lands, and Mr. Gamble has been
in negotiation for some time past to obtain
the necessary authority from the officers of
the Indian Department to lay the pipe
through these Unds, which authority has
now^been obtained. W^hen completed, the
hospital will be all that could be desired.
It has been suggested, however, that the sick
mariners would be better taken care of in
the city hospital, commonly known as the
" Jubilee Hospital," where it is understood
they would have the benefit of a resident
doctor and nurses, and all the appliances and
advantages of a modern hospital. Negoti-
ations are now being earned on with the
n\anagers of that hospital for this purpose,
and if suitable arrangements can be made,
it is probable the sick mariners will be moved
to that hospital, so as to be put in the best
and most comfortable position. With refer-
ence to the present system of feeding the
sick mariners, the keeper of the Marine
Hospital receives a free house, a salary of
§500 per year, and $5 a week for the patients,
which is considered a liberal allowance, and
more than is paid to the keepers of other
marine hospitals in the Dominion. The
doctor has reported that the food supplied
by the keeper is excellent, and the patients
who have recently been in the hospital have
expressed in writing, that their treatment in
the hospital has been all that could be desired,
and that they have been looked after and
taken care of in the best manner, and the
food was plentiful and of the best descrip-
tion. This manner of boarding patients, at
a certain allowance per week, has been
adopted at the other marine hospitals in the
Dominion, and has been found to work re-
markably well. The duty of the doctor who
attends such hospital is to see that the
patients are properly taken care of, and fed
in the most approved manner. If the sick
mariners are moved to ihe Jubilee Hospital
they, of course, will receive similar treatment
to the other patients taken care of in that
hospital, and will receive the advantages and
appliances of a modern hospital.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— The
reply is very satisfactory — it is better thaa
we could have expected.

The Senate adjourned at 3.36 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, February 27th, 189S.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at three
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
THE CHOLERA OUTBREAK.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON rose to

Call the attention of the Government to the re-
ports of a renewed outbreak of cholera in Europe,
and to the fears entertained that there will be an
epidemic of cholera, both in Europe and America,
during the comitig summer, aud inquire of the
Goveniment what steps they have taken and intend
to take to prevent the intro^luction of cholera into
Canada, and to deal with it if so introduced ?

He said : My object in making this inquiry
I is not only to ascertain what the Govern-
ment have done, but what they are doing
and what they intend to do to defend this
country from an invasion of cholera dunng
the ensuing summer. Not only that, but to
elicit from the members of this House, a
discussion from which the Government per-
haps may be able to obtain some informa-
j tion, or at all events receive some suggestions
that may guide them in what they propose
! to do. It has been said that a discussion of
this kind in this House might excite public
I alarm. Now, I am not of that opinion. On
the contrary, T believe it will be reassuring to
the public, I believe it will fill the public
\ mind with confidence and with hope, to
learn that the Government is fully alive to
its duty in this regard at this particular
j time. Not only that, but the municipal
authorities in some places are consider-
I ing the question. We find the pub-
I lie board of health in Toronto is dis-
I cussing this subject ; therefore, I think it is
my duty to bring this matter before the
Government in this House, in order that
they might be encouraged in going on with
the good work, as I said before, of defending
this country against an invasion that, I

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera [FEBRUABY 27, 1893] Outbreak.

will undertake to say, is not less to be
dreaded than invasion by a foreign army.
Now, hon. gentlemen, that an outbreak and
a widespread outbreak of cholera will take
place in Europe during the ensuing year, I
think is beyond perad venture. You will
see that the medical officer, Dr. Kinster, ap-
pointed by the United States Government
to investigate and examine the condition of
Europe's cities and towns, reports that he
finds nearly every town and city in Europe
which he has examined to be in a most un-
sanitary condition. You will find that the
alarm in Europe to-day is so great that a
convention has been called -at Vienna, not
only of the medical profession of every
country in Europe, including England, but
of all the sanitary officials and experts on
the continent, to provide some means by
which the enemy may be met ; therefore, I
think we are justified in this House in tell-
ing the Government that at this particular
time they must do their duty to the people
of this country. Now we all, perhaps,
know that cholera is a filthy disease ; it
is of animal origin ; it is a bacterial
organism, a living organism, which re-
quires not only food for its living,
but for its propagation and multi-
plication ; that it multiplies in a most
amazing degree ahd it finds most fruitful
soil among people who are prepared and
ready for its cultivation, by bad sanitation,
by badly ventilated houses, badly dmined
houses, bad food, and above all by bad and
impure water. It Ls the testimony of nearly
all who have any experience that cholera
poison is disseminated chiefly through water.
This is the experience of nearly all the cities
and towns not only over the civilized world
but over what we call the semi-civilized
world : that impulse water above all things
is to be avoided ; and I might say just here,
that the remedy for this, is that all water,
from whatever source you get it, ought to be
boiled for at least five minutes before l)ein*(
used either for drinking or other purposes.
I may dwell for a few moments, with the
permission of this House, upon the question
as to where cholera comes froiu. It origin-
ates in two places especially and particularly,
and the first is upon the sterile plains of
Arabia, flanking on the Red Sea on the
west, where, as you know, stand the holy
cities, or what are called the holy cities
of , Mecca and Medina. It also comes
from Hindostan. There, it is said to

originate spontaneously. It originates \n
these places simply, because of the filthy
habits of the people, because of the num-
bers who congregate there year after year
to worship at the shrines of the deities and
idols of the Hindoos. It originates in Ara-
bia because. the people assemble there almost
annually at the greatest festivals they
make to the tomb of Mahomet. Sometimes
as many as 800,000 people assemble there at
a time, many of them travelling four, five
and six hundred miles, and in Hindostan,
they travel from 1,000 to 1,500 miles and
assemble in hundreds of thousands and they
die there like flocks of sheep. At the tomb
of Mahomet, they offer up thousands of sheep
as sacrifices, and the offal of those sheep is
spread out in the sun to rot and fill the air
with miasma. We find the people dying
there in ^thousands on the plains. They are
not even buried. The clothes are stripped
off them and a few inches of sand thrown
over them. The wind blows the sand off and
thebodiesare exposed to putrify under a torrid
heat. The clothes are taken home, and dis-
tributed as memorials to their relations. Thus
cholera has originated in every instance at
these two places Take the shrines of Jug-
gernaut and Adam's Peak ; hundreds of
thousands of pilgrims congi^egate annually
and live in the most indescribable filth and
die by the thousands. As soon as the
cholera breaks out they Hee for htnne and
the roadside and desert are covered with the
bodies of those who die on the way — bodies
that are left to putrify in the sun and poison
the air. You can understand that would l>ea
pi ace not only to cultivate the cholera germ or
microbe, or whatever you wish to call it, but
it lives there and has focxl on which to live.
It remains there and only breaks out in an
epidemic fonu at these great festivals and
fairs and occasionally it makes a trip across
Europe, reaches England and finally comes
to America. No combination of natural
causes can produce cholera. For instance
dry and cold cannot produce cholera, nor
can it l>e produced by dampness or moisture
nor can any accidentiil causes such as famine
or war, the misery of the poor or the
luxury of the rich produce cholera. Cholera
like all other contagious diseases, such tis
small-pox and scarlet fever, is specific. It is a
peculiar j)oison and has to be transported in
order to reproduce itself in other places, and
this is one of the reasons why I move in this
matter. There is no difference of opinion

Digitized by

Google

168

The Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

alnong people who are familiar with it as
to its cause. Some people pretend to
say that quarantine is no use. Now T
propose to deal with this very briefly to show
that quarantine is of use. Cholera is an im-
ported article, and as the leader of the Gov-
ernment can tell you, like every other
imported article it can be stppped at the'
frontier. Conditions such as filth, damp, and
bad water may disseminate cholera poison.
It is carried by man to man. It travels as
fast as man travels and no faster. It travels
in the highway of pommerce and in no other
places. In 1829 it started out in Hindostan.
It found its way to Russia and from there
travelled up the valley of the Volga to Mos-
cow and from there it spread through Europe.
It reached Hamburg in 1831, and England
in January, 1832. Let me call the attention
of the Minister of Agriculture, who I be-
lieve has charge of the department which
deals with this subject, to the fact that
cholera travels in winter and in summer —
it travels as much in January, February and
March as in June, July and August. There-
fore, whatever the Minister of Agriculture
proposes to do should be done forthwith in
order that cholera may not reach this coun-
tiy and produce its direful efifects. It reached
England in January, 1832, producing great
mortality and reached Paris in March
and killed no less than 120,000 people
in France. The first cholera case in this
country was at the city of Quebec, on the
8th June, 1832, and was brought there by
an immigrant ship. These immigrants
were pushed through to Montreal, Toronto,
Kingston, Hamilton and Niagara. We find
it skipped over the healthy interval between
Quebec and Montreal. Three Rivers barri-
caded itself and would not let the immigrants
land there. It passed up to Montreal and
made its abiding place there for a short
time. On the way to Montreal a raattrass
was thrown over the side of the vessel and
was picked up by a man who took it home,
and he and his wife died of cholera. An-
other instance was where a fisherman, who
was fishing on the bank of the river, was
asked to bury a dead body. He did so, and
he and his wife and nephew died from
cholera. Quebec lost 4,000 people and
Montreal 4,000 in that outbreak. We
have no record of what Toronto, Kingston
and Niagara lost. It may be objected that
quarantine and proper regulations are
expensive. Let me say that it has been

estimated by the highest authority that
every adult is worth $1,000 to the country
in which he lives. Now I think that is
a fair estimate. If you take those
8,000 people that were lost in the cities of
Quebec and Montreal, without regard What-
ever to the number lost in other parts of the
country, you have a loss of $8,000,000 to
this country. In 1845 cholera started again
from Hindostan, travelled exactly the same
course over to Astrakhan and up the Volga
and reached Europe in the same way. It
reached England in October, 1848, in the
fall of the year, and produced terrific results
there. Two vessels started, one from Havre,
France, to New York, the other for New
Orleans, both carrying cholera. It was
spread through the whole of the continent
from New York and New Orleans. We all
have read of the result of the epidemic of
cholera in 1849. The fatality was dreadful.
I will mention two or three cases showing
the extent of the loss. Russia lost during
that outbreak no less than 600,000 people ;
England lost 70,000. The number in
America has not been calculated. In 1854
it came exactly the same way — up the valley
of the Volga to Moscow, and spread again
and crossed, the Atlantic to New York.
France lost during this outbreak 114,000 of
her people. It arrived in New York in May,
1854, and produced some terrible results,
especially in the city of Buffalo. In one
ward of that city which was not in a good
sanitary condition the loss was one in
every fifty-seven of the population. In
another ward it was one in sixty. In another
ward, where sanitation had been attended
to, the loss was only one in 274. Montreal
lost 1,300 people. In 1865 the plague came,
not from Hindostan, but from Mecca
to Alexandria, spread through Southern
Egypt, cities of Syria and along the coast
of the Mediterranean up to Marseilles and
from there through France into England,
and reached New York in 1865. This attack
w^ not nearly so serious on the continent
of America as were the other two. I have just
given a brief outline of the attacks we have
had on this continent of cholera, the sonrce
from which it comes and the place to which
it came on this continent. The present
epidemic does not difler from the others only
in this respect, of its greater fatality, if possi-
ble, and of the greater convenience and im-
proved rapid transit for reaching us. There
j is more known about cholera, it is true, more

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera [FEBRUARY 27, 1893] Outbreak.

169

known about its causation and about its
treatment^ but however that may be,
<»ur duty is to meet the enemy upon the
threshold and give it a cold shoulder and
not allow it to enter the country at all. The
duty of the Grovemment at this particular
time is imperative. It may be said that
there are differences of opinion as to the
jurisdiction in this Dominion — whether it
rests with the Dominion Government, the
Local Government, or the municipal authori-
ties. I do not think that any difference of
opinion ought to stand in the way one mo-
ment of this Government doing its full and
complete duty in every respect, whether it
infringes on the rights of Local Governments
or municipalities. We will have theconscious-
ness of having done our duty. I would bar-
ricade every avenue of commerce in this
country. It is not necesvsary, as I will point
out before I get through, to create great
delay on the frontier, but it is necessary to
see that the people who are diseased are
stopped and taken care of and cleansed, and
that all their clothes are cleansed before they
are aUowed to proceed. This does not take
many days if you have proper methods of
doing it. The great delay in quarantine has
always arisen from lack of efficiency and
saijitary police, for want of proper meajis of
purifying the clothes of the people who have
cholera and for want of isolation hospitals.
You must separate the sick from the diseased;
if you have the proper appliances, commerce
need not be much delayed by a good system
of quarantine. I will say that these quaran-
tine stations ought to be supplied with the
most approved appliances known to science ;
put them there at any cost. Suppose the
cholera does not come, there is no loss. These
appliances will serve to protect the country
against invasionsof other epidemics, such as we
had in Vancouver and Victoria la^t year. It
may be objected that quarantine regulations
in Southern Europe have not prevented
cholera as was anticipated. I grant that,
but my reading has taught me this, it was
not efficiently carried out. There was not a
proper sanitary police, and unless it is well
done it had better not be done at all, and in
no case that T know of has (quarantine been
properly and efficiently put into execution.
It will be said that England Hoes not ap-
prove of quarantine. Now let me say Eng-
land has quarantined every town and village
throughout Great Britain and Ireland, by
sanitary precautionary measures. England

has spent in the last fifteen years no less
than 830,000,000 a year in purifying her
cities and towns — $450,000,000 in fifteen
years to purify her cities so that cholera
cannot enter. Cholera will not go to any
country unless invited. It is a most respect-
able disease ; unless you invite it by tilth
and uncleanliness it will stay away. In
point as an instance of this is the city of
VTorcester. In 1865 the cities and towns
in England were almost devast^, but in
Worcester not one door was entered by the
pestilence. Why ? She had cleaned every
part of the city and she had not
a solitary case of cholera in her whole borders.
England is no guide to us. Neither in the
United States nor in Canada have those pre-
parations for meeting the epidemic been
made : therefore we have to depend largely
on quarantine. There is no time now for the
people of this country to make those sanitary
improvements which are needed in order to
ward off an epidemic of this kind. Therefore,*
as I said before, we have to depend on qua-
rantine very largely to prevent the importa-
tion of this dise^e into the country. Qua-
rantine every principal avenue of commerce :
if there are small avenues, I would rather
close them up for the season and make all
commerce pass through the leading channels,
thus making the quarantine effective. If we
had no regard for human life at all, from a
commercial stand-point it will pay this coun-
try, as I haveshown, in the saving of life ; but
when human life is the sacrifice every pecu-
niary consideration must be dropped. We
must save the lives of our people at whatever
cost, and we have no right to stop to consi-
der whether we can afford this expenditure ;
it is the duty of this Government to protect
tho public health at any cost. It has been
estimated by an American authority, one of
the best in the United States, that the pe-
cuniary loss in New York City of an out-
break such as took place in 1849 would
amount to more than $200,000,000, in com-
merce alone to that city without calculat-
ing the loss of life. I grant that this is
a heartless standard on which to base an
argument, but it is an argument and I felt
it ray duty to bring it to the notice of the
House however heartless it may appear. 1
do not myself calculate the value of human
life from a money stand-point, and I am con-
fident that the Government do not either.
Cholera is more or less a nervous disease.
Fear will produce all the premonitory symp-

Digitized by

Google

170

The Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

toms — how necessary it is therefore for us
to allay public alarm by having proper pre-
paration made to cope with the disease when
it strikes the country. We all know the
effect of fear upon the lower animals, that it
acts upon the alimentary canals. We know
the effect of it upon the human body — that
it affects the alimentary canals the same
way. Fear of cholera will sometimes bring
on diarrhoea and all the preliminary symp-
toms of cholera. All the premonitory symp-
toms, lassitude and so on, are produced by
fear, so that fear, while it does not originate
the poison, will conduce largely to the spread
of cholera. The enervating influence of fear,
by lowering vital action, as every medical
gentleman knows, makes the system a ready
receptacle for any poison, whether scarlatina
or cholera, but more especially cholera. We
find in every great calamity, whatever it may
be, that panic is the thing to be dreaded,
If the public become seized with panic,
.whether on board ship or on board trains,
it conduces to very serious results. If quar-
antine only afforded a contingent power of
protection, we ought to have quarantine,
and we ought to have it thorough and
efficient ; and unless ifc is efficiently carried
out, with the proper sanitary police on
the frontier, it had better nut be carried
out at all, because it would lull the public
into a false security. I also believe it to be the
duty of the Government to publish a pamph-
let and put it into every household in this
Dominion, calling the attention of every
householder to what he should do in his
house in order to be secured against the
epidemic, and also what ought to be done
in the early and premonitory stages of the
disease, because I hold that in the premoni-
tory stages cholera is the most tractable ^nd
easily managed disejise known to the profes-
sion. It is only when it is advanced to the
second and third stages that it becomes
unmanageable. Therefore, how important it
is to have the public armed with means of
defence, with all the sanitary arrangements
necessary about the house, and the know-
ledge of what to do in case one mem-
ber of the family is attacked ; because,
while the house may be in a good sanitary
condition, this member may go abroad and
bring it home ; and it is important for the
people to know what to do, for it is so rapid
in its course that there is not time very
often to send for a physician. I will give to
the House a few of these necessary things :

local and house drainage ; stench traps and
privies, and every source of domiciliary im-
purity should be cleansed ; ventilation, dry-
ness, constant cleansing of every place and
department should be -attended to ; noputri-
fying garbage should be left either in the
cellars, yards, buckets, or anything of that
kind ; every cistern must be emptied, every
wet place made dry ; water should be
boiled five minutes. The kinds of disinfect-
ants t<> use and how to use them ; avoid
eating over-ripe fruit and unmatured vege-
tables ; and above all teach people this, that
rest is one of the most important things to
ward off cholera. A man, or a woman, or
a boy, or a girl who gets a good night's rest,
is not apt to be attacked by any disease the
following day ; and the old adage " early to
bed and early to rise," is as true to-day as
when it was first uttered, and it should be
impressed upon the people that the highest
possible standard of vital force'should be kept
up. All excess of eating and drinking should be
avoided. Wear flannel next the skin to pre-
vent the sudden change of atmosphere, and
wear flannel round the abdomen for the
same purpose. If these things are done
and observed, there is not much danger of
any one being attacked by cholera. I will
read what Dr. Sayer says about cholera — I
suppose he is one of the greatest authorities
on the subject — I was with him a short
time during the epidemic in 1865-66 in
New 'York City : If the people understood
the simple fact that cholera is always pre-
ceded by certain premonitory symptoms, such
as lassitude, debility and so on, and that in
this stage of the disease it is almost always
curable if the proper precautionary measures
are taken, it would tend to allay public terror
and largely reduce mortality. Now let me
read you a little confirmation of this from
what took place in England. This is a re-
port made by the general board of health in
^ England in 1865, and I will read a little of
it to prove what Dr. Sayer says about this
disease. Speaking of house to house visita-
tion of proper medical officers in every town,
and city, he says :

III Great Britain such a system of house visit-
ation by medical experts was made the means of
incalculable benefits to the people diiriu>j; the
epidemic cholera in 1849 and 18.54. Not only were
the localizing causes of cholera discovered, but

I cases of cholera and the habitations it most fre-
(juented were continually discovered, where no

] other metUcal or efficient care had been given ; a
vast number of cases of cholera in its premonitory

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera fPEBRUARY 27, 1893] Outbreak.

171

and early stages were discovered from day to day
and at once provided with care.

The object of my pamphlet will be to sup-
ply the householder with information to do
exactly what was done here.

The attention of every family was calletl to the
dnty of using proner-hygienic care and employing
timely medical aia. The prevcdence of the epi-
demic in any home or locality became speedily
limite<l and altogether ceased when such domestic
inspection and skilful medical counsel were given.
In the city of Olasffow, the sanitary inspectors
found and prescribeafor 15,000 cases of cholera in
the early stages (1,000 of which had passed on to
the rice-water discharges) and of the total number
there were only 1 3 cases that went on to collapse.
During the mouths of August and September, 1849,
eight medical officers and their parochial assistants
found 45,564 cases of cholera in various stages in \
persons needing their counsel, and of this number .
only 52 passed into cholera after treatment.

In the Metropolis and fourteen other cities and
towns in which there was faithful house to house
visitations, there were found 130,000 premonitory
eases in various stages of development. About 6,000
were passing into developed cholera. Of this
enormous number — says the report of the General
Board of Health— not above 280 actually went on
to the developed stage of the disease ; and the
reports show that even the lar^t^r part of this small
proportion occurred within trie first few days of
the introduction of the preventive measures, and
before they came into full operation.

I could give you much evidence to show that
there is no disease known to the medical
profession more easily managed and more
curable than cholera ; but if it ever reaches
a certain stage it is almost certain death.
So I will repeat, at the risk of being con-
sidered tiresome, that the most important
duty of the Government to-<lay is to place
in the hands of every household in the
Dominion this information, that I am read-
ing here to you to-day. It will stop panic ;
the public will have confidence and hope,
and the disease will not spread so rapidly
as it would if this was not done. Now, hon.
gentlemen, I will not detain you any longer.
I could quote from such men as Spencer
Wells, who has written recently upon the
subject. He does nr>t give the treatment
of cholera, but deals with it in many other
. respects. I will not tire you any longer,
but I would urge the Government to spare
no expenses now. The probability of the
epidemic reaching Canada is greater to-day
than it was in any previous year. With the
Chicago exhibition, the large number of
vessels crossing the Atlantic, unless careful
measures are taken, will till this country
with that dreadful disease during this com-

ing season ; and the loss to commerce alone
will be infinitely greater than any expense
the Government might make. The stag-
nation of business intone week would cost us
more than t«n times the amount it would
take to barricade the country against this
disease ; so that viewing it from no other
stand-point, I would say to the Government
that their duty is clear at this particufar
time, irrespective of any jealousies on the
part of any municipalities, on the part of
local governments, wherever they are al-
lowed to do something to save human life
in this country, let them do it ; and
I say it is imperative upon them to do
it at this time. The country will endorse
any expense rather than have the epidemic
in this country again ; and I am satisfied
that every hon. gentleman in this House,
whether he be with the Government
in the House of Commons or out of the
House of Commons, in this House or out of
this House, and every voter in this country,
will say to the (iovernment, " Your duty is
to prevent the invasion of this country by
cholera during the coming season ;" so that
I. think the Government, need not hesitate ;
— the Government need not be afraid to do
their full and complete duty, and if cholera
does not come, so nmch the better ; we have the
means there of protecting and defending his
country from an invasion by other epidemics
if they should come. Now this is more im-
portant because we are in connection with
Japan and China almost directly ; and they
are great fever and filth centres, and from
these we may expect to receive nearly every
kind and description of epidemic disease into
this country ; and it is more imperative and
important now than ever before and I
would ask the Government, on my own l>e-
half and on l^ehalf I believe of the people of
this country, not only to understand their
complete and full duty now, but to hence-
forth carry it into execution.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN — No more impor-
tant question, I assume, can engage the at-
tention of this House than the matter which
has l)een submitted to us by the hon. gentle-
man, and which has been so ably expounded
by him. The |x>8sible advent of that dread-
ful scourge, which is recognized generally as
the most severe and fatal of all diseases,
within a short time is suthcient to fill the
whole of the j)eople of this country with
very grave apprehension. T w^ill not attempt

Digitized by

Google

172

The Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

to go over the history which the hon. gentle-
man has so ably given you, and the informa-
tion which I have no doubt will benefit you,
concerning the disease, even to the extent of
advising you to be careful when you are
drinking water to put some antidote in it.
Existing for centuries in India, this disease,
stirange to say, did not start on its devasta-
ting journey until a comparatively i^ecent
date. It has made six visitations to this
country, and I am not aware that the
disease has been mitigated to any extent. It
is as virulent to-day as it was when it first
made its appearance. The hon. gentleman
has explained that it has been fully investi-
gated by bacteriolojgists and that it origi-
nates from bacteria. It is unfortunate that
that investigation has not resulted in the
discovery of any means whereby we
could check. the disease. The necessity of
guarding the public health is recognized by
all civilized nations, but it is not always
done. I know that in the United States
this matter was not taken up, in the case of
yellow fever, until 50,000 lives had been
sacrificed and $100,000,000 worth of pro-
perty lost ; then a national l)oard of health
was formed in 1878 and 1879, and it had
theeflfect of checking the yellow fever. It has
not appeared there since. That board has
been superseded by the course which the
Americans intend to take with reference to
cholera, of vesting all the power in the Sec-
retary of the Treasury. A Bill for that
purpose was introduced into the United
States Senate and subsequently passed by
the House. The public health, as you are
aware, may be guarded by municipalities ;
it may be guarded by the provinces, and
finally it may be guarded by the central
authority. When these three bodies unit«,
then, indeed, it will be well guarded, and I
see no reason why Canadians cannot be
united on this occasion and thus provide
superior means for checking the introduction
of cholera into this country. The cold season
has caused a lull in the disease, but not
always does cold check cholera. The expe-
rience of the past goes to show that a tem-
porary cessation of the epidemic does not
give reason to hope that it will not make
its appearance as usual ajjain. Pursuing its
ordinary course, we may expect to have it
return in the course of travel. It is well
known that the principal propagators of the
disease are the great unwashed. Although Can-
ada has not in the past done a great deal for the

public health, I presume it was because of
the healthiness ox the inhal>itants and that
the necessity did not exist here to a large
extent ; still it is time now that Canada
assumed a right position to gaye this matter
of public health more attention ; and I take
this opportunity of sayiiig, not only on
account of cholera but on account of any
other epidemic, that a board could readily
be established here at slight expense, which
would be the means of disseminating a vast
amount of useful information, a boai^ which
might have powers accoixied to it that would
enable it to be of great benefit to the coun-
try. Some time in the near future such a
board ought to be established. I am not
aware really what the Grovernment propose
to do or what they have done, but it is their
duty, in order to relieve public apprehension
and dispel any fears which people may have,
to at once declare what is their intention
and thus reassure the people. I think in
that respect they can be greatly assisted by
the neighbouring country and Great Britain.
The United States have taken the greatest
concern in this matter, and extraordinary
powers have been vested in the Secretary of
the Treasury, or the President. He has
power to declare even non-intercourse and
to order the disinfection of ships, the sani-
tation of ships, the isolation of patients
and so on. The experience of New York
in the epidemic of 1892 shows that the
disease can be kept out, because you will
remark no case of cholera occurred in
New York of a secondary character. All were
brought from abroad. By prompt interfer-
ence the disease was checked, because there
is a mode of detecting cholera by means of
the bacteria, which are generated in enor-
mous numbers in the intestines during the
course of the disease. Even in the mildest
form of it the presence of the disease can be
detected, and then the greatest care should
be taken to isolate it. This was done by a
physician at the fort at New York in the case
of a child attacked with cholei*a which no
one thought was more than diarrhoea ; on ex-
amination by microscopists it was found to be
a case of cholera. The chiM was at once
seat down to quarantine in the bay, and the
result was that no other case occurred in
the city. The medical profession of New
York believe that they can guard the city
effectually against the disease ; but they
are all in favour of what will strike you all
as the correct thing, a national quaiuntine, a

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera [FEBRUART 27,n893] Outbreak.

173

quarantine where, aided by the national
and state authorities, there will be no con-
flict of opinions, no political squabbling, and
no attempts to use this as a means of
aggrandizement for individuals. I think
you wiD see that they can take all the
m^ans which God has given them to
resist the disease; therefore, I think
that a national quarantine here would
be the best method. The Govern-
ment of this country, great and power-
ful as they are, I think are not above
taking advice. I believe that the whole
medical profession of this Dominion would,
without hesitation, recommend them to
have the assistance of scientific men, to con-
sult with them as to tlie best method of
keeping out cholera. In this way, I fancy,
by the expenditure of a little money
comparatively, this result could be secured,
the people of this country would have their
apprehensions laid at rest, and we would
feel perfectly safe. It is said that dirt is
the quartermaster of cholera ; therefore, by
strict cleanliness we can accomplish a good
deal, and I do not disapprove, if it could
be feasible, of the distribution of a small
book with a few practical suggestions,
among the people ; but I hope that the
necessity for such a course will never exist.
There is no doubt, however, that cholera
has the same virulence now that it had
when it first made its appearance in this
country. It has not abated one jot ; and it
is said that we are equally incapable of
combatting it ; that we have found no
means to check or arrest it, once it has
taken hold of the person. The hon. gentle-
man has mentioned that the province of
Ontario takes a deep interest in this mat-
ter, and has a board of health established,
and is very anxious to have as perfect
means as possible to prevent the disease ;
but all the quarantines which existed here
before have been effete, useless establish-
ments, which should be swept away at
once ; the patching of them up will do
more harm than good. The department
that has charge of this matter will under-
stand that they must adopt the most
approved methods ; it will not cost a great
deal, but cast what it may, it would
be well to make a beginning now, and not
perpetuate the old effete system. I do not
know any man who is adviser to the Govern-
ment in that respect, or whether they take
any advice, but I would recommend on this

occasion that in the establishment of this
quarantine the expense of it should not fall
on the locality where the outbreak occurs.
S'o one would tliink of making those people
pay for it ; but they will assist. The pro-
vincial and* municipal authorities assisting,
there is no doubt we will have as efficient
means as any country in the world. The
Americans will also aid them, I am satisfied,
It is their interest to guard against the en-
trance of cholera into Canada, because it
would easily pass the frontier into the United
States. They have sent men to Europe to
watch the disease there, and these men have
the power of giving a certificate without
which a vessel cannot be admitted
to port. Now, we do not aim at anything
of that kind, nor would I recommend such
stringent measures as those ; I do not think
they are necessary, but in any case Where
the importation of cholera from abroad was
anticipated we could use the British and
American consul service and thus be able
to treat the matter as well as they can, I
thank the House for listening to these few
remarks, and I am very glad the honourable
gentleman postponed the debate to give me
an opportunity of expressing my opinions.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— Now that we have
had the pleasure of listening to the remarks
of two hon. gentlemen, members of the medi-
cal profession, I claim to be allowed to give
the opinion of a layman on the same subject.
You will all admit that the portion of the
Dominion which is more directly threatened
with the epidemic referred to in the motion,
is the Lower Provinces, — the cities and
ports on the Atlantic coast. I see by the
motion that inquiry will be made of the Go-
vernment as to what steps have been taken
or what the Government intend to take to
prevent the introduction of cholera into Ca-
nada. The hon. gentlemen, the medical men,
who have spoken, have shown us the neces-
sity of preventing the introduction of cho-
lera ; and one of them has been soothing
enough to show that cholera is not at all a
dangerous disease, so much so that out of
15,000 who caught the disease in England
at one time only 15 died. That is all very
encouraging, but I believe if we could pre-
vent the 15,000 people getting cholera it
would be the wisest method to commence
with. You are all aware that we in the
Lower Provinces are open the whole sea-
son of navigation to contagion from ships

Digitized by

Google

174

The Cholera fSBNATE] Outbreak.

coming from the old country, but per-
haps you are not aware of this fact that
in the majority of our ports there are no
medical inspectors. I rise simply to call the
attention of the Government to this fact,
that we have in the most of our^rts no me-
dical inspectors. Take the county of Digby
for example ; from Yarmouth to Digby is a
considerable^ distance, and there are five or
six ports between the^e two f)oints, yet there
is not a medical inspector. T have had let-
ters from several correspondents asking me
to see the Government and endeavour to
have medical men appointed there. On the
Straits of Northumberland there is not one
medical inspector. I firmly believe that the
first step the Government should take is to
appoint medical men at all the ports where
vessels from Europe are likely to touch dur-
ing the coming season. All those ports are
open to navigation from abroad and
ships come to 'load from England, France,
Germany, Italy, Spain and even from the
northerly coast of Africa ; that I am person-
ally awar^ of. If we are threatened with
the introduction of cholera, it is. in my opi-
nion, not so nmch from the chartered
lines of steam-ships as from those vessels
which come to load with timber or make oc-
casional voyages to our ports from the coun-
tries of Europe. There is greater danger of
introducing the disease from such ships than
from the regular liners, and I therefore urge
upon the Government the necessity of ap-
pointing inspectors at those ports to see that
every ship which comes from Europe or from
American ports where the infection may be
reported to exist, are free from the epidemic,
and if necessary to enforce the quarantine
regulations. I am not sufficiently familiar
with the history of cholera to deal with the
question of how it should be treated or other-
wise prevented, but the point to which I
have called attention has been brought to
my notice by people who have written to me
on the subject. I would ask the Minister to
call the attention of the gentleman who re-
presents the Minister of Marine and Fisher-
ies in his absence to this important question,
and request him to see that in the maritime
provinces medical inspectors are appointed
all along the coast to enforce the quarantine
regulati<ms whenever and wherever it may
be necessary.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I rise for
the purpose of giving my unqualified support

to the very able and patriotic remarks that
have fallen from the hon. gentleman who
has introduced this subject, and also what
has been said by the hon. gentleman from
Kingston. A few days ago I moved for
certain papere and when the return is
brmight down I propose to deal at some
length with the question of cholera, small-
pox, yellow fever, and typhus fever. How-
ever I feel it my duty not to allow this
discussion to close without expressing my
unqualified approval of what has been so
well and ably stated by those hon. gentleman
to whom I have referred. I agree with the
hon. gentleman from Kingston that cholera
is just as virulent to-day as it was when it
first made its appearance in Europe, and so
far as I know there is no specific by which
it can be cured, so far discovered. The
medical profession, apart from sanitation, is
almost as helpless as when cholera was first
introduced into Europe. I also quite agree
with him that while it is necessary that
every precaution should be taken by munici-
palities, and local governments, it is the
bounden duty of the Federal Government to
organize such a board as will have the sole
authority and control over all quarantine
throughout the Dominion, and that they
should not for a moment trust to any great
extent to any local authorities or govern-
ments. T say that largely because of the
sad experience we had in British Columbia
during last summer when we were in a state
of siege for nearly three months in Victoria,
and largely so in Vancouver and New West-
minster, owing to an epidemic of small-
pox. It cost the city of Victoria alone
over $60,000 to meet the expenses neces-
sarily incurred in connection with that
small-pox epidemic. I am sorry to say at the
present time we have another visitation of
small-pox from China. It appears to be
almost impos8ib?e for a ship any more to
come from China and Japan without carry-
ing one or more case of small-pox. As I
stated the other day, the Government have
been so derelict as to allow our quarantine
station — if 1 may dignify It by the term —
to remain in its wretched condition for so
long a time. It was worse than having
nothing at all. It led us to trust to some-
thing which was of no value. I hope that
the Government, late though it is in the
day, will lose not one moment of time in.
erecting a new quarantine station at William
Head and putting it in a most efficient con-

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera [FEBEUARY 27, 1893] Outbreak.

175

dition, because it is not only small-pox that
we have to dread but typhus fever, cholei^a
and other contagious diseases. I claim that
we are exposed to greater, if possible, danger
from outbreaks of this kind than any of the
eastern port« of the Dominion. A few days
ago I drew the attention of the House to the
fact that nine-tenths o£ all the shipping
visiting the poi-ts of Victoria, Vancouver
and Nanaimo is foreign ; whereas three-
fourths of t^e shipping calling at the Eastern
ports of Canada is British. Such being the
case, I claim that we are more exposed on
the Pacific Coast than the ports on the
Atlantic Coast to the introduction of epide-
mics of the diseases mentioned, and I again
urge upon the Government the importance
of proceeding without delay to put the
quarantine stations on the Pacific Coast in
first-class condition.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— We must all feel
indebted to the hon. member from Wei land
and the hon. gentleman from Kingston for
the interesting statements and excellent
suggestions they have made on this subject.
I rise to express my belief that these gentle-
men are somewhat unduly alarmed. I should
not like it to go abroad in this country that
the mortality from cholera is as great, or the
clanger as imminent, as gentlemen of the
medical profession seem to indicate. When
cholera visited this country in 1832 the con-
ditions were different entirely from what
they are to-day. We have, happily, not only
in Canada but in other parts of the Western
world, made wonderful progress in learning
and observing the laws of health. In 1832
cholera as a rule followed the tracks of the
unfortui^ate emigrants who came to this
country. Numbers of them stopped off at
Quebee and Montreal, and necessarily disse-
minated cholera there as they did at other
points where they stopped temporarily. I
have a very distinct recollection of the
cholera hospitals along the banks of the St.
Lawrence when the emigrants came up in
batteaux and barges on their way to the
West. The unfortunate people were in a
very low condition of vitality from the long
passage across the Atlantic, the poor food,
and other causes, and so succumbed very
readily to the disease. The cholera did not
spread far westward in this country : it
was confined for the most part to the places
where the emigrants went. Since then we
have learned a great deal about cholera, more

particularly during the last few years, and
it has been very properly observed that
cholera is one of those diseases which you
must either eat or drink. In stating that I
do not share the alarm of my medical friends,
I would not for a moment desire to check
any action that the (xovernment of this,
country might take with a view to enlighten-
ing the people on the laws of sanitation. If
they were not useful in keeping out cholera
they would be useful in subduing very many
other diseases, such as typhoid and diph-
theria, which are quite as alarming as
cholera and very apt to prove quite as
serious. Not long ago there was a very
serious outbreak of diphtheria in Toronto.
Such outbreaks are very frequently occur-
ring. Fortunately the people of Canada are
feeling the necessity of adopting sanitary
precautions. Whether the Government here
would be sufiiciently in touch with the
people to educate them on the laws of sani-
tation, I cannot say. It is probably outside
of their functions, though I would consider
it an important matter. Their duty would
be, I consider, to co-operate with the United •
States. If cholera visits this country, it
must come from the other side of the Atlantic.
It has been shown by the hon. member from
Kingston that it can be kept out. We have
had an illustration of it recently at New
York where several shjps were quarantined
within gun-shot of the shore until cholera
patients were removed and the disease was
stamped out. As I have said, cholera is
known to be a very different disease from
what it was supposed to be when it visited
this country sixty years ago. At that time,
very many of the doctors, nurses and clergy-
men who were brought in contact with the
cholera patients succumbed. To-day, you
find in the well-regulated hospitals of West-
ern Europe that nurses and doctors enjoy
almost absolute immunity from cholera.
You very rarely hear of one of them being
attacked with the disease ; so cholera is not

' contagious. It is, as I have said, one of
those disease* that you must eat or drink.

! It is a disease which attacks the intestines.

1 1 wish our medical friends had given us, in
popular phraseology, some better indication
of what it is. As I understand it, the
cholera gei*m attacks the mucous lining of
the intestines and eats it off, and the conse-
quence is that the serous blood flows through
in consequence of the removal of the mucous
lining. The discharge of serum blood, of

Digitized by

Google

JT6

The Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

course, means the washing out and discharge
of the life forces of the body. The best
method of preventing cholera is to keep
it out. As you have either to eat it or
drink it, so long as our foods and our
drinks are wholesome and the air we
breathe is pure, we not only escape cholera
but every other disease.. With reference
to the treatment of cholera, I have noticed
lately that a number of cases have been
treated with great success at St. Petersburg,
simply by washing internally as well as ex-
ternally, with injectionsof soap and water —
washing out the bacilli. In St. Petersburg
they are constructing a hospital, and at the
foot of each bed there are large douches
where the soap and water flow from the dou-
che and wash the intestines out. The me-
dical man who first made the experiment in
St. Petersburg or Moscow was given 25 cases
to treat — all cases that had gone into the
second stage, and I think the proportion of
cures effected was 20 out of 25. We know
that the proportion of deaths whei*e cholera
has passed into the second stage was in other
epidemics 60, so it is a more fatal disease,
where it finds a subject that is fitted for it,
than those which have been mentioned, but
I think there should l>e no cause for alarm in
this country, because we have all improved \
our sanitation very greatly. It is the duty,
of course, of all the cities, towns and villa-
ges to exercise more care and adopt greater
sanitary precautions. T do not approve of
the prescription that the hon. member from
Kingston gives— to introduce a corrective
into the water we drink. The conclusion I
have arrived at from my i*eading is that
those who avoid stimulants escape with im-
munity, and that the people who were cut
down were those who indulged in stimu-
lants.

Hon. Mr. ALMON~The Hindoo.s,
among whom the greatest ravages have oc-
curred, diink nothing but water.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The disease arisesfrom
tilth, and if you eat a great deal of it,
whether you take whiskey or not makes very
little difference ; but in adopting precau-
tions against the disease, I unhesitatingly
say, as far as my reading of the statistics
goes, that persons who are known to be
sol)er and avoid stimulants, are less liable to
take the disease. As I said before, I think
our Government ought to act in this matter

in concert with the United states authori-
ties, who have made arrangements to adopt
very stringent quarantine regulations. They
are exposed to cholera through the St.
Lawrence, as we are exposed to cholera
through United States ports, and on the
Pacific we are mutually exposed in the
same way, but I think if proper concerted
action is taken by the Governments of
the two countries there will be no great dif-
ficulty in keeping cholera out. At the same
time, I think it is well to warn the people
not only to avoid cholera, but to avoid other
diseases as well — that it rests with them-
selves to say -whether they will become fit
subjects for attack or not. They ought,
during the cholera season, to exercise greater
care, to live correctly, to eat wholesome
food, to see that the germs of disease are de-
stroyed in both food and drink. Water is
necessarily one of the principal avenues for
the introduction of cholera — the germ is ia
the water. At Hamburg it was proved that
the terrible devastation was due to the water
they were drinking, but no one can say that
the conditions there and in Canada are the
same. Hamburg is a city where the filth of
a thousand years is accumulated — a city
with narrow streets^ where many of the
people are filthy in their habits, and where,
through vice and poverty, a great many per-
sons have lowered their vitality. We have
no such city in Canada. I think there is no
occasion for serious alann if the ordinary
precautions are taken to keep out the disease.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— The
hon. meml>er from Niagara, who brought
forward this question, deserves the thanks
of the House and of the country. We are
anxious in British Columbia to know what
the Government propose to do, not so much
on account of cholera as of small-pox. Every
steamer entering ouV ports now carries one
or more cases of small-pox, and it is impor-
tant that something should be done soon to
protect our province from epidemics. I have
no doubt the Minister of Agriculture is
aware of the precautioiis that have been
adopted by the steam-ship companies carry-
ing passengers from Europe to America. All
emigrants are detained and housed for a cer-
tain number of days and kept under strict
medical supervision and 'examination before
the departure of the steamer. At the end
of the certain number of days those who are
ill and not able to proceed are taken back.

Digitized by

Google

'Hu Cholera [FEBfiUABY 27, 1898] Outbreak.

and those who are well are forwarded to
their destination and again subjected to a very
strict examination and perhaps to quaran-
tine as well. I do not know what power our
Grovernment could exercise to induce the
steam-ship companies on the Pacific coafit to
do anything of that kind, but if they
are powerless in that way, self-interest
might induce the companies to adopt
such precautions as I have mentioned,
because the loss of time and money by
quarantine is very great, and they might
avoid it by adopting some such course as I
have mentioned. One of the great dangers
lies at our very doors in the case of an epide-
mic— that is, imperfect sewerage and impure
water. It is a lamaentable fact that through-
out this country all sewers drain into rivers
and the masses of the people use the waters
of those rivers without boiling or filtering,
and take into their systems the germs of
diphtheria, typhoid, scarlet fever and other
diseases.. It is well known that a cholera
bacillus carried into a river soon breeds mil-
lions of germs and the water becomes con-
taminated. These are no doubt municipal
matters,^ but the Dominion Grovernment
ought to act on the suggestion of the hon.
gentleman from Niagara and issue a wckrn-
ing to municipalities and the people about
drainage and about the necessity of boiling
the water they use, to avoid an epidemic.
There is a very able article in The Fw^uirty
by Sir Spencer Wells, dealing with the ques-
tion of cholera. He mentions one instance
which occurred in 1866, showing how the
distribution of cholera poison occurred
through the contamination of the waters of
the Biver Lee by the discharges from some
cholera patients. These patients had arrived
at Southampton suffering from cholera in its
early or latent stage. They were supposed to
have recovered and were allowed to pass on
to a cottage. They infected the river first
and the district supplied by the water com-
pany afterwards,Srith the result that 16,000
people were attacked with cholera and 6,000
of them died. He also shows that a person
who may leave an infected port in good
health and cross the Atlantic, may carry the
germs of the disease with him and spread it,
and yet escape himself. All this goes to show
the necessity of strict quarantine, and of
fumigating and disinfecting. He says that
that is the only remedy. Th^n he deals with
the question of disposing of the bodies of
those who die of cholera^ He says that the
12

clothing and the bodies should be cremated,
that it is the only way to kill the germ*
Burying the dead only spreads the disease^
as the germ multiplies in the ground and
may be dug up again. However, I ami satis-
fied that our Government will take every
precaution to prevent the introduction and
spread of this dreaded epidemic.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not rise
to prolong the discussion, because I know
very little about the germs of the disease
and how they are propagated ; but with
regard to what fell from my hon. friend from
New Westminster, with reference to the
Grovernment taking independent miction in
this matter, I think that whatever course
may be pursued should be in concert with
the towns, cities and municipalities of the
country. If the Government were to under-
take the matter alone, it would have a
tendency to make the municipalities and
local authorities generally indifferent. It is
well to instruct the municipalities as to the
best means of preventing the spread of
cholera, small-pox, diphtheria and other
diseases, but, if the Government act alone
they will have less effect than if they secure
the co-operation of all the authorities. It is
too big a task for the Government to under-
take alone. It has been stated here that
fear has a tendency to increase the danger.
I think, therefore, that the Government
ought to act vigorously and that they should
do so in co-operation with the different
municipalities, instructing them as to the.
best means of keeping their towns in a good
sanitary condition.

Hon. Mr. POWER— There is one reason
why the discussion of this matter is pecu-
liarly appropriate here : we have in the
Senate the Minister who has control of the
quarantine. I do not propose to discuss the
general question of cholei-a at all ; but 1
wish to say this — I hope the Minister will
not take anything for granted, but that he
will see for himself and will not be satisfied
with reports from officers qp the spot. There
are two principal avenues through which
cholera is likely to come into Canada during
the, present season. One is Halifax, a port
to which regular lines of steamers come, and
which is peculiarly a port of call for steamers
in distress, and to which steamers in which
disease breaks out, and which for that reason
would probably not be brought to New York,

Digitized by

Google

178

rhe Cholera [PEBBUABY 27, 1893] Outbreaic.

would be likely to go. We shall probably
have a number of steamers calling at Halifax
with cholera cases during the coming season.
The other point is Quebec. Unless I am
very much mistaken — and my hon. colleague
can inform the House if I am — the present
preparations to deal with a large influx of
cholera patients at Halifax are not at all
what they ought to be. I may say further
that a new-fangled machine for fumigating
clothing which was sent down to Hali-
fax has not in practice been found a
success. This machine, which I under-
stand is a pretty expensive one, wae sent
down to Halifax some weeks ago for the
purpose of disinfecting the clothing of pas-
sengers iirriving there and bound for western
points. It was found that it destroyed not
only the microbes, but the clothing too, and
the officials have been obliged to fall back on
some less modem and less destructive method
of disinfecting. I know from gentlemen
who crossed the ocean last summer in a
steamer which was quarantined at Grosse
Isle that there was great negligence on the
part of the authorities 'who dealt with the
steamer, and that passengers were allowed
to proceed on their journeys who were not
supposed to proceed, and of whose proceed-
ing I presume the Minister of Agriculture
knew nothing whatever. There is no use
now in talking about going into questions of
sanitation, looking after sewerage and that
sort of thing. It is too late. The thing we
have to do — the most urgent duty now, is to
. look after the quarantine. We know how
effectual good quarantine was in New York
last season, and it is the duty of the Gov-
ernment, and particularly of the Minister of
Agriculture, to see that quarantine, particu-
larly at these two points, Halifax and
Quebec, is what it ought to be.

Hon. Mr. READ(Quint^)— And Victoria.

Hon. Mr. POWER— There is no cholera
coming to Victoria as I understand. I am
speaking now of cholera solely ; and I say
that the Minister should take nothing for
granted — that he must see for himself, and
get rid as far as possible of red tape and all
these official trammels which in Canada seem
to render the expenditure of money very
much easier than the doing of any really
valuable and practical work.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I did not intend to
speak on this question, but I must follow the

senior member. With regard to the quaran-
tine officer at Halifax, Dr. Wick wire, there
could not be a more capable official.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I did not say a word
against that officer.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I think perhaps one
difficulty, in former times, was that he had
not good means of visiting the vessels. Now
he has the use of a steam launch. The hon.
gentleman from Welland spoke of a number
of cases of cholera which were said to have
been cured ; perhaps they were not Asiatic
cholera cases at all. When there is an epi-
demic of any kind raging, anything that
resembles the prevalent disease is supposed
to be a case of it. If during an epidemic of
Asiatic cholera a person is seized with
vomiting and diarrhcea, he thinks he has
the cholera, and when it passes off he
thinks he has been cured of cholera, and
when people want to make out a favorable
case for a particular mode of treatment,
they refer to such instances. Will any one
tell me what a disinfectant is? In old times,
when the plague was rife (which was only
an aggravated case of typhus fever), it was
supposed that burning sugar on & shovel
prevented the spread of the disease. When
the cholera broke out in Halifax, in 1834, I
was all through it, and I fancy I have seen
more cases of cholera (perhaps I am pre-
sumptuous in saying so) than all the other
members of the House put together. At
that time ■ there were 500 fatal cases in
a population of 10,000. The first case
was one that came from Quebec. I was
a student at the time. I said, " How did
you disinfect ? I am told that burnt sugar
is a good thing in a case of that kind;"
and it was supposed that sulphuric acid on
manganese, giving off oxygen, was a disin'
fectant. I will tell you what the munici-
pality of Halifax did at one time. There
was an outbreak of diphtheria. How did they
prevent it ? They put on the house a large
placard, three. or four feet long, which fright-
ened people ; nobody could pass without
shivering. A constable was placed at the
door, supposed to stay there 24 hours, and
only the medical man was allowed to go in.
I do not think the constable disinfected him-
self at all ; I do not think he even washed
his hands. I asked a member of the city
council, " What about that constable ? Is
he not in danger of contracting the disease ? "

Digitized by

Google

The Cholera [FEBRUAEY 27, 1S93] Outbreak.

179

He said, " My dear doctor, if you knew as
much as I do about it — a policeman cannot
catch anything.'' There was a good deal of
truth in that, and therefore it saved a great
deal of money ; but the taxes were so high
that they nearly drove the people out of the
city. Still, for God's sake do not let the
municipality catch cholera and put \ coh-
stable at the door.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— Before the hon.
gentleman replies to the inquiry, I desii*e to
answer one or two things. In the first place,
I think this discussion has done good so far,
because we are not so much discouraged as
when we started. One hon. gentleman com-
mented on the fact of only fifteen patients
dying out of 15,000 ; I may say with re-
gard to that that I was simply reading the
report of the British Board of Health/>n that
subject, and I so explained to the hon. mem-
ber from Halifax. I quite diflFer from the
hon. gentleman from Ottawa when he states
that our sanitation has been very much im-
proved. We have not removed the filth
from our towns a^d cities ; we have simply
displaced it from our back yards into the
water which we drink. That is true of every
town in Canada, except on the sea coast
where the tide takes it away. In any city
in Ontario or Quebec they pump the water
out of the place where the sewage is depo-
sited ; so our sanitation is not much improved
in that respect. A doubt has been thrown
upon the whole question by the hon. member
from Halifax who asks : " Who has seen the
microbe " ? I have not seen it, but the medi-
cal world have seen it and are satisfied as to
its existence. Koch, the great bacteriolo-
gist, and others have seen it and have actu-
ally grown and cultivated these microbes
upon gelatine plates; and it is positively
and absolutely known now what the cholera
bacillus is. There is no doubt about it ;
they perfectly understand the whole subject,
and as the hon. gentleman from Kingston
has said, they have no method of dealing
with it except by closing the door against it
and cleansing the country.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I must express my
great satisfaction with the spirit in which
the professional men in this House have
treated this question. They have dealt with
it in the proper spirit. When I first read
the notice given by the hon. member for
Welland, I was afraid that a discussion here
12i

might lead to a panic ; but, on the contrary,
the speeches of the medical men who have
spoken upon this subject have had a reassur-
ing efPect My own belief is that cholera is
not such a foe now as it was in 1832, in 1849
or in 1854; Science has changed the nature
of our defence. At that time we did not
know how we took the disease. It was be-
lieved that by simply going near a person
suffering from cholera you might catch the
infection, and often the pick were deserted
in lonely houses and even on the street. It
w^ also believed then that contagion was
floating in the air, that the disease went
from place to place of its own motion. Now,
science has taught us that it is a germ that
you may take into your system with your
food or your beverage, and that you can
guard against it by. eating wholesome, pro-
perly prepared food and drinking pure water.
If you drink water that has been boiled it
cannot contain a living germ. But it must
not be understood that this water may be laid
aside, and that, provided it has been boiled
once, it is pure for ever and that there is no
danger of its again receiving and propagat-
ing the germ ; because I think that in water,
milk, fruit and all those substances, the germ
propagates with the greatest facility. Now
there is to be no panic in the country, and
the medical men have told you that fear has
upon men a certain influence leading to
cholera, if I may be allowed to express myself
in that way. It weakens in us certain organs
upon which cholera operates most actively ;
and if you have cholera and are frightened,
you have less chance of recovery than
if you understand what the disease is and
know that you are within a curable distance.
Therefore, it is most important that there
should be no panic ; and I do not consider
this disease, cholera, as being nearly as dan-
gerous as small-pox, scarlatina, or diphtheria
which are all highly contagious diseases.
Diphtheria is communicated by emanations
from the mouth which may dry in a room
and then float in the air. Small-pox you can
take by the simple touch ; Scarlatina is a
disease which is carried in the air from the
small pellicles of the skin that float about
when the patient is recovering. I
say that cholera is not so contagious
as those diseases that I have men-
tioned. It is transmitted by the emanations
of the sick. It may be also transmittible
by their clothes and rags ; therefore, in
dealing with all things, passengers or goods

Digitized by

Google

180

TAe Cholera [SENATE] Outbreak.

coming from an infected place, the greatest
care and attention must be paid to the
quarantine; and the Government has de-
cided to establish a perfect quarantine sys-
tem at all the entry ports in the Dominion.
The disease may come to us hy way of
Halifax, Quebec or St. John. Those are the
three most exposed stations. The hon.
member for Shediac has pointed out that
there are also other ports through which the
disease may enter. It is true, but as we
have provided for the main stations, we ako
intend to provide for the secondary stations,
and all those ports which are called second-
dary, such as Sydney, Chatham, Pictou,
Charlottetown and other minor quarantine
stations, will be fitted out with sufficient
appliances for the class of vessels calling at
those places. Such harbours are visited by
merchant ships, which do not, as a rule,
carry passengers, or carry very few,
and the •crew is limited to fifteen or
twenty men on the large sailing vessels.
The precautions to be taken there are very
plain. The vessel must be inspected. First
of all we must ascertain if the people on
the ship are healthy. If there is a very
serious disease, it cannot be dealt with
there. It is impossible that the Government
could provide sufficient hospitcd accom-
modation, medical men and appliances, to
treat cholera at every seaport of the
Dominion; consequently,- the rule will be
that should a vessel having on board persons
suffering from any dangerous disease, by
accident arrive in one of those secondary
stations, it must immediately be sent to
one of the main stations where the disease
can be properly treated, and the crew taken
care of. At such a station an ordinary
merchant ship can be cleansed, and the
clothes of the men can be purified.
If the purifying process should spoil the
clothing, the cheapest way, I believe,
is to bum the clothes and buy others,
which cost from $8 to $10 per man ; and as
to purifying the ship, which is always an
open vessel, sulphur is the substance acknow-
ledged to be most effiactive in destroying
the germs. I have stated what the Gov-
ernment intend to do at these minor
stations. I will now state what they pro-
pose to do at the large ports where the
danger is greatest, such as Grosse Isle, Hali-
fax and St. John — St. John and Hali&ix
only at this time of the year, and the early
spring. But the moment the navigation of

the St. Lawrence is fully open, the great
danger will be at Grosse Isle, because every
steamer carrying immigrants comes to that
station. We have provided for the erection
of detention buildings, for disinfecting ap^
pliances, for refitting and completing hospital
and other buildings, and for improving the
watef supply. The disinfecting. appliances
consist of three large steam disinfecters,
di-oxide blast, and mercuric drench — these
appliances are to purify the ships and bag-
gage. The ships are to be disinfected by a
blast which will force the sulphuric fumes
all through the vessel, which is acknowledged
to be one of the safest modes of destroying
the germs. A new building is being put
up there for detention for first and secoud
class passengers. You may have heard
a great deal concerning the harsh way '
t^e passengers, healthy .and suspected,
were treated in New York last year. We
intend to give the sick all necessary
comfort and to treat the healthy people in a
no less humane way, and consequently we
will erect buildings for the detention of
immigrants and passengers who are not in-
fected by the disease, but only suspected, to
keep them i^)art ; and such buildings are to
be put up at Halifax, St. John, <^ebec and
British Columbia. In each of these stations
the appliances that I have mentioned will
also be established. The vote in the Esti-
mates for the putting up of the stations in
British Columbia is $62,000, providing for
new grounds, water supply, suitable build- '
ings for hospital and detention purposes,
and residence for the physician, and another
sum of $35,000 for a deep- water wharf, and
this will be at Williams Head, wh^ra a vessel
can lie at any time without being interfered
with by wind or gaJe, or with the easterly
winds that prevail at Albert's Head, where
a vessel could not lie. Wharfe are also to
be provided for at St. John and Halifax. A
queistion arose whether there should
not be a wharf at Grosse Isle. The
opinion of mariners was taken upon the
subject, and the last information the Gov-
ernment got upon the matter was that a
wharf, if accessible, would be very useful
indeed. You could land pas^ngers and bag-
gage, and disinfect vessels much quicker along-
side of the wharf ; but the seamen and the
pilots of the St. Lawrence tell you that this
wharf will not be accessible; you cannot
reach it at night ; you can hardly reaj^ it in
the daytime. There is a reef projecting

Digitized by

Google

The Ohekta [FEBRUARY 2T, 1893] ChUbreak.

181

from Ste. Marguerite Island at the east,
and nearly opposite where the wharf would
be there is a sand bank and shodl which
would make access to the wharf very diffi-
cult ; and, moreover, after spending $150,000
to build this wharf, you would not have a
sufficient depth of water to float large steam-
ers ; you require at least 27 feet at low water
80 that dredging would be necessary. The
gentlemen interested in the steam-ship traffic
of this country came to the conclusion that
the wharf could not be used to advantage,
and that it was sufficient to provide the
necessary tenders to remove the passengers,
baggage and goods with lighters, if neces-
sary, and also to have upon them the neces-
sary appUAoes to purify the vessels. Now
that is only dealing with one portion of the
subject. So far, we have not gone beyond
the seaboard. That is where the main
danger is ; and I am glad to see thrt
everybody understands it, and that the
Government has given to that part
of the subject the utmost attention ; the sea
coast is where we are to guard first and above
all. But should cholera break through this
barrier, either through the quarantine in
Canada or through the quarantine in the
United States, it might spread over the
country. We are face to face with a land
boundary of over 3,000 miles, with at least
fifty ports of entry. I think that I am very
much below the^gure, because' there are more
way I of communication between the United
States and Canada than fifty ports. The
country will understand that it is impossible
to establish an effective quarantine at all
those ports of entry, and therefore we are
brought face to face with the question —
what is the duty of the Government and the
duty of the people who want to be protected,
in limiting the number of these ports of
entry ? I give this honourable House the
assurance that whenever the Government
find it necessary to protect such ports of
entry, they will establish there as effec-
tive a quarantine as there is at the sea-
ports. It is most difficult to protect
the frontier ; universal experience proves
that land quarantines are s^ways more diffi-
cult of effective enforcement than md^ritime
quarantines. In the event of cholera gain-
ing a foothold in the United States this
year, the department will take the follow-
ing steps to prevent its introduction, by
railway communication, into Canada: first,
an efficient medical inspection will be

made at certain ports of entry into Canada
from the United States, and a certificate of
disinfection exacted. At those pcnnts of
entry reasonable accommodation will be pro-
vided for detention purposes, railway cars
could be fitted up for the disinfection by
steam and sulphur fumes of the clothing and
b^g^e oi infected or su^>ected persons,
and bi-ohlorate of mercury drench could b«
used for such articles as could not be disin-
fected without damage by steam. Now that
is the utmost that it is poesiUe for any Gov-
ernment to do with a frontier stretching
from the Atlantic to the Pacific, across a
continent, of oyer 3,000 miles. I wish to
come to another part of the^ subject. We
have heard very wif recommendations made
as to cleanliness, Ihe purity of the water,
and the necessary care that is to be taken
about the household. I hope this honourable
House will not make a mistake upon this
point as to the limits of the authority of
the Dominion Government in that relation.
By the British North America Act the
Dominion Government is empowered to
legislate on matters of quarantine and ma-
rine hospitals : by the law, we are the
guardians of the ports of entry into the Do-
minion, but beyond that all other powers
rest with the local governments and the
municipalities. It is for them to deal with
the cities, towns, villages, houses, and ^ hos-
pitals within the country. I have the satis-
faction of announcing to the Senate that
after an interview, which has taken place in
the Department of Agriculture here with
delegates from British Columbia, from the
Territories, from Ontario, from the Lower
Provinces and Quebec, I am convinced that
those gentlemen fuUy understand their du-
ties and their obligations and that they will
fulfil them to the utmost and that there is
no fear of any friction between the Dominion
authorities and the local boards. The hon.
member from Welland made a very wise and
practical suggestion — that a pamphlet should
be published, showing the people what they
should do — first not to take the cholera, and
second how they are to treat themselves, or
be treated, when they think they have
symptoms of it. That question I think is not
within our jurisdiction : it is a municipal
matter — the prescribing how the houses are
to be kept, the water, to be boiled, the food
cooked, and when it should be used. Last year
when there was a fear of the introduction of
cholera into the country, the Board of Health

Digitized by

Google

182

Mondays Law [SENATE] Amendment Bill

in the province of Quebec immediately issued
a circular warning the people and advising
them what was best * to be done tinder the
circumstances. However, if the idea pre-
vails that the Government should issue such
a pamphlet, I am willing to give the subject
all my attention and all possible assistance.
It has been stated that certain quarantine
regulations should be imposed upon pas-
sengers coming from Asia to Canada. The
hon. gentleman who made the sugsjestion —
which is a very good one — will understand
that it is impossible for this country to
impose such a quarantine abroad, but I am
convinced that self-interest will le^ the
steam-ship coippanies to exact certificates
from passengers should* they come from
Asia, where there is nearly always some con-
tagious disease prevailing, such as small-pox,
cholera, or some malignant fever. It is in
their own interest that they should do so,
and I have lately had conversations with a
representative of one of them, Mr. Shaugh-
nessy, vice-president of the Canadian Pacidc
Railway, who gave me to understand that
they were adopting most rigorous precau-
tions— that it was their own interest that
their ships should be looked upon as healthy
if they wished to establish a traffic and
secure a paying passenger business. I hope
I have reassured the House that all necessary
precautions are being taken by the Govern-
ment. I trust that upon this point there
will be no undue excitement or alarm, and
that it will not go abroad that we are
threatened by an enemy against which we
have no arms and no munitions.

HOLIDAYS LAW AMENDMENT BILL

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the second read-
ing of Bill (N) " An Act to amend the law
relating to holidays." He said : The holidays
mentioned in this Bill were adopted by the
Dominion Parliament because they were
holidays in the province of Quebec. Lately
they have, in the pi-ovince of Quebec, dis-
pensed with them, and a Bill has been intro-
duced removing those days from the list of
holidays. It is proposed here to assimilate
the law by doing away with Annunciation,
Corpus Christi and the festival of St. Peter
and St. Paul. When the Bill goes into
Committee of the Whole, I propose to amend
the last phrase of it. I think it would be
more appropriate to make a specific amend-

ment to the law by' stating the statutes
which it will affect and the sections intended
to be repealed.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I am too good a
follower of the leader of the House to oppose
any amendment to the Bill, but I propose to'
ofier an amendment in Committee of the
Whole to provide that the Domini<^ Thanks-
giving Day be always held on a Sunday.
My reasons are these : What did the
Thanksgiving holiday originate from ? Is it
British, is it Catholic or Protestant ? No, it
is an American institution got up by the
Pilgrim Fathers to do away with love of the
old country and the festival of the Christmas
holidays. The Puritans left E^land at a
time when they suffered from persecution in
the reign of Charles the First. They suffered
so much from persecution, that when they
got to America they refused to let a Quaker
live amongst .them— they persecuted Qua-
kers, Episcopalians and . Baptists, and they
established Thanksgiving Day. No one is
more thankful than I am to the Almighty
for the benefits we enjoy. Cholera may come
here and desolate our people, and yet we are
expected to observe the proclamation of the
Governor-General and thank God for it. I.
know we are such miserable sinners that we
should be thankful for the few mercies given
to us, but I do not think there is much giWng
of thanks on the holiday called Thanksgiving
Day. What takes place on that holiday ?
The poor are deprived of a day^s labour, and
have nothing to do but loaf about. Many of
them are Roman Catholics, who do not be-
lieve that the Government have a light to
tell them on what day they should go to
church or not. In England, where there is
an established church, it may be the case,
but I feel a thrill go over me when the Go-
vernor-General proclaims that I should go to
church on a week day. I do not believe
that the injunction of the fourth command-
ment has anything to do with our Sunday,
but if it has, the same commandment which
says that I shall rest on the seventh day,
says also that I shall labour on the other six
days of the week, and by proclamation you
make the people break the fourth command-
ment— for what ? To comply with an old
Puritan custom. How many people go to
church on Thanksgiving Day? Very few..
Is it not a day devoted to gluttony and to
horse-racing and kindred amusements? It
is bosh, a sham and a humbug and ought to

Digitized by

Google

Militia Land [FBBBUARY 27, 1893] Grant Bill.

183

be done away with. To sav that it is doing
God a service, is a piece or hypocrisy and
humbug.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I think the
hon. gentleman from Halifax has slandered
Nova Scotia when he says that Thanksgiving
Day is not observed there. In Liinenburg
I know it is observed as religiously and with
as great zeal and earnestness as Sunday is
kept. Probably where the hon. gentleman
comes from it is different, but elsewhere
throughout the province it is a day on which
people offer up thanks and praise for the
benefits conferred upon them.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I think the only
difference in the way Thanksgiving Day is
observed in Lunenburg and Halifax is jbhis :
in Halifax we have gluttony, and give our-
selves indigestion on turkey and plum pud-
ding, and we think we are doing God a
service; in Lunenburg, it is simply a day
devoted to sauer-kraut and cabbage.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I would ask the
junior member from Halifax not to press
his amendment. Dominion Day ^ is not a
Thanksgiving Day but a national holiday.
Thanksgiving Day is fixed by proclamation
by the different provinces. Generally the
provinces have the same day that is fixed
by the Dominion. It is in the fall of the
year when the granaries are ftril and people
are most inclined to be thankful for the
blessings they enjoy. Dominion Day is a
holiday of a different character — a day on
which people go into the country, or attend
national .gatherings or address the people in
favour of the institutions of the country.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I did not say that
Dominion Day should not be kept. I say
that Thanksgiving Day should not be
observed. I have often noticed in the prac-
tice of my profession poor people shivering
over their scanty fires and complaining of
not being allowed to work on Thanksgiving
Day. I have been told by one of them, " I
would not keep the day, because it is against
my conscience to do so, but my employer
did. If I had been allowed to work I
would have earned something and been more
thankful than I feel now."

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

BANK ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the second
reading of Bill (I) " An Act to correct a
clerical error in the Bank Act." He said :
The object of this Bill is to correct a clerical
error in the French edition of the Statutes.
The year 1891 is mentioned instead of 1901
as the year in which the charters of the
banks expire.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second tune.

MILITIA LAND GRANT BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL moved the second
reading of Bill (G) "An Act to make further
provision respecting grants of land to mem-
bers of the Militia force on active service in
the North-west." He said : The object of the
Bill is simply to extend the time for grant-
ing land warrants to those who served dur-
ing the troubles of 1885. Many of the claims
were before the Department of Justice, but
were not adjudicated upon or examined until
it was too late to issue the warrants before
the 31st December last, and this is simply
to extend the time for the granting of these
land warrants until the 31st of next Decem-
ber.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was
read the second time.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (15) " An Act to incorporate the Do-
minion Burglar Guarantee Company (limi-
ted)." (Mr. McMillan.)

Bill (19) "An Act respecting the Hamil-
ton Provident and Loan Society." (Mr. Mac-
Innes, Burlington.)

The Senate adjourned at 6 o'clock.

Digitized by

Google

184

Custom^h&use Employees [SSINATfi] of MmtreeU.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tuesday, Febrawy 28th, 1893,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3 p.m.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

BILL INTRODUCED.

Bill (L) " An Act to consolidate and
amend certain Acts relating to the Manitoba
and North-western Railway Company of
Canada." — (Mr. Lougheed.)

CUSTOM-HOUSE EMPLOYEES OF
MONTREAL.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved :

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-Geoeral ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laia before this
House, a list sciving the names of all persons em-
ployed permanently or temporarily at the Custom-
house at Montreal, on the first day of January,
1868, also, a similar list of those so employed on
the first of January ultimo, with, in both
cases, their ages, nationality, religion, salary,
occupation and date of appointment.

He said : It is only ^thin a few days
that I have come to the conclusion that it is
my duty to bring this matter before the
House. Until lately, I had always believed
that the people of Montreal were quite able
to look after themselves, and see that they
were treated fairly in the Government
appointments in that city. Having occasion
to frequently visit Montreal, I have noticed
that the representatives of that city are
always anxious to secure the French vote,
and I supposed that this recognition of the
importance of the French element would
lead them to do justice to them. During
the last recess I had occasion to pass
through Montreal several times, and I heard
numerous complaints on the subject to which
I am now calling attention. Wherever I
met people, in the streets, at their residences,
at the banks, I heard complaints that the
Government was unjust in its treatment of
the majority in Montreal. I did not credit
these statements, for the very good reason
that I knew nothing about the matter — I
had never looked into it, believing that the
representatives of the city were pre-
pared to do their duty. I heard the
statement that an Englishmen was to suc-
ceed the late Mr. Ryan. For many years

the office has bmn fidlled by Englishmen,
and it would seem that amongst the French
majority nobody was considered fit for the
position of collector of customs. I thought
I would look into the matter on retrntdng
to Ottawa. On my arrival here, after the
recess on the 2l8t instant, I sent for the
blue books and examined them. Then I
was forced to the conclusion that the com-
plaints to which I have reforred were well
founded. As to the last pase — the appoint-
ment of a collector — I do not know whether
the complaints are justified or not, as the
Government have not made the appoint-
ment yet. According to the last oenMis, the
French element in the city of Montreal is
largely in the majority. I believe the
French population number two-thirds or
more, but it is enough for my ai^ument to
say that they are in the majority. I find
that at the Montreal custom-house there are
109 officials belonging to the permanent ser-
vice. Of these 69 are English-speaking and
40 are French. The English-speaking offi-
cials receive in salaries about $51,000 and
the French $28,000. Now, I say that it is
not right that the majority of the people
should ha^e such a ^all proportion of the
offices and salaries. Of temporary officials, I
find that there are 103, of whom 71 are
English-speaking and 32 French. The
English-speaking officers rec^ve in round
numbers $31,000; the French-speaking
officers, $11,000. Of ordinary labourers
there are 26^ of whom 18 speak English
and eight French, so that in round num-
bers there are 176 English-speaking
officials and only eighty-eight French-speak-
ing— ^that is, one-third of the employees are
of French origin in a city where two-thirds
of the people are of that race, and the
salaries are in about the same proportion.
Now I say that is not right. I do not like
to touch this question, but I feel it my duty
to do so. The Government should conduct
public affairs in such a manner as not to
compel the minority to bring up this ques-
tion and ask to be allowed to earn their
bread. I might point to the example which
the province of Quebec sets to the Dominion.
Only eight days ago a proposition to abolish
the Legislative Council of that province was
brought up by an English-speaking member
of the Legislature, Mr. Cook. He said that
although the Legislative Council had been
created for the protection of the English-
speaking minority of the province, it was

Digitized by

Google

Oustam^iauie Employees [FEBBUASY 28, 188S] of Montreal.

185

not neoeaeary — tbat they did not want
such protection — that no protection was
needed from the French majority.
Could the French minority here say that at
Ottawa ? No^ but we could have said it at any
time before Confederation. Things were
managed a good deal better then than they are
now. At the time of Confederation consider-
able objections were ui*ged against the move-
ment on the ground that the English-speaking
minority in Quebec would not receive fair
play from the ms^ority. Those who raised
these objections wanted a legislative union
and why? — Because, they said they would
be in the majority, while under Confedera-
tion, in the province of Quebec, they would
be in the hands of the French. Let me
quote from the Confederation Debates what
one of their representatives, Hon. Mr. Rose,
afterwards Sir John Rose, had to say on this
subject : —

W ith reference to this subject, I think that I, and
those have acted with me — the English-speak-
ing members from Lower Canada — may in some
degree congratulate ourselves as having brought
about a state of feeling between the two races in
this section of the province which has produced
some ^ood effect. (Hear, hear.) There nas been
«ver smce the time of the union, I am happy to
say — and that everybody knows it who has anv
experience in Lower Canada — a cordial understand-
ing and friendly feeling between the two nation-
alities, which nas produced the happiest results.
Belonging to different races and professing a
different laith, we live near each other ; we come
in contact and mix with each other, and we respect
each other ; we do not trench upon the rights of
each other ; we have not had those religious party
differences which two races, speaking different lan-
guaffee and holding different rehg^ious beliefs,
might be supposed to have had ; and it is a matter
of sincere gratification to us, I say, that this state
of thimra has existed and is now found amongst us.
<fiear, hear.) But if instead of this mutual confi-
dence ; if, instead of the English-speaking minority
placing trust in the French majority, in the local
legislature, and the French minority placing the
same trust in the English majority in the general
legislature, no feelmg existed, how could the
scheme of Confederation be made to work snccess-
f ally. ( Hear, hear. ) I think it cannot be denied that
there is the utmost confidence on both sides ; I feel
assured that our confidence in the majority in the lo-
cal government will not be misplaced, and I earnestly
tru«t that the confidence they repose in us in the
federal legislature will not be abused. (Hear, hear.)
I hope that this mutual yielding of confidence will
make us both act in a hifi;h minded and sensitive
Tnanner when the rights of either side are called in
question^-if ever they should be called in question
in the respective legislatures. This is an era in the
history of both races — the earnest plighting of
each other's faith as they embrace the scheme. It is
remarkable that both should place such entire con-
dAeaoe in one' another; and in future ages our

posterity on lK>th sides will be able to point with
pride to the period when the two races had
such reliance the one on the other as that each was
willing to trust its safety and interest to the
honour of the other. (Hear hear.) This mutual
confidence has not been brouffht about by an
ephemeral or spasmodic desire Tor change on the
part of either ; it is the result of the knowledge
each race possesses of the character of the other,
and of the respec^each entertains for the other.
(Hear, hear.) It is because we have learned to
respect each other's motives, and have been made
to feel by experience that neither must be aggres-
sive and that the interests of the one are mfe in
the keeping of the other. And I think I may
fairly appeal to the President of the Council that
if, during the ten years in which he has agitated
the question of representation by population, we,
the English in Lower Canada, had listened to his
appeals, — appeals that he has persistently made
with all the eamestneiis and vigourof his nature — if
we had not tamed a deaf ear to them, but had gone
with those of our own race and our own faith, the
people of Upper Canada, who demanded this
change, where, I would ask him, would have been
onr union to-day ? Would not a feeling of distrust
have been established between the French and
English races in the community, that Would have*
rendered even the fair consideration of it utterly
impracticable? (Hear, hear.) Would the French
have in that case been ready now to trust them-
selves in the general legislature, or the English in
the Local Legislature in Lower Canada ? No ; and
I pray God that this mutual confidence between
two races which hav^e so high and noble a work to
do on this continent, who are menaced by a com-
mon danger and actuated by a common interest,
ujay continue for* all time to come. I pray that it
maj' not be interrupted or destroyed by any act of
either party : and i trust that each may continue
to feel assured that if at any time hereafter circum-
stances should arise calculated to infringe upon the
rights of either, it will be sufiicient to say, in order
to prevent any aggression of this kind : ** We
trusted each other when we entered the union ; we
f«lt then that onr rights would be sacred with you,
and our honour and good faith and integrity are
pledged in the maintenance of them." (Hear, hear.)
I believe that this is an era in our history to which
in after a^s our children may appeal with pride,
and that if there should be any intention on either
side to aggress on the other, the recollection that
each trusted to the honour of the other will prevent
that intention l>eing carried out. I feel that we
have no reason as the minority to fear aggressions
on the part of the majority. We feel that in the
past we have an earnest of what we may reasonably
expect the future relations between the two races
to l>e.

What has been the consequence of this liber-
ality on the part of 'the majority in our pro-
vince ? Under our laws the English minority
of the province have the right to an English-
speaking superintendent of education.
Nevertheless, they refuse to act upon their
rights : they say they can trust to the
liberality of the French majority, and that
they have always received justice at the

Digitized by

Google

18©

Oustom-Jume Employ ees^SEJ^ ATE] of Mimfreal.

hands of the French superintendent of
education. I would be happy to-day if I
could congratulate the Parliament of Canada
on the existence of such a spirit in this body,
but I could not do so without stating what
was untrue. It would be false to say that
we have a fair proportion of the appoint-
ments to public offices. I|[o not mean to
say that we must have exacuy the same pro-
portion of appointments that our people
bear to the whole population of the Dominion,
but I say it should be something approach-
ing that proportion. I would not object to
having less than our right proportion in the
city of Montreal, if the deficiency were made
up in some other part of the Dominion. I
have shown that in the Custom-house in
Montreal we are not fairly treated — that we
have not got our fair proportion of the
patronage : if the Government can show that
we have more than our right in other de-
partments, they should do so.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^)— That is very
easily done.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— It is not easily
done, because the figures ar^ before the pub-
lic and show the contrary. The French race
are about one-third of the population of the
Dominion, yet we have only one-sixth of the
appointments. I do not care what calcula-
tions are made to prove the contrary : I was
shown a calculation of that kind this morn-
ing and I can simply say that it was either
dishonest or stupid. In Montreal, a paper
which is very aggressive tried to show that we
had more patronage than we were entitled
to. How did they do so 1 By comparing
the offices held by Protestants and Catholics.
Now, I am not speaking of religious denomi-
nations— I am speaking of nationalities, and
of the right of the French population of
Canada to a fair share of the public patron-
age. That is the least that we have a right
to expect, in view of the liberal treatment
that we extend to the English-speaking
minority in our province. If you look at the
official returns, you will see that the English-
speaking population of Quebec has more offices
than it is entitled to by its numbers ; but our
leaders say " majorities are strong and ought to
rely on their strength, and try to do more than
justice to the minority, so that they may
feel that they are well treated." This is the
way we act in Quebec. Why is it that the
contrary is the case here? I know it is

often said " let us have no more French or
English — let us all be Canadians." Well,
we of Quebec are ready. We do not claim
to be French ; we are Canadians. If the in-
justice were confined to the customs offices in
Montreal, I could understand that it was
accidental ; but I find it is the same in
every Government office in that city. The
same principle is carried throughout, and it.
looks as if the Government were acting on a
settled policy. It is that of which I com-
plain. To show that it is a regular rule, let
me- refer you to the condition of affiskirs at
Quebec. It is well known that Quebec is a
French city, yet in the custom-house there
you will find about the same thing that we
complain of in Montreal. Formerly, the
collector of customs at Quebec was a French-
Canadian : now he is an Englishman and
his assistant is also English. Take Sher-
brooke, where the French outnumber the
English two or three to one, and again we
find the collector of customs is English. I
have looked through the figures and I find
that it is about the same everywhere. At
Quebec, Mr. Blanchet, the collector of cus-
toms, was replaced by Mr. Forsyth, but we
never complained. In Montreal, Mr. De-
lisle was collector of customs, forty or fifty
years ago. When he died an Englishman
was appointed ; he was succeeded by another
Englishman, and he again by another.
Who will fill the office nextl An
Englishman, if rumour be true. Now,
is that right ? I ask any man whether it is
fair to the French population? It is quite
evident that there is a fixed determination
to keep French Canadians out of office. It
is a knowledge of these facts that has led
me to bring this matter before the House,
Although I do not represent Montreal, I am
an elector there. I am not only a citizen of
the province of Quebec, but I am a repre-
sentative of the Dominion in this House,
and especially of the province of Quebec,
and I am only doing what I conceive to be
my duty in bringing up this matter. If
others are here for their own pleasure or
advantage, I feel that I am here for some-
thing else. I am here to see that justice is
done to every man, irrespective of his ci'eed
or nationality. I found that others neglected
to take up this matter, and I felt bound in
honour and conscience to discharge the duty
which they ha\e overlooked. It is repugnant
to me, because I dislike to bring up this
matter so often, but when I see my duty

Digitized by

Google

Custom-house Employees [FEBRUARY 28, 1893] of Montreal

187

clearly before me I do not seek to do merely
what I like beat, but what I believe and
know to be right.

Hon Mr. PROWSE— It is rather un-
fortunate that such a question as the one
introduced by the hon. member from Dela-
naudi^i'e should he discussed in this House.
I have no doubt at all that had this question
been brought before the Government in a
quiet, private way, the influence of the
French nationality would have been quite
sufficient to secure justice for that race in
the Civil Service of this country. I* would
have thought also that the hon. gentleman,
before taking up the complaint in reference
to the comparatively distant city of Mont-
real, would have looked closer to home, and
endeavoured to correct the same fault which
must be apparent to him here every day.
We find in this very Chamber that every
office on the floor of the House, and even
extending beyond the chamber to the post
office, is occupied by a gentleman of the French
nationality ; and I do' not think there has
been any word of complaint by the majority
who belong to other races. It would be a
great injustice for us to take up this matter
at the present time in reference to the city
of Montreal, or any other city, and say to
officials who are not of French extraction
" you must make room for other men, because
we must have fairly balanced nationalities
in public offices." I think it would be
a very unjust thing ; but T would say this,
that as vacancies occur it becomes a strong
argument in favour of those not represented
in these positions that they should have their
friends placed there to fill up vacancies as
they occur. In this chamber there his been
no agitation and no demand made for an
English-speaking clerk since the death of our
late lamented Mr. Adamson ; but I take it
for granted that when a vacancy occurs —
which I hope will be a long time hence —
the Government will see their way to placing
an Engli8h-sp>eaking clerk at our table and
in other offices where there are none now. It
is most unfortunate for Canada that this
question, and questions of a similar nature,
should be discussed in our legislative halls.
It is not calculated to bring about that
friendship which should exist between all
nationalities in this chamber. The English
people have their national feeling; the Scotch
people also have their national sentiment ;
the Irish, the Germans and the Dutch have

each their national feeling, as well as our:
French-Canadian friends ; and I say bhat if
we wish to build this Canada of ours into a
strong patriotic nation, we must endeavour
as far as possible to bury national prejudices
and unite for the common good.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Before this moti6n
is put, I have a few words to say, more par-
ticularly as the remarks made by the hon.
gentleman who proposed the motion refer to
a department over which I have had the
honour to preside for some thirteen or four-
teen years : therefore, I may bo excused if
I refer verybriefly to some of his statements.
Hon. gentlemen will understand that in all
filling of positions in the outside service
the Minister must necessarily, as a rule, take
the advi<5B of those who represent the con-
stituency: and I am quite satisfied that if
the hon. gentleman had paid a little closer
attention to the positions of the officials in
the customs in Montreal at the present
time, he would not have made the complaint
to which we have listened in reference to
the relative positions held by the diflFerent
nationalities. I fully accord with the remarks
made by the hon. gentleman from Prince
Edward Island who has just spoken, depre-
cating the introduction of questions of nation-
ality or of religion in our legislative halls.
However, if a minority of either class of
people, whether religious or national, feel
that they have not been fairly treated, I do
not say that it is improper that these griev-
ances should be brought to the notice of the
Government and that justice should be done,
if any injustice is found to exist. I think
that I can appeal to some of the gentlemen
of the same nationality as my hon. friend
who made this motion, that so far as my
administration of the affairs of the customs
for some thirteen or fourteen years was
concerned, where I thought an inequality
existed, and opportunities presented them-
selves, without turning men out of office who
had been appointed long before I assumed
the responsibility, I took good care when
these vacancies did occur that the nation-
ality of the people who thought they had
been aggrieved was not forgotten. Now
during the last year of my tenure of office
as Minister of Customs a large number of
changes were made in the city of Montreal.
I can make the same explanation here that
I made in the Lower House when this ques-
tion came under discussion. There were

Digitized by

Google

188

Gu8tom*hoim Eti^l^ees [SENATE] of MmtmU.

several old officials who had been appointed
long before this Gk)verttement came into
power, and whose age unfitted them for the
due performance of the woi^ allotted to
them. They were, to a large extent, English-
speaking people, and in the superannuation
no new appointment was made from the
outside service, but the next in order receiv-
ed his promotion, and if you look at the
status of these officers to-day you will find
that a French gentleman was promoted to
the highest position under the collector —
that is the surveyor of customs — who can
by gradation rise to a $2,500 per annum
salary ; you will find that he is a French
gentleman and that he succeeded a Scotch-
man. If you take the cashier, who was super-
annuated on account of age and infirmity,
you will see that I promoted a Fr^ch gen-
tleman to his position, simply because he was
next in order, to use a common expression,
and that he deserved his promotion. Ihe
chief clerkship is also in the same position, as
are a number of other offices^ I have the
civil list under my hand and it shows that I
have pursued precisely the same course, but
I never asked the question as to whether the
man who was under the chief of that parti-
cular branch at the time was French, Irish,
English or Scotch ; but when I found that
he was entitled to promotion, that his ser-
vices and his character and assiduity in the
performance of his duties justified it, he was
promoted ; and that is the course that has
been pursued continuously in the adminis-
tration of the department. I have in my
office a statement of the principal offices in
the city of Montreal and by whom they are
filled. If the hon. gentleman will refer to
it, he will find that nearly nine out of ten of
the principal offices are filled by gentlemen
of his race. I do not say that they should
not be there. Most of them entered the ser-
vice at a low grade and a small salary and
gradually reached the top by promotion.
Now, I am not prepared to say what will be
the action of the Government in filling the
position which has unfortunately been
rendered vacant through the death of
the late collector, who, as every one
knows, was incapable of doing a wrong
act to any class of people, no matter what
their religion or nationality might be. I am
not at present prepared to say who may be
his successor, but I think the hon* gentle-
man stepped a little beyond the mark when
he enumerated so many Englishmen who

had filled the p08iti(Hi after the death of Mr.
Delisle. Mr. DeliMe was succeeded by Mr.
Simpson, the old collector formerly a^^inted
in Kingston. I am speaking from memory
now, and if I am incorrect I shall be glad
to be corrected by any gentleman who may
be listening to me. Mr. Simpeon was suc-
ceeded by Mr. Ryan. Now these are the
collectors within my recollection since the
time Mr. Delisle occupied the position. It
is quite true also that Mr. Blandiet was
succeeded by Mr. Forsyth, and perhaps it
may be gratifying to my hon. frieiii to
know {hat thoee who were most ardent in
the recommendation, and in impressing upon
the Government the propriety of that ap-
pointment were gentlemen of his own race,
including the representatives from that
section of the country ; but it must be re-
membered that Mr. Blanchet, whom we all
know, succeeded Mr. Dunscombe, who was
an Englishman. However, I make the
statement — and I say it in all truth-
fulness— that the late Hon. Mr. Blanchet
was not appointed to that position because
he belonged to the French race. He was
appointed in consideration of the great ser-
vices which he had rendered to the Conser-
vative party for a quarter of a century, and
I' think that that is the ground upon which
appointments of that kind should be made,
without reference to nationality. My hon.
friend also referred to Sherbrooke ; well Mr.
Currie, the collector at Sherbrooke, was ai>-
pointed in 1871 at a time when my hon.
friend will admit that the great majority of
the inhabitants of that city were of the
English-speaking people ; but by reason of
the introduction of manufactures (and perhaps
this reason may not be appreciated by some
hon. gentlemen who have listened to me) and
the extent to which they have been carried
since the national or protective policy has
been inaugurated in this country, attracted
to that city a large number of the French
habitants who go there to seek work — and I
am glad of it — instead of g(Hngover to Mas-
sachusetts or some other place in the United
States. I only wish in others of our cities
the manufacturing establishments would in-
crease to such an extent as to afford. employ-
ment for all those who desire to l^ve their
farms and become citizens. Now I am Hot
going to refer to the question of the relative
numbers in Montreal, which my hon.
friend has spoken of, because I am not pre-
pared to do so ; but with reference to the

Digitized by

Google

Cuatam-hcuse Smpl^eis [FSBBUART 28, 1893 J of Montreal

189

extra officials, they are all paid the same per
diem. I am not in a position to say now
that the hon. gentleman's statement in
reference to the salaries is either correct or
incorrect, but I venture to state that the
statistics which my hon. friend has given to
the House must have been taken from books
that were several years old, and not the last.
If the hon. gentleman will take the last
issue of the civil service list, which gives the
result of the changes to which I have refer-
red, they will find that the disparity in refer-
ence to the salaries paid to the different
officials and the different nationalities * does
not exist to the extent to which he has
referred. T could give the hon. gentleman a
list of those officers who were promoted and
now occupy the places and perform the duties
that were formerly assigned English-speaking
people ; but I do not advance that as any
virtue or any credit due to myself. I say
that in carrying out a policy of that kind,
and in promoting gentlemen who are entitled
to it, I did nothing more than my duty, and
I know that that is the principle upon which
the Government, of which I have been a
member for some years, has acted in reference
to all those appointments. Whoever may
be appointed in Montreal, I hope he will be
a man capable of conducting the business of
that great and important port and possessed
of sufficient commercial knowledge to justify
his appointment. When I said a few
moments ago that I thought services to one's
country should be a recommendation for
appointment, I do not wish to be understood
as saying that that alone should be the
qualification. In addition to the services
which he has rendered to his country, a man
should have the necessary qualifications to
discharge the duties of the office which he is
about to assume ; and I can only say, as far
as the present Grovemment is concerned, as
well as that which preceded it, that their
only desire in the appointments to offices in
the administration of the different depart-
ments or the affurs of this country, is to do
what is right and to mete out justice equally
to all classes of the people ; and I am sure
when their attention is called to any case
where it has not been done, they will be
prepared to rectify the error and to see that

no class of the community, no matter what
their religion or nationality, shall receive an
injustice at their hands.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^)— Before this
question is put, I would like to make a few
remarks. I had thought I would live long
enough to See the time when we would all
look upon ourselves as Canadians, and I do
hope that we shall soon all come to the conclu-
sion that we are Canadians and that we will
not continue to discuss in our legislative
halls these matters of language and religion.
I have in my hand a return under the head
of "L^lation for 1891-92," which includes
the staff of the Commons, the Senate and
the Library during the above year. There
were 264 persons under salary, made up as
follows : —

French Roman Catholic. 129
English-speaking K. C.'s 48

ToUl R. C /s 177, drawing $145,433.52

ProtB8tant& all told 87, drawing 80,855,86

R. C. excess 90, drawing 164,577.66

The Public Works Department shows that
the regular hiside staff is made up as follows :

French Roman Catholics 77, drawing $74,178.30
English-speaking R. C.'s 19, drawing 17,509.96

Total R. C.*8 99, drawing $91,688.26

ProtestaYits all told. 38, drawing 48,608.58

Paid for outside extra copying during the
same year, 1891-92, $9,117, distributed as
follows !

French Roman Catholics .$6,910.28

English-Speaking Roman Catholics 1 ,876. 72

$8,787.00
Protestants * .. 330.00

The following table showing the religion
of all the civil servants on the ^^ inside ser-
vice " or headquarters staff at Ottawa, and
the mechanics and labourers at headquarters
has been furnished. It is drawn from offi-
cial blue books and other sources of exact
knowledge. It will be seen that the Roman
Catholics and Anglicans have much more
than their proportion, judging by percen-
tages of population shown in the census of
1891 :—

Digitized by

Google

190

Custoni-Jiouse Employees [SENATE] of Montreal

Febntary, 1893.

Militia Department

Secretary of State

Interior Department —

Finance do

Inland Revenue

Customs Department

Post Office do

Agriculture do

Public Works Department

Auditor-General

Justice Department

Indian Affairs . ,

Railways and Canals ,

^larine and Fisheries

Privy Council

Senate, House of Commons and Library.

Printing Bureau Clerks

Mounted Police

Mechanics and Labourers

Printers, Bookbinders, etc ,

Total numbers

What each ought to be

Salaries drawn by each denomination . . . ,

Percentage each are entitled to

Total salaries each are entitled to

Roman
Catholics.

Anglicans

Presby-
terians.

Me-

thodist.

All

other Pro-

teetanta.

! 25

•3

1 0

177

104
209
823

:::::;:::;i':::-:': 1

128

311

123

208

633

201

232

269

216

$707,543

$382,641

$140,473

$73,650

»128,003

$587,247

$186,202

$214,846

$243,492

$200,523

You will see that the amounts which are drawn
by the French-speaking gentlemen are out
of proportion to those drawn by the English.
We have never brought this up ; we think
that justice is done us, perhaps, and we
think that we are all Canadians, and should
be all Canadians. If I do not happen to
speak the French language, I do not think
my neighbours alongside me should give me
a kick for it. I am an Englishman myself,
and I do not think my children should
reproach me because I was bom in England,
and I do not propose^ to chastise them be-
cause they were born in Canada. We are
all Canadians. I hope that the time of this
House will be spent more profitably than it
could be in a discussion of such matters as
these.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I am not at all
surprised at the arguments which have been
used in answer to my inquiry — if I may call
them arguments. They are not logical and
therefore they only expose the weakness of
the Government's position. I am very much
obliged to the hon. Minister of Commerce
for the explanation he has given us, but I beg
leave to assert that it is no answer to my
inquiry ; on the contrary, if I fully appre-
hend his remarks, they amount to a proof
that I was right. The Minister said that
there had been great changes made lately.

That shows that t^e Government must have
been wrong, since they claim credit for these
changes. It is an admission that they have
endeavoured to correct the wrong. But
the books of this year have not yet ap-
peared ; they are among the secrets of the
Government, which, of course, I do not
know. I think that my allegations have
been fully borne out. The hon. Minister of
Trade and Commerce said that it must not be
forgotten that the Government have to act
on the advice of the members who support
them. I believe that that is right if the
advice is good, but suppose they give wrong
advice, is the Government, which is respon-
sible for the appointments, to do what every
one must admit is wrong ? It is only right
to act on the advice of the members support-
ing the Government when the advice in
itself is proper, but not otherwise. If the,
supporters of the Gk)vemment give wrong
advice, it only shows that the party is wrong
Then the hon. gehtleman says that we ought
not to introduce questions of religion here. I
said nothing about religion, but I deny the
proposition that questions of religion should
not be brought up in this House. In the
matter of divorce, for instance, when my re-
ligious convictions lead me to oppose divorce
is it not my duty to say so ? Any question
which has a public aspect can fairly and pro-
perly be brought up for consideration in this

Digitized by

Google

Oustam-house Employees [PEBEUaRY 28, 1893J of Montreal.

191

House. The hon. gentleman from Prince
Edward Island said that we ought not to
excite passions. I quite agree with him, but
he ought to be the first man to advise the
Government to treat the minority fairly, and
thus avoid exciting ill-feelings. I have
brought this matter up to-day because the
Oovernment have not respected the rights
and feelings of the French population of Ca-
nada. I was in this House at the time when
for two years, we heard the complaints of
Nova Scotia and their demands for an in-
creased subsidy of 10 millions of dollars. Did
we, who represent the province of Quebec,
ever rise in our places and say, " Let us hear
no more of Nova Scotia ? " No, the whole of
the representatives of the province voted 10
millions of dollars to quiet Nova Scotia.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — Nonsense.

. Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— We voted one
million a year, for ten years, yet nobody ever
heard a representative of Quebec say, " We
are tired of hearing all this talk about Nova
Scotia." Yet when we, of the minority, rise
up to try to defend our rights, we are told,
" Let us hear no more of Quebec or of French
and English : let us be Canadians only."
The hon. member from Prince Edward
Island says, ** Do not excite passions. " I
say to him do not excite mine to-day by
telling me that I have no right to complain
of an injustice. The hon. member from
Quints has pointed out that in the Senate
and the House of Commons the French po-
pulation have more than their share of the
patronage. The hon. gentleman probably
did not clearly understand what I stated : I
said I did not care if there was a dispro-
portion in any particular department, pro-
vided on the whole each element of the
population was fairly treated. What I
stated, and what I repeat, is this, that the
public documents show that we have only
one-sixth of the patronage in the whole
Dominion. In 1884 Sir Alex. Campbell,
who was then the leader of this House,
brought down a printed statement with res-
pect to the civil service of the Dominion,
and said, as he put the book on the Table :
** Now the French people wDl see that they
have their fair share." I could not at the
time answer him, but a few days^ afterwards
I was in a position to say that the leader of
the Government had misled the House — that
his statement was not borne out by the

facts — that after adding up figures on 200
pages of the blue book, I found that the
French people, far from having their fair
share of public patronage, had only one to
six, and the leader of the House made an
excuse that he had been misled by an offi-
cial of his department. We accepted the
excuse, but that is the fact, that the leader
of this House, at that time, made an incor-
rect statement. If the hon. member from
Prince Edward Island had been there, he
would have said : " Let us hear no more
about the subject in this House." I do not
speak often, and I do not speak good English,
but I think I can make myself understood.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— The only trouble
is that the hon. gentleman knows too nmch
English.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE—I have shown
by the public* documents that up to this
year, at all events, the French population
of Canada have not been fairly treated. If
the returns for this year show an improve-
ment in that condition of a&irs, I will be
the first to admit that the various lessons I
have given the Government on this subject
have had due effect and I will thank them
for any improvement they may make.

Uhon. M. TASSfi'— Honorables mes-
sieurs, je n'avais pas I'intention de prendre
part au d^bat qui porte sur un sujet que j'ai
traits ailleurs, mais certaines observations
que je viens d'entendre m^ritent d'etre rele-
v^. Je ne saurai^ partager Fopinion expri-
m^ par un honorable repr^entant de File
du Prince-Edouard (M. Prowse), que ces
sortes de questions, ^tant, de leur nature, fort
d^licates, ne devraient pas etre d^battues au
parlemeYit, mais que Fon devrait se contenter
de representations au gouvemement. Le
parlement a ^t^ institu^, entre autres choses,
pour prendre connaissance des griefs du
sujet, et je n'en sache aucun qui ne puisse
^tre discute d'une i^qon convenable, qui ne
f roisse aucun sentiment, qui s'impose a Fat-
tention de tons les hommes raisonnables,
6pris du sentiment de la justice. Bien des
fois, dans cette chambre, les sujets apparem-
ment les plus chatouilleux, 1^ plus infiam-
mables, ont et^ discut^s, et il n'en est pas
r^sulte autre chose que de bons efiets. II
n'est pas de Fint^r^t public que Fon etoufie
Fexpression de griefs legitimes. Le feu qui
couve sous la cendre est souvent le plus dan-

Digitized by

Google

192

CustQmrfunM Smploy6€$ [SENATE] of Montnal.

gerenx. Le gouvemement a tout k gagner
a ces discussious, puisqu'il peut s'^lairer
ensuite de la lumiere qui en jaillit. La
motion de Thonorable s^nateur de Lanau-
di^re (M. Bellerose), demande des renseigne-
ments sur les employ^ de la douane de
Montr^l, leur nationality, leur &ge, la date
de leur nomination, etc. Elle sera sans
doute accord^, mais je crois qu'il eiit ^t^
pr^f^rable d^obtenir un ^tat de tout le ser-
vice public, tant de Tint^rieur que de I'ext^-
rieur. Des 1882, j'ai demand^ un ^tat sem-
blable k la Chambre des Communes, et il
serait bon d'en avoir une ^tion plus r^ente.
Cinq ans plus tard, je discutai cette meme
question dans une s^rie de lettres au Mail de
Toronto, qui linit par trouver mes chifi&es —
chiffres puis^ aux sources officielles — tene-
ment concluants, qu'il refusa de lespublier, ce
qui m'obligea de les adresser a Y Empire, Un
fait certain, toutefois : nous n'avons pas k la
douane de Montr^l notre part de repr^n-
tation, le patronage est administr^ de fa^on
k y rendre tr^ difficile Fentr^ de nos com-
patriotes. Dans une remarquable s^rie d'ar-
ticles sur le patronage — articles qui devraient
etre lus soigneusement par tous les hommes
publics — M. Joncas,riiabile d^put^de Gaspe,
vient de constater qu'il y a 69 Anglais
employ^ dans le service ext^rieur de la
douane k Montreal, et 37 Fran^ais, les pre-
miers recevant des salaires pour un montant
de ^60,300, tandis que les Fran^ais gagnent
settlement $27,700. Et n'oublions pas qu'il
s'agit d'une ville en tres grande majority fran-
9ai8e. Mais il ne faut paa oublier que le
patronage s'exerce surtout par Tentremise
des deputes. Sa^hons blamer qui de droit.
Si notre population qui constitue la minority
dans la Conf^^ration, veut faire prot^ger
ses droits, elle doit commencer par ^lire des
d^put^ qui soient bien identifies avec ses
int^rets. Ce qui se passe au Manitoba oil
Ton ne craint pas de violer une charte solen-
nelle montre avec quelle vigilance nous
devons surveiller ce qui se passe. Eternal
vigilance is tJie pHce 0 liberty I a-t-on dit
avec raison. L'honorable leader du S^nat
(M. Bowell), d^are qu'il suit invariablement
les recommandations des membreii du parle-
ment dans la distribution du patronage
Jocal, et je le'crois. Je me rappelle qu'apres
avoir et^ ^lu d^put^ de la cit^ d'Ottawa, k la
fin de I'ann^ 1878, j'attirai Tattention de
rhonorable ministre sur le feiit qu'il n'y avait
pas un seul employ^ f ran9ais parmi lee douze
ou treize officiers de la douane locale, ce qui

causait de s^rieux inconv^nients k ceux de
nos nationaux qui ne parlent pas anglais.
M. Bowell fut frapp^ de cette injustice, me
promit de la r^parer promptement, et, a la
premiere vacance, il nomma M. Pierre
Marier, I'un de nos citoyens les plus respec-
ts. M. Marier est encore k son poste,
n'ayant pas cess^ de donner pleine satislao-
tion. Dans tout Ontario, 1 1 Canadiens-fran-
9ais settlement sont employ^ dans le service
ext^rieur des douanes. Qui, mieux attrait
valu engager le d^bat sur toute \fik ligne afin
de pottvoir jttger la qttestion en pleine con-
naissance de cause.

L'hon. M. BELLEROSE— L'honorable
s^nateur me permettra-t-il de I'interrompre
et de rectifier I'errettr qu'il fait. L'honorable
monsieur dit qu'il eut ^t^ pr^f Arable que
j'eusse amene toute la qttestion du service
civil au lieu de ne parler que de la douane k
Montr^l. II faut que l'honorable pr^pinant
se soit trouv^ absent lorsque j'ai parl^. La
proposition que j'ai soumise k]& chambre est
bien restreinte k la position que le gouveme-
ment a faite k notre nationality a la douane de
Montr^l, &iais j'ai ^tay^ oette plainte sur
un document officiel que notre ami, feu l'ho-
norable F.-X. A. Trudel et moi nous avons
oblig^le gouvemement k mettre devant le par-
lement, il y ad^j^des ann^es, etbien avantque
l'honorable monsieur eut attir^ I'attention de
la Chambre des Communes sur Tin justice dont
souffrait notre nationality. Par ce document
j'ai prouve que nous n'avions qu'un sixi^me
du patronage du gouvemement tandis que le
chififre de notre population nous donnait
droit k un tiers. J'ai ajout^ que nous ne nous
plaindrions certainement pas si, n'ayant pas
notre part legitime dans un ou dans un cer-
tain nombre de dt^partements, nous avions
plus ou du moins notre part legitime dans les
autres, mais tel n'^tait pas le cas.

L'hon. M. TA8SE — L'explication de mon
honorable ami ne d^truit aucunement la
force de mon objection. II ne s'agit pas tant
du passe que du present. Je le r^it^re : un
^tat general eut donn^ plus de satisfaction
a I'opinion publique. La motion que nous
discutons, a fait cUre k mon honorable ami
de rile du Prinoe-Edouard (M. Prowse),
qu'en admettant que les Canadiens-fran^ais
n'eussent jMts leur part k la douane de Mon-
tr^ Ton pourrait se plaindre, avec tout
autant de raison, que I'l^l^ment anglais eet
insufiisamment represent^ au S^nat et a la

Digitized by

Google

Custom-house Employees [FEBEUARY 28, 1893] of Montreal

193

Chambre des Communes. Mon honoi'able
ami oublie qu'il n'y a pas d'analogia dans les
deux cas, puisqu'il nous faut au parlement
un double service necessity par 1 usage des
deux langues ; par le fait que tous les docu-
ments sont lus et imprim^ dans les deux
langues, ce (|ui demande un personnel consi-
derable de traducteurs ; par le fait, dis-je,
qu'ony applique, sauf dans les eomptes rendus
des debats du S^nat, Farticle de la consti-
tution qui met sur un meme pied la langue
fran(^ise et la langue anglai^fe. L'objection
de ITionorable s^nateur serait-elle fond^
qu'il lui serait facile de trouver d'amples
d^ommagemeuts pour sa. race dans les
d^partements de la Douane, du Revenu de
rint^rieur, de Tlnterieur, des Post^s, des
Sauvages, de la G«k)logie, etc. Jl trouverait,
par exemple, qu*il n'y a pas un seul Canadien-
fi*an<^*ais employ^ dans les douanes au Mani-
toba et au Nord-Ouest, a la Colombie-
Anglaise et a Tile du Prince-Edouard. II
trouverait, par exemple, que dans tout le
service public, tant de Tint^rieur que de
Texterieur, sur 4,528 officiers, nous en comp-
tons 789 quaud le chiffre de notre population
nous donnerait droit k 1400. Et cette dis-
proportion est encore plus marquante dans
les salaires que dans le nombre des fonc-
tionnaires. - II trouverait, par exemple, qu'il
n'y a pas un seul juge f ran^ais dans les pro-
vinces d'Ontario et de la Nou velle-Ecosse, qui
comptent, cependant, plus de 130,000 Cana-
diens-f ran9ais, quoi qu'endise le dernierrecen-
sement. Le gou vememen t a nom m^ des j uges
fran^is au Nouveau-Brunswick,au Manitoba
et dans les Territoires du Noixl-Ouest, quine la
cedent pas a leu rs confreres pour le savoir et
rint^grite, et j'esp^re que Thonorable mi-
nistre de la Justict., qui possede k un si haut
degr^ le sens de I'^uit^, comblera la grave
lacune que je viens de signaler. II est ^1^-
mentairo qu'une qualite essentielle d'un juge
doit ^tre la connaissance de la langue du
justiciable. Cette quality manque a un trop
grand nombre. Je traiteavec lemepris qu'elle
m^rite Fancienne assertion du G'iobe que les
Canadiens-fran9ais doivent k leur manque
d'instruction de n'etre pas repr^nt^s au
service civil dans la proportion de leur
nombre. Les examens officiels en font bonne
justice. Let ii8 all be Canadians ! s'est
eerie i'honorable repr^sentant de Quints
(M. Read). Personne ne le desire plus que
moi ; personne n'est plus fier que moi de
notre pays, de ses populations, de ses richesses,
personne aussi n'a une foi plus robuste
13

dans I'avenir de ce vaste domaine qui a ^t^
tailie pour devenir I'un des plus beaux. Fun
des plus heureux, Fun des plus grands pays
de la terre, et le modMe de toutes les soci^tes
am^ricaines. Mai^ cela ne veut pas dire que
les Canadiens-fraiK^ais doivent jouer un rOle
inferieur, qu'ils doivent souffrir a cause de
leur origine, qu'ils doivent s'effacer k chaque
instant, que les portes du service public
doivent leur etre ferm^es, ou ^peu pres, dans
certaines provinces, que leur langue doit
^tre sacritiee a celle de la majority. Non,
honorables messieurs, il n'y a pas do race
inferieure en ce pays. Et je ne permettrai
jamais sans protester que notre race soit
trait^e com me telle, que ce soit dans les pays
de Fouest ou ailleurs. La confederation ne
reconnait pas cette inferiorite ; elle est le
le fruit d'un pacte solennel entre les races
parlant fran^ais et parlant anglais, et si Fon
veut qu'elle dure, qu'elle soit perpetuelle —
esto perpetua ! — il faut appliquer la grande
charte de nos droits et de nos libertes dans
toute sa plenitude. Ne parlez pas de patro-
nage ! nous a-t-on dit. Pardon, nous en
parlerons tant que justice ne sera pias faite.
Nous n'avons pas besoin de faveurs. Mais
nous reclamons notre place au soleil de notre
libre pays, et nous ne cesserons d'insister sur
la reconnaissance de nos droits. A ceux (jui
traitent cette matiere aussi lestement, je
ferai observer que I'une des principales
causes des malheureux troubles de 1837 et
1838 a ete la fa9on injuste, arbitraire, avec
laquelle nous etions traites dans la distri-
bution de^ charges et des honneurs publics.
Jusqu'4 FUnion de 1840, nous etions regardes
comme des parias dans une province dont
nous avions ete les pionniers et oii nous
etions Fimmense majorite. Rappelez-vous ce
passage des fameuses 92 Resolutions, adop-
tees le 21 fevrier 1834, par une grande
majorite de FAssembiee Legislative du
Bas-Canada, et qui enumeraient tous les
griefs du temps. **La partialite dans la
distribution des cnarges publiques,'*y disait-
on, " est portee au comble, puisque sur une
population d'environ 600,000 habitants, dont
1 525,000 environ sont Fran^ais d'origine,
I 47 fonctionnaires seulement, les moins retri-
j bues, sont de cette extraction, tandis qu'on
I compte 157 fonctionnaires d'origine britan-
• nique. Puisque Forigine nationale et la
I langue des Canadiens sont de venues des
'occasions d'injure, d'exclusion, d'inferiorite
I politique, de separation de droits et d'inte-
I r^ts, la Chambre en appelle a la justice

Digitized by

Google

194

Songhees [SENATE] [ndians Reserve.

du gouverneraent de Sa Majeste et de son He said : — It is quite possible that the
Parlement, a Thunneur du peuple anglais ; Minister of Trade and Commerce, who has
les Canadiens ne veulent r^pudier aucun . been in Victoria more than once, may know
des avantages qu'ils tiennent de leur ori- the position of this reserve. It adjoins the
gine. " Mais ces representations n'ayant best portion of V^ictoria very closely. It is
pas eu plus d'eiffet que les prec^entes, le ' a drawback to the progress of the place. The
peuple fatigu^, exaspere de se plaindre en buildings upon it are nearly all deserted and
vain, dans nos chambres, dans la presse, dans , are very unsightly. The residential part of
les assemblees publiques, jusque meme dans Victoria surix>unds the whole village and the
le parlement imperial, prit un jour les armes reserve retards the progress of the place very
et troua de balles le drapeau anglais. . . Je ; much — it is a blot on the city. For this con-

n'approuve pas la n^volte, je I'ai denoncee il
n'y a pas longtemps mais il n'en est pas moins
vrai qu*elle fut I'oeuvre de trois quarts desiecle

dition of things no one is to blame. Certainly
not the Indians — we came to them, they did
not come to us. However, the time h€is

d'injustice. Jen'insisterai pas surcette page du ' come when these Indians should be removed,
passe, page de deuil, page de sang, page d'une not merely for the purpose of pleasing the
guerre civile, la plus terrible de toutes, que people of Victoria, but from motives of
nous voudrions pouvoir effacer de notre his- morality and humanity. They are now sub-
toire. Cette triste lecon parait perdue pour ' ject to temptations from the white people in
certains francophobes de I'ouest, qui pour- ; the way of drunkenness and immorality. * I
raient bien allumer un feu plus destructeur ! have seen those people dwindle down from a
que celui de leurs prairies ; elle parait perdue ' thousand to thirty or forty, chiefly through

pour certains hommes, semeurs de troubles
et de divisions, petris de pr^jug^s nationaux,
qui si^gent dans une autre chambre ; elle
parait perdue pour certains publicistes qui,
pratiquantaleurmani^rel'amourduprochain,
haient tout ce qui estsang, foietg^nieceltique.
Mais si cette le(^*on est perdue pour ces
hommes-1^ v^ritables fl^aux publics, qu'elle
ne le soit pas du moins pour les sages de la
nation, pour I'immense majorit-^ du parle-
ment pour ceux qui sont plus particuliere-
ment, charges de nos destinies. Les premiers,
en soulevant les plus mauvaises passions,

contact with degraded white people and
acquiring habits of drunkenness and immor-
ality. So long as they are left where they
are, they will be subject to those evil influ-
ences, and for that reason alone steps should
be taken for their removal. I perfectly
recognize that there are diflliculties in the
way of remoWng these Indians. In the first
place, there is a triple authority. First of
all, the Local Government holds the sover-
eignty of the soil : then there is the right of
the Indians to possession, and the Dominion
Government, as trustees for the Indians, have

meneraient le pays au bouleversement et a la < control of the reserve so long as it is an Indian

ruine, les autres peuvent seuls le consolider et

le sauver, en prechant la concorde et la bonne

entente et en restant tideles a la noble devise

qui orne la couronne britannique : *^ Dieu et

mon droit."

reserve ; but I think those difficulties can l>e
overcome. Undoubtedly, it is the right of
the Provincial Government that the reserve
should fall into their possession when the
Indians are removed, and if they get the re-
serve, which is worth now about $200,000,
they should provide another place for the
Indians. It would not be just to the tribe
to expect them to give up a valuable pro-
! perty without having some permanent pro-
I vision made for them elsewhere. I would
Call attention to the present unsatisfactory post- 1 call the attention of the ministers to a way
tion of Songhees Indians Reserve in Victoria, and j in which this matter might be dealt with.

SONGHEES INDIANS RESERVE.

iNguiR\.
Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) rose to

inquire

1 . How much money is to the credit of Songhees
Indians, from proceeds of leases and other sources ?

2. Is it the intention of the (iovernmeut to come
to an agreement with the (Government of British
f'olumbia and the said Indians* in the near future
for their removal U) a more suitable locality ?

l^. Is it the intention to take any steps without
delay to acquire a suitalde reserve, and for the dis-
lK)sal of the present one ?

There is a beautiful reserve not far from
Victoria, fronting on the sea, where there is
good fishing. It is occupied by the Victoria
Indians who speak the same language as the
Songhees and are similar in manners and
customs. If you would allow the Victoria
Indians to go down to that reserve, the dif-
ficulty would be removed. With a little

Digitized by

Google

Songhees [FEBEUAEY 28, 1893] Indians Reserve.

195

negotiation, and perhaps by paying the
Indians a small annuity, some such conclu-
sion might be arrived at, and it would be
the best solution of the difficulty. There is
ample room for all the Indians of the two
tribes on the reserve I have mentioned. I
would suggest that a commission should be
appointed to take this matter up with the
Provincial Grovemment and the Indians.
The Dominion Government should first of
all ask for the opinion of the Provincial Gov-
ernment upon the whole question of the
removal of the Indians, the disposal of the
old reserve and the acquisition of a new one.
The Government should recommend that a
joint commission be appointed : I would sug-
gest Mr. Vowel, the superintendent of Indian
affairs in British Columbia, as one. He is a
gentleman who thoroughly understands the
question. Mr. McKay, the agent at Kam-
loops, is a gentleman who has the confidence
of the Indians. He knows the Indian lan-
guage very well, and whatever he would say
they would abide by. He has been in that
country forty years and has won the con-
fidence of the Indians. The Local Govern-
ment could appoint a representative to meet
these gentlemen, and between them they
could settle the question. This matter has
been up in the local House recently, and that
body has passed a resolution unanimously,
asking the Government to bring the matter
to the attention of the Dominion Govern
ment. Everyone who spoke on the subject
desired to have it settled at once. The com-
missioner of crown lands suggested a plan of
dealing with the matter similar to the one
which I have suggested to-day and he seemed
to think that the object in view could be
easily accomplished. I do not know what
money there is to the credit of these Indians,
but there ought to be enough to acquire a
new home for them. On the score of hum-
anity and morality, I hope the Government
will lose no time in coming to some an^ange-
ment about the removal of those Indians.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. member
has explained the situation which these In-
dians occupy and the injury that is done to
Victoria and that immediate locality, in the
way of preventing the improvement and ex-
tension of the city, as well as the bad eflfect
from the close proximity of the tribe to the
class of people to which he has referred. He
has dealt with the subject so fully that it is
quite unnecessary for me to enlarge upon it.
13^

I may inform the hon. gentleman and the
House that the Government have not lost
sight of these facts, and that they are now
in communication with the British Columbia
Government with a view to arriving at some
solution of this question. As the hon. gen-
tleman has pointed out, there is a difficulty
in tUe fact that there is a triple ownership
of the reserve. An offer has been made for
the land, which is much greater than the
sum mentioned by the hon. gentleman. A
trust company has offered $350,000 for the
land now occupied by the^ Indians, and which
is partially surrounded by the city, but the
Government have not yet been able to come
to a conclusion as to any satisfactory arrange-
ment for the removal of the Indians. The
difficulty in the past, I think, has been in
not l^eing able to secure the consent of the
Indians themselves. The proposition now
is, as I understand it, fiom the Minister of
the Interior, under whose particular super-
intendence and charge the Indians are, to
enter into arrangements if possible with the
Local Government, and with the Governor of
that province, who may be asked to inter-
cede, or probably the gentleman to whom he
himself has referred, in order to enable the
Dominion Government to secure a reserve
upon which these Indians could settle, and
acquire the land which they now occupy and
which, as he has pointed out, would in case
the Indians are removed, accrue to the Gov-
ernment of the province. All that our
Government can do is to negotiate for the
removal of the Indians, and I take it
for granted that a portion of the sum
received for that reserve, in case it were
sold, would have to be used to acquire a re-
serve for the Indians and which should be
sufficiently large for them to live comfort-
ably. That is really the position of the
question to-day. The answers to the
questions which the hon. gentleman asks are
as follows : First, the amount of money
standing to the capital account is $9,573.01 ;
the amount of interest, $1,323.66, making a
total of S10,896.67. Negotiations with a
view to obtain a surrender thereof from the
Indians owning the Songhees reserve and
their removal to some suitable locality have,
for some time, been carried on by the
Indian superintendent at Victoria ; and
thirdly, should the Indians agree to surren-
der their present reserve, there will be no
difficulty in procuring a suitable reserve
elsewhere ; but it is, of course, necessary to

Digitized by

Google

196

Holidays Law [SENATE] Amendment Act,

ascertain whether they will leave their pres-
ent reserve before acquiring another reserve
for them ; likewise, before any steps for the
disposal of the present reserve can be taken,
it will be necessary that the Indians agree
to sui-render the same for sale. These are
full answers to the questions of the hon.
gentleman. I undei'stood him to say that
the number of Indians was about forty. Am
I correct in that ?

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— So T
believe.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL— The official state-
ment is, there are about 136 souls all told.
I suppose that means men, women and
children ?

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— The
Chief came to my house to consult me, and
he told me then that there were only about
thirty or forty left.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This is the state-
ment made by the Deputy of the Depart-
ment, Mr. Vankoughnet, and placed in my
hands. I sincerely hope that the time is not
far distant when another reserve may be
acquired for these Indians. I am quite sure
it will be in their interests that such a re-
serve should be set apart for them, and it
will be equally in the interests of the city
of Victoria. At present it is really a blot
upon the city, and I quite agree with the
hon. gentleman in saying that it is morally,
and physically, I might say, in the interests
of the Indians that they should be removed
from their present position.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)~I am very
much pleased indeed that my hon. colleague
has brought this question before the notice
of the House, and I not only concur in the
views he has expressed, but also in the re-
commendation he has made to the Govern-
ment. I think the proposition he has placed
l>efore the House and the Government is the
best one for the solution of this question.
I am also happy that the Government are
about to take active steps towards securing
a more suitable place for the remnants of
that once very important band of Indians.
However, I should be very sorry indeed if
the Government decide to accept the offer of
»^350,000 from this Company which the hon.
leader of the Government has mentioned, for

this reason : when Companies get possession
of a considerable block of land like that,
they lay it out — at least it has been done in
Winnipeg and other cities in Manitoba and
the North-west Territories, and also in
New Westminster, Victoria and Vancouver
— they lay that land out in a manner that
certainly would not do credit to a place like
Victoria. The streets are mere lanes or
alleys ; and unfortunately a portion of the
city of Victoria is laid out in that manner
now. I hope, therefore, that it will not fall
into the hands of any company, or if it does
fall into the hands of a company, that some
stipulation should be placed in the agree-
ment by which they shall be compelled to
have streets of a certain width ; but I think
if it is left in the hands of the Government
they will be able to realize nearly 8350,000
but in all probability nearer half a million
within a short time, and I take it for
granted that the Government are not so
hard up for money that they cannot aiford
to sell that property on two or three years'
time. I am convinced, if it is properly laid
out and offered for sale to the public, that
they will realize a great deal more than they
could possibly get from any company.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I do not wish to be
understood as saying that the Government
have ofiered the property for sale. I merely
mentioned the fact that an offer had been
made, in order to show the value which was
put upon the land ; and hon. gentlemen must
not forget that it is a grave question whether
the Dominion Government has the right or
authority to sell that land. As was pointed
out by the 'member for Victoria, the moment
this land is surrendered by the Indians, the
fee reverts to the Local Government and not
the Dominion. So that any steps that may
be taken for the sale of that land will, I take
it, be by the Local Government, and they
will acquire whatever profits or benefit may
arise from it, and that being the capital of
the province, I think they will pay attention
to the very pioper suggestions which have
been thrown out by the hon. member from
British Columbia.

HOLIDAYS LAW AMENDMENT ACT.

THIRD READING.

The House resolved itself into Committee
of the Whole on Bill (8) "An Act to amend
the law relating to Holidays."

Digitized by

Google

Bank Act [FEBRUARY 28, 1893] Amendment Bill

197

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I shall now move
the amendment of which I gave notice at
the second reading.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED-^I would ask my
hon. friend if he has caused the whole of the
statutes to be perused to ascertain if any
mention is madeof those particular holidays
in any of the other statutes except those two
named, viz., the Interpretation Act and the
Banking Act ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I have.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— It appears tome
that the Act in its present shape would be
very much better than with the proposed
amendment.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -I may say that I had
a i-eport from the Clerk of the House upon
the subject and he ascertained that the
amendment was accurate.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I gave notice that I
intended to move, not an amendment, but
an addendum to this Bill, that Dominion
Thanksgiving Day should be held on Sun-
day. I am not going to press the motion,
for several i*easons. In the first place, I
think it would not pass, because the mem-
bers of this House are not sufficiently edu-
cated up to the importance of it, but I trust
that next Dominion Thanksgiving Day they
will look round and Fee how it is observed
in the places in which they reside. I think
they will find that a very small proportion
of the people give thanks to God in churches,
as they are intended to do under the procla-
mation. A great number employ that day
in dissipation of all kinds, which is very
much to be deplored. Many persons share
my opinion that the Government have noth-
ing whatever to do with religious observ-
ances. In the Dominion of Canada we have
no established church, and, therefore, no
Government has any right to tell the people
in this free country that they should go to
church and worship God in a particular way,
when they do not feel inclined to do so.
When the members of this House are edu-
cated up to what ought to be done, I shall
bringforward this matteragain. Itmay takea
long time to drive it into some of their heads,
and I may not be alive at that time, but
they will then see that Thanksgiving Day in
order to be properly observed, should be kept
on Sunday when eveiybody should go to
church. Many people spend the holiday in

dissipation, but there are others who have
the same religious scruples as I have, who
object to being dragooned by the civil author-
ities to go to church, and they do not do it ;
they spend their time in idleness and lose
their day's labour. You may say that these
men could work if they had the same reli-
gious principles I have against going to
church, but they cannot do it, because their
employers belong to other churches, and they
difi*er from yourselves and myself, and think
the Government should make the religions
for us and tell us what observances we should
make and where we should go, and, there-
fore, they shut their stores, and their employees
are driven into idleness when they most need
money. I would likewise suggest to the hon.
gentleman that he should consider this fact,
that when he employed the present officials
he paid them a certain salary for a certain
number of days work. He has now added
three days' work by this bill, and he is not
going to increase the salary. Should they
not be allowed three additional days to the
fortnight's holidays they have in the summer?
I think the Government should have the
same feeling that an honest gentleman w^ould
have towards the people he employs. He
makes an agreement and he should keep it.
You have made an agreement with the civil
servants to work a certain number of days
in the year and you pay them accordingly ;
now, when you take away three days, I think
you should give them three additional days
pay or lengthen the summer holidays by
adding three days. I hope that when I in-
troduce my resolution the House will be
sufficiently educated on the subject to adopt
it.

Hon. Mr. BOLDUC, from the Commit-
tee, reported the Bill with one amendment,
which was concurred in.

The Bill was then read the third time, and
passed."

BANK ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

THIRD READING.

The House resolved itself into Committee
of the Whole on Bill (I) " An Act to cor-
rect a clerical error in the Bank Act.''

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED, fi-om the Com-
mittee, reported the Bill without amend-
ment.

The Bill was read the third time, and
passed.

Digitized by

Google

198

The Commercial Policy [SEJSTATE] of Canada,

MILITIA LAND GRANT BILL.

THIRD READING.

The House resolved itself into Committee
of the Whole on Bill (G) " An Act to make
further provision respecting grants of land
tx) members of the Militia force on active
service in the North-west."

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I would like
to ask the Minister why the necessity exists
to continue this Act 'I Certain militia in
the North-west are entitled to a grant of
land for serWces as militia men. Why the
necessity to extend this Act ? Is it in con-
sequence of the militia not having located,
or is there any other reason why this Act
should be extended for another year ? Has
there been any delay in the civil service
department ?

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL I can only repeat
what I stated when I introduced the Bill :
that a number of those who performed
military service during the troubles in the
North-west are entitled to these land
warrants. They made their application,
but delay took place in sohie cases in the
making of these applications and in the re-
porting upon them in the Justice Depart-
ment. They were received too late. The
time had expired before they could obtain
them, and this is simply to extend the time
to the 31st December, in oi-der that war-
rants may be issued to those whose claims
have been passed upon by the Justice De-
partment and upon whose claims reports
have been made that they ai'e entitled to
take them. I might mention that this is
the second time the Bill was introduced ; it
was brought up some years ago and was re-
newed in 1891 for one year; and now it is
proposed to extend the time until the 31st
December next. That is the whole provis-
ion of the Bill —to enable these volunteers to
receive their wari*ants.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED I would say in
this connection that there are other numer-
ous applications from those who consider
themselves entitled to scrip now before the
Government, and I would ask the hon.
leader of this House that their applications
should be considered, and that closer atten-
tion should be given to the claims of many
men whom I know to be entitled to scrip
than has been given in the past.

I Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I think the pas-
I sage of this Act will enable the Department
of Justice to report in favourof all those who
I are entitled to it. My short experience in
j the Militia Department led me to this con-
I elusion, that nearly every man who walked
I ten miles in the North-west during that re-
bellion made claims for scrip or land warrants.
I wish the hon. gentleman to understand that
I have no reference to the claims to which
he refers, because I understand his claims
are valid, and if they are of course they will
be recognized, provided the claim is made
and the proof put in before the 31st Decem-
ber.

Hon. Mr. McKAY, from the Committee,
reported Bill the without amendment.

The Bill was read the third time and
passed.

The Senate adjourned at 5.20 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Wednesday, March 1st, 1893.

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

THE COMMERCIAL POLICY OF
CANADA.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON moved—

That a Select Committee V>e appointed to intjuire
into the statistics of the country, and its industrial
progress, with the view of assimilating our com-
mercial policy with that commercial policy that
has mcreased the prosperity of the people of the
United Kingdom ot (4reat Britain and Ireland, in
such a marked degree ; with power to send for per-
sons and papers, and to employ shorthand writers.

He said : — Hon. gentlemen, the object
that I have in view in moving for a com-
mittee of so much importance ais this arises
from the fact that in the House of Com-
mons, the hon. Finance Minister, in the
budget debate, stated that it was the inten-
I tion of the (Government to appoint a Minis-
terial Committee for the purpose of inquir-
ing into these very matters during the recess
of Parliament. At the same time the hon.

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada,

199

Finance Minister, in his budget speech,
defined clearly the position which he occu-
pied. He defined clearly the position he
occupied before the country on the broad
question, and he has taken his stand dis-
tinctly on the platform of protection. He
has cast from him the policy of free trade,
and thrown it over to the hon. leader of the
Opposition. I refer to page 682 of the Han-
sard, where the hon. Minister says : —

Then the first question comes from my hon.
friend, will the Government adopt free trade? My
answer to that is **no," I know I disappoint my
hou. friend in not taking up the pet idol and dream
of his heart, the one idea which is the bright star of
his existence, towards which he trea<ls his devious
way, sometimes in one country and sometimes in
another, from platform to platform, but always
with that bright particular star in sight ; now, I
believe only fifteen years distant is that bright
particular star of free trade, the freest of free
trade.

The hon. Finance Minister has, I take for
granted, passed over the policy of free trade,
whatever it may mean, to the leader of
the Opposition, and has taken his stand
upon protection. The hon. gentleman does
not know the full force of the principles
which govern British commerce and the
effect they will have upon the minds of the
people, when they are heralded by an organ-
ized party from every platform. Now, hon.
gentlemen, if the hon. Minister of Finance is
going to appoint a Ministerial Committee
for the purpose of inquiring into the indus-
tries of the country so far as they affect the
protective policy of the country, I do not
think that would be an entirely satisfactory
committee to procure the information which
the people of the country at large desire ;
and I think that the Senate is eminently
fitted and has the time to give for such an
inquiry as the people of the country desire.
Hon. gentlemen must be perfectly aware
that there is a great deal of unrest at the
present moment in regard to the trade ques-
tion ; that petitions have come in, resolu-
tions from important bodies, labour councils,
farmers' unions, patrons of industry, and
manufactories of all kinds — petitions have
come in in great numbers, which show that
there is an unrest in regard to the trade
question, that there is something pressing
upon the industry of the country, not only in
the farming community, but throughout the
general industrial community ; and all that
the people want, I believe, is to have infor-
mation ; because there can be no doubt about

it that in consequence of these petitions, in
consequence of this evident unrest with
reference to the trade policy of the countiy,
we are on the eve of a change in some
direction, and I have no doubt everybody in
the country is anxious to know what that
change shall be. They are anxious to apply
their intelligence, after they have had the
information placed before th»*m in such a
manner that they can use that intelligence
for the benefit of the country and for their

I own benefit. Now, hon. gentlemen, I think
that this honourable House can supply that

I committee, and can secure the information

I which is so much desired. This honourable
House has performed a valuable service for
the country in the last committee of a special
character which it dealt with ; I i-efer to the
committee appointed to inquire into the Bale
des Chaleurs matter ; and I think the countiy
acknowledges that the services which were

! performed by the Senate on that occasion

, have been invaluable.

! Hon. Mr. POWER— If the hon. meml)er

i will allow me to correct him, there was no

special committee in that case ; it was the

ordinary Railway Committee of the Senate.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Then it was not a
special committee ; but the inquisitions of
that committee cleared the mists that were
pressing upon the vision of the people of the
province of Quebec, and in that respect I
' say that they have performed a valuable
service. I think that the. same services can
be performed by a committee such as I
speak of — a special committee appointed for
the purpose of making that special inquiry.
It is not an uncommon thing ; we see to-day
that England is appointing a committee to
inquire into the agricultural depression.
Between the year 1815, when the com
laws were adopted, and 1846, when they
were abolished, there were five special com-
mittees appointed to inquire into the depres-
sion in agriculture. We saw that there was
a royal commission appointed by Great
Britain only so far back^^as 1886 — a special
commission appointed to inquire into the
general trade depression of Great Britain
and the world. It is information for the
people of the country to exercise their
; intelligence and their franchise upon. It
. is for that reason that I make this motion
j to-day. T make a motion not only for a
I committee, but a committee with a view to

Digitized by

Google

200

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

assimilating our commercial policy with the
commercial policy which has brought
great prosperity to the people of the
XJnited Kingdom. What are the difficulties
that we are suffering from at the present
moment? We are suffering from limited
markets. The National Policy, I contend,
has done its work. We have ariived at that
stage of our* industrial progress when a
change is desirable. We have brought into
existence manufacture-s, and in fourteen
years the capabilities of the country, so
far as absorption of the manufacturing
power of these industries is concerned, has
reached its limit, and the evidence of that
is the combines that have been formed in
almost every branch of industry. What
for ? For the purpose of restricting the pro-
duction within the limits that the manu-
ffiWJturing capacity of the country can absorb.
The statement is often made to me, why
cannot they export ? They cann-'t get into
the markets of the world with their manu-
factures, because the cost of manufacturing
is increased to such an extent by the pro-
tective policy, by the duties put upon all
articles entering into imlustrial enterprise,
into the personal and individual require-
ments of labour, it adds so much to the
cost of manufacturing that^ manufacturers
cannot get beyond the limits of the markets
of Canada, the markets of 5,000,000 of
people, in order to absorb their manufactur-
ing power. That is the position in which
we find ourselves to-day, and the result is
that the very thing that we imposed the
National Policy to establish, has now come
round, and it is used as an engine by a coqi-
bination of manufacturers to restrict the
production within the limit, as I said
before, of the capacity of 5,000,000 of
people of Canada to absorb the pro-
duct of their capital and industry. The
evidence of that\ is before us in the
Trade and Navigation Returns, because they
show that we have only exported one and
a half million dollars worth of the manufac-
turing products of Canada. At the end of
fourteen years we have only been able to
export in the neighbourhood of $1,500,000
worth of the manufacturing products of
Canada ; I say that is an evidence in itself
that the manufacturers of the country cannot
jjo beyond the limits of Canada in order to
find a market for their products. W^hen I
say it is $1,500,000, I of course draw a dis-
tinction between those manufactures brought

into existence by the National Policy that
do not especially belong to the natural manu-
facturing industries of the country but are
sustained by the importation of raw material.
I draw a distinction between those indus-
tries and the manufacture of such articles
as lumber, doors, sash and blinds and articles
of that kind. Therefore I say that the time
has come when it is nece^ssary for us to in-
quire and ascertain what is the best policy
tcrbe pursued. Are these statements cor-
rect, are these statistics which are put before
us of that character that they can be taken
as absolute facts and taken as an indica-
tion of the development and progress of the
country ? We find our labouring popu-
lation in our cities, such as Montreal, Toronto
and other places, petitioning the Government
against lending any aid to immigration.
Why do they do that ? Because they know
that in aiding immigration the Government
is bringing labour to a restricted market,
that the restricted market of 5,000,000 is
already filled with all the manufacturing
power that the country needs — that bring-
ing more skilled labour to the country is only
bringing men to compete with them and still
further depress their industry and the means
by which they live. If we had a policy that
enabled our manufacturers to get abroad to
the markets of the world beyond the limits
of Canada, you would not find the labouring
population of the country making any effort
to confine the efforts of the Government in the
direction of immigration, but would warmly
welcome any accession to their ranks. But
when they know that the manufacturing
power of this country is limited to the wants
of the people in the country, and that there
is skilled Jabour enough in the country at
present to fill those wants, they know it is
only an injury to themselves and to those
whom we attract heic in the hope of increa-
sing the manufacturing power of the coun-
try. Now, as you are all aware, I have had
the honour of speaking once or twice in this
hon. House on the question of free trade. I
have taken up the question feeling the pres-
sure on oui*selves out in the West so far as
the duties are concerned and so far as the
cost of manufactures are concerned, and it
has led me U) make as deep an inquiry as
the facilities at my command enabled me to
do to see what the best policy for the coun-
try is. Several policies have been
brought forward — commercial union,
unrestricted reciprocity, partial reciprocity

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada.

201

with the United States, and fair trade
^ith England. I do not know any party
that has come forward and has been bold
enough to realize and acknowledge that
a policy of free trade with the world such as
has been adopted by England is within the
capacity of the people of Canada to pursue.
After fully inquiring into the merits of the
question, I have come to the conclusion that
the people of Canada are in quite as fit a
condition and have quite the capacity, intel-
ligence and ability to take upon themselves
the full effect of the policy of free trade as
pursued by Great Britain. When w.e see to
the south of us that our neighbours are also
making great advances in the same direc-
tion, when we see the complete overturn of
the Republican party, not only in the elec-
tion of the President of the United States,
but of the Republican party in the House of
Representatives and in the Senate, and when
we see the Democratic party succeeding on
the square issue of free trade, we may realize
that the day is not far distant when the
most perfect freedom of trade will prevail
without sacrificing the perfect independence
of Canada. As Mr. Cleveland put it to the
people when he was seeking re-election four
years ago, he stands on the same platform
to-day, and it is the issue of free trade versus
protection that was put before the people of
the United States at the late election.

Hon. Mr, KAULBACH— No, no.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is, and I can
prove it, too. The proof is in the gentle-
men whom the president has selected to com-
pose his Cabinet. Among them he has
selected Mr. Carlisle for his Treasurer, and,
according to the New York Tribune^ Mr.
Carlisle has stated that he would accept it
if allowed to associate with a committee
embracing some of the most prominent free
traders of the United States. He has,
according to that paper, proposed to asso-
ciate with him David Wells and Thomas G.
Shearman, in the preparation of the policy of
tariff reform which is to be instituted. Every
lion, gentleman knows what David Wells's
policy is. He is one of the most advanced
thinkers in modern political economy and
has written some most valuable works
on such questions, and his policy is a free
trade policy. Thomas G. Shearman is also
an out-and-out free trader : the New
York l^rHrnne calls him a radical free

trader — that is, a single tax man ; and he
wrote a letter to thp London Times in Sept-
ember last complaining .of the speech made
by Lord Salisbury, as indicating the proba-
bility of England once more returning to
protection in consequence of his remarks,
and saying that the United States were
making rapid strides towards free trade —
not the free trade in vogue in England, but
radical free trade which took direct taxation
as its mode of levying the taxes required for
the country. Those are the men that Mr.
Carlisle has chosen to associate with himself
to initiate tariff reform in the United Stated.
They have greater difficulties, I acknow-
ledge, to contend with in the promotion
of any free trade policy than we in
Canada have to contend with. They have
to meet much more extravagance in their
expenditure, and have loaded themselves
down with several heavy burdens in the
shape of pension lists, sugar bounties, silver
purchase, and a variety of things of that
kind. They have to clear the air of that
expenditure and adopt a more economical
management in their affairs before they can
take the advanced position that Canada at
the present moment is able to take, in
effecting a change of policy towards free
trade. The United Sta.tes is also in a much
better position to maintain a protective tariff
than we in Canada. As you all know, the
United States embraces almost every one —
they can get their oranges from Florida and
from California, and put the West in com-
petition with the East. They can get their
sugar from the southern States. They can
sell their northern products in the South and
their southern products in the North, and
are able to supply themselves with a variety
of products that we cannot supply, but
which it would not be wise to supply ourselves
with under recipiocity conditions if it means
a continuance of the same protective tax on
labour. We occupy a position on this continent
in which all our provinces lie in nearly the
same latitude— almost all of us produce
exactly the same things, and therefore we
have to seek a market abroad for the surplus
that we have to export. If we have to buy
oranges we must bring them from the West
Indies, from Florida or California or the Medi-
terranean. If we buy tropical fruits, we
have to get them from the United States or
from countries outside of the United States,
and the question for us is whether we will
lock ourselves up within ourselves under a

Digitized by

Google

202

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

policy of protection — our National Policy as
it is called, as we have been doing for the
last fourteen years, or are we to assimilate
our tariif with that of the United States as
some people here advocate at the present
moment. Tn fact, I believe the Finance Minis-
ter is waiting upon the people of the United
States to find out exactly what their policy
is going to be before he will show any indica-
tion of the policy he will pursue in these
mattei^, and that is what I call assimilating
our tariff with that of the United States and
I say that that is not asserting that inde-
pendence that we should show. We are not
bound to the United States so far as trade
matters are concerned. We can adopt any
policy that we think is best for the promo-
tion of the interests of the people of Canada
without reference to the people of the United
States, but the question of reciprocity does
not leave us in that independent position.
We cannot enter into a reciprocity treaty
unless the country with which we seek that
reciprocity treaty is willing to reciprocate on
terms to suit us : for that same reason the
difficulty presents itself in reciprocity with
Great Britain on the fair trade basis.
We may imagine that it would be to
the advantage of Canada, but we have
to persuade the people of Great Britain
that reciprocal trade is a wise policy
and will have the same beneficial results for
the people of Great Britain as some imagine
it will have for the people of Canada. In
that respect, both on the fair trade basis
with Great Britain or reciprocity with the
United States, I say we are not maintain-
ing that independent position, for which the
National Policy was instituted, .by seeking
to sacrifice our independence in trade mat-
tei-s with reciprocity in any direction what-
ever. Free trade on British lines will pre-
serve that independence, although producing
an assimilation of commerce, and will insure
that prosperity to the people of Canada that
it has insured the people of Great Britain
since they adopted the commercial policy
which they have been operating under ever
since 1846. I have asserted, in the motion
that I have put before this honourable
House, that the people of Great Britain are
prosperous. I have staked the success of
the motion I have put before the House on
the assumption that the people of Great
Britain are prosperous. I know many peo-
ple try to make out and persuade the coun-
try at large that the people of Great Britain

are not enjoying that degree of prosperity
under free trade they are credited with, and
therefore. before I can proceed with m}' mo-
tion with any hope of having it adopted by
this honourable House I must show that
prosperity does exist in Great Britain. C)f
course the phase of prosperity depends en-
tirely on how individuals may view that
prosperity. There are two classes of pros-
perity— the prosperity of capital or the suc-
cess of labour ; although inter-dependent
they differ in degree. If you wish to see the
prosperity of capital it may possibly be at the
expense. of labour and vict versa. Now hon.
gentlemen will recollect perfectly well that a
couple or three years ago English capital took
a great speculative turn in the Argentine
Republic so that it almost shook the found-
ation of Great Britain and brought down the
old house of Baring. The basis of that specu-
lation was land in the Argentine Republic.
The Government of the Argentine Republic
upon a semi-socialistic basis instituted a sys-
tem of land bonds guaranteed by the Govern-
ment and they issued land bonds amd the price
of land advanced until they had run the price
of their lands up to $40 per acre. All that
capital was advanced by British capitalists.
Of course after the hollo wness of it was seen
through the bubble burst. It brought
down the house of Baling, which was the
medium of the capital operating. That spe-
culation induced over production. The
products of labour that wept put to the
Argentine Republic, for trade follow^ capital,
were so great that it brought about over pro-
duction and left the trade of Great Britain
in a depressed condition so far as capital is
concerned. But we have the very best evi-
dence to show that that depression is not
applicable to the labour of Great Britain —
that although that depression stiU exists and
is still being felt in the trade circles of Great
Britain in consequence of over speculation,
it is not felt in the same way by labour and
I wish to show you by public evidence how
far I am right in my statements. One result
of the strikes of last year was the voluntary
cessation of work on the part of labour, to
equalize supply and demand, supportingthem-
selves in the meantime rather than accept a
reduction in wages. A Royal Commission
was appointed in 1886 by the (rovernment of
Great Britain to inquire into the trade de-
pression. It completed its labours in 1888
and here is one of the clauses of the report
that appear in" it. It is one of the best au-

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada. 203

thorities we can possibly quote as to the ' families, 10,000,000 agricultural labourers
prosperity of the working class of Great i and their families. One class should not be
Britain. | protected at the expense of the other ; they

There is no feature in the situation, which the | */;« dependent on one another so long as
commissioners have 1)een called to examine, so satis- ' they remain dependent upon and identified
factory as the immense improvement which has - with the soil, and all are equally interested
taken place in the condition of the working- classes | ^o maintain its productive power, but when
dunnff the last twenty years.— Report of the , . * . '^ ' . ,

R..yar(Bri!;i8h)Comtni»ionon the Department of ,!<»« companies or insurance comi»mes be-
Tntde, 1888. j come the landlords, a decadence of agncul-

Then I come to the financial review of ^"''^ ^^^^ ^>^ ^^^^^ ^«''- ^'^ «^> ^^^^^^^^^'
1892. Dealing with the financial condition ' ?^*^ '' ^^^^f l^'^'Tu^ "^T" ^I'^^'^r'

of the country itself it savs • ^^^ power has been the result of the policy

^ ' ^ ' of Great Britain of late years. But I will

It is quite clear that the revenue could not have I not confine myself to those isolated instances
been so large if the great body of the oopulation I ^^ixoh. may be considered, to a certain extent,
had not been able to spend so freely ; and especially « .'^t-h^i ^j_- j?

it is noticeable that there are increases in the very , ^8 foreign. I will take quotations from our
items of revenue which depend most upon the j own blue books, issued by our own Minister
general consumption. Furthermore on total receipts of Agriculture in his annual report. I have
of about 20 millions sterling on sev-enteen of the before me the report of the High Commis-
prmcipal railways m the United Knigdom, the, . u/-, j-ij- j. j.

ifecreak acconling to the weekly traffic Returns, in I s»«ner for Canada, including agents reports
the groHs receipts is only £100,000. It is to iye re- i from various parts of the United Kingdom,
collected that on a single railway— the North The following is from The Field, an agricul-
Eastern~the ^eat Durham strike is estimated to ^^ral paper of the very highest standing, of
have cx>st not lar short of half a mdhon sterling. , j^^^i^Q^g^ 1891, quoted by Mr. Dyke :-

It shows that the revenue has been main- .» Enouch has come to our knowledge to
tained and it has been derived from the make one see that although the agricultural popu-
prosperous condition and the consuming lation as a whole mav not show so great a defi-
power of the people of Great Britain. Then \ ^»««^> ' ^1>.«7 ^*»1 ^>«, * falling off from 10 to 20 per
'^. ufuLT^rwD- £ I cent m all those aiuble counties m which the four-

again we have the /ar^nti/rA% ^^t^^" for ; ^^^^^se system of cultivation still prexails . . . . In
January, in which an article on the labour one case known to us there are nearly 30 per cent
question appears. It is by Mr. Schloss, a fewer people at work upon the land in 1891 than
gentleman quoted as an authority by Mr. J^^^re were in 1881. If, as we believe will be
^,1 \ • i.4.-i.-- uu found to b€L the case, there has l)eeu a special re-

Gould, an American statistician, who ha^ duction inThe number of the agricultural labourers
been appointed to inquire into the labour where the occupiers of the land are tied to * farm
statistics of Europe for the purpose of getting four-course ' it will form a new indictment against
the best information on the subject of the ^^*^ method.

condition of the labouring classes for the " It is very difficult, as 77t«/t^/c/ says, to show
information of his Government, and there- ' the effect of the various methods of farming
fore, I presume, he is a capable man, that is, upon the population, but it can be safely
capable of expressing an opinion. This is stated that in the purely agricultural and
what Mr. Schloss says : — I more especially in the arable districts the

The general increase in the remuneration of ^ *P^"/)^'**^ P^P"^^^^^
labour which has taken place during the last three, than fifty per cent dunng the last twenty

years throughout the length and breadth of the ' years, the young men having migrated to

kingdom has l.een witnessed by social reformers towns and manufacturing districts. "

of every class with profound satisfaction. ^y^^ ^.^.^,^ .^ ^^cognized as an authority

Now, there is evidence from three sources, one in Great Britain, in consequence of the
a royal commission, the other the financial , ability at the head of its editorial columns,
review, and the third an article by a man ; Now, you see that while The Fipld ac-
who is thoroughly informed upon the \ knowledges the existence of the agricultural
labour question, and they state that the ' depression so far as the diminution of labour
prosperity of the labouring classes is un- on the soil is concerned, it is not attributed
doubted both in regard to the wages they \ to the free trade policy of the country, but
receive, and the purchasing power of those to the system of agriculture pursued. Mr.
wages. The interests dependent on agricul- ' Dyke goes on to say :

ture in England are 200,000 landlords and , rhiring the last four years the trade of the
their families, 1,000,000 tenants and their country has been increased by £130,000,000, while

Digitized by

Google

204

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

in shipping there has l)een an iuctease of nine
niilliou tons. Railway receipts had increased ten
and a-half millions ; savings banks deposits, six-
teen and three-quarter millions ; and the output of
coal had increased twenty-four million tons. These
figures indicated a solid advance in commercial
prosperity. On the other hapd, emigration had
decreasefi by 14,784 ; pauperism had decreased by
39,00(), the number of paupers last year being the
smallest number on record during the past twenty-
five yearp.

" During the last few years, nearly every
branch of manufacturing industry has been
fairly prosperous, and in many branches of
trade, taking the purchasing value of wages,
men have been really better paid than they
would have been in Canada or the United
States, and of course this state of affairs
quickly becomes known." Now, hon. gentle-
men, there is a statement from one of our
own agents, Mr. Dyke, who has been the
agent in Liverpool for a great number of
years, who makes it his business to inform
himself fully and thoroughly as to the con-
ditions of agriculture, so that he can give
the best and most reliable information to the
people of Canada in such a report as this.
He goes on to say that during the last few
years nearly every branch of manufacturing
indust;:y has been fairly prosperous, and in
many branches of trade, taking the purchas-
ing value of the wages of the men, they have
been better paid than they would be in Can-
ada and the United States, and of course
this statement quickly becomes kifown. The
following appeared in the Liverpool Cattriei'j
of the 6th November, 1891, and shows the
extent to which the population of the agri-
cultural districts has been depleted : — !

Agricultural labour is so scarce in some of the
Midland Counties that the ro<jt crops are lying in '
the fields ungathered. At Eye Green, Northamp- i
tonshire, the fanners have advanced wages over 25 |
per cent, hut still more hands are wanted.

There, hon. gentlemen, is the evidence that I
the labourers' wages have been increased 25
per cent and yet the requirements are not-
filled ; and I think I have seen a statement
made in defence of agricultural depression
by the Right Hon. Mr. Gladstone, in which
he said agricultural wages had been advanced
of late years by fifty per cent. Mr. Dyke
goes on to speak of the value of land : —

The opinion I expressed last year that the de-
pression in agriculture had touched its lowest point
has been confirmed. There is now a better demand
for well situated farms, more especially of grass
land, than there has been for some years past. One
of the leading Lon«lon journals of recent date states

that : " About 1 10 farms in Essex are now tenanted
by Scotsmen, all of whom have migrated to the
country within the last few years, the majority of
them coming from Ayrshire. These settlers are
going in largely for dairying ami stock, and as a
rule, they are doing well, the average rent l>eing
something under a sovereign an acre. '

Then he quotes from the Estates (Gazette)
with regard to the price of land, after show-
ing that lands had depreciated in the last
twenty years about 50 per cent. The same
journal in December, in a review of the year's
sales of real estate, says : —

Land — that is purely agricultural areas — has
been a '^drug" through the whole of the season,
due principally to the depression which still exists
in the agricultural markets ; the prices, however,
have not fallen any loM^er, for, according to the
al)ove figures it will l)e seen that land comes out as
selling at an average of about £42 per acre, which
is £1 more than the average price obtained in
1890.

Now, hon. gentlemen, although the price
of land has fallen 50 per cent in the last
twenty years according to the Estates
(Gazette), yet it still maintains an average
value of land in England of £42 per acre
and increased <£1 an acre in value in the
year. We would be very well satisfied indeed
if we could say the land approached any-
thing like one-half that amount ; and there
is no reason in Canada, under the same free
trade policy that Great Britain has been
working under for the last foi-ty-six yeai^
why the price should not be identically the
same as it is in England, What is it that
gives the value to that land ?

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)~Popu-

lation.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The hon. gen-
tleman is quite right, it is the large cen-
tres that are close to the agricultural farms
I which give them a near market and a high
I purchasing power for those things which are
I the produce of the farm. Adopt the same
I policy and build up the cities and towns in
Canada by stepping out into the markets of
I the world and drawing the wealth of the
i world to Canadian centres, and I tell you
I gentlemen, you will see a great increase in
the price of land from one end of Canada to
I the other in consequence and you will see a
I large increase in our towns and cities. Now,
with regard to the number of cattle, sheep and
I pigs in Great Britain, as an evidence of the
increase and development of agriculture
I there, we find that the number of cattle in

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada,

205

the two years between 1889 and 1891 has
increased by 713,000 head ; the number of
sheep has increased by 3,100,000 head. The
increase in pigs during the same two years
was 377,000. Does that look like agri-
cultural depression] It does not look
much like it wh^n those enormous figures
ai-e reached as the increase only in two
years. However, I will go on and show you
more. This is a report of Mr. Connolly,
our Government agent in Dublin ; and he
shows, quoting from Irish returns, that in
1891 there were exported from Irish ports
646,000 head of cattle, 799,000 sheep, 527,-
000 swine, and 36,000 horses. There are
5,000,000 people in Ireland, and they are
able %o maintain an export of 646,000 head
of cattle. This is an internal return and does
not appear in the trade returns of Great
Britain, but it shows that free trade Ireland
exports to free trade England 646,000
head of cattle, 36,000 horses, 799,000 sheep,
and swine, 527,000. Now, let us compare
these figures with what we are able to show
in our export trade from agricultural Can-
ada. We have a population of 5,000,000
and good so^J and a large quantity of it, and
we can make no showing such as that.
With regard to the prices that they get for
those cattle, the following table gives the
average price per hundred weight, live
weight for fat cattle and sheep sold in the
Dublin market in the month of December,
1891, as issued by the Irish Land Com-
missioners : —

Cattle 74 cents per pound, live weight. Lot prices.
Bollocks 74 cents a pound, live weight. **
Ewes, 7 cents per pound, live weight. *'

Wethers, 7i cents a pound, live weight. '*

Now those hon. gentlemen who are acquain-
ted with the agricultural interests will know
that seven and a half cent« a pound live weight
is a very remunerative price and 646,000
head of these cattle, or I presume, a large
number at those prices were exported from
Irish ports.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— My hon. friend
will allow me to say to him that the cause
of that is that the Irish people are not able
to eat their cattle and the people of Canada
can.

Hon- Mr. BOULTON— I live in the pro-
vince of Manitoba where there are large
numbers of new settlers from various parts
of the world. I meet men from (Jermany,

I from Hungary, from Ireland, from Scotland

jand from all the countries of Europe, I

might say. They are all around me, and I

I can assui*e you that those farmers that have

I come from Ireland do not answer the des-

I cription given by my hon. friend in the

slightest degree. They are remarkably cap-

j able, healthy, strong able-bodied men that

bring with them a f^ir amount of capital —

jand fine families, more capital than the

\ Ontario farmers are able to take from here

j into the province of Manitoba. We have

1 of course the agricultural labourer who goes

lout witlj not quite so much means, but

quick intelligence and valuable experience ;

and the fact that that statement is made is

not at all reassuring t«> the people of Ireland

I should think. Then we have in Limerick

another evidence which is opposed to the

idea of my hon. friend from Toronto, and

that is with regard to the dairying. Here

is a clause in this report which says : —

Under the inanagemeut of enterprising Cana-
dians, Messrs. Cleeve Bros., the Condensed Milk
Company, have, perhaps, the larcest factory of its
kind in the world at Limerick, where they employ
about 500 hands. The milk of 9,000 cows is daily
handled in the factory, and some H0,000 tin cans
are manufacturetl each day for the conveyance of
this milk in its condensed form.

They have factories at Clonmel, Mallow, Hospital
and >iill street, and between them all the milk of
16,000 cows is manipulated.

The factory sends its tins of. milk to most parts
of the globe, and quite recently 200 cases sent to
Sydney arrived there in splendid condition.

Then here is a letter from Cleeve Bros. :
evidently Mr. Dunne or Mr. Connolly has
written to him and they address him,
" Thomas Connolly, Dominion of Canada : —

131 Gkoroe Street,

Limerick, 28th December, 1891.
Thos. Connolly, Esq.,

Dominion of Canada Govt. Agency,
I Dublin.

Dear Sir,- Yours of the 23rd inst. to hand.
j You are quite right about the success of the
t creamery moveuient in Ireland being due to our
I skill and energies, and now Irish butter is coming
j to the front again, in fact we are getting better
I prices than any continental butter ; and if the
I Canadian (Government were to have the matter
I properly gone into, we see no reason, from our
I knowledge of C^anadian dairying, why they should
' not profluce a butter equal to ours.
I \ ours faithfully,

I CLKKVK BROS.

, Now, hon. gentlemen, there is a dairy interest
; in the south of Ireland. What I was quoting
I before was the Dublin market in the north ;

Digitized by

Google

206

The Commercial Policy [SENATK] of Canada.

this is the Limenck market in the south. Now,
there are the evidences of industry, and pros-
perity for the Irish fanner the condensed milk
industry, employing 500 hands to manufac-
ture the farmers' product. Have not we
got a capacity for employing 500 hands?
Have we not the cows to do it with ? Are
we not able to enter into a manufacture of
that kind ? Have we not more Cleeve Bros,
in our midst ? What is there to prevent
them from operating here ? Tt is the econ-
omic conditions under which the people of
Canada are working to-day. If we adopt
a free trade system the same as the English
and Irish people are doing, we can compete
for that magnificent trade, the evidences of
which are in our own blue books, furnished
by our own Government agents. Now, I
will give you some of the prices with regard
to horses, from the report of Mr. Down, agent
in Bristol :

The following are the prices such horses fetched
at some of the local fairs in September last. At
Bristol fair t —

Heavy draught horses, from £ 70 to £100
Hunters, from 5 to 6 years old. 80 to 1.50

Carriage horses, as pairs 150 to 250

Cart colts 40 to 50

Farmers' hacks, al)out 45 to 55

At Homcastle fair I notice that English hunters
made from £70 to 210 guineas each, and Irish
from 60 to 140 guineas ; one or two really first-class
animals n taking 200 guineas. There were but few
carriage horses on offer, and and they were sold for
about 150 >ruineas, the lowest price reported bemg
70 guineas. Surely these figures ought to entice
the Canadian farmer to try his skill at horse-
breeding.

That is valuable information for the Cana-
dian farmers — valuable information for us,
and these reports contain much more of the
same character. We will transmit through
the Hansard to the press the information
contained in this ; and I venture to say very
few people of the country have had the
facilities and opportunities of reading it.
But hon. gentlemen tt\ay say the difficulty
arises with regard to the freight rates. I quote
those furnished by Mr. Dyke of Liverpool.
Freight from Hanover, Germany: horses, $25
per head ; River Platte, $40 per head ; Canada,
$30 to $35 per head— $10 better than the
Argentine Republic, only $5 l>ehind Ger-
many. Then we take cattle : River Platte,
$30 per head ; Canadian $13 per head.
Sheep : River Platte, $4.50 to $5 a head ;
Canada, $2.50. Butter : Copenhagen, Den-
mark, $11.25 per tub: Hamburg, Germany,

I $11.25; Canada, Strathroy, Ont., $11.50
I and so on. You will see, hon. gentlemen,
, that in the matter of freight rates we are
I not behind other countries in reaching the
I best purchasing market the world oflFers and
we are not behind in capacity to produce,
and not behind in intelligence, and not be-
hind in physical power. Then what is it
that prevents us coming somewhere near the
figures that those farmers who are work-
ing under a free trade policy are cap-
able of doing, as evidenced in our pub-
lic reports? I say, hon. gentlemen, that
it is the economic condition under which our
farmers are working and the economic con-
dition under which the people of Canada are
working that creates the difference. Hon.
gentlemen cannot point to our freighting facil-
ities and say that they are the reason ; they
cannot say that we have not the soil, that we
have not as good and intelligent fanners as
the world can show ; but it is the taxes, not
only the taxes that are raised for the pur-
poses of carrying on the Government of the
country, but the hidden taxes which the
hon. Minister of Finance has let us into the
secret of, in the question of coal oil. It is
the taxes of $20,000,000* taken out
of the labour of the country, plus the hid-
den tax which make it a burden upon the
industrial life of Canada of $50,000,000 a
year. I venture to say that the $20,000,000
of taxes which the people have to pay towards
the revenue is increased by the hidden tax to
which the Minister of Finance has referred
1 to $50,000,000. Upon inquiry before such
a commission as I suggest, we will be able to
ascertain how far the purchasing power of
the country is borne down by the taxation
on labour, and how far it is borne down by
I the hidden tax which is consequent upon
I the protective policy, and have these hidden
taxes brought to light. There is one other
point I ought to draw your attention to, so
far as the labouring population of Great
Britain is concerned, and that is the econ-
, omy with which they are able to supply
! themselves. The Mark Lane Expresa is
' authority for the statement that Great Bri-
tain is the only country in the world that
gets the benefit of cheap wheat and cheap
I bread. In Great Britain today 280 pounds of
I Minneapolis flour is reported as being sold
for one guinea — that is, a trifle over $5 for
280 pounds of flour shipped from the Minnea-
I polis mills to Great Britain. Now, I saw it
I stated in a paper in St. John, N.B., which

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada,

207

is a purchasing market for the flour of the
country, that flour had gone up 20 cents a
barrel, and now touched ?5. In St. John,
N.B., flour is $5 for 200 pounds; in free
trade Great Britain flour is worth $5 per
280 pounds. There is the difference. Two
hundred and eighty pounds of flour, shipped
from our western country away across
the ocean to Europe, is sold in Great
Britain for $5 ; and the people of New
Brunswick, in the agricultural country where
the flour is grown and where the protection
is put on for the supposed benefit of the
people who eat the hveaJd and the people who
grow the wheat, have to pay the same for
200 pounds of flour as the people in Great
Britain pay for 280 pounds. But that is
not all. As to the price of bread the Mark
Lane ExjrresH is authority for the statement
that a four-pound loaf of bread is sold for
3|d. in the east end of London among the
labouring classes ; in the west end of Lon-
don it is sold for 7d. per loaf where every-
thing is done on a more expensive and extra-
vagant scale. In Chicago where the wheat
comes from, the cost of a four-pound loaf is
Is. I could hardly believe that such a state-
ment could be true that in Chicago, where
the wheat first leaves the elevator, the
price of bread is Is, and away in a distant
land, after paying freight that same article
is sold for 3|d. or 7| cents. I would not
believe such was the case if I had not come
across a clipping in the Buffalo Neivs, which
I will read for the information of the House
because it confirms what the Mark Lane
Express is reported to have stated in their
columns. This is from the Buffalo News :

Bread and butter are luxuries in which only
the wealthy people of New York can indulge —
working people are forced to buy bread a day old,
while the unemployed are thankful to get the
second t>aking that is old bread soaked and re-
kneaded with scrapings and baked asain. 8tale
bread sells at half-price and second baked at one-
third of .the regular price.

Here are the prices that prevail at the local
bakeries : — White breail, 1 ll>. 5 cents ; rye bread,
1^ lbs. 8 cents ; milk bread, \\ IW 8 and home-
made bread, 1^ lbs. 8 cents. Elgin butter made in
El^in, III., months ago retails at 38 cents. Oswego,
N. v., butter is 44 cents. Long Island butter, 55
cents.

Now, there are some of the prices that the
labouring people in the city of Buffalo have
to pay for their bread. In free trade Eng-
land the labouring population can obtain the
four-pound loaf for seven and a half cents,
and the labouring population in the city of

Buffalo have to pay twenty cents for their
four- pound loaf. Thank Grod, we have not
got to that yet in Canada. In almost any
part of Canada, you can buy a four-pound
loaf for ten cents.

A VOICE— Eight cents.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— Oh, no, not eight
cents ; a two pound loaf costs six cents.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I do not think
you can obtain a four-pound loaf of the best
flour for eight cents, but you can for ten. I
am not at the present moment comparing
these prices with Canadian pricas ; but if the
hon. leader of the Senate on behalf of th^
Government proposes to continue the protec-
tive policy and to extend to the farming
population the same protective policy that
they have been trying to foster our manu-
facturing power with, we may veiy soon
expect that the consuming population of
Canada will pay more than ten cents a pound
for a four-pound loaf ; because if protection
does anything it restricts competition ; it not
only restricts competition in those articles
which are protected in the first place, but it
restricts generally the interests of the coun--
try ; everything is worked from a high stand-
point, from a presumed high stand-point and
a high scale of prices.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— You ask the same
kind of protection as granted to the manu-
facturer. What are the protections they
should have would you suggest ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— An export bounty
on sugar ; an export bounty on butter.

Hon. Mr. LOWELL — I was not awai^
that our farms produced sugar before.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— This is what the
Government proposes to do. And one of the
last acts of last session was to prolong the
sugar bounty for two years to change agri-
culture from dairying to sugar growing. I
am very much opposed to it. I understand
the Government policy is to continue the
protective policy and rearrange the tariff
by giving the farmers protection for their
agriculture,

An hon. MEMBER — You do not approve
of that ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, because I
say it is no protection to agriculture and I can

Digitized by

Google

208

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

show it to you in the flour that goes to New
Brunwsick and is sold there for $5 a barrel.
We had to sell our wheat in the province of
Manitoba for forty-five and lifty cents and
the millers, who are protected to the extent
of seventy-five cents a barrel, derive the
profit from that, the farmer does not get it,
the export value in free trade England gov-
erns our price. Now, what is the result so
far as our gristing is concerned ? That there
are fewer men employed in gristing to-day
than in 1881 ; the census returns show that
there are fewer men by 200 employed in
gristing than there were in 1881.

^ Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think you might
go back twenty years and say the same
thing.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— If a protective
policy reduces the number of men employed
in such an important thing as gristing — I do
not mean from the manufacturer s stand-point
— but so far as the country is concerned,
where does their protection come in ? The
moment we limit the producing capacity of
our manufacturers we reduce the consuming
power of the people.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— We grow the
flour.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, ^ut the pro-
tection does not help that. What I am
endeavouring to show is that, under the free
trade policy where competition is encouraged
in every phase and in every form of life, so
that they are able to get their four-pound
loaf for seven and a-half cents, in the
country to the south of us they have to pay
twenty cents for the same four-pound loaf :
I refer to the city of Buffalo and the city of
Chicago.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM-- Skinflint cities

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes ; but that is
what protection does ; if we continue in the
career of protection we have been pursuing
for the last fourteen years, we must expect
to develop false commercial principles
among the people. Now, hon. gentlemen, I
wish to show what the history of the free
trade policy is, in its initiation in the year
1846, the manner in which it was brought
about, and the results which flowed from the
adoption of that policy. One of the first
movements toward free trade was made in
the year 1838, when new light came in upon |

several prominent men, such as Cobden and
Bright and others. They undertook a cru-
sade against the protective policy in Great
Britain, which had prevailed for 400 years
and which had gone through all kinds of
varying modifications and extensions during
that time. There was one peculiar and
notable change on one occasion — the import
of wool was forbidden in order to keep up the
price. Finding that that did not operate
a law was passed requiring that everybody
that was buried should be buried in woollen
shrouds, thus hoping to increase the con-
sumption. All sorts of plans of that kind
were resoH^ed to in those days, which may
be considered dark days in the light of to-
day.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN- Did they not
prevent them wearing calico dresses as well ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, and adopted
other means to attain the same end. A pro-
tective duty was given to the farmers under
the Corn Law. It culminated in 1846 by both
' the fanners and the manufacturers complain-
I ing of the burdens they were resting under.
It took eight years for Cobden and Bright
I to educate the people of Great Britain to
' the adoption of this new commercial idea
that had come into their minds — something
that the people had never realized, something
I that the people of the most intelligent and
I highly educated character had never rea-
lized as a sound policy, very much as many of
our friends here in Canada do not realize
that we can throw down our barriers while
I the United States keep up theirs, and yet
hold our own. But as I say, it took only
i eight years for Cobben and Bright and their
associates to convince the people from one
1 end of the British Isles to the other that
i this policy, which was adopted through their
I efforts and which was at that time purely
i an experiment, purely a theory — it only
took them eight years to convince the peo-
ple of Great Britain in opposition to the
strongest protective power not only of the
manufacturing population but of the landed
interest as well who were supposed to be
enjoying the benefit of the Corn Laws — it
only took eight years to educate them up to
a' sense of the advantages that would
accrue from the adoption of this policy,
I and who was it that adopted it 1 In
I 1841, 8ir Robert Peel, a Tory, fought
the battle at the general elections upon
I the policy of protection vermis this new

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MABCH 1, 1893 J of Canada.

209

theory of Cobden and Bright which had
been promulgated about two or three years
previously, and his Parliament and his gov-
ernment were returned to power by about
150 majority in 1841 pledged to protection.
They fought protection through the whole of
that Parliament for six yeai's up to 1846
step by step with those opponents, those
men who were trying to introduce a free
trade policy, until finally they themselves
became converted and were obliged to yield
to the conversion of the whole of the people
of Great Britain and bring about a free
trade policy in direct opposition to the po-
licy on which they had been elected five
years previously. I have taken the trouble
to select some of the quotations from the
speeches of the statesmen of that day, some
of whom are living to this day, and I will
first read to you what the Right Hon. Mr.
Gladstone had to say in 1844 or 1845. Glad-
stone's great policy was reciprocity such as
our present Government is proposing and
such as the Opposition have been proposing,
only in a different form, one unrestricted
reciprocity the other partial reciprocity, but
Cobden and Bright refused to have anything
to do with reciprocity. They denounced it
as a political makeshift. They said it had no
common foundation in the new commercial
theories they had taken up. But this is the
way that Gladstone argued the question.
He said :

So long as it is wise to exclude the products of a
foreign nation by tariflfs levied for the protection
of oar own people, against the competition of these
products, it must be unwise to admit them unless
that nation will pay for their admission by a cor-
responding concession in reganl to our productions ;
and that these nmtual concessions must be made
and guaranteed by treaty. Under those circum-
stances, he saiii that it was not wise to fetter the
(iovemment by an alistract declaration.

In reply to the above Lord Howick
said:

You ought to consider at once, and without
reference to foreign countries, the means of reduc-
ing your import duties, and if foi'eign countries
neglect to foUow your example, their own commer-
cisd loss will be their punishment.

You will see that Lord Howick had realized
what the full force of Cobden and Bright's
contentions were in the matter. Gladstone
claimed a longer trial for the existing law,
and our Finance Minister asks in his Budget
speech for fifteen years. Fifteen years more
protection, hon. gentlemen, will fix the
14

I country more firmly under the heel of mono-

I poly -

Mr. (iladstone claimed a longer trial for the
I existing law. He contended that the experience of
I its operation had fully indicated the statesmanship
' of the (loverament and had realized all their .ex-
j pectations. He condemueil the agitation of the
I League as productive of the moat mischievous con-
sequences, and declared that if Parliament con-
) tinned to argue the question it would unsettle busi-
ness, and be injurious to every interest in the
I country, and especially to the public credit. Amid
I great cheering from the Tory side, he claimed
1 stability for the decisions of Parliament, and
I trusted that the House would not disturJ) the
' settlement that had l>een arrived at after a fair
examination and adjustment of conflicting inter-
^ts, and which adjustment had been put into law
by the compromise measures of 1842.

This was the tariff policy that had been
initiated by Sir Robert Peel before the adop-
tion of the free trade policy. I have no doubt
that some gentleman will say that what I am
advocating is almost as mischievous.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Harmless.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I am glad to hear
I have so far converted the hon. gentleman.
There are the sentiments of one whom hon.
gentlemen will acknowledge to be one of
I the most distinguished statesmen the world
has ever known, even if they should differ
from his opinions. There are the sentiments
he expressed when he was following out the
protectionist theory only two or three years
before he changed his mind and adopted free
trade. Now what does the leader of the
British (government say to-day with regard
to that free trade question ? Speaking to the
electors of Midlothian in November, 1885,
he said :

*' I do not deny that there is distress, but it is
greatly less than it was before the free trade
reformation. When that reform began, trade in-
creased to a degree unexampled in the history of
the whole workl. Periods of distre-ss have been
due t) special causes which have been 1>eyond
human agencies to deal with. Such times of hard-
ship have l)ecoine almost, if not absolutely un-
known owing to the blessed effects of free trade.
The country has made a great step forward and
will not go 1)ack.*' Then pointing to the moun-
tains in the distance, he said : " You might as well
I try to uproot the Pentlands from their base and
fling them into the sea. "

, Now, there are the sentiments expressed

I by the Right Hon. Mr. (Jladstone in 1885.

I have read the sentiments he expressed in

1845, sentiments which were followed by a

, complete reversion of his policy and of the

Digitized by

Google

210

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada,

ideas' which governed him by adopting the
free trade policy promulgated by Cobden and
Bright in those days. Now, this is what Sir
Robert Peel said, in one of his speeches
when he had received the light from Cobden
and Bright, when he had made up his mind
to adopt the free trade policy and was argu-
ing for that policy :

Show me one relaxation, one removal of pro-
hibition which has not contributed to the advant-
age of the great Ixnly of conBumers. . I will go
further, I will show you that the removals of pro-
hibition have contributed, not merely to the
geueral weal and atlvantage of the consumers, but
that they are perfectly consistent with the per-
manent benefit and increased wealth of the pro-
ducer. He then enforced his challenge by some
startling statistics showing the increased importa-
tion of timber under the reduce<l tariff, which
increased supply has stimulated shipbuilding and
every trade of which wood was the raw material.
A reduction of the tariff on silk and its materials
has been followed by the increased prosperity of
the silk trade. For centuries the English manu-
facturer has been protected by a high tariff a^inst
the •* pauper labour of France." He exclaimed,
** Look at the state of your silk trade at this
moment." The French have long been accustomed
to plume themselves upon their silk manufactures.
But it may, perhaps, surprise a few of those who
are listenuig to me, to leani that last year, with
our relaxed tariff, we actually exported to France
more silk than we exported to the whole universe
in any year of the protective system, and there is
no branch of manufactures in which the same im-
provement is not observable.

The manufacturers of this country have free
access to the raw materials which constitute the
fabrics of their manufactures. I am entitled there-
fore, I think, to call upon the manufacturer to re-
lax the protection which he enjoys."

Sir Robert Peel then criticised as unjust
and unwise all the protective taxes on the
clothing of the people. He said :

In dealing with the clothing of the great body of
the people, I call upon the manufacturers of the
great aiticles of cotton, woollen and linen to relin-
quish their protection.

These are some of the sentiments which
show on what basis Sir Robert Peel was
arguing when that great free trade struggle
was going on in 1846, and after he had be-
come converted. Those remarks show you
how similar the question is before the people
of Canada to-day, and not only before us but
before the people of this whole continent.
It only shows you that exactly the same dif-
ficulties and troubles were pressing upon the
people of Great Britain in 1845, that are
pressing upon the people of this continent
in 1892. How was that policy brought
about ? To show you how the leaders of both

parties gradually united 'in establishing free
trade, for you must recollect the people of the
country were agitated from one end to the
other : the Free Trade League was holding
meetings in every city and town, and money
was being raised and the greatest activity
ever seen in political agitation was going on
throughout the United Kingdom. On one
night alone there was $1,250,000 raised by
private subscriptions to aid the eflForts being
made to overturn the protection which was
holding down the people of England, How
was free trade eventually brought about ?
By a union of Lord John Russell and Sir
Robert Peel, in the interests of the country.
To show how the leaders of both parties
gradually united in the interests of the
country to establish free trade. Lord John
Russell said :

Considering the plan of the Minister as a great
measure, a measure that is to lay the foundation of
a completely new principle witn regard to our com-
mercial legislation — the principle being neither to
foster one trade nor the other, out to leave them to
"flourish or fade " according to the energies and
skill of the people, and believing tliat is the sound

Frinciple, 1 am prepared to give every support
can to the plan brought forward by the right
hon. gentleman.

That was the first time that Lord John
Russell had given in to the principles on the
floor of the House of Commons, but Sir
Robert Peel c^uld not persuade his Grovem-
ment to adopt that policy, and the conse-
quence was he resigned. With the excep-
ti(m of Sir James Graham, they all refused
and continued to be protectionists, and all
resigned. Then Lord John Russell was called
upon by Her Majesty to form a Government,
and after a fortnight trying to form a Gov-
ernment in a protectionist parliament, he
gave it up, and confessed his failure, although
Sir Robert Peel wrote to the Queen, and told
her that if Lord John Russell could form a
Government out of the material existing in
Parliament at the time, he would give him
his cordial support and co-operation. Not-
withstanding that, he failed, and Sir Robert
Peel was again called on to form a new Gov-
ernment. He then invited all his old col-
leagues to come in and help him to carty
out his policy, and if they did not wish to
carry it out, then he would select other men,
and on his invitation his old colleagues
with one or two exceptions, the Duke of
Buccleugh and Lord Stanley, joined
him. With the same Parliament, and almost
the same Government that had been elected

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada.

211

on a protectionist policy five years before
they had all become converted by the argu-
ments of Cobden and Bright and the Free
Ti*ade League, and these great Tories, the
Duke of Wellington and Sir James Graham,
Gladstone, and all of those statesmen that
Sir Robert Peel had for his colleagues,
turned over and became converted to the
free trade idea, and there they have stood
to the present day. As Gladstone said, you
might as well try to move the Pentlands
from their base as to try to get the people
of Great Britain to depart from the policy
of free trade which they adopted in 1846.

When Sir Robert Peel resigned upon the
refusal of his cabinet to unite to bring about
the new policy so powerfully argued for by
jCobden and Bright and the free traders, he
said that he would oflfer no factious opposi-
tion to the Government or those who had
thrown him out of office. He promised to
support Lord John Russell's administration
in carrying out the now commejcial policy.
He said : " If that be the policy which will
be pursued, I shall feel it my duty to give
to his Government my cordial support. I
presume that Her Majesty's Government will
adopt that policy — and that if other coun-
tries choose to buy in the dearest market, it
will be no discouragement to them to permit
us CO buy in the cheapest." He then advised
Lord John Russell to abandon the " treaty "
and " reciprocity " system in his foreign
commercial policy. " I trust," he said, " that
the new Government will not resume the
policy which they and we have found so
inconvenient, namely, haggling with foreign
countries, instead of taking that independent
course which we believe to be conducive to
our own interests."

How applicable that is to the subject before
us to-day, to the commercial and political posi-
tion that we occupy here in Canada at this
time ! Those very words might be uttered here
on the floor of the House of Commons or in the
Senate and be applicable to the commercial
position of the people of Canada at this time.
To show you how completely many states-
men had become converted in those days,
Mr. Robinson had moved when a member of
the House of Commons for the enactment of
the Corn Laws in 1815 : as the Earl of Ri-
pon in the House of Lords he moved the se-
cond reading of the Bill for their repeal in
1846. He confessed in a straightforward
way that he had been converted ; and anti-
cipating the charge of inconsistency, which

he knew would be fired at him, he said: —
*' I know you can extract from the records
of this House language and sentiments of
mine diflferent from those I utter here to-
night ; but I take no shame to myself, be-
cause the only time to regret any change of
opinion is when it proceeds from a bad mo-
tive." The hopes of the protectionists now
rested upon Lord Stanley in the House of
Lords and to the cry of "On Stanley, On"
he was urged to upset the Bill in the Lords,
but the Duke of Wellington and others had
so much confidence in Sir Robert Peel's judg-
ment they passed it. The same Lord Stanley
(at least I presume it was the same), as Lord
Derby, was waited upon some 20 years ago
by a deputation of farmers to petition for
legislative relief in some form to check agri-
cultural depression, told the deputation " If
you cannot farm profitably with the plough
you must then try the spade." His views had
changed, although closely identified with the
agricultural interests. He no longer looked
upon protection as a panacea for depression
in the value of land or its cultivation.

Then again Sir James Graham was twitted
for his change of opinion by some members
of the House of Commons : they said if the
Government have changed their views, let
them manfully own it, and Sir James
Graham said : " We have changed our Wews
and, when I say that, I remove all the
speeches that I made in favour of protection
before." The day that the Anti-Corn Law
Bill passed the House of Lords, Sir Robert
Peel was defeated on the Irish Coercion Bill.
Lord Brougham,in the course of debate at the
end of his remarks, paid a fine tribute to
" the public virtues, the prodigious powers
of mind, and the immense courage " of Sir
Robert Peel, who, he said, "had cast away all
private and personal considerations, had
disregarded his own interests, had given up
his right U) power and superiority, and had
exposed himself to the most tempestuous
and troubled sea that the political world
had in modern times ever exhibited, who
had given up what to an ambitious man was
much— the main security of his power ; he had
surrendered what to a calculating man was
much, his influence and authority with his
party, and he had given up what to an amiable
man was much, viz., private friendship
and party associations. AH these sacrifices
he had made with liis eyes open in order to
discharge what he deemed a gi^eat public
duty." Then, agaui, hon. gentlemen, we have

Digitized by

Google

212

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

the utterances of Sir Robert Peel when he
was announcing his resignation. He said :

Sir, I shall leave office, I fear, with a iiame
severely censured by many honourable gentlemen,
who, on public principle, deeply regret the sever-
ance of party ties ; I shall surrender power, severely
censured, I fear again, by many honourable
gentlemen, who, from no interested motive, have
adhered to the principle of protection as important
to the welfare and interests of the country ; I shall
leave a name execrated by every monopolist, who,
from less honourable motives, maintains protection
for his own individual benefit ; but it may be that
I shall leave a name sometimes remembered with
expressions of good will in those places M'hich are
the abode of men whose lot it is to labour, and to
earn their daily bread by the sweat of their brow —
a name remembered with expressions of good-will,
when they shall recreate their exhausted strength
with abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter be-
cause it is no longer leavened by a sense of in-
justice.

Those are the noble words uttered by one
of the greatest statesmen to whom has ever
fallen the lot of guiding the destinies of
England. It was under such circumstances
that the free trade policy under which Great
Britain exists to-day was brought into ex-
istence in the manner I have shown. It is
an interesting record ; it is interesting to
recall the history of those times, because we
move in cycles. The same thing that op-
presses the world to-day will oppress them
fifty years hence. You cannot put old heads
on young shoulders ; we all have to buy our
experience. What I contend is, we have
bought our expeiience in Canada for four-
teen years, and I think that the time has
come when it is wise for us to consider that
a change is necessary, and in the direction
of the policy which has brought prosperity to
that country. They have set us an example ;
they have helped to civilize and chiistianize
the world, have the free and liberal principles
which govern the commercial life and the
political life of the people of Great Britain.
Now, it will be necessary to show how far
the prosperity of the people of Great Britain
has been promoted by the adoption of the
commercial policy of 1846. I wish to show
what the increase of trade a as, following the
adoption of the commercial policy of 1846.
I have here a small l)ook called " Farrar's
Free Trade," by Sir Thomas Farrar, giving
all the various stages through which various
countries have gone, and also the increase
from year to year in British commerce, and it
isfroip that I amquotingin putting before you
facts and figures in order to show what pros-
perity followed upon the adoption of free

trade in England. The total trade in 1810
was $665,000,000. Thirty-four years after-
wards, in 1880, it was $3,485,000,000. In
l890, ten years later, it had again made
another leap to $3,720,000,000. The im-
ports in 1840 were $310,000,000; thirty-
four years afterwards they had jumped to
$2,055,000,000. The exports in 1840 were
$210,000,000. In 1882 they had jumped
to $1,115,000,000, and in 1890 to $1,570,-
000,000, an increase of nearly $500,000,000
in ten years. Then take the shipping, Brit-
ish sailing vessels in 1850 — the navigation
laws were not repealed until 1850 — they
had the same protective policy for their
coasting trade and navigation that we have
in Canada to-day. In 1850 they had 17,000
sailing vessels with three millions of tonnage
and 414 steamers with a tonnage of 108,000
tons. In 1880 the sailing vessels remained
stationary as far as numbers were concerned,
but increased in tonnage by one million.
The steamers had increased from 414 to
3,789. Now you see that the free trade policy
in thirty-four years had increased the number
of steamers by 3,375. The sailing vessels
remained stationary with regard to
numbers, but increased a million of tons.
The steamers, from 1880 to 1889, again
increased 2,000 vessels, with an increase
of tonnage of nearly two millions of
tons. What is the history of the shipping
of Canada in the same period ? A decrease.
Although we are second in importance so far
as our coasting and fishing trade are con-
cerned, and we have the best facilities for
carrying on a magnificent trade all over the
world, and attaining the same result that has
produced such great benefits for Great Britain
under a free trade policy. We have inland
navigation from the head of Lake Superior to
the ocean, and the same ocean facilities are
open to us for conducting the same tirade that
the people of Great Britain have developed in
the last half century. Nevertheless we have
decreased our shipping from 1,300,000 tons
to 1,000,000 of tons in the past decade,
while Great Britain has increased the numl^r
of steamers owned and employed by her to
eai-ry the trade of the country by 2,000 vessels •
with an increase of two millions of tons in
tonnage. There is an illustration in comparing
free trade with protection. Then again take
the tonnage entering and clearing. The excess
of British tonnage entering the United King-
dom for 1850 was 3,545,000 tons. That is. the
excess of British over foreign, and in 1880

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada,

213

that had increased from 3,500,000 to 23,900,-
000 — that is the excess of British over
foreign. In 1840 the total of all ton-
nage entering and clearing was : British, 6,-
940,000 tons ; foreign, 2,949,000 tons. The
British tonnage clearing between 1840 and
1880 has increased from six millions of tons
to forty-one millions of tons of British ves-
sels alone, and seventeen millions of tons of
foreign vessels. There we have a total tonnage
of 58,000,000 in 1890 against 9,000,000 in
1 850. There are thirty years with 50,000,000
tonnage increase in the carrying trade of the
people of Great Britain. Now, hon. gentle-
men, I would like to say, with regard to our
own increase of tonnage entering here, that
the returns show a very great inci'ease, a
veiy large increase, but what is that in-
crease ? That increase is not the foreign
trade such as this of Great Britain ; recollect
there is no coasting trade in this ; but the
vessel that leaves Seattle and goes to Van-
couver is given as entering and clearing.
The ierry that runs between Vancouver and
Seattle is called entering and clearing, and
all the vessels of that kind are entering and
clearing.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL— It is not a ferry.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is not what we
call foreign trade ; it gives a false impression.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL.— It is from one
countiy to another.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON.— There is nothing
dishonest in putting it in in that way, but
it is perfectly honest for me to draw atten-
tion that it is only a daily service across
fifty or sixty miles of ocean between two
countries that lock their doors on ene ano-
ther's trade ; and we have the same kind of
service between Rochester and Cobourg and
aci-oss the Niagara and Lake Erie and
across the St. Lawrence.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH.— The same as
between France and England.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL.— And half a dozen
other less distant points.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON.— There are indi-
vidual cases in Great Britain where probably
the distance is just about the same. But
Britain does not lock her door ; she directs
the world's highway ptist it. Now we know
perfectly well we have no trade with our

5,000,000 in Canada like the trade of Great
Britain, and that when we put 43,000,000
entering and clearing, alongside of the
58,000,000 tons of Great Britain entering
and clearing, it should be explained how
those figures were arrived at, and that it has
not the same bearing nor the same meaning
at all as the 58,000,000 tonnage that has
been developed by the people of Great
Britain under their free trade policy.

Hon. Mr. POWER- -If the hon. gentle-
man would be kind enough to state the
amount of the imports and exports of Gseat
Britain as opposed to those of Canada, a
better estimate could be formed of what the
ships carried.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— We Know what
our imports and exports are. I think they
have reached something like $240,000,000
our total trade ; whereas the total trade of
Great Britain is $3,750,000,000.

Hon. Mf. BOWELL - Better make it per
capita while you are at it, and it will be
complete.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is easy to ar-
rive at it }}er capita ; but I will give the hon.
leader the per capita of our export trade. It
has decreased j^^r capita $2 between 1 880
and 1890, our export trade has decreased
from $24 to $22 per head under the protec-
tion policy, and our import trade has re-
jnained stationary, and the export trade of
Great Britain has increased by the sum of
'$250,000,000, while the export trade of
Canada has fallen $2 per head in the last
decade. The Trade and Navigation Returns
, show that, by reference to the last Year
; Book issued by the Department of Agricul-
, tre for our information. And now I will
I give the hon. leader of this House some
I figures given out by Sir ^John Lubbock,
I president of the Board of Trade, who occupies
one of the most prominent positions. At a
meeting of the London Chamber of Com-
merce, Sir John Lubbock, in an address on
I some of the recent aspects of commerce, gave
the following figures to show to the people
I of Great Britain that the free trade policy
, was doing all that it could be justly called
upon to do. He said :

•* In 1881 the total Britiah trade ^m £C94,0(K),-
000 ; last year it M'as £744,000,000, an inci-ease of
.tT>0,000,000." Then he says, ** but hon. gentle-

Digitized by

Google

214

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

men may say that other countries have done juat
as well, and he compares the total trade of Great
Britain with the total trade of France and the
United States, two protective countries, one in
the immediate neighbourhood of Great Britain,
and the other on this continent, and he showed
that the total trade of France was £383,000,000
in 1880, and £368.000,000 in 1890. The United
States was £311,000,000 in 1880, and £340,000,000
in 1890." This last estimate is different from the
other, because he has not included what he has
called the foreign trade. "

Hon. Mr. DEVER.— Very nearly double.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON - Veiy neurly
doifble. Now, what does that mean ? That
the decrease in that decade for France was
£15,000,000 ; that the increase for the
United States was £29,000,000—60,000,000
people wit^ an increase in the producing
power of the people by immigration of
£12,000,000 throughout that decade. Their
increase was only £29,000,000, and the
United Kingdom had an increase of £49,-
000,000. Those are the figures he gives out
to compare with the two protective countries.
Then he- shows what the exports' of France
are. In 1880 they were £138,000,000 and
in 1890, £150,000,000 ; the United States,
£171,000,000 in 1880, and £176,000,000 in
1890 ; the United Kingdom, £223,000,000
in 1880, and £262,000,000 in 1890. Now,
hon. gentlemen, the increase in France was
only £12,000,000, and the increase of the
expoi-ts of the United States was only
£5,000,000 and the increase of the United
Kingdom was £39,000,000. Now, I have
given you the figures with regard to the*
exports and imports. We all know what
our own exports and our own imports are.
They amount to about $240,000,000 ; and
those are figures that cannot be refuted, be-
cause they are the figures given by one of
the most distinguished men in Great Britain
upon trade questions, and a man who sat at
the head of that great conference that was
assembled Ia«t year from all parts of the
British Empire to consider the commercial
question, to consider questions of interest
between the colonies and Great Britain.
Sir John Lubbock was the chairman of that
convention ; and it was to quiet the agitation
that had arisen in Great Britain in conse-
quence of the fair trade movement that he
stated those figures for the information of
the people of Canada, and for the guidance
of the people of Great Britain themselves,
and I think comparing what Great Britain
has accomplished, what Canada and what

France have accomplished, and what the
United States have accomplished, it is a gi*eat
showing in favour of the policy of free trade
in Great Britain.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^)— You have not
given us the increase of population during
that period.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I will give you
that. I am glad you reminded me of that.
The increase of population during that period
has l)een two millions.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— More than
that.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, sir.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— I know l>et-
ter.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The population
was 34 i millions in 1880, and the population
in 1890 is, I think, 37 millions, so it is about
2,500,000 of an increase. Now, I wish fur-
ther to draw the attention of the House to a
tabulated statement that has been given to us
by Sir Thomas Farrar upon the trade policy
and the increase of trade in Great Britain,
and there are four items put down here to
show an evidence of the prosperity and the
increased prosperity of the people of Great
Britain : that is the consumption of spirits,
the consumption of sugar, of tea and of
flour ; and T am vei*y happy to be able to
say here that although there has always
been a very great deal of talk in consequence
of the free trade policy, that the drink bill
of England is paying the debt and paying
the taxation, the evidence in this i^turn
shows that is not the case. In 1840 and
1846, when free trade was brought into
force, the consumption of spirits was I'Ol
gallon per head of the population, and in
1884, which is the last date to which this
return is bi*ought down, the consumption of
spirits is 1 -04 gallon, so there was only an
increase in the consumption of spirits of 03
per head of the population between 1844 and
1884.

Hon. Mr. DEVER ^?6.50 a head, to-
bacco and spirits ; that is higher than ours.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Then in the con-
sumption of tea, it shows that it increased

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada.

215

from 1 J lbs. in 1846 to 5 or nearly 5 lbs.,
tV of a lb. less than 5 lbs. in 1884. The
consumption of sugar increased from 19 lbs.
in 1846 to 72 lbs. in 1884 ; the consumption
of flour increased from 40 lbs. in 1846 to
251 lbs. in 1883. So that you see the in-
creased prosperity of the people of Great
Britain did not indicate an increase in their
luxuries or dissipated habits, but it re-
dounded to the benefit of the solid comfort
of the people by an increased supply of
those comforts of life which added to the
enjoyment and prosperity and comfort of
the great labouring population that pro-
duces the results I have shown you in the
trade and commerce of the people of Great
Britain, ^ow, hon. gentlemen, they have
to purchase those supplies from countries
like Canada and the United States and
India and Russia, and all over the world ;
they have to be transported and pay car-
riage, and they are able to purchase those
supplies, able to pay the transportation rates
and able to supply themselves with that
enormous consumptive power which is
gi*eater than Canada possesses and greater
than the people of the United States
possess, certainly as regards sugar, cer-
tainly as regards tea, and I think as
regards flour : and their purchasing
power is so gi-eat under the free
trade policy that they are able to increase
their consumption of those articles that con-
tribute to the prosperity and comfort of
their families, in consequence of the free
trade policy which they are working
under. There are many more interesting
statistics that I could bring before you, but
I think that I have brought quite sufficient
to show you that so far as the prosperity of
the people of Great Britain is concerned
under their free *rade policy, there is
no country on the face of the earth that
enjoys the same advantages, the same bene-
fits from high wages, the same purchasing
power of those wages as the people of Great I
Britain enjoy under the free trade policy or
economic conditions that they are working
under to-day, and I have become so thoroughly
convinced from reading the statistics, from
studying the conditions, that if the same
economic conditions were applied to the I
labour and industry of Canada the same i
beneficial results would flow to every indus- 1
trial worker in the country ; and out of that j
industry that is engendered in consequence
of that policy, the wealth of the country |

would increase and be distributed in an
equitable manner over the whole population
of Canada according to their physical and
intellectual power. Now I have dealt with
the population of Great Britain; I have
shown you how the free trade policy was
brought about ; I have shown you what
prosperity has issued from it and what
prosperity the people of Great Britain
have enjoyeii and are enjoying to-day from
it. Now I have to take up the question of
the protective policy of Canada in order to
show how far that has failed in its purpose to
satisfy the people of Canada in the hopes
and ambitions that they set out to satisfy
when they imposed that national policy in
1878 ; that is by adding to the purchasing
power of the people of Canada, by adding to
the population of Canada, to supply a home
market for the agriculturists of Canada,
by adding to the producing and exporting
power of the country as shown by the trade
returns, and by adding to the general pros-
perity, or rather the equitable distribution of
profits, so far as shown through trade and
navigation returns and other ireturns given
to us for our information. With that object
in view I have prepared a return here, hon.
gentlemen ; I have taken the statistics of
1881 and the statistics of 1891, and have
put them side by side in this return, so far
as the number of hands engaged in the
manufacturing industry of the country is
conberned. I cannot tell how many men
are engaged in the farming nor in the min-
ing nor in the lumbering ; but we have a
fairly complete and accurate return so far
as the manufacturing is concerned.

Hon. Mr. POWER— No; not accurate.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Well, at any rate
they are given to us. We have the word of
the hon. gentleman who leads this House
for it, that we can accept them as facts. I
presume he is prepared to accept thenti as
facts, and that is all I want him to do. So
far as anything I may have to say may
create an impression upon his mind to open
it to a more liberal view as to what the com-
mercial policy of Canada should be, if I
could accomplish that I would feel myself
the proudest man in the countiy.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It would require a
surgical operation.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No ; it is not
such a heavy contract as you think for, per-

Digitized by

Google

216

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada,

haps. I have already shown you he is half
a tree trader, because he has taken the duty
off tin in order to protect the people who are
canning ; and all I want is that the Minister
of Trade and Commerce shall yield to the
petitions of people from all p^rts of Canada
to take the duty off binder twine and off
iron, and take it off all these things, and
when he responds to all the petitions sub-
mitted for his consideration, he will have
adopted the very policy I am arguing for
this afternoon. But I regret to say that the
hon. Minister of Finance is going to take his
stand upon protectionand cast free trade to the
winds. I am afraid there is very little hope
for the free binder twine that Mr.
McCarthy is asking for, or the free any-
thing else that has been moved for, because
you cannot make a stand between ; there is
nothing between protection and free trade.
You cannot injure one factory and keep up
the rest. You cannot deprive Mr. Stairs of
the benefit of the investment of his capital
and the people who are employed under him,
and leave all the rest as they are ; that
would not be a fair thing ; but if you take
off all the duty and give Mr. Stairs an
opportunity to work under a free trade
policy, I have no doubt he will be one like
Cobden and Bright, he will toss up both
hands for free trade ; but I think he cer-
tainly will be very much aggrieved, the same
as the gentlemen engaged in the production
of coal oil will be if they are going €0 be
sacrificed in the public clamor for a general
red uction . As I said, there is nothing between
free trade and protection : you have to go
the whole hog or nothing at all ; and the
whole hog to go is free trade with the world ;
that is going to carry the country through
the next ten years with a great deal more
^clat than any other decade of our national
life has done.

An hon. GENTLEMAN— You are a
prophet.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON.— Yes, I am a
prophet. When I get these figures before me
and see what has been accomplished
in the past ten years, I think when
you get these figures before you, sir,
you will feel that you have some justi-
fication for saying I am a prophet. Now,
I have prepared these figures, and I have
di\-ided the names of those that are en-

gaged in the manufactures of the country
under three heads. I have made a differ-
ence between those who are engaged in the
preparation of our own home raw material,
such as lumber, such as our saw-mills, grist-
mills, planing-mills, paper mills, fish canning
and curing, our creameries and cheese, our
ship and boat-building, etc. Now, those are
what I call preparing our own home raw ma-
terial for market ; and what do I find 1 1 find
in the saw-milling 42,000 men engaged in
1881, and in 1891 52,000 men engaged;
that is 10,000 out of the 112,000 that the
hon. Minister of Finance has advanced as an
argument where the National Policy, has
done its work. Now, that does not, to my
mind, show any increase in the manufactur-
ing power of our lumber, but instead of
sending our board timber and square timber
to Great Britain, as we uscmI to do before

1880, we are now sawing it into deals and
into lumber and sending it to England or
the United States. It does not show or prove
any increase. It merely shows a transfer of
the labour that used to be engaged in
the square timber — because we all know that
has fallen off and been transferred into the
saw-mi(ling — to manufacture deal or lumber
for the foreign markets : so I do not consider
that is any increase, or that that can be
considered any contribution to the 112,000.
In the flour and gristing, I find 6,476 in

1881, and in 1891, 6,296, or 180 less in 1891
than in 1881. That is not a good showing
for one of our natural industries. Not-
withstanding the development of our great
North-west Territories and that we have
added enormously to the growth of wheat
there and built mills there, if these returns
are correct we are employing 180 less men
in one of our natural industries than we
were in 1881. In planing and moulding
there has been an increase. In the paper
mills there has been only a very slight in-
crease. Then we come to fish-curing arid
canning, which I referred hon. gentlemen to
the other day. I have got it down here. In
1881 nobody is returned as fish-curins^ and
canning. In 1891, 29,000. If you add
that to the 10,000 saw-milling, you have
39,000 accounted for out of the 112,000
which we have heard advanced as an' argu-
ment in favour of protection.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— 52,000 in saw-milling,
you said.

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Foliey [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada.

217

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— An increase of
10,000, I said : I call it only a transfer
from square timber to saw-milling. Then
fruit-canning seems to be a new industry
brought in: in 1881 nothing, in 1891 2,946.
You cannot say protection has brought those
men into existence.

Hon. Mr.
that about.

READ— Protection brought

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I think I can give
you an instance in regard to the fruit can-
ning in Great Britain. There was a friend
of mine who had a farm of 280 acres, and
every acre of that 280 was down in small
fruit — strawberries, raspberries, gooseberries
and every conceivable kind of fruit. In
consequence of the cheap sugar coming from
Germany a great impetus was given to fruit-
canning and preserving in Great Britain,-
and there was an agitation on the continent
to do away with the sugar bounties. Brit-
ish statemen were urged to put on a corres-
ponding duty to the export bounty of the
continent, and in anticipation and expecta-
tion that that duty was going to be put on,
to check and counteract the effect of the ex-
poit bounty, just to the extent of the expec-
tation that it was going to be put on down
went the price of fruit. It was free sugar —
it was free competition that enabled that
man to cultivate that 280 acres, and he em-
ployed 400 pickers on that farm, simply for
the purpose of taking his part in the farm
industry ; it was the free competition of the
world's markets op6n to them, and the cheap
sugar they were enabled to obtain from the
continent, that sustained the industry. Now,
I mention that in order to show that it was
not pi-otection that brought in that 3,000
men employed in fruit-canning. The pro-
tection is keeping them down. It is pre-
venting them expending their energies and
increasing their industries, and increasing
their foi-eign trade and profit by export from ,
Canada — what they might accomplish if they
were working under a more economic con- 1
dition.

Hf)n. Mr. BOWELL.— The hon. gentle- ,

dustries in the jam and confectionery lines
which more than compensated for the
lass of employment through the refineries.
I had prepared this return of the number of
people employed in the preparation and
manufacture of home materials for market
and they numbered in 1881, 88,000; 1891,
142,000, or an increase of 54,000 in that
period. But, as I have shown you, 32,000
of those are engaged in fish-curing and fruit-
canning, and 10,000 in lumbering, which
accounts for 42,000 out of that number.
Then we come to the manufacture of raw
material, imported or partially prepared
materials, which are manufactured and may
be considered as brought into existence par-
tially by protection, such as our woollen mills,
our cotton mills, our sugar refineries, boiler-
making, &c., and all those small industries
that have been thus brought into existence.
I find that in our woollen mills between 1881
and 1891 there is only an increase of 600
men.

Hon. Mr. COCHRANE— What are the
numbers ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON -In 1881 it was
7,778; in 1891 it was 8,403. Then I find
that in iron and brass fitting for some reason
or other there is a decrease. There were
2,558 employed in 1881 and 1,367 in 1891.
In carving., *fec., there were 408 employed in
1881 and in 1891 only 215, Now we come
to our agricultural implemenjis that we have
plumed ourselves upon, and in 1881 the
census returns show there were 3,656 men
engaged in the manufacture of agricultural
implements. In 1891, ten years afterwards,
we had only 3,887, or 200 men more employ-
ed in the manufacture of agricultural imple-
ments than there were in 1881. Now, what
has protection done for this industry so far
as increasing the home market for the people
of Canada and for the agricultural produc-
tions of Canada ?

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN — Did it not reduce
the price of farming implements ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Not so much as

man does not surely pretend to say that the i .- , , , , ^, , .

. _^;^: ^c „ J,.*.. „ iJ! i^« ^- I " ^'® "^ "^ ^"^ markets open.

imposition of a duty on sugar, in order to
meet a foreign bounty system, was not justi-
fied ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON--I mean to say
that cheap sugar brought into existence in-

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Prove that.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I will tell you if
you take the duties off all that enters into

Digitized by

Google

218

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

manufacture of a binder you will find that
the manufacturers of Canada can manufac-
ture that binder twenty-five per cent cheaper
than they are able to manufacture it now.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— Is it not a fact
you can buy a binder, a reaper or a mowing
machine for 50 per cent of what it cost before?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— They are
cheaper here than in the United States.

Hon. Mr. BQULTON— You cannot put
me off the track in that way. If you want
to go into the question of the depreciation
of prices that has taken place since 1878 I
will explain that. I wiU show* that there
has been a depreciation since 1873 of 60
per cent in every article the world requires
for its consumption, such as coal oil, tea,
sugar, coffee, iron, steel — everything the
world requires for its consumption — so it is
no argument at all to say that binders are
cheaper here now than they were before.
Have we got our agricultural implements as
cheaply as we could get them under a free
trade policy ? — that is the question.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH—Have you
added that 60 per cent to the value of our
exports ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, we have not,
and i will tell you why, because while we
will sell a binder to the people of Canada
for $100 we have to sell' it for $80 in
Australia or Russia whenever we send it
abroad to compete with the manufactures
of other countries, but there has been no
depression in the value of our main exports,
such as lumber, fish, cattle, etc. Our exports
of manufactures, however, are sent abroad
at the expense of the people of Canada, and
I will prove it to you. I have not gone into
the question of the cost of American binders,
because they have a protective policy in that
country. In the North-west some people
prefer an American-made binder to a
Canada binder and will pay a higher price
for it. It sells higher because there is 35
per cent duty on it.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY- -Why do they
get it, then ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Because they
fancy that kind of a binder. I have been

in shoemakers' shops and have realized that
American manufacturers must offer some
I special inducement to sellers to shove off
I American goods on purchasers. Probably
I the very clerks in the shops may be getting
50 cents a pair for persuading you to buy
' American goods instead of Canadian goods.

■ Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— It is the fault
of the people.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is, but that is
no argument. What I claim is, that if you
were to adopt a free trade policy we would
not only be able to get our binders 35 per
cent cheaper, but we would be able to in-
crease the manufacture in Canada ten-fold
by making them cheaper, because we could
send them abroad to Russia or Chili or any
country that requires them. We could teach
the people of China and India to use agii-
cultural implements.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Why
you not send them there now ?

could

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I will explain
that ; but 1 would first say, that if you
change the economic condition of Canada
you will find more men like Mr. Eddy, who
has for forty years made Canada his home
and built up an industry here that is a
pride to the country. British and Ameri-
can capital will compete for the establish-
ment of factories and the development of our
raw products, and trade and population will
increase, our fine wat«r powers will be
opened out and electricity developed and the
revenue, paying power of the people through
the increase of population and the increase
of wealth will mcrease. At present in the
manufacture of a binder, which is a sample case,
every single thing that enters into the manu-
ture of a binder has to pay a duty of 30*per
'. cent — bar iron a duty of 35 per cent. The
t nuts 'and bolts have to pay 30 per cent.
1 The only things that are admitted fi*ee are
' the steel teeth in the binder. There is very
little timber used, but that timber we may
possibly have to import, so the manufacturer
of agricultural implements has to pay, we
will say, an average of twenty-five per cent
on every single article he uses in the manu-
facture of the binder. The artizan who is
working on it has to pay twenty-five per
cent on every article he consumes.

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 1, 1893] of Canada,

119

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— Have not the
Americans to pay 65 per cent ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I am not speak-
ing of the Americans. We are independent
of the Americans. What we want to do
is to manufacture cheaper than they can,
and beat them in the markets of the world.

Hon. Mr. KAULRACH— And make this
a dumping ground for the refuse of the
United States?

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think the question
of order should be raised. It is most unfair
that these interruptions should be continued.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— I think there
should be a limit to the discussion of a ques-
tion which is outside the business of this
House, and especially when the hon. gentle-
man talks — I will not be so unparliamentary
as to say rubbish, but something very like it.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Order !

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— Well, it was too
much to listen to.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— The hon. gentle-
men must not consider that the business of
this House is limited to the divorce court. I
am sorry that the views which I am pressing
on the House should have touched up my
hon. friend that he is anxious to choke me
off. It is the best evidence that my argu-
ments are sound and are telling. My hon.
friend from Belleville tells us he introduced
the principles of the National Policy in the
Senate before they were introduced any
where else. Why should not I introduce the
principles of free trade and perhaps induce
my hon. friend from BellevUle to be the
mover of a Bill to remove the protective
features of the National Policy from
the Statute-book. I think that the
Senate is a very proper arena for such a dis-
cussion. We have the experience of age
and of being engaged in all the varied pur-
suits of the country ; and the hon. gentleman,
if he will reflect for a moment that to-day
large numbers of the population of Canada
are petitioning for a removal of duties, will
cease to consider my remarks rubbish. I
think the time of the Senate can be properly
utilized by bringing forward questions of
this kind. It would be profitable to appoint
a committee to take evidence on the subject.
They could get Mr. Massey, of the Massey

Manufacturing Company of Toronto, and
other manufacturers of the country, to come
down here and tell the House what their
views on the subject are, and perhaps if they
accorded with mine, the hon. gentleman
would not then consider them rubbish. What
I was going to, say with regard to the binder
is this — supposing a binder costs $60 to nake
it in a Canadian' factory — supposing that
every single thing that enters into the manu-
facture of the binder is subject to a duty of
twenty-five per cent, and all the labour
engaged in the manufacture of the
binder has to pay twenty-five per cent
on .the articles required for consumption ;
take that duty off the articles re<iuired to
go into binders and off the articles con-
sumed by the labourer, and the manufac-
turer will be able to make that binder for $45
instead of $60. Now, what a difference
that would make in entering the markets of
the vvorld — Russia, Australia and otder
parts of the world that require these imple-
ments— if we could enter them with a
binder costing $45 instead of one that costs
$60 I One .price means that export is pro-
hibited ; the other means there is an en-
couragement to export. Now, that is the
way that I would explain the very question
of the manufacture of our binders, dnd you
can apply that in any direction to our
manufactures. The hon. leader of this
House, in his position of Minister of Cus-
toms, I have no doubt, will be able to recall
an incident where a manufacturer came to
him and said : We want the duty knocked
off the wire that we require for manufacturing
spring beds. The Minister of Customs made
i him bring evidence before him to show that
no one was manufacturing that kind of
wire in Canada. When he had gone to the
trouble to prove that that kind of wire was
not made in Canada, the Minister released
that Avire from duty and gave it to that
' manufacturer free of duty. What was the
result 1 The result was that he has opened
j up a large trade with Birmingham, and he
is sending his spring beds home to England,
I and has found a market there which was
I not open to him so long as he had to pay
1 the duty of 3n per cent on wire that en-
, tered into the manufacture of his spring beds.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— There never was
such a duty.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I do not remem-
ber the exact amount of the duty, but what-

Digitized by

Google

220 Hamilton Provident Guarantee [SENATB] and Loan Society's Bill.

ever it was that duty >^ as taken off. He
gets out from Birmingham now the iron bed-
stead which he puts the wire mattress on
and he pays for this by sending his spring \
matresses to Birmingham. There is a ease
where the article imported is paid for direct-
ly by the product of the industry of the
people of this country. He utilizes our
water power in Quebec, our beech and
maple, and with the aid of the free importa-
tion of wire he maintains a brisk trade with
Birmingham ; a further reduction of other
duties will increase his profits and the com-
forts of his labour. Carrying out this thec»ry
of removing the burden of taxation from the
people of Canada, we increase enormously
the manufacturing industry, to the great
benefit of all classes. Returning again to
tables before me, I find that those engaged
in the manufacture of imported or partially
prepared raw material in 1881 was 31,369,
and in 1891, 45,348, a difference of 14,000.
I come now to another portion of the return
and that is the manufacturing incidental to
local necessities, such as printing, publishing,
tinsmiths, tailors, carpenters, electric light-
ing and gas works and such industries, and I
find that in those there were engaged in 1881,
98,000 ; and in 1891, 115,000, an increase of
17,000. What I contend is that in the first
and last of those returns those engaged in
preparing our raw material for market and
local necessities were not in any way helped
by protection ; cur fruit and our fish, &c., are
natural products, our logs are raw material
— they are part of our capital, something
that all countries do not possess. What I
want is to have the labour of the lumberman
cheapened by the remission of the duties that
enter into his calling. The same with regard
to grist mills.

is to incorporate a company to indemnify
those who lose through burglary. It is a
sort of insurance company. The details of
the Bill will be fully explained before the
Committee on Banking and Commerce.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH
novelty in this country ?

-Is not this a

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— Yes.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I shall move when
that comes up that Nova Scotia be ex-
empted from the operation of the Act.

The motion was agreed
was read the second time.

to, and the Bill

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN
revenue ?

-What about the

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I will show you
to-morrow how the revenue is to be raised.

The debate was adjourned until to-morrow.

DOMINION BURGLARY GUARAN-
TEE COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved the second
reading of Bill (15) "An Act to incorporate
the Dominion Burglary Guarantee Company
(Limited)." He said : The object of the Bill

THE HAMILTON PROVIDENT AND
LOAN SOCIETY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington) moved
the second reading of (Bill 19) " An Act re-
specting the Hamilton Pro3'ident and Loan
Society." He said : The object of the Bill is
to increase the capital stock of the company
and to reduce their borrowing powers.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (38), An Act respecting the Western
I Counties Railway Company, and to change
I the name of the company to the Yarmouth
I and Annapolis Railway Company. — (Mr.
I Power.)

I Bill (25), An Act respecting the Grand
Trunk, Georgian Bay and Lake Erie Rail-
way Company. — (Mr. Power.)
I Bill (31), An Act respecting the Central
I Counties Railway Company. — (Mr. Clemow.)
Bill (20), An Act to amend the Act in-
1 corporating the Buflfalo and Fort Ene Bndge
I Company. — (Mr. Ferguson.)

The Senate adjourned at 6.10 p.m.

Digitized by

Google

Ballantynt [MARCH 2, 1893] Divorce Bill

221

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, March 2nd, 189S,

I Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I intended to
' make a similar objection.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— In that case I ask

TheSPEAKERtooktheChairat3o^clock.iP^™!«T^ ^ withdraw the motion, with

permission to remodel it.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

FREIGHT RATESON THE CANADIAN
PACIFIC RAILWAY.

MOTION DROPPED.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON rose to move the
following resolution : —

Whereas the competition of the Canadian Pacific
Railwa\ is a source of irritation to the Government
of the United States, and threatens to interfere
with the international courtesies that have been
reciprocal in the bonding privilege, and has called
fortn from the President of the United States a
recommendation to restri«^t the bonding privileges
between the two countries in the transport of
(^anadian trade through the United States terri-
tory.

And whereas, the construction of that branch of
the Canadian Pacific Railway, intended to diviBrge
from their main line at or near Regina, in the
North -wesyb Territories, to the United States
boundary, is for the purpose of connecting their
main line with the Sault Ste. Marie system of the
Canadian Pacific Railway, and will have the effect
of diverting the trade and tratfic of Canada north
and west of Regina through the United States, for
about one thousand miles, instead of through
Canadian territory, and competing with the rail-
wavs of the United States for the traffic through
that one thousand miles of country.

And whereas, such a divergence is not in the
interests of the people of western Canada, and
renders to them no competition, while weakening
the earning power of the main line of the C^anaclian
Pacific Railway, between Regina and North Bay,
and enhancing the rates on their produce seeking
an eastern market.

Resolved, That in the opinion of this House, the
branch line starting from Regina, and running
south-easterly to connect with the Sault Ste. Marie
system of the Canadian Pacific Railway, should l)e
cancelletl before constniction on the saitl branch
line is commenced.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I wish to call the
attention of the House, and particularly of
the leaders, to this motion as one that can-
not be put. It is a motion prefaced by
three preambles, and, according to Rule 15
of the House, no motion prefaced by a pre
amble can be received by the Senate.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think the hon-
gentleman's objection is well taken.

The motion was dropped.
BALLANTYNE DIVORCE BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN moved the adoption
of the report- of the Divorce Committee on
Bill (C) " An Act for the relief of Martha
Ballantyne." He said : I have very little
to say in moving the adoption of this report.
Both parties in these proceedings, the peti-
tioner and the respondent, belong to the
farming class, and had known each other
for several years. After some three months'
better acquaintance they were married, in
the year 1862. She had resided, with her
father in the township of Scarborough up to
the time of her marriage. The respondent
resided on a farm which belonged to him in
western Canada. They were married, and
she proceeded with her husband to his farm
in the west. They did not live happily al-
most from the first. LTnpleasantness arose
between them in consequence of letters ad-
dressed to her from home not coming to him,
and he resented this. He was an improvi
dent man and made a mortgage on his place,
and about five months after his marriage he
consented to his wife going home to get
some money from her father to pay off in-
terest due on the mortgage. She accord-
ingly went home and saw her father, repre-
sented the state of facts, and got him to
give money, some 8150, towards the interest
due on the mortgage, which she gave to her
husband. This unpleasantness, between them
continued and increased, and on two occa-
sions he actually drew a knife across her
throat, thi^eatening to kill her. However,
his necessities increased, and his inability to
meet his mortgage increased with them, and
he allowed her to go home a second time,
and urged upon her to get a considerable
sum of money from her father towards
the liquidation of at least the interest
on the mortgage. She went home, but her
father, as subsecjueiit events proved very pru-
dently, did not see his way to furnish more
money. When she returned home the un-

Digitized by

Google

222

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

pleasantness between them was largely in-
creased. However, as his necessities pressed
him owing to his want of industry and pru-
dence, he urged upon her to go back again
and try to get more money from her father.
When- he found the case was hopeless he
suggested to her to go home, and, as he would
lose his farm, to pass the winter with her
father while he endeavoured to procure an-
other pl6U3e to settle upon. He purchased a
ticket for her and sent her home. This was
I think in the fourth year of her marriage.
She took with her one of the children and
remained at home for several months. In
the meantime she addressed several letters to
her husband which were not answered. She
subsequently found that he had left the coun-
try and gone to the United States. There
he went through a ceremony of marriage, it
would appear, with another woman, and after
several years she found that he was living
with this woman as his wife in Hamilton.
This she did not discover for several years
after, when she determined to institute pro-
ceedings in order to free herself from the
position in which she was. She had not suffi-
cient money for a time, but subsequently she
was able to prosecute her case, for on the
death of her father she became entitled to
some property under his will. So soon as she
coidd command the necessary amount, the
petitioner entered these proceeidings to obtain
a divorce, having ascertained from the
minister who married her that her husband
was living in a state of adultery with another
woman in Hamilton and had several children
by her. The facts set forth in the preamble
to tlie Bill were abundantly proved before
the committee, and the committee were at

one in thinking the petitioner was entitled
to the relief she claims. The corrections in
the Bill as printed were made in accordance
with the evidence produced before us.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

THE COMMERCIAL POLICY OF
CANADA.

DEBATE CONTINUED.

The Order of the Day being called :

Resuming the adjourned Debate on the motion
of the Honourable Mr. Boulton :

That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire
into the statistics of the country, and its industrial
progress, M-ith the view of assimilating our com-
mercial policy with that commercial policy that
has increased the prosperity of the people of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland
in such a marked degree : with powers to
send for persons and papers, and to employ short-
hand writers.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON said :— I concluded
my remarks yesterday upon the motion for

j the appointment of a Select Committee in
referring to some statistics that I have com-
piled, or rather a condensation of Bulletin
No. 8, of the manufacturing returns given to
us by the census commissioner, and I have

; put them in such a form that they can be

I readily understood : —

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MAECH 2, 1893] of Canada.

223

CANADIAN MANUFACTURES.
Preparation of home raw material for market.

InduBtrieft.

Saw milling.

. Flour and gristing.. . . . . .

Planint; and mouFding. . . .

8a8h, door and blind ....

Wood turning

Paper milL» .

Meat curing

FiAh-curin^ and canning

Fniit-canning

Coopering

Packing case

Rolling stock

Creameries and cheese. . . .

Tallow refineries . .

Vinegar and pickles.

Ship and boat-building . .

Block and spar.

Sail and tent-making . .
Starch, soap and candle. .

Lime and cement

Brick, potteries

Marble and stone

Salt and superpho6[>hate. .

Smelting works

Oil refineries

Tanneries

Hatters and furriers .

Total.

42,085

6,472

633

2,878

604

1,588

3,277

3,i94
2,154

4,848

620

2,665

6,816

287

974

5,941

2,350

88,441

52,148

6,296 I

2,818 I

5,646
784 I

2,102

1,964 I
29,039

2,546

3,152 I
323

4.900 I
3,432 I

7 !

383
3,961

120

412

742
3,256

9;9i8
344

1.901 !
347

4,262
1.507 I

142,810 ' 22,421

5,762

2,468

327

594

125

518

4,961

1,480

1,734

621

ia3

1,224

$11,020,012

7,000,000

799,000

1,734,000

170,765

1,917,000

190,459

864,689

103,230

201,621

41,690

816,000

991,000

2,200

96,000

226,000

40,250

173,765

243,230

293,272

$18,532,896

1,784,000

7,083

123,144

1,145 I

798

190

1,011,742
87,800
435,000
518,000
735,000
184,750

355,303

1,253.954

9,944,110

62,140

73,500

1.510

724.323

124,152

23,466

62,589

20,618

'24^606'

1,012,184

1,580

29,809,275 | 47,755,103

9
5

60
4
6

31
2i

10
326
2
2
9
6
3
9
7
3

9
11

8
16

Manufactures incidental to local necessities.

Industries.

No. of
Employ^.

No. of
Employe,. ^^^^- ^

No. of

1881.
i

Printing and publishing } 5,311

Bookbinding I 1.086

Blacksmithing 12,461

Foundries 7,789

Tinsmiths 3,685

Tailors and clothiers 18,029

Bakeries 3,968

Carjienters and joiners 8,713

Watchmakers 778

Boots and shoes 18,949

Cabinet and furniture 5,867 i

Carriage-making 8,713

Gunsmiths 59)

Harness and saddlery 2,911 ,

Electric light ".

Gas works 512

Total 98,756

1891.

7,540
1,498

12,053

12,614
5,184

21,190
4,962
9,762
1,663

17,853
7,463
9,087
68
3,055
545
1,673

1891.

697

9,395

619
1,718
3,962
1,653
4,321

644
5,384
1,336
3,337
42
1,548

115,590 j 34,865

Value of I Value of
Plant. Exports.

$ $

3,358,600 j I 89,838
439,400 !/

1,262,100 1

4,300,000 129,414

839,000 . 15,826
545,933 I M.625

609,900 16,823

1,127,000 i 2

532,444 ; 28

1,849,300

1,035,046

1,131,635

24,500

243,078

1,695,000

2,799,000

76,639

73,921

22,291,930

6,785

473,871,

Digitized by

Google

224

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

Manufactures from imported raw material or partially prepared material.

Industries.

No. of
Employes.

Woollen

Cotton

Sugar refining

Engine building

Bouer-making

Musical instruments

Engraving, &c .

Iron and brass fitting

Chemical works

Coflfee and spice

Wire- works

Carvinff, &c

Agricultural implements . . .

Stoves and fumacen

Shirts and collars

Brooms and bruslr.

Paper l»g8 and boxes

Confectioner}'

Gunpowder

Glass works

Pianoaction ...

Press stamps, &c

Mathematical instruments .

Cutlery

Edge ools

Type foundries

Patterns and moulds

Washing machines

Baby carriages

Mattresses . .

Hosiery

Spring bed

Safes and vaults

Belting and hose

Whip and trunk

Lam])s, picture frames . . .

Nail and tack

Ro]^ and twine

Electro-plate

Total

Aerated vv'aters.

Breweries

Tobacco

Distilleries

Total

1881.

7,778

3,527
938

1,061
330
941
474

2,.558

223

145

418

3,656

2! 731
957
258

53
309

546

59
1,760

32
698

43
941
529

No. of
Employes.

' No. of
Establish-
ments.

31,369

401
1,411
3,757

285

5,854

1891.

8,403

8,033

1,937

1,257

425

2,172

746

1,367

900

162

862

215

3,887

447

30,057

636

964

24,90

573

908

113

81
682
100
6
130
1R9
180
822

78
180
143
854
443
869
764
739

■« I

45,348

^«)3 I

1,865 I

5,288 ,

404 I

8,205

1891.

842
21

8
18
29
86
48
55

134 I

25 I

16 I

211

156

279

3
14

2
12
27

3
22

4
33
56
22

58
169
14
19
10

3,494

169

162

.'^3

Value of
Plant.

3,440,992

6,115,981

1,846,000

426,000

149,450

213,524

343,228

620,000

195,483

63,265

484,016

50,000

933,216

117,000

241,467

56,501

110,075

410.152

282,800

37,000

29,000

19,000

1,500

29,800

300,500

85,500

2,900

25,000

20,000

20,660

158.000

10,150

24,000

67,000

ia3,528

^ 60,905

314,000

531,200

77,000

18,021,743

511,100

1,186,000

450,000

282,000

2,429,100

Exports.

107,000

884,846 400

135,048 242

119,063 ' 70

408,079 ' 25

..... 7

18 •

403,957 18

' 20

' 7i

6.975 52
90

1,614,968

17,611

1,113

47,404

100

66,134

RECAPITULATION.

Home raw material 88,441 , 142,310

Imported raw material 31,369 45,348

Local industries i 98,756 115,5tW

Breweries, &c 5,854 , 8,205

Uuenmnerated industries 28,353 51,494

Total 252,773 362,947

22,421 29,809,275 47,755,1(»3

3,494 18,021,793 1,514,968

34,865 32,291,930 ; 473,871

393 2,429,100 66,134

14,646 7,871,949

75,819 80,415,047

49,810,076

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy tMAfiCH 2, 1893] of Canada.

225

I compare the number employed in manufac-
turing in 1881 with the memufacturing popu-
lation employed in 1891. As I said, I have
divided the list into three difterent parts —
those who are engaged in the manufacture
of our own raw material — material that is
indigenous to the country — raw material that
all other countries do not possess but most
other countries require, such as our lumber,
the fruit we are able to grow in this latitude,
fisheries, etc., etc. Our fisheries, as the hon.
gentleman fi-om Prince Edward Island, last
year, in the course of discussion informed us,
are the second largest in the world. We
have the second largest fisheries and these
fisheries have to be drawn upon by countries
outside. The fisheries require no protection.
Those who are engaged in manufacturing
lumber require no protection. Anything
you will do in the shape of relieving them of
taxation is a profit to those who are engaged
in fishing, in lumbering, and in farming, and
mining in Canada, and it is in order to obtain
for the industrial population of the country
a relief from taxation, and remove it from
the shoulders of labour and put on to
the profits of the country the means of
public revenue. I have to crave the indul-
gence of the House for appearing, perhaps,
tedious in presenting my remarks, but it is a
great question, and I am discussing new
principles in our commercial life, and it is
largely for the purpose of enabling the press
of our country, who receive copies of our
Debates, to get the information in a condensed
form, that I am presenting these facts to the
House, facts gleaned through a considerable
amount of study and work on my own part,
and for that reason, I crave your indulgence
if I do take up more time than under ordinary
circumstances would be warranted. I repeat,
those who are engaged in the preparation of
our raw material for markets was in 1881,
88,000, and in 1891 was 142,000. There is
an increase there of about 54,000, but, as you
will see when the return is published, 29,000
of those are engaged in fish-curingand canning
who did not appear as such in the census of
1881. The next return is manufactures inci-
dental to our local -necessities, which include
the printing and publishing of our newspapers
in our cities and towns, book -binding which
is a local industry, blacksmithing which is a
local interest. I would draw your attention
to this fact, that in Canada in 1891, we have
400 less blacksmiths than we had in 1881.
What does that show ? The demand for their
15

labour is not equal to what it had been. Who
keeps the blacksmith going mostly 1 Is it not
the demands of the farmers — shoeing their
horses and putting on their tires, repairing
their machinery ? Here we find, after four-
teen years of the protective policy which we
have been pursuing, that there^ are 400 less
blacksmiths than there were in 1881.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— All the work
is done by machinery now.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That is the ex-
cuse generally advanced, but I find there is
one and one-third blacksmith to every in-
dustrial establishment in the country, and
therefore I do not think the question of
machinery comes in at all. A blacksmith
is necessary in the neighbourhood of every
community. I find there was 9,39*5 estab-
lishments with 12,000 men working in them.
Then I find our tailors and clothiers have
not increased -to any extent. There were
18,000 in 1881, and 21,000 in 1891— an in-
crease of only 3,000, notwithstanding the
increase of population during the decade.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-
sewing machines?

-Where are the

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I daresay that
machinery comes in, but if a protective
policy does not increase the consuming
population what does it do? The Indians
of the North-west were rich when they had
a million buffalo to themselves, but they
would not make a nation. Was not pro-
tection imposed in order to keep our popu-
lation at home and to draw a manufactuiing
and consuming population nearer to our
I farming lands in order to increase the pro-
fits of the farmers of our country ? If it
does not do that what does it do? We
know it increases our burdens, and whether
our numbers are diminished or slightly in-
creased through machinery or other causes
I do not know. We should keep pace with
machinery. We find that other countries
arfi increasing their population. Notwith-
standing the drain through emigration and
other sources, England increased 3,000,000
in the last decade, but here we find the ma-
terial industries necessary for our popula-
tion, such as making boots and shoes, mak-
ing clothing, attending to our blacksmith
shops, and so on, that they are positively
decreasing. What do we find so far as

Digitized by

Google

226

The Commercial Policy [SENATEJ of Canada.

boots and shoes ai^e concerned ? In 1881
there were 18,949 men engaged in Canada
in the manufacture of boots and shoes, or
connected with shoe-shops, and in 1891 there
were only 17,853, or 150 men less employed
in our boot and shoe trade in 1891.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— The price of
boots and shoes fell off.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Well, I do not say
what it is ; explain it any way you like ; but
what I do say is that if the National Policy
has not increased the population or increased
our prosperity, then it should be removed,
and the taxation incidental to it should also
be removed. Even in the carriage making
there is only an increase of 300 men ; and
there is only an increase of 55 in the number
of men engaged in the harness and saddlery
business. Now, hon. gentlemen, there are
facts and figures side by side, and when the
Hansard appears you will be able to judge
for ypurselves. I have picked out some of
those industries only where the figures show-
ed an excess in 1881 ; but I am pointing out
to the House that in those material indus-
tries upon which the comfort and the pros-
perity of the people depend, the statistics
show a decrease, and, therefore, there must
be a general decrease in either the purchas-
ing power or the requirements of the people
in order to cause that decrease ; because, hon.
gentlemen, understand that those men engag-
ed iii those industries are limited to the
wants of the population that live in the coun-
try. They are not exported — there is nothing
in that list which is exported. Very well,
hon. gentlemen, the numbers of men engaged
in those industries are 98,000 in 1881, and
115,000 in 1891, or a general increase of
17,000 in the people engaged in those
industries during the past ten years, and,
of course, electric light, which accounts
for 545 of them, and gas works are included
also as manufactures. Then take the
last list, which is those engaged in the manu-
facture of raw material which we import from
abroad and manufacture in this country for
our own people. Now, the number of nien
engaged in that manufacture was 31,000 in
1881, and 45,000 in 1891. With regard to
our agricultural implements, in 1881 we had
3,656 employed in their manufacture, while
in 1891 we have only 3,887. Notwith-
standing the development of the North-west
Territories, notwithstanding the general in-
crease which the prosperity of an agricultural

country like Canada should produce, we
have only 200 more men in our machine
shops in 1891 than in 1881. Now, these
are facts, which, if the census is correct, we
cannot get over, and as I said before, if the
population has not increased, then we must
devise some means in order to increase our
population, in order to increase our local
centres, in order to increase the manufactur-
ing power of the country, in order that it
may not be limited merely to the wants of
5,000,000 people, which the Trade and
Navigation returns show us is naturally the
case. The returns show that the power of
manufacturers to produce, whether from
imported or raw material, or from any of
those things that are brought into existence
under the National Policy, is mainly limited to
the 5,000,000 people who are in the country.
Now, with reference to those industries
which might be claimed to be brought into
existence by the National Policy, such as
woollens, cottons, sugar and so on, what is
the condition of their employment to-day ?
It is that there are only 14,000 more men
engaged in those industries in 1891 than
there was in 1881.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH—What are the
products of those industries?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— They are not put
down in the census returns that came under
my notice. I am now taking bulletin No. 8,
which gives the number of employees and the
number of establishments and the amount
of capital invested in the plant, not in bricks
and mortar or real estate, but merely in the
plant there is an increase in those manufac-
tures which might be claimed to be sustained
; by the National Policy, of only 14,000 men
over what were employed in 1881. Now, is
it wise to keep up the National Policy to
impose a taxation with all its hidden
. features such as were explained to us
and acknowledged to by the hon. Min-
I ister of Finance? Is it wise for us to
I keep up that great burden of taxation upon
I the labour of the country for the sake of an
I increase of 1 4,000 men ? If the taxation was
I imposed in a different way so that it was
lifted off the shoulders of industrial labour
in the country, would not that difference of
14,000 men have been 114,000 men under a
different method of operating, under a more
economic system, under which we could en-
courage the development and growth of
our manufacturing industry ? Take the ex-

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MABCH 2, 18l>iJ of Canada.

227

perience that has been shown to us by that
great mannfacturing people in Great Britain,
and what they have accomplished in the
development of their trade, not only in the
early history of their free trade development
but in the past decade, and compare it with
what we have been able to accomplish in
the same direction with good facilities, and
if we study this policy of free trade in the
same way as it was studied between 1838
and 1846, we will come to exactly the
same conclusions, that we have capacities
for our own people and our own country to
produce the same beneficial results for the
people of Canada that have been accom-
plished by the people of Great Britain, and
in that respect we will be assimilating our
tariff with that of the mother country,
while competing with them to sell the
same goods in the same markets with
them. While inducing that competition
and entering into that competition with
them they will feel no ill-will, because they
will have the benefit of competing in our
markets for whatever they have to sell at
the same time. It is only when we exclude
them from our markets and compete with
them in other markets under some special
advantages, under some reciprocity treaty
which makes a discrimination against
them, it is only then that their ire wq^ld
be raised, when they saw that an undue
advantage was being taken; but they are
too manly to complain of competition
when that competition is put upon a fair
basis by opening our markets to them as
well as to other people. I should have said
also that some of the cotton industries that
have been brought into existence under the
National Policy account for 6,000 of those
14,000 of an increase, but there is this to
be said — that in the cotton industry they
largely employ women and children. The
average proportion in our cotton industry
is two-thirds women and children and one-
third men. Our census returns show us
that the employment in our manufacturing
is 267,000 men, 100,000 women and child-
ren, and in the development of our cot-
ton industries it is more women and
chOdren that are being employed, an in-
crease among the women and children more
than anything else, and that is not what I
call a happy feature in a country like this.
We are not so over-populated that we can
afford either to work our children at too
early an age or take the mothers and
15i

daughters away from home where they can be
much more profitably and better employed
in caring for those children. A system
that brings that state of affairs into force by
artificial means is not a wise one. If we
leave it to the open competition of the world,
I the cotton manufacturers will find that by
selecting a specialty and perfecting its manu-
facture, they will be able to hold their own.
But to bring it into existence by imposing
j taxation is restricting the national develop-
ment of the people of Canada. Now, there
have been some figures presented with
regard to this manufacturing industry by
! the member from W^est Ontario in the
the House of Commons. I have not fol-
lowed him as to the exact method by
which he came to his conclusions, but the
conclusions he has come to show a very
large amount of hidden tax in the manufac-
turing of raw material. I give you also
some figures shortly; in 1872 >ve imported
cotton to the extent of $10,207,000 ; we im-
ported cotton wool for manufacturing pur-
poses, raw material, to the extent of
$392,000 worth, as shown* by the Trade
and Navigation Returns for 1872 ; in
all $10,599,000. The population in
1871 was 3,695,000. Therefore our
purchasing power for cotton was $2.87 per
head. That was our purchasing power in
1872. In 1891, instead of importing the
manufactured article, we imported only $4,-
000,000 of manufactured cotton, and we im-
ported 46,000,000 lbs. of raw cotton valued
at $3,673,000. Now, if we take the popu-
lation of 1891, which is 4,832,679, and gauge
it by the purchasing power of 1872, which is
$2.87 per head, we arrive at a consumption
equal to $13,869,000. Now the difference
between what we paid for the 47,000,000 lbs.
of cotton wool and the $4,000,000 worth of
manufacturing cotton we brought into the
countiy is $6,203,000 ; and therefore it will
be assumed that $6,203,000 is made up of
the cost of manufacturing that cotton. Now,
I believe the cost of manufacturing cotton
in Great Britain bears a proportion of 75
per cent for the raw material, and 25 per
cent for the manufacture. If it costs in
Canada more than 25 per cent to manufac-
ture that cotton, then the people of Canada
are paying so much more for the manufac-
ture of their cotton by whatever it may be
over that 25 per cent. I will not vouch for
the correctness of my figures so far as the
25 per cent is concerned, but I think I have

Digitized by

Google

228

The Oommercial Policy [SBNATEJ of Canada.

seen it somewhere that that is the proportion
of the cost of manufacture to the cost of the
raw material, and if that is the case it shows
a very large amount of money now is being
earned by the manufacturers in the prepara-
tion of that 46,000,000 lbs. of cotton-wool
before it reaches the consumer in Canada,
and to that extent the people are taxed not
only for the revenue, on the $4,000,000 in
the manufacture of cotton, but for the hidden
tax on the cotton-wool.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quints)— Have not we
exported a large amount of cotton manufac-
tures ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No ; we have ex-
ported $334,000 out of a consumption of
$13,869,000.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)'— $320,000
worth.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, out of an
assumed production of $13,869,000. Hon.
gentlemen will see that that is a very
small record t6 show of our ability to
reach the markets of the world ; and
how is that exported? It is exported
in spite of the protective policy. It
is exported at the expense of the people
of Canada. I venture to say that if you
could see the invoice prices of that cotton
as it went abroad, that it is sold abroad, in
China or wherever it may be sold, in compe-
tition with British goods at a much less
price than they sell it at to the people of
Canada ; and they are using those markets
as a slaughter market for what they cannot
get rid of inside the ^ve millions of people
and we have to pay for that export.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man is altogether in error. It is a different
class of goods exported to China altogether
from that which is consumed in Canada —
made expressly for the market.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON —In that case, of
course, I have no means of drawling a conclu-
sion as to prices : if this is a special article
and not sold in Canada at all, simply sold
there, I cannot compare it, but what I do
mean to say, is that the cotton that is sold
to the people in Canada is protected by 25
or 30 per cent, while in the outside market
they have to sell that cotton in competition
with free trade England, and it must be

sold at a much less rate than the rate for
which it is sold to the people of Canada.
Now, I explained, hon. gentlemen, very
much the same thing with r^ard to the
manufacture of some of our agricultural
implement?. I showed you in the instance
of the binder how, by removing the taxation
and reducing the cost of making that binder,
we increased our export to the markets of the
world, very much cheapening to the manu-
facturer of that binder the process by which
he has to manufacture. So it applies to all
other kinds of articles we make in our facto-
ries and that there is a demand for in the
world's markets. Now, there is another very
important industry, and that is the manufac-
ture of paper ; in that is enveloped the great
question of the export duty on our pulp wood,
which has created a considerable amount of
interest in our public journals as to the
policy of putting on an export duty or keep-
ing off an export duty as it is at present.
I am strongly in favour of putting on such
an export duty as will protect the manu-
facturers. There, I say, we have an op-
portunity of protecting our manufacturers.
I endorse the principle of protecting our
manufacturers in that way, but I object to
the principle of protecting our manufacturers
if the people have got to pay for it. If I
h&y^ to pay for the protection I do not want
it. However, this is a thing that does not
come out of the pockets of the people of Can-
ada. I thoroughly appreciate the fact that no
argument is of any value at all unless you
can show how Canada is going to secure her
revenue to pay her just debts and develop
the country as we have been developing it
in the past. So far as the manufacture of
paper is concerned, there is this to be said,
that it is almost entirely now made out of
what we call pulp wood ; and we have as fine
an area of pulp wood as it is possible for any
country to possess, which is still untouched.
Wehaveourextensivesprucebushandwehave
it in the neighbourhood of our chief streams
with as fine water-powers as any country in
the world. On the Ottawa River, on the Trent
River, the rivers flowing through Quebec and
the rivers through the west, and the east we
haveasfinewater-powersascanbefound in the
whole world ; and we have the raw material.
Now, England imports every year $10,000,-
000 worth of paper, or partially prepared
paper ; if not paper, pulp for the purpose of
making the paper. And how much do we
export ? Do we supply one single dollar's

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 2, 1893] of Canada.

worth of that paper that England imports
from abroad ^ No, she receives it from Nor-
way, Sweden, Germany, France and other
European countries. Here we have
facilities where competition for that trade
can be carried on? We have cordwood
in our bush, which is selling for
$1.50 a cord ; and why is it we cannot
export from Canada any portion of that
$10,000,000 worth that England is willing to
receive and wants to receive in order to help
her to carry on her manufacturing industnes?
How is it that we do not supply any of that
at all? I Mdll tell you ; because the taxation
that presses upon the industries of the coun-
try and the labour of the people who are
engaged in our industries is so great that
they cannot manufactui*e at a price to
compete in the open market of Great Britain.
I will try and show you how that taxation
produces this effect. Take the machinery of
one of those mills : take Mr. Eddy's mill at
Ottawa or that still larger one in Quebec,
near Lake Champlain, which has a capacity
of 100,000 pounds a day. I saw in the
Empire a very interesting account of Mr.
Eddy's mill, in which it describes the capa-
city of his mill here as being 40,000 pounds
a day. Now^ I venture to say, hon. gentle-
men, that the machinery that it has been
necessary to import to make the paper in
Mr. Eddy's mill has cost at the very least
$150,000 before he could start to make paper.
Now, hon. gentlemen, that machinery pays
a duty of 32 or 33 per cent before Mr. Eddy
can touch it. What does that mean ? That
means he has got to add at the very start
$50,000 to the capital that it is necessary
for him to possess to conduct those opera-
tions. •

Hon. Mr. MclNNES— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That amount at
6 per cent interest is a permanent tax put on
the industry amounting to $3,000 a year.
That is the way the cost of increasing the
manufacturing of our paper is arrived at ;
but not only that, hon. gentlemen, he has to
import all kinds of things annually, such as
hoop-iron and various things of that kind ;
and I venture to say that if we were to ap-
point this committee and were to invite
Eddy or any one connected with that indus-
try to come before us and tell us what he
has to import, we would find that the duties
he has to pay to the Government annually

in the conduct of his business amount to
$5,000 a year, in addition to the $3,000 a
year, which is a permanent tax upon that
industry, which I call a tax upon capital.
That is a tax upon the investment of capital
in this country ; before any sti*anger can
come into this country, before one of our-
selves who may have the means to invest
and the enterprise" to go into it, can go into
a business of that kind, we have to hand
over to the Dominion Government $50,00p,
in order to obtain the permission to carry
on an enterprise which will be of great
advantage to the people of Canada. Now
there is the tax upon capital ; the otFier
is the tax upon labour; and in this way
national industry is taxed. Now I am ask-
ing that this tax shall be imposed in another
manner, lifted off the industry, off the capital
that goes into the industry and off the
labour that goes into it, and if that is
done you will see how the exports of Canada
will reach the markets of the world by the
ships that we are able to build ourselves.
Take another case to show how the tax upon
capital exists. There are our great import-
ing houses that import, we will say, half a
million worth of goods annuaHy, and sell it
to the people of Canada. What is the effect
upon our importing houses ? Before they can
handle one dollar's worth of those goods and
show them to the retail merchants who come
there to inspect them some three or four
months before they require them, they have
to pay 32, or 33, or 35 per cent upon the goods
imported. We will assume one of our houses
in Toronto or Montreal has to import
$500,000 worth of goodsevery year, that that
is their capacity in business ; they have to put
down $80,000 or $100,000, in addition to the
price of the goods before they can enter int4>
that business.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No, they seU
by samples before the goods actually arrive
in the country.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— If the hon. gen-
tleman knows anything about it at all, he
knows these goods have to be imported long
before they are required, that the merchants
send out their buyers nine months before the
demand for them and they then send their
orders, and they have to have them in their
warehouses three or four months before they
are transported to the retail establishments.

A VOICE— Oh, no !

Digitized by

Google

230

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Well, sometime
anyway. I do not care how long it is ; at
least they have to be possessed of $50,000
to $100,000 capital more than the cost of
the goods, and therefore, to that extent it is
a tax upon the investment of capital in that
particular industry, and so it is with our
paper industry. Now, the manufacture of
paper is becoming a great industry ; it is
taking the place of lumber in a great many
things. A great deal is now made of card-
board that was used before as luml)er, and a
great deal is made of paper, and the con-
sumption of pulp is annually increasing.
E^en oysters, hon. gentlemen, now are con-
veyed in paper bags, papier-mach<^ pails, etc.
We have now within our own borders all
that we require for the successful establish-
ment of a paper mill. But what is the
condition to-day ? The Government of the
United States charges us $6 a ton upon the
export of chemical paper ; they charge $7 a
ton on some of the paper, and $2.50 per ton
upon what is called mechanical paper ; but
we permit the American manufacturei*s to
come in here and cut down our timber and
to take it by the thousands of cords in
car loads over to their paper mills in the
United States. That wood goes to the United
States free, and they are enabled to compete
with our men who are manufacturing that
paper pulp here with the advantage of $6 a
ton duty on their paper ; they are charged
no duty going into the United States upon
them, they get them inperfectly free ; but if
we establish our industry here and persuade
gentlemen to enter into the manufacture of
paper here, in competing in that market for
the sale of that paper, they are subjected to
a duty of $6 per ton, and to that extent
they are behind those gentlemen who come
in here and work right alongside of them
thmugh the winter, in the same woods, for
the same purpose and for the same manu-
facture. Now, I ask is that justice to our
manufacturers ? Is that a wise policy for us
to pursue if we want to develop our manu-
facturing industries ? There, I say, is a
legitimate opportunity for the Government
to protect an industry.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Free trade.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, free trade,
but free trade in industry. But you must
recollect that you cannot grow a tree in a
year ; it is not like growing a bushel of wheat
or a pound of cotton. It takes half a century

to grow those trees ; that is part of our
capital, and what we should do is to try
and make the most out of that capital if we
possibly can. We should say to the^ people
who require that timber for pulp purposes,
" If you require that timber for the manu-
facture of paper, you must come in here and
establish your factory in Canada." We will
prohibit the exportation of the cords of wood
that are required for the manufacture of that
pulp at any rate by such a duty as will equal
the tax that is put upon the pulp that goes
into the United States. We will then secure
the co-operation of the paper manufacturers
in the United States to have the duty taken
oflf. They must have our timber. In the
Fox River Valley, in Wisconsin, which is one
of the largest paper centres in the United
States, they are drawing from our spruce bush
on Lake Superior to a large extent to keep
their mills supplied. The hon. leader of this
House should realize the great difference in
the price of the finished article and the
price of a cord of wood ; that price should
be earned in Canada if the American
market is closed to us by a high duty.
For instance, if they put 86 a ton duty on
pulp going into the United States and it
takes two cords of wood to make one ton of
pulp, I say we should put $6 duty on the two
cords of w.ood — $3 or $4 a cord on the
wood that is required by them, and in that
way let their own manufacturers come of their
own volition and in their own interest to per-
suade their own Government to take that
duty off our manufactures. If we do that
and if we hold the timber that we possess,
you will see two dozen manufacturers like the
E. B. Eddy Company spring up all over the
country. That compswiy pays, according to
the Empire, $329,000 wages in the city of
Ottawa every year for simply the manufac-
turing done in connection with the paper
and pails and those things made out of
the pulp that it grinds. Now the Eddy
Company's power to manufacture is limited
to the wants of 5,000,000 people. They can-
not get through those barriers into the
United States, except to a limited extent
in consequence of the taxation we impose
upon their capital, their labour and their
industry and the duty in our neighbours
markets — they cannot reach the open market
of Great Britain, in consequenceof the burden
of our taxation and their manufacturing
capacity is therefore limited to 5,000,000
people. Lift that burden from them, relieve

Digitized by

Google

The Gommercial Policy [MAKCH 2, 1893] of Canada,

231

their industry of taxation ^nd you wiQ give
them a benefit of $12,000 a year, possibly
making all the difference between their ability
to export and their inability to do so. Not a
solitary manufacturer of pa[)er in the coun-
try will have the slightest objection under
a different policy to let all the manufacturers
of paper that wish to come to the country
to do so, but I venture to say if you keep up
the duties and not give them the markets of
the world, they would very justly complain
of attempting to attract more manufacturers
of paper to overstock the home market and
render their investment valueless. That is
a very strong point indeed, and we have an
opportunity of protecting the manufacturers
engaged in that important industry in Can-
ada, and of distributing millions of dollars
wages by such a protection as we would
afford. I would refer here to the fact that
England imports of cotton manufactures
$11,000,000 worth ; of iron manufactures,
$16,000,000; leather or partially prepared
leather, $35,000,000 ; boots and shoes, $1,-
500,000; gloves, $10,000,000; paper, $10,-
000,000 ; silk, $55,000,000 ; woollen stuffs,
$35,000,000 ; iron, $10,000,000. There is
an open market for us for every one of those
articles, and we can turn our attention to
the production and exportation of them.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quintt^)— We do send
a very large amount in value of leather now
— over a million dollars.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I am aware of
that but could we not send $5,000,000
worth as well as one million dollars worth.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-
would make it.

-So we could if we

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, Sir, our taxa-
tion prevents it. I have enumerated those
to show that there is an open market for us
where there is no prohibitory taxation at all.
All we want to do is to get the right econo-
mic conditions and we can have a share of
the large sums which are expended for the
articles I have enumerated in England and
we can bring that capital here to increase
our cities and our consuming population
adjacent to our farms. Then again with
regard to coal oU, that is a question that has
b€«n pretty well thrashed out and I will not
detain the House with any remarks in con-
nection with it, but I would just say this
that you should take the duty off coal oil iand

admit crude oil free — you must recollect the
difference between crude oil aiid refined oil
bears 25 per cent of the total value of refined
oil — that is, it costs 75 per cent to manufac-
ture the raw material for use. We consume
15,000,000 gallons of coal oil and if we were
to throw off the duty entirely and throw
open our markets for importation of crude
oil alongside of our own productions we
might do more refining of oil in the country
and increase the numbers of people engaged
in preparing coal oil for consumption, than
are now engaged in its production.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Is that free
trade?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, that is free
trade. It is on that principle that the Gov-
ernment of Great Britain acted when they
were petitioned to put a duty on sugar in
order to protect the British refiners from
unfair foreign competition. The Govern-
ment said "no, we cannot do it, because cheap
sugar from Germany and Belgium and other
countries reduces the cost of sugar in this
country and leads to the employment of
more men in the manufacture of con-
fectionery, jams, etc. We cannot put
on a duty to protect the refiners ; they
must exist on their own merits. It would
furnish employment for ten orfifteen thousand
more men in the production of these articles
and we cannot put a duty on sugar to pro-
tect the refiners. They will have to fight on
their own merits." I say with regard to our
coal oil the same beneficial results might
flow, because we might increase the employ-
ment of labour in our coal oil business by
refining more than in the production. I am
satisfied that if we develop our resources and
increase the population of the country by the
policy that I suggest, the Petrolea oil wells
will keep flowing on in a much greater ratio.
If you make it worth while for capital to
come in under a moi-e enlightened policy you
will find the Petrolea oil products wUl be
quadrupled, and I am not afraid that they
will be injured any more than other manu-
facturers would be injured in consequence of
an improved economic system of working. I
will cite one more example which hon. gen-
tlemen will understand : The clothes I stand
in. are made by the Sanford Manufacturing
Company, they cost ten dollars factory prices.
Hon. gentlemen have said to me, well what
more do you want; are they not cheap enough.

Digitized by

Google

232

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

what do you want free trade for? My reply
to that is if you remove the taxation that
bears upon the capital and labour invested in
that industry, that clothing can be made
25 per cent cheaper. The cloth is manu-
factured in our woollen mills and made up in
this clothing factory. Both these industries
have reached the limit of absorption by the
people of Canada, of their goods ; if you
reduce the cost of making up that clothing
hy 25 per cent they can enter the markets
of the world with their clothing and their
cloth, and instead of having one Sanford
Manufacturing Company we might have a
dozen. No doubt it would make this com-
pany rustle a little harder for its profits, but
the people of Canada would reap the benefit
of its rustling, not only in the increased
employment, the enlarged markets would
insure, but in the cheaper clothing we would
wear. On the other hand, increasing the
manufacturing capacity of clothing without
enlarging the markets by a change in our
commercial policy would only lead to the
combines which are so universally condemned.
I now come to the question of raising revenue.
My hon. friend from Glengarry has several
times suggested how are you going to raise
the revenue. We had from the Finance Min-
ister in his Budget speech, a statement that
free trade was impossible, that hon. gentle-
men on the opposite side knew perfectly well
that there was $28,000,000 that had
to be raised before we could possibly consi-
der the question of free trade. The resolu-
tion that I now have before the honourable
House calls for an assimilation of our policy
to that of Great Britain. I have not called
it free trade, because although the term free
trade has generally been applied to the com-
mercial policy of Great Britain — because it
is the freest trade that the world knows — it
is not really free trade, in so far that a large
portion of the revenue of Great Britain is
derived from customs duties, but the Govern-
ment of England has imposed its taxation in
such a manner that the labouring population
of England do not pay one solitary penny to
the revenue of the country.

Hon.
tea?

Mr. MoMILLAN— What about

Hon. Mr. BOULTOX -Except on tea;
the duty on tea is fourpence a pound. I'he
labouring people are allowed to get their
malt and make all their home brewed beer

free from intemad revenue tax, so if they do
I not want to pay tax on tea they can take
j advantage of that, and many homes have a
I mild home brew as a wholesome drink.

' Hon. Mr. BOWELL— And drink beer ?

i Hon. Mr. BOULTON— And drink beer,
I and it is a mighty good thing to drink. Dr.
Osier, of Toronto, is authority for the state-
ment that more disease came under his no-
tice in the hospitals from the consumption
of tea than from many other causes. Beef
and beer have made Englishmen what they
I are, and I have no doubt the leader of the
I House has felt the benefit of it himself.
I What I was going to say is this, there is not
, one single penny of taxation imposed on the
I labour of England ; even the income tax is
I imposed only on incomes over ^150 a year,
— all whose incomes are under that amount
I are relieved from taxation upon them. The
I taxation is imposed in such a manner that it
! is not possible for any other industry in the
! country to increase the cost of their manu-
I factures in consequence of the duties. The
duty is imposed upon tea because it does not
I enter into the manufacture of anything — it
' is a species of direct taxation. They put a
I duty on currants and raisins because they
I are, to a certain extent, luxuries — they are
not necessities. They put a tax on a few
j articles of that kind.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— And coffee ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON.— CoflTee and cocoa.
I We^ have an excellent almanac published in
' this country for the first time — the Star
j Almanac, which will take the place I hope,

in this country of Whittaker's Almanac,
I which gives all the statistics of the trade and
I commerce of the world for the information of
1 the people of Great Britain. The Star

Almanac is full of the most instructive and
I valuable information and it is within easy

reach of every one. It is there that I find
; the statistics in so far as the customs duties
'< are concerned in regard to Great Britain's
I re venue and every one who will turn to the Star

Almanac can inform himself of those facts.
I The revenue of Gi*eat Britain is derived as

follows- 100 millions of dollars from customs ;
i 7 5 mil lions of dollars from excise ; 65 millions

of dollars from stamps ; a land tstx of 1 1
I millions of dollai*s ; property and income tax,

65 millions of dollars ; post office 50 millions

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy ("MARCH 2, 1893J of Canada.

233

of dollars ; and the telegraph service yields
11 millions of dollars. There are a few
smaller items which bring the revenues to
90 millions of pounds or 450 millions o(
dollars a year mostly contributed by volunt-
ary contribution. The customs of course is
what I call voluntary contribution ; people
are not obliged cu purchase any of the things
that are taxed.

Hon, Mr. READ (Quinte)— They need
not purchase tea or coffee ?

Hon. Mr. BOULTON~I always make
ail exception of tea and coffee.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— They are
luxuries.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It is only 15 mil-
lions of dollars out of 450 millions of dollars,
the revenue from tea. The consumption of
tea is five pounds per head of the population,
and at fourpence per pound that is one shil-
ling and eightpence that a British labourer
pays on t^a for the use of his family, at the
rate of five pounds per head. It is exactly
following that model that I propose we should
raise our revenue. Now, what are we re-
ceiving to-day upon those very articles ? Ac-
cording to the Trade and Navigation Returns
we are collecting a duty on spirits and to-
bacco to the amount of 82,500,000. The
tariff has not been imposed to encourage the
largest amount of revenue on that. If you
would lower the duties on light wines you
would probably increase the revenue.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— We get a larg-
er revenue than that from liquors and to-
bacco.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I am speaking of
the customs revenue now. The customs re-
venue from spirits and tobacco is $2,500,000.
We are getting a revenue from silks of $800,-
000. V

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint^)— You will take
that off if you follow Great Britain.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, I would
retain the duty on silks — continue that until
there is a manufacturer of silk in this country
and the people whoare manufacturing through
that duty are charging the people more than
they should receive in open competition in
the markets of the world. When that time

arrives, I say take the duty off silks. At the
moment it does not impose any hidden tax
on the people, and therefore it is a tax on the
profits of the people. Those who are able to
purchase silk dresses for the family are better
able to pay the tax than those who wear
homespun.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN-
silk.

-Every one wears

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN— Yes, the servant
girls wear it.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Then if so let
them pay their share of the revenue.

Hon. Mr. McMILL AN— They would not
wear it long under free trade.

Hon Mr. BOULTON— Of raw tobacco
we import 15 millions of pounds. I propose
that the tax on tobacco should be increased
by ten cents a pound.

Hon.
smoke.

Mr. McMillan -You do not

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Yes, I do— I
smoke more than is good for me. That would
produce $1,320,000. Then the duty, on to-
bacco has not reached the limit they put on
it in Great Britain at all. Then currants,
raisins, nuts, etc., produce a revenue to-day
of $340,000. Cocoa and coffee yield a revenue
to-day of $60,000. We import 22,000,000
pounds of tea. Recollect when I talk of pro-
posing anything I am only showing you how
revenue can be raised so as to lift the burden
of taxation off the shoulders of labour. At
six cents a pound, that is one penny less than
the duty imposed in Great Britain, that
would yield a revenue of $1,320,000. We
had an excise revenue last year of $8,000,000,
and a revenue from miscellaneous resources
of $8,500,000 — that is our post office, our
public works, our investments upon bonds
and a variety of similar things. That, of
course, goes on just exactly the same as our
internal revenue goes on. Now, our rail-
ways and canals have been run at a loss to
the ^ple of the country of $1,000,000.
Those should be managed upon a business
basis. The Intercolonial railway should at
least pay the cost of hauling freight over the
line. The canals should at least pay the cost

Digitized by

Google

234

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

of putting vessels through, and if you manage i
them on a business basis that way, without j
taking into consideration interest on capital i
such as the Australian people do — they have ^
built their own railways and get a revenue
back of 3 J per cent — but without doing that,
I say those public works should bear the cost
of moving the freight over the line or through
the canals and if we manage upon that basis
there is $1,000,000 a year to be derived
from that.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— That would
increase the burdens of the people.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— No, it does not
increase the burdens of the people at all — it
is business. Then I calculate that in conse-
quence of free trade a larger trade would be
developed — there would be an increase of
$500,000 in the post office at the very
lowest calculation. In free trade Great
Britain, the post office revenue with penny
postage is fifty millions dollars, 20 times as
great as ours, although the population is
only 7 times as large. To a certain extent
there would be a saving in collection, which
I put down at $400,000. Whether that can
be effected or not is questionable ; however,
I put it down. That altogether makes a
revenue of $25,000,000 that we are receiving
from those sources to-day, except tea and
tobacco, and $1,000,000 from public works.
The hon. Minister of Finance in his speech
the night before last said there was $21,000,-

000 from those sources. I have got down
here by adding certain things to $25,000,000.

1 thoroughly appreciate the fact that we
must raise a revenue of $35,000,000 annual-
ly. We want to go on developing our re-
sources— go on improving our country and
building our public buildings and extending
our national interests where it is wise to do
so. Free trade will increase the business of
the country to such an extent as to increase
that $25,000,000 a year by natural condi-
tions, but if we find the revenue is not res-
ponding to the gradual reduction of the tariff
impose a five per cent duty upop imports.
That is to say, there will be $16,000,000 of
imports which are now subject to duty after I
have takenoff the duty of these articles, spirits,
etc., which are l)earing at the present moment
an average tax of about twenty or twenty-five
per cent. I would propose to take off five
per cent each year until we get down to
^ve per cent. There I would call a halt

until the people see for themselves whether
the revenue can bear the abolition of that
five per cent. Five per cent would yield
$4,200,000 a year.

The moment you diminish your duties you
increase importation — the imports will there-
fore be doubled, so than I calculate by reducing
the revenue down to a five per cent tariff
you will get not only the $4,200,000 as we
do to-day,but in consequence of the reduction
you will increase the importation until the
revenue at five per cent will be $8,400,000.
Add that to the $25,000,000, under the
present condition of things you have a
revenue of $33,000,000, and I defy any
hon. gentlemen to show how any hidden tax
can be imposed on the people of Canada by
a revenue of that description. I grant that it
would be better to remove the five per cent
that I speak of, and I do not doubt that
when we would arrive at that point the
increase of population and the greater pros-
perity of the country would induce the
people to decide that the five per cent should
go because that five per cent would still be
a tax on the labour and industry of the people
in competing in the markets of the world.
That is the way in which T would raise the
revenue ; but if that policy of free trade is
going to accomplish anything nearly like the
result accomplished by the people of Great
Britain, itis going to increase our own wealth,
prosperity, and population. I say that the
revenue of Canada under a policy of that kind
before ten years are over should be $60, 000,000,
and voluntarily contributed by the people of
Canada out of their prosperity ; $60,000,000 a
year by the people of Canada because of their
increase in wealth and because of the in-
crease of population, and because they draw
from the centres of the world the trade
which would enable them to pay it. That
$60,000,000 a year would go to improve our
highways, to build our railways and public
works. I say that it is the revenue paying
power of the peeple that we have to look for-
ward to and encourage and not the gov-
ernmental power of extracting revenue. At
the present moment the revenue is extracted,
but under that mode if the revenue paying
power of the country is increased, the revenue
would immediately respond to it. I think I
have sa'd sufficient with regard to the re-
venue to show that the great bug-bear that
is felt by nearly everybody in the country,
that under free trade it is impossible to raise
a revenue — that that is dissipated — that it

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 2, 1893] of Canada.

235

is quite possible under a tivp per cent tariff
to raise all the revenue necessary for the
purposes of the government of Canada. If
it is necessary to economize, of course you
can alter the expenditure in quite a different
way. What I say is, that this mode of impo-
sing taxes is not a direct tax like that im-
posed on our coal oil, cottons, etc. Recollect
there is no income tax,no stamp tax,-we have
not got £30, 000, 000a year to pay forour army
and navy as England has to do — we have
not great expenses all over the world,
to maintain ambassadors, consuls, and
everything of that kind ; therefore the in-
come tax and the stamp tax are not neces-
sary. We want nothing but the simple
imposition of taxes, which are voluntary
contributions on the part of the people.
I would like to have touched upon the posi-
sition Lord Salisbury assumed last year
which led the fair traders to believe that
Great Britain would respond to the position
of the Hon. Finance Minister, i.e., exchange
favour for favour, but time will not permit me
to do so further than to say that I looked
upon Lord Salisbury's speech in June last
year as a warning to those nations who
refused to gi-ant Great Britain most favoured
nation treatment, under discriminatory tariffs,
that a restriction might be imposed on their
imports. Spain had given notice of the
cessation of most favoured nation treatment
on the 1st July last, in consequence of the
reciprocity treaty they entered into with the
Government of the United States but she
has since given us the benefit of her mini-
mum tariff, and I attribute that to the firm
attitude of the British Government. I have
to thank the House for the patience that
they have shown in listening to my length-
ened remarks, but as I said before, it is a new
idea— a new position that I am laying before
this honourable House for their information,
and I must apologize for occupying the time
of the House so long. It is necessary for
me, I believe, to name a committee before
sitting down and trusting my resolution to
the good will of the House. I have no other
desire at all but to utilize the Senate so far
as collecting information for the benefit of
the Canadian people — to utilize the expe-
rience that exists in this honourable Houseand
the knowledge that they have of all parts of
the country and the requirements of the
Dominion, and the object of this committee
is first of all to sit down and examine the
statistics to see if I have made any mistake

whether what I have advanced here is in any
way incorrect — then to send for leading
lumbermen and manufacturers — the manu-
facturers of agricultural implements, etc., and
cross question them, and send to various parts
of the country and invite leaders of industry
to come before the committee and give evidence
and embody it in such a way as our own Pro-
vincial Governments do, as is the common
thing for Governments in Great Britain to
do and as has been done in this Parliament,
for this is an inexpensive mode of collecting
information. But I should like some one to
be on that committee not wedded to the
policy of protection, as the announcement
made by the hon. Minister of Finance shows
that the Government is likely to- be. It is
not going to be a committee that' will cost
very much, or a committee that is inimical
CO the policy of the Government, because
those gentlemen whom I have named here
are nearly all in spmpathy with the Govern-
ment. The committee I would suggest
would be the Hon. Mr. Bowell and the Hon.
Mr. Casgrain for Ontario ; the Hon. Mr.
Angers and the Hon. Mr. Desjardins for
Quebec ; the Hon. Mr. Power for Nova Sco-
tia ; the Hon. Mr. Boyd for New Brunswick ;
the Hon. Mr. Macdonald for Prince Edward
Island ; the Hon. Mr. Reid for British
Columbia; the Hon. Mr. Perley for the North-
west Territories and myself. I ask for this
committee to collect and furnish such infor-
mation as they can gather for the people of
Canada at large.

Hon. Mr. BOW^ELL— I am sure that the
House has listened with a good deal of
attention, if not with much patience, to the
speech which has been delivered by my hon.
friend upon this very important question.
It is not my intention to follow him through
the labyrinth of figures or the arguments
which he has produced to the Senate. Hav-
ing given his views, not only to the Senate,
but, as he intimated himself, to the world
through the medium of our Debates, I was
in hopes that he would have been contented
to have his views placed on record and then
withdraw his motion. I cannot conceive it
possible under our system of Government,
responsible as the Ministers are, not only to
the Crown but to the people, that they could
consent to relegate their duties to a commit-
tee of this or of the other House. The hon.
gentleman is altogether in error in supposing
that the hon. the Finance Minister made

Digitized by

Google

236

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

any such declaration, as that to which he
has referred, in the House of Commons in
his Budget speech. He never intimated,
nor could he have ever conceived the idea of
appointing a Ministerial committee to in-
quire into the state of trade in this country
in order that that committee might make a
report to the Ministry upon which they might
base a policy.

Hon. Mr. McINNES, (B.C.)— He might
do it in a moment of weakness.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL.— There are many
people in this world who are subject to such
Hts of weakness, but I do not think that the
present administration are so weak as to
seek advice of any committee in the manner
indicated by the hon. gentleman. What the
Finance Minister stated was that he believed
there existed in the country at the present
moment a certain amount of unrest, and
that as the policy of the Government has
been, since the inauguration of the National
Policy, to remove taxes wherever they con-
sidered they could do so in the interests of
the community generally — where the remo-
val of taxes in many cases would be a direct
protection to the manufacturers themselves
— that they would do so. That remincbs me
of one remark made by the hon. gentleman
from Marquette in which he stated that I
indicated that the Grovemment were desi-
rous of establishing a free trade policy be-
cause I had intimated in some remarks in
this House that they had taken the duty oflF
tin thereby protecting indirectly the can-
ning industry. The hon. gentleman can apply
that illustration to all the articles on the free
list. Tin is not made in this country, con-
sequently it would be no protection to keep
the duty on it. The duty on that article
would be simply and purely for revenue pur-
poses, and just as soon as the Government
ascertained that a sufficient revenue could
be raised to meet the requirements of the
country without taxing the articles that are
not made in this country, it was part of
their policy to remove it from the dutiable
list. As I indicated before in the remarks
that I made upon the subject, if he
will refer to the free list he will find
that there are 103 articles, in addition
to those which I specially mentioned
on that occasion, which we have placed on
the free list since the establishment of the
National Policy, and thev have all been in

the line indicated by the hon. gentleman
when he spoke with reference to tin. So I
might continue and point out that the whole
policy of the Government has been, as the
requirements of the country indicated they
could do it, to remove the duty from articles
not made in Canada in order that our people
might obtain them at a cheaper rate, and
those who used them in the manufacturing
industries receive just that additional pro-
tection. I have found it difficult to come to
a conclusion as to what the hon. gentleman's
opinions and principles are. He is a free
trader in some articles ; he is a high protec-
tionist in others, especially when he strikes
the particular article of lumber. I believe
that political economists have laid it down
that such duties as the hon. gentleman askod
us to impose are the most objectionable
taxes, because they prevent the owner of a
particular article in the country from selling
it just where he pleases. However, he may
be very much like an Irish recruit when
he was asked how high he was ; he said :
" Bedad, I'm either five feet ten or ten feet
five ; I do not know which." It is precisely
the same with my hon. friend : it is ques-
tionable if he knows whether he is a free
trader or a protectionist. If he is a free
trader in one respect, he is a protectionist in
the other.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Protect our forests.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL—Protect our forests at
the expense — I am not giving my opinion ; I
am giving the answer to a suggestion — pro-
tect our forests at the expense of the owner
of the timber. That is really what it means.
If the hon. gentleman and those who enter-
tain his views are so solicitous of the interests
of the country, why deprive the owners of
the timber of the pecuniary l)enefits arising
from the sale of it at a higher price than it
could be sold for in this country ? How he
can advocate such a policy and at the same
time advocate free trade is something beyond
my comprehension. I leave it to him to
reconcile his conflicting views at his leisure.
However, I do not propose to discuss this
question at all. I could not help smiling at
his ideas about the blacksmith. I remember
as a boy, and my hon. friend from Belleville
will rememl)er also, in the \dllage where we
lived forty or fifty years ago there were 50
per cent more shoemakers in the town earn-
ing their living by making boots and shoes

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 2, 1893] of Canada.

237

than there are to-day, though the population
is now over 10,000. It is easily understood.
Just the same remark applies to the black-
smiths. We know that the nails and the
horse-shoes are all ready made to put on the
horses' feet and all the blacksmith has to do
now is to shoe the horse. When I was a
boy in the town to which I have alluded,
the blacksmith used to make the horse-shoes
and the nails and had to point the nails, and
it created a great deal of labour. In 1902 I
will expect to hear the hon. gentleman
making another free trade speech, and I will
be bound to say if he adopts the same line
of argument he will tell the House that
Canada has gone to destruction because
there are not as many horses drawing the
street cars as there were 20 years ago ; and
I venture the assertion that in less time
than I have indicated there will be very few
street car horses.

Hon. Mr. BO U LTD N— Everybody will
be riding then for pleasure.

Hon. Mr. BOWELI^ I do not think
that will indicate any decadence in the pros-
perity of the country, and so you may apply
it to every article to which he has referred.
The hon. gentleman said in his opening re-
marks that he could have no confidence in
any report made by a Commission appointed
by the Government, that the report of a
Ministerial Commission certainly would not
be satisfactory.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON -In consequence of
their declaration that protection was their
policy.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I would have told
the House that, if the hon. gentleman had
allowed me. He would have no confidence
in such a report in consequence of the decla-
ration of the Government of their policy.
Well, if that be the case, is this House or
the cr)untry to suppose that they would have
a more favourable report from the commit-
tee that he himself has indicated, because, if
I remember the names, the majority of them
are gen tlemen holdi ng precisely the same views
upon the trade policy of this country that
the hon. Minister of Finance does when he
indicated the course that the Government
intended to follow. But I think it is alto-
gether unnecessary. The scope or sphere
or duties of this committee are limitetl by
this resolution. The hon. gentleman has

so worded it that they could only make a
report in such a way as to meet his particu-
lar views. They are not left to their own
discretion as to what report they should
make. The resolution says the Select Com-
mittee is to be appointed to inquire into the
statistics of the country and its industrial
progress **with a view of assimilating our
commercial policy with that commercial
policy that has increased the prosperity of
Great Britain." That is, that this commit-
tee is to make such an inquiry from the
facts to be laid before them as would enable
us lo adopt a policy altogether different
from that which this country has approved
of over and over again. Hence, if the hon.
gentleman is desirous of having a report
on the actual state of the country as it exists
to-day and then to draw deductions from
that report, as to what would be the best
course in the interests of Canada and the
people, he would certainly not have restricted
their operations in the manner he has done.
Apart altogether from that, a committee of
this kind would be attended with great
expense, and I notice the hon. gentleman
and some of his friends objected very strongly
to the expense to which the country had
been put by the appointment of commissions
to make other inquiries upon particular
questions ; I suppose they would be equally
consistent in opposition to a committee of
this kind. But there is one greater objec-
tion than any other ; and that is it would be
relegating to a committee of this House the
work which pertains exclusively to any
Government that may exist under our system
of responsibility, and for that reason the
Government could not, in justice to them-
selves or to the position they hold — with-
out violating the fundamental principles of
responsible government — accede to a re-
quest of this kind. I apologize for having
said so much upon this question ; but I
think I have given sufficient reasons why
this committee should not be granted.
The hon. gentleman has laid before the
House and the country an elaborate state-
ment of what he conceives to be the interests
of the country in changing its policy. Now,
I should judge that the reasons and the argu-
ments which he has given ought to be, in his
own opinion, sufficient not only for the coun-
try but for the Government to guide them in
shaping their policy, if they desire to change
the one that has been in force. The hon.
Finance Minister did not, as my hon. friend

Digitized by

Google

238

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

says, cast from him free trade ; he never
adopted free trade ; the Government never
thought of adopting free trade. The Gov-
ernment propose, as long as they receive the
confidence of the people of this country, to
continue in force in its integrity the policy
which has existed for the last 14 years.
They propose to modify and amend it as
they believe it to be in the interests of the
country ; and as soon as the great voting
mass of the people of this country think the
principle should be changed, that we should
adopt the free trade doctrine to which my
hon. friend has alluded and upon which' he
had spoken for four or five hours, they will
assert their rights at the polls ; and then my
hon. friend, probably, from his superior
knowledge, will be taken into the Govern-
ment as Finance Minister; and he can
elucidate not only his own ideas, but he can
promulgate his own policy,and have it placed
upon the Statute book, if he can persuade his
colleagues to consent to it. Then the people
would learn from experience whether
a policy which may have been in
the interests of a country like Great
Britain is fitted at all for Canada,
with its limited population and its want of
wealth and industries. That which would
be, has l)een, and is in the interests of one
country, certainly is not always adaptable
to another country dissimilarly situated ;
and so in this case the financial exposition
the honourable gentleman has given us is one
which I should not think would bear analyz-
ing for any length of time. As an illus-
tration the very fact of putting 10 cents
more upon tobacco, as he indicates he would
do, to raise a revenue would be the best
reason why he would not receive as much as
if he lowered it. He gave the reason one
moment before, why the revenue would
decrease when, referiing to liquors, he
said : " You can get a larger amount of
revenue if you lower the duties upon wine
and spirits, because you would import a
greater quantity." If that be the fact in
reference to liquors, how can the hon.
gentleman argue it would not apply also to
tobacco ; and he forgets this, that we live
alongside of a foreign country, with between
three and four thousand miles of a frontier,
and if you put the duty at a higher rate than
that of the adjoining country, just so soon
as the consumer in Canada learns that he
can obtain it cheaper across the line, the
revenue would soon fall through the operations

of smugglers. That argument applies of
almost every article upon the free list.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— It's a poor rule
that won't work both ways.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — It is a very poor
rule that won't work both ways, and hence
the necessity of so framing your tariff as to
get the largest amount of revenue from the
luxuries and prevent to as great an extent
as you can, the illicit traffic that is carried
on. But the argument of my hon. friend is
not consistent ; he did not apply the same
argument as to liquor and tobacco. If the
argument has any force in the one case, it
should have force in the other. That is the
only thing I desire to point out to the hon.
gentleman. When I asked the hon. gentle-
man how he proposed to protect the farmers
in any other way than they are protected to-
day, the answer was " Put an export duty
upon sugar." Well, it is the first time I
knew we raised sugar in this country, and
that the export duty upon sugar would
increase the ^^'ealth of the farmer. You
might, by putting it on wheat put something
in his pocket ; but I do not think the coun-
try is prepared for anything of that kind.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— You misunderstood
! me ; I said you were developing the policy
j of protection, one of the Acts passed on the

last day of last Session was the continuance
I of the bounty system in reference to sugar

with the view of changing the system of
! agriculture from dairying to beet-root sugar

cultivation .

j Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I do not propose

to pursue this debate, as far as I am con-

j cerned, any further. I can only ask the

I House, if the hon. gentleman insists on his

' motion — which I trust he will not — to reject

' it for the reasons I have given. I think

I that it is unnecessary, and as he has given

us so much information, we will be able to

I sleep over it, think over it and cogitate on

I it for the next twelve months, and probably

I it might have some effect upon obtuse minds

I like my own. I certainly have not been

able to follow his logic to such a conclusion

as to lead me to believe that the appoint-

j ment of this committee would be of any

I possible use, or that the change of the

present policy would be in the interests of

i the country.

Digitized by

Google

T?ie Commercial Policy [MABCH 2, 1893] of Canada,

239

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— In reference to the
formation of a committee by this Chamber,
to inquire into matters which would pro-
perly come within the policy of the Govern-
menty I may mention to the leader of the
House that on several occasions, when the
Mackenzie Grovernment was in power, this
House appointed committees, not only to
examine into the policy of the Government,
but to condemn the (Tovernment for the
adoption of a particular line of policy. I
may mention one in reference to the selec-
tion of Fort William as an outlet for the Ca-
nadian Pacific Railway. I think the com-
mittee approved of Port Arthur as the
proper place, and also in reference to the
extension of the Canadian Pacific Railway
in a direct line westward, crossing the Red
River near Selkirk. That was condemned
by this House, and a line running directly
south to Winnipeg was suggested. I think
on other occasions this House has formed
committees and got papers, and commented
on the action of the Government. I do not
think there is much danger of that being
done just now. I do not think the commit-
tee could do any harm. It would gather a
large amount of information suggested by the
hon. gentleman ; but so far as the fiscal po-
licy of the Government is concerned, in the
House of Commons in the year 1876, proba-
bly the hon. gentleman will remember a
very celebrated resolution which was adopted
in that House, in which the leader of the
then opposition. Sir John Macdonald, insisted
upon having the words " mining and manu-
factures," included when the changes were
rung over the country. That was a com-
mittee to inquire into the mining, shipping
lumbering, etc., interests of the country."

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-Was it adopted ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Oh, yes, I think so.
It was amended by several members, it was
as follows : —

Reaolved that a Select Committee composed
of Messrs. Baby, Burpee (Sunbun^), Carmichael,
McDougall, Charlton, Delorme, Dymond, Piatt,
Sainclair, Workman and Mills, be appointed to
iu(|Qire into the causes of the present depression in
the manufacturing, mining, commercial, shipping,
lumber and fishing interests, with power to send
for persons, papers and records, etc.

That was rather a celebrated resolution.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— It was opposed by
the Government of the day, was it ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I do not think they
opposed it. It was on the 21st February,
I 1876.

I Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— By whom
was it moved ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— "Mr. DeCosmos moved,
seconded by Mr. Bunster, that all the words
after " That " to the end of the question be
left out and the following words added : —

'* the early revision of the tariflF is desirable ; and
that a revised tariff, discriminating to a greater
degree than the existing tariff, in favour of home
productions and manufactures, but not unduly
stimulating one section of the country or one in-
dustry to the injury of other sections and other
industries, would be productive of great benefit to
the whole Dominion *' inserted instead thereof ;

*'And objection being taken to the said pro-
posed amendment as out of order on the ground
that it involved the imposition of a burden on the
poople ; Mr. Speaker decided ** That the proposed
amendment being an abstract proposition and
barren of results was in order.

" And the question beinfi; put on the said pro-
posed amendment was with leave of the House
withdi-awn.

** Mr. Blain moved in amendment to the main
motion, seconded by Mr. Metcalfe, and the question
being put, That the word "financial" be left out
and the words " manufacturing and commercial '*
inserted instead thereof :— It was resolved in the
affirmative.

** Mr. Tupper moved in amendment, secondeil by
8ir John A. Macdonald, and the question being
put, that the main motion as amenaed, be further
amended by adding the word ** mining" after the
word *' manufacturing " ; it was resolved in the
affirmative.

*'Mr. Mitchell moved in amendment, seconded
by Mr. Masson, and the (luestion being put, that
the main motion as amended be further amended
by adding the words '^shipping, lumbering and
fishing interests " ; it was resolved in the affirma-
tive.

** Mr. Mackenzie moved, seconded by Mr. Blake,
and the question being put, that the main motion
be further amended by leaving out the name of
**Mr. Currier" inserting the natme of **Mr. McDou-
^all (Renfrew)" instead thereof; it was resolved
m the affirmative.

** Then follows the main motion."

The matter was suggested by several
members of the House of Commons at dif-
ferent time.

Hon. Mr. PRIMROSE— As hon. gentle-
men are all aware, I am a new member, and
am scarcely yet acclimated to the atmosphere
of your Chamber ; I know little of your
methods of procedure, and if I should trans-
gress I crave your indulgence on that ac-

Digitized by

Google

240

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

count. I have listened to the address of the
hon. gentleman in support of the motion,
and I have been impressed with his industry,
if with nothing else. I think he is to be
commende<l for the industry which he has
displayed in the compilation and collection
of such a mass of figures as he has put be-
fore the House. He must have spent con-
siderable time in the preparation of these
figures. They were not got up in an hour or
a day. I want to know if he is equally to
be commended for the conclusion at which
he arrives. I think not. I am not going to
enter at all into the figures. There is only
one point in his address which I wish to
touch ; and T have to say in regard to that
point, that if his conclusions are as utterly
at variance with the facts in regard to the
other matters which he has brought before
us — and I think that is a fair and
legitimate conclusion — then one is forced
to say that his conclusions must be
erroneous. I speak of the shipping interests
of this country, and when I do so I know
whereof I affirm, having been connectetl with
that industry for many years in its manage-
ment and otherwise ; and hon. gentlemen
will pardon me if I say that as I listened to
the remarks of the hon. member and the de-
ductions he drew from those remarks, the old
Latin proverb which I learned in my student
days came back to my mind, "J> sufar
ultra cvppidahi," " Let the shoemaker stick
to his last.'* If I wish to consult a
gentleman in regard to the interests of
shipping, I will not betake myself to
a man residing far inland, or to a farmer
who may be thoroughly at home in the mat-
ter of cereals and wheat, but ignorant of
maritime affairs. If I wish to l)e instructed
in regard to shipping, I will go to men in
the maritime provinces, who reside by the
sea and who know by experience the state
of this great industry. Now, any one may
go to the blue books with the very best in-
tentions in the world, and, from very ignorance
of the subject, derive false impressions. He
may be entirely misled. Now, hon. gentle-
men are just as well aware as I am that at
this very moment, while we are discussing
this matter, in the Clyde and all the large
seaports of England, and not only in Eng-
land but in our own seaports in Canada,
there are hundreds,nay thousandsof steamers
• and vessels that are laid up for lack of work
for them. I ask the hon. gentleman, is this
state of matters in the mother country to be

' attributed to the free trade policy of (Jreat
I Britain ? If you consult the latest informa
tion you will find that a great many vessels
. are laid up for actual lack of employ-
ment ; and if the hon. gentleman thinks
the depression on this side is attri-
butable to the National Policy, it is only
fair for me to say that the depression on
the other side is the result of free trade. Is
it not a fact that the deduction in either
i case is perfectly false 'and unreliable ? Any
; one at all acquainted with the shipping in-
terest knows it is subject to periodical cycles
i of depression, which occur with amazing regu-
' larity in time. I remember once travelling
j from Halifax with a gentleman who spent
I his whole life in the construction of ships,
who had just completed a fine vessel, and
was hurrying to Halifax to dispose of it ;
and I said, " What is the reason f ' He said
j to me "I have several reasons ; I have
I lived long enough to know that thei*e
' occurs at certain intervals a depression in
the shipping interests, and the time is about
at hand, and I want to get rid of this ship.'*
I He got rid of most of the shipping he had on
[ hand, and very shortly afterwards the de-
pression to which he alluded occurred.
My hon. friend confesses that his object is
to speak through the Hansard to the coun-
I try. For what purpose ? Was it to ad-
! vertise the attractions of this land of ours ?
I No, it is to paint everything in the colour of
! night, to hold out, so far as his influence
can hold it out, a great placard such
I as I have seen on a pond of ice — " Beware
of this country : there is danger here I ' Is
I that patriotic i 1 think not. Then I have
; listened, but not with very much pleasure I
! must say, to deductions that have been ar-
rived at in different speeches, somewhat on

I the same line as this I am dealing with ; and

I I do not think it is fair to select isolated dis-
' tricts in Canada, where depression and exo-
dus exist, and compare these districts
with other isolated districts in the United
States and other countries, where no such

i factors exist to cause a depression because
that depression and exodus to my own cer-
tain knowledge,are in many cases entirely due
to local causes, and the National Policy is

I about as much responsible for it as the cora-

i mercial policy of the Fiji Islands. If
we take Canada as a whole, and compare her
even with the United States or any other

, country, and allow for the difference in popu-
lation, I make the assertion that she will be

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 2, 189:^] of Canada.

241

found to be as prosperous as any other coun-
try if not more so; but is it fair to compare
this country with older countries of greater
wealth and population ? I think not ; and I
would just suy in conclusion that we forget
how young our country is, and consequently
We deal with it unfairly ; and I am reminded
in this connection of the saying of Scotia's
immortal bard as t namored of his bonnie
Scottish sweetheart he sang of her, " My
love she's but a lassie yet " ; so of our coun-
try she*R but young. As we say in common
parlance, she has not filled out yet ; but who
among us hon. gentlemen, albeit prophet or
son of a prophet, is competent with prophetic
pencil to line out the splendid proportions
of her prime that is to be ? Then, as now,
she will indeed be a sweetheart well
worthy the love of every leal-hearted Cana-
dian. Then shall we not be more deter-
mined than ever we have been, viewing
matters in this light, that despite the ac-
tive opposition of her pronounced foes, des-
pite the misei'able lukewarmness of her pro-
fessed friends, despite all malign influences,
emanate whence they may we shall with
heart and hand and brain and intellect, with
all the attributes of our manhood, help this
Canada of ours upward and onward towards
the accomplishment of that magnificent
destiny which her Almighty Maker has so
plainly designated as hers. Would it not be
better — nay, I will not put it interrogatively,
but I will put it in the language of strong
assertion and say — surely this would be
better than to adopt the course which, to
say the very least of it, has a tendency to be-
little the glorious land we live in, which is
to some of us our adopted country, but to
others of us the dear land of our birth.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I know I have no
right to speak a second time, but I ask the
indulgence of the House for a moment to
point out that the precedents to which atten-
tion was called by the hon. leader of the
Opposition are not at all applicable, to my
mind, nor does my ^collection corroborate
the impression which the hon. gentleman
desired to leave upon the House. If he will
turn to page 64 of the Journals from which
he read, it will be learned that this motion
was made, not by Sir John Macdonald
nor by any member of the Opposition, but
it was made in the interests of the Govern-
ment of the day by one of their most promi-
nent supporters, Mr. Mills, of Both well, and
16

seconded by Mr. McDougall, of Renfrew,
the present Auditor-General, also a supporter
of the Government. It reads as follows : —

That a select committee composed of Messrs.
Baby, Burfiee (Suubury), Carmichael, Currier,
Charlton, Delorme, Pymond, Piatt, Sinclair, Work-
man and Mills be appointed to inquire into the
caused of the present financial depression ; with
power to send for persons, papers and records, and
that four be a quorum.

There was only one Conservative upon that
whole committee. It was not for the pur-
pose of ascertaining what they could do in
order to change the policy of the Government
of which he was a supporter. The present
motion is for that purpose and that only.
This motion was, I remember distinctly — I
was in the House at the time, and I took
some interest in the debate that occurred —
for the purpose of aiding the Government.
It was asserted that during the period of the
existence of that Government a certain
depression existed through the countiy and
a committee was asked for in the interest of
the Government by one of its most prominent
supporters, for the purpose of inquiring into
the truth of that which was alleged to exist at
the time in order to show that that depression
did not exist. The other motion to which
my hon. friend called the attention of the
House was an amendment. Mr. Blain moved
that the word " financial " be struck out.
Then Mr. Tupper, now Sir Charles Tupper,
moved in amendment, makinganother change,
by adding the word "mining" after the
word ** manufactures." Then Mr. Mitchell,
seconded by Mr. Masson, who is now a mem-
ber of this House, moved to add that shipping
be inquired into. Then even Mr. Mackenzie,
the premier at the time, was not satisfied
with the motion nor the complexion of the
committee, and he moved that the main
motion be amended by leaving out the
words " Mr. Currier " in order that there
should not be a member on that com-
mittee who held views different from those
of the existing administration, and that
was carried. I find no fault with Mr.
Mackenzie for doing that, not the slightest ;
but I point out to this House the nature of
the committee and the purposes for which it
was appointed, and if the Government of the
day desired a committee in order to shield
them from the responsibilities of that depres-
sion, I had no objection. I, on behalf of
the Government of which I am a member
do mot occupy that position. We believe

Digitized by

Google

242

The Commercial Policy [SENATE] of Canada.

we are quite capable of managing the affairs
of this country without the assistance of the
committee for which the hon. gentleman has
applied, and I am sure a moment's reflection
will show the hon. leader of the Opposition
that the committee to inquire into the
expenditure at Fort William, or what was
known at that time as the Kaministiquia
expenditure, was not at all analogous to the
one now proposed in the motion before the
House. If the Government has made any
improper expenditure — if its policy with
reference to a particular railway, whether it
should be an all-land railway or whether it
should be an amphibious animal, is challenged
— that would be legitimate matter for a com-
mittee to inquire into, and the House could
properly condemn the Government if they
found they had expended the money impro-
perly. 1 apologize for having spoken on
this subject, but I thought it was due to the
House, considering the remarks that have
been made, that I should point out what
the object was in appointing that committee,
what its character was and the purposes for
which it was formed.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— My contention was
that committees of a similar character had
been appointed in this House and in the
other House. The complexion was the same
— it was a government committee.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— It would be a
government committee if the government
proposed it through one of their friends.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The policy of the
government was directly called in question
in making Fort William the port on Lake
Superior, inst-ead of Port Arthur, and in
building the Canadian Pacific Railway.

Hon. Mr. TASSIll -Was not Mr. Baby a
member of that committee in 1876 ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELI^-Yes, I had for-
gotten him. The committee was composed
originally, as moved by Mr. Mills, of Mr.
Baby, the present judge, Mr. Burpee, of
Sun bury, who was a Liberal, Mr. Carmichael,
whom most of you know, Mr. Currier, Mr.
Charlton, Mr. Delorme, Mr. Dymond, then
editor of the Globe, Mr. Piatt, the member
from Prince Edward, Mr. Sinclair, another
Liberal member from the west, and Mr.
Workman, from Montreal. There were two
Conservatives, Mr. Baby and Mr. Currier.
Mr. Mackenzie moved to strike.Mr. Currier's
name out, lea\ing Mr. Baby as the only

representative Conservative on the com-
mittee.

Hon. Mr. TASSE— I must admit that the
Conservatives were very few at the time, but
the quality supplied the Jack of quantity.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON- I wish to make a
few remarks in reply to the Minister of
Trade and Commerce.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — The hon. gentleman
has spoken and bored the House for. two
days.

; Hon. GENTLEMEN— Order, order.

I Hon. Mr. ALMON— I withdraw the

word " bored " — I say fatigued this House

two days, and if he continues toinflict as

; to quote a French expression, I would like

! to ask is not this toujours perdrix ?

I Hon. Mr. POWER--I think the hon.
t gentleman from Shell River has gained at
t least all that any other member of the
I House expected he would gain. He has
I had an opportunity of placing, before the
Senate an amount of valuable information,
and if the members take the advice given
them by the leader of the Senate, if they
read, mark and inwardly digest the speech
delivered by the hon. member, they will
come here next year very much wiser, many
of them, than they are this year. I do not
think the hon. gentleman need ask for any
right to reply, because no one in thej^enate
made any attempt to reply seriously to the
hon. member's speech. There is just one
remark I should like to make with respect
to something which fell from the hon. mem-
ber from Pictou. The hon. gentleman told
us that he was a tyro, bijt I think the
manner in which he delivered his remarks
showed that he had practised in some other
field if he was a tyro in the Senate. I
think the remarks he made with regard to
shipping are calculated to create a wrong
impression in the House. The hon. gentle-
man stated what is perfectly true — that
there is a general depression in shipping.
As I understood the hon. gentleman, he
claimed that it was unfair to attribute the
decline in the ship-building industry of Can-
ada to the National Policy. If the hon. gen-
tleman from Pictou will bear with me, I shall
refer to the statistics given in the report of
the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. He
will find that on the 31st December, 1873,
there were on the register books of the Do-

Digitized by

Google

The Commercial Policy [MARCH 2, 1893] of Canada.

243

minion of Canada, 6,783 vessels of a tonna-
ge of 1,073,718 tons. He can follow up the
returns year after year to 1878 and he will
find that the registered vessels in Canada
and the tonnage continued to increase until
the year 1879, and that from the year 1879,
when the National Policy was introduced,
the number of vessels built and the tonnage
continued to decrease and at the time the
last report of the Minister of Marine and
Fisheries was made up, the number of ves-
sels had fallen off to 6,691, a drop of about
500, and the tonnage had fallen from 1,330,-
015 to 1,024,000. The hon. gentleman from
Shell River gave us the statistics as to Bri-
tish shipping and in that old country shipp-
ing, instead of continuously declining, as
oura hasdeclined, has continuously increased,
and the hon. gentleman will see that his re-
marks with respect to the want of knowledge
of the hon. gentleman from Shell River were
not, perhaps, quite so appropriate as he sup-
posed.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— In the years
1874 to 1878 inclusive, while the Grit party
was in power, the ships built in Canada
decreased by 80 per cent. We had a number
of old vessels that could not be sold. The
registered tonnage may have increased,
because we had a number of old vessels that
we could not sell, but the ship building
decreased 80 per cent, and had that continued
we would not have had any ships in Canada
at all in ten years. The old ships were kept
and the number built during that time were
added to those on the register and increased
the tonnage.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I allowed the hon.
gentleman to interrupt me, but I do not
think he has made the matter any better.
The oflScial returns prepared by the Govern-
ment and similar returns prepared by all
Governments up to the present time, show
that up to 1878 there was a continuous
increase in the tonnage of this country in
the number of vessels on the register and in
the registered tonnage, and that from the
year 1878, when the National Policy went
into operation, there has been a continual
decrease until the present time. I do not
say that one thing has been the cause of the
other — I say there is that coincidence.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH — I say the
building of vessels decreased during the
period to which I have referred 80 per
cent.

16^

H<m. Mr. BOULTON— With the permis-
sion of the House I will yield to the expressed
desire of so many members and ask permis-
sion to withdraw the motion. (Cries of No I
no ! Yes I yes ! and carried I)

The SPEAKER— The motion is carried.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — Yeas and nays.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I do not see
why we should be kept here two days debat-
ing a question of this kind without having a
decisive vote upon it.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I asked the hon.
gentleman to withdraw the motion, but I
believe a member can only withdraw it with
the unanimous consent of the House.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY — I have never in my
experience known that consent to be with-
held when the hon. gentleman himself asks
for it.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I demand that the
yeas and nays be taken.

The SPEAKER— I declared the motion
to withdraw, carried.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not think that
the fact that His Honour the Speaker has
said carried would prevent the yeas and
nays being taken, if there are two members
who insist upon it. I am surprised that
there are two members who insist upon it.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I certainly insist
upon it.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I think it would be a
very great pity if the hon. member from Hali-
fax presses for a division, for this reason : as I
understand, he wishes a vote to be taken
whether the hon. gentleman shall have leave
to withdraw his resolution. Now, while I
am opposed to the hon. gentleman's resolu-
tion, and while if it were put to a straight
vote whether this motion be assented to or
not I should vote straight against it, I do
not want to be put in the position of deny-
ing the usual courtesy accorded to every
gentleman in this House of being permitted
to withdraw a motion.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— If I am in order I
will insist upon having a division taken.
The House has been detained here for two
days discussing an abstract question, and I

Digitized by

Google

244

The Census [SENATE] o/l891.

wish it to be understood by a vote taken on
this resolution, that this honourable House
will not waste two days listening to a speech
from which no benefit can be derived.

Hon. Mr. SPEAKER— The question is
on the motion of the hon. member from
Shell River that he be permitted to with-
draw his motion.

The motion was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 6 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Otfuwa, Friday^ March Srd, 1893,
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3 o'clock.
Prayer and routine proceedings.
' THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills, reported without
amendment from the Committee on Banking
and Commerce, were read the third time and
passed : —

Bill (19) " An Act respecting the Ham-
ilton Provident and Loan Society." (Mr.
Maclnnes, Burlington).

Bill (15) " An Act to incorporate the
Dominion Burglary Garantee Co., limited."
(Mr. McMillan).

NOVA SCOTIA PERMANENT
BUILDING SOCIETY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

another clause exempting from the operation
of the Act real estate acquired or owned by the
Society prior to the Act of 1887. When the
Bill was before the committee, it was not
thought desirable to extend the time to twelve
years, and they therefore struck out clause 2
as it stood in the Bill, and simply amended
clause 1 1 of the Statute of 1 887, by adding
the following subsection, which was consi-
dered reasonable : —

The duty to sell within seven years real estate
! acquired in satisfaction of anj' debt shall not apply
I to real estate acquired or owned by the Society on
or before the 23 of June, A. D. 1887.

The Bill now simply amends the Act of

I 1887 so far that the obligation to sell the

land within the term of seven years does

not apply to any land acquired or owned

prior to the Act of 1887.

Hon. Mr. ALMON moved that the amend-
ments be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was then read the third time and passed.

THE CENSUS OF 1891.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. TASSE moved—

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the (>ovemor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, copies of all representations and letters
which have been addressed to the Department of
Agriculture, on the subject of errors made, or
which may have been made, in the census of 1890-
91, as to the number of English-speaking and of
French-speaking people.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN, from the Committee
on Banking and Commerce, reported Bill (F)
" An Act to amend An Act respecting the
Nova Scotia Permanent Benefit Building
Society and Savings Fund," with amend-
ments.

He said : — The Bill as it was originally
presented to the House was for the object
of repealing one of the sections of the Act of
1 887, respecting this Savings Society. Thatsec-
tion obliged the Society to sell lands acquired
by them in satisfaction of any debt within
seven years after being so acquired. The
Bill proposed to give the Society the power of
holding any property acquired in that way
for twelve years instead of seven. There was

He said — This motion speaks for itself.
I should like to know when the information
for which I move will be laid before the
House.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS~The Government
has no objection to the adoption of this
motion, but it is impossible for me tD state
when the returns will be laid upon the
table of the House. The Department Ls now
very busily engaged preparing addresses and
returns for the Lower House, and extra
hands will have to be employed to satisfy
the demands of Parliament ; but I can
assure the hon. gentleman who is making
this motion, that there will be no undue
delay in bringing the papers down.

Digitized by

Google

Western Counties [MARCH 3, 1893] Railway CoJs Bill

245

Hon. Mr. TASSI^- I should !ike to have
the papers as early as possible, as I intend
to take further action.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The matter will be
attended to.

WESTERN COUNTIES RAILWAY
COMPANY BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved the second
reading of Bill (38) " An Act respecting the
Western Counties Railway Company and to
change the name of the Company to the
Yarmouth and Annapolis Railway Com-
pany.

He said : — In 1887 an Act was passed
bringing the Western Counties Railway
Company, which had been incorporated by
the Legislature of Nova Scotia, under the
jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada.
This Act declared the Western Counties
Railway and lines now and hereafter
owned by the said company to be for
the general advantage of Canada. Chap.
77 of the Act of 1887, authorizes the com-
pany to issue debentures for the purpose of
paying off its liabilities and completing the
road : and it appears that under this Act of
1887, a contract was entered into with cer-
tain capitalists or brokers in Londim for
the purpose of raising £275,000. The
object of the raising of this amount was to
pay off the indebtedness of the company to i
the Government of Nova Scotia, and to
certain other creditors. A difficulty arose
between- the people of London, who are
called the syndicate in this Bill, and the
company, and there was a law suit. The
syndicate in London declined to advance
the money under the contract, and the
company brought a suit against the syndi-
cate, and I believe the company succeeded
in the suit in the court of first instance,
and an appeal was taken. Meanwhile the
prospects of the company began to brighten,
and the people of London have apparently
agreed now to carry out their contract
in a modified form. The company have
agreed with the syndicate in London
that they shall be allowed to do so,
and an agreement has been entered into,
which was made on the 31st January of the
present year, embodying the terms of this
compromise. The principal object of this

Bill is to ratify that agreement made be-
tween the company and the syndicate in
London. One of the conditions of the agree-
ment, of course, was that the appeal taken
from the decision of the court in England
was to be dropped. The Bill also provides
that the name of the company shall be
changed from the Western Counties Rail
way Company to the Yarmouth and Anna-
polis Railway Company. That is an impor-
tant change, because the new title indicates
the character of the road, and gives its two
termini in the name " Yarmouth and Anna-
polis ;" the road runs from Yarmouth to
Annapolis. I am not aware that there is
any objection to the second reading of the
Bill. The phraseology of the Bill in some
places is capable of improvement, but if any
improvement is thought necessary, that can
be made in the committee to which the Bill
will go. I may add that this Bill was care-
fully considered in the Railway Committee
of the House of Commons, the premier him-
self having taken a decided interest in it
and that the Bill, as we have it, is the re-
sult of the consideration given to the original
Bill as it was introduced in the Commons by
the Minister and the committee of the other
House.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— My hon. friend
has explained this Bill, but not perfectly.
This Bill is also to give them the right to
issue preferential stock. And there is a
novelty in the Bill to my mind ; it allows
this company, not only to be a railway
company and to have ships in connection
with the railway, but gives them power to
hold and acquire ships and to use them for
all purposes they think proper in trade and
commerce. I have known of vessels being
allowed to be built and used by a line of
railway, but by this clause they have power
to acquire, build and equip ships and to use
them in any manner they think proper.

Hon. Mr. POWER— That is a detail
which may be amended in committee.

Hon. Mr. X AULBACH— I am interested
in Nc'.i Scotia, and the Local Government
have expended a large amount of money ;
therefore, I should not like to see the rail-
way fail in consequence of going into ship-
building and commerce independent of the
line altogether. When the Bill comes before

Digitized by

Google

Central Counties [SENATE] Railway Co.'s Bill.

the Railway Committee I hope they will
look into the matter.

The motion was agreed to.

THE GRAND TRUNK, GEORGIAN
BAY AND LAKE ERIE RAILWAY
COS. BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL moved the second
reading of Bill (25) " An Act respecting the
Grand Trunk, Geoi'gian Bay and Lake Erie
Railway Co."

He said : - - This is a Bill asking for an
extension of time. It contains no unusual
provision. The second clause of it, dealing
with the mortgages, is really in the interest
of the public, and to secure those who have
the right of prior payment. These particu-
lars will be examined by the committee, of
course.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Before the motion
is adopted, I should like to call the attention
of the hon. gentleman to the provbion of
the second section, the effects of which may
have been fully explained in the committee
in the Lower House, but it appears to me to
give somewhat extraordinary powers, and I
merely call attention to it, that the com-
mittee, when they meet, may consider it.
The clause reads : -

Notwithstanding anything in the said Act of
the province of Ontario, 44 Victoria, chapter 69,
or this -Act, or anything otherwise heretofore done
by the company, and so on, that they may issue
Ixjnds, etc.

And then the latter clause pl'ovides that this
shall be a lien upon such branch and such of
the lands, tolls, revenues, and other pi*operty
of the company, forming part of or con-
nected with such branch, whether then
existing or thereafter acquired, as is men-
tioned therein, in preference and priority of
all other charges thereon. The only point I
desire to point out to the House and the
committee is how far this may interfere
with other liabilities which, previous to the
passing of the Act, would have priority, and
whether any privileges which existed previ-
ously would be destroyed.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— I think it is quite
right that the leader of the House should call
attention to this. It was my intention to

do so ; but if the leader of the House had
I read the whole section he would have seen
I that these two things come first, and then
I follows the priority given to these mortgages,
I but of course they will be fully explained in

committee.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-That does not
touch the point that I raised. There are
penalties which are imposed ; fines follow
for not complying with the provision of the
Act, respecting certain returns, and the
next provision is with reference to working
expenses. The point I desire to call attention
to is this : are there any liabilities other
than those which are incurred in the work-
ing of the road, and are there any debentures
issued prior to this issue which will be
affected by this Bill ?

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— All this will be ex-
plained.

The motion was agreed to.

CENTRAL COUNTIES RAILWAY
COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the second
' reading of Bill (31) " An Act respecting the
Central Counties Railway Co."

He said : — This Bill is merely to allow the
company to extend their line of railway.
Some two or three years ago they constructed
I some thirty or forty miles of railroad, and
! now they are desirous of continuing it
I through to Caledonia Springs, and ultima-
tely to the township of Russell, in order to
; reach the saw-mill at that point. There is
I nothing unusual in the Bill. It is of great
j importance to that section of the country,
and I presume there will be no objection to
its passing.

, The motion was agreed to.

i BUFFALO AND FORT ERIE BRIDGE
COxMPANY'S BILL.

I SECOND READING.

I Hon. Mr. McCALLUM moved the second
reading of Bill (20) "An Act to amend the
Act to incorporate the Buffalo and Fort Erie
Bridge Company."

Hesaid : — In the absence of the hon. Sen-
ator who had charge of this Bill, I move that

Digitized by

Google

Railway Construction in [ItfARCH 6, 1893] the N.W. Territories

247

it be forwarded a stage. I would say that
this is a Bill to amend the statute 54-55
Victoria, chapter 61. Two years ago they
obtained a charter to build a bridge across
the Niagara River, and they want to con-
tinue the charter and get the privilege of
build ipg a tunnel in place of a bridge, if they
think proper to do so. There is nothing
objectionable in the Bill, as far as I can see.

The motion was agreed to.
The. Senate adjourned at 4 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Monday, March Gth, 189S.

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o^clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION IN THE
NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY rose to

Ask the Government, if they are taking any
steps towards compelling the present proprietors of
the Great North-west Central, and the Manitoba
and North-west Railway Companies to complete
the construction of those raaas as provided by
their charters ?

He said : — This notice has been on the Paper
quite a number of days. Directly after I
had put it on the Paper I learned that one
of the proprietors of the Manitoba and
North-western Railway was here and was
desirous of having an interview with the
Grovernment with reference to some extra
aid that they were seeking with a view of
constructing that road on to Prince Albert.
I then concluded to defer asking the ques-
tion in the hope that some arrangement
might be arrived at that would not neces-
sitate my asking for the information. How-
ever, I have been informed that they have
had an interview with the Government and
that the answer is not satisfactory, or rather
the company themselves have not been given
any assurance such as they hoped to receive,
and therefore they are unable to go on with
the construction of the railway. I do not
think it amiss to call the attention of the
House to some facts in connection with the
country through which that railway is sup-
posed to pass, and the effect that the non-

completion of it as provided for by the
charter, is having on the settlers. I think
something over 200 miles of the Manitoba
and North-western Railway has been built.
The company have got a land grant of
6,400 acres a mile for the portion already
built and yet there is about 210 miles of the
road to be constructed to complete it to its
intended terminus. Prince Albert. The
company apparently are unable to go on and
raise the money to complete this route the
remainder of the distance. Some two years ago
the Government, I regret to say, employed, and
they have now, I think, employed in Dakota
an agent, Mr. Webster, who has induced
some two hundred settlers to go in and
locate on the line of that railway, some sixty
or seventy miles beyond the terminus to
which it is now built. Mr. Webster has
told me himself, and others have told me,
and I learn from letters that I receive
almost daily from settlers in that country,
that these men complain that no road is be-
ing built — that they were induced to go in
there by the Government officials, on the
promise that the railway would be built, and
the land has been opened up for settlement,
and their entries have been received, and
now the company is not going . on with the
road. This is a very deplorable state of
things to these people who have been induc-
ed to go in there with the expectation that
there would be a railway built. As I have
said, they have located fifty, sixty, seventy,
and eighty miles beyond the present termi-
nus of the road, and anybody knows the
great hardships and privations which these
people have to undergo in consequence of
locating at such a distance from railway
communication. The last time that I was
in Regina, in the month of January, I met
a man who was coming, I think, from
Nebraska. He had been up and
down the Carrot River district,
and he was about to bring men out this
spring. I contend that as this company
received a large amount they ought to go on
and build the railroad; and I think their
failure to do so is a matter for the Govern-
ment to deal with. They have received
6,400 acres of land per mile as a subsidy for
the building of this road ; and they are ask-
ing nearly 825,000 per mile for that land
grant. If the land was put up at any reason-
able price, I think the money might be raised
to enable them to go on and build the road.
The route is across a prairie country, and

Digitized by

Google

248

Railway Construction in [SlilNATE] the N.- W. Territories.

there is no physical obstruction. There are
no large iron bridges to build, and no rocks
to excavate, such as you have in the eastern
portion of Canada. It is across a prairie
country and easily built ; but the company
have asked such large prices for the land that
they have not raised the money, and the
result is the road is at a stand-still and noth-
ing is being done ; while at the same time
the Government, Ithink unwisely, have allow-
ed their agents to induce people to go in
there and settle on the land, in the anticipa-
tion that the railway would be built. Owing to
that fact, I think the Grovemment are in
duty bound to see the road built, as far as
the settlers are located, anyway, and if they
desir^ to stop when they have got that far,
well and good, but they should not allow
the settlers to go any further than the ter-
minus of the road, wherever that may be.
The Government gave a large subsidy, $80,-
000 a year, to the Long Lake and Prince
Albert Railway ; I think if they had given
that subsidy to this railway, which goes to
the same country, it would have been the
means of doing a great deal more good than
the other road has accomplished. I think this
is eminently a matter for the consideration of
tlie Government, inasmuch as they have al-
lowed settlers to go in there believing that
the road would be completed ; and the policy
of the Government in the North-west, in my
opinion, is wrong. It is a libel on the coun-
try— I state it advisedly — to say that 6,400
acres of land per mile is not enough of a sub-
sidy to build a railway. I think it is sufficient,
and I say that if the Government of the
country will change their policy and
advance $1.50 an acre on this land for which
they themselves ask $3, it will enable
the company to complete the road. The
Government to-day ask $3 per acre for lands
in the North-west Territories ; they have
increased the price during these years of de-
pression of which the farmers have been
complaining ; still, I think the Government
showed a very wise knowledge of the coun-
try when they increased the price of land
from $2.50 to $3 per acre; and if they
would advance $1.50 an acre on this land it
would enable this company or any other
company who choose to undertake it, to go
on and complete the road ; and the Govern-
ment could then hold first security on this
land of $1.50 per acre. The railway would
then he l>uilt and the country opened up,
and the people would be satisfied. A few

years ago, when people saw a railroad map-
ped out on a plan, they went there in antici-
pation that the road would be built. They
are doing that to some extent now; but if
the policy I have suggested were adopted,
the company would be able to build the rail-
road. At $1.50 per acre for 6,4C0 acrtes, the
amount raised would be nearly $10,000 a
mile. Valuing it at $3 an acre there would
be another $10,000 left, which would be
ample, because, as I have said, if the road
were opened up the Government could sell
the land and recoup themselves, the Railway
would be built, and the people could settle
along the line. Now, it is not necessary
for me to go into any lengthy speech on this
matter. These are the plain facts of the
case, and I think the matter is one that the
Government should take into their very
serious consideration, and provide a remedy
for, because they have induced settlers to go in
there. I have not made inquiry recently,
but I know that last session such was the
case. I have had correspondence with Mr.
Webster, in Dakota, about the number of
people settling in that country. The Gov-
ernment should either prevent him sending
anybody else there, or go on and build the
railroad in order, in some measure, to re-
dress the wrong and suffering these people
are enduring in this locality. Then with
reference to the Great North-west Central,
that railroad, if built where it ought to go,
would pass through a very large tract of
country which has been settled ten years.
I know that noiiih of where I live, in the
Primitive Methodist colony, there were
several townships well settled up in the
spring of 1883. I have met those men con-
tinually since they went in there on the
promise of the railway being built. There
was a charter granted, but the parties to
whom the charter was granted have been
trading among themselves and quarrelling,
and to-day they are in law ; the proprietors,
Mr. Codd and Mr. Charlebois, are in law
about it, and nothing has been done to com-
plete the road ; the people are settled away
in advance of the road, and living there ex-
pecting it to be built ; and through the
quarrel between these men nothing has been
done, and nothing is being now done to
compel them to complete the road. I do
not know what course should be adopted ;
but I know something should be done. I
have been all over that northern country ; I
know it well ; I have been at Touchwood

Digitized by

Google

Railway Construction in [MARCH 0, 1893] the K-W. Territories. 249

and north of Qu'Appelle, and I know that a
great portion of that district has been settled ;
and a greater portion would be occupied if
there were a railway there. These people are
raising crops and living in hopes that the rail-
way will some day reach them. I have a large
number of petitions which I have been re-
quested to present to the Government, ask-
ing that the charter be taken away from both
companies; but I have refused to present
them, for the reason that it would almost be
an advertisement that the present company
could not complete their lines ; and a new com-
pany would not be likely to undertake the
work. I thought it would be better to try and
encourage in some way or other the present
proprietors to go on and complete the road.
I do not think it is a wise policy to allow men
to get hold of a charter and go into law over it,
endeavouring to make a large amount out of
it themselves. I repeat that it is a libel on
the country to say that 6,400 acres of land
is not a sufficient grant, because I know
that it ought to be, and it is ; and if the
company cannot raise the money because of
any past acts of other companies, I think it
would be a wise thing for the Government
to take the matter in hand and even
shorten the grant down to 4,000 acres, and
give them $4,000 subsidy ; the land is worth
84 an acre, and the Government ask $3 for
it ; and then they should curtail the bonding
powers to $5,000, 86,000 or $7,000 ; and still
there would be plenty of money in it. At
present these men are selling the bonds ; they
have no status in the money market and
they are not able to raise the necessary capi-
tal ; consequently, they have to take a large
discount on the value of the bonds. In view
of the fact that people have been allowed
to go into this country in the expecta-
tion that Parliament would compel these
parties to complete the road, I think it is a
serious matter to let the companies drift along
as they are doing. The fate of these people
is at stake, and something should be done ;
these companies should be compelled to go
on with what they have undertaken to do.
I bring this matter before the House because,
as I say, I am besieged with petitions and
letters ; before I came down, and since my
arrival here I have received letters and peti-
tions in this matter ; and I have written to
the parties saying I did not think it was wise
to present petitions asking that the charters
should be discontinued, and allow any one
else to come in, because I do not think other

parties could come in and build the road as
favourably as these parties could. I think it
would be wise to advance $1.50 per acre,
and hold the land as a security. It is worth
$3 an acre ; the Government are asking that
for it. They have increased the price from
$2.50 to $3, showing that that is their opinion
of its value. They could advance the money
and hold a first claim against the land, and
they would be able to recoup themselves.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — A moment's reflec-
tion will convince the House that the Gov-
ernment has no power to compel a company
to proceed with the construction of a road
which it commenced under a charter ob-
tained from Parliament, though it may have
a Government subsidy. The only course
that the Government can pursue, unless it
changes the terms on which the subsidy was
given, is to deprive the company of the sub-
sidy m case the terms of the charter are not
fulfilled. That seems to be the case with
the two companies to which the hon. gentle-
man refers. They obtained charters from
Parliament to construct roads through a
portion of Manitoba and the North-west
Territories, in aid of which the Government
agreed to give 6,400 acres of land per mile.
They proceeded with the construction of
the road to a certain extent, and then they
stopped. The only penalty the Government
can impose under the circumstances is to
annul the land grant. Then the question
may arise as to whether more favourable or
other terms should be made with them —
that would be adopting the suggestion
which the hon. gentleman himself has
made, of retaining the lands in the hands
of the Government, and advancing them a
cash subsidy in lieu thereof ; or to allow the
charter to lapse by its non-fufilment, and
then grant a charter to other parties.
There are many difficulties that will present
themselves to the latter course being pur-
sued. The importance of the construction
of these roads is fully realized by the Gov-
ernment as well as by those who have taken
a deep interest in them. The object the
Government had in granting, as I thought
at the time, large and ample subsidies, was
to open up and develop that country, and
make it easy of access to the immigrants
who desire to settle there. I do not know,
nor have I ever heard before, that Mr.
Webster, the agent in Dakota, or any one
else acting for the Government, represented

Digitized by

Google

250

Railway Construction in [SENATE] the N.-W, Territories.

to those who have been brought back to
the country, or those brought into the
country who never were in Canada before,
that the Government was building this
road. It may be possible that the agent
pointed out to them that the road was
being built in a certain direction under a
subsidy from the Government, and that
they would, if they settled in that imme-
diate locality, have the advantages of an
outlet by the means of that railway. That^
I think, is in all probability the inducement
that was held out to these people. If the
company have failed to carry out the terms
of their charter the Government can scarcely
be held responsible for their failure. The
hon. gentleman says that 6,400 acres of
land ought to be sufficient to enable them
to raise money, not only to commence,
but to construct and complete the road.
Past experience, unfortunately, for what
reason I am not prepared to say,
has not verified that statement. This com-
pany is composed of some of the most
wealthy men we have in Canada. It is
represented that they have spent some
twenty odd thousand dollars per mile on
the road already constructed, and that they
are unable to raise money in the English
market upon the security which they offer —
that is, of the ix)ad which is already con-
structed and the 6,400 acres of land per
mile.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— What did the hon.
gentleman say was the cost per mile of the
road already constructed 1

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The road, if I am
correctly informed, cost from §20,000 to
$23,000 per mile for the portion already con-
structed. I wish the House to understand dis-
tinctly that I give no opinion as to the expen-
diture on that railway. I merely state the
fact as it has been given to me. If, as the
hon. gentleman says, it is a libel on the
country to suppose a road cannot be con-
structed for a subsidy of 6,400 acres of land
per mile, I scarcely know what to term it.
If it be a libel to say it cannot be built for
that subsidy, then it is an evidence of
improper expenditure of money in what has
already been done. The suggestion made by
the hon. gentleman in reference to retaining
the land and giving a money grant is one
which I will bring under the notice of my col-
whether they will adopt that prin-

ciple I am not prepared at the present mo-
ment to say. The House and the country
know that in selling public lands by a Gov-
ernment the principal is eaten up to a very
great extent by the expenses attending the
sale and management of them. Now, I have
understood that instead of the company
asking $4 per acre for these lands, they have
offered the Manitoba Government a large
quantity of the lands already earned
for $2.50 per acre, in order to re-
lieve them of their indebtedness to
the Manitoba Government ; and their legal
agent told me only two or three days ago
that they had disposed of a large quantity
of land in England at $1 per acre in order
to raise money to pay interest on the bonds
as they fell due, and one reason why he was
urging still further aid to this road was that
he felt that a great injury would be done to
the country if the coupons upon the deben-
tures, due in a short time, were not paid.
However, my answer to that was, that if
the Government were to step in and relieve
every company that has given bonds upon
their road when they fail to meet the interest
upon their indebtedness, it would be equal to
assuming the responsibility of all banki^pt
concerns in the country, and that was a prin-
ciple which I did not think the Government
could adopt. However, the Government, I
can assure the hon. gentleman, is as anxious
for the construction of these roads and the
opening up and developing of that country as
he or any one else could possibly be, and any-
thing they can do, consistent with the means
they have at their disposal, will in the
future, as in the past, be done to assist
them. I can say further, that in two or
three cases the time for the completion of
these roads has been extended by the Gov-
ernment when applications and representa-
tions have been made before them which
induced them to believe that, with further
time to enable the company to negotiate
with moneyed men in this country and in the
older countries, they would be able to com-
plete the road. They have so far failed, and
in the case of one of these roads the Govern-
ment has declined at the present, until they
have further information, to extend the
time for the completion of the road. If that
course be pursued, their charter will to that
extent lapse, and then it will be for the
Government to consider what steps should
be taken in order to enable others who are
desirous of taking hold of those enterprises

Digitized by

Google

Doran [MARGE 7, 1893] Divorce BilL

251

to complete the road. Beyond th^t I do
not know that I can say anything. If there
is any further information that the hon. gen-
tleman would like to have, I should be very
glad to give it if in my power.

DEPARTMENTAL RETURNS.

INQUIRIES.

Hon. Mr. MclNNES (B.C.)~Before the
Orders of the Day are called, I should like to
ask the leader of the Government when I
may expect those returns that I asked for
some time since — the first moved for about
five weeks ago, and the other about two weeks
ago 1 The one relates to correspondence with
respect to the quarantine station in British
Columbia, and the other to correspondence
between the Dominion Government officials
in British Columbia and the Government
here and the officers of the Canadian Pacific
Railway steamers with respect to the intro-
duction of small-pox last May and June.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I can assure the
hon. member that we are not neglecting his
request at all. Some of the clerks are even
working at night to prepare all the returns
asked for in relation to the census and other
matters and also in connection with quaran-
tine. T shall call the Deputy Minister's atten-
tion to my hon. friend's great anxiety to have
these papers brought down as soon as pos-
sible.

Hon. Mr. MclNNES (B.C.)— I do not
wish the Government to understand that I
am complaining. I am merely asking when
I may expect to get these papers.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE -I should like
to know when I may expect to have a
return concerning the Experimental Farm,
for which I moved some days ago. I do not
think it would take two hours' time to pre-
pare it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I am in hopes that
I may be able to bring it down in a very
few flays.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (17) "An Act respecting the St.
Lawrence and Adirondack Railway Com-
pany." (Mr. McMillan.)

Bill (44) " An Act respecting the Mani-
toba and South-eastern Railway Company."
(Mr. Bemier.)

. The Senate adjourned at 4 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tuesday, March 7th, 189-1

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.
DORAN DIVORCE BILL.

REPORTED PROM COMMITTEE.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN, from the Conmiittee
on Divorce, to whom was referred the Bill (E)
** An Act for the relief of James Frederick
Doran," presented their report.

He said : It will be within the recollec-
tion of the members that substitutional ser-
vice was sanctioned in this case, in conse-
quence of the inability of the petitioner
to find where the respondent was. Since
then the petitioner learned that the respon-
dent was on her way from Europe on an
Atlantic steamer bound for New York.
Fortunately, the petitioner was able to
make personal service on her when she
landed in New York, so substitutional ser-
vice was not required. I move that the re-
port be now adopted.

The motion was agreed to.

THIRD READING.

The following Bill, reported without
amendment from the Committee on Rail-
ways, Telegraphs and Harbours, was i^ad
the third time and passed : —

Bill (31) An Act respecting the Central
Counties Railway Company. — (Mr. Clemow.)

BUFFALO AND FORT ERIE BRIDGE
COMPANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (20) "An Act to amend the Act
to incorporate the Buffalo and Fort Erie
Bridge Company," with an amendment.

Digitized by

Google

zoz

Grand Trunk, Georgian Bay [SENATE] and Lake Erie By. Co.'s BiLL

He said : — The amendment to this Bill is
short and requires very little explanation.
The Bill is to amend a preceding Act, and
one of its clauses which related to the bear-
ing of the General Railway Act upon the
provisions of this Act was amended by intro-
ducing into it " the said Act," that is to say
the Act which this Bill amends, as well as
this Bill itself, so that it would read that the
provisions of the Railway Act have been in
controvention of the Act which this Bill
amends. This clause was so obviously in the
interest of the promoters of the Bill that
there was no objection to the amendment. I
move that the report be adopted.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon Mr. McKIMDSEY moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

GRAND TRUNK, GEORGIAN BAY

AND LAKE ERIE RAILWAY

COMPANY'S BILL.

REFERRED BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours' re-
ported Bill (25) *'An Act respecting the
Grand Trunk, Georgian Bay and Lake Erie
Railway Company," without amendment.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I wish to make one
or two observations with respect to this
report. When this Bill was before the
Riiilway Committee the committee were
under the impression that tlie only effect of
the first clause would be to extend the time
for the beginning and completion of the
work specified in the Bill for two years be-
yond the time allowed by existing legisla-
tion. The committee saw no objection to
that and passed the first clause. Since the
meeting of the committee, it has come to my
knowledge that the change made by this
Bill in the existing law was really much
more important. The Act in 1887 made
one section of the Ontario Act applicable to
the works of this company. The first clause
of this Bill makes the whole Ontario Act
applicable to the works of the company, and
the consequence may be very serious. I
have not had time to examine and see
exactly what the results will be, but clearly
the results may be very serious and may

prevent the company from going on with
the works contemplated by this Bill, and I
think that if the hon. gentleman in charge
of the Bill has no objection, the wisest plan
would be to refer the Bill back to the Com-
mittee on Railways for further consideration.
I do not care to move that without the con-
sent of the hon. gentleman who has charge
of the Bill, but if he has no objection I
think it would be desirable to do so.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— -I do not know that I
could make any objection to a motion of that
kind being presented to the House. I am
quite prepared, if it is thought necessary that
any change should be made in the Bill, to
consent to the course suggested. I will only
remark that, while offering no objection to
this course being taken, I do not myself
think it necessary, for this reason, that the
Bill has undergone a very careful examina-
tion on the part of very eminent lawyers.
Mr. Bell, the solicitor of the Grand Trunk,
has looked into it very carefully and examin-
ed it minutely. It has gone through the
House of Commons, where amendments were
made to it. If any hon. gentleman will refer
to the original copy of the Bill introduced in
the House of Commons, and the copy as it
comes to us, he will observe that two amend-
ments were made in that committee, indicat-
ing clearly that very close and particular
attention was given to its provisions. I may
also mention that in addition to the Bill
having gone through the ordeal of a very
close examination at the hands of the Rail-
way Committee of the House of Commons,
it has been considered by our own committee,
although perhaps not quite so fully. I think
there was a very fair discussion upon it in
our own committee, but still some point
might have been overlooked. My own view,
however, would be that it is unnecessary for
us to refer it back for consideration. I think
that the parties interested in the Bill have
taken all the precautions necessary to have
their desires embodied ; and if, in carrying
out the provisions of the Bill, any inconveni-
ence or trouble arises, they have themselves
to blame, and not the House. I should
prefer, of course, making the motion for its
third reading, as it has been thus carefully
examined ; but I shall not stand in the way,
if the hon. gentleman from Halifax, or any
other hon. gentleman, thinks it necessary to
refer it back to the committee. I do not
feel disposed to stand in the way at all of

Digitized by

Google

Wetland Canal [MARCH 7, 1893] Investigation.

253

the fullest investigation being made, if it is
required.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The law clerk,
whose duty it ^^^s to examine the Bill,
found that it was open to the objection
which I have indicated, and I understand
the hon. Chairman of the committee takes
the same view that I do ; and although in a
certain sense the promoters of the Bill are
responsible, still, if we find in the passage
of a Bill through this House that there is
some defect in it which will defeat the ob-
jects of the promoters, it is our duty to
remedy the defect if possible ; and inas-
much as no harm can come to the Bill if it
is referred back, and it can be reported
back on Friday next and assented to in the
other House, amended or unamended as the
case may be, the safest way is to have the
Bill referred back to the Railway Committee.
I therefore move that the Bill be referred
back to the Railway Conmiittee for further
consideration.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I have taken the
responsibility of seconding the motion, as it
has not been objected to by the promoter of
the Bill, who has taken a very fair course ;
but in answer to what my hon. friend on the
other side of the House has said with regard
to this particular amendment, that it was in
his judgment not at all necessary that it
should be considered again, perhaps because
it has been subjected to the scrutiny of emi-
nent counsel and the committee of the other
House, I may say, in justice to myself and
the members of the committee of which I
have the honour to be Chairman, that it is
not the first time that we have had to cor-
rect mistakes in Bills which had been sub-
jected to the same ordeal ; therefore I did
take notice of the objection at the time,
but without comndtting myself to what my
view may be on looking into it. We had
not the same opportunities of scanning it
very carefully, and I think it would be in
the interest of justice and good legislation
that we should have an opportunity of con-
sidering it again.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — I make no objection.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was referred back to the committee.

WELLAND CANAL INVESTIGA-
TION.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM i-ose to

Im^uire of the (iovemment what action, if nny,
they intend to take upon the evidence taken at the
Welland Canal investigation before A. F. Wood,
E^q. , as to the management of that important work
by William Ellis, superintendent, and others under
hmi, as disclosed by the evidence ?

He said : This question which I have on the
paper to-day is not a new one by any means ;
many of you will remember that it has been
before the House for the last four years. I
do not intend to-day to make any very
lengthened remarks on the question, because
I do not intend to tire the House. I have
said enough on it already, particularly if the
answer of the Grovernment is satisfactory. I
know that they have had plenty of time and
hon. gentlemen will all remember the reply
the leader of the Government made to me
in this Chamber two or three years ago, and
last year particularly ; but I hope the Gov-
ernment is now prepared to give me an
answer, and it depends on the answer that
is made by the leader of the House whether
I shall make a few remarks or not ; and if I
consider it my duty in the interests of
the country to make any remarks, I hope
the House will put up with me ; I will not
be very long. I do not know that I will do
on this occasion as I threatened to do last
year if they did not dismiss this gentleman
who has been guilty of wrong-doing on the
Welland Canal ; I remember every remark
that I made on that occasion. I said I
was bound to get the evidence before the
country ; I said often in this House I did not
see why the Government had anything to
hide in this matter. There may have been some
blunders in the Department, and that may
be the reason why they do not take action ;
the Department themselves maybe somewhat
guilty as well as the superintendent of the
Welland Canal. I do not wish, however, to
say anything further until I get the answer.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I was going to pre-
mise what I had to say by expressing the
hope that the hon. gentleman would not
begin at Genesis and end at Revelations,
and yet upon a little reflection it might do
us a great deal of good if he would read the
whole book. I can only say in reply to the
question asked by the hon. gentleman that

Digitized by

Google

254

Welland Ganal [SENATE] Investigation.

I made inquiries at the Railway Department,
and I was informed by the Minister that the
evidence brought out suggested certain re-
forms in the management of the Welland
Canal, and he assured me that he was now
seriously engaged in looking into the whole
matter with a view to making such changes
AS he could, and which he trusted would meet
the views of the hon. gentleman, more par-
ticularly in reducing the staff and the ex-
pense attending the working of the canal.
What that will be I am not at this present
moment able to inform the House ; but I am
sure I know that his intention is to try, as
far as possible, to meet the hon. gentleman's
views.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM~In reply I have
just a few words to say. Does the hon.
Minister mean to tell me they are studying
the evidence ? Does he mean to tell me any
member of the Government ever looked at
the evidence ? He was himself for a short
time Acting Minister of Railways and
Oanals, and this has been a burning question,
as you all know. Did he look at it ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Yes, I did very
-carefully.

Hon. Mr. McCALLU^I — At the evidence,
or at Mr. Wood's report ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Both, and the hon.
gentleman's speech in addition.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM — I have no doubt
at all if the hon. Minister looked at my
speech and if he believed what I said — and
I stand by every word of it — he would come
to the conclusion that Mr. Ellis and these
parties ought to have been cleaned out long
ago. I can refer hon. gentlemen to the Sen-
ate Debates and read what the leader of the
House stated last year. He said that im-
mediat-ely aft-er the session was over they
would go on and look into this matter. Are
they aware that the Dominion is losing a
large amount of money by their inaction in
this matter? Even Mr. Wood, the commis
sioner — a man who has broken all the com-
mandments in trying to shield the wrong-
doing in the Welland Canal — tells the Gov-
ernment of the country that they are losing
$20,000 a year ; and I can tell them if they
look at the accounts last year, that with the
man they had to look after affairs, although
he has not got full control, $20,000 was

saved last year, as the result of my action
in the matter. Why should they delay
action? I am not going over what I
explained to this House before ; but if any
hon. gentleman will look ^t the evidence he
will see that the Government are a^ing
unjustly by the people in allowing the matter
to stand. Probably the Government them-
selves are to blame. I say that to some
extent they are to blame. They were to
blame for Mr. Ellis's conduct in allowing him
to go on spending the country's money,
without any check on him, when they had,
you may say, a written document before
them establishing his guilt. They made
him disgorge $475 since, but there is a lot
more to be recovered ; there is this other
money which he took by means of the man
that built his house, as disclosed by the
evidence. The Government is not acting
fairly in this matter. The hon. leader tells me
to-day, very much the same as I was told last
year, that something will be done immediately,
but he does not tell us how it is going to be done.
It may go on for another year. It is getting
to be an old story. All I ask the Govern-
ment to do is this — as I said before, I want
the Government to dismiss these parties that
have been guilty of wrong-doing, or to pub-
lish the evidence to the world so that every-
body can see what is taking place on the
Welland Canal. It is a very unpleasant
thing for me to bring up in the House every
session a matter of this kind. People say I
am vindictive in followingup Mr. Ellis. I have
no feeling against anybody, but I want to
see justice done. I spent four months of my
time trying to get at the facts in this matter.
Mr. Wood, the Commissioner, was sent up
to St. Catharines to cover up the iniquities
on the Welland Canal, and here we are to-
day, four years after the investigation, with-
out any step taken to punish the wrong
doers. I am sorry that the Government
have not got time to spend even half a day
to look into this business. They have done
the rest of the business of the country well,
but they have done nothing in this matter.
They do not even take enough interest in it
to look at the evidence. My hon. friend
told me that he looked at the evidence ; it
is the first intimation that I have had of
any Minister of the Crown having done so.
Will the hon. gentleman tell me what part
of the evidence he has examined, because
I am a little suspicious? He looked at
Mr. Wood's report — he looked at two of

Digitized by

Google

Wetland Canal [MAKCH 7, 1893] Investigation.

255

them, becaiise there are two. You know
how difficult it was to find out whether
there was more than one report. At first
the GU)veniment said there was no second
report, but I knew better. I knew there
was a second report, and finally I got it.
What object can there be in shielding these
men 1 It only shows that the Department
of Railways and Canals is mismanaged.
How otherwise could they have allowed the
Superintendent of the Welland Canal to go
on constructing public works without any
authority, while the Department paid for
them afterwards ? How could they allow
the Superintendent of the Welland Canal
to incur an expenditure of a thousand
dollars, against the report of the engineers,
and without the knowledge of the Govern-
ment, except from what I have stated here in
this House ? That is the way the business
of the Department of Railways and Canals
is being carried on. I am forced to say so,
because the evidence produced at the in-
vestigation proves it. Mr. Wood was sent
there for the purpose of covering up the
iniquity of those employed on the Welland
Canal, and he did it well. What will be
the next move? I should not wonder if
they would pension ofi" Mr. Ellis and give
him a premium for his rascality. I will
show you what great claims this man
has on the Government for superannuation,
because it has been hinted at that he should
be superannuated. He has graduated in
the public service of this country, and of
course he ought to be paid He has claims
on the Government. He took the men who
were employed on the canal, to build -his
house, and paid them with Government
money, returning it as if they had been
working for the Government, and the pay-
master paid them, and they signed the pay-
list as if they had been working for the
Government. After three years, during
which the evidence has been before the
Government, they have not moved yet, and
I tell them one and all that every word 1
say is proven by the e^'idence. That is not
all. I gave them memoranda where to
find the evidence substantiating what I
have said, but they were too busy — they
have not had time to look into this matter — it
is beneath them. Mr. Ellis received $100,
and free gas and fuel from the Gas Com-
pany. Was it for his good looks, or was it
for favouring the company by turning the
gas down during the season of navigation.

to the injury of the country, while we were
paying $10,000 a year for gas to light the
I canal from sunset to sunrise ? It has been
i proven by the evidence, although the report
1 of Mr. Wood does not show it, that people
were drowned in the canal because the gas
was turned down when it should have been
turned up. Since I called attention to the
fact in the House a year ago, we have had
the gas burning full flare on the canal. Mr.
Wood says the evidence was unsatisfactory.
Even the lock tender who should have
been on the lock where these people
were dix)wned was away at the time.
Mr. Ellis had his teaming charged
to the Government, such as hauling
manure, iron fencing, etc., besides his livery
bill. They made him disgorge some of his
livery bill, but they did not get half of it.
Here they have thisgentleman on the Welland
Canal and he cannot order ten cents' worth of
expenditure. The Government lost con-
fidence in him after the revelations at the
investigation. We have a double head on
the Welland Canal now. Mr. Ellis is there,
but his usefullness is gone, and they have a
man there to look after him to keep him
honest. Although none of the changes are
made that even Mr. Wood advocated on the
canal, yet by having this man there they
saved $25,000 to the country last year. Mr.
Ellis threatned to kick men out of his office
because they had formerly refused to grant
his requests. That is a nice officer to have
on the canal. What were his requests 1
They refused to endorse his paper and they
refused to lend him money. They refused,
worst of all, to write lettei*s to Sir Charles
Tupper when Mr. Ellis was blowing his own
horn, in order that he might get extra pay.
He must have got somebody else to blow his
horn, because they raised his salary from
$2,000 to $2,900 a year and $300 a year for
travelling expenses, but that did not satisfy
the Government. They had to pay him $50
a month more. But when the matter was
brought out they made him disgorge $4 75 of it.
Of course the Government ought to super-
annuate this gentleman. He established a
treasury board on the Welland Canal, com-
posed of the clerk, the paymaster and him-
self. He pensioned off a man on the Welland
canal for three years and seven months,
putting him down for so many days every
month when he knew he was not working.
The paymaster and the clerk knew it also.
Mr. Ellis had this pensioner put down under

Digitized by

Google

256

Wetland Canal [SKNATE] Investigation,

several diflferent forms to hide it from the
Government. The evidence shows all that.
Mr. Ellis made forty -three false returns to
the Government, trying to cover it up. Here
is a man, after all I have said about him,
who is still employed on the Welland Canal.
They say they are going to look into this
matter. They were going to look into it
four years ago. I suflfered a good many
indignities about this matter. I said last
year, and I say now, I can go on every
stump throughout the Dominion and explain
the way this Welland Canal has been mis-
managed by the Government, and still be a
Conservative. 1 could not l)e anything else.
What are the Government keeping these
men for ? I have sent a list of them to the
Government and they do not act on it. Mr.
Ellis built a township bridge at the cost of
the canal — took $1,000 out of the canal
funds against the report of the engineer.
He did that to please his friends. The Gov-
ernment cannot show by the pay-lists in the
Department that that bridge has been built.
I know they cannot, because I have gone
through the lists for nine years and cannot
find it. That is a good deal of work, but
the Government of this country never
sent me assistance. I have had to fight Mr.
Ellis and the canal officials and all their
friends and their attorney, and last,
but not least, I had to fight the Commissi-
oner. The Commissioner was the worst of
all, because he was invested with authority.
He was thei-e with the powers of a judge.
The idea of a judge receiving information
from the Government what to do ! When I
put a question squarely that a witness should
answer, when they were getting money to
pay Mr. Ellis's debts, the Commissioner would
not make the witnesses answer — he said they
could answer if they liked. And it is the
report of that man that the Government have
before them. The Government themselves,
if they ever glanced at the evidence, required
him to make a second report and I do not
know yet but he has made a third report.
He made two any way, because I have got
them both. Mr. Ellis built a custom-house
and post office at Port Colborne with canal
money, without any authority from the De-
partment, and also a dock at the same place
at a large cost, which dock is useless. Any
one at all acquainted with the affairs of a
country knows that the Department of Rail-
ways and Canals has nothing to do at all
with building custom-houses. That is for

the Public Works Department. But whea
that house was built, nobody owned it, and
they had to pass an Order in Council vest-
ing it in the Public Works Department. Still
the Government, knowing that, continue to
keep Mr. Ellis in office. Mr. Ellis allowed
the waters of Lake Erie to run into the Wel-
land Canal causing damage to the extent of
$25,000 when he had plenty of men and
means at his disposal to prevent it. He had
his instructions, yet he allowed this to
occur: that is the report of the Engineer,
Mr. Page, that the country lost $25,000
through Mr. Ellis's neglect. If he had only
been guilty of neglect a man could forgive
him, but when you find so many peculations
coupled with the neglect you cannot over-
look it. He certified to Henry Vander-
burgh's time when he ought to have known
better. There is an old gentleman on the
canal who was worn out 15 years ago, to
my own knowledge, but they put him oa
there. He lives at a place called Allanburg,
and he keeps the time of the men working at
the gate-yard at Port Dalhousie, which is l-t
miles away. He goes down in the morning
by the train and gets there about 8 o'clock,
and leaves there at half -past five in the even-
ing. It is important to have such an
official, l>ecause he was keeping the time,
weighing material, etc., and putting the
figures down in a scratch book, as the evi-
dence shows. He has charged the Govern-
ment as high as $205 a year for railway
fares. That is by his own evidence. I had
him before the Commissioner four times be-
fore I got the truth out of him, and I found
that while he was charging the Government
$205 a year for railway fares, his tickets
cost him only $32. That man is there yet
on the canal. And that is the evidence of
Henry Vanderburgh. Mr. Ellis built struc-
tures such as bridges, flumes, and so on, that
he had no right to do, as is proven by the evi-
dence. What did he get in return ? He got a
testimonial from the manufacturers at St.
Catharines of several hundreds of dollars. I
could go on and show what great claims ^Ir.
Ellis has on the Government to retain him in
his place, but I think the few factsi have sub-
mitted to the House ought to be enough. I
cannot take the Government by the throat to
make them do right, but if they continue to
do as they have been doing in this matter, I
am bound to resent it a^ far as I can. There
are others in the wrong besides Mr. Ellis.
They could not have managed as they did if

Digitized by

Google

Wetland Canal [MARCH 7, 1893] Investigation.

25T

there had not been a ring. There is another
gentleman on the Welland Canal with whom
I must deal now — he is called John B. Smith
and another gentleman named Demare, both
assistant superintendents as they are called—
there are seven or eight assistant superint-
endents altogether. Even Mr. Wood, after
breaking nearly all the commandments,
recommended that three of the assistant super-
intendents be discharged, but the Government
have not had time to attend to it. There is
this Mr. Demare who paid money jbo himself
that he should have paid to the Government.
He says that he sent the money through
the post office to be put to the credit of the
Government, but the money never got there.
It is a question whether he sent it or not — he
says he did, but the money was never receiv-
ed by the Government. He sent men to
work at Mr. Ellis's house and also to the
house of Mr. Lawrence, clerk of the canal,
and the time was returned as if they had
been working for the Government, and they
signed the pay list. These are some of the
gentlemen whose conduct the Government
want time to look into. They had not time to
look into the accounts sent in by Mr.*Ellis and
they took it for granted that they were all right.
Mr. Ellis allowed Government employees
under him to work at Mr. Boger Miller's
contract. The time was returned as if the
men had been working for the Government.
The men were paid by the Government pay-
master while working on Mr. Roger Miller's
contract. Mr. Miller was paid in full for
his contract, although he get Government
men's labour and Government material, and
was not charged with the same. He also
let Government land on shares. Hon.
gentlemen will remember hearing me speak
in the House long ago of pickings ; one hon.
gentleman laughed when I said at the be-
ginning of the investigation that Mr. Ellis
was getting pickings. ' Now, here are the
pickings. He let Government land on
shares to be farmed, and he got one-third of
the crop for his own use. Of course the
amount was not large ; he may have got 500
or 600 bushels of grain a year. I did not
think that was a very serious thing ; but let
us consider the matter. It is in the evidence
that three of his friends, lock tenders, gave
- him a share of their crops ; they describe
the shares and the number of bushels he re-
ceived. Now, there were three of his friends
who had to be dragged out to swear to
this; and what do you suppose Mr. Ellis
17

swore to ? He swore that no man gave him a
share of his crop. This is the gentleman
we have now on the Welland canal. I tisk
the Government to look at the evidence, if
they do not believe me, an^ they will see
that what I state is the case ; they must
believe the evidence. This man to whom I
referred as giving. a great deal of trouble on
the canal, when I spoke first, locktender
Bradley, swore that Mr. Demare wanted him,
Bradley, to make a false report against a
brother locktender; so that he, Demare,
could have the said locktender dismissed
from the lock, as he, Demare, did not like
him. Well, if that is not making trouble
on the canal, I do not know what is. Mr.
Demare takes the gas ; he has burned five
jets in his house for years. During the season
of navigation the Government pay for the
gas as furnished to the shop at Port Dal-
housie, the gas going through the Govern-
ment meter there and being charged to the
Government. Mr. Ellis gets his gas from
the Gas Company ;^ Mr. Demare has his
charged to the Government. Now, this is
the condition of affairs on the Welland canal.
Is there any use of going further ?

Hon. MEMBERS— No, no.

Hon. Mr. McCALUM—There are three
or four more ; shall I deal with them
further ?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Enough.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— But the Min-
ister has not got enough }et. I am not
dealing with the hon. member for Lunen-
burg; it is the Government I am after —
the leader of the Government ; because of
all men in the service of the country, I
respect him, and I believe if he had had
charge of the Department of Railways and
Canals from the beginning he would have
looked after this matter. There is one thing
he did not look after closely in connection
with the management of his own Depart-
ment. He allowed $700 worth of boots to
be entered free ; he did not collect duty on
them. That came out in the investigation.
Roger Miller brought in that amount. of
boots, and he made 80 cents a pair ; and
that was not all. In order to sell them to
the men he returned two days' work for
every man to pay for the boots — two days'
work that was never done.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Who brought them
in?

Digitized by

Google

258

Welland Canal [SENATE] Investigation.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— Roger Miller
brought them in.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Were they leather?

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— No, rubber. I
was hunting for the boots over there, and if
I had found them I was going to have them
seized.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I can assure the
hon. gentleman he is making a statement
for wliich there is not the slightest founda-
tion. I never heard of the boot transaction
before, and no man who ever smuggled into
this country had any permission or counte-
nance from me in any case that was brought
under my notice. I have no doubt there
has been a great deal of smuggling, but the
hon. gentleman would be better acquainted
with that than I would.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM — I do not accuse
the hon. member of anything of that kind.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— But you did.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— No.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentleman
said these goods were smuggled and that I
knew it.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I didnotsay that
the hon. gentleman knew it, but I say that
if he had looked at the evidence he would
have known it. I say there is no doubt at
all that the thing was done in this way, that
the department knew of it, but that the
hon. gentleman knew nothing of it.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— They never re-
ceived any such privilege from me, or any
one else. No man ever received permission
from me, while I was Minister* of Customs
for nearly 14 years, to bring goods into this
country without paying duty.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— Well that is
straight so far, but that is the excuse they
made. That is all I can tell you ; that is the
evidence sworn to. I take the Minister's
statement on that, but I may say to him
that he can see the list here in the Debates
of the goods — the clogs to have a clog dance
at Port Dalhousie Hall ; and there is no
doubt that the duty was not paid on these
goods. The Minister says that I accuse him
of allowing that, but I do nothing of the
kind — very far from it. I might accuse him
of something else, but not of that.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Do they have clog
dances over there ?

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— Well, you can
go over, and see if you like. You must not
try to bother me, because I will not be
bothered.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— The more I get
the more I will give. Now, as to these boots,
the hon. gentleman feels very tender about
them, thinking that I want to say that he
sanctioned smuggling, but I do not say any-
thing of the kind ; I know too well for that.
But these are the facts, as he can see by
looking at the Debates, where I called atten-
tion to the page in the e\ddence where the
invoice of the boots appears, and if he wishes
to satisfy himself, I will show it to him. I.
am not finding so much fault about that ;
the trouble is that every man who bought a
pair of boots had two days' work returned,
work that he did not do, and the Government
of the country were deceived. That is what
I find fault with and not the matter of the
duty on the boots. I do not like really to
think that the hon. gentleman should get so
peppery because I mentioned a name. I
might mention my hon. friend's name in
reference to something else, because there is
no doubt at all he was instrumental in send-
ing this gentleman Wood over there to look
after the canal investigation, and I say cer-
tainly he picked the right man in Mr. Wood
to shield the wrong-doing of the canal offi-
cials. I will say this much for him, that he
is a very clever man, and he was sent there
for that purpose ; I might therefore accuse
the hon. gentleman of doing that, but I do
not accuse him of winking at the smuggling
of boots into the country. Mr. Roger Miller
had a contract at the house that Mr. Demare
lives in. It is a Government house. He
sent the Government men to do the work,
and paid the Government men and paid for
the material to do the work and Roger
Miller got the pay for it. Mr. Miller had the
contract. And what did Mr. Wood say ?
He said the work was well done, and passed
it over in that way. The hon. gentleman
says : " Oh yes, we looked at the evidence,
we read it," but I have serious doubts about
that. I have got the evidence with me here ;
it makes quite a bundle, but if any one of the
Ministers will give nie half a day, I will take
the trouble to turn from page to page and

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal [MARCH 7, 1893] Investigation.

259

show hiin where it is. When T was speak-
ing in the Senate and summing up this case,
I quoted very nearly every page where they
would find the evidence. Now, my hon.
friend, the member for Lunenburg, says he
has had enough ; he cannot stand much.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— You asked me
if I had enough, and I said yes.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM-^ohn B. Smith
is a very fine gentleman connected with the
canal, I had not much fault to find with him,
but Mr. Ellis used him to borrow money
from the employees on the canal to pay his
debts. If you look at the evidence you can
see what that arrangement was. I have not
got the page just now, but the arrangement
was this ; they paid him a dollar a day more
for the use of his horse than they ought to
have paid, if he would allow half a dollar a
day to stand back to pay Mr. Ellis's debts.
This arrangement went on for two years. There
are two other men just in the same position as
this man. I brought them tip, but this
Commissioner selected by the Government
to get at the facts on the Welland Canal
would not compel them to answer. He said
" ask him if he got any money corruptly."
The idea of a man appointed Commissioner
on the Welland Canal investigation to take
evidence and get at the facts, with the
powers of a judge, wanting to make the wit-
ness the judge of corruption ! That is what
I had to contend with. As I claim, Mr.
Ellis used this man to borrow money to pay his
debts. I might go on and show other things ;
there are one or two more. As you heard me
state in the House, one gentleman took some
plank, and his excuse was that he wanted a
man to bring old plank to floor his stable
and his barn. He took him new plank and the
gentleman kept the new plank and did not
return it. You heard me say in the House
he wanted old plank and he kept the new.
That is all I have to say at present, I have
the return here where the Government made
Mr. Ellis disgorge this money which he took
improperly ; and even Mr. Wood, when he
refers to the witness Chatfield, who worked
three weeks at Ellis's house, does not say
anything about it ; he gives his name but
does not tell the amount. I have got an ac-
count in my hand of the amount of money
this country has lost by that ; but still the
Government think it is all lovely ; they do
not want to disturb him. Here is the ans-
17i

wer — it is very satisfactory — they have it
under consideration. All I ask them to do
before they arrive at a conclusion in that
matter, if they are ever going to arrive at a
conclusion, is to consult the evidence, and if
they have not a copy, I will furnish them one.
I ask the Gk)vemment particularly to look
at the evidence and not at Mr. Wood's re-
port, which is contrary to the evidence —
which makes the evidence perform an oppo-
site duty to that which it should do to cover
up these people. He even tells them after
that that the country is losing $20,000 a
year, a^nd still the Government of this coun-
try permit this state of afiairs- — the Govern-
ment that I have been supporting all my life,
the Government that I think is perfect, barr-
ing this. If I can remove this objection to
them, I can go before the world and
say we have a good Government, but
while this remains there is a blot
on them in my estimation and in the
opinion of a great many others. The action
of the Conservative Government in this
matter is giving the dry rot to the Conser-
vative party in the counties of Welland and
Lincoln. That is my opinion. Of course
they may not think so ; but it has done much
to hurt the Government, for this reason — they
know what is going on. My speech is in
the hand^ of the Conservatives all over the
country ; they get disgusted when they see
what is going on. They know how this man
tyrannized over the people before, and they
sent a man there to watch him. If 'the
Government had so little confidence in the
man that they had to send some body to
watch him, they ought to dismiss him.
These are all the observations I will make at
present. Later on I may put another ques-
tion on the Paper. I trust the hon. Minister
will be kind enough to tell me when the
Government will arrive at a conclusion in
this matter.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— Seeing the per-
sistence with which my hon. friend has pur-
sued his subject, I have taken the trouble
of going through the evidence in detail and
the report made by the Commissioner upon
that evidence. After my hon. friend had
all the opportunities he desired, calling
witnesses from every quarter, examining
them for days and days together, with coun-
sel upon Mr. Ellis's side, the hon. gentleman
choosing to conduct his own case upon the
other.

Digitized by

Google

260

Welland Canal [SENATE] Investigation.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM — It was not my | statement and nobody ever told him that I
case, it was the case of the public. ' did.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— He conducted
the case of the public then before that Com-
mission ; but during that investigation my
hon. friend never questioned the integrity of
the Commissioner. He went on with the
case for a number of days, and a very large I
amount of expense was incurred that the ^
country had to pay for. The Commis-
sioner sat there until there was no more I
evidence before him, and then he made his
report, and he found as a re.sult that during i
the period of over ten years that this official i
was superintendent of the Welland Canal I
there were some slight irregularities, amount-
ing to a sum, during the whole period, of
not over $100, and that it occurred in this
way — year after year carters and others en-
gaged upon the canal were sometimes told by
him* in the evening, or at noon, to take a
load of gravel and place it upon the walks
around his house ; little things like that go-
ing on for over ten years make the sum of
the irregularities which this Commissioner
found. Now, it is a matter of refijret to me
to have a word to say in opposition to my
hon. friend, for whom I have the greatest
respect ; but I feel I would not be display-
ing a manly spirit to sit here knowing the
facts and having read the evidence and the
reports, without mentioning this to the
House. There was nothing in all the state-
ments made here — and they have been very
large and very unlimited both in amounts
and quantity. This report is that the sum
of the irregularities over a period of ten
years that Mr. Ellis has been in office did
not exceed $100.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— That breaks the
record of the opposing lawyer, Mr. Rykert.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— I must beg
to take exception to the hon. gentleman's
statement ; it was the report of the Commis-
sioner. The persistence with which my hon.
friend has pursued this subject is only con-
sistent with the statement which he made
there, that because he did not take into his
employment a man whose conduct did not
warrant him in employing him, that he
would pursue him until such time as he put
him out of office.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM -I say the hon.
gentleman is wrong ; I never made that

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— I was speak-
ing of the official report of the Commis-

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— It does not say
anything of the kind.

Hon. ;SIr. O'DONOHOE— I wUl say
this, that in order to relieve this House and
the Government, for whom I am not here to
speak, it would be well that that report of
the Judge sent to hear the case should be
read to them, and being read I think there
would be an end of any further inquiry
upon this harrowing subject.

Hon. Mr. FLINT— Was the hon. gentle-
man there to hear the evidence ?

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— I read the
evidence — that was what I said.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— Will the hon.
gentleman be good enough to tell us how
many pages of the evidence he read ?

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— I read the
evidence of every witness examined in that
investigation, and I read the report.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — We all remember
that some years ago the hon. gentleman
brought this matter before the House. The
charges were very strong indeed, involving
fraud, and indeed almost every crime that a
man could be guilty of. The charges were
supported by very strong arguments, and
we were right in not listening to them
(because there are always two sides to a
question), until the Government appointed
a Commission to investigate the matter.
The Government did appoint the Commis-
sion, I think, some three years ago, and
they have been very remiss in not deciding
promptly upon the evidence. If Mr. Ellis is
in the right, the Government have a great
deal to answer to Mr. Ellis for allowing
his character to remain blackened by the
charges of the hon. gentleman. If Mr. ,
Ellis was wrong, he should have been dis-
missed. I do not think it is for want of
energy on the part of the Minister of Rail-
ways that he remains in office. He man-
aged to discharge thirty or forty clerks who
had been employed on the Intercolonial
Railway, giving them only two months pay.

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal [MARCH 7, 1893] Investigation,

261

Consideiing that m&nj of them were old
in the service, and of course unable at their
time of life to find anything to do, that
was very energetic action on the part of
the Minister. I think the leader of the
House is wrong in saying that the hon.
gentleman had not time to look into the
question. We know he has a great deal of
energy in some ways. He does not seem
to want for energy and activity in that
kind of thing, and therefore, I think, in
four years the ' overnment ought to have
had time to decide whether Mr. Ellis was
right or wrong. If he is wrong let him be
discharged, or if the report of the com-
mittee is not strong enough to warrant that,
let him be reprimanded. If, on the contrary,
the charges of the hon. gentleman have not
been sustained, let them say so, and let the
censure fall on the hon. gentleman who has
brought the matter before this House.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— I do not rise to
say one word in condemnation of Mr. Ellis
or anybody else, but I do rise for the pur-
pose of ihaking some explanation. The first
matter to which my attention is called is
the livery bill. Every one who lives in the
Niagara district knows that engineers from
foreign countries and elsewhere visit the
Welland Canal. They are sent there by
their Governments to examine that work,
and Mr. Ellis 'has always been instructed to
show them over the work — he has employed
and engaged horses and cabs to drive these
men over the works. That has been the
custom throughout the whole of the manage-
ment of the canal. Mr. Ellis carried out
that custom under instructions, as I under-
stand, and these livery bills represent the
expenditure in that way. It has been the
custom of the Government to pay for the use
of horses for the superintendent to travel the
length of that canal, and when he did not use
a horse, to pay his railway fares. That canal is
27 miles long and there are important works
on nearly every half mile of it. The super-
intendent has to be on the canal constantly,
and if he had to pay his expenses it would
eat up his salary. Many a time he is called
out at night to go 15 or 16 miles to examine
a break on the canal. These are some of the
items in connection with that expenditure
for livery. I have not read all the evidence,
but I have thought it due to the House to
point out these matters. Another statement
that I would like to make is that the con-

struction and repairs were constantly going
on on that canal during the whole time of
Mr. Ellis's management and superintendency.
That construction work and these repairs
were constantly being mixed. There were
foremen employed by the Government doing
work at one place, and Mr. Ellis had men
doing work at another place and they were
interchanged, so that it was dificult to keep
their time apart. I can therefore readily
understand that irregularities would creep
in under such circumstances. If I under-
stand the case, Mr. Miller was a foreman
under the Government. He was employing
men doing work in the winter season. These
men had to work in water up to their knees
a great part of the time, repairing the locks
and putting in gates and that sort of thing.
The rubber boots to which the hon. gentle-
man has referred were necessary, and if
those boots were brought in free of duty,
they belong to the Government and they
are the property of the Government to-day,
and are hanging up in the storehouse at St.
Catharines.

Hon. Mr. McCALLXJM— The hon. gentle-
man spoke of Mr. Ellis's livery bill. Does
he not know that the Government of this
country allow him $300 per year specially
for livery expenses ? If the hon. gentleman
looks at the accounts he can see that.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON- I quite under-
stand that. The $300 is for this purpose —
there is a railway running the length of the
canal and the $300 is to pay expenses of the
railway and horse-hire back and forth, but
the expenses to which I refer are those that
I have described. Frequently those foreign
engineers have come to me and I have turned
them over to Mr. Ellis and he has looked
after them. My own opinion is that Mr.
Ellis was justified in charging the Govern-
ment with those expenses. I have been in-
formed that in many instances the engineers
came to Ottawa and were sent to the Wel-
land Canal with a note to Mr. Ellis. I men-
tion this to show how irregularities might
come in. With regard to the gas in Mr.
Ellis's house, I do not think he was judicious
in taking that. The gas is furnished on the
canal by contract with the Gas Company.
Mr. Ellis has nothing to do, as I am told,
with the making of that contract. The con-
tract covers the lighting of the Government
offices as well as the canal, and Mr.

Digitized by

Google

262

Welland Canal [SENATE] Investigation.

Ellis was injudicious enough to let them
put the gas into his house, but in no way
could it affect his relationship with the Gas
Company, because the company was under
contract with the Government. Then the.
hon. gentleman referred to repairs made to
houses. I may tell the House that the lock-
tenders^ and bridgetenders' houses are
furnished by the Government. Each man
pays $5 a month for the use of the house,
and the Government keep the house in repair
at their own expense. I do not know the par-
ticular house to which the hon. gentleman
referred, where Miller's men were sent to
repair it, but I do know that in nine cases
out of ten the Government furnish the houses
for these men, and as the men have to pay
rent the repairs should be done at the expense
of the Government. I hate not read the
evidence at all, and I simply make these
explanations in order that the House may
be informed of the facts. With regard to
the overflowing of Lake Erie into the Wel-
land Canal, by which so much damage was
caused, I may say that although the damage
was reported at that time to amount to
$25,000, it turned out to be nothing like
th^-t amount. The damage was all repaired
by the men on the canal themselves. I may
add that the works at that point were under
construction and repairs at the time and
there was a difficulty between Mr. Thomson,
the engineer, Mr. Page, the chief engineer,
and Mr. Ellis — that portion of the work had
not been handed over to Mr. Ellis and he did
not conceive it to be his duty to look after
it. Each one tried to screen himself in the
matter, but, as I say, there was a difference
between the Superintendent and the engi-
neers who constructed the work as to the
time when the Superintendent should take
the work over.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— Mr. Ellis had
the keys and had full instructions to close
the gates. This is shown by the evidence.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— That it true,
but there are telegrams which passed be-
tween Mr. Ellis and Mr. Thomson, who had
charge of the work. If there were irregu-
larities, you can well understand that they
arose through a difference as to who had
control and who had a right to look after
this and after that ; it was very difficult to
separate the two works. In that way I ap-

prehend a great many irregularities crept in*
I do not say this in defence of Mr. Ellis, or
anybody else. I speak of it. in order that
the House may be seized with the reasons
for some of these irregularities, and if the
Government examine the matter I would
like them to investigate that particular
phase of the question. I have no particular
interest in Mr. Ellis, or anybody else, but I
would be wanting in my duty as a public
man living in that locality, if I did not
put the House in possession of the qualify-
ing circumstances in connection with the
matter.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM — I have no ob-
jection to the hon. gentleman speaking, but he
should confine himself to facts. He speaks
from hearsay ; I speak from what was sworn
to before the Commission. About the over-
flow of Lake Erie, I am speaking of the
evidence of Mr. John Page, who was a
prominent man in the country. It appears
to me that the hon. gentleman from Welland
must have had the story of Mr. Ellis, or his
counsel, Mr. Rykert ; he could not "have got
his factf^ from the evidence.

Pon. Mr. BOWELL— I have only to add
a few words to what I said a few moments
ago about the boots : If the statement made
by the hon. gentleman from Welland be cor-
rect, then they came free into the country
legitimately, because the law specially pro-
vides for the free admission of articles im-
ported by or for the use of the Goverment.
I have no recollection of ever having heard
of it before, but the idea may have become
prevalent that these boots were admitted free
in the interests of the contractor or of the
foreman. If the contractor imported, and
would otherwise have had to provide them,
they would have been dutiable ; if they were
imported by the foreman for the use of men
employed by the Government, they would be
free under the law.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I think I stated
it that way — that that was the m ay they
came into the country. It was not the matter
of duty on the boots, but every man who got
the boots had two days' time returned to pay
for the boots, and the contractor, by getting
the boots admitted free, made 20 cents per
pair on the boots.

Digitized by

Google

The Balfour [MAECH 7, 1893] Divorce Case.

263

THE DISMISSAL OF JOHN J. COS-
GROVE.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE moved

That an humble Address be preseuted to His
Excellency the Governor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, copies of the Order in Council, infor-
mation, evidence and papers upon which the dis-
missal of John J. Cosgrove, an officer of the Inland
Revenue Department, proceeded and was deter-
mineil. .

The motion was agreed to.

THE GOVERNOR-GENERAUS INS-
TRUCTIONS.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. WARK moved :

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Govemor-Oeneral ; praying that
His Excellency will be pleased to lay before this
House, a copy of the Royal Instructions from Her
Most Gracious Majesty the Queen, to His Excel-
lency on his appointment to his present office.

He said : — In the first Parliament Of
Canada, which met on tbe 7th November,
1867, Mr. Alex. Campbell, afterwards Sir
Alex. Campbell, movpd, seconded by Mr. Blair,
that an address be presented to His Excel-
lency the Governor-General for a portion of
these royal instructions, and if the Govern-
ment of that day thought that such infor-.
mation was necessary for the House at that
time, no argument is neceasary to show that
such information should be in our possession
now.

The motion was agreed to.

BILL INTRODUCED.

Bill (M) " An Act respecting the trial of
Juvenile offenders." (Mr. Allan.)

THE BALFOUR DIVORCE CASE.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN move«l the adoption
of the 15th report of the Select Committee
Divorce re BiU (B) " An Act for the relief
of James Balfour," and gave a summary of
the evidence.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I do not mean to say
that this subjecthasbeensprungon the House,
but I think it has been prematurely brought
under discussion. The evidence was only put
in my box to-day. Although it is a very clear
case, still very many cases may occur requir-

ing consideration and twenty-four hours
ought to elapse between the time we are
put in possession of the evidence and the time
we are called upon to give a decision. I have
very great respect for the Court as it is at
present constituted, but they are not a Court
to try tbe case — at least that is my opinion.
I may be wrong, and if so, I hope the lawyers
in the House will correct me ; but I think
they are a committee to take the evidence
which is laid before us. Well, if that evidence
is laid before us at ten o'clock, we can scar-
cely be in a position to discuss it at three ; it
may be very voluminous and require very
great consideration, and members who are
not as early risers as myself would not have
time to read the evidence. I will withdraw
my objection in this case, but I think here-
after if we could be allowed a little longer
time to consider the evidence it would be
vety much better. The committee are not
the judges ; they take the evidence and they
must give us time to consider it. If I am
wrong in what I have stated as to powers of
the Court, of course I withdraw it, but I
think hereafter we should have a full twenty-
four hours to consider the evidence before
we are called on to give our decision.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I quite agree-
as I very seldom do — with my hon. friend
behind me.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I quite agree
that it looks unseemly and improper in these
cases to be called upon, in less than twenty-
four hours after receiving the evidence, to
decide upon them in this House.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— It was printed
yerterday morning.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— It never came
to my post office until eight o'clock last even-
ing. This case seems to me to be a very clear
one, but every man has a right to his own
judgment in such matters ; and what might
seem very clear to me sometimes would not
seem so clear to others, or the reverse of that
would very often be the case. But I tell my
hon. friend behind me that I think the duties
of the committee are not only to collect the
evidence but to report upon the evidence,
and the finding of the evidence, and gene-
rally the findingof the committee is affirmed
by the Senate and by the lower House ;so that
my hon. friend must not ignore the rights

Digitized by

Google

264

The Balfour [SENATE] Divorce Case.

and privileges and duties and responsibilities
of the committee. I simply rise to say
that I think generally we should have at
least forty-eight houi-s ; the evidence should
be distributed and should be in the hands of
hon. gentlemen that length of time before
they are called upon to vote. I can assure
the hon. gentleman I did not mean to inter-
rupt him in any unpleasant manner ; I was
merely utteiing the views of gentlemen
around me, who seem to think it was not
proper that a summary of the evidence should
be taken down by the reporters and appear
in the Debates.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— I think the re-
marks of the hon. gentleman from Halifax
are perfectly correct. It does seem extra-
ordinary to me that the printing of this
House has been so badly attended to. This
matter has been in their hands for some days
and was only distributed last night, and
some members have not received their copies
yet. There is something radically wrong
with respect to the printing of the House,
and I want to biing it to the attention of
the Government in order that it may be
rectified. We have had the same difficulty
from year to year, and I do not see any
change in the least respect so far as these
Bills are concerned in the present session.

Hon. Mr. OGIL VIE— I do not know how
the Bills may be printed, but the Debates
of the Senate never were printed more
promptly than they are now. They are here
the next day now, whereas before we some-
times did not have them for a number of
days.

Hon. Mr. POWER~I find myself in a
most unusual position to-day ; I am obliged
to agree with the hon. gentleman from
Lunenburg in front of me, and my hon.
friend behind me. That is a combination
of circumstances which I do not remember
having occurred before. I quite agree with
those hon. gentlemen in thinking that the
evidence should be in the hands of members
for a sufficient time to allow them to read it
over carefully and make up their minds on
it, but I did not rise to express my concur-
rence with my hon. friends, but to express
my regret at the new departure which seems
to have been taken by the hon. gentleman
from Barrie. It has not been the practice

in the House since the time I came here,
which is now a considerable time ago, up to
this year, to have the evidence in these cases
set out in the Debates of our House. The
evidence is printed for the use of members,
and every hon. gentleman can satisfy him-
self as to whether the evidence in a given
case is sufficient to warrant him in voting
for the passing of the Divorce Bill or not.
This House, a great many years ago, was so
anxious that the evidence in those divorce
cases should not be scattered broadcast, that
it made a rule forbidding the distribution of
the evidence outside of the members. The
evidence is kept by the clerk in the book,
and copies of the evidence sufficient for the
use of members are printed, and no more.
I could understand in a contested case,
where the evidence was of a conflicting
character, that the Chairman of the commit-
tee, or any member of the committee, advo-
cating one side or other of the question
should think it his duty to go into the
evidence at some little length, but this ses-
sion there has been no case of that kind.
This, I think, is the second case we have had
to deal with. There has been no conflicting
evidence at all. Both cases were unopposed,
and I think it is very much to be regretted
that the hon. Chairman of the committee
should have thought it his duty in both to
go into the evidence at some little length.
There is no earthly object, which I can see,
to be gained by that course, and the very
objectionable result is that that evidence
which we take great pains to keep within
our own walls is scattered in our Debates
all over the country. I think that this is a
very regi'ettable circumstance ; and my own
feeling is that the proper course to take now
would be simply to state that .the hon. Chair-
man of the committee had moved the adop-
tion of the report and to suppress the sum-
mary of the evidence which he gave. It is
true the hon. gentleman did not use the vile
language which was reported in the evidence,
but he gave us all the circumstances, and I
thought it was an exceedingly fortunate
thing that the hon. gentleman spoke in so
low a tone that some of the audience did not
1 hear what he was saying ; but while it is
true that the audience did not hear what he
was sajring — the audience l)elow the bar —
his statement goes upon our Debates and
that is, I think, an exceedingly objectionable
thing, and is contrary to the will of the Sen-
ate expressed on several occasions.

Digitized by

Google

The Heward [MARCH 7, 1893] Divorce Bill.

265

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— I could but very
imperfectly hear the junior member from
Halifax. So far as I could understand what
he said he referred to the non-printing, or the
non-distribution of the evidence taken be-
fore the committee. The hearing, I think,
only occupied three hours. The Bill was
distributed very shortly after noon yester-
day ; and I did not suppose for a moment
that a man of his great intelligence and
familiarity with evidence could fail to have
mastered the subject in an hour. With re-
gard to what my hon. friend, the senior
member from Halifax, says I assure him it
would be a matter of relief to me if the
House felt that I would do my duty by
simply moving the adoption of the report
I thought I was pursuing the proper course;
however, I may be mistaken, and if the
House thinks so I certainly will with
very great pleasure alter my course and
simply move the adoption of the report.
I thought it my duty to bring out the
salient points of the case, not using any
language which would offend the most sen-
sitive person, and I took a great deal of
trouble in preparing the statement ; it was
a difficult thing to reduce what one has to
say in a few words, and yet bring out all
the facts. I took a great deal of trouble to
prepare myself so as to accomplish that re-
salt. I have no desire to occupy the time
of the House speaking on the subject, and
if it is the general wish of the House, I
would simply in the future move the
adoption of the report. I bave been told,
and told repeatedly, that members in the
House of Commons were in the habit of
looking at what was said on the motion
for the adoption of the report in the Senate
to get a clue to the case; and it was partly
with that view that I took this course. In
the next report I make I will adopt the
course suggested, if the House desires it.
This is a perfectly clear case, and any man
of ordinary intelligence would see in half an
hour that the committee was warranted in
recommending the adoption of the report.
When the House submits a case to hon.
gentlemen who take every pains to inform
themselves fully, and commits the duty to
them, unless there is some objection, the
House generally adopts their report. I can
only say that I desire to meet the wishes
of the House, and I have earnestly tried to
do so in this particular matter. I know
it is not a pleasant subject, and I used my

utmost endeavours to present it in such a
way that it would not be objectionable.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr, CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to.

THE HEWARD DIVORCE BILL.

THIRD READING POSTPONED. *

The Order of the Day being called —
consideration of the 16 th report of the Select
Committee on Divorce re Bill (A) " An Act
for the relief of Edmund Holyoake Heward."

Hon. Mr. GO WAN said — I am not in a
position to move the consideration of thi«»
report this evening and for reasons I desire
to submit to membens of the Cabinet, and
which I think it my duty to lay before the
House. Hon. gentlemen will remember that
when a change was proposed in the mode of
printing for this House it was thought it
would be a very great advantage, indeed, to
have it under Government auspices and
accordingly a Bureau was formed for that
purpose. I have some experience in print-
ing for the Senate, but I speak only from
my experience in connection with the Divorce
Committee. I have had some experience in
the past and I have some experience at pre-
sent, and I must say that I think the new
order of things, so far as my knowledge ex-
tends, has not met expectations. Now,
in the case that has just been referred to I
thought, as I saw it in proof yesterday morn-
ing, that it ought to have been down im-
mediately afterwards; it could not take
more than an hour or two to strike off and
ought to have been down immediately. I
mention the fact to the hon. gentleman from
Ottawa, and I could mention a further fact
which shows me there is something wrong
in the Bureau. There is a case which has
not yet come up, which I think shows mis-
management in the Printing Bureau. In
reading over the proofs, as I usually do, of
all the causes that come up, I found a vital
omission in the report of the Hebden case ;
a most important exhibit was entirely left
out. Thinking that the fault might be
with some of the officers of the House, I at
once went to them and ascertained that the
error was not with them ; they had there
the paper which was sent to the Bureau which

Digitized by

Google

266

The Reward [SENATE] Divorce Bill.

showed clearly it was a careless act
altogether.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— By whom?

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— On the part of the
Bureau. The pages were shown to me all
numbered including this exhibit, and it was
not printed ; it was a most stupid blunder for
this reason ; the exhibits were all numbered
in consecutive order ; I think it was exhibit

, 5 or 6, but they had before them that which
showed there was an omission of some kind
and it was sufficient to attract their attention,
but they took no notice of it whatever. So
far as the officers of the Senate are concerned,
all I could say is in their favour. I think
they have been very careful to mark exhibits.
It is a strange omission, but the subject
generally is very important. In the first
place, it is very important to the parties con-
cerned who are delayed and hindered in
their business ; it is a very great annoyance
to the committee who, goodness knows,
have annoyance enough in going into these
cases ; and it is an unnecessary annoyance
to the committee who are delayed ; and
further it is a very important matter in this
respect ; the country pays for all the loss
that is occasioned. If the business of
the House is delayed, it is delayed at the
expense of the country. I hope and trust
that the hon. gentlemen who are mem-
bers of the Cabinet here will cause an

* inquiry to be made. This condition of things
is something I have not been accustomed to.
Thousands of papers have passed under my
notice, and I never saw such unnecessary
delay, and I must say that some of the
proofs that came to my hand would not do
credit to an ordinary country printing office.
I do not expect the report I refer to down
till to-morK»w, and therefore would move
that the consideration be postponed till
Thursday next.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I hope the hon.
gentleman, the Chairman of the committee,
who gives such careful attention to the work
he performs, will not allow himself to get into
the habit of revising the printed evidence.
I have very often sat with the committee as
Chairman and have never undertaken that
duty. I think my hon. friend should not
be imposed upon. I think that the steno-
grapher's duty is done when he reports the
evidence and transcribes it. The Law Clerk
should see that the evidence is perfect and

that nothing is defective, and while compli-
menting my hon. friend on the industry,
care and attention he gives to these matters
in seeing that the evidence is properly
elucidated, I hope that in the future he will
not take upon himself the onerous duty of
revising the Printing Bureau.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— I did not mean to
convey the idea that I examined the proofs
with a view to correction. I did nothing of
the kind. I have never done so in all my
long judicial life, and I do not undertake to
do it now, but I have the advantage of receiv-
ing the proofs in order that I might delibe-
rately at an early day go over them and
consider them and see if every thing was
correct and right. The proofs are examined
by the officers of the House, but I was
anxious to get an early copy of the galleys
in order that I might study the matter as it
became me to do as Chairman of the com-
mittee.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— In this case
a very important letter was left out, and it
would be well if some one would examine
these documents after they are printed ;
otherwise the parties interested might not
have their case presented to the legislature
in its proper form.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I am very glad the
hon. gentleman, the Chairman 6i the Divorce
Committee, has called attention to the delay
which has taken place in the printing, and
also the omission of one of the most important
documents., I sliall see that the attention
of those who have charge of the Bureau is
called to it, and endeavour to avoid delays,
if possible, in the future. In the multiplicity
of business which goes through a large
printing office like the Government Bureau,
we must not be surprised if occasional errors
occur, and sometimes errors of a very im-
portant character, and it is the duty of the
clerk of that committee, whoever he may be,
in supervising the proof sheets, to see that
the evidence is laid before the House in a
complete state. It is not the duty of the
Chairman of the committee to do this kind
of work, but it is only creditable to the hon.
gentleman to say that so anxious was he to
have the report of the committee complete
that he examined it himself. A very amusing
mistake occurred in reference to some re-
marks made in this House some short time

Digitized by

Google

The Customs Officials [MARCH 8, 1893] at Quebec.

267

ago, in making quotations from the Toronto
Globe : you would have been surprised if you
had seen It. A portion of the extract was
omitted in the very centre, and put in large
type, as if it were mine, and if it had gone
to the public in that way I should have been
quoted as approving of the most radical doc-
trines and the most objectionable language
towards the government of which I am a
memlier. I merely instance this to show
that these errors will occur and I cannot
conceive it possible that that could have beeti
intentional. I am glad my hon. friend has
called my attention to this matter, and I
repeat again that I shall see that the Printing
Bureau is notified of it and that a little more
care is taken in future.

SECOND READING.

Bill (E) " An Act for the relief of James
Frederick Doran." (Mr. Clemow.)

The Senate adjourned at 5.35 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottatva, Wednesday^ March 8th^ 1893.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.

THE CUSTOMS OFFICIALS AT
QUEBEC.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved :

That an humble Address be present-ed to His
Excellency the Governor-General ; praying that
His Excellency will be graciously pleusecl to cause
to be laid before this House, a list giving the names
and salaries of all persons now employed, either
permanently or temporarily, in the customs at
Qaebec, showing the age, nationality, religion, sal-
ary, occupation and date of entry into the public
service of each.

He said : — I regret exceedingly having to
bring these matters before the House. I
know there is a feeling among some of the
hon. members of this House against this
question being brought before Parliament,
but no part of the community should be so
treated as to feel forced to do so. Sensible
men, whether French, Scotch, Irish, German
or any other nationality, are wise enough and

Christian ertough to know that the best
means of agreeing together is to give full
justice to every man. We in Quebec, who
are the majority, have been so long accus-
tomed to give to other nationalities their
rights and privileges without waiting to be
asked, that we always feel any injustice
keenly, and if there is injustice done to us
it is because my compatriots have been too
slow to vindicate their rights. I know there
are some hon. gentlemen here who want to
ridicule that statement, but it is quite true^
— the public documents show that. Were
we not too slow to ask for redress 10, 12 or
20 years ago when evidence was put before
the House as to the public patronage ? Have

I we not been too slow since 1867, waiting until
1881 for those documents to prove that our
rights had been ignored by the Government

I of Canada since Confederation. I may bring
to the recollection of hon. gentlemen the fact
that on the 8th of March, 1881, 12 years
ago, the hon. member for De Salaberry at
the time (the late Mr. Trudel) rose in his
place in this House and asked for a list of
all the civil servants in Canada, whether
employed in the inside service or in the out-
side service. The Government seemed to
endeavour to find out how they could take
exception to the demand, and here are the
words of the leader of the Senate : —

I do not know whether my hon. friend who made
this motion considers what labour and expense will
be involved in complying with the address which
he asks the House to adopt. It includes not only
the inside service, but also the outside service of
the Dominion. To obtain the information for which
he asks, correspondence must take place with the
officers of the Dominion throughout the country^
and returns must be made of their various ages,
religious and nationalities. Then the compilation
of that, and the printing of the returns will cost
the country several thousani of dollars, and cannot
be completed for several ra onths. ♦ ♦ * The sub-
ject will certainly involve ^ ery large expenditure,
and the information connot be secured for several
months, and when procuret* the return will be of no
use unless printed. It will make a small blue book.
Whether it is desirable to put the country to such
an expense for what I suppose is a matter of
curiosity, I leave it to him to say.

Now that was the answer given to them by
the hon. leader of the House. That is all
very well, but I am not accustomed to be
shut off in that way when exception is taken
to such a demand ; and I therefore rose in
my place and spoke to the leader of the
House in this way : —

We may be influenced by what the hon. Post-
master-General calls ** curiosity," but I say we are

Digitized by

Google

268

The Custom Officials [SENATE] at Quebec.

moved by a sense of justice towards the different
nationalities of this Dominion. ♦ ♦ ♦ Under the
circumstances it is almost too much for the hon.
Postmaster-General to insinuate that in asking for
this information we are actuated by curiosity.
We, of Quebec, who have been accustomed to do-
ing justice to the English-speaking minority of
our province, feel it hard to be met as the hon.
member for De Salaberry has been met to-day by
the hon. Postmaster-General, with an insinuation
which should not have fallen from his lips. ♦ ♦ * I
hope the Government will consent to this a^ldress.
K wc are in error on this subject, we should know
it ; if not, the Government should have their
attention directed to the injustice of which we
complain, and grant us the redress which we
seek.

To this Sir Alexander Campbell replied : —

■ I fear after the remarks which have fallen from
the hon. gentleman from De Lanaudi^re and the
hon. gentleman from De Salaberry, that more
evil would result from withholding the information
than from granting the address. 1 may inform my
hon. friend behind me (Mr. Bellerose) that I did
not use the word "curiosity " in any such sense as
he has supposed. ♦ ♦ ♦ I do not think that such
injustice exists ; I hope it does not exist, but per-
haps it is as well to let the address go ; if the
House does not grant the motion it may be
supposed that the (rovernment has something to
conceal, or that they are conscious there is an in-
' justice done in some cases. ♦ ♦ * We shall allow
the motion to go, although it will cost a great deal
of money to obtain the information that is asked
for.

This is the way we were treated when we
asked for an address in 1881. We knew
very well that it was expensive, but we in-
timated that we should have it in some way
or other. It took two years and a half to
get the information. Every session we
called for the report, and there was none
furnished. They said : you will get it by
and by ; and we got it by and by, after
two years and a half. And what occurred ?
In February, 1884, the Postmaster-General,
the leader of the House, Sir Alexander
Campbell, rose in his place and made the
following statement : " I bring the return to
the address voted by the House," and turn-
ing towards me he said : " The hon. gentle-
man will see the French minority have more
than their share of the public patronage." I
could not say a word. It was a printed
volume of 250 or 300 pages, all figures with-
out being added up. I saw at once that the
Government had made the return in this
manner so as to evade the question. I had
no time then to add all those columns, so I
remained silent ; but the same night I went
to work adding those figures, and what did
I find ? I will read to you my statement the

next day, the 19th February, of what I
found :

The Hon. Minister of Justice in his remarks,
on answering my speech on the right of the
French minority in this Dominion to have a
Senator of their own origin on the Treasury benches
was pleased to state that the French minority had
no reason to complain ; that if they had not a
Minister of French origin in this House, they had
more than their share in the public service of the
Dominion. He referred to the report in answer to
an address of the Senate in 1882, which report
was placed on the table of this House some few
days ago.

Now, the hon. leader of the Senate, having
made this statement from his seat in this House, I
was bound to accept his word. Though I was
convinced that this statement of his was not in ac-
cord with the facts. Yet I was bound not to con-
tradict him before I had a chance of looking into
the matter and comparing his statement with the
official return. This I have done, and what do I
find ? Not only has the French minority not re-
ceived at tlie hands of the English majority a fair
share of the public patronage, but on the contrary
they have not even received such a share as,
though not in proportion to their numbers, would
even show a disposition on the part of the majority
to recognize the rights of the minority.

I went on to state :

Taking the official report referred to by the hon.
minister. 1 find that the number of officials in the
whole Dominion is 3,530 of whom only 627 speak
the French language, or in other words a propor-
tion of about six to one ; that the amount of
salaries paid to them is $2,136,005, of which $456,-
803 is the aggregate amount of the salaries of the
French-speaknig officials, also a proportion of six
to one.

Now, if I open the census of 1881, 1 find that the
population of the Dominion is 4,324,801 souls, of
which 1,298,929 are of French origin, leaving a
population of 3,025,871 of other origin.

So that while the French are about one-third of
the whole population of the Dominion, the officials
of French origin are only one-sixth of the whole
Government staff in Canada, and the salaries of the
French-speaking fraction form only one-sixth of
the au^ount of the salaries paid to the whole of
the Government officials.

Sir Alexander Campbell says :

In referri:)g the other day to the return which
had been laid on the table of this House, I did so
not having seen any synopsis of it, and not being
aware that any synopsis had been made. I spoke,
however, on the authority of a person who had ex-
amined the return, and who informed me that the
French -Canadian race were abundantly represented
in the service of the country. Under the im-
pression that that was correct, I used the language
which the hon.. gentleman has quoted.

He had to withdraw his statement when I
proved to him, after three whole nights of
adding figures, that he had deliberately mis-
led the House. We areaccustomed to being

Digitized by

Google

The Customs Officials [MARCH 8, 1893] at Quebec.

269

treated in this manner by the majority, bnt
while such treatment is extended to us there
is one representative of the French race here
who is determined to do his duty. I may
have to ask in vain for justice for years, but
until the day of my death I will continue to
demand fair treatment for those whom I
represent. A man who has not the courage
to vindicate his rights and privileges does
not deserve to live. I have hesitated a good
deal about bringing up this matter, because
I knew how I would be received, but having
right on my side I feel the strength of my
position. We heard the arguments advanced
the other day in the discussion which arose
about the Montreal Custom-house — we were
told that the French employees in the Senate
and the House of Commons were more num-
erous than the English officials. That is no
argument in reply to a general statement.
There are 7,000 officials in this country and
we have not our fair share of appointments.
It is not fair to take the Senate and House
of Commons, and point to them as illustra-
tions of the share of patronage that the French
receive in Canada. The public documents
show that there is about an equal number of
French and English officials in the two
Houses of Parliament. Another argument
brought forward and published in our
Debates last week is that, taking all the
Catholic officials, about half the number of
Government employees are Roman Catho-
lics. I have yet to learn that any one has
complained that the • Catholic population
have not their fair share of the public pat-
ronaga Was it honest, therefore, when I
was complaining of the unjust treatment of
my nationality to say in reply ** but the
Catholics have a fair share of public pat-
ronage." Let us discuss the question of
nationality, and that alone. The present
member from De Salaberry (Mr. Tass^) sug-
gested the other day that I should have
brought up the whole question instead of a
special case to show that throughout the
public service the French minority are un-
fairly treated. I did not deal with the
whole question, because I was afraid I
would be told, as I was told 12 years ago,
that it would be incurring a great and un-
necessary expense. The report would be
undoubtedly voluminous, and we thought it
was unnecessary, since the situation has not
changed much in 1 2 years. But let us look
at the returns for the custom-house at
Montreal. Exception was taken the other

day to my figures by the Minister of Trade
and Commerce, but I find that I was not
mistaken. I have procured from the De-
partment of Agriculture statistics which show
that of the entire population in the electoral
division of Montreal, about 100,000 are
French and 82,000 of other nationali-
ties. In a city of 182,695 people, there are
ten French to eight English-speaking citi-
zens and yet we have only one- third of the
patronage in the Custom-house and it is
rumoured that a new collector is to
be appointed who will be of Eng-
lish origin. Now is the time and here is
the place, to demand justice for the French
of Montreal. In the city of Montreal
there are 766 officials of the Dominion Gov-
ernment. Of these, 416 are English-speak-
ing and 350 French-speaking. There is the
same disproportion in the salaries. The total
of the salaries paid is $393,000. Of this
amount the English-speaking officials receive
$218,000, and ithe French-speaking officials,
$160,000. Thkt was last year. The returns
for this year are not yet published, an^ I
cannot speak or them. Since I referred to
this matter a few days ago, the press of
Montreal has taken up the question. The
Gazette and the Witness have dealt with it,
and they cannot deny the truth of my state-
ment, but that beautiful newspaper, the
Witness, replies that the Catholic population
of Montreal have their full share. That is
no reply to my argument. My motion to-day
refers to the custom-house at Quebec.
Every one knows that Quebec is a French
city — that there are very few of its citizens
of any other race — yet the Collector of Cus-
toms is an English-speaking official. There
are thirty-four permanent officials, of whom
sixteen are English and eighteen French.
There are sixty-three temporary officials
altogether, of whom thirty-four are English
and twenty-nine French. Altogether, there
are fifty lEkiglish-speaking officials in Quebec,
and forty-seven officials of French origin —
that is, a minority of French officials in a
city which is almost exclusively French. I
defy any one in this House to say that under
such circumstances I have no reason to com-
plain. We hear complaints in this House
almost every day on matters of very much
less importance than this. In^ family, when
one of the children sees that the parents
are partial to other members of the
family, it produces uneasiness and bitterness
of spirit. In dealing with communities,

Digitized by

Google

270

The Customs OfficidU [SENATE] at Quebec,

there is the same result from partial and
unjust treatment. Does any one suppose
that Quebec would have so readily consented
to the union of the provinces if we had
known that we would be treated with such
unvarying injustice when we became a
minority in the Confederation ? No, we
never expected that ; on the contrary, we
thought that the majority here would do
with us as we do with the minority in Que-
bec. We believe that the majority ought
to be magnanimous and give the minority
even more than their share ; and why ? Be-
cause the majority may say, " we do not
care ; we may give you more, but if you are
not quiet we are more powerful than you
and we will quiet you down." I say that
any man who has a heart in his bosom, and
who recognizes the privileges and rights of
the minority, must feel that this is the
proper course. Now let us look at tlie
salaries in Quebec. The salaries amount to
$25,016, out of which $12,800 is paid to
Englishmen, and $13,116 to Frenchmen.
Tl^p salaries of temporary officials amount to
$30,279. The amount paid to Englishmen
is $19,750, as against $15,000 to Frenchmen.
I have shown conclusively the determination
of the Government in the matter even to
this day. The hon. Minister of Trade and
Commerce said there had been a change for
the better ; I do not see much change. We
will be able to tell better next year. Not
long ago a deputy head who was over sixty,
resigned or was forced to resign ; at all
events, he was a Frenchman. Who replaced
him 1 An Englishman. Now is that fair ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Where is that?
There are so many vacancies now it is hard
to tell what the hon. gentleman refers to.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Mr. Schreiber
is there now. And there are very many
other cases. That is the reason why I am
referring to this matter to-day. I wish to
refresh your memories with reference to that
matter. I know the hon. Minister has done
something in that department which is to our
advantage, and I know that it is reasonable.
No man in this world can enter a new de-
partment and put things right at once. He
cannot turn out officials; he must wait until
there is a place vacant, and then he may do
justice. That I know very well, but, hon.
gentlemen, we have been complaining, and
we must complain if we expect to produce

any change. Now, I am referring to these
facts to show you that wherever we go we
find the same. Let us take Sherbrooke.
Of the population of that city about 5,000
are English-speaking to 7,000 French-speak-
ing, and how is it there? The first two offi-
cers in the Customs-house are English with
large salaries. There are five officials alto-
gether— three English and two French. The
salaries are $3,241, of which $2,600 is paid
to Englishmen and $641 to Frenchmen, mak-
ing a difference of one to three against the
Frenchmen. Now, let me refer to Montreal
again on that subject — speaking of the head
men. In Montreal, as the hon. Minister of
Trade and Commerce admitted the other
day, since Mr. Del isle there have been two
Collectors of Customs — Mr. Simpson and
Mr. Ryan. The latter is dead. Who will
succeed him? I do not know. I have heard
rumours, but I will not repeat them. If
the Government have ever thought of
giving justice to us, is not this the time,
when there is a place in Montreal for
a new appointment, particularly when it
is known that the French are in the majority
in Montreal. If the hon. Minister of Trade
and Commerce was sincere in the words he
uttered the other day, surely he cannot over-
look the rights of the French population of
Montreal when making this appointment. It
is well known that the English members will
go down to the French population in Mont-
real making promises and asking to be
elected, and when elected they forget their
promises. In Montreal not only has the
Collector of Customs been an Englishman,
but for years past the sub-collectors have all
been Englishmen, and it is the casejKxlay.
Now, is that right 1 I say no. In Quebec
Mr. Forsyth is English, and there is a
majonty of English officials. In Sherbrooke
how does it stand ? The same as in Montreal.
Mr. Perry is the collector, and Mr. Murphy
the sub-collector. Does not that show a
settled policy ? Does not it show that we do
not speak too often on the question — that we
do not speak oftenenough to secure our rights?
We try to find these things out, and we
have a right to know them, when we have to
pay our share of the expenses of the Gov-
ernment. Who is in a better position to
discuss these questions than I am ? Am I
not independent of the Government? I
know there are not many in this Dominion
who are quite independent of Gk)vemments;
but I am quite independent ; and I am not

Digitized by

Google

The Customz Officials [MARCH 8, 1893] at Quebec.

271

poor enough to ask for their bread. I am
in a position to ask redress for others — to
demand that every man receive his rights
from the Government, and this I intend to
do. That is my principle ; and I hope that
I will live long enough to defend it. Now,
hon. gentlemen, look a little further into
this matter, as far as Montreal is concerned.
I will show you something elsa If you
look at the state of things in Montreal, you
will find again that the heads of the
great majority of the departments there are
English. You have the superintendent of
Canals, Mr. Kennedy ; you have the col-
lector, J. O'Neil ; you have had collector of
Customs Ryan, who is dead ; you have sub-
collector O'Hara ; you have the deputy-post-
master Palmer, Post OflBce inspector, King ;
you have the sub-inspector Nelligan; you
have gas inspector Hart ; you have the
chief immigration agent Hoolahan, and the
sub-agent Nicholl, receiving salaries amount-
ing to $19,31 1 in all. These are all English-
men at the heads of departments. Then
let us look at the number of French speak-
ing heads ; you have Postmaster Dansereau ;
Excise collector Vincent ; Inspectors of Ex-
cise Chalut and Bellemare; assistant-inspec
tor of gas Aubin, with salaries amounting to
$1 1,300 in all. There are about ten English
to five French heads in the city of Montreal.
If I could keep you here until to-night I
could show you that in all the departments
it is as bad, or worse. I could take you
into certain departments in Ottawa, and
defy you to find half a dozen French-
speaking servants.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— In the Public
"Works Department?

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— No. What is
the proportion ?

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— I do not know.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Since the hon.
gentleman has asked the question he should
understand what he is speaking of. True,
you have a fair proportion of French-speak-
ing men in that department, and why ? Be- 1
cause for over twenty-five years a French
Minister has been there — in fact, almost
always the head of the department has
been French. This shows that we have
been actuated by a spirit of justice and '
liberality. The French have been |

honest enough to give you a fair share
where they have had the power, and we
ask nothing more of the Englishmen,
Scotchmen, or Irishmen who are at the
head of other departments ; and yet we are
met with such arguments as I heard here
the other day — not argumentn, but mere
assertions. If I were out of this House I
would qualify them, but here I would not.
I stand by the opinion expressed by an hon.
gentleman the other day, which I repeat,
that we should never hear those questions
discussed in this House.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— These hon.
members crying " hear, hear," are just the
guilty parties. Not long ago a judge of the
Superior Court of Quebec died, and whom
did the French ask for as a new judge ?
Judge Johnson. Why? Because he was
one of the oldest judges^ and because it was
right that a judge of that nationality should
be on the bench. That is the way we act
in our province, and so you never hear of
such a question in Quebec ; and have we not
a right to ask to be treated here as we treat
others there ? Have we not a right to go to
the book, which you respect so much, on the
table before us, which says you should do to
others as you would like to have them do to
you 1 We ask no more ; just give us fair
treatment and you will hear no more of
those complaints. If you hear more about
this question next year, you may strike your
breast and say, *' By my fault, by my great-
est fault." We do not like to raise the ques-
tion, but we are compelled to do it. Let me
refer to the Experimental Farm, which is
now under the superintendence of the Mini-
of Agriculture. How are we treated there ?
How many French-speaking gentlemen do
we find there ? One to 60 or 70, or perhaps
50. I am aware that there is a man there,
coming from what part of the world I do not
know, who translates English into French.
I do not know his name, but he is the only
French-speaking official there, though I have
asked and urged as much as I could to have
another man there. I have recommended
for increase of salary one who bears an Irish
name but speaks the French language.
I do not care for the name if they
would only increase his salary ; but though
he translates, and speaks both languages,
he only receives the pay of a labourer

Digitized by

Google

272

Dominion Officials in [SENATE] Quebec and Montreal.

I defy any gentleman in this House to say
that we are fairly treated at the Experi-
mental Farm. It is when we protest against
that state of things that some gentlemen
have the courage to rise up and say, " Oh,
do not speak of that ; suflfer patiently."
Well, gentlemen, when I receive injuries
from any one of you I may suflfer ;
I am at liberty to suflfer personally, but
as a representative of the people I am
not at liberty to allow those whom I repre-
sent to be injured. It is a part of my duty
to defend them, to ask that they be treated
according to what is just and right, and it
is on that account that I make this motion.
I would consider that I was stealing from
the public treasury were I to remain quiet
and not endeavour to protect those whom
I am in duty bound to defend. More than
anything else, I want to do my duty, and
this is a part of my duty, which I will do,
and I hope the Government will try to
remedy the injustice of which I have com-
plained. I wish it to be understood that I
know very well that this cannot be done
to-day, or this year; I know very well it
cannot be remedied in two years, but I ask
that the proper remedy be applied in due
course of time, and that every year,
when occasion arises, we may congratulate
the Government and say, " Well, you have
not done all, but you have done everything
you could do," and that will be quite suf-
ficient, at all events as far as I am con-
cerned.

The motion was agreed to.

DOMINION OFFICIALS IN QUEBEC
AND MONTREAL.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved

That an humble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor- G eneral ; praying that
His Excellency will be pleased to cause to ^ laid
before this House, a list giving the names and
salaries of all persons employed, whether as Heads
of Departments, Assistant Heads of Departments,
Superintendents, Inspectors, Collectors, Agents,
&c., in tho various public deoartments in the Cities
of Quebec and Montreal, under the Government of
Canada, with a statement of the age, nationality,
religion, occupation, and date of entering the public
service, of each such person, with the date of all
changes and promotions among such persons.

He said : I have nothing to say on this
motion, because I thought I might save
time by speaking on the two motions at the

outset, and I referred to this matter at the
end of my remarks, showing how matters
stood in Montreal as to the heads and deputy
heads.

Hon. Mr. DRUMMOND-Before this
motion is adopted I desire to say a word
or two on the subject. The hon. gentle-
man has fqrestalled, to some extent, the re-
turn which he has moved for, inasmuch as
he assumes it to be the case that injustice
has been done to his confreres in the ap-
pointment of civil servants of the Crown
in the department to which his motion re-
fers. I am not prepared to oppose the
motion, nor am I prepared to admit that
injustice has been done, in advance of the
returns, but I say this, having in my per-
sonal, experience laid down as a rule rigidly
to be followed that no question of nationality
or religion can be admitted by me to be
either a bar or a cause for promotion in
either my associates or my servants in any
department whatever, I am therefore able
to speak with absolute dispassionateness on
this subject. I say that it is a dangerous
principle to allow any gentleman to lay
down as an absolute rule for fitness for the
public service that a man shall profess any
particular religion, or be of any nationality.
I would suggest another matter to be con-
sidered by the Government in appointing a
civil servant. Take for example the Cus-
tom-houses in' Quebec and Montreal. If
I gathered correctly from the speech of
the hon. gentleman who has made
this motion, he would have the rule
of three carried out rigidly in the ap-
pointment of civil servants in the Custom-
houses in those cities. Now I will give him
another teat which, in my opinion, could be
more fitly and properly applied in both those
cases. Let him take the amount of business
done at the custom-houses at both ports.
You may discriminate between those who
bring their business to the port and the
business conducted in the custom-houses in
•those two ports, and allot to the nationality,
if he will, and the religion — although I think
it is a most reprehensible principle — in ap-
pointing officials for the custom-house ser-
vice, making appointments in due proportion
to the nationalities of the persons who do
business in those offices. I say it is a better
test than the other. For my part I would
deprecate the introduction of such questions
either one way or the other, but I do say, if

Digitized by

Google

Dominion Officials in [MARCH 8, 1893] Quebec and Montreal.

273

the question of nationality is to enter into
the matter at all, the test I have suggested
is a more fit and proper one to apply, namely,
that the servants who do business in the
custom-houses should bear some relation to
the people who enter the custom-houses to
do business — than to decide upon a vague
question of population in either of the cities.
I will not oppose the motion if the leader of
the House sees fit to grant it, but I depre-
cate the application of any such rigid system
to the selection of public officials, and I feel
it my duty to state in advance thase objec-
tions.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I am very
happy that I have made out so good a case
that a man so clever as the hon. member
from Monti'eal could not answer it, and that
he had to put into my mouth arguments
which I never used. I never said that in
each department we ought to have a fair
share, but I said that in all the departments
of the Dominion taken together, there ought
to be places for our nationality ; and suppose
we are not fit for one department, we may
be better fit for others ; but I showed that
in the whole of the Dominion we have not
half our share, and I merely referred to
Montreal as a special case. The hon. gentle-
man speaks of a better test. Well, I know
something about the Custom-house officials
at Montreal, as well as the hon. gentleman,
and if ever Montreal had a good collector it
was a Frenchman, Mr. Del isle. I defy him
to say to the contrary. Will he say that the
late collector was a good one ? I say no, and
I can give him evidence in support of my
statement. I would not have said that if I
had not been forced to do so. When I make
an argument or statement I am prepared to
stand by it. I have done more than that :
I have charged members of the Government
in this House with having foresworn their
oaths, and I would not withdraw the state-
ment. Before I make a statement I know
what I am about, and anything I state I
stand by. I never admitted that there were
not other qualifications than nationality.
Indeed, I may be better fitted myself to be
a soldier than a senator — what has that to
do with the thing 1 It is the views of my
people who put me here, and probably fear
on the part of the Government.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I know what
brought me here. I know the circumfjtances.

It is that I could not, by any possible means,
be taken out of the House of Commons, and
if you want me to go through the whole
affair I am ready. I have a whole pamphlet
written on the subject, but —

Hon. Mr. POWER— Dispense I

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— When I make
a statement I am prepared to stand by it.
The hon. gentleman says the danger of
applying this principle that I advocate is
that it may result in making bad appoint-
ments. But the present system does not
always prevent that. I may name now a
gentleman in the civil service who can
hardly read and write, but who has a salary
of $3,000 to S4,000 just to protect him as a
supporter of the Government. Was the pro-
per qualification asked from this gentleman?
He has to write letters for the Government
every day, and he has to get them written
by his secretary. Having always stood by
the Conservative party I do not care to
come out with all that I know, but if I am
forced to it by some one coming in my way,
I am ready ; I may be forced to defend my-
self. I have no reproach to make against the
Minister of Agriculture or the Minister of
Trade and Commerce — they have only
recently become heads of their departments
and have not had time to make a change. I
do not bring these matters up in a hostile
spirit — I do it as a friend of the Govern-
ment, because I know if they were to pur-
sue the course followed in the past it would
injure them, and as they have begun right I
would like to see them continue to do jus-
tice to every one and allow every patriotic
man to stand by them.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I did not intend to
speak upon this motion — I thought it was
one the House would allow to go through
without any comment, — but it is my duty to
declare now that the Government has not
the slightest objection to bring down all the
information that the hon. gentleman wants.
I hold the principle that as far as possible
we are to live in harmony, and that while a
fair distribution of patronage should be
made to everybody, the best test for it is
qualification. Now, some allusion has been
made to the displacement of the head of a
department here, which is a very consider-
able one. This gentleman was a French-
man, but I believe that the next after him
in capacity was duly appointed to fill his

Digitized by

Google

274

Dominion Officials in [SENATE] ^bec and Montreal.

place. There may be others as well qualified
(but they are not known to me) as Mr.
Schreiber to take Mr. Trudeau's place.

Hon. Mr.
none better.

BELLEROSE—There were

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— And the time may
come when a leading English official in some
other department will go, and we may have
a Frenchman to take his place just as good
as the Englishman going out ; if so, we will
appoint him.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— It was so in the
Secretary of State Department.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— As to the state-
ment that the hon. gentleman was brought
into this House by fear on the part of the
Government, I do not believe that; and
when I wished to contradict him upon that
point, I intended to pay him a compliment.
He was brought here because of his fitness.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE-
lieve it.

-I do not be-

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I am convinced of
it. The hon. gentleman was brought here
because he was the most competent man
for the position, and when he was removed
from the Local Legislature he made his own
choice, and I expect that when he was
elevated from the House of Commons to
the Senate it was according to his own
choice, also, and I may say, to the choice
of His Excellency, the then Gk)vemor-Gene-
ral, and the country. Now, I do not con-
tradict the hon. gentleman to be at all dis-
agreeable to him, but as he is anxious to do
his countrymen at large so much justice, he
should do a little to himself. A question
of this kind, if it is to be discussed at all,
should be dealt with in a spirit of moder-
ation, and with great care. Words that
gentlemen utter here may be misconstrued
elsewhere, and people with small grievances
may fancy that they are much larger than
they really are. I think, therefore, that
whenever such a question is brought up
again, it should be handled with a great
deal of care and considerable moderation.
It is the intention of the Government to
deal fairly with everybody, and for the
benefit of the Crown to secure the best pos-
sible public officers without distinction of
religion, and as far as possible to make a

fair distribution of patronage between the
different nationalities in the Dominion.
Some reference was made to the Collector
of Customs in Quebec. Now, I think it
is right that I should say here that Mr.
Forsyth was appointed on the special recom-
mendation of my own countiymen.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Does not that
show how liberal we are ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I do not deny that
we are liberal, but I say he was a man of our
own choice, and he was a proper man to
appoint.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Yes. '

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Had there been a
better one we would have taken the best.
As to the Experimental Farm, the hon.
gentleman stated that the population of
Ottawa was about equally divided. Now I
must correct him.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I said that
though there was a minority of French in
this community, at the Experimental Farm
there ought to be certain number of officials
of French origin, because when we go there
now we are forced to speak English because
there are no employees at the farm who
understand French. That was in reply to
the argument that in the Senate and in the
House of Commons the nationalities were
about equally divided.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The farm is for the
whole Dominion ; it is not merely for Que-
bec and Ontario, but it is for the whole con-
federation, and of the business carried on
there, I must acknowled(;e that the greater
part of it is conducted with English-speak-
ing people. I am glad to see that the people
of the province of Quebec every day are tak-
ing greater advantage of the Experimental
Farm than they have previously done. Every
day the amount of information required from
the province of Quebec is increasing and
if the French officials who are now employed
there are incapable of keeping up with the
amount of work required of them, it is the
intention of the Government to supplement
them and give additional assistance. I think
one or two clerks able to attend to the
French correspondence will be needed from
the increasing applications from Quebec, but

Digitized by

Google

Daminian Officials in [tf ABCfl 8, 1893] Quebec and Montreal.

275

at the start I am very sorry tp say the pro-
vince of Quebec did not take a sufficient in-
terest in the Experimental Farm. The peo-
ple did not apply for the information that
we would gladly have supplied to them, but
I am glad to see now that they are improving
in that respect and making a better use of
the farm.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I may tell the
hon. gentleman that I have myself many
times, in the province of Quebec, stated that
those bulletins that are issued were at the
beginning only printed in English, so in
, Quebec our people did not have an oppor-
tunity of reading them and knew very little
about the farm.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I should not have
added anything to the remarks of my hon.
colleague, had it not been for a statement
made by the hon. gentleman who has moved
this resolution. I should be remiss in my
duty to a departed personal and political
friend, although neither of my nationality
nor of my religion, were I to allow the charge
to be made as I understood the hon. gentle-
man— I hope I was in error — that he was
not a gckxl officer and could scarcely read or
write.

Hon.
that.

Mr. BELLEROSE— I never said

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I confess I do not
know what the rules of this Senate are, but
it does seem to me — this is a little digression —
that an hon member should not be permitted
to rise half a dozen times unless it be to put
himself right. If we should continue this
free and easy style, I must say we will soon
get into a state of chaos, rather than main-
tain a calm, cool, deliberative spirit. I under-
stood the hon. gentleman to say — and Ishoidd
be very glad to be corrected if I am mistaken
— that Mr. Delisle was one of the best cus-
toms coUectors that ever was in the city
of Montreal. I do not demur to that state-
ment for the best of reasons. I knew
nothing of him. except from a very slight
personal acquaintance. I knew nothing of
of Mr. Delisle in his official capacity. He
had left the service — if my recollection serves
me right he was dead before I entered it.
But when the hon. gentleman says that Mr.
Ryan was not a good officer, I can tell him
that there never has been an officer appoint-
18}

ed by the Government of Canada to occupy
the responsible position that Mr. Ryan held
in the City of Montreal, who received greater
praise or a greater number of encomiums
from those who, like my hon, friend from
Montreal, had to come in contact with him,
for his efficiency in the discharge of his
duties. The hon. gentleman spoke of some
one, and if he did not mean Mr. Ryan, I
should like to know whom he did mean.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I did not mean
Mr. Ryan, but as the hon. gentleman does
not wish to be interrupted, let him go on.

' Hon. Mr. BOWELL— He said there
was a gentleman appointed to office who
was receiving $4,000 per annum, who
could scarcely read or write, and that
he had to hire a clerk to do his correspond-
ence. I admit Mr. Ryan had a clerk to do
his correspondence, and if the hon. gentle-
man does not know, he ought to know, that
there is not a collector in the whole Do-
minion of Canada at the head oi an
important port who is not obliged to have
a secretary or a clerk to do his cor-
respondence. Take a port like Montreal,
collecting as it has done for a num-
ber of years past from $7,000,000 to $8-
000,000 and $9,000,000 per annum. The
collector has to come in contact with and
discuss questions affecting the tarifi^ the law,
importations, exportations, and frauds, which
are committed, with almost every merchant
in that whole city. To expect that he could
do the whole correspondence would be an
utter absurdity, and a reflection upon the
good sense of any man who knows anything
about it. I can tell the hon. gentleman,
Mr. Ryan occupied as prominent a position
in the city of Montreal as any man in it.
He received the honour, at the hands of the
largest division in the city of Montreal, of
being elected by a very large majority to re-
pr^ent them in the House of Commons. I
never recommended to His Excellency for
appointment to a responsible and lucrative
position with greater pleasure any gentle-
man than I did Mr. Ryan of Montreal, and
my experience of him during the time he
was collector was that he was one of the
most efficient men in the employ of the
Government, because he had common sense
and the practical, commercial knowledge re-
quired by a man to discharge the duties of
that particular office. I make this statement

Digitized by

Google

276

Dominion Officials in [SENATE] Quebec and Montreal

in justice to the memory of one for whom I
had personally great respect, and I do not
wish the House to think that because I
speak a little earnestly I am at all annoyed.
Perhaps, like my hon. friend, when I rise to
express my views I do it with a little
earnestness. I do not think, either, that the
remarks of the hon. gentleman from Kenne-
bec justified the reply made by the hon.
gentleman who moved the motion. The
remarks made by the hon. gentleman for
Kennebec were of that courteous gentle-
manly style which always characterizes the
hon. gentleman, no matter in what sphere
we meet him ; and certainly the House
will admit that he had as good a right
as thehon. member to express his views as to
what shall constitute a man's qualifications,
and, if the question of nationality is to be
discussed, that he had as good a right to
point out any mode by which the comparison
should be made as my hon. friend who moved
the motion. In doing that I do not see what
necessity there was for referring to past
debate, or past discussion in this House, or
to past statements which the hon. member for
DeLanaudiere made in this House accusing
some member of the Government of having
violated his oath. I am very sorry if any
occasion has ever arisen to justify a remark of
that kind. If it were justifiable, or if it were
true, I would not be the one to say that he
should have to withdraw it ; but let me hope
that th^ time has gone by when such an
assertion can be made, and that he will not
have it to say of the gentlemen who occupy
positions in the Government to-day. I do
not complain that he has made the motion —
I have not objected to it, because I thought
that he would have regarded any objection
as an evidence that the Government wish to
hide their transactions in connection with
appointments to office. We discussed this
question before, and a moment's reflection, I
think, will show the hon. gentleman that he
was scarcely fair in again referring to* it
after the statement I made in reference to
Sherbrooke. I refer to the appointment of
Mr. Perry ; that was before the Government
of Sir John Macdonald came into power.
The same remark applies with respect to the
second officer to whom he referred. They
were appointed at a time when the popula-
tion of the city of Sherbrooke was almost
exclusively English ; the building up of the
manufacturing industries has been the cause
of the influx of a large French population.

I am very glad to know that, because it has
furnished employment in the country, instead
of forcing these people to go abroad. Now,
as to the justice which the hon. gentleman
asks should be done in the town of Sher-
brooke, does he propose, since the French
population is at the present moment in a
majority, to turn out those who have been
in office for years ?

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Every one knows
that under our system of administering the
aflfairs of this country, if an officer be once
appointed to any position, he holds that
position during good behaviour.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— We have not yet
introduced the vicious system of turning out
people exclusively on the ground of their
political views or of their nationality. In
calling the attention of the House to the
fact that upon the superannuation of Mr.
Trudeau, Mr. Schreiber, an Englishman,,
succeeded to the position, it would have
been but fair had the hon. gentleman ex-
plained that the principal object in making
the change was to reduce the expenditure of
that department — that the work formerly
done m the city of Ottawa had been trans-
ferred to Moncton. The whole management
of the Intercolonial has been transferred to
that town, and that necessarily involved a
rearrangement of the office here. In that
rearrangement, Mr. Trudeau was super-
annuated. In my little experience of him,
a more faithful officer, or a more courteous
gentleman I never met. Mr. Schreiber suc-
ceeded him. Now, I never heard an Eng-
glish-speaking gentleman find the slightest
fault, no matter what his political complexion
may have been, when Mr. Grant Powell, Under
Secretary of State, was superannuated and a
French gentleman, Mr. Catellier, was pro-
moted to his place. He was the next in
seniority, and was entitled to it by reason of his
long service and his ability. When it was pro-
posed that he should be promoted, there was
not a man in the Cabinet who was not grati-
fied to know that such an old faithful ser-
vant had an opportiinity of being promoted
to the highest position in his department.
That is the principle upon which the Gov-
ernment has acted, and it is the principle

Digitized by

Google

The Printing [MARCH 8, 1893] Bureau.

277

upon which, as long as it exists, they will
continue to act. I could name a dozen heads
of the different departments in the city of
Montreal who are French gentlemen. I do
not say they got their positions because they
were French ; they got them for the reasons
indicated by my colleague, the hon. Minister I
of Agriculture, because the Government be-
lieved they were entitled to them either by
promotion or for services which they had
rendered. I apologize to the House for
having occupied their time with this matter,
but I could not listen silently to what I con-
sidered to be a very grave reflection upon an
old and estimable friend, and particularly
one who was revered by the merchants of
Montreal, who were constantly compliment-
ing him on the courteous manner in which
he performed his duties in that city.

The motion was agreed to.

THE PRINTING BUREAU.

EXPLANATION.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— In the Senate
yesterday the hon. gentleman from Barrie
called attention to some delay in the print-
ing of the proceedings of the Divorce Com-
mittee, and the omission of an important
exhibit from one of the records in the
Hebden case. I have made inquiry, and
the Queen's Printer has furnished me with
an explanation, which I will read to the
House : —

Deit. of PiBLic Printing and Statioxerv,
Office ok the Queen's Printer
and controli^kr of stationery,

Ottawa, 8th March, 1893.
-Metnorandunf for the Honourable Mr. Bowell.

With regard to the printing of the two divorce
cases concerning which vou made inquiry, T have
the honoar to report as follows : —

The manuscript for the Hebden divorce case
came down to the Bureau in the afternoon of March
the 3rd, and was opened and placed upon the desk
of the foreman under, a weight without special
examination. Three hours alter, at 7 o'clock in
the evening, the night foreman came on and took
up the manuscript to put the work in hand. He
noticed that the page 36, containing Exhibit 6, was
missing. That fact did not strike him as at all
unusual, because a very large number of manuscripts
that come to the Bureau are imperfect, particularly
in the case of exhibits. These are frequently kept
back, not being quite ready, and are inserted in the
galley proofs. 1 send herewith the declarations of
the two men who saw the manuscript. They are
both confident that that leaf of the manuscript was
missing.

With regard to the delay in the He ward case, I
find that through the large lock-up of type at pre-
sent existing in the Bureau, sorts of italic ran out,
and that the letter " M '* was turned upon the
second form, and that therefore the second form
waited until the first form was worked off. There
was, however, an unwarrantable delay in this which
even under these circumstances might have been
sent up by noon instead of four o'clock of the 7th.
I do not think that the foreman of the room has a
valid excuse for that delay.

I would add that neither I nor the superintendent
of printing heard of any trouble in relation to these
two cases until last evening aftec it had been
spoken of in the Senate. I think that had either
Mr. McMahon or myself been called to the tele-
phone or had any communication been addressed
to either of us the trouble which arose might have
been prevented. There were telephone messages
through the day about the delay in the Heward
case, but no rumour of any difliculty was reported
to us, and it happened that in each instance one of
the clerks answered the telephone and communi-
cated with the foreman.

S. DAWSON,
. Que^iiH Printer and Controller of Stationery,

Dept. of Public Printing and Stationery,
Office of the Queen's Printer
AND Controller of Stationery,

Ottawa, 8th March, 1893.
I, E. Carter, sub- foreman at the Printing Bureau,
declare that I received the copy of the Hebden
divorce case in the afternoon of March 3rd, and
laid it under a weight on my desk for the night
foreman to go on with. I did not examine the
copy.

E. CARTER,

Svh'forenian,

1, 1). Tass^, night^oreman of the Printing Bureau,
declare that I took up the copy of the Hebden
divorce case off the desk at 7 p.m. — when I came
on, and that I examined the copy, and declarethat
page 36 containing Exhibit 6 was missing.

I further state that in the manuscript receivied
at the Bureau, it is commonly the case that ex-
hibits are withheld to be inserted in the K^lley
proofs, and that on noticing the absence of this
exhibit, I supposed that it was so withheld.

D. TASSE,

Foreman.

Deft, of Public Printing and Stationery,
Office of the Queen's Printer
and c<»ntr0ller of stationery,

Ottawa, 8th March, 1893.
Dear Mr, Bowell, — I send you herewith a
memorandum in relation to the matters brought up
by Senator Gowan. I have not seen the report,
but I have ascertained the subject of the complaint
from Mr. Stephens of the Senate staff.
Yours truly,

S. DAWSON,
Qtieen^M Printer and Controller of Stationery,
The Hon. M. Bowell,

Minister of Trade and Commerce.

Digitized by

Google

278 Manitoba and North-western [SENATE] Railway CoJs Bill.

I hope the explanation is satisfactory to the
hon. gentleman.

ST. LAWRENCE AND ADIRONDACK
RAILWAY COMPANY BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved the sec-
ond reading of Bill (14) " An Act respect-
ing the St. Lawrence and Adirondack Rail-
way Company."

He said : — The object of this Bill is to au-
thorize this company to lease their road to
the Central Vermont Railway Company, or
the Ogdensburgh and Lake Champlain Rail-
way Company. It is almost word for word
the old Bill.

The motion was agreed to.

MANITOBA AND SOUTHEASTERN
RAILWAY CO.»S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER moved the second
reading of Bill (44) " An Act respecting the
Manitoba and South-Eastern Railway Com-
pany."

He said :— The object of this Bill is merely
to enlarge the time for constructing the first
thirty miles of the railway. The time was
originally the 1st of November, 1893, and
the Bill is to extend the time to the 1st of
July, 1895.

The motion was agreed to.

MANITOBA AND NORTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY CO.'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved the second
reading of Bill (L) " An Act to consolidate
and amend certain Acts relating to the
Manitoba and North-western Railway Com-
pany of Canada."

He said : — The object of the Bill is to
consolidate the various Acts of this company
which extend over a period of ten years.
There is no material change except in
reference to the extension of the time for
building a certain section of the road, and
that will be discussed in the Committee, I
suppose, when it comes up.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED. In respect to
this same Bill I also move that Rule 61 be
dispensed with. The rule provides that a

certain time shall intervene between the
second reading of a Bill and its submis-
sion to the Committee : There are certain
gentlemen from Montreal and Toronto who
desire to appear before the Committee to
explain the objects of the Bill, and doubtless
the House will suspend the rule to permit
them to appear before the Committee and
not lose their time in Ottawa.

The motion was agreed to.

BILLS INTRODUCED

Bill(N) "An Act respecting the Senate."
(Mr. Angers.)

Bill (13) "An Act to give effect to the
agreement between the Grand Trunk Rail-
way Company, Canadian Pacific Railway
Company and the Corporation of the city of
Toronto." (Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington.)

Bill (55) " An Act respecting the Lake
Erie and Detroit River Railway Company."
(Mr. Casgrain.)

Bill (57) " An Act to amend the Act to
incorporate the Montreal and Atlantic Rail-
way Company. "(Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington.)

Bill (33) " An Act to incorporate the
Manufacturers' Accident Insurance Com-
pany, and to change its name to the Manu-
facturers' Guarantee and Accident Insur-
ance Company." — (Mr. McKindsey.)

Bill (42) " An Act to amend the Act to
readjust the representation of the House of
Commons." — (Mr. Bowell.)

CENSUS RETURNS.

INQUIRY. ^

Hon. Mr. WARK— I would like to ask
the kon. Minister of Agriculture when we
may expect the first volume of the Census
Returns?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I believe the first
volume will be ready in a few days. The
last proof sheets of the preface have been
approved, and I believe that the whole work
is now in the hands of the Queen's Printer.
I have no doubt that it will be ready for
distribution in a week.

The Senate adjourned at 5 p.m.

Digitized by

Google

The Reward [MARCH 9, 1893] Divorce Case.

279

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Thursday, March 9th, 189S.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
THE HEBDEN DIVORCE CASK

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN moved the adoption
of the Report of the Divorce Committee re
Bill (B) " An Act for the relief of Robert
Young Hebden." He said : — I am glad that
it is not necessary to further* postpone this
case. Owing to the interference of the leader
of the House, the service of the Bureau has
very much improved. In this case all the
facts set forth in the preamble were fully
proved to the entire satisfaction of every
member of the committee. The offence
charged was shown to have been committed,
and there was nothing in the evidence sug-
gesting collusion. At the same time, the
applicant swore to these facts upon his oath
— in a word the whole preamble was proved.
One slight amendment was made in the Bill,
merely to correct a typographical error.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

THE HEWARD DIVORCE CASE.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN moved the adoption
of the report of the Committee on Divorce
re Bill (A) "An Act for the relief of Edmond
Holyoake Howard."

He said : — This case in many respects is
similar to the one the House has just passed
upon. The evidence was full and complete,
establishing every fact necessary and leaving
in the minds of the Committee no doubt
whatever that the claims of the petitioner as
set forth in the preamble were fully and
amply established. Certain amendments
were made in the Bill to bring it into more
complete unison with the evidence as to the
time of the committing of the offence, and
one clause with reference to the custody of
the children was struck out — inasmuch as

the law without any new enactment gave
the custody of the cluldren to the father.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER— I wish to offer
some remarks upon this matter. I do not
know if I am in order at present in doing
so, but I desire to call the attention of the
House to the evidence in this matter. I
quite understand that there is an agreement
here that those hon. gentlemen who do not
wish to grant divorces are merely to protest
in a mUd way to save principles ; still, I
think, we shaU not be reproved for offering
remarks on the evidence on the judicial
points. , I think we are sitting here as a
jury. The committee who have made inves-
tigations are in the position of a grand jury,
and they report to us a true bill. We are
sitting here as petit jurors, and the defen-
dant in each case is supposed to be the
accused party. I think the rule followed in
courts of justice in trying indictable offences
should be followed here, so the remarks I
am offering are only on the ground of judi-
cial views and in the interest of the commu-
nity. I have gone over the evidence in this
case, and to my mind, with all due deference
to the views of the hon. gentlemen compos-
ing the committee, I respectfully submit that
the evidence in that case would not warrant
a verdict in any court of justice. In judicial
circles this is known as an ex parte case.
The defendant is not present and not repre-
sented, and in such cases we should require
evidence which would leave no doubt at all
in the mind of anybody. In going over the
evidence what do we find ? The petitioner
himself does not charge his wife with any-
thing. He does not prove anything himself.
His evidence is only hearsay, which is not
admissible in courts of justice. Now,
the evidence of Vaughan and Pierce, to
my mind, have absolutely no weight.
The evidence of these gentlemen appears to
be in some parts childish. There is another
witness. It is the porter who was on the
train which went from Montreal to Chicago,
on board of which train it is supposed that
the parties went to Detroit. That witness
refers to a fact which, in itself, might raise
a strong suspicion against those parties,
I admit, but if you will go over the evidence
carefully, I think that you will say with me
that although there are strong suspicions
against the parties, still there is room for
doubt. I will go a little further and say
that there is no evidence. The witness does

Digitized by

Google

280

The Reward [SENATE] Divorce Case.

not, to my mind, sufficiently identify the
parties. I will not say he has seen the
parties, because to my mind he cannot say
that he has seen them — but he refers to
certain parties who went from Montreal to
Detroit on a certain date. He never saw
those parties before and never saw them
afterwards. He saw them only on this
occasion amongst a thousand other people
going from Montreal to Detroit, and still he
comes here and what do we find ? We find
an identification of the parties merely based
on photographs. Well, I do not know
whether you are ready to put yourself, your
wife and your famUy at the mercy of a
porter on mere identification by photograph.
W^hatever your views on this matter may be,
to my mind the evidence is not sufficient to
show an identification. If such a case were
put before a court of justice, a JU17 would
find such a serious doubt as to the guilt of
the party that they could not convict.
Under these circumstances my only desire is
to Call your earnest attention to the evidence
and suggest that perhaps it might be well
that this matter should be postponed for a
day or two.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I am very
much surprised that the hon. gentleman can
place any such construction on the evidence
adduced before the Committee. I think a
plainer case has never come before a Divorce
Committee for the last ten or twelve years.
The woman herself in a letter admits her
criminality with the co-respondent

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No.

Hon. Mr. McINNES— If my recollection
serves me right, she admits it.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— She says "I
have wronged you."

Hon. Mr. McINNES— She did not make
use, probably, of as plain language as would
satisfy some hon. gentlemen, but there was
only one inference to be drawn from the
statements made in her letter to her husband.
There is another point which the hon. gentle-
man who has just spoken haslost sightof — the
evidence given by the gentleman who lived
almost immediately opposite the residence of
the petitioner. He states that this man
CoursoUe was in the habit of going continu-
ously on Sundays, during church hours, to He-
ward's house and remaining thei'e, knowing

that the husband was away, until within a
very short time of the church service being
over. Then the evidence given by the porter,
I think, was very pointed and convincing,
inasmuch as this woman's husband bought
her a ticket and secured a lower berth for
her on the pullman car, and she was placed
on board the train at Montreal, I think, by
his uncle. A few miles out from Montreal,
this gentleman, Coursolle, came on board the
train. He had secured the drawing room of
the car. As he entered she immediately
abandoned her berth and took up her quar-
ters with him in the drawing room, where
she remained until the following afternoon
at one or two o'clock, when they arrived at
Detroit ; and although both of them had se-
cured their sleeping accommodations, one for
a single lower berth and the other the draw-
ing room, all the way to Chicago, yet they
abandoned the train there and remained at
Detroit. The relationship existing between
the parties during this time, as described by
the porter, I think, were most convincing
evidence. His suspicions were aix>used from
the fact that she had secured sleeping accom-
modation in an ordinary berth and given it
up to join this Capt. Coursolle in the draw-
ing room. There are other circumstances
which at present I cannot remember, but
which to my mind establish her guilt. The
Committee had no hesitation in unanimously
deciding that it was a plain case and that
the prayer of the petitioner ought to be
granted.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— I did not intend to
say a word more on this case nor should I
have done so now, if the hon. gentleman
from Manitoba had not stated that he believed
no jury would convict if the crime was
charged before a jury in an ordinary court.
I know not what is the hon. gentleman's ex-
perience may be in courts, but I had over
forty years' experience in the administration
of the criminal law, and I unhesitatingly
say that I believe no jury would fail to con-
vict of the crime charged under similar cir-
cumstances and with the same evidence
laid before them. The evidence is twofold.
I am not going to offend the ears of any
gentleman by entering into particulars, but
I want to point /)at sufficient to justify the
action of the Committee and my own action^
and in stating so strongly that the case was
fully supported. The evidence is twofold.
1st. What took place at St. John's, where,

Digitized by

Google

The Heward [MARCH 9, 1893J Divorce Case.

281

notwithstanding being positively forbidden
by her husband to meet the gentleman who
is charged with participating in this crime
to meet him, his wife deceived him, and not-
withstanding he positively forbade the man
to come to his house, they both for a long
time unknown to the husband secretly met
together under circumstances detailed at
length in the evidence — under circumstances
that no judge would have over-looked or
refused to submit to a jury as some evidence
of guUt. I will not enter into the particu-
lars. My hon. friend opposite a layman
has done justice to the matter so far as he
has touched upon the evidence, but I would
say and repeat that if the case stood alone
upon that testimony, a judge would not be
warranted in withdrawing the case entirely
from a jury. He might tell them that the
testimony was weak or that something fur-
ther might be added, but he would not
have been bound to say that he must
withdraw the case from the jury under
the circumstances that were brought out
in the evidence. What these were any
gentleman who takes the trouble to read the
evidence will fully see. They were very
suggestive, to say the least of it, of an
improper intimacy between the parties, and
they were both acting in violation of a pro-
mise they had given the husband. Then,
with regard to the other part of the evi-
dence, that which took place on the cars,
unless the hon. gentleman who has spoken
would expect in a case of this kind direct
evidence, I do not know what more he could
require. Now, this crime is of a nature that
is almost always committed in secret. It
scarcely ever happens that there is direct
testimony to make out a case, but I can
scarcely conceive a case where the evidence
is more complete. The woman went to
Montreal, and was met by her uncle in
Montreal, and furnished with a ticket for a
particular sleeping berth. She wei^t on to
the Junction outside of Montreal, having
occupied the seat mentioned on her sleeping
berth ticket until she came to that point ;
then, going to the parlour in the sleeping
car, which was occupied by Capt. Coursolle,
at once said to him "I was looking for you,"
and telling the porter that she would not
require her berth for that night — that she
would go into the other, the parlour section,
occupied by Coursolle. Any man or any wo-
man that could believe the pair remained
together all night (having regard to what

passed between them on previous occasions,
and the circumstances attending his going
on the cars) must be in a state of innocency
not usual, and possessed of a nature that is
rarely found amongst ordinary mortals. The
fact, to my mind, was conclusive of the wo-
man's guilt. I need say no more. Other
members of the committee may deem it well
to supplement other particulars.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not want
to prolong this discussion. I think my hon.
friend who has raised the doubt is not with-
out some proper reason for doing so. I
hesitated in accepting the views of the Com-
mittee, until after I had read the evidence,
because I had some doubt as to the identi-
fication of Coursolle on the train. I delayed
coming to a decision on , the case until I had
read over the evidence, but when I found
that the day on which the porter says Cour-
solle went on the train was the same day
that, the petitioner swore, his wife went on
the train, I had to infer that Coursolle was the
man. The only difficulty in my miad is
this, that the photograph as given to us
showed Coursolle in a military dress while
on the train he was not in such dress, which
makes a great difference in the appearance
of a person, and there might be a mistake as
to the identity, but considering the gossip
about these persons at St. John*s, consider-
ing that Coursolle had made those surrepti-
tious visits to the house of the petitioner
while the husband was a^ay — taking all
these facts with the other circumstances at-
tending the case, the way they went to and
from the woods together, and the evidence of
the porter, with her letter in evidence, it left
in my mind no reasonable doubt. In these
cases, of course, we apply the rule which gov-
erns criminal evidence : if there is a reason-
able doubt, we give the accused the benefit of
the doubt. The Committee were unanimous
and, though I had some hesitation at the
beginning for the reason which the hon. gen-
tleman from St. Boniface has referred to, the
identity of Capt. Coursolle on the train that
day, I decided that the case was established.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— I would point
out to my hon. friend from St. Boniface, a
very conclusive point of evidence which he
has apparently overlooked, and which may
relieve his mind on the question of identifi-
cation. It happens in this particular case
the Committee did not entirely rely on the

Digitized by

Google

282 House of Commons Bepre [SENATE] sentatlon Readjustment Bill.

production of the photographs to establish
the identity of the parties. It happened
that in this particular case, the sleeping car
diagram produced showed conclusively that
the name of Mrs. Heward was marked for
this particular berth by the Canadian
Pacific Railway officials in Montreal who
sold it, and if hon. gentlemen will refer to
the evidence they will observe that her
name appears in berth 5, marked by the
officials who sold the ticket for that particu-
lar berth ; that the porter in returning his
diagram to the proper official of the Rail-
way Company marked upon that diagram
that this particular berth was not occupied
during that night, no that entirely apart
from the production of the photograph and
the identification of the lady in question by
that photograph, it was established that
Mrs. Heward had this berth sold to her
upon the date in question, and that it was
not used ; consequently we were not com-
pelled to rely upon the photograph alone, to
establish her identity. Then in respect
to the identity of Capt. Coursolle, I
submit to this honourable House that it
was not necessary to prove the identity
of this individual or any other man,
so long as it was not the petitioner, who
occupied that particular stateroom with Mrs.
Heward. I see no point whatever with res-
pect to the identification of the particular
man who committed the offence complained
of, so long as Mrs. Heward occupied the
room in question with somebody else other
than her husband. That is all this House
or the Committee is called upon to decide,
and that has been proved beyond peradven-
ture. I would refer hon. gentlemen also to
the letters which have been produced, parti-
cularly exhibits 5 and 6, which are letters
that were written, after the separation, by
Mrs. Heward to her husband, and it will be
distinctly seen from those letters that she,
while not admitting this particular case, yet
clearly admits that she had so wronged her
husband as to justify the step which he had
taken in separating her from him. I would
refer hon. gentlemen to exhibit 5 in which
she makes this statement — " You have been
sufficiently wronged already ; if you had
given me one more chance it might have
been different, even to our happiness ; I have
wronged my Edmond, but you did not under-
stand my nature," &c. Then again in exhi-
bit No. 6, at the top of the page, hon. gentle-
men will find this statement : " How is it that

Mrs. never found herself in my predica-
ment t Do not punish my Libby (referring to
her child) for my doings. Please answer my
questions clearly, who is your informer, &c."
I submit to the House that sufficient infer-
ence at any rate can be drawn from these
statements to clearly establish on the part
of Mrs. Heward a confession as to her wrong-
doing in this particular matter, and in con-
junction with the other evidence submitted
to us, sufficient to justify the finding of the
Committee that the case was clearey proved.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the Bill

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
wfi^ read the third time and passed.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (13) an Act to give effect to an agree-
ment between the Grand Trunk Railway
Company of Canada, the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company and the Corporation of
the City of Toronto. — (Mr. Maclnnes, Bur-
lington.)

Bill (bo) an Act respecting the Lake Erie
and Detroit River Railway Company. — (Mr.
Casgrain.)

Bill (57) an Act to amend the Act to in-
corporate the Montreal and Atlantic Rail-
way Company. — (Mr. Maclnnes, Burling-
ton.)

Bill (33) an Act to amend the Act to in-
corporate the Manufacturers' Accident In-
surance Company, and to change its name
to "The Manufacturers' Guarantee and
Accident Insurance Company." — (Mr. Mc-
Kindsey.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS REPRESEN-
TATION READJUSTMENT BILL.

• SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL moved the second
reading of Bill (42) " An Act to amend the
Act to readjust the representation in the
House of Commons."

He said :— This is not a very formidable
enactment; it is simply to correct some
errors which exist in the law as passed
during the last session of Parliament. The
first clause has reference to the Nipissing
district, which the House will recollect was
added to the Algoma district and divided into

Digitized by

Google

House of C(mman$ Represen [BIABCH 10, 1893] tation Readjustment Bill. 283

electoral divisions and a representative
given to each in the House of Commons.
The present proposition is to extend the
limits of that district in accordance with
the Imperial Statute which was passed
defining the boundary line between Ontario
and Quebec. When the law was passed
last year, they simply adopted the description
in the Ontario Statute defining the judicial
district of Nipissing. After examining the
Imperial Statute it was found that a portion
of the district was not included within the
territorial limits of the electoral district.
The amendment is simply to bring within
the limits of the Nipissing district those
who live in that portion of the territory in-
cluded in Ontario by the Imperial
Statute defining the boundary. In the city
of Ottawa the words in the old Act " and
shall return two members " were omitted in
the Act of last session. If an election were
to take place in the city of Ottawa under
the Act as it now stands upon the Statute-
book, the city would be entitled to only
one representative. By this Bill the words
•* and shall return two members" are added.
The county of Ottawa, it will be remem-
bered, was divided into two electoral dis-
tricts, one called Wright and the other La-
.belle. By some blunder the word ** west '*
was inserted in the Act where the word
" east " should have been used. It is pro-
posed to substitute east for west. In the
electoral district of Hochelaga, the town of
St. Antoine is designated as a ward, and
one clause of this Bill is to correct the error.
In the electoral district of RouviUe by some
blunder the parish of Notre Dame de Bon-
secours was omitted, and the effect of the
omission would be that the electors in that
parish would have no vote. A clause of the
Bill is to include Notre Dame de Bonsecours
in the electoral division of Rouville. The
next clause relates to the electoral district
of Chambly, as it is designated in the old
law. There is a little sentiment in con-
nection with the retention of the word
Verch^res. I remember it was promised at
the time that the electoral district should be
called Chambly and Verch^res, and this
clause is to carry out that promise.
In the electoral district of Bagot,
one of the parishes, St. Liboire, was
omitted ; it is added by this Bill. Another
blunder occurred in the description of the
electoral district of Richelieu. St. Ours is
described as a town, but it is really an incor-

porated village, and it is proposed to correct
the error. In the district of St. Hyacinthe,
a portion of the territory was omitted, which
disfranchised, I am told, about twenty elec-
tors, and the amendment is simply to bring
them within the district. In the electoral
district of Provencher, the parish or town-
ship of Hanover was omitted r this simply
provides for adding Hanover to the electoral
district of Provencher. These are the only
changes, and the House will see that they
are not material. They are simply clerical
and typographical errors. If, however, the
House desires further information or time to
study the question, I shall simply move the
second reading? to-day and the Bill can be
considered in committee to-morrow ; but if
my explanations are satisfactory, the Bill
may as well be considered in committee
now.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time and referred to a
Committee of the Whole House.

Hon. Mr. HO WLAN, from the committee,
reported the Bill without amendment.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (23) " An Act respecting witnesses
and evidence." (Mr. Angers.)

Bill (39) " An Act ta incorporate the
Ocean Accident Corporation." (Mr. De
Boucherville.)

Bill (48) " An Act respecting the Port
Arthur, Duluth, and Western RaUway Com-
pany." (Mr. Clemow.)

The Senate adjourned at 4.40 p.m.

THE SENATE.
Ottatm, Fi-iday, March 10th, 1893,
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3 p.m.
Prayers and routine proceedings.
THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills, reported without
amendment from the Committee on Rail-
ways, Telegraphs and Harbours, were read
the third time and passed : —

Bill (25) " An Act respecting the Grand
Trunk, Oeoigian Bay and Lake Erie Rail-
way Company." (Mr. Vidal.)

Digitized by

Google

284 Manitoba and North-western [SENATE] Railway Company's Bill

Bill (44) " An Act respecting the Mani-
toba and South-eastern Railway Company."
(Mr. Bemier.)

Bill (17) "An Act respecting the St.
Lawrence and Adirondack Railway Com-
pany." (Mr. McMillan.)

MANITOBA AND NORTH-WESTERN
RAILWAY COMPANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (L) "An Act to consolidate
and amend certain Acts relating to the
Manitoba and North-western Railway Com-
pany of Canada," with amendments.

He said : — There are three amendments
to this Bill, and as they are separate and
have no necessary connection with each other,
I will explain them separately so that the
House may be in a position to act on each
amendment as it is put. The first amend-
ment is to the first clause, which was that
repealing part of the Acts that are now con-
solidated under this Bill. The Bill, as it
was introduced, reads in this way after re-
pealing those provisions — " and in lieu of the
said Acts and provisions, this Act, subject
to the Railway Act and its amendments,
shall apply to the Manitoba and North- west-
em RaUway Company, ike." Under this
wording of the section, a very nice question
arose and one which possibly might have
been attended with difficulty had it not been
for the amendment suggested and which
makes it quite clear. The rule which applies
to the position of a special Act under the
General Railway Act is this — that the special
Act rules in every respect where the General
Act does not conflict with it. Now, in order
to make this perfectly plain, the clause was
altered so as to read this way : " And in lieu
of the said Acts, and provisions, this Act,
and in any matters not provided for by this
Act, the Railway Act and its amendments
shall apply, <kc." This makes it perfectly clear
and creates no confusion, and I see no reason
why the House should not accept the amend-
ment.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The next amend-
ment relates to section 6 of the Bill and to
subsection 3 of that section. This is a con-
solidation Act, and this clause, amongst
other clauses consolidated, is a new clause
of subsection 10 of the original Manitoba
Act, and it is simply, as it reads in the
Bill, re-enacting the clause, and the refer-
ence to the same clause in the Manitoba
Act is printed at the bottom of it ; but it
has been proposed to amend it (as I will
explain to the House when I read the sec-
tion) in this way : " The capital stock of
the company may be increased from time to
time," etc. It was suggested that it would
be well to give power to decrease the capital
if the company chose. This suggestion was
acted upon, and the amendment was made
which was read at the Table of the House,
introducing the word " decrease " after the
word " increase," It is obvious that possi-
bly the question might arise in another
place, where the people are rather suspicious
about the wording of this clause, whether
this would not affect the previous issues of
bonds and shares, and that was a question
which was a very serious one proposed for
the promoters of the Bill, and a very serious
one with reference to the legislation, and it
is now submitted for the determination of the
House. I simply explain the scope of the'
amendment, which is to give power to the
company to decrease their capital stock as
well as to increase it. The original clause
only gave power to increase the capital stock
to any amount, which they always have acted
upon for the last ten years. Whether the
amendment is a wise one or not is for the
House to determine.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— In respect to
the amendments referred to in this particu-
lar clause, since the submission of the Bill to
the Committee this morning the solicitor of
the Company, upon perusing the amendment
proposed, concluded that it would be better
not to disturb the present powers which the
company have, and the company therefore
retjuest that the Bill remain as it was before
its submission to the Committee with regard
to this particular clause. I, therefore,
move that this amendment be not concurred

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The last amendment
is the one which refers to clause 23. It is

Digitized by

Google

Manitoba and North-western [MARCH 10, 1893] Railway Company's Bill 285

an amendment which relates to the interest
on bonds. The framers of this Bill, in pre-
senting it in Committee, seem to have for-
gotten that the question of interest upon
bonds had already beeti dealt with in clause
20, which was apparently conflicting with it.
Therefore, it was moved that subsection 2
of clause 23, be struck out, " The interest
payable in respect of debenture stock includ-
ing interest upon any bonds, etc." The Com- .
mittee without hesitation agreed to strike
out these words. I see no objection to the
adoption of the amendment.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon, Mr. LOUGHEED moved the third
reading of the Bill.

Hon. Mr. BO ULTON— Before this Bill
receives its final reading, T wish to say a
few words with repect to the legislation
contained in it. I do not propose to move any
amendment which would require me to give
notice and necessitate the postponement of
the Bill, because such an amendment would
somewhat interfere with the General Rail-
way Act, which is already part of the legis-
tion of the country. This Bill is a consoli-
dation of the legislation affecting the Mani-
toba and North-western Railway Company
of Canada. The reason I have selected this
Bill for the purpose of pointing out the in-
jurious legislation which T consider is con-
tained in a Bill of this kind, is that the line
passes through the district in which I re-
side in the North-west Territories. I am
not opposing the Bill from any enmity to-
wards the compimy, or for the purpose of
attempting to restrict their operations in
the slightest degree : but as I pointed out to
this honourable House in some remarks T had
occasion to make with regard to the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway, I feel that this Bill
confers too great powers upon this railway
company, and railway companies generally,
with regard to their powers to issue stock
and to create liabilities upon the company
in the shape of bonds or mortgages. The
only object there would be in increasing their
stock unduly is that dividends may accrue
to holders of that stock, and when a large
amount of stock is placed upon the indebted-
ness or liability of a railway company in any
district, the people who are served by

that railway company have to contri-
bute to the traffic in order to meet
those dividends. In a country such as I
have the pleasure of residing in, we are
subject of course, to railway communication
without competition ; that is to say, with-
out such competition as hon. gentlemen have
in other parts of Canada. We have no
water communication to assist us in keep-
ing down rates, and the fact is that up there
we have very little competition between rail-
way companies and therefore we are forced
to protect ourselves, and it is only through
the legislation of the country that we can
protect the people. So far as this question
is concerned, I am quite aware that it is in
the power of the Government to declare
whether the rates are reasonable or unreason-
able. To that extent the country is pro-
tected, but we might also afford a protection
by limiting the amount of capital stock that
these raiPway companies are allowed to put
upon the road. In the present instance the
capital that is being put upon the road is
$12,000,000, without reference to the
mileage that may be created under this Act.
if the railway should happen to be com-
pleted in various directions, and it came to
500 miles, there would be $25,000 per mile
stock issued upon the road. In addition to
that they have the power to issue $20,000
in bonds and mortgages. Now, hon. gentle-
men, that is $45,000 a mile capital imposed
upon the district Vhich has to do the carry-
ing trade for 500 miles in our North-western
country, and what I say is that that is an
excessive amount, that by no possible means
can it cost $45,000 per mile to build that road.
$30,000 per mile at the outside is fully ample
to meet all the requirements of construction,
equipment, and even extravagance in that
respect ; and it is wiser for us, I think, to
consider the advisability of passing legisla-
tion of this kind and not change our system.
I am quite aware that under the General
Railway Act powers are conferred upon
railway companies to increase their stock to
an unlimited degree, merely restricting it to
the power of the shareholders. An amend-
ment should be made to the General Rail-
way Act which would make that power sub-
ject to the approval of the Governor-General
in Council, because T contend that as far as
the general industries and the general wealth
of the country are concerned, the foundation
of that, and what creates the wealth of the
country, is the labour put into it, and the

Digitized by

Google

286 Manitoba and Northrwestem [SENATE] Railway Company's Bill.

industry of that labour, and a Bill of this
kind empowers the individual to collect that
wealth through the large amount of stock
the company can issue and collect dividends
upon. Of course, if they cannot collect divi-
dends, then the credit of the company is
depreciated, to the extent to which the bonds
or stock are depreciated, so that whichever
result happens, the company suffers to some
extent. I contend that in the interests of
capital itself it is wise to limit that power to
$30,000 a iQile rather than to give them the
power to issue $45,000 a mile, with the ad-
ditional power we are conferring here of in-
creasing that if they see fit to do so. There
is a clause here which says :

The capital stock of the company shall be twelve
millions of dollars, divided into two hundred and
forty thousand shares of fifty dollars each.

2. The directors may make and issue as paid-up
stock shares in the company, whether subscribed
for or not, and mav allot ana hand over such stock
in payment for right of way, rolling sto^k or mate-
rials of any kind, and also for .the services of con-
tractors and engineers ; and such issue and allot-
ment of stock shall be binding on the company,
and such stock shall not be assessable for calls ;
and all paid-up stock heretofore made and issued
in accordance with the provisions of section three
of chapter eighty-six of the statutes of 1888 is lega-
lized and coimrmed.

In that clause I can see how it is possible to
convert that twelve million dollars into paid
up stock of the company while only twenty-
five or fifty cents on the dollar may have
been paid in on that stdck. Under that
clause it is quite possible for the company
to let a contract to what is popularly known
on this continent as a construction company,
and they can enter into a bargain with them
to pay that partly in stock and partly in the
proceeds of the bonds ; and they can make
a bargain with them which will enable that
construction company to take that stock at
twenty-five or fifty cents on the dollar,
When they have done so and made the bar-
gain, that comes to be paid up stock to the
extent of one hundred cents on the dollar.
Supposing such a thing were done, there has
only gone into the construction of that rail-
road twenty-five or fifty cents, or whatever
proportion of value may be bargained for in
carrying that transaction, and when that
stock goes upon the market, the country is
bound to sustain it, so far as this legislation
which has enabled the company to put that
stock upon the market. My object in
speaking of this is to enter a protest, so far
as the agricultural industry in that great

country is concerned ; it is impossible for us
to submit to more than a legitimate charge
for carrying our produce to market. What
I claim is that ordinary and fair economy
should be used in the construction and
management of the road. When that is
done, I have no fear but what the country
will be able to prosper and progress, but it
is utterly impossible in that country, where
we are depending entirely upon railway com-
munication, to pay such rates as will enable
the company to collect a dividend of $45,000
or $50,000 or $60,000 per mile, as the case
may be. As I said before, it is not my
intention to move an amendment now, be-
cause it would be unfair, while the general
Railway Act allows every railway in the
country to increase its stock to any amount,
to deprive this company of the same privi-
lege. There is another clause also which
gives the company another year to build 20
miles. I regret very much indeed to see
that clause in the Bill. I should be sorry
to say or do anything that would interfere
with the development and progress of the
country, but I certainly think that the Gov-
ernment should assist the company in some
way or another that would enable them to
buUd that 20 miles this year. The leader of the
House last year (Mr. Abbott) asked for the
passage of the Act which permitted another
year to elapse without constructing any por-
tion of the railway, and, in consideration of
that, 40 miles were to have been constructed
the following season. Now, we see that this
Bill asks for a further extension of time for
the completion of the 20 miles, and that the
section of 40 miles had not been constructed.
It is a great drawback, and I understand
what the settlers suflfer for want of railway
communication — settlers who go 30, 40, 50
or 60 miles in there waiting for the rail-
way; and I cannot but express my regret
that the Bill contains that clause. At the
same time, I do not propose to say anything
that will interfere with the progress or de-
velopment of the country.

The motion was agreed to.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (O) " An Act to amend the Seamen's
Act."— (Mr. Bowell).

Bill (P) " An Act to amend the Inland
Water Seamen's Act." (Mr. Bowell.)

Digitized by

Google

TheBules [MABOH 14, 1893] of the Souse.

287

BiU(Q) "An Act to incorporate the
Canadian Live Stock Insurance Company."
(Mr. Almon.)

Bill (41) "An Act to incorporate the
Eastern Trust Company." (Mr. Almon.)

Bill (46) " An Act to incorporate the
Ocean Guarantee Corporation." (Mr. Fer-
guson.)

Bill (53) " An Act respecting the Alberta
Railway and Coal Company." (Mr. Loug-
heed.)

THE RULES OF THE HOUSE.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL moved :

That he will move, that a Special Committee be
appointed to consider and revise or add to the
Rules, Orders and Forms of Proceeding of the
Senate, and that such Committee do consist of the
Honourable Messieurs. Allan, Dickey, Miller,
Power, Pelletier, Bellerose, and the mover, with
power to report from time to time.

He said : — With the consent of the House
I should like to add the names of the Hon.
Messrs. Howlan and Lougheed, making the
committee nine instead of seven.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)--I hope the
leader of the House will not object to adding
the names of Mr. Scott, and my hon. col-
league from British Columbia, Mr. Macdonald.
Both of these gentlemen are well up in the
rules governing this body, and, I think they
will be most useful members of the com-
mittee. I do not think it will make the
committee too large or unwieldy.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I have not the
slightest objection. My only desire is to
have a good working committee, and I have
always found in the past that too large com-
mittees are not as workable, if I may use
that expression, as those that are smaller.
Still I have not the slightest objection to
adding the names of the gentlemen that have
been suggested. I move that the names of
Messrs Scott and Macdonald (B.C.) be added.

The motion was agreed to, and the motion
as amended was adopted.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (J) "An Act for the relief of John
Francis Schwaller." (Mr. Clemow.)

Bill (K) " An Act for the relief of Annette
Marion Goff." (Mr. Clemow.)

THIRD READING.

Bill (42) " An Act to amend the Act to
readjust the Representation in the House of
Commons." (Mr. Bowell.)

The Senate adjourned at 4 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Ottatva, Monday^ March 13th, 1893.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (48) " An Act respecting the Port
Arthur, Duluth and Western Railway Com-
pany." (Mr. Clemow.)

BiU (46) " An Act to incorporate the
Ocean Guarant-ee Corporation." (Mr. Fergu-
son.)

Bill (53) " An Act respecting the Alberta
Railway and Coal Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

The Senate adjourned at 3.30 P.M.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tuesday, March lith, 1893.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills, reported without
amendment from the Committee on Rail-
ways, Telegraphs arid Harbours, were read
the third time and passed :-^

Bill (13) "An Act to give effect to an
agreement between the Grand Trunk Rail-
way Company of Canada, the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company and the Corpora-
tion of the City of Toronto." (Mr. Mac-
Innes, Burlington.)

Bill (55) "An Act respecting the Lake
Erie and Detroit River Railway Company."
(Mr. Casgrain.)

Digitized by

Google

288

Welland Canal [SENATE] Investigation.

Bill (57) " An Act to amend the Act to
incorporate the Montreal and Atlantic Rail-
way Company." (Mr. Maclnnes, Burling-
ton.)

THE WESTERN COUNTIES RAIL-
WAY COMPANY.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (38) " An Act respecting the
Western Counties Railway Company and to
change the name of the Company to the Yar-
mouth and AnnapoKs Railway Company,"
with an amendment. He said : This amend-
ment occurs in clause 8 of the Bill, which
proposes to give power to this company to
acquire, own and operate steam and other
vessels without restiicting the power to oper-
ations of that description named in connec-
tion with the undertaking of the railway.
The amendment as suggested and agreed
to introduces the words which have been
read, in consequence of which the clause will
read this way — " The company may, for any
purpose in connection with their undertak-
ing, acquire, &c." The other amendment is
a mere consequential amendment. The
amendment was proposed by the promoters
of the Bill and accepted unanimously by the
Committee. I see no objection to it and I
think it may be agreed upon at once.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved that the amend-
ment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill as
amended was then read the third time and
passed.

THE WELLAND CANAL INVESTI-
GATION.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE gave notice that
he would, on Tuesday next, move : —

That an humble address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General, praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House all the papers, examinations, evidence and
report of the Commissioner to whom the charges
preferred by the Hon. Senator McCallum against
\Vm. Ellis, a superintendent, on the Welland
Canal, were referred for investi^tion ; also an
account of the expenses of such investigation in-
cluding an estimate of the cost of the debates mode
in Parliament in reference to said charges.

He said : I give this notice because I see
a motion on the paper to-day by the hon.

Senator from Monck. For four years this
matter has been before the House and im-
mense expense has been incurred in conse-
quence of it. The Senate, while the matter
has occupied their attention, has not had an
opportunity of seeing the data on which to
come to a proper conclusion, and will not be
in that position until these papers are
brought down. I, therefore, suggest to my
hon. friend, the member for Monck, that he
defer bringing up his motion until those
papers are laid before the House.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— That is a law-
yer's advice, and such advice when gratui-
tously offered is not woi-th much.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— That is very
witty.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM moved :

That an himible Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General : praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, a statement and account showing the
amount paid back to \Villiam Ellis, superintendent
of the Vs elland Canal, taken by hin\ (Ellis) in ex-
cess of what was just, right and proper, and not
included in a return 'laid before the Senate, in
answer to an Address of the Senate, of the 17th
of June, 1891.

He said : — Hon. gentlemen may remember
that an address was passed lately calling
upon the Government to lay before the
House certain statements of the accounts
and amounts of money that the Government
of this country made Mr. Ellis give back of
what he had taken. I have got that state-
ment in my hand. I do not know that it
has ever been put in our Debates. My hon.
friend from Erie is very anxious to get in-
formation on this matter, and he * told
us the other day that he had read all the
evidence < taken at the Welland Canal inves-
tigation. I know that hon. gentlemen in this
House are not all as well acquainted with
the case as he must be if he read all the
evidence. I questioned the correctness of
his statement when he made it, but he in-
sisted that he had read all the evidence,
and he said the only proof furnished by
that evidence was that $100 had been taken
by Ellis wrongfully. I tried to help him
out of the difficulty that he was getting in-
to. I told him that he was quoting from
the statements of Mr. Ellis or of his counsel
Mr. Rykert. Mr. Rykert puts the
amount that Mr. Ellis had taken.

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal [MARCH 14, 1893] Investigation.

289

at $118. My hon., friend from Erie goes
him one better, and says that Mr. Ellis had
taken only $100. I should advise Mr. Ellis,
if he ever gets into any trouble again, to
retain the hon. Senator from Erie, becaujse
he can do better than Mr. Rykert did.
Now, I hold in my ha Ad a statement show-
ing that a very considerably larger amount
than that was taken. I do not know
whether the hon. gentleman from Erie has
read this part of the evidence to which I
refer. Did he ever read Mr. Foster's evi-
dence ? I have got it in my hand. Many
of you have heard me say that he burnt the
books so that I could not get at the amount
he charged the Government every month,
and certified to its being correct and right ;
but what did I do ? I took it from the pay
lists and put it in the evidence, and anybody
who looks through the evidence of Robert
Foster will find the list that I procured, and
to which I called the attention of the Gov-
ernment. The Commissioner did not want
to have it put in ; he said : " You can call
my attention to it when you come to sum
up." I did not get at all the facts. I re-
member every word that I said in this House
in making the statement that Mr. Ellis had
taken approximately from the public beyond
what was right, just and proper to the amount
at least of $800. Now, I am moving this
motion to see how much the Government
have got back from that gentleman. I hold
a statement in my hand, and it is as fol-
lows: —

Refuni to an Address of the SeticUe, dated 17th
Jum, 1891.

For a statement and account showing the amount
of money received and taken in excess of what was
just and proper by William Ellis, superintendent
of the Welland Canal, if any, from the 29th day of
December, 1879, until the 11th day of September,
1889 ; also a statement showing the amount of money
paid bock by Mr. EUis.if any,and date.of payments,
if any. Further, a copy of the bond given as
security by Mr. Ellis, if any, to secure the pay-
ment of the money taken in excess.

(Sd.) J. A. CHAPLEAU,
Secretary of StOrte.

(Ref. No. 6.)
Mover, Hon. Mr. McCallum.

Ottawa, 20th July, 1891.
(Return No. 13.)

Sir, — I herewith transmit Return in answer to
an Address of the Senate dated the 17th of June,
1891, with statement and account showing alleged
excess of charges for horse hire made by Mr. W.
Ellis, superintendent of the Wellanfl Canal from
29th December, 1879, until 11th September, 1889.
19

Also, of amounts stopped from Mr. Ellis by the
Auditor-General.

No bond has heen given by Mr. Ellis for any re-
payment.

I have the honour to be, sir.

Your obedient servant,

(Sd.) A. P. BRADLEY,
Secretary.
The Under Secretary of State,
&c., ■ &c., &c.,

Ottawa.

DEPARTMENT OF RAILWAYS AND
CANALS.

RKTURN NO, 13.

Return in answer to an Address from the Senate
dated the 17th of June, 1891, for a ** statement
and account showing the amount of money received
and taken in excess of what was just and proper by
William Ellis, Superintendent of the Welland
Canal, if any, from 29th December, 1879 to the
11th day of September, 1889, also a statement
showing the amount of money paid back by Mr.
Ellis, if any, and date of payments if any.
Further a copy of the l)ond given as security by
Mr. Ellis, if any, to secure the payment of the
money taken in excesp."

Reference No. to Address (Dept.) 134945.

** '* *' Secy, of State No. 6.

Statement of amounts paid for horse hire for Mr.

Ellis, Superintendent of Welland Canal.

1881.
June

1884.

30 — Horse hire, &c., with mail cor-
respondence, examining and
reporting canal works

Feb.

17 — Horse and buggy (August pay
list repairs .

1886.
May 17 — 6 days' horse and buggy.

Aug — 5 do do

—3 do do

— 1^ do do

Sept.
Nov . .
1887
April .

May. .
June..

-Carriage $3.50, 13^ days' horse

and buggy $34

-19 days' horse and buggy

.—8

July....— 19

124
—10
—9

Aug,
Sept . . .
Oct. . . .

1888.
April. .
May.. .
July . . .
Aug . . .
Sept . . .
Nov . . .

1889.
May....— 4

June —14

July....— 13

—10
-12
-17
—18
—14
—12

do
do
do
do
do

do
do
do
do
do
do

do
do
do

do
do
do
do
do

do
do
do
do
do
do

do
do
do

3 50

1 50

8 50
8 50
4 50
1 50

37 50
45 50
26 00
44 50

26 00
18 00
16 00

21 00

27 00
37 50
40 00
30 00
21 00

9 00
30 00

28 50

Total S475 50

Department of Railways and Canaw,
2nd February, 1891.

Digitized by

Google

290

Wetland Canal [SENATE] Investigation.

Statement of deductions from the salary of Wni.

Ellis, Superintendent of Welland Canal, and

placed against paymentA made for horse hire
• for him.

1890.

Nov. Salarj' for October deducted by

Auditor-General $ 241 ^

1891.

Jany. Quarterly alloM'ance December
for travelling expenses de-
ducted by Auditor-General . .. 75 00
March. Deduction from salary on account

over payments for horse hire . . 30 00

April. Deduction from salar}' on account

overpayments for horse hire. . 30 00

376 66

LEONARD SHANNON.

AcrountaiU.

Department of Railways and Canals,
July 8th, 1891.

Now, if my hon. friend from Erie had read
the evidence, as he said he did, he must
have seen this. I do not see my hon. friend
from Niagara in the House. I am very
sorry that he is not here, because he under-
took to mislead the House the other day on
two or three points. He undertook to mis-
lead them on the question of the rubber
boots, on the question of the gas, and in
reference to repairs to houses, and other
points. I should like very much if he were
here to-day, because I want to explain these
matters to the House and let the hon. gen-
tleman see if he can reconcile his statement
with the facts in evidence. Now, I have
read a statement which shows that Mr.
Ellis took $475.50 from the Government —
that is, up to the time that this statement
was made up. What I want to find out is
whether he has taken any, and, if so, how
much, since then. Mr. Rykert, who was
counsel for Mr. Ellis at the time of the
investigation, admitted that the loss to the
country was $118. They tried to excuse
Mr. Ellis's conduct on the ground that the
amount was so small. As I said at the
time, it was as good an excuse as that of
the girl who got into trouble and who thought
she might be pardoned because her illegiti-
mate child was so small. Now, the Govern-
ment, up to the, time this statement was
brought down, had made Mr. Ellis pay back
into the public treasury $376.66, and I
want to ascertain if they have made him
pay back anything more since this state-
ment was made up. Perhaps I have been
too hard on the Government — they may be
simply keeping Mr. Ellis on in order to give

him an opportunity to p^y back what he owes
the country. Nobody in this House is
more tired of this subject than I am. I
only deal with it again in order to keep my-
self right before the country. I have not
made a statement in this House that I do not
believe to be perfect!/ true. My hon. friend
from Erie says that he read all the evidence
through : if so, he should know better than
to make the statements to which he has
given utterance in this House. My hon.
friend from Niagara stated that the Gov-
ernment had a contract with the Gas com-
pany to furnish gas on the Welland Canal
and that the sum agreed upon covered the
gas used in the public offices. If the hon.
gentleman recognized the duty that he owes
the country he would not make such a state-
ment to mislead the House. If he had
looked at the sessional papers he would have
known better. It is true that Mr. Ellis
had nothing to do with making the contract.
It is a bulk sum contract of $10,000 a year.
I have the document in my hands, and if it
were not too long I would read it to the
House. In addition to the bulk sum for
lighting the canal, whatever gas was fur-
nished to the offices of the canal and some
few lights on the old canal is paid for by the
thousand — it goes through the meter. My
hon. friend admitted the other day that it
was injudicious on the part of Mr. Ellis to
allow the company to put gas into his house.
Now I think the company might have given
whatever quantity of gas they liked if he
had not in return given the company a q^iid
pro quo by turning down the gas on the
canal to the injury of the navigation of the
country. That is my complaint in reference
to the gas. Another thing that I showed is
that the gas has been used in Demare's
house — it passes through the Government
meter and the Government pays for it.
The sessional papers contain the following
items : —
St. Catharines and Welland Canal Gas Lighting

Balance of contract for new canal gas sup-
plieil for season of 1887 $5,000

That is for half the year. Then in addi-
tion to that there are the following items : —

25,400 ft. of gas supplied Canal Offices 12
months, per meter, $2.50 $63 50

Gas supplied old Welland Canal for season
of 1887} 9 lamps as per original account
at 30 cents 270 00

1 1 , 1 X) ft. of gas supplied Port Dalhousie
shops, per meter, at $2.50 27 75

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal [MASCH 14, 1893] Investigutian.

291

15,000 f fc. gas to the Collector's house, Port

Dalhousie ! 37 50

20,000 ft. gas to the Welland Canal Office. 50 25

Now, in the face of these facts, why should
the member for Niagara try to mislead the
public on the subject ? Then the hon. gen-
tleman spoke about the houses on the Wel-
land Canal, and said that as the Govem-
* ment rent these houses they should make
the repairs. I do not object to the Govern-
ment making repairs on those houses on the
Welland Canal. I spoke of the overseer's
house at Port Dalhousie — the house which
used to be the old canal collector's house at
that point. I find no fault with the Gov-
ernment for repairing a house, but I do find
fault with Mr. Ellis for giving a contract to
an individual without competition, and I
find fault with the Government of this
country for furnishing material and pay-
ing the men for doing a large propor-
tion" of that work while Mr. Miller, the
contractor, got the money. The hon. mem-
ber for Niagara tried to make a cushion of
himself to save Mr. Ellis in dealing with
these two matters, and also in referring to
the damage done on the Welland Canal
through Mr. Ellis' neglect. He tries to put
the blame on W. G. Thompson. Now, what
was the evidence of Mr. Page? I have it
here, and I will read it : —

Q. It was the dutj' of the men in charge there
that night to see the gates closed when they saw
the storm coming ? — A. We have only to look to
the superintendent.

Q. Should not the harbour master have looked
to that ? — A. He has nothing to do with the lock.
He cannot touch the lock gates.

Q. Has he no power to look after them? — A.
No.

Q. Who would have power there ? — A. The man
in charse.

Q. Mr. Secord is the man there ? — A. I suppose
so. The fact is, the gates should be closed, storm
or no storm, at the close of navigation.

Q. Were instructions given to that effect? — A.
Oh, yes, I have told Mr. Ellis repeatedly that — no
instructions, but it has been talked over and the
reasons have been given.

This is Mr. Page's evidence, given under
cross examination. It is not necessary to
quote any further from it. I now come to
the case of Shiner's Pond Bridge. The hon.
member from Niagara, in his anxiety to help
Mr. Ellis in this matter, came all the way
from California to give evidence. I am sorry
that he is not in the house now to hear his
own evidence read.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— He is away west.
19^

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I wUl deal with
the matter now, because I propose to wash
my hands of this matter after I get through,
and hold the Government responsible. I
want to show that the hon. gentleman from
l^iagara was not satisjfied with trying to run
the county of Welland, but he wanted also
to run the Department of Railways and
Canals.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Would it not be
better to postpone this matter until the hon.
gentleman is present ?

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— No, I think I
had better read his evidence. He has sworn
to it and he could not change the effect of it
if he were here. It is not my fault that he
is not in his place. My notice was on the
paper for some time and he knew that it
was coming up. Here is the evidence that
was taken when Mr. Ferguson was called
in defence and examined by Mr. Ellis'
counsel, Mr. Rykert :

Q. You are member for the County of Welland?
— A. I am.

Q. Do you know a bridge called Shiner's Bridge
on the main road from Thorold to A Han burg ?— A.

Q. How long have you known that bridge ? — A.
For fifteen or sixteen years.

Q. Have you had occasion to cross that bridge
repeatedly? — A. Yes.

Q. I believe you had workerl somewhere in that
neighbourhood ?— A. Above that near Welland.

Q. What time was it that you were working
there ?— A. From 1873 up to 1878 or 1879.
* Q. I)o you know in what state the bridge was
when you first commenced to work there or to use
the bridge ? — A. I did not take particular notice
of it, but it was in the usual state that bridges in
that part of the country are.

Q. Do you know that the bridge was used
largely by contractors on the Welland Canal ? — A.
I do especially in the construction of that portion
near the bridge -the bog lock there.

Q. How was it used ? Was it considerably worn
out ? — A. Yes, in hauling the heavy material for
the construction of the lock, I am quite satisfied
that they damaged the bridge and wore it out.

Q. You are quite satisfied that the contractor's
teams did serious damage to the bridge ? — A. Yes.

Q. Did you have occasion to represent that to the
Government ? — A. 1 did on several occasions.

Q. For what purpose? — A. I understood from
the department that it had been referred £o Mr.
Page and Mr. Page had reported asainst its recons-
truction by the Government. I did not see the
report.

Q. What action did you take in reference to
it ? — A. I went to the Minister of Railways and
Canals, who was then Mr. Pope. I reported the
thing to him from my own knowledge and from the
information I had gathered from the people that
the bridge was worn out and that in my opinion it

Digitized by

Google

292

Welland Canal {SENATE] Investigation.

ought to be reconstructed by the department. We
had several interviews, and finall}'^ Mr. Pope said
that he could not verv well recommend its recons-
truction in the face of what Mr. Page had said or
written. I still urged it very strongly upon him and
he said to me ** I do not see any other way of get-
ting it done for you except by Mr. Ellis, the Super-
tendent of the Canal does it, and he said ** Von
had probably better see Mr. Ellis and tell him that
I do not object to it ; that I can give instructions
to have it reconstructed out of the appropriation
for the canal, but 1 could not very well go to the
House and ask for an appropriation in the face of
Mr. Page's report." I saw Mr. Ellis and told him
what Mr. Pope said and he said he w ould do it,
but it was a good while after I spoke to Mr. Pope
on the subject.

Q. Was it upon that that Mr. Ellis undertook
the bridge ? — A. Yes.

Q. Is that a bridge of great public advantage ?--
A. I think so. I don't see very well how the
people of the upper portion of Thorold township
could get into Thorold without that bridge. It
appears to me to l)e an important bridge.

Q. Were representations ma^le to you by the
township |>eople in reference to the bridge ? —
A. Yes, time and again.

Q. Did they n>ake application to you to have
that bridge repaired If - A. Yes ; 1 had several
deputations. Mr. John Wilson, Reeve of the
Township, urged the matter very strongly and the
deputations that waited upon me also. I may say,
that it was my own conviction that the Department
should reconstruct that bridge or I would not have
urged it so strongly on Mr. Pope. I think there are
a good many letters of mine in the Department on
the matter, for I had been working at it a long
time l>efore I succeeded in getting Mr. Pope to
have it done.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM — Did you get any letter
from the Minister about it at all? -A. I think
probably I did.

A. Are you sure ? — A. No ; I am not sure.

Q. How long ago M'as that? — A. It must have
been when I first commenced probably three years
ago.

Q. When did you have that conversation with
Mr. Pope? — A. It must have been about two years
ago or two years and a half ago— I can scarcely
tell.

Q. And you say that Mr. Pope told you to get
Mr. Ellis to build the bridge?— A. He said if Mr.
Ellis would build the bridge out of his appropriation
for the canal he had not the slightest objection ;
but he could not in the face of Mr. Page's report
ask Parliament for an appropiiation specially for
that purpose.

Q. You were the authority then for Mr. Ellis to
build the bridge ? — A. I think I was. I do not
know whether Mr. Ellis got instructions from the
Department about it ; but I know I con\eyed to
Mr. Ellis what Mr. Pope said to me about the
bridge, and Mr. Ellis said he would see what he
could do, and try and do it.

Q. Did you get Mr. Ellis to do any other work for
you a long the Canal in that way ?- -A. Not specially.
1 have not l)een as lucky as I might have been.

Q. You and Mr. Ellis must l>e very friendly
when he would build a bridge for you in the face
of the report of the engineer ? — A. I do not know
that he is particularly friendly.

Q. We ha\ e evidence here that that bridge cost
over |1,0(K) ?- - A. I dont know what it cost.

Q. Mr. Ellis built that bridge on your instruc-
tions ? — A. No. He built it on the instructions
that I conveyed to him from the Minister of Rail-
way and Canals. I dont suppose the Mr. Ellis
would have touched it otherwise for I asked him
time and again and he said that he would not do it.

Q. Did he do anything else for you without
instructions ? — A. I think he put a culvert in at
the canal near Port Colbourne. There was one put •
in by Mr. Thomps<m on the west? side, and I under-
stant that there was one put in by Mr. Ellis on the
east side.

Q. You do not know that there were three or
four put in there ? — A. I do not ; but I know there
ought to have been.

Q. Do you know how they were put in ? — A.
No, I never saw them.

Q. Is it not strange that you did not take inter-
est enough in the work to see it if you were the
man who ordered it? — A. I never went near it.

Mr. RYKERl— Where they pi|)es or culverts?
-A.I do not know.

Hon. Mr. M('(^ALLUM— Dont you know^ that
there are culverts put in on both sides of the tanal
that carry in sediment in^ the canal, on your
instructions? — A. I do not know. I have not seen
them.

Q. Do you rememl)er expressing, just before the
last election, that if you were defeated it would be
Mr. Ellis s fault ? l-)id you not say that before a
public meeting.

The COMMISSIONER — The witness may
answer the question if he pleases, but I do not
think it is desirable to go into such matters. We
are not investigating any political questions at pre-
sent.—A. I do not remember any such expression
being used by me.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM —You are the gentleman
that orderetl Mr. Ellis to build that bridge?— A. I
conveyed to him what Mr. Pope said, and the wish
Mr. Pone had expressed with respect to it.

Q. When did you convey that information to
him ? — A. It must have been two yearsior two years
and a-half ago.

I could not rebut Dr. Ferguson's evidence,
on the Slimer's Pond Bridge l>ecause John
Henry Pope had gone to a higher sphere. The
hon. gentleman swore that he did not remem-
ber stating, just before the last election, that
if he was defeated it would be Mr. Ellis's fault,^
but what was the fact ? The hon. member
was elected to Parliament in 1887. I worked
hard to help to elect him, but the next time
he appeared before the people he was de-
feated. The hon. gentleman is one of the
best speakers we have in Ontaiio ; he is a
pleasant man, a good looking man, a clever
man and a rich man. The people of Niagara
district took him to their bosom and kept
him there for ten years, but when they saw
the way he acted with Mr. Ellis they threw
him away. I will not say they spewed him

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal fMARCH 14, 1893J Investigation.

293

out, but they threw him a«vay. It is a
singular fact that three of the gentlemen,
who have been aspiring to public honours in
the Niagara district, who gave evidence at
the Welland Canal investigation have been
left at home by the electors. I am a strong
Conservative, but you may remember that I
warned th'fe Oovernment that the effect of
keeping on Mr. Ellis was to give the dry rot
to the party in Niagara district. My words
have been verified by the results in the late
-election. You remember the remarks of the
hon. member from Niagara when he referred
to the repairs on the overseer's house. Now
I will read you the account as it appears in
the Sessional Papers : —

To Roger Miller, Port Dalhousie :—

Takins down floors, partitioDs,8tairs
andaoors of overseer's house, Port
Dalhousie, removing mud antl de-
cayed flooring, laying in 160 feet
drain from same to harbour, con-
creting floor, building cellar, re-
newing floors, partitions, stairs,
doors, ^..throughout, arranging
windows and door openings, put- '
ting in new sash and doors, taking
down old stone chimney and
building new brick one, repairing
outside blinds, plastering, paint-
ing, &c., papering, as per agree-
ment IviOO

Takins out decayed floor of adjoin-
ing lock master's house and mud
underconcreting and relaying new
floor, lay ins; 160 feet drain from
same to har Dour, taking off old and
putting on new plastering and
ceiling, making newwindow open-
ings and putting in new sash
frames and blinds, taking out
other decayed sashes and fitting
with new, painting and papering
where req u ired , as per agreement. 1 l^^y

Taking out floor, partition, stairs,
doors of old Collector's oflice and
converting into additional dwell-
ing accommodation for overseer,
removing fault and brick division
Mall and rebuilding in proper

- position, making new window
openings and titting with new
sash and blinds, renewing other
old sashes fitting storm sash, re-
pairing blinds, removing old
chimney, building new one and
plastering, painting and papering
throughout as per agreement 400

$l,03r>

No one has ever heard me say that the
€k)vemment should not repair the lock- ten-
ders houses on the Welland Canal ; no one
has ever heard me say that the canal em-

ployees are too well treated. I have raised
my voice against having them tyrannized
over. What I have complained of, and
what the evidence shows, is that improve-
ments should be made to Mr. Demare's
l^use, and the time of the men and material
furnished should be paid for by the Govern-
ment. When I moved for an investigation
into the management of the Welland Canal
I pointed out that Mr. Ellis, in reporting to
the Department, showed where he drove a
spike, or put a link in a chain, or painted a
flagstaff, or caulked a punt, but he did
not tell the people of this country where
thousands and thousands of dollars of the
public money had been squandered. No
one ever heard me say that the lock
tenders or other employees on the Welland
Canal were paid too much. I have com-
plained often that they were not paid
enough. In some few cases they get more
than they are entitled to, but, promotion,
there, like kissing, goes by favour. I am
sorry thafthe hon. gentleman from Niagara
is not here to-day, because I would like to
deal more at length with him. He tried to
mislead the House and put me in a false
position. I will not allow him, or the hon.
member for Erie, to do so. I want to have the
evidence which was taken at the investigation
submitted to the public. I want to go beyond
the report, because the report is partial ;
otherwise it would not have been necessary
to make two reports. If you will read the
evidence for yourselves you will find that the
Commissioner who was sent to investigate
matters on the canal was more of an advocate
than a judge. Every question he puts is
with a view of shielding Mr. Ellis, and the
Government will see this when they come to
read the evidence. What I claim is that
the Government should either dismiss Mr.
Ellis from ofiice or publish the evidence to the
world, then I will be satisfied. There is not
a man in this House who regrets more than
I do the necessity of bringing up this question
so often. I have no object in doing so except
to discharge my duty to the public, and I
have to thank the House for the patient and
kindly manner in which they have listened
to my remarks.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— There is no objec-
tion to bring down the information which
the hon. gentleman asks for in his motion,
but I think this House should not be asked
to affinn a statement of which they are not

Digitized by

Google

294

The Pollution of Elvers [SENATE] in British Columbia.

cognizant. The hon. gentleman will see that
the motion makes a distinct and positive
charge against Mr. Ellis of having taken
money in excess of that to which he was
entitled. The hon. gentleman's object
can be attained just as well by omitting
these words, and without asking the Senate
to declare by a motion that certain things
took place of which they are not cognizant.
The words of the resolution are " taken by
Mr. Ellis in excess of what was right, just
and proper." There is a distinct and posi-
tive charge against Mr. Ellis which may or
may not be true — I am giving no opinion on
that point — but I think it is too much to
ask the House to affirm that he did take
money improperly, without the -facts being
first laid before them in a return such as the
hon. gentleman asks for. I would suggest
an amendment of the resolution which will
attain the object that the hon. gentleman
has in view, without asking the House to
affirm that, which I have no doubt he firmly
believes to be true, but which i? not yet
established. If he would amend the motion
in this way : " Will cause to be laid before
this House a statement and account showing
the amount said to have been improperly
retained by Wm. Ellis, superintendent of
the Welland Canal, and not included in, &c."
I hope my hon. friend will accept that sug-
gestion, as it will attain the object he has in
view without placing the Senate in a false
position.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I do not wish
to place the hon. gentleman or the House
in a false position. If they could be placed
in a false' position now, they would have
been by the motion I moved before, and the
hon. leader of that day did not complain then
that he was placed in a false position. If
he will look at the minutes he will see that
this is siihply a copy of a resolution passed
when the leader of this House was the late
Premier. That motion called for " a state-
ment and account showing the amount of
money expended in excess of what was
just and proper by Wm. Ellis, Superintend-
ent of the WeUand Canal, if any, from the
29th day December, 1879 until the 11th
day of December, 1889. Also a statement
showing the amount of money paid back
by Mr. Ellis, if any, and date of payment,
if any."

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-
no ** if any " in this motion.

-But there is

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— -If it was takea
properly why do the Government make him
disgorge 1 According to the statement I
have read he was compelled to refund
$376.66. My object is to learn how much
more the Grovernment have made him pay
back. The Government state that he took
$475.60: if it was right for him to take it»
why make him disgorge any of it? You
say now that I want to place the Senate in
a false position.

Hon. Mr.BOWELL— The hon. gentleman
misinterprets my language altc^ether : I
attribute no motives to the hon. gentleman.
I did not say that he has attempted to put
the Senate inafalse position, but if the Senate
were to affirm this motion they would do so.
The hon. gentleman's motion, as passed last
session, is not at all of the same character as
the motion now before us, because he says
in that motion *' money taken in excess, if
any " : that is qualified, and consequently in
that way could not be objectionable to this
House. •! was surprised when the hon.
gentleman said that the late leader of the
Senate allowed a motion of this character to
pass. We have no objection to bring down
all the papers and a full statement of the
amount refunded by Mr. Ellis, and, if it
were within the purview of the resolution,
even to give the reasons for it ; only I ask
him to amend his motion in the manner I
have indicated.

Hon. Mr. McCALLUM— I am perfectly
willing to do anything that the Senate says
I should do, but the hon. gentleman can see
why the words " if any " were in the first
resolution and not in this one. When the
first motion was made, I had no proof that
any money was refunded — the statement I
have read to-day shows that the Gk>vemment
have compelled Mr. Ellis to disgorge $376.66,
and I want to find out if any more has been
refunded. The hon. gentleman can do as
he likes about changing the resolution.

The motion was amended as suggested,
and adopted.

THE POLLUTION OF RIVERS IN
BRITISH COLUMBIA.

INQUIRY.

Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) rose to

Inquire of the Government whether the orders
issued to prevent the pollution of rivers in British

Digitized by

Google

Seatnen's [MARCH 14, 1893] Act.

295

Columbia with oSsA from the salmou canneries are
being enforced, where it is possible and practicable
to <lo so ?

What does the Fishery Officer in that province
report on this subject ?

He said : This question was before the
House last year and the leader of the House,
Mr. Abbott, took a great interest in the
matter and promised that an order should
be issued to prevent the pollution of the
rivers in British Columbia. I believe orders
have been issued and something done there,
and I wish now to hear what has been done.

Hon. Mr. BOWELLr-Positive instruc-
tions have been given to the agent of marine
and fisheries, to the inspector of fisheries
and other fishery officers in British Columbia
to enforce the Act relating to fish offal on
the Fraser and other streams in British
Columbia, which Act absolutely prohibits
the throwing of offal into the streams or
rivers, or the disposal of it upon the shore
or bank of the rivers, &c. It has been found
possible and practicable to comply with the
requirements of the Act in a measure, by
the working of a small oil factory on the
Fraser, and if this method were carried out
on a sufficiently extensive scale by the nu-
merous canning establishments on the rivers,
the fish offal could be satisfactorily disposed
of within the meaning of the Act, as a mar-
ketable article of oil and fertilizer may be
produced from the offal. The fishery officers
of the province have almost invariably
reported against the system hitherto pur-
sued of throwing offkl into the water, as it
is alike injurious to the fishing interests
and to the inhabitants along the rivers gen-
erally. From this the hon. gentleman will
see that so far as the Department is con-
cerned the most rigid instructions have been
given, and the most rigid regulations adopted
in order to stop the injury which has been
done by the throwing of the offal indiscrimi-
nately into the rivers.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (40) " An Act to incorporate the
Canada North West Land Company, limited."
(Mr. McKindsey).

Bill (3) " An Act to amend the Wrecks
and Salvage Act." (Mr. Bowell).

Bill (59) " An Act to incorporate the
Canada Carriage Company." (Mr. Reid,
Quinte).

Bill (61) "An Act respecting the dis-
posal of money paid in connection with prcu
ceedings before Parliament." (Mr. Bowell),

Bill (60) " An Act respecting the Grand
Trunk Railway Company of Canada." (Mr.
Vidal).

SEAMEN'S ACT.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (O) " An Act to amend the
Seamen's Act."

He said : This Bill makes but a slight
change in the law as it now stands upon the
statute-book.. It provides that the master
of a vessel shall have the same rights as are
given to seamen in respect of wages — when
the master purchases supplies for the vessel.
At present the seamen and the master both
have a lien upon the vessel for their wages,
but there is no lien upon the vessel by which
the master could be secured in the indebt-
edness which he might incur in connection
with the supplies. This slight amendment
is recommended by the Judge of the Exche-
quer Court in order to make the law — in so
far as it relates to the seamen and to the
shipping on the inland waters as well as on
the sea — in accord with the Imperial Statute
upon that question. I know that some are
of opinion that it is placing too much power
in the hands of the masters of running the
vessel into debt. I am not aware, nor have
I received any information, that abuses
have arisen under the Imperial Act which
would justify a I'epeal of the lien which is
given. The other Bill on the paper imme-
diately following this has reference to inland
waters ; hence I refer to it at the present mo-
ment. It simply gives a lien upon the ship
for the indebtedness which has been in-
curred, in order to protect the master and
those who furnish supplies.

Hx)n. Mr. VIDAL — That is, properly in-
curred.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL -Yes, properly in-
curred.

Hon. Mr. POWER— As the hon. leader
of the House says, the amendment makes
but a slight change in the wording of the
law, but the change in the substance is very
considerable, and I should not like, by let-
ting the second reading go without saying
anything about it, to be considered as hav-

Digitized by

Google

296

Trial of Juvenile [SENATE] Offenders Bill

ing assented to the principle of the Bill. I
presume if so desired one can discuss the
principle of the Bill when the motion to go
into Committee is made, because the change
that is proposed is a very important one ;
and one as to which very much difference of
opinion exists among the people of the Mari-
time Provinces. I think it would be better,
at any rate, if it were allowed to stand till
to-morrow — in fact under the rules of our
House it should stand over till to-morrow —
and then allow members to express their
opinions on the principle of the Bill if they
think proper. It has been often done
before.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I think the
leader of the House will agree to the pro-
posal of the hon. member from Halifax.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Oh, certainly.
The motion was agreed to.

INLAND WATERS SEAMEN'S ACT

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (P) " An Act to amend the

ter to me, and I told them that it was the
first I h.id heiard about it; I told them
they should come here and see about it. I
am interested largely in that trade myself,
and I know the way in which vessels are
run. They hire a captain and pay him so
much a month, and he hires the men and
boards them. If the principle of this Bill
were legalized, it might be a serious thing
for the owners of vessels. Most of our cap-
tains are French Canadians, and they go on
board with their families ; the wife supplies
everything, and the captain is paid every
month. Under this Bill, and after the cap-
tain receives all what is due to him, then
any one who had furnished supplies, who did
not send in his account, would have a lien
on the vessel later on — the next year.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— I think my hon.
friend has misapprehended the character of
the Bill : it simply says the master of the
ship shall have a right to be reimbursed any
disbursements he make^

Hon. Mr. OGILYIE — Any one furnish-
ing supplies.

Inland Waters Seamen's Act." He said :— | Hon. Mr. VIDAL— Oh, no ; it is just
It is not necessary that I should repeat I putting the master in the same position as
my former remarks, because the principle I the seamen with reference to wages,
of this Bill is similar to that of the mea-

sure which has just passed the second read-
ing, except that this refers to inland waters.

Hon. Mr. OGILVIE— Before the Bill is
read the second time, I wish to say that I
have heard some very strong objections
to it raised by the owners of boats in in-
land waters. Many of these vessel ownei-s
engage a barge captain, who engages his
crew, and takes care of the crew all the
way through. Our Transportation Com-
panies say that under this Bill they would
have no track of what their indebtedness
might be. When the season is through the
captain is paid all the wages for the run-
ning of the boat, for the supplies and the
men ; under this Bill the proprietors, after
paying the captain, might have a claim
made by the people who had furnished the
supplies to the captain. Most of our barges
in the inland waters are run in the
way I have mentioned, and the owners
complain seriously of the proposed legis-
lation. They came to me in Montreal last
Friday or Saturday and mentioned the mat-

OGILVIE— I did not look at

Hon. Mr.
it closely.

The motion was agreed to.

TRIAL OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS
BILL.

I Hon.

SECOND READING.

M^ ALLAN moved the second
j reading of Bill (P) " An Act respecting the
1 trial of juvenile offenders."

He said : — I am prepared to go on with the
Bill, but it was only distributed since the
I House met, and I do not know whether
I under those circumstances the House would
I agree to my going on with the second read-
ing. . . . *

' Hon. MEMBERS- Oh, yes.
(

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— The object of this

' Bill is to provide that the trial of all juvenile

offenders under the age of 17 years shall in

j all cases take place without publicity and

Digitized by

Google

Trial of Juvenile [MARCH 14, 1893] Offenders Bill

297

separately and apart from the trials of other
accused persons, and at suitable times to be
designated and appointed for that purpose.
At present there is a clause in the criminal
code very much to the same effect, but with
this important exception that it leaves it in
the discretion of the police magistrate or
justice of the peace whether or not he will
have the trial so held. The wording of the
clause as it stands in the Criminal Code,
now is, that " so far as it appears expedient
and practicable " it 'shall take place separa-
tely and without publicity. The object of
my amendment is to strike out that clause
and substitute the one in the present Bill,
making it compulsory on the Police Magis-
trate or Justice of the Peace in all cases to
try juvenile offenders separately and without
publicity. I think hon. gentlemen will
agree with me that the system which has
hitherto prevailed of young boys and girls
under 16 or 17, sometimes mere children,
perhaps 1 2 or 1 3, being brought up for trial at
a police court amongst a number of other
offenders much more advanced in years, and
some of them pretty well advanced in crime,
drunkards and others, disreputable and
hardened characters, that this system is a
most pernicious one, and that nothing can
well be more injurious to the future of these
children, or their chances of reformation.
Indeed, I can scarcely imagine anything
more unwise and injudicious, not to say
cruel, than the girl or boy of twelve or thir-
teen or fourteen years of age, who has been
for the first time arrested, it may be on some
trivial charge, perhaps some petty larceny or
other slight offence, being placed in the
dock in the midst of the class of spectators
who constantly throng police courts, and in
the company of old and hardened offenders,
and being tried there publicly. I am
quite convinced that very often this public
disgrace entails an entire loss of self-respect
on the part of the unfortunate boy or girl,
and may be the very first step towards the
downward course in the path of wrong
doing. I think, therefore, that it is most
desirable that in all cases, arrangement
should be made for holding the ;brial of
these juvenile delinquents without this pub-
licity, and separately entirely from those of
older offenders, and this is therefore the
object I have in view in the first clause of
this Bill. I propose to strike out section
No. 550, as it now stands in the Criminal
Code, and to substitute this for it. It will

then make it obligatory, instead of leaving
it optional with the magistrate, to Tiold these
trials for juvenile offenders separately. The
wording of this clause is otherwise precisely
the same with the original section in the
Code. Then as regards the second
clause which provides that parents or guar-
dians be summoned before the magistrate to
show cause why the boy or girl, if convicted,
should not be committed to some industrial
school or reformatory, I might explain that
in the original draft of the Bill that clause
was followed by another clause, and I think
a very important one, empowering the
magistrate to infiict a fine or some other
punishment upon the father or mother of
the child, or if the parents were dead, upon
the guardian or whoever the child was living
with, if it was shown that it was entirely
owing to their neglect, or bad example that
the child had wandered from the right path,
had fallen into evil habits and ultimately
had been led to commit the offence for which
he was brought before the magistrate.

Upon submitting the draft of the Bill,
however, to the Minister of Justice, he
thought that the public were hai*dly educated
up to that point and that it would not be
judicious to press that clause, and therefore
it was struck out ; but at the same time I
.think it would be very desirable to retain
this other clause, because I cannot but think
that it will have a very wholesome effect if,
when these unfortunate children are brought
up charged with some petty larceny or mis-
demeanour, the parents are obliged to attend
and to show whether or not it is the result
of their carelessness, neglect, or ill treatment
or some other causes, that the boy or girl
has been lead into crime. I think if the
magistrate had power to issue those sum-
monses and oblige the parents or guardians
to attend on these occasions, it would often
enable him to form a better judgment how
to deal with the young offender, and whether
it would be better to send him to an indus-
trial school or to a reformatory or punish
him in some other way. By the Criminal
Code, magistrates have the power to send
juvenile offenders under a certain age to
these institutions. There are two sec^ns
dealing with the subject. One is section 33
which is as follows : —

\Vhere under any law of Canada, any boy is
convicted in Ontario whether summarily or other-
wise of any offence punishable by imprisonment,
and the court, judge, stipendiary or police niagis-

Digitized by

Google

298

Trial of Juvenile [SENATE] Offenders Bill.

trate by whon he is so convicted is of opinion that
such boy does not exceed the age of 13 years, such
court, judge or magistrate may sentence such boy
to imprisonment in a certified industrial school for
any term not exceeding 5 years and not less than
2 years : Provided, that no boy shall be sentenced
to any such school unless public notice has been
given in the Ontario (jrazette and has not been
countermanded, that such school is ready to receive
and maintain boys sentenced under laws of the
Dominion ; Provided also, that no such bov shall
be detained in any certified industrial school beyond
the age of 17 years.

Theother is section 956 and is asfoUows : —

The court or person before whom any offender
whose age at the time of his trial does not, in the
opinion of the court, exceed sixteen years, is con-
victed, whether summarily or otherwise, of" any
offence punishable by imprisonment, may sentence
such ofiender to imprisonment in any r^ormatory
prison in the provmce in which such conviction
takes place, subject to the provisions of any Act
respecting imprisonment in such reformatory' ; and
such imprisonment shall be substituted, in such
case, for the imprisonment in the penitentiary or
other place of confinement by which the offender
would otherwise be punishable under any Act or
law relating thereto : Provided, that in no case
shall the sentence be less than two years or more
than five years confinement in such reformatory
prison ; and in every case where the term of impri-
sonment is fixed by law to be more than five years
then such iniprisonment shall be in the penitentiary'.

2. Every person imprisoned in a reformatory
siiall be liable to perform such labour as is required
of such person.

R.S.r., c. 181, s. 9Q.

Those are the sections as they now stand. This
Bill makes no change in respect to them. It
simply gives the magistrate power to summon
the parents or guardians to show cause why
the boy or girl if convicted should not be
^ent to one of these institutions. I have
introduced this Bill at the instance of the
Prison Reform Conference and Prisoners
Aid Societies of Ontario, by whom this whole
subject of dealing with offenders, but more
particularly juvenile offenders, has been
taken up and discussed with a great deal of
care and earnestness, and a few months ago
the Minister of Justice, while visiting To-
ronto, received a deputation from the associ-
ations and had several of these matters laid
before him. It is mainly at their instance
that I now present this Bill to the House,
the chief object being really to provide that
for the future the trial of all juvenile offen-
ders shall take place in the way specified in
the first clause.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not rise for the
purpose of opposing the second reading of
the Bill, but I wish to call attention to two

or three points which I think the hon.
gentleman who has the Bill in charge might
consider between this time and the time
when the House goes into Ck)mmittee on
the Bill. Section 550 of the Code is as
follows : —

The trials of all persons apparently under the
ase of sixteen years shall so far as it appears expe-
dient and practicable take place without publicity
and separately and apart from that of other accused
persons and at suitaole times to be designated and
appointed for that purpose.

Now in the first place I do not see why in
this Bill now before us it is proposed to alt-er
the age from sixteen to seventeen. The age
of sixteen runs through all our legislation
with respect to juvenile offenders, and I do
not" see why a change is made in that res-
pect. It is liable to lead to confusion. Then,
to my mind the section as it stands now in
the Code goes quite far enough. The trials
of " all persons apparently under the age of
sixteen years shall, so far as it appears expe-
dient and practicable; take place without pub-
licity." One can readily understand that
there might be a case where it would not be
a desirable thing that the trial should be
held in private. Under this Bill, if it be-
comes law, one can imagine a case where a
lad between sixteen and seventeen could l>e
tried in secret and sent to prison without
having had a proper opportunity to defend
himself or without the circumstances of the
case being properly understood, and without
giving the parents of the boy a proper oppor-
tunity to look after his interests. The second
provision is to provide that the parent or
guardian is to be summoned to show cause
why a minor should not be committed.
There is, in the existing law,, a certain dis-
cretion left to the magistrate, but if the second
clause of this Bill becomes law there is no
discretion left with the magistrate : he has
to sentence the boy. In the second subsection
it is provided that whenever a boy or girl is
charged with an offence, the parentor guardian
is to be summoned. I do not see why the
clause should be worded in that way. It is
time enough when the child is convicted of
the offence to call in the parent or guardian,
because after all it is a very simple thing to
charge any one, either under 16 or over 16,
with an offence, and I do not see why the
parent or guardian of a child should be liable
to be brought into court to show cause why
the child shotild not be taken out of his or
her hands simply because the juvenile is

Digitized by

Google

Trial of Juvenile fMARCH 14, 1893] Offenders Bill.

299

charged with an offence. I think it should
be done only in cases where the juvenile is
convicted.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— What would be
the use of sending for the parent after the
conviction has taken place ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— The object is to
show cause why the child should not be sent
to a reformatory or industrial school. That
is the object of calling in the parent or
guardian. I do not see why that should be
done until the accused has been convicted.
This Bill really may have a much more
important effect than we contemplate, or
than the honourable gentleman who intro-
duced it contemplates, because it is a very
serious thing to interfere with the rights of
parents in the way in which this BUI pro-
poses to do. Before the Bill becomes law
there should be some modification at any
rate in the wording of the clause. With res-
pect to the clause which the hon. gentleman
said had been inserted in the original Bill,
but which has been dropped, I should quite
concur in that. If through the wilful
neglect or bad example of a boy's parents or
guardians he has become a charge on the
public, the parents or guardians might be
obliged to contribute something towards the
expense to which the public have been put
to maintain the child in prison ; still, I
equally admit that while the principle of the
Bill and the object of its promoter are most
praiseworthy and desirable, it is a piece of
legislation which needs to be carefully
scrutinized.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Does not the hon.
gentleman think the third line from the
bottom covers that objection — ** If any there
be, why such boy or girl if convicted should
not be sentenced ? "

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I think there
is a great deal in what has been said by the
hon. member from Halifax, and I hope it
will be incorporated when the Bill is in
CcMnmittee. I do not see why the age should
be increased from 16 to 17. It is in the
public interest, in some cases, that those
juvenile offenders should not be examined
and punishment inflicted entirely in private.
In country places especially, it sometimes has
a cautionary effect on other children that
they must not commit similar offences. In

cities they should not be sent up promis-
cuously for punishment with older criminals,
but in country places I think the operation
of this Bill will not be beneficial to the
morals of young children. If other children
do not know how such offences are dealt with
it will not have the effect of checking and
preventing them from committing offences
for which they might be punished in the
same way.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— The point
raised by the hon. gentleman from Halifax
is not, I think, a good one, where he speaks
of a juvenile charged with an offence
and holds that at that stage there should
be no reference to his parents or those stand-
ing in the place of parents. Now that is
contrary to the usage in criminal cases, with
adults as well aa with the young ; because
when any one is taken in custody, that is the
time to aid him and prepare him for his
defence. It is not after his conviction,
because if convicted there is an end of any
assistance to be given him. I certainly
disagree altogether with the hon. member
when he says that parents and others
interested in the juvenile should not be made
aware of it as early as possible.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I never said anything
of that kind at all.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— If I misunder-
stood the hon. gentleman I desire to say
nothing further on the subject. I understood
the hon. member to say that it was only
after conviction that any one should be
summoned to his assistance.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — So far as the age is
concerned, I should ha^e no objection my-
self to making the age sixteen. It was made *
seventeen at the instance of those interested
in the subject, but it did not commend itself
to my judgment, for the reason suggested by
the hon. gentleman that it is desirable we
should have uniformity, as far as possible, in
dealing with subjects of this kind. But
with regard to making it compulsory and
not optional on the police magistrate and
justice of the peace to hold these trials
separately, I am strongly of opinion that it
is human nature to save one's self trouble,
and in many instances magistrates may find
it is " not expedient or practicable " to hold a
separate trial when it is perfectly practicable

Digitized by

Google

300

Representation of [SENATE] Vancouver District.

to do so at the cost of a very little inconveni-
ence, and I would therefore press this provi-
sion in the first clause. With regard to the
second clause, I certainly — likemyhon.friend
opposite — understood my hon. friend from
Halifax to say that he saw no reason why
the parents should be summoned before the
child was convicted : whereas, one of the
principal objects of that clause is to give
every opportunity to the parents or guar-
dians to state any mitigating circumstances
to the magistrate, or give a satisfactory
reason if they can why the child should not
be sent to the reformatory or industrial
school, or if it is a first oflFence to have the
child sent back to their charge with a repri-
mand and a caution as to the future. Not
only that, but I wish to throw as much re-
sponsibility as I can on the parents or guar-
dians, and to convince them that they will
be held responsible, as far as possible, for
discharging their duties towards their "child-
ren. These questions can be still further
discussed when the Bill goes before the Com-
mittee, but I hope that its provisions, as I
have explained them, will commend them-
selves to the approval of the House.

Hon. Mr. McDonald (P.E.I.)-I
think the Bill in question is a good and pro-
per one, but at the same time the case is
provided for under the Ciiminal Ckxie. This
goes, perhaps, a little further, but there is
this to be considered — it would be difficult
to carry out the provision of the second clause
of this Bill in some of the provinces where
there are no reformatories or industrial
schools to which juvenile offenders can be
sent.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — It says at the end of
the clause " or otherwise punished."

Hon. Mr. McDONALD (P.E.I.)--That
leaves it as it is at present. In our province,
juvenile offenders have to be sent to the
common jail, wh^ere they associate with the
worst classes of criminals and offenders. It
is a desirable and necessary thing that there
should be an industrial school or reformatory
in every province to which juvenile offenders
could be sent, and I should like to see the
Government take this matter into considera-
tion and establish industrial schools or
reformatories throughout the different pro-
vinces. That may perhaps be considered to
some extent as the duty of the different

provinces, but is one of those things which
should be* undertaken by the Dominion
Government itself. Just as they undertake to
establish penitentiaries in the different pro-
vinces, I think they might establish reform-
atories for juvenile offenders also. With
reference to the second clause of the Bill,
which provides that when a boy or girl is
charged with any offence the court should
summon the parents or guardians, I quite
agree with the view taken by the hon. mem-
ber from Halifax, that it would be sufficient
to summon the parents ^ if the offender was
convicted. The charge might be made
through malice or in error, and in that case
the release of the accused would follow as a
matter of course, but if there is evidence
sufficient to convict the offender it would be
time enough to summon the parents or
guardians.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

• SECOND READINGS.

Bill (Q) " An Act to incorporate the Cana-
dian Live Stock Insurance Association."
(Mr. Perley.)

Bill (41) "An Act to incorporate the
Eastern Trust Co." (Mr. Lougheed in the
absence of Mr. Almon.)

The Senate adjourned at 5.15 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Wednesday, March loth, 1893.

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

REPRESENTATION OF VANCOUVER
• DISTRICT.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) — Before
the Orders of the Day are called, I would
like to ask the leader of the Government if
a writ has been issued to fill the vacancy
caused by the lamentable death of the late
Mr. Gk)rdon for the district of Vancouver.
I am aware that this is rather an unusual
question to put in this House ; but as it is

Digitized by

Google

Seamen's Act [MARCH 15, 1893] Amendment Bill.

301

a !i\fttfr^r of public policy, I think it is quite
proper that it should be asked here.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I am not awar^
whether the Speaker of the House of Coal-
itions has issued a writ for the holding of an
election for the district of Vancouver, ow-
ing to the death of the late lamented Mr.
Grordon. My impression is that no writ has
been issued, but I can ascertain and let the
hon. gentleman know to-morrow.

SEAMEN'S ACT AMENDMENT BILL,

THIRD READING.

The House resolved inself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole on Bill (O) " An Act
to amend the Seamen's Act."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. BOWELL said : The change
proposed by this Bill is simply to add these
words to the 59th section of chapter 74,
which gives to the master the same remedy
in reference to wages as is given to the sea-
men. The proposition is to add after the
words " recovery of his wages " the follow-
ing- "and for recovery of disbursements
properly made by him on account of the
ships, and for liabilities properly incurred by
him on account of the ship." Then the
clause would, read this way : "Every master
of a ship registered in any of the said pro-
vinces shall, so far as the case-vpermits, have
the same right, lien and renredies for the
recovery of wages and for the recovery of
disbursements properly made by him on
account of the ship." The attention of the
Department of Marine and Fisheries was
called to this hy the judge of the Exchequer
Court, in connection with some question
which came before him affecting the right of
certain masters of ships. Perhaps the best
information I could give would be to read
the letter sent by the Exchequer Court
judge to the Department. He said :

As the Session of Parliament is approaching
pray permit me to make one or two suggestions
witn reference to the law respecting a master's
lien for wages and for disbursements incurred on
account jof the ship.

Ist, in the year 1889, the House of Lords, in
the case of **The Sara" (14 App. Cas. 209), over-
ruled a number of earlier cases and decided that
the Admiralty Court Act, 1861, did not give the
master a maritime lien on the ship for his disburse-
ments ; and later in the same year the Parliament
of the United Kingdom by the Ist section of 52-53
Victoria, chapter 46, gave every master of a ship

the same rights, liens and remedies for the recov-
ery of disbursements properly made by him and for
liabilities properly mcurred by him on account
of the ship as a master now has for the recovery of
his wages. By the 191st section of the Merchant's
Shipping Act 1854, the master was given a mari-
time lien for hiti wages and by the 59th section of the
Seaman's Act (R. S. C. c. 74), the Parliament of
Canada has given the same lien in respect of vessels
registered in Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Bruns-
wick, Prince Edward Island and British Columbia.
Do you not think it would be well to add to section
59, a subsection in the terms of the Ist section of
the Imperial Act, 52-53 Victoria, chapter 46 ?

The sole object of this Bill is to give the
master a lien upon the ship for the supplies
which he properly purchases for the use and
on account of the ship, and to make it
uniform with the Imperial Act as it now
stands in the Statute-book. The Minister
of Marine and Fisheries, who 'had given a
great deal of consideration to this, concurring
in the suggestion made by the learned judge,
prepared the amendment to the Bill. .

Hon. Mr. POWER— When I first looked
at the Bill it struck me that, under the Im-
perial legislation, the master had not a lien
for disbursements, but on enquiring into the
matter I found, as the letter from the judge
shows, that in the year 1889, an Act had
been passed in England giving this addi-
tional lien to the master, and I think,
whatever our own individual opinions might
be as to the advisability of the change, we
are pretty safe in following the lead of the
Imperial Parliament, and I find that this
Bill is, mutatis mutandis, a copy of the Im-
perial Act.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not know
very much about the Imperial Act but my
experience is that masters of vessels have a
very great power, and I do not know that
any persons in Canada have asked for this
enactment. I do not see that the masters
of vessels have not sufficient security at pre-
sent, and I do not think my hon. friend can
show that persons interested in shipping
consider this change necessary. I^ would be
better pleased if he could show us that, in-
stead of merely showing that the Minister
of the Exchequer, or the Judge of the Ex-
chequer Court, consider it advisable. We
know that at present masters have very
great power ; they can pledge the ship for
any supplies and necessaries, and surely in a
foreign port, where close communication be-
tween the master and vessel owners can

Digitized by

Google

302

Inland Waters Seamen's [SENATE] Act Amendment Bill.

be obtained, there is no necessity for this.
A captain who^ is abroad can easily make
disbursements and excuse himself for them,
and they cannot properly be opposed by the
owners. I think it is giving too much power
into the hands of our masters and I do not
see any call for it in this country. .

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN, from the Commit-
tee, reported the Bill without amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time and

INLAND WATERS SEAMEN'S ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

THIRD READING.

The House resolved itself into a Commit-
tee of the Whole on Bill (P) " An Act to
amend the Inland Waters Seamen's Act."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. BOW^ELL said .—When I in-
troduced this Bill, I am under the impression
that I said it gave a lien not only to the
master of the vessel for the wages and sup-
plies, but that it extended to the merchants
who furnished the supplies. I wish to cor-
rect that. It does not — it goes no further
than the Bill that we have just passed. I
might call the attention of the House, how-
ever, to a fear which seemed to have taken
possession of some of the forwarders en-
gaged in the trade on the St. Lawrence and
Ottawa Rivers. They were under the im-
pression that, in a case where they era-
ployed a captain or a master of a barge,
paying him a certain sum per month, cover-
ing all expenses during the season, that that
might possibly render them responsible for
any supplies purchased by the master over
and above the amount which they had agreed
to pay him. They do not object to the Bill
so far as it relates to the lake navigation,
because there they say they have control
over the mastei* or captain of the vessel;
that as a rule he is a man of greater respon-
sibility than those whom they employ to
take charge of their barges. The plan they
adopt is to take some one who is acquainted
with the River St. Lawrence and the River
Ottawa, and pay him, say, a couple of hundred
dollars a month, more or less, with a distinct
understanding that that is to cover all the
wages of the men I'equired to work the boat
and the necessary supplies. The owners have |

no further responsibility beyond the amount
that they agree to pay the master which is
to cover all contingencies. In order to
satisfy those who are engaged in the trade,
I saw the Deputy-Minister of Justice and
also the secretary of that Department, and
their decision is that this Bill affects them
in no way other than the manner in which
they are affected now. If they make an
agreement with a man to take charge of a
barge and furnish all the supplies and hire
all the men and pay their wages for so much
per month, that tneir responsibility there
ends ; but the master, in that case, would
have a lien upon the vessel and claim against
the owner for the amount which he has
agreed to pay him for the month's wages,
which I think the House will say is quite
correct. No third party could make any
collection. After these explanations from
the Deputy-Minister of Justice, those en-
engaged in the trade were quite satisfied, but
he did suggest to them, as a means of pro-
tecting themselves to a greater extent if they
thought proper, to make that a part of the
bargain— that in the lease, or whatever
agreement they made, they should stipulate
that they should not be responsible, nor
should they pay the monthly allowance un-
til they were satisfied that the men were paid.
Capt. Gaskin, who came to Ottawa on be-
half of the trade, said that that was the
practice now in force — that though they em-
ploy the masters by the month for the
service I have described, before settling up
in the fall they ascertain that all the wages
were paid as far as possible. The powers
given in this Bill, as far as they aff^t the
inland waters, are precisely the same as those
applying to masters on sea-going vessels.
The words " Admiralty Court*" are left out,
for the following reasons given by the
learned judge: —

The Inland Waters Seamen's Act (R.S.C., c. 75)
does not contain any provision similar to the 59th
section of the Seamen's Act, or the 191 st section of
the Merchant's Act. It in possible, however, that
the masters of vessels trading on inland waters
would, by virtue of the 4th section of the Admiralty
Act, 1891 (Canada), now have a maritime lien for
their wages. As to that I express no opinion, be-
cause the question has not come up, ana tnerefore
has not been arsued, but would it not be well to
remove any doubts and make the law relating to
the masters' lien uniform throughout Canada by
making section 59 of the Seamen's Act and any
amendments for the purpose of giving the lien %m
to disbursements applicable to vessels trading in
inland waters.

Digitized by

Google

The Archives [MAECH 16, 1893] of the Dominion.

303

Hon. Mr. VIDAL, from the Committee,
reported the Bill without amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

G. T. R. COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL moved the second read-
ing of Bill (50) "An Act respecting the
Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada."
He said: — This Bill sanctions an arrange-
ment which has been made between the
original Grand Trunk Railway Company
and thirteen or fourteen other railway com-
panies, who have entered into an agreement
and desire to be amalgamated as the one
company, of coarse guarding carefully all
the rights and privileges of those interested.
The details of the Bill will properly come
under the consideration of the Railway Com-
mittee, and from past experience we know
that they will be most carefully consideied
by that Committee.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (32) " An Act respecting the Canada
Life Assurance Company." — (Mr. Maclnn^,
Burlington.)

Bill (34) " An Act to incorporate the
^Voodmen of the World."— (Mr. Vidal.)

Bill (62) " An Act to revive and amend
the Act to incorporate the Equity Insur-
ance Company, and to change the name of
the company to the St. Lawrence Insur-
ance Company." — (Mr. Maclnnes, Bur-
lington.) ^

The Senate adjourned at 3.50 p.m.

and Commerce, were read the third time and

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Thursday, March 16th, 1893.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

THIRD READINGS.

The following Bills, reported without
amendment from the Committee on Banking

Bill (33) " An Act to amend the Act to
incorporate the Manufacturers Accident In-
surance Company, and to change the name
thereof to the Manufacturers' Guarantee and
Accident Insurance Company." (Mr. Mc-
Kindsey.)

Bill (41) " An Act to incorporate the East-
ern Trust Company." (Mr. Power.)

OCEAN GUARANTEE COMPANY'S
BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN, from the- Committee
on Banking and Commerce, reported Bill
(46) " An Act to incorporate the • Ocean
Guarantee Company," with an amendment.

He said : I may explain that the amend-
ment is simply to supply some words which
were left out by mistake in the clause which
provides where the Company shall conduct
business, they forgot to say " in Canada and
elsewhere," and those are the words that
were inserted. It is not a matter of any
moment.

The report was adopted.

Hon. Mr. DESJ ARDINS moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

THE ARCHIVES OF THE DOMINION.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BERNIER moved :

That in the opinion of this House it is desirable
that the Government of Canada shall forthwith
take measures to save from destruction the archives
of the administrations which have succeeded each
other in the North-west, of the Hudson's Bay
Company, and of other associations, as well as all
documents or papers in the possession of these as-
sociations or of persons willing to yield them up,
in so far as these archives, documents or papers
may be useful for the history of the country, the
making known of its resources, and the establish- ■
ment of the rights and customs of its people.

He said : — The motion which I offer for
your consideration is one that I sincerely
hope will commend itself to the unanimous

Digitized by

Google

304

The Archive^ [SENATE] of the Dominion.

favour of this honourable House. It relates
to the archiv^ of the country, a matter in
which everybody in my humble opinion, is
interested. The development of the natural
resources of the country, the fostering of
national enterprises, the increase of our pro-
ductions, the extension of trade and com-
merce, and the creation of new facilities for
transportation are all matters worthy the
attention of the Government and of Parlia-
ment. We all admire the efforts made
throughout the land to increase the material
prosperity of the Dominion and we all desire
to promote this grand object which is not
only important to realize but is of prime
necessity. Although these enterprises seem
to aim at material and physical wants alone,
still a moment of reflection is suflicient to
convince anybody that from the successful
carrying out of the same must necessarily
grow a healthy national sentiment. But
these are not the only ways of fostering
this desirable and high national spirit ; in
fact, the history of the country is perhaps
the most effective means of stimulating
national pride, and consequently, of loyalty
to our own Dominion, for the reason that
its pages contain the narration not only of
the noble deeds of the ancestors, but also the
very life of the nation ; that is the trial of
its literary, scientific, political, judicial,
commercial and industrial activity. Such is
the importance of history that it forms the
basis of social science. No one could thor-
oughly understand the present, much less
the future, if he had' no knowledge of the
past. Having thus briefly tried to impress
the House with the general importance of
history, I desire to call your attention more
particularly to the history of Canada, or at
least to the necessity of collecting and of
safely keeping the material which are the
fountains from which the historians and the
literary class generally obtain their inspira-
tion. The Government is already doing
something in that direction, but the ques-
tion arises in the minds of many — should
not a little more be done ? I have visitfed
the department where the Archives are
kept. Apart from the inadequacy of the ac-
commodation with regard to space, it occur-
red to my mind that perhaps they were not
altogether safe from destruction by fire.
There is already a vast amount of historical
documents. It would be deplorable if they
were destroyed or spoiled to any extent, and
it seems to me that we should not delay, too

much in providing for the safe custody, if
not of all, of at least the most important
I documents and books. Unless special at-
I tention is called to such a matter, it is liable
to be easily forgotten. One or two facts
1 will illustrate the usefulness of these docu-
j ments. One of the able gentlemen in
I charge of that department has informed me
I that very often they are consulted,
even by men engaged in law pursuits,
and in some instances that gentle-
man has been called before courts
of justice to establish by means of these docu-
ments the legal righta of certain parties to
very important estates. A matter which
should also, I respectfully submit, engage
the attention of the hon. Minister who pre-
sides over this department, is whether some-
thing should not be done towards re-organ-
izing or rather completing the arrangenients
of that branch of the service. There are two
very able and distinguished gentlemen there
whose diligence and capacity are to be highly
praised, but they require some assistance.
Their work is not satisfactorily progressing,
and one of the impediments to which they are
subjected is the want of funds. The subsidy
to that particular department should be
very materially increased ; by such action it
I would be possible to get most valuable docu-
j ments which are now being scattered, or
lying in places where they may be destroyed
at any moment. There are in some Euro-
pean cities, a large amount of documents
relating to the history of Canada, and I
have seen myself thousands of volumes
stored in old buildings which could not be
saved in case of fire or of riot, which unfor-
tunately may occur in Paris some day or
«ther. I am perfectly aware of the impossi-
bility of getting all these at one time, but it
is none the less important to get as many as
possible without delay. Coming nearer
home, and speaking more particularly about
our North-west history, allow me to state
that even there, in that distant lone land,
history has its attractive and noble records.
They tell of the hardihood and of the hard-
ships of LaVerendrye, the discoverer of our
great North-west ; they tell of Franklin and
of his companions, of McKenzie and of his
voyages, oi Lord Selkirk and of his colony ;
of which the hon. member for Kildonan, sit-
ting at my right, is a worthy and respected
representative. They tell ctf the fur trade
and of the Hudson Bay and of the North-
west companies ; to the history of which the

Digitized by

Google

Tkt Dominion [MARCH 16, 1893] Archives,

305

hon. member for Mille Isle has contributed
two valuable volumes, as has also the hon.
member from de Salaberry in general mat-
ters concerning the North-west. They tell
of the exertions of the missionaries to intro-
duce Christianity and civilization amongst
the Indian tribes, at one time the kings and
the terror of those territories. They tell
also of the efforts of the same missionaries
to aid in the establishment and maintenance
of the authority of Great Britain and of the
Dominion of Canada over the prairies.
These records are to be found in many
places, but most of them amongst the
archives of the old council of Assiniboia,
and in the Hudson Bay Company's forts.
The latter company has been in the habit of
keeping in every one of its numerous posts a
daily record, not only of its transactions,
but also of the events of the time as they
occurred. Those records together with the
records of the missions, constitute a very im-
portant source of information on almost
every subject. For instance whenever the
idea of building the Hudson Bay Railway
takes a practical form, we will find in the re-
cords of the company information that could
not be obtained otherwise or elsewhere. So
trade iteelf would be benefited by the preser-
vation of those historical archives. From
what I have learned, I have reason to believe
that these archives are being, to a certain ex-
tent, scattered, and will, in part be finally
lost. There is no time to be lost if we want
to save them. Old folks are disappearing ;
old forts are also disappearing ; Fort Garry
is no more ; old documents are spoiled and
lost, and so our historical sources are liable
to be dried out, for want of some effort made
at present to preserve them. Very little
effort would save these interesting documents
now, and put into the hands of our literary
and scientific classes new elements and new
wealth from which they would continue to
enrich our libraries and our minds. We
must acknowledge that Canada has not been,
until now, over generous towards the liter-
ary classes of our population. We are daily
confronted with requests, in one shape or an-
other, for state aid ; it is our duty to
give to those requests proper consideration.
Should we not also extend some of our
favours to those cultured minds, whose en-
joyment is to give out for our own instruc-
tion the results of their researches and of
their night labours. And here allow me to
take this opportunity of referring to a worthy
20

class of our population, I mean the members
of the civil service. A large number of them
are men of very great distinction, of whose
courtesy and knowledge we avail ourselves
every day, and who, after having given to
the internal administration of the affairs of
the country their day work, for a salary not
at all excessive, leave their office to indulge
without any remu|ieration, in some literary
and scientific pursuits for the benefit of the
public at large. For those, and also for out-
siders, who delight in such intellectual
work, we should do something. I am not
prepared to say that the Government should
at present follow the example of European
countries in allowing public subsidies to the
gensde lettres, but it seems to me that the least
that could be done would be to keep and pre-
serve for them and for subsequent genera-
tions the material out of which historical,
scientific and literary monuments would be
erected to enrich our Canadian home. By
doing so, no doubt we would stimulate the
intellectual activity of our scholars, and the
outcome of their labours would be much
more valuable to our rising generations than
those foreign books, of which so many are
rather poisonous drugs than healthy intel-
lectual food. I may give a sample of the
historical documents to which I am referring.
I have told you in a general way of the
! colony of Lord Selkirk, and of the efforts of
the missionaries to civilize the far w^st. Do
you know that Lord Selkirk, a noble man
and a good Presbyterian, called to his assist-
ance a Catholic bishop? And here is a
document which shows that Lord Selkirk in
doing so had been very fortunate and well
inspired. The letter is from Governor Simp-
son, of the Hudson Bay Company. It was
addressed to Mgr. Tach^ on the occasion of
the death of Bishop Provencher, who went
from the shores of the St. Lawrence to the
Red River banks at the call of Lord Selkirk,
and with the permission of Mgr. Plessis,
then Bishop of Quebec :

Fort Garry,

Red River, June 30th, 1853.

The Right Reverend the

Bishop of St. Bonif.\ce,
He k La Crosse.

My Dear Lord, — I have the honour to acknow-
ledge your communication of the 12th January last,
on the affairs of the mission of the Roman Catholic
Church in these Territories.

Before proceeding to reply to that letter, I de-
sire to place on record a tribute of respect for the
memory of that excellent prelate, your predecessor,

Digitized by

Google

306

The Dominion [SENATE] Archives.

whoee loss we have so recently had to deplore.
During a long period, loneer than human friend-
ships are usually permitted to endure, it had been
my happiness to maintain with that worthy bishop
an intercourse, characterized by personal esteem
and respect, never, during upwards of thirty years,
interrupted either in our official capacities or in our
private relations. In his public career he proved
himself the friend of order and good govemtnent,
the promoter of every object likely to conduce to
the general welfare, and a pillar of strength to the'
constituted authorities, ever ready to l>ear his
share of public burdens, in the delil)eration8 of
council, as well as in the maintenance of the laws.
Of liis private worth, the widespread feeling of sor-
row at his loss affords a touching pi oof of his bene-
volence and lil>erality, his pious and blameless life
had won for him universal esteem ; to myself indi-
vidually, he was a friend honoured and esteemed,
with whom it was ever a pleasure to associate.

Permit me to say, in conclusion, that it is some
consolation on this sad occasion, that the late
bishop's office devolves on so worthy a succes-
sor ; the individual may be changed, but the
•* Bishop of St. Boniface, it is felt, will continue
to 1>e to this colony an example of christian virtues
and enlightened views.

(Sgd.) G. SIMPSON.

I certify that the preceding is a true copy of the
portion or Sir George Simpson's letter, relative to
the lamented Bishop Provencher.

f ALEX., Archbishop of St. Boniface, O.M.I.
This is a noble example given us by men of
days gone by, and the recording and circu-
lating of such documents would teach the
present and future generations a sound
lesson as to the mutual regard wliich we
must entertain for our respective rights,
principles and feelings. Imbued with such
generous and broad view^s, and working hand
in hand as did those men, we could rely on
the future and cherish the hope of being
able to build up a united nation, a Canadian
home, pure and simple, under the safe-
guard of the coat of arms which I see over
the head of our worthy Speaker, under the
fldg which floats on the top of these build-
ings, and from whose waving undulation we
all expect protection and fair play. It had
been my intention to address the House in
my own language also, but as I have detained
you much longer than I at first expected, I
will close my remarks by expressing the
hope that this plea of mine in favour of the
national archives will be favourably received
by this honourable House, by the Govern-
ment, and by the hon. Minister who presides
over this branch of the service, the hon.
Minister of Agriculture, whose literary attain-
ments are on a par with his political ability.

Hon. Mr. KIRCHHOFFER — I take
great pleasure in seconding the resolution of

my hon. colleague. It is desirable, not only
from a sentimental point of view, but also
from an economical and utilitarian one, to
have the early history of any country or
any colony compiled from authentic records.
It is of great service to the student of history,
the politician, or that large element in a new
country, incoming settlers, who are interested
in its development. It is most desirable
that the student should not have unreliable
data or unauthentic archives from which to
compile what he is seeking. Unfortunately,
the early history of all the great countries
of the world have been compiled from re-
cords so obscure, from traditions so untrust-
worthy, that they are in many instances
comparatively valueless. Events of not al-
together remote origin, but of comparatively
recent date, are now so frequently contra-
dicted that we are led to believe many of
our most eminent historians must have been,
in many instances, romancing and there is an
element of truth in the remark made with
reference to one famous author, that what he
hits is mystery and what he misses is his-
tory. Consequently, from time to time
some iconoclastic gentleman smashes into
fragments our most sacred beliefs and our
most treasured traditions. For instance, we
are now told that the celebrated words of
command attributed to the Duke of Wel-
lington at Waterloo, " Up guards, and at
them " were never uttered at aU. We are
also informed that the famous battle signal
under which Lord Nelson entered upon one
of the most famous naval engagements of all
time was never hoisted at all. We are
divided now in our allegiance as to whether
the works of the greatest poet the world
ever produced were written by Shakespeare
or by Bacon, and worst of all, we are told
there is absolutely no truth at all in one of
the most cherished legends of our childhood
— a long way back with some of us — that
Romulus and Remus the founders of
ancient Rome were suckled by a wolf. Had
a resolution like this been introduced in the
Roman Senate I have no doubt but that
we should find these events all authen-
tically reported in the Hansard of that
period, but we do not wish that the records
of our country should be treated in any such
slipshod manner. We who live in that
great North-west are thoroughly imbued
with the idea that we have there the centre
round which the rest of the Dominion must
eventually revolve. If we all agree that it

Digitized by

Google

The Dominion [MAfiCH 16, 1893J Archives.

307

is desirable, and I think we must do so, that
the early history of such a country as that,
and the record of its early settlement, of the
condition of life of its early settlers and peo-
ple, should be authentically preserved, then
I say, the resolution of the hon gentleman
has not come one day too soon. Fortunately,
I understand some progress has already been
made in the direction aimed at. The His-
torical Society of Winnipeg, under the pre-
sidency cf Mr. MacBeth, a native of that
country, and a member of a large and influ-
ential family of early settlers, has been en-
gaged for some time in making valuable col-
lections and interesting researches, and has
collected a great deal of data connected with
the early settlement of the country. Such
an institution as that will be found very
valuable in obtaining the information to
which the resolution of the hon. gentleman
refers and which I have great pleasure in
supporting.

Hon. Mr. ALMON — I think the mem-
bers of this House must feel under great
obligation to the hon. member from St.
Boniface for having introduced the question of
the archives before the House, and it is more
especially wanted out in the North-west.
About four years ago, when I went over the
prairies to the ocean on the other side, I was
very much shocked to see the dilapidated
state of old Fort Garry — in fact, there was
nothing left of it but a gate-way, and that
was so shattered that I wonder it has not
fallen down by this time by the frost getting
into the cracks of it. A very small sum of
money — I dare say a thousand dollars —
would have repaired it. I went through
the old house and asked for the room where
the old papers where kept, and was over-
joyed to find there was a room full of them.
I went into the room, but to my great dis-
gust, I found there was no one in charge of
them. The attendant said, "you may take
any of those you like," but not being
acquainted with the laws of the country,
and fearing I might become responsible, I
declined to do so. I think everybody will
allow that Mr. Brjrmner is a capital man
to be at the head of the office, but he
has not a proper place for the archives. I
should like to ask hon. gentlemen, how
many of you have \'isited the place. You
cannot go down there in the winter without
breaking your shins over a number of boxes
lying in the dark passage. It is a dingy place,
20^

and going there to look over the documents,
you are not in a fit state of mind to enjoy
them. Why not remove the archives
down to the Langevin Block, as it is called ?
There are very many interesting documents
and maps there which we would all like to
see. I do not exactly see the connection
between the archives and agriculture. I
should think the Library would be the- proper
building for that Department, but certainly
the room in the basement of the western
block is not the place where they ought to
be kept. They should be where they would
be accessible to members of the House and
where one could go to while away an hour
or so looking through the records of the
past. I do not wish to deprive the Minister
of the office of custodian of the records, but
I should like to have them kept in a better
place.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— I beg to congratu-
late the hon. Senator from Manitoba, who has
just spoken, upon the move which he has in-
augurated towards having the archives of
the provinces preserved and put beyond the
possibility of destruction. I simply wish to
add that it is also desirable that the same
steps should be taken towards the preserva-
tion of the archives which concern the his-
tory of the other extremity of this country —
the Maritime provinces — and it might apply
as well to Ontario and Quebec, but I believe
and I feel sure that as far as Quebec is con-
cerned, attention and money towards that
end will not be wanting. In the Maritime
provinces, however, the question has been
very sadly neglected. I am aware myself
that in Halifax papers were burned twenty
years ago the value of which was not known,
I suppose, but the value of which was un-
doubtedly very great as a matter of history.
Those papers had been stored in a cellar in
the Legislative Assembly, and were either
burnt or in some other way destroyed. Some
of them were preserved, which are now of
great value. Those papers are there and
are apt to be destroyed by fire or otherwise,
and as there are no other copies of them the
destruction would be an irreparable loss.
We have in London most valuable papers, of
which collection about 400 volumes have
been copied, and of which very much more
remains to be copied. The state papers, of
which about 200 volumes have been copied
and much more remain untouched, are also
valuable papers for the history of Canada,

Digitized by

Google

308

The Dominion [SENATE] Archives.

but pertain more particularly to Quebec
and Ontario. Although it is very desirable
that the Government should continue to have
them printed, they are less exposed than a
series of papers to which I wish to refer —
the papers relating to the Maritime pro-
vinces, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and
Prince Edward Island — which are now in
the Department of Marine and Fisheries.
They are in the attic-s, exposed to be burned
in any conflagration which would consume
the buildings, and those papers are of the
greatest value to the history of the Maritime
provinces. Now, of all the moneys that
have been devoted by the Grovemment here
towards having historical documents copied,
about five hundred dollars have beenem ployed
in copying those papers. I submit, hon. gentle-
men, that that is not sufficient. I know of
some individual states in the neighbouring
republic which devote much more money to
securing copies from those archives that are
to be found in London and Paris, than the
Parliament of Canada devotes to the whole
Dominion. That is not commendable, in my
idea, oh the part of our Government. Some
private individuals spend more money for
that purpose than the Government of
Canada does. We are now laying the basis
for a large Dominion in the future and it is
very important that the documents relating
to Canada in the beginning of its history
should be preserved. The written history
of the country is a part of the country, and
although it has been said " Happy is the
nation that has no history," that proverb, I
am convinced, was started in schools by
•pupils who were too lazy to keep up with
their classes. The truth of it is that the
historical documents of the nation are
exceedingly precious, and if we allow them
to Ije destroyed we should be open to very
severe censure from the following generation,
especially from the historians of future ages
who undertake to trace the progress of this
Dominion from its inception. Look at what
is going on just now. We have Mr. Park-
man, in the United States, who has lately
l>een writing about the Maritime provinces
putting certain historical personages and
facts in a shape that is not at all in accord
with the ideas of our historians. He has
been in Europe and has got most of the
documents to which he refers copied. Our
historians are not in a position to answer
him, because they have not the means — the
documents are not here. Hon. gentlemen, I

am glad the question has been brought before
the House. I should like to impress upon
the Government the necessity of spending
more money than they are now devoting to
that purpose. The whole of the grant for
archives for historical pur{k)se8 is, I believe,
$6,000. Now that is not enough — it is not an
adequate provision. The country is not
built materially only — it is built of matters
that appeal to the intelligence of the people
and most certainly the historical records are
of that character. I hope the hon. Minister
of Agriculture, who is here and who has
charge of the documents, will tell us that
future appropriations will be increased and
that next year a more liberal allowance will
be voted. Another matter which I had
almost overlooked is this : Our archives are
scattered almost all over, as much as they
are in any country in the world. We have
three deposit vaults, I believe— one in the
Privy Council, one in the Secretary of State's
Department and the bulk of them in the
Department of Agriculture. I believe that
state of things should be altered. In my hum-
ble opinion they should be placed under the
charge of one person who takes an interest in
the archives — not simply a person appointed
for the purpose of filling a position, but a man
or men who are devoted to the subject and
lovers of our country, who would exercise
care and intelligence in collecting and com-
paring our archives, in such a way, that when
historians visit our archives, they should
know where to find them. At present the
archives are almost chaos at Ottawa. I
forgot to add that a part of the archives is
to be found in the Library. I submit the
I archives should be put under one head, and
I under one officer, to whom should be given
I the charge of them, so that our archives
' would not only be in existence here, but
I available to historians at large and those
j who interest themselves in writing the
history of the country.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I would not venture
to take up the time of the House with any
remarks of my own on the subject, because
one could not hope to add anything to the
eloquent appeal made by the hon. member
from Manitoba, but I venture to take this
opportunity of suggesting that all documents
connected with the early history of the
country should be preserved with the most
scrupulous care and that every precaution
should be taken to prevent the destruction of

Digitized by

Google

The Daminian [MARCH 16, 1893] Archives.

309

papers such as has been alluded to by the hon.
gentleman who has spoken in reference to the
early history and settlement of the country :
but it is also of some importance that we
should preserve the buildings and other
things connnected with the early history of
the country as well, and I venture to put in a
plea, with the hon. gentleman from Halifax,
for the preservation of the old gate-way at
Fort Garry. When I was last there that
gate-way was almost crumbling to pieces. It
could be taken down very easily and put up
again and preserved as a relic. That is one
of the most interesting buildings connected
with the early history of the country. I do
not know whether it is a matter which comes
within the purview of the Dominion of
Canada, but it would be a great pity if it
should be allowed to be pulled down and
nothing be left of old Fort Garry.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— On behalf of the
Government, I may state that I am very
much pleased with the resolution that has
been moved by the hon. member from St.
Boniface, seconded by the hon. member from
Brandon. It is very important that the ar-
chives of the country should be properly look-
ed after and the sources of our history careful-
ly preserved. The object of the resolution is
to induce the Government to secure what
historical documents can be obtained in the
North-west Territories from the Hudson
Bay Company. I may state thai since the
notice has been given, it has been my inten-
tion to direct the officers of my Department
to communicate with the Hudson Bay Com-
pany and the authorities in the North-west,
to ascertain if they are willing to hand over
to the Dominion Government for safe-keep-
ing what archives they may have. I hope
that this will lead to a favourable result.
Should the Hudson Bay Company be willing
to hand over to the Government what docu-
ments they may have, they may rest as-
sured that proper care will be taken of them
here, and that they will be assorted and
made accessible to the future historian of the
country or any persons interested in con-
sulting them. It has been stated also by
the hon. member from Shediac that some at-
tention should be paid to the historical
documents of the lower provinces, and that
some very important documents had been
lost in Nova Scotia. I may say the Do-
minion Government cannot very well inter-
fere in this matter, because the Local Gov-

ernment in each province has archives of its
own. and it is not likely that we could ob-
tain anything from them except permission
to duplicate what documents they may
possess. In Quebec, as in Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick, I believe, the provincial
secretary is in charge of the archives of the
province, including all the old French docu-
ments, patents, letters of French Governors,
<kc. It is impossible to obtain those, and I
do not believe it would be possible to obtain
original papers from Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick. I dare say the words uttered
by the hon. member from Shediac will draw
their attention to the matter, if the docu-
ments ai'e not now properly taken care of.
But at present the Government is applying
$6,000 to the collection abroad of informa-
tion concerning the history of the country.
A portion of that money is spent in London
in the British Museum in copying the Haldi-
mand collection there, and a portion is spent
in France. There are, it is true, important
documents in France, which are not kept in
a secure place. Some of tJhem are not in fire
proof buildings at all. We are doing what
is possible with the means put at our dis-
posal by Parliament — $6,000 — a portion of
which is now being spent in Paris and
London.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— How much is being
spent in London and how much in Paris.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— For the next year
about $2,000 for copying in Paris and some
$4,000 for the saine purpose in London. That
includes various items connected with it —
printing and other expenses in each place.
As to there being proper officers in charge
of these archives, I think we can congratu-
late ourselves in having had so far the ser-
vices of Mr. Brymner, who has taken charge
of the English portion of the archives, and
the valuable services of Mr. Marmette, who
has been mainly connected with the French
portion, and the researches made in France.
As to putting all the documents here in Ot-
tawa into one building, I do not know that
that can be very easily done. I do not wish
to give up anything that I have, and it is
pretty much the same with the provincial
secretaries — they do not wish to give up
anything ; and when we walk over to the
Privy Council we find that they are not
anxious to get rid of anything they have.
So that to arrive at a solution of this point

Digitized by

Google

310

Speaker of the [SENATEJ Senate Bill.

is a hard matter ; but I know that measures
are being adopted in the Privy Council to
take proper care of the papers there, and the
same course is being followed by the provin-
cial secretaries, and in my own office some
improvement has been made lately. The
papers that belong to my Department are in
two places, in the west block and in the Lan-
gevin block ; they are in fireproof rooms.
At "present there is no better place to put
them in. I dare say that in the course of
time we shall find an opportunity of taking
some steps whereby these papers can all be
put together. Some reference has been made
to the old gate of Fort Garry being preserved
as an historical souvenir. For myself, I would
be very glad if this could be done, but I do
not think the Dominion Grovernment could
do anything towards attaining this end. It
is local property, which belongs to the Govern-
ment of Manitoba or the city of Winnipeg
— I do not know which, but it is within the
jurisdiction of the Government of Manitoba
and it will be for them to follow up, and I
hope they will &ct upon the suggestions
offered by the hon. members on the other
side of the House.

The motion was agreed to.

OCEAN ACCIDENT CORPORATION
BILL.

SECOND READING POSTPONED.

The Orders of the Day being called,

Second reading (Bill 39) " An Act to in-
corporate the "Ocean Accident Corporation."

Hon. Mr. ALLAN said : — I think there is
some curious blunder about this Order of the
Day. There are two Bills apparently bearing
upon the same subject, only one is entitled
Ocean Accident Corporation and the other
Ocean Guarantee Company. Now I find that
on Friday, the 10th March, a message was
brought to this House from the House of
Commons with a Bill entitled an Act to in-
corporate the Ocean Guarantee Company.
It was read the first time and ordered to be
read the second time on Monday next. On
Monday this Ocean Guarantee Company's
Bill was read the second time and was re-
ferred to the Committee on Banking and
Commerce ; and to-day, as chairman of the
Banking and Commerce Committee, I re-
ported on that Bill. When I saw the Bill
of my hon. friend on the Orders of the Day I
inquired of the Clerk and I looked at the
two Bills and found that they were the same

precisely word for word, with the difference
that one was called Guarantee Company
and the other Accident. There is no doubt
that there is only one Bill, and that the Bill
passed its third reading to-day.

Hon. Mr. DeBOUCHERVILLE— My
neighbour, the Hon. Mr. Ferguson, asked
me to propose this Bill last week and to put
it off till to-day. On Monday I heard him
propose this Bill for the Ocean Accident
Company. He is not here to-day and I
would, therefore, like t6 withdraw the Bill
until he returns. I do not know that there
is any hurry about it.

The Bill was allowed to stand until to-
morrow.

SPEAKER OF THE SENATE BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the second
reading of Bill (N) " An Act respecting the
Speaker of the Senate. He said : This is
quite a short Bill and includes only three
clauses. The first provides that if the
Speaker of the Senate, from illness or other
cause, finds it necessary to leave the chair
he may call one of his colleagues to fiU it
during a portion of the sitting or during the
whole day. The next clause provides that
when the Speaker is unable to attend, upon
information given by the Clerk of the
Senate to that effect, the Senate may choose
one of its members to fill the chair during
the business of the House. The third clause
provides that every act done by any Senator
acting in the capacity of Speaker shall be
as valid as if the same had been done by the
Speaker himself You have all felt, especially
members who have been here for a long time,
that there is very serious inconvenience in
not being able to replace the Speaker of the
Senate in case of illness, and in not being
able to call somebody to preside over the
Senate if the sitting is a very long one. I
know there is some doubt as to the power
of the Senate to adopt this measure. It is
not a question which has not been thought
of before ; but I think that heretofore we
have not looked in the right direction for the
proper authority to justify the pa^^sing of
such a Bill as this. From what I can leam»
most of the persons who dealt with the
question, referred to section 18 of the
British North America. Act for the
necessary power to adopt this measure. I

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAECS 16, 1893] Senate Bill.

311

do not think that under that clause the Senate
can find the necessary power, but I believe
that under section 91, where it is provided
that Parliament has the right to make the
necessary legislation for the proper carrying
on of the business in the government of the
country, we can find the power to adopt this
Bill. It is stated, of course, and the prin-
ciple is admitted by everybody, that we have
no right to amend the constitution — that is
the British North America Act. I admit
that. It is quite plain under the wording
of the law. But I submit for your consider-
ation that the passing of this Bill in no way
amends the constitution. The Speaker of
the Senate now is appointed by His Excel-
lency in Council. We do not propose to
take that power away from him. He shall
always have the power of appointing the
Speaker of the Senate. But it is only pro-
posed in cases of urgency, when His Excel-
lency cannot interfere in time to prevent
great inconvenience resulting to the public
service by appointing another Speaker, that
the Speaker in the chair shall have the privi-
lege of calling upon one of the hon. members
of this House to take the presidency for the
time being, and should he be unable at any
time to reach this House, upon a notice be-
ing given to the Senate of the absence of the
Speaker, that the Senate shall have the
power to choose one of its members to fill the
chairduring the Speaker's absence. Now if this
legislation is adopted, it will not in any way
amend the constitution in so far that His
Excellency in Council may not, if he so
choose, appoint a Speaker to replace the
Speaker already appointed, since he holds
office at pleasure. But meanwhile, when the
interference of His Excellency in Council
cannot be had at any time, the Senate shall
have the power to carry on the business of
the country by appointing some one tempo-
rarily to till the Chair. Now, I say that
this is not an amendment of the constitu-
tion. It does not in any way alter the
rights of the Crown. The appointment can
always, and will always, be made in the
same way. It is done only to provide for an
emergency, It is unnecessary for me to cite
a case in point of such an emergency. We
are now nearing the end of the session. If
it should be our misfortune that the
President of the Senate should be called away
for unavoidable reasons, or on account of sick-
ness near the end of the session, we might be
compelled to sit for twenty-four hours, per-

haps, or more. The session might be pro-
longed beyond Easter, and how much longer
might it not be prolonged ? It is to meet
cases of this kind that it is proposed that
the Senate shall have the power to appoint
some one to replace the Speaker. I believe
it is a power incident to the attributes of
the Senate. I am quite sure that the mem-
bers of this House, who have very great
experience in this matter, will give the Bill
their due attention ; and I shall wait with
pleasure what enlightement they may throw
upon the measure.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I congratulate the
hon. gentleman and the Grovernment on their
courage in dealing with this question, and I
quite agree with the hon. gentleman that
the necessities of the case demand legislation
in this direction, though I confess I cannot
agree with him altogether in the reasons
that he has given for this proposed change.
It may be interesting, perhaps, historically
to refer to the circumstances under which
we have been placed in situations heretofore
of great embarrassment from the want of this
legislation. On no less than four occasions
since tjie meeting of this Parliament of Ca-
nada for the first time, we have found that
difficulty and that embarrassment. That
difficulty, I have always understood, arose
entirely from the construction of this 18th
section of the British North America
Act, and I beg to remind my hon. friend
that, when that difficulty took place the
whole of that Act was in force and included
in it was this ninety-first section. Now, for
the first time I believe, the ninety-first sec-
tion has been brought forward as the only
ground on which legislation could proceed.
It may be interesting in a historical sense to
refer to the circumstances under which past
legislation in this direction has been taken
by this very Parliament, and the authority
under which they took that course. My
hon. friend has not referred to the Imperial
Act passed in 1875 in amendment of
this very section of the British North
America Act — he has not referred to this
as one of the grounds for passing this Act,
but expresses some hesitation and doubts
with regard to that clause having any rela-
tion to the question now before the House.
I can well understand that hon. gentlemen
who have doubts — and perhaps there are
some who have doubts upon the question —
will have those doubts very much increased

Digitized by

Google

312

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate BUI

by the position taken by the hon. Minister
in asking the House to agree to this Bill,
for the reason that I have already stated,
that at the time doubts arose as to the power
of this Senate to act in cognate cases to
this, and these very doubts were created by
the fact of section eighteen of the British
North America Act being not considered as
applicable at all to this question, for a very
different reason. What was that section ?
It was this — that the powers, privileges and
immunities of the Senate and House of
Coipmons respectively should be confined to
the powers, privileges and immunities which
at the time of the 'passing of the British
North America Act were held and enjoyed
by the British House of Commons. It was
contended then, with a great deal of force,
that under these circumstances, as at the
time they did not enjoy these powers subse-
quently acquire.], we could not legis-
late. I should not have risen on. the pre-
sent occasion had it not been my duty to
take a part in the long discussions which
occurred some twenty years ago, and which
forced me to look into the matter, and for
another reason also, that I found myself on
that occasion in antagonism with tl^ gen-
eral sentiment of the members of this House,
and certainly to a large extent, if not almost
entirely, in antagonism to the senti-
ments of members in another place.
This was the state of things when the House
undertook to legislate on the question,
that is to say, to give additional powers to
the Senate and House of Commons which
were not given to them by the British North
America Act ; powers to take evidence and
examine witnesses on oath before their com-
mittees. That was in the year 1873. In the
previous year, 1872, the English House of
Commons had acquired those powers ; they
acquired for the first time the power to
examine witnesses on oath before committees,
and assuming that to be shown, that they
had the power, an Act was passed by the
Canadian Parliament on the 3rd of May,
1873, which conferred upon certain com-
mittees of the two Houses the same power,
under the impression that, because the
English House of Commons had acquired
it after the British North America Act five
years afterwards, this Act was within
the competency of this House and was not
idtra vires. Now that Act was caused by an
unfortunate accident which had happened,
and a somewhat similar accident has hap-

pened since. It was the case that arose in
1872, when the Speaker of this House,
Mr. Cauchon, was prevented by a snow-
storm from getting to the House at the
time to which the House had adjourned,
and under those circumstances we were
placed in a situation of great embarrassment.
I, as one, was called upon to look into it,
and we came ultimately to the unanimous
conclusion under those exceptional circum-
stances, and to meet an emergency that
we were justified in meeting, and adjourned
to meet at a future time. Then came this
Act of 1873, and on that occasion I had the
misfortune to stand somewhat alone, al-
though I was supported by one or two hon.
gentlemen in the contention which I made,
which was that the Act was ultra vires of
this House, inasmuch as it conferred a power
which was not given to us by the British
North America Act to legislate upon. The
then Minister of Justice, our late lamented
friend, Sir Alexander Campbell, hesitated
and expressed some doubts, but he urged on
the House to pass the Bill. The leader of
the Opposition then, a gentleman who was
well acquainted with the senior members of
this House, the late Mr. Letellier, spoke of
the objections made to the passing of the
Bill as being senseless. Well, a short time
sufficed to show that hon. gentleman the
value of that criticism, because within two
months afterwards that Act was disallowed
by the Queen as being ultra vires. On the
first day of July, 1873, that Act was disal-
lowed on the advice of the law officers of the
Crown, and the Imperial Parliament within
two years afterwards, in the year 1875,passed
an amending Act, which is before me, and
which I will read if it is necessary, to remove
those doubts and to give us the power-* which
we then claimed. That Act is to be found
in the appendix to the rules and orders of
this House, entitled "An Act to remove
certain doubts with respect to the powers of
Canada under section 18 of the British North
America Act of 1867." After reciting those
doubts, it enacted that the privil^es,
immunities and powers held, enjoyed and
exercised by the Senate and by the House of
Commons should be such as are from time to
time declared by Act of the Parliament of
Canada, but shall not confer any privileges,
immunities and powers exceeding those at
the time of the passage of such Act held
and enjoyed by the House of Commons
of England. That gave us the power we

Digitized by

Google

speaker of the [MAfiCH 16, 1893] Senate Bill.

313

claimed, and I ought to say, before passing
on, that in another clause of this Act this
disallowed Act was re-enacted by the Imperial
Parliament. But as those Acts only gave
power to administer oaths by certain com-
mittees, not to all committees, the Parlia-
ment of Canada, in the year 1876, within
twelve months after this amendment of the
British North America Act, passed an Act
which extended the powers to taking evidence
and administering oaths before all committees
of the Senate and House of Commons. The
question under the amending Act again came
up in 1885, and the Parliament of Canada
proceeded further in the same direction, and
having got those extended powers by the
amendment of the British North America
Act, they passed an Act providing for the
emergencies to which my hon. friend has
alluded with regard to the absence of the
Speaker of the House of Commons ; because
although there are certain powers given by
the British North America Act — I think
about the 47 th Section of the Act —
and although it enabled the House to pro-
vide for that emergency where the Speaker
was absent, it was only for the period of forty-
eight hours and there were still the emergen-
cies to which my hon. friend has alluded, of
the Speaker being struck down in the perfor-
mance of his duties in the House and be-
coming unable to remain there, and so on, or
his behig unavoidably absent and the House
being informed by the Clerk that the Speaker
was unable to attend. The Act to which I
allude, passed in 1885, provided for both
these emergencies with regard to the House
of Commons in the same way and on the
same lines as the Bill which my hon. friend
has presented to the House ; that is to say,
where the Speaker was suddenly taken ill hte
should leave the Chair and put another in
his place for the day ; that provides for the
case which is proposed to be provided for by
the first clause of this Bill, and with regard
to the second clause when the Clerk of the
House informed the House that the Speaker
was unavoidably absent, prevented from
being present, then another member should
take his place temporarily. They have the
convenience of having a Chairman of Com-
mittees of which they could avail themselves,
and made use of that officer and called him
a Deputy Speaker. Although this Bill pro-
ceeds upon the same lines, we do not
propose in this Bill, as I read it, to interfere
in any way with the appointment or the re-

moval of the Speaker, by the Govemor-Gene-
ral. We propose simply in an emergency
like this that the House should be in a posi-
tion to put a member in the chair, who should
act for the remainder of the day. Under the
2nd section of the Act, where the House
was informed that the Speaker was unavoid-
ably prevented from being present they could
provide also for that emergency. This being
the case, it was apparent that the House pro-
ceeded upon the amended British North Ame-
rica Act with regard to those contingencies,
and with regard to their legislation they had
the power to proceed under that amended
Act. We proceeded in the case, as I have,
spoken of Mr. Cauchon, in 1872 upon the
idea that he was unable to be present, but
we had no precedent then to guide us and
we had to fall back upon the inherent right
which prevails in every deliberative body of
meeting an emergency of that kind by adjourn-
ing, by not proceeding to do business, because
theActsays the Speakermustbe inthe Chair,
simply by unanimous consent adjourning
until a future time. We followed that
course in the case of the death of Mr. Plumb
in 1868, when he was struck down and could
not be here. We met on the adjourned day,
and we had to take that course again until
a new Speaker was appointed. In the case
of the present Speaker, something occurred
at one time which, I hope, will never happen
to him again : he was prevented by serious
illness in his family, and I believe by snow-
storms, from being in his place, and on two
occasions we had to adjourn the House to
meet that contingency until his return.
Now, at that time it was thought that we
could not do any business, and the result
was that for all purposes of legislation there
was a deadlock. It is to meet such an
emergency that this legislation appears to
me to be necessary. I quite agree, as regards
section 91, that it proves most conclusively,
in conjunction with the amended Act, that
we have the power.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— What section of
the Act do you rely upon specially ?

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The Olst.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— And 18.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY—** It shall be lawful
for the Queen, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate and House of Com-
mons, to make laws for the peace, order and

Digitized by

Google

314

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

good government of Canada, in relation to all
matters not coming within the class of sub-
jects by this Act assigned to the Local Legis-
lature." This is a general provision which
has been acted on in the Privy Council in
decisions which have been given since, uni-
formly recognized, and I quite agree with my
hon. friend that if there was any doubt as
to the applicability of the amended Act,
passed in 1875, section 18 of the British
North America Act, this section would ap-
ply. If this power given by section 91 is
intact, we would be justified, even under
that section, in acting upon it, but I thought
.it would be right in a matter like this
that we should know exactly how we pro-
ceeded in past times and the precedents we
had had, and I think I have satisfied the
House that it was more than a matter of doubt
whether we had any right to pass the oaths
Bill in 1873; it was established beyond
doubt that we had no right to proceed under
that 18th section, and that section was
amended for the purpose of enabling us to
exercise our powers, privileges and immuni-
ties in the Senate and Commons — the most
comprehensive words that could be used,
that we should have all those powers, and
we now propose to exercise them.

Hon. Mr. POWER — Would my hon.
friend allow me to ask him one question 1
Why, if the view taken by the hon. gentle-
man is correct, would not we have the
power under section 91 to have done what
we had not the power to have done pre-
viously, that is just as necessary as this ?

Hon. Mr. DICKEY — I have already
stated candidly to the House that that was
one of the points on which I differed from
my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture.
I do not rely upon section 91 exclusively,
but it confirms a power which I consider
this House has had by the amended Act,
which gave, those powers subsequent to this
enactment, and which I should think would
leave no doubt upon the minds of any
hon. gentleman that taking the two Acts
together we have undoubtedly power, but
when this question was up before, I have
already mentioned that the then leader of
the House, the Minister of Justice, the late
Sir Alexander Campbell, stated frankly that
he had doubts about the power of the House
but he added, as I wish to add to-day " we
can do no harm in passing this Act; we can
bring the matter to a head and get the

power in some way or another," and of
course he had too much tact to refer to the
probability of an amended Act, but he said
in some way or another we will get this
power. Well, it turned out as we expected,
and in consequence of that I did not divide
the House on the question, although I
expressed myself very strongly that we had no
power and it resulted as I expected; the
law officers of the Crown at once
promptly decided that it was ultra vireSy
that we had not the power under the
18th section, but they advised legislation
whiflh took place by this amending Act,
within two years afterwards for the pur-
pose of giving us that power ; the whole
difficulty arising, as I hope I have explained,
from the fact that the British North Amer-
ica Act only conferred the pawers enjoyed
by the House of Commons at the time of the
passing of that Act in 1867, and the amend-
ment extended those powers to the powers,
enjoyed by the House of Commons at the
time of the passing of thb Act in question.
Under those circumstances, therefore, I
think the House, for the sake of its own
character and to place itself in a proper light
before the country and to avoid the very
embarrassing difficulty which my hon. friend
the Minister of Agriculture has suggested —
of being caught at a critical period of the
session with no power to do business — that
we should take this course, and if the
result should be, as I hope it will not be, and
as I think it will not be, that the law officers
of the Crown who advise Her Majesty,
should say there was a doubt about these
things, that doubt would be removed by an-
other amendment to the British North Am-
erica Act, which would come from England,
and will not be at our asking but, as it was
in 1875, it will be the suggestion of what
was right and proper to enable the Senate
to perform its legislative functions as a con-
stituent branch of Parliament. Under these
circumstances, hon. gentlemen, I think the
House would be justified in passing this Act,
and whether I am right in my contention or
whether it is put exclusively upon the power
given by section ninety-one is a small mat^
ter ; it is quite sufficient, it is a power which
we ought to have, which of necessity should
belong to us, and we owe it to ourselves to
put ourselves in a position to get that power.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— This Bill was only
distributed on Monday. Since then I

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MABOH 16, 1893] Senate Bill.

315

have been very fully occupied, with other
duties, and I was interrupted also by indis-
position. I can do little more than call atten-
tion to some points which disturb me, raise
a signal of caution and urge that we should
move slowly in this matter, certainly not
without ample consideration. I do not pre-
sent my disjointed observations as full
argument or all that might be said on an
important question of this kind. I can do
little more than call attention to the salient
points. The question is a difficult one,
involving matter of construction and consti-
tutional capacity, and demands a fuller inves-
tigation than could well be given in a large
deliberative body. It is a matter upon which
experts are not agreed and the facts bespeak
additional caution. As I said, I shall only
be able to indicate some salient points that
occur to me, but though they may not be
presented in the most orderly manner or
argued out properly, my hon. friend and
legal leader will not pass them by, for his cha-
racter as an honourable courteous gentleman
and accomplished lawyer has preceded him
to this House, and his manner of life for at
least seven years in a calm atmosphere will
have shown him the duty and the importance
of weighing all that can be said, where there
is a conflict of opinion. It is a serious matter
to meddle with the British North America
Act except upon cogent grounds, and never
should it be attempted, unless the authority
to do so is clear. Some alterations in the
British North America Act were made and
sanctioned by the Imperial Parliament ; a
doubtful exercise of power by the Parliament
of Canada, was healed or confirmed, but
never, so far as I am aware, has the substance
of the machinery for legislation been touched.
I look with apprehension on any attempt to
do so. I am free to admit the Bill aims at
remedying a practical inconvenience, that
has occurred in the past, but very serious
difficulties were at these times obviated
within the lines of the constitution. Here
there is no pressing urgency and certainly
none for action, as some contend, by arrogat-
ing powers not ours. The session is almost
at a close, and if any emergency arose such
as occurred in Mr. Speaker Macpherson's time
it might be met in the way then adopted So
far as I am informed all precedent is against it,
as hon. gentlemen will see by examining the
records. In 1869, in consequence of the
"necessary temporary absence" of Hon. Mr.
Cauchon, flon. John Ross was appointed

Speaker by Royal C!ommission. Sir Alexander
Campbell explained that the appointment was
a temporary one ; and no debate took place.
Here is no precedent for this legislation.
But the inconvenience of the situation was
so obvious that a Bill was introduced.
Accordingly on 17th of May, Sir Alexander
Campbell introduced a Bill to enable the
House, with the permission of the Governor-
General, to appoint a Speaker temporarily ;
and to enable the Speaker to name some
one to occupy his place when he left the
Chair. Sir Alexander said he had considered
the question and was persuaded we had the
power to pass the Bill. The Bill was subse-
quently withdrawn to give time for the con-
sideration of many and serious objections
that were made. Here is no precedent for
this legislation. In 1872, in consequence of
an accident to the train the Speaker was
detained. The House, took the matter into
its own hands and appointed the Hon.
Mr. Hamilton chairman ; who took tbe
chair and adjourned the House. No
debate took place on the occasion.
In 1880, Sir David Macpherson was taken
ill after the opening of the House, and the
beginning of the debate on the Address. The
House took no action. There was no debate
on the subject. Hon. Mr. Botsford was ap-
pointed by Royal Commission during the
adjournment, in the temporary absence of
Sir David Macpherson. Here is no pre-
cedent for this legislation. In 1888, Hon.
Mr. Plumb died suddenly while he was
Speaker. On the meeting of the Chamber,
it was duly moved and seconded that Hon.
Mr. Ryan take the Chair, and an adjourn-
ment was ordered unanimously. A debate
took place on this occasion. Hon. Mr.
Dickey expressed the opinion that the House
had the power of appointing a Deputy-
Speaker till the Crown appoints another
Speaker, t.c, when there occurs a sudden
vacancy in the Senate speakership. But in
the end the House adjourned " by consent."
That is really the history of what has taken
place in the past, and certainly there is noth-
ing in it to show any precedent for this Bill.
The first consideration that presents itself to
my mind is the fact that ours is a written
constitution, the Government of Canada be-
ing one of enumerated powers, the British
North America Act being the instrument
that specifies them, and wherein authority
should be found for the exercise of any legis-
lation it assumes the power to pass. The

Digitized by

Google

316

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

whole frame-work of our constitutional Act
is the creature of an Imperial statute.
While the power of the Imperial Parliament
is practically unlimited and absolute even to
changing the constitution, our power is
limited and restrained by the instrument —
our written constitution, and especially it
seems to me in all that pertains to any inte-
gral part of machinery devised for legisla-
tion, where power is not plainly conferred,
the exercise of it is impliedly prohibited, I
must think, for the intent of the grant would
otherwise be defeated by such exercise. What
the true intent and meaning of the British
North America Act is, so far as it touches this
Bill, it will be proj)er to consider, in the
light of recognized rules of construction. I
take it the prime object should be to ascer-
tain the meaning of the Legislature, and the
rule seems to be applicable with special force
to a written constitution, not to attempt to
interpret that which needs no interpretation,
but to take the whole statute together to
arrive at the legislative intent. The pre-
amble to the British North America Act
recites that it is " expedient not only that
the constitution of the legislative authority
in the Dominion be provided for, but also
that the nature of the executive government
therein be declared." Section 9 enacts that
*' the executive government and authority
over Canada is hereby declared to continue
and be vested in the Queen," and section
14 appears to be in keeping with and
subsidiary to this provision. Section 17
deals with the legislative power pro-
viding " there shall be one Parliament
for Canada consisting of the Queen, an Upper
House, styled the Senate, and the House of
Commons." Then comes the provision touch-
ing the Senate (sec. 21 to 31) in relation to
its constitution, the qualification of Sena-
tors, how summoned, the tenure of office,
who may be appointed Speaker, the number
necessary to a quorum, and other particulars.
And so with regard to the House of Com
mons, and the members to be elected, (kc,
<fec. (37 et seq). Followed by the provisions
(55 et seq.) as to the Royal Assent to a Bill
passed by both Houses. One Parliament for
Canada, consisting of the Queen, the Senate
and the House of Commons — clear and de-
tailed provision as to both Houses. Sec. 34
is the provision for a Speaker necessary to
the completion of the Senate. It reads as
follows : —

" The Grovernor-General may from time to

time by instrument under the great seal of
Canada appoint a Senator to be speaker of
the Senate, and may remove him and appoint
another in his stead."

Nothing here is obscure, nothing that
needs interpretation — the power to appoint
a Senator and the power to appoint a Speaker
given in the same terms (see sees. 24 and 34),
the executive and prerogative authority of
the Queen being brought in play in both cases,
as provided by the Act. Nothing is said as
to the appointment of a Deputy-Speaker for
the Senate, no provision for a locum tenena^
the power of removal and the power of
appointing another Speaker in his stead,
however, being provided for. How marked
the difference in respect to the Speaker of
the House of Commons. There is an essen-
tial difference : In the case of the Senate
his appointment is by the Crown, in the case
of the Conunons provision is made for the
election of one of its members as Speaker
(sec. 44). For the Senate neither a Deputy-
Speaker nor a locum tenens to act as such
is provided for or appears to have been con-
templated. While in the case of the House
of Commons, detailed provision is made in
sec. 45 in case of vacancy by death, resigna-
tion or otherwise, in sec. 34 the Governor
is t^ appoint a Speaker to the Senate and
may remove him and appoint another in his
stead. Sec. 47 gives Parliament power to
provide " in the case of the absence of the
Speaker of the Commons from the Chair,"
in the absence of any such provision the
clause enacts that the House may elect
another of its members to act as Speaker
during the absence of the Speaker, <fec.

The two bodies, the Senate and the House
of Commons, both branches of Parliament,
have like duties to perform— Jboth are to
operate presided over by a Speaker — but
while in the case of the Commons, the right
is given to appoint an acting Speaker, in
the Senate is deliberately withheld. Surely
it is a reasonable conclusion, that in the case
of the Senate it was designed^ to confine the
appointment to a member selected by the
Governor-General and by him alone acting
as Her Majesty's representative and such a
construction is in accordance with the letter
as well as the spirit of the Statute, and leads
to no absurdity. The Act of Parliament de-
signates who may be the depository of the
powers and privileges of Speaker of the Se-
nate viz : an appointee of the Grovemor-Gene-
ral under the great seal — and in confining it

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAECH 16, 1893] Senate Bill.

317

to such depositary the constitutional act
impliedly prohibited it being exercised by any
other. It is a trust for a public purpose,
which cannot be assigned, I think ; other-
wise the security to the appointing power is
lost. Let us look at some other provisions
in the British North America Act — section
14 and as to the duties and functions
of the Governor-General. Special authority
is given to him to appoint a deputy for cer-
tain necessary purposes (possibly some His
Excellency might appoint without express
enactment), but express authority was given
and it operates as a limitation. Now, many
of the powers and functions, demand no abi-
lity and little discretion, e.g. writing a name
— tilling in a form — or a nod of the head —
surely it may well be thought, in the case of
the Senate, that the omission to provide for
a locum tenens to perform the duty of the
Speaker was of deliberate design. Power is
given to Provincial Legislatures to alter
their constitution, but I have sought in
vain for any authority or power to alter
our Constitutional Act. If existing, where
is it to be found? And further, let it be
borne in mind the proposed Bill touches
the prerogative and appointing power in
enabling the Speaker of the Senate to
appoint a presiding officer for the Senate,
with the powers, privileges and duties of a
Speaker — and the Bill proposes to validate
his every act. Now, every one knows the
prerogative is not to be prejudiced or taken
away without clear enactment, involving the
assent of Her Gracious Majesty, and the
rule of construction is in accordance with
our highest and best sentiments. The pre-
rogative is part of the band that unites us
with tender clasp to the dear old land — that
unites us Britons beyond the sea, to the
greatest Empire the world has ever known.
I ask where is the power to be found in our
Constitutional Act to alter an integral part
of the constitution — the Senate — in the ma-
chinery for legislation 1 Is it to be found
in section 18 as alleged ? I think not. The
context and the subject-matter in view for-
bid it. The power is given to each House
respectively to secure freedom of speech, to
prevent disorder, to punish inside and out-
side offenders for contempts in certain cases,
to make inquiries and other kindred subjects
that might be mentioned, but it does not touch
a matter of this kind. My hon. friend seems
to build on this frail foundation. For my part,
in looking at it, I could scarcely think of any

even plausible argument, anything that could
be laid hpld of with sufficient firmness
even for the purpose of discussion. Then
comes the point^and it seems to me the
only point — under the 91st section, and I
am not surprised that my hon. friend should
t-ake the view he does; it is the onlypos-sible
foundation which occurs to me for advocat-
ing the cause of legislating in the manner
proposed by this Bill. The suggestion is
that under the general terms there is general
power to make laws for the peace, welfare,
and good government of Canada, but I must
say that I think, as at present advised, it is
a very forced construction to regard it as sup-
porting this proposed measure. The Bill re-
lates to the construction of the Senate, and
how it may hereafter be composed. The Senate
cannot act without a presiding officer, and
the Bill relates to the composition of the
Senate, how it ^hall be meide complete in
case of the absence of the Speaker. Now,
what does the 91st section provide ? It
deals altogether with matters foreign to the
aim and purpose of the Bill before us.
The clause 91 gives a detailed enumeration
showing what was in the mind of the Legis-
lature in using the term " peace, welfare
and good government of Canada " and that
is the point we are to arrive at, — What was in
the mind of the legislature in passing thus Act ?
What in using the terms peace, welfare and
good government of Canada 1 Not the ma-
chinery for legislation, or any part of the
constitution itself. Had it been so intended
I take it that apt words would have been
used judging from other provisions of the
British North America Act. We find in the
body of the Act the whole of the details en-
tered into, and a full enumeration of the
classes of subjects in respect of which Canada
is empowered to legislate. The words, " for
greater certainty but not to restrict the gen-
erality of the foregoing terms," have an in-
timate connection with the specified clauses.
I take it that the general words, apart from
subjectswhich affect outside general interests,
can only cover a matter of a kindred character
to the matters enumerated, and this view, it
seems to me, is strengthened by reference to
the first item in section 92. Hon. gentlemen
will remember that section 91 provides as to
the power of the Dominion : section 92 is as
to the provinces, but both sections are inti-
mately and closely connected. Section 92,
No. 1, gives power to Provincial Legislatures
to amend their constitution in a general way,

Digitized by

Google

318

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

excepting only the office of Lieutenant-Gov-
ernor.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN.-- -WeU, upon the prin-
ciple that the expression of one thing ex-
cludes another, I think it is fair to infer
that if such power was intended to be given
it would be expressed. The argument for an
absolute and uncontrolled power, under the
terms "peace, order, welfare and good
government of Canada," pushed to its legi-
timate conclusion might be used in a way
that would tear our constitution into rags,
as well as neutralize the Royal ai^thority.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— Where then, I
would again ask, is the power to be found —
the express power given to appoint a pre-
siding officer for the Senate and appoint
another in his stead ? Nowhere. Strength
is lent to this view by section 35 which re-
serves to Parliament the power to deal with
the question of a quorum. Then section 36 is
not without importance seeing that it enacts
that the Speaker — that is, the Speaker
appointed by the Governor-General, by the
Crown, under the great seal, shall in all
cases have » vote with other members. All
this may be very tedious, but it is impossible
to arrive at a just conclusion without going
into particulars in considering the proper
construction of the British North America
Act. It is quite evident our Upper House
is modelled in many particulars after the
House of Lords, and when convened in Par-
liament it forma with the Commons the
Legislative Assembly by whose advice,
consent and authority with the sanction
of the Crown are all laws made. It
is given a separate and independent position,
the Speaker has no casting or double vote,
on equality the question is decided in the
negative, but other attributes of the House
of Ix)rds we cannot claim, though we follow
somewhat the practice of that august body.
The House of Lords has inherent and inde-
pendent rights from the free constitution of
the House of Lords. Now, in England, the
Chancellor, or the Lord-keeper, is the Speaker
of the House of Lords ex officio, and he may
or may not be a member of that House.
My hon. friend will remember many instances
in which a commission was issued appoint-

ing to the House of Lords judges who were
not peers, and that not very many years
ago ; but I may say the Speaker of the House
of Lords qua Speaker has no more power than
our Speaker, though if he happened to be,
as he generally is, a member of the House
of Lords, he can at the proper times exercise
the duties and functions of a peer. It is
laid down that the Speaker qua Speaker is a
ministerial, not a deliberative officer, though
as a peer, as I said before, he has a right to
vote. Our power to make rules is merely an
incident. We have no prescriptive or
inherent authority ; all we possess is within
the four corners of the Constitutional Act.
Well, a difficulty that occurred here in the
past, as any one can understand, is liable to
occur at any time ; in England how was it
obviated ? Not by allowing the House of
Lords to exercise its inherent power of
electing a Speaker. It is provided for in this
way : The Queen issues a Royal Commission
appointing one or two or three — in some of
the later commissions as many as three have
been Deputy-Speakers.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Four.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN — Four on one occa-
sion, it is now suggested. I remember three
in a single Commission. In the absence of
the Chancellor any one of these, usually by
arrangement among themselves or according
to the order of precedence, acting for the
Chancellor, but the very moment the Chan-
cellor comes in he takes the Chair, and if
none of the Deputy-Speakers are present,
the Chancellor be absent and the House
acts on its inherent prescriptive right and
appoints a member to act until one of
those authorized by the Crown enters,
and the moment he enters he takes the
Chair. Now, the formal appointment made
by the House of Lords springs from their
inherent power, from time immemorial, and
it must have been in the contemplation of
the Legislature that no inherent power could
be found under the written constitution,
and the clause in the British North America
Act, 34, confines the appointment strictly to
the Crown. Our power must be derived under
the written constitution or it does not exist. I
ask the House why it was not given in our
constitution to appoint a Deputy-Speaker,
and the answer seems to me quite plain —
because designedly withheld. Even in

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAKCH 16, 1893] Senate Bill

319

England the Speaker of the House of
Commons when he is elected must be
approved by the Queen, and we go through
very much the same ceremony here with the
Speaker of the House of Commons, although
practically approval it is never withheld, but
the rule and principle of the supreme
authority of the Crown remains. This Bill,
if it became law, gives us a prolocutor ap-
pointed by the Speaker or by the Senate
with all the powers and privileges which the
Queen's Commission confers on a Senator
appointed in the manner prescribed by the
Constitutional Act. An important duty and
trust for a public purpose, I must believe,
cannot be assigned to one whom the Crown
has not constituted. Let me say a word
further : The matter is of a nature that His
Excellency the Governor-Greneral may feel
bound to consider it his duty to reserve, and
it seems our duty to give all the aid possible
in considering the point, and that we should
have the amplest discussion to throw as
much light on the subject as possible.
Doubtless His Excellency would receive the
opinions of the law officers of the Crown in
Canada, that the several Bills submitted
are right and constitutional, but if I am
not mistaken. His Excellency Vould not
be bound by that, and he might reserve
this Bill, and he might send it over for
the opinion of his Government, and they
doubtless would take the opinion of the law
officers on the subject ; and therefore I say it
is very proper that the fullest inquiry should
be made. I am sure there can be no desire
on the part of any one to arrive at any other
conclusion than that which w right in this
matter. In any case it would certainly not
be pleasant if any Act passed here was sent
back disallowed ; it would be an unpleasant
thing, and I certainly would not like it. Now,
while I agree that some provision might be
desirable to obviate the inconvenience, if it
arises, of a temporary vacancy in the Chair —
I think it ought to be done and would like to
see it done iu a constitutional way, and I
think that the method by passing this Bill
would not be a constitutional one. Suppose
the Imperial Parliament was applied to,
after going through the proper and constitu-
tional ceremony for doing so — I do not know
how that could be done exactly.

Hon. Mr. feOTSFORD— By an address
from both Houses.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— By addressing both
Houses perhaps : either suggesting an alter-
ation that would fit the case, or it might be re-
ferring to some tribunal, which would consider
and pass upon the constitutionality of the
proposed measure; but something should be
done where there is really a doubt. I would
like to remedy it if it could possibly be done
here, but I will not and cannot lend myself
to anything that I believe to be entirely
unconstitutional. Now, I am not sufficiently
familiar with the rules and procedure in
Parliament, with the parliamentary practice,
to know how and in what manner my hon.
friend, if he desired, could retain the matter
before the hon. gentlemen in this House and
discuss it quietly with them. If he could do
so under the rules I think it would be a wise
thing. There are no less than three ex-
Speakers in this House. My hon. friend from
Richmond, a gentleman thoroughly versed in
constitutional precedent and in parliamentary
procedure. My hon. friend opposite from
Ottawa, an old experienced parliamentarian,
and one whose opinion I respect — I res-
pect as much as any one in this House.
Then we have my hon. friend from Toronto,
who has occupied a place from the very in-
ception of the Senate, and then we have the
hon. gentleman from Sackville, an old and
experienced member, the Nestor of the
House, and who came here as a Speaker, and
we have my hon. friend from Prince Ed-
ward (Hon. Mr. Howlan), and a number
of other gentlemen on both sides of the
House, who have made a study of the sub-
ject. I think my hon. friend could take a
method of arriving at it by appointing a
committee to consider the matter. T really
think it would be more satisfactory to the
House and country, and perhaps would re-
sult favourably ; but the difficulty I see is
this : if the Bill is read a second time and
referred to the Committee, we .would be
adopting it to some extent, and I could not
consent to the second reading of the Bill ;
but there are methods by which parliament-
arians could provide for a friendly confer-
ence with regard to this measure ; we aim
only to do what is right, to arrive at the
truth, and in whatever way brought out
we want the truth, by some means or
other. I earnestly appeal to my hon. friend
the mover of the Bill to give his best
•consideration to the proposition, and to
hasten slowly in such an involved and vital
matter.

Digitized by

Google

orth Arthur, Duluth and [SENATE] Western By. Co.'s Bill.

VIDAL — I think it is consult-
renience of the House if I move
ment of the debate till to-

ri was agreed to.

^TING OF PARLIAMENT.

MOTIONS.

READ moved the adoption of

)rt of the Joint Committee of

on the printing of Parliament.

KAULBACH— I was not pre-
lis was explained ; what is it ?

READ— It will be found at
outinework of session, 3 10, 000;
rt, $40,000 ; farm and dairy
000 ; binding, $5,000. In all,
may say that in the other branch
lature this was concurred in

POWER— I would like to
nervation with respect to this
bink that Parliament Ls dealt
h in being charged with the
1 binding of departmental re-
nting a larger expenditure than
s fairly responsible for ; and it
le expenditure of the various
as being less than it really is.
would be to class the printing
ts as part of the departmental

KAULBACH— It is generally
' members of Parliament — t^e
g is generally asked for and
y the committee itself.

n was agreed to.

READ moved the adoption of
t of the joint committee of both
le printing of Parliament. He
report merely recommends that
ence be given to one of the
Iso the payment for some articles
ifferent members of Parliament
) $252, and recommends that it
led in future.

1 was agreed to.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (40) " An Act to incorporate the Cansr-
da North-west Land Company (Limited)."
(Mr. McKindsey.)

Bill (59) "An Act to incorporate the
Canada Carriage Company." (Mr. Read,
Quints.)

Bill (32) "An Act respecting the Canada
Life Assurance Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (56) " An act to revive and amend
the Act to incorporate the Moncton and
Prince Edward Island Feny Company."
(Mr. Poirier.)

Bill (68) " An Act respecting the Colum-
bia and Kootenay Navigation Company."
(Mr. Power.)

Bill (67) " An Act to revive and amend
the Act to incorporate the North Canadian
Atlantic and Steamship Company." (Mr.
Casgrain.)

Bill (R) " An Act further to amend the
Act respecting Canned goods." (Mr. Bowell.)

The Senate adjourned at 6 o'clock.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Friday, March 17th, 1893,
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3 o'clock.
Prayers and routine proceedings.

THIRD READING.

Bill (53) "An Act respecting the Al-
berta Railway and Coal Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

PORT ARTHUR, DULUTH AND
WESTERN RAILWAY COM-
PANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (48) " An Act respecting the Port
Arthur, Duluth and Western Railway Com-
pany" with amendments. He said : — This
company is operating in connection with

Digitized by

Google

The Hawaiian [MAEOH 17. 1893] Islands.

321

various tracts of mineral ore extending for
some distance into the adjoining State of
Minnesota. In that State there is another
company incorporated by the same title. The
object is to enable them to work these mines
and convey the ore to Port Arthur. This
Bill gives the company power to lease and
make traffic arrangements with two com-
panies that are incorporated in the St^te of
Minnesota, one bearing the same title as this
Company, and the other being a company
known as the Duluth and Iron Range Rail-
way CJompany. The first amendment is to
include another railway company, also in the
State of Minnesota, making three companies
incorporated in the ^tate of Minnesota with
which this Bill would authorize the company
to make traffic arrangements. The com-
mittee could see no objection to this addition,
as they are all working to accomplish the
same, or in the same line — conveying these
mineral ores to Port Arthur.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The next amend-
ment is a consequential one — that is to say^
its object is to enable the company to make
arrangements with one or more of these
three companies.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The next amend-
ment was rendered necessary by the fact of
including this additional company. The
amendment strikes out the words which con-
fined it to two companies and extends it to
the three companies. It is simply a conse-
quential amendment for the purpose of making
it plain that this company can make arrange-
ments with the three companies in the State
of Minnesota, or any one or more of them.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— The last amend-
ment enables this company, as the interests
of the four companies will be closely identi-
fied, to acquire debentures and guarantee
payment of its indebtedness. It seems to
21

follow as a matter of course that they should
have such a right in order to carry on the
business.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved that the,
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was then read the third time and passed.

TRANSMISSION OF TIMBER BILL.

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL introduced Bill (S)
" An Act further to amend the Act respect-
ing Joint Stock Companies to construct works
and facilitate the transmission of timber
down rivers and streams." He said : — ^This
Bill merely changes the standard of measure-
ment from the old standard of board to cubic
measure. The change is made to prevent
the injustice which the old standard causes,
now that much smaller logs than formerly
are floated down streams, particularly the
Ottawa River. I may mention that it is
purely a domestic arrrangement of the lum-
bermen who own these works upon the rivers,
and it is introduced at their suggestion. It
does not reduce the rate of tolls ; it only re-
adjusts them in a more equitable manner.
Fuller explanations will be given at the
second reading or when the Bill is referred
to a Committee of the Whole House. I
move that the Bill be read the first time.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the first time.

THE HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

INQUIRY. '

Hon. Mr. BOULTON inquired :

If the Government have taken tiny steps towards
acquiring a port of call between Australia and
Canada and the Hawaiian Islands, in the event of the
foreign relations of those islands undergoing a
change ?

He said : — The reason I have put this ques-
tion upon the notice paper is on account of
the revolution that has taken place in
those islands during the past two or three
months, and the overthrow of the native
government of the past. Following imme-
diately upon the footsteps of that revolution
comes an application to the Grovemment at
Washington for the purpose of bringing
about the annexation of those islands to the
United States, and thereby yielding up
their former state of independence. It is, I

Digitized by

Google

322

The Hawaiian [SENATE] Islands.

consider, a very important question to the
people 6f Canada — the question of preserv-
ing the independence of those islands or
failing in the preservation of the independ-
ence of those islands, at any rate to secure
for the people of Canada a port of call that
will enable us to use that place as a calling
station or repair station, or for any purposes
which may be necessary to conduct our com-
merce on the Pacific Ocean without any re-
striction. Hon. gentlemen are aware that
Australia and New Zealand in the Southern
Pacific Ocean and the colonial possessions
on the c^ast of China, l>ear the same rela-
tion to the people of Canada that the State
of California bears to the State of New
York, or the State of Florida. We have
exactly the same reason for preserving our
communication with Australia and New
Zealand intact, as the people of California
have for preserving intact the communica-
tion between the states on the Pacific
Oce^n and the states on the Atlantic coast,
and it is with that knowledge that I desire
to impress upon this honourable House the
analogous position that we occupy in the
British Empire to that of the states of the
Union. Now, the argument has been used
to establish a precedent that Great Britain
has annexed many islands and ports of call
in the history of the past, notably
the islands of Malta and Cyprus, Gib-
raltar, Aden, the Island of Ascension
on the coast of Africa, the Island
of St. Helena, and so on in various parts of
the world. Why were they brought under
the protectorate of Great Britain ? It was
for the purposeof having convenient stations
in the highw^-y of commerce for British
trade between the various parts of the em-
pire. There is one thing, however, that is
worthy of being brought to the notice of this
honourable House, and that is whenever the
people of Great Britain annexed any of those
islands or ports of call for the purpose of
protecting her commerce. Great Britain al-
ways kept those ports perfectly free. Free
trade prevails there and free access to
those ports ; the same benefit was accorded
to all foreign nations who used those ports
of call, exactly the same conditions were
accorded and the same advantages were
conferred upon foreign nations as Great
Britain granted to her own subjects and
in that respect no jealousy arose in the
acquisition of such islands and ports of call.
This brought forth a notable remark from

the celebrated statesman Bismarck at the
Berlin Treaty, when the discussion of the
acquisition of Cyprus or when the Turkish
convention which gave the Island of Cyprus
to the people of Great Britain, was under
discussion : Bismarck stated that when
Great Britain opened out a i^w port or took
possession of any portion of territory in the
world that territory was made safe and free for
all nations and protection to life and property
aflForded, therefore he said it is for the bene-
fit of the commerce of the world that Great
Britain should take upon herself the respon-
sibility of utilizing Cyprus or any other
port. In that respect, the position of Great
Britain in taking possession of ports such as
I have described, is not analogous to the posi-
tion that is now being asked by the new
Government of Hawaii for the Government
of the United States to assume in taking the
Hawaiian Islands, for the ports and trade of
the United States are held as close preserves
for the trade of the United States only
to —

Hon. Mr. POWER— If the hon. gentle-
man will excuse Die, it does not appear that
the United States propose to take possession-
It looked that way a month ago but it does
not appear so now.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Not at present I
will grant, but it does not always do to give
up a just cause simply because there may be
a change in the condition or procedure in
relation to that cause. I wish to go on and
show exactly what has been done and what
is now being done in regard to them. As I
said before, these Hawaiian Islands are soli-
tary beacons in the vast expanse of ocean be-
tween Australia and British Columbia ; there
is no port of call within 2,000 miles of the
Hawaiian Islands on the way to Australia.
It is on the direct line between Australia and
British Columbia, which is only about 250
miles further than from San Francisco. Then
agahi in the event of a canal being cut across
the peninsula at Nicaragua, the Panama
Canal having failed, and which I believe may
not be very far distant in the future, in con-
ducting our communication by water between
the port of Montreal and British Columbia
we will require to make use of that canal, and
in developing our water communication with
China and Japan from our Atlantic ports,
the Hawaiian Islands are on the direct route
between Nicaragua, or whatever port may

Digitized by

Google

The Hawaiian [MARCH 17. 1898] Islands.

323

eventually be established there and China
or Japan. That shows of what importance
these Islands are to Canada, and of course to
Great Britain and Australia, quite as much
as they are to the people of the United
States, and for that reason I maintain that it
is desirable to draw the attention of the Gov-
ernment to these facts. Now, hon. gentlemen,
I will read to you Article I. of the treaty
that it was proposed to enter into by the
present revolutionary Government of the
Islands, with the Government of the United
States, which however, as the hon. member
from Halifax says, has been withdrawn :

Article 1. The government of the Hawaiian
Islands hereby cedes, from the date of exchange of
the ratifications of this treaty, absolutely and with-
out reserve to the United States, forever, all rights
of sovereignty of whatsoever kind in and over the
Ha^^iian Islands and their dependencies, renounc-
ing in favour of the United States every sovereign
right of which, as an independent nation, it is now
possessed, and henceforth said Hawaiian Islands
and every island and key thereto appertaining and
each and every portion thereof shall neeome and be
an integral part of the territory of the United
States.

That is the treaty now proposed by the
present Government of the Hawaiian Islands,
but withdrawn from consideration by the
President of the United States.

The United States negotiated a treaty in
1849— article I. sets forth : " There shall be
perpetual amity between the United States
and the King of the Hawaiian Islands, etc.'^

That treaty was supplemented by a treaty
in 1875, which extended reciprocal arrange-
ments and specified certain articles of com-
merce which should be admitted free by both
countries for seven years, terminable there-
after on notice. Then the treaty of 1884
extended the term of the treaty of 1876 for
seven years more, terminable thereafter on
•one year's notice, and the exclusive right was
granted in 1884 to enter Pearl Harbour and
maintain there a coaling and repair station
during the existence of the treaty. Now
these are the treaties which have been
entered into between the United States and
the Government of the Hawaiian Islands. I
quote this, hon. gentlemen, in order to show
so far as the present condition and so far as
the present change of government in Honolulu
is concerned that that treaty is being broken
by a revolution, no doubt brought about for
the purpose of annexing those Islands to
the United States. Now, the treaty that
Great Britain had with the Hawaiian
21i

Islands which was negotiated in 1851 exists
still to-day and has been in force since 1851.
I quote the first two articles.

Art. 1. There shall be perpetual friendship be-
tween Her Majesty, the Queen of the United King-
dom of Great Britain and Ireland, h^r heirs and
successors, and the King of the Hawaiian Islands,
his heirs and successors, and between their respec-
tive subjects.

2. There shall be, between all the Dominions of
Her Britannic Majesty t^nd the Hawaiian Islands,
a reciprocal freedom of commerce. The subjects
of each of the two contracting parties, respectively,
shall have liberty freely and securely to come,
with their ships and cargoes, to all places, ports
and rivers in the territories of the other, where
trade with other nations is permitted ; they may
remain and reside in any part of the said territories
respectively, and hire and occupy houses and ware-
houses ; and may trade by wholesale or retail, in
all kinds of produce, manufactures and merchan-
dise of lawful commerce, enjoying the same ex-
emptions and privileges as native subjects, and
subject always to the same laws and established
customs as native subjects.

In like manner the ships of war of each contract-
ing party, respectively, snail have liberty to enter
into all narbours, rivers, and places withm the ter-
ritories of the other, to which the ships of war of
other nations, are, or may be, permitted to come,
to anchor there, and to remain and refit ; subject
always to the laws and regulations of the two
countries respectively.

The stipulations of this Article do not apply to
the coasting trade, which each contracting party
reserves to itself, respectively, and shall regulate
according to its own laws.

Now, hon. gentlemen will see by article 2
the interest which the people of Canada
have in the maintenance of that treaty with
the Government of the Hawaiian Islands.
In 1851 that treaty was entered into by
Great Britain for herself and the whole of
her dominions, and in the event of any
change taking place in the foreign relations
of thefee islands that treaty would become
null and void, and the protection it afforded
to the commerce of Canada between our
ports and Australia and New Zealand would
be to that extent threatened. It might be
threatened for the reason that we are compet-
ing with the people of the United States
for the ocean traffic on the Pacific; we
are competing for the trade to Australia,
working together under the British consti-
tution. The fact is, if these islands were
annexed under the constitution of the United
States they would be admitted to statehood
and would possess sovereign powers. Those
are powers outside of the national will of the
Government of the United States and if the
Government of the Hawaiian Islands should
come under the influence of American

Digitized by

Google

324

The Hawaiian [SENATE] Islands.

citizens in those islands, that influence might
be Used to the detriment of Canadian compe-
tition in the Pacific Ocean for trade within
the bounds of the British Empire, for
trade with Australia, New Zealand, or
colonial ports in China. If we have
any hope or ambition to extend our com-
merce beyond the limits of Canada by
adopting a different commercial policy, a
policy of f i*ee trade such as has developed the
commerce of Great Britain, it seems that we
should look upon the loss of an independent
station or port of the importance this is with
the most jealous eye and jealous care in order
to protect the commerce of Canada whatever
it may grow to. Now, hon. gentlemen, I
wish to point out that this movement for
annexation has been very largely brought
about in consequence of the policy of the
United States with regard to the reciprocal
arrangements as to sugar duties. Hon.
gentlemen will recollect that under the
McKinley Bill in 1890 the duty was taken
off sugar. In 1876 a treaty was entered into
between the Government of the Hawaiian
Islands and the United States for the pur-
pose of admitting sugar free into the United
States on reciprocal terms. That arrange-
ment was made and the people of the Sand-
wich Islands had the right to send sugar to
the United States upon more favourable
terms than other sugar-producing countries.
American planters went in there, and that
developed the growth of sugar in those
islands and increased the production to a
very great extent, reaching in the present
day to about 130,000 tons. The reciprocal
treaties negotiated under the McKinley Bill
first of all threw open to the world the right
to sell sugar in the United States market and
then again restricted it to those countries
that entered into reciprocity treaties. This
led to the negotiation of treaties with Brazil,
San Domingo, Spain, etc., and all the sugar-
producing countries : it made "however,
those concessions which were obtained in
1876, and renewed again in 1884, of no
value to the Hawaiian Islands ; in order to
protect her own citizens from the cheapening
of the cost of producing sugar by drawing
all the sugar-producing countries to the
United States to sell their sugar, which
brought down the price to a very great ex-
tent, and in order to protect their own
citizens, they gave a sugar bounty of two
cents a pound on all sugar produced in the
United States. This I have no doubt is one

of the leading causes that brought about the
revolution in the Hawaiian Islands, for the
purpose of bringing those islands into the
boundaries of the United States, and by an-
nexation to the United States obtaining two
cents per lb. of sugar bounties under the
McKinley Bill. It would have cost $6,000,000
to do that. That would be the price the
people of the United States would have to
pay if they brought those islands in under
the treaty by annexation : that is what it
would be worth to sugar interests in the islands.
The same influence is no doubt operating
in Cuba and San Domingo to-day. Under
the McKinley Act a reciprocity treaty has
been negotiated with all the sugar producing
countries, and it is quite possible that the
same influences which were used to bring
about a change in the Government of the
Sandwich Islands, may be used to bring
about a change in some of those West
India Islands with all the trade restrictions
of the present commercial policy of the
United States. Whatever the cause has
been there is the fact that we have to look
at ; there is the influence that has been
bringing about the change in those islands
in the Pacific Ocean taking from the people
of Canada and Great Britain the aidvan-
tages they possessed under the treaties to
which I have already referred anfl putting
those islands under the control of a people
who may be disposed to restrict and thwart
the competition of Canada on the Pacific
highway. When you realize that those
islands in that vast expanse of ocean some
five or six thousand miles wide, are the
only places where a ship can call to get coal
or for repairs or anything else, it brings
forcibly to our attention the necessity for
looking this matter straight in the face,
and judging whether it is not wise for our
Government to press on the attention of^
the Imperial authorities the condition of
affairs as they exist to-day. I should be
the last to advocate any interposition that
might interfere with a more beneficent state
of civilization on any islands, but at the
same time when a change is being sought
for, now is the time to express ourselves
and point out our interests in the matter
to the Imperial Government which con-
trols and protects our international inte-
rests. I should like to quote one or two
statements from a book that I have here
written by Captain Mahan of the United
States Navy. It is entitled "The Influ-

Digitized by

Google

The Hawaiian [MARCH 17, 1893] Islands.

325

ence of Sea Power on History." He opens
. his work in the first chapter by saying : —

The first and most obvious light in which the sea
pi-esents itself from the political and social point
of view is that of a great highway ; or better,
perhaps, of a wide common, over which men may
pass in all directions, but on which some well-worn
paths show that controlling reasons have led them
to choose certain lines of travel rather than others.
These lines of travel are called trade routes ; and
the reasons which have determined them are to be
souffht in the history of the world.

>iotwithstanding all the familiar and unfamiliar
dangers of the sea, both travel and traffic by water
have always been easier and cheaper than by land.
The commercial greatness of Holland was due not
only to her shipping at sea, but also to the nume-
rous tranquil water-ways which gave such cheap
and easy access to her own interior and to that of
Germany.

This is the view of a prominent naval
officer of the United States — that the sea is
a common open to the trade of the world.
It should be our policy to preserve that
common free and independent for Canadian
and British commerce, free and independent
for the commerce of the world, and not allow
any portion of it to be barred against the
free developement of the trade of the empire.
I would again quote from an article in " The
Forum " by the same naval officer, Captain
Mahan, who is evidently a very intelligent
and distinguished gentleman. Referring to
the Hawaiian Islands, he says : —

To have *a central position such as this, and to
be alone, having no rival and admitting no alter-
native throughout an extensive tract, are condi-
tions that at once fix the attention of the strate-
gist— it may l>e added of the statesmen of commerce
likewise.

You can see what great importance he,
as a naval officer, and professional man,
attaches to these islands in the Pacific
Ocean and the same arguments that he is
advancing there for their acquisition by the
United States are arguments for the people
of Canada to maintain the independence of
those Islands or at all events to maintain a
port of call for Canadian vessels on that
highway. Here is another quotation of
Captain Mahan s in the article in the Forum
I referred to as follows : —

How much poorer would the world have been
had Eufflishmen heeded the cautious hesitancy that
now bids us reject every ad\ ance beyond our shore-
lines ! And can any one doubt that a cordial, if
unformulate<l, understanding between the two chief
states of English tradition, to spread freely,
without mutual jealousy and in mutual support,
would greatly increase the world's sum of nappi-
ness ?

I consider that, approached in that spirit,
the annexation of those Islands would pro-
bably lose a great deal of the danger that
we have to fear in their acquisition by the
United States but, as I said before, unfortu-
nately when those Islands come under the
Government of the United States we are
then liable to be thwarted in our competition
by many means well known to steam-ship
companies or sugar interests or other corpo-
rations who have their individual or perso-
nal interests in view, and are not controlled
as others states would be nearer home. We
have an instance of that in the Behring Sea
arbitration now going on. That arbitration
is the result of an eflFort on the part of those
who conduct sealing operations as a corpora-
tion in the Behring Sea to restrict Canadian
competition in catching seals on the high
seas. So that if w^e want to avoid difficul-
ties such as have led to this very arbitration,
we . should, before those islands have lost
their independence and have become a
portion of the United States, protect
our interests in order that a port of call may
be insured to us. We all know that Great
Biitain is slow to move where the interests
of the UnitedStates are concerned. We are so
closely identified with one another and have
so much in common that where the interests
of the United States are concerned Great
Britain is far more slow to move than if
another foreign nation were taking the same
stepvS. More than that, the Sandwich
Islands do not possess to the people of Great
Britain the same importance that they pos-
sess to the people of Canada. Except com-
ing up from Cape Horn or going backwards
and forwards between the port now used by
the railway across the Isthmus of Panama,
and the China and Japan Seas, England
does not attach as much importance to the
Sandwich Islands as to the Suez Canal or
other eastern channels of commerce which
guard Imperial interests on their route, but
in Canada, if we want to develop trade with
Australia and closely ally ourselves by cable
or a steam-ship company with that great con-
tinent and develop our trade in that direc-
tion, it can only be done by having an inde-
pendent position in those Islands, in the
event of their passing under the control of
the United States Government, in order to
develop our own interests and our own in-
dustries by the competition which the ocean
traffic of the Pacific aflFords. I may say that
so far as the present is concerned, as the

Digitized by

Google

326

The Hawaiian [SENATE] hlatxds.

hon. member from Halifax has already stated,
that treaty has been withdrawn by the
President. It has been followed by a Com-
mission which has been sent by the United
States Government to Honolulu in order to
inquire into the conditions which brought
about the revolution there and caused the
American flag to be hoisted over the Gov-
ernment buildings of those Islands, with, no
doubt, the propriety of taking down the
American flag and leaving those Islands
free and independent until, at all events,
they have become satisfied that by a vote of
the people, uninfluenced by any foreign power
they desire that annexation should be carried
out. I think, that under all the circum-
stances of the case and seeing the importance
that those islands are to the people of Can-
ada, solitary beacons in that vast expanse of
3,000 miles with not a single island of any
description between them and our ports in
British Columbia, it becomes the imperative
duty of the Government to represent to tbe
Imperial Government who control the inter-
national relations of the Empire, what the
interests of Canada are in the matter.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I hope the
committee now appointed on the rules of the
House will so define the rights of meu^bers
of this body about asking questions as to
forbid debates on inquiries. We know in
the House of Commons a member may
simply ask a question, hardly being allowed
to make an explanation. That was the rule
adopted in this House, but unfortunately
it has not been strictly complied with, and
now a member can put a question on the
paper, presumably for the simple purpose of
eliciting an answer, and spring a debate on
the subject to which it refers. No doubt I
am now transgressing the rule myself in
making these remarks, but we have it on the
authority of the hon. member from Rich-
mond that great latitude should be allowed
to members asking questions. That latitude
has, however, been extended further than is
reasonable. I am not sorry that my hon.
friend has opened up this question. I was
going to ask — cui bono — what good it
would do, but after all it may lead to
beneficial results. The Minister of Trade
and Commerce cannot have his eyes shut
to the importance of keeping Honolulu
or Pearl Harbour open as a port of call for
our vessels on the Pacific Ocean. The
subject is one of growing importance. Our

trade on the Pacific is yet in its infancy.
Ere long we may reasonably expect that we
will exchange products with our sister colo-
nies in Australasia. On that vast expanse
of ocean, there is but one group of islands
where our vessels could find a port of call,
north of the equator. If those islands are
to be annexed by the United States, it
should be well understood that it is done
with the concurrence of the people of
Hawaiia. The whole subject of the recent
revolution is being investigated by a Com-
mission sent from the United States, but it
should be borne in mind that we also have
large interests in those Islands. We have
about 1,500 of a population there, while the
United States have about 2,000. There .are
some 15,000 Chinese some 13,000 Japanese
and some 8 or 10,000 Portugese. The assi-
milation of such a mixed population is a
greater contract, I should think, than the
United States would care to undertake. As
an hon. gentleman remarked, when England
assumes the protection or the possession of
any Island, it has always been open as a
port of call for the whole world, but that is
not always the case when important islands
fall into the hands of foreign nations. I am
quite sure that our Minister of Trade and
Commerce is alive to the interests of the
country, as he and the Government always
are, and that he has already represented to
the British Government the deep and growing
interest that Canada, has in maintaining
the independence of the Hawaiian Kingdom.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) I do
not think it would be proper for this House
to deal with a purely Imperial question. The
hon. gentleman who asked the question has
advised the Government to press this matter
on the attention of the Imperial authorities.
How can our Government do so? They
know little or nothing about it ; they have
no agent in the country. We have no trade,
at present, with those Islands. They lie
3,000 miles from the coast of British Co-
lumbia. At one time we had a trade, but
the treaty of 1875 giving reciprocal trade
with the United States shut us out. In
former years we used to get sugar, salt and
molasses from the Sandwich Islands. Now
we do not get a. ton of freight from there in
a year. They used to take our timber, fish
and products of that kind, and we had a
large market there for salt salmon. That
was all cut off by the treaty with the United

Digitized by

Google

The Hawaiian [MARCH 17, 1893] Islands.

327

States in 1875. If there was a treaty in
1851 with England that gave us equal rights
with our neighbours in that market, how is
it that she has allowed that treaty to be over-
ridden by the United States treaty as it has
been? Now, with regard to England's connec-
tion with those islands, for the last 100 years
she has had ships of war in those waters.
She has a consul-general, admirals, captains
— officers of intelligence, at those Islands,
and yet in the face of all that, no attempt
has been made by the mDther country to
prevent the annexation of those islands by
the United States. I caunot understand
their allowing this to go on without a pro-
test. By right of discovery if any power
should claim the group England should have
them. Capt. Cooke discovered them in 1 777.
Britain ought to have a larger interest in
the islands than the United States have,
but for all that, there is not a hand moved
by the Imperial Government in this matter.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That is what I
want them to do.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD— We cannot
do it. If they are satisfied with the present
condition of things, we must be satisfied. It
would almost amount to presumption if we
weretooffer advice to the Government of Eng-
land about the ownership of a group of islands
lying 3,000 miles from our shores. Although
England discovered those Islandsandhad this
connection with them all those years, yet
the Americans made the trade of those
islands with their whaling fleets. About 50
years ago there were few white people on the
islands and little or no trade. The whaling
fleets going up to the Arctic Ocean wintered
on the islands and supplies of all kinds,
causing merchants to embark in trade and
commence business there. Banks had to be
(^ned as ships drew bills on different places
and this built up Honolulu. I have visited
thoee islands. They are very beautiful,
the soil is rich and the climate salubrious ;
whatever country gets them will secure a
rich prize. The exports of those islands
amounted to about fourteen millions of
dollars last year. The imports were small,
amounting to only about five millions. The
poptdation numbers about 87,000. At Ho-
nolulu there are several churches, and there
are 168 schools on the islands attended by
10,000 pupils. Altogether there are thirteen
islands eight of which are inhabited — five

are small and not inhabited. Honolulu is
in a highly civilized condition. They have
electric lights and tramways. I cannot see
that this Government can make any move
whatever in the matter. "We have lost our
trade through the treaty of 1875 with the
United States, who will continue to hold it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Although slightly
out of order, I am .disposed to say a word or
two in response to a remark made by the
hon. gentleman from British Columbia. The
hon. gentleman appears to regret, as did the
gentleman who asked the question, that
England had not taken more decided action
in connection with the Sandwich Islands.
I am glad to see that England is beginning
to be a good deal shrewder than she has
been in the past. If England had expressed
any strong objection to the probable annexa-
tion of these islands to the United States,
the treaty which President Harrison sub-
mitted to the Senate of the United States,
I have no doubt would have been ratified,
and the Sandwich Islands would have been
part of the great republic by this time. It
is England's refusal to express any opinion
on the matter at all that has left matters as
they are and has given a chance for the
sober second thought of the people
of the United States, to realize that
the Sandwich Islands would l>e a sort of
white elephant which they are better with-
out.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— In reply to the
question put by the hon. gentleman from
Marquette, I can only repeat what was
stated in the House of Commons by the
First Minister (Sir John Thompson) when a
somewhat similar question, wjthout debate,
was put to him by one of the members of
that body. That is, that the Government
has not directly had any negotiations with
the Imperial Government upon the question
of the annexation of the Hawaiian Islands to
the United States. They have had corres-
pondence, however, in reference to the cable
which has been advocated for some time
past, to get authority to land upon those
shores wires in making direct cable connec-
tion between British Columbia and Aus-
tralia. That is the extent to which the
correspondence has gone at the present
moment. I shall, however, not fail to for-
ward, through our High Commissioner, a
copy of the debate which has taken place

Digitized by

Google

328

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

here to-day. Although this country is to a
very great extent interested in obtaining a
coaling station should the islands be annexed
to any foreign power, I confess I am fully in
accord with the remarks made by the hon.
gentleman from Halifax. It is question-
able, in my mind, whether this debate will
not to a very great extent influence some
United States statesman in endeavouring, if
possible, to get possession of those islands.
They may come to the conclusion that they
are of such great importance to Canada that
they had better deprive us of any privileges
and destroy our trade, if possible, in the
future, should we attempt to have
direct communication between British
Columbia and 'Australia. However, it has
been pointed out that the present administra-
tion in the United States decline to even
justify, let alone ratify, the action of their
representative at Honolulu. I could not
help smiling, however, when my hon. friend
from Marquette said that, if we would
adopt that free trade policy, of which he is
such an ardent admirer, in this country and
which has developed to such a great extent
the trade of Great Britain, we should
derive equal advantages therefrom. He
followed that immediately with the decla-
ration that all these difliculties which have
presented themselves to his mind have arisen
on account of the partial free trade policy
adopted by the United States. The fact
that they put sugar on the free list, which
would give to the planters and shippers of
raw sugar on these islands some $6,000,000
were they part and parcel of the United
States, is the cause of the difliculties that have
arisen in that country, so that if Canada is
to be punished and we are to suffer either in
our trade or by any other means, it is just
on account of ihe free trade policy which has
be^n adopted so far as it affects sugar, with
the additional bounty which they propose to
give to the planters who raise sugar in that
country. That is one question that is inci-
dent to the whole trade policy of the coun-
try. It was absolutely necessary to the
United States, if they did not desire to des-
troy the whole planting industry in that
country, to adopt a system of bounty, which
led the thirteen or fourteen hundred Ame-
ricans who now inhabit those islands to
create a revolution and endeavour to have
the group annexed to the United States
that they might profit by the 2 cents a
pound additional. I congratulate the hon.

gentleman on answering himself on most
occasions when he advocates that free trade
nostrum of which he is so particularly fond.
I may add, from the present aspect of poli-
tical affairs in the United States, it is not
likely that they will push the annexation
of that country. If they do, I am quite con-
vinced that Great Britain, if she has not
lost her cunning, will look after her own
interests and ours also.

SPEAKER OF THE SENATE BILL.

DEBATE CONTINUED.

The order of the day b^ing called —

Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion of
the Hon. Mr. Angers for the second reading of Bill
(N) ** An Act respecting the Speaker of the
Senate. "

Hon. Mr. YIDAL said :— I trust that it
will not be considered presumptuous for me
as a layman to express the views which I
hold with reference to this important matter
which is under the consideration of the
House. I fully agree with the statements
of my hon. friend beside me that it is a very
important question, although I look at it
perhaps from a different point of view. I
think it is exceedingly desirable that the
matter should be very fully discussed, and
the Senate should have eveiy opportunity of
hearing what can be advanced on either side
in order that they may arrive at a safe and
wise conclusion. We have had the very
great advantage of having from eminent
jurists an opinion expressed on both sides of
the Question. On the part of the hon. intro-
ducer of the Bill, the Alinister of Agriculture,
and on the part of the hon. member from
Amherst, we have had placed before us very
good and sufficient reasons why the Bill should
l)e accepted by the House and should now have
its second reading,and we have also had in the
lucid and exhaustive remarks of my hon. friend
beside me the utmost that could be said
against the Bill being adopted by the House.
It would really seem as if it were trespass-
ing on the time and patience of the House
for one like myself, a layman, to occupy any
time with remarks upon it, but I trust the
House will excuse me for expressing my
opinions ; and I think perhaps my observations
may be interesting, if not of so great value
as those coming from men experienced in
legal questions. Now, I differ very much
from my hon. friend beside me as to the con-
clusions at which he arrives, from the pre-

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 17, 1893] Senate Bill

329

mises which he has given to us. With most
of the statements which he has made as to
actual facts and occurrences I fully concur,
but I do not agree with the inferences and
conclusions which he has drawn from those
statements. For convenience in discussion
I might divide my remarks into three heads,
thus giving three reasons why I think the
Bill is a desirable Bill to be adopted by the
House. I would say in the first instance
I think that we have the right to pass it
from the inherent power which the House
possesses to preserve its own existence. Then
again from the authority given by the
original British North America Act. Again
in 1875, by the amendment of the 18th
section of the original Act — a threefold cord,
— and in my judgment any one of these rea-
sons-would be sufficient to justify the House
in adopting the Bill which has been presented
to us.

Hon: Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. VH)AL — As to the inconve-
nience which my hon. friend has mentioned ;
I believe there is a very general agreement
in the House, as to the inconvenience of
our present position in this matter. I do
not myself think inconvenience is a
sufficiently strong word : I think it is an
exceedingly awkward and dangerous position
we are in with reference to it, inasmuch as
we are exposed, as the hon. Minister of
Agriculture clearly showed in the few
remarks he made on introducing the Bill,
not merely to a slight inconvenience, but to
risking the stopping perhaps of very impor-
tant business which might be requiring the
attention of the House : so that the interests
of the country might very seriously suffer :
and I think in this point of. view it is ex-
ceedingly desirable that the evil should be
examined into without delay and the best
possible remedy applied to it. Now, with
reference to the inherent power which I
claim we possess, I may say in the lirst in-
stance that while my hon. friend beside me
drew a marked distinction between the
power conferred by special acts or given by
special authority, and this inherent power,
it struck me that, after having very fully
expatiated upon it, he in the concluding
remarks which he made with reference to it,
really set aside and counteracted every
thing which he had said before in reference
to it : because it will be remembered in

giving his final illustration with respect to
it, he took the House of Lords as the ex-
ample which we were to follow as far as we
could. While he showed to us very properly
and clearly that the appointment of the
Speaker of that House, the Chancellor, and also
of three or four deputy-speakers was made
by the Crown, he went on to show to us
that, in the event of it so happening that
neither the Chancellor nor any one of the
four deputies was present, the House had an
inherent right to put one of its members in
the Chair and go on with the business of the
House. Now that appeared to me to be
a giving up of the whole question. In the
very instance which he gave there was,
evidently, the inherent right, in the absence
of any special provision, to take the step as
necessary for the very preservation of the
House and the carrying on of its business.
Now, I think we have shown that we in this
country have, though not professedly, yet
actually, recognized the existence of that
principle in the action which has been taken
by this House and Parliament on former
occasions. We have had the instances
mentioned here which occurred several times
in reference to our Speaker, when he from
some cause or another was unable to occupy
the chair and the business of the House was
interfered with. It has been spoken of as
though the selecting of a person to occupy the
Chair temporarily, and not to enter upon any
real business in the House, was a different
thing from the point which is now before us, of
officially electing a man to represent the
Speaker and investing him with the Speaker's
powers, privileges and authority. I cannot
myself see any difference. The very fact
that this House when it has met underthose
circumstances, without a Speaker, has chosen
one of its members to occupy that Chair is to
me sufficient to show that it has recog-
nized that it had an inherent power to pre-
serve its own existence, and in this way to
prolong it and fit it for duty. It does not
matter how much or how little business was
done by it. Universal consent does not
touch the (juestion. I hold that in these
case* there was the universal recognition by
the House of the fact that it had this inhe-
rent power to appoint a temporary Speaker :
when it appointed a person to that position
it might be well understood by all parties
that no business would be gone on with, but
simply to allow a motion for adjournment;
but I should like to know when a person is

Digitized by

Google

330

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

called to the Chair whether it is possible to
limit his acts.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— Oh, yes.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — He is there to dis-
charge all the duties of that Chair, and if he
were not vested with that power, he could
not put a motion to adjourn. The very fact
that he has the power to put a motion to the
House shows that the House has the inhe-
rent power to continue its existence by put-
ting a person in the Chair when by any
accident that Chair might be vacant. I
think the action this House has taken on
former occasions shows that we really in our
inner consciousness, recognize that we had
the power and that we really did exercise that j
power on these several occasions when the '
temporaly Speaker was appointed. Now |
with reference to the example which we have
in the House of Commons' action on that
point, we know that they act in one sense
upon a more specific authority then we do,
but at the same time the principle is recog-
nized there, and their action, if it is looked
into, will be seen to justify the action now
proposed to be taken here. However, I
shall come to that when I speak of the
power which I conceive is conferred upon us
by the very statutes which are quoted as
limiting our power and preventing us from
taking this step. I would first refer to the
action of the House of Commons in 1885.
I do this as an illustration of the principle
which I announced of the House hav-
ing an inherent power l)eyond that con-
ferred upon it by the British North America
Act. Now, the original British North
America Act, as will be found by reference
to section 47, made provision for the House
of Commons to meet an emergency of this
kind, until the Parliament of Canada other-
wise provided, in case of the absence of the
Speaker for a period of forty-eight consecu-
tive hours : the House may elect any of its
members to act as Speaker, and that acting
Speaker shall have power, «fec. Now, in
1885, the House of Commons took action,
but did they confine themselves to the speci-
fic provisions of this clause ? They went on
beyond it ; they assumed a power and exer-
cised an authority which was not conferred
upon them in this clause : for here it is the
House that is empowered to choose one of
its members to occupy that position ? Turn
for a moment to the Act passed in 1885 by

the House of Commons, and you will find
they did not consider themselves bound by
that provision. What did they enact there f
That whenever the Speaker of the House of
Commons from illness or other cause finds it
necessary to leave the Chair during any part
of the sittings on any day, he may call upon
the Chairman of Committees, or in his
absence upon any member of the House of
Commons to take the Chair. Now what
more would hon. gentlemen require than
that ? Does that not show that the House
of Commons, or rather Parliament, for we
are partly the makers of that law, it was not
the House of Commons only ; it was the
Parliament of Canada that so acted, and
although the power was actually restricted
to the House appointing a person to fill the
vacancy, we the Canadian Parliament en-
acted that the Speaker should have the
power to call upon the Deputy-Speaker or
any other member in his absence to fill the
Chair. Can there be a clearer case produced
than this to prove that we notonly possess,but
have exercised the power to fill a vacancy of
this kind : and hon. gentlemen must see that
the possession of this inherent power is actu-
ally necessary for our very existence as a
Senate or deliberative body. We must have
it. We have exercised it by acting as
though it had been conferred upon us by
statute. Now passing to the second point —
although I think the first one is sufficient to
justify the present course, — passing to the
second point that the British North America
Act gave the power, I am merely repeating
an argument which has been strongly and
unanswerably advanced by the Minister of
Agriculture in introducing the Bill ; that in
the Olst section of that Act we find these
words " it shall be lawful for the Queen by
and with the advice and consent of the
Senate and House of Commons to make laws
for the peace, order and good government of
Canada.*' Now that covers a good deal of
the ground. You see what the Act further
says, it goes on to say " in relation to all
matters." Surely that covers a wide field —
in relation to all matters, with only this
exception, matters which are by this same
Act exclusively given to the provincial
legislatures. That is the only exception.
All matters except those which are by this
Act exclusively given to the Provincial
Legislatures may therefore be acted upon by
the Parliament of Canada. Bear that in
mind — to make laws — it is to be done by

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the fMARCH 17, 1893J Senate Bill.

331

statute — to make laws for the peace, order
and good government in relation to all
matters not coming within the class of sub-
jects by this Act assigned exclusively to the
Legislatures of the Provinces. Now T hold
that it cannot be denied that this specific Act
which we propose to authorize to be done by
the Bill now before us, is just one of those
which must be included in the " all matters
necessary to the order and good government of
the country ;" and therefore, under that
section, I believe we clearly have the power
to do it. I am quite well aware that the
argument has been advanced that the la>y
was passed in 1867, and it has not been
recognized that it gave this power by the
Ministers of Justice and members of Parlia-
ment. It seems to have been lost sight of,
but I cannot help that ; it was there and
might have been acted upoii. Many of you
* will remember that I have for some years
frequently spoken privately with reference
to this very matter, and contended that we
ought to take some step with reference tc
making provision foi^ such a contingency as
might arise; but I have always felt that
under the circumstances, knowing that I
could not claim any great acquaintance with
legal matters, and, having opposed to me
the opinions of the best and highest legal
authorities in this House, I always felt it
was right and proper that I should not urge
my views about it. I never had an oppor-
tunity of speaking on this subject to the
House when in session ; but when I have
the countenance, as at present, of some of
the most eminent legal gentlemen in the
country, I am the more emboldened to
speak my views on the subject. So much
for the British North America Act of 1867.
Now, the Imperial Act of 1875 has also, I
think, a very direct bearing upon this ques-
tion, and it is well that we should see what
is given in the preamble, the ** whereas," as
the reason for the Act being passed. This
is the Imperial Act, chapter 38-39 Vic,
known as the Parliamentary Act of 1875, of
Great Britain. We find in that Act : —

And whereas doubts have arisen with regard to
the power of defining by an Act of the Parliament
of Canada in pursuance of the said section, the said
privileges, powers or immunities ; and it is ex-
pedient to remove such doubts, &c.

And therefore to quiet these doubts and
make sure that the ParHament of Canada
had power to define and say what were the
privileges, powers and immunities of the two

houses, the Parliament of Canada has been
given specific power to do this. We find
the following in the enacting clause. I will
not read all the words, simply the sub-
stance : —

That the privileges, immunities and powers to
be held and enjoyed by the Senate shall oe such as
from time to time are defined by Act of Parliament
of Canada. The powers— whatever powers there
are — are to be defined by Act of Parliament of
Canada, and the only restriction as to the limit of
power conferred by such Act or to the extent to
which this privilege or power may be exercised, is
that it shall not confer any privileges, immunities
or powers exceeding those at the passing of such
Act held by the Commons House of Parliament of
Great Britain.

There is the only limitation. The Par-
liament of Canada may define, may say what
are the powers of the House. Clearly and
distinctly the only limitation is that they
shall not exceed the powers enjoyed by the
Commons House of Parliament of Great
Britain. Can hon. gentlemen venture to
say that at that time or that at any time
the House of Commons of Great Britain had
never the right to call a member to the Chair,
in the absence of the Speaker. It has always
enjoyed the right and maintained the right
the inalienable right inherent in it, and there-
fore, I consider that this Act rightly under-
stood, passed for the very purpose of defining
in an unmistakable manner the extent of
the powers which we enjoy as a branch of
the Legislature, clearly and distinctly shows
that we have the power by the Act of our
Parliament to define these powers, and that
the only limit is that they shall not exceed
those powers possessed in the Commons
House of Parliament at that time.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN. —Has it power to do
anything else ?

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— Yes, but not as to
certain things which are specified in the
Act; it would not have the power to elect
its own Speaker : that is clearly the prero-
gative of the Crown, and I am quite sure in
any interpretation of the law, that item
would be held to be outside the powers given
to the Parliament of Canada which I have
referred to and quoted. I think either of
the three sources mentioned would give suffi-
cient authority for taking the step now pro-
posed to- be taken in the Bill now before
us for its second reading. My hon. friend
remarks as to the necessity or desirability of
not hurrying this matter, considering it care-

Digitized by

Google

332

Speaker of the [SEN" ATE] Senate Bill.

fully, taking a great deal of time over it, that
there was no urgency about it. I differ from
this view to some extent. I think the ques-
tion has l)een before us for a long time, and
we have often thought of it and considered
it, and therefore as a matter of time for con-
sideration, I do not think it needed it. But
then it struck me with respect to this ques-
tion of urgency that this is a very appro-
priate time to do it. It is urgent that it
should be done at once : and why 1 We are
approaching the end of the session. We have
every reason to expect and sincerely hope
that our Hon. Speaker will hold this posi-
tion for the remaining time that we will be
here : but if we pass this Bill it does not be-
come law until it receives the assent of the
House of Commons and the assent of His
Excellency representing the Queen : and
therefore it does not come into any imme-
diate operation. I may mention the ordeals
through which it has to pass. It is well
to bear this in mind. After passing the
ordeal in this House of a searching in-
vestigation and severe comments, it has
to go through the ordeal of its passage
through the House of Commons. There are
eminent lawyers there, men well acquainted
with the Acts I have referred to, and the
principles upon which the government of
the country is conducted, and if it is found
there that we have passed a Bill which they
think is exceeding the powers of Parliament
to piiss, it would be rejected there, and there
would i)e an end of it ; but supposing — which
I think is very likely — that they would
recognize" the reiisonableness of the action
which is proposed to be taken, even then it
is not law until His Excellency the Governor-
General, has assented to it, and this, in my
judgment — I may be wrong — would be one
of the cases, if he had any doubts in his
own mind about its encroaching on the pre-
rogative of the Crown, which he could with
the utmost propriety withhold his assent
from, until he could communicate with the
home authorities and ascertain their view
with respect to it ; and therefore, I see no
harm in* our passing this bill in the fear of
it encroaching on the prerogative of the
Crown. I think the prerogative of the Crown
would be sufficient^' guarded by the course
which would have to be followed. Allow me
to say I share most fully with my hon. friend
beside me in the appreciation of the advant-
ages and privileges of the Crown possessing
the prerogative which it does, and I would

certainly not seek to encroach upon that
prerogative in the least. I thmk it is
essential to the stability of our Grovemment
and the well being of our people that the
prerogative should be maintained and not
encroached upon. Now, we will suppose the
bill receives the sanction of His Excellency
the Governor-General, it has still another
ordeal : there is still the power of the home
Government to veto it.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— No, disallow it.

Hon. Mr. YIDAL— To disallow it ; so
that it would go home to the old country and
the Crown lawyers, men of the highest legal
position in the Empire, would have an oppor-
tunity of forming a judgment upon it. If it
was found to be an encroachment upon the
privileges of the Crown it would be simply
disallowed and there would be an end of it
and no harm would be done ; whereas if we
do not piiss the Bill, I think it is generally
admitted, something should be done in
order to get rid of this difficulty in which
we are placed in this matter, and that if we
do not adopt this plan some other course
must be pursued. Of course we know that
by address to the Crown there might be an
alteration in the Imperial Act obtained, if
required, but contending as I do that the
British North America Act has given to this
Parliament the full authority and full power,
twice repeated in the Act, to make the pro-
visions embodied in this Bill, I think we
should be perfectly justified in giving the
Bill its second reading. If hon. gentle-
men refer to the Act of 1885, providing for
the temporary absence of the Speaker of the
House of Commons it will be observed that
it is as similar in its terms to the present
Bill as the circumstances in the character
of the two houses will admit. It has just
the same provision that the Speaker may
call upon a member to occupy his position in
the event of his absence for a short time, or,
in the event of his not coming to the House,
being detained by a snow-storm or other
cause, that on the clerk notifying the House,
they would have the opportunity of fillinj^
the Chair for the time being, and at the same
time it is of course necessary that a person
occupying for a time the position of Speaker
should be vested with power and authority
to act as Speaker, and that acts done by him
should be thus made valid and binding :
otherwise a question might arise as to their

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 17, 1893] Senate Bill

333

being strictly in accordance with the law.
I think, therefore, that we cannot do better
than give the Bill its second reading. I have
no doubt the discussion will be further pro-
longed and more light thrown upon it, but
having taken the opportunity to put before
the House the opinion a layman forms on
the matter, I leave it with the House to
form their judgment, hoping that the Bill
will meet with approval.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — There are so very
many important and complex consideratione
connected with the subject matter of the bill
now before the House that I find it extremely
difficult to form a satisfactory judgment in
my own mind as to the course which we
ought to pursue. No one can possibly shut
his eyes to the very great inconveniences
which has been experienced in the past and
which may very possibly be experienced
again in the future in consequence of the
House not having the power to elect a gen-
tleman to fill the chair in the event of any-
thing occurring to the Speaker of the House.
Of course we stand in a different position to
the House of Commons, where they have a
Deputy -Speaker, inasmuch as the ordinary
business of this House is certainly not of
such a nature and the sittings of the House
are not so prolonged, except perhaps towards
the close of the session, that any gentleman
in an ordinary state of health would have
any difficulty in filling the position without
assistance. But apart altogether from any
question of assistance to the Speaker of this
House in presiding over its deliberations we
know that upon several occasions great incon-
venience has been experienced in consequence
of the House not having the power to appoint a
Deputy-Speaker to the Chair in the case of the
illness or unavoidable absence of the Speaker
himself. These instances have been already
alluded to by gentlemen who have spoken
before me and they are no doubt fresh in
the minds of hon. gentlemen to-day. How
such occasions may most unexpectedly arise
was brought home to me very strongly in
my own personal experience : It so happened
that during the last year I had the honour
of filling the Speaker's chair, I was
taken ill in the course of the night and
there seemed every probability when the
morning came that I should not be in a fit
state to perform my duties that afternoon.
I sent for my medical man and told him that
under any circumstances, he must positively

have me in such a condition that I could
take the Chair at 3 o'clock, and fortunately
for me and the business of the House, he
brought about such a change that I was able
after all to preside. I only give this as an
instance of what may occur to any hon. gen-
tleman who occupies th^ Chair. Then again,
there are other causes which may occasion
the absence of the Speaker, as serious illness
in his family for instance, such as unfortu-
nately occurred, which I hope may never
occur again, with our present Speaker, for
whom, I am sure, we all felt at the time the
greatest sympathy. It might happen also in
returning after some short adJ3urnment of
the House, as has happened before this, that
the Speaker might be detained unavoidably
by snow-storms or other accidents in the
course of his journey, so that I agree most
thoroughly with all that has been said as to
the great necessity of endeavouring if
possible to find some solution of the difficult
position we may be placed in at any time
under the present condition of things. There
is an old adage, however, about " doing evil
that good may come >" perhaps it is hardly
one quite applicable in this case, because we
do not desire to do anything that is
morally wrong, but we find ourselves
in a great difficulty as to how to remedy
the very serious inconveniences which have
arisen and are likely to arise again and again,
and in order to get out of this difficulty we
are asked to assent to legislation which I
think is, at all events, of a very doubtful
character in a constitutional point of view.
Now while I would shelter myself under the
same designation as that which my hon.
friend from Sarnia has applied to himself,
" simple layman " and therefore as one not
quite competent perhaps to pronounce a
very accurate judgement upon such difficult
constitutional points, I would like, with the
permission of the House, to refer to what
has been written upon the subject by a
gentleman to whom we all look I think with
considerable confidence to guide us in every-
thing connected with Parliamentary and
constutional law. I refer to Mr. Bourinot,
the clerk of the other branch of Parliament.
Now my hon. friend opposite has laid great
stress upon the supposed inherent powers
which he contends this House possesses, and
in regard to which I do not think we stand
at all in the same position as the Parliament
of Great Britain. Let us see what Mr.
Bourinot says on this important point : —

Digitized by

Google

334

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

The Parliament of Canada is not a ** constituent "
body, having the statutory power to alter its own
constitution. The legal und constitutional status of
each branch is set forth in the British North Ame-
rica Act ; the Senate, in the exercise of its powers
as a legislative body, must act with the Speaker
in the Chair, as provided by the Act, otherwise its
acts may be called in question in the courts.

The Senate has not the powers under the British
North America Act that are civen to the House of
Commons, which, by virtue of the 47th section of
that Act, has elected a Deputy -Speaker to act
in the *' absence, for any reason, of the Speaker
from the Chair." It is noteworthy that the origi-
nal Quebec Resolutions appear to have provided
for giving larger power to the Upper House of the
Dominion Parliament (see resolution 15), but when
the Act of Union was framed the provision in
question was not inserted.

With regard to " the inherent powers " of
the Senate, upon which so much stress has
been laid by previous speakers, let me quote
Bourinot again :

The Senate is a legislative body acting within
the limitations of the statute, and has none of the
constitutional and legal functions of the House of
Lords, which forms part of a constituent body,
having authority to alter the constitution of Parlia-
ment in any particular. The fact that the House
of Lords has Deputy -Speakers does not give the
Senate any authority to follow their procedure,
since the Senate is the creation of a statute and is
limited in its powers by an Imperial statute.

In the constitution of the United States, an
express provision was considered necessary for the
appointment of a Senator to act in the absence of
the legally appointed President of that body, who
is also Vice-President of the United States.

Then with regard to the power which the
Senate may be supposed to possess under the
Imperial Statute chapter 38-3 9th Vic, legis-
lation which was passed at that time givdng
power amongst other things, with regard to
the examination of witnesses under oath be-
fore the two Houses and their Committees ;
the expressions there " the pnvileges, im-
munities and powers " to be held, enjoyed and
exercised by the Senate, had been held, I
think, by my hon. friend from Samia to give
the Senate the power to legislate in the
direction of this Bill. With respect to that
point I would like to quote again what Mr.
Bourinot says : —

The privileges, immunities, and powers to be
held, enjoyed and exercised by the Senate and by
the House of Commons, and by the Members thereof,
respectively, shall be such as are from time to time
dehned by the Act of the Parliament of Canada,
but so that any Act of the Parliament of Canada
defining such privileges, immunities and powers
shall not confer any privileges, immunities or
powers exceeding those at the passing of such Act,
held, enjoyed and exercised by the Commons
Home of Parliament of the United Kingdom of

Great Britain and Ireland and by the members
thereof.

Under this statute can the Parliament of Canada
invest the Senate with authority to elect, or other-
wise provide for the appointment of a Deputy-
Speaker ? What are the ** powers " poesessed by
the English House of Commons ? The ** privileges,
immunities and powers " in question are certainly
not those possessed by the House of Commons as
a part of a constituent and sovereign body which
may alter its own constitution in any respect. It
was never contemplated under this section, to give
the Parliament of Canada the power of altering the
constitution of either House m any particular, as
respects the number of qualifications of members,
or the office of Speaker, for instance. It is clear
that the meaning of the word '* i>ower8 " is here
restricted by the words '* privileges " and ** immu-
nities," that the words are ejmdem generic, and
that the ** privileges, immunities and powers "
mentioned in the original 18th section, and the
amendment thereof just quoted, refer to the privi-
leges of freedom of speech, freetlom from arrest on
civil process during the session, the power of pro-
tecting witnesses, the power of expelling and sus-
pending members, the power of commitment and
of punishment for contempt and such other ** pri-
vileges, powers and immunities '* as are exclusively
enjoyed by one branch of the legislature a« inherent
powers and privileges. In electing a Deputy -
Speaker, the House of Commons of England found
it necessary to obtain the authority of a statute to
give validity to all acts done in the absence of the
Speaker, inasmuch as the House doubted its com-
petency to make the appointment on mere resolu-
tions a Standing Order of it* own.

Mr. Bourinot goes on to say :

Looking into the principles that generally
govern the application of the doctrine of ** implied
powers " to a constitution especially as laid down
by Marshall, Cooley and Story — I understand that
they must be construed in the present case as the
power of doing simply such acts and employing
such means as are necessary to the exercise or
enjoyment of the office of Speaker, appointed and
acting in accordance with Statute. Tne " implied
powers " are those essential to the discharge of the
duties of the office — the carrying out of tne rules
and usages of Parliament and the assertion and
execution of the *' powers, privileges and immuni-
ties " of the House under the law. The appoint-
ment of a Deputy-Speaker is not in any way
absolutely essential to the due performance of the
office. In all cases *' the implication must be
necessary, and not conjectural or argumentative."
It must arise naturally from a general power, and
not be strained to apply to a Specific proN^ision.
Where "the means for the exercise of a granted
power are granted no other or different means can
be applied as being more effectual and convenient."
The courts of the United States have in numeroas
cases prohibited legislative interference intended to
add to the conditions or circumstances under which
a constitutional right is exercised. We see in the
cases of the Speakership of the Commons, and the
deputy of the Governor-General there are express
powers given to meet certain exigencies.

There is another consideration which
weighs with me very much indeed, it is with

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 17, 1893] Senate Bill.

335

regard to the question of prerogative and the
fact that our Speaker is appointed by the
Queen represented by the Governor-General
and that by this Bill we will assume the
right to place' the powers exercised by the
Speaker who holds his Commission from the
Crown in the hands of one elected by our-
selves. On that point, Bourinot says :

The Queen, represented by the Governor-Gene-
ral, has, under the Imperial statute or fundamental
law of our constitution, the sole right to appoint
and remove the Speaker of the Senate ; and the
riehts of the Crown in this particular cannot be
ta^en away by mere implication under the 18th
section of the British North America Act just dis-
cussed. The prerogatives of the Crown can only
be chanigeil or taken away by express language with
its expressed consent. If the Crowu's rights as
respects this appointment can only be taken away
by Imperial legislation— the same authority that
created the Senate and the Speakership — then it is
difficult, if not impossible, to understand on what
principle any authority can be vested in the Senate
by a statute of Canada to elect the Deputy of an
officer appointed in express terms by the Crown.
It would be a direct interference with the preroga-
tive of jthe Crown. If there is believed to be an
implied power anywhere, for the appointment of
a beputy, it might be argued that it is in the
Crown itself, and assuredly not in the Senate. But
the doctrine of implied powers cannot be applied
to change a provision of the statute, providing
expressly for the appointment of a Speaker, and in
the face of the fact that in all other instances where
a deputy or administrator is required in the
aljsence, illness or incapacity of a functionary — a
lieutenant-governor in addition to the cases already
cited — express provision is made in the British
North American .\ct.

To jny mind this question of the prerogative
is one of the weightiest considerations which
we must take into account when we are con-
sidering whether we are proceeding in a le-
gal and constitutional manner in passing a
Bill for the election of our own Speaker.
With regard to what has taken ' place in
the past and which has been quoted as a
precedent by some hon. gentlemen, when
under the special circumstances of the case
in the absence of the Speaker a member of
the House was called to take the Chair for
the purpose of adjourning the House, there
is certainly no comparison between a pro-
ceeding of that kind and the placing of a
gentleman in the Chair when the House is
proceeding with its legislative work. In the
former case a member who was called there
was simply put there for the purpose of ad-
journing the House and nothing more. Un-
der this Bill the gentleman who may be put
there as Deputy-Speaker will exercise all the
powers of the Speaker for the time being,

and the question is whether if that be not
constitutional and legal we will not run
great risk of Oil r legislation hereafter being
called in question. These are the considera-
tions which weigh with me in considering
this question. I was desirous of saying just
these few wqrds in reference to this matter,
because I find myself placed in an unusual
position. As a supporter of the Govern-
ment I am exceedingly unwilling to be found
voting against them, more especially on a
difficult question like this (m which one may
well distrust one's own judgment, but I can-
not bring my mind to acquiesce in the views
which have been enunciated either by the
Minister of Agriculture, the hon. member
from Amherst, or the hon. member from
Samia. I think we should, at all events,
pause before we commit ourselves finally to
legislation of this kind, great as are the in-
conveniences which it seeks to remedy and
I would rather see some delay take place in
the passing of the Bill. I quite acknowledge
that it seems comparatively a small matter
for us to go to the Imperial Parliament to
ask them to pass an Act to place the matter
beyond any doubt and whether it may be
desirable to obtain the opinion from the
Supreme Court as to the legality of such a
procedure as this Bill contemplates is, per-
haps, hardly for me to suggest, but at pre-
sent I can only say with regret that I can
not see my way to vote for the Bill as it
now^ starids.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— I think, the im-
portance of this question fully justifies the
most ample discussion that we can give it
in this House, and although it is almost im-
possible to avoid repetition of part of what
has fallen from gentlemen who have already
spoken in the course of one's argument, I
take it for granted that the House will treat
indulgently any one who endeavours to
throw light upon this important subject.
There can be no question at all that the pre-
sent condition in regard to the organization
of the House, so far as the Chair is con-
cerned, is highly unsatisfactory, and that if
we have power to apply a remedy it is most
desirable that we should do so. The several
instances in which difficulties have occurred
in connection with the Chair have been
stated to the House, and I do not intend to
repeat them, because as I have just said
there can be no question whatever as to
the expediency and desirability of supply-

Digitized by

Google

336

Speaker of the [SENATE] ^Senate Bill

ing the want with which this Bill contem-
plates to deal if we have the power to do
so. I am in a rather awkward position in
regard to both my hon. friends who have
just spoken — the hon. member from Sarnia
and the hon. member from Toronto — that
while on the one hand I agree with the con-
clusions of my hon. friend from Sarnia, I
diflFer very much upon what he has advanced
in support of that conclusion ; whtle on the
other hand, I agree with nearly all that my
hon. friend from Toronto has said while dif-
fering entirely from his conclusion. And
first, with regard to the important point
taken by my hon. friend from Toronto — tKat
is as to the inherent power of this House
to deal with the question. I am fully in
accord with my hon. friend from Toronto as
well as the learned Clerk of the House of
Commons with regard to the question of pre-
scriptive or inherent right in the Parliament
of Canada under our written constitution.
We have no inherent right — no rights ex-
cept those defined by the British North
America Act, and therefore the prece-
dent or practice of the House of Lords in
connection with the subject are no guide or
example for us. The practice and precedent
in connection with the high office of Speaker
in the House of Lords is settled by prescrip-
tion, and as I have just remarked prescrip-
tion does not apply in any way to the Con-
stitution under which this Parliament ex-
ists. If we were at liberty to take the
practice and precedents of the House of
Lords on this question and be guided by
them, there would be a clear course before
us. The Crown could appoint other Speak-
ers— not Deputy -Speakers, because there
are no Deputy-Speakers in the House of
Lords. They are not called Deputy-Speak-
ers in the Journals or in the commission of
appointment, although I am aware that May
in referring to the locum tenens of the Chair
in the House of Lords, calls them Deputy-
Speakers, but they are called Lord Speakers
or Speakers in their commission and in the
Journals, and not regarded as Deputies at
all. The precedents which have been cited
by my hon. friend from Barrie on the occa-
sion of his address yesterday, are precedents
which we cannot accept for guidance on a
question of this kind, for the reason that we
exist under a written Constitution, and
therefore must be exclusively guided by it ;
and unless we have in that written Constitu-
tion power for the law which we contem-

plate passing, I admit we would not be
acting prudently in passing this Bill ;
but I believe we have distinct and ample
power in section 91 of the British North
America Act for this purpose. With
regard to section 18, a good deal of misap-
prehension appears to exist in reference
to the amendment made to that sec-
tion. The amendment does not alter in the
slightest degree its force or tenor, so far as
the present question is concerned, from the
clause as it originally stood in the British
North America Act. In the original Act
of 1867, the 18th section read so as to give
such powers to the Senate and House of
Commons of the Dominion as were enjoyed
at the passage of that Act in 1867, by the
Imperial House of Commons — that is, it
gives power to the Parliament of Canada
to clothe itself with such powers, privileges
and immunities as were enjoyed by the
House of Lords at the passage of the Act in
1867. At the time of the passage of
that Act a committee of the House of Com-
mons did not possess the power to swear
witnesses and take evidence under oath. A
memorable crisis occurred in the history of
this country — the Pacific Railway difficulty
— when it was considered desirable to have
that power. Two or three years after the
passage of the Act of 1867, the Imperial
House of Commons did take the power to
examine witnesses under oath, and it was
thought the Senate and House of Commons
could take that power also, and we passed
an Act accordingly, but under very grave
doubts by leading lawyers on both sides of
the House. It was afterwards considered
that we had not the power to pass that Act,
because the power with which we attempted
to invest* ourselves under our own Act was
not possessed by the Imperial House of
Commons, at the date of the passage of the
British North America Act, and clause 18
of the British North America Act was
amended in order to give us that power ; the
power to clothe ourselves at any time by Act
of this Parliament with any power which
might be possessed by the Imperial House
of Commons at the date of the passage of
any Act by the Parliament of Canada.
With regard to this particular question in-
volved in this Bill the amendment to the
British North America Act made not the
slightest difference from the original
section as it stood in the Constitution Act.
With reference to that clause I am fully in

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH IT, 1893] Senate Bill

337

accord with the hon. gentleman who has
just sat down, that we do not obtain under
it such power as would entitle us to pass the
Bill now upon the Table of the House. My
hon. friend has read so fully from the papers
supplied by the Clerk of the House of Com-
mons on the subject that it is unnecessary to
go over that ground. I fully agree with
the Clerk of the House of Commons that
the word " powers " in that clause has rela-
tion to the words with which it is connected
in the same clause — " privileges and immu-
nities " — and confers only such powers as
are germane to these subjects — powers for
instance to swear witnesses, to commit for
contempt, and to do other acts mentioned
by Mr. Bourinot ; but it does not give us
power to legislate in the way of alteration of
the Constitution. As to the point of altering
the constitution, I contend the propose<l Act
is not an alteration of the constitution. I
contend that it is not an infringement of the
prerogative of the Crown either. In the
first place, I do not concede that the execu-
tive act of the Crown in appointing the
Speaker of this House is a prerogative act.
It is an executive act just as the appoint-
ment of one of the judges to our Courts is.
Therefore we do not Interfere with any pre-
rogative of the Crown : but even if it were
a prerogative act, how can it be said that
we interfere with the prerogative when the
Bill, would not in any way alter the
status of the Speaker ? We do not
attempt to interfere with his status,
his existence or being in any way whatever.
If we were attempting to pass a law to sup-
plant the Speaker in the Chair under his Com-
mission from the Crown, if the question of
prerogative applied, there might be some jus-
tice or force in the argument ; but as we do
not in the slightest degree contemplate dis-
turbing the status of the Speaker in any way,
I do not see how it can be argued that we
are interfering with the power of appoint-
ment of the Crown. Respecting the course
pursued in the House of Commons with re-
gard to the election of a Deputy-Speaker in
that House it is generally assumed that the
British North America Act expressly gave
power to the House of Commons to appoint
a Deputy -Speaker, such as now exists. That
however is not the case and the officer now
acting in that House under Act of Parlia-
ment as Deputy-Speaker — is the creation of
Parliament under its implied powers. Clause
forty-seven of the British North America
22

Act only gives express power in relation to
an interim Deputy until Parliament other-
wise provides. There is no express power
given by the British North America Act for
the creation of such a permanent officer as
now exists as Deputy-Speaker in the House
of Commons. I thiii a great deal of weight
should be attached to the peculiar construc-
tion of section forty-seven. It is as follows: —

" Until the Parliament of Canatla otherwise pro-
vides in case of the absence for any reason of the
Speaker from the chair of the House of Commons
tor a period of forty-eight consecutive hours, the
house may elect another of its members to act as
Speaker, and the member so elected shall during
the continuance of such alieence of the Speaker
have and execute all the powers, privileges and du-
ties of the Speaker. "

Now from the very language used in that
clause — " Until the Parliament of Canada
otherwise provides " — and from the fact that
this clause is -merely intended to give the
Parliament of Canada power for the appoint-
ment of an interim Deputy-Speaker, not such
a Deputy-Speaker as exists in the House of
Commons under the Act of the Parliament
of Canada, I say it is clearly to be inferred
that the power was in Parliament somewhere
vested by the British North America Act to
provide for a Deputy-Speaker as was done in
1 885. Now it is said that by the appoint-
ment of a Deputy -Speaker such as is contem-
plates! by this Bill we would be altering the
Constitution. I contend that it would not
be an alteration of the Constitution, for it
would not interfere with the status of the
Crown — appointed Speaker. The House
would be constituted exactly as it was before
but even if that were necessary so far as this
particular object is concerned I think that
we have ample and absolute power to pass
this legislation. In another place the same
language is used with regard to the Senate
which is employed with regard to the House
of Commons in the clause I have just read.
By the British North America Act, the quo-
rum of this House is fixed at fifteen includ-
ing the Speaker. Now we have undoubtedly
the power to fix our quorum at nine or ten
or any other number if we think fit to do so.
Hon. gentlemen would call that perhaps an
alteration of the Constitution. There must
be authority for it somewhere in the Consti-
tution because the language of the clause
is: —

Until the Parliament of Canada otherwise pro-
vides the pr^ence of at least fifteen members, in-
cluding the Speaker, shall be necessary to consti-

Digitized by

Google

338

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

tute a quorum of the Senate for the exercise of its
powers

It does not specifically give power to the
Parliament of Canada to alter its quorum,
but it infers the power being in our posses-
sion by the words, " until the Parliament of
Canada otherwise provides." It must be re-
collected that the Constitution under which
this Dominion exists was drafted by able
men and that it underwent the revision of
the ablest draughtsmen and legal minds in
England before it became law. I put this
question to myself and I put it to the
House, was it likely that in drafting the
clause in reference to the Speaker of this
House, giving the power to the Crown to ap-
point that officer — wtis it not most likely
that these men were thoroughly acquainted
with the practice and precedent of the
House of Lords and that there existed a ne-
cessity for such an officer as interim Speaker
when three or four such officers betimes
could be found in the House of Lords. There
they had before their eyes the precedents
and practice of the House of Lords under
which three or four interim Speakers gener-
ally existed, that they w^ould make no provi-
sion for a substitute — is it probable, especi-
ally as they referred to the same subject as
connected with the House of Commons — is it
probable, having referred to the subject
in connection with that House, and Having
made provision for an interim Deputy-
Speaker, that they did not think of the
necessity of having a substitute for the
Speaker in the Senate — that such a probable
necessity never occurred to them at all?
But there is more than that. I have it on
good authority that in the original Quebec
Resolutions which formed the basis of the
British North America Act, there was some
express authority taken or given in connec-
tion with the appointment of a Deputy-
Speaker in this House. It was stricken out
either in the London Conference or by the
draughtsmen, but having been stricken out
what would be the reasonable inference to
be drawn from that fact? Would it be that
there would be no necessity for such an
officer as Deputy-Speaker in this House ?
Certainly not. Then if the necessity for
such an officer in thLs House must have been
apparent to their minds, would they not
have made some provision for it, and would
they have striken out the clause making such
provision if they had considered that the
power for making such an appointment did

not exist somewhere in the Constitution ?
I contend they would not. Perhaps the
most important clause of the British North
America Act is clause 91, which has been
quoted by my hon. friend from Sarnia. Its
language is just as comprehensive as words
can make it and is expressly made, as I
construe it, to meet cases not specifically
enumerated in it, or exclusively given to the
provincial legislatures. The language is " It
shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with
the consent of the Senate and House of
Commons, to make laws for the peace, order
and good government of Canada in relation
to all matters" not exclusively given to the
Provincial Legislatures. That is the mean-
ing of the clause. The power was given to
make laws on all questions not exclusively
given to thLs Provincial Legislature, and it
defined certain of the subjects with which
the ParUament of Canada shall have exclu-
sive right to deal, but it expressly says in
the clause that it does not define them spe-
cifically with the intention of limiting in
any way the general powers given in the
first lines of that clause to the Parliament of
this Dominion. Now, my hon. friend from
Barrie, yesterday, in the very able and learned
speech with which he favoured the House, to
which we all listened with great pleasure and
attention — and not one in the House more
so than myself, because since the hon. member
has been a meml)er of this House it has been
my good fortune to have somewhat intimate
relations with him, and I have learned to
prize very highly any opinion he would give
on a question of this kind — I difler from the
const met ion which my hon. friend has
placed on this 91st clause, and I differ in
the principle of construction he has applied
to it. My hon. friend has said that these
words must have alluded to the subjects
specifically mentioned in the 91st section
and delegated to the Parliament of Can-
ada. As I view the clause it was unne-^
cessary to do anything of that kind, because
every subject mentioned here as within
the exclusive power of the Parliament
of Canada, carried with it every other subject
incidental to it, and consequently everything
that was necessary to be enjoyed by the
Parliament of Canada, in dealing with one
of these subjects was given expressly by the
different divisions of that clause. My hon.
friend says it is only questions germane or
cognate to these specific subjects that were
intended to be included in the general and

Digitized by

Google

Wrecks and Salvage Act fMARCH 17, 1893] Amendment Bill.

339

comprehensive opening lines of section 91.
I believe that the very opposite is the case
— that those lines were put there for the
purpose of comprehending powers of legisla-
tion that could not specifically be put there.
The specific powers were given " for greater
certfdnty but not so as to restrict." This
language taken in connection with the
first part, the clause appears to me to be
conclusive. By the enumeration of certain
subjects which were to come exclusively
under the jurisdiction of this Parliament —
it must and could only have meant that
apart from these, all matters that were not
exclusively given to the local Legislatures —
even with the powers of this Parliament —
that is the only limit as I contend under
that general section and the general powers
of Parliament to pass all laws whatever they
may be, for the peace, order and good
government of Canada. I do not wish to
trespass unnecessarily on the time of the
House in further elucidating this point.
•
Hon. MEMBERS— Go on, go on !

Hon. Mr. MILLER— I think the whole
c|uestion is in a nut shell. I agree with my
hon. friend from Toronto and Mr. Bourinot
that clause 18' of the British North America
Act does not give us the power to pass this
Bill, I agree with him that the subjects
enumerated by Mr. Bourinot are the real
class of cases over which power was in-
tended to l)e given to the Parliament of Ca-
nada in that behalf. While I can abandon
every contention that has been made by the
hon. member from Amherst under that clause
and the amendment to it which, as I have
shown the House, did not affect in the
slightest degree the original clause as it
stood in the British North America Act —
while I have given the benefit of every doubt
on that point, I claim still that under the 9l8t
section of the British North America Act,
we have ample power to pass this Bill.
Strange to say, in the opinion which has just
been read by the hon. member from Toronto
as emanating from the Clerk of the House of
Commons, that gentleman does not refer to
clause 91, in which, in my opinion and in the
opinion of men whose judgment is entitled
to much more consideration than mine, the
whole thing \& involved. I therefore should
give my support to the Bill. As my hon. friend
from Samia says, it will have to run the
gauntlet of the House of Commons where
22^

there are men very well able to sift and in-
vestigate it. It will have, of course, to
receive the Govemor-Generars assent, and
it will be disallowed in England if it is con-
sidered to be unauthorized by the provisions
of the British North America Act. I think
we want this Bill ; the necessity has been
fully dilated upon by the hon. gentlemen
who have preceded me. With these few
observations I have only to say that I
shall be very happy to vote for the Bill, and
if the suggestion thrown out by the hon.
member from Barrie is entertained by the
Minister in charge of the Bill, of appointing
a special committee, it might not be an un-
wise step. Such a Committee would be well
suited to investigate the subject fully, and
might recommend the postponement of it until
another session, if strong doubts were enter-
tained of our power to deal with it. But I
think some action should be taken to deal
with what is justly considered a defect in
the organization of this House.

The Debate was adjourned until to-mor-
row.

THE SCHWALLER DIVORCE BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN moved the adoption
of the Report of the Select Committee on
Divorce re Bill (J) " An Act for the relief
of John Francis Sch waller." He said the
preamble in this case was fully and satisfac-
torily 4)roved.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved that the
Bill be now read the third time.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

WRECKS AND SALVAGE ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (3) " An Act to amend the
Wrecks and Salvage Act." He said : — This
is a very simple amendment to the Act. The
change is made in order to facilitate the
more rapid investigation into wrecks, or any
difiiculties that may arise in connection
therewith. Any hon. gentleman who will
turn to the 81st chapter of 49th Victoria,

Digitized by

Google

340

Parliamentary [SENATE] Fees Bill.

will find it reads as follows : " On the con-
clusion of any such inquiry the officer who
made the same shall send to the Minister for
the information of the Governor in Council,
etc." The proposal of this Bill is to leave
out the words " the Governor in Council."
The 8th section reads as follows : "If it
appears to the Governor in Council in any
case as aforesaid, either upon or without
any such preliminary inquiry as aforesaid,
or in case of a charge of misconduct or
incapacity brought by any person against
any master or mate of any ship, when a
formal investigation is requested or ex-
pedient, the Governor may appoint any
officer or officers of the Government of
Canada, etc. " The amendment provides for the
striking out in this case in the first line the
words " Governor in Council " and substitut-
ing the word "Minister; " to omit again in the
sixth line the words " Governor in Council "
and insert in lieu thereof the word " Minis-
ter." That will enable the Minister, imme-
diately upon a wreck taking place, in which
an investigation is deemed necessary, to send
an officer at once without waiting until the
Council meets to obtain the authority of the
Governor in Council ; and it will enable
also the Minister to de^l with the question
immediately on receipt of the report instead
of waiting for the Council to meet and ob-
taining the authority which is necessary
under this Act. The House will readily see
that delays must necessarily take place in a
case of that kind. The result has been in
the past that in many instances, wh^re the
Minister has been obliged to wait until he
obtained the authority of the Governor in
Council to appoint an officer to make this
investigation, that the witnesses have all left
the country. Hon. gentlemen from the
Maritime provinces know the character of
sailors generally and those whose evidence
would be required in these investigations.
The object of the Bill, which I think will
readily receive the assent of the House, is to
give power to the Minister to act immedi-
ately upon receiving information of wrecks
in any portion of the Dominion, and to de-
cide immediately upon receipt of the report.
The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was
read the second time.

PARLIAMENTARY FEES BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL moved the second
reading of Bill (61) "An Act respecting the

disposal of moneys paid in connection with
proceedings before Parliament." He said : —
The practice has prevailed in both Houses of
Parliament in Canada of receiving fees for
Bills or other purposes and placing them to
some particular account. In the House of
Commons it is to the credit of the Clerk of
the Railway Committee, or the Contingent
Accounts, I am not sure which, and I believe
the same system has prevailed here ; and
then in cases of re-payment of a fee for a
Bill which had not passed, or for the purpose
of paying for printing or other purposes, the
Clerk has had power to give his cheque and the
balance, whatever it might be, was paid to
the credit of the Receiver-General. The
object of this Bill is to provide that all mo-
neys that are paid, either to the Clerk or any
official or officer of either House, shall be
placed at once to the credit of the Receiver-
General ; and then when Parliament remits
or refunds any sum or any fee that has been
paid to this account, it should be regularly
checked out and audited ^and paid by the
Auditor-General. The principle involved in
the Bill applies to all moneys collected by
officials, whether in the Customs, Inland Re-
venue or any other Department of the Go-
vernment, although it did not formerly. I
remember at one time where they collected
cartage fees, and insurance fees and warehouse
fees it used to be credited to the Collector,
who paid the temporary employees out of
this fund, and any balance went to the
credit of the Receiver-General ; or if there
was not enough, they paid from the general
fund of the Dominion. I thought that it
opened a wide door for the disposal of money
improperly if the parties were not thoroughly
trustworthy. An order was passed at once
that all moneys so collected should pass to
the credit of the Receiver- General, and that
all bills should come under the supervision
of the head of the department, and moneys
paid foi: temporary work done should go
direct and be chargeable to the several ports.
Under the old system it did not so appear.
Contingencies for extra work might run up
to $10,000 or $20,000 a year. The fund re-
ceived in the way I have indicated would be
used for the purpose of paying them, and if
it met the whole of the expenditure, then
the actual expenses of the port would appear
to be so much less than it was really ; if it did
not meet the whole of those expenses, then
the expenditure, to the extent to which the
amount of these fees was less than the

Digitized by

Google

Equity Insurance [MARCH 17, 1893] Company's Bill.

341

amount paid out, would appear against the
port. The Finance Minister in introducing
this into the Lower House — and I believe
the Auditor-General has also insisted upon
it — said that all moneys should pass to the
credit of the Heceiver-General, so that they
could be properly audited, and that all funds
paid, whether to the Senate or to the House
of Commons, should be treated precisely in
the same way as any other amounts.

Hon. Mr. McKAY— The hon. Minister
is slightly mistaken in regard to payments
received by the Senate. For the last four
or five years the Senate has been in the
habit of paying all the money received for
private Bills to the credit of the Receiver-
General, as this bill proposes to provide, and
those moneys have been checked out in the
way here proposed. What 1 wish to call
attention to more particularly, is the fact
that this Bill proposes to take away some of
the privileges of the Senate. Our privileges
are going one by one, and this is another
stfep in the direction of diminishing our
powers.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Will the hon. gen-
tleman point out in what way the privileges
of the Senate are being diminished, in order
that I may look into the question ? If this
Bill is depriving the House of any of its pri-
vileges, I shall bring the matter to the
notice of my colleagues before pushing it
further. I know I have correctly stated the
practice which prevails in the House of
Commons, and I was informed that the same
system existed here.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT- -No.

Hon. Mr. McKAY — The present system
in the Senate was adopted in 1887, and what
I wish to point out is that this Bill proposps
to establish the system by act of Parliament
and remove the matter entirely from our
control.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— It would give the
Auditor-General complete control over the
expenditure and take the control from the
House.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It has been the
practice of this House to pay out sums on
the Clerk's cheque in cases which come
altogether within the jurisdiction and con-

trol of the Senate. I have very grave
doubts as to whether the Clerk would be
able, after this Bill became law, to pay
money in the same way on the order of the
House. The Bill provides that every pay-
ment is to be made by "the Senate and
House of Commons." If that means that
the two Houses must concur, then the clause
requires amendment. Many of those pay-
ments have been made, not under rules or
Standing Orders, but by direction of the
Housa I think it ought to be made per-
fectly clear that money deposited with the
Clerk of the Senate may be withdrawn on
the order of the House.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD (^.S.)— There is
another point worfh considering — the Audi-
tor-General may refuse to obey a resolution
of this House.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The Auditor-Gen-
eral is the servant of Parliament, and if an
order is given to pay he is obliged to comply
with it.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— The resolution of
this House would not be law : he would not
obey a resolution of this House, if, in* his
opinion, it conflicted with the law.

•The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

SECOND READING.

Bill (34) "An Act to incorporate the
WcKKlmen of the World." (Mr. Vidal.;

EQUITY INSURANCE COMPANY'S
BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. M a cINNES( Burlington) moved
the second reading of Bill (62) " An Act to
revive and amend the Act to incorporate
the Equity Insurance Company, and to
change the name of the Company to the St.
Lawrence Insurance Company." He said : —
The object of this Bill is to revive a charter
which was never used and to change the
name of the company.

Hon. Mr. POWER— My hon. friend, Mr.
Pelletier, who is absent from the House to-
day, asked me to call the attention of the
Committee to which this Bill is to be refer-
red to the fact that the name which this
company, as reorganized, propases to take

Digitized by

Google

342

Tht &off [SENATE] Divorce Bill.

is a name which has already been appro-
priated by a fire insurance company in the
city of Quebec, incorporated by the Legis-
lature of the province of Quebec. The
local charter is chapter 81 of the Statutes of
1886. Hon. gentlemen will see that it
would be exceedingly inconvenient to have
two companies known by the name of St.
Lawrence.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— I
will see that the Bill is made satisfactory
in the Committee.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

OCEAN ACCIDENT CORPORA-
TION BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON moved the se-
cond reading of Bill (39) : An Act to in-
corporate the Ocean Accident Corporation.
He said : — This is a Bill which was left over
yesterday, the House being under the im-
pression that it was the same as a Bill that
had just passed its third reading. If hon.
gentlemen will examine this Bill they will
find that although the same persons are being
incorporated the two Bills are for different
objects.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

The Senate adjourned at 6.15 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Monday^ March 200i^ 189S,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
THE CLAIM OF MICHEL GOSSELIN.

MOTION.

Hon Mr. BELLEROSE moved :— .

That an hninble Address be presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General; praying that
His Excellency will cause to Ije laid tJefore this
House, a copy of all documents in relation to the

demand of Michel Gosselin, Half-breed, living at
Roseberry, Manitoba, and claiming an indemnity
for losses sustained during the troubles in the
North-west in 1869 and 1870.

Also, a copy of all correspondence exchanged
between the Dominion Grovemment and the said
Michel Gosselin in relation to the said claim.

He said (in French) — On the 12th Septem-
ber, 1890, Michel Gosselin wrote Sir John
Macdonald claiming an indemnity for losses
he had suffered in 1869-70. To this Mr.
Pope, Sir John's secretary, answered that
Sir John had instructed him to say that the
Minister of the Interior was then absent, but
on his return the matter would be submitted
to him and justice would be done. Some
time after the Minister of the Interior wrote
to Gosselin stating that he had nothing to
do with the matter and that he should apply
to the Secretary of State. Gosselin wrote
to the Secretary of State who referred him
back to the Minister of Interior. This i»
the information supplied to me. I want to
see the papers to know if it is correct. If
the statement is true it is not extraordinary
that the people of the North-west have been
so often agitated by difficulties thrown in
their way and the injustice they have
suffered.

The motion was agreed to.

THE GOFF DIVORCE BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN moved the adoption
of the report of the Select Commit-
tee on Divorce, re Bill (K) "An Act
for the relief of Annette Marion Goff." He
said : — In a long experience in respect to
criminals and criminal procedure, and some
in divorce matters, I do not recollect a
single instance in which greater cruelty,
brutality and heartlessness on the part of a
husband has been proved than in the case
ncJw before us, nor do I recollect any instance
in which the long forbearance and desire to
forgive of woman has been more constantly
displayed.

The charges were proved, and the com-
mittee without the slightest hesitation de-
cided to recommend that the Bill be passed.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

343

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (56) "An Act to revive and amend the
Act to incorporate the Moncton and Prince
Edward Island Railway and Ferry Com-
pany." (Mr. Poirier.)

Bill (68) "An Act respecting the Columbia
and Kootenay Railway and Navigation Com-
pany." (Mr. Mclnnes, B. C.)

Bill (67) " An Act to revive and amend the
Act to incorporate the North Canadian
Atlantic Railway and Steam-ship Company."
(Mr. Casgrain.)

TRANSMISSION OF TIMBER BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (S) "An Act further to
amend the Act respecting Joint Stock Com-
panies to construct works to facilitate the
transmission of timber down rivers and
streams. "

Hon. Mr. POWER— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman is in a position to assure the
House that the rates authorized under this
Bill are not higher than at present.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I made particular
inquiries on that point before introducing
the Bill and I am assured that there will be
no increase — that it is a decrease, on the
whole, but a redistribution to make the
charges more equitable than they were under
the old law.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill was
read the second time.

SPEAKER OF THE SENATE BILL.

DEBATE CONCLUDED.

The order of the day being called —

Resuming the adjourned del3ate on the motion
of Hon. Mr. Angers for the second reading of Bill
(N) ** An Act respecting the Speaker of the
Senate."

Hon. Mr. POWER said :— Hon. gentle-
men, with respect to this Bill, the members
of the House occupy a veVy unusual, and
I think a very desirable position. All
the members of the House are satisfied
that the present condition of the law is open
to objection, and all wish that the result
which is aimed at by this Bill, or some

similar result may be reached. There are
no politics in the Bill, and the members of
the House are in a position to approach it
in a perfectly unprejudiced frame of mind ;
and I think our great object in dealing with
a measure of this kind should be not to
allow our nrinds to be influenced by our
wishes in any way. It is one of those cases
where we should try to see that the wish is
not father to the thought. The very fact
that we are all anxious that this BiU, or
something like it, should become law, is per-
haps a reason why our judgment may be
blinded, and it is a reason why we should
decide carefully and after full consideration.
Now, this must be borne in mind, hon.
gentlemen, that, while the Bill is a very de-
sirable one to pass, there is no absolute
necessity for it. It is not a Bill of urgent
necessity. We have existed twenty-six
years without it, and have succeeded in
doing pretty . well, although during the
greater part of these twenty-six years the
country has been governed oy the wrong
people.

Hon. Mr. READ- -It has only been mis-
governed five years.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Clearly, if we find,
or if we have reasonable ground for think-
ing, that there is any substantial doubt as to
our power to pass the Bill, there is no urgent
ne'^essity for passing it now. As we have
got along twenty-six years without it, we
can get along for a few months more. If we
consider what consequences may follow from
this Act, if we have not the power to pass it,
we shall be further disposed to hesitate and
be cautious. If we have not the power to
pass this measure, and do so and act upon it,
it may be that some very important Bill
passed when the officer whom this BiU provi-
des for occupies the Chair of the Senate may
be held to be invalid on the ground that the
Bill had not got three readings in a properly
constituted Senate ; and one can readily ima-
gine the trouble and confusion that might
ari«e if our legislation was to open any
question such as that. There is another cir-
cumstance to bear in mind. On a former
occasion this Parliament, acting on the pro-
visions of the 91st section, or relying at
any rate, to a very considerable extent
upon the provision of the British North Ame-
rica Act which authorizes the Parliament of
Canada to pass all laws for the peace, order

Digitized by

Google

344

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

and good government of Canada, passed a
bill intended to authorize a committee of the
House of Oommons to take evidence on a
very important public liiatter which involved
the credit and welfare of the country ; and
the measure passed at that time was passed
very largely upon the opinion of Dr. Todd,
the Librarian of Parliament and an autho-
rity on Parliamentary law and practice re-
cognized all over the English speaking world;
but after that Bill had become law, as far as
we could make it law, it was submitted to
the law officers of the Crown of England and
they decided, apparently with little hesita-
tion, that we had gone beyond our powers
and had infringed upon the powers of the
Imperial Parliament.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. POWER— And this Parlia-
ment was placed in what we must regard as
a somewhat humiliating position, and had to
ask the Imperial authorities to secure the
passage through the Imperial Parliament of
a Bill giving this Parlhiment power to pass
such a measure ; so, hon. gentlemen, I say
that unless we are very clear about our
right to pass this Bill, we should be
unwise to pass it. Before attempting to
put my own views in the matter before the
House — that is undertaking to argue the
question — I wish to call attention to a some-
what remarkable circumstance. Four hon.
gentlemen have addressed this House in
support of the measure. Two of those hon.
gentlemen, the Minister of Agriculture, who
introduced the measure, and the hon. gentle-
man from Richmond who sits beside him
and who spoke before me and made a power-
ful speech — ^rested their contention that
this Parliamnt had a right to pass such a
measui'e as this solely on the 91st section
of the British North America Act. Those
two hon. gentlemen recognized the fact
that outside of the 91st section we had not
the power. On the other hand, the hon.
gentleman from Cumberland, if I understood
him correctly, did not think we had the
power under the 91st section, but thought
we had it under the earlier sections of the
British North America Act and under the
Act of 1875, the Imperial Act amending
the British NortK America Act. The hon.
gentleman from Samia, if I apprehend his
argument correctly, was of opinion that we
had a right to act under the 91st section
and under the earlier sections as well.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL-

right besides.

-And the inherent

Hon. Mr. POWER— So, when the hon.
gentlemen who favour this measure differ in
their views in such a decided way, I think
the House will have reason to hesitate before
concluding that we have the power to pass
the measure. If it cannot be done under
the 91st section, as the hon. gentleman
from Amherst contends, then the only way
in which it can be done is under the earlier
sections ; and if it cannot be done under the
earlier sections as the Hon. Minister of
Agriculture, and the hon. gentleman from
Richmond contend, then the only way in
which it can be done is under the Olst
section ; and there you have the hon. gentle-
men who support the Bill practically nullify-
ing one another's arguments. I think that
is a view of the matter which deserves con-
sideration. Hon. gentlemen, this matter is
not now before Parliament, (at any rate it
has not been considered by the Government
of the day) for the first tim^. This House
has been led since 1867 by two very dis-
tinguished gentlemen — men distinguished
for their experience in public affaii*s and
their knowledge of constitutional law. Sir
Alexander Campbell and Sir John Abbott.
When Sir Alexander Campliell led the House
a measure looking in the same direction as
this was prepared, but the Government came
to the conclusion that there was a doubt
about the right of this Parliament to adopt
such a measure and the measure was not
pushed. While Sir John Abbott was leader
of this House he also considered the matter,
and I am informed that he, who was a par-
ticularly skilful interpreter of statutes, con-
cluded that this Parliament had not the
power to pass such a measure. The
natural conclusion is, I think, that, when
hon. gentlemen like those, who were an-
xious that some such measure should be
adopted, could not see their way to adopt
it, we have not the right to pass this
measure, and that we should be unwise not
t.o follow the footsteps of our predeces-
sors. I know it has been alleged by some
hon. gentlemen that section 91 was not
considered on former occasions, and that
the theory that we can pass this measure
under the introductory paragraph of section
91 of the British North America Act is
a new one. I think that we should all
be disposed to look with suspicion upon

Digitized by

poogle

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

345

alleged discoveries of previously undiscovered
provisions in a statute which has received
so much careful consideration at such skilful
hands as has the British North America Act.

the constituent act, and there are certainly
no inherent powers. Turning to the por-
tion which establishes Ihe legislative Ixxly
— the Parliament of the Dominion — the first

The presumption is, looking at all the cir- section, we find, thatmight seem to deal, with
cumstances of the case, that that section 91
was considered. When the former authorities,
anxious to exert their powers, considered
the question whether they had the right to
exercise this power or not, I think that it
is unreasonable to suppose that it would not
have occurred to them to see whether they
had the power under section 91. I am sat-
isfied, hon. gentlemen, that they did this and
that they satisfied themselves that they had j \^^^
not the power. This inaction of Parliament
on previous occasions is a very strong argu-
ment indeed in favour of our not acting now.
Leaving the past, I may say, as to the
question of our right to legislate under
other portions of the British North America
Act than section 91, or under the Imperial
Act of 1875, that there is very little to be

the question before us, is the 18th ts amended
by the Imperial Act of 1875.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— It is repealed alto-
gether.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The Act of 1875 has
l>een substituted. The 18th section has l)een
repealed and another section substituted.
That section reads as follows — the newsecticm

The privileges, immunities and powers to be
held, enjoyed and exercised by the Senate and by
the House of Commons, and by the members there-
of, respectively, shall be such as are from time to
time'defined by the Parliament of Canada, so that
any Act of the Parliament of Canada defining such
privileges, immunities and powers, shall not confer
any privileges, immunities or powers exceeding
those at the passing of such Act, held, enjoyed and

added to the verj' able argument submitted exercised by the (Commons House of Parlia-

to the House by the h(m. gentleman from
Barrie. It is true that that hon. gentleman
did not deal with the claim advanced by
the hon. Minister of Agriculture that we
could act under section 91 ; but that is not
at all remarkable, because the hon. gen-
tleman from Barrie had no reason to
suspect that any such claim would l>e set
up. The views of Dr. Bourinot, as set forth
in a memorandum quoted by the hon. gen-
tleman from York division, were similar to

ment of the Unite<l Kingdom of (treat Britain and
Ireland and by the memoers thereof.

That section is substituted for section
18, and in my humble opinion that section
affords the very strongest argument which
can be found in favour of the proposed
legislation ; but I do not myself feel satisfied
that we have under that amendment the
right to adopt the proposed legislation.
There are more objections than one. In
the first place, hon. gentlemen, the 18th

the views expressed by the hon. gentleman section, even in its new form, does not
from Barrie ; and, since the measure was deal with the constitution of the Senate, but
introduced, I have seen Dr. Bourinot, and with the privileges, immunities and powers
he expresses the opinion that we have no of the Senate when duly constituted. Later
power under section 91 to pass this measure, < on we are told how the Senate is to he con-
and that the new position assumed by the stituted for the despatch of business ; but as
Gk>vemment is untenable. However, at the I understand it, this section deals with the
risk of repeating what has already been said, , privileges, immunities and powers of the
I shall attempt to state briefly the argu- ; meml)ers of the House when duly constitu-
ments against adopting this measure apart ted. The view adopted by Bourinot is that

from section 91. In the first place, it
must be borne in mind that the Senate has
no inherent powers. The hon. gentleman
from Sarnia spoke of the Senate as having
the right to do this owing to its inherent
powers. The Senate is the creature of a sta-
tute ; it is just like a County Council or any
other comparatively inferior body. It is the
creature of a statute and cannot do anything
beyond what it is authorized to do by the

statute. It has no implied powers, beyond I doubtful about the right to appoint a Deputy-
those derived by necessarj^ implication from | Speaker, and on account of that doubt an Im-

it does not extend to such a measure as the
one l)efore us, but refers to those privi-
leges, immunities and powers dealing with
such things as the protection of witnesses,
examining witnesses under oath, freedom of
speech, exemption from arrest under civil pro-
cess and other things of that sort. Although
the House of Commons of England is not,
like this Senate, the creature of a statute,
but is a constituent body, that House felt

Digitized by

Google

346

Speaker of the [SEN'ATE] Senate Bill.

penal Act was passed for the purpose ; and
if it is the case that the House of Commons
of England had not the power, a fortiori
this Parliament has not the power.

Hon. r.Ir. McINNES— When did they
pass that Act ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— T do not remember
the date. In the face of the provisions of
the British North America Act which deal
with the office of Speaker, we have no right
to provide for such an officer, more parti-
cularly as our constituent Act makes a
different provision ; and on this point I am
happy to say that the Minister of Agricul-
ture and the hon. gentleman from Richmond
agree with me. Coming to the sections of
the Act which provide for the constitution
of the Senate : section 34 provides for the
appointment and removal of the Speaker.

The Governor-General may from time to time,
by iustrument under the Great iSeal of Canada,
appoint a Senator to be Speaker of the Senate, and
may remove him and appoint another in his stead.

The language of that section implies that
the person acting as Speaker shall be
appointed by the (Governor-General, in the
Queen's name, as Senators are appointed.
The Bill before us makes a totally different
provision. It provides that the place of this
Speaker may be taken by a gentleman elected
by the Senate ; and I contend that the pro-
posed measure conflicts directly with this
sectitm of the British North America Act,
and that we cannot infringe upon the power
of the Crown represented by the Governor-
General without the authority of an Imperial
Act. Section 35 reads as follows : —

Until the Parliament of Canada othemise pro-
vides, the presence of at least fifteen Senators,
including the Speaker, shall he necessary to con-
stitute a meeting of the Senate for the exercise of
its powers.

The natural construction of that is, I think,
that the Speaker is a necessary, component
part of the Senate, to constitute a meeting
for the exercise of its powers. The fact that
the expression "until the Parliament of
Canada otherwise provides" is used, in-
dicates that this provision is a temporary
one — that the Parliament of Canada can
either increase or decrease the quorum ; and
it may be urged — I presume the hon. gentle-
man from Amherst may urge — that under
this section the presence of the Speaker may

be declared not necessary to constitute a
quorum. I hardly think that that argu-
ment should prevail. If we look at the next
section, I think it will appear that the
Speaker is always supposed to be present.
Section 36 is as follows : —

Questions arising in the Senate shall be decided
by a majority of voices, and the Speaker shall in
all cases have a vote, and when the voices are equal
the decision shall be deemed to be in the negative.

If we take the section with respect to the
quorum in the House of Commons, I think
that our conviction that the Speaker of the
Senate must be present will be strengthened.
For the phraseology with respect to the
House of Commons is different from the
phraseology with respect to the Senate. As to
the Senate the section says " until the Par-
liament of Canada otherwise provides, the
presence of at least 15 senator, including
the Speaker, shall be necessary to constitute
a meeting of the Senate for the exercise of
its powers." Section 48 says : —

The presence of at least 20 members of the
Hou'«j of C'Ommons shall be necessary to constitute
a meeting of the H«)use for the exercise of its
powers ; and for that purpose the Speaker shall be
reckoned as a member.

In one case 20 members of the House con-
stitute a quorum ; in the other 15, one of
whom must be the Speaker. The language
with respect to the Speaker of the House of
Commons is different from the language with
respect to our Speaker. Section 47 which
deals with the absence of the Speaker of the
House of Connnons is altogether different
from the language used as to our Speaker : —

Until the Parliament of Canada' otherwise pro-
vides, in case of the absence for any reason of the
Speaker from the Chair of the House of Commons
for a periml of forty-eight consecutive hours, the
House may elect another of its members to act as
Speaker, and the member so elected shall, during
the continuance of such absence of the Speaker,
have and execute all the powers, privileges and
duties of Speaker.

TJie fact that a provision is made for the
absence of the Speaker of the House of
Commons, while no provision is made for the
absence of the Speaker of the Senate, is a
very strong argument against our having
the right to provide for the absence of our
Speaker. Where the Parliament in England,
in a Bill such as this, drawn, as the hon.
member from Richmond said, by skilled
English draughtsmen, undertakes to deal
with similar cases as two different Houses,

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

347

and inserts a provision for the absence of
such an important officer as the Speaker in
one House, and omits any reference to the
absence of the Speaker in the other House ;
that is almost conclusive evidence that the
intention was not to provide for the absence
of the Speaker in the latter House." Hon.
gentlemen contended that we might imply
the right to provide a Deputy-Speaker be-
cause it would be a convenient thing ; but
this difference in the phraseology would
hinder us from implying any such provision
as to the Senate. Where the provision is
expressed in one case and omitted in the
other, it is a well known rule of construction
that you cannot imply the insertion of the
provision, where it is omitted. Upon this
point, the case is even stronger, because we
have not only the case of the Speaker of the
House of Commons, but the case of the
Govemor-Greneral. I have read the provi-
sion as to supplying the place of the Speaker
of the House of Commons. Section 14 of
the British North America Act, provides
for the case of the Governor-General. It is
as follows :^-

It shall be lawful for the Queen, if Her Ma-
jesty thinks fit, to authorize the Oovernor-Oeneral
from time to time to appoint any person or persons
jointly or severally to be his deputy or deputies
within any part or parts of Canada, and in that
capacity to exercise during the pleasure of the
(jovemor-CTeneral such of the powers, authorities
and functions of the Govemor-C^eneral as the
(iovernor-General deems it necessary or expedient
to assign to him or them, subject to any limita-
tions or directions expressed or civen by the
Queen ; but the appointment of such a deputy or
deputies shall not affect the exercise by the Gov-
ernor-General himself of any power, authority or
function.

More than that, when we turn to section
67, we find : —

The Governor- General in Council may from
time to time appoint an Administrator to execute
the office and functions of Lieutenant-Governor
during his absence, illness or other inability.

That is, during the absence or inability of
the Lieutenant-Governor. So in. our consti-
tutional Act you have a provision made for
the absence of the Speaker of the House of
Commons ; you ^ave a provision made for
the absence or incapacity of the Governor-
General, and you have a provision made for
the absence or incapacity from any cause of
the Lieutenant-Governor ; but there is no
provision made for the absence or incapacity
of the Speaker of the Senate. I must say
that I think the argument to be drawn from

that is almost irresistible in favor of the
absence of any power in Parliament to prov-
ide for that event. I may say, although it
is not a very important matter, that in the
framing of the United States constitution it
was thought necessary to make a special
provision for the absence of the President
of the Senate of the United States. There
is another circumstance, not a very important
one, but still one of considerable weight,
pointed out by Dr. Bourinot in his work
and also in the memorandum read by the
hon. gentleman from York — that the Legis-
lative Council of old Canada had no power
and never claimed the right to appoint a
Deputy-Speaker, and that even the Legisla-
tive Assembly of old Canada had not the
power to appoint a Deputy-Speaker until
they got it through Imperial legislation.

Turning to section 91, the section upon
which the hon. Minister of Agriculture
bases his authority for proceeding with this
measure, I shall first read the portion of it
upon which the hon. gentleman bases his
claim :

It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate and House
of Commons, to make laws for the jjeade, order
and good government of Canada, in relation to all
matters not comine within the classes of subjects
by this act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures
oi the provinces ; and for greater certainty, but

not so as to restrict the generality of the foregoing
terms of this section, it is hereby declared that
(notwithstanding anything in this Act) the exclu-
sive Legislative authority of the Parliament of
Canada extends to all matters coming within the
classes of subjects next hereinafter enumerated.

The British North America Act was an
Act which was drawn with very considerable
care, as one would naturally expect ; and it
was drawn upon a plan which can be reco-
gnized in the Act itself. The earlier sections
of the Act provide for the creation of a
Parliament for Canada. There are general
headings each covering a number of sections.
Part Three provides for the Executive
power ; part Four for the Legislative power.
That is it provides for the constitution of
the Parliament which is to do the legislative
work for the Dominion. Part Five is under
the heading " Provincial Constitutions."
Then part Six — the two preceding parts
having created a Parliamentary machine
to do the legislative work of the Dominion,
and Legislative machines to do such work
for the different provinces — goes on to pro-
vide for the distribution of power between
the Parliament and these local Legisla-

Digitized by

Google

348

Speaker of the [SKNATE] Senate Bill.

tures. And the object of these two or
three sections, 91, 92, and one or two
later sections, is to separate the matters
which are to i)e dealt with by the large ma-
chine here at Ottawa from the matters
which are to be dealt with by the smaller
machines in the various provinces. This part
does not undertake to deal with the consti-
tution of Parliament at all . It deals with
the subjects that are to be handled by Par-
liament and by the legislatures respectively.
Section 91 enumerates a great many sub-
jects on which Parliament may legislate, and
inasmuch as any enumeration made by man
is sure to be imperfect, and as the intention
of the Imperial Parliament was to give all
powers not expressly given to the local legis-
latures to the Dominion Parliament, the
vesting of this residuum of power, as one
may call it, is provided for in the language
just quoted. Apart fi-om any rules of con-
struction, I do not think that any one would
expect to find that, where the Imperial
Parliament had, in the portion of the Act
dealing with the constitution of Parliament,
and without reserving any power of altera-
tion to this Parliament, made certain provi-
sions with respect to the constitution of the
Parliamentary creature — this Canadian Par-
liament— different provisions were cimtained
in a portion of the constituent Act relating
to a diiFerent subject altogether. It could not
be expected that in the latter part which did
not profess to deal with the constitution of
Parliament, power would be given to alter
and amend the Act, counter to the provisions
contained in the earlier portions, which avow-
edly and directly dealt with the constitu-
tion of Parliament. If this view as to the
force of section 91, which is now propounded
publicly for the first time, be correct, there
was no necessity for the Imperial Act of
1875 ; because clearly, as Dr. Todd argued
very strongly, that Act was one necessary
for the peace, order and good Government
of Canada. It is doubtful if you could say
that this Bill has to do with the peace, order
and good government of Canada. It is sim-
ply an Act relating to the internal manage-
ment of Parliament. Notwithstanding that
argument of Dr. Todd, the Law Officersof the
Crown, held that his view was unsound as to
the Act with respect to examining witnesses
under oath ; and I am quite satisfied that
the same Law Officers of the Crown or their
successors will come to the same conclusion
about this Act if we pass it. If this view

were a sound pne it would have influenced
the Law Officers of the Crown as to that
former Act.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— It is not lifted into
the higher sphere, as Lord Hobhouse, one of
the Lords of the Privy Council in a case
under the Temperance Act said. It must be
lifted into the higher sphere as my hon.
friend has contended.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I have tried to show
that this measure would run counter to the
earlier portions of the British North Amer-
ica Act. The hon. member from Richmond
said that in this measure we did not attempt
to touch the Speaker ; but I do not see how
that could l)e contended, because we in this
measure attempt to provide that the im-
portant duties which by the British North
America Act are assigned exclusively to an
officer appointed by the Governor-General
in the Queen's name shall he performed by
an officer elected by ourselves. I think that
is a very serious interference. I may add
tliat I do not think there is much force in
what was said about the skilled draughtsmen
of the British North America Act, that is
in tlie direction indicated by the hon. gen-
tleman from Richmond. If the draughtsmen^
of the British North America Act were
skilled, as I readily admit they were, we
must, presume that they knew what they
were doing, and that the Bill which they
drafted expressed their meaning ; and inas-
much as the old Legislative Council of
Canada had not the power to appoint
a Deputy-Speaker, the probabilities are
it was not thought necessary or desirable
that the Senate should have that power ;
and if as the hon. gentleman from Rich-
mond said, in dealing with the Senate,
the draughtsmen of that Act were in-
fluenced by English ideas and took for
granted that the Senate would have
the right to appoint a Deputy - Speaker,
why did no.t they take the same view with
respect to the Commons ? Why did they
make a s{)ecial provision as to the Speaker
of the Commons ? My view^ with respect to
section 91, summed up, is that under the
general language of section 91, the Imperial
Parliament did not intend to allow this
Parliament to alter its own Constitution ;
that under this general language as to certain
subjects which might be dealt with by this
Parliament as distinct from those to be

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senaie Bill.

349

dealt with by the Local Legislatures, it never
could be supposed that the Impenal Parlia-
ment intended that we could alter our own
Constitution. See how careful the Imperial
Parliament was, and how careful those
draughtsmen were, to see that there should
not be any doubt, where they did intend to
make a provision of this sort. Through
Part 5 of this British North America Act
one often comes across the words " until the
Legislature of Ontario othen^'ise provides,"
or *' until the Legislature of Nova Scotia or
New Brunswick otherwise provides " ; so
that it is implied in the sections dealing
with the Provincial Legislatures that there is
a good deal left to them. Still in section
92, when the Imperial Parliament comes to
deal with the exclusive powers of the legis-
lature, what is the first thing that it assigns
to the Provincial Legislatures ? " The amend-
ment from time to time, notwithstanding
anything in this Act, of the Constitu-
tion of the province, except as regards
the office of Lieutenant-Governor." Now,
if it had been the intention of Parlia-
ment to allow the Canadian Parliament to
alter its own Constitution and to vary the
provisions made by the Imperial Parliament,
there would have been something perfectly
clear and unmistakable about it. As I
have said l)efore, the British North America
Act provides that the Senate shall he con-
stituted for the discharge of its functions as
a Senate, as a branch of Parliament, when
there is a Speaker appointed by the Gover-
nor-General in the Chair. This Bill proposes
to repeal that provision pro tanto^ and to
provide that this Senate shall be constituted
for the discharge of its functions when there is
a gentleman selected by ourselves in the Chair.
I think there is a direct conflict l>etween the
two provisions. I think it would l)e wiser for
us not to pass the Bill, for the various reasons
I have given ; that the prudent leaders of
opinion in this House in the past refrained
from doing so because they thought we had
not the power ; because it is clear, I think,
and it is admitted by the hon. gentleman
who introduced the measure and by the hon.
gentleman who sits beside him, that we have
no power to do it outside of section 9L I
think it is also just as clear, in my humble
opinion at any rate — and I understand in
the opinion of the hon. gentleman from
Amherst — that we have not the power under
section 91 ; and it is wiser not to p€iss the
Bill because the evil effects of passing this

Bill, if we have not the power to do it, would
be very considerable ; and further I think it
is not necessary, for this reason : the end
which is desired to be reached by this Bill
can l>e reached with certainty and with
about as much speed by an Address to the
Crown asking for the passage of an Im-
perial Act to the same effect. The Imperial
Parliament is sitting now, and a measure of
this sort would be passed, as a matter of
course, through all its stages in a com-
paratively short time, and would become law
before ,we met here again ; and we should
be in a position at the opening of next ses-
sion to make the provision which hon.
gentlemen desire to make by this measure.
There would be no question whatever then
as to our entire power to do what had been
done, and we should feel perfectly safe and
easy as to all the measures which this Parlia-
ment subsequently passed ; and there is this
further thing about that course, which I
think should recommend it to hon. gentle-
men who lead the Government here, that we
would not run the risk of being humiliated
as we have been humiliated before by being
told by the law officers of the Crown in
England that we had done that which we
had no right to do. There is no doubt
about our right to present that Address,
and there is no question but that the
measure would be passed almost immediately
by the Imperial Parliament; and I think
hon. gentlemen that is a wise and prudent
course, and the only course for us to take.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — There is one point in
my remarks, what I consider one of the
strongest, which the hon. gentleman has
failed to take any notice of — that is the
po^^er of the House of Commons under sec-
tion 42. When the Speaker is absent from
the Chair it is provided that the House shall
elect a person to occupy the Chair. Now the
Act passed in 1885, says that the Speaker
may call any one to take his place in his ab-
sence at any time ; that, according to the
hon. gentleman's theory, is unconstitutional,
and if the Speaker carried out that very law
now, the action of the House might l)e called
into question because the Speaker was not in
the chair.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
probably has not adverted to the fact that
the 47 th section in its very language shows

Digitized by

Google

350

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

that it is only a temporary provision, that it !
only provides for the absence of the Speaker '
until the Parliament of Canada has made <
other provisions. The Act of Parliament of |
Canada which the hon. gentleman said was
passed under that section makes other pro- ]
visions for the filling of the chair in the ab- 1
sence of the Speaker. |

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— My hon. friend
from Halifax has sought to limit section 47 I
to the House of Commons, but I contend |
that this power runs through the whole of
the British North America Act " until such
time as Parliament otherwise provides."
We have many things here in this Act, and
they with this Bill come under this general
power given to us under this Act ; it gives
us the power to do what we are doing now.
This is a cognate case — as justifiable as the
Act of 1885 — appointing a Deputy-Speaker
to the Commons when we changed the 47th
section as we did in 1885, just the same rule
and principle does and would apply now.
My hon. friend starts with telling us that it
would be better if we would take another
course. I have had that opinion myself ;
and if we by a joint Address of both Houses
ask for an amendment of the Act, the result
might be accomplished, but my hon. friend
forgets thd-t we might be stultifying our-
selves even in that case ; we might be told
that we had the power already and why
should we come to them to ask a power which
we had. We might actually stultify our
own rights and privileges, and I believe that
is a full answer to my hon. friend, and we
should not unnecessarily question or by our
own act curtail our privileges. Independent
of that this emergency may arise at any
time. We do not know what moment my
hon. friend in the Chair may have to leave
that Chair, and are we to run that risk any
longer? Have we not run that risk long
enough 1 I think the sooner we dispose of
any such unfortunate contingencies as that
the better, and I think that the most ejffec-
tive way we could do it would be the man-
ner proposed, and T think that would be
the end of it ; we would, hear no more
about the validity of our action.
Now, I must say that I approach this subject
with a good deal of hesitancy, knowing
that there has been such a conflict of
opinion amongst the members of this Senate,,
not only at present, but for the last twenty
years ; and, not professing to be a consti-

tutional lawyer, but a plain lawyer, having
practised forty years in courts, trying to
construct or interpret statutes according to
my views, or the interests of my clients, I
therefore approach the matter with con-
siderable hesitancy, but without any fear of
expressing my opinion as to what is the
meaning and intention of this Act. I do
not think this Act touches the prerogative
of the Crown at all. I believe the pre-
rogative of the Crown has been given to
us to act in this matter. I believe the
British North America Act has conferred
on us all the rights and privileges required
in order to make this change. I think
that is inherent, coherent and innate
in this Act, and it is inspired through al-
most every page of the Act, and I do not
believe my hon. friend from Halifax was
fair when he placed the hon. member from
Amherst and the hon. member from Sarnia
against the Minister of Agriculture and
member from Richmond, because they were
not by any means very antagonistic to each
other in their views, but were all of the
same opinion on this Bill. I must say when
I heard my hon. friend the Minister of
Agriculture base and place nearly all his
grounds, if not all, for passing this Act on
the 9l8t section, I felt a little disconcerted.
I had never looked at it in that light. I
had placed it mainly under the 18th section.
The hon. member from Richmond put it
under them both together.

Hon. Mr. POWER.— No.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I thought he
did. The hon. member from Amherst,
supported by the hon. gentleman from
Sarnia, based his opinions mainly upon the
amended Statutes of 1875, of the British
North America Act. He considered it
was strengthened and supported by the
91st clause, and the two together, with the
whole scope, intent and meaning of the Act,
he believ^ gave us a perfect right to legis-
late in the way we propose. Now my hon.
friend from Amherst went back a long way.
I was in the House in 1873, and I remember
well when my hon. friend from Amherst
took a conspicuous and leading part, as he
always did, in the discussion upon the Oaths
Bill. I was a young member at the time,
and my bashfulness, coupled with my hesi-
tancy, prevented me from expressing an
opinion ; but I was with him then

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill

351

that we had no power under that
section, because at the time of the
passing of our British North America Act
the House of Commons of England had not
the power to administer oaths, and although
the* Parliament of Canada subsequently de-
sired to get that power, the House of Com-
mons subsequently having got the power,
yet we could not take that power
because it wtis not the privilege and
power of the English House of Commons
at the time of the British North America
Act — that is the House of Commons
had not then power. Although we passed
that Act, the views of my hon. friend from
Amherst were recognized, and the Act was
disallowed by the Imperial Parliament, or by
Royal Proclamation. Then we got the Act
of 1875. Now that Act of 1875 re-affirms
and re-enacts section 18 of the British
North Atmerica Act, that all the privileges,
immunities and powers created under the
Act of 1867, for the House of Commons and
the Senate, shall l)e such as are from time to
time defined by the Act of the Parliament of
Canada ; but no greater than those enjoyed
by the English House of Commons. Now,
in 1876, the Semfte and Commons extened
the powers as far the Oaths Bills — the
powers of the Commons — and granted to
all the Committees the powers of administer-
ing oaths, which was a power l>eyond the
power enjoyed by the House of Commons of
England at the time. The power was granted
to the House of Commons in a certain Act,
and as long as we did not exceed that
general power, we had the right to pass
that legislation, which we did pass in 1876.
We gave extended powers to the Committees
as to oaths l>eyond the powers of the English
House of Commons at the time. This shows
that we were not strictly tied down to the
privileges of the House of Commons. Then, as
regards this amended Act of 1875, I contend
that we have the power under that Act for
this reason : that the Commons have that
power — the House of Commons of England
have that power. They have the power to
appoint a Deputy-Speaker. They appoint
a Deputy-Speaker. They have appointed a
Deputy-Speaker back prior to our British
North America Act. We have it that the
Commons exercised that power back as far
as 1853 ; they appointed a temporary Speak-
er, and for several years continued doing
so. It was the practice of the House of
Commons up to 1855 to 1866. Then an Im-

perial Act was passed and the Parliament
ratified the previous actions of the Commons
of England. This provision was made with
reference to the temporary absence of the
Speaker : —

'* A Deputy-Speaker shall perform his duties
and exercise his authority, pursuant to the Stand-
ing Orders or other order or resolution, every Act
done and proceeding taken in or by the House,
pursuant to any statute, shall be as valid as if the
Speaker himself were in the chair. "

That is just what we have done or intend
doing by this Act ; that is the action of the
House of Commons in England in 1855, and
subsequently what was done under that was
rendered valid by an Act passed afterwards;
an Act was passed confirming what was done
confirming the practice which had sprung up
in the House of Commons. Now it maybe said
that that was done by Imperial power which
is not granted to us. Of course it was, but
it was established ; therefore it was the
power the House of Commons had not only
by practice but by l)eing establishexi by law
in England prior to the passing of our Bri-
tish North America Act, and if the English
House of Commons had that power and such
privileges at the time of the passing of the
British North America Act, then we had the
right at any time to have the same legisla-
tion here ; but certainly, after 1875, when
the 18th section was renewed and con-
firmed, it established our rights beyond all
question. I refer hon. gentlemen to the
eighth edition of May, pages 234, 235 and
236. I have endeavoured at least to show that
that was the practice of the House of Com-
mons in England, and that was confirmed by
legislation in 1866, and has l)een the prac-
tice ever since, and if they had the power, no
matter how obtained, we must have the
power, because we have it not only in the
original Act of 1867, but by the confirming
Act of 1875. We have all those powers
which the House of Commons had, and I
contend we have the power to pass this mea-
sure, because it does not exceed the powers,
privileges and immunities now enjoyed by
the English House of Commons.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— Do you find
any place where the House of Lords has the
power? I know that the Commons has the
power.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The English
House of Commons has the power ; and that
is all we want. We have nothing to do in

Digitized by

Google

352

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

this case with the House of Lords, and this
Senate can have by this Bill the same power
as the English House of Commons — as held,
exercised and enjoyed now by the English
House of Commons, and by the members
thereof

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— The Commons
elect their Speaker, but the Speaker of the
Senate is by appointment.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH -That may l>e,
but it matters not how it is done. If they
hold, enjoy and exercise it, we can, but as
regards the Deputy-Speaker we are not
attempting to infringe upim the prerogative
of the Crown as given to us under our British
North America. Act. If we have them under
that Act we will not and do not attempt to
interfere with the prerogatives f>f the Gov-
ernor-General, but he may intervene at any
moment, and our statute interprets that
" may " as permissive in the Governor-
General and not imperative.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— What alx>ut interfer-
ing with the statutoi-y power of appoint-
ment?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not under-
stand my hon. friend. If this Bill is the
statutory interference, my hon. friend means,
I do not see where tlie interference is ; we
are not interfering with the statutory power
of appointment in the slightest degree. This
power is given to us under the British North
America Act ; it is inherent, coherent and
an innate power in the Act. We are not
infringing at all, because the Governor-
General has the same power after we pass
this Act as he has now. Then we come to
the 9l8t section. It is clearly there that
the powers are probably stronger than I at
first thought they were. The 91st section
of the Act refers .particularly to certain
powers granted to the Parliament of Canada,
and says : " make laws for the peace, order
and good government of Canada in relation
to all the following matters ; " but then it
does not say they shall have only that power
to make laws for the peace, order and good
government of Canada ; it does not confine
the power to those particular matters sub-
sequently named there, but it says this : —

But not BO as to restrict the generality of the
terms of the foregoing terms of this section.

So that it is the peace, order and good
government of Canada applied to all these

subjects enumerated. It is not to be con-
fined to that alone because it says plainly it
shall not be restricted in any way to aflTect
the general terms of the section ; therefore
it is not confined to that section ; but those
regulations as regards the law, peace, order
and good government are generally spread
over and influence the whole statute as far
as it goes and is applicable to govern the
whole of it, and therefore, I think, with that
section 91, together with the 18th section, or
more correctly, the amending Act of 1875,
I think that we have the power within this
body to pass this Bill, because if you look
generally through all the British North Ame-
rica Act, the 35th, 41st, 45th and 47th sec-
tions, you will see they all recognize the power
of Canada to change the law. All these legis-
lative enactments can be changed by Par-
liament. It is ** until the Parliament of
Canada shall otherwise provide." You find
in almost every section of that Act " until
Parliament otherwise provides " such and
such things Kre enacted. It shows not only
that the general powers given in the 91st
section prevail throughout the Act, and read
with the amended Imperial Act of 1875, I
think gives the power ttiat we here claim
not as an alteration of British North
America Act, or usurpation or breach of the
Crown's prerogative and it is not trespassing
on the prerogatives of the Crown ; because
my contention is — and I think it is the
ccmtention of my hon. friend from Rich-
mond— that that Bill does not interfere
with the prerogative of the Crown, because
the prerogative of the Crown is given us
under the Imperial Act. I think that is
what my hon. friend from Richmond con-
tended, and we do not intend to interfere
with the rights of the Government or the
rights of the Governor-General, because it
does not claim to be co-ordinate with his right,
but expressly sul)ordinate, by the notice of
amendment by the hon. member for Amherst
in these words at the end of the second sec-
tion : " until the Speaker himself resumes the
Chair,or another Speaker be appointed by
the Governor-General." He can at any mo-
ment exercise his prerogative and right,
simply we keep up the continuity of our bu-
siness here, if anything occurs to stop our
proceedings and not by any means to inter-
fere with the appointing or removing power
of His Excellency, but in order that we can
go on with the business of the country — to
which we are commanded to attend ; and I

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

353

say that I believe that is a power inherent
in our Constitution, inherent in the machi-
nery that is given to us, that taking the
whole statute together — that is the legisla-
tive intent — that th y are not to be blocked
in this way. It is a power we have exer-
cised for the last twenty years, although I
achnit notPto the extent asked for in this
Bill, and I feel confident it will not be con-
sidered ultra vires. I admit that there is a
conflict of opinion among hon. gentlemen,
those learned in the law here. The Govern-
ment is the special custodian of the Consti-
tution. No doubt its law advisers have
fully considered thi^ Bill, and if any of us
have any doubt, let the responsibility rest
with the Government.

As I before said, if we had not the power
then, we had no right to appoint a man to
take the Chair as we have done on several
occasions for the last twenty years. We had
no right to put a man there to give a motion
to adjourn or to enter into debate. In all
these acts we recognized our powers inherent
in the Senate of Canada to do so. It is a
power that I am confident we have a right
to exercise as much as we have the right to
exercise any power given to us specifically
by the Constitution. We cannot go outside
of the Constitution here, but there are some
things inherent under the Constitution.
Suppose the Crown has by grant given and
conveyed a piece of land to any one, with all
the privileges and appurtenances, has it not
the right of way, if of necessity, through the
Crown^s surrounding property 1 It is a con-
stitutional right, it is a legal right in order
to use the property, although it is not so
stated in the grant. In conferring a grant
the inherent power goes with the grant of
exercising aU the rights necessary for the
enjoyment of it. I consider that this Bill is
not infringing on the Constitution or on the
prerogative. We are not violating the Bri-
tish North America Act, we are merely pro-
viding for the continuity of the proceedings
of this House and nothing can be done under
this Bill that would prevent His Excellency
the Governor-General from exercising his
prerogative at any moment.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I have listened with
a good deal of interest and attention to the
able arguments of hon. gentlemen who have
spoken against the propriety of our adopt-
ing the Bill now under the consideration of
the Hous^. The arguments advanced fail
23

to convince me that it is not within the pur-
view of Parliament to pass this legislation.
I t^ink the arguments were largely based
upon the assumption that we are attempting
to interfere with the rights and prerogatives
of the Crown. From the stand-point from
which I look at it I see no such attempt.
The language of the second paragraph of the
Bill I admit is too strong. The word " ap-
pointment " carries with it the idea of per-
manence. When we come to that particular
paragraph, I intend to suggest the use of the
word " choose," or "select," conveying the
idea that it is to be only a temporary action
of the House. The first clause of the Bill
gives the Speaker the right to ask any
Senator to take the Chair temporarily, it
being assumed that he himself is in the
building at the time. He may resume the
Chair in five minutes, or not until the end
of the sitting. If that is straining the Con-
stitution, then I must say the Constitution
is exceedingly delicate. If so small a mat-
ter affecting the organization of one of"
the bodies of Parliament, is to give a
blow to the Constitution, it certainly does
not present that elasticity which I think
it ought to possess and which, I'am prepared
to show, it does possess. The next para-
graph in the Bill was intended to meet one
of those cases of emergency that will arise, I
suppose, in all legislative bodies — that has
arisen in the past in this House, and that
will no doubt arise in the future. From my
stand-point, it seems to me that our Consti-
tution would be an exceedingly weak one if,
on an emergency arising we were unable to
meet it in the summary manner which I
propose to explain. You can easily conceive
in a wide country like this that the Gover-
nor-General may, . at any particular time
when the Speaker is ill or detained by a
snow-storm, be a thousand miles away. Will
any one tell me that it is in the interests of
good government tMtt this important body
should be immediately paralyzed simply be-
cause there was not a Senator qualified to be
put in the Chair ? That is practically what
those who declare their intention to vote
against this Bill announce that they are
prepared to say. They are prepared to an-
nounce to the outside world that our Consti-
tution is so weak and so inadequate to our
necessity that we are unable to pass the
simple provision contained in the second
clause of this Bill. It in no way disturbs or
affects the royal prerogative. If we elect

Digitized by

Google

354

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

from ourselves any gentleman to take the
Chair in the temporary absence of the
Speaker, we give him no right to hold the
Chair beyond the time the Crown may choose
to recognize. Who is to be affected by
this ? Certainly not the public ; certainly not
the House of Commons ; certainly not the
Governor-General ; certainly nobody in the
five millions of people of Canada. It is said
that the Crown will be affected. His Excel-
lency, when he authorized the Government
to introduce this Bill, saw no objection of
that kind to it. We know that under our
system of responsible government, the Queen,
or His Excellency, has no voice in the selec-
tion of the Speaker — that he is appointed,
and may be removed at any moment, by the
Pri>y Council of Canada. It is practically
the Privy Council of Canada that is in-
terested. The Privy Council comes forward i
and says we appi*ove of this measure and we
think it should be on the Statute-book.
Here we have heard a long argument as to
•what the law officers of the Crown may say
on the subject, as if they would have any-
thing to say when it does not conflict with
or affect in the slightest degree any funda-
mental part of the Constitution. A good
deal of argument has grown out of the disal-
lowance of the Act of 1873. I will first
draw attention to the Act 1868. Under
that Act we did what, if the interpretation
put upon the British North America Act by
gentleman who are opposed to this Bill is
correct, we have no power whatever to do.
In that year we passed an Act to provide for
the administration of oaths to witnesses. At
that time the House of Commons of England
had not that power. So looking at it in the
light of section 18, that Act was ultra
vires. Did the Imperial Act disturb it?
Not at all. They do not think of dis-
turbing any of our legislation unless it
encroaches on the prerogative of the Crown.
That has been their p<lfccy and desire — to
abstain entirely from interfering with our
legislation. They do not want to interfere ;
they know very well that under our system
of Government, popularized as it is, it would
l)e improper for them to interfere unless
Imperial interests were at stake. That
would be the only justification. That Act of
1868 was allowed to stand. When the dis-
cussion arose as to the Act of 1873, atten-
tion was called to this Act, and what did the
Imperial authorities do ? They did not say
that we had no authority to pass it. They

said that because we had doubts about it,
they would take a certain course. They
recited in the Bill that certain gentlemen in
Canada had doubts, and then they declared
that the Act " shall be valid and shall be
deemed to have been valid as from the date
upon which the royal assent was given."
That was done eight years after •to relieve
the doubts of gentlemen who had questioned
our power to pass the law. It was not in
their own interest but for ours — because we
wanted it done. But it has been said that
the law officers of the Crown disallowed that
Bill. Why did they disallow it ? Because
the father of Confederation asked them to
do so. We, all know that that Act was
introduced in 1873, at a time of great excite-
ment in this Confederation, when a commis-
sion was appointed to investigate the charges
connected with Sir Hugh Allan. Notice
was given of the Bill by Mr. Foumier, a
member of the Opposition, not of the Govern-
ment. Subsequently John Hillyard Cameron,
who was of the opinion that we had the
power to pass it under the British North
America Act, took it up and passed it
through the House of Commons. When it
came to this House, Sir Alexander Camp-
bell took charge of it. What was his \'iew
of the question ? On the 28th April, 1873,
he speaks of the Premier having doubts as
to the power of the Canadian Parliament to
pass the Bill, and then mentions the fact
that another high authority, John Hillyard
Cameron — and those that knew him know
that he was a high legal and constitutional
authority — had no doubt as to our power,
and he says : —

The Premier felt grave doubts, but another
high authority (Hon. J. H. Cameron), entertained
a different opinion, which was entitled to great
respect. The case stood very much as the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Dickey) put it. The Commons
originally had no power to examine witnesses on
oath at all, but were in the habit of sending them
to the Lords to be sworn. Then an Act enabling
the Commons to swear witnesses before thePrivate
Bills Committee was passed, and in this way the
matter stood when our Union Act of 1867 was

Ced. It was perfectly clear that the British
se of Commons hati not the power in 1867.
I This Canadianj\ct of ours proposes to give this

pO'

wer got in England by an Act of Parliament.
>Vhile, therefore, there was a grave doubt in this
matter, our Bill was not a serious affair after alL
The heavens will not fall if we are wrong, if wc
have stretched our authority somewhat. As an
independent legislature, if we err at all it should
be in the direction of freedom. He would desire,
speaking in a general way, where there was any
doubt about our powers, not to circumscribe them.

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893J Semte Bill

355

He would rather ffo for extending than diminish-
ing our powers. If we were wrong in this Bill,
it was at all events with the sanction of very high
authority. He did not venture any opinion him-
self upon the legal poiftt. What, as a Colony, we
had done in the past, we might, without very great
danger, assume we had the power to do in the
future.

Clause 18 of the British North America Act,
as it originally stoodjgave to this House and to
the House of Commons the powers then held
by the House of Commons at that date, so
that our powers did not extend, expand and
grow as the powers of the House of Commons
of England did. I will call attention later to
the fact that when the Act of 1875 was
passed by the Imperial Parliament — and I
suppose with the hope that it would prevent
the necessity of the Canadian Government
going back so frequently for legislation —
they gave us the enlarged and growing
powers of the British House of Commons.
They gave us the largest legislative powers
that any legislative body in the world
possesses — powers that are changing year by
year, growing according to the condition
of things. This is a young country :
do you mean to tell me that if we
narrowed down our interpretation of the
British North America Act to the simple
wording of ' it we would be able to
carry on the country in ten or fifteen years ?
No, and so the British Parliament thought,
and in 1875 they declared that the rights,
immunities and powers of the Senate and
House of Commons of Canada were co-equal
with those of the British House of Commons
at the time that w6 passed any Bill. Now,
ten years hence, or eleven years hence, or
twenty years hence, our powers will be keep-
ing pace with theirs, and we know very well
that the powers of the British House of
Commons are keeping pace with the most
advanced legislation in the world — far ahead
of any other, I may say. The British House
of Commons is to-day the most powerful
body in the world. Now that Bill, which
Sir Alex. Campbell described as "not a
serious affair after all," was a more import-
ant one than this. It carried the pains of
perjury to any one who committed perjury.
This Bill is not on the same plane as that, not
of anything like the same magnitude and
iiuportance.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The Bill of that day
did not affect the validity of our legisla-
tion.

23^

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Sir Alexander Camp-
bell continues : —

Then, we had given ourselves the benefit of
the doubt in the Copyright Act, upon which the
Queen had not yet pronounced. ♦ ♦ ♦ If we were
wrong in this Bill, it was at all events with the
sanction of very high authority. He did not ven-
ture any opinion himslf upon the legal point. What,
as a colony, we had done in the past, we might, .
without very great danger, assume we had the
power to do in the future.

Conveying the idea, at all events from his
stand -point, that we had the power before
Confederation, and if then, how very much
enlarged are our powers now ? Supposing
we did pass this Bill and that attention was
called to it, what would be the course of the
Imperial Parliament ? If they thought wise
to interfere, they would do just as they did
in 1875 — confirm the Act. But I think,
recognizing to the fullest extent the prin-
ciples of responsible government, as the
Speaker is appointed by the Administration
of the day and not under the Queen's signet
at all, they would decide that the interests
of the Crown were in no way affected or
disturbed. If the representative of the
Queen in this country approves of this Bill,
that ought to be a sufficient argument to all
that has been advanced against it. J^at
alone would be a sufficient argument, tH ^
propose to go further than that. I should
regret exceedingly if we evinced a disposi-
tion to circumscribe our powers. Sir Alex-
ander Campbell was a good Conservative, but
he felt the importance of preserving the
rights we enjoy — at all events, of not dim-
inishing them, and while not straining the
Constitution, at least regarding it as some-
what elastic and not of that cast iron cha-
racter that some hon. gentlemen have des-
cribed it to be. I want to explain to hon.
gentlemen why that Act of 1873 was disal-
lowed. There was a good deal of feeling and
excitement about the question — whether
witnesses should be examined before a Com-
mittee of the Commons on oath. Sir John
Macdonald, who was, in 1873, Minister of
Justice, and within six ye^rs from the time
when he was the principal actor in the im-
portant events referred to, made a report,
as Minister of Justice, to Lord Dufferin. His
Excellency did not agree with Sir John Mac-
donald and they consulted Mr. Todd. I
will read what Sir John Macdonald says,
and ask whether the law officers of the
Crown had any alternative whatever except
to take the course which he suggested. Sir

Digitized by

Google

356

Sptdktr of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

John sets forth first the premises whether
the House of Commons had the power in
1867. There is a solid basis for his argu-
ment, ignoring altogether section 91. He
then gave a higher value to the word
** power " than the hon. gentleman from
Richmond gave — both Sir John Macdonald,
Mr. Todd and other authorities to whom I
shall refer just now — gave a more enlarged
interpretation to this word power under the
18th section. Sir John Macdonald was quite
right in laying down the premises that this
Parliament, viewed in the light of the 18th
section of the British North America Act,
had exceeded its jurisdiction. He laid down
that undeniable premises in reference to this
exercise of power, assuming that the Act
was passed in conformity with the powera of
the 18th section. He goes on to say : —

The Question has been raised whether it is com-
petent for the Parliament of Canada to confer this
power on a Committee of the Senate or House* of
Commons here, as it is a power which was not pos-
sessed or exercised by the British House of Com-
mons at the time of the passing of the British
North America Act, 1867.

The undersigned has come to the conclusion, al-
though not without doubt, that this Bill is not
withm the competency or jurisdiction of the Cana-
dian Parliament, and that the attention of Her
MiJj^y's Government should he called to its pro-
vifi^il^ and to the doubt that exists with respect
to its validity.

Now I ask you whether the law officers
of the Crown in England, in view of that
opinion of Sir John Macdonald, had any al-
ternative? They could not aiSbrd to cast
any reflection or doubt on the soundness oi
Sir John Macdonald's opinion, because they
recognized that he was largely interested in
the drafting of that Act and ought to know
what its true interpretation should be. Lord
Dufferin, who had a good deal of skill as a
diplomatist and a member of the House of
Peers, and also had a good knowledge of
constitutional law, did not agree with Sir
John Macdonald. He believed that the Par-
liament of Canada, notwithstanding the re-
strictions of clause 18, had power under the
91st section to pass the Bill. In a long re-
port to the Imperial authorities, dated May
3rd, he says : —

A Bill has been introduced into the Dominion
House of Commons in the present session, intituled
"An Act to provide for the examination of wit-
nesses on oath by Committees of the Senate and
House of Commons in certain cases ; " a question has
been raised as to whether the Dominion Parlia-
ment were competent to pass this Bill in view of
the restrictions imposed by the 18th clause of the
British North America Act aforesaid.

That notwithstanding the view taken by
Sir John Macdonald, notwithstanding the
House of Commons had not the power under
the 18th section, yet under the lai^
power given generally in the Confederation
Act, Parliament was warranted in passing
that bill. What did Mr. Todd say ? We must
recollect that the late Mr. Todd was an au-
thority second to none on either side of the
Atlantic — that for nearly forty years he had
been a close student of the Constitutional law.
Those who knew Mr. Todd in the old Parlia-
ment of Canad€^ and afterwards under Con-
federation, will know how close a student he
was, and how ready he was to give assistance ;
how painstaking and accurate he was. No
one ever thought of doubting any principle
laid down by Todd. His books speak for
themselves. They are authorities not alone
in this country, but on the other side of the
Atlantic as well. Todd quotes the clause
and says : —

In my opinion that clause was intended to
restrain the claims of eithe rHouse to indefinite pri-
vileges and immunities, by providing that such pri-
vileges shall never exceed those enjoyed by the
Imperial House of Commont at a given date. The
privileges and immunities herein referred to are
those tiiat might reasonably or unreasonably be
claimed as inherent in, or necessarily attaching to
the Houses of the Canadian Parliament pursuant
to the maxim that '*^all things necessary p^lss as
incident." By limiting such privileg*^ and powers
to those possessed by tne Imperial House of Com-
mons in 1867, it prevents, on the one hand, an
imdue encix)achment or extension of privilege, and
on the other hand secures to the two Houses and
the members thereof, respectively, the privileges,
immunities and powers appropriate to them as
component narts of the Canadian Parliament.
. It is to oe observed, however, that the power
so conferred upon Committees by the English
Houseof Commons was not claimed as a " privilege"
inherent in that body. It was merely a power
conferred by Statute, to facilitate legislative in-
quiries, similar to that which has been repeatedly
conferred upon Statutory Commissions ; and in
being so conferred it did not trench upon any pre-
rogative of the Croi^Ti, or enlarge the constitutional
rights of the House of Commons.

The Dominion Parliament were therefore
clearly competent, in my judgment, to confer a
similar power upon Committees of the Senate and
House of Commons, pursuant to the authority
conveyed to the Parliament by the 91st clause of
the British North America Act, ** to make laws
for the peace, order, and good government of
Canada. "

In a word, the restrictions contained in the
18th clause of the aforesaid Act, are restrictions
upon claims that might be urged upon behalf of
the two Houses of the Canadian Parliament, or the
members thereof, respectively, to inherent or
excessive privileges, and are not intended to pre-
vent the exercise of legislative powers by the

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate BUI.

357

whole Parliament, provided that the same are
exercised within appropriate couatitutional limits.
(Signed) ALPHEUS TODD.
Library of Parliament,
Ut of May, 1873.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Was not that
disallowed by the Imperial Parliament ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Disallowed in the way
I have stated. Sir John Macdonald pre-
pared the paper which I read a few moments
ago. He set forth that it was in excess of
the powers held by the House of Commons
in 1867, and was therefore tdtra vires of the
Parliament of Canada. I say the law officers
in England would not desire to question Sir
John Macdonald 's opinion.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— Don't you think
that they would exercise an independent
opinion ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Had not Sir John
Macdonald's opinion been presented in that
way, I do not think they would have dis-
allowed it. I have more faith in the opinion
■of Mr. Todd and John Hillyard Cameron and
■of Lord Dufferin than in the opinion of the
law officers of the Crown given under such
circumstances. I do not desire to show any
-disrespect to the Privy Council, but naturally
those gentlemen could not be expected to
take the same deep interest in matters of
that kind that those on this side of the
Atlantic would. Besides, I never can get
■out of my mind the feeling that there were
reasons behind it all. I do not want to talk
about them now, but it was a time of very great
excitement and it is not desirable to mix up
the events of that day with this matter. I
certainly think that the opinions I have read
will more than counterbalance the opinions
of the law officers of the Crown in Eng-
land. But at all events, that was a matter
of very great consequence and where
there was a correct premises, as Sir John
Macdonald laid it down, taking as a stand-
ard the powers of the British House of Com-
mons in 1867, it is no wonder that the law
officers of the Crown declared that the legis-
lation was vitra vires. There is no doubt
At all that it was, if they took Sir John
Macdonald's paper and went no further.
They would say there was no doubt at all
that the Parliament of Canada had exceeded
its ' powers. They were not interested in
enlarging and extending our powers, or
studying the question from the stand-point of

Mr. Todd, or of John Hilyar«i^^ Cameron,
or even of Lord Dufferin. It was a fortu-
nate thing for us that that Act was dis-
allowed, because what has been the result ?
The Act that has already been adverted to
by the hon. member from Richmond was
passed, which gave us powers largely in ex-
cess of those conferred upon us by the
British North America Act. In order that
no question should arise in the future, the
British House of Commons said we will give
them all the powers that the British House
of Commons now possess or can possess
in the future. Was not that saying all
that it could say? I took the trouble
to look up the debates in the House
of Commons and in the House of Lords
to see what interest they took in it but there
was not a syllable uttered in either House.
The Bill went through without a single
comment. That is the compliment that they
paid us. I expected to find a remark by
some member of either House that they
were giving the Parliament of Canada very
wide powers,. but not a single syllable was
uttered. I looked to see what view was
taken of it by the members of the British
Parliament, but was surprised to find that
the Bill went through without any one
paying attention to it. Of course they
have other things there which are more
engrossing on their attention. As I said
before, the Crown accepts this legislation, and
the Crown is the only part of our Constitu-
tion which is in the smallest degree affected;
no other element of the Constitution is con-
cerned in any way. With all due respect
for the powers of our Speaker, I am free to
admit that I do not know of any officer, any
official, any functionary who, in any legis-
lative body, has less to do. They took good
care to give our Speaker as little as possible.
Then again, it is not at all essential that
the Speaker occupy the Chair all the time.
What does the Lord Chancellor do when
he wants to speak ? He goes down in the
Chamber.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— He is not replaced.

Hon. Mr, SCOTT— No ; not replaced;
the Chair is empty, and he addresses the
Lords as we address each other, and does
not address the Speaker. We do not ad-
dress the Chair ; we address each other. It
is contrary to the rules, and it would be an
impropriety to recognize that we had a

Digitized by

Google

358

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

Chair. That is practically our position, and
the status of this House ; and the Speaker
has a perfect right to come down on the
floor of the House and join in the debate.
I have seen Speaker Christie corae down and
take part in the debate on the floor of the
Senate. Is it so important that there should
be somebody in the Chair all the time ?
Could not somebody else put the motions ?
Our Speaker, as I said before, has fewer
functions, fewer powers than the head of any
legislative body that I know of. It does
seem to me, under those circumstances, that
we ought not to hesitate about claiming the
rights we profess to have under this Bill. I
was very sorry indeed that I could not get
the extract which was read from Bourinot.
I have the highest respect for his opinion,
and I would like to have seen it. I sent
down to the printing office to get it, but
have been unable to see it. My recollec-
tion of it when it was read, was that it was
predicated on a condition of things not such
as I have described — that it was there
assumed what hon. gentlemen in this debate
have assumed, that we are appointing a
Deputy-Speaker. Now, we never contem-
plated anything of the kind. There
is nothing in the Bill to show that ; no jus-
tification for saying so, and this word " ap-
point " is altogether too strong. The Bill
only indicates that we are doing what is
simply a temporary act, not disturbing thd
power of the Crown or the Speaker in any
way ; and therefore I should like to have |
had that extract to read it over before mak- 1
ing any more comments. However, I have '
sent for it two or three times, and it cannot I
be got from the Printing Office ; and there- 1
fore I propose to make an observation or '
two ; I propose to quote Bourinot in that
respect, because I lay down this principle,
that our constitution is not alone the British |
North America Act ; that it is the rights j
and privileges and the powers that have
come down from time immemorial of the !
British House of Commons. That is our I
power, and let any man look back at
the history of the House of Commons and
he will see that every quarter of a century I
the powers of the House of Commons have I
been expanding, and they are going to i
expand more and more. Take as an evid- '
ence of it a most important thing in the '
memory of many people of recent years — ]
the Long Parliament. It is not necessary ,
to refer to the period of the Stuarts and \

Charles, when the House of Commons as-
serted themselves, but take the Reform Bill
when practically the House of Commons
took the constituencies that the L-^rds repre-
sented, that the Lords could nominate. We
know that the Lords protested and objected
and they threw it out ; the Commons sent it
back and they threw it out again \ and the
Commons went to the King and said : " We
will fill up the House of Lords with men
who will pass this Bill." He said :
" No, you cannot do it '' ; and they said :
" We will." He said, "We will give you
twenty -one ; " and they said, "No, we will
take the absolute power to pass the Reform
Bill." What did the king do? He had to
yield. That is the last occasion on which we
have any record of the king objecting to the
proposals of the Ministers of ^e day ; and
the Lords, finding they were going to l)e
swamped, walked out of the House. We
will have that history repeated, I think, with
reference to the Home Rule Bill ; it will go
up to the House of Lords and they will reject
it once : whether they will reject it twice I
cannot say ; but Gladstone has the power to
pass the Bill and send it up. The power of
the House of Commons is a large, growing
and expanding power. As the conditions of
the country change, the powers of Parlia-
ment grow, and I do not want it togo abroad
that the British North America Act alone is
the charter of our rights and liberties, I
say they are higher and broader than that,
and I point to the Act of 1875, amending
that, in confirmation of what I say. Now in
reference to the expanding powers which I
say we possess, year by year as the country
grows and its conditions alter in ways and
manners we cannot now dream of, our rights
and privileges will grow pari pasmi with
those of the House of Commons of Eng-
land. Now would you say it was Mr. Bou-
rinot's view that our Parliament was res-
tricted by the words of the British North
America Act ? I will read some paragraphs
from his work on parliamentary procedure
and practice, page 781, second edition. It
is under the chapter " General Observations
on the practical operation of Parliamentary
Government in Canada" It reads in this
way:—

In any review of the legislative Acts of the
Dominion, the Government of England has for
many years past fully recognized those principles
of self-government which form the Ijasis of the
political freedom of Canada. No Act of the Parlia-
ment of the Dominion can now be disallowed

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

359

except it is in direct conflict with Imperial treaties,
to wnicb the pledge of England has been solemnly
given, or with a Statute of the Imperial legislature
which applies directly to its dependency. The
Imperial Parliament may legislate in matters im-
mediately affecting Canada, but it is understood
that it only does so as a rule in response to
addressed of her people through their own Parlia-
ment in order to give validity to the Acts of the
latter in cases where thelBritish North America
Act oi 1867 is silent, or has to be supplemented by
additional Imperial legislation.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Hear, heiir.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— At page 783 he de-
scribes the large powers the provinces have ;
— have all those specified in sections 91 and
92:—

£^ch Government acts within the limits of its
defined legislative authority with respect to those
matters which are of purely local concern, and it
is only when the interests of the Empire are in
direct antagonism with the privileges extended to
the Colonial dependency, the sovereign authority
should prevail. This sovereign authority can never
be exercised arbitrarily, but should be the result
of discussion and deliberation, so that the interests
of the parent state and the dependency may l)e
brought as far as possible into hannuny with one
another. The written and unwritten law provides
methods for agreement or compromise between the
authorities of the present State and its depen-
dencies.

It is quite clear that Mr. Bourinot does
not consider that we have that ironclad Con-
stitution that some hon. gentlemen have de-
scribed.

In matters of kw the Privy Council is guided
by various rules which wisely restrict appeals from
the dependency within certain defined limits. In
matters of legislation and administration, on which
there may be a variance of opinion l)etween the
Canadian and the Euelish (Government, the means
of communication is the Governor-General and the
Secretary of 8tate for the Colonies.

That would seem to indicate there was
not a very anxious desire to interfere with our
legislation and especially so harmless a meas-
ure as is this. I would like to read an opinion
given by the highest authority in the land,
as we recognize him ; that is, the members
of the Privy Council in England, who cer-
tainly ought to be as tenacious of the rights
of the Crown as the Crown itself ; because
they do immediately represent the Crown in
the Privy Council. In the celebrated case
of Hodge V8. the Queen, under which the
powers conferred under our charter came up
for consideration, they said : —

With respect to the subjects over which the
Parliament and Legislatures of Canada have legis-
lative control by the British North America Act of

1867. They must be considered to have the plenary
powers of the Imperial Government (to quote the
words of the judicial committee) subject only to
such control as the Imperial Government may ex-
ercise, from time to time, and subject only to Her
Majesty's ri^ht of disallowance, which the British-
North America Act reserves to Her, and which no-
one doubts will be exercised with full regard to
constitutional principles and in the best interests
of the country when exercised at all.

Now, how often has it been exercised of
recent years ? In the cases I have given
where the Imperial authority has intervened
it has been at our instance ; but when the
Act of 1875 was passed, giving us the en-
larged powers, 1 have not been able to find
that those larger powers were given at our
instance and request. I am not aware that
it was at the instance of Canada ; on the
contrary, so far as 1 have been able to
discover,* it was their own action. They
seemed to be stimulated by a desire to shut
out the subject for ever more and say, " here
take all the powers which the House of
Commons has, the growing powers, at any
time to pass any particular bill." That is
practically what they said, and I am not
aware of our asking for it. Then on page
785 Bourinot again refers to the unwritten
law : —

If we study the Constitution of Canada, we
find that its principles rest both on the written and
the unwritten law.

And then he goes on to discuss the British
North America Act ; he describes it as
being somewhat of a more flexible instru-
! ment than some of the hon. gentlemen who
I have spoken on this question would maintain.
I am sorry if Mr. Bourinot has been quoted
at all "that he could not have been quoted
under his own hand. I do not know how
far he has prepared any paper, or how far
he has committed himself to any view on the
subject, and therefore I say it with all the
greater respect for his opinion, I fear that
the premises as laid down for the extracting
of an opinion from him may not have been
just in harmony with the provisions of this
Bill. If my memory serves me correctly,
he adverted to our appointing a Deputy-
Speaker, which we do not propose to do,
and clearly would not have the power to
do ; but this Bill is altogether a diflerent
affair.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— It reads that way.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Not at all.

Digitized by

Google

860

Speaker of the | SENATE] Senate Bill.

Uon. Mr. POIRIER— Is not the man
who takes the Speaker's place in his absence
a Deputy-Speaker ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— No, he is not a Deputy-
Speaker in any sense ; just to complete the
organization of the Chamber there is a
Senator in the Chair.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— He is another
Speaker.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— He is a Speaker pro
tern ; you may call him a Speaker.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— Would my hon.
friend read the last line of the Bill : — ** And
such Senators shall thereupon have and
execute all the powers, privileges and duties
of Speaker." You may call it any name
you like, but it is to all intents and purposes
a Deputy-Speaker.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Those words might be
struck out ; what power has the Speaker but
to put questions from the Chair 1 As showing
that it is not proposed to disturb or interfere
with the prerogative of the Crown, we may ask
an hon. gentleman to take the Chair in a press-
ing emergency, and the next minute he may
say : "I hold a Commission from the Sover-
eign to sit as Speaker in this body." We do
not dispute that. He is onJy placed there
in a contingency to carry on the functions
of the body, so that we will not be at a
stand still. My hon. friend spoke of the
dire consequences which might ensue if some
Act of Parliament was passed with some one
in the Chair other than the Speaker. Who
can call it to account in the courts of this
country ? They cannot take cognizance of it.
Who enacts the Bill ? Her Majesty by and
with the advice and consent of the Senate
and the House of Commons of Canada. Do
you suppose they could go beyond one of our
Acts of Parliament ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— Certainly.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I think I could, as a
lawyer, answer certainly not. I do not
think they would do anything of the kind.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It would be ultra
vires.

Hon. Mr. SOOTT— It could not be idtra
vires unless the Imperial authorities chose to

take a strained view of it and intervene,
which I do not think is at all likely. As I
have read from Bourinot, the Imperial au-
thorities do not wish or do not desire, — it
has not been their policy since Confederation
— to in any way disturb anything we do
here, provided it does not encroach on Im-
perial rights there ^ and this Bill is no en-
croachment on Imperial rights. The Gover-
nor-General, who represents the Queen, has
a voice in the matter nominally, and he con-
sents, I presume. I suppose the Government
can tell us that before the Bill goes through.
If that is done I do not think the House
should have another objection to it. If the
hon. gentleman can say the Governor-Gen-
eral has seen the Bill and approves of it, that
is an end of it. There is nobody else who
can take objection. I listened with a great
deal of respect to the very able arguments
addressed to this House by the hon. gentle-
man from Barrie, but I think he is mistaken
in his conclusions. He gave us a very able
and thoughtful opinion on this subject, but
in it I find that he states that we have no
prescriptive or inherent right — that all we
possess is within the four comers of the
Constitutional Act. Well, I think I heard
my hon. friend go a little further than
that on a former occasion in 1888, when the
question came up in consequence of Senator
Plumb's death. He said : ** If no one ob-
" jects you have objected, and I was going to
" point out what the precedent had been in
" the past ; I have no doubt the inherent
" power exists with the House to adjourn.
My learned fnend says now he does not
think there is any inherent power.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN — That .was simply to
adjourn.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I think if we can put
one motion we can put another.

Hon Mr. POIRIER— No.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— My hon. friend says
no ; it is a matter of opinion ; it would be
unparliamentary to talk about hair splitting,
but words will rise without one desiring to
utter them. Then I find the hon. senator
from Barrie also quotes the hon. senator
from Amherst as having given expression to
the opinion that we might appoint a Deputy-
Speaker. On reading the language of the
hon. gentleman from Amherst at that time,
his language was exceedingly guarded and

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate BilL

361

does not convey any such opinion ; on the
contrary, he gave a written paper, and in it
he proposed that the motion to adjourn
should be coupled with the statement of
certain facts, in order to show that the
House was doing as little as possible. Here
were his words : —

The bou. ffeiitlenmn, Mr. Hamilton, took the
Chair accordingly by consent of the members
present, declare the House adjourned until a
future period. By consent of the members present
and out of respcjct to the memory of the late
Speaker, the Hon. Mr. Plumb, I declare the House
adjourned until Monday, the 19th inst., at three
o*clock in the afternoon.

He did not in the remarks he made there,
certfidnly, convey the idea, that the House
had the power to appoint a Deputy-Speaker
or Speaker pro tern. His views are wider
and larger. I have the debate before me,
and thought his language was exceedingly
circumscribed and showed a disposition not
to go beyond what was absolutely necessary.
It seemed to be the current feeling of the
House that we should not discuss the ques-
tion furtheiL than to adjourn. We did,
however, have a debate ; it appears it
occupied some columns of our Debates. Sev-
eral hon. members spoke ; we had a debate
with a Speaker in the Chair, indicating that
our organism was preserved and kept up,
and that the Constitution of the country did
not receive a violent shock.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— There was no
executive action.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Nothing could be more
executive in its character than adjourning
the House. It certainly was a good deal
more than putting a motion and being en-
tirely governed by the House, yea or nay,
as to whether the motion was carried or
rejected.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— T feel that I
cannot give a silent vote on this question.
Having for some ten or fifteen years past
advocated the necessity of having a senator
to replace, now and then, the Speaker in the
Chair, it might happen that I would be con-
sidered to have been insincere when I feel
bound on the present occasion to refuse my
complete support to the Bill now under con-
sideration. I am bound, it seems to me, to
give some reasons for such a refusal.

Had the Bill contained only the first
clause I would be induced to give it my

support considering that it might not then
be tdtra vireSy and even then if so it
could have no bad consequences, as under
the first clause the Speaker would have the
Chair for a short time during a sitting and
be at hand to resume the Chair in case of
any difficulty arising such as deciding a
point of order, restoring order in case of
words of heat having been uttered, or all
other difficulties which the Speaker alone
has a right to settle. With reference to the
second and third clauses, it has always been
my honest conviction that this Parliament
had no right to pass such legislation, that
it was vltra vires. I will not take the time
of the House in repeating arguments which
have already been advanced ; it is sufficient
for me to state that I agree with most of the
arguments which have so well been put be-
fore this House by the hon. Senator from
Halifax (Mr. Power). Indeed, I rose after
that hon- gentleman's speech for no other
purpose than to state my concurrence in the
views ^pressed by that hon. Senator and if
I gave way and allowed the hon. Senator
from Ottawa (Mr. Scott) to follow the hon.
gentleman from Halifax^ it was to wait and
see whether the hon. leader of the Opposition
would not convince me that the hon. Senator
from Halifax was wrong and so alter my
views. But far from having been convinced by
the hon. gentleman from Ottawa that this
Bill was altogether constitutional, he on the
contrary has convinced me that we have no
right to pass such a law. The hon. Senator
from Ottawa has stated that this Parliament
derives its power in this instance from the
91st clause of the British North America
Act, which enacts that in every case where
the subject is not one of those alloted to the
provinces, the Federal Government shall
have full power to legislate for the peace,
order and good government of Canada. That
hon. Senator has added that under this
clause, there can be no doubt of our power
to pass such legislation. I am not a lawyer,
but as a layman, I regret to say that I dis-
sent from his views. No doubt, much legis-
lation can be brought under this 9 1st clause,
but in the present instance, I emphatically
deny that this clause grants such power.
The Senate may not lose sight of the 34th
clause which restricts the 9l8t so far as this
question is concerned. The 34th clause
reads thus : —

34. The Governor-General may from time to
time, by instrument under the Great Seal of Can-

Digitized by

Google

362

Speaker of the [SBITATE] Senate Bill.

ada, appoint a Senator to be Speaker of the Senate,
and may remove him and appoint another in his
stead.

Hon. gentlemen will see that by this
enactment the power to appoint a Speaker
to this House is reserved to the Crown. If
so, is it not evident that this special enactr
ment restricts the general power given by
the 91st clause. Now, let me refer Your
Honours to the 2nd clause of the Bill under
consideration which reads thus : —

2. Whenever the Senate is informed by the
Clerk at the table of the unavoidable absence of
the Speaker, the Senate may appoint any Senator
to act for the Speaker during such absence, and
such Senator shall thereupon have and execute all
the powers, privileges ana duties of Speaker.

Now, in passing such legislation, is not
this House appointing a Speaker ? So much
so that the Speaker appointed by the Crown
might not resume the Chair for months and
during all such time the Senate would have
for its Speaker a gentleman chosen by the
Senate in violation of the Constitutional law
which enacts that the Speaker of the Senate
shall be appointed by the Crown. Then the
hon. Senator from Ottawa went on referring
to the Bill passed by this Parliament some
years ago, concerning the swearing of wit-
nesses before Committees. Now, that Bill
was disallowed on the ground that it was
7dtra vires — and no doubt it was. But
suppose it had not been and that it had not
been so disallowed, it could not help the
hon. gentleman in his pretentions, the two
cases being altogether different. In the
matter of swearing witnesses this Parliament
had acted under the provisions of the 91st
section of the British North America Act,
which it seemed then was in no way res-
tricted by any other clauses of this same
Act, and which truly was not directly res-
tricted by any other provisions of the Con-
stitution. Nevertheless, it was disallowed
in England on the ground that the Bill was
ultra vires, the 18th clause of the British
North America Act giving to the two Cana-
dian Houses of Parliament only such powers
as the Commons in England had at the time
of the passing of the British North America
Act, in 1867. At the time the House of
Commons in England had no power of
swearing witnesses. In the present ins-
tance the case is a good deal stronger, the
34th clause restricting completely the general
power given by the 9 1st clause. Let me now
refer the House to the 3rd clause of the
Bill under consideration. It reads thus :

3. Every Act done by any Senator, actineas
aforesaid, shall have the same effect and validity
as if the same had been done by the Speaker him-
self.

Now, I should like to know how it is pos-
sible for this Parliament to give what it has
not. The powers and privileges given to
the Speaker of this House are part of the
Constitution. The Crown, in conformity
with the Constitution and under its pro-
visions, having appointed the Speaker, this
House has no power or privileges which it
can legally and constitutionally give to
another of its members. If any one could
delegate such powers, I should say the
Speaker appointed by the Crown is the only
one who could do so, and not this House.
I give notice that when this Bill is referred
to a Committee of the whole House I shall
move that the 2nd and 3rd clauses be
struck out.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— On this matter I
take similar views to those expressed by the
hon. gentleman from Delanaudiere. I be-
lieve not only that the 1st clause of the Bill
is intra vires^ but that it is a good clause
and that it should be enacted. I might add
further, that I believe we have by inherent
power the rights and privileges mentioned
in that clause. There is a distinction between
the powers given us by our Constitutional
Act and the inherent powers that we possess
in common with all other deliberative as-
semblies. . We have some inherent powers,
but those powers cannot conflict with the
powers specially pro\dded by the Constitu-
tional Act which created us. For example,
we have the power to adjourn ; there is not
the remotest doubt about that. If a panic
occurred here, we would have the power to
adjourn with or without a Speaker. Suppose
a panic occurred here could we not adjourn
whether the Speaker was in theX^hair or not f
That is an inherent power. There is nothing
in the Constitution that authorizes us to
appoint chairmen of Committees, still we do
so. Why ? Because while the House is in
Committee, no legal act is performed, and
we have the inherent privilege of appointing
a chairman of a Committee. I would go
further and admit that the Speaker might
have the right to call to the Chair somebody
to take. his place while the debate was going
on provided, however, that no vote be taken,
but my ground is that while holding to those
inherent powers and privileges we cannot
conflict with our constitution, and that in

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 20, 1893] Evidence Bill.

3t>3

the matter of the appointment of a Speaker
we have no privileges whatever. In my
humble opinion clauses 2 and 3 of this Bill
are ultra vires, as they conflict with the
Constitution which created us and under
which we have our existence.

The second clause provides that whenever
the Senate is informed by the Clerk at the
Table that the Speaker of the Senate is un-
avoidably absent, the House may appoint
some one to take his place. That creation
of the House is either a Speaker or is not.
If he is not, he avails nothing, as the Senate
can do no political act without a Speaker.
If he is, we are stepping in and taking
powers on ourselves equal to those reserved
for the Crown ; we are appointing a creature
whom the House of Lords in England has
not the power to appoint ; the Lords do not
even appoint their Deputy-Speakers. The
hon. gentleman from Ottawa has talked
very lightly in my estimation of our con-
stitutional charter. I believe, for my part,
that we should guard against unduly inter-
fering with it. It is the Act, the source
of our very existence, and it should be
religiously respected.

At six o^clotk the Speaker left the Chair.

After Recess.

Hon, Mr. POIRIER rose to . resume his
speech.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL suggested that before
proceeding with his speech the Orders of the
Day should be disposed of.

WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the Second
Reading of Bill (23) " An Act respecting
witnesses and evidence."

He said : — This is a Bill respecting wit^
nesses examined and evidence adduced be-
fore the Courts created by the Parliament
of Canada. It applies to all criminal pro-
ceedings and to other matters respecting
which the Parliament of Canada has juris-
diction. As to witnesses in criminal cases
it is a new measure, which is in the line of
the progress which is made in other countries
in relation to evidence. Formerly interest
and crime debarred witnesses from being
heard. It is proposed that none of those

causes should affect the right of a witness to
give evidence. It is proposed that every
person charged with an offence, and the wife
and husband, as the case may be, of the per-
son accused, shall be a competent and com-
pellable witness. We all know that under
the present law a wife cannot be heard as a
witness against her husband, and a husband
cannot be heard as a witness against his
wife. They are not competent or compel-
lable witnesses. It is proposed that they
shall be made competent and compellable,
competent in so far that a husband or a wife
can state what he or she may have seen of
the offence committed, but not to give evi-
dence upon confessions or admissions made
during the marriage. If they are to be com-
petent witnesses I think they must also be
coDipellable witnesses. It is absurd, in my
humble opinion, to provide that a witness
shall be competent but not compellable. If
he is a competent witness he must come
before the court, not as a man bound to give
only one side of the case, but as one who is
bound to tell all he knows about it, and he
should not have the privilege of declining to
answer on the ground that his reply might
criminate him. He is protected under the
provisions of this Bill in so far that no other
case, either civil or cruninal, could be
brought against him on his own evidence or
the evidence he had given in a previous case.
I say that it is in the interest of the accused
that he should be a compellable witness. His
evidence will not be half as strong if he
comes before the jury protected from telling
everything he knows about the case. It has
occurred on many occasions that the life of
a prisoner depended on his own statement.
He often is the only witness who can give
the true version of what has occurred.
During my experience I have had a man
tried before me where the whole of the
evidence rested on two admissions made
by him. It was a case of murder which
occurred where there was no other person
but the prisoner and the dead man. The
deceased received a blow and never spoke
afterwards. Nobody knew of the case but
the prisoner himself. Immediately after the
event the prisoner continued on his voyage
and he made then a statement while under
his first excitement, which statement con-
tained no extenuating circumstances. Half
an hour later he made another statement in
which he mentioned ^extenuating circums-
tances, showing that the assault had been

Digitized by

Google

364

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

committed against him and that he had
killed his assailant in legitimate self-defence.
The jury were charged that if they believed
one statement it was a murder, that
if they believed the other statement it was
•either manslaughter or justifiable homicide.
The jury adopted the latter statement as the
true one. That man was in peril of his life
for two days, the whole of the time that the
trial lasted. Had he been a competent and
compellable witness, I have no doubt that
the jury would have accepted his statement
— which was the true and real one I believe
— that the man was killed in legitimate self-
defence. In this case, and in many others
that have occured, it is important in the in-
terests of justice — because that is the object
in view in examining witnesses — that the
prisoner should be in a position to give evi-
dence, that he should be a competent wit-
ness, and if he is made a competent witness
it is in his own interest and in the interest
of justice that he should be a compellable
witness. The 5th clause of the Bill pro-
vides that no person shall be excused from
answering questions upon the ground that
the answers to such questions may tend to
criminate him or may tend to establish his
liability to a civil proceeding at the instance
of the Crown or of any other person, provi-
ded, however, that no evidence so given shall
be used or received against this person in
any criminal proceedings thereafter institu-
ted against him, other than prosecution for
perjury if, in giving such evidence, be makes
a false statement. That is the protection
that is given him, that upon his evidence
alone he could not be tried for the offence
and that there must be some other evidence
to convict him. The other clauses relate to
the evidence of public documents, of procla-
mations, of deeds passed before notaries and
of various documents which purport to issue
under official seal or under some official au-
thority.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— That is already on
the statutes.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Yes, but thb is a
codification. It also provides, which is now
in the law, that a child so young as to be
unable to justify before a court the obliga-
tion of an oath, may also be a witness and
give evidence, but subject to the limitation
that the statement of such a child shall not
b« of itself evidence, but must be corrobor-

ated by other circumstances or other evi-
dence. Those are the main points of the BilL

Hon. Mr. POWER— I have been taken
completely by surprise. The House rose at
six o'clock, while the hon. gentleman from
Shediac was engaged in making his speech,
and I presumed, as has been the universal
practice of this House since I have had the
honour of holding cuseat here, that the hon.
gentleman would have gone on with his
speech as soon as the Speaker resumed the
Chair. When I return, I find the House en-
gaged in discussing the details of a difilerent
measure altogether from that which was be-
fore us at recess. It is a measure as to which
there is a great difference of opinion. I could
have understood if the House had taken up
only measures which would not lead to dis^
cussion. During all the years that I have
been in the Senate I have never known a
case of the kind to occur before.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I understood that
this was done by the unanimous consent of
the members of the Senate present at the
time, reserving the discussion to be carried
on at length on the other subject after get^
ting through the Orders of thfe Day.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I was about to
make the same remark as the hon. gentle-
man from Halifax. This is a very important
measure. It is a radical change in the
Criminal Law, not only of this country but
of England, and it is of such importance
that I think it ought not to be taken up at
this time of the evening when nobody ex-
pected a debate. If the hon. gentleman
proposes to go on with the Bill to-night, I
shall find it necessary to speak at some
length on the question, but if it is postponed
until another time I shall be quite satisfied.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— It is the fault of the
House that this measure has been taken up
now. There was no objection raised to the
course adopted.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— When the sug-
gestion was made, I thought it was a most
unusual mode of procedure, but as there was
a consensus of opinion and no one objected
I did not raise an objection. It is one of
those important measures that will, I have
no doubt, create a great deal of discussion.
In this House, under our rules, we affirm
the principle of a Bill at the second reading.

Digitized by

Google,

Parliamentary [MARCH 20, 1893J Fees Bill.

365

It is not so in the House of Commons.
Hence, you have a greater latitude in the
House of Commons, because you may allow
a bill involving a very important principle
to pass the second reading, reserving the
right under the rules to object to the prin-
ciple at a subsequent stage. I can under-
stand the objection taken by the hon. mem-
ber from Lunenburg and the hon. member
from Halifax, because if the Senate pass the
second reading of this Bill they affirm its
principle unless each individual reserves the
rights to himself to discuss the principle in
Committee.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I think that the
House will have a full opportunity of discus-
sing the Bill perhaps at greater advantage
when the House goes into committee of the
whole, and 'that we might allow the 2nd
reading of the Bill, to take place on that
understanding — that no member will be
bound by this second reading and that when
the House goes into Committee of the Whole
a full discussion of the principle of the Bill
will be admitted. We will get one step
further on by taking this course. I do not
intend to press this BUI to-morrow but will
give every reasonable delay before going
into Committee of the Whole on the Bill. I
think that the House might follow this
course after the explanation I have given of
the Bill — i stated that it was new in prin-
ciple— I drew the attention of the House to
the principal features of the Bill, and under
the circumstances, I think we might have
the second reading take place now without
causing any difficulty.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Ishal) certainly
conform to the feeling of the House if it is
understood that we do not commit ourselves
to the principle of the Bill by letting the
second reading pass now. The Bill proposes
a radical change and it should be very care-
fully considered.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not propose to
object to the second reading of the Bill now.
The hon. Minister will see that in dealing
with an important measure of this kind it is
desirable that the discussion should take
place at the second reading, because at that
stage members who may agree with a great
portion of the Bill can point out the portions
of it which need amendment, and those
suggestions can be considered by the Minister
before he goes into Committee with the Bill.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— When we go into
Committee of the Whole I will give ample
time for the discussion of the Bill, and if it
is necessary we might have more than one
sitting in Committee of the Whole.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— If no other
hon. gentleman will move in committee to
amend the Bill I shall move that two words in
the fourth clause be struck out, " and com-
pellable."

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— That has been the
subject of a long discussion in the other
House.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill was
read the second time.

WRECKS AND SALVAGE BILL.

THIRD BEADING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved that the
House resolve itself into a Committee of the
Whole on Bill (3) " An Act to amend the
Wrecks and Salvage Act."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. BOWELL said :— This is simply
to facilitate the investigation into wrecks or
other matters connected with vessels, by
substituting the word " Minister " for
** Governor in Council." It will enable the
Minister to instruct the man to make the
investigation at once and make the report to
him on which he can act and for which he is
responsible, before he can lay it before
Council for approval.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL, from the Committee,
reported the Bill without amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time and

PARLIAMENTARY FEES BILL.

THIRD URADINO.

The House resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole on Bill (61) " An Act
respecting the disposal of moneys paid in
connection with proceedings before Parlia-
ment."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. McKAY— I should Hke to
know what the process will be in case this
House should resolve to return a portion of
the fees on a Bill. At present it is refunded
through our own Clerk.

Digitized by

Google

366

Doran [SENATE] Divorce Bill. *

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— It will be on the
order of the House for a refund. The cheque
will be issued, which will be honored by the
. Auditor-General and paid out of the Contin-
gent Account which is placed to the credit
of your accountant. I asked the Auditor-
General the question which has been put to
me, and also the Finance Minister. I am
informed that this Bill is simply to carry out
in principle by law that which has been the
practice of the Senate for some years. Then
I asked this question — supposing the Senate
authorizes the refund of a deposit which has
been made, what will be done ? The Auditor-
General stated that a cheque will be issued
on the order of the House. There will be
no difficulty under the new Act. The com-
mittee recommend the refunding and upon
that the cheque will be given by the Audi-
tor-General.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— On the recom-
mendation of the committee, but that must
be adopted by the House.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Yes.

Ht)n. Mr. PERLEY from the committee,
reported the Bill without amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

TRIAL OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS
BILL.

THIRD READING POSTPONED.

The order of the day being called — Com-
mittee of the whole House on Bill (M) " An
Act respecting the Trial of Juvenile Offen-
ders."

Hon Mr. ALLAN said : — The Minister
of Agriculture has been kind enough to
show me a memo, from the Minister of
Justice on this Bill. With many of his
\'iew8 I entirely agree, but as I think it is
a matter which should be very well con-
sidered indeed before it passed this House,
particularly as it will be an amendment to
the present Criminal Code, my own feeling
is rather to withdraw the Bill ; but in the
meantime, as I am desirous of putting my-
self in communication with the Prison
Reform Association and others at whose
instance I introduced the Bill, I move that
the Order of the Day be discharged and
fixed for Thursday next in order that I

may have an opportunity to consult these
gentlemen, though my own feeling is to
withdraw the Bill.

The motion was agreed to.

DORAN DIVORCE BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN moved the adoption
of the report of the Select Committee on Di-
vorce re Bill (E) " An Act for the relief of
James Frederick Doran." He said : — As this
will probably be the last case of divorce com-
ing before the Senate this session, I think it
but right that I should bear testimony to
the efficient manner in which every officer of
the Senate, with whom my duties as Chair-
man of the Special Committee on Divorce
brought me in contact, performed his duty.
From the Law. Clerk, especially, down, I can
and do state that every duty was promptly
and faithfully executed to my entire satis-
faction, and I must not omit to include our
shorthand writers, who did their work in a
most creditable manner, with a celerity and
accuracy deserving the highest commenda-
tion. This case in which I now move the
adoption of the report is, I may say, grow-
ing out of the malign influence of a mother-
in-law who had large expectations for her
daughter to live in a style she had lived
in, but finding her disappointment she as-
sisted in separating a couple who might have
lived happily together. The old man Doran,
the grandfather of the petitioner, was too
wise to accept the suggestion this woman
made to him : to use a common expression, he
was not going to take off his clothes before
he went to bed. The result was that the
matter came to an open issue and she would
not allow her daughter to return to her hus-
band. How the respondent lived afterwards
I cannot say and do not desire to know.
Ultimately Mrs. Doran went to France and
though we do not know it as a fact, we were
informed by one of the witnesses that she
went through a form of marriage in Paris.
All the facts alleged were proved, the fact
of his living with her for a few weeks and
the fact of her declining at the instance of
her mother to return. The whole preamble
of the Bill was fully sustained. It is a case
that the committee unhesitatingly recom-
mended for the adoption of the report.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-— To put the
case in a nutshell, the happy union in this

Digitized by

Google

Speaker oj the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill

367

case was rent asunder through the baneful
influence of a mother-in-law who induced her
daughter to break her marriage vows.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— I understood that
tne object of having this celebrated divorce
committee appointed and having only one
copy of the evidence printed, was to keep
the details out of our records. I cannot
understand why the chairman of the Com-
mittee should give a summary of the evi-
dence when we have the full evidence in our
hands, unless it be to give the filthy details
to the public. The sooner we do away with
the committee, or with the reports, or the
divorce proceedings, the better it will be for
our own credit.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW moved the third
reading of the BilL

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (26) "An Act relating to the Har-
bour of Thornbury on Georgian Bay." (Mr.
McKindsey.)

Bill (77) " An Act to further amend the
Act to enable the City of Winnipeg to
utilize the Assiniboine River water power."
(Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (84) " An Act reepecting the Grand
Trunk Railway Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

Bill (63) " An Act respecting the Can-
adian Power Company." (Mr. Power.)

Bill (U) " An Act further to amend the
Railway Act." (Mr. Bowell.)

THE SPEAKER OF THE SENATE
BILL.

DEBATE CONTINUED.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER resumed his speech.
He said: — When the House rose at six
o'clock, I was remarking that the House of
Lords had not the power to appoint either
its own Speaker or Deputy-Speaker. Ex-
ception was taken to these remarks ; I had
not time to complete my idea, but I will
give it in a few words. There has been an
ancient conflict between the House of Lords
and the Crown as to the right of appointing
Speakers and Deputy-Speakers, the Lords

never having relinquished their privileges on
the one hand, and the Crown on the other
hand having imposed hers ; so that the
situation is this : the Crown appoints
Speakers to the House of Lords, and also
means to appoint Deputy-Speakers. These
are even appointed by batches. Notwith-
standing that, the Ix>rds have maintained
their privileges, and when the list of the
Crown appointees is exhausted, then the
nominee of the Lords goes in and takes the
Chair, but subject always to be merged or
immerged in the nominee of the Crown
when he is present ; so that if the chairman
of committees should, in consequence of the
absence of the Speaker and Deputy-Speak-
ers, take the Chair, the moment the Lord
Chancellor or one of the Deputy Speakers
comes into the House of Lords, the power
of the nominee of the House of Lords of the
chairman of committee, ceases ipso facto^
and the Lord Chancellor or the Deputy-
Speaker takes his place. That is the situa-
tion there, hon. gentlemen ; but it does not
ajffect our case, because we are not governed
by the precedents that obtain in the House
of Lords. The authorities have disposed of
us otherwise. Now, I will take the argu-
ment of the hon. the leader of the Opposi-
tion, whom I am sorry not to see here to-
night, and I wish the House to understand
that if I am bold enough to endeavour to
answer him, it is not because of any lack of
respect or deference for him. This is a
deliberative body. Let that be my justifica-
tion. The hon. gentleman made very light
of the necessity of a Speaker at all;
he went to the extent of intimating to
the House that if we had no Speaker at all
we could go on just the same ; and that any-
body could put the question from the Chair.
Hon. gentlemen, that assertion, falling from
the mouth of such a prominent lawyer as the
leader of the Opposition surprises me. Why ?
The Speaker is as necessary a factor to the
running of our machinery here as a judge is,
necessary to a court of law ; so much so that
we are not a Senate properly sitting as a
Legislative body unless we have a Speaker ;
and it is surprising to hear the contrary
stated, when the information comes from the
leader of the Opposition. He said further,
that the Law Officers of England* had no
concern about it, that the Crown took hardly
any interest in the matter ; that if they did
interfere on some occasions it was at our
pressing request. All the records of both the

Digitized by

Google

368

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

Canadian House find the British House con-
tradict that statement. Let me read to you
the preamble of our Act of 1885, and you
will at once see if it is important or not that
we should act when properly constituted, and
if it is really of small importance any how
whether we have a chairman or not. Here
is the preamble of the Act of 1885 appoint-
ing a Deputy-Speaker in the House of Com-
mons:—

VVhereaa the House of Commons has resolved,
Ac.—

That is the resolution of <^e House of Com-
mons ; I will not read the first part —

And whereas the assent of the Crown has been
obtained to the adoption of the same resolu-
tion.—

That precaution was taken to have the
assent of the Crown beforehand, which is
necessary with us as well as with them in
England.

And whereas it is expedient to give effect to
the same

And listen to this, hon. gentlemen.

And whereas the validity of acts or proceed-
ing of the House done or taken during the absence
of the Speaker might thereafter be questioned
imless declared valid by law, etc."

Therefore you see at once that it is the
opinion of our Legislature that acts per-
formed while there is a doubt as to the re-
gularity of the appointment of the presiding
officer, might be invalid. This shows
clearly, hon. gentlemen, that this House at
least regards it as of primary necessity that
our organization should be complete. The
hon. gentleman has moreover insinuated that
perhaps in England they do not entertain
the same view. Let me read to you the
preamble of the Imperial Act of 1874, which
practically goes over this ground.

Whereas doubts have arisen with regard to the
power of defining by an Act of Parliament of
Canada, in pursuance of the said section, the said
privileges, powers and immunities, and it is expe-
dient to remove such doubts, etc.

Such doubts, hon, gentlemen, are doubts
that have arisen or sprung from acts done
by us after the passing of our Act of 1878,
showing therefore that in England they con-
sider that unless we proceed with our powers
properly organized the legislation performed
is doubtful and its validity is questionable.
But the hon. gentleman has insinuated they
only entertain those opinions when Canada
is concerned. Let me take you back to Eng-
land itself and see if they disregard those

questions and show if they are not even jea-
lous to see that no act of Parliament be
performed except when the House is in its
full and most complete organization. Here
is an Act passed by the Imperial Parliament
in 1855. The House of Commons by a reso-
lution of its own, had appointed a Deputy-
Speaker for the House or Commons, which
office was not in existence before. Some en-
actments had been made and particularly
some new members had been sworn in whUe
the Deputy-Speaker was in the Chair. The
resolution creating the office of Deputy-
Speaker had only been passed by the House
of Commons and therefore doubts arose as
to whether acts done while the Deputy-
Speaker was in the Chair were valid, and
therefore this Act was passed to validate
them. Listen to the preamble : —

An Act to prevent doubts at to the validity of
certain proceedings in the House of Commons ;
whereas the House of Commons on the 4th day of
August, 1853, Her Majesty having previously
si|pified her consent to the House that the House
might do therein as seemed fit, resolved, as fol-
lows : —

All those precautions had been taken.

That whenever the House shall have been in-
formed of the unavoidable absence of the Speaker,
the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and
Means should take the Chair, and in the event of
the Speaker's absence continuing for more than
one day, do, and if the House snail see fit, take
the Chair in like manner during any such absence,
and whereas on the 4th day of the present month
of June, Mr. Speaker being absent, the right hon.
gentleman, the Chairman of the Committee of
Wavs and Means, took the Chair in pursuance
of the said resolution, and whereas the House on
the same day further resolved as follows, viz. , the
Chair on each subsequent day during the week,
namely, that in the event of Mr. Speaker's absence,
Mr. Fitzroy should take the Chair on a subsequent
day during the present week, and whereas again
the said right hon. gentleman, in consequence of
the continued absence of Mr. Speaker, should per-
form therein certain duties pertaining to the office
of Mr. Speaker.

And all those precautions had been taken
in the House of Commons :

And whereas doubts may arise as to the valid-
ity of acts done or proceedings taken by or in the
House during the time as aforesaid, in relation to
certain matters regulated by the Statute, be it
enacted, &c., kc.

This shows, hon. gentlemen, that the subject
of which the hon. leader of the Oppo-
sition was making light is not so light a
matter. It affects the validity of l^sla-
tion itself : and if acts performed under such
authority as this were deemed insufficient in

Digitized by.

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

369

the Imperial House of Commons, do you
hon. gentlemen, think that as to acts per-
formed by tlie proposed Deputy-Speaker or
more properly by the new Speaker, will not
be disputed before tribunals and will not be
subjected to doubts of the greatest magni-
tude ? The hon. gentleman, moreover, en-
deavoured to put the hon. gentleman from
Barrie, the foremost advocate of this -side of
the question, in the position of contradicting
himself, which surprised me very much ;
and as the hon. gentleman from Barrie has
spoken once, and cannot be heard again, I
may perhaps answer these remarks for him.
The hon. gentleman from Ottawa said that
the hon. gentleman from Barrie had stated
during this debate that we had no in-
herent powers ; and citing a previous debate
at the death of Mr. Plumb he said that
the hon. gentleman from Barrie had affirmed
that we have inherent powers — thus
trying to show a contradiction. That
attempt at finding my venerable friend con-
tradicting himself, if made by a layman,
might have been understood and might
have been justified, but coming from a pro-
fessional man can hardly be excused. At
that time the question was as to whether we
could appoint a Chairman to pass resolu-
tions of condolence or of adjournment — a
privilege inherent to every body, and that
no power on earth can take away, no more
than they can take our own existence.
Every deliberative body, and every meeting
has the right to adjourn or to elect a pre-
sident for matters outside of their legal at-
tributes. It is then a body, not legal,
not politic, it is a body doing certain things
of its own jurisdiction ; those are the in-
herent rights to which my hon. friend
referred, and when to-day he said we had
no inherent rights, he distinctly said, and
every lawyer in this House understood, that
we had no inherent rights coming in conflict
with the Constitution ; that all the legal
rights we had were derived from the charter ;
that before the charter existed we did not
exist ; we had no right ; our rights com-
menced from its existence, and that we have
no inherent rights except the rights given
by the charter, either directly or by impli-
cation. I believe I am right in stating the
opinion of the hon. gentleman from Barrie.
Well, now, to conclude all and make it more
remarkable, after the hon. gentleman from
Ottawa had sustained the Act in the way he
did, having gone exceedingly far, having
24

endeavored to show that the opinion of the
law officers in England was as it were
of no consequence ; after saying that
in the controversy of 1873, when Sir
John A. Macdonald sided one way, 'and
Lord Dufferin and Mr. Bourinot the
other, there was no alternative left to
the Law Officers of England but to decide
with Sir John Macdonald which is hardly
consistent with what we know of the inter-
ference of our Ministers here with the Law
Officers of England ; he reached a very
strange conclusion. Before sitting down he
actually condemned all the act now before
us ; in words that could not be mistaken he
averred that the Bill v^ ultra vires. You
all remember him saying that of course we
could not appoint a Speaker ; that the word
ing of the act would have to be changed.
He proposes to strike out the word "appoint"
in the bill, which makes it ultra vires, and
substitute the word " elect " or " choose,"
and that the bill will then be all right. Now,
hon. gentlemen, I ask the question ; what is
there in a name ? This is a matter of syno-
nym. Call it what you like, the moment the
person chosen or appointed by the House
has got the privileges, rights and powers
enumerated in this Act, he is to all intents
and purposes a pro-Speaker. In the Repu-
blic of the United States, when the Vice-
President *is al)sent, and they appoint a
supplementary one, they call him by his own
name, a President pro tern, a gentleman that
has all the powers of another gentleman.
There is a wide difference between a deputy
— a man appointed by a superior — and a
gentleman who is appointed to act as vice
of the other one, with all his powers. What
does clause 2 say ?

Whenever the i^enate is informed by the Clerk
at the Table of the unavoidable absence of the
Speaker the Senate may appoint

Let us read the word "choose," to please
the leader of the Oppasition —

— may choose any Senator to act for the Speaker
during such absence, and such Senator shall there-
upon have and execute all the powers, privileges
and duties of the Speaker.

Then clause 3 : —

Every act done by any Senator as aforesaid shall
have the same effect and validity as if the same
had been done by the Speaker himself.

The Crown has reserved to itself the right
to appoint a Speaker, and that is a part of
our Constitution ; if we extend or restrict

Digitized by

Google

370

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

that right we are modifying the Constitution
by giving another man an equal power with
the Speaker. We arrogate to ourselves the
authority to appoint a Speaker. Whence do
we draw the authority, hon. gentlemen?
Where have we the power to procreate such
a l)eing ? We cannot have it outside of the
Constitution, and we have it not within the
Ctmstitution. Our existence, our powers, our
right to procreate or to act politically must
be drawn from our charter, and the Crown
alone could beget and procreate such a being
as Speaker. We have not within ourselves
by any inherent right the privilege to give
existence to such a being. But the hon. gen-
tleman for Ottawa |ias said, or given the
House the impression, that it would not
matter much if we were to interfere with
those details. These are not details at all,
hon. gentlemen ; this is the very essence of
our machinery, and the hon. gentleman's views
were not the views entertained by the
fathers of Confederation ; his views were not
the views entertained by the leading states-
men of England when our British North
America Act was discussed. If I am not
tiring you too much, I crave your attention
to these words of Tjord Carnarvon : —

As to the unaltered character of. the Bill

That is the British North Aryerica Act.

— such an undertaking was part of the compact
between the seven provinces, he should be glad for
the House to understand that the Bill partook
somewhat of the nature of a treaty of union, every
single clause of which had* been debated over and
over again and had been subjected to the closest
scrutinj', and in fact each of them represented a
compromise between the different interests involved.
Nothing could be more fatal to the Bill than that
any of those clauses which were the result of a
compromise should be subject to two such alter-
ations. It would be his duty to resist the alter-
ation of anything which was in the nature of a
compromise and which, if carried out, would be
fatal to the measure.

You know our representatives were then
in England, and that, very clause concerning
our power to appoint a Deputy-Speaker
came up before the Parliament in England.
It was decided there, after mature consider-
ation, that the Governor-General might have
a deputy, that the Lieutenant-Governors
might have deputies, that the House of Com-
mons should, to the extent of what is in the
Act, have a deputy also, but no provision
was made in our case. This clause existed
in the Quebec Resolution that was submitted
in England : —

The Speaker of the Legislative Council

Which became our Senate — I am reading
the whole clause 15 —

The Speaker of the Senate^ unless otherwise pro-
vided by Parliament, shall be pointed by the Crown
from among the members of the Legislative Coun-
cil and shall hold office during pleasure and shall
only be entitled to a casting vote on an equality of
votes. .

Therefore, in the Quebec Resolutions there
was no mention of a Deputy-Speaker, and
we have no mention of it in the Act, and
therefore, there is no place left for any
doubt. If the case was not provided for it
is because the framers of our Constitution
did not thiiVk it should be.

Hon. Mr. DEYER— What Parliament
did they refer to there 1

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— Those are the

Quebec Resolutions.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— But I wish to know
what Parliament they had in view.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— I am reading fn>m
the Constitution of Canada by Doutre and
the Quebec Resolutions are here inserted. I
am reading froln section 15.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— The British Parlia-
ment?

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — No, this Parliament

Hon. Mr. POIRIER— This is simply to
try to show that the hon. leader of the
Opposition was, if I may be permitted to
us« the expression, wrong in making light
of our Constitution, and thinking that we
could disregard it entirely. As you have
seen, the Act provides for a Speaker and does
not provide for a Deputy-Speaker in our
case, and perhaps the Latin maxim might
apply here — "inclusio unius est exclusio
alterius." Now the source of our power,
according to the mover, the Hon. Minister
of Agriculture, whose high legal opinions I
greatly respect, and who will excuse me I
hope for discussing this Bill — the source of
our power in this case is clause 9L I am
sorry the hon. Minister did not more fully
show us how this stream could flow from
that source. If there is a clause in our Con-
stitution that has been debated before the
courts, not only in this land but in England,
it is certainly that clause. It has been
sifted over and over again. On that is
based the distribution of the powers as

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAECH 20, 1893] iSenate Bill.

311

between the central authority and the pro-
vinces. It is a clause which refers to sub-
stantial legislation ; but never before to my
knowledge did I hear of any interpretation
^ven to it as dealing with what I may call
procedure. That clause recites the various
powers given to the provinces and reserves
the balance to the central Government, but
deals not with the mode of putting the
machinery in motion. It relates to the
order and good government of Canada.
From it have arisen all those questions con-
cerning the selling of liquor wholesale and
retail, the navigability of railways and other
points disputed between Ottawa and the
provinces. This clause states that outside
of the powers given to the provinces, when-
ever questions of peace, order and good gov-
ernment arise, those questions shall fall
under the power and jurisdiction of the
central Government, in contradistinction
with what is done by the United States,
where the primitive and original powers
came from the provinces or from the differ-
ent States and was retained by them, except
what was specifically given to the Congress.
If that clause carries such an interpretation,
it is certainly a novel or an extended inter-
pretation. It has not been given to it be-
fore. But assuming that it does, it is cer-
tainly limited by clause 18 of our Constitu-
tion. That was admitted by my hon. friend
from Richmond, who is not here to-night,
and by several others, that if clause 91
gives us the power which is asked for, it is
limited by section 1 8 of our Act, which is
now contained in the Act of 1875. That
Act submits us or puts us on a par with the
House of Commons whenever their rules are
inconsistent with our Constitution, and
gives us as a prototype not the House of
Lords but the House of Commons of
England. Therefore we are governed by
the rules that govern the House of Com-
mons in England, which also governs our
House of Commons^ere ; but we cannot go
beyond that ; in adopting those rules we
cannot come in conflict with our Constitu-
tion in matters that are directly provided
for. Acting within the limits of our Consti-
tution, we can take or give ourselves the
privileges enjoyed now by the House of Com-
mons in England ; but what are those privi-
leges ? In England the House of Commons
has existed from its beginning to the year
1855 without having a Deputy -Speaker. In
order that we should take upon ourselves to
24J

stretch and strain the Constitution, we must
at least be justified by the emergency, by the
absolute necessity of the situation. Are we
now in such an emergency as would justify us
in stepping in and appointing a Speaker ? If
the British North America Act had not pro-
vided for a Speaker then I admit we might
have the privilege : but we have been given
a Speaker and the Act declared that the
Speaker shall be the appointee of the
Crown. Is your case so preying and the
necessity so urgent as to justify us in ap-
pointing another one ? If it is urgent for us,
then it would have been urgent for the
Imperial House of Commons of England, who
had no Deputy-Speaker up to 1853. Here is
the history of the Deputy-Speakers or of the
Speaker of the English House of Commons.
I will make it short. A committee was ap-
pointed in 1852 to inquire into the question
as to whether the House of Commons had
the right to appoint a Deputy-Speaker, and
to recommend to the House what should be
done in the absence of the Speaker. They
state in their report that between the years
1647 and 1703 — that is for the space of 56
years — the Speaker had been absent on but
three occasions, and that in each case the
House, being informed that the Speaker was
detained at Court, adjourned till the next
day. No Deputy-Speaker was appointed
and there was not that stringent, that press-
ing necessity for them that appears to exist
for us. Between 1603 and 1640, nine cases
of absence of the Speaker are reported and
in each case except one the House adjourned.
In 1640 a new Speaker was appointed, which
did not get the assent of the King, who was
then in jail. There was a case of necessity.
The assent of the King was necessary to the
validation of the power of the Speaker.
There was a supreme necessity. They did
without it, getting the assent of the Lords.
But the creation of a Deputy-Speaker is not
such a case of necessity. Between 1650 and
1668 only two cases of absence are reported ;
between 1668 and 1760, six absences alto-
gether are recorded. On the 13th March
the Speaker, Sir John Criemear informed the
House he had a violent attack of colic and
could not be present. Because of his ab-
sence he was excluded and given a successor,
the House being informed that he had ac-
cepted a gift of 1,000 guineas to favour the
passing of a certain Bill. The word boodle
was not in existence then. As a matter of
fact he was pledged to pass a certain

Digitized by

Google

372

Speaker of ^Ae^f SENATE] Senate Bill.

\
Bill and remained absent on that ac-
count. The House of Commons did
not think they had the power to appoint
a Deputy-Speaker and did not in fact appoint
one. They appointed a new Speaker. Mr.
Anslow, who was Speaker 34 years, was de-
tained only four times for sickness between
1760 and 1803. Later on the House of
Commons by a resolution decided that in the
absence of the Speaker the Chairman of the
Committee of Ways and Means would be
called to the chair and act as Speaker. The
first instance took place in 1855 during the
absence of the Speaker. Now, it is the Acts
performed while this Deputy -Speaker was in
the Chair, that were questioned afterwards
and forced not only the House of Commons,
but the whole Parliament of England to pass
an Act legalizing what had been done during
that time, showing that it is no trifle to dis-
regard the regular procedure of Parliament.
In what position should we be, if we were
to pass Bills and enact laws with an irre-
gular Speaker in the Chair? We are not
given by our charter the power to deal \fith
our Speaker, and there Ls no absolute neces-
sity for us dealing with that question as we
are provided with a Speaker appointed by
the Crown. So far I have endeavoured to
show that we have no authority at all in
the premises. Now, I contend that if a
Deputy-Speaker can be appointed — which I
cannot admit — he must be appointed other-
wise than by the House. You will admit
that in the case of our House of Commons,
it is not contradictory that the House should
elect a Deputy-Speaker, it being empowered
to elect its Speaker ; but as a matter of fact
our House of Commons does not elect its
Deputy-Speaker. To all intents and pur-
poses they have no Deputy-Speaker there ;
Mr. Bergeron cannot open the proceedings of
the House ; he is called, and as a matter of
fact, any member may be called by the
Speaker, to take the Chair. Any person so ,
called by the Speaker to occupy the Chair, i
continues sitting even when Mr. Bergeron is |
in the House. They practically have no |
Deputy-Speaker with privileges equal to
those enjoyed by the Deputy -Speaker of the
House of Lords. It is enacted the Speaker
may call upon the Chairman of committee
or any other member. If we appoint a
Deputy-Speaker we are going far in advance
of them ; and I will call the attention of the
promoters of the Bill to this question, that
they have practically no Deputy-Speaker in

the House on the other side who may act
independently of the Speaker. But there
they have the privilege to appoint their
Speaker, which we have not, and I submit
very humbly that if we are to have a Deputy-
Speaker at all he must come from the same
authority that appoints the first Speaker, the
Crown, who having appointed one Speaker,
must appoint the other, and not we who
have nothing at all to do with the matter.
To justify my contention I would refer to
clause 131 of the British North America
Act which I think supports my contention :

Until the Parliament of Canada otherwise pro-
videe, the Governor General in Council from time
to time may appoint such officers as the Governor
in Council deems necessary or proper for the
effectual execution of this Act.

Assuming that the Speaker of the Senate,
who steps into life-with all the adornments
of other officei's, who is made and created by
the Crown, revocable at will — assuming, I say,
that he is an officer, then perhaps the Crown
might step in and appoint a Deputy-Speaker
to us. I have no very clear views about it,
but I humbly submit that if in the premises
anything at all can l>e done it can only be
done by the one authority. If a second
child is to be born, he neecLs must have the
same father, or else he will not be legitimate
and l>elong to the same family. If bom in
any other way he will not be the heir-at-
law. In the Deputy-Speaker we wish to
create and procreate a full-fledged heir to
the kingdom with all the privileges and
powers of the Speaker. It is known by
every lawyer that our powers cannot go
beyond those of the House of Commons in
England, the Act of 1875 limits our
powers so that we cannot go above and
l>eyond what is l)eing done and enjoyed in
the way of privileges in the Imperial House
of Commons at the time our legislation
passes. When for the first time in 1855
the English House of Commons, by Act of
Parliament — not by resolution of the House,
but aji Act of Parliament, based on a reso-
lution of the House — passed a law enabling
the House of Commons to have a Deputy-
Speaker, they did it with a reservation — and
I call the hon. Minister's attention to it —
to be found in the Imperial Statutes of 1855,
Chap. 84, — An Act providing for the per-
formance of certain duties of the Speaker
during his temporary absence from the
House of Commons. There is a preamble to
the Act and the Act gives power to appoint

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

373

a Deputy-Speaker, but here is the restnction
in clause 3 : —

Provided also that nothing herein contained
shall affect the election of a Speaker or the forms
thereof or any prerogative of Her Majesty con-
tained therein or otherwise relating to the office of
Speaker.

If we are bound to progress here as they
progress there, if we are bound not to go
ahead of them, there is this restriction, and
if the Crown has any prerogative or au-
thority in dealing with our Speaker, we are
put on our guard here not to infringe upon
any of the rights and prerogatives of the
Crown. I call the hon. gentleman's atten-
tion to this third clause of the Act of the
Imperial Parliament of 1855. I therefore
conclude that this Bill is not within our
power. At one time it seemed to me, and
does still seem to me, that the hon. gentle-
man from Amherst ventilated the whole
situation by stating that if this Act be re-
jected it will give occasion to proceed in the
matter through the Imperial Parliament. I
do not agree to that. I do not agree that
this honourable body should show itself in
such a light as to take a wrong way to call
the attention of our leaders and be told,
^* Go back, you are not on the right road."
I say that some course should be adopted
more compatible with our honour and dig-
nity. If the Bill is to be questioned, as it
must certainly be questioned, I would
humbly ask the Government to take it upon
themselves to proceed by an Address of
both Houses to the throne, but not to have
the Senate led into a cu/ de sac and then be
told by the authorities in England to go nofur-
ther, that we have gone the wrong way. I will
therefore take the liberty very earnestly of
a.sking the hon. mover of this Bill not to
press it further now. There is no urgent
necessity for it at present. I would advise
him to appoint a committee, or at least let
it stand until next session and not put the
Senate in a false position. Many gentlemen
will vote, of course, influenced by the pres-
tige of the Government. I think it will be
admitted that laymen, without any offence
to them, are not supposed to be conversant
with those tine questions of law as lawyers
are supposed to be. Perhaps sometimes
they are better qualified to judge, but the
probabilities are the other way. I therefore
ask the hon. gentleman to withdraw his Bill
or let it remain over until another session. |
Jn the meantime, I cannot conceive why this |

House, falling back on its inherent privileges,
could not do anything and everything in the
way of helping the Speaker in the prelimin-
ary stages of legislation ; reserving for the
Speaker the putting of questions and all
matters that must be done by himself. We
cannot do any legal act without the Speaker,
but we could do the preparatory work with-
out him. This debate that we are pursuing
in the presence of the Speaker, we might do
without him, with any of us in the Chair ;
we could even carry oq the discussion in the
lobby of the House. It is all preparatory
work. I do not see any reason why the
Speaker should not call any Senator to
replace him in the Chair. It would
not go on the record —provided that
when a vote is put or when a Bill has
to pass a stage, the Speaker is in the Chair.
Another argument, and the last one : suppos-
ing a Bill framed as proposed by the hon.
leader should pass, here is a dilemma and a
very serious one — supposing the Bill passed,
and we elect or appoint or choose or fabricate
a Deputy-Speaker, how would you come and
sit as the Senate ? How would you meet
this clause of the Constitution which enacts
that until the Parliament of Canada other-
^vise provided, the presence of at least
fifteen Senators, including the Speaker, shall
be necessary to constitute a quorum for the
transaction of business ? The Deputy -Speaker
shall l)e considered the Speaker or he shall
not l>e. If he is considered a Speaker, we are
undoubtedly usurping the rights and privi-
leges of the Crown ; if he is not a Speaker,
we cannot exercise our power without a quo-
rum of fifteen, including the Speaker. I do not
see any way to get out of the dilemma. I
beg to thank the House for their kind atten-
tion and forbearance to what may appear
effrontery, but which, on the contrary, is an
expression of my honest conviction of what
is right and permitted by the constitution. •

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— I desire to say a
few words with regard to this Bill, because
in the question which has come before this
House is involved a point that I took last
year on the Redistribution Bill. I agree
with the hon. gentleman from DeLanaudi^re,
so far as this Bill is concerned, that the first
clause is one which it is desirable that we
should pass for the convenience of the
Speaker. The last two clauses I do not think
there is a necessity for, because the power is
already in the Crown, in the case of unavoid-

Digitized by

Google

374

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

able absence or prolonged absence or any-
thing of that kind, by removing the Speaker
and replacing him by another gentleman for
a temporary period under the present Consti-
tution. But the grounds upon which I
oppose this Act are embodied in the agree-
ment from, which the hon. Minister of Agri-
culture draws his deductions in presenting
this Bill to the House. He has told us that
it is under section 91 of the British North
America Act. I take exception to that
view. I do not think that section 91 was
placed in the British North America Act for
any such purpose at all. I do not believe
it was placed there to convey such powers as
the leader of the Opposition says are inhe-
rent in the Constitution of the country —
that is to say, that we have the same powers
but no greater than the Parliament of Great
Britain. If you wfll trace the history of our
Constitution you will see that it has come
down from the Imperial Parliament step by
step ever since the year 1763, when Canada
was first established as a Crown colony, and
step by step, change by change has taken
place until in the year 1867 the Imperial
Act which gave us our Constitution as it
stands to-day was passed. That Constitution
is the outcome of the deliberations of the
various provinces that created the Confede-
ration or Dominion of Canada. The Consti-
tution is the outcome of an agreement made
between our provinces as to the powers they
should work under in our present constitu-
tion. That Constitution is a written one —
it is defined in the British North America
Act, and what I contend is that the powers
given under section 91 are merely the resi-
duum powers not mentioned in the British
North America Act as the powers that the
Parliament of Canada shall possess and the
powers that the provinces shall possess. In
that way we differ from the Constitution of
the United States. The Constitution of that
country is the outcome of the various States
uniting when they declared their independ-
ence and conferring a portion of their powers
on the general Government but retaining the
sovereign powers they possessed at the time
they went into that union ; the residuum of
powers not contained in the Constitution
remains in the individual States. We, on the
other han(i, have established our Confedera-
tion on a different basis. We have defined
certain powers for the provinces that form
the Confederation and we have defined the
powers that the general Government shall

have, and under section 91 of this Act we
defined that the j^eneral Government shall
possess the residuum powers that are not
mentioned in the British North America
Act. That is the contention I make in
regard to the importance and value of sec-
tion 91. It is not a clause that is put in
there to enable us to do anything we choose
— to enable us if we choose, according to the
contention of the hon. leader opposite, to
say that we shall have no Governor-General
or elect our Governor-General, or alter our
Constitution in any way we like. I con-
tend that it is a most dangerous infringe-
ment on our Constitution when we take the
ground that under that section 91, we have
the power to override the special conditions
which the Confederation Act imposes on
the various provinces which joined together
for the purpose of establishing Canada. The
hon. member for Ottawa division said that
we had perfect power under the British
North America Act to do anything we
chose — anything that the Parliament of
Great Britain and Ireland had power to do.
Hon. gentlemen will recollect that in the
Hon. Mr. Mackenzie's time, when he found
the Senate contained a majority against him,
he desired to exercise the same constitu-
tional power that the Imperial Parliament
has — that is, to increase the number of
Senators in the same way that the Imperial
Parliament has to increase the Lords in the
event of a deadlock occurring, and the ques-
ti(m was referred to the Imperial authorities
and the reply was given that there was no
such power.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think the hon. gen-
tleman is slightly in error as to that particu-
lar matter. There is a power mentioned in
the British North America Act. The Mac-
kenzie Government applied to the Imperial
authorities to allow them to exercise that
power, which permission the Imperial autho-
rities refused.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— That is, to in-
crease them by six ?

Hon. Mr. POWER—Yes.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— What I wanted
to point out was merely that the number of
Senators is fixed by the British North America
Act, but there is a clause in the Constitution
whicli says there shall be so many Senators,
and we have no inherent power to increase

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAECH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

375

the number. If we have the power that the
hon. member from Ottawa says we have,
we would have the right to increase those
Senators not only by six but by twenty-five
or fifty if we saw fit to do so, but it is clear-
ly laia down by a clause in the British North
America Act, that we shall have only so
many Senators and we must abide by that.
We have no power to alter that, because it
was part of the agreement we entered into
when we established the Confederation. So
^gain with regard to the very question we
are speaking of here. It is laid down in a
clause of the British North America Act,
that the Speaker of this House shall be ap-
pointed by the Crown and we have no power
in oui-selves to change that. The advantage
that I consider we have in our Constitution
over that of the United States is that the
United States when they came together
and established their Constitution imposed
a cumbrous method upon themselves by
which an amendment could be made to their
Constitution. They have to appeal to the
States, the States have to get a three-fourths
majority of votes to sanction it, and I do not
know what difficulties they have to go
through before they can get an amendment
to the Constitution. We are not in that
position. We have drawn our inspiration
from the British Constitution which has
been handed down through centuries of ex-
perience and centuries of time, that keeps
pace with the age. It is a Constitution
that is based on government by precedent.
That is the fountain head of the British
Constitution. We are part of the Constitu-
tion. If we were to assume the powers that
the hon. member from Ottawa says we are
entitled to, it would not be the British Con-
stitution, but a Constitution entirely inde-
pendent of its British origin. I, for one,
do not propose to vote ourselves, by any
side issue like this, outside of the British
Constitution, which is the bulwark of the
liberties of the people who live under it,
and it is for that reason that I feel
strongly on the subject. The Bill commends
itself to a majority of the House, as
it commends itself to my judgment as
being a convenience and advantage to this
honourable House, so far as the first clause
in the Bill is concerned, but when it is pro-
posed to take that power under that clause
91 of the British North America Act, then I
say I am distinctly opposed to it. In the same
way if we were to admit the principle that

we have that power under that section of
the British North America Act, we might
have ^he same power to infringe upon the
liberty of the various provinces. If section
91 gives us power to legislate for the peace,
order and good government of the country
we might say it is for the peace, order and
good government of the country that we
should infringe on the rights of the prov-
inces. If we can do it one way we can do
it the other, and I contend that is a point,
that we have to consider and for their integ-
rity it is not wise for us to infringe upon
our Constitution. We can accomplish what
we desire in a legitimate and legal way.
All we have to do is to express our desire
by an Address of both Houses for an Im-
perial Act conferring upon us the power
that we require and it is unnecessary for us
to do this in a roundabout way and establish
a precedent that will entitle us year by year
more and more to enlarge the powers that
it is now being contended are contained i;^
that section 91. I think, for the safety of
our constitution under which we are living,
that we should not seek to infringe upon
that constitution in any particular by means
of those enlarged powers which are supposed
by some to be contained in the section of
the British North America Act referred to,
but secure an amendment in a straightfor-
ward manner. I might mention that the
question came up with regard to the appoint-
ment of justices of the peace in the prov-
ince of Ontario. It was a case where the
law was tested on the ground that the
justice of the peace should be appointed by
the Dominion Government. It came before
Chief Justice Armour, in 1888, in the case of
Regina vs. Bush. I quote from Vol. IV : —
"Cases decided on the British North America
Act, 1867, edited by John R. Cartwright."
In this case is the following : —

Section 91 of the Act provides that it shall be
lawful for the Queen, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to
make laws for the peace, order and good govern-
ment of Canada, in relation to all matters not
coming within the classes of subjects by this Act
assigned fxclusively to the Legislatiu-es of 'the
provinces.

There the contention is held out that under
that section 91, we had the power to create
justices of the peace, but it goes on to say :

If the passing of laws providing for the appoint-
ment of justices of the peace is not within the
classes of subjects assigned exclusively to the Legis-

Digitized by

Google

376

Speaker of the [SENATEJ Senate Bill,

latures of the provinces, it is certainly within this
section, for one of the first steps in making laws
for the peace, order and good government of
Canada would be the making of laws for the ap-
pointment of justices of the peace.

Section 92 of that Act, however, provides that
in each province the Legislature may exclusively
make laws in relation to matters coming within the
classes of subjects next hereinafter enumerated,
that is to say : — 14. The administration of justice
in the proWnce, including the constitution, main-
tenance and organization of Provincial courts, both
of civil and criminal jurisdiction, and including
procedure in civil matters in those courts.

Now, there is a case where some one tried to
protect himself on the plea that under that
clause 91 the Dominion Parliament had the
power to appoint justices of the peace, but
the contention was overruled. The courts
of the country decided that section 91 did
not confer those powers but gave them to
the Provincial Legislature.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— And that, notwith-
standing the powers given under the 91st
section in all matters of criminal law and
procedure.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON- I will not detain
the House at this late hour with any further
remarks beyond saying that the Governor-
General has the power to establish what we
are mainly seeking to establish in thig Bill
— that so far as the convenience- of this
House is concerned the first section is a
harmless one, and one that probably it
would be advisable for us to pass. Tiie other
two I do not think it advisable that we
should pass. We do not want to take the
power out of the Crown. The highest officer
of the Crown is the Speaker of the Senate,
and he derives that prominence from the
fact that he is appointed the Speaker by the
Crown. The Speaker of the Commons is the
First Commoner — he is elected by that
House. But the Crown has reserved to
itself the prerogative of the appointment of
a Speaker of the Senate, and if we under
this Bill take power to ourselves to elect a
Speaker, and let our appointed Speaker who
is appointed by the Crown absent himself for
a month or two, as this Bill would permit
him to do, we would be taking away from
the dignity of the position and would be in-
fringing upon the Constitution of Canada,
and until I am satisfied that the power that
here is sought is not an infringement upon
the constitution I shall feel it my duty to
vote against the second reading.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I wUl say a few
words to clase the debate in this matter. I
wish to inform the House that this Bill has
been brought before it after mature deli-
beration. It has been a subject of con-
siderable study by the Minister of Justice,
and of frequent discussions between him
and myself as to the right of the House to
adopt such a measure. I have very great
respect for the opinion of Mr. Bourinot,
cited here, but after giving that opinion
a great deal of consideration, after the
Minister of Justive has given also great
attention to that opinion, the Government
has come to the conclusion that the Bill
now submitted for your consideration was
within the power and jurisdiction of this
House. Referring to the opinion and paper
written by Mr. Bourinot upon the question
of the Speaker of the Senate, it is to be
remarked that he deals with the case only
as coming under section 18. He never in
any way at all refers to the power of this
House under the 91st section of the British
North America Act. He argues in his
paper that section 18 was the one that
did not give us that power, and he goes
into a consideration of the powers that
the House of Commons and the Senate
of Canada possessed under section 18
before it was amended in 1875. Now,
I think that we derive the power that
T am asking the House to exercise under
section 91. I do not wish to go over
the arguments that have been adduced
before this House. They have been ably
placed before you, and J think it is not
necessary for me to go over the ground
again. One of the points urged against the
Bill, which I do not think is a strong one,
was that no Bill of this kind was brought up
before to-day and that the Senate has been
in existence for 26 years. Now, I do not
look upon that as an argument. Many
laws — and many good laws — are forthcoming
yet, and I for one do not believe that all
the laws that the Statute-book contains are
I the limits of the wisdom of this country.
I The wisdom of this country may still be
I further exercised than it has been heretofore
I according to circumstances and according to
I the special exigencies of the case. It was
stated that Sir Alexander Campbell and Sir
John Abbott have been leaders of the House
and that they never thought of bringing
such a Bill before us.

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAECH 20, 1893] Senate Bill.

377

Hon. Mr. POWER— Allow me to inter-
rupt and correct the hon. gentleman. It
was said that they had thought of it, and
after having thought the matter over they
came to the conclusion they could not do it,
which Ls a very different thing.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -I shall refer to that
point. 1 do not know what was Sir Alex-
ander CampbelFs opinion, but I happen to
be informed of what Sir John Abbott'**
opinion was upon the point. No later than
last year, had time allowed, the Bill I am
submitting to the House would have been
proposed by him. That was his opinion on
the point, and he expressed it openly to
several members of the House. It has been
stated that this Bill was an infringement
upon the prerogative of the Crown. I main-
tain that the Bill was drafted with such care
^nd attention that there is not a single word
in it that could be construed as an infringe-
ment of the prerogative of the Crown. The
Bill purports to put this House in a position
to go on with the business of the country until
the Governor in Council can interfere and
appoint another Speaker if it has its choice. A
very proper amendment has been suggested
by the hon. member from Amherst, which is
Altogether according to the opinion I ex-
pressed to the House when I presented
the Bill. I stated that there was no inten-
tion to infringe and that the Bill did not
infringe upon the prerogative of the Crown,
and he suggested very properly that the
following words be inserted — "until the
Speaker himself shall resume the Chair or
another Speaker be appointed by the Gov-
ernor-General." Now I declare that I accept
his amendment as making the Bill clearer
and as answering the objection which is made
that it might be construed as an interference
with the prerogative of the Crown. An-
other very proper suggestion has been made
by the hon. member from Ottawa which
indicates a distinction between the word he
proposes and the word that is now in the
Bill. Whenever the Senate is informed by
the Clerk at the Table of the unavoidable
absence of the Speaker, the Senate may
" appoint " any Senator ; it is proposed to
say ** choose," and I think there is a dis-
tinction there. The word " choose " does
not look so permanent as the word
"appoint," and consequently I think the
suggestion is a good one. Now, I have

heard hon. members who argued upon this
point say they are in favour of the first
clause of this Bill. Well, I only want them
to be logical to the whole Bill. * If they are
in favour of the fii'st, they cannot help but
be in favour of the second, and if they are
opposed to the second, necessarily, if they are
logical, they must be opposed to the 1st, be-
cause the second clause is only the natural
consequence of the first. When you admit
the necessity for the first clause, when you
admit that there is a necessity for this
House having the power to carry on the
business of the country in case the Speaker,
through illness or other cause, has to leave
the Chair, if that illness is prolonged until
the next day or until the evening, you must
also acknowledge that it is logical for the
Senate to draw attention to the fact that
the Speaker is not in the Chair, and for the
Senate to be put in a position to temporarily
choose oneof itsmembers to occupy the Chair
and fulfil the duties that the Speaker him-
self would have to fulfil had be been present.
It was said in argument that there was no
necessity for the Speaker to be in the Chair
when we are discussing the acts of this
House. I cannot agree with that. This
House would not l)e the Senatfe, nor would
we be a properly constituted House unless
there was a Speaker in the Chair. It was
stated a few minutes ago that this discus-
sion upon the Bill might proceed without
the Speaker being there at all, and that his
presence was only required when we were
called to vote upon a motion or when a mo-
tion was put before the House. That point
I think is sufficient to show that there is no
strength in such an argument. Now it has
been said that this House, by adopting this
Bill, might be put in a very humiliating posi-
tion, because later on it might be found that
we had not the right of adopting this Bill. I
do not know if everybody in this House will
view the matter as I do, but I believe it
would be a more humiliating position for this
House to be in if it went, by an Address, be-
fore the Crown and sought permission to ap-
point a Speaker or to choose a substitute to
replace the Speaker in case of illness and we
were told " But you have that power under
section 91." It is worse for us to be told
that we have not the intelligence of exercis-
ing the power which is given us by the Con-
stitution, than to be told " there is a doubt
as to the constitutionality of your action and

Digitized by

Google

378

Grand Trunk [SENATE] Railway Co.'s Bill.

we shall make it right." The worst they
could say would be that we had
exaggerated our attributes and exceeded our
power ; the most they can say is, tliere is
a doubt whether we have the power under
section 91. I maintain there would be no
humiliation in that at all. Now, it was
suggested by the hon. member from Barrie
and very properly — and I must compliment
him upon the great attention he has given
this question — at the beginning of this
debate that this Bill might be referred to a
special committee. At the time I was struck
by the force of the suggestion, but at this
present moment, when the Bill has been dis-
cussed for four days and every member here
who is an authority upon a matter of this
kind has expressed his opinion, and come to
a conclusion, what good could be derived
from going before a special committee ? The
hon. member from Barrie could not make a
more able effort or a better prepared speech
than he has made in the House. The hon.
member from Halifax could not support his
side of the case with stronger arguments
than he has used here, and the hon. member
from Richmond, as well as the hon. member
from Ottawa, has thrown such light upon this
subject that •this House is now ready, I
l)elieve, to come to a conclusion whether the
Bill shall be read the second time or whether
it shall h^ rejected. I therefore press the
motion which I have made, asking that this
Bill be read the second time now, and I am
most thankful to the hon. member from
Amherst, as well as the hon. member from
Ottawa, for the suggestions they have made
to perfect this Bill by the addition of the
words " until the Governor-General has
appointed another Speaker " and also for the
substitution of the word " choose " for the
^word "appoint."

The Senate divided on the motion, which
was agreed to on the following division : —

CONTENTS :

Hon. Messrs.:

Angers,
Bellerose,

Macdonald(P.E.I.),

Maclnnes (Burlington),

Bemier,

Masson,

Bolduc,

Merner,

Bowell,

Miller,

Casgrain,

MoQtplaisir,

Clemow,

O'Donohoe,

DeBlois,

Primrose,

l>ever,

Prowse,

Dobson,

Rea<l (Quints),

Guevremont,

Reid (Cariboo),

Kaulbach,
McClelon,
McKay,
McKindsey,

Allan,
Boulton,
do wan,
McCallum,

Robitaille,
Scott,
Smith,
VidaL— 30.

NON-CONTENTS :

Hon. Messrs.:

Mulnnes (Victoria),

Poirier,

Power. — 7.

The Bill was then read the second time.
The Senate adjourned at 10.30 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottauja^ T^iesday, March 2l8t^ 189S,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.

GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY COM-
PANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (50) ** Aji Act respecting the
Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada,"
with amendments. He said : — The first
amendment refers to the consolidated de-
benture stock and the application of the
proceeds of that stock. It was intended
that the application should be of such
proceeds as were necessary, but it read in
such a way that it referred to the whole of
the stock and it was altered by inserting the
words " so much as." In the same line, in
connection with that, some words are struck
out so that it will read that it refers to the
schedule generally. I see no objecti(m to
these amendments.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL moved that the amend-
ments be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The next amend-
ment refers to clause 13 of the Bill, which
is struck out. This clause was intended to
bring this united company within the pur-
view of the Railway Act legislation with
regard to crossings. It was explained to us

Digitized by

Google

Speech of Mr. WaUace [MARCH 21, 1893] at Kingston.

379-

that legislation is now before Parliament
which is general in its character and renders
this clause unnecessary, and it was therefore
struck out by the committee at the sugges-
tion of the Hon. Minister of Trade and
Commerce.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL moved that the
amendment be concurred in.
The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The next amend-
ment Occurs to the 16th clause — the clause
applicable to the first general meeting of the
company in 1894. That was intended to be
a meeting for the appointment of directors,
but these words were left out and they are
inserted, " present at such meeting for the
election of directors." I see no objection to
the amendment.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — In my opinion this is
merely a correction of a printer's error and
it should not be necessary to move concur-
rence in the amendment. However, I move
that the amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was then read the third time and passed.

THIRD READINGS.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN, from the Committee
on Banking and Commerce, reported the fol-
lowing Bills which were read the third time
and passed : —

Bill (32) " An Act respecting the Canada
Life Assurance Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

Bill (39) " An Act to incorporate the
Ocean Accident Corporation." (Mr. Fer-
guson.)

Bill (62) " An Act to revive an Act to |
incorporate the Equity Insurance Company
and t<) change the name of the company to
the St. Lawrence Insurance Company."
(Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington.)

Bill (40) " An Act to incorporate the
Canada* and North-west Land Company,
Limited." (Mr. McKindsey.)

Bill (34) " An Act to incorporate the
Woodmen of the World." (Mr. Vidal.)

THE SPEECH OF MR. WALLACE AT
KINGSTON.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. POWER rose to—

Call attention to a speech reported in the
KinfjMfon Neiat, as having been delivered by Mr.

N. Clarke Wallace, M.P., at a meeting of Orang-
men held in the city of Kingston, on Friday, the
10th of March instant, in which he is reported to
have used the following language, with respect to
what is generally spoken of as** The Home Rule
Measure for Ireland : "

** To this, our friends over there will never sub-
mit. Britain may cast them out, but if she does,
she has no right to look for further allegiance.
They are preparing for action. Their unalterable
determination is never to submit to home rule, and
they will have the sympathy of the Orangemen of
Canada ; aye, more than sympathy, they shall have
our active aid, if that active aid l>e necessary. VV^e
shall be unworthy of our ancestors, if we fail in our
duty in such a crisis ; "

And ask the leader of the House —

Whether or not, Mr. X. Clarke Wallace, M.P.,
the Controller of Customs, disavows the use of the
languacre so attributed to him ; and if he does not,
what action, if any, the Government proposes to
take with respect to the conduct of the said officer,
in using such language on the occasion in ques-
tion ?

He said: — I think it is perhaps hardly
necessary for me, before beginning to say
what I have to say, to disclaim any feeling
of unfriendliness towards Mr. Wallace, or
the body of which he is at this time the
head in Canada. I cannot myself see why,
even if a secret organization should be
deemed necessary or desirable to protect the
interests of the Protestant minority in Ire-
land, the same organization should be neces-
sary to protect the interests of the Protestant
majority in Canada, more particularly in the
province of Ontario, where the Protestants
outnumber the Catholics about as five to
one. It has, however, pleased Providence,
in its inscrutable wisdom, to allow Orangeism
to be transplanted to Canada and to take
i-oot here and flourish luxuriantly, and I for
one am not seriously disturbed over the fact.
I do not know very well what the funda-
mental principles and doctrines of the Order
are, but I know that the great majority of
the members of the Orange body are fairly
good citizens. Many of them are upright
and estimable men, and there are some of
them so fair-minded and at the same time so
intelligent and enlightened that they recog-
nize the fact that a Roman Catholic may
safely be placed in a position of trust, either
public or private, and not only that, but they
act upon their belief and do so place Catho-
lics. We have one member of the Order in
this House — a prominent member — who
comes within the last category. In calling
attention to Mr. Wallace*s speech, I feel
that I am acting in the interests of public

Digitized by

Google

380

Speech of Mr. Wallace [SENATE] at Kingston.

and official decorum, and I think I may add
of public and official decency. Some hon. gent-
leman has said to me that the occasion when
these remarks were made was not a public ;
occasion. That is not a correct statement. |
The occamon I take it was almost as public
as a meeting of the Senate. The occasion
was a public dinner given in the city of
Kingston, in honour of a prominent citizen
of Kingston. It was not in any sense a
secret gathering. Letters of regret were
sent by gentlemen occupying official posi-
tions. There were newspaper reporters
present ; and this dinner to Capt. Gaskin
of Kingston was no more a secret or
private gathering than the dinners which
take place in the old country, at which the
leaders of public opinion in that country
often disclose their policies. I feel, conse-
quently, that there is not the slightest impro-
priety in referring to what has already
become public property. I shall quote a few
words from the speech made by Mr. Wallace
on the occasion in (question, and I shall quote
from the Kingston Xews^ which I under-
stand, is the Conservative organ in King-
ston. The reports of Mr. Wallace's speech
given by the two newspapers in Kingston,
the News and the WJiig^ are substantially
the same. The first objectionable observation
which Mr. Wallace made — and I may re-
mark that apparently nothing had been said
by any one previously to call forth the re-
marks which Mr. Wallace made, there was
nothing bad tempered or sensational or of a
sectarian character said up to the time that
Mr. Wallace spoke — was as follows :-

He referred to the record of Kingston in th »
aunals of Orangeism, and recalled with admira-
tion the refusal of the ]>rethren here to remove
their arches at the behest of the Duke of New-
castle on the occasion of the visit of the Prince of
Wales.

I think that most people will feel that,
whether they approve or disapprove of the
action of the Orangemen in connection with
the visit of the Prince of Wales to King-
>iton some 33 years ago, at any rate it is one
of those occurrences which are better not
recalled. I may add as showing that Mr.
Wallace was not as careful al)out his state-
ments as he should be, that he is reported in
the Whig as having said, with respect to
the Duke of Newcastle, under whose tutor-
ship the Prince of Wales was travelling, that
he pretended to l>e a Protestant but that he
avowed himself a Roman Catholic l>ef()re his

death. Mr. Wallace is altogether in error
on this point. That Duke of Newcastle
never did so. His son, some 20 years after his
death did become a member of the Church
to which I belong. However, this visit of
the Prince of Wales is not a very serious
matter. Later in the speech came the lan-
guage to which I refer in the notice. I do
not know that it is necessary for me to read
it over again. Now, what is the meaning of
the language reported as having been used
by the Controller of Customs ? It is just this,
that if the wishes of the vast majority of the
people of Ireland shall prevail, and if Ireland
shall enjoy rights of self-government, such as
are enjoyed by the people of Mr. Wallace's
own province of Ontario, then the Orange-
men of Ireland will resist and re^sist by
force.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— No.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If my hon. colleague
will endeavour to keep himself in a more
subdued frame of mind until I have got
through, I have no objection to his saying
all he pleases, but it is not easy for two
members to address the House at the same
time. I was just stating what this language
meant — that it meant that, in case this
measure, the character of which I have in-
dicated, should be made law by the British
Parliament, the Orangemen of Ireland will
resist and resist by force.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— No.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
can point afterwards that it is not so. I say
that if any other meaning can be attached
to the language used by Mr. Wallace and
used by the people whom he was promising
to assist than that they mean to resist the
law if the home rule measure shall become
law, then one cannot understand the mean-
ing of language. When we find that orders
are given to manufacturers in BimMngham
and other places for large quantities of
rifles, we cannot deem it likely that those
who mean to buy them propose to depend
upon moral suasion.

Hon. Mr. DOBSON— How does the hon.
gentleman know that large orders were
given ?

Hon. Mr. POWER— We know through
the newspapers.

Digitized by

Google

Speech of Mr, Wallace [MARCH 21, 18931 at Kingston.

381

Hon. Mr. FLINT — Perhaps, they were
pop guns.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I shall read the lan-
guage again.

Hon. Mr. CASGRAIN— Dispense.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Whether it means
using firearms or not it does not make any
material difference. What he said was " to
this our friends there will never submit.
Britain may cast them out, but if she does
she has no right to look for further allegi-
ance." *

Is not that a declaration that they will
not be any further loyal ? He continues
" they are preparing for action. Their unal-
terable determination is never to submit to
home rule, and they will have the sympathy
of the Orangemen of Canada — aye, more than
sympathy, they shall have our active aid, if
that aid be necessary. We shall be unworthy
of our ancestors if we fail in our duty in
such a crisis."

If its Irish opponents refuse positively to
accept home rule and submit to it, there is
only one way of hindering it from going ^n-
to operation, and that is by force ; and v^e
are told that if they do resist the law they
shall have the sympathy and active aid of
the Orangemen of Canada in their resis-
tance. To the ordinary reader that is the
meaning that. would be conveyed by that
language. I do not know whether that was
the meaning which Mr. Wallace intended to
convey or not ; but that is the impression
which would be conveyed to the ordinary
reader of that language. Now what is that
language? It is simply deliberately con-
ceived, prospective treason. This gentleman
says : "If the Queen, Lords and Commons
of Great Britain and Ireland pass this mea-
sure, and it thus becomes law, and is entitled
to the loyal obedience and allegiance of every
British subject, we shall not obey it. Our
friends in Ireland will resist, and we are pre-
pared to offer them active help in their re-
sistance." That naturally means that we
should have a second editionof the Williamite
wars in Ireland, and that the waters of the
River Boyne 'might be again crimsoned with
Irish blood, Such language as that, coming
from any gentleman of prominence would be
inexcusable, but coming from a gentleman
who is a member of the Parliament of Can-
ada, and the virtual head of a great Depart-

ment which controls an enormous patronage,
and who draws a salary from the Public
Treasury of $5,000 a year, I think it is so
outrageous as to be almost incredible. I am
afraid, however, that there is no doubt about
the use of the language- I find, as I have
said, that the reports in the two newspapers,,
the Conservative and the Liberal newspapers
of Kingston, are almost Identical. I find in a
subsequent issue of the Conservative paper,
the issue for the 15th March, that there is a
reference to this matter which I think puts
it beyond any question.

Hon.
Whig ?

Mr. CLEMOW— Is that Tite

Hon. Mr. POWER— This is TJie News.
The one which I read first was the paper of
the 11th. In The Xetvs of 15th March,
there is an article headed " Davin and
Wallace " which I may as well read in full ;
it is very short : —

Mr. Wallape, M. P. and Controller of Customs^
must have forgotten that he was a Minister of the
Crown when he intimated in his speech in this
city the other night that the Orangemen of Canada
would assist their brethren in Ireland in armed re-
sistance to Home Rule, so, at any rate, thinks Mr.
Nicholas Flood Davin, M.P. for Regina, who has
given notice. in the House of Commons that he will
to-day put the following inquiry.

And then the inquiry is given, and the
Neivs goes on :

As the report froiu which this extract 'was^
taken appeared originally in the Ntws^ we may re-
mark that the shorthand notes are still extant, and
that Mr. Wallace said at least as mucli as was
transcribed. "

So I do not think there is any question
about the use of the language. In order to
remove any possible doubt al)out this matter,
I shall read a despatch which appears in the
Montreal Gazette of yesterday, headed,
" Ulster Conservatives Express Thanks to
Their Countrymen in Canada for Their
Proffered Assistance."

London, 18th March. — The following manifesto

has been issued by the members of the Ulster Con-

I servative party to their countrymen in Canada in

I response to the offers made at public meetings at

I Toronto and elsewhere to send practical assistance

to enable the Irish Loyalists resist a home rule

Parliament : —

We, the majority of the parliamentary repre-
sentatives of Ulster, representing a majority of the
people of that province, cordially thank our friends
in Canada for their recent expressions of sympathy
and offers of assistance in the event of any attempt
being made to coerce our people into submission to

Digitized by

Google

382

Speech of Mr. Wallace [SENATE] at Kingston,

a rebel Parliament. We hope that such an emer-
gency may never arise, as we cannot believe that
such unparalleled political infamy could ever be
perpetrated as to attempt to force a hateful yoke
upon a loyal and peaceful population against their
will, and against the will of the majority ot the
people of Great Britain. If such tyranny be ever
attempted, we are rejoiced to know that we can
confidently rely in the hour of our need upon the
sympathy and help of our friends and kinsmen in
Canada.

This is signed, on behalf of the Ulster
members of Parliament, by E. Saunderson,
Chairman. So I do not think there is
any doubt about the language ; and that
despatch goes to show that it was not lan-
guage used without deliberation, and the
whole circumstances of the case go to show
that Mr. Wallace spoke after careful prepa-
ration.

Now, to realize the serious character of
Mr. Wallace's offence, let us take another
case. Mr. Wallace is not a member of the
Administration, I am happy to say, but he is
what is called in the old country an Under
Secretary ; and I understand — it has been
stated in the House of Commons — that
he controls and is to control the patron-
age of the Customs Department. There
is another officer occupying a somewhat
similar position, the Solicitor-General,
Mr. Curran. Let us suppose that Mr.
Wallace's colleague, Mr. Curran, had de-
clared at a banquet of the St. Patrick's
Society in Montreal, which he attended two
or three days ago, that if Home Rule were
not granted, the Home Rulers of Ireland —
who constitute about four-fifths of the peo-
ple of Ireland — would rise in rebellion and
would claim by force what had been denied
to justice and reason, and that in such case
their Canadian friends would extend to
them their sympathy, 4nd more than
that, help in the shape of men and money
in resisting the officers of Her Majesty's
Government — what would the people at large
say of that ? Would there not be an outcry
from all parts of Canada and of Great Bri-
tain and Ireland as well, and a demand for
Mr. Curran's immediate removal from office,
and would not this demand be loudest from
the belligerent gentlemen who are now trying
to urge the people of Ulster into rebellion ?
The'genial Solicitor-General, whom everybody
is disposed to like, you would probably hear
dubbed " a black hearted traitor :" the bene-
volent despot who just now presides over
the destinies of the Senate and of Canada
would be unable to resist the demands for

the decapitation of that officer ; and even
the unqualified retraction of his speech
would hardly save the official head of the
Solicitor-General.

Hon. gentlemen, this is a very serious
matter. There is just one excuse for this
offence, or one fact which n^ight be sul)-
mitted as a palliation, and that is that
gentlemen more highly placed than even the
Controller of Customs of Canada, gentlemen
in the old country who ought to set an ex-
ample of prudence and loyalty, have used
language calculated to convey an impression
similar to that conveyed by the language
used by Mr. Wallace. The language is ex-
ceedingly discreditable to these gentlemen,
particularly as, not many years ago, the
party whose leaders are now using language
of that kind were in treaty with the leaders of
the Home Rule party with a view to introduce
a measure of Home Rule. Hon. gentle-
men must remember that those gentlemen
hare an excuse which Mr. Wallace has not.
Those gentlemen are out of office and are
trying to get into office; and, as the humour-
ous member who so long represented the
County of Wentworth in the House of Com-
mons used to say, " the she-bear robbed of
her whelps is mild when compared with the
Liberal-Conservative out of office." There is
that excuse for the language used in the old
country by the Conservative gentlemen who
are out of office. There was nothing of that
sort in the case of Mr. Wallace. He and his
friends were in office, and he was very com-
fortably fixed. Now, hon. gentlemen, as far
as regards the use by Mr. Wallace of the
language attributed to him, I think there
can Ixj no question.

I have no idea whatever as to the course
the Government propase to pursue, but I can
form some idea of what the Controller of
Customs has earned, what his conduct merits,
when one considers the fate of two or three
less conspicuous offenders who were guilty
of a much less serious offence. I am not
an annexationist, hon. gentlemen ; I believe
that our own political and social systems
are preferable to those of the great
Republic ; but, for a man who thinks
differently, I hold that it is not treason to
advocate the union of Canada with the
United States if that union is to be brought
about by peaceful means and with the con-
sent of the Imperial Government. I con-
tend that that is not treason. Certain per-
sons in Canada have undertaken to bring

Digitized by

Google

Speech of Mr. Wallace [MAIRCH 21, 1893] at Kingston.

383

al)out the union of Canada with the United
States by peaceful means, and with the con-
sent of the Imperial Government ; and that
is a much less serious offence than taking up
arms in rebellion or assisting in armed re-
l>eiHon against the Imperial Government.
One gentleman who committed this oflfence
was a Mr. McDonald. He was an officer in
the militia, and his commission, I understand,
has l)een cancelled. Another was a gentle-
man in the employment of the Local Gov-
ernment of Ontario, Mr. Elgin Myers, who
filled a not very important position in that
province. That gentleman was requested to
resign, and not having done so, he was
ejected from office by Sir Oliver Mowat ;. and
it would appear that the ejection has met
with the approval of the great bulk of both
parties in this country. Then the case
which comes nefirest home to us, is the case
of J. J. Ck>sgrove of Toronto. That gentle-
man was an officer in the Inland Revenue
Department, which is a sister department, so
to speak, to the Department of Customs over
which Mr. Wallace presides. That gentle-
man did not, as I understand, advocate an-
nexation publicly, but being requested by
some of his friends, he signed a paper in-
tended to call a meeting to consider the ques-
tion of annexation. That was by no means
so great an oflfence tvs the one of which the
Collector of Customs has been guilty ; and
what was the course taken by the Govern-
ment ? They dismissed Mr. Cosgrove ; and
they have shown in Mr. Cosgrove's case what
they think of even a suspicion of disloyalty
in an inferior officer. .Now the question
comes, have they a diflferent standard for
superior officers ? Is the net which catches
the little fish so constructed that the big fish
can go through ? There is this further con-
sideration in the case of a man like Mr.
Wallace, at the head of a great department
like that, having probably as much patron-
age at his disposal as any head of a departs
ment in the Government : we have no
guarantee but that he may take steps to fill
the custom houses with officials who hold
the same views as himself. I think, hon.
gentlemen some action is due to the reputa-
tion of the Government and of the country,
and to the sense of public propriety and
decency which should prevail amongst all
respectable people of both parties in this
country.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I trust I am not
using unparliamentary language when I say

that I think the senior member for Halifax
has discovered a mare's nest. He is a man
of cool judgment and perhaps with as little
of the Irish fire in him as any man born on
the Green Isle ; but I thought at first, when ,
I heard of this inquiry, that Clarke Wallace
had been buying firearms and sending them
home, which turns out not to be the case.
He says the people of Ulster are opposed to
Home Rule and they are not going to submit
to it if they can possibly help it ; and he says
"if they want assistance from us we will
send it." That I understood meant assist-
ance in the way of money. I think that our
friend Edward wrote out to us a short time
ago asking for money in that same cause, and
I believe he wrote to the Hon. Frank Smith,
who was probably the best man he could
"communicate with for that purpose. If he
had written to those close-fisted gentlemen,
he would not have got much from them, but
he knew where he was likely to strike oil ;
he wrote to Mr. Smith. I do not think
that Fmnk Smith will send over very many
blunderbusses and cannons. My view is that
men who send their money over there are
pretty big fools. I think they had l)etter ^
ke^p their money at home. I do not suppose,
j however, that money sent over there would
1 be used for the purchase of firearms. The
hon. member from Halifax went consider-
ably out of his way when he endeavoured to
show that it was the intention of Mr. Wallace
to do anything more than advocate the send-
ing of money over there to assist in the
election of members. However, I do not
think we have anything to do with that
matter here.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I do not propose
to be led into a discussion upon the question
which my hon friend from Halifax has re-
ferred to in his speech. He will permit me
however, to thank him for the very good
opinion he appears to have of some gentle-
men who belong to the Orange Association.
He says some of them are fairly respectable.
I will reciprocate by saying that there are
many gentlemen belonging to the religious
profession to which he belongs that are
eminently respectable, and I hope that the
great mass of those to whom he has referred
to-day are equally respectable with those to
whom I have referred. However, they must
be judged by their conduct. The hon. gen-
tleman has referred to a great many points,
and if we were on the stump and were seek-

Digitized by

Google

384

Speech of Mr. Wallace [SENATE] at Kingston.

ing the ears of the electors, and desiring to
appeal to the passions of either one class or
the other, I might be inclined to have a tilt
with the hon. gentleman ; but as this is not
the case, I can only repeat the language of
a very eminent poet belonging to our own
nation which I think is very apt in this
case, that " a little nonsense now and then is
relished by the wisest men." I do not desire
to be disrespectful in my reply and will not
say that all his remarks were nonsensical,
though I think it would be very much
better if we in this country learned one fact ;
that is, to allow the people across the water
to deal with the questions which affect them
without dragging them into our discussions,
particularly in the legislative halls of this
country. My hon. friend would probably
have been a little more fair, notwithstand-*
ing the fact that he had given that notice,
if he had amended it by copying the re-
vised report published in the newspaper to
which he referred.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I looked for the
revised report and could not find it.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I would have given
it to the hon. gentleman if he had asked^or
it ; I have it here. So far as those points
are concerned, however, there is not a mate-
rial difference ; I do not draw the de-
ductions from the language that has been
quoted, that the hon. gentleman does. I am
not going into a defence or a condemnation
of the language, but I interpret it very much
as the junior member from Halifax does. I
should l)e very sorry to accuse Mr. Blake of
disloyalty because he has appealed to a cer-
tain class of the Canadian people to aid the
Home Rulers in the political fight which is
now going on in the old country. I do say
this, however, that while my hon. friend
may be an ardent supporter of the policy
pursued by Mr. Blake at present in favour
of Home Rule, there are in this country
others who differ from him in tofo on that
question, and that they have just as good a
right to expend their money and aid those
who think as they do, as my learned friend
has to expend his money in aid of the Home
Rule movement. Upon that broad principle
I have nothing more to say. The Govern-
ment have no official knowledge of the lan-
guage used by Mr. Wallace more than the
hon. gentleman has ; neither do they hold
themselves responsible for language which

may be used outside of the House in
connection with the political afiOiirs
of the empire generally, any more than the
administration of 1876 held themselves
responsible for the utterances of one of their
colleagues in the County of Argenteuil,
when he made use of language which was
taken exception to by the late Mr. Holton.
Mr. Mackenzie replied that he was not
responsible for Mr. Huntingdon's utterances
upon questions that affected the local politics
or the religion of certain people in 'that
province. Mr. Huntington at that time was
the Postmaster-General and a member of
the Administration, and might be held by
his leader responsible for his utterances.
Further than this I do not propose to dis-
cuss this question. As to the action of
certain people so long ago as the time the
Prince of Wales was here, T shall leave that
to the hon. gentleman sitting to his right to
defend, if he deems it necessary. However,
I can assure him and I am quite safe in
saying it, that if the Queen of England
has to wait for an attack upon the throne,
or upon the institutions of the country, by
treasonable men, until Mr. Wallace or those
whom he supports in the North of Ireland
rebel, she will long reign over us, and God
grant that she may.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— I regi-et that the
hon. member from Halifax considers it his
duty to bring this matter under the consi-
deration of the House. We have one asser-
tion from the hon. gentlemen, however, that
must be satisfactory to the great body of
Orangemen in this' country — that they are
moderately respectable citizens. The Orange-
men of this country will feel under deep
obligation to my hon. friend, the member
from Halifax, in coming to this conclusion,,
because it is universally admitted that the
Orangemen of this country, of all parts of
the empire, have been loyal and true to the
British Throne. I do not think we have any-
thing to do with the utterances of gentlemen
occupying positions such as Mr. Wallace-
holds. It is a free country and we are enti-
tled to free speech ; I see nothing in the ut-
terance of Mr. Wallace upon the occasion
referred to which should bring any condem-
nation on him or the body that he has re-
presented for so many years. If all the acts
that have taken place during the last ten or
twelve years were brought before the notice
of an Assembly like this, there would be a

Digitized by

Google

Speech of Mr. Wallace [MARCH 21, 1893] at Kingston.

385

stir from one end of the province to the
other ; but there has been no case of that
kind occurring among the Orangemen, and I
agree with the leader of the House when he says
that it will be a long time before the Queen of
Great Britain will bedethroned by Orangemen.
There appears to be a great diversity of
opinion on this Home Rule measure. I do
not propose to enter into a discussion of the
question, or to say whether it is right or
wrong, but there are many people in this
country, as well as in England and Ireland,
who do not approve of the present Home
Rule measure as introduced. It is due to a
very great extent to the fact that we in
Canada have enjoyed a certain amount of
Home Rule, but of a different nature from
the Home Rule that was sought in Ireland
at the commencement of the agitation. I do
not think there would be a dissentient voice
among the Irish Protestants of this country
if a bill were inaugurated to give substantial
justice to all sects and parties in Ireland ;
but they think — whether rightly or wrongly
is not for me to say — that their rights will
he imperilled, and taking that view of the
case they are determined, as far as lies in
their power, to act in a way that will prevent
the passage of that Act. My hon. friend
from Halifax introduced into this debate a
matter that took place when the Prince of
Wales was here a few years ago.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I simply read from
the speech made by Mr. Wallace, at Kings-
ton, as regards that matter.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— And commented
on it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Simply pointed out
that it was a mistake.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOW— Mr. Wallace had
nothing to do with the arches being thrown
down in Kingston. The circumstances were
very different. The Prince of Wales came
to this country, and at that time the Orange-
men of the old country were suffering under
great disabilities and not allowed to hold
any positions under the Government. The
Duke of Newcastle, acting under instructions
from England, found it impossible to recog-
nize in any way the loyal Orangemen of this
country. I think it was a bad business, but
still it took place. The Orangemen did not
commit murder over it ; they submitted in a
quiet and peaceable manner to the treatment
25

they received at the hands of the Duke of
Newcastle. I may say I regret exceedingly
that this matter has come up in the Senate.
We have been a long time living har-
moniously together, and we want to continue
in that line. We do not want any firebrands
among us, irritating the people of this coun-
try. Goodness knows we have sufficient
to cause irritation without bringing up
those questions which do not affect us
at aU. The people of Ireland can very
well take care of themselves without
the intervention of the hon. member from
Halifax. I consider it my duty, being an
Orangeman and a friend of Mr. Wallace, to
come forward in his defence. Of all men in
this country he is the one who least deserves
this attack. He hs^ been here a long time
and has occupied positions of trust. He is
an honourable man and he would be the last
in the world to do anything to bring dis-
credit on himself or on the country. If the
hon. gentleman from Halifax had waited to
hear the reply of Mr. Wallace in the lower
House, which is going on at the present
moment, I do not think he would have con-
sidered it necessary to introduce the subject
here. Our duty is to carry on the affairs of
the country. We are not a political body
to any great extent, and we want to do
what we can to serve the best interests of
the country. I believe it would be better
for the hon. member from Halifax and for
this House and for the country if the matter
had not been referred to at all, but that
Mr. Wallace should be allowed to express
his views as he thinks proper without com-
menting on them here. The effect of the
hon. gentleman's action will not redound to
the credit or advantage of the party to which
he belongs.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I wish to say one
or two words in explanation.

Hon. Mr. BOWELLr— I should like to
have it understood, or to understand myself,
what the rules of order are in this House.
Is a general discussion upon a question put
to the Grovemment in order and has the
member of the Senate who asks the question
the right of replying ? I can understand that
upon a substantive motion it may be allowed,
but if this practice is to be permitted, there
will be no end to discussion upon every tri-
fling questicm put in the House. I do not
object to the hon. gentleman speaking, but I
have been forcibly struck, since I have had

Digitized by

Google

386

Speech of Mr. Wallace [SENATEJ at Kingston.

a seat in this House, with the fact that on
mere inquiries such as this, not only is there
a general discussion, but the member who
asks the question invariably rises to reply.
That provokes other replies, and there is
a continued discussion. I wish the hon. gent-
leman to understand that I do not rise to
prevent his making an explanation, but I
think it is a very good opportunity to have
this point of order decided. I wish to know
what the practice has been and what it is to
be in the future.

. Hon. Mr. ALLAN — There is no doubt
that the practice has been in this House, to
permit a member who has made an inquiry
to reply after the leader of the Govern-
ment has spoken, but I ventured when I was
Speaker to call the attention of the House
to the inconvenience likely to result from
such a thing, because the House can see that
when a matter of the kind is brought up, if
the one who introduces speaks and is followed
by others and the leader of the Government
makes a reply, there should be an end to the
question. Great inconvenieiice has arisen
from the fact that after the leader of the
Govermnent has made his reply, other mem-
bers have spoken and the leader of the
Government must either leave what is said
after hus reply to the question unanswered,
or rise to speak again. I hope the hon.
gentlemen who have the revision of the rules
under their charge will take cognizance of
this practice. My hon. friend from Halifax
has a perfect right under the practice of the
House, to speak again, but I can only say
that the whole thing is exceedingly incon-
venient and irregular.

Hon. Mr. MASSON— This is not a ques-
tion of tolerance, so far as the Senate is con-
cerned. We have the same rules as the
House of Lords in England, and in England
it is a well established fact that if a question
is put on the instant, there is no discussion
allowed, but in the House of Lords, when a
peer wants to have an explanation of a sub-
ject and a discussion to follow, he has only
to place a notice on the paper and then it
becomes a subject for discussion. The hon.
leader of the House was not a member of
the Senate when that question was discussed
last year, but it was understood then that if
a discussion was desired notice should be
given. Of course it may be considered
desirable to change this rule, but I wish to

point out that the hon. member from Halifax
is acting upon the well understood practice
of the Senate

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The point that I
put is this : — Has an hon. gentleman who
makes an inquiry a right to reply after his
question is answered, as he would have if he
had made a substantive motion.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not propose to
go into any new matter at all. I wished to
say that my object in calling attention to
this subject had apparently been misappre-
hended by the hon. gentlemen who have
spoken.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That is not an
explanation ; that is a reply to what has been
said.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think the hon.
gentleman is a little too sharp. I say I
have been misapprehended, and the fact that
I have been is apparent from the construc-
tion that hon. gentlemen have put upon my
language. They assume that I have raised
a question as to the right of persons in this
country to assist those who are opposing the
Home Rule movement in Ireland. I never
intended to do that. I called attention to
the language used by the Controller of
Customs in Kingston, to the effect .that if,
after this Home Rule measure became law,
the people of the north of Ireland, who are
opposed to it should resist it by force, they
would be assisted in their forcible resistance
by the Orangemen in Canada. Now, that
is a totally different thing from the matter
which these gentlemen talked about. What
comparison is there between what Mr.
Wallace advocates and Mr. Blake's getting
money to carry on a political campaign in
the old country ? One is a constitutional,
legitimate and proper thing. I did not say
whether Home Rule was a desirable thing
or not. The two parties are fighting about
it, and I, as a loyal subject, shall submit to
whatever the decision of the British Parlia-
ment may be. What I say is that the
Controller of Customs has announced^ that
under certain circumstances he and his
friends will be prepared to be disloyal and
to aid people to take up arms against the
Government of the Empire. That is a very
serious thing. It is no use saying that we
are not concerned in it. No matter where
that language is spoken, it is still the

Digitized by

Google

The Post Office [MABCH 21, 1893] at SackviUe.

387

language of a member of Parliament and of
a prominent officer of the Government.
How is it, if this language of the Controller
of Customs does not come within the juris-
diction of the Government, that the act of
Mr. Cosgrove, in signing a requisition to
call a meeting, was brought before the
Government? That was not done in
Mr. Co8grove*s official capacity ; it was done
as a citizen of Toronto. However, I am
getting beyond the explanation now.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The hon. gentle-
man asks how did the case of Mr. Cosgrove
come before the Government ? This is an
illustration of the inconvenience arising from
the practice to which I have referred. Since
the matter has been introduced, however, I
must explain that Mr. Cosgrove's case was
brought under the notice of the Department
by the representatives of some of the con-
stituencies in and about Toronto, who made
a complaint that he had signed a disloyal
document, and the matter was thoroughly
investigated. So much for that. The hon.
gentleman has put a wrong construction upon
my words — I will not say intentionally. The
reason I introduced Mr. Blake^s name was
this — the junior member from Halifax inter-
preted the language of Mr. Wallace to be a
call for aid in money. I accepted that inter-
pretation, and I asked was that more disloyal
than Mr. Blake's appeal fo;* aid to conduct
the repeal movement on the other side. I can
only say that I fully concur in the remarks
made by the hon. member from York and I
hope that the hon. gentleman who is Chair-
man of the special committee to revise the
rules of the House will take care that this
subject is thoroughly defined in the future
as to what is admissible and what is not.

THE POST OFFICE AT SACKVILLE.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. BOTSFORD inquired if the
Government intend to make provision this
session for the construction of a suitable post
office at Sackville, N.B. He said : — I owe
the Senate an apology for introducing such
a local matter, and I feel bound to explain
why I think it necessary to put this question
and to show that Sackville has been neglected
in the matter of postal facilities. The claims
of the place are these : It is a centre of 5,000
inhabitants, with a railway station, where a
large amount of business is done. A branch
25i

railway extends from the station to Cape
Tormentine, which is the means of commun-
ication with Prince Edward Island in the
severe months of winter, and the mails are
carried by that route. Sackville possessi^s a
population which has a very large corres-
pondence. There are two academies there, a
university and a commercial college, at which
some 250 students are at this time in atten-
dance. Including the professors and others
employed there, over 300 persons are con-
nected with these institutions who have a
large correspondence with all parts of the
Dominion, for most of the provinces send
their young people to be educated at Sack-
ville. There are large manufactories in the
place, there are two foundries, a cheese and
butter factory and a large carriage factory.
Sackville possesses a larger tract of alluvial
marine land than any other part of the pro-
vince, not less than 30,000 acres; consequent-
ly there is a large correspondence carried on
through the post office. These are claims which
I think ought not to be ignored, but when I
call the attention of the Government to the ,
condition in which the post office is now, it
must be apparent th^^t justice has not been
done to that district. The building is very
small : the space allowed for the public is
not more than nineteen by six feet. Persons
coming from a distance in bfid weather
crowd into that office, and I have known
occasions when persons who had boxes at the
post office were unable to get at them in
consequence of the crowded condition of the
room. Under the circumstances, I think
Sackville is entitled to better accommodation
than it possesses. In fact the accommoda-
tion is not creditable to the Government.
Looking through the statistics I find that
other places with less population and yield-
ing less than half the revenue that is col-
lected at our office^ have larger buildings —
or ought to have larger, because I see in
some parts of the Maritime provinces as
much as $25,000 has been appropriated for
the building of post offices in less populous
centres than Sackville. In Prince Edward
Island post offices have been built in places
with not half the population of Sackville
and not more than one-quarter of the revenue
collected. It seems impossible to find out
on what principle the Government have
acted in erecting post offices in the various
parts of the country. There seems to be no
system about it. I hope, under the circum-
stances, the Government will take this

Digitized by

Google

388

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

matter into very serious consideration and
give better accommodation to the parish of
Sackville.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— My hon. friend is
altogether too old a parliamentarian not to
know that representatives of the Govern-
ment in either House never give information
as to what wiU appear in the estimates. I
shall therefore have to ask him to wait until
these estimates are laid before us ; but 1
will promise him this, that I will bring his
remarks and his advocacy of Sackville before
my colleagues so that they may understand
the necessity of having better accommoda-
tion for the business of the post office at
Sackville.

CANNED GOODS ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (R) " An Act further to
amend the Act respecting Canned Goods."
He said : — There is very little change pro-
posed in this Bill from what already appears
on the Statute-book. It is simply to compel
the canners of fruit to have the names of
their factories legibly stamped on the cans
either by label or some other mode. At pre-
sent all that is necessary is to have the name
of the dealer, but as a better guarantee as
to the purity of the goods it is deemed ad-
visable, not only by the Government but by
the canners themselves, that each canner
should be compelled to have the name of the
factory, or the party who owns it, stamped
on the can. I may add that this is done at
the instance of the Fruit Canners' Associa-
tion of Ontario.

Hon. Mr. DEVER — I might point out to
the Minister of Trade and Commerce that
the name on the can would not amount to
much unless there was also the date when
the fruit was canned.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think the sug-
gestion is a very good one, because as the
hon. gentleman very properly pointed out,
the fruit might be three or four years old
and deteriorated. When we go into com-
mittee to-morrow, I think we can make such
an amendment as will carry out the hon.
gentleman's views.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— These labels are
printed in very large quantities and the

packers generally import a large number at
a time, because the larger the quantity the
cheaper they can be produced. It is ex-
pensive work, as there must be a different
block prepared for each colour. If a bad
season should be experienced, a large number
of these labels would probably be left over,
and if the suggestion of the hon. gentleman
from St. John were carried out, these labels
would be useless, because the alteration of
the date could not be made by a pen or by
obliterating the old number in any way.
Then, again, fruit put up in cans herme-
tically sealed should keep well. If decom-
position sets in, the cans expand and any-
body can tell immediately whether the con-
tents are sound or not without opening the
can. This Bill does not apply to the labels
on the cans, but to the label on the package
containing the cans. Perhaps, it should be
made to apply both to the packages and to
the cans.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

CANADIAN POWER COMPANY'S
BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON moved the second
reading of the Bill (63) " An Act respect-
ing the Canadian Power Company." He
said : — The object of this Bill is simply to
enlarge the powers previously granted to
this company, enabling them to take water
from the Niagara River at a different place.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

THE SPEAKER OF THE SENATE
BILL.

IN COMMITTEE.

The House resolved itself into a Committee
of the Whole on Bill (N) " An Act respect-
ing the Speaker of the Senate."

In the Committee, on the first clause,

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved that the
first clause be amended by inserting after
"leave" the word "temporarily," and to
leave out from "Chair" to the end of
the clause .and insert " until the Speaker
resumes the Chair during the same
sitting." He said : In my opinion we have
no right to appoint a Speaker, but I believe

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 21, 1893] Senate Bill.

389

that the Speaker of the Senate, even without
this legislation, has a right to leave the
Chamber for a short time and to call another
gentleman to replace him. The Senator thus
called to fill the Chair in his absence will
have no power as Speaker. It is to make
this provision that I have moved this amend-
ment to the lirst clause.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I do not know that
it is necessary for me to give any explana-
tion of the unnecessary amendment which
has been proposed to the first clause. It is
proposed to have it read " temporarily."
The whole sense of the phrase shows that
the replacing of the Speaker by a member of
the Senate is for a temporary absence. That
would be superfluous, I think. If you strike
out the words following " Chair " and insert
the words proposed, you again get into
trouble, because if there is a necessity for
the Speaker to leave the Chair and to call
some other Senator to replace him for a
while, that replacing may last the whole
sitting ; he may be so unwell that he cannot
return and resume the Chair before the
House rises ; therefore the clause in itself
would be impracticable. I think the lan-
guage of it is as perfect as it is possible to
make it. With reference to the two amend-
ments proposed by the hon. gentleman, the
first one is covered by the wording of the
Bilk, and the second would be defeating the
object that the House has in view. There-
fore I think the first clause should be car-
ried as it stands.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
has not been long enough in the Senate to
ascertain that it is difficult to say of any
clause that the language is perfect.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— No ; as perfect as
possible.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
has just stated that it is as perfect as it can
be. That remark would come better from
somebody else than from the gentleman who
is responsible for the Bill.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Explain why.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think there is an
old saying about self-praise.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I gave the House
to understand that the Bill was not drafted
by me, but by the Minister of Justice. The

remark applies to him and not to me. If
the Bill had been drawn in French I would
be more able to appreciate the construction
of it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I wUI not say the
Minister of Justice did not draw the Bill,
but it is not the practice for him to draw
Bills. They are generally drawn in the
department. This House dealt last year
with a measure which came from the
Department of Justice.- Although it was
amended by a Joint Committee in a great
many ways, this House amended it in forty
different ways, and it is not perfect yet. So
hon. gentlemen should be a little slow in
describing any measure as being perfect. I
think the criticism upon this clause which is
given to the House by the hon. gentleman
from DeLanaudi^re is a justifiable one. I
quite agree with the hon. Minister of
Agriculture in thinking that the word " tem-
porarily " would not be necessary, because
the subsequent language of the clause would
show that the absence of the Speaker was to
be only a temporary one. Here is the
language : —

Whenever the Speaker of the Senate, from ill-
ness or any other cause, finds it necessary to leave
the chair durinff any part of the sittings of the
Senate, on any day, he may call upon any Senator
to take the chair. "^

That is doing all we wish to do, but this
Bill goes on to say : —

And preside as Speaker during the remainder
of such day.

There you enter upon debatable ground.
It does not add anything to the value of the
Bill ; as long as the Senate can put some
one in the Chair that is all that is necessary,
and when you say ^* and preside as Speaker "
you may be going further than you have a
right to do. The Speaker of this Senate is
appointed by the Governor-General and the
person we put in there presides as locum
tenena for the Speaker, but not as Speaker ;
and I think the criticism of the member for
DeLanaudi^re is just. The Bill would not
be injured by the striking out of these
words. The further change which the hon.
gentleman suggested, that he shall take the
Chair until the Speaker himself resumes the
Chair before the close of the sitting for that
day, is also quite defensible, because I do
not understand that the intention of the
Gk>vernment is to appoint a salaried officer
who is to be a Deputy-Speaker like the

Digitized by

Google

390

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill.

Deputy-Speaker of the House of Cpmmons.
Then, if not, the other senator should be
called to the Chair only for the time being
and not to wait to the close of the meeting,
and adjourn the House. If it should hap-
pen— which has not happened yet during
these 26 years — that the Speaker after leav-
ing the House wa& taken seriously ill, then
under clause 2, the Clerk would inform the
House that the Speaker was ill, and the
House would appoint some one to take the
Chair and adjourn the House. Ifnquestion-
ably there is a good deal of doubt about our
power to appoint an acting Speaker, and the
wiser course would be to adopt the course
recommended by the hon. member for De-
Lanaudi^re.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I am afraid I must
differ from my hon. friend in regard to his
observations upon the remarks of the hon.
Minister on the other side. I think that
the hon. gentlemen was rather hyp)ercritical r
when the Minister made use of the words
" as perfect as possible," he used them in a
comparative sense, that it was better than
the amendment. It has been said that it is
not necessary to put in this and to strike out
the words " and shall preside as Speaker."
Those words are in the Act, which was the
residt of the amended legislation on the other
side of the water in regard to the Speaker
of the House of Commons ; and this Bill is
drawn exactly upon the same lines, and it is
only that he is to preside as Speaker. That,
my hon. friend from DeLanaudi^re has a per-
fect right to object to, and he is in his right
when he states that he opposes it. The Bill
is to provide for the temporary absence of
the Speaker. The Bill provides that the
new member would go into the Chair and
preside as Speaker until the Speaker himself
came back, and it is directly contrary to the
principle of the Bill to strike out those words.
He does not go into the Chair as a mere
figurehead. He is in place of the Speaker.
TherefcH^ the words are in accord with the
object intended by the legislation. I think
there can be no dispute about that : and the
words " until the Speaker himself resumes
the Chair " shows it, although for the mo-
ment he presides as Speaker, or else he is a
nuisance there, and an unnecessary part of
it altogether.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— Would not it be de-
sirable to use the same expression in both

clauses ? If the gentleman was placed there
in the absence of the Speaker, either temp-
orarily or for some time, as the Speaker has
to act in the same capacity, would not it be
better to use the same expression in
speaking of him in both clauses ? In one
clause he i& said to preside as Speaker, and
in the other to act for the Speaker.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I believe the
reason given by the hon. Minister of Agri-
culture is a good argument in my favour.
The hon. Minister of Agriculture says that
if the amendment proposed should become
a part of the law it might happen that the
Speaker could not resume the seat at the
end of the sitting. That is just the reason
why we should have the amendment, because
if the House is not allowed to adjourn with
the gentleman in the Chair who is not the
Speaker, then I say it will not be consti-
tutional ; but if he is the Speaker or the
Deputy-Speaker, or acting as Speaker, then
the difficulty arises also whether this is cons-
titutional ; but if it is stated that he resumed
his seat before the end of the sitting then it
prevents a breach of the constitution. Now
what is the consequence of that ? Let us
take a case which has happened already. I
was called to order and I did not submit to
it. I said I would rather go to the bar and
make up my case. Supposing a gentleman
had been in the Chair with no power, arid I
had been taken prisoner by the Usher of the
Black Rod could I not proceed at law against
the man who had ordered my arrest and
against the man who had taken me in
custody, for a breach of privilege and for an
indemnity 1 To be sure I could. This shows
the great necessity that the gentleman
occupying the Chair should have the power
and privileges which the British North
America Act gives to the Speaker. It is to
prevent such a difficulty as I have described,
that I say the Speaker will have to take the
Chair before the end of the sitting in order
to adjourn ; otherwise there is no adjourn-
ment. If the gentleman who replaces the
Speaker has no authority he cannot act as
Sp)eaker. He may listen to the debates, but
cannot do anything ; if any difficulty occurs
he has to send for the Speaker and the
Speaker must decide. As the matter stands,
there may be difficulty for the retison that
the gentleman in the Chair had no auUiority.
Supposing this Bill were not disallowed two
or three years hence, the difficulty might

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MAEOH 21, 1893] Senate Bill

391

have to be decided in the courts and my
conviction is the courts would decide the
man had no authority. I think we should
deal with the matter fully now, in order to
prevent difficulty in future. When I see
such gentlemen as the hon. members from
Amherst, Halifax, Richmond, York, the
hon. Minister of Agriculture, and Sir John
Thompson all disagreeing on this particular
point, I am convinced that there must be a
great difficulty somewhere. I am only surprised
that those men who are responsible for the
work will go on and say " Oh, never mind."
With reference to the Bill regarding the
swearing of witnesses, it would not have been
extraordinary if the Bill had been approved
of and sanctioned by the authorities, because
that Bill came under the 9l8t clause of the
British North America Act, and the only re-
striction upon it was the 18th clause; and
what did it say ? It said that the Senate
had no powers except the powers which the
English House of Commons had. That is
the only restriction ; but in this case there
is a direct restriction. The 91st clause is'
restricted by the 34th, which states plainly
that the appointment of the Speaker will be
the prerogative of the Crown. That is quite
clear. When you see the other Act disal-
lowed by the Imperial authorities, although
the Governor was convinced that it was con-
stitutional, it is probable this also will be
declared tdtra vires. What difficulty could
there be in postponing this Act till the next
session? I would suggest to the Ministry
that they might refer this Bill to the Su-
preme Court, as they did the Act of Mani-
toba, before getting the House in trouble.
Supposing it had happened under this Bill
that I was called to order by a Senator oc-
cupying the Chair in the absence of the
Speaker, do you think I would have submit-
ted ? No, I would have gone to Court and
sued him for damages. For these reasons, I
think it is only right that we should move
slowly in this matter and with great caution.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH~I do not see
why we should prolong this debate ; the
matter was fully discussed yesterday.

Hon. Mr. POWER~The hon. gentleman
from Amherst and some other hon. gentlemen
seem to have an impression that this Bill is
not to be discussed, and if that is the senti-
ment of the House, I shall say no more. I
thought our duty was to see that we were
acting properly and constitutionally ; but if

that is not our duty, I shall be glad Uy be
relieved of any responsibility in regard to
the Bill. In line 5 of the first clause, the
word " sittings " should be " sitting." I
think also that we should make the amend-
ment suggested by the hon. member for
York division, that the Speaker may call
upon any gentleman to take the Chair and
act for him during the remainder of the day.
The hon. gentleman thought the language
in the two clauses should be uniform. When
you say " preside as Speaker," you mean he
is Speaker, and in the other case he is simply
a substitute for the Speaker. The difference
between those two expressions might mean
the difference between the Bill being held
within our powers and outside of our powers.
We might have the right to put some one in
the Chair during the absence of the Speaker,
but not the right to appoint any one as
Speaker.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The third clause
provide* that.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I suggested it would
be desirable to have the language the same.
I do not really press that, because my ob-
jection is as to the constitutionality, and I
do not feel disposed to press for any altera-
tion.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I am willing to
accept the suggestion of the hon. member
for York to make the language of the first
clause similar to the second, or the reverse
Tt is quite immaterial to me. I think it
would be better to say " to preside as
Speaker," in the first clause, and to use the
same language in the second.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I take it for granted
that the intention of the hon. gentleman
who introduced this Bill is to provide that,
the gentleman who is placed in that Chair
shall be, to all intents and purposes, the
Speaker for the time being ; otherwise the
legislation would be of no value. If that
is what is intended, it is better to put it so
that there can be no mistake about it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The wiser plan
would l)e U) adopt the practice of the House
of Lords. Our, Speaker is appointed by the
Governor-General, just as the Lord Chan-
cellor is appointed by the Cr*)wn. In the
House of Lords the Cn)wn appoints three or
four Deputy-Speakers, and when the Lord
Chancellor is obliged to leave the Chair he

Digitized by

Google

392

Sj^aker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

calls one of these Speakers to the Chair. If
the Loi*d Chancellor and those Deputy-
Speakers are all absent, then the House itself
chooses the Speaker. I think it would be a
more convenient practice to have some two
or three gentlemen recognized as being those
who would be called to the Chair in case the
Speaker were absent.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— I daresay I may
incur the risk of being reminded that " fools
rush in where angels fear to tread," if I call
attention to a point which has been overlooked
in the discussion of this Bill. It seems to
me that under the second clause of this Bill
the Clerk of the Senate may have a little too
much power, and I see no reason why that
^ssne power should not be vested in any
Senator. It is just possible that a Bill may
be pending before the Senate in which the
Clerk, for the time being, may be very much
interested, and he may act as this clause
empowers him to do.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— He could be dis-
missed.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— His object can be
attained by the delay.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— What has been
adopted here is the procedure followed in
the House of Commons when that House
meets and there is no Speaker. The clerk of
the House rises and, without oflfering a word,
points to the leader of the Government, who
is thereupon given the floor, and he proposes
that a member of the House be chosen to
take the Chair. The legislation proposed
here is in the same sense. When you are
choosing a member of the Senate to fill the
Chair temporarily, somebody has to preside.
There may be a debate when you are mak-
ing the choice of the gentleman who is to fill
the Chair temporarily. The Clerk of the
House is presumed to be presiding over the
discussion then going on, and it is he who is
called upon to give the floor to the members
of the Senate wishing to speak upon the
choice. The wording of this clause is in
accordance with the practice in England and
in the House of Commons here.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — And our own prac-
tice in committee.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY moved to amend the
clause by inserting after the word "Speaker"
" until the Speaker himself shall resume the

Chaif, or another Speaker be appointed by
the Governor-General." He said : — My object
in proposing this is to carry out the view
which is carried out in the same clause pro-
viding 'for the Speaker resuming the Chair.
I had another object in view to which I hope
the Committee will not object. — that is, to
make our legislation as perfect as poesible.
I wished that there should be a legislative
recognition on the face of this Bill that we
do not propose in any way to interfere with
the prerogative of the Crown in the appoint-
ment of the Speaker.

Hon. Mr. McKAY — I presume it is the
intention, after this amendment is made,
that the same Senator who is called to the
Chair on an occasion of this kind shall be
the Speaker until the Speaker returns, if it
should be a week or more.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT moved that the word
"appoint" l)e struck out of the clause and the
Word " choose " be substituted for it.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved that the clause
be further amended by striking out the word
" act " and substituting for it the word " pre-
side."

The motion was agreed to and the clause
as amended was adopted.

On the third clause.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE moved that this
clause be struck out of the Bill.

The motion was declared lost and the
clause was adopted.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved that a fourth
clause be added to the Bill to provide that
no additional charge on the revenues of the
country shall be imposed by the passing of
this Act.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— There is no neces-
sity for that ; it is understood.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If it is understood,
it is just as well to have it expressed.

Hon. Mr. MASSON— He could not be
paid without a vote of Parliament.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I notice that a
number of gentlemen say that thLs is un-
necessary who are anxious that it should not
be inserted in the Bill. It is as well that

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 21, 1893] Senate Bill

393

we should enact that the new office shall not
involve a charge upon the public revenue. It
was only a very short time ago that the
Speaker of the House of Commons, who has
ten times as much work to do as the Speaker
of this House, got a paid assistant, and I
do not think there is any excuse whatever
for a further charge on the revenue of the
country for the discharge of the duties of
the Speaker of the Senate. Tt is as well
that we should make it quite clear that this
Bill shall not be taken advantage of here-
after for the purpose of appointing a paid
officer.

Hon. Mr. MASSON — The ordinary
interpretation of a statute is that no salary
is to be paid unless the salary is mentioned.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Even supposing the
clause which the hon. gentleman proposes
were added to the Bill, it would have no
effect whatever if the Government desired
to pay a salary, because it could be done on
a message from His Excellency placing an
item in the Estimates to pay the Chairman
or Speaker pro tern. That would override
any law.

Hon. Mr. POWER— That is an entirely
new doctrine.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— It has been the
practice of every deliberative body. There
is scarcely a session of Parliament in which
there does not appear a vote in the Estimates
to such and such a person, notwithstanding
anything in the Civil Service Act to the
contrary. If an item were put in the Esti-
mates stating that the Speaker />ro tern should
be paid a certain sum for services rendered
it could be done and would not be a violation
of law.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— This
could be repealed at any moment,

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I do not think the
hon. gentleman from Halifax is endeavour-
ing to better this law : he is attempting to
defeat it. If the clause which he proposes
were to be made part of the Bill, it could
not be introduced in the Senate. It should
be initiated in the other House, because a
Bill which imposes any charge on the revenue
of the country must be introduced there.
The proposed clause is out of order, and
would to a certain extent defeat the spirit of
the Bill. It would lower the position and

the choice that the Senate would be making
of one of its members to fill temporarily the
Chair of the House if we were to enact that
he should not be paid. Of course it is an
honorary office ; it is left to the choice of
the Senate. When a choice is made it is not
by the Government but by the Senate, and
the Senate could appoint nobody who could
receive a salary unless it adopted the choice
of the Government for which the Govern-
ment is responsible. If the clause gave any-
body to understand that the gentleman
occupying the Chair during the absence of
the Speaker could receive a salary, the Bill
could not be introduced in the Senate at all.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I cannot con-
cur in the views expressed by the hon. mem-
ber from Halifax. Suppose under this Bill
a Senator is called to the Chair and occupies '
it for a year, or two years, I should be the
first member of this House to advocate that
he be paid a salary during the time he occu-
pies the Chair.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If the absence of the
Speaker should be prolonged, the Grovern-
ment would naturally appoint a Speaker and
that Speaker would be paid. I wish to say
a word or two to the Minister of Agriculture :
It is very unpleasant to have a difference of
opinion of a decided character with a
gentleman like him, but he must bear in mind
that a good many of us have been- here for
some time and have a pretty fair idea of how
the business of this House should be transact-
ed. The hon. gentleman undertook to impute
to me, in moving my amendment, a desire to
defeat the Bill. He was out of order in
doing so. I think, on the contrary, the
addition of the amendment might be the
means of saving the Bill, because the amend-
ment, instead of making a charge on the
country, would show that the bill did not
involve any expenditure. In the interest
of the Bill it might be better to have some
such clause incorporated in it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I meant by my
remark that I thought the hon. gentleman
fn)m Halifax was not exerting himself to
improve the BilL

The amendment was rejected.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington), from
the committee, reported the Bill with amend-
ments, which were concurred in.

Digitized by

Google

394

The District of (SENATE] Vancouver Vacancy.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (86) " An Act respecting the Chilli-
whack Railway Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

Bill (87) " An Act to incorf)orate the
British Columbia Dock Company." Mr. Mcln-
nes, B.C.)

Bill (66) " An Act to incorporate the
Grand Council of the Catholic Mutual Ben-
efit Association of Canada." (Mr. Sullivan.)

Bill (49) " An Act to incorporate the
Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway Com-
pany." (Mr. Ogilvie.)

Bill (24) " An Act further to amend the
Supreme and Exchequer Courts Act." (Mr.
Angers.)

The Senate adjourned at 5.50 P.M.

THE SENATE.

Ottmva^ Wednesday, March 22nd, 1893,

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.
FORT GEORGE, NIAGARA.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved :—

That an humble Address be presented lo His
Excellency the Govemor-(4eneral ; praying that
His Excellency will cause to be laid before this
House, copies of all petitions to the Government,
or any Department thereof, from the Canadian
Institute, the Lundy's Lane Historical Society, the
Mayor and residents of Niagara Falls and Niagara
Town, with reference to the protection and preser-
vation of Fort George (Niagara) and the grounds
and buildings connected therewith.

He said : — I do not propose to make any
remarks upon the notice of motion, but sim-
ply to ask the leader of this House for an
answer thereto. I understand that a simi-
lar motion was brought up in the House of
Ck)mmons and the Government promised to
make some investigations in the matter.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— There is no objec-
tion to bringing down the papers, but the
matter is now. under the consideration of the
Militia Department, and provision is being

made to put those forts in a sufficient state
of repair to preserve them.

The motion was agreed to.

GENERAL INSPECTION ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL

FIRST READING.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL introduced Bill (V)'
" An Act further to amend the General
Inspection Act."

He said : — This is a short Bill and
deals with the inspection of apples. An
Act was passed last year which has proved
to be impracticable. It 6ould not be car-
ried out, and at the request of the Fruit
Growers' Association and those connected
with the factories, it has been slightly
amended.

The Bill was read the first time.

THE DISTRICT OF VANCOUVER
VACANCY.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)—Before the
Orders of the Day are called I wish to remind
the leader of the Government of a promise
made by him one week ago yesterday, in
answer to a question as to the issuing of a
writ to fill the vacancy created by the death
of Mr. Gordon, for the district of Vancouver.
It no doubt has slipped his memory, and I
should like to kno\^ now if it has been
issued. * V

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH—Does my hon.
friend intend to contest that constituency f
Otherwise it is an unusual thing for mem-
bers of this House to interest themselves in
such matters.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— The other
day when I asked the question, I stated it was
a very unusual thing to make the inquiry
here, but as it was a matter of public policy
I consider it was not irregular. Inasmuch
as we have only six representatives'^ in the
House of Commbns from British Columbia,
and all this session the very important dis-
trict of Vancouver has been unrepresented,
through the illness of the late member, I am
anxious to know if a writ has been, issued.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— No personal or
private interests ?

Digitized by

Google

Speaker oj the [MAECH 22, 1893] Senate Bill.

395

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— That is a pri-
vate matter of my own — not of the hon.
gentleman from Lunenburg.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Probably I owe an
apology to the House for not having an-
swered the question before. The writ has
not been issued, and even if it had been, the
hon. gentleman knows well that, considering
the extent of that territory, it would have
been impossible to have had an election in
time to enable the new representative, who-
ever he might be, to attend this session of
Parliament.

THE SPEAKER OF THE SENATE
BILL.

THIRD BEADING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the third
reading of Bill (N), " An Act respecting the
Speaker of the Senate."

Hon. Mr. DICKEY—Before the vote is
taken, I wish to refer to a statement made
by the hon. member from Barrie referring to
myself, as to what took place in the year
1888. My hon. friend stated that in 1888,
I had expressed the opinion that the House
had the power of appointing a Deputy-
Speaker till the Crown appointed another
Speaker ; that is, when there occurs a sud-
den vacancy in the Senate speakership. I
should not have troubled the House with so
small a matter, except that in the Debates
which came to me these expressions are in
italics, a very unusual thing in reporting
the debates of the House, and therefore I
presume it came from the hon. gentleman's
manuscript which he read on that occasion,
and which must have been underscored for
my particular benefit. I entirely acquit my
hon. friend of any intentional misrepresenta-
tion of my views on that occasion, but all
the same he has unintentionally misrepre-
sented me. I have before me the debate
which occurred then, and all that I ventured
to recommend to the House was stat^ by my-
self. I used the expressions "Deputy-Speaker"
and "Deputy- Chairman" indiscriminately,
but merely as a temporary matter, which
will be explained by referring to what I
said on that occasion. I said : "I am
quite of the opinion that the House regu-
larly, now in consequence of a legal
adjournment, has the power as a con-
stituent body of appointing one of its
members to preside temporarily over its pro-

ceedings." Then I go on to speak of the use
the word " Deputy - Speaker," speaking of
the practice in the House of Lords appoint-
ing temporarily a Deputy-Speaker, which is
a very strange thing. The expression
merely convey^ by the observations was
that I was in favour of this House assum-
ing the power temporarily in an -emergency,
without any act as yet, of appointing a
Deputy-Speaker in the same manner as was
done in the House of Commons. In order
to make it perfectly plain, I added : " I
may venture to suggest if the House, in-
stead of starting out upon an adventure of
assuming new powers which possibly may be
questioned hereafter, it would be just as
well for us to follow the precedent which
was adopts here in 1872." Assuming as I
have already said that we have the inherent
power, being regularly met here, of appoint-
ing a temporary chairman just as if the
head of the flouse was struck down in har-
ness in the performance of his duties, I
think when they appoint a Deputy, not so
much for the purpose of doing business as of
adjourning the House until a future day ;
and on that occasion my hon. friend says
there was a debate, as there was, and my
hon. friend the senior member from Ha-
lifax, also made a suggestion that instead
of taking the course which I proposed of
doing this by universal consent, he proposed
that a resolution be passed. Well we were
all anxious to do what was right, and I at
once said : " If that is the wish of the House
I am willing to defer to it " ; but my hon.
friend from Barrie was present on that occa-
sion, and he said " I am sorry to diifer with
my hon. friend the senior member for Ha-
lifax," and then he goes on to refer to that
and he says " It is far better for us I think
to follow precedent, although I quite agree
that the inherent power exists in the
Senate to meet any emergencies that may
arise, although not distinctly provided for
either in the rules or by the statute.
The statute is very specific in regard to
whom it appoints and how the Speaker of
this House is appointed, and I think it
would he safer to follow the course sug-
gested by my hon. friend from Amherst."
" The suggestion made in the written paper
handed in by Hon. Mr. Dickey was then
put and agreed to unanimously."

Now there is not a word in this in refer-
ence to this expression which I used, " De-
puty-Speaker," only to illustrate that we

Digitized by

Google

396

Speaker of the [SENATE] Senate Bill

might do temporarily what the House of
Lords did, and the words "a temporary
Chairman," which I also made use of, showed
this : there is not a suggestion there that I
ventured to advocate any power to be exer-
cised by this House of venturing out upon
a new line in appointing a Deputy-Speaker
as had been done in the Commons by Sta-
tute. I hop)e, therefore, that I have explfidned
that matter sufficiently to the satisfaction of
the House. I think, while I am on my feet,
I may as well state that I think the House
is very greatly indebted to my hon. friend the
member from Ottawa, from the course that
he has taken in this matter, without any re-
ference to party, but simply upon the merits
of the Bill itself, and in doing so he has im-
parted to this House a great deal of valu-
able and most interesting information, and
time is not wasted by referring to these step-
ping-stones in the history of this country. We
are going back, as my hon. friend went back,
to the year 1872, and there we find on that
occ£^ion the Governor-General took a
very different view from the view that I
took and that others took in regard to this,
and he was of opinion that this Oaths Act,
about which so much has been said, was per-
fectly intra vires and within the competency
of this Parliament ; and this is the way
he finally put it : —

My conclusions have been further fortified no*
only by the opinions of many legal authorities
whom 1 have consulted, but more especially tha^
of Mr. Todd, the author of *' Parliamentary Govern-
ment," etc.

What does Mr. Todd recommend? Mr.
Todd gave a strong opinion that the House
had power to pass the Bill. For what rea-
sons ? This is his opinion : —

The Dominion Parliament were therefore clear-
ly competent in my judgment to confer a similar
power upon the Senate and the House of Commons,
pursuant to the authority conveyed to that Parlia-
ment by the 91 at clause of the British North
America Act to make laws for the peace, order and
good government of Canada.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I do not want
to interrupt my hon. friend, but will this
lead to a general discussion ? If so it will
delay us very much. He is going into the
whole principle, which I think is irregular,
because we may spend a whole day discuss-
ing it.

Hon. Mr. DTCKEY~My hon. friend
knows perfectly well that I have a perfect
right to discuss the principle of the Bill, but

I shall not discuss the matter unduly. I
have great respect for the feelings of the
House as well as my own on that point ; but
that is the foundation of the opinion of Lord
Dufferin, who transmitted that Bill ; and
he says here he has transmitted it with the
other information to Sir John Macdonald,
the leader of the House, and it reads in
this way : —

Your despatch, kc. , with enclosures has been
referred to the Law Officers of the Crown upon the
report that the * * of the Oaths Act is
ultra vires.

That report was made by Sir John Mac-
donald, and in that report he laid no stress
whatever on the 9l8t section, but his
opinion was founded upon the 18th section.
With all those authorities Lord Kimberley
sends a despatch to say substantially that
the Bill is clearly ultra vires ; so that it is
quite clear according to those authorities, so
far as the Colonial Office would make up
their minds, that the 91st section did not
apply, and in accordance with what they
did, immediately after to disallow the Bill.
It is quite clear they considered the 91st
section did not apply to this. It is some-
what curious that the discussion in this
Senate took place on the 28th April, 1873,
and two days afterwards Sir John Macdon-
ald'E report in Ck)uncil also took place ; and
it appears from that, that he had quite
changed his mind. I do not know whether
he was influenced at all by the discussion
here, but Lord Dufferin says in his despatch
that doubts seem to have been thrown upon
it in Parliament, and' after considering the
matter fully. Sir John Macdonald gave his
opinion, we had no power to pass the Bill.
Under those circumstances, it was decided
the Bill was ultra vires. 1 think it is very
important that those matters should be
brought forward, and that we should see that
we are perfectly in line with the action of
the Colonial Office and the Imperial Law
Officers of the Crown. Subsequently the
amended Act of 1875 was passed. I merely
refer before I sit down to the curious fact
that 20 years ago we were confronted in this
discussion by the opinion of a librarian of
Parliament on this question, and which
turned out to be valueless, and we have now
had thrust in on this debate a long opinion
given by another official, the Clerk of the
House of Commons, upon this question.
With regard to his opinions I have nothing
to say, except that I have very high respect

Digitized by

Google

Speaker of the [MARCH 22, 1893] Senate Bill.

397

for that gentleman as a litei*ary man and a
very successful importation from the East
to this Parliament ; but at the same time I
am quite willing to leave the matter as it
stands, with this assurance on my mind, that
I think we need have no fear that the opi-
nion of the clerk of the House of Commons
will interfere with the passage of this Bill
any more than the opinion of the librarian
influenced the Parliament on the other side
of the water twenty years ago.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— I am very glad that
my hon. friend has called my attention to
this subject and enabled me to offer some
explanation in respect to the matter. I had
not intended to say anything on this subject,
but merely to submit to the decision of the
House on the third reading ; and I do not
propose to interfere by any attempt to offer
amendments to the measure before us. When
I referred to my hon. friend, it was merely
in the course of reference to what had occur-
red in the House. I was endeavouring to
show there was no precedent for the pro-
posed action and only in a general way,
without going into particulars. It was
chiefly from my own personal recollection of
what passed. I did not enter into that point
as an argument. I can see no argument in
it ; and therefore I did not dwell upon that
point. My hon. friend has referred to me
apparently as taking the view that we had
the inherent power. At the risk of troubling
the House I will just read what I said and
show that my remark had no relation what-
ever to the substantive power, and that all I
contended for was that a dehberative body,
such as ours, possessed, as any municipal
council would possess, an inherent or implied
power of dealing with a matter of this kind
when under discussion. What I said was
this : —

If DO one objects ! You have objected, and I
was going to point out to you what the precedents
have been in the past. I have no doubt that the
inherent power exists with the House to adjourn,
but what was done in 1872 is the only precedent
we have had since Confederation, and it would be
safer to follow that, and that the House should
adjourn by consent. A very serious question may
arise in taking any course, and it would be far
better for us, I think, to follow precedent ;.
although I quite agree that the inherent power
exists m the Senate to meet any emergency which
may arise although not distmctly provided for
either in the rules or by statute. The statute is
very specific in regard to who has to appoint and
how the speaker in this House is appointed, and I

think it would be safer to follow the course sug-
gested by my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Dickey).

So that I think I have vindicated my po-
sition and shown that it was not inconsis-
tent with my attitude on this Bill. Whether
I was consistent or not is of little moment.
The question is, are my arguments sound,
and I have nothing to convince me that this
proposed meddling with an integral part of
the Constitution at all comes within what
has been termed ** the higher sphere of
power " under the general terms in sec. 91.
Very far from it : I still think the Bill before
the House bad and unconstitutional, root
and branch. ^

I have a long personal acquaintance with
the hon. member from Ottawa and I have a
high respect for him and for his opinions,
but it is quite evident that he spoke, build-
ing on the opinion of Mr. Todd given at a
former time. While I have great respect
for Mr. Todd's memory, I think the opinion
of Mr. Bourinot is certainly quite equal to
Mr. Todd's. I am sorry if I fail to any
extent to bring out all that my hon. friend
opposite said on a former occasion. It was
not intentional. His arguments on this
Bill did not strike me as very cogent, and I
did not therefore dwell on them.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I do not propose to
discuss the principle of the Bill. I only de-
sire to say that I think the amendments
which were made in committee have very
much improved the Bill. At the same time,
as I still have lingering doubts as to the
constitutionality of the Bill, notwith-
standing the additional arguments of the
hon. member from Amherst, I, of course,
to be consistent, cannot vote for the third
reading. It may be, if we apply to the
Imperial Parliament for legislation, we
might be told that we already possess the
power, but I confess that I so far differ
from the Minister of Agriculture that I
would rather run the risk of being snubbed
for not doing all that I possibly had the
power to do, than to be snubbed for doing
what I really had not the right to do. At
the same time no one would be better
pleased than I shall be if it is established
that we can legally make the changes pro-
posed in this Bill, and so remedy the many
serious inconveniences which have existed
in the past and which are likely to arise
again. I should rejoice very much indeed
if the result of this legislation is upheld as

Digitized by

Google

398

OanaiianPa^tfk [SBNATS] Railway Gwipcmy' 8 Bill.

ooming within our rights, should widen still
further the powers and privileges both of
this House and of the Parliament of Canada.

The motion was agreed' to on a division.

The Bill was read the third time and passed.

TRANSMISSION OF TIMBER DOWN
STREAMS BILL.

THIRD READING.

The House resolved itself into a Committee
of the Whole on Bill (S) " An Act further
to amend the Act respecting Joint Stock
Companies to construct works to facilitate
the transmission of timber down rivers and
streams."

Hon. Mi*. VI DAL, from the Committee,
reported the Bill with amendments which
were concurred in.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

THORNBURY HARBOUR BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY moved the second
reading of Bill (26) " An Act relating to
the Harbour of Thombury, on Georgian
Bay."

He said : — This is a Bill for the purpose of
confirming an agreement made between the
town of Thombury and the township of
Col ling wood for the joint occupation and
ownership of a harbour and certain ware-
houses at that harbour. There is nothing
in the Bill except the confirmation of this
agreement.

The Bill was read the second time.

CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY
COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington) moved
the second reading of Bill (84) " An Act
respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company."

He said : — The object of the Bill is to
restore certain powiers to this Company, of
which they were deprived by the Act of
1885. The Bill of course will be fully dis-
cussed in committee.

Mon. Mr. KAULBACH— That informa-
tion is not sufficient. What are the privileges
which are to be restored ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— XJnder the thirty-
seventh section of the Canadian Pacific
Railway Company's Act the company were
authorized, by Parliament, under their
charter, to issue preference stock at the
rate of $10,000 per mile. When the com-
pany were obliged to come to Parliament in
1885, owing to financial difficulties, they at
that time had an issue of stock of $100,000,-
000. The Government in dictating terms
directed that $35,000,000 of that stock
should be cancelled and that the power
given to that company under the thirty-
seventh section of their Act should be held
in abeyance. After the company repaid
the debt with interest, it was natural that
this clause should ipso facto be re-enacted.
It had only been held in suspense during
that time. Hon. gentlemen are aware that
in the financial markets of the world brokers
look very carefully when companies propose
borrowing money, and a doubt arose in the
the minds of some eminent lawyers as to
whether it was necessary to re-enact that
clause. The object of the present Bill is to
enable the company to issue the preference
stock as provided in their charter, and the
necessity for it is this, as hon. gentlemen are
aware, the company from time to time are
acquiring branches that are very heavily in-
volved. They necessarily have to assume
payment on the bonds of those roads that
they take over, and therefore the company's
position is in this way different from ordi-
nary companies, that the mortgage debt is
largely in excess of the liabilities of the
shareholders. The natural conditions of cor-
porations is that the principal portion of the
debt should be borne by the shareholders,
who are at the bottom of everything, and as
a rule we restrict the mortgaging powers of
all companies on the basis that if the owners
or shareholders of the road propose to in-
crease the financial standing of the company
they should do it themselves. This Bill per-
mits the shareholders, not by a vote of the
majority as they were allowed under their
charter to do, but by a two-third vote to
confirm the proposition to take in partners
at a preference. The shareholders, either
by themselves or by inducing others ti» come
in, may offer preference sUxik at a fixed rate
of interest. It is a domestic matter purely
and simply, which does not affect outsiders
and which requires, before any action can be
taken, the assent of two-thirds of the share-
holders.

Digitized by

Google

Canned Qoods Act [MARCH 22, 1893] Amendment Bill

399

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)— I
think it is only proper for me to draw the
attention of the House to the manner in
which the printing is done. This Bill came up
on Monday in the third reading form of the
House of Commons, and for two days I
have been endeavouring to get it from the
Printing Bureau in the third reading form,
but have not succeeded.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— In the event of
the company increasing the debenture stock
to $25,000,000 or $30,000,000, or whatever
it may be, does it entail a corresponding
reduction of the mortgage indebtedness, or
does the mortgage indebtedness remain still
a liability as well as the increase of stock ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The special object of
this Bill is to pay off* mortgage liabilities
that are bearing a higher rate of interest.
The great object of investors now-a-days is
to invest their money at long periods. The
early mortgages on some of the lines of
railway which now form part of the subsi-
diary system of the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way fall due in about fifteen or twenty years
from now. The rate of interest ten years
ago was much higher than at present, and
capitalists much prefer taking a lower rate
of interest if the investment is a permanent
one or if it is guaranteed stock, than a
higher rate for a short term. A man would
rather hold a perpetual three per cent than
a four per cent terminating in three or four
years.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— What I wanted
to know was whether that mortgage indeb-
tedness would be cancelled ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Yes, the mortgages
will be cancelled, and replaced by this issue
of bonds.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

CANNED GOODS ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.

THIRD READING. ,

The House resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole on Bill (R) " An Act
further to amend the Act respecting Canned
Goods."

In the Committee, on the first section,

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— With regard to the
name and address to appear on the package.

I am not aware whether hon. gentlemen
have noticed what has taken place with
regard to the article of cheese in England
within the last two or three days. The
suggestion of the Home and Foreign
Exchange, of London, England, is that there
should be a specific mark of " Canadian " on
our cheese so as to distinguish it from the
foreign article, which is surreptitiously
brought in and sold on the London market
as Canadian cheese to the great detriment
of our trade. The same remark might apply
to fruit canned in this country. Would the
name and address provide sufficiently for the
goods being known as Canadian without
being marked " Canadian." If the word
" Canadian *' were inserted, it would be
sufficient : that is the opinion of the Home
and Foreign Exchange who handle such
goods on the other side of the water.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The clause
refers to packages of canned goods, does it
mean every can, or simply the packages in
which the cans are contained ? If it simply
applies to the package before being sold, I
do not see any use of it, because the cans
are all taken out of the packages before
being sold, and it would be giving no intelli-
gent information tc* purchasers. The cans
should be labelled.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN — Every can is a
package.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I think it
should be specified that the cans are to be
stamped.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — My proposition is
to adopt the suggestion mside by the hon.
member from St. John, and to add that the
date of the canning be stamped also upon it.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— I am opposed to
this amendment. It will entail a very great
expense on the packers without accomplish-
ing any good result, inasmuch as any labels
so prepared for the use of the packers will
be valueless if not all used in the year they
are dated. In lobster packing, some seasons
the industry is almost a failure, because lob-
sters cannot be had ; in such a season a
large stock of labels would have to be carried
over to the following year and would be use-
less if dated. In reference to canned goods,
I do not care whether it is lobsters or fruit,
so long as the contents are hermetically

Digitized by

Google

400

Canned Goods Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

sealed, it does not matter when they were
put up. As soon as the air is admitted,
decomposition sets in, and that only happens
when the acid eats away the tin and admits
the air, but until that takes place the con-
tents of the cans are as good as if they had
been packed the day before.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD (P.E.L)— Iquite
agree with the remark of the hon. gentle-
man from Prince Edward Island. It would
be almost impossible for those who are en-
gaged in the canning of lobsters or the
packers of fish of any kind, indeed, to put
date on the packages. When I speak of
" packages,'' I presume it refers not only to
the cases in which the lobsters are packed,
but every individual can, and that the labels
referred to must be on each one of those
cans. It is difficult for a packer to put on
each can the date when it was packed. It
would impose on each lobster factory an ex-
pense of from $50 to $100 each season to put
on the date alone.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Only the year is bo
be stamped.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD (P.E.L)— Even
then there is a good deal of difficulty about it.
Persons engaged in the lobster packing
business order their labels ahead. The
lobster packing would be over about the
1st of July, but there are other articles
besides lobsters packed, such as mackerel,
cod-fish and hake, which would require to be
labelled in this way, and there would be the
same difficulty in every instance about the
date. Respecting the other features of the
Bill, there would be no difficulty in carrying
them out, and they would be desirable.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Could not the
difficulty to which the hon. gentleman refers
be obviated by having the labels printed in
large quantities, and each year the date be
stamped on those used ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— There seems to be
an objection to putting the year on each can
because all the labels are not used in one
season. I think that the year might be
added by a separate label, or stamped on.

Hon. Mr. PRO WSE— That means a very
considerable tax on the packers. I speak par-
ticularly of the industry of lobster packing
with which I am better acquainted than with

others. It sometimes happens that we have
only 25 or 30 days for the packing season.
During that time in a successful season a
factory will pack from 100,000 to 150,000
cans, and that many impressions would have
to be made to put on the date. I do not see
any use or benefit that the public can derive
from it

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Could it not
be done afterwards ?

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— It can be done,
but I should like the hon. gentleman from
New Westminster to go to some of the can-
ning factories there and ask the people to
put on the dates on every can and hear their
reply. It would involve perhaps the ex-
penditure of $100 per season for each factory.
The handling of from 100,000 to 150,000
cans is no small job. If they are to be
stamped after they are put away, it means
that the whole of those cans must be moved
again. Now, I have n^ver heard any
demand for this legislation. When parties
purchase canned goods they examine say one
can in every 10, or one package in every 10,
and from these samples judge the average
quality of the lot. They may find a bad can
occasionally, but they approximate very
closely the quality of goods to be sold. I do
not see any benefit to be derived by imposing
this tax on the canners. It appears to be
the intention of the Government not to have
this Bill go into operation during the coming
spring packing season. The date is made
the 1st of July. I would suggest that it be
made the 15th of July, so that the lobster
packing season may be over.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I have no objection
to changing the date as suggested. The
object of exempting all goods which are to
be packed under this clause until the 1st
of July, was to enable them to use any labels
they may have on hand. If the hon. gent-
leman thinks that making this legislation
operative in July would work harshly on
the salmon or lobster canners, I have no
objection to fixing a later date. I am still
further impressed with the propriety of
adding the word " Canadian " from what I
saw h few years ago in Prince Edward
Island when visiting the canning factories
there. I saw them take the very best
lobsters, curing them, canning them and
putting Yankee labels on their packages. I
asked the packer why he did so and I added

Digitized by

Google

Canned Goods Act [MARCH 22, 1893] Amendment Bill.

401

" the time will soon oome when you will be
prevented from doing that." He answered
that the factory belonged to Americans and
that the goods sold better with " Boston "
than with " Prince Edward Island " on
them. I suppose that arose from the fact
that the United States dealers had been in
the habit of shipping the very best class of
lobsters caught in our waters, thereby
obtaining a character for United States
lobsters which should belong to Canada.
My hon. friend called my attention to a
fraud which had been perpetrated in refer-
ence to cheese. My attention had already
been directed to that, and I have before me
now a draft of a Bill to meet the difficulty.
Whether I shall be able to submit it during
the present session I am not at the present
moment prepared to say, but I must inform
the House that some time ago that question
of stamping in bond was brought to the at-
tention of the Government when I was at
the head of the Customs Department. I
issued a very prompt and peremptory order
that no change should take place in pack-
ages in bond for exportation or sale. The law
allows the owners of goods in bond in this
country to repack them for the purpose of
preserving them, but there is no law to pre-
vent them putting goods on the market as
the pnxluct of a country other than that
from which they came, and I was very much
afraid from what I had heard that there was
a good deal of looseness in that respect in
some of our ports. I have not heard of it
since. It is difficult to meet a case like this,
supposing an inferior cheese has been manu-
factured in the State of New York, or the
State of Maine, adjacent to our Eastern
Townships, and marked " Canadian " in the
United States and imported into Canada for
the purpose of exportation in lx)nd, simply
passing through the country. How far would
we have the power, under the l)onding re-
gulations, or our treaty obligations with
the United States, to interfere with an ar-
ticle after it came into the country, not for
consumption, but for exportation, that
is a serious question, as hon. gentlemen
will, upon a moment's reflection, see.
That question is under consideration now.
If w«' ^ }- the power, and it would not be
an i ^ement of treaty rights, it is highly

iiec4 ^ .y that we shall prevent it, particu-
larly in the article of cheese, for we know
that along the borders and particularly down
in Maine and Vermont States adjacent to
26

our own country, they not only make an in-
ferior skim-milk cheese, but manufacture a
bogus kind of cheese out of fat, which is
sent to England and very often sold as Cana-
dian cheese, thus destroying the reputation
of our cheese in the English market. The
question has not been overlooked by the
Government, and steps wiU be taken, as far
as possible, to remedy the evil.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— The only way to
obviate it would be to have an inspection in
Canada of all cheese coming into Canada.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— That is the point I
called attention to, as to how far we would
have the right to interfere with goods which
are not ours passing through the country in
bond — whether it would be an infringement
of treaty rights.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quints )— There is no
doubt this matter requires a good deal of
attention. It is well known in this House
that we have a law on our Statute-book which
prevents cheese being made in a factory
except from the unskimmed milk ; no cream
can be taken from the milk, no strippings
can be withheld, and no milk from a diseased
cow used, and you can see the eflect in
England of enforcing these regulations in
Canada. If a speculator there sells 10,000
boxes of cheese it is always described as
Canadian cheese ; they do not gamble in
anything but Canadian cheese, because they
know what the average quality is. United
States cheese may be one quality or another,
we cannot be too particular about prevent-
ing anything going through unless it is
branded in some way or another to designate
what it is. Buyers in England are always
desirous of speculating in Canadian cheese,
because they know that we only make it
from the milk as it comes from the cow.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN— The BiU under
consideration is, in my judgment, perfectly
right. Although the lobster season is over
in July, some little illicit fishing is carried
on later. The rule of the Department was that
the case should be branded on the outside ;
now it is proposed that every package shall
have stamped on it the date of packing,
which I think is a very proper provision.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I sympa-
thize very largely with what has fallen from
both hon. gentlemen from Prince Edwar i

Digitized by

Google

402

Canned Goods Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

Island who have objected to the BilL As hon.
gentlemen are aware, we probably do a
larger canning business in British Columbia
than in all the other provinces put together,
especially in fish. I know that our canners
get their labels manufactured in England ;
and those labels are so glossed that I fear a
rubber stamp, or anything of that kind
would not make a sufficient impression on
them to retain the date for any length of
time. That is the only difficulty I See in
the way. If it were ordinary paper, and
they eould be stamped with an ordinary rub-
ber stamp, I do not think that any particu-
lar hardship would be entailed on the can-
ners, but I know they carry a very large
stock from one year to another, and that a
large portion of this stock would be practic-
ally useless under this legislation, because in
the salmon canning business, as in the lobs-
ter business, and even in the fruit business,
it is only about one year in four that we
have a very large run of salmon, when the
canning establishments are taxed to their full
extent. Such a season is generally succeeded
in the following year by a run not one-
quarter as large. Then it gradually in-
creases until the maximum run is attained
three or four years afterwards. I must con-
fess that I am in sympathy with what the
hon. gentlemen from Prince Eklward Island
have said, and if the difficulty could be ob-
viated in any way, I should l)e glad to see it
done. I also quite agree with the hon.
gentlemen that canned fruit, or fish, or meat,
or anything that has been canned, is just as
good half a dozen years after packing, as the
very next year or next month, providing the
atmosphere is entirely excluded from the con-
tents of the can. Such being the case, I
hope that the Government will not impose
any unnecessary expense on those who are
engaged in that very important industry in
our province as well as on the Atlantic
coast.

Hon. Mr. POWER ~I think the hon.
leader of the Government begins to see
what very few of us saw at the beginning
of the discussion, that the wisest course to
take now in connection with this clause
would be to pass it in the shape in which it
appears in the printed Bill, with a single
verl)al alteration suggested by the hon.
leader himself. We have heard from the
representatives of two provinces, where can-
ning is an importiuit industry. The state-

ments made by those hon. gentlemen would go
to show that the insertion of the date might
lead to inconvenience, and that there is
really no necessity for it ; and while at first
I was myself, led to suppose that it would
be advisable to have the year of canning
stated on the package, I begin to think now
that the advantages are really not sufficient
to compensate for the drawbacks.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— It would not cost much
to stamp the date somewhere on the can. A
press could be used for that purpose. I am
surprised that any one should desire to have
such goods placed on the market in such a
way as to leave a doubt as to whether they
were sound or not.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The labels that
I have seen on canned goods cover the
whole can. As my hon. friend from Quints
has digressed from the question before us,
perhaps I might be allowed to follow his
example. These things should be confined to
the canning and not to the catching of fish for
immediate use. I am in a peculiar position
in the place where I reside. The season for
catching lobsters ends in July, and we are
not allowed to catch them during the long
close season. It is supposed that this regu-
lation is confined to canneries. I have pro-
tested against any lobsters coming into my
house during the close season, but they are
brought in surreptitiously, and I see them
sometimes on the table. The fishermen
sometimes catch half a dozen lobsters along
the shore and bring them in to sell. If this
regulation were confined to canneries and
not C4>plied to the fisherman who catches a
few lobsters occasionally, it would be very
much better.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN— Those who eat
the canned goods deserve some considera-
tion. I have very grave doubts as to whether
canned goods, especially fish, are as good
after a dozen years as they are when they
are canned. Recent science has demon-
strated that in these canned goods poisons
are developed other than those of decom-
position, and it is highly desirable, for the
benefit of the public, that the date should
be put on each can.

Hon. Mr. REESOR— We must judge
these things by the years of experience that
the people of this country have had. The

Digitized by

Google

Canned Goods Act [MAECH 22, 189:;] Amendment Bill.

403

hoiL gentleman from Kingston has given the
nail a tap on the head by saying that the
people generally are interested in this mat-
ter, just as much as those who are engaged
in canning. I know with reference to the
canning of fruit, if it is thoroughly well
canned it will stand for years. I have kept
canned fruit seven or eight years, but it was
put up in glass, and in such a way that it
seemed to improve instead of deteriorating ;
but that is not the way the average canned
fruit turns out in this country. There is
generally so little experience and so much
carelessness and imperfection in canning
that you run a great deal more risk if you
get canned goods two years old than if you
get it in the first year. I believe the same
principle applies in a great measure to
canned fish. I will not say, however, that
fish canned ever so well will necessarily im-
prove as fruit will. Fruit improves if per-
fectly canned, but where is it possible to get
fish so perfectly canned 1 I doubt very
much if it can be done. I would prefer to
use only canned goods that have been canned
a short length of time. It is in the interest
not only of the people at large but
in the end, of those engaged in can-
ning to adopt this legislation, because it
will give their trad*^ a greater reach and
give to the public more confidence in canned
goods and the prices the canners will realize
in the end will be all the better. It will
compel them to take the utmost pains in con-
ducting their industry if they are obliged to
give the date of the canning. Amongst seeds-
men a great variety of seeds that are sold
are not very good after the first year. Some
may be good after being in stock two or three
years, but not good four or five years. The
invariable practice of the most experienced
people in this matter is to take the old seeds
with the new so that a certain portion of
them germinate every year. We cannot do
that in the same way in canning fish and
meats of any kind. I think the Bill that
the hon. M inister of Agriculture has intro-
duced is one that ought to be passed and
these checks upon giving out poor products
should be put on for the benefit of the can-
ners themselves, as well as of the public, just
as it is for the benefit of the dairyman that
he should be compelled by law to use only
the best of milk and the whole of the milk
for his cheese products. It is better for the
dairymen and better for the public that it
should be so ; no other country will crowd us
■ 26i

out so long as we employ vigilance in turn-
ing out our products. We need not be afraid
of any competition.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I should be sorry if
the proposed regulation were not adopted, I
consider it an important point to have the
date of packing stamped on each can. I
quite agree with the hon. member from
Kingston in what he has said. I do not
propose to repeat his argument. I have
had considerable experience in putting up
fruit, though I have never put up any fish
or meat, and I have found that the temper-
ature has a great deal to do with the con-
dition of the fruit. If kept at a moderate
temperature, it will preserve its quality
much longer than if kept in a high temper-
ature . In buying canned goods I avoid all
those that are placed in the shop windows.
I fancy that sun light on the tin affects the
fruit, particularly if the temperature is above
what it ought to be. If you keep fruit at a
low temperature, a degree or two above
freezing and hermetically sealed, it will re-
main good a long time. I think the in-
fluence of the tin and of the solder on some
classes of canned goods is very marked. If
the contents are acid, of course they are
affected by it much more, but the tempera-
ture is a very important consideration. If
the year is stamped on the can we will know
that it has not been subjected to those great
variations of temperature that goods long
canned are exposed to, and therefore, I
think it is a very important matter that the
date of packing should be on every can.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I quite
agree with the hon. gentleman from York
and the hon. member for Kingston, when
they say that the public, as well as the manu-
facturers, should be taken into consideration
and I also agree with the hon. member from
Kingston that decomposition takes place
very readily when air is admitted ; but I
can speak from personal experience, having
eaten canned meat nine years old, which
was kept out in the province of British
Columbia by the canners themselves. I was
testing the goods, to see how long they would
keep and retain their freshness. I quite
agree with the hon. gentleman from Ottawa
who states that the temperature has a great
deal to do with the quality. It is true the
canned salmon which I ate was kept in a
temperature of about 50 degrees ; and I con-

Digitized by

Google

404

Canned Goods Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

tend that if you keep the cans dry, you pre-
vent the tin corroding and the solder being
displaced, and prevent the admission of air,
and that under proper conditions you can
keep canned goods, fish, fruit and meat for
an indefinite period. I rose more particu
larly to answer the suggestion put by my
hon. friend from St. John, and also by the
Minister of Agriculture, that the stamp
could be put on the tin and not on the label.
I do not know how it is with lobsters, and
canned fruits, but I know that the salmon
cans are completely covered with those
highly glossed lal>els. The most of them
have a stamp with a machine that makes the
lid. It is stamped and the only suggestion
I would make is this, that in qaaking the
cans for a certain year they should put the
stamp on the lid ; but it would be utterly
impossible to stamp these glossed labels ;
and I do not think the ordinary ink would
remain on the tin itself.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It might just be
impressed on the tin.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I wish to express
my gratification at the spirit in which this
measure has been received. It is a small
Bill, but it is a very important matter to
the consumer. I am more particularly im-
pressed with that idea after hearing the re-
marks of my hon. friend from Kingston.
The word " year " instead of date is an im-
provement, for the reasons suggested by the
hon. member from Prince Edward Island.
If you put the date on every day's catching,
the labels would have to be re- dated ; if you
put the year on instead of the date, the same
stamp would do for the whole catch of a
season.

Hon. Mr. DEVER — I never intended any-
thing more than the year should be put on.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I have also accepted
the suggestion of the hon. member from Mur-
ray Harbour, of putting 1st August instead of
Ist July, and I accept the amendment of
the hon. member from Amherst. I think
these changes would make it — I was going
to say- -perfect, but my hon. friend from
Halifax mii^lit take exception to the term,
knowing that nothing is perfect in this
world. I desire to call the attention of the
Committee to this fact, that all labels are
not printed in England, not even those

in British Columbia, as I know from per-
sonal observation. There is a very large es-
tablishment in the city of Victoria, that has
grown up underthe influence of the National
j Policy, an establishment which makes a great
! deal of money out of the printing of these
I labels for the Dominion of Canada. They
are printed by hundreds of thousands. I
was in the establishment and saw the whole
I operation, and I also saw the same labels two
I or three hundred miles north of Victoria,
j last fall, when visiting some canneries. I am
I glad to know that these labels are of as good
I a quality as those which are imported. My
I hon. friend would \te right if he said that a
j number of the packers formerly, before the
establishment of these lithographic places in
I the country, used to ship the product of
! canneries to England without any label at
' all, and labelled them in the warehouses at
Liverpool. They gave two reasons for do-
ing so, one that they could get the labels
cheaper, and the other that the label being
put upon the can in the country in which
they were to be sold would give a fresher
and clearer appearance.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I was goingto agree
with the hon. Minister in thinking that this
clause was nearly perfect, but I think that
the insertion of the word Canada may possi-
bly interfere with my opinion of it. The
hon. gentleman stated a while ago, that a
good many of our fish canneries put the fish
up in cans which lK>re United States labels.
I am aware that that is the practice, and I
should like to state the reason why it is so :
I have friends who are engaged in the busi-
nass of packing to whom I have spoken
about this very matter, and I told them that
I thought it was a great mistake, and un-
wise policy to allow United States labels to
go upon the goods which they put up them-
selves; but the fact is that the American
dealers are even more liberal and more satis-
factory to deal with than dealers in the old
country or in Canada, and a packer makes
an arrangement with some United States
dealers to let them have his whole season's
packing, with the understanding that the
packages are to bear the label of the foreign
concern. I know that it is rather an objec-
tionable thing, and I have taken that
ground in talking with these gentlemen, but
still I doubt the wisdom of our undertaking
to hamper the business any more than is ab-
solutely necessary.

Digitized by

Google

Canned Goods Act [MAECH 22, 1893] Amendment Bill.

405

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— That would not
be hampering the business.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— We should not be
ashamed of our own goods.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON— If you tell the
packer to put " Canada " on it, the packer
himself will get whatever benefit there is
from the quality of his goods, but if it is a
United States label the foreigner gets the
advantage.

Hon. Mr. REESOR— The same complaint
was made when Canada first undertook the
shipment of cheese to England. Canadian
dealers thought they were at a disadvantage,
because everybody knew United States
cheese, and they asked for it, and it was
difficult to sell Canadian cheese anything
like as well as American cheese. The con-
sequence was that many dealers there Were
obliged to sell their cheese as American
cheese, or not make the necessary profit.
Well, now things have changed and Can-
adian cheese commands a better price than
American, because we have insisted that the
universal practice in the manufacture of
cheese in Canada shall be such as to produce
the very best quality. A good deal of pains
has been taken to have the makers thorough-
ly instructed and that they shall provide all
appliances for the making of the best cheese
that can be produced on this continent. Well,
they have succeeded, and our cheese com-
mands a price better than the United States
cheese, and the Americans are only too
anxious to work in their cheese and sell it as
Canadian. Would it not be well for us to
put " Canadian " on all our canned goods
and build up a trade for ourselves ?

Hon. Mr. PROWSE— I do not object to
the suggestion made by the leader of the
Oovemment, changing the word from date
to year, which is not a very important '
matter. The oldest packers are very often i
asked by their correspondents in the old
country to send them cans of lobsters with- ]
out any label at all, and to allow them to |
put the label on over there. It is impos- j
fiible to prevent them doing so. The conse- 1
quence will be that if we put the year on
and the goods are held over by the ndddle-
man to make his profit, the label will be
taken off and the date changed to the fol-
lowing year.

Hon. Mr. OGILVIE— Perfectly right.
The clause was adopted.
On the last clause.

Hon. Mr. POWER— There was some
question raised as to the quality of the
goods ; it occurred to me as a desirable
thing that something should be inserted in
the Act which provides, if a label is put
on misrepresenting the quality of the goods,
that the person who puts it on shall be
liable to a penalty. I refer to the Revised
Statutes of Canada, chapter 105, sec. 3, and
also sec. 4, which pix)vides that any person
who places on any package, any brand or
mark which falsely represents the date when
the article is packed, is liable to a penalty.
It seems to me in the 2nd section we might
insert before the word "quality," "which
falsely represents the quantity or quality or
weight." It would be an sidditional guar-
antee that the people were getting a new
article and not an old one bearing a false
label.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Is not that already
provided for in the clause? This Bill is
simply an amendment of subsection 1 of
section 2 of the Act respecting Canned
Goods, chapter 105 of the Revised Statutes,
the one to which the hon. gentleman has
referred. It simply substitutes this section
for subsection 1 of section 2 of that Act.
All the penalties provided in that Act re-
main in force, and they are applicable to
this.

Hon. Mr. POWER— There is no penalty
in the Act now for selling goods not of the
quality represented.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This Bill compel-
ling the packer to put the name of the manu-
facturer on it and the date of its packing is
sufficient guarantee. He would not put an
inferior article or another article in it, or
less weight, because if he did he would ruin
the reputation of his canning factory, and
that is the very reason why the canning in-
dustry of this country has suggested this
amendment, because inferior goods have in
the past been put into cans, the agent who
sold them simply having his own name put
on them. The effect is to ruin the trade
generally, and the packers suggest, in order
to prevent the practice, that their own name
and the name of the factory, should be placed

Digitized by

Google

406

Monctan and P.EJ. [SENATE] Railway and Ferry Co.'s Bill.

on each package ; then if the canned goods
were of an inferior quality only the factory
where they were packed would be injured.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The hon. Minister
might take the matter into consideration
before the third reading to-morrow.

-It is a very good

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-

suggestion.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If all packers were
long-sighted, the argument would be sound,
but they are not. I know many cases where
people pack inferior fish and other articles,
and put their own names on the packages.

Hon. Mr. REESOR— To a great extent
it incurs its own penalty.

Hon. Mr. DESJARDINS, from the
Committee, reported the Bill with certain
amendments, which were concurred in.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (77) "An Act further to amend the
Act to enable the City of Winnipeg to
utilise the Assiniboine water power." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

Bill (86) " An Act respecting the Chilli-
wack Railway Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

Bill (66) " An Act to incorporate the
Grand Council of the Catholic Mutual
Benefit Association of Canada." — (Mr. Sul-
livan.)

Bill (49) "An Act to incorporate the
Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway Com-
pany."— (Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington.)

BRITISH COLUMBIA DOCK COM-
PANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) moved the
second reading of Bill (87) " An Act to in-
corporate the British Columbia Dock Com-
pany." He said : — This is an exact copy of a
Bill passed in this House three years ago
and which lapsed recently. I took exception
to clauses eleven and twelve of the Bill
passed three years ago, which clauses I see
are reproduced in this Bill. On that occa-
sion I moved an amendment to them which
was not accepted by the House. As I have
no reason to believe that such an amendment

would prevail at the present time, I shall
not occupy the time of the House in sub-
mitting the amendment again.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

SUPREME COURT ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. PELLETIER moved the se-
cond reading of Bill (24) "An Act further
to amend the Supreme and Exchequer Courts
Act." He said : — When this Bill was intro-
duced here the leader of the House was evi-
dently under the impression that it was a
Government Bill and took charge of it
However, it was introduced in the other
House by a private member with the appro-
val of the Minister of Justice. The object
of the Bill is to amend clause b of the 29th
section of the Supreme and Exchequer
Courts Act, referring to cases in which an
appeal lies from a judgment rendered in the
province of Quebec. Some difficulty has
arisen over the interpretation of the clause,
and in the opinion of the Minister of Justice
this amendment is necessary.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

The Senate adjourned at 5.40 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottaiva, Thursday, March 2Srd, 189S,

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayer and routine proceedings.

MONCTON AND PRINCE EDW^ARD
ISLAND RAILWAY AND FERRY
COMPANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours,
reported Bill (56) ** An Act to revive and
amend the Act to incorporate the Moncton
and Prince Edward Island Rcdlway and
Ferry Company," with amendments. He
said : — This Act is to revive and amend the
Act of incorporation and to provide

Digitized by

Google

WitwMe$ and [MARCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill

407

for an extension of time for the commence-
ment and completion of the work. The words
" for the commencement and undertaking "
have been omitted from the Bill, and ought
to be inserted to give the company the
benefit of the two years extension. The
words ** the commencement and under-
taking" have been introdu<5ed : I see no
objection to the first amendment. The next
amendment is in the third clause, which pro-
vides for the securing of the debentures, and
after the amount is stated the remainder of
the clause proposes to define particularly the
manner in which these debentures shall be
secured, but as that has already been pro-
vided for by a prior Act, as well as the tolls
on the ferry, a special Act is not required :
and it is proposed to strike out all after the
word " dollars " to the end of the clause ; so
that the Railway let will apply and carry
out in a uniform manner the securing of
those bonds and debentures, and also provide
for the regulation of the tolls. I apprehend
there is no objection to this amendment and
I see no reason why it should not be con-
curred in.

Hon. Mr. POIRIER moved
amendments be concurred in.

that the

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was then read the third time and passed.

THIRD READING.

Bill '(63) "An Act respecting the Cana-
dian Power Company." (Mr. McKindsey,
in the absence of Mr. Ferguson).

WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BILL.

IN COMMITTEE.

The House resolved itself itself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole on Bill (23) " An Act
respecting Witnesses and Evidence."

(In the Committee)

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— When I moved the
second reading of this Bill I explained the
principles that were involved in it, and it
was agreed then that the Bill should be dis-
cussed, when in Committee of the Whole, as
if the principle of the measure had not been
sanctioned by the House at the second read-
ihg. T have a few remarks, to make now,but
I fi^all wait to be enlightened by the discus-
sion which is about to take place.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— This is the second
time upon which a Bill of this kind came to
us from the House of Commons involving in
the main principle contained in this Bill.
In 1885, when the Bill came to us from the
House of Commons it was lost, several
gentlemen who are now present, myself
amongst the number, voting and speaJcing
against it. Members, not unnaturally, I
think, desire to adhere if possible to their
deliberate utterances upon other occasions ;
but in my opinion it sometimes becomes
a duty to cease opposition, and I will
endeavour to show that that duty is a
right, proper and justifiable one. Let it be
remembered that the English Constitution
and ours are essentially different from the
Constitution of the United States, in this
that ours is an elastic Constitution and not
one of a cast iron character like that of the
United States — that any Government in
our country not in accordance with the well
understood wishes of Uie people as expressed
and enunciated by its representatives can
be displaced in a day. That the Upper
House here and in England serves the pur-
pose of a delaying and revising body and
gives an opportunity for the sober second
thoughts of the people. It is in its essence
very similar to our own. It becomes us not to
depart from the recognized, if unwritten prin-
ciples, which lie at the very root of parlia-
mentaiy government at home and here. I
think no gentleman who has studied consti-
tutional questions will deny that they are
the very bulwark of our rights and the very
essence of our parliamentary system. The
well understood wishes of the people pro-
perly and persistently expressed must ever
ultimately prevail. In England there is a
means of bringing the Upper House into
unison with the well understood and often
expressed wishes of the people there. Here
under the terms of our written Constitution
there is absolutely none, and therefore the
greater obligation upon us not to ignore the
principle of action by which our great proto-
type, the House of Lords, regulates the per-
sistence of their opposition. Bagehot who,
as every one knows, is an excellent authority,
defines the position of the House of Lords
under the English constitutional system in
these words : —

Since the Reform Act the House of Lords has
become a revising and suspending House. Their
vote is a sort of hypothetioJ vote. They say we
reject your Bill this once or these twice or even

Digitized by

Google

408

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

thrice but if you keep on sending it up at last we
won't reject it.

As Freeman tersely puts it, "up to a i
point not easily defined the Lords, may go on ^
rejecting a Bill. Beyond that point they j
must not go." j

Now let me apply this to the matter in .
hand. Three Bills from the House of Commons 1
similar to the one before us were brought up. |
One was voted down by a majority of 87 '
to 63. Another -^as dealt with in a similar i
manner by a majority of 80 to 57. A third !
Bill passed the House of Commons by 87 j
against 55 only, but it was thrown out in ,
this Senate. I then made up my mind, I
must say, that if it came up again this House ,
could not properly vote against it and that I
I at all events would bow to the popular >
will expressed by the representatives of the I
people. It has come before us again, and !
comes under very different auspices. It is I
not merely the vote of the House of Com- j
mons — I am not aware whether there was any
test vote taken against it — but it comes under
the auspices of the Government. Doubtless '
they were con\'inced of the current of public i
opinion and so changed the views that might I
have prevailed in the past. At all events it I
comes twice from the House of Comnibns, ;
and the last time under the auspices of ' the
Government of the country. Therefore, as
the Bill now before us in scifar as it em-
bodies the principle of the Bill of 1885, that
I think was promoted by my hon. friend the
Senate member from Halifax — in so far
therefore as it embodies the principle of that
Bill, I think we would be acting not merely
in violation of the well understood principles
that prevail in England but in a way that
may bring disaster upon this House itself.
There is another aspect of this matter.
Those who noted the decided drift of public
opinion both here and in England must have
seen the strong current that has set in in
favour of a measure of this kind. In Eng-
land any one can plainly see for himself
if he will only refer to the Hansard
and the voluminous reports that appear
of the debates that occurre<l. Vol. 324. The
general consensus of many of the leading and
most influential and ablest lawyers in Eng-
land was in favour of the principle and in
favour of the measure itself, and so far as I
could recollect from the discussion, the main
cause of its rejection was that it applied to
Ireland, and on that account it was ulti-
mately rejected. At all events strong feel-

ings which prevailed amongst the best of
the Irish members was largely influential in
causing its rejection. I do not propose to
give any rehash of the arguments which
were advanced on both sides of the Bill and
which any one possessed of a little memory
could easily do. I will confine myself to a
few observations as to its working in this
country and in other respects shall foUow
the course pursued by my hon. friend and
legal leader, if t may so call the Minister of
Agriculture. I' think I can show that
there is the highest possibility of the safe
and efficient working of the measure in all
the great provinces of Canada. I have little
doubt that it will work well elsewhere, but
I can speak of my own knowledge and I
think I shall be able to point out some pecu-
liar features in our system which will render
its working satisfactory. I have no doubt in
my own mind that the judges generally will
do all that is possible to secure an efficient
and fair working of this measure and speak
from personal knowledge — for I am acquain-
ted with nearly every judge in my own great
province — I am perfectly persuaded that one
and all will lend, as will be their duty, their
assistance to a fair working of this measure.
I am satisfied that the judges generally who
preside on trials for crimes will see that the
law is not worked as an instrument of tor-
ture or for the purpose of worrying or en-
trapping a timid witness.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Please explain how a
judge can interfere, if the prisoner is. a com-
pellable witness ? The prisoner is then in the
hands of the Counsel and so long as the
questions are correct and proper he cannot
interfere.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— If my hon. friend
would kindly wait until I have closed, I
would be glad to answer any questions.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentleman is
laying down a positive statement which the
House is supposed to accept. There is no
power in the Act which would enable the ,
judge to interfere. The moment he is a wit-
ness he is in the possession of the Counsel.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— If my hon. friend
had waited I would have told him that I
was not going to accept that view which
would make a prisoner a compellable wit-

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MABCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

409

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentleman is
arguing the other way.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— But the main prin-
ciple of the Bill that was formerly before usdid
not make the witness a compellable witness.
I was saying that I did not think the judges
of this country would allow the letter of this
Bill, making a prisoner a competent witness
to be abused ; and I speak with confidence
for Ontario. Moreover, there is a peculiarly
favourable feature in administration with
us that probably three-fourths of all the
criminal cases that come into the courts
are disposed of by a single judge acting
alone. He it is who determines the guilt or
innocence of the party. Lest my estimate of
the number coming before the tribunals
might be questioned or supposed to be exag-
gerated, I take the liberty of referring to a
report which I sent a good many years ago
to the Hon. Mr. Blake when he was Minister
of Justice. Firstly, I will explain to hon.
gentlemen that the local judges of Ontario
are judges of five distinct tribunals. A
court has been created which is termed the
County Judge's Criminal Court, and was
specially designed for the purpose of trying
prisoners who are willing to be tried without
a jury. In 1876, I presented a calculation
to the hon. Mr. Blake showing that in at
least four-fifths of all the cases of crime
that came before the local judges the pri-
soners accepted their jurisdiction and wished
to be tried without a jury. I am not aware
how that law is carried out in other parts of
the country. With us the following js the
process ; the local judges in Ontario have
practically a jurisdiction over nearly every
case known to the law except capital felony ;
and the practice is that when a prisoner is
committed for trial the sheriff at once reports
to the judge ; he appoints a time to hear the
matter ; the prisoner is brought up, and he
is asked in the first place whether he is wil-
ling to be tried by a judge and without a
jury ; if he consents to be tried by a judge
without a jury a day is appointed for
the trial and the witnesses brought forth,
and the judge hears the matter. I am quite
sure that no counsel for the Crown, appear-
ing before a judge who is acting as a jury as
well as a judge, however anxious that counsel
might be to secure conviction, no counsel would
talk in a manner that possibly he might
before a jury ; and I think it adds to the safe
working of the law, both the law that affects

the question and the power to decide the
facts are resident in the same person. I think
that is an additional feature in favor of the
proper working of the Bill, should it become
law ; and one cannot help as a general rule
agreeing with the saying " Whatever is best
administered is best " and a large share of
the power, the inlluence and the benefit of
the law depends upon proper administration.
Erskine, the greatest of England's advocates,
speaking of criminal trials, once said that
from the moment an advocate refuses to
defend a prisoner in court where he daily sits
to practice from that moment the liberties of
England are at an end. If an advocate refuses
to defend because of what he may think of
the prosecution or the defence, he assumes
the ofiice of judge, nay he assumes it before
the hour of trial, and in proportion to his rank
and reputation throws his opinion — which
may be a mistaken opinion — into the scale
against the accused, in whose favour the
benevolent principles of the English law
have made all exceptions. The words of that
great advocate in the main embody a leading
truth, and my fullest hopes are for the bene-
ficial effects of this principle in a wise admin-
istration of the benevolent principles of the
British law which make all exceptions in
favour of the accused. I was much struck
with a case that my hon. friend and leader
mentioned as having actually occurred before
him. It brought to my mind another case
of a similar character, a capital felony, a
charge of murder, which was tried before me
Juany years ago in Cayuga. Two men were
drinking together in an hotel ; they quar-
reled, they fought there, and it was seen that
one of them had a knife in his possession.
After remaining some time in the house both
went out, the landlord taking care to send one
out at the frontdoor and the other at the back.
The season was winter ; the ground wa« slip-
pery ; and within 20 minutes after both men
went out, one was found stabbed to the heart.
The evidence of course showed a great many
collateral facts and such as I need not refer
to, bad feelings between the two men, and
so on, but what a substantial point was the
evidence, the possession of this knife shortly
before the man that was killed went out,
coupled with the evidence of their not be-
ing good friends. After hearing the evi-
dence I charged hypothetically suggesting
many grounds that would, if they were
found as facts by a jury be fair evidence
either going to show innocence or reducing

Digitized by

Google

410

Witnesses and [SBNATEJ Evidence Bill.

the crime from murder to manslaughter and
under Bome circumstances opening the
ground for positive aoquittal. Unfortunately
the examination made by the medical men
was very imperfect and the course of the
wound, whether downward or straightfor-
ward or underneath, was not made clear. There
was no clear evidence upon that. But after
charging the jury, within fifteen niinute6,it is
disgraceful to say within fifteen minutes (not-
withstanding the eloquent speeches which
came from both sides and notwithstanding
a long charge by the judge) within fifteen
minutes the jury brought in the verdict of
capital felony, murder. It was shocking in
every sense — shocking to me and yet under
the law in existence I was obliged to per-
form the duty of passing the sentence of
death upon this man. Oi course, I cbrres
ponded with the Government and the matter
was set right ; but it occurred to me when
my hon. friend was speaking, it occurred
to me as a pregnant argument in favour of
enabling a man to speak on his own behalf,
his truthfulness tested by the accounts
which he gave an intelligent judge or an
intelligent jury to pass upon it, giving
due weight to what he said, and if he
gave his evidence in a way not to com-
mend itself to the judge or the jury, they
could reject it, in fact the right to testify it
is altogether in favour of the innocent man.
As to the guilty man it does not matter
whether it is in his favour or not. Now,
that case came to my mind when my hon.
friend was speaking, and it struck me as vali-
dating, in a large measure, what he has said
and showing a case in which it would have
been a very great advantage to have the
prisoner's own account of what happened.
He might have been able to explain,
for example, that the man was tampering
with the knife, and in rushing at him
fell or might have given some account that
would throw light upon the subject and
enable the matter to be better put and
more thoroughly understood. I must add
for the credit of the country that I was told
afterwards that it was a case in which party
feelings had caused all the difticulty. A few
years ago a case came into my mind of
another character, but still of a very serious
character, or what might have been very
serious, which occurred in Ireland and the
facts are shortly these. A gentleman who
was not a resident in the country was spend-
ing a few days at a place a short distance

out of Dublin. His host accompanied him
to the gate and the station was (mly a
short distance away. I forgot to say that
this gentleman had been reading " Epidemics
of crime through the country," crimes of a
particular kind well known and which fol-
lowed one after the other, and just at this
time there was an epidemic of charges by
women for the purpose of levying black-mail
upon men accusing them, falsely as it came
out in many cases of violence charged and
and especially on board the cfirs. The
English cars are not constructed like ours ;
there are several compartments and some-
times a man may find himself alone with
another person inside these cars. He had
just arrived at the cars, had merely time to
jump on board, and when the guard had
shut the door he found a rather flashily
dressed woman alone with him. He was
strongly impressed with all he had been
reading in the newspapers ; he thought to
himself what a position I am in, and he did
not know what to do to guard himself. He
first thought of writing down something and
saw that would not do. Suddenly an idea
flashed upon him, he reached as far as he
could out of the window with his umbrella
(and everybody carried an umbrella) he kept
opening and shutting his umbrella as fast as
he could. Everybody in the other cars saw
him and at the next station they stopped.
The guard said "what is wrong ? " The gentle-
man turned round and looked to the person
on board and so explained the trouble and he
took a seat in another compartment. Now,
this gentleman had appeared a great deal in
society and if he was able to get off in some
way, or if he succumbed and paid blackmail
he might have got off but the very feeling
that such a charge could be made against
him filled him with horror and dread. For-
tunately, he took steps to furnish evi-
dence that he could not possibly have intei^
fered with this woman, by opening and
shutting his umbrella during the whole time.
The moral of that story is, when a man
travels in an English coach never be without
an umbrella. In the case to which I have
referred, if that gentleman had been charged
with any attempt to do what was wrong
towards this woman and been allowed to go
into the witness box, he could have given his
own version of it, as it now was, many pas-
sengers saw the umbrella and he was safe.
It seems a laughable thing to repeat it here,
but the cold sweat was on his brow when he

Digitized by

Google

Witnme^ (md [MARCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

411

thought that be could not guard himself* bj
going into a witness box. I may have some-
thing to say in Committee upon some portions
of this Bill, but on the main motion, that
which allows permissive evidence, I must
vote for the Bill for the reason I have given.
With regard to compelling a man to appear
to give evidence against his wife, or the wife
to give evidence against her husband, I have
had anxious thought about it and I dis-
cussed it repeatedly with many members of
the House in order to add to the little light
I possess on the subject myself, I most
strongly hesitate. There might be danger
in the course and it might be calculated to
ruin the peace of families and to lead to
perjury. I shall, therefore, unless I hear
something convincing to the contrary, vote
against that part of the clause. I cannot
accept it. Then, there are some details
with regard to making statutes and public
instruments proof which will possibly require
some little addition. They may be allowed
to stand on their merits as they are.
Possibly it might be more complete if some
additions were made, but I am most
anxious myself, on every ground to see this
measure with regard to witnesses passed
through this House, because I see here an
answer to an objection which has often been
made that a prisoner cannot give his own
account of an affair. Moreover it is a neces-
sary complement to the Criminal Code, and
I know as a fekct that the greatest of English
jurists has stated that we are entitled to the
highest credit for passing it — that it was an
achievement almost, if not quite unique for
the English-speaking people all over the
world. I am obliged to the House for list-
ening to me so patiently, and I hope I have
succeeded in showing that I am justified from
my own point of view, in voting for this
Bill. I iHBlieve that the will of the people,
properly expressed through their representa-
tives, should be respected, and now is the
time, having twice passed through the Lower
House, to vote the measure.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— This Bill contains
very many excellent features. It is one
which, I think, the House will generally
support, except in one particular, and that
really is the one debatable point in the
whole of the Bill — the power to force a
prisoner into the box and be a witness
against himself. It is doing violence to all
our trfliditions of the administration of the

criminal law. It has so many repugnant
features about it that I confess it is rather
shocking to one's nature that it should be pro-
posed in a British Parliament. In the ad-
ministration of justice in our criminal law,
we are, I think, generally in advance of the
Pest of the world, even of the mother country.
I think our system is. now brought down to.
as perfect a state rs the experience of the
age will allow. I know of no country
where trials are fairer, where so large a
proportion of those who are really guilty
are convicted, and where the accused has in
every degree so fair and just a trial. There is
no country on either side of the Atlantic
where the criminal laws are so well admin-
istered, and where justice is so thoroughly
and so fairly meted out as in Canada. We
are in advance in every direction. We have
gone further in reference to this question of
evidence than most countries. If we ac-
cept the first proposition in this Bill — that
is to allow a party charged to be a witness
— then we are abreast of every country in
the world. I am not aware at this moment
that any country has adopted the principle
of compelling an accused person to be a
witness.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — In high crimes.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I am not speaking of
assaults, of course, but I am not aware that
in any country that principle has been
accepted in criminal cases. I am quite sure
that no body of British jurists would listen to
such a proposition. It would take many years
to educate the people of the British Islands
to believe that the proposition is a sound
one. In the the early days, down to I think
1688, it was the custom in England, as
it is now the custom in France, to catechise
the prisoner, not under oath, but to categori*
cally put questions to him ; and as hon.
gentlemen know it was about that era that
what is known as the Star Chamber was in
existence. Its proceedings were private and
its methods became very repugnant to the
principles of liberty advocated by the Anglo-
Saxon race, and so it was swept away and
that principle of examining the accused was
swept away with it. The principle was then
accepted and adopted that every man should
be adjudged innocent until proved guilty^
and that no man should be asked to accuse
himself. So it stood for nearly 150 years.
Since then when an accused person has

Digitized by

Google

412

Witnme$and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

been brought before a magistrate in the
first instance what has been the system ?
The prisoner is cautioned. He is told : You
are not obliged to answer the question ; if
you do answer the question your statement
will be taken down and it may be used on
your trial. He is fully warned in advance.
That has been the governing principle with
reference to parties accused. So far has that
been carried that any one who has had expe-
rience in courts of justice knows how ex-
ceedingly cautious judges have been when
active and skilled detectives have made ar-
rests and have wormed out of the party ac-
cused a half confession or admission of cer-
tain facts that go to forge a chain of evi-
dence against him. Many judges have sim-
ply ruled out such evidence and have
said we will not allow such testimony as
this. We know how weak many minds are
and how easily influenced under exciting in-
fluences, and it is not a safe rule to lay down
that admissions under such circumstances
should be admitted as evidence against a
prisoner, and so the testimony obtained by
detectives has almost always been ruled out
by judges, as not being safe and as likely
to lead to serious and dangerous conse-
quences. That rule has been carried too far,
and within the last four or five years our
judges have been disposed, where statements
have been made by accused persons volunta-
rily, to permit that kind of evidence to go
on record. Many judges hesitate even to do
that. In my own experience some judges, in
recent important trials, if the admissions have
not been wormed from the accused, or he has
not been catechised, have allowed those
statements to be used on the trial. That is
about as far as we have gone, and that is
the present condition of aflairs. We have
been in the habit of following the precedents
of Great Britain. Their population is seven
or eight times greater than ours. They have,
of course, the ablest jurists in the world,
and it has been exceedingly safe to fol-
low the lines that they have laid down.
They have had the question up repeatedly,
but it has never even made the progress
of allowing accused persons to be compe-
tent witnesses except in special cases. In
1885, a considerable innovation was made. It
was enacted that in certain classes of crimes
it was only fair to the accused to allow him
to be sworn as a witness — that is if he wishes
it himself — in cases of criminal assault —
cases where blackmail was very likely to be

levied and has been, no doubt, in the past
A Bill was passed in 1885, known as the Cri-
minal Law Amendment Act, which provides
that every person charged with an offence,
and the husband and wife, shall be a oom-
pe'tent but not compellable witness. This
relates chiefly to the defilement of women
and girls. That is the extent to which the
English jurists were prepared to go so late
as 1885. The next change was made in 1889,
when the question again came up in Parlia-
ment as to how far in other cases the accused
should be a competent witness. In no case
was there any thought of the proposition
that an accused person should be a compel-
lable witness. In cases relating to minors and
the care of children, admissions by the accu-
sed were allowed. That is the extent to which
the law has gone in England, so if we were
in this Bill to limit it to that extent — that
every person charged with an oflfence shall
be a competent witness — it would be far in
advance of the code existing in any other
civilized country. I am aware that in many
states of the Union, in some of the western
states more particularly, that law has now
been adopted — that is that the accused is
competent to go into the box. If he goes
into the box and is sworn, then of course he
is subject to cross examination. All the
advantages of making him a compellable
witness are attained. It is argued that on
a charge if an accused person declines to
avail himself of his right to give testimony,
a strong feeling arises in the minds of
the jury that he cannot give an explana-
tion, and it no doubt affects prejudicially
the party charged, and very properly
so, but that is the extent to which it
goes. So cautious are our legislators in
adhering to the principle that a person ought
not to be prejudiced by his abstaining from
being sworn, that neither the counsel nor
the judge can comment upon that fact in
addressing the jury — the judge and the coun-
sel for the Crown must abstain from making
any observations on the fact that the accu-
sed might, if he so pleased, be sworn and
give an explanation of the facts. It shows
how exceedingly cautious and how tenacious
of well established personal rights the British
system has been, and I should regret exceed-
ingly if we made this leap in the dark
without having had some experience of how
it is going to work, because it seems to be a
very dangerous act to adopt a precedent of that
kind in advance of the rest of the world. I

Digitized by

Google

Witnesm and [UAECH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

4r3

am not aware that our Canadian judges
have expressed any positive opinion on the
subject. They may have done so, but
if they have it has not come under my own
observation. Hon. gentlemen are aware that
it has been found in civil cases useful in the
administration of justice that the plaintiff and
defendant should both be sworn — the plain-
tiff can put the defendant in the box and
the defendant put the plaintiff in the box.
The system has worked exceedingly well,
but I do not see the analogy between that
and what is proposed here. The cases aris-
ing in the civil courts are generally contracts
and accounts between parties, and it is quite
reasonable and proper that the parties to
such cases should be examined and forced
to give an explanation of what they thought
at the time the agreement was signed. It
seems natural and proper and has been a
very great success, but the parallel ceases
when you come to propose that a party ac-
cused, as between the Crown and the accu-
sed, should be compelled to go into the box
and be sworn. My own experience leads me
to the conclusion that the temperament of
prisoners is so vastly diffierent that it would
not be safe. Take a guilty man who is a pro-
fessional burglar, a criminal by profession
— who has been years and years at it : he is
a cool, deliberate man. He goes into the box
and is sworn. He weaves a very ingenious
tale. Possibly the evidence against him may
be circumstantial, and his tale fits in with
the circumstantial evidence. We know that
juries are very apt to believe such testimony
and would acquit him. Take, on the other
hand an innocent man, of nervous and exci-
table temperament. He is sworn and he loses
his head at once, as the best of us will under
keen cross examination. It has been said that
many a man will tie a rope around his neck
by having a poor tongue. How often have
you seen men lose a case because they were so
excited in the witness box under cross exami-
nation that they got worried and lost their
heads. Women have often been known to
faint under cross examination, and, as we
know, beg to be allowed to rest when under
a very severe cross examination. What con-
dition might not an innocent man of nervous
temperament find himself in when attempt-
ing to give an explanation of certain circum-
stances ! He fails in satisfying the
judge and jury, and he may be
convicted, because he has not steadi-
ness— he is too nervous and excitable

and he cannot tell a straight story in the
box. We all know how dangerous it is to
put some men on the stand. Some men are
bad witnesses, not from any disposition to
evade the truth, but from nervousness.
They may, in fact, be over scrupulous some-
times. 1 gave known men who, simply
from an anxious desire to tell the truth,^
have failed to give a real statement of the
facts. I do not consider that there is any
analogy between the case of a plaintiff
and defendant, as sworn in a civil cause,,
and of an accused person being sworn.
Suppose a man does go into the box, and he
perjures himself, what are you going to do
with him ? Are you going to try him for
the perjury ? If you do, is he to be allowed
to make an explanation of his perjury 1 See
where that lands us. It is sure to be per-
jury, and where the party is a hardened
criminal, and it may not be a capital offence
— burglary, larceny, or some other crime —
there is an inducement to commit perjury.
If he is compelled to be sworn, and he
knows that he has either to perjure or to
criminate himself, one or the other, a hard-
ened criminal will perjure himself. Then,
what are you going to do with him ? Under
this Bill he would be a witness over again.
Is he going to stick to his perjured testi-
mony, or criminate himself ? I would go so
far as to adopt the principle of making an
accused person a competent witness. In
France the judge examines the accused.
That has been mside the subject of very sharp
criticism by English jurists. The witness
is not sworn, however. In early times when
they wanted to make a man tell the truth,
they had an iron rack on which they
stretched him, and as his tendons were
stretched he was asked to admit certain
things. If he refused, the stretching was
continued until he would rather tell a
falsehood than suffer any more pain.

Hon. Mr. MASSON— And if he did not
make any admission, the fact went against
him.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I will read an extract
from the latest work on the subject, the
Law Quarterly Review^ vol. 8, published in
1892. An English jurist witnessed an ex-
amination of a man charged with murder,
and this is the way he describes it : —

The impartiality of the president seems to me
au absolute farce. It is agreed on all hands that

Digitized by

Google

414

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

the president ought to be impartial, and no one
dare? to assert that in reality he is not. The fol-
lowing dialogue is a fair specimen of what regularly
takes place at every session of the Assize Court.
When the president has gone too far — and Heaven
alone knows what constitutes going too far ! — the
council for the defence objects. Thereupon the
president sits up in his chair, adjusts his pince-
nez, and scornfully replies. ''I suppose Maitre So
and So, you don't doubt the impartiality of the
president ?" Counsel hastens to protest that such
an idea never entered his head ; and the president
triumphs, naturally. Were the barrister to
make any further objection he knows only too
well the penalty — withdrawal of his right to ad-
dress the court, supension from his functions, and
not improbably a prosecution for insulting the
magistracy. It is the old story of the man brand-
ishing a big stick in the face of his child and ex-
olamin^, '* If you don't say I'm the best of fathers

I'll whip you within an inch of you life And

now, what do you think of me ?"

The usual line of the president's examination
of the prisoner (known as the * interrogatoire')
consists simply in a series of statements much in
the following manner : —

President. — On the 27th March you returned
home late at nieht ?

Prisoner. — It s false ! I never went home on
that night.

President. — Silence ! Don't add to your crimes
by fresh lies. I say you went home, &c.

Frequently the president takes no notice what-
ever ot the prisoner's replies, but purfiues his course
of statements with unruffled composure. At the
close of this examination — which is a matter with
which the judge and prisoner are solely concerned,
without any intervention of counsel, and which in
the case of a clever prisoner, fighting with more
energy and hope of success than most of them dis-
play, frequently re,solves itself into a very sharp
intellectual tussle — comes the examination of the
witnesses.

I simply quote this as showing the views
of English jurists on the subject of the exam-
ination of a prisoner, although not under
oath. There are probably some hon. gentle-
men who are in favour of the Bill. I should
like to. hear some arguments in favour of the
principle rather than against it. While I
should bow with very great respect to the
opinions of the judges, if they have expressed
any, still I think we ought to take the expe-
rience of the English jurists rather than
hastily adopt what is an innovation. The
subject has not been discussed in the press
of this country ; it has not been discussed in
the Courts or by the profession. A few years
. ago there was a proposal to do away with
the Grand Jury. It led to a very active dis-
cussion among the judges themselves, by the
Grand Juries and by the press, and resulted
in threshing out the subject pretty tho-
roughly, and that did a large amount of
good. It may result, probably, in the abo-

lition of the Grand Jury, but it would have
been a mistake to act on the first impulse.
If this subject should be discussed by the
profession and the judges openly, we proba-
bly may, four or five years hence, come to a
different conclusion from what we have now.
It is an innovation which is rather shocking
to our views, inasmuch as in the matter of
criminal administration we are all pretty
conservative, and we do not wish to go in
advance of the mother country, which is ad-
mitted to be in the van in the matter of cri
minal law.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— If the hon.
gentleman who has the Bill in charge will
omit that part of it — " compellable " — and
the other portion allowing the wife to testify
against the husband and the husband against
the wife, it would shorten the debate.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It has been stated
that the principle of this Bill is altogether
new, and in advance of any other legislation.
I wish to point out that the Bill is already
law in the province of Ontario — I mean
that of making the wife and husband wit-
nesses competent and compellable. I will .
refer to the Statute — chapter 14, section 9
of the Ontario Acts of 1891, assented to the
14th April, 1892. If the principle is good
in one case, it might be applied in another.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— There is no dispute
about civil cases.

Hon. Mr ANGERS— This does not apply
purely to civil cases. It also applies to cases,
such as arise under the License Act, in which
penalties are provided and imprisonment is
the punishment in default of payment. There-
fore, if in Ontario the principle has been
admitted to be good in civil cases and in
mixed cases, quasi-civil and quasi-criminal,
in which a man is punished by a fine, and,
in default of payment by imprisonment, which
may last for months and months, it is not
derogating very much from the principles of
English legislation to propose that the same
system may be adopted with justice and
wisdom in greater cases. It is proposed to
apply the same rule of evidence in cases
of crime and misdemeanour, and aho in civil
cases under the jurisdiction of the Dominion
of Canada. Now if it be thought wise that
the wife should give evidence in favour of her
husband when he is only subject to a fine or

Digitized by

Google

Witneam and [MAECH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill

415

imprisonment for perhaps five or six months,
will you tell me that it is not wise that this
man, fighting for is life at the bar, should
have the same privilege of calling his wife
to give evidence in his favour, and if she can
be called to give evidence in his favour, why
should she not be made compellable also?
What is the main object of the administra-
tion of justice ? The main object is to
punish crime and to get at the truth.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— If in the cases that
I have cited the object is to get the truth,
why in the case of crime and misdemeanour
should not that very same mode be used to
get at the truth and to punish such crime ?

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I say for a
minor offence the wife or the husband may
be a sufficiently good Christian not to commit
perjury, but, in a case where the crime is
punishable with imprisonment in a peni-
tentiary or possibly death, the same witness
might swear falsely in order to clear the wife
or the husband as the case may be. There
is a great diffei*ence between the two.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I do not see the
difference, and for my part the conscience
speaks as loudly in a small matter when it
speaks under oath as it does in a great
matter. The principle is the same and the
fear of God must be as great when you give
evidence about a small matter as in a great
matter. Of course if we are to distinguish
between those who are credible witnesses
and those who are not, we cannot make any
laws. We should have to refrain from
making laws altogether. We should have to
refrain altogether from examining witnesses
under oath, if the principle which the hon.
member from DeLanaudi^re lays down is to
be accepted to its fullest extent. This law
which has been applied in Ontario in smaller
matters, has so far, given ample satisfaction.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The Act was only
passed last year.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS—T have said so far.
I have read nothing in the papers and have
heard nothing from the Ontario lawyers
that would indicate that it did not work
well. True, the experience under the Act
is very short. The question was asked

whether the judges of this country had ex-
pressed any opinion on the matter.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— With regard to the
criminal law, I mean — higher offences.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— In relation to this
very Bill, I do not think they have given
any opinion as to whether an accused person
should be a compellable witness.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— That is the only
point.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The judges have
expressed an opinion as to the advisability
of allowing an accused person to give evi-
dence. It might have gone as far as making
it compellable, but the note that I have be-
fore me does not justify me in affirming be-
fore the House that they have given an
opinion whether the accused should be a
compellable witness or not : but 29 have
expressed the opinion that the accused
person should be a competent witness,
and nine only opposed the principle. So
far, then, I see that the opposition is to
the word " compellable." Do I understand
the House to oppose that portion of it where
the husband and wife are allowed to be
witnesses ? ^

Hon MEMBERS— Yes, yes.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Let us deal now
with the " compeUable " part of it ; we shall
then come to the other portions. I propose
that the Bill be accepted with the word
" compellable." I want to have the opinion
of the House on the subject.

On the third clause.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT moved that in the third
line the words " and compellable " be struck
out.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— That affects
the wife as well as the husband. I cannot
agree with my hon. friend the Minister. The
argument he has adduced before us has had
no effect on my mind. My hon. friend dealt
with the question of the conscience ; but we
must judge human nature as we find it, and
we must ask what effect the position of a
wife towards a husband or a husband towards
a wife would be if either were compelled to
give evidence against the other 1 I fear the
best of us would shrink from committing our

Digitized by

Google

416

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

wives to the penitentiary or to sacriRce their
lives. My hon. friend referred to the ques-
tion with regard to the small offences as well
as the larger ones ; but that is not the stan-
dard by which we are to judge human na-
rure — not the standard I wish to be judged
by if, as a result, my wife were to lose her
life by it. The question would be" between
my conscience and my oath, and therefore I
judge other people by myself in these mat-
ters, and we must judge those classes whose
standard is the lowest in this matter, as well
as those who are governed by standards that
we must set up for ourselves. I am utterly
at a loss to know why this sudden change
has come over the Senate. Last year a Bill
was brought in which passed through Com-
mittee, I believe, making the prisoner a per-
missable witnass, but not compellable. It
did not go further than that.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— What Bill is that ?

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The Evidence
Bill.

. Hon. Mr. MILLER

(Mminal Code.

-I think it was the

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Perhaps it
was, but I thought this Bill was l>efore the
Oommittee.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— The Bill that was
introduced last session in the House made
the prisoner a competent and compellable
witness. In the Joint Committee of both
Houses, to whom that Bill was referred, we
altered that provision and made it to read
" competent and not compellable."

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— We had the
criminal code up before us. When we were
asked to amend that code, we were asked to
do something that was wrong. I think we
should not hasten in this matter. There is
nothing in the moral nature of our people
here that compels us to go beyond the well
established principles of criminal law which
have stood the test of centuries, that a man
is not obliged tc) give evidence against him-
self, and cannot give evidence for himself in
any criminal case ; neither can the wife nor
the husband give evidence against each other.
England has not thought proper to change
that principle ; they see no necessity for it,
and why this new theory, advanced I do not
know by whom, and not asked for by the
members of the bar or by the people, should

be brought before us at all, is beyond my
comprehension. I have probably had as much
to do with criminal law as almost any hon.
gentleman in this House. In my early prac-
tice I defended unfortunate criminals, and
after a while, when I was appointed Queen's
Counsel, I had a great deal to do in criminal
matters and capital offences, and I have yet
to learn that any change of the existing law
would cause an improvement in the admin-
istration of justice. I believe, on the contrary
the proposed change would result in a mis-
carriage of justice. My whole knowledge and
practice in criminal cases lead me to believe
that a change in this regard would not im-
prove the administration of justice. It would
benefit the skilled criminal : the cool, col-
lected fellow would go into the box and
might be able to escape by cleverness ; but
the poor unfortunate man who goes
before a magistrate for the first time is sent
to jail and remains there until his consti-
tution is broken up. He is then brought up
before a skilled counsel, and the unfortunate
prisoner is incapable of giving even honest
evidence, because he is so cowed by the
people who presume him guilty, owing to
the fact that he has been taken out of a
dungeon and brought before the court, that
in nine cases out of ten he would be so con-
fused that instead of exculpating himself, and
obtaining justice to his case, the tendency
would l)e the other way, and he would have
the prejudice of the court and community
against him, l>ecause they would not believe
him under his oath, although you compel
him to give it ; and then, supposing a man
will not give his evidence at all, you leave
him in the position of being considered
guilty of the offence with which he is charged.
Looking at this Bill from every stand-point,
I think it encourages crime ; you put a pre-
mium upon crime. I think in this matter
there is a minimum of good and a maximun
of evil. It is going back to the meth<xls of
the Star Chaml>er and the inquisition, and
savoui*s of the thumb-screw, the boot, and
the rack.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY—I wish to say
that I am opposed to clause 3, which allows
a witness to give evidence on his own
behalf.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED — I doubt if
within the four corners of our Statute-book
any section could be found importing so many

Digitized by

Google

Witneases and [MABCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

4ir

nuHcal departures as in this particular sec-
tion from the principles of evidence so well
established by our present system of juris-
prudeace. The Minister of Agriculture said
the other day, in intn)ducing the Bill, that
we were not committed to the principle of
the Bill by agreeing to the second reading.
T see in this clause no less than three prin-
ciples, one of which 1 very gladly concur in,
the other two of which I am entirely opposed
to. In the first place there is imported
into this clause the principle of competency.
In the next place there is imported into the
clause that very radical departure from a
well established principle of the law of evi-
dence which has existed almost from time
immemorial so far as our English law is con-
cerned, the question of compellability, con-
t^iined in the corapulsoiy feature (»f this
particular clause. In the next place there is
introduced into it what has never existed in
the history of English jurisprudence, or so
far as is known, according to the statement
of Sir James Fitzjames Stephens, in respect
to the jurisprudence of any country.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— The introduc-
tion of the principle by which the husband
may give evidence against the wife, or the
wife against the husband. Permit me, hon.
gentlemen, in the first place to deal for a
moment or so with some observations made
by the hon. Minister of Agriculture in ad-
vocacy of the introduction of two pf the
principles to which I object, namely, the
compulsory feature, and the admissability of
the evidence of the husband as against the
wife. I would point out to my hon. friend
that the class of cases referred to in the
Ontario statute, and those for which we are
legislating, are entirely different and abso-
lutely distinct, as wide apart as one could
possibly conceive, namely, a class of offences
dealing with municipal law, and that more
serious class of offences dealing with misde-
meanours and felonies. Now, J would point
out to my hon. friend that according to our
\rest jurists there is no affinity whatever be-
tween those two classes of law, viz., muni-
cipal law and criminal law; and I would
refer my hon. friend to Sir James Fitzjames
Stephen's work on criminal law, at page 3,
in which he deals with that particular class
of cases. I know that the trend of modern
legislation in regard to municipal offences
27

has been to make admissible the evidence
of the husband as against the wife, and the
wife as against the husband, and also to
make compulsory the evidence of the accused.
Reading from his work upon the general
view of criminal law, I cite the following : —

Again, there are several branches of law which
cannot properly be described as part of the crimi-
nal law, but are very nearly related to it. The
most remarkable of these is the law relating to
what are described as penal or qui tam actions.
These are cases in which particular matters princi-
pally connected with the enforcement of some spe-
cial Act of Parliament are made liable to penalties
which may be claimed by private persons or public
authorities who choose to sue for them. Innumer-
able instances might be given of these. One well-
known case gave rise to an action brought against
Mr. Brad laugh for having voted and sat in Parlia-
ment without taking the oaths then prescribed for
a perscm who did sit ami vote. Other instances are
to be found in the Municipal Corporations Act,
which imposes penalties on those who act as mem-
bers of Town CouD'^ils without being duly qualified
or who, being such members, accept any contract
with the Corporation.

Though closely allie<l with the criminal law pro-
perly so called, these enactments cannot be said to
form a part of it. They all depend upon special
Acts of Parliament, relating to an immense variety
of subjects quite unconnected with each other an<l
illustrating no general theory or principle.

Many crimes in the full sense of tne word are
properly speaking only sections meant to enforce
Acts of Parliament relating to subjects which have
little to do M'ith crime. Such, for instance, are
sections of the various marriage Acts, which forbid,
untler pain of penal serxntude, certam irregular
marriages ; sections in numerous Acts m hich make
certain false declarations equivalent to perjury ;
sections which appoint special punishments for the
forgery of particular documents, and an infinite va-
riety of others. Of these I say nothing. They be-
long rather to the particular subjects to which the
Acts of Parliament containing them refer than to
the criminal law in the common sense of the phrase.

It is not necessary for me to say that the
provinces cannot legislate in respect to
criminal law, and the divergence is so wide
between the two classes of offences — the (me
an offence and the other a crime — that the
principle embodied in the Ontario Statute
cited by my hon. friend the Minister of Agri-
culture cannot l)e said to \w, a parallel case
nor analogous nor applicable in reference to
this particular Bill. It appears to me, hon.
gentlemen, that the principle has l)een lost
sight of, which has given rise to our present
system of the law and evidence in respect
to criminal cases. The trend of all modem
legislation for the last half a century or more
has l)een to enforce such legislaticm or to
pass such legislaticm as would protect the
pris<mer while b<*ing tried on the particular

Digitized by

Google

418

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

charge which has l)een laid aaainst him. If
hon. gentlemen will l(x>k at tlie history for
some time ptist of legislati<m in respect to
law of evidence they will see that this is the
idea that has animated and inspired all the
legislators who have endeavoured to legislate
on this particular suhject. We tind quite a
difference existing Iwtween the law of
England and the law of France in resi)ect of
this particular matter. Now to show the
spirit which has animated the French legis-
lature in dealing with the same matters, I
would ask the indulgence of the House while
I refer to a citati<m from a French author
cited in Stephens IxKik on criminal law —
upon a very similar (juestion to that which
is now hefore this House. Sir James Fitz-
james Stevens, sj)eaking of this principle by
which an accused is not called upon to crim-
inate himself, or in other words, by which
he is granted immunity from being made a
compulsory witness against himself lays it
down as one of the fundamental principles
of our system of jurisprudence ; and he
says :—

This is one of the most characteristic features
of our English procedure, and it presents a
marked contrast to that which is common to, I
believe, all continental countries. It is, I think,
highly advantageous to the guilty. It contributes
greatly to the dignitv and apparent humanity of a
criminal trial. It eflfectually avoids the appearance
of harshness, not to say cruelty, which often
shocks an English 8y)eclator in a French court of
justice, and I think that the fact that the prisoner
cannot l>e (juestioned stimulates the search for in-
dependent evidence. The evi«lence in an English
trial is, I think, much fuller and more satisfactory
than the evidence in such French trials as I have
been able to study.

And he attaches to his work on criminal
law this extract taken from one of the
leading French authors upon a kindred
subject ; the contrast is described by M.
Cottu pages 103 and 104 : —

The Courts of England offer an aspect of im-
partiality and humanity which ours, it must be
acknowledged, is far from presenting to the eyes
of the stranger. In England, everything breathes
an air of lenity and niUdness ; the judge looks
like the father in the midst of his family occupied
in trying one of his children. (An extraordinary
position for a man to l>e in.) His countenance
has nothing threatening in it. According to an
ancient custom, flowers are strewn upon his desk
and upon the clerk's. The sheriff and officers of
the Court wore each a nosegay.

Everything among us, on the contrary, ap-
pears in hostility to the prisoner. He is often
treated by the public officers with a harshness, not
to say cruelty, at which an Englishman would

shudder. Even our presiding judge, instead of
showing that concern for the prisoner to which the
latter might Appear entitled, from the character of
impartiality in the functions of a judge whose
duty it is to direct the examination and to estab-
lish the indictment, too often becomes a party
against the prisoner, and would seem sometimes to
think it less a duty than an honour to procure his
conviction.

Npw% I ask hon. gentlemen are we seeking
to introduce into this Dominion of Canada
this system which has l)een designated, not
by the leading jurists of Great Britain, but
by the leading jurists vi France, to be a
scandal in the French Republic ? It cer-
tainly has been so designated by all the
leading writers l>oth in (jreat Britain and
in France to l)e a scandal at the present
time that trials should be conducted as they
are at present in France. I say unhesita-
tingly, hon. gentlemen, that the two features
in the* Bill to which I object are no less than
a revival of the system which prevailed
centuries ago, which my hon. friend from
Ottawa referred to when the thumb-screw^
and the rack were resorted to for the pur-
pose of extorting from an unfortunate ac-
cused a statement which might have been
entirely in conflict with the truth, but
which might be in harmony with the desire
of his prosecutor, for the purpose of estab-
lishing a case against him. Allow me to say
that so far as I can ascertain — and I have
looked into this matter so far as my abilities
and my facilities have pennitted me — I can-
not find either cm the ccmtinent of Europe
or on the continent of America any system
approaching or adopting the principle im-
ported into this Bill in respect to the ac-
cused and his wife, or rice versa^ as the case
may l)e. I certainly have been somewhat
curious to ascertain how the idea arose to
introduce a Bill that so far ignoi'ed well
established traditions and that fundamental
principle of our system of jurisprudence, to
which I have alluded. Why those should
be so departed from as to l>e entirely trodden
under foot and a new principle incorporated
which has never been demanded by leading
jurists, which htus never been required by
the public, I am at a loss to comprehend.
It is an innovation I say of the most ad-
vanced character ; it is not only radical
legislation, but it is experimental, so far as
experiment can possibly he tried.

lion. Mr. MILLER—Does my hon. friend
intend to apply that language to the compe-

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill

419

tency as well as the compulsory feature of
the Bill ?

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— No, I refer to
the compulsory clause, as to accused and
als4> as to husband and wife. Allow me to
say that I congratulate the Government
upon intnxlucing a Bill so much in harmcmy
with public opinion as expressed for the last
25 years, namely in making the evidence of
the accused admissable, I think this Govern-
ment is to be complimented upon the fact
that inasmuch as they have after various
trials endeavoured to introduce this parti-
cular feature into our law of evidence, there
is now a certainty of such Ijecoming law.
Such a Bill on three occasions has passed the
House of Lords, which is the most conserva-
tive institution I think which exists on the
continent to-day, but it has not yet succeed-
ed in passing the Commons. I therefore
say that the Government is to be congratu-
lated on the introduction of this important
legislation and I hope that feature of the
Bill will receive the unanimous support of
the House. Let me return to the other fea-
ture in the Bill. I refer to the evidence of
the wife against the husband. Sir James
Fitzjames Stephens says that "in no place is
the husband compelled to testify against the
wife or the wife against the husband."

Hon. Mr. MTLLER—Hear, hear.

Hon. Mr. POWER — Not even in France.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED- -That is the
most comprehensive statement made by a
well known writer.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— That they were not
j>ermitted at all to give evidence against
each other ?

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Not compelled.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Not compelled,
either in Europe, America or elsewhere. In
no country accoixling to Stephen is the hus-
band compelled to give evidence against the
wife, nor the wife against the huslmnd.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Except in Ontario
in criminal matters.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— The Ontario

Act does not deal with crimes. Now, T say

that the Bill which has l)een submitted to

this House contains a recognition of the im-

27J

policy of this particular matter which is
sought to be embtxlied in this clause and I
refer to this clause :

Providetl, however, that no husbaud ahull be
compellable to disclose anj' communication made
to him by his wife during their iifiarriage.

I cannot undei-stand the peculiar incon-
sistency of his particular phraseology. It is
laid down here so as to permit of no doubt
whatever that the Government recognized
the impolicy of making a huslmnd give evi-
dence against the wife so far as any dis-
closure whicli has taken place l)etween them
is concerned " that no huslmnd shall be com-
pelled," tkc.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Competent it is ?

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Let me point
out the strange inconsistency notwithstand-
ing this fact. This only affects communica-
tions made between the husband and the
wife. Now the husband would be a com-
pellable witness as against the wife for any
offence committed by the wife in respect to
any matter where there was not a disclosure
by communication. Now there is the incon-
sistency.

Hon. Miv ANGERS— Oh m> !

Hon. :Mr. LOUGHEED -If there has not
been a disclosure or a communication of
what has taken place between the husband
and wife ; that is to say if the wife commits
an offence and the husband sees her commit
that offbnce, but she has not disclosed
tlie offence to the huslmnd than the husband
is compelled, is dragged into the witness
lx*x and made a compellable witness to give
evidence as against hLs wife ; and then on
the other hand if the husband is found in
the commission of the off*ence and the wife
should see the husband commit the offence
she is lx)und to give evidence against him.
Now there is a recognition at once of the
unwisdom and the impolicy of the introduc-
tion of any such principle. I say it is not
(mly a radical departure from the principles
to which I have already alluded, but it
permits evasion of the grossest charactei* to
take place in respect of what is already pro-
vided against. Perhaps a lawyer naturally
lo<3ks at the constructicm of a statute to find
in what way evasion may be prevented or
employed. Allow me to point out the
peculiar way in which this is drawn. Now
all that a man has to do for the purpose of

Digitized by

Google

420

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

granting immunity to himself and pi'event
his wife giving evidence against him is to
dischxse the matters to her and then claim
the iranmnity.

Hon. Mr. AN(JERS~No, the wording
does not bear that interpretation at all.
He is not debarred from stating facts which
he has seen ; but he is not bound to give
evidence of the communication that took
place between him and his wife.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— He can at once
say when he is put in the box, " ray wife
has disclose to me the commission of this
offence."

Hon. Mr. MILLER— Then he will be
asked, " do you know anything about it
apart from that T If he knows the facts,
independent of the communication, then his
evidence is not shut out.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Then that be-
ing the case he is bound to give evidence
against his wife.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Yes, of the facts
he has seen.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— T say that is a
principle which should not be adopted by
this House. As I have before said, there
is no precedent for the incorporation of such
a principle in any system of evidence ; there
has never been any demand for it on the
part of jurists, on the part of lawyers, on
the part of public opinion, or from any other
source, so far as I can ascertain. I might
say that this matter came up before the
Joint Committee appointed by lx)th Houses
last session for the purpose of codifying the
criminal law, and for the purpose of report-
ing upon the law of evidence as then pro-
posed, and that committee after going very
carefully into the Bill, prepared a clause
which I have before me, and which is very
much on the lines of the English Act, which
reads as follows : —

4. Ev'ery person charged with an offence, and
the wife or husband, as the case may be, of the
person so charged, shall be a competent witness,
whether the person so charged is charged solely or
iointly with any other person : Provided as fol-
lows : —

(a. ) A person so charged shall not be called as
a witness in pursuance of this Act, without his
consent ;

(b.) The wife or huslmnd of the person charged
shall not be called as a witness in pursuance of this

Act without the consent of the person so chargetl,
save that where a man is charged under any of the
! provisions ot the Criminal Code of 1892, specified
I in schedule A to this Act, without his consent.

Schedule A refers to a class of cases pro-
viding for the purity of morals, <fec. I might
say that the amendment which I now move,
and which was adopted by the Joint Com-
mittee last year, is very much upon the lines
of the amendment to the criminal law which
was introduced into the Imperial Parliament
and which passed the House of Lords, but
was defeated in the House of Commons. In
connection with this particular point, I might
say that never have they gone so far in
England as to introduce the feature of com-
pulsion in respect to the law of criminal
evidence. Much as this matter has been
discussed for the last quartei* of a century in
England, and many as the efforts have been
to incorporate it into their criminal law, yet
there never has been even a proposition made
so far as I can gather from the Imperial
debates, that this particular feature should
be introduced into their volume of criminal
law ; and it is not necessary for me to say
that we have always looked to England as
the fountain head from whence our system
of jurisprudence has sprung. If there has
been any legislation in which England has
been almost radical in, it has been in keep-
ing pace with advanced thought in the
matter of evidence with respect to criminal
law — at least on the part of her leading
jurists in endeavouring to pass through Par-
liament such legislation as would be con-
ducive to public good in connection with this
particular subject. I therefore think that if
we adopt legislation which will be in har-
mony with the most advanced thought in
Great Britain and elsewhere it should suffice.
This hon. House should not be asked to
jmss legislation on this subject of a more
advanced character than that which has
been adopted or approved by other countria^
I therefore move the amendment which I
read from the Bill of last year.

H<m. Mr. SCOTT— I withdraw my mo-
tion because the language of this amendment
is more suitable.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — I have just been re-
minded by an hon. gentlenian who is as com-
petent as any member of this House to
speak upcm it, that the subject has been quite
exhausted and that he hopes I will not make
a long speech, and I have given him the as-

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

421

sumnce tliat I will not ; but the subject is
one of such importance that I feel I would
like, after the remarks which have fallen
from the hon. gentleman, to say a few words
with regai-d to it, especially as I had the
honour of lyeing chairman of the Joint Com-
mittee on the criminal code, which met last
session and which had this Bill .under ccmsi-
deration. There cannot be a question that
the Bill is an importiint departure from the
settled principles of legislation in respect to
criminal evidence either in Great Britain or
in one of its dependencies. That is a point
ujwm which we all agree, but it must be ad-
mitted, I think, at the same time, l)y those
who have given any thought to this ques-
tion, that for years past the trend of public
opinion in Great Bntain has l>een in the di-
rection of this Bill. The principle so much
respected and so long adhered to, and
clcithed with so much veneration fn>m its
antiquity, of not permitting a culprit to com-
mit himself or give evidence against himself,
has been gi-adually losing force and weight
amongst the cultured legal minds of Great
Britain, and I think that no pnK)f of that
assertitm is required frcmi the fact that on
two occasions a Bill very similar to
this lias gone through the House of Com-
mons, where we all know some of the finest
legal minds in Great Britain have discussed
the question. That l>eing the case I think
we need not be so much afraid of taking
this vStep, l>ec4iuse in this country we
can make innovations, we can take steps
in advance in regard to the improvement
and lil>eralizing of our laws, which cannot
]je dcme so easily in old countries, which
are hedged in by*traditi(ms and associaticms
which have not yet sprung up to give
us tnmble or stand in our way in that
respect in a new country like Canada.
It is a great deal to have the example of the
House of Lords and leading legal minds of
the Empire in favor of the principle which
is contained in this Bill. My hon. friend
from Calgary, who made a very able speech
to which I listened, as I alway listen when
he speaks on a question of this kind, with the
greatest deference, led me to suppose from
the tone of his speech that he was in opp<>
sition altogether to every portion of this
Bill. I waH very happy — on the interruption
that I took the liberty to make — to learn
that his argument, strong as it was, was
dii^cted altogether against the compulsoiy
chivi-acter of the Bill, and not against giving

competency to any witness to give testimony
in criminal matters in a Court of justice
And I may say here the clause under the
considei-ation of the House involves two or
more principles which are innovations im our
law of evidence in criminal matters. It in-
volves first, the making competent and com-
pellable witnesses, and secondly, it in-
volves the appplication oi that principle to
husband and wife. In all general laws of
evidence exceptions have been made in
English statutes in favour of the exemption
of the husband from testifying against the
wife, or the wife against the huslwmd.
Therefore, we have two distinct principles
to consider here in this case. I may
say, for my own part, I am in favour of
makinga party criminally charged a competent
witness, but I am not in favour— although
my mind goes somewhat in that direction -
I hesitate going the full length of making
him a compulsory witness. It may l>e said
when a witness is made competent and he
refuses t<^) take advantage of the opportunity
that the statute offers him, that he is l(K)ke<l
upon as being guilty. Admitting the force
of that deduction, I think there would be
greater danger in making him a compulsiory
witness if he were guilty, for undoubtedly
he would not hesitate even in minor cases,
i if forced to do so, to make statements con-
trary to the truth, and in fact U) connuit
I wilful perjury in more serious crimes. There-
j fore, I am at present only in favour of making
an accused person a competent witness, and I
^ see no objection to applying the principle of
I competency to husband and wife when it Ls
I in relation simply to facts within the know-
ledge of each and not to confidential commu-
nications, or indeed any communications that
may have taken place between them. On
the contrary, I see a great deal of reason in
many cases why these parties should be com-
petent witnesses. Supposing a crime is
attempted to be committed on the wife, and
the husband steps in and takes the life of the
individual who makes the assault. Is it not
a hard Ciise that the wife should not l)e a
ct)mpetent witness if her huslmud were
charged with the murder of that man, to
give evidence in his favour 1

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— I hope my hon.
friend does not suppose that I oppose that
principle.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — I do not now un-
derstand my hon. friend to extend his objec-

Digitized by

Google

422

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

tion beyond the matter of making witnesses
compellable, even in the case of the husband
and wife. We have the clearest indication
now of what his real views are on this ques-
tion from the amendment he has just sub-
mitted to the House. There are other classes
of criminal cases in which the party accused
should be a competent witness and because
he is very often the only person able to speak
in regard to his innocence. In a case where
crime has been committed where only two
were present, the accuser and accused, he
would have a chance to obtain justice if the
charge were false. Under these circum-
stances, I may say I intend to vote for the
amendment of my hon. friend. I hold the
Bill in my hand as it was introduced origi-
nally in the House of Commons last year
and wtis sent to a Joint Committee of both
Houses. The hon. gentleman read quota-
tions from the Bill as originally introduced
last year, and as it left the Joint Committee,
and Siiid he favtmred the Bill tis the Joint
Committee amended it.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— I have not
troubled the House in the many years that
I have been here in the discussion of im-
portant questions that have come before us,
but this is one on which T wish to express
an opinion. When any legal question comes
up in the Senate, gentlemen of the legal
profession seem to imagine that they should
monopolize the subject. I am opposed to
this Bill iyi fofo. I take this ground after
an experience of nearly thirty years in
criminal matters. In my judgment, to
make a person who is chaiged with a crimi-
nal offence a compellable witness, is entirely
wrong. Under the law as it stands to-day,
a pei-son charged with a criminal offence is
brought before a magisti'ate, and if a jyrima
facie case is made out against him, he is sent
for trial to the superior court. When he
is put in the dock his mouth is closed.
The Court says : — ** You cannot explain
anything, you cannot give evidence ; you
are simply in that box to be tried by the
evidence that will be brought to bear on
your case." Then the Crown is obliged to
bring evidence to prove the charge ; the
prisoner is pi*asumed to l)e innocent until
he is proved guilty. The Crown closing
that man's mouth and putting handcuffs on
him says, in effect, that if only one witness
comes up against him it L*« not sufficient to
convict him — that there must be some cor-

roboi*ative evidence in addition to that of
the witness.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— That is only in
certain cases.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— That has l)een
the position of the law heretofore. The
effect of this Bill would simply be this : the
accused may, if he chooses, go into the Ik>x
and the jury may attach what importance
they like to his evidence. At all events,
they will be inclined to say that his evidence
is not so worthy of credence as that of
another persons But supposing the prisoner
refuses to go into the box, what will be the
effect on the jury ? The jury and the people
outside would say that the accusetl was afraid
to go into the box and give evidence. If
hon. gentlemen in this House will think
over the matter for a moment they will come
to the conclusion that every pris<mer on
trial, if compelled to go into the witness l)ox,
is likely to perjure himself, thus adding
another crime to the one already committe<l.
That is human nature, and why should we
offer inducements to perjury ? Why should
we, by the law of this country, encourage
people to commit a second crime in order to
I escape the consequences of the first ? I think
j it is mischievous legislation from l>eginning
to end, because no man will give evidence t<»
convict himself. Then, as to making a witne>ss
I compellable, that can only apply to the
I Crown.

I The Crown is compelled to prove the case
I against the prisoner, and this is to enable
the Ci*own to use the prisoner to convict
I himself. Does any one belfeve that there is
I one man in a hundred who will prove him-
j self guilty % I do not care what precedents
; may be bi^ought from England or any other
' country. We are here to make laws for
' our own people. I have had thirty years
I experience of the administration of criminal
law, and I say that there is no good to
come out of legislation like this. It will
only encourage the commission of a second
crime when a first offence is charged. We
have too much perjury already. The small
courts of this country, as I have felt for
a good many yeai-s, more particularly in
Ontario, are a common school for perjury,
W'hen you come to trials of contested elec-
tions, they are simply a superior kind of
school for perjury. When you come (judg-
ing by experience in my own county)

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 23, 1893] Evidence Bill.

423

to the Scott Act, it has been a sort of
academy for perjury. I do not want to add
another school of perjury to the list. There
is no use of putting a prisoner in a position
of adding another crime to the one he is
charged with.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentle-
man* from Milton is perhaps the most con-
servative man in the House. In 1885, a
measure making an accused pei'son a com-
petent witness wtus introduced in this House
and I had the honour to have charge of the
Bill. When I moved the second reading of
that Bill the hon. gentleman from Barrie,
who spoke first to-day in favour of this mea-
sure, delivered a very able and learned
address against the Bill. The hon. gentle-
ment from Lunenburg also did the same
thing. His iidress was not (juite as learned,
but it was just alx)ut as long ; and the hon.
gentleman from Ottawa gave an address
which was able and full of his own experi-
ences as Crown Prosecutor.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— T forget what I
did. .

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
from Richmond, so far as 1 know, "lay
low." It shows how much legal gentlemen
in this House have been educated. They
keep their minds open, and new light has
come in upon them but the hon. gentleman
from Milton is just where he was eight years
ago. I have the greatest respect for the
experience of the hon. gentleman from Mil-
ton, but I think when we set against his judg-
ment that of the hon. gentlemen from Rich-
mond, from Barrie, from Lunenburg and
from Ottfiwa, we will hardly think it as
good as theirs. I may say further, for the
information of the hon. gentleman from
Milton, that nearly all the most prominent
legal minds in England are in favour of this
Bill. The late Attorney-General, the pre-
sent Attorney-General, Sir Charles Russell,
the late Lord Bramwell, the late Lord Sel-
bome and all the le^ing lights in the pro-
fession in England are in favour of this Bill.
The hon. gentleman from Richmond refen^ed
to a suggestion which I made to him, and
which he appears to have misunderstood, and
I rose for the purpose partly of saying that I
did not think the hon. gentleman was asked
to curtail his remarks, but I said that he
might suggest, at the close of his remarks.

that the House understood the position
pretty well now, and that hon. gentlemen
were quite ready to vote on the measure,
and, although I might talk for half an hour
on the subject, the House is ready tx> vote.

Hon. Mr. PROWSE~It may be the
opinion of some hon. gentlemen that the
House is ready for the question, and that
when ceilain gentlemen have expressed their
opinions on the question l)eforeus, everybody
ought to l>e ready to take a vote. But I
want to hear this question discussed sufli-
ciently, so that I can give an intelligent
vote, which at the present I might scarcely
know how to do. I am impressed by the
remarks made by the hon. member from
Milton. I look upon it in this way, that
when you make a prisoner a competent
witness, you are going a long way towards
making him a compellable witness. He
must make his selection. He may have his
mind made up that if he is (mly heard by
the court and jury, he will show that he is
innocent of the charge. The moment he be-
comes, by his own recjuest, a witness, he
becomes a compellable witness to all intents
and purposes, in this way- he makes his elec-
tion, taking it for granted that he is inno-
cent, becfiuse he l)elieves that if he can be
heard, he can prove his innocence. He is
put in the l>ox, and then he is subjected to
examination by his attorney, and cross-
examination by the Crown prosecutor. It
has been said by some learned gentle-
man to-day that the principle object of the
courts of justice is to get at the truth ; but
there is another object almost equally pr<3-
minent. We know very well that the
legal profession has become to a great extent
overcrowded. It is l>ecoming a case of the
survival of the fittest, and it is an object
with lawyei*s when they go before the
Court to make out their case — I was
going to say by fair or by foul means.
I have heard an honest and unsuspecting
witness tortured in the witness box until he
Wiis compelled to tell an untruth. I would
not say that such a pers<m has perjured him-
self, but that it was the result of the sharp
cross-examination. I heard of a prominent
gentleman in another place — I will not men-
tion his name — being engaged in a case in a
certain court. This gentleman who has the
reputation of being a terror to witnesses,
when about to begin the cross-examination,
stood in front of the witness and stared him

Digitized by

Google

424

Railway Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

ill the fiice. The man was almost paralyzed by
the look of the attorney, and exclaimed :
" My lord, I declare to Heaven that I have
told the iruth whatever Mr. Jones may make
me say." An accused person may make him-
self a witness, and then he is subjected to all
the torture of a cross-examination. If a
prisoner could l)e allowed to make his own
statement and then l)e questioned by the
judge upon the l)ench, or by the jury who
are anxious to get at the truth, I would not
have so much objection to it, but on the
whole, the legislation here proposed will
tend to injure rather than to do good, and if
you begin to allow one prisoner to take his
choice of l)eing a witnes.s, and another
prisoner says " I will not go into the
witness l)Ox," the very fact that he has the
privilege of doing so, and does not do it, will
be used against him.

Hon. Mr. 8C0TT— At the present time a
prisoner has the right to make his statement
without being sworn, either through his
ccmnsel or directly Ui the court. He c;in give
his account of the circumstances.

The clause was adopted.

Him. .\rr. HOWLAN, from the Commit-
tee, rejMH'tetl that they had made some pro-
gress with the Bill.

B1LL8 TNTHODUCED.

Bill (45.) " An Act to incorporate the
Clevehmd, Port Stanley and London Railway
and Transportiition Ct)., and to confirm an
agreement respecting the London and Port
Stanley Railway." (Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (04.) " An Act to incorpoi-ate the Al-
bertii Irrigation Co." (Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (35.) "An Act to incorporate the Cal-
gary Irrigation Co." (Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (89.) " An Act respecting the Nelson
and Fort Slieppard Railway Co." (Mr. Reid,
B.C.)

Bill (58.) "An Act to incorponite the
Aut<miatic Telephone and Electric Co. of
Canada." (Mr. Murphy.)

CANNED GOODS ACT AMENDMENT
BILL.

THIRI> READIXG.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL move<l the Third
reading of Bill (R) " An Act to amend the

Act respecting canned go<xls." -He said : I
may intimate to the hon. gentleman from
Halifax that I have been thinking over his
proposition to add the word " quality." I
think it would be impracticable, when you
reflect that the article might be, when put
in cans, of tirst-class quality and might,
for the reason suggested by the hon leader
of the Opposition — through exposure to. the
sun in shop windows for a month or two —
deteriorate in quality. If that amendment
were inserted, it might render the packer,
under such circumstiinces, liable to a pen-
alty.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

TRIAL OF JUVENILE OFFENDERS
BILL.

WITHDRAWN.

The Order of the Day being called — " Com-
mittee of the Whole House on Bill (N), An
Act I'especting the trial of Juvenile Offend-
ers."

Hon. Mr. ALLAN said : — I notified the
House that when this Bill came up again I
should ask leave to withdraw it. I regret
very much having to do so, because I think
it is extremely desirable that the main object
of the Bill namely, to ensure the trial of
juvenile offenders for petty offences privately
— should be accomplished. It is extremely
desirable that it should be made compulsorj*
upon the poUce magistrates and justices of
the peace to try the^e young offenders
promptly and privately, but there are other
clauses in the Act which I think could also
be amended in the way suggested by the
Minister of Justice. I recognise the fact
that it is important that any legislation
affecting the criminal la w should be thoroughly
considered. Hasty legislation .in a matter of
this kind is not at all desirable. Therefore,
I ask leave to withdraw the Bill for the
present session.

The Bill was withdrawn.

SECOND READING.

Bill (T) " An Act to amend the North-
west Territories Act." (Mr. Angers.)

RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING.

H(m. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (U), An Act further to amend
the Railway Act.

Digitized by

Google

North Canadian Atlantic ky, fMARCH 24, 1893J and Steamship Co:$ Bill. 425

Hon. Mr. POWER— I wish to inform the
Minister that there is one point to which I
^^dsh to draw his attention when the Bill is
before Committee— that is the third clause.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL- 1 will explain in
Committee the reasons why the Department
think this provision in the thii*d clause is
necessary.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
wtis read the second time.

The Senate adjourned at 6.15 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Friday, March 2.1th y l^'^-^-

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

FIRST READING.

Bill (112) " An Act respecting the ins-
pection of petroleum.*' (Mr. Howell.)

THIRD READINGS.

Bill (26) •* An Act relating to the Har-
Ixmr of Thornburj' on Georgian Bay." (Mr.
McKindsey.^

Bill (77) " An Act to further amend the
Act tt) enable the City of Winnip>eg to
utilize the Assiniboine River Water Power."
(Mr. Sutherland.)

Bill (84) " An Act respecting the Cana-
dian Pacific Railway." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlington.)

Bill (86) " An Act respecting the Chilli-
wack Railway Company." (Mr. Maclnnes,
Burlingt<m.)

Bill (49) " An Act to incorporate the
Atlantic and Lake Superior Railway Com-
pany-." (Mr. Ogilvie.)

NORTH CANADIAN ATLANTIC

RAILWAY AND STEAM-SHIP

COMPANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Select
Committee on Railways, Telegraphs and

Harl)ours, reported Bill (67) "An Act to
revive and amend the Act to incorp)rate
the North Canmlian Atlantic Railway and
Steamship Company," with certain amend-
ments.

He said: — It is my duty to explain the
amendments which have Ijeen made in this
Bill. It is an Act to revive and amend the
Act with re.spect U^ the North Canadian
Railway and Steamship Company, and to
change the name of it, amongst other
things, and in the change of the name they
adopted the name of another company.
They asked to be incorporated as the Labra-
dor Railway and Steam-ship Company and
this conflicting, as it did, with the name of
an existing company, it was proposed, and
consenteil to unanimously by the Committee
that the name should l>e changed, and that
it should be " the Quel)ec and Labrador
Steam-ship Company," so that the title would
indicate their scope, and then the title
would not intei-fere with that of any exist-
ing company. I may explain the two
amendments because the tme is entirely
ccmsequential upm the other — that the title
of the Bill should be the Quel)ec and Labra-
dor Steamship Company. I see no objec-
tion to the amendments, which are consented
to by the gentleman in charge of the Bill.

Hon. Mr. CASGRAIN moved that the
amendments be concurred in.

The motion wjus agreed to and the Bill
wjis read tlie third time and passeil.

CATHOLIC MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSO-
CIATION OF CANADA.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN, from the Select Ccmi-
mitte <m Banking and C(mnnerce, reported
Bill (66^ " An Act to incorporate the Gi-and
Council of the Catholic Mutual Benetit As-
sociation of Canada," with amendments. He
said : — The iussociation named in this Bill had
preWously l)een incoi'ponited by an Act of
the Ontario Legislature and seek now to l>e
incorporated under a Dominion Act, and in
the first section it is thought desirable to
make an amendment in order to show more
clearly who the incorpoi-ators were under
the present Act. That is the only amend-
ment.

Hon. Mr.McKINDSEY--(in the absenc-e
of Mr. Sullivan) moved ctmcurrence in the
amendment.

Digitized by

Google

426

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was then read the thiixl time and passed.

WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BILL.

REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE.

The House resumed in Committee of the
Whole consideration of Bill (23) " An Act
respecting Witnesses and Evidence."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. POWER~We had just dis-
posed of the fourth clause of this Bill when
the Committee rose yesterday, and it struck
me that the amendments which were made
in the Bill rendered another amendment
necessary. I propose the following sul)-clause
to l)e added to clause four : —

The failure of the person charged, or the wife
or the husbaiid of siicn peraon charge*!, to testify
shall not create any presumption of guilt of the
person charged, ami such failure shall not be made
the subject of comment by the counsel for the prose-
cution.

It is quite clear that the changes that we
made in the clause yesterday would alto-
gether fail in their effect if the counsel for the
prosecution were allowed to make any com-
ment i)n the fact that the pei-son charged, or
his wife, had not given evidence. The effect
of such comment would be almost as bad as
if the person had gone into the box and htid
given evidence calculated to injure him or
herself. I may say that a piovision, such as
is contained in this amendment, exists in the
United States law and in the laws of various
states of the Union. I know it is in the
laws of the State of Nebraska. It is a neces-
siiry consequence of the amendment which
was adopted by the conmiittee yesterday.

Hon. Mr. AN(JERS— In deeding with
this Bill I do not know that all our anxiety
should be for the accused. We should also
keep in mind the main object of the admin-
istration of justice, which is to elicit the truth
and punish crime. Yesterday we accepted
a clause by which a prisoner can go into the
box and give evidence in his own l)ehalf. We
have adopted in the same clause the pi'inciple
that his wife may also give evidence in his
favour, if he gives his consent. Should we
go any further than that? I believe not. If
an accused person feels innocent and is not
afraid of cross examination, let him go into
the box and if he does not do so, and does
not wish his wife, who was present when the

Clime was committed, to be examined as a
witness, should we prevent the court and the
juiy from appreciating these facts ? You are
asked to say that althoifgh a man has the
right to give evidence and tell all the truth,
and does not exercise his pnvilege, he
should not be prejudiced by his failure to do
so. I think that is going beyond the protec-
tion that a prisf>ner should have. He has an
opportunity of making his statement ; let him
make it if he can. If he does not dare do
that, let the jury appreciate his silence and
let the judge charge the jury as he thinks
best in the interest of justice. I submit
these considemtions to the wisdom of the
House.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— In discussing this
question yesteixlay, I assumed that that was
a corollary to the clause that we adopted.
The witness is subject to examinatitm. I
undei*sto<Kl it was in the draft bill of hist
year, and I supposed it was in the amend-
ment moved yestei*day. In any of the
authorities I have looked up that has been
accepted Jis a necessary corollary. In the
discussicm on the principle in England, I
understood that that accompmied the pro-
position in all cases.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— 1 l>elieve that

allowing a jury to take into considei-ation

the refusal of the accused or of his wife to

give evidence is juvSt as dangerous as forcing

the one or the other to be a witness. Why ?

Because if the priscmer and his wife do not

enter the Ik)x, then the jury is to appi*eciate

the fact -that is to say, the jury will tind

in the fact certain evidence against the

I prisoner. Is not that inducing an accused

I pei^on and his wife to perjure themselves in

j order to prevent the jury drawing that

I inference ? Whenever you touch that

! question you will always lind that it leads

I to immond legislation. After long experience

I it has been acknowledged throughout the

j whole world that the safest, the mast Cliris-

tian and most moral way is to refuse the

■ prisoner and his wife permission to enter

the Ikjx, otherwise you will pi*oduce a state

of things that will demorahze the country-.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Yesterday the
principle of allowing the prisoner and his
wife to give evidence was accepted by the
House. Now, I only ask one thing more —
do not go l>eyond that. If a man who has

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 24, 1893] Evidence Bill.

427

the light t*) give evidence does not choose to
fi^ve it, let him take the consequences. Do
not adopt this 8ul)section, which I think
Ls giving the accused a gi*eater protection
than he deserves, l>ecause if he is innocent
he will not fearto enter the box, and if he is
guilty and declines to tell the ti*uth, the jury
should l)e in a position to appreciate that
fact. However, T leave it to the House.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The juiy are in a posi-
tion to appreciate it. This proposed amend-
ment only goes to the extent that counsel
shall not comment on the fact. This allows
the judge to comment <m the fa«,t to the jury,
and the jury can draw their own conclusion.
Tt simply prevents the counsel in his address
to the jury from saying that the man must
be guilty, otherwise he would step forth and
be sworn. That is all that it prevents.

Hon. Mr. AN(JERS— It is proposed to
prevent the counsel for the prosecution from
mal^inga comment on the fact to the jury. We
all know that jurymen are in nearly all cases
laymen Why should you prevent the Crown
which, as everybody will acknowledge, has
always in this country shown the greatest
leniency in dealing with accused perscms —
why should you prevent the counsel for the
Cn)wn making a comment before the jury
who cannot, perhaps, appreciate the full
force of evidence ?

Hon. Mr. KAI:LBACH— The Crown is
bound to make out a case against the prisoner
entirely independent of him. I would al-
most rather see the clause iis it was
before without the insertion of this amend-
ment as propased by the hon. meml>er
frrmi Halifax. T think, further, that no
comment should be made by the coun-
sel or by the judge on the fact that the
pris<mer does not testify. The objection
which I had yesterday still remains. The
Bill offers a greater temptation to perjury
now than before. If you are to allow coun-
sel to say to the jury that a man was guilty
because he did not testify and prove his in-
nocence when he had an opportunity to do
it, there is a greater temptation now for a
man to go into the box and commit perjury
when it is not compellable for him t<j do so.
I wish that somebody else would move an
amendment providing that the judge also
shall take no notice of the fact that the
prisoner did not give evidence. I say it is a

premium for perjury, and that you force a

man to go into the box and commit perjury

I to siive himself from the inference that

j would be drawn from his failure to give evi-

' dence.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— Evidently the law-
yers ai*e determined to destroy this Bill. I
cannot perceive the use of allowing a crimi-
\ nal to give evidence in the l)ox, if you des-
. troy that evidence or the inference which is
; to be gained from it. I hold that if he goes
into the Ik)x and tells his story, both
judge and jury have a right to draw their
own inferences : if he can accjuit himself, so
much the l>etter. If he can explain the cir-
cmnstances in such a way that the jury
could decide that he was innocent, why
should he Ije prevented from doing so ? But
it is imly fnmi hearing the whole of the evi-
dence in such cases that jurymen can draw
their conclusions. We did quite enough, in
my opinion, to satisfy any reasonable man
when we miule the alteration in the Bill
yesterday, and made it read in such a way
that the wife of the accused person could
give evidence. I think we will destroy the
effect of the Bill and make it pertectly
worthless if we a<lopt this amendment.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— If I rejul the amend-
ment of my h<m. friend aright, I think that
he alhrms the principle and also enjoins
counsel not ti> comment. Now, that is a
very different provLsicm fn)m the Bill of 1885,
which related only to trials l^fi)re jury in
Ontario, or cases tried mostly l>efore the
judges alone, and that makes a material
difference, l)ec*iuse it is not to be supposed

I that a judge who is trained in these matters

! and in the pei'formance of the duties, would
l>e influenced by any remark of t^^atkind. I

j observe in the Bill of 1885 the principle is
simply afl&rmed in relation to trials l>efoie a

, judge, and it reads in this way : —

In case an accused trietl l)efore a jury tloes not

I offer himself as a witness, or heconie a witness on

the trial, no ohservation shall l)e allowed to l)e

made at the trial, either hy the counsel for the

prosecution, etc.

Now, there is an essential difference l>et ween
the amendment proposed by my hon. friend
and what was so veiy ably advocated in
1885. There alsf) seems to l)e a subst*intial
difference in the principle laid down : —

rhe failure of the person charged or the wife of
such person to testify shall not create any pre-
sumption of the guilt, etc.

Digitized by

Google

428

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

At all events, it seems to me Uy lay down a
principle that it shall not create any pre-
sumption at^ainst the prisoner, and then
again, it relates to a trial before a judge
without a jury. With reference to the
counsel commenting, there is not so much to
be said against it, l)ut with reference to lay-
ing down the principle that it shall not
operate in a certain way, that seems to me
to l>e dangerous. If I understand my hon.
friend from Halifax aright, he certainly de-
parted from the principle of the Bill of
1883.

Hon. Mr. MILLER— It must l^e consid-
ered in the first place that the Bill l)efore
the House is not an imposition of any kind
placed upon the accused, but an additional
privilege and lil)erty which this Bill intends
to give him, that Ls Jhe privilege to an ac-
cused person to testify on his own behalf.
Now that may be a means o^ saving his
lil>erty or his life. If we were restricting
the present privileges to pei^sons accused of
crime in any way, then we should take all
proper precaution, such as no doubt my hon.
friend has in view in proposing this amend-
ment, to see that checks and guards are
thrown about the operation of the law ; but
as I think we are extending the privileges of
an accused pei*son and increasing his chances
of acijuittal by ujaking him a witness in his
own l)ehalf, I do not know that we should
impose any restrictions upon him, or give
him any privileges which do not exist under
similar circumstances under the law which
enables a plaintiff or defendant to testify in
a Court of Justice. We all know that in a
civil suit in Ontai-io the plaintiff or defen-
dant is a witness in his own case, but if the
plantiff or defendant does not go into the
l)ox, the c«iunsel are not excluded from ask-
ing why he is not put in the box. The de-
fendant's counsel is not excluded from saying
" Why was not the Plaintiff put in the box ?"
and the jury are not excluded from asking
why he was not put in the box ; he is a
party who could speak most pointedly and
accurately, and if he refuses to do so it is a
pix)per matter for comment.

Hon. Mr. McKINDSEY— In a civil suit
he cannot refuse to give evidence.

Hon. ]VIr. MILLER — He cannot refuse if
he is asked. But if the plaintiff brings a
suit, and the evidence of himself is import-

ant in relation to that suit, and he declines
to go into the box, or if the defendant
w^ho might be expected to give material evi-
dence on his own behalf declines to go into
the box, it tells against him. Of course the
opposing counsel could be put in the box,
but lawyers all know that it is a dangerous
thing to do, because you make him your own
witness, and the least thing that is said
against you is doubly as bad as if he were
an independent witness ; but if the plaintiff
or defendant does not go into the box, the
counsel can comment up<m it, and ask the
jury to draw their own inference. I feel
some hesitancy al>out this amendment. I
would not make it as general as it is now.
It might l>e amended to include only cai>es
tried before a jury. Many of the civil cases
are tried before judges, but perhaps my hon.
friend might consent to go so far as to
modify the clause to prevent the counsel
making comments on cases tried before a
judge. If it is the desire of the House or of
the committee that it should l>e so, I should
not be prepared to make it as general as it
is, and certainly I would not agree to any
amendment that would take from the im-
partial judge sittina: on the bench the right
of drawing any inferences in a charge to the
jury that might be proper under the circum-
stances. I do not think that would l>e a
wise thing to do.

Hon. Mr, SCOTT - It might be made to
apply to the jury. Where the judge presides
he has a right to exercise his dLscretitm, but
where it is a jury trial, I think it is fair that
counsel should comment upon it. I am per-
fectly willing to leave it that way.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS The subsection
should read " and such failure shall not l>e
matle the subject of comment by counsel for
the prosecution " and leave out " nor delwir
the judge from making comment on the
refusid or neglect to do so."

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Under that
motion it is contemplated the Court wH>uld
have the right to make any comments.
Would the hon. gentleman include the jury ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -The failure of the
person charged, whether the wife or husband
of such person, to testify shall not be made
I the subject of comment by counsel for the
prcKsecution when tried before a jury. Will
the hon. gentleman allow the proposed sul>-
seetion to be amended in this way 1

Digitized by

Google

Witnesm and [MARCH 24, 1893] Evidence Bill.

429

Hc»ii. Mr. POWER Tf the hon. gentle-
iimii will allow me to make the amendment
myself I would prefer it.

H<m. Mr. K AULBACH I think that is
right ; whether a judge makas a comment
t>r not he alwayvS takes cognizance of that
fact.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think the first
part of the provision is perfectly correct.
He thinks I should strike that out ; 1 do
not think so, because I regard it as a sul>-
stantial part of the clause. There should
be no presumption if the person charged
does not go into the box. At present the
Crown is obliged to make out its case with-
out any help from the criminal, and we do
not propose to assist the Crown very ma-
terially in the matter, but if the person
charged g<»es into the box he can be cross-
examined and the Crown can have the
benefit of a cross-examinaticm. I do not
think that if a man or his wife d<jes not
go into the box it should create any pre-
sumption whatever, and that, I believe, is
the feeling of the Senate. I am quite
willing to provide that the fact shall
not be made a subject of comment by the
counsel for the Crown in his address to the
Jury. As it is now, the judge trying the
case has a right to comment on it, but the
counsel has not.

H<m. Mr. GOWAN^-If I re^ the
amendment right, it is a pasitive declai'ation
that such and such shall not be done. That
surely is not proper. Then my hon. friend
e<mtends that it should be confined to tnal
before a jury and not before a judge.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am willing to
make that provision with raspect to the
jury, but take the case of a trial before a
stipendiary magistrate, or before two country
magistrates. These country magistrates are
sometimes not very much superior to the
men who act as jurors, and I am not at all
clear that magistrates should be allowed to
draw conclusions from the fact of the pris-
oner not going into the box. However, I
am willing to make the change as regards
the jury.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— If the change
were made, the presumption would l)e that
the prisoner was guilty, which is contrary to
the presumption at present ; and he would
have to prove his innocence.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — He could veiy easily
rebut the presumption by saying he was not
guilty. It is his own fault if he does not
rebut the presumption ; he has it in his
p<jwer. If he is gtiilty, and cannot do it, T
do not think, we should be much troubled
about the presumption being against him.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Under the law
now he is asked if he is guilty or not guilty.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I make it read in
this way —

The failure of the person charged, or the wife
or husband of such person, to testify, shall not
create any presumption of the guilt or innocence
of the person charged, and such failure shall not
be made the subject of comment by the counsel
for the prosecution in addressing the jury.

The Committee divided on the amendment
which was rejecte<l — Contents 17, Non-con-
tents 28.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Moved that the fol-
f owing be added to clause 4 : —

'* The failure of the person charj^ed, or the wife
or husband of such person, to testi^ shall not be
ma«le the subject of comment by counsel for the
prosecution."

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I wish to draw the
attention of the House t<^the fact that the
Bill as amended establishes a difference bet-
ween the rules of evidence in Ontario and
the rules of evidence under this legislation.

H<m. Mr. MILLER — In civil cases.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Yes, in civil cases.
This Bill applies not only to criminal law
but also to civil law under Dominion Acts.
Under the law of Ontario the plaintiff and
the defendant and the accused in any case
of pnxsecuti(m for fines, are competent and
compellable witnesses. After the report is
made to the House, I wish to have the Bill
stand for a third reading on Mcmday next,
in order that I may consult with the Depart-
ment of Justice and ascertain whether it
cannot be so amended as to bnng it, in civil
matters, into harmony with the Ontario law
of evidence.

Hon. Mr. MILLER And the Nova Scotia
law.

Hon. Mr.LOUGHEED— I would suggest
that a suKstantive clause pnmding that this
shall apply to all ca.ses except criminal mat-
ters would meet the difficulty.

Digitized by

Google

430 Columbia and Kootenay By, [SENATE] and Navigation Co. Bill.

Hon. Mr. MILLER — I think there is no
difference of opinion as to the necessity of
some amendment to meet the point raised
by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, and he
has taken the wisest coiyse in postponing
the third reading until next week.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I wished to give
notice to the House of this distinction which
perhaps had escaped the attention of hon.
membei-s yesterday.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN, frcmi the Com-
mittee reported the Bill with amendments,
which were concurred in.

COLUMBIA AND KOOTENAY RAIL-
WAY AND NAVIGATION CO. BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. MACDONaLD (B.C.) moved
the third reading of Bill (68) " Aw Act res-
pecting the Columbia and Kootenay Rail-
way and Navigation Company." He said :
There is an amendment proposed to this
Bill, and I should like to hear an explana-
tion of it so that I may have an opportunity
to reply.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) moved to
strike out all the wonls after the woi*d
" north " in the IQ^h line to the word " and "
in the 19th line in the second section of the
Bill. He said : — This Bill passed through its
second stage without any explanati(m what-
ever. I think that I was not here when it
was read the second time : therefore, I may
be allowe<l to make a few remarks on the
Bill, and as the hon. gentleman who has
charge of it claims the right to reply to what
I say, I hope that I shall have a similar
pnvilege if I think it necessary. This Bill
asks for powers to build a railway from
Nelson and Robson near the internaticmal
line, north to Revelstoke, adistance of about,
as near as I can make out from the maps.
150 miles. It may be a few miles, more or
less, than that. It passes through an exceed-
ingly rough, mountainous country, and there-
fore the roiul may be considerably longer, or
perhaps shorter, than the figures I have
gi%'en. A chai'ter wjis granted by the local
legislature some years ago, and a portion of
the road, I think about twenty-five miles of
it, has been built between Nelson and
Robson. I am not prepared to say why
they have come here to get a Dominion
charter. As far as the building of that road

is concerned, I may say that I am as strongly
in favour of it as any hon. gentleman in
this House, or in this country, and my
sole object in moving the amendment of
which I have given ^ notice, is simply to
protect and to promote the interests of that
particular portion of British Columbia,
which is being fast filled up, owing to the
many mining camps and claims' that have
been discovered there within the last two
yeai*s. I moved in the Railway Committee,
when this Bill was before it, that a certain
portion of the .seccmd clause should be struck
out. I will read the whole clause in order
that hon. gentlemen may fully understand
how I want the section amended :

The Company may construct and operate a rail-
way between some point on its present line be-
tween Nelson aiul Robson on the soutli and Revel-
stoke on the north, together with such branch or
branches as may from time to time be authorizeii
by the Governor in Council, not excelling in any
one case the length of 30 miles.

The words that I wish sti'uck out are
" together with such branch or branches as
may from time to time be authorized by the
Governor in Council, not exceeding in any one
case the length of 30 miles." H<m. gentlemen
are aware that in the General Railway Act
the power of building branches to the ex-
tent of six miles is given to railway com-
panies. I refer to the Railway Act of 1886,
49 Vic, chap. 109, sec. 15, subsec. 15 : —

Any Company may construct a branch or
branches not exceedipg six miles in length from
any terminus or station of its railway.

That is the power granted in the General
Railway Act, and I am not aware that this
Parliament, or any Parliament since 1867,
has granted powers such as those asked for
in this section, other than that granted to
the Canadian Pacific Railway in their origi-
nal charter. The 14th section of that Act
provides : —

The Company shall have the right from time to
time to lay, construct, equip, maintain and work
branch lines of a railway from any point or points
along the main line of railway to any point or
points within the territory of the Dominion.

Apart from the extraordinary privileges and
powers granted the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way, I think I am perfectly safe in saying
that no such powers as are asked for in this
Bill have been granted to any company. In
the Railway Committee, some lion, gentle-
men thought that an exception ought to be

Digitized by

Google

Columbia and Kootenay By. [MARCH 24, 1893] and Navigation Co. Bill. 431

made with re8i)ect to this line from the fact
that it passed through an exceedingly rough
and mountainous section of country, where
it was very difficult and very costly to build
railways. That is no excuse at all. Why
should we depart from the well estiiblished
piinciple laid down in the General Railway
Act ? This House is only tcw) glad to grant
charters to any company applying for per-
mission to build roacls in any portion of our
country, and I claim that if we pass this Bill
in its present form it will be est^iblishing a
precedent by which any and every company
that may be formed in our province, or any
othert province in the Dominion can con-
sistently come l)efore us and demand the
same privileges. Unfortunately, the province
of British Columbia, covering an areii of
over 360,000 square miles, is nearly all of a
nitmntainous nature, and the causes alleged
in the committee why these privileges ought
to be granteil would apply to any and every
portion of that vast area of country. As I
mentioned a while ago, a great number of
gold and silver mines are being discovered in
the Kootenay country nearly every numth or
two. It wa.s alleged by some hon. gentleman
in the committee that it would be too long,
in case a new mining camp should spring
up, to wait until the next meeting of Par-
liament to enable them to get a Bill
through. I do not know of any mining
camp, either in Canada, in the? United
States or in any of the territories of the
United States, where they made such rapid
developments and the interests Vere such
{IS to demand the construction of a railway
within eight or ten months. I claim that
if any such necessity arises in any section
along this railway, the company have only
to apply to this Parliament for a charter U)
build branches for thirty, fifty or <»ne hun-
dred miles, if necessary, and it will imme-
diately be granted. Those are the principal
reasons why I think the amendment that I
have given notice of should be adopted.
The object is to prevent other c(mipanies
being placed at a disadvantage by the ptiss-
ing of this Bill. Supposing, for instance,
that a new mine is discovered ten or fifteen
or twenty miles from the main line fnmi
Nelson to Revelstoke, and there is only one
mine — an immensely rich mine, as the most
of our mines are — and it is found to be
ijnpi*acticable to build a waggon road owing
to the rough character of the country, and
the only way by which that mine can be

, opened and developed properly and made
to pay would be by the company own-
; ing it building the line, after mak-
I ing the preliminary surveys, giving
j notice of a Bill and coming before Parlia-
< ment for legislation, before their Bill could
' become law, under this Act the Columbia
and Kootenay Company can go to work and
! take advantage of all the labour and expense
i incurred by the other company, and build it
and charge probably twice or three times as
much as they should charge for carrying the
ore over their line. They would charge pro-
bably twice or three times as much as it would
cost the local C(»mpany owning the mine to
carry their ore to market. Owing to the
very rapid strides in mining in that par-
ticular portion of British Columbia, I believe
that in the next ten years we will have
eight or ten railways coming in there from
the south, and probably jis many from the
north from the Canadian Pacific Railway.
However, my sole object is to prevent a
monopoly being created and a barrier thrown
in the way of other companies who would
feel disposed to go in and open up that . por-
tion of the country. I therefore move, that
all the words after the word ** north " in the
sixteenth line be ^truck out down to the
word "and" in the nineteenth line.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— I am
sorry I cannot accept this amendment, and I
am surprised and I regret that my hon.
friend should think it necessary to bring for-
ward anything of this kind which would re-
tard the progress of the country and hamper
the company proposing to build the railway
in this very mountainous district. If this
amendment carries it might do a great deal
of harm tf) the country and prevent the pro-
gress of mining, prevent miners going into
that country, and result in great injury to
many persons there. The clause which the
hon. member objects to is giving the Gover-
nor in Council power to allow this company
to build certain branches. Surely the mat-
ter is perfectly safe in the hands of the
Governor in Council, and if this company
wish to build b;nnches, it is proper that the
Governor in Council sholild give them that
privilege, especially as there is no other Com-
pany known that wants to build a line over
any portion of this ground. There is no fear
that the rights of any other person or Com-
pany will be infringed or trenched upon by
the privilege now sought. The hon. gentle-

Digitized by

Google

432 Columbia and Kootenay By. [SENATE] and Navigation Oo, Bill.

men has told the House that the Canadian
Pacific Railway have the power to build
branch lines in all directions ; well that is a
very strong argument in favour of this Bill.
If that large company has the power to do
those things why should not a smaller c<mi-
pany have the power? The smaller and
weaker companies ought to have more con-
sideration in this House than powerful cor-
porations. I have no fear that the House
will decline to giv^ this power now sought
for. Every facility ought to be given to com-
panies that are ready to embark their money
in an enterprise of this kind in the Kootenay
country. At any time new mines may be
developed, and if branch lines are built to
those mines, so much the better. Theh miners
can go in and get their supplies and takeout
their ore. I hope the House will reject the
amendment proposed by the hon. member.

H<m. Mr. KAULBACH— I waited to
hear what my hon. fnend, who has just spo-
ken, had to say in answer to the remarks of
the h(m. member from New Westminster. I
am largely a free trader in railways. I
l>elieve if we leave the Bill as it is now we
will be creating a monopoly, because we will
give to this one company now the right to
go into a sea of mountains, out of which
there may be only one pass. There must be
great engineering difficulties to c<mtend with
in a country like that. These enterprising
men may go in there and develop some
mines and incur the exf)ense of tracing out
a railway line to connect with' this, or some
other railway, and they may find before they
can come to Parliament and get a charter
for that purpose, this company coming
in and taking the very line they had
marked out, depriving them of all the rights
they should have in connection with the
mines. It is an unusual power to give. In
the case of the Canadian Pacific Railway it
is a different matter. They can go in any
direction, but here there may be only one
pavss from the mine to a connecting railway,
and after these men have gone in there and
expended their money to develop their mine,
and brought in a population to work their
mine, it would l>e unjust to allow another
company to supplant them, jis would be
possible under the Bill, before they could get
their charter.

question I do not think there will be a dis-
sentient voice on this matter. In 1889 the
British Columbia legislature chartered a
company t<^ build a line in this country ; they
were unable to raise the capital and in 1890
they came to Parliament and asked leave to
be allowed to lease their line to the Canadian
Piicific Railway Company. The Canadian
Pacific Railway Company obtained a lease
of the line under the legislation of this Par-
liament and they built a road connecting
the Arrow Lake and the Kootenay Lake,
from what is called Nelson to Robson. It
was thought that that would furnish suf-
ficient railway facilities for that country. It
was found, however, that these lakes froze up
by the mcmth of November and were not open
till May ; in the meantime the mining in-
dustry was paralysed. This Bill propases to
give power to the Canadian Pacific Railway
company practically to build from their
main line at Revelstoke down to a point on
this road 50 or 100 miles south, connecting
the two points. This Bill proposes to give
the company power to build branches into
the various points where ore is found. At
present it is all taken to the United States.
There are two American railways that are
getting the benefit of it by our not being
able to build in that country. One road
that runs up to Caldwell, Cobban's Road,
from the United States, and the other road,
Mr. Hill's Road, connects with the ferry up
there. If I were tf) state the amount of
silver goir^ to the United States now, hon.
gentlemen would be surprised. There are
mines there of marvellous and amazing rich-
ness. The report comes from the curator of a '
museum in British Columbia, and it is an
official report, in which he describes twenty or
thirty mines of richness, varying &*om $100
to $1,000 per ton, not 6nly silver and lead,
but also gold. Those mines are rich enough
now to justify the carrying of the ore down
the sides of the mountains in sacks and
transporting it to the boundary and into the
United States. All the ore goes there. The
smelter built at Revelst^)ke has been idle.
I do not know that it has ever done any
work. T suppose 95 per cent of the mineral
is o^vne(l by j)eople fn)m the United States.
: and the ore all goes to that country. This
, proposal is to offer facilities to bring the ore
I north into our own country.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— If hon. gentlemen will | Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I am not
really take a little trouble to understand the | objecting to that.

Digitized by

Google

Cohmbia and Kwittmy By. [MARCH 24, 1898] and Navigation Co. Bill. 433"

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hoii. gentleman
wants the pronKiters of this Bill to say where
they are going to build this branch. It is
quite impossible at present for them to say
where it would be in their interests t<j build
it. The centre of the most attractive mines
has moved about. Two years ago it was at a
point called Ainsworth. Then it nioved fur-
ther north to another district. Then it
moved further north and north-west to what
is called the ** Lard eau," and that is considered
at present to be the lichest mining countiy
on this continent, according to the United
States reports. All the ore that is mined
there is at present going to the United
States. The company would not be justified
in building the line from Revelstoke to Nel-
si>n unless they have a right to build the
branches. As to keeping anylxxly else out,
that is not a very substantial argument, be-
cause the country has been open there for
some time for people to go in there if they
like to do so. The only "people who have
gone in are from the United States. The
British Columbia Legislature is chartering a
number of railways — practically giving free
trade for all railways to go in. T have in
my hand a list of railways for which appli-
cations have l)een made to the British Col-
umbia Legislature for charters. If they can
be built they will develop that country, but
on our side c)f the line no Canadian company
has l>een able to undertake the work except
the Canadian Pacific Railway Company.
They have already taken over two or three
railways south of their main line and, if they
do not furnish money for the construction of
this branch, it is difficult to say^whei^e it
will lie found unless it is provided by the
United States capitalists. If charters can
l)e obtained from British Columbia to con-
nect with United States roads the railway
faoilitieis can be provided that way. The
object of this Bill is to bring the ore from
those mines north into our own country
Unices the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany have the right to build branches wher-
ever they are likely to be pn)ti table, they
will not undertake the work. It will be an
expensive line to build and there is no money
in it without the branchas. The territory
to be reached lies from ten to thirty miles
further east of that.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— The hem.
gentleman says the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company should not be hampered in
28

building branches wherever they please j if
as the hon. gentleman will say this is a
Canadian Pacific Railway Company Bill
why is it not in their name ? If it were in
their own name I would withdraw my oppo-
sition immediately.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I thought I explained
that in the first instance. In 1889 this
company got a charter from the British
Columbia Legislature to build the road.
They were unable to carry out the under-
taking, , and they came to this Parliament
for permission to lease their line. It would
be a very arbitrary act on the part of the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, when
their attention has been drawn to the ex-
istence of such an enterprise, if they were
to assert their right to build a line there
themsel ves. It would not lie very honou rable,
and it is not the system that the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company has pursued. We
have here every session applications of this
character by companies that the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company has assisted by
advancing money and afterwards leasing
their lines. It is all in the interests of that
part of the country, and it would be a veiy
serious mistake if the House were to adopt
the amendment. It depends entii*ely on cir-
cumstances that will be developed in the
next three months in which direction the
road should be built. The distances are
from ten to forty miles from the main line
to the various points.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN — As a member of
the Committee, I diflTered somewhat from the
hon. gentleman from Ottawa, and I differ
from him now as to the objection that was
raised. As I understand it, no objection is
taken to this road which is virtually a
branch of the Canadian Pacific Railway from
Revelstoke, fifty miles or so, and there is no
objection in the world to giving them every
facility to build that line and any branches
that the General Railway Act gives them
power to construct : the objection taken in
the Committee was that an exception should
be made in this particular case in favour of
a large corporation which is denied to smaller
corporations. No other corporation has
come to this Parliament and asked for un-
limited power to build branches for a dist-
ance beyond six miles. That was the objec-
tion presented to us in the Committee, and
it stinick me that no special reason was given

Digitized by

Google

434 Columbia and Kootenay By, ( SENATE] and Navigation Co. Bill,

for making an exception in favour of this
company. No special reason has been given
c>day why it should be done. My hon.
friend speaks very glowingly of that country,
and I am very glad to hear his statement.
I believe it is a well-known fact that we
have in British Columbia very valuable
mines, equal to the silver regions in Nevada
and Colorado. It is important that those
mines should be developed, but we should l>e
careful not to make exceptions to the Gen-
eral Railway Act, which might restrict the
development of the country which some
hon. gentlemen speak of promoting. I can
quite understand how, in the opening up of
a valuable mine, the parties interested in the
property should be anxious to procure a
railway of their own. What would be their
position under this legislation ? They will
be restricted by the t«rms of the General
Railway Act in the construction of branches,
while this company will have the power to
coiiStruct branches a distance of thirty miles,
and they are liable to l>e headed off by this
company under the large powers conferre^l
upon them by this Bill, ]>ecause no other
combination of individuals can possibly pro-
ceed with a work of this kind without first
coming to Parliament and getting a charter.
I think this would tend to restrict opera-
tions in that country and embarrass and
prevent that enterprise which the hon.
gentleman so much wishes to promote. This
is the view that I took of the subject in
Committee, and I thought it only proper
that I should express it here.

Htm. Mr. BOW ELL I have listened
with a g<»od deal of attention to the remarks
of hon. gentlemen on this subject, and I
think if there ever was a case in which
almost unlimited power should be given to any
railway company to build brancli railways it
is in the very pai't <^>f the country in which it
is pr()pose<l to construct this line. As the
leader of the Op{H>sition very properly
pointed out, it is a mountainous country.
No one knows that better then the hon.
gentleman who moved the amendment. I
have visited that neighbourho(Kl and have
s<mie idea of the character of the cf)untry
through which this road is to pass, and I
know the absolute necessity for building the
line. I also am ctmvinced thattus mines are
discovered in the mountiiins, greater neces-
sity will arise for giving powers to any rail-
way companies with the money to invest in

that sectit»n of the country to extend their
branches so as to be enabled to carry the
freight to Canadian points instead of allow-
ing it to go to the United States. At present
there is a gi*eat competition on the part of
the Northern Pticific Riiilway Company and
what is termed the Great Northern, better
known as the "Jim Hill Line." The latter
company have pushed their line so rapidly
that they now connect with the Kootenay
River, run down through the Kootenay lakes
by boat int<» the Nelson Distnct and
into the mining country (where the miners
get their supplies from the United States)
and take the products of those mines Imck
to Montana to l)e smelted. The Canadian
Pacific Railway Company have already built
a line running from a place now called
Robson, formerly called Sproat's Landing,
along the noi*thern bank of the Kootenay
River, stfirting a little north of where it
emptias into the Columbia and crossing the
river alxmt half ^ay l>etween that and Nel-
son. That was done for the purjx>se of
enabling the miners to obtain their supplies
from Canada tna the Canadian Pticific Rail-
way and the Columbia, insteiul of through
the United States. Since, however, that
road was built very rich discoveries have
been made alxmt thirty miles still further
on. This proposition is to construct another
railway from near the foot of Arrow Lake
on the Columbia River running in a south
easterly direction to tap these mines and t4»
furnish them with supplies, bringing the ore
up the Columbia River to Revelstoke and
have it smelted in our own country, and by
that means heading off, if I may use that
expression, the United States roads who
own boats on the Kootenay extending their
roads from the Kootenay Lakes north-west-
ward in order to tfip that section of the
country where there is every prol)ability in
a veiy short time that there will lye a large
IK>pulation and a great deal of mining wealth
develop»ed. That is the pi*opasition before
the House to build that road. My hon.
friend from New Westminster takes excep-
tion to giving this Company the power to
build branches running from their line that
is now built from Robson through the ccmn-
try until it strikes Nels<m in a south-
easterly direction. T cannot see any possible
objections to that, and when you consider
that there is no industry in that section of
the country except mining, you may depend
upon it no one will put their money into

Digitized by

Google

Columbia and KooUnay Ry. [MARCH 24, 1893] and Navigation Co. Bill 435

building railways for any either purpose than
obtaining the traffic connected with the
mines, and whether it be to the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company or any other com-
pany, I do not think in this particular case
that we should hesitate to give them all the
power that they require. For this re^ison,
if other rich discoveries of silver, giilena or
whatever it may be are made, why should
they not have the power to run their road
in order to supply the miners and to carry
out the weidth of the country ? I know it
may be said, let them come to Parliament
and get their powers. I am very much
inclined to favour in a great mefvsure the
United St^ites system of building railways
and let any company build a railroad just
where they please. Let them tile their plans
and have all competition you like. I see
this Bill was introduced by Mr. Mara, and I
wjis unaware, until the hon. member from
Ottawa stated it, that it was a Canadian
Pacific Railway scheme, beyond this- -that I
learned this comj)any was to build it because
they had been seeking aid (and it is one of
the companies that should receive aid if any
are to be bonused by the Government) and
the Canadian PaciKc Railway Company
agreed to take it over and run it and give
tliem a per cent^ge of the earnings. That
is the true position of the case and I hope the
House will hesitate Ijefore depriving the
company of the privilege they ask in the
Bill. In that country no pr>ssible harm can
happen from giving them this power. If it
were in Ontario or in the prairie section I
would hesitate before giving ^em the power,
but under the circumstances, I would give
them all the power and facilities possible to
build where they please.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlingt<m)— I
happen to have been in that country and to
have travelled over it. I understand that
the objections raised to the Bill by the hon.
member from New Westminster are cm
account of the powers they seek to build
branches thirty miles long. When I was
up there in Septeml>er last, I was at Arrow
Lake, the point mentioned by the leader of
the House, from which it is proposed to
extend a branch to the mining country.
When I was there I heiird some very en-
couraging reports from the mines, and it
was considered then that a wagon road
would be sufficient to enable the country to
be opened up and to give facilities to miners
28i

to bring in their supplies, and for the ores
to be taken out. Since then greater dis-
coveries have been made, such as have been
described by the leader of the Opposition, in
the extracts which he has read from news-
papers, and a wagon road will not answer
the purpose at all now. It is contended
that this company could apply to Parlia-
ment and get a charter, but that would in-
volve a delay of, as we know, about a year,
and it would then Ije too late, and, besides,
granting this power to the railway is the
very best thing that can be done for that
part of the country. I am very much sui-
prised that any honourable gentleman hav-
ing the interests of British Columbia at
heart should think for a moment of opposing
the Bill.

Hon. Mr. POWER— As I understand,
there is not the slightest opjM)sition to giv-
ing this company power to build the road
described in the Bill. The only oppositicm
is to giving them a roving chai*ter to enable
them to go over that country and build
roads thirty miles long without coming to
! Parliament for power to do so.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Branches.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It is the same thing.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— It is a

very good thing.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It is, but you may
pay a little too much for your whistle. With
respect to the prairie country, and any point
between Calandai* and Port Moody, or pos-
sibly Vancouver, the company would ha\e
the right to build branches where they please
under their charter, but it must be remem-
bered that this mining country is in the pro-
vince of British Columbia. It is not in the
territories. The subject of mining is one
which is left to the local legislatures. Com-
panies have already been incoi^porated by the
Legislature of British Columbia, as I under-
' stand it, for the purpose of getting into this
' mining country, and there is an immense
amount of wealth to be developed there. Ca-
pitalists are prepared to invest their means
to develop it, and there is no fear that the
roads will not be built. The position which
we would create by this Bill has been indi-
cated by the hon. member from Hopewell —
we give this company the right to build
wherever they please. The Canadian Pacific

Digitized by

Google

436 Columbia and Kootenay Ey, [SENATE] and Navigation Co. Bill,

Railway Company is a very powerful body.
Let us suppose that a local company under-
takes to build a road to Lardeau — that is sup-
posed to be the latest and very best of the^e
mining tracts. Suppose one of those com-
panies incorporated by the Legislature
of British Columbia undertakes to build
a road to Lardeau, the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company, under the power which it
gets by this Bill, will simply step in and
shut the other comjNiny out. They will con-
tend that under (»ur legislation they have a
stixjnger claim than any company with a
merely pi*ovincial charter, and they can come
in and head off the local company. We have
not to go very far for evidence that the Ca-
nadian Pacific Railway Company is capable
of doing a thing like that. We have the
\ case of the Ottawa, Arnpriorand Parry Sound
Railway. That company undert<K)k to build
a road between the points indicated by its
title. In one place there was only a single
pass through which they could go, and when
it was understood that they were going that
way, the Canadian Pacific Railway Company
undertook to anticipate them and prevent
them from utilizing that pass. The very
same thing may happen in British Columbia.
We would be perfectly justified in giving
this company, which is the Caniuiian Pacific
Riiilway Company under another name, the
right to build this main line and to build
branches to any of the j)oints named. If
other discoveries should be made after a year
or so, they can come to Parliament and get
mlditional powei's, but we ai*e giving them
an unfair advantage in competing with other
companies. No other company can build a
branch more than six miles long without
coming here foi* legislation. We give the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company the
right to build a branch thirty miles long
without coming here. I see considerable
objection to that course.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— From the
remarks made by the hon. gentleman from
Ottawa, he would lead one to suppose —
* I do not say intenticmally — that if the amend-
ment which I proposed became law it would
prevent the ores found in that section of the
country from going north. Such is not the
fact.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I do not think the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company would
build the main line. I do Jiot think they

would he justifie<l in building it without the
power to build branches.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)- -I do not
know whether the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company would he justified in doing that or
not. It is evident the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way Company, like oth^r great corporations
know on which side their bread is buttered,
and unless it pays them they will not build
it. I am JUS anxious to see those branches
built as any one, but I want to see this
comptiny go through the same form here
that every other company has to dn that
is, apply to Parliament, which they can do
within nine or ten months, for legislation. If
the main line Ls built from Nels(m and Rob-
s<m to Revelsti)ke all the earnings fn»m
LanieauandSl(x;oml)e districts will find their
way to Revelstoke.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington) -It
will if the branch railways are built.

H(m. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I am as
much in favour as any one of seeing these
branches built — but I want this company to
come to Parliament for the right tx) do so.
The hon. gentleman from Burlington expres-
sed surprise that I should propose this amend-
ment ; and he said that if I had the interests
of British Columbia at heart, I would not do
I so. I can say without reservation that every
I move whicl\I have made in this House, has
I been in the interests of British Columbia,
j but I am not so very sure, when I hear the
i melodious voice of my honourable namesake
advocating a measure of this kind, that he
has the interests of the country always in
view. If the interests of British Columbia
are as near his heart as they are to mine, I
can assure him that he will l>e regarded by
the country more as a representative of the
people in Parliament than of any corporation
or l)ody.

The Senate dividetl cm the amendment
which wasS rejected by the following vote : —

Contents :
Hon. Messrs.

Bellerose,

Boulton,

(Shaffers,

Dever,

Kaulbach,

Lewin,

McCallum,

McClelan,

McDonald (B.C.),

McInuQS (Victoria),

Macclonald (P.E.I.),

Memer,

Poirier,

Power,

Prowse,

Reesor,

Reid (Cariboo).— 17.

Digitized by

Google

General Inepection Act [MARCH 24, 1893] Amendment Bill.

437

NoN -Contents :

Hon.

Messrs.

Allan,

McKindsey,
Macdonald (Victoria),

Abnon,

Angoi-8,

Macfarlane,

Botsford,

Maclnnes (Burlington),

Bouchenille

de.

Miller,

Bowell,

Montgomery,

Boyd,

Primrose,

Casgrain,

Read (Quint^),

Clemow,

Robitaille,

Dickey,

Scott,

Dobftou,

Smith,

Flint,

Sutherland,

<iowau,

Vidal.-27.

McKay,

The Bill

waji

then rert<l the third time an

pjussed.

THIRD READING.

Bill (24) "An Act further to amend the
Supivme and Exchequer Courts Act," passed
through Committee of the Whole, was read
the third time and passed.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (45) ** An Act to incorporate the Cleve- '
land, Port Stanley and London Transp)i*ta-
tion and Railway Company," and to confinn |
an agi-eement raspecting the London and
Port Stanley Railway." (Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (54) "An Act to incorporate the
Alberta Irrigation Company." (Mr. I»ug- '
heed.) i

Bill (35) " An Act to incorporate the Cal-
gary Trrigaticm Company." (Mr. Lougheed.)

NELSON AND FORT SHEPPARD
RAILWAY COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hem. Mr. REID (B.C.) moved the second
i-eading of Bill (89) " An Act respecting the
Kelson and Fort Shepptird Railway Com-
j)any." He said : -This company has obtained
a charter from the Provincial Government to
build a line of railway from a point near
Nelson (m the K<K>tenay Lake to a point
near Fort Sheppard, but thinking that they
would be in a better position by obtainng a
charter from this House, they have come here.

The motion was agreed to.

CANADA CARRIACJE COMPANY'S
BILL.

THIRD READING.

H<m. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.) moved
the adoption of the rep>rt <»f the Select Com-

mittee on Standing Orders and Private Bills
7'€ Bill (59) " An Act to incorporate the
Caniula Carriage Company."

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— When this mat-
ter came up the other day, at my suggestion
the hon. gentleman postponed the considera-
tion of the report. I considered the ol>
jects and purposes of the Bill too extensive
and that the power for preferential dividends
and priority of preference, etc., were extra-
ordinary and not usually granted to com-
panies. Since then I find that this Com-
pany have obtained powers under two
charters from pn)vincial governments and
that they intend to work under this charter
instead of the others. As they have the
p<^)wers granted to them in the province of
Ontario already, I do not see why I should
I object to the report of the Committee.

I The motion was agreed to.

I Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte) moved the
I third reading of the Bill.

' The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
j was read the third time and passed.

GENERAL INSPECTION ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (V) **An Act further to
amend the General Inspection Act." He
said : — Thi^ Bill is simple in its character. It
is to change the mode of inspect icm of apples
which are packed in l>arrels. In the Bill as
it stands upon the Statute-lxiok, the clause
reads as follows : —

No. 1 inspected Canadian apples shall consist of
perfect specimens of one variety of uniform size,
and in the case of a coloured variety of fairly uni-
form colour, and shall lie fre« from scabs, worm
holes, knots and blemishes of any kin<l.

The second
apples : —

subsection refers to No. 2

No. 2 inspected Canadian apples shall consist of
specimens of one variety, free from scab, worm
holes, knots and blemishes of any kind but not of
uniform size and colour.

Those who are engaged in this tratle re-
presented to the Department of Inland
Revenue, under whose management the In-
spection Act is, that it was impossible to

Digitized by

Google

438

General Inspection Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

comply with this hiw, and the proposed
amendment is to read as follows : —

No. 1 inspected Canadian apples shall consist of
well-grown specimens— specimens of the variety
named, instead of one variety — of nearly uniform
size, free frouj scab, worm holes and bruises and
properly packed.

Section No. 2 reads as follows ; —

Inspected Cana^lian apples shall consist of spe-
cimens not entirely free (leaving out the words
•* of one variety,") from defects nientioueil in
clause No. 1, but which on account of inequality,
or their lack of colour, or other defects, couUl not
be included in that class.

That is, they could not be included in class
No. 1. I think that the amendment was sug-
gested by the Fruit Growers' Association,
and the proposition is to make the Inspec-
tion Act workable, as it is not workable at
the present time.

Hon. Mr. REESOR- -Have any other
changes have been made in the Bill ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-No other change
than those which I have said.

Hon. Mr. POWER —I do not rise to op-
pose the Bill. Our object should be to have
the law with i*espect to the inspection of
Canadian apples in the most eifective form
which is practicable, and it appears from the
statement made by the hon. Minister that
in the form in which we passed the provi-
sion last year it was not practicable. I wish
Uy call the attention of the Minister to cer-
tain defects which present themselves in the
wording of the Bill before us, with the hope
that the Minister will give the suggestions
consideration between this time and the
time when the House goes into Committee
on the Bill. The lii*st subsection of the clause
proposed to be enacted is decidedly an im-
provement upon the existing law, which
provided that the specimens should be
perfect. We cannot expect perfect
apples any more than perfect Bills.
The words ** nearly uniform size '' are an
improvement on the words in the previous
Act " of uniform size " and in case of a
coloured variety " a fairly uniform colour." I
think, however, that the latter part of the
clause will require some amendment. The
Act on the Statute-book s^iys " shall be free
from scab, worm-holes, knot*< and blemishes
of any kind ; " this Bill provides they shall
Ik? '* free from scabs, worm-holes and bruises

and pi-operly packed." I do not profess to
be a judge of apples, but I think that knots
are an objectionable feature in apples claimed
to l)e first class, and the expression ** ble-
mishes of any kind " is decidedly better
than the language in the Bill now before us.
For instance, an apple which has begun to
decay would not come under the provLsions
of this Bill. Then, as to the second quality
of Canadian apples, I really think under the
Bill we are now passing no apple could l>e so
bad that it would not meet the recjuirements
of that sub-clause 2. I would suggest to
the Minister that some amendment should
be made in that clause. I do not think we
should give the stamp of Canadian authonty
to fruit which is not at any rate fairly go<Ki

Hon. Mr. ALMON - The Act of last ses-
sion struck me as very unworkable, I under-
sUxkI tive biirrels per hundred wei*e t^i be
examined, and the examiner was to get 5
cents per barrel. Now, it is not to be sup-
posed tliat a farmer who examines these
apples is going to- make an enemy of his
neigh lx)ur whom he meets every day, for 5
cents a l)ari'el. Then, again, it is a difficult
thing to examine a barrel of apples. If
you empty them out you will find it im-
possible to get all the applas into the Imrrel
again, owing to their having .settled. I
think the proper way would l>e to stamp on
the barrel the name of the farmer rai.sing
the apples, and the county where they wei-e
raised. W"e think Nova Scotia apples are
far superior to apples from any other part
of Canada, and therefore if they were branded
as Nova Scotia apples, and the name (»f the
fanner put on the barrel, it would save this
expense. If they ai-e shipped to Livei^xxd,
or any other market, and they turn out to l)e
bad, it will become known to the trade, and
the man who sends such apples is not likely
to get more ordei-s.

H(m. Mr. KAyLBACH -I think N(»va
Scotia is advancing most rapidly and is a
very flourishing district avS iar as apples are
concerned, and h(m. gentlemen would l>e
surprised at the rivalry existing among apple
growers to expoH the best gcxxis. They are
in favour of the Inspection Law as it is now.
The classification, however, seems to l)e de-
fective. But if the fruit growers have sug-
gested that this should l)e the standard of
No. 1, I shall cei-tainly make no objections;
otherwise the point raised by my hon. friend

Digitized by

Google

North-west Territories Act [MARCH 24, 1893] Amendment Bill

439

fnmi Halifax seems to be reasonable. This
is a great industry in Nova Scx)tia. They
are lieginning to i*aise good fruit and are
anxious, as far as possible, that the charac-
ter of their fruit should not be depreciated
for want i»f proper inspection in the market
in England where it is sold. The inspection
law we had last year was favoured by th^
Apple Growers' Association ii| our counties,
and if they approve of this present classifi-
cation I have no objection ; otherwise 1 think
it is defective.

Hon. Mr. REESOR— This Bill should be
gone into very carefully in the Connnittee
of the whole. It woidd be necessary, if any
anxendments are contemplated, to go into
Connnittee at a future day so as to give par-
ties a chance to prepare their amendments.
I have read several of the reports of the
Fruit Growei-s' Association, and I retid the
Pomological Journal, and I see that very few
apples are iiuspected. In fact, I do not know
of any inspected last year. They regard the
law as periFectly unworkable from the very
fact that it states that apples should be per-
fect ; and you cannot get a Imrrel of perfect
apples. If it was expressed on the barrel as
the statute retiuires, the shi{)per would run
the risk of having them thrown back on his
hands. Another objection is the great expense
of inspection, which costs alx>ut ^20 a cargo.
Bruising nece.ssarily occurs in the shipping ;
the apples nmst be bruised a little when you
are pressing the head of the barrel, to pack
them properly, and it is impassible to guard
against that. I have a great deal of con-
fidence in what the fruit growei-s reported,
.and if what has been re^ is the result of
the fruit gn>wers meeting, I would like to
see the Bill printed and distributed and have
a chance to say a little more alxnit it. I
know such a Bill is nece>«jiry. ]

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The Bill is printed
and distributed and wa»s framed at the in-
stance of the parties representing the Fruit
Growers' Associaticm. I will call their atten-
tion to the suggestions which have l)een made
by the hon. gentleman from Halifax, so that
when we go intoCcmimittee we c^in consider
it fully. The only object is to make the
Bill as workable as jK>ssible.

The motidh was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the seoimd time.

NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

IN COMMITTEE.

The House resolved itself into a Com-
mittee of the Whole on Biir (T) ** An Act
to amend the North-west Territories Act."
In the Committee.

Hon. Mr. POWER As far as one can
gather from this Bill, it provides for the
case of the Governor .in Council issuing a
proclamation doing away with trial by jury
in the North-west Territories, and it may
be that I am mistaken about it. I should
like to have some explanation.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED -If my htui.
friend will permit me to reply to the obser-
vation which he has made I would say that
under Ordinance Sixty of 1888 of the North-
west Legislature, in anticipation of the
repeal of the two clauses referred to in this
Act, namely, sections 71 and 88, there is pro-
vided a very much more elaborate jury
system than heretofore prevailed. Under
the North-west Territories Act there is no
pnivision sufficiently elalx)rate for the
sunnnoning of jurors, and in anticipition of
the repeal of those two clauses this ordinance
has been passed ; you will find it in the
revised ordinances of the Territories. It is a
statute very similar to that which obttiins in
the various provinces of the Dominion, and
at the end of thatordinance there is a clause
providing that it only shall come int<j force
and take eiiect immediately after the repeal
of secti(ms 71 and 88 of the North-west
Territories Act. So that jK)wer is now asked
by the Governor in Council to repeal those
sections. Ui)on the repeal of these two
secti<m^ the jury system sc* provided for by
the North-west Assembly, will come into
operation.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — Instead of wishing
to do away with trial by jury it is to perfect
the system by getting power to withdraw
the section of the law in the North-west
Territories Act which applies to this subject,
and to be in a position to put into force the
legislation adopted by the Territories.

j Hon. Mr. POWER— After the explana-
' tion made by the hon. gentleman I have r»o
! further objection to the Bill.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Buriington), from
the Committee, reported the Bill without
amendments.

Digitized by

Google

440

Eastern Canada Savings [SENATE] Company Bill.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the third
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

CANADIAN LIVE STOCK ASSOCIA-
TION BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN, from the C(mimittee
on Banking and Commerce, reported Bill
(Q) " An Act to incorporate the Canadian
Live Stock Association." He said : — These
amendments appear rather voluminous, but
they are of the same character and in one
direction. It is a Bill introduced to incorpo-
rate a Company called the Canadian Live
Stock Insurance Company. As the Bill was
presented to the House, and as it came be-
fore the Committee, the capital stock was
fixed at only $50,000, and they were allowed
to go into the transaction of business and
operation on only paying ten per cent upon
that amount of capital stock. When the Bill
was submitted to the Insurance Branch of
the Finance Department, this was strongly
objected to, inasmuch as this kind of insur-
ance is exceedingly risky, and it was thought
very inadvisable that a company should be
allowed to go into operation on so small a ca-
pital and with so small an amount paid up.
The Committee therefore amended the Bill,
making the capital stock of the company,
$100,000 instead of $50,000, and obliging
them to have fifty per cent paid up upon it
before they availed themselves of the privi-
lege in the next paragraph of further increas-
ing their capital stock to §100,000. That is
the main amendment. Then it makes it
obligatory upon the company that ^25,000
of the capital stock be paid up in cash into a
chartered bank in Canada to the credit of
the company, which amount shall not be
withdrawn except for the purposes of the
company. Then they are allowed to go into
business. Then the other amendment was
in the insertion of a clause, which is in all
these Bills, giving them the power to take
real estate in satisfaction of any debt or
judgment, but obliging them, as in the case
of all their Bills, to sell the property within
thirty yeai-s, or otherwise it reverts U) the
owner. These are really the amendments ;
it is in the direction of strengthening the
company in having a sufficient amount paid
up.

Hon. Mr. ALMON moved concurrence in
the amendments. He said : — I am afraid
this might hamper the commissioners — the
story of there being no disease among cattle
in Canada. I think the small capital shows
the cattle are in a very healthy state.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

Bill (80) " An Act respecting the Temis-
couata Railway Company." (Mr. Pelletier.)

Bill (56) " An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Hydraulic Compjmy.'' (Mr. Lough-
heed.)

Bill (78) " An Act respecting the British

America Assurance Company." (Mr. Allan.)

' Bill (47) "An Act respecting the London

1 and Port Stanley Railway Company." (Mr.

j Lougheed . )

[eastern CANADA SAVINGS COM-
I PANY BILL.

j FIRST AND SECOND READINOS.

I A message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (98; " An Act to
i amend the Act to incorporate the Eastern
I Canada Savings and Loan Company (Lim-
ited.) "

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. POWER. The solicitor who
has been in charge of this Bill has been in
Ottawa, since its introduction in the other
House, at great expense and inconvenience,
one thousand miles from home, and as the
Bill is merely to correct a clerical error in
the Act, I presume there will be no objection
to pushing it through to-day. I move that
the 41st rule be dispensed with as far as
this Bill is concerned.

The moti(m was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. POWER moved the second
reading of the Bill.

The motion was agi*eed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

The Senate adjourned at 6.15.

Digitized by

Google

The Annexation of [MARCH 27, 1893] the Hawaiian Islands.

441

THE SENATE.

Ottawa J Monday, MarcJi 27 th, 1S9S.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

THE ANNEXATION OF THE
HAWAIIAN ISLANDS.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. BOULTON inquii-ed :

Whether it was the intention of the (Government
to take any official action to represent the interests
of CaiuMla in the maintenance of the inilef>en(lence
of the Hawaiian I8lan<l8, and to communicate
their views on the subject to the Imperial (iovem-
meut through the proper medium of official com-
munication, His Kxcellency the (Jovernor-General ?

I do not propose to recapitulate the argu-
ments that I advanced when this subject
was before the House on a recent occasion,
but the day following the asking of that
question a reply was given by the hon.
leader of the House in the organs of the
Government — the Toronto Empire and the
Daily Citizen. I looked upon that as an
olficial communication to the people of the
country as to what the intentions of the
Government at the time were on the question.
I will read what appeared in the Ottawa
Citizen of the 18th instant, as a reply of the
(iovernment to the question : —

Hon. Mackenzie Howell said that in reference
to recent events no communication had taken place
between the British and Canadian (governments,
but correspondence had previously been exchanged
on the suDJect of a landing station at Hawaii for
a cable between British Columbia and Australia.
He ha4l no douV>t if Hawaii were annexed by the
United States that (»reat Britain would take care
that Imperial and Canadian interests were duly
protected. He did not think the diplomats of
I the Mother Country had lost their cunning in this >
respect. He quite agreed with Senator Power '
that ( Treat Britain had acted wisely in refraining '
from taking any official notice of the annexation I
movement. Had any other course been adopted |
it would have spurreil ex -President Harrison to !
have carrieil out the wishes of the agitators before
his administration Mere out of office. !

Now the reply that the hon. leader of the I
Government gave in the House, as appears *
by the Debates, was as follows : — |

I shall however not fail to forward through our
High Commissioner a copy of the debate which has
taken place here to day.

The notice that appears in the official organ
leads me to suppose that even to the extent

of sending a copy of the delate home to the
High Commissioner, the hon. leader has
changed his mind, because no mention of it
is made in the official announcement through
the Government organs, which is always
supposed to be a semi-oflficial announcement.
Now I think that the question is of sufficient
importance to receive official attention. There
are two propositions that I advanced on the
last occasicm that I had the honour of
addressing the House. One is that, where
the interests of Canada are concerned, we
have the right to represent to the Imperial
Government how far our interests are
threatened or advanced by any certain or
uncertain action, and thei'e is a channel of
communication between the Imperial Gov-
ernment and the Canadian Government,
which is the Governor General, and that it is
wise for us to assert our right in order to
represent our interests. Then again there is
also the interest we ixxssess in seeing as far
as we possibly can that the independence of
those islands should l>e maintained in order
that we may have a friendly port of call in
developing our trade with Australia. I
asked this question in the hopes that the
Government would see that it was to the
advantiige of the country to represent in
official form the interests that Canada has in
the maintenance of the independence of those
islands.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I am somewhat
surprised that the hon. gentleman should
take it for granted that because an announ-
cement is not made through a newspaper in
the city of Ottawa, or any other city of the
Dominion, that therefore the Government
has not taken action or had taken action
upon any questi(m. The article read by the
hon. gentleman is, I think, a report of the
proceedings of this Chamber and not an
official announcement, not even an editorial.
I should like the House and the country to
understand that every article that appeai-s
in a newspaper that supports the (Govern-
ment is not tf» be accepted as an official an-
nouncement from the Government of its p4>-
licy. If that were the case, there is scarcely
an hon. gentleman present who would not l)e
rising every day and saying that he did not
see such and such a thing in the newspapers
supporting the Government, and, therefore,
that the Government is remiss in its duty
on important questions affecting the general
interest of the Dominion. I make this sta-

Digitized by

Google

442

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

tement, being somewhat surprised that my
hou. friend, with his experience, should
have adopted the ci»urse that he has pursued
in reference to this question. I do not, how-
ever, complain of his asking the question a
second time and I can assure him that
whenever the Domini<m Govei-nment deem
it in the intei'est of Canada that I'epresenta-
tion should be mfiide to the Imperial Gov-
ernment on this or any matter that affects
the general interest of the Empire, and more
particularly of the Dominion of Canada,
they will not hesitiite to do their duty. Co-
pies of the report of the delmte will be sent,
not only to the High Commissioner, but
also to the Imperial authorities in order
that they may know what are the views of
gentlemen occupying prominent positions in
this country in reference to this questicm.

WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the third
residing of Bill (23) *' An Act respecting
Witnesses and Evidence."

He said : — I have given some attention to
the Bill respecting Witnesses and Evidence
since it has been amended, and I really think
that the improvements that we have made i
are not very great. I would ask the House
to go back to the clause as it tii'st appeiired
in the Bill when it came to us from the
House l>elow, by Uiking out the word " com-
pellable " and adding that, in case the per-
son accused does not volunteer evidence,
there should be no comment made upon it
by the counsel before the jury, we would
have, perhaps, a more acceptable Bill and
one that would tend more to the ends of
justice. Before moving the third reading of
the Bill or asking that it be recommitted
to a Committee of the Whole, I would like
to know the opinions of those who have dis-
cussed the Bill or of any hon. gentlemen in
the House who wish to take jwirt in the
debate. I shall follow the opinicm of the
House without expressing my own, but I
think the suggestion that I have made is
one that will commend itself to the attention
of the Hou.se.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— My suggestion was
that the accused should not be a compellable
witness and that his omission to go into the
box should not be made the subject of com-

ment by the counsel for the Crown. So far
as presumptions go, of course we cannot pre-
vent them, because the jury and every body
else will have their own views and therefore
whether we insert those words or not, to my
mind it makes very little difference — the
presumption will be raised necessarily and
naturally. Still, I think it very unfair that
the Crown counsel should comment upon it.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — ^Before moving the
third reading of the Bill, I move that it be
further amended by substituting clause
twenty-four as it was in the Bill when brought
up in the House of Commons, taking out the
word " compellable " in the third line of that
clause and inserting the words *' failure of
the persons charged or of the wife or of the
husband of such person testifying, shall not
l>e made the subject of comment by the coun-
sel for the prosecution in addres.sing the
jury."

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am not going t4»
quarrel with this, but there is one point to
which I desire to direct the attention of the
Committee, particularly the Minister in
charge of the Bill. If hon. gentlemen look
at the proviso in the short form of the Bill
as it was introduced, they will see that it is
as follows : —

Provide<l, however, that no huslmnd shall l»e
competent to disclose any eomniunications rna<le to
him by his wife tluring their man-iage, and no wife
shall be conn>etent to clisclose any commuuieation
made to her by her husband during their marriage.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— That remains.

Hon. Mr. POWER- -I do net think it
should remain. In conversation with one
of the officers of the House of Conmions, he
said he was under the impression that the»
House of Commons had made a mistake in
putting the word '* competent " there. You
see the husband need not go on the stand
unless he likes, and the wife need not go on
the stand unless she likes, but having taken
the stand, I do not see that there is any
rejuson why, if the husband chcK>ses or if the
wife chooses, that communicati(ms made
during marriage should not be disclased,
because it might be that these communica-
tions would be to the advantage of the
accused. I am not going to move any amend-
ment, but it seems to me doubtful whether
it is wise to pass the clause as it stands.

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 27, 1893] Evidence Bill.

\
443

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I would draw the
hon. gentleman's attention to the fact that
that would not l)e evidence at all ; it would
\>e hearsay and, legally speaking, would
amount to nothing.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Then the proviso is
not necessary.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The failure of the
person charged, or of the wife or husband of
such person, to testify shall not be made the
subject of comment by counsel.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— In the draft of
the Bill which came to us from the Com-
mons the word ** compellable " appears in-
stead of " competent." It appears to me
that the word " compellable " would Ije
better suited in this particular place than the
word " competent," inasmuch as it might
be to the advantage of the accused that the
statement made by the wife to the husband,
or by the husband to the wife should l)e
disclosed in evidence. I am, therefore, of
the opinion that we should strike out the
woixl " competent " and re-insert the word
*' compellable," which formerly appeared
there. The statement disclosed by the wife
to the husband n(?ed not necessarily be hear-
say ; for instance, it may l>e an admission
which would be direct evidence, and which
would be admitted. Therefore I am strongly
in favour of retaining the last four lines of
the clause, but inserting the word " com-
pellable " instead of " competent." I would
move that that word be inserted.

Hon. Mr. POWER - The point is this,
that neither husband nor wife is compellable
to give evidence, and therefr)re the proviso is
unnecess*iry.

H')n. Mr. LOUGHEED -If it seemed
desirable to the accused that the disclosures
should be made, that cannot possibly l>e
done under the present phraseology of the
clause. Now, it may l>e in the intere.st of
justice that that disclosure should be made
in favour of the accused, and if a statement
has been made by one to the other, there is
no good reason why it should 1x3 inadmis-
sable if it would serve the interests of jus-
tice that that disclosure should l)e made ;
whei*eas under the pre.sent clause it could
not l)e iulmitted.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— It strikes me that
the motion befoi-e us is not strictly in oirler.

By our record the committee of the whole
were considering this Bill, and certain
amendments were proposed by that commit-
tee, reported to the House and concurred in by
the House and that Bill in it« amended form
was adopted by the House. Now any motion
must be to rescind the action of the com-
mittee.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It Ls to make an
amendment by striking out that word.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— It will not harmcmize
with what the House has adopted.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— No doubt the pre-
sent action doe^ not accord with the action
of the House taken the other day. I sub-
mitted to the House that it was desirable
that we should cjo back and try and make
the Bill as perfect as we could by making
the clause read in this way : —

Provided further that no husband shall l)e
compellable to disclose any comniunication made to
him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife
shall be (compellable to disclose any communication
ma<le to her by her huslmnd during their mar-
riage.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— It might l)e inter-
esting to hon. gentlemen, in connection with
this matter, to read what has recently
occurred in the House of Lords. The Lord
Chancellor moved the second reading of a Bill
to enable prisoners, or their wives, or their
husbands, Jis the cjuse might l)e, to give
evidence on their own behalf. That Bill
was read the second time.

I Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The Bill before us

I has gone through the House of Lords twice

I and was rejected in the Commons, and as

the hon. gentleman says, there is now a Bill

' l)efore the House of Lords^ a copy of which

as fii-st introduce<l by the Loixl Chancellor,

we had when we discussed it the other day

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— That para-
graph in the paper, to which the hon.
gentleman from Sarnia has alluded, if I
understood it aright, does not say he will be
a compellable witness.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— No.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH- My hon. friend
has moved to insert not compellable instead
of not competent. I cannot say that I am
very much opposed to the amendment, but

Digitized by

Google

444

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill.

it may operate very injuriously to a husband
or wife if their relations t^) each other are
not cordial. In that case, if either is allowed
to give evidence contrary to the wishes of
the other, it mi^ht lead to discord. Suppos-
ing the wife wishes to get rid of her husband,
she might avail herself of the opportunity to
go into the box and state what was told to
her in confidence by her husl)and during the
marriage. It may have that effect.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not think I
could have made myself clear to the Com-
mittee while speaking a moment ago, and I
shall try to do so now. I am supposing now
that we adopt the suggestion made by the
hon. Minister. We then pass clause 4 in
this form : —

Every person charge<l with an offence and the
wife or husband as the case may be, of the person
' so charged shall be a competent witness, &c.

I think that the clause is complete in
itself. You cannot compel a wife to dis-
close conmmnications which have passed
l)etween her and her husband during the
marriage, because she is not compellable to
go on the stand at all, and the same with
the huslwind you cannot compekhim to go
on the stand, and of course you cannot com-
pel him to make disclosures. We find' that
in Australia, where they pass an act similar
to the one now before us, the clause is worded
in this way : -

Every person accused of an indictable offence
and the wife or huslmnd, as the case may be, of
every such person, shall be a conn)etent on his or
her behalf but shall not be a compellable witness
without his or her consent.

The Minister has within his reach the Bill
now before the House of Lords, and the
safest way would l>e to take that Bill, which
has been carefully considered and has l>een
passed time and again by one or the other
of the English Houses. If we follow the
exact language of that Bill we shall be per-
fectly safe. It would l)e better to do so than
t<» try to frame something of our own here.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— The hon. member
from Halifax says that when the witness is
in the box it is not necessary to protect that
witness from repeating any communication
that may have passed between them during
the marriage. The wife may be willing to
do so, and that is why the proviso is put
here. I think it is better to make it that

she cannot be forced to give evidence, than to
say that she shall not be competent. The hon.
member from Calgary has mentioned that it
may be of interest to the accused that she
should. I think that the suggestion is a
good one in the interest of the accused, and
therefore by adding the word ** compellable ''
it is sufficient.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I am not very
much attached to my own opinion in the
matter, only it is not ah\'ays the (me way —
it may be that the wife or the husband may
be desirous of giving evidence adverse to the
party accused. There may be such cases —
I do not suppose they will often occur.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— There is some mis-
apprehension with regard to the policy of
the law which excluded the wife under the
former Bill, or the husband, from giving
I evidence to one agjiinst the other, of eonver-
I sations between them and that that exclu-
sion is only carrying out the sul)stiince of
I the present law. Those communications
! between husband and wife are of a privi-
leged character, and the policy of the law
I went a great deal fui'ther than lias yet l)een
adverted to. The policy rested on this — that
it was not in the interest of domestic life,
or the relations l>etween husl)and and >*-ife,
' that either should \m allowed to give evi-
I dence of those communications between
I them — not that it should l)e a question
I whether they should l)e comp>elled to do so,
but it was the policy of the law that they
should not be allowed to do so, and there-
fore the Bill is perfectly right in its present
form, that it should not be competent for
either to do so. Otherwise you are reduced
to this singular absurdity, that while you
have now said that the husband, or the wife,
is not to be a compellable witness, yet if
they cho<Kse to come in the wife may, for the
purposes of justice, be competent though not
compellable, to give evidence of communica-
tions from the husband admitting his guilt.
The Bill as it came to us was consistent,
because although that Bill made the wife a
compellable witness, it protected her in the
interest of public policy and d(miestic peace,
that she should not l)e allowed to give evi-
dence of communications Ijetween the hus-
band and the wife, those comnmnicaticins
being strictly of a privileged character.
Therefore, I think it would l>e better if the
Minister would iidhere to the wording of

Digitized by

Google

Witnesses and [MARCH 27, 1893] Evidence Bill.

445

that pjirt of his clause — that neither of them
should l^ competent. Otherwise, where is
the peace of that family after the trial is
over ? All those considerations lie at the
root of this, which has been the rule of evi-
dence as long as we have had any such
rules, that these communications are privi-
leged and that neither party is at lil>erty to
give evidence of them. Now we are asked
to say that the wife shall not only be com-
petent, but shall be compellable.

Hon. Mr. K AULB AC H— Could not the
difficulty be got over in this way — that the
evidence could l)e given with the consent of
the accused party ? That would not inter-
fere with the relationship between husband
and wife. If either is satisfied that the
other should give evidence, permission should
be given to so do. That would meet the
difficulty as to the privileged character of
the communication, and I think the Bill
should be amended in that direction.

Hon. Mr. POWER— If the proviso is to
remaui, it had l^etter remain in the shape in
which the Minister proposes to put it. The
effect of this clause is that the wife shall not
\)e compelled to come in and give evidence
hostile to her husband. If she chooses to
come in, she shows what her feeling is, and
you cannot stop at communications. The
amendment suggested by the Minister is in
the right direction. It might be wiser and
safer to get the exact wording of the clause
in the English Bill.

Hon. Mr. HOWLAN- The Bill was
amended in Committee and reported as
amended, and we are now about to read it
a third time as amended. If it is proposed
to further amend the Bill, it should be re-
C4)mmitted to a committee of the whole
House.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— The House decided-
ly pnmounced against making a husband or
a wiie be a compellable witness ; that has
been accepted by the Minister, and it is now
merely proposed to alter the drafting so as
to more clearly express the decision of the
House. The Bill as it stands makes it per-
missive, and the object of the amendment is
to more effectually carry out the wish of the
House.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — I do not seem to
have been understood. It is not the princi-

ple of the Bill to which I object, my object
is merely to keep our proceedings in a regu-
lar and proper form. As I understand the
motion, it is first to strike out the word
** compellable."

ANGERS—^The motion is to
a clause for the present one — a

Hon. Mr
substitute
clause omitting the word ** compellable

Hon. Mr. VIDAL-- If the present Bill is
to be altered, the motion must be to strike
out the three clauses which we inserted in it.

Hon. Mr. McKAY The House ha.s al-
rea<ly adopted the amendment.

Hon. Mr. BELLER08E~^As I under-
stand the rule of the House, if the amend-
ment Ls a very important one notice must be
given that it will l>e proposed at the third
reading.

Hon. Mr. 8C0TT- Not in the case of a
public bill.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Then the Bill
has to be re-committed if the amendment is
an important one.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— In iis nmch as
the House appears to l)e unanimous with
regard to the principle of the Bill and some
divergence of opinion exists concerning the
m<xle of expressing the decision of the
House, would it not be better to i*e-commit
the Bill to a small Connnittee to propo.se a
clause which would meet the case?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS—If there is any
opposition to amend the Bill on the thii*d
i-eading, I am willing to rec<»mmit the Bill to
a Committee of the Whole House for con-
sideration of the amendments which I have
propased. The amendment is to withdraw
the first section of clause four and substi-
tute <me I had read to the House - -keeping
the subsection which was adopted as part of
clause four to prevent connnent on the
failure to give evidence. The proviso is as
follows : —

Provided, however, that no husband shall \y
compellable to disclose any communication made to
him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife
shall be compellable to disclose any communication
made to her by her husband during their marriage.

The subsection is as follows : —

The failure of the person charge<I, or of the
wife, or of the husl>and, of such person to testify,

Digitized by

Google

446

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

shall not be made the subject of comment by
counsel for the prosecution in addressing the jury.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — What l^ecomes of the
two subsections a and h 1 Do they remain ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS~No, t^ie schedule
drops out, and the subsection which I have
just read remains as a portion of my amend-
ment.

The motion was agreed to.

H<m. Mr. ANGERS — I have another
amendment to projwse in the fifth line of the
27th clause, after "commissioner'' add "or
any other person authorized to take affi-
davits."

Hon. Mr. GOWAN- -That would entirely
meet my objection.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — I also propose to
change the letters which are mentioned in
that clause as refernng to schedules a and b,
those having disappeared.

The amendment was adopted.

H(m. Mr. ANGERS moved the third read-
ing of the Bill.

H(m. Mr. LOUCJHEED- -Is the hon.
gentleman going to introduce the clause with
regard to civil cases?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I find that it is im-
possible to shape the Bill in its present form
to assimilate the laws of the Ontario and the
Dominion. The Bill has come from theLower
House : it would not be the Siime Bill at all
if an amendment were made as suggested.
The proper way to have dealt with the mat-
ter would have been to introduce two Bills,
one i-eferring specially to the criminal law,
in which the piinciple adopted by this House
does not go as far as the principle adopted by
the Lower House, and another Bill referring
to the civil law, where both Houses agreed ;
but in its present shape it is impossible to
amend the Bill in any way to go as far in
civil matter as the laws of Ontario and the
Maritime provinces go. Therefore, for the pre-
sent, the Bill should remain as it is, the rules
of evidence in Dominion matters being more
restiicted in civil cases than the rules of evi-
dence in provincial matters.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY -Does the hon. gen-
tleman contend that we have the right to
legislate on the rules of evidence in civil
cases '!

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — We have no power
to legislate in civil matters which come
I under the jurisdiction of the Local Legis-
latures exclusively, but in matters concern-
ing which this House has special jurisdiction,
we have a right to say what shall lie the
law pf eWdence — that is, we pass laws rela-
tive to Corporations, and if we have that
right we have the right to legislate in re-
laticm to the evidence upon that law — that
is the contention. In this Bill we have
adopted that principle and it has never been
disputed yet, but of course we have no juris-
diction in the matter of laws relative to
evidence in cases which have been reserved
exclusively to the jurisdiction of the Local
Legislature.

-That is property

Hon. Mr. DICKEY-
and civil rights ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Certainly.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— The reason T
have given some little attenticm to this mat-
ter is owing to the fact that the North-weM
Territories Act is very peculiarly framed in
i*espect to the jurisdiction of the North-west
Assembly, and everything done by the North-
west Assembly is made subject to any legis-
lation which may have been enacted by the
Dominion Parliament. Hence, I can ci>n-
ceive a veiy great conflict immediately arising
when this Act is passed in reference to evid-
ence in civil cases in the North-west Terri-
tories. The question will be at once raiseti
that the Dominion Parliament has legis-
lated in relation to evidence in civil lYiatters,
thereby depriving tlie legislature of the

I North-west Territories of its right to legis-
late in a similar direction. The law of

I England is the law of eWdence in the Terri-
tories to-day, but as we have expressly legis-

; lated up<jn the law of evident^ in civil mat-

I ters, the question will be raised that we
have ousted the law of evidence of the local

I legislature as well as the English law of
evidence.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— What would l)e the

result in the provinces ?

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— They would be
different, because exclusive jurisdiction is
given to the provinces to legislate in this
matter, whereas in the Territories eveiything
is done subject to the legislation which is
passed by this Parliament, and therefore, I
would point out to my hon. friend the diffi-

Digitized by

Google

Railway Act [MARCH 27, 1893] Amendment Bill.

447

culty that confronts us at once in matters
of evidence relating to civil jurisdiction in
the Territories. I think it would have been
very much l^etter if at this stage of the Bill
it had l^een made only applicable to criminal
pi*ocedure.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I wish to draw the
attention of the hon. member to the second
clause, which I hope is not an infringement
upon the attributes of the Legislature of the
Territories. It re^ds as follows : —

Thi& Act shall apply to all criminal proceedings
and to all civil proceedings and other matters
whatsoever respecting which the Parliament of
Canada has jurisdiction in this behalf.

That would Hmit its eflfect to the Acts
that the Parliament of Camula passes and
would not extend the rule against the legisla-
tion adopted by the North-west Territories.
That was not my great objection to the Bill.
My great objection was that we were not
going as far in civil cases as they had gone
in Ontario, but in the present state of the
Bill, it not having originated in this House, 1
did not see any mode of I'eaching the ol>ject
in view without introducing another Bill.
The proper way to deal with it, I believe,
would be to make two bills, one for civil
eases and one for criminal cases.

Hon. Mr. LOUCmEED I say this will
cast a cloud at once upon the law of evi-
dence JUS it at present prevails in the North- 1
west Territories, owing to the peculiar clause
in the North-west Territories Act, which
provides that all legislation passed by the
North-west Assembly is subject to Dominion
legislation. Now, I would say that the
North-west Assembly has not legislated in
regard to the law of evidence, except to this
extent, that the law of evidence as it exists
to-day in England, or Jis it existed on 1st
July, 1870, is in operation in the North-west
Territories. You would specially legislate
in this Bill in respect to matters over which
the Parliament of Canada hiis no jurisdiction.
There is no question whatever that the Par-
liament of Cantula has jurisdiction to legis-
late whenever it chooses, in regard to evi-
dence in the North-west Terntories. Not so
in regard to the provinces, l^ecause the pro-
vinces have exclusive jurisdiction in mattersof
evidence relating to civil cases, and if there is
a clause inserted in this Bill that it shall not
disturb or affect the law of evidence as it at
present prevails in the North-west Territo-
ries, it would be quite sufficient for my pur-

poses ; otherwise you at once place us in con-
flict with what is the law to-day.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I am sorry to be
obliged to tivke up the time of the House so
often in a discu.ssion of this matter, with the
Speaker in the Chair, as if we were in Com-
mittee of the Whole. I understand the
hon. member for Calgary to say that they
had no special legislation relating to evidence
in civil c;ises, and that they follow the law
of evidence. Do I repre.sent accurately what
he has sjiid 1

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Yes.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS Then this Bill
cannot put them in a worse position than
the Dominion is in to-day in reference to the
very same subject. If it is good for the
Dominion to-day, in opposition to the sug-
gestion T made the other day of going a step
further, I think the North-west Territories
might readily accept the law that we make
for the Domini(m upcm the very same sub-
ject, and I hope the hon. gentleman will
understand thjit it is not easy nor, perhaps,
advisable to make an exception for the
North-west Territorias, l)ecause if we do we
would l>e admitting that we are not doing
for the Dominic m exactly what we
should do in this legislaticm. Therefore, I
hope hon. gentlemen will accept that. Now,
it will tjike a very short time to test the
value of this Bill. After it receives the
sanction of the Crown, the courts will have
to deal with it every day, and perhaps next
session this House may come to the conclu-
sion that we should go a step further in the
direction indicated by the Bill as presented,
or in some other dii'ection ; but at present
1 do not think we can improve the position
at all.

The moticm was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third tune and passed.

SECOND READING.

Bill (58) " An Act to incorporate the Au-
tomatic Telephone and Electric Company of
Canada." (Mr. Murphy.)

Bill (V) " An Act further to amend the
General Inspection Act." (Mr. Bowell.)

RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

IN COMMITTEE.

The House resolved itself into a Commit-
tee of the whole on Bill (U) "An Act further
to amend the Railway Act."

Digitized by

Google

448

Railway Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill,

In the Committee — On the first clause.

Hon. Mr. BOWELLr— T propose a slight
amendment to this clause in order to accom-
plish the object which the promoters had in
view in proposing it, and that is to strike
out in the fourteenth line the words "and the
mode of protection thereof." That would
simply amend the (original Act by omitting
the words *' protection of " in the sixth line of
chapter twenty-seven, the object being to
remove any doubts that may exist as to the
power of the Railway Committee t<> adopt
rules in the interest and for the protec-
tion of the community. I may add, this deci-
sion has been arrived at after discussion be-
tween the different Railway Managers and
the Department. It will be necessary, in
order to understand that, to read the clause
in the original Act, by w^hich it will be seen
that this proposal removes any doubt as to
the power of the Railway Committee to deal
conclusively with the question of the suffi-
ciency of the mode and place of any proposed
crossing of one railway by another. The 17th
section reads as follows : —

The works to be executed and the measures to
be taken by the respective companies, as it ap-
pears necessary or expedient to secure the public
safety.

In reading the Act as it stands upon the
Statute-b<M)k, the legal gentlemen of the
House will undei-stand it fully ; it reads in
this way : —

Whether constructed under Dominion, or Pro-
vincial or Municipal authority or otherwise, unless
the moile and modes of protection of the proposed
crossing, or intersection, or junction, or union are
first appn)ved by the Railway Committee.

The woixls " pi*otection of," as they appear
in this clause, would seem to \w restricted
to the words "place and nuxle of" instead
of the crossing itself and the intersection ;
s(» they strike it out of the Act, and that
leaves them full and distinct power to deal
with the crovssing in the 1 74th clause.

The amendment was agreed to.

On the second clause,

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I pi-opose to amend
clause 2, as it is a little ambiguous, and
would, I doubt not, if passed as printed,
lead not only to confusion, but would com-
pel all railway companies to keep a man
stationed in their yards, if strictly applied ;
so that where they cross the tracks, as they

do in scores of places in some of the large
yards, it would cause great hardship. I
propose to sul^stitute the word "person"
for the word ** officer." In order to make it
cleAr and prevent misunderstanding as to
' what is meant by the main line, I propase
to add the following sulxsection : —

Every main track of a branch line is to be
a main line within the meaning of the section,
which shall apply whether the same line be owned
by different companies or by the same company.

There is a doubt now as to whether a rail-
way company is compelled to provide the
same protection upon crossings upon lines
which they have acquired and which were
not originally a part of their main line. The
Railway Committee of the Privy Council
have been under the impression — and I think
acted upon that impression — that they had
the i)ower to compel them to keep men at
these crossings ; but the railway companies
contend that any branch which they have
acquired forms a part of the main line, they do
not come within the meaning of the law as
it stands on the Statute-book. This is to
make it so clear that the Railway Committee
of the Privy Council shall have powder to
compel them to provide the same protection
on crossings as those to which I have referred,
as if it were on the main line.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN~I should like to
ask if this clause would apply to the branch
line going into Kingst^m, which is not a
main line.

H(m. Mr. BOWELL— It would apply
there.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I propose the follow-
ing as an additional subsection to that
clause : —

In case of street railway companies crossing
eacli others tracks in a city or town, it shall be the
duty of the conductor to go forward and look up
and down the line to he crossed and then to signal
the motorman to cross while he is there.

Under the preceding clause the train must
come U> a standstill, but this will meet every
possible case and relieve the company.

Hon. Mr. SMITH- -You mean the conduc-
t^>r shall get off the car.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— Yes, and look up and
down.

Digitized by

Google

Railway Act [MARCH 27, 1893] Amendment Silt.

449

Hon, Mr- SMITH— It will be very incon-
venient, and I do not think there is any
necessity for it.

Hon. Mr, DICKEY— It is done that way
on the Ottawa and Presoott Railway.

Hon, Mr, SCOTT— The street railway
company will be much better suited and it
will do away with the necessity of having a
special officer there. He is bound to stop
now under the preceding section.

Hon. Mr, SMITH— If there are only street
cars crossing each others tracks, that would
be unnecessary : if there was a locomotive
going up and down the provision would be a
wise one.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— If that provision were
not adopted there would have to be an offi-
cer there and the car would have to come to
a full stop. That is the law at the present
time.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Then that law is a
great hardship.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY — This proposed
amendment, which is a very good one, does
not apply to crossing a railway track ?

H(m. Mr. SCOTT— No.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— In crossing the
railway between this and New Edinburgh,
the motorman should get off and see that
the line is clear before attempting to cross.
Why should not this section apply ?

Hon. Mr. SMITH— It would be proper
enough if one of the tracks was a railway
track, but in the case of the electric railway
the car can be stopped and there is no ne-
cessity for this pi-ovision.

Hon. Mr. OGILVIE— If that is the law
as applicable to large cities, I will agree
with my hon. friend on my right that it is a
pity it should be so, and if that law were to
l)e carried out in large cities, I would not
like to own stock in the company or to be a
resident of the city, because the street cars
would be rendered almost useless. It would
take at least 25 to 30 per cent more time
than the present system, and cost the com-
pany a great deal more to do the same work.
They are reducing their prices, giWng trans-
fers and doing the best they can to help us
and give us quick transit. If you pass a
29

law injuring their charter, it hui*ts the public
and the company and accomplishes no good.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The hon. gentleman
does not understand me. At prwent the
interpretation put on the law is that where
a street i-ailway crosses a steam railway,
they must come to the Railway Committee
for permission to cross. The Railway Com-
mittee invariably make an order that an
employee of the street railway company shall
be stationed at the crossing, just as if it
were a crossing of two steam railways. That
is a hardship to the street railway company.
The cars have also to come to a full stop :
they must observe the law. Now, it is on
behalf of the street railway that I am making
this proposition. It is to save the expense
of having a special officer at each crossing.
They would have, under the law as it stands,
to come to a dead stop every time they reach
the crossing. If the conductor can get off
the car and look up and down the track, he
can beckon to the motorman and proceed
without delay. If we do not adopt this
amendment, the Railway Committee will
make an order requiring an officer to be
stationed at every crossing, and that each car
shall come to a stop at the crassing. This is
to relieve the street railway companies.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Look what the effect
of it would be in Torontc*. Take the Yonge
street cars for instance, they would have to
stop at King street, and again at Queen
street. Does the hon. gentleman mean that
all street cars shall come under this regula-
tion.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— They come under the
law with regard to railways. This would
minimize the expense and delay.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— There iftagreater
danger to human life in running electric cars
through a city than in running railway trains.
Take Toronto and Montreal as an illustration.
In Toronto the cars come down Yonge Street
at a rate of ten or twelve miles an hour. I
say that the precaution suggested is very
necessary.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— The man on the plat-
fonu running a car — say an electric car — •
can see better from the platform when he
reaches a street crossing than the conductor
could if he jumped off the car and ran ahead.
It would be a hardship to compel the con-

Digitized by

Google

450

Railway Act [SENATK] Amendment Bill.

ductor to get off the car at each crossing and
look up and down the street.

Hon. Mr. POWER -There is a good deal
of force in what has been said by the
hon. gentleman from Toronto. Tliis clause
requires further amendment, because this
provision will apply to sti*eet railways oper-
ated by horses as well as to cars run by
electricity. If a horse railway crosses another
horse railway, there does not seem to l)e any
necessity for the conductor jumping off to
run and see if there is a car t»oming on the !
other tmck. I think it should l)e limited to
the case of the crossing of an electric road.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— Thei;e is no need for
it whatever.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I am willing to limit
it to electric railways.

The amendment was changed accordingly
and adopted.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved that section 3
be struck out. He said The necessity
for the weighing of cars at certain int<»rvals
has l>een very strongly impressed on the
Railway Department for the reason, as
they allege, that the cars increase in
weight by the accumulation of dirt, snow,
ice, etc., and that those who employ such
cars have to pay more than they should for
the freight carried. A great deal of objec-
tion, however, has been made to the clause
on the ground that it is springing it at once
upon the railway companies. It has, there-
fore, been decided by the Railway Depart-
ment to omit the provision from this Bill,
but the railway companies slwuld understand
that it is still under the consideration of the
(iovernment, and in all probability some
provisit)n will be made at a future meeting of
Parliament to remedy the evil to which I
have referred. Si^>me of the railway c .mpanies
complain very bitterly that it would involve
a large expenditure, particularly where a
company employs from 15,000 to 20,000
cai-s. They tuld that to re- weigh and re-mark
those cars evei-y four months would entail a
very large expenditure ; but it must l)e
rememl)ered that in England where this
matter has received a great deal of consider-
ation, the companies are required t<i re-weigh
their cars oftener than is proposed in this
Bill. It has been found necessary in Great
Britain, to piotect the people from the loss

which would l)e involved in carrying freight
on cars which are constantly increasing in
weight through accumulations of dirt and
moisture. If it be necessary to make such a
provision in a country like England,, it
certainly must be very much more necessary
to do so in Canada, where the climate would
aggravate the evil. However, for the pi'esen^
I propose, for the reasons I have given, to
strike out clause 3.

The amendment was agreed to.

On the fourth clause.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-^This clause merely
removes the Electric Railway at the Falls
from the operation of the Dominion Act and
places it under the law of Ontario. It is
done at the instance of the Premier of On-
tario, who thought that under the peculiar
circumstances of that n>ad it would be better
to do so, and the Minister of Justice gave
his wmsent befoi*e leaving.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON- -I would suggest
that the following woixls be added to the
fourth clause after the word " declaring " —
" so long as the same shall be operated under
section 7 of the Act of its incorporation,
that it shall l>e run by electricity." Under
their charter they run by steam from Queens-
ton to the Suspension Bridge, but from that
point they are obliged to o{)erate by elec-
tricity, and they might be relieved under
this clause from that obligation. Their line
runs altmg the front street of the town, and
they should l)e compelled to comply with
the »terms of section 7 of the charter st>
as to protect the people of Niagara from the
evil effects of having steivm cars running
along the Imnks of the river. They have
secured the right of way free in front of the
houses of the people of Niagara Falls, and in
some cjuses have clipped off pit^ces of their
gardens. I think the people of Niagara
Village should l)e protected from having
smoke from locomotives blown in through
their d(K)rs and windows.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— If the Ontario
charter under which they build the road
gives them the p)wer to run by steam or
electricity, the amendment that the hon.
gentlemen suggests would make no differ-
ence. Supposing you say " so long as it is
operated by electricity,'' the moment they
put a steam engine upon it they come under

Digitized by

Google

Railway Act [MAECH 27, 1893] Amendment Bill.

451

the provisiorLs of the General Railway Act
of the Dominion, but that Act would not
prevent them running a steam engine over
it. Unle8« you could accomplish that object,
1 do not see what benefit the amendment
would he to the people of Niagara.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON -The opinion of
the lawyers that I have consulted is that
after the passing of this Act they would be
relieved from running it by electricity. In
the interest of the people of Niagara, it
ought to be clearly enacted that they would
not l)e relieved of the section which requires
them to run their cars by electricity.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I do not know what
legal gentleman would give that opinion.
For the moment I cannot see how the amend-
ment would accomplish the desired result.
I heard objections to this clause from gentle-
men connected with the railways ci-ossing
this line, that this electric railway under the
provisions of the Ontario chaii/er had taken
a i>ortion of their property, and they think
they would be safer under the Dominion
than under the Local Government. How-
ever that is not the point that the hon. gen-
tleman raised. I would ask him not to move
his amendment at present, I will make in-
quiry as to the effect that he thinks tliq
clause will have, before the third reading,
and if it should be as he indicates, it is a
question whether his amendment should not
be accepted. There is a further clause to pro-
vide that all actions for damages against any
cc>m|)any, by reason of the railw ay or the work-
ing thereof, shall be conmienced within a year
af t^r the alleged damage has occurred The
clause was attached to the Bill as introducecl
but has been omitted in the printing. I
move that the clause be inserted.

The motion was agreed to.

H(m. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) moved that
paragraph r, of sectitm eleven, of the Rail-
way Act, chapter 29, of the Statutes of 1888,
be repealed and the following substituted
therefor : —

r. — The constructi*)!! of branch Hties exceeding
one quarter mile in length, but not exceeding
thirty miles.

The provisicm in the Railway Act for
which I propose to substitute this is as fol-
lows : —

The construction of such branch lines exceed-
29J

ing one quarter mile in length, but not exceeding
six miles."

I move this in consequence of the princi-
ple laid down on Friday last with respect to
the Kootenay and Columbia Railway Com-
pany's Bill, that a Railway Company could
build branch lines for thirty miles on each
side of its track to any extent they might
desire. I endeavoured to point out on that
occasion that of all portions of the Domi- '
nion, British Columbia was the last one
where such powers should be granted, and
for this reason -that it is only occasionally
you can find a pass for a railway through
the mountains, and if one company has the
exclusive right of building branches in that
part of the country, the public interest and
the developement of that section must neces-
sarily be interfered with. In a level country
you can run a road anywhere you please,
and there would be no necessity for restrict-
ing the power to build branches. If this"
House wishes to be consistent with its ac-
tion on Friday last, it will adopt this amend-
ment to the Railway Act.

Hon. Mr. K AULBACH -The hon. gen-
tleman is not consistent. On Friday last he
complained of any company l>eing allowed
to construct a branch more than six miles in
lengtli, without coming to Parliament for
the jH:)wer to do so : now he wants every
company to have the right to construct
branches thirty miles in lengtli.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.) I smiply
want to see if the House will carry out the
principle to which twenty -seven meml)ers of
the Senate committed themselves last
Friday.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— If the hon. gentle-
man were consistent or logical (as he tries to
make it appear, the House would not l>e if it
opposed his amendment), he would not make
such a proposition. Had the House affirmed
the principle of giving any company an ex-
clusive right to build branch lines, then the
hon. gentleman would l>e logical. The
House decided that a company should have
the right to construct a branch from the foot
of Arrow Lake, some thirty miles into the
mountains, in order to reach a mining dis-
trict. The House said " you can build any
branch there that you deem necessary in the
interest of your company or of the country'
where those mines are to l>e developed."

Digitized by

Google

452

British America [SENATE] Insurance Company's Bill,

Now the hon. gentleman says because
the House has granted that right to
one company, therefore the privilege should
be conferred upon all companies to build as
many branches as they please. The province
of British Columbia can grant as many
charters as they please for the construction
of branch lines in any and every direction,
and if another company comes to this Par-
liament for a charter to construct a branch
line, running from the Kootenay Lakes if
you please to these same mines, for the pur-
pose of taking the ore out in another direc-
tion there would be no objection, I take it, to
giving them the right to do so. But the
Hon. gentleman says that they would not do
that because this company has a right to
build a branch there. They could build if
they chose to do so, and if they built in the
other direction, it would not interfere with
the development of the country. T like the
ingenious way in which the hon. member
has tried, by a side wind, to attain that
which he failed to accomplish by a direct
vote. I hope the House will not adopt the
proposition.

Hon. Mr. McINNES(B.C.)— Instead of a
branch of 30 miles, the Bill which was passed
hereon Friday last authorized the construction
of a branch 150 miles in length and to con-
struct as many branches as they chose for
30 miles on each side of that line. That is
what T objected to.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This road is to
start from the foot of Arrow Lake and run
in a south-easterly direction. It is not to
go to Robson.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— They do
not know where they are going yet. As
near as I can make out, the line Ls to be 150
miles in length, and Parliament is giving
that company an exclusive right to build
branches for 30 miles on each side of that

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Not the exclusive
right.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— It is prac-
tically an exclusive right, inasmuch as they
can intervene and build a road wherever a
private company may have taken prelimin-
ary steps to do so — they can build the line
while the other company is applying for a
charter here.

The amendment was declared lost.

Htm. Mr. DEVER, from the Committee,
reported the Bill with amendments which
were concurred in.

TEMISCOUATA RAILWAY COM-
PANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. PELLETIER moved the second
reading of Bill (80) " An Act respecting the
Temiscouata Railway Company.'' He said:
The object qf this Bill is to grant the Temis-
couata Railway Company from Edmundston
to St. Leonard's, in the province of New
Brunswick, the work to begin nnthin two
years and to be completed within five years
from the passing of the Act. The most im-
portant part of the Bill is to authorize the
Company to bridge the River St. John from
some convenient point on the Canadian side
to a convenient point on the United States
side, to connect with the railway on that
side. As in ordinary bills authorizing the
bridging of a navigable river, it is provided
that no work shall begin until the plans have
l)een submitted to the Governor in Council
and approved by him. Those are the princi-
ples of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to.

SECOND READINGS.

Bill (36) "An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Hydraulic Co." (Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (47) " An Act respecting the London
and Port Stanley Railway Co." (Mr. Loug-
heed.)

BRITISH AMERICA INSURANCE .
COMPANY'S BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN moved the second read-
ing of Bill (78) "An Act respecting the
British America Assurance Company." He
said : — This is a Bill to make certain alter-
ations in the chai-ter of the British America
Assurance Company. Some of them are not
of a very important character. One pro-
vision allows them to change the time for
holding their annual meeting, and also to
change the name of their chief officer from
I Governor and Deputy-Governor to Presi-

Digitized by

Google

Welland Canal [MARCH 28, 1893] Investigation.

453

dent and Vice-President ; appointing a Gene-
ral Manager and Directing Committee, and
also giving them power to reduce or increase
the capital stock under certain conditions.

The motion was agreed to.

BILLS INTRODUCED.

• Bill (6) " An Act further to amend the
Steam-boat Inspection Act." (Mr. Bo well.)

Bill (97) " An Act respecting the harbour
and river police of the province of Quel^ec."
(Mr. Bowell.)

Bill (103) "An Act further to amend the
Act respecting public officers." (Mr. Bowell.)

Bill (106) ** An Act resi)ecting the Ladies
of the Sacred Heart of Jesus." (Mr. Robi-
taille.)

FIRST AND SECOND READINCiS.

Bill (85) " An Act to incorporate the
Canadian Gas Association." (Mr. Clemow.)

Bill (69) " An Act to incorporate the
Canada Atlantic and Plant Ste^m-ship Com-
pany." (Mr. Power.)

Bill (52) ** An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Street Railway Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

The Senate iidjourmed at 5.35 P.M.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Tiieadayy March 28th, 189S.

The SPEAKER
o'clock.

took the Chair at 3

Pmyers and routine proceedings.

THIRD READINGS.

Bill
British Columbia Dock Company." (Mr.
Mclnnes, B.C.)

Bill (45) "An Act to incorporate tlie
Cleveland, Port Stanley and London Trans-

portiition and Railway Company, and to
confirm an agreement respecting the London
and Port Stanley Railway Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

Bill (89) " An Act respecting the Nelson
and Fort Sheppard Railway Company." (Mr.
Reid, B.C.)

Bill (58) " An Act to incorporate the
Automatic Telephone and Electric Com-
pany of Canada." (Mr. Power.)

Bill (47) " An Act respecting the London
and Port Stanley Railway Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

Bill (80) " An Act respecting the Temis-
couata Railway Compjiny." (Mr. Pelletier.)

Bill (52) "An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Street Railway Company." (Mr.
Lougheed.)

Bill (69) " An Act to incorporate the
Canada Atlantic and Plant Steam-ship Com-
pany." (Mr. Power.)

Bill (98) " An Act to amend the Act to
incorporate the Eastern Canada Savings and
Loan Company (Limited)." (Mr. Power.)

Bill (78) " An Act respecting the British
America Assurance Company." (Mr. Allan.)

Bill {8b) " An Act to incorporate the
Canadian Gas As8ociati<m. (Mr. Clemow.)

THE WELLAND CANAL INVEST-
IGATION.

MOTION POSTPONED.

The motion being called —

That an humble Address \)e presented to His
Excellency the Governor-General ; praying; that His
Excellency will cause to be laid before this House,
all tlie papers, exanunatioiis, evidence and report
of the Commissioner to whom the charges preferred
by the Honourable Senator McCallum, against
William Ellis, 8uperint4*ndent on the Welland
Canal were referred for investigation ; also, an
account of the expenses of sucn investigation,
including an estimate of the cost of the Deliates
made in Parliament in reference to said charges.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE asked that it ]>e
allowed to stand.

,^^, ..**.. . .u Hon. Mr. McCALLUM This order has

^--^ It'' rtlV kTlT,!'^ /if.^ l)een standing a long time and I see no i-ea^on

*^ " ^^"^«^«"% - ^^^ .^ should remain any longer on our Oi*der

Paper. This is the third or fourth time that
the hon. gentleman has askeil that it be
allowed to stand over.

Digitized by

Google

454

Contingent Accounts [SENATE] of the Senate,

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— I should be
glad to do anything to favour my hon. friend,
but I cannot possibly proceed with the motion
until the papei's come down. It is a motion
of that nature, but if my hon. friend is so
very anxious about it, perhaps I may not
keep him even until then.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I can assure my
htm. friend that it is no fault of mine that
the papers are not before the House. I have
inquired for them half a dpzen times. At
one time I understood that they were ready
to be laid before the House, but on making
inquiry I learned that they were not pre-
pared.

The moticm was allowed to stand.

A CORRECTION.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE called attention
to an error in the minutes of yesterday's
proceedings. He said : — I wish to call the
attention of the House to the fact that in
the minutes of yesterday's proceedings it
simply mentions that the Witnesses and
Evidence Bill was read the third time, not
stating that the motion was carried on a
divLsion. I draw the attention to this so
that the correction may be made when the
journals are being prepai-ed.

RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

THIRD KEADING.

The order of the day being called —

Third reotUng Bill (26) '* An Act further to
amend the Railway Act.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL said : after the sug-
gestion made by the hon. member from W"el-
land last night, I made enquiry of the Rail-
way Department and it was thought advisable
to accept the suggestion made by that hon.
member, for tliis reason ; this is a road pur-
porting to be an electric railway operat/ed
by electric power, but it is somewhat
in connection or may be in connection
with one of the main lines running into
Niagara, and it is better that care
should be taken to keep it within the pro-
visions of the General Railway Act in case
it should become a part or parcel of any of
the main lines of railway. I therefore move,
that the words " so long as the said railway
is run or operated by electricity " be inserted
in the sixth line of the fourth section after
the words " the Railway Act."

The amendment was concurred in, and
the Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

CONTINGENT ACCOUNTS OF THE
SENATE.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. McKAY moved the adoption
of the second report of the Select Committee
on Contingent Accounts of the Senate. He
said : — This report is printed in the minutes
of yesterday : I presume hon. gentlemen have
read it and that it is not necessary to make
any comments .upon it.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Before adopting
this report I beg to call the attention of the
Senate to the sixth paragraph : —

Your committee recommend that the sessional
messengers be paid the sum of $2oO for their ser-
vices during the present session.

That is equal to paying messengers §125 a
month. Now I can see no reason why there
should be any departure from the principle
laid down by the Senate the year before last
in connection with the sessional messengers.
I find on page 351 of the report of the Com-
mittee on Contingencies of 1891, a recom-
mendation that the sessional messengers be
paid, in addition to their ordinary sessional
pay $2.50 per day for each and every day of
the session beyond the 100 days, and in
future sessions at the rate of $2.50 per day.
Now the recommendation of the Committee
in this case gives to the messengers the
advantage of the $250, no matter how short
the session may be, and if it exceeds 100
days, they get the additional $2.50 per day ;
the result is that we have the messengers of
this House paid better than any other class
of officials. I do not know what practice has
been followed here, but it seems to me we
should adhere strictly to the report adopted
by the Senate in 1891. It does seem some-
what extravagant — if I may be. permitted to
use that term — to say that an ordinary
messenger should receive between $4 and
$5 a day for the work he does in this House.
In dealing with public funds indiWdually I
have always adopted the principle of acting
as nearly as possible as I would do if they
were my own, treating employees liberally
in all cases where there is a justification for
it, but, with all due respect to the Committee,
this recommendation is a piece of extrava-
gance which is not justifiable, particularly

Digitized by

Google

Contingent Accounts [MARCH 28, 1893] of the Senate,

455

when we are dealing with money that is not i
our own. I therefore move that the sixth |
paragraph of this report be struck out. |

Hon. Mr. McTNNES (B.C.)— Before that \
is carried, T think it is due to myself and a
number of the members of the Committee to
say a few words, more particularly as I happen
to be the member who moved in the matter
and suggested the recommendation. Until
1891 the sessional messengers always received
8250, no matter whether the session was long
or short; but the session of 1891 was an
exceedingly long one, extending over five
months, and an additional indemnity of $500
was granted to the members of both Houses
of Parliament, and a recoumiendation was
made by the Committee on Contingencies
that the sessional messengers' pay ought to
be increased if the session exceeded 100 days.
That was adopted, but I think I am per-
fectly safe in saying that very few, very few
indeed understood the amendment moved by
Sir John Abbott, that in future sessions they
should receive at the rate of $2bO. If this
session closes in a day or two, as seems very
probable, it will be one of the shortest
sessions since Confederation. If the, motion
made by the hon. the leader of the House is
carried, the sessional allowance for these
messengers will be reduced to about $160.
I think that this is an exceedingly small
matter. The additional $80 or $90 would
only amount to about $550, and I think that
if the Government were endeavouring to
economise, they would apply the pruning
knife in other directions where larger sums
are spent without that care and supervision
that is applied in this case. It would be
only fair and right that they should grant
the regular allowance to those poor people
whose time for the balance of the year will
be practically of no account. As it was
promised in the Committee yesterday that
a revision of all the salaries should be made
at the beginning of next session, T think it
is only right, generous and just on our part
that we should grant the $250 as recom-
mended in the report.

Hun. Mr. KAULBACH— My him. friend
says that this is only a small matter, but we
should deal with small matters tm the same
principle as we deal with large matters. We
should act with the same care and prudence
as if it were a matter concerning ourselves.
I cannot understand the reason that my

hon. friend has given for the change at all.
We know well enough there are many per-
sons clamonng for the positions -men who
could not get half as much outside, and it is
an unpleasant matter to deal with here. We
come in daily contact with these messengers,
and they perform many duties for us, yet I
must support the Minister in his contention
that it is contrary to all rule and principle
to adopt this recommendation. We have
established the rule that for a session of one
hundred days we shall allow $250, and if it
is less than that it must be reduced.

Hon. Mr. POWER — If we were fixing
, the pay of the messengers now for the first
I time, I should be disposed to agree with the
; hon. leader of the Government, but for the
I last fifteen years the sessional messengei-s of
I this House have been paid at the rate of
, $250 a session, just as the members of the
I House have been paid $1,000 a session, and
I do not think there is any more reason for
cutting down the pay of the messengers than
there i^ for cutting down the pay of the mem-
bers. I have not heard any hon. gentlemen
propose that the pay of the members should
be reduced. It is perfectly true that at the
close of the session of 1891 an amendment
was moved to the report of the Committee
on Contingent Accounts to the effect men-
tioned by the hon. leader of the House. I do
not think as a rule that it was understood
at the time that that was the object of the
amendment, and the impression on the minds
of members of the House and the impression
on the minds of the messengers themselves,
up to two or three days ago, was that they
were to be paid the usual $250. I do not
think that this House would like to do a
i thing which is tx) a certain extent unfair.
These messengers have been under the im-
pression that they were to be paid $250,
and I think, without giving them any
notice of the change, it is rather hard and
unfair that this change should be made.
Now that attention has been calle<l to the
matter and the intimation has been given
that the whole scale of salaries is to be revi-
sed at the beginning of the next session, the
messengers will be prepared for a possible
reduction. I do not agree with the view
taken by the hon. leader of the Government
and by the hon. gentleman from Lunenburg,
that in dealing with the officers or employes
of this House you are to consider for what
sum you might get people to do the same

Digitized by

Google

456

Contingent Accounts [SENATE] of the Senate,

work. I look upon a position in the service
of the Senate as a sort of a prize, something
which comes to very few people, and it is re-
garded as a prize. I think there is no rea-
son why there should not be just a few of
these small plums left for the small people,
as well as the large plums for the big people,
and I think, for the present session at any
rate, we might treat these messengers as
they have been treated in the past, and let
them understand that hereafter their pay is
liable to be reduced.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL — I am somewhat sur-
prised at the remarks of the hon. gentleman
from Halifax, more particularly when he
knows, as I read to the House, that we fixed
the pay of the messengers of this House in
1891, so that none of them can be taken by
surprise.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I stated that it was
not understood as a rule.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE -In this matter
the salary having l)een for some fifteen yeara
$250 a session, T do not think it would be
entirely right, because this session happens
to be exceptit>nally short, to cut down the
allowance. There was a reason for increas-
ing it in 1 891 — a very good reason, as stated
by the hon. member from Halifax. The ses-
sion was so very long that it seemed only
just to increase the rate. It is on an aver-
age session that the rate should be made and
more particularly as it is in contemplation,
in the early part of next session, to revise
the list of salaries.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— But a sessional
messenger is not a salaried officer — it is a
per diem allowance.

Hon. Mr. O'DONOHOE— It is a sessional
allowance, but, after all, it is 2>ro tanto a
salary — it is so much to these messengers.
When for fourteen or fifteen years they have
been in the habit of receiving $250 per ses-
sion as an allowance, it is not entirely fair
to them to cut that down because this session
happens to be exceptionally short. There is
great force in what the leader of the House
says about the settlement of 1891, but it
must be remembered that the sessional em-
ployees of the House are not really met as an
employer meets his employees making a bar-
gain with them ; they have just to take

what they get ; it is a certain allowance that
is set apart for them. They are not parties
to the bargain, nor are they parties to the
shortening of the session. If the session
were only for thirty days instead of sixty
days, according to the argument of my hon.
friend, the leader of the Government, the
pay would be cut down to the pay of thirty
days, although it is well known that these
sessional employees remain here free from
other engagements in order to take upon
themselves the duties of the House. I think
the $250, as that has been the rate for
fifteen years in exceptionally long sessions,
should be continued to them, particularly as
it is intended next session to revise the
allowances generally. ^

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I do not rise
to oppose the amendment, but I could not
let it pjiss without saying a few words. I
recollect very well seven or eight years ago
when I, as a member of this HouSe, asked
to amend the report of a committee, I was
told by the leader of the Senate at that time
that it was a serious matter to interfere
with the report of a codimittee nominated
by the House — ^that its reports should be
accepted, unless some very grave and im-
portant reasons could be assigned for inter-
fering with them. I regret to see the Unan-
imity of the House in desiring to have this
amendment at once carried. I would have
been less surprised had it not, as I am told,
been decided to increase the salaries of
members this session — because it was shorter
I suppose. I understand that the members
of both Houses are to receive an allowance
of six days extra.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL— Not this House.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I mean Parlia-
ment. This House has to vote the money,
so my argument is perfectly good. The
House of Commons could not get the in-
crease without the vote of the Senate. Are
we prepared to say that because of the
shortness of the session members of the
House of Commons must receive an increase
of six days allowance, and that for the same
reason the sessional messengers shall receive
a little less ? That is rather hard on our
messengers. It is my custom to stand by
the poor people and help them through
their difficulties. We who are rich can take
care of ourselves. The argument has been

Digitized by

Google

Steamboat Inspection Act [MAECH 28, 1893J Amendment Bill.

457

used that the session is short, and that the
remuneration will be sufficient, but these
poor people may not be able to get work for
a month or two yet. They gave up their
employment to be here, believing that the
session would last as many months as we all
supposed it would. There is not a member
of either House that did not look forward
to a session of four or five months. Now,
for reasons which they could not help, the
session is shortened. Only yesterday the
Finance Minister, because of the absence of
the Premier, said that some important Bills
must be left over until next session. It is
rather too much to expect that our messen-
gers shall suffer on that account. For the
small sum of $400, 1 think we ought to stand
by the report of our committee.

Hon. Mr. FERGUSON— I see a very
ejisy way out of this difficulty. It appeal^
that we are to receive six days extra allow-
ance. If that be so, we rich people, as the
hon. gentleman from Delanaudi^re describes
U5s can easily make up a fund of $400 and
hand it to these messengers. The Minister
is perfectly right in keeping the expenditure
of the House within reasonable bounds, and
if we rich people want to be genen)us, we
-csLii subscribe the $400 amongst ourselves.

Hon. Mr. McDONALD (P.E.I.) -I shall
support the amendment, especially after
hearing the argument of the hon. member
from Delanaudiere. There are numbers of
well educated young men who would be
delighted to get positions where the remu-
nei-ation is even one-half of what these mes-
sengers receive for the present session. I
know young men who are qualified to fill any
j>osition in a mercantile house in the Domi-
nion, who are now l<»oking for situations, and
the very best that they can do, starting in a
Ijank or first class mercantile establishment,
is to get $100 a year and lK)ard themselves.
There are many young men who would be
glad to come from more distant provinces to
Ottawa to fill these positions. If we con-
sider that this matter was settled in 1891, I
do not see how we can go bjvck on that deci-
sion.

The Senate divided on the amendment,
which was adopted by the following vote : —

Angers,

Macdonald ( Vicforia)y

Botefoi-a,

Ma^donsAd {F.E.I.),

Boucher ville,

de Mclunea {Burlington),

Bowell,

Merner,

Boyd,

Mouteoinery,
Murphy,

CleinoM%

Desjanliiis,

Ogilvie,

Dickey,

Perley,

Drummoud,

Primrose,

Ferguson,

Prowsp,

Howlan,

Read (Quint ^,

Kaulbach,

Reesor,

Lewin,

Smith,

Loughee<l,
McClelan,

Sutherland,

Vidal.- 34.

NoN -Contents :

The Hon. Messrs.

Aruiand,

(iuevremoiit,

Bellerose,

Melnnes ( Victoria),

Bernier,

Masstm,

Bolduc,

Montplaisir,

Boulton,

O'Douohoe,

Casgi-ain,

Pelletier,

Chaffers,

Power.

DeBloia,

Robitaille,

Dobson,

Wark. -19.

Flint,

Contents :

The Hon. Messrs.

Allan,

McKay,
McMillan,

Almon,

The report as amended was adopted.

STEAM-BOAT INSPECTION ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill ("6) " An Act further to
amend the Steam -boat Inspection Act." He
said : — This is a change in the Inspection Act
to enable freight boats to run without certified
engineers in certain cases. The law as it
stands makes no distinction in this respect
between passenger and freight boats. It is
proposed by this Bill to retain the regulation
applying to passenger steam-boats, of what-
ever tonnage, but it does not necessitate the
placing of an engineer on freight boats,
except as it may be deemed necessary by the
Minister. In the eleventh line the word
"Minister" is substituted for the word
"board." In all other parts of the Act the
power of granting certificates is vested in the
Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and it is
only in this one section that the word
" board " is used. The sixty -first section of
the Act is changed to provide that all fines
and penalties imposed for the infraction of
this Act shall go to the Receiver-General.
The Act as it stands provides that half of
the fine shall go to the informer and the
other half to the Receiver-General. It is
proposed to authorize the Governor in Council

Digitized by

Google

458

Public [SBN'ATE] Officers Act.

where the circumstances may warrant it, to
grant payment of a portion of any such
penalty to the informer, if he is not the
Inspector. The Inspector is included under
this clause, as it is in the existing Act, because
it is his duty to lay information where he
finds there has been an infraction of the law.
The amendment is in the right direction.
There have been many cases in which parties
have unnecessarily interfered with the trade
for no other purpose than to receive a portion
of the fine. The Department think it much
better, under the circumstances, that it should
be left to the Governor in Council to say
whether any or what portion of the fine
should be paid to the informer. The object
of this Bill is simply to make the Act more
workable than it is at present.

The motion was agreed to and the Bill
was read the second time.

The House resolved itself into a
mittee of the Whole on the Bill.

Com-

Hon. Mr. POWER— T congratulate the
(Tovernment on the change made by the
second clause. Under the existing law half
of the fine in each case goes to the informer;
under this clause it goes to the Receiver-
General. T think it is a decided improve-
ment.

Hon. Mr. MacINNEH (Burlington), from
the Committee, reported the Bill without
amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time
and passed under a suspension of the rule.

HARBOUR AND RIVER POLICE
BILL.

SECOND AND THIRD READINriS.

Hon. Mr. BOWEL L moved the second
reading of Bill (97) " An Act to amend the
Act respecting the Harbour and River
Police of the province of Quebec." He
said : — This is a very small and unpreten-
tious Bill, but it is somewhat important to
the shipping interests of the country. Under
the present law, power is vested in the Gov-
ernor in Council to appoint river and har-
bour police in the cities of Montreal and
Quebec. That is optiomil. The river police
of Montreal has been abolished for two or
three years. The river police of Quel>ec is
to be abolished, so far as the Dominion Gov-

ernment is concerned ; no appropriation is
taken for payment of the river police.
There is an imperative law upon the Statute-
book compelling the shipping to pay certain
fees out of which the river and harbour
police were formerly paid. The object of
this bill is to repeal that clause, which im-
poses the tax upon the tonnage of the ship-
ping that comes into the harbour. If the
Government should find it advisable, and in
the interest of the country, to continue the
river police at either of these cities, then
they can continue to impose it, but in case
they should abolish the police at Quebec, as
has been done at Montreal, there is no
reason why the shipping should be taxed,
and the object of the Bill is simply to relieve
the shipping of the dues which are now
collected.

Hon. Mr. PELLETIER— Does this mean
that the river police at Quebec will be
abolished this summer ?

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— Yes. It is pn>
posed to pursue the same course in reference
to the river police at Quebec that has
been pursued in reference to the river
police at Montreal. The river and har-
bour jx)lice will in future be under the
management and control of the muni-
cipal authorities of the city of Quebec as
they are at Montreal.

The motion was agreed to and the bill
was read the second time.

The House resolved itself into Committee
of the Whole on the Bill.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL, from the Committee
reported the Bill without amendment.

The bill was then read the third time and
passed under a suspension of the rule.

PUBLIC OFFICERS ACT.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (103) "An Act resj>ecting
Public Officers." He said :— This Bill is
simply for the purpose of giving the Governor
in Council the power to declare what officers
should come within the meaning of the word
** Public Officers." Under the law now,
commissicms are issued to officers who are
appointed to any position of a permanent
character, and a small fee is charged for

Digitized by

Google

Drummond County Ry. [MARCH 28, 1893] Company's Bill

45^

these commissions. Some officers who have
received these commissions decline to pay for
them, on the ground that they do not come
within the literal meaning of the Act as it
now stands upon the Statute-book, and
this Bill is to give power to the Governor in
Council to declare who shall come within
the meaning of the Act, in order to prevent
any trouble or difficulty in future. Although
the fee is small, the number of officers
appointed thoughout the whole Dominion is
large, and there is a certain amount of
revenue which I think is properly and legiti-
mately collected under the circumstances.

The motion was agreed to.

The House resolved itself into a Commit-
tee of the Whole on this Bill.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.), from
the Committee, repoi-ted the Bill without
amendment.

The Bill was i-ead the third time and
passed, under a suspension of the rules.

LADIES OF THE SACRED HEART OF
JESUS BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. ROBITAILLE moved the
second reading of Bill (106) " An Act res-
pecting the ladies of the Sacred Heart of
Jesus." He said : — On moving the second
reading of the Bill I should explain that the
Sacred Heart is an educational establish-
ment for young ladies situated near Mon-
treal, with a branch in the city of Montreal.
The object of the Bill is to extend the pre-
sent Act of incoi'poration, and to enable
these ladies to acquire property for the pur-
poses they have in view, viz., education. Of
course the Bill limits the amount of property
which they can own and manage. The
other provisions relate chiefly to the internal
economy of the institution.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I rise for the pur-
pose of directing the attention of the Com-
mittee to which this Bill will be referred, to
the fact that the draftsman of the Bill was
apparently not aware of the fact that this
association has been incorporated by the
legislature of Nova Scotia, so far as regards
that province. Apparently the dniftsman
of this Bill was not aware that there was
any other enactment incorporating them
except in one province of Canada. I hope

there will be some provision made in the
Committee for the case of the institution in
Halifax. They own a country house there
where the children go during the holidays,
and also a house in the city. The properties
are somewhat valuable, and the titles are
perfectly good, no clouds upon them, and I
think probably it would be better that this
act should not apply to that branch of the
associatifm.

The motion was agreed to.
FIRST AND SECOND READINGS.

The following Bills wei-e introduced from
the House of Commons and read the first
and second time under a suspension of the
rules : —

Bill (92) " An Act to amend the Mer-
chants Shipping Act with respect to load
lines." (Mr. Bowell.^

Bill (99) " An Act respecting the Harbour
Commissioners of Montreal." (Mr. Angei-s.)

Bill (83) " An Act respecting the Toron-
to, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway Company."
(Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (79) " An Act to incorporate the
North American Canal Company.' (Mr.
Clemow.)

Bill (43) " An Act to amend the Crimi-
nal Code, 1892." (Mr. Angers.)

Bill (70) ** An Act respecting the Nakusp
& Slocan Railway Company." (Mr. Mae-
donald, B.C.)

DRUMMOND COUNTY RAILWAY
COMPANY'S BILL.

FIRST READING.

A messjige was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (71) *' An Act res-
pecting the Drummond County Rjiilway
Company."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. .Mr. McMILLAN moved that the
I rules of the House be suspended and that the
! Bill be read the second time presently.
I

I Hon. Mr. (JUEVREMONT (in French)
- I am opposed to the motion for many rea-
sons. In the first place I object to the se-
cond reading now because T know that there
are some gentlemen in Montreal who are op-

Digitized by

Google

460

The Alberta Irrigation [SENATE] Company's Bill.

posed to the Bill and who have not had suf-
ficient notice to enable them to appear be-
fore the Committee to-morrow. There is a
rule of this House which requires that be-
fore a Bill can be read the second time it
shall be printed in both languages. This Bill j
has not been printed in French yet and I
object to the second reading of the Bill to-
day.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I hope the hon.
gentleman will not persist in raising this
technical objection to *the Bill. It is true
that if the hon. gentleman persists in his
objection the Bill cannot be read ; but I
understand this company have already built
al)out sixty miles of railway, and they have
to build about sixty-two mile^ more in order
to reach Chaudiere Junction. This road
proposes to connect with the Intercolonial
Railway and to give a competing line from
the lower provinces to Montreal, competing
with the Grand Trunk Railway and Cana-
dian Pacific Radlway, which I think is a
most desirable object. If there is any sub-
stantial objectionable feature in the Bill,
and the hon. gentleman comes before the
Committee on Railways, I have no doubt
the committee will l)e prepared to make the
necessary alterations, but T hope the hon.
gentleman will not persist in his objection,
which is a technical one.

Hon. Mr. OGILVIE— I also hope that
the hon. gentleman will not persist in this
technical objectiim. It will not accomplish
anything, and I quite agree with my hon,
friend from Halifax that this line will be a
valuable road. One of the arguments used by
thehon. gentleman isafallacy — theargument
that the people interested in opposing it
could not be here in such a short time. I
know a large majority of them where here
this morning, talking to me about it. If they
were here to-day, they could be here to-mor-
row ; and I do hope that the hon. gentleman
will, as a reasonable man, allow this Bill to be
read the second time at this late period of
the session.

Hon. Mr. GUEVREMONT—( In French.)
I know personally that there are gentlemen
in Montreal who are opposed to this Bill. I
saw one of them recently who told me so,
and he asked me to take care and notify him
in time so th«Lt he could come here and
oppose it before the Railway Committee.

The second reading was allowed to stand.

THE SESSIONAL INDEMNITY.

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. ALMON— I wish to ask the
leader of this House if there is any truth
in the rumour that we have heard, that a
resolution has been passed in the Commons
providing that if any member was absent
for six days on private business there would
be no deduction from his sessional allowance ;
and if so, does that apply to the Senate.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— The resolution be-
fore the House of Commons is to allow each
meml^er of Parliament an absence of six
days — that no deduction shall be made from
the sessional indemnity should a meml)er be
absent six days. That applies to both
Houses.

The Senate adjourned at 5.30.

THE SENATE.

Ottaim, Wednesday, March 2inh, 189S.

The speaker took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

THE ALBERTA IRRIGATION COM-
PANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, from the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, re-
ported Bill (54) intituled : "An Act to in-
corporate the Alberta Irrigation Company,"
with amendments. He said : —This is the
first of a series of three Bills having similar
objects in view. They were referred to a
subcommittee, and carefully considered and
discussed in the committee itself, with the
result that these amendments were adopted.
The first is to add two subsections, provid-
ing in the first place, that before an applica-
tion could be made to the Governor, in
Council under this Bill, the notice should be
published in the nearest paper for a period
of two months, so as to give persons inter-
ested in the matter sufficient notice. The
other sub-section is to require that the plans
of the proposed improvement for irrigation
purposes should be lodged in the office of the

Digitized by

Google

The Drummond County [MARCH 29, 1893] Railway Bill.

461

registrar. These clauses were thought neces-
sary in the public interest.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved that the
amendments be concurred in.
The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— The second amend-
ment occurs in the compensation clause. It
is simply to strike out the two words
** entered upon." As the Bill read, the com-
pensation was limited to the lands " entered
upon." Those two words were struck out to
give it a wider scope and make it apply to
all lands.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED moved that the
amendment be concurred in.

The motion was agi*eed to, and the Bill
was then read the third time and passed as
amended.

THIRD READINGS.

Bill (35) " An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Irrigation Company." (Mr. Loug-
heed.)

Bill (36) "An Act to incorporate the
Calgary Hydraulic Company." (Mr. Loug-
heed.)

Bill (70) "An Act to incorporate the
Nakusp and Slocan Railway Company."
(Mr. Macdonald, B.C.)

BUI (79) "An Act to incorporate the
North America Canal Company." (Mr.
Clemow.)

Bill (83) " An Act respecting the Tonm-
to, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway Company."
(Mr. Lougheed.)

Bill (106) " An Act concerning the ladies
of the Sacred Heart of Jesus." (Mr. Robi-
taUle.)

THE DRUMMOND COUNTY RAIL-
WAY BILL.

SECOND READING.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.), from the
Committee on Standing Orders and Private
Bills, presented their twentieth report re
Bill (71), "An Act respecting the Drum-
mond County Railway Company."

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved that the
Fifty-seventh Rule of this House be dis-
pensed with in so far as the same relates to
Bill (71) "An Act respecting the Drum-

mond County Railway Company," as recom-
mended in the twentieth report of the Select
Committee on Standing Orders and Private
Bills.

Hon. Mr. GUEVREMONT (in French)—
I rise for the purpose of objecting to the
adoption of this motion. The 14th Rule
of this House provides that " one inter-
mediate day's notice in writing must be given
of all motions deemed special." This Bill is
not on the Orders of the Day, and even if it
were on the Orders of the Day, the objec-
tion which I raise is sufficient.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not think the
point of order is well taken. The adoption
of the report of the committee has never
been deemed a special motion.

Hon. Mr. DeBOUCHERVILLE— It is
not the adoption of the report of the Com-
mittee to which the hon. gentleman objects,
but to the motion.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The motion is to
adopt the report of the Committee, which
recommends that the Rule be suspended.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I believe the
objection is not well taken. The hon. gen-
tleman from Sorel might reach the end he
aims at by letting the Bill be read a second
time. Then it could not go before the com-
mittee for two days, when it would be too
late. In this instance, there is no necessity
for notice, because under our rules, when
the Committee on Standing Orders and
Private Bills recommends the suspension of
any rule, concu^^rence may at once be taken.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved that the
14th and 61st Rules of this House be dis-
pensed with in so far as they relate to this
Bill, and that the said Bill be now read the
second time.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— This Bill could
not be read the second time for the reason
that it has not been printed in French yet.
The Legislature of the province of Quebec
refused to grant a charter to this company
and there seems to be something wrong with
it. That is why I raise this objection.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman's
objection is not well taken, because the
French version of the Bill was distributed^ I

Digitized by

Google

462

Subsidies in Land [SENATE] to Railtcays Bill,

think, two days ago. It was in the Chamber
yesterday.

Hon. Mr. GUEVREMONT (In French.)
— Under the 18th Rule of this House, the
Bill cannot be read now. The 18th Rule
provides that " No motion to suspend, modify
or amend any Rule, or part thereof, shall be
in order except on one day's notice in
wnting, specifying precisely the Rule or
part of Rule- to be suspended, modified or
amended, and the purpose thereof." The
Committee may recommend the suspension !
of the Rule, but it rests with the House to I
say whether the recommendation shall be '
adopted. I think that before the motion I
can be adopted, one day's notice in advance
must be given. |

Hon. :Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman |
is too late with his objection — the report
has already been adopted.

the Bill goes to the Committee on Standing
Orders and Private Bills, so that that Com-
mittee may look into the question of notice,
which could not be done if a petition had
been presented. In this case there was
no petition, and the Bill, after the first read-
ing, was referred to the Standing Orders
Committee. To-day that committee reports
that the notices are complete. The House,
therefore, has nothing more do with this Bill
than to read it the second time, because it
is in iiccordance w4th the Rules of the House.
That is why I suggested to the mover that
he ought not to add to his motion anything
about suspending the Rules. The Rules
have been complied with and there is no
necessity to suspend them. There is no
necessity for the notice of motion ; the Bill
comes before the House as a matter of course
when the cf)mmittee report that the notices
have been regularly given.

Hon. Mr. GUEVREMONT— The recom- 1 Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I understand that
mendation may have been adopted, but you the Speaker has decided that this Bill, not
cannot make a motion without giving a day's j being on the Orders of the Day, cannot be read
notice. | the second time without notice. We cannot

therefore deal wuth the matter any further.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— After the Bill'
is read the second time it cannot be taken j Hon. Mr. DICKEY — There is no appeal
into consideration without forty-eight hours ! f »*om the decision of the Chair to the House,
notice, but no suspension of the Rule is so far as I know, and therefore the hon. gen-

needed for the second reading.

tleman who has charge of the Bill should
give notice of the second reading at the next
sitting of the House.

The SPEAKER— I understand that the
motion before the House is for the suspen-
sion of the Rules and the second reading of
the Bill. Such being the case, when one
member objects to the suspension of the
Rules the motion is out of order and the Bill
cannot be read to-day. '

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN-I withdraw the i SUUSIDTES IN LAND TO RAILWAYS

part of the motion which refers to the sus- 1
pension of the Rules, and I now move that
the Bill be read the second time. 1

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— I move that
this Bill be read the second time at' the next
meeting of the House.

The motion was agreed to.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I wish to ask the
The SPEAKER^Not being on the ' inc^ulgence of the House to introduce a Bill
Ordei*s of the Day, a special motion is
re(juired to have it read to-day, and, an ol>

jection having been made to the special
motion without due notice, it cannot be read
now.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— There is a Rule
which states when a Bill originating in the
House of Commons comes to the Senate
without a petition having been presented to
this House, that then after the first reading

I to enable the Grovernment to deal with some
of the North-west lands. I think the House
will understand it better if I just read a
short memorandum which I have in refer-
ence to it, which is as follows : —

Memorandum on Bill intituled ** An Act relat-
ing to the granting of subsidies in land to railwray
companies. '

Some years ago it was represented to the depart-
ment (by Mr. Bridges, Land Commi*iouer of the
Hudson's Bay Company, if I mistake not), that
the lands in the southern part of t|ie district of

Digitized by

Google

Freight Hates and Interest [MAECH 29, 18931 on Loans in the N.- W.T. 463

An>erta were suitable chiefly for grazing purposes, i
that in fact they were almost valueless without
access to water, and that to make grants to rail-
way companies of every alternate section would be
to spoil both the sections so granted and those
which remained for homestead purposes.

An Act (49 Vic, cap. 12) was acconlingly
pasised, authorizing the (iovenior in Council to
grant railM'ay land subsidies in tracts of a town-
ship each, on setting apart lands elsewhere for the '
purposes of school endowment, and on the change |
oeing assented to by the Hudson's Bay Company,
who were to receive lan<ls of equal value else- |
where.

The Hudson's Bay Company have decided to
accept this arrangement, ana the object of the pre-
sent Bill is to enable the (iovernor in Council to
deal with all the lands in the township (exclusive
of the Hudson's Bay Company's sections) in the
manner originally intended.

The House will see the land has been
granted in aid of these railways in the North-
west, but upon these conditions, and the
Hudson's Bay Company having declined to
accede to this proposition, we now ask that
the Governor in Council have power to deal
with the townships, less the Hudson's Bay
section. I beg leave to introduce a Bill in-
titled : " An Act relating to the granting of
subsidies in land to Railway Companies."

The Bill was i*ead the first and second
time, under a suspension of the Rules.

The House resolved itself into Committee
of -the Whole (m this Bill.

On the first Clause.

Hon. Mr. POWER— With respect to those
school lands, those which are to l)e substi-
tuted for them in the townships, may not l>e
in such a suitable place.

Hon. Mr. 8C0TT— Itsays of ecjual value. ,

Hon. Mr. POWER— But they may not |

be as convenient.

I
Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This proposition .
does not propose to interfere with the law j
on the Statute-book as it stands so far as it |
relates to the school lands, and hon. gen- 1
tlemen will see that it will l)e advisable, in
the interests of the school fund, if this sec-
tion of the country is only fitted for grazing
purposes, to have their property in some
other portion of the territory where settle-
ment will be likely to take place.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY, from the Conmiit-
tee, reported the Bill without amendment.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the third
re&ding of the Bill.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

FREIGHT RATES AND INTEREST ON
LOANS IN THE N. W. T.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— Before the Orders
of the Day are proceeded with, I desire to
call the Government's attention to the fact
that there is all over the North-west Terri-
tories a feeling that the Cantuiian Pacific
Railway Company are charging excessive
rates on the products of the f Arm going out
of the country and on some articles coming
into the country. I am aware, and other
hon. gentlemen of this House know that the
Government of Canada has given a large
grant both in lands and money towards the
building of that railway, and rendered such
other assistance as was in their power. That
I think was quite right, and I heartily ap-
prove of it, but in a large portion of that
country there i^ no competition to reduce
their rates. I understand there is a pro-
vision that the Government have something
to say about those freight rates. Inasmuch
as tlie settlers of that country feel that they
are aggrieved, that they are paying excessive
rates, it would be but right and fair for the
Government to make proi)er inquiry to as-
certain if such is the case, and if it is found
that the rates are excessive, the Government
should cause them to be reduced. We are
entirely at the mercy of the corporation.
Whether they charge too much or not, I am
not prepared to say, but there is a wide-
spread feeling all over the country that the
rates are excessive. It is but fair that the
Government should look into the matter,
and, if such is the case, see that redress is
granted to the people of that country. I
hope this will be done during the re-
cess. We are willing to pay what is
right and fair, but I do not think we should
pay excessive rates, and the Government
should act as a medium between the com
pany and the people of that country to see
that proper rates are fixed. Next session I
shall enquire if the Government have in-
vestigated this matter. I call the attention
of the Government to this matter in order
that they may see that justice is done to
the settlers. There is another matter to
which 1 wish to call attention, namely, the
rate of interest charged to farmers in that
new country. Of necessity many poor people
are going into that country, and many who

Digitized by

Google

464 Freight Rates and Interest [SENATE] on Loans in the K-W.T.

are inexperienced and who have never
farmed before. Oftentimes they get behind
in their accounts. The interest law of this
country is such that it allows a moneyed
man to charge any rate he wishes, and the
rates charged in that country by money
lenders are exorbitant. I would be ashamed
to tell you the rates of interest that a great
many people have to pay on loans. I think
there should be a maximum rate.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— Par-
liament cannot pass such a law.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— Yes they can do
that, because I remember not very long ago,
when I lived in New Brunswick, a man
could not recover more than six per cent.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— You cannot do it
now unless the rate is fixed by agreement.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— -But the law should
fix a maximum rate of interest. I know a
man who has lost a hundred pounds by
making side bargains. I say there should
be some fixed i-ate, so as. to prevent these
exorbitant rates being exacted. A man will
sell a binder on time, the interest to be at
8 per cent, but if the debt is not paid when
it is due, he charges 12 per cent. If you
are distressed and have to borrow money,
you often pay 24 per cent. Hon. members
may laugh, but I know that to be the case.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— I have
seen 30 per cent paid often.

Hon. Mr. PERLEY — I say when a man
pays 30 per cent on a farm anywhere he
signs his death warrant as a farmer. He
cannot do it. I have heard men before the
Agricultural Committee of the House of
Commons, who have been our agents down
in Dakota, describe the cut-throat mortgages
there — mortgages bearing 40 and 50 per cent.
The result is that it has depopulated that
country. Our country in a very short time
will be in the hands of new men, because
the farmer when he gets a little in debt will
pay anything to clear off* his indebtedness,
trusting that something will happen to pull
him through. He gives a chattel mortgage
at excessive rates, or even signs a note, and
cannot recover from it unless he has some
other resource than his farm to obtain the
money. I can quite understand those gen-
tleman who have money to loan opposing

this movement, but I know in New Bruns-
wick a number of years ago, 6 per cent was
fixed by law as the maximum rate of interest,
and if by any means you got more than 6
per cent, you forfeited the principal. I know
that Parliament could make such a law to-
day. A Bill should be introduced and
passed in this House preventing over 10 or
1 2 per cent being charged — that should be
the maximum rate, and that is very large.

Hon. Mr. McCLELAN-

per cent would be enough.

-Six or seven

Hon. Mr. PERLEY— Frequently you
find 24 and 20 and 15 per cent charged in
that country. There is a private bank in
almost every town fn)m Winnipeg to the
Rocky Mountains. These men get money
at 8 and 10 per cent from the banks and
lend it out at 18 and 20 per cent and per-
haps more. This is something more than a
laughing matter ; it is a matter of serious
importance. People who go to that country
to settle, when they get a little hard up
borrow money at exorbitant rates. I claim
that 10 or 12 per cent would be a good in-
vestment there, and lenders should be satis-
fied with it. I hope the Government will
consider this matter during the recess and
will next session introduce a Bill to protect
our people from the extortions of the money
lenders.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I have very few
words to say in reply to the hon. gentleman.
The first subject to which he called the at-
tention of the House was that of the rates
of the Canadian Pacific Railway. That is a
question that has been discussed not only in
this House but elsewhere. I cannot at the
present moment say whether the rates are
exorbitant,. as indicated by the hon. gentle-
man. This I do know, that the last time I
looked into this matter I found that the
freight rates charged by the Canadian Paci-
fic Railway Company in the North-west and
in Manitoba were lower than on many railways
similarly situated in the iidjoining States.
Whether they are too high or not I shall not
discuss at this moment, but if the Company
have l)een charging exorbitant rates — that
is, rates in excess of those fixed by the Order
in Council, I can assure the hon. gentleman
it will receive the attention of the Govern-
ment, and I will make inquiries into the
matter. As to the other inquiry that is

Digitized by

Google

Merchants Shipping Act [MARCH 29, 1893] Amendment Bill.

465

sioi^ething which can only be dealt with by
Parliament. It is a matter of trade, and it
would be necessary to introduce a Bill fixing
the rate of interest. That the hon. gentle-
man call do himself ; it is a public question.
I remember very many tussles that we have
had iji the House of Commons during the
last 25 years over this important question.
I rememl>er it coming up with my hon.
friend who sat just in front of him, when he
was first elected to the Legislative Counciil
in 1862, so it is not a new question.
I am somewhaf surprised to hear my hon.
friend say that the rates of interest range
as high as 15 and 20 per cent in Manitoba
and the North-west. I know in Ontario
any amount of money can be obtained upon
good security at 5 and 6 per cent. The
loan company — a very small one — with
which I am connect^ lends }noney on good
loans at 6 per cent. There was a time in
Ontario, before we were flourishing as we
are now, when the people were not so well
off as at present, when money would bring
^^, 10 and 12 per cent, but of late years I
notice that it is not the case, and I am
sorry to he*ir that it is so in the North-
west. I quite agree with my hon. friend
that the man who pays 15 or 20 per cent,
or even 10 per cent, if he is a farmer, is
mortgaging his property — I was going to
say, without the intention of paying it,
hut whether he had that intention or not
he would be very apt to lose his property.
He would have to do as many others have
done under similar circunistances — receive
the money from the loan company and then
abandcm the prof)erty and let the company
suffer. That is abc>ut the result when money
is borrowed at such rates. If the hon. gen-
tleman feels strongly upon the question, I
would suggest to him, if he wants a very in-
teresting debate next session, to introduce
a Bill dealing with the matter, but I think
I could almost guarantee him that it would
never get through the House of Commons,
whatever its fate might l)e in this House.
They are too far advanced in their ideas
about the right to buy and sell. I am suf-
ficient of an old fogey to agree with the hon.
gentleman, but I know the advanced feeling
with respect to money and dealing with
money is such that he could never get it
through the House of Commons.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — No loan company
attempts to lend money at the rates that
30

have been mentioned in the North-west, or
anywhere else.

MERCHANTS SHIPPINCI ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

IN COMMITTEE.

The House resol ve<l itself into a Committee
of the Whole on Bill (92) "An Act to amend
the Merchants Shipping Act with respect
to load lines."

(In the Committee).

On the first clause,

Hon. Mr. POWER— I think that we need
a little more information l>efore we pass this
clause. It is a very important one, and I
presume the hon. leader of the Govei-nment
who has charge of it will give the House the
information needed. I quite understand
that it is desiraljle that sections 1 and 2 of
the Merchants Shipping Act of 1890 shall
not apply to ships registered in Canada,
because I l^elieve the new load lines pix)vided
by this Act of 1890 are calculated for steel
and irop vessels and not for our wooden
ships. It is desirable that there should l)e
some regulation in Canada as to the depth
to which a ship shall l)e loa<led, and it has
occurred to me that it is not at all improlmble
that the provisions of the Merchants Ship-
ping Act of 1876 should apply to vessels
registered in Canada, while the proWsions of
the Act of 1890 should not. I have not
heai-d that there was any complaint of the
operation of the Act of 1876, but the hon.
gentleman will see that this Bill proposes to
repeal not only the Act of 1890, which has
l>een objected to, but that it leaves nothing
to take its place. It struck me that it would
prol)ably l)e l>etter to revive the repealed
sections of the Act of 1 876 which are repealed
by the Act of 1890.

Hon. Mr. BOWELI^-The hon. gentle-
man is a little in error in the v-iew which
he has taken of the Bill. Canada has now
on the Statute-l)ook an Act relating to the
load lines of Canadian vessels. This, how-
ever, under the Merchants Shipping Act had
to l>e confirmed or approved l)y the Imperial
Government l)efore it could be brought
into operation. That law has never been
accepted or approved of by the Board of
Trade in England, and consequently the law,
as it is now on our Statute-book, has been

Digitized by

Google

466

Merchants Shipping Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill,

inoperative, 1/ecause it has never been
approved by the Board of Trade in England
and consequently not brought into force by
the Governor in Council, as provided that it
should be, in Canada. The Bill now before
the House is to repeal that portion of the
Imperial Act which imposes certain restric-
tions upon Canadian vessels in England.
It may seem strange that the Canadian
Parliament is asked to repeal any portion of
an Imperial Act, but that power is given t<j
the colonies by section 547 of the Merchant's
Shipping Act of England. It reads as
follows : —

*' The legislative authority of any British pos-
session shall have power, by any act or orrlinance
confinned by Her Majesty in Council, to repeal
wholly or in part any provisions of this x\ct relat-
ing to ships registered in such jX)8se8sion, but no
such act or ordinance shall take effect until such
approval has been proclaimed in such possession,
or until such time thereafter as may be fixed by
such act or ordinance for the purpose. "

By this Act Parliament has power to re-
peal any portion which affects their vessels
in that particular. This Bill is an
instance in which the Law Clerk thought
he knew better how the clause should he
worded than the officials of the Department
of Marine and Fisheries. In this case it was
the Law Clerk of the House of Commons.
He struck out of the Bill as it was origi-
nally sent to tlie House of Commons the
words " repealed so far as they relate to or
affect the ships." He added instead "decla-
red not to apply to." I desire to have this
amended by striking out the words " decla-
red not to apply to " in the first section and
restoring the words " repealed so far as they
relate to or affect ships registered in Can-
ada." That is adopting the words of the
Imperial statute.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— What would
be the effect of this ? It is not only with re-
gard to the depth which a ship should be
loaded, but as to the height of the deck load.
Our vessels going to the West Indies are
not allowed under the Act to carry lumber
on deck beyond a certain height above the
rails, which is a very obnoxious measure, be-
cause the vessels constructed for that busi-
ness are built to carry a deck load, and there
is no danger to life or property in conse-
quence of the lumber being piled higher than
they are allowed to carry it. Will it affect
the deck load as well as the depth of the
load?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— It virtually bmngs
into force the Act as it now stands on the
Statute-lx)ok as soon as it is proclaimed.
As I explained just now, the Act is not in
operation because the Imperial Load Line
Act interferes with and restricts the trade in
so far as it affects Canadian vessels, and the
object of this Bill is to repeal that portion of
the statute which affects our shipping, leav-
ing the law as to deck loads and load lines
precisely as it is now on the Statu te-lx)ok.
i I have no doubt my hon. ^friend is better
acquainted with it than I am.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Will the hon. gentle-
man be kind enough to read the two sec-
tions of the Imperial Act of 1890 which are
repealed ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I have not the
statute before me. If the hon. gentleman
will let the matter stand until the third
reading of the Bill, I will look into it. The
only explanation I received was that it was
desirable to repeal that portion which
affected Canada. There is a difference of
opinion on one point, and it is just as well
to be frank with the House — it is question-
able, in the minds of sotfie who have studied
this question, whether the repeal of this
portion of the Imperial Statute would relieve
Canadian vessels in English ports, or whether
it should be confined exclusively to vessels
registered in Canada within the waters of
Canada, or any* other waters not affected by
the Imperial Act. I know it is contended
by some that it would not relieve Canadian
vessels in English ports. It is, however, I
think the opinion of the Minister of Marine
and Fisheries himself that the repeal of this
Act would relieve them from the liability.

Hon. Mr. 1)EVER— The Minister of
Trade and Commerce would not make this
alteration without having the advice and
support of the shipping interests of the
country. No doubt they have asked the
Government to make this change.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL~I think most
people know, particularly those interested in
shipping, that the whole shipping int^i-est of
Canada has been opposed to these very great
restrictions that have been imposed upon
them by what is generally known as the
Plimsoll Act, and the object of this Bill is to
relieve them from these restrictions.

The motion was agreed to.

Digitized by

Google

Criminal Code [MAECH 29, 1893] Amendment Bill.

467

Cuiumittee, reported the Bill with an aniend-
ineiit, which was concurred in.

HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS OF
MONTREAL BILL.

THIRD READlX(i.

The House resolved itself into a Couimittee
of the Whole on Bill (99) " An Act respecting
the Harbour Counuissionei-s of Monti*eal."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved that a second
section be added to the Bill, providing that
Mayor of Montreal shall be p.r-officio

Harbour Commission of

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (^B.C.) from the i secution of an offence under sections 256 and

257 of the Code. It is perfectly proper that
those guilty of the offence should be pun-
ished, but why is it necessary to obtain the
consent of the Minister of Marine and
Fisheries for the prosecution ?

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— This is to correct
an error which occun-ed first in the Bill of
1891, and seems to have been overlooked
ever since. The section is necessary for the
protection of the master from a mutinous
crew. Nothing is so likely to occur as a
mutiny against the captain, and a refusal of
the crew to go to sea, and when the men are
brought before a magistrate, they generally
charge that the ship was unseaworthy. It
has often occurred at Quel)ec, late in the fall,
that sailors, not wishing to go to sea, have
made chargQs of this kind against the master
of the ship, causing such delay often as to
keep the vessel over through the winter. 'If
it is provided that the consent of the Min-
ister of Marine and Fisheries shall be had,
the crew will not l)e so likely to enter a
prosecution on frivolous grounds. The object
of the clause is to protect the ship-owhers.
It should be l)orne in mind that the master
of the ship is as much interested in having
the vessel seaworthy as any of his crew. I
think the clause is necessary and should
apply not only to sea-going vessels, but to
vessels on our great lakes.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I consider the
clause a wise one. A case occurred in the
County of Lunenburg of the kind to which
the hon. gentleman refers. Some malicious
sailors intimated to an insurance company
that the vessel on which they were engaged
was unseaworthy, and the company instead
of investigating the claim prosecuted the
owner. The prosecution failed to establish
the charge.

Hon. Mr. POWER -There is some force
in the statement made by the hon. Minister
of Agriculture, but as a rule sailors do not
themselves have the owner of the vessel in-
dicted for attempting to send an unsea-
worthy vessel to sea. The rule is that the
sailors refuse to go to sea on the ground
that the vessel is unseaworthy.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS -Yes, but we want
to prevent them doing that without a reason-
able foundation for the charge. When th^re

the

H niemWr of the

Montreal.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington), from
the Committee, reported the Bill with the
amendment, which was ctmcurred in.

The Bill was then read the third time
and passed.

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
BILL.

THIRD READINr;.

The House resolved itself into a Commit-
tee of the whole on Bill (43) " An Act to
amend the Criminal Code 1892."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. POWER— I wish to call atten-
tion to a slight clerical error in section three
of the Code. The House will remember that
the Code was put through rather hurriedly
last session, and although we corrected a
good many errors here, some remained. If
hon. gentlemen will look at the paragraph
marked ** K " they w ill see that the word
** such " should be struck out, because it re-
fers to something which, I suppose, was in
the Act out of which this language was
taken, but which is not in our Code. I move
that the word " such " be struck out.

The motion was agreed to.

On the tenth paragraph.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not see why
this section should be added. There does not
seem to be any goo^J rea.son why the consent
of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries
should be considered necessary for the pro-

Digitized by

Google

468

Criminal Code [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

is a rise in wages the men are always dis-
posed to refuse to go to sea- -you will always
tind them unwilling to submit to the articles
that they sign. They are ready to say that
the ship is unseaworthy, and thus delay the
sailing. This clause is to provide that there
must be some good ground for charging that
the vessel is unseaworthy,

Hon. Mr. POWER— Is it the experience
in Quebec that sailors prosecute the owner
or master for sending a ship to sea in an
unseaworthy condition ? Our experience in
Halifax is that the crew, under such cir-
cumsUinces, refuse to go. Then when they
are brought before a magistrate they plead
that the ship is unseaworthy.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— H it is made an
indictable offence they will avail themselves
of that means of prosecuting because the
ptfblic would have to bear the expense of the
prosecution.

The clause wjis adopted.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I have an amend-
ment which I wish to submit to the commit-
tee at this point. I propose to restore the
recommendation njade by the joint commit-
tee who had this Criminal Code under con-
sideration last session. It will come in as a
section just following section 728. Sections
727, 728 and 729 deal with the jury, and
the amendment which I propose has regard
to the jury. I may mention that this amend-
ment, or an amendment a good deal stronger
than the one I am about to propose, was
unanimously reconunended by the joint
committee which had this C<xle under con-
sideration last session. It will be remem-
bered by hon. gentlemen that the Code was
considered in the House of Commons at a
very late period in the session and the Mini-
ster of Justicfe, who, I was informed and
verily believe, was in favour of this change,
thought that at that stage in the session it
was perhaps advisable not to push the mat-
ter, and after the prorogation of Parliament
the Department of Justice caused inquiries
to be sent to the various judges throughout
the country and answers were got from a
number of them. I was informed by the
gentleman who was Deputy-Minister of Jus-
tice at the close of last session, that these
answers were nearly equally divided. The
proposition reported by the joint Committee

was that in case the jury was composed of
12 membei*s, 10 jurors could find a verdict
in a criminal case. The Deputy-Minister of
Justice in sending out his inquiries to the
Judges unfortunately worded the provision
differently, and the inquiry sent round to
the Judges was whether they thought it de-
sirable that 9 out of 10 instead of 10 out of
1 2 should be allowed to find a verdict of
guilty. To that inquiry, as I say, the an-
swers which came in were about equally
divided. The proposition which I am about
to make does not go as far as the recom-
mendation of the Committee of last session.
My proposition is simply that it shall not be
necessaiy that the jury shall be unanimous,
but that the verdict of guilty may be re-
turned even though one member of the jury
dissents. Hon. gentlemen ai'e all perfectly
aware that the ends of justice are continu-
ally defeated by some one juror who is either
obstinate or a crank, or f)erhaps in sym-
pathy with the criminal. A crime Ls
committed, reasonable evidence is produced
of the guilt of some particular person, and
that person is brought before the magistrate ;
the magistrate finds there is sufficient jrrima
facie evidence to commit him ; he is com-
mitted and afterwards he is brought before
the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury as a rule
seem to think it their duty to find that the
circumstances are very strongly in favour of
the innocence of the accused. In fact, in a
g'reat many cases the grand jury refuse
to find bills against a man of whose guilt
there is very little doubt. So, justice, as you
see, has to inin this gauntlet. There is first
the commitUU by the magistrate, then the
case comes before the grand jury, and then
the trial befoi*e the petit jury. The evidence
may be so clear that the judge and eleven
jurors and every one in the court are satisfied
of the prisoner s guilt, but if there happen to be
on that jury a man who may l>e a connection
or a friend of the accused, a crank of some
sort, or a man with peculiar views as to
capital punishment, or an anarchist, or an
enemy of society, that one man can render
all the expense and trouble that has l^een
taken utterly useless, and defeat the ends of
justice and turn the miscreant out to prey
upon society. Now, hon. gentlemen, I do not
think that state of things should be allowed
I to continue. The hon. Minister of Agricul-
ture when we were discussing the Bill with
respect to criminal evidence, if I may be
allowed to refer to that matter, was appar-

Digitized by

Google

Criminal Code [MAECH 29, 1893] Amendment Bill

4(39

ently under the impression that I have some
sympathy with the cnminal ; I wish to assure
him that I have not the slightest. I did not
speak on the subject, but other hon. gentle-
men gave the reason why they did not think
the accused himself should be forced to go
int<:) the l)ox, or that his wife should be com
pelled to go into the l)ox. We are not with-
out experience on this point of taking a
veixiict from a number of jurors less than
the whole number. A few years ago it was
looked uj)on as necessary that the jury should
1)6 unanimous in civil cases. I do not know
just how l(»ng ago the change was made, in
Nova Scotia, but I think it was some 30
j'ears ago. In that province the jury in civil
cases consists of nine persons, and seven out
of the nine can find a verdict. There has
never l)een any complaint of the operation
of the law, and it has worked most satis-
factorily. No one would dream of going
back to the old law. When we con-
sider all the advantages that have l)een
conferred upon accused persons of late
years, not least amongst them the ad-
vantages which are secured by the Bill res-
pecting Criminal Evidence which piivssed
through this House the other day, we shall
not be going too far at all, in fact not far
enough, if we adopt this amendment. No
one could accuse us of going too far, if we
.*iay that eleven out of twelve jurors shall be
allowed to find a verdict of guilty. I, there-
fore, move that the schedule be amended by
inserting the following before the last line
on the first page after section 728, as sec^on
I'l^a: -

It shall not hereafter be necessary that the jury
shall Ixj unaniniouH in a criminal case, and a vei diet
of guilty may be retume<l notwithstanding the
dissent of one juror.

Hon. Mr. K AULBACH—Would you not
qualify that by adding •* after Ijeing out of
their l)ox a certain length of time T

Hon. Mr. POWER— You can add '* after
four hours' delil)eration," if you think it
well, but*I do not see any particular object.

Hon. Mr. GO WAN— I am inclined to
favour the hon. gentleman's proj)osition, if
it came up as a distinct, independent ques-
tion. I do not say so positively, but the in-
clination of my mind would he rather in the
direction he points. I think, however, it
would l:)e exceedingly dangerous at this time
to make such a vital alteration as this in

respect to procedure. It would involve a
thorough examination of the whole Act. I
am not prepared to discuss such a subject
now, but T think it would be perilous to
bring it in at this time. We would have to
see how it would fit in with the rest of the
Code, and possibly it might cause the loss of
the Bill when it went back to the Commons.
I shall certainly be obliged at this period of
the session to vote against it.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Weare making
substantial alterations in the Bill now
before us, and 1 do not .see why this amend-
ment should not be made at the same time.
I think the change is a good one. It is a
question which has been canvassed amongst
the members of the Bar and the Bench for
the last year or more, and my own exper-
ience has been that often the ends of justice
have not been accomplished in consequence
of some obstinate juryman being determine<l
to stand out against all reason, and even
against the judge's charge to the jury. Such
a man may prevent the ends of justice being
accomplished. If the words are added
" after four hours deliberation," T think we
could very safely pass the Bill. If, how-
ever, the passing of this amendment by us
would delay or defeat the Bill, that should
end the matter : otherv^ise T am in favour of
it, and shall vote for it.

Hon. Mr. ANUERS- \ cannot accept
the amendment proposed by the hon. gentle-
man from Halifax. Even if it hml been
proposed at another stage of the session I
am opposed to such a principle in criminal
matters— the principle of receiving the
verdict of only a majority of the jury.

Hon. Mr. POWER— This is not a mere
majority : it is all except one.

Hon. Mr. ANCiERS— Well, of the large
majority, the verdict of eleven out of twelve ;
in principle I am opposed to that. It is not
desirable in a counti-y like ours, composed
of different nationalities, where we have,
especially in the province of Quebec, often
a special provision for a mixed jury, that
there should be any opportunity to dis-
tinguish l>etween those who agree and those
who disagree on the jury. It rarely occui-s
that a ciise has to l)e tried a second time on
account of the jury not l>eing able to agree
upon the verdict. I do not think it occurs

Digitized by

Google

470

Criminal Code [SENATE] Amendment Bill.

more than three or four times during a year avS this which the hon. member from Halifax

in the province of Quel)ec.

Hon. Mr. POWER— You are singularly
fortunate.

Hon. Mr. AN(JER8 -And that is a less
inconvenience than furnishing the public
with an opportunity of stating later on that
such and such a juror differed from the
majority becauvse he was a Liberal, or a
French-Canfvdian, or an Irishman. We
should avoid that as much as possible, for
the present, at any rate. Therefore, on
piinciple, I am opposed to the amendment
submitted by the hon. gentleman. As to
the question of urgency, I do not think it is
prudent or necessary to accept this amend-
ment without a careful examination of the
code to see whether this amendment will
dovetail pi'operly into it. A third reason is
that the Bill that is now before the House
deals'only with clerical eri^ors. •

Hon. Mr. POWER— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. ANOEHS — No question of
principle whatsoever is in\ olved in this Bill.
On the two grounds that I have mentioned,
it is not advisable to accept thjsamendment,
r really believe it would defeat the Bill. It
might not go through the Lower House, and
I doubt very much whether it would be
supported by my own province, on the
grounds that I have stated.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— As to the ques-
tion of urgency, if it should be th<^ means
of defeating this Bill, as my hon. friend
suggests, I would not press it. At the same
time, I am not with him on the other reasons
that he gave us, because I know in the pro-
vince from which I come, frequently through
the obstinacy of one juryman, the ends of
justice have l>een defeated. From some
tampering, or other cause, one man has l>een
induced to hold out against all reason and
against the charge of the judge : he does not
giv« his reas<ms, he simply determines that
he will not yield. As to the secrecy of the
jury, that is simply with the grand jury. In
the cjise of the petit jury, ten minutes after
the verdict it io known how they all stand.
There is nothing in the j)oint with I'egard to
secrecy. The province of Quebec may Ije an
excepti<m, but in the province of Nova
Scotia, the ends of justice have freijuently
been defeated for want of such a provision

Hon. Mr. GO WAN —This is really a more
debateable question than hon. gentlemen
suppose. The unanimity of jurors has l>een
re<|uired for ages and a very great difference
of opinion exists on the subject. It has
been urged that even if eleven could give a
verdict, the very moment the jurors retired

i to their room, their first act would be to as-
certain by a general vote how they stood,
and if they found eleven of one opinion they
might go in and returna verdict at once, but
if the twelfth man could say ** Stop a mo-
ment, I have something to say to you about

' this : I insist upon giving my reason," they
must remain. Now, the matter l^eing one
on which a great difference of opini<m exists
and a serious principle is involved, it would
l>e wrong at this stage, when dealing with
this technical small amendment U^ the Code
to introduce such an important principle.

Hon. Mr. DRUMMOND -I must con-
fess that the temperate and calm manner in
which the hon. gentleman from Halifax in-
troduced this motion commends itself largely
to me, and I do not say that in regard to the
projH)sal which he has brought out my .sym-
pathies are not very largely with him, but

I it does apj>ear to me that a fatal objection
lies in the fact mentioned by the hon. leader
of the House, that this is a Bill merely for
the purj)ose of making certain technical
amendments to the Code, and it is of gi*eat
imj)ort;ince that it be carried thnmgh at the
present session. I therefore urge the hon.

, member fi-om Halifax t<j withdraw his mo-
tion with the proviso that if he introduce a
short Bill next session it will be considere<l,
antl I shall be disposed to go with him if I
feel as I do at present, but the i-emarks of
the hon. Minister of Agriculture and the hon.
memberfrom Bar rie seem tome to put l^eyond
question the desirability of his withdrawing;
his motion -and not dividing the House at
the present time. •

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am gla^l to find
that the hon. gentleman who has just spoken
sympathizes largely with the view I enter-
tain in this matter, but there is a certain
amount of misapprehension in the minds of
some hon. gentlemen who have spoken with
respect to the i)osition of the matter. In the
first place, the hon. member from Barrie

Digitized by

Google

Criminal Code [MARCH 29, 1893] Amendment Bill.

471

seemed to think that thi^ would prevent any
delil>eration on the part of the jury. At the
suggestion of the hon. member from Lunen-
burg I amended my motion by saying " after
four hours' deliberation," so that eleven jurors
could not find a veixiict un^l after four
hours' deliberation. That would give ample
time for the twelfth juror to endeavour to
convince the others and make them see
things the way he did. The hon. gentleman
from Barrie seems to think that this is a re-
volutionary change. I do not think any
serious upheaval would result from it in the
province of Ontario. I know none occurred
in the province of Nova Scotia when it was
provided that a certain number of the jury
might find a verdict in civil cases, and a great
many of those civil cases are of as vital im-
poi'tance as a cnminal case. A civil suit
may involve S-0,000, and a criminal case
may only involve imprisonment for a short
time. I would not care to discuss all the
reascms urged by the hon. Minister why we !
should not pass this Bill. He said something |
w ith respect to mixed Junes in the province ,
of Quebec, the etfect of which T did not al- "
together catch. In Quebec there are some-
^times juries composed of French and English-
speaking men.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — Sometynes ten
English and two French.

Hon. Mr. POWER -The hon. gentleman's
idea is that the twelfth man might be the
one Fi*enchman.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Or he might be an I
Irishman — worse. I

Hon. Mr. POWER -Supjx^sing the party
accused is a Frenchman, is there not some
proWsion in the law of Quebec which would
hinder him from being tried by eleven Eng- ,
lish-speaking jurors ? '

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— If he chooses.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Probably he would
choase.

Hon. Mr. ANCiERS— It is a matter of
choice.

Hon. Mr. POWER -With the accused?
Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Yes.

Hon. Mr. POWER— And if he is a French
speaking man he will proViably choose to be
tried by a jury of his own nationality.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— As a rule they
prefer to he tried by a mixed jury.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Suppose he prefers
six of each — suppose six Fi-enchmen and six
Englishmen are on tlie jury and five of the
Frenchmen think he is guilty and one Eng-
lishman thinks he is not guilty, who is hurt ?
Reverse the position and say there are six
English and five Fi^nch jurors who think
one way and one Frenchman thinks the other
way, can any one claim that wrong could Ije
done if the verdict of the eleven men is taken
in preference to the decision of the twelfth ?
I do not think that there is anything serious
in that objection. It must be remembered
that when I proposed this amendment I was
not spe-aking merely for myself. As I have
stated already, the Joint Committee com-
posed of a number of professional men of
both Houses, considered this Criminal Code
very carefully last session and they unani-
mously recommended this change, after due
consideration. To say that it is a revolu-
tionary change and that it would not be
proper to introduce it, is not fair or reason-
able. It is not fair to that committee. I
gave the House some of the reasons why it
wiis not dealt with last session, ancj I forgot
to mentioi;i this — I do not think it was said
to me in confidence, but I was informed by
a gentleman who is in a position to speak
with authority, that if this amendment were
made in the Senate the Government were
prepared to accept it in the House of Com-
mons.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I must tell the hc«i.
gentleman that he is misinformed.

Hon. Mr. P0WJ:R— That was the under-
standing, I think, last session, and I do npt
know where the hon. gentleman gets his
information, but I got mine this session
from what I consider the very best authority,
next to the Minister of Justice. W^hether
the same gentleman who informed me has
informed the Minister I do not know. If he
has, he has simply changed his opinion since
he spoke to me. Another objection taken
was that all the amendments made were
merely veibal. Turn to the amendment at
page 16") and you will see that there has
been a clause added that is an entirely new
enactment, just as nmch so as the one that
I propose. I do not think there is any sub-
stantial reason why this amendment should

Digitized by

Google

472

Criminal Code [SENATE] Amendment Bill,

not pass. It is in the interests of justice
and I shall not withdraw it.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— The hon. gen-!
tleinan may be prejudiced in the future if he
does not withdraw it now. Many, like my-
self feel in favour of it, yet in consequence of
what has been said they might vote against
the amendment under the circumstances,
and therefore it would prejudice the matter
at some other time.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — In answer to what
the hon. gentleman has said as to inform-
ation he has had from some official source, I
.must tell him that his information is incor-
rect, in so far as the Government has never
come to the conclusion to accept such an
amendment. An amendment altering one
of the vital principles of the criminal law in
this country could not be made or decided
upon without being first brought before the
Council. This matter has never been dis-
cussed by the Council and no conclusion has
been arrived at, and I can tell the hon. gentle-
man that the Government does not wish to
make this amendment.

Hon. Mr. PCnVER- This is an entirely
new view of the functions of the Governor
in Council. T do not think all the pro-
visions of the Criminal Code were considered
last year in detail bv the Governor in Coun-
cil. "

Hon. Mr. ANGER8 — They are supposed
to have been. The ^Minister of Justice in-
troduced the meiisure, and his colleagues, I
suppose, took it for granted that he would
not do anything improper, and he intro-
duced the measure on his own responsibility.
I -never said that the Government, as a
Government, had considered the matter and
decided to accept it, but I explained what 1
had been given to understand by the best
authority next to the Minister of Justice.
If the Minister of Justice were willing to
accept, I do not imagine that any of his
colleagues would object to it.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN- -Unless my hon.
friend will withdraw his resolution it would
embaravss those who would, and probably
wdll, ejidoi-se the subject of his motion at a
future time, but it would be improper to
atlopt a vital principle of that character at
this period of the session ; I do not think

the amendment would be likely to be carried
in the Lower House if it were inserted ;
therefore, although I would rather not do
so, I must vote against my hon. friend's
amendment if he persists in it.

Hon. Mr. LOUGH EED— There appears
to exist some misapprehension in the minds
of hon. gentlemen in regard to the position
of the Government last session in regard to
amending the jury law as it stands at
present. The Committee were certainly
under the impression at the time it was
submitted to them that there was a dispo-
sition on the part of the Government
to accede to the proposition as it had been
proposed. In British Columbia the majority
of the jury in criminal cases within the
jurisdiction of the County Court can agree
upon a verdict. Of course we in the Terri-
tories are placed in a different position from
the provinces, inasmuch as we have only six
of a jury. Although it requires unanimity
in the Terri tones, so far as the jury is con-
cerned, yet if a jury of six in that part of
Canada can bring in a veixiict against a
prisoner, I should say that the same justice
should be meted out in the provinces — at '
least, what is good enough for the people in
the Territories should be good enough for
the people* in the provinces. Consequently a
verdict say by eleven in the provinces should
insure to the accused the same measure of
justice as a verdict by six jurors in the Ter-
ritories. I would be very sorry, however, if
my hon. friend from Halifax should, so late
in the session, press his motion, upon the
House. I merely desire to record the Wews
which I hold in relation to this subject, and
T would ask my hon. friend in view of the
opinions which have been expressed by some
hon. members of the House — opinions w^hich
are in sympathy with his own — that he
withdraw the motion for this session and
doubtless next session the Government will
give fuller consideration to the subject.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It has been stated
that in the North-west Territories the jury
is composed of six, and six bring in a
verdict.

Hon. Mr. LOUGHEED— Yes.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— We only want the
same principle. Whatever may be the num-
ber of the jury, we want the unanimous

Digitized by

Google

Carleton Branch [MARCH 29, 1893] Railway Bill.

473

verdict. If it had been proposed in the
Lower House that the number of jurors be
limits to eight or ten, it might not meet the
same objection that I now make. We want
a unanimous verdict, whatever may be the
number of the jurors.

Hon. Mr. P()WER--I do not wLsh to
pn)long this discussion. I might express my
own opinion as to why the hon. gentleman
does not want the amendment, but I shall
not. I say that in deference to the opinions
that have l)een expressed, I will, with the
permissiim of the hon. gentleman, with-
<lraw the amendment. There were some
other amendments which the code needed, I
presume, and we had better let them go, as
they are clerical amendments. It is not the
desire of the Government to make the
measure perfect — it is their desire to get it
through.

Hon. Mr. ANOER8- Oh,
make it perfect.

no, it is to

H(m. Mr. YIDAL, from the Committee,
rejHirted the Bill with amendments, which
were concurred in, and the Bill was then
read the third time and passed.

The Senate adjourned at six o'clock.

SECOND SITTING.

The Speaker took the Chair at eight
o'clock, P.M.

Routine proceedings.

MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

THIRD READIXO.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved thethird read-
ing of Bill (92) *' An Act to amend the Mer-
chant Shipping Act, with respect to load
lines.'' He said : -The third reading of this
Bill was delayed to enable us to examine the
s<^ctions to be repealed. I think the hon.
gentleman fnnn Halifax is satisfied that the
repeal of all the sections mentioned is neces-
sary.

The motion was agree<l to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

DRUMMOND COUNTY RAILWAY
I COMPANY BrLL.

SECOND READING.

' Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved the second

reading of Bill (71) "An Act respecting the

Drummond County Railway Company."

He/ said : — This is a Bill to give additional

powers to the company whose charter was

I obtiiined, in 1886, from the Quebec Legisla-

I ture and amended in 1889. They built 65

' miles of their road, and now they want to

come under the Dominion laws and be given

powerto extend their linefrom St. Leonard's

to a point on the Intercolonial Railway in

the county of I^evis.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was re^d the second time.

CARLETON BRANCH RAILWAY
BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A message was received from the House of
Commons with Bill (122) "An Act to con-
firm the Side of the Carleton (city of St.
John) Branch Railway."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved, that the 41st
rule of the House be suspended and that the
Bill l)e read the second time presently. He
said : In reference to this Bill, I will make
the explanation necessary to induce the
House to allow it to be passed through all
its stages to-night. By an Act passed in 1 890
or 1891, the Minister of Railways and Canals
was authorized to enter into an arrangement
with the city of St. John, N.B., for the sale
by the Government of what is termed the
Carleton Branch, on the payment to the
Government of $40,000. That sum has Wen
{)aid and a transfer has l)een mmle ; this
Bill is simply to confinn the arrangement
which has l)een made by the Government
with the city of St. John for the transfer of
that branch.

Hem. Mr. DICKEY— The arrangeuient
has l)een carrietl out, I undei-stand ?

Hem. Mr. BOWELL— Yes.
The motion was agreed to.
The House resolved itself int^ Committee
of the whole on the Bill.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington), from
the Committee, reporteil the Bill without

Digitized by

Google

474

Patent Act [SENATE] Amendment Bill

'amendment, and the Bill was then read the
third time and passed under a suspension of
the rules.

PATENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (110) " An Act fur-
ther to amend the Patent Act."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved that the rule
of the House be suspended and that the Bill
be read the second time presently. He
said : — The object of this Bill is to compel
applicants for patents to furnish the Depart-
ment with the claim or claims in triplicate.
It also provides that the Deputy -Commis-
sioner of Patents may be authorized to sign
tlie same as well as the Commissioner. It
provides that where more than one applica-
tion for a patent is made in one notice, the
fee of S2 be collected for each patent men-
tioned in the notice, and that if a partial i
fee only is paid, the proportion of the fee
paid shall be stated in the patent, and the
patent shall, nowithstanding anything there-
in or in this Act contained, cease at the end
of the term for which the partial fee has '
been paid, unless at the expiration of the i
said term the holder of the patent pays the
fee required for the future term of sixmonths. |
That is the main object of the Bill. The
object of allowing the Deputy-Commissioner
of Patents to sign, is to avoid a delay when
the Commissioner of Agriculture is away or 1
engaged in other business : and there is no I
reason why the Deputy-Minister should not |
have that power. There are several thousands i
of those patents issued every year. i

Hon. Mr. POWER— The principal object"
of the Bill— if that is the one just mentioned |
by the hon. gentleman- -is a perfectly right
and proper one. The Deputy-Commissioner is j
the only person who has to do with the I
patents, and it is a mere piece of red tape ;
and unnecessary formality to require the '
signature of the Commissioner, who is the
Minister, I understand. There is one pro- j
vision to which the Minister refen*ed which ^
needs some explanation. . He said that it was i
proposed that the plans and specifications !
should .be sent in to the Department in
triplicate.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Not the plans,
merely the claims The plans are sent in

duplicate, but it is required that the claims

should be sent in triplicate. One copy
I remains in the otfice, one copy is annexed U)

the patent as it is issued, and the third copy
' is for the Printing Bureau, so as t<) save the
, Department the trouble of making a copy of

a long and technical document.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The explanation is
j thoroughly satisfactory.

' The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
I was read the second time and referred to a
j Committee of the Wliole House.

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. POWER—Does this Bill say
that section 21 is repealed? I wish to call
attention to the fact that the subsection of
section 21 was apparently. droppe<l alto-
gether, and that was one of some importance.
If instead of repealing section 21, you re-
peal the first section of 21, it would probably
answer just as well.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— There is no dis-
cussion about the application. There seems
to be very little reason why it should be re-
ferred to the Minister of Justice, because
only questions of law should be referred to
him. The technical ([uestions that may
arise must be decided by the officers of the
Department, who are specialists in this mat-
ter, and of course the Department would
not think of granting a patent when there
was a dispute<l claim upon it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am able t<^ speak
rather feelingly from a little experience I
have had in connection with applications for
patents at Washington. The people who
are applying for patents, and the public
generally, need all the protection they can
get. The second* subsection of this section
21 is a very valuable one. It tends to
pi'event litigation ; everylxKly knows there
is liardly any subject which is a more fenile
source of litigation than the acquiring of
patents. It is very important that where
questions do arise the opinion of the Deputy-
Minister — not necessarily the Minister of
Justice — should be had in the first instance,
so as to be sure that the man who thinks he
is getting a patent is really getting a valuable
right, and is not simply getting hold of a
lawsuit. I do not think we should part
with that second subsection.

Digitized by

Google

The Drumnxond County [MARCH 29, 1893] Railway Company's Bill 475

Hon. Mr. ANGERS — T have no objec-
tion to a<lopt the suggestion if hon. nienibeVs
think it is necessiiry, but as a rule whenever
there is a disputeil claim it is submitted to
the Minister of Justice before the Depart-
ment can deal with it. On technical ques-
tions, as to whether it is a real invention or
not, the Department decides. If the amend-
ment is accepted by the House, I have no
objection to it : we might say the fii-st part
of the 21st section.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY I am very glad that
the Minister ha.s taken this coui-se, because
otherwise, if this subsection was repealed
with the other pail of the section, there
would l>e no pn>tection at all, even where a
dispute might arise cm a legal point.

The amendment was agix»ed to, and the
clause as amended was a<l opted. .

Hon. Mr. POWER 1 notice in subsec-
tion 2, relating to the jwiyment of fees, the
woi-ds ** or before " are struck out. It should
l>e "at or before."

Won. Mr. AN(JER8 — Those woixls were
in the Bill as intnxluced in the House of
Connnons and wei'e there struck out. Of
course, that would not debar any one from
sending the fee beforehand, and I thought
it would not l>e worth while to insert the
woi-ds in the Bill after they had b*»en struck
out by the House of Commons. It would
cause delay and trouble for a trifling matter.
Every Ixxly will understand that common
prudence will recpiire the fees to be mailed a
little in advance in order to have them reach
Ottawa in time.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The action taken by
the House of Commons seems extniordinary.
It may happen, for instance, that the repre-
sentative of the patentee is in Ottawa a
month l>efore the expiration of the patent,
and has taken that opportunity to pay the
fee. What the motive of the House of Com-
mons was in striking out those words it is
difficult to understand.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— I did not under-
stand it either : but suppose the patentee
happened to be in Ottawa a month before
the expiration of the patent and offered the
fees, the hon. gentleman will understand we
never refuse them.

Hon. Mr. DRUMMOND— I understand
that the shortest term of a patent is six

years and that it can be extended for twelve
years longer. Suppose after the end of the
first year the inventor wishes to extend the
patent for the full term can he do so 1

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— Certainly ; that is
the way I understand it.

Hon. Mr. DEVER, from the Committee,
reported the Bill with an amendment which
was concurred in.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

THE DRUMMOND COUNTY RAII^
WAY COMPANY'S BILL.

A QUESTION OF ORDER.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I should Uke to call
the attention of the House to the position
in which we stand with reference to the
Drummond County Railway Bill. I am
asked, as Chairman of the Committee on
Railways, to call a meeting of the Committee
for to-morrow morning. I am quite j)repared
to act, as I am sure every member of the
Committee is, but I am placed in a position
of difficulty in which I should like to take
the counsel of the House. The rules of our
House require that a Bill shall not be con-
sidered in Committee until after twenty -four
houi-s' notice. It has been suggested to me
that that was evidently intended to mean a
sitting of the House, and, if that be a correct
interpretation of the rule, as the i^econd sit-
ting of the House to-<lay has been counted a
separate day, the Committee might meet to-
morrow morning and consider the Bill. The
difficulty in my mind arises entirely from the
fact that this might not be considered twenty-
four hours' notice. Substantially it is, l)ecause
the Bill has had two dLstinct stages to-<lay.
If there is any doubt upon that point, it is
but fair and right, after the manner in which
we have suspended the rules of the House in
other cases, that the parties should have an
opportunity, of presenting their claims for
incorporation. I have been pressed to call
a meeting of the Committee, but have re-
frained from doing so until I know what
the feeling of the House is on the subject.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL -I think the re-
marks made by the hon. member from Am-
hei-st are correct, so far as they apply to the
rule itself. It was undei-st^KKl, I should
judge, when that mle was adopted, that it

Digitized by

Google

476

The JDrummond County [SENATE] Railway Company's Bill.

contemplated the intervention of twenty-
four hours between each sitting of the
House. I can scarcely suppose it would
mean that if the Committee sat to-morrow,
and the House did not adjourn until 9 or 10
o'clock at night, ft would preclude the
consideration of the Bill by the Committee
the following day. Literally interpreting
the rule, it would mean twenty -four hours
from the time when the second reading
passed this House before it could be consid-
ered by the Committee. There has been
some little tlatit^ude, I have noticed, in the
intf^rpretation of the rules here, and the rule
might be construed as meaning from one
sitting of the House to another, but whether
it was contemplated to apply the rule to a
case like this, where there have been two
sittings in one day, I cannot say. There is
an easy way of getting over the difficulty.
The House might consent to suspend the
rule, but I very much fear that such a course
would be objected to by some of the members
who are opposed to this Bill.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I mentioned it be-
cause it is the only Bill that will be referred
to us, and I did not like to give thirty or
forty gentlemen the trouble of meeting and
doing something that might be disallowed
by the House. As the rule has been sus-
pended in so many cases, I thought it might
be dispensed with in this case.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — In endeavouring to
interpret the meaning of one of the Rules
of the House, it would l)e well to think for
whose benefit the rule has been made. Is it
for the benefit of the members of the Senate
or for the benefit of persons outside, that
they may have due notice that the Bill is to
be considered ? My opinion is that twenty-
four hours must elapse between the second
reading of the Bill and its consideration by
the committee. Unless the rule is suspended
by the consent of the House, the Bill could
not go before the connnittee to-morrow.

Hon. Mr. POWEI^ I did not undei-stand
the leader of the House to express any de-
cided opinion on this question, and I do not
think that our practice has Ijeen of the rigid
chaiacter indicated by the hon. gentleman
from Sarnia. I have veiy fre<juently known
Bills to be considered by the Committee
within twenty-four hours after the second
reading, without the notice retjuired by the

Rules. In this particular instance the parties
who are interested have been here, and their
representatives are here now in force, so that
there is no harm being done. We are suspend-
I ing the rules on behalf of the Government
measures, and pushing business through. Is
there any particular reascm why this Bill
should be made a sort of scapegoat for the
I laxity which has been shown in dealing with
other Bills, some of which are not so meri-
torious '? No substantial reason has been given
why this Bill should not pass. It was n<»t
opposed in the House of Commons, and the
fact is just this — the company has built some
sixty miles of road thiY)ugh a good and
j)opulous country, and proposes to build
some sixty miles more. The company is
not fusking Parliament for any aid or special
privileges. I think it one of the most meri-
torious private bills that we have had l)efoi^
the House this se.ssion. Although the
twenty-four hours notice might be required
if we were interpreting the rules strictly, I
would remark that we do not interpret our
rules strictly, and the Chairman would have
been justified in thinking that the notice
was sufficient. The Forty-seccmd Rule pn>-
i vides that measures are sometimes passed
with unusual speed, and now at the close of
I the session, is just the time when measures
' are l)eing passed with unusual speed. I do
I not see why a different me^usure should l)e
I dealt out to this Bill ^rom that which has
! been applied to all othei*s. It is a case for
I liberal construction and a liberal construc-
tion of this rule would allow the Bill to go
I l)efore the Committee to-morrow morning.
I think the Chairman would have }>eenquit<»
justified in calling the Committee without
referring the matter to the House and re-
I porting the Bill to the House.

i Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— I do not know
, that I am particularly intei*ested in this Bill
I -in fact I know very little about it although

it is in my charge. I agree with the hon.

meml>er from Halifax — I do not see why this
I Bill should be made a scapegoat at the tail

end of the session. It certainly will not help
I those who are opposed to the measure when

it comes before the Railway Committee, to
I be raising all these technical objections at

diffei-ent stages of the Bill. I would rather
I see the hon. gentleman accept the motion to

suspend the rule and fight the Bill for all it
I is worth before the Committee. If he has a
1 good ciuse, if he has a valid objection to the

Digitized by

Google

The Drummond County [MAECH 29, 1893] Railway Company's Bill. 477

granting of this charter, I am satisfied that
the Railway Committee will deal with the
subject on its merits. I hope the hon. gentle-
man who has opposed it at the different
stages wilt not oppose the suspension of the
rule. As I understand the Chairman of the
Committee, he cannot accept the twenty-four
hours as meaning from one sitting to
another.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — This is really a case
where the House is called upon to decide
l)etween olxserving the strict letter of the
law, and considering the Rules in a liberal
spirit as applicable to the measure before us.
If this were a case where the parties inter-
ested, in the passage of the Bill, or opposed
to it, were at a distance from the Capital,
the House would not be justified in allowing
any deviation from the rule, but I under-
stand no opposition has been made to this
Bill in the House of Commons, and no oppo-
sition has been made here except by one
hon. gentleman, and I am also given to
understand that the parties have been here,
and are here now, and that no injustice can
>>e done to anybody by construing the rule
liberally and letting the Bill go before the
committee to-morrow. The House would be
acting in the right spirit in the matter if
they adopted that course.

Hon. Mr. VIDAL — Like my hon. friend,
I should be very much l)etter pleased it
those interested parties would consent to a
suspension of the rule, but I would not join
in forcing it if they are not willing to con-
sent to it.

Hon. Mr. GUEVREMONT (In French.)
I regret exceedingly that I cannot assent to
the proposition to suspend the rule with
regard to this Bill. I object to it for several
reasons. The first is that persons outside of
the Senate are opposed to the Bill, and repos-
ing confidence in the members of this Cham-
ber, they would adhere strictly to a rule calcu-
lated to delay the consideration of a Bill
designed to injure a large number of resi-
dents in the locality where the railroad is to
be built. They have gone away. It would be
unfair to them to suspend the rule and pro-
ceed wuth the Bill, without giving them a
chance to come and present their reasoiis for
opposing it. The hon. member from Halifax
has said that no opposition was made to the
Bill in the other House : if I remenil)er

correctly it was opposed in the Railway
Committee of the other House. I do not
know what particular reason the hon. mem-
ber from Halifax has for wishing to see this
Bill passed in opposition to the w ishes of the
people of the province of Quebec. Why
did the Bill not pass before the Quebec Legis-
lature at its last session? The company
obtained their charter originally from the
Quebec Legislature. They appeared before
the Legislature at its last session asking for
an amendment to their charter ; why then,
will the hon, gentleman from Halifax tell
me, did the Legislature of Quebec deem it
necessary, knowing the needs and wishes of
the. people of that locality, to refuse that
legislation ? I believe that we should i*e-
spect the decision of the people of the pro-
vince of Quebec, knowing, as they do per-
fectly, the circumstances of the case and the
needs of the people of that locality. We
should ti*ust to the judgment of the Local
Legislature, and enforce the Rules of this
House with regard to this Bill.

Hon. Mr. POWER- The hon. gentleman
makes a very good fight for his clients. He
tells us that the people who are interested
in opposing this Bill left Ottawa, and that
they went away relying on the rigid enforce-
ment of these technical rules against this
Bill, and that, having been here and hav-
ing gone away relying on these technical
grounds, they are not in a position to appear
l>efore the Committee to-morrow to oppose
the measure. T do not think that, in the
first place, that is a s^round of objection that
would commend itself to the members of this
House. The hon. gentleman knows per-
fectly well that the parties who oppose this
Bill have, in himself and in some of his col-
leagues, the strongest representatives they
could have. There is not an objection to
be taken to this Bill before the Committee
that the hon. gentleman is not in a position
to present just as well as any of the gentle-
men who have gone away to Montreal. Con-
sequently, there is nothing in that argument.
Then the hon. gentleman makes some refer-
ence to my having taken an interest in this
Bill. Coming from the province of Nova
Scotia, I am even more interested in the
success of this undertaking than the hon.
gentleman is, because the road, for the con-
struction of which this company is asking
power, is a line which will cimnect with the
Intercolonial Railway, and afford freight to

Digitized by

Google

478

The Drummond County [SENATE] Railway Company^s Bill.

and from the province of Nova Scotia a
better line than the Grand Trunk Railway
offei*s. I should be very sorry to see an
important measure of this kind blocked by
a mere technical objection, taken in this
way at the close of the session. With re-
spect to the question of order in this House,
while the decision of the Speaker is always
treated with respect, the Rules provide that,
when it comes to an interpretation of a Rule,
the House has a right to deal with the
matter. If there is any doubt as to the
meanin<]j of a Rule, the House has a ri<]jht to
decide what shall be the interpretation of
that Rule, and, if it is the decision of the
House that the Committee could meet to-
morrow and consider this Bill, there is noth-
ing to prevent the House so deciding.

Hon. Mr. MASSON — The hon. gentleman
from Halifax asks why this Bill is opposed
The hon. gentleman from Soi'el explained
in French that the Bill is distasteful to the
province of Quebec — that it was presented
to the Legislature of Quebec at its last
session, and was thrown out. These parties,
having failed there, have come here for legis-
lation which is distasteful to the province.

Hon. Mr. POWER -It does not follow
that it was distasteful to the people of
Quebec because it was rejected by that legisla-
ture.

Hon. Mr. MASSON- Oh ! oh !

Hon. Mr. POWER— One can readily
understand how that would happen. The
Great Eastern Railway Company, repre-
sented by the hon. gentleman fi*om Sorel,
have a right to build a line close to the
south bank of the St. Lawrence river. There
is a considerable population there, much
more than in the interior where this road
proposes to go, and one can readily under-
stand that where the majority of the votes are,
there the majority of representatives would
be also. I can readily understand that the
representatives of the counties facing on the
St. Lawrence river, would not — looking at
the thing from a local point of view — be
anxious to have this road constructed,
because they might be under the impression
that that would interfere with the construc-
tion of the other road. The Great Eastei'n
Railway Company has liad a charter for I
think fifteen yeiirs, and has made almost

no progress. I do not think that the older
company ought to be allowed to stand in the
way of a live company which shows what it
is prepared to do by what it has done.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHER VILLE— I do

not think the question is whether the Bill
should be supj>orted or not ; the question is
as to the interpi-etation of the rule of the
House. Although the hon. memljer from
Halifax is generally in the right, he is a little
mistaken in the way he has put the question
to-day. If this Bill had been read the sec*md
time at the tirsf sitting, this sitting might
be considered a whole day, and to-morrow a
whole twenty-four hours on account of there
having been a sitting l)etween the second
residing and the reference to the committee,
but in this cjuse there will be no sitting l>e-
tween the second reading and the sitting of
the committee, and, therefore, I do not think
the interval can l)e taken as a day. Certainly
if we were discussing the details of the Bill
the reasons given by the hon. member fn>m
Sorel are very strong. If any one is interest-
ed in this Bill it is certainly those who come
from the province of Quebec, and I dare say
a majority of them would l>e opposed to this
Bill. But that is not the question ; the ques-
tion is shall the rules be adhered to or not.
If any one is opposed to the Bill he has a
right to take advantage of the Rules of the
House and these rules cannot be changed
except by unanimous consent. No notice
has been given of the propasition to susj>end
the rule and the questicm cannot l>e discussed.
I do not see how my hon. friends can think
there is any doubt that twenty-four hours
cannot be interpreted in any sense than at
least one sitting having taken place l^tween
the second reading and the reference to the
connnittee.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN I move

That ill the opinion of this House the construction
•of the rules will permit the committee to meet and
consider this Bill to-morrow morning.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHER VILLE- There

must be a notice of that motion.

Hon. Mr. MASSON Such a motion can-
not be put without notice.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I do not see that
the motion is out of order. The question
of order hjus arisen with reference to this
Bill, and the hon. gentleman wants to take

Digitized by

Google

The Printing [MARCH 30, 1893J of Parliament,

479

the opinion of tlie House on the question of
order. He has a ri<?ht to do that.

Hon. Mr. MAS8()N — What is the ques-
tion l)efore the Chair ? The hon. *i;entleman
had no ri|?ht to put that question. He can
only put a question when he gives notice of
it ; otherwise the House does not know of
it. I have not examined the rules sutti-
cently to know whether we can, by our
ipse dianfy change the Rules of the House.
The Rules are framed for the protection of
the minority, and the majority cannot change
them. The Rule says that you cannot dis-
pense with any of the Rules if one memljer
objects. The hon. gentleman is endeavouu-
ing to make the House declare that we
shall not follow the Rules : that is tanta-
mount to changing the Rules.

Hon. Mr. McMJLLAX—The Chairman
of the Committee has asked the House for
instructions, and I think the House should
gi>^ him these instructions.

Hon. Mr. MAS80X — No hon. member
has a right to ask for instructions. He can
ask the opinion of the House as to what he
might do in an infoiinal way. He has no right
to ask for instructions, because other instruc-
tions cannot he given to him unless a motion
is made. The House can only manifest its
feeling by means of a motion. I appeal to
the hon. member on the other side who has
just spoken and ask him, can a motion like
this l>e sprung upon the House without giv-
ing notice, unless it is a question of adjourn-
ment.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This whole discus-
sion is as irregular as it could possibly be,
but, as the hon. member who has just sj)oken
indicated a moment ago, it arose from a
difficulty that presented itself in the inter-
pretation of the rule by the Chairman of the
Railway Committee. I do not think my
hon. friend from Alexandria can make the
motion he has presented. The only way to
arrive at it would be to make some motion,
and, if it is declared out of order by the
Speaker, appeal to the House against his
decision. This mode is irregular. Tf the
hon. gentleman desires to put an interpreta-
tion upon the inile which many of us think
it would not bear, the only way he can do
that is by giWng notice and bringing it up
to-morrow morning at the next sitting of

the House. It would be somewhat difficult
to declare by resolution that a rule should
be interpreted in direct opposition to the
wording of the rule itself. You might pass
a resolution repealing that rule and substi-
tuting another, and then declaring what its
meaning should be, but certainly it would
l>e, not only irregular, but something unpre-
cedented, to pursue the course that my hon.
friend suggests now.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— I gather from the
expressions of hon. gentlemen, more particu-
larly on the other side of the House, that 1
shall be obliged to call the Committee toge-
ther at a future date.

Hon. Mr. POWER -After the next sit^
ting.

The Senate adjourne<l at 9.30 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa^ Thursday, Moj'ch SOth, isy-i.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at II
o'clock.

Routine proceedings.
THE PRINTING OF PARLIAMENT.

MOTION.

H<m. Mr. READ (Quinte) moved the
adoption of the Sixth Report of the Joint
Committee of lx)th houses on the Printing
of Parliament. He said : — This report was
read at length at the Table yesterday. It
provides that certain documents be printed,
and that certain documents be not printed,
and also recommends that a copy of Blatch's
Ready Reference to the Statutes of Canada
be supplied to each member of both bran-
ches of the Parliament, and other minor
matters.

Hon. Mr. POWP]R — I camiot approve
of the item providing for the purchase of
the " Ready Reference " for each member
of both Houses. This lx)ok may l)e of some
use to lawyers, but few of the meml)ers of
the House will look at it ; and this will in-
volve a large expense at a time when the
Government are endeavounng to reduce ex-
pense, as they did when dealing with the

Digitized by

Google

480

Civil Service [SENATE] Superannuation Bill,

messengers. I think the Committee should
recommend that any member who wishes to
get this Ready Reference might have it in
the place of st«,tionery. This is just one
of those cases which we often have of hon.
gentlemen trying to do a good turn for their
friends outside at the public expense instead
of doing it at their own.

Hon. Mr. READ — My recollection is that
the piice is only 80 cents a copy.

Hon. Mr. MrCLELAN— I undei-stood
that the feeling of the committee was that
it was not important to lawyers, who were
supposed to know all about the law already,
but that it might l)e useful to laymen.

Hon. Mr. VTDAL — Although a member
of that committee, in my judgment, they
have gone entirely outside of their duties
and powei^s in making a recommendation of
this sort. As a Printing Committee, we are
called upon to judge of the propriety of
printing documents submitted to the House,
and I do not think it comes within the
duties of that committee to make grants. It
appears to me that that should be left to
tha Committee on Contingent Accounts, or
at any rate, to some other committee than
the Joint Committee of l)oth Houses on
Printing.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — It ought to come
l>efore the Library Committee.

Hon. Mr. GOWAN— It was referred to
the Hon. Mr. Power and myself. Hon. Mr.
Power did not quite agree with me, but I
appeared before the Committee and rei)re-
sented the point wherein we differed. At
tlie same time, I was able to bear testimony
as to the usefulness of the lxx)k, not so
much to a lawyer as to a layman, and l)eing
somewhat familiar with the Statutes for
many years, I recognized the value of this
l>ook. It is just the plan I adopted myself
years ago, and it is a good means for any one,
whether a gentleman learned in the law, or
a layman, to keep track of the Statutes as
they pass, and I very strongly reconnnend
the purchase of the lx)ok. The committee
were unanimous in reconunending it.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I take tlie
sfime view as my hon. friend from Halifax.
I do not consider it of much value for laymen.
Lriiwyers, of course, would keep altering it to

meet the amendments in legislation, but you
could hardly suppose a layman could do that.
Without these amendments it would be use-
less as a guide. I said last session that I
did not think the Printing Committee had a
right to vote or recommend the granting of
money for any purpose.- There are other
gentlemen, I l)elieve, who have written a
guide to the Statutes just as meritorious as
this <me, but for some reason, of which I am
not aware, this one is. recommended by the
Committee. I think all the members wh(»
want it should buy it for themselves.

The motion was agreed to.

CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION
BILL.

FIRST AND SECOXD READINGS.

A Message from the House of Commons
was received with Bill 27 ** An Act to amend
the Civil Service Superannuation Act.'

The Bill was read the fii'st time.

Hon. Mr. BOW ELL moved the su.«pen-
sicm of the rule as regaixis thLs Bill, and that
the Bill be re^ the second time.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I shall object to the
rule l)eing suspended any further than per-
mitting the second reading. I do not object
to the second residing.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

BILL INTRODUCED.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (123): "An Act re
specting the Voters' Lists of 1893."

The Bill was read the first time,

INQUIRY.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I would like
to know when I may expect the returns to
my motion with reference to the Exp<»ri-
I mental Fann.

Hon. Mr. AN(iERS~I am surpiised that
the hon. gentleman has not received this yet.
I have often applied for it, and I think the
I delay is due to the absence of some of the
j officers of the Department, but I shall be
willing to show it to the hon. gentleman in
case it should not be laid on the Table before
the House closes.

The House adjourned at 12.15 p.m.

Digitized by

Google

The RvLlez Df tMARCH 30, 18J>3J the House.

481

Second Sitting.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at 3
o'clock.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

PUBLIC PRINTING ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL introduced Bill (X)
" An Act to amend chapter 27 of tlie Re-
vise<l Statutes intituled an Act respecting
the Public Printing." He said : — This is a
very short hut a very necessary Bill for the
proper workinpf and management of the
Intercolonial Railway. The House is aware
that a change has been made by which the
headquarters of the Intercolonial Railway
are now at Moncton, from which station all
orders are issued affecting the railway.
Under the law as it stands relating to the
printing of Parliament and all other Gov-
ernment printing, the Intercolonial Railway
officials at Moncton, St. John, Halifax, and
Queljec are prevented from even printing
the tickets neccessary, or a time-table when
it may be neccessary to make a change. The
Bill is to give authority to the Railway De-
partment to have that kind of printing per-
formed where it is most convenient in the
public interest. Thepowergiven here issimply
to enable the superintendent at Moncton or at
Quel)ec in case they should require railway
tickets or a time-table, to have it done theie
without sending it to Ottawa. The incon-
venience which would arise f^om having to get
the work done here will present itself to eveiy
member of the House. This leaves the
auditing of the accounts to the Queen's
Printer and Auditor-General at Ottawa, so
ius to prevent the possibility of any over-
charge.

The motion was agreed to, and the BiU
wjui passed through all its stages under sus-
pension of the rules.

THE RULES OF THE HOUSE.

MOTION.

The Order of the Day being called, " consi-
deration of the report of the special Com-
mittee appointed to revise the orders, rules
and forms of proceeding of the Senate."

Hon. Mr. POWER moved the adoption
of the report and explained the changes pro-
31

posed. He said : — The Committee thought
that they would not make any recommen-
dation to the House as to the action which
should be taken upon these rules now. Thei^e
is a good deal to be said in favour of allow-
ing this draft to stand over until next session
so that each hon. gentleman may have a
copy of the draft and consider it during the
recess, if he is so dispased, so that when we
meet again (which I hope we may all next
year) this draft can be referred to a Com-
mittee and any amendments that may have

I suggested themselves to the members of the
Senate during the recess may then be con-

I sidered. Of course if the House think well
to adopt the rules at once, notice should be
given, because under our rules a day's notice
is required to make a new standing order,
and it would l>e necessary now to give notice
for Saturday. I have moved the fuloption
of the report, which does not imply that the
rules are to be dealt with at once, and I leave
it to the House to decide whether the rules
shall stand over until next session.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHER VILLE — I
understand that these ndes are to be print-
ed.

Hon. Mr. POWER—They are printed
now. Any hon. gentleman who wishes to
examine them can do so in this form quite
as conveniently as in any other form.

Hon, Mr. DICKEY— I should like to
make a suggestion to the leader of the
Government with raspect to the last point
that was Jidverted to by my hon. friend as
to the time when these rules shall come into
operation. That ought to be well thought
of before we come to any conclusion upon it
for this reason, that it would be manifestly
a most inconvenient thing that these rules
should go into operation at any period of
the session except the beginning of the ses-
sion. Otherwise you would have one set
of rules in operation for a portion of the
session, and for the remainder of the session
would have these new and revised rules. It
would lead to a great deal of entanglement
and difficulty in the applicati(m of these
rules, but it would be simplified if we could
start fair. If the House will place confi-
dence in the laboui*s of the Committee and
on Saturday will conclude to adopt these
rules, they willl)e in shape to go into operation
at the beginning of next session. There is

Digitized by

Google

482

The Rules of [SENATE] the House.

a manifest convenience in that course, and effect from the beginning of the second ses-
certainly there is an equally manifest incon- ' sion ijfter this. There is no difficulty in that,
venience in any course which would require I do not think it is proper to discuss the

them only to take effect after the first ten or
twenty days of the ensuing session. I leave
it to the House to consider what is best to
l>e done.

Hon. 'Mr. SCOTT -T was not able to

merits of these rules now, but I am strongly
impressed with the correctness of the \'iews of
the hon. member from Ottawa in reference
to the passage of Bills through either House
without having been petitioned for, the peti-
tion in each case setting forth what Ls re-
BiU.

attend all the meetings of the conmiittee, l>ut quired and what is intended by the
I observe there are some of the rules which i Private interests may be materially affected
certainly require further ctmsideraticm. I , by the omission of anything from a petition,
can see no harm in allowing them to stand i and I think the rule in the House of Corn-
over until next .session. No emlnjirrassment , mons, in the Private Bills Committee as well
could arise by having them take effect scmie j as in the Railway Committee, has invaria-
tinie next session. Ijooking over them, I ' bly been, unless good reasons were shown
find rule fifty-seven practically is predicated , for departing from it, not to make any con-
on the assumption that private Bills may go cession in a Bill that is not embraced in
through this House without a petition being ' the petition, the object being to prevent the
presented. We should have a j>etition pre- 1 possibility of any person or any interest
sented before any Connnittee should consider' being taken by surprise. The suggestion, I
the Bill. If we adoj)t tJiis rule it will . undei-stiind, before the House at the present
strengthen the l>elief which is growing more , moment is simply to accept the report and
and more every year, that parties can present ! to consider on Satuixlay next as suggested
a petition in the House of Comuums and get ' by the hon. member from Halifax, whether

a Bill through there, and when the Bill
comes here it ^ill jus a matter of coui*se be
referred to the Standing Orders Cimnnittee.
We should adhere to our rules and insist
upon having a petition presented here ; and
if the petition is not presented at the right
time, we should require them to go through
the form of petitioning for leave to petition.
I see no inconvenience to result from letting
the rules stand until next session.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I am in precise\>'

he should proceed with it this year or let it
stand until next session.

H(m. Mr. KAULBACH -Had we notbet-
ter take it up now ? I think we had better
decide now whether these rules should be
dealt with next session or not. On Saturday
we shall have a very thin House. I am only
surprised that there are so few alterations
in the rules. I thought there would be a
great many more. No doubt the Committee
looked carefully through them and it shows

the same position as the hon. meniber from ' that the rules Were not so defective as some
Ottawa. It has been my misfortune not to ! of us thought they were. As to the Contia-

be able to attend the meetings of this com-
mittee, other duties having made greater
demands on my time. I fully concur in the
remarks made by the hon. meml^er from
Amherst, and alst), in the remarks made by
the hon. member from Ottawa, so far as the

gent Accounts Committee, I think it will
be more workable with the reiluced number,
and the public interests will be more care-
fully guarded. It is better to move that
the considerati<mof the rules take place next
session. It is useless to <jo to the expense

adoption of the report is cimcerned. It I of putting this in b<x)k form when it is be-
would be highly inconvenient to bring a new fore us in the most convenient form,
set of rules before the members of the House

with a view to having them come into force
in the middle of a session, and yet from what
has just fallen from the hon. member from
Ottawa, I think it is equally important that
we should not adopt these rules until the
next session of Parliament. Then, after a
thorough consideration of them during the
recess, if we think proper to adopt them
next session they could be made to take

Hon. Mr. BOW^ELL— I would suggest
that a sufficient number of these copies be
printed so that each member of the Senate
may have a copy.

Hon. Mr. POWER— That was the under-
standing. The opinion of the House, so far
as one can gather it from the remarks which
have been made by hon. gentlemen, is in

Digitized by

Google

Civil Service Superannuation [MARCH 30, 1893] Act Amendment Bill.

483

favour of letting the draft stand over for
consideration until the beginning of next
session. I may say that that was rather
my own inclination. It is desirable to make
our rules as nearly perfect as possible and
probably after the corsideration which may
be given by hon. gentlemen to this draft
during the recess, next session they will be
made more nearly perfect than these rules
are as submitted. I move that the considera-
tion of the draft be postponed until the next
session of Parliament.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY—In reference to
what has fallen ivom the hon. member from
Ottawa, about the presentation of a petition,
there is no alteration made in the rules with
regard to that. It remains as it has always
l>een. There has been a question about it.
I remember well Sir Alexander Campbell
stated as his opinion that the rules as they
stand and as the draft stands would require
a petition for every private Bill to be pre-
sented to this House, no matter whether the
Bill originated in the House of Commons or
not. I was of a different opinion, but we
both agreed that it was very desirable that
there should he a petition, for the reasons
which have been given by the leader of
the House to-day.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The inile of the
House of Commons is the same as our rule.
If a petition has been presented to the
House of Commons, and the House of Com-
mons has considered the petition and has
passed the Bill through all its stages, I doubt
very much whether we have the consti-
tutional right to refuse to deal with that
Bill. I doubt if we have the right to alter
that rule so a^ to require a petition to be
presented to this House.

Hon. Mr. B0T8F0RD--I was chairman
of a committee appointed to revise the rules
some years ago, and I know the difficulty of
making any alterations. It is very difficult
in 3- hurried way to put the true value on
the construction of any rule that might be
made. At that time copies of the rules
were furnished to every hon. member, and
an opportunity was given to consider them
thoroughly. Some changes were proposed,
but not so many as have been suggested by
the committee this session. I should like
to consider thoroughly the bearing of these
31J

rules, and therefore I hope the consideration
of them will be postponed until next session.

The motion was agreed to.

CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION
ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

THIRD READIXG.

The Order of the Day being called. Com-
mittee of the whole House on Bill (27) "An
Act to amend the Civil Sei'\'ice Super-
annuation Act."

Hon. Mr. BOWELL said :— This Bill is of
some importance, and I may add that it is
I not the Bill that I thought it was that was
j reported from the House of Commons this
morning. When I moved the suspension of
the Rules this morning I thought it was the
Bill regulating the insurance of the civil ser-
vants. The Bill before the House is one
changing materially the laws i^gulating the
superannuation of civil servants, and conse-
quently is somewhat more important than
the other. The measure has been fully dis-
cussed in the other House, and I am not
sure whether the members of the Senate have
read the debate attentively. If they have, it
will relieve me in a great measure from the
necessity of referring to it at any lengtli.
Should membei*8 of the Senate require it, I
shall try to answer such questions as may sug-
gest themselves in the progi'ess of the Bill
through Committee. The object of the
measure is to try, as near as possible, to
make the fund out of which the superannua-
tion is paid self-sustaining. At present the
charge upon the consolidated revenue of the
country is much larger than the Government
think it ought to be, and the civil servants
who profit by it could submit to a larger de-
duction annually in order to make the dif-
ference between the amount paid out and
that which is contributed to the revenue from
these abatements less onerous than at pre-
sent. I may add that while the proposition to
' increase the amount paid by civil sei*\'ants
I each year, another short Bill is introduced
which is a corollary to the one now before the
House, and which practically forms part of
it, providing a very cheap rate of insurance
for the civil servants. The Government do
not propose to enter into a general business
of insurance, but they confine it exclusively
to the employees of the Crown. I make that
statement in order that there may be no

Digitized by

Google

484 Civil Service Superannuation [SENATE] Act Amendment Bill,

misapprehension as to the intention of the ' years, and by the system of insurance which it
(Tovernment, and that the House and the is proposed to add to the superannuation, to

country may understand that the (lovern-

make a provision for the widows and orphans

ment does not propose to interfere with the of civil servants who die in the service,
legitimate insurance companies of the Those who have studied the question know
country beyond their own civil servants, that a civil servant may contribute to the
The House will remember that the first fund for 35 years, after which period his
Superannuation Bill was passed in 1870. contributions cease ; he may then continue
The provisions of it will be found in 33 ' in the service for 5 or 10 years longer, as his
Vic, chap. 4. It was introduced by the ! health w^ould permit, and if he is able to per-
late Sir PVancis Hincks. At that time he form the duties of his otiice. The provision
proposed that the abatement should be that you can retire a civil servant at 60 years
annually 4 per cent on all salaries of ?600 is not imperative. It is imperative on the
and upwards, and 2A per cent on all salaries part of the officer to accept if the (rovern-
under $600. Calculations have shown that ment so decree, but if he maintains his
if that rate had been maintained up to the , health, as many of them do, he can continue
present time and the fund had not l)een | for a longer {)eriod. I can give you one or
loaded at the time it was passed by the ' two illusti*ations where they approach the
superannuation of a large number of em- age of nearly 90. Take the late clerk of the
ployees who had never contributed to the | House of Commons, he was 89 or 90 when
fund, many of whom are still drawing their | he was superannuated, and he was then a
pensions, that abatement w^ould have been vigorous and active man and performed his
sufficient to have balanced the accounts. I duties admirably. That officer might have
Shortly after, by the Act 36 Vic, the annual paid into the superannuation fund during
abatement was reduced from 4 to 2 per cent the whole 35 years and then draw a pension
upon salaries of S600 and over, and to 1| per I for only a few years, and when he dies his
cent upon salaries under $600. This reduction j family gets nothing. Or take a still harder
has had the effect of placing a charge upon case, one in which an officer may have been
the revenue of the country very much in ' 35 years in the service, all that time con-
excess of the receipts, as is shown by the \ tributing to the superannuation fund, if he
public accounts of last year. In 1891-92 > drops off before being superannuated his
the amount paid by civil servants into the j family gets nothing, or all they get is the
fund amounted to 863,892.70, but the sum ! two months' gratuity which is paid to all
paid out to those who h;id been superan- officers. As an illustration of longeWty in
nuated amounted to 8253,679.88. This | this country we find upon looking into the
disparity, the House will see, is very great, j records that there are no less than 391
I have the table before me, but I will not persons now upon the su}>erannuation list
weary the House reading it, showing the ' drawing their annual pensions, who were
operation of the law as it stands on the > placed on the retired list in 1870-71, at
Statute-b(X)k from 1871 to 1892. That is ; which time the Superannuation Act was
including the first year on the 4 per cent and passed. *

the 2 J per cent, and then under the 2 per j

cent and the IJ percent. I will just call I Hon. Mr. POWER -They ha^l paid
the attention of the House to this fact, that nothing,
the first year there was paid into this fund |

849,000, the second year 853,000, and the Hon. Mr. BOWELL A large proportion
third year 854,000. The law w^as then of them never paid anything into the fund
changed, and the receipts from this fund fell | at all, and that is <me reason why, as I said
to 834,000, and it has only at the present befoie, it has bt^en overloaded. The average
day reached the sum to which I have already ' age of those 391 persons now upon the list
called the attention of the House, 863,000, I is alwuit seventy-one years which speaks well
while the expenditure has reached $253,679. I for our climate. Some of them run from
Under the circumstances, two propositions t^ghty t<) ninety. It has been contended by
suggested themselves to the Oovemment. ' some that we should alxilish the whole sys-
One was to al)olish the whole system ; the ' tem. This is scarcely julvisable under the
other was to so amend the law jus to try and circumstances. I may add, although it has
make the accounts balance in a very few nothing to do witli this question, that when

Digitized by

Google

Civil Service Superannuation [MARCH 30, 1893] Act Amendment Bill

485

tlie uri)(inal Superannuation Bill was inti*o-
dueed in the House of Commons in 1870, I
was one of thase who opposed the measure.
It is not necessary for me to go into my
reasons for opposing it. The law is cm the
8tatute-l)ook at present, and it would be a
great hardship, particularly to those who are
now in the service, to intei-fere with their
positions. Neither does this Bill propose to
iiitei-ft^i-e with the status of the present civil
servants. They will remain as they have
lieen in the past, and will receive the same
advantages that they enjoy under the pre-
sent law. It is proposed that any party
entering the service after tlie age of forty-
tive years shall not be entitled to superannua-
tion, and shall not he required to contribute
to the su]>erannuation fund. It is proposed
])y the present Bill to make the abatement
three and a half per cent im all salaries over
S600, and three per cent on salanes under
8600, so that persons entering the service
now will know precisely what they may
exj>ect. This sum will l)e dej)osited to
the cre<lit of the Receiver-General, and
the otficials paying into the fund will
I'eceive on those investments 6 per cent.
That is, the (lovernment propose to »idd to the
sum which they pay in 2 per cent more than
what might be considered the rate at which
a (yove^nment could borrow money, or in
other words, it is a contribution from the
public exchetjuer to the extent of 2 per
cent in order to create a fund which would
l)e sufficient to meet the requirements that
would be made upon it. The House will
undei-stand — if I have not made it plain I
trust attenti(m will be called to it — that the
al>atement is increased. That abatement
will \)e placed to the credit of the fund out
of which the superannuation payments are
ma<le. In order to make ends meet, if I
may use that expression, it will l>e necessary
for the country to contribute an additional
2 per cent, making the interest allowable 6
per cent by which it is believed that in
about 25 years the fund will be self-sustain-
ing. Calculations show that the fund then
at the credit of the Civil Service Superanua-
tion Fund will amount to about $2,000,000.
That being the case, then the necessity of
<lrawing upon the general funds of the coun-
tr}' in orvler to meet the requirements of the
Bill will have disappeared. I have almost a
deluge of statistics which I do not .suppose
the House desires to l>e troubled with. I
have given as short and as clear an exposi-

j tion of the proposition that is now before
, the House as I could well do in the short
space that I allotted to myself at this period
' of the session. I am inclined to the opinion
j that although the Bill met with a good deal
t of opposition in the other branch of Parlia-
ment, still the great majority came to the
I conclusion that the proposition of theGovern-
! ment was in the interest of the civil ser-
I vants and certainly in the interests of the
revenue of the country.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Is this in-
creased abatement compulsory upon all who
are now in the Civil Service, or only on those
who enter it hereafter ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — It is compulsory
on all civil servants at the present moment.
It will be equally compulsory on all civil
servants who enter the service, under the
age of 45, in the future, only at a higher
rate.

'Hon. Mr. POWER -I never read the
, debates of the House of Commons and so I
dare say I have lost a great deal, but I
think the hon. gentleman's explanation,
although not very long, was clear enough
and gives us a very fair idea of the principle
of the Bill. I may say, without pledging
myself as to details, I feel, as one member
of the House, that the BUI is a step in the
right direction. I have always felt that it
was a crying injustice at any rate a very
grave misfortune — that the faithful public
servant who dies in tiie service of the state
after serving it for thirty or thirty-five yearo
dies a pauper, unless he has managed to save
money, and leaves his wife and child i-en
nothing. I have always felt that some
system of state insurance like this was pref-
erable to the old system of superannuation.

' Hon. Mr. KAULBACH—This Bill does
not deal with life insurance, does it ?

Hon. Mr. POWER This Bill, as I under-
stand it, goes with another Bill, and the

' result of the additional deduction which is
made on account of the superannuation fund
is that any civil servant who pays this in-
creased deduction from his salary is entithnl

' to a life insurance -Is not that the case 1
That is, the family would be entitled to so

1 much after his death.

Digitized by

Google

486 Civil Service Superannuation [SENATE] Act Amendment Bill.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— No, he would have
to pay additional for life insurance, only at
a much lower rate than ordinary insurance.

The motion was agreed to and the House
resolved itself into a Committee of the
Whole.

(In the Committee.)

On the second clause,

Hon. Mr. POWER— If the civil servant
is over 45 at the time of his appointment,
he does not get the advantage of the old
system of superannuation ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — No, nor does he
contribute anything to the superannuation
fund. He gets his full salary.

The clause was adopted.

On clause five,

Hon. Mr. SCOTT-^-Will this afifect the
civil servant who is superannuated immedi-
ately after this Bill passes ? -How does It
affect him ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Not at all.

Hon. .Mr. SCOTT— Section 4 seems to
be predicated on the assumption that the
moment this Bill is passed and the moment
the country adds 2 per cent, then there
is a sufficient fund to meet the superannua-
tion without drawing upon the general fund
of the cou^^try.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — " The superannua-
tion allowance to which all persons whom
this Act is applicable to becomes entitled,
etc." Now, this Bill only adds to the Super-
annuation Act as it is now upon the Statute-
book. It is really adding another clause,
providing for a higher rate of abatement
annually from the salaries of those who
come into the service after the passing of
the Act, and does not affect what might be
termed the Superannuation Fund No. 1.
Any one now in the service, if superan-
nuated, will receive 2 per cent annually
upon his salary, as he does now — that is, if
a man receives $1,000 a ye^r and has paid
in thirty-five years to the superannuation
fund, he is entitled to 70 per cent of his
salary. If he has paid in twenty years, he
would be entitled to 40 per cent of his
salary — 2 per cent for each year. If a civil
servant should be superannuated after the

passing of this Bill, it does not affect him in
the least.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)—
Where is the fund from which the premiums
are to be paid under the Insurance Act?
Out of this fund 1

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— No, that is out of
another fund altogether. I have a table
showing the rates of the ordinary insurance
companies, and what we propose for the civil
service is to give them a better and cheaper
rate for insuring their lives for the benefit
of their families in case of death. The
reason why we can give them a cheaper in-
surance is that the whole of the work can \ye
done by the Finance Department ; there
will not be those expenses that are incurred
by regular companies in the way of rent,
agents, officers, etc.

The clause was adopted.

On the fifth clause,

Hon. Mr. POWER— That is a ver>^ desii*a-
ble provision, and I hope that the expecta-
tions of the leader of the Grovernraent with
respect to this fund may be realized. The
hon. gentleman stated that the Finance
Department were of opinion that at the
expiration of twenty-five years from this
date the superannuation fund would be
found self-sustaining. That would be a
very desirable condition of things, but I
wish to make this observation, that unless
the Government pursue a totally different
course from that which they have pursued
in the past with respect to superannuation,
this fund will never become self-sustain-
ing. Year after year men who were in
the full possession of all their faculties,
and as well able to work as ever they were,
have been superannuated at high figures in
oixler, in some cavses, to make nnmi for gen-
I tlemen who were looked upon more favour-
1 hly by the powers that be. That is the
, general rule, but by this time I should sup-
I pose that nearly all the Liberal employees
I who were in any way obnoxious have been
I removed, and there will not be the same
j temptation to superannuate in the future
that there has been in the past.

Hon. Mr. DEVER- I know one gentle-
man who was superannuated in 1873 who

Digitized by

Google

Civil Service Superannuation [MARCH 30, 1893] Act Aviendment Bill,

487

hacl l>een drawing a salary of $1,600 per
annum. I think he was superannuated at
.^1,400 per annum, and he is living to-day,
hale and hearty.

Hon. Mr. MacTNNES (Burlington)—
The Government cannot possibly super-
annuate improperly any officer without
breaking the law, so that the Government
are liable to be pulled up if they do so. I
had occasion to look into the civil service
superannuation question about ten years
ago, and I found that so far as the practice
of superannuating improperly was concerned
the sin lay at the door or the Mackenzie
Government quite as largely as at the door I
of the present Government. |

I
Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I do not see that |
it wi)uld be at all profitable to enter into "
that discussion now, but if the hon. gentle- '
man would like a few facts in connection i
with the record of his own party, I am
quite prepared to give them to him. I do
not propose at the present moment to de-
fend every act of ours, although I think we
have been just about as perfect as could be
expected of human beings under the circum-
stances, but I have a list here that would
rather astound the hon. gentleman, of super-
annuations from 1874 to 1878. However,
I do not desire to enter into that question,
because it is not pertinent to the subject,
and would only lead to acrimonious political
debate, which I know hon. gentlemen would
desire to avoid as much as possible. It does
not always follow that the full amount of the
superannuation which is paid annually is
actually a charge upon the public funds, for
this reason — speaking of my own depart- 1
ment, which may be a little egotistical -
in the large cities where you superannuate a
gentleman who is receiving probably 82,000
a year, the next officer under him would be
appointed probably at $1,600, and taking
the different grades down, men would be
appointed at lower salaries, so that when you
come to balance the account it is not really
as onerous a tax as appears on the face of it.
That is one of the points to which I forgot
to allude when I was addressing the
House before. If the hon. gentleman had
read the debates of the House of Commons
he would have l)een — I was going to say
better instructed — because I furnished tables
to show, taking the city of Quebec as an
illustration, that where I superannuated two

or three officials some of the positions were
not filled at all, and others w^ere filled at a
lower salary, so that when you put the
saving in salaries against the amount paid to
the superannuated officers, there is an actual
gain to the revenue, while taking the state-
ment as it appeai-s in the Auditor-General's
and the Receiver-C^eneral's Report, it would
appear as if just the amount charged to the
superannuated fund had been added to the
expenses of the country. I do not say that
that is the case all the time. There may
have l)een improper superannuations, but if
so, I think I am safe in saying that the sin
and iniquity of such work does not lie alto-
gether on the shoulders of the present
(xovernment. I hope under the new law,
whoever may be in power will carry it out
more rigidly than in the past.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quinte)— 1 think this
Bill is a very great improvement, because we
know the enormities of the old system, and
we know also where people who had paid
for a length of time into the fund happened
to pass off, their families were not in any
way provided for. This is a great improve-
ment on the existing state of aflairs.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— While I
admit that this Bill is a great improvement
on the present superannuation law, the
principle of superannuation is entirely wrong,
and I entirely dissent from the views ex-
pressed by the hon. members from Halifax
and Quints. I believe that superannuation
is a fraud. I see no good reason why a civil
serv ant should become a pensioner on the
Treasury of Canada. They are paid as much
and in mast instances a great deal more than
they would get in any other calling or posi-
tion in the country. They would not
remain twenty-four hours longer in the civil
service than they could help if they could
get better positions outside. I think they
are well paid, and this only encourages them
to live, not only up to, but in many instances
l>eyond, their income, and the (juicker the
Government of Canada, I do not care
whether it is Grit or Tory, Avipe that law off
the Statute-books, the more independent and
self-reliant the civil servants of this country
will become. I do not see why they should
be superannuated any more than clergymen,
school-teachers and others who are advanc-
ing the material and moral welfare of the
country. I am totally opposed to superan-

Digitized by

Google

488

Voters' [SENATE] Lists Bill.

nuatiou. This is an improvement on the to do what was wrong, but as to the hoo.
present condition of the law, but I hope the gentleman's administration of his Depart-
Goverrment in the near future will l)ring in | ment in other respects I have never heard
a measure to abolish the superannuation | anything said against it. I think the hon.
system so that nolxnly entering the service I gentleman has always tried to do his work
hereafter will look for the benefits of
superannuation fund.

Hon. Mr. POWER — I am very sorry to
ditter from the hon. gentleman from British
Columbia. The Government ought to deal
with its servants as any large institution
carrying on a very extensive business would
deal with its servants. If we come to look
round us we find that the great corj)orations
in this country, and of other countries, do
provide for the cases of death, or old age
and inability to work of their employees.
The Bank of Montreal, as I understand it,
has a very thorough system, not exactly of
superannuation, but something very nearly
like it — a combined superannuation and life
insurance. The Canadian Pacific Railway
Company have one, and T think that there
is every reason why the Government should
have the same. It is, of course, desirable
that it should be conducted in a business-
like way. My complaint is that in the past
the superannuation has not been conducted
in a business-like way. The hon. leader of
the Government made some remarks about
the preceding Administration. If the Ad-
ministration of Mr.^Mackenzie sinned in that
way, I think at any rate their crime has
l>een barred by the statute of limitation. I
speak of the Government as a corporate
body, so to say, and not as a political lK>dy,
and 1 know since the present Government
came in, there have been a great many
superannuations which should not have
taken place. I did not mean to reflect at
all upon the manner in which the leader of
the (Government conducted the Department
over which he presided for so many years.
I have never heard it alleged that the hon.
gentleman was guilty of extravagance, undue
favouritism or that there was any fault to be
found with the administration of his
Department with respect to the employees.
It has been charged against him that he was
rather rigorous, and that the legislation
which was passed by Parliament at the hon.
gentleman's instigation went rather too far
in the direction of treating importers as pub-
lic offenders, and Jis being prima facie crim-
inals who had to be watche<l just as though
they were criminals and were always ready

thoroughly, honestly and economically.
The clause was adopted.

! Hon. Mr. VIDAL, from the Committee,
i reported the Bill without amendment.

I The Bill was then read the third time and
I passed.

j VOTERS^ LISTS BILL.

' SECOND READING.

, Hon. Mr. BOWKLL moved the second
I reading of Bill ( 1 23) " An Act respecting
1 the Voters' Lists of 1893." He said :— This
I is simply a Bill to postpone the revising of
\ the voters' lists for the present year. I need
' not enter into any explanation. All I can
I say is that it will save a very large amount
' of money, and as there is no probability of
I a general election within a year, it is not
deeme<l advisable to go to the expense that
I would be involved in revising the lists.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Is it under-
stood that there will be a revision of the
I voters' lists before a general election takes
I place ?

j Hon. Mr. BO WELL -I think I may
inform the hon. gentleman that there will
1 be, some time within the next two or three
' years.

I The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time.

! The House resolved itself into a Commit-
, tee of the Whole on the Bill.

I (In the Committee.)

i Hon. Mr. POWEH — This Bill shows that
there has been a change of mind on the part
I of the Government lately, because in the
t early part of the session a Bill was inti*odu-
j ced providing for the revision of the lists
i this year. I was going to say I thought the
I Government should take the House more iiito
I their confidence than the leader of
I the House has done, but the question is,
I why this change of mind on the part of the
Government ? Is it that since the l)eginning
I of the session they have come to the conclu-
I sion that it would probably not be desirable

Digitized by

Google

Voters' [xMARCH 30, 1893] Lists Bill.

489

tliat there should be an election at an early
date, owing to the change in public senti-
ment, or to the circumstances which have
occurred since the beginning of the session;
or does it meiin this, that, seeing the change
in public senthnent, the Government are
anxious that the young men of the country
shall not have an opportunity to vote at the
coming election, as they have not had an
op})ortunity at the election of 1891 ? It will
Ije remembered by hem. gentlemen, that in
the session of 1890 the House of Commons
>vas given to understand that there would
not be an election until the voters' lists had
been revise<l, and notwithstanding that, the
election took place before there was another
revision. I hope that the Government do
not intend to repeat the injustice of 1891,
when no man under 24 years of age really
had a right to vote, although every man
over 22 at any rate should have had that
right. The election of 1891 was run on voters'
lists three years old, and if the Govern-
ment should, as they did in 1891, spring an
election on the country before next session,
the result will be that we shall have the
same scene enacted an election run and all
the young men under 24 excluded from the
light to vote.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH-I think my
hon. friend need not fear such a calamity
occurring to his own [>arty. At the last
election they thought they were going to
take the field and capture the Government.
Every by-election held since then shows that
public opinion is in favour of the present
Government and their policy. I hope the
Government may have a revision of the
Franchise Act and that there Avill be a more
lilieral one given to us. It is more liberal,
I know, than the Franchise Act of Nova
Scotia — -in fact, it is so very near manhood
suffrage that I think we could fairly adopt
it now.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I may compliment
my hon. friend from Halifax on his facetious
speech. We have heard the allegation
l>efore that there was a great change of
sentiment — a change which he says prevails
throughout this continent and more partic-
ularly on the northern portion of it. If we
refer back to the ante-election speeches, in
the House of Commons, we find that the
hon. gentleman's friends have been indulging |
in these prophecies for al:M)ut fifteen years.

! Every year we have been assured, public
sentiment has been changing so rapidly that
scarcely a man bearing the name of Liberal-
' Conservative would .dare to present himself
to any constituency. We may be veiy much
, like the boy who was constantly crying
" Wolf " when there was no wolf — the
I change may come some day — when the hon.
gentleman and his friends will cross the
floor. It can scarcely be expected that a
party can retain power for ever, although
Canada can present a record, so far s^ the
party which now controls the destinies of
] this portion of Her Majesty's dominions is
, concerned, that is scarcely to be found in
I any other part of the world. As the hon.
member from Lunenburg said a moment
ago, an attempt was made to capture this
I country in 1891. After the general election
I the courts opened a very large number of the
! constituencies. Certainly it could not have
: been through the sins of the hon. gentlemen
; opposite or their friends, because they nevei-
carry on an election except upon the purest
possible principles ! But for some reason or
other, 30 or 40 of the successful ()ppositi(m
candidates were unseated, and the result of
the by-elections has been' that a majority of
about 30 after the election has been swollen
to about 65 all told. If that be an indica-
tion of a rapid change in public sentiment, I
do not think we need fear appealing to the
electorate at any time. I have no recollec-
tion that any promise was made, such as
that to which the hon. gentleman referred,
in Parliament.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It was made by the
hon. gentleman who was then Secretary of
State.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Where was i^

made?

Hon. Mr. POWER-ln the House of
Commons, in the presence of the leader of
the Government.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Perhaps the hon.
gentleman's recollection is correct. When
the hon. gentleman attains the height of his
ambition, which I suppose is to be leader of
the Government, he will find that he may
with all honesty and sincerity make a state-
ment in the House- one year, that he may
find it impossible to carry out the next year ;
j or he may often find that it is not in the
I interests of the country that it should be

Digitized by

Google

490

Civil Service [SENATE] Insurance Bill,

done. Events chanj^e so rapidly that it is
sometimes necessary that we should, to a
certain extent, change with them. The reason
for deferring the revision of the voters' lists
this year is very simple. A Bill was intro-
duced in the House of Commons to simplify
the mode of revising the list, making it less
expensive than it has been in the past. A
large number of membei-s on both sides of
the House thought it did not go far enough,
and after a discussion in the House it was
deemed advisable to further consider the
provisions of the measure dealing with the
mode of revising the list, and if possible to
make it still less expensive. That being the
case, and as I intimated before, it is not at
all likely that there will be an election before
the next session of Parliament, it was deemed
advisable to save the expense that would be
incurred in revising the lists, and to adopt
if possible a much more economical mode,
and probably change to a certain extent —
although I do not say that it will be the
case— the franchise in the direction inti-
mated by the hon. gentleman from Lunen-
burg. That is a point of view from which I
will not discuss it, neither do T desire it to
go on record that that is the intention of the
Government. There is a variety of opinions
on that question. Many old Tories, if I
may use the expression, think that the ex-
tension of the franchise has gone so far that
it is scarcely worth while stopping short of
manhood suffrage, while there are others who
adhere with a good deal of tenacity to a
restriction of the franchise — not placing it
in the hands of everybody.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington), from
the Committee, reported the Bill without
amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time
and passed.

FIRST AXI) SECOND KEADINCiS.

Bill (109) " An Act further to amend the
Dominion Lands Act." (Mr. Bowell.)

CIVIL SERVICE INSURANCE BILL.

FIRST AND SECOND READINGS.

A Message was received from the House of
Commons with Bill (11) ** An Act respecting
the (Javernment Civil Service Insurance.''

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the suspension
of the Rule and that the Bill be read the
second time.

The Bill was read the second time and
refen*ed to a Committee of the whole House.

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This Bill requires
very little explanation further than what
has already been given in the discussion on
the Superannuation Bill. It is simply a sys-
tem of insurance by which civil servants can
insure their lives for the benefit of their fami-
lies at a cheaper rate than they can obtain
it in the regular companies. The Govern-
ment have come to the conclusion, after
many years' experience, that as the Superan-
nuation Act only provided for those who
lived long enough to be retired and draw
upon the funds, and no provision whatever
wiis made for the widows and orphans, many
of whom were left in destitute circumstances,
that the system proposed in this Bill is ad-
visable, lender this Bill every civil servant
in the employ of the (lovernment v\'ill be
enabled to insure his life in the manner that
I have indicated by paying a small sum
annually, and thus will leave something for
his wife and children at his death. The pro-
visions of the Bill are simply to carry out
that system of insurance.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I believe the
intention is to leave it entirely voluntary
with those who now pay into the fund, and
by an almtement they can come in.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Yes.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— But it is com-
pulsory on all who may hereafter come into
the service 1

Hon. Mr. BOWELL^ No.

Hon. Mr. DEVER- They simply get the
l^enefit of insurance at a cheap rate ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL -Yes.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I am sony that it is
not compulsory on those who come into the
service hereafter.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington)--
Whether is it compulsory or not, it is an ex-
ceedingly good Bill. It is not only in the
public interest, but it is also in the interest
of the civil servants themselves. It was
alwavs a complaint against the Superan-
nuation Act that it did not contain a pro-

Digitized by

Google

Civil Service [AlARCH 30, 1893] Insurance Bill.

491

vision for the families of deceased civil
servants, but the fact was always overlooked
that the Superannuation Act was never in-
tended to make a provision of that kind.
For many years past the Government has
been urged to adopt a measure of insurance
under which the civil servants could insure
themselves at a cheaper rate than with the
pr<»prietory companies. Under this Bill they
♦^et the benefit of the difference in interest
between i and 6 per cent, and they also save
the office and other expenses connected with
ordinary insurance business, as well as the
profits which acci-ue to private companies.
We all know that the insurance basiness is
very profitable, as it ought to l>e. I must
congratulate the (Government on the excellent
plan they have adopted for insuring the
lives of civil servants.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— I hope they will be
able to run such an office without any loss
to the country. Based on that principle, I
think it wOl be very popular. If it I'esults
in a loss to the country, it will only be
regarded as an indirect way of giving a
donation to people who are not entitled
to ft.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— If it is volun-
tary on the part of those who come in here-
after, I am afraid it will be a perfect failure.
Those who come in hereafter should do so
on the understanding that they insure their
lives. Have the officers of the Senate and
House of Commons the inght to come under
this Bill ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Yes, every civil
servant. It must be borne in mind that the
same examination, as in a regular company,
by a medical man, must be made before a
civil servant will be accepted, and I find
there is a provision in the 10th clause that
the Minister may decline to enter into an
insurance contract where there are, in his
opinion, sufficient grounds for so declining.
There might be an employee of the (Govern-
ment whose health would not justify the
taking of the risk, and consequently it could
not and should not l)e made compulsory.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— Should such a
man be taken into the service — if his health
is of that character ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL- I quite agree with
the hon. gentleman that he should not, but

unfortunately, such men do creep in some-
times. There ai-e many men who are prudent
' and do not spend all their salaries, who may
have just as much insurance on their lives
I as their salaries will justify, and it would be
' a great hardship to compel those men to
take more insurance and suffer a reduc-
tion of salary that they could not well
afford.

Hon. Mr. CLEMOAV— There is no doubt
that a great many civil servants are already
insured, and have been insured for years,
and it would be a great injustice to retjuire
them to insure when they do not need it.
We know in the past a great many insurance
companies have failed and people have lost
all they invested in policies. The object of
this Bill is to give greater security to the
civil servants.

Hon. Mr. POWER— It seems to me the
Bill ought to be compulsory. The (Jovern-
ment is in the position of any other large
association having ag reat many employees.
I may be mistaken, ))ut T am of the opinicm
that in the case of the Bank of Montreal
and other large corporations in this country,
life insurance is compulsory. I think it
should l)e compulsory except in the case of a
civil servant already insured to the amount
which is indicated in this measure. The
Bill fixes S2,000 as the maximum and $1,000
as the minimum. In any case where a civil
' servant is already insured to the amount of
$2,000, the Bill should not apply, but it
should apply and be made compulsory in
every other case.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— -Suppose he is an old
Imchelor ?

Hon. Mr. POWER -He may have a
sister or some other person dependent on
him.

Hon. Mr. DEVER -I think it is suffi-
cient to hold out the low rate of insurance.
That ought to be enough. There is no
similarity at all between the case of the
Bank of Montreal and the Civil Service of
this country. The civil servants, to a very
large extent, owe their appointment to
influence, and some of them are much better
paid than any bank clerks in the country. It
is quite enough to hold out to the civil ser-
vants the inducement of lower insurance

Digitized by

Google

492

Witnesses and [SENATE] Evidence Bill,

than they can obtain anywhere else. I do
not think there should be any further induce-
ment than that.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It ha« l>een stated
that no good reason has been given why
the system of insurance should not be com-
pulsory. I have heard some veiy good rea-
sons stated on this side of the House, and
it is not necessary that I should repeat them
all ; but I may be allowed to say that, as
far as the Government is ccmcerned, it would
be unsafe to make it compulsory, and for the
civil servants it would be unjust. It is not
intended at all for others. It would be
unsafe for the Government, because if it is
compulsory to insure every civil servant
they would have to take risks which no
company would accept. That is a good rea-
son i\>v not making the insurance compul-
sory. It would l>e unjust to the civil ser-
vants also, l)ecause some men have already
insurance on their lives perhaps all that
they can carry. A third ground is that
some men want no insurance at all. Some
of them are rich and can afford to do with-
out insurance. For those three reasons the
House is justified in coming to the conclu-
sion that tlie insurance system should not be
compulsory.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH- My intention
was that it should l>e optional with those
already in the service, but that it should be
cohipulsory on those who want to come in
hereafter. It should be arranged in the same
way as in the banks, where there is an
abatement from the salary.

Hon. Mr. SULLIVAN- The examina-
tion for the Civil Service and the examina-
tion for insurance are entirely different.
The examination for insurance is more
minute, and the family history is gone into :
but the Civil Service examination is done in
a very gingerly manner. Most of thevSe
civil servants belong to benevolent and
beneficial*}' societies and are already insured
in fact.

Hon. Mr. POWER I wish to say one
word more before the clause is carried. The
hon. Minister of Agriculture said that it
would be unfair to the Government to adopt
this compulsory system of insurance. Now,
inasmuch as it is discreti >naiy w ith the
(Government, T cannot see how it would be
unfair. The (Government would not be

obliged to insure every civil servant : a maa

I who was disqualified by disease would natu-

! rally not be insured ; but any employee who

comes into the service in the future in good

health should be insured. It is not intended

to apply it to those who are in the ser\'ice

now, unless they wish to come under the

terms of the Bill. My suggestion was that

, it should not apply to persons who could

I show that they were already insured, so that

the reasons given by the hon. gentleman,

I when examined, amount to very little more

than what one finds inside a soap bubble.

The clause was adopted.

Hon. Mr, McINNES (B.C.), from the
Committee, reported the Bill without amend-
ment.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BILL,

COMMONS AMENDMENTS CONCURRED IN.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons to return the Bill relating to
witnesses and evidence, with certain amend-
ments.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS - This Message in-

forms us that the House of CJommons

has concurred in the first amendment,

striking out the words " and compellable.''

Now, the second and third amendments to

which the House of Commons has not agreed,

j were in relation to the clause : " provided,

however, that the husband shall not becom-

' pellable to disclose any communication made

I to him by the wife during their marriage."

I This House was induced to accept the words

I '* not compellable," wishing at-thesame time

I to give the accused the opportunity of hav-

' ing evidence of such conversation if it was

I thought in his interest that it should l>e

given. In the other House they have come

, to the conclusion that it w^as "wiser that there

should l)e no such disclosure at all, and

I instead of the word " compellable " they have

I inserted the word "competent," so that un-

i der no circumstances, whether it is favour-

I able to the accused or not, can the wife or

j the husband l)e allowed to disclose any com-

I nmnication during marriage. The other

' amendment is in the subsection of the fourth

I section, which provided that the failure to

I give evidence should not he made the subject

Digitized by

Google

Dominion Lands Act [MAECS 30, 1893] Amendment Bill.

493

of comment by counsel. It is the wish of
the House below that the judge should not
have tlje power of making any comments.
Under the circumstances it is l)etter to move
that this House concur in the amendments
of the House of Commons, and it will be then
the law that no disclosure of communications
between husband and wife during their
marriage shall be given in evidence at all.
We will have also the principle laid down in
the Statute tliat the wife or the husband
shall be a competent witness and can be
called to testify on the facts of the case.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— I certainly
endorse the amendments of the House of
Commons, because they are in the line of the
arguments I made in this House : usually,
however, I do not convince the House.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Whatever our opi-
nion may be of the desirability of the changes
— and I think the wisdom of one of them is
doubtful — we have really nothing to do but
accept the amendments ; l>ecause if we do
not accept them the Bill is lost. The motion
of the hon. Minister is the only one that we
can carry.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS—I move that the
Senate do not insist on their second and
third amendments to the Bill respecting
Witnesses and Evidence to which the House
of Commons have disagreed, and that this
House agrees to the amendments made by
the Commons to the said Bill.

The motion was agreed to.

It l)eing six o'clock the Speaker left the
Chair.

After Recess,

DOMINION LANDS ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

THIRD READINO.

The House resolved itself into a Committee
of the Whole on Bill ^109) " An Act further
to amend the Dominion Lands Act."

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— In the early settle-
ment of Manitoba, the House is awai-e that
certain sections of land in each township
were set apart for school purposes. Some-
time in 1870— between 1870 and 1880— the

20-mile l)elt on either side of the road
running from Winnipeg to Deloraine was
withdrawn from settlement and homestead-
ing, and reserved for the purpose of making
land grants to any company that would
construct railways through that section of
the country. The land remained in that
state for some few years. Afterwards it was
opened for settlement, but in ignorance of the
law at the time many of the first settlers in
that country settled upon the school sections
which they have continued to occupy up to
this day, having made large improvements
upon them, and it Ls considered a very great
hardship to deprive them of the lands
acquired by homesteading. It has been a
source of grievance for a great many ye^rs
in the province of Manitoba, and now, with
the consent of the Government of Manitoba,
it has been decided to pass an Act placing
these settlers in the same position as they
would have been in had they settled u]X)n
the lands which were open for homesteading
at the time. Another provision of the law
is that while they confirm these settlers in
the title to the land upon which they live,
and which was taken up previous to the
year 1882, land of equal (juality and as ^ell
l(K*ated shall l)e setaside for school purposes.
Mr. Greenway, on l)ehalf of his Govern-
ment, ccmsidering this an equitable settle-
ment of the case, consents to the surrender
of the sections originally set apart for school
purposes, and accept others in lieu thereof,
which of coui-se will have to l)e to the satis-
faction of that Government — land of e(iual
I (|uality and as well located. I may mention
I for the informaticm of the House that this
! endowment for connnon sch(K)l purposes hjis
I reached the sum of .^672,241. Of this sum
I .'^329,699 has already been paid in and is
invested as an endowment for their schools.
■ For the hilance of S300,000, the security is
on the land and the amount is drawing 6 per
cent until the settlement. It was a wise
policy, I think the Hou^e will say, at the time
I and this land will, if properly managed by the
people of Manitoba, provide them with an
ample fund to carry on their schools in the
future. The reason that the Bill is confined
to the year 1882 is the fact that the regula-
tions in reference to school lands were fully
known by every person going into Manitoba
and the Territories at that time.

Hon. Mr. KAULBACH— This is not
confined to the province of Manitoba, is it ?

Digitized by

Google

494

Subsidies in aid of [SENATE] Railways Bill,

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Yes, it is confined
entirely to Manitoba.

Hon. Mr. MacINNES (Burlington), from
the Committee, reported the Bill without
amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time
and passed.

CUSTODY OF JUVENILE OFFEND-
ERS IN NEW BRUNSWICK
BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message wa^ received from the House
of Commons with Bill (104) "An Act relat-
ing to the custody of juvenile offenders in
the province of New Bi-unswick."

The Bill was read the first and second
times under suspension of the rules, and
referred to a Committee of the Whole
House.

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— By the charitable
exertions of Lady Tilley in New Brunswick,
a Reformatory for juvenile offendei^s has
l>een established. It is a most laudable
action on the part of this distinguished Lady.
She now wishes to see her action crowned
by obtaining from the Dominion Parliament |
the necessary power for the Magistrates and |
Judges to send juvenile offenders to this |
Refonnatory, and this Bill, which has been
adopted by the other House, is for that
object. It is provided that children may
be, with the consent of their parents or
guardians, apprenticed to persons to be
approved by the authorities. It is also
provided, as in the common law relating to
penitentiaries, that the i mates may be
visited by clergymen of their own faith and
denomination.

Hon. Mr. DEVER, from the Committee,
reported the Bill without amendment.

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

SUBSIDIES IN AID OF RAILWAYS
BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (127) " An Act to

authorize the granting of subsides in aid of
the construction of the lines of railway
therein mentioned."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the suspen-
sion of Rule 41, and that the Bill be read
the second time He said :— The Bill is
simply a renewal of the subsidies formerly
granted by the different Acts of Parliament
at former sessions. There are no new sub-
sidies.

Hon. Mr. POWER -Inasmuch as there
is no very great hurry about this Bill, I hope
the hon. gentleman will not mind if I object
to the suspension of the rule, as there is
some other business to come before the
House.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL -If the hon. gentle-
man desires that we should not proceed
further to-night, I would not ask for a sus-
pension of the rule. My reason for moving
it now is that there is nothing in this Bill
that has not been affirmed by both Houses
of Parliament at previous sessions.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the second time and passed through
its final stages.

COMMISSIONER TO WORLD'S FAIR
BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (124) "An Act respect-
ing the appointment of Commissioners to f he
World's Columbian Exposition."

The Bill was read the first and second
times under a suspension of the rule, and
referred to a Committee of the whole House.

(In the Committee.)

Hon. Mr. ANGERS —The BUI is to
authorize the Governor in Council to appoint
a member of the Senate and a member of
the House of Commons as Commissioners to
represent Canada at the World^s Columbian
Exposition, and to authorize the Govern-
ment, notwithstanding the Independence of
Parliament Act, to pay their expenses.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.), from the
Committee, reported the Bill without amend-
ment.

Digitized by

Google

Petroleum Inspection Act [MARCH 30, 1893] Amendment Bill.

495

The Bill was then read the third time and
passed.

SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS'
BILL.

FIRST READINf}.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (132) "An Act fur-
ther .to amend the Act respecting the Senate
and the House of Commons."

The Bill was read the first time,

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the suspen-
sion of the rule and that the Bill l>e read the
second time. He said : — This Bill simply
gives authority to pay meml)ers of both
Houses their sessional indemnity without
deduction if they have not l>een absent more
than six days during the session.

Hon. Mr. POWER— 1 object to the sus-
pension of the rule in this case. I think
this is a most improper Bill.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Then I move that
the Bill be read the second time at the next
sitting of the House.

The motion was agreed to.
ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
of Ct)mmons with Bill (118) "An Act to
amend the Act respecting the Royal Mili-
tary College."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the suspen-
sion of the rule and that the Bill be read the
second time. He said : — This is a Bill to amend
the Royal Military College Act in one or two
respects. The salaries which have been
paid to the professors have, almost since the
passage of the original Act, been not strictly
in accord with the provisions of the law,
and the Auditor-General having called the
attention of the Militia Department to this
fact, it was found necessary, in order to
legalize the payments which have been made
and also to fix the salaries for the future,
that there should be an amendment to the
Act. That is one of the provisions of the
Bill. Another provision is to change in one

I of the clauses the words " the Amiy Act "
t and insert instead " Mutiny Act." It is
merely a clerical error and brings the Col-
lege under the surveillance of the Army
Act instead of the Mutiny Act. A section
of the Act provides that in filling up the
vacancies in the' College, a certain numl>er
sl>all be selected from e^ch province. I
found when I was administering the affairs
of that Department that there were several
vacancies in the College, although quite a
sufficient number of cadets had passed the
reijuisite examination entitling them to a
position in the College, but unfortunately
they were contined mostly to one or two of
the provinces, and the fconsequence was that
if we had acted strictly in accordance with
th« provisions of the law, there would liave
been some five or six vacancies. I came to
the conclusion then, as my successor has
done since, that if the College is to be main-
tained they should have power to select from
those who have the necessary qualifications
to fill the College, first equally dividing
them if they are U) be found in the different
provinces and, if not, take them from the
other provinces, and the power is given t^)
the Minister under this Bill to select
the necessary number to fill the College
from among those who have passed the ex-
aminatic^ns, taking them by order of merit,
no matter from what province or portion of
the Dominion they may come. These are
the most important provisions of the pro-
posed amendments to the Military College
Act. There is one, however, which is more
military in character than anything else. It
establishes what they call a milicary branch
in connection with the College — that is, it
puts the sergeants and servants who are
employed there under military law the same
as they would l)e if they were under a com-
manding officer. There is another which
relates to the civil branch. It is for the
pui^xise of bringing the officers to head-
quarters where they will be taught their
I duties so that they will be prepared to take
positions in the outside service.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
passed through its final stages under a sus-
pension of the rules.

PETROLEUM INSPECTION ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House

Digitized by

Google

496

Ocean Steam-ship [SENATE] Subsidies Bill.

of Commons with Bill (112) ** An Act further
to amend the Petroleum Inspection Act."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This BUI has been
introduced in order to carry out the change
made in the Petroleum Act by providing
that petroleum can be imported into Canada
in tanks. Clause 1 revises the interpre-
tation of the term "package," eliminadng
tlie words " tanks" and ** other vessels."
This becomes necessary in view of the third
subsection added to section 15. (See section
8). Clause 2 is intended to place the
duty of inspection upon officers of Inland
Revenue. Clause 3 reduces the fire test
from 95 to 90. In the several States of the
United States the test ranges from 72 to
90. It is alleged by experts that the treat-
ment in bringing the oil up to stand the
additional 5 degrees is very wasteful with-
out conferring any benefit. Then we come
to clause 4. The Railway and Steam-boat
Transportation Companies require a special
class of oil (manufactured in the United
States) which they use for outside purposes
— switch lights and head lights. The weight
which was under the former Act resti-lcted
between 8*23 and 8*32 pounds, has been ex-
tended to 8*14 as a minimum, and 843 as a
maximum, and the fire test is reduced from
275' to 200^ Fahr. Oils within these ranges
have for years been used all over the conti-
nent. The amendment made by clause 5 is
to section 7, requires the marking of im-
ported oil to be the same as is required in
respect of Canadian oil. The " tare " and
" net weight ' in pounds is added. By
clause 6, the word " Canadian " is placed
l)efore the word "petroleum " in section 10
of the old Act, to prevent any further doubt
as to its applying only to domestic oils and
refineries. Clause 7 places the inspection in
all cases upon nominees of the Inland Reve-
nue Department. By clause 8 a subsection
(3) is added, permitting importation, under
certain conditions, in tank cars. Clause 9
reduces inspection fees on imported petro-
leum from 30 cents to 10 cents, etc., bring-
ing imported and domestic oils to an equality.
Clause 10 establishes a penalty for bringing
in oil through other than permitted ports.
Clause 11 emlK)dies as a section of this Act
what was heretofore the terms of an Order
in Council made under authority of chapter
49 of the Statutes of 1891. Clause 12
repeals above Statutes (chap. 49 of 1891).

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
passed through its final stages.

j CUSTOMS ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

I FIRST AND SECOND READINGS.

I A Message was received from the Houst*
, of Commons with Bill (126) " An Act further
to amend the Act respecting Duties of Cus-
toms."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— This Bill is to

amend item 184, chapter 20, of the Statute?;

of 1890. It deals with the duties whicii have

I been imposed in the past upon binder twine

; and extends the section of the Act relating

I to the importation of machinery not manu-

I factured in Canada to 1896. It would

! lapse this year if it wei-e not thus extended

three years longer.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
I was read the second time at length at the
Table.

OCEAN STEAM-SHIP SUBSIDIES
BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
!of Commons with Bill (129) "An Act to
amend the Act respecting Ocean Steam-ship
Subsidies."

The Bill was read the first time.

H<m. Mr. BOWELL- This is a BiU to
amend section 1 of chap. 2 of the Statutes
of 1889. It repeals the provision authoriz-
ing the Government to grant a subsidy to
the extent of £25,000 sterling to any line
of steamships running between Australia and
British Columbia. The Government has not
yet been able to secure any direct fortnightly
line of steamers upon that route. A large
English company owning a line at present
! running between some portion of Australia
I and New Zealand have made propositions to
' the Government to establish a monthly line
of steamers of from 2,800 to 4,000 tons be-
tween Vancouver and Sydney for a subsidy
of £25,000 sterling. The first proposition
was a demand for £50,000. This amount
they exi)ected to be divided between Canada
and Australia, and possibly the British
Government would give something in the
way of mail subsidies. We made the com-
pany a proposition of £20,000 for a monthly

Digitized by

Google

Ocean Steani-ships [MARCH 30, 1893] Subsidies Bill.

407

service, providing the time occupied in
making each trip should not exceed twenty-
one days — that is about four days less than
is now occupied in making^he trip from
Australia to San Francisco. They intimated
that it was impossible in the beginning of a
service of this kind to accept less than
X25,000. The Government, bnelieving that
this country is desirous of having a direct
line between British Columbia and Australia
with boats nearly if not quite equal to the
Empress Line between Vancouver and
Japan, came to the conclusion that if we
could secure the services of this responsible
and wealthy company for even a monthly
line for twelve months, as an experiment, we
would be justified in asking Parliament to
change the Bill so as to allow us to give them
the full subsidy of £25,000 sterling for the
year's service. The proposition is simply this
— that for one year the boats will be put upon
the route, commencing in April next, and if it
is found that there is a probability of the line
paying, arrangements will be entered into
with the company for three years at least.
The House will, I think, appreciate the
course which the company in self-defence is
pursuing, and also the course which the Gov-
ernment proposes to pursue. If it is found
that the route will not pay, even with the
subsidy as large as that, it will be in the in-
terests of the Dominion that we should
cease paying the subsidy. On the other
hand, if the company cannot make it pay
with a subsidy of £25,000 per annum, it
would be wrong to compel them to continue
it for any number of years. These are the
reasons which induced the Government to
ask Parliament to consent to the amendment
of the Act in order that we can make the
trial of direct communication between Aus-
tralia and Canada, and with a line of steam-
ers that will make the trip in three or four
days less time than that which runs be-
tween the Antipodes and San Francisco.
With our facilities for carrying freight and
passengers by the Cana^lian Pacific Railway,
Canada will stand a fair chance to secure at
least a large proportion of the trade between
this continent and Australia. I may also
add that the Canadian Pacific Railway Com-
pany have agreed to enter into arrangements
with the steam-ship company to place at
their disposal all the agents that they have
in Australia and in Canada in order to pro-
cure freight both ways, and they pletlge
themselves to grant the minimum rate of
32

freight charged to United States lines by
the Central, the Southern and the Northern
Pacific Railways, so that the probabilities
are, in case this line is put upon the route,
as there is no doubt it will be if this Bill
passes, that we shall have in a very short
time a large portion of the Australian trade,
and I am also in hopes that it will open up
a market for the surplus products of this
country which have not now a market.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — You mean the com-
ing April ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— Yes, next month.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The original Act
was a bad one, but the present Bill is woi^e.
That is my humble opinion about it. This
is a very fair specimen of the kind of legis-
lation of which we have had a good deal in
Canada of late years. There is no doubt
the people of Canada are asked to pay a
very large tax, and this is done with the
object of securing an advantage which, as a
general thing, never matenalizes. Now,
Canada has sent agents to Australia on
more occasions than one, for the purpose of
making inquiry there as to the reasonable
probability of securing trade ; and I think
that the general feeling amongst business
men is that, up to the present time at any
rate, we have not been given any reason to
suppose that there is likely to be any valu-
able trade between Australia and Canada.
Now the Government come down and ask
us to pay $100,000 a year on the chance
that we may develop a little trade there.
It is a propositi(m which should not receive
the approval of Parliament, but it is a pro-
position which will receive that approval,
and I do not suppose there is any particular
object in talking about it except expressing
ones dissent.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I hope the hon.
gentleman will not object to the suspension
of the rules.

Hon. Mr. POWER— No, I am not ob-
jecting : it will go through anyway.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I think the reason
tha^t no trade has ever been developed
between Canada and Australia is because
we have had no direct steam communication.
A very large trade, the House knows, has
developed between Japan and Canada, so large

Digitized by

Google

498

Drummond County [SENATE] Railway Co: 8 BUI.

I hat it has excited the jealousy and envy of
the United States railways, and they have
almost threatened to annihilate the Canadian
Pacific Railway. I am in hopes that if we
get this direct line, as I think we shall, the
trade will develop as largely with Australia
as it has with Japan.

The Bill passed through its final stages
under a suspension of the rules.

DRUMMOND COUNTY RAILWAY
COMPANY'S BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY, fr^ra the Committee
on Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours,
reported Bill (71) "An Act respecting
the Drummond County Railway " without
amendment.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN moved the third
reading of the Bill,

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE—This Bill comes
before us under such peculiar circumstances
that I feel bound to do anything which I
can to show the House that it ought not to
pass. I rise to a question of order as to the
report of that Committee. If I read the
rule correctly, it provides that in the case of
a Bill from the House of Commons, notice
must be given at least twenty-four hours
before the Committee meets. Now, twenty-
four hours means a day, and it has been
customary for the past twenty-five years to
give notice of Monday for Wednesday; that
is one clear day. What is the object of
that ? You must go into the object of the
rules to get at the meaning of them. Ru^e
61 says that if the Bill originates in the
Senate, one week's notice must be given.
Why ? So as to give the parties who are
interested time to reach the seat of Govern-
ment and oppose or support the Bill. The
rule adds that in case a Bill has gone
through the other House it shall not be
necessary to give a week's notice, because
the parties are advised and informed, and
are in a position to reach the seat of Gov-
ernment if they desire to do so. That is the
evident object of the rule. Now, has that
object been accomplished in this case ? The
Bill was read last night about 9.30.

Hon. Mr. McMILLAN— It was read
before nine o'clock.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Then say 8.30-
All the mails had gone except the North

west mails. How could you inform thase
parties that the Bill would come up to-
night at 9.00 or 9.30 ? Surely you could not.
Then has the object of this rule been com-
plied with ? Ndt at all. That shows that
the object of the rule was to give ample
notice to interested paitie^ to appear before
the Committee. Otherwise why could not
the Committee have sat last night im-
mediately after we adjourned, and passed
the Bill? The parties could not reach
Ottawa in time. I have explained the ob-
ject of the rule, and I say that the practice
of the House is in favour of that inter-
pretation. The Committee has never been
summoned except after one clear day's
notice. I am sure there is not a gentleman
in this House who can cite a case where
such a thing as is now attempted has been
done. It is an innovation, and under what
circumstances? I shall have occasion to
speak of the circumstances probably by and
by. If I were to do so now I would be
called to order, a^d I confine my remarks to
the question of order. If we look to the
authorities, what do we find ? In such cases
in England, a clear day's notice is required.
Tl^is again shows the intention of our rule.
Then if this is so, why should we sanction
an innovation and act upon an interpretation
which evidently is not in accord with the
intention of the rule ? I object to the report
of the Committee as being quite against the
rules of this House.

Hon. Mr. POWER -The hon. gentleman
from DeLanaudiere, as a rule, has very clear .
vit'ws upon questions of order. I have heard
him many times with a great deal of pleasure,
but I do not think I have ever listened to
him with more surprise than on the present
occasion. Last evening when this Bill was
being considered, it was contended that the
twenty-four hours meant a day. It was used
as an argument by the opponents of the Bill.
I do not just know whether' the hon. gentle-
man spoke upon that question, but others
who agreed with him in opposing the BOl
contended that twenty-four hours meant
twenty-four hours, and His Honour the
Speaker took that ground. Although I had
argued as well as I could in the other direc-
tion, I had to admit, as I have freely ad-
mitted since, and I think all the friends of
the Bill have admitted it, that the decision
of His Honour the Speaker was right, and
that when the rule said twenty -four hours, it

Digitized by

Google

Drummond Oounty [MARCB 30, 1893] Railway Co:^ Bill.

499

meant that, and not thirty-six hours or forty-
eight hours or anything else. The notices
were duly posted before half-past nine last
evening, and the Committee met at half-past
nine this evening, as it had a perfect right
to do, and devoted about forty minutes to
the consideration of this Bill. The report
comes before us, and if there is anything ob-
jectionable in the Bill, it is quite in order for
any hon. gentleman to move an amendment,
but I am surprised that the hon. gentleman
should undertake to raise such a question of
order as that. I have never heard a more
frivolous point of order.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— The hon. gen-
tleman says he is surprised to hear me raise
this objection. When the point was dis-
cussed yesterday T was not here, but if I
had heard of it, I would only have come to
the conclusion that the case had not been
well discussed, since my views were just as
I have stated them now. It would not pre-
vent me from taking this objection to-day,
even if I had known it ; but I did not know
it. However, if the question has been de-
cided by the Speaker, I have nothing more
to say. Had I known it I would not have
raised the objection now.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHERVILLE— The
Bill has reached this stage without amend-
ment, but not without opposition. I think,
as others have thought, that there is a clause
in thLs Bill which is very dangerous. It is
the third clause, which reads thus : —

** The company is hereby declared to have all
the franchises, rights, privileges and authorities
conferred upon it by the said Act of the Legisla-
tiife of the province of Quebec. "

I need not go any further ; that is the only
thing I want to di*aw attention to. Amongst
the privileges granted by the Legislature of
Quebec to this very road was that of issuing
debentures, I think, to the amount of
$20,000 ; it may be $25,000, but it was not
less than 820,000. I call attention to the fact
that this privilege is confirmed by the Bill
which we are passing; it cannot be taken
away. Although there might be other laws,
there is nothing in the Railway Act of the
Dominion that limits the quantity of deben-
tures that may be issued. It is true that
generally we have allowed those railroads to
issue debentures to the amount of $25,000,
but we leave to this company the right to
issue debentures under its Quebec charter,
32i

and in addition give it power to issue other
del)entures to the extent of $25,000 a mile
of the Vail way and branches. Tlierefore we
have a company authorized to issue deben-
tures to the extent of $45,000 per mile.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHERVILLE— I sup-
po e the hon. gentleman means it is not his
opinion; still it is well known that in
another Bill passed during this session where
several companies were merged into one to
be called the Atlantic and Lake Superior
Railway Company, Parliament put in this
9th clause which provides in effect that the
Dominion Parliament gives the Company
the right to issue debentures, but it must
give up all other rights of issuing under
other legislation. Since both Houses of
Parliament have thought the precaution
necessary in that case, and since, in the
opinion of many, this Company will have in
reality power to issue $45,000 or 850,000 a
mile, there ought to be no opposition —
although I expect some — to the following
amendment. I move that the Bill be not
now read the third time, but that it be
referred to a Committee of the Whole House
with instruction to insert after the word
"extent" in line 2 of clause 7, "$25,000 in
all including all issues under any powers con-
ferred by the said Act of the province of
Quebec." I hope, since we have already
thoufi^ht 'it necessary to take this precau-
tion m the Act to which I have referred,
there will be no hesitation to accept this,
which, after all, will only assure the Com-
pany that we are not giving them the right
to issue two sets of debentures.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I just wish to make
two observations : one, that this Bill was
carefully considered by the Committee of
the House of Commons, counsel being heard
on both sides, and that that committee, in
which they are, as a. rule, very careful as to
the financial aspects of every measure, passed
the Bill in its present form. I think the
construction put upon the language of the
Bill by the hon. gentleman is incorrect and
unsound. The case of the North Atlantic
Company is a totally different one from this.
Various roads were being consolidated, and
it was more convenient for practical pur-
poses, for the purposes of the company it-
self, that there should be one line of deben-

Digitized by

Google

500

Drummond County [SENATE] Railway Co.'s Bill.

tures or mortgages rather than several of
different kinds and denominations, It is
not so in this case : there is only one com-
pany and one line. And the important point
is this, hon. gentlemen, with respect to this
measure, that the opposition to this Bill has
been conducted in an unusual way. The hon.
gentlemen who opposed the Bill made use of
the Rules of the House, as they have a per-
fect right to do to the utmost extent, to pre-
vent this Bill being considered by the com-
mittee upon its merits. If this Bill had
been allowed to go to the committee at the
time when it should have gone and would have
gone if the technical Rules of the House had
not been enforced against it, these objections
and questions might have been considered
by the Committee, and if the Committee
had thought there was any doubt they might
have made the amendment ; but after all
the delay which has been caused and which
hindered the Committee from considering
the Bill as carefully as it might perhaps
have considered it ; an amendment is now
proposed which, if carried, will kill the Bill.
There is only one more sitting day of Parlia-
ment. If this Bill goes down to the House
of Commons with this amendment at the
meeting on Saturday forenoon — I am not
sure whether they have two meetings in the
other House — but whether there are or not,
the single objection of a member in the
House of Commons can hinder the Bill
becoming law. After a Bill has been fought
through both Houses, as this has been, the
fairer way is to deal with it on its merits.
The people who invest in the bonds of the
company will scrutinize the company's char-
ters— this Act and the other Act — carefully
enough to see that they are not taking any
risk.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY — I wish to say a word
on behalf of the committee who reported
the Bill. Clause 3, to which my hon. friend
adverted, reserved all the rights and privi-
leges under the Quebec Act. Why? Because
under it a large portion of this work has
already been constructed, obligations have
been incurred, and when they came to this
House for legislation they put a clause in the
Bill preserving all their rights and making
all those securities available. Clause 7 pro-
vides that no greater issue of bonds for the
prosecution of this work than §25,000 a
mile shall be issued. My hon. friend says
that the original Quebec Act fixed the limit

at $20,000 a mile ; well, this enlarges the
power. In view of the extension of this
line it should be enlarged to §25,000 a mile
and no more ; and therpfore we had no hesi-
tation in saying — and that was my opinion —
tha( the issue of bonds was confined to
$25,000 a mile ; because this company asked
to be placed under the provisions of the
Greneral Railway Act by being declared a
work for the general advantage of Canada,
and when they ask that privilege they must
take the consequences. CJnder the general
provisions of the Railway Act and under the
special provisions in clause 97, there can be
no doubt whatever that their power to issue
bonds is confined to the sum of $25,000 a
mile ; and it was upon that view — which I
have no hesitation in saying was the correct
view — that we passed the Bill.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I cannot agree
with the argument of the hon. member from
Halifax, and the hon. member from Amherst.
The Quebec Act gives the company power
to bsue bonds to the amount of 820,000 or
$25,000 a mile. The hon. gentleman says
that a part of the road has been constructed ;
that is true ; but this has no effect upon
what has been done. It does not prevent
this Bill from giving, for the fifty or sixty or
ninety miles to be built in the future, the
right to issue bonds for $20,000 under the
Quebec Act, and $25,000 under the present
Bill.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— Oh, no.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I beg the hon.
gentleman's pardon. The objection of the
Committee was that the General Act would
make that all right. Very w^ll, -what did I
ask. Will you tell me whether in the Gene-
ral Act the amount is limited ? No : I
say it is not limited. If the Act gives
them all the franchises, powers, pri%i-
leges and authorities which the company has
under the Quebec Act, I say those rights
and privileges remain theirs. If you add
new powers, giving them rights to issue bonds
for $25,000, then it will be $45,000 on the
new portion of the road. It will not affect
the forty-five miles which is built from
Drummondville to St. Hyacinthe.

Hon. GENTLEMEN— No, no.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— Hon. gentle-
men may say " No, no," but the Act is there

Digitized by

Google

Drunmond County [MAfiCH 30, 1893] Railway Co.'s Bill.

501

and speaks for itself. JQow, if we are wrong
al>out that, why is there this oppasition to
the amendment which merely declares that
they shall not have power to issue bonds for
more than $25,000 ? Why not grant it, if
you are sure the Bill is sufficient ? It very
often happens that in legislation more is in-
cluded in the Bill than is wanted, and why ?
In order to be quite sure. Then why not
make it sure to-day ? I suppose it is because
of the indebtedness of that company to
some banks which have loaned too much ;
the bank is to be paid out of the $45,000.
The House is asked to say that our legisla-
tion in the past is unjust, because I recollect
well that when a Bill was presented asking
for power to issue bonds to the extent of
over 825,000 a mile, the request was refused,
and we amended those Bills; now we are
asked to favour this company and grant
them special privileges. I say all this in
order that it may appear in our Debates, so
that the public at large may see what we
are doing. We should always pursue such a
course that we need not be ashamed of what
we do or leave ourselves open to a charge of
inconsistency. What reasonable objection
can there be to the amendment? We
merely propose to add two or three words to
say that the $25,000 which is mentioned
here will be for all purposes — that it will
set aside the power under the Quebec Act
to issue $20,000 per mile. If that is already
provided what harm can result from making
it sure? We wish to give this company no
more power than we give to others ; that is
all we ask, and I hope the Senate will accept
the amendment. There is another argument
which will app>eal to men of independent
minds ; it is stated — and it is easily proved,
because it is a public matter — that this Act
of incorporation was presented to the Que-
bec Legislature a few years ago. The com-
pany was incorporated under a local Act for
the construction of a road between two
points in the province of Quebec. Not hav-
ing succeeded in Quebec they come here for
legislation, claiming that the road is for
the benefit of Canada, in order to make it a
Federal Act. Now, this alone ought to put
the House on its guard.

Hon. Mr. POWER- The road connects
with the Intercolonial Railway. That makes
it a road for the general benefit of Canada.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— The hon. gen-
tleman says it goes as far as the Intercolonial

Railway. Will he tell me that a local line
connecting with a federal road is thereby re-
moved from local legislation ? I am sure, as
a lawyer, he will not say that. If not, why
does he interrupt me to say such things?
Are we prepared in this House to say that
we will impose upon the province of Quebec
the building of a road under such circum-
stances as I have just stated ? For my part,
if this was an Ontario or a Nova Scotia
case, I should decline to support it, because
the Local Legislature having refused legisla-
tion, the;e must be some good reasons why
it should not be granted, as we are not
aware what reasons there were for refusing
legislation at Quebec, we should not sanction
it. Then there has been plenty of work
done for some days past ; a great many par-
ties from outside have been here canvassing
members in this House as in the othet
House. To-night at the meeting of the
Committee, it was, I will not say a farce,
but we could scarcely hear one another.
Why was there so much talking ? Why
were these outsiders there ?

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I call the hon.
gentleman to order : it is a well-known rule
in all Parliaments that no member has a
right to refer to the proceedings of a commit-
tee in the House.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I know I am
out of order : but I believe I have given
sufficient reasons to show to the majority of
this House that this Bill ought not to pass
in its present shape. I hope the Senate
will gi-ant the amendment, in order to make
it sure that the company cannot issue more
than $25,000 of debentures per mile.

Hon.Mr.MAcINNES(Burlington)— There
is nothing in the Bill itself that anybody
could possibly object to. The only objec-
tions raised to the Bill are as to the bonding
powers. It is contended, on the one hand,
that under this Bill bonds to the extent of
$45,000 a mile can be issued— $20,000 under
the Quebec Act and $25,000 under this Bill.
The promoters themselves have assured the
Committee that they have no intention to
issue more than $25,000 per mile — that none
of the bonds have yet been issued. The
chairman of the Committee, who is a man of
very great experience, besides an eminent
lawyer, has given us a very clear opinion on
the subject. I must admit that I had a good

Digitized by

Google

502

Drummond County [SENATE] Railway Cc's Bill.

deal of difficulty in making up my mind as
to the vote I should give upon this measure,
but after the discussion that has taken place,
and looking at the Bill itself, I do not see
any reason why I should vote against it.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I would ask the
House to excuse me from voting in this case,
and for this reason. I do not desire to put
my opinion in opposition to that of a gentle-
man of so much legal experience as the hon.
member from Amherst, whose opinions upon
all occasions we look up to with very great
respect. Distrusting my own judgment in
the matter I do not care under those circum-
stances to vote in any way that would have
the effect of throwing out the Bill, because
that would be virtually the effect of carrying
this amendment. At the same time, using
my best judgment, and looking at clauses 7
and 3 I cannot bring my mind to the con-
clusion that clause 7 so far overrides clause
3 that the company will be precluded from
issuing both the bonds under the Quebec
Act and the bonds under the Bill now before
us. All the powers and privileges that they
possess under the Que}:>ec Act are preserved
to them by this Bill and there is nothing
whatever said, so far as I can see, in clause
No. 7 to limit the powers given them in
clause No. 3 in any way whatever. The
counsel who attended the meeting of the
Committee on behalf of the promoters of the
Bill, did state that no bonds whatever had
been issued, but I did not understand, as
the hon. member from Burlington says he
understood them to say, that they never
intended to issue them. So far as I can
form any judgment in the matter, if this Bill
passes the company will have power to issue
bonds to the extent of $45,000 a mile if they
please.

' Hon. Mr. SMITH— What hardship would
it bring upon the province of Quebec sup-
posing they did issue bonds to that amount ?
Nobody would be fool enough to take those
bonds.

Hon. Mr. READ (Quint*^)— I see that we
passed a Bill with a similar clause this ses-
sion, the Act relating to the Chilliwhack
Railway Company. That company was in-
corporated by the Legislature of the pro-
vince of British Columbia, and in our legis-
lation we gave that company the same power
that is given in this Bill. If we do autho-

rize the company to issue bonds to the ex-
tent of $45,000 a mile, as it is stated this
Bill will do, it will be nothing more than we
have done in the case of the other company.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN— We all know that
constructing a railway through that sea of
mountains costs a great deal more than
building a railway through this eastern
country.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— It is scarcely fit
that our time should be occupied by a ques-
tion which cannot be put, because this is a
motion in amendment to the Bill, of which
no notice whatever has been given, and
therefore it cannot be entertained.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— You cannot
pass the Bill to-day then. Let the third
reading stand until Saturday, and we will
give notice of the amendment. At the third
reading every member has a right to move
an amendment.

Hon. Mr. POWER— On the question of
order I think the hon. gentleman from
DeLanaudi^re is wrong, but I must ask the
hon. gentleman from Amherst to be kind
enough to withdraw that technical objection.
It is only right that the opinion of the
House should be taken on the amendment,

Hon. Mr. DICKEY— Very well, I with-
draw it.

Hon. Mr. POWER— Although techni-
cally the amendment may not be in order,
still there has been no opportunity to give
notice and I think it would not be treating
the opposition to the Bill fairly to press the
point of order. The correct thing is to let
the amendment be put,

Hon. Mr.DE BOUCHERVILLE— I wish
to speak on the point of order.

Hon. Mr. POWER — There is no question
of order before the House. The hon. mem-
ber from Amherst raised a point of order
and then withdrew his objection.

Hon. Mr. De BOUCHERVILLE— The

hon. gentleman says that at the third read-
ing of a Bill notice must be given of any
important amendment. The hon. gentlemen
who support this Bill all admit that this
question is not an important one, because in
their opinion the same thing is in the Bill

Digitized by

Google.

Drummand County [MARCH 30, 1893] Railway Co.'s Bill.

503

that is in my motion. How, therefore, ca^i
this be an important amendment and what
necessity is there to give notice ? It is a
very common thing in this House to move
at the third reading that the Bill be sent
back to the Committee. If it were necessary to
give notice twenty-four hours in advance, how
could that be done ? It stands to reason that
there cannot be a notice of motion in this
case. . The hon. gentleman from Halifax says
that if there had been more time the Com-
mittee might have considered our objection,
but that there was so little time that the
Bill might be lost and we cannot put the
amendment to the Bill. The question is this
— should we allow a doubt to exist ? Cer-
tainly no one will say that there is not a
doubt when half the House is of one opinion
and the other half of another opinion. I
want to have the doubt removed and that is
why I wish to have a vote on my amend-
ment.

The House divided on the amendment,
which Was rejected by the following vote : —
Contents :
The Hon. Messrs.
Angers, Gu^vremont,

Arniund, Montplaisir,

Boucherville, de Robitaille- 7.

De Blois,

NoN

-Contents :

The Hon. Messrs.

Bowell,

McMillan,

Boyd,

Macfarlane,

Dever,

Maclnnes (Burlington),

Dickey,

O'Donohoe,

Ferguson,

Power,

Go wan,

Primrose,

Kirchhofifer,

Read (Quinte),

McKindsey,

Smith,

McLaren,

Snowball— 18.

The Bill was then read the third time, on
a division.

On the question — Shall this Bill pass ?

Hon. Mr. GU^VREMONT (in French)
— Contrary to custom, I wish to propose an
amendment to the Bill at this stage. Hon.
gentlemen may think it extraordinary, but
I wish to put this amendment on record.
On a question of such importance to my con-
stituents as this, I feel that I must deviate
from the regular course followed in this
House. I believe it to be my duty to ex-
plain my reasons for taking this unusual
course, and also to explain how this Bill
injuriously affects my constituents. The

Great Eastern Company obtained a charter
to construct a railway through the counties
of Verch^res, Boucherville, Richelieu, Yam-
aska, Nicolet and Lotbini^re. This charter
was obtained several years ago, but the road
has not been completed yet. The company
have met with difficulties, and these dif-
ficulties will be increased by the passage of
this Bill. If we pass this measure it will
be the means of delaying, if not altogether
preventing the construction of that road on
the south shore of the St. Lawrence. The
Grand Trunk Railway was commenced in
1850-51. In 1856 that company found
itself in such a position that it could not
continue its work, and if the Government of
the two Canadas had not come to its aid,
the undertaking would have been dropped.
In 1856 the Parliament of Canada vote i aid
to assist the company t-o complete their line
between Riviere du Loup and Sarnia. That
measure was carried by a majority of one.
The representative of the counties of
Drummond and Arthabaska, Mr. J. B.
Dorion, voted against that measure. The
result of the completion of that road was
that it opened up the forests of Canada for
settlement. If the country is settled and
prosperous to-day, it is due to the building
of that railway. The Government in that
instance put the Grand Trunk Railway
Company in a position to complete its road.
The member who represented the five coun-
ties to which I have referred voted for that
measure. To this day those five counties are
without railway facilities, and they depend
upon the construction of this Great Eastern
line to provide them with railway communi-
cation. Now, when the Great Eastern
Railway Company is making an effort to
construct that line, a measure is brought
before this House to authorize the building
of a competing line a short distance south
of the St. Lawrence, which, as I understand,
will have the effect of preventing the Great
Eastern from continuing its work. That is
the reason why I have taken every means in
my power to prevent the passage of this Bill,
and I only regret that my efforts have been
unsuccessful. I have acted in the interests
of my constituents and in the interests of
the Eastern Townships generally. The
people of that section will feel deeply the
absence of any sentiment of gratitude in
this House for their generous support to the
Grand Trunk Railway measure in 1 856. I
therefore move that the Bill be not now read

Digitized by

Google

504

The Sessional [SENATE] Messengers' Fay,

the third time, but that the 4th clause
thereof be struck out.

The motion was declared lost on a division.
The Bill then passed.

The Senate adjourned at 12.15 a.m.

THE SENATE.

Ottawa, Saturday, April Ist, 1893.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at 1 1 a.m.
Prayei-s and routine proceedings.

THE SESSIONAL MESSENGERS' PAY.

MOTION.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I find that since
the Senate, upon my motion, struck out of
the report of the Committee on Contingent
Accounts the paragraph relating to the pay-
ment of the sessional messengers, the House
of Commons have granted what might be
termed a gratuity to their messengers and
servants of 15 days' additional pay. Under
the circumstances, with the consent of the
House. I propose to move a reconsideration
of the motion that was carried here, striking
out thit paragraph from the report of the
Contingent Accounts Committee and sub-
stituting therefor words which will give to
. the messengers of the Senate 1 5 days' addi-
tional pay — the same amount that has been
awarded to the messengers of the House of
Oommons. I move that the resolution
adopted by the Senate on Tuesday, the 28th
day of March inst., whereby the sixth para-
graph of the report of the Committee on
Contingent Accounts of the Senate was
stricken out, be now reconsidered.

The motion was agreed to.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved that the sixth
paragraph of the said report be amended by
striking out 82 50 and substituting therefor
the words "$2.50 per day for the session,
and in addition thereto payment at the same
rate for 15 days additional."

Hon. Mr. POWER~I am very glad
that the leader of the Government has, to a
certain extent, reconsidered his somewhat
hasty action of the other day. My conten
tion is, however, that it would have been

wiser to have adopted the report of the
Committee as it stood originally. That pro-
vided that each sessional messenger should
be paid $250 for the session in accordance
with the uniform practice of the House.
The public would have known nothing about
the matter. Now we are reaching about the
same end, but the course that we are pur-
suing advertises to the public that we are
paying these men for time during which they
are not occupied here. The motion is a good
one, but the way in which the thing is done
is objectionable. It would have been better
to have acted on the recommendation of the
Committee on Contingent Accounts.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — I quite accord with
the views expressed by the hon. member from
Halifax. I would be personally opposed to
the principle of paying any sum to any per-
son for work not performed, but I could not
conceive it just or equitable to the messen-
gers of this House, if that rule were departed
from in the House of Commons, that our
messengers should not receive as much as
the employees of the other branch of Parlia-
ment. That is why I have made this motion
to-day. I am not prepared to admit, how-
ever, that my action on the 28th March was
even hasty or had not been fully considered.

The motion was agreed to.

DUTIES OF CUSTOMS ACT AMEND-
MENT BILL.

THIRD READING.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the third
reading of Bill (126) "An Act further to
amend the Act respecting the duties of
Customs."

Hon. Mr. POWER— This Bill was allowed
to stand over at my suggestion. I am
thankful to the House for the courtesy
extended to me. Probably this is not just
the best time to go into a discussion of the
tariff. I have no doubt if I were to make a
speech of half an hour or so, and the hon.
leader of the Government, or some other
gentleman on that side, were to reply, that
the hon. gentleman for Ottawa would speak
for another hour or so. It would be very
instructive, but it might interfere with the
progress of the regular business.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL — Suppose we pair
off.

Digitized by

Google

Duties of Customs Act [APRIL 1, 1893J Amendment Bill.

505

Hon. Mr. POWER— There is a legal
maxiiD which says the law does not pay any
regard to trifles. The amendments which
this Bill proposes to make in the existing
tariff are mere trifles, and therefore I think
it is wiser not to consider them. I may
make one or two observations on the changes
which are proposed by this Bill. One is to
reduce the duty on binder twine from 25 to
12^ per cent. I hope it may afford a certain
measure of relief to the farmers of the West
who use binder twine in large quantities,
but I hardly think that it will, for this
reason — pretty nearly the whole business of
manufacturing cordage and rope of all kinds
on this continent is in the hands of a single
combination. The National Cordage Com-
pany of the United States controls nearly
the whole output of that country, and the
Consumers Cordage Company of Canada
controls the whole output of Canada except
what may l)e made in the Central Prison at
Toronto and what may be made hereafter in
the prison at Kingston under the arrange-
ments made by the Government, and the
consequence is that the reduction in duty
cannot materially affect the price of binder
twine, because the cordage which would
compete with that of the Consumers Cord-
age Company is the cordage manufactured
by the National Cordage Company in the
United States and they are one and the
same concern practically. There is, there-
fore, no substantial competition. If the
duty were removed altogether it might
be worth the while of the manufacturers of
the old country to make arrangements to
send binder twine to Canada. Under the
present circumstances, I do not think it will
be, and the probabilities are that this re-
duction in the duty on binder twine will
have a very immaterial effect. Then, as to
the duty on coal oil, I do not understand
that the duty has been reduced, but the
regulations which go along with the tariff
have imposed an almost prohibitory duty on
coal oil, and these regulations have been to
a certain extent modified. That will pro-
bably help to reduce the price of that very
necessary article. Meanwhile the Govern-
ment have the whole subject of the tariff
under consideration. I suppose we may be
thankful this year for very small mercies,
and we may hope that by next year the eyes
of the Government will be properly opened
and that they will give us a material reduc-
tion in the tariff.

Hon. Mr. DEVER~If the reduction of
12^ per cent duty on binding twine does
not make any difference, the entire removal
of the duty would not make a difference. I
think this Bill reduces the tax to a very low
point, and brings fairly into competition the
binding twine of other countries. Every-
body must be satisfied that the duty now is
merely nominal. Before New Brunswick
came into the Union we us^d to pride our-
selves that our duty was only from 12| to
15 per cent. We thought we were doing
very well, and I think still that we were
doing well. I should be glad to see our
tariff reduced to a uniform 12 J or 15 per
cent, and I do not think that there would
be any difficulty in accomplishing it and
earning the gratitude of the country. This
Bill is a great step in advance in the matter
of binding twine, because it is certainly
acceding to the wishes of the farming com-
munity, whom we are most anxious to con-
sider. If there is any class of people that
feels the effect of the high duty, it certainly
is the farming interest. Therefore, when
we make concessions to the farming commu-
nity, it should be, and I believe it will be,
satisfactory to the whole people of Canada.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I have no com-
plaint whatever to make of the comments
made by the hon. gentleman from Halifax,
but I think if he had carried his logic a
little further he would have come to the
some conclusion as my hon. friend from
St. John. If the reduction from 25 per
cent to 1 2 J per cent is to be of no Ijenetit be-
cause the market is controlled by the Ameri-
can combine, that combine would exist to
just as great an extent if the market were
free, and consequently \f they control the
market now with the duty lowered to 12i
per cent, they would control it if we had no
duty at all. If they charge an exorbitant
price now, they would continue to charge
an exorbitant price then, were it not for the
advantage given to the manufacturers in
Germany and England to compete with
them under a duty of 12^ instead of 25 per
cent. In reference to coal oil, we import
into this country some 10,000,000 gallons
per annum for consumption, and the reduc-
tion of from 3 to 4 cents per gallon is no
small decrease. That is brought about by
the facilities which areoffered to the importers
of that oil by the removal of the restrictions
which existed formerly in reference to the

Digitized by

Google

503

Senate and H. of C. [SENATE] Act Amendment Bill,

tank importations and the reduction from
30 to 10 cents in the inspection fees.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— Not only that, but
it gives an opportunity to our mechanics to
manufacture barrels, which were formerly
manufactured in the United States. The
hon. gentleman will see that it means a con-
siderable profit to the country.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I congratulate the
Government on the fact that the hon. gentle-
man from St. John, who was manifesting
symptoms of independence during the session,
has got back to his right place at the close
of it. I did not say that the reduction from
25 per cent to 12 J per cent would be no
benefit ; I said it would have a very trifling
eflfect, and I gave as a reason that that
reduction would not be sufficient to induce
the manufacturers in England to go into
that line of business and to some over here
and compete with the United States manu-
facturers. If there was no combine between
Canada and the United States, the reduction
of the duty would be very considerable and
important.

Hon. Mr. DEVER— I would remind the
hon. gentleman from Halifax that I am
always in opposition to the Government
when their measures are not good. When
their measures are good, I would be acting
very improperly to oppose them.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the second
reading of Bill (132) "An Act further to
amend the Act respecting the Senate and
House of Commons." He said : — This Bill is
in the line of the resolution we have just
passed in reference to the messengers. It is
to allow each member of Parliament to be
paid his full sessional indemnity, unless he
has been absent more than six days during
the session from his attendance in the
House. You remember at the last session
of Parliament the time allowed was twelve
days. That was on account of the great
length of the session by which members
were kept from their ordinary business a
much longer time than in ordinary sessions

of Parliament. This Bill is to allow six
days, which is supposed to be a time propor-
tionate to that allowed last session. While
moving this I express the hope that in future
the House of Commons will not adopt this
system, but as the Bill has been passed by
the House of Commons at the solicitation of
the members of that House, I see no reason
why the members of the Senate should not
be treated in the same way.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — Last session was an
extraordinary one, and I think that the Gov-
ernment were justified in allowing a certain
number of days, because in a session extend-
ing four or five months, members would
necessarily require to be absent sometimes.
My own objection to the Bill is that it looks
like adding six days to the sessional indem-
nity.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I objected to the
rule being suspended in favour of this Bill
at its first reading, and I do not regret that
I did so. I was pleased to notice that the
hon. leader of the Government did not feel
himself in a position to say anything in
favour of this Bill. It is one calculated to
bring discredit upon and lower the dignity
of this Parliament in the eyes of so much
of the civilized world as becomes aware of
this action. Last session was a very long
one. It extended over the business part of
the year, and (as I think even last year very
improperly) the Government introduced a
measure at the close of the session allowing
each member to get the indemnity for twelve
days as having been spent in the service of
the country which these gentlemen had spent
in attending to their own business. It comes
to this, that a member of either House has
his choice. He is paid a certain sum to
cover his expenses while here at the seat of
Government. If he thinks that his own
private business is of more consequence tian
the business of the country, and he goes
home and he attends to has own private
business, he has no right to expect to be
paid from the public Treasury as though he
had been serving the country. There was
some little excuse last year, as I have said,
but this year we have had an exceptionally
short session — lasting only two months — the
shortest session since 1876, and members are
paid $1 ,000 for the session— that is at the rat©
of $6,000 a year. There may be a few members
of either House whose time and services are

Digitized by

Google

Senate and B. of C. [APKIL 1, 1893] Act Amendment Bill.

507

worth more than $6,000 a year, but I do not
think that any one will undertake to contend
that the services of a majority of the mem-
bers are worth more than that. The rate of
$6,000 a year is very handsome payment in-
deed. The members should have been sat-
isfied with it, and should not have introduced
such a measure as this. I was sorry that
the leader of the Grovernment did not speak
in a more decided tone when he came to ex-
press the hope that this would not form a
precedent. As I said before, I think it is
highly objectionable and discreditable legis-
lation. It just means this, that the House
of Commons have the public Treasury under
their control, and at the close of the shortest
session for 18 years they help themselves from
the Treasury to the extent of about $8,000.
They are supposed to be the guardians of the
Treasury and yet, while acting as guardians,
they are taking the public funds for the
benefit of memb'?rs of Parliament, to the
extent of about $8,000.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill was
read the second time at length at the Table.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the thii-d
reading of the Bill.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— Divide !

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— I regret very much
the innovation which has been under discus-
sion, but I think we would be taking a very
high-handed part if we were to throw out
this Bill. I have no personal interest in it,
but I should be very sorry to interfere with
the opinions and views of gentlemen whose
position and circumstances I do not choose
at the present moment to inquire about. I
- think it is a great mistake to discuss this
Bill, and it would be a still greater mistake
to divide the House upon it. If there is to
be a division I ask to be excused from
voting.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— The reason
why I ask for the yeas and nays is this — a
few days ago, a recommendation ^as made by
the Contingent Accounts Committee of this
House to give our sessional messengers the
fuD sessional allowance. This was objected
to by the Government. It was one of the
smallest and most penurious things that I
knew any Government to be guilty of. I
venture to say that if the late Sir John
Macdonald had been in his place in the

other House, or the late Mr. Mackenzie, he
would have shrunk from doing an injustice
to those poor helpless sessional messen-
gers. I understand the Internal Economy
Committee of the other House have gra-
ciously agreed to allow them fifteen out of the
thirty-five <lays that they were short of the
100, thereby diminishing the reduction to $40
or $50 each. It is a small thing to make any
reduction in the pay of those men, and I am
astonished that any Government or com-
mittee would be guilty of it. A Bill is now
presented to this House asking that mem-
bers of both Houses of Parliament should
be granted $48 each — for what ? Is it for
attending to their duties in Parliament ? No,
it is simply to pay them for looking after
their own private business at home, or, I
will not say gallivanting about the country,
but going about the country interfering in
elections. Last year it was veiy objection-
able to grant additional indemnity — this
year I consider it still more objectionable,
for the reasons which have been given by
the hon. gentleman from Halifax. This is
one of the shortest sessions since Confe-
deration, and we would be doing wrong if
we were to vote away some $8,000, which
this Bill will be the means of doing, while
we are depriving the six sessional messen-
gers in this House of some $40 or $50 each.
If those messengers had any control over
the length of the session, if it were through
any fault of their own that they are here a
shorter time than usual it would be different.
The fact that this t<ession covers only sixty or
sixty-five days is not their fault. If they were
in a position to vindicate their rights I would
not occupy the time of the House in discuss-
ing the subject, but certainly I do not feel
disposed to let this Bill go without dividing
the House.

Hon. Mr. ALLAN — I think we are mak-
ing a great ado about a small matter.
Moreover, I do not think we have a right to
criticize the proceedings of the other House
and suggest that they are taking this extra
amount to cover time spent in looking after
elections. It is a pity the matter should be
discussed in this way. As regards the mes-
sengers, I was one of those who voted in the
Committee for not granting them an extra
allowance, and for this reason, the hon.
gentleman knows very well that we have
had it thrown in our teeth from time to
time that our expenditures are extravagant,

Digitized by

Google

508

Senate and H. of C. [SENATE] Amendment Bill

and in excess of those of the House of
Commons. Therefore, when I heard that
the House of Commons had voted a certain
sum to their messengeiti, I did not think that
we should go beyond that. But when the
House of Commons chose to increase the
amount, there was no reason why our mes-
sengers should be placed at a disadvantage
as compared with the messengers of the
other House. While I agree as to the inex-
pediency of making this allowance at this
time of the session, still I do not think we
will place ourselves in a very dignified posi-
tion by dividing the House on this Bill.

Hon. Mr. BO WELL— I cannot allow the
remarks of the hon. gentleman from New
Westminster to pass without a slight com-
ment. I do not know what he meant or in-
tended to convey by his very courteous
words — the smallest thing ever perpetrated
by a Government — but one thing I can tell
him, that the late Sir John Macdoliald, had
he been here, would have been just as safe a
guardian of the public funds as the hon.
gentleman could be. Sir John Macdonald's
views of right and wrong certainly cannot
be gauged by the opinions expressed by the
hon. gentleman from New Westminster. The
report of the Contingent Accounts Com
mittee was based upon principle. That prin-
ciple I expressed very fully at the time —
that I thought either House should deal in
matters of public expenditure as far as possi-
ble in the same manner as they would deal
with their own funds, and I question very
much if the hon. gentleman would have put
his hand in his pocket to pay any one of his
servants $125 a month when he had agreed
to pay him only $2.50 per day. It is singu-
larly unfortunate that in public affairs, people
have their pets that they desire to pay, at
the expense of the country, more than they
should legally receive. We have acted upon
the broad principle of paying our messengers
the wages that we agreed to pay them. If
any one has done extra service then I say
a gratuity should be paid to him, as one
would do in private business, and as I have no
doubt would be done here if circumstances
warranted such payment, but I object in ^o^o to
the construction put upon my action. I took
the course that I pursued here upon my own
individual responsibility, but I am quite
satisfied that the Government, if their
opinion were asked, would justify my course
in that matter ; nor should I have deviated

from that had it not been from the fact that
the House of Commons thought proper to
make an allowance to their messengers, and
I could see no equitable reasons why the
messengers of this House should not receive
the same consideration. As to the Bill now
before us, I have not the slightest objection
to record my vote in its favour, though, as I
intimated when I moved the motion, I think
it would be more dignified — and I say it
unreservedly — if members of either House
did not urge this matter session after session-
However, as the Bill has been passed by the
House of Commons, it will place the Senate
in an invidious position were they to reject
it. If we are to have a division I trust the
hon. gentleman from Ottawa will not be
excused from recording his vote, because he
has no personal interest, nor has any other
hon. gentleman who has been at the seat of
Government during the whole period of the
session. It affects only those who happened to
be absent. I almost regret having made
those remarks, but I considered them neces-
sary, because I did not think the hon. gen-
tleman's remarks were warranted under the
circumstances. I might call his attention to
this also — I know of no by-election which
has taken place, except the one in Middle-
sex, during this session.

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I was speak-
ing of last year.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— We are not dealing
with the matters of last session. There has
been no "gallivanting about the country," or
electioneering that I am aware of, unless it
has been in the election of the gentleman
who has just taken his seat in the House of
Commons for Middlesex. It is one of the
rights of a British subject to take part in
elections and endeavour to elect the man of
his choice, in order to affirm the principles
which he believes to be right in governing
the country without his action being desig-
nated as " gallivanting."

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— He should
do it at his own expense.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL-I shall take part
in elections as long as I have the health and
strength to do it, and I have no doubt the
hon. gentleman would do the same thing if
he thought he could help his party.

Digitized by

Google

Homestead Exemption Act [APKIL 1, 1893] Amendment Bill.

50^

Hon. Mr. McINNES (B.C.)— I trust that
the hon. gentleman will not take my remarks
as being personal — I did not refer to him
personally. I meant to refer to the Gov-
ernment as a whole.

Hon. Mr. BELLEROSE— I have already
given my views on this question and I have
not changed them. When I spoke on the
subject, had a vote been taken I should
probably have recorded mine against the
Bill. But to-day I must deal with the mat-
ter as it stands before us. The Government
having done what I believe is right towards
our messenget^ or at least having given
them a portion of what they are entitled to,,
I shall not vote against this Bill. We must
approve of what has been done in the other
House. The members of that body having
decided that there is a justification this year
for allowing six days absence of any member
without reducing his sessional indemnity, I
should not like to condemn their judgment.
While I am not in favour of the principle of
this BQl, I believe that the sessional indem-
nity ought to be larger than it is. Public
men who devote themselves to their duties
should receive more than $1,000 a year.
However, in this instance that is not the
question before us ; we are simply asked to
declare that a member shall not suffer a
reduction of his indemnity unless he has
been absent more than six days during the
session. If the House is divided on this
question, I shall vote for the Bill.

Hon. Mr. SMITH— At this late stage of
the session, and inasmuch as we are not
responsible for this Bill, I think it is bad
taste to find fault with those who are
responsible to the country for their action.
It is a small matter, and not one calculated to
improve the character of this House to give
such prominence to this particular motion.
The hon. gentlemen who are opposing this
Bill were quite willing recently to vote away
the public money to people who had not
earned it, but they are ready to-day to find
fault with a Bill which comes to us endorsed
by the House of Commons. It is a poor
rule that will not work both ways. The hon.
member from New Westminster was one of
those who would have voted away the public
money improperly this week had the House
allowed him to do so. Since we are not
responsible for this Bill, I cannot see why
the hon. gentleman opposes it, unless his

object is to make a little political capital at
the end of the session. He has had so very
little to find fault with this session that we
should forgive him for seizing upon this
opportunity to make a point against the
majority.

Hon. Mr. POWER— I rise simply for the
purpose of asking the hon. gentleman from
New Westminster not to demand a division •
on this Bill. I cannot agree with the hon.
gentleman from Toronto that it is bad taste
to discuss it. I think the bad taste was in
introducing the measure and passing it ; but
inasmuch as we are not responsible for it
and cannot defeat it, it would be better not
to have a division. I hope the expression
of opinion here to-day may have the efiect
of preventing the introduction of such
measures in the future.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
was read the third time and passed.

HOMESTEAD EXEMPTION ACT
AMENDMENT BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House of
Commons with Bill (116) " An Act to amend
the Homestead Exemption Act."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved that the rule
be suspended, and that the Bill be read the
second time at length at the Table. He
said : — Under the statute regulating home-
stead exemptions in the North-west each
settler is allowed to hold 80 acres free from
seizure. The Manitoba Legislature passed
an Act extending the exemption to 160
acres. That Act was declared ultra vires of
their power under the Constitution. A

i motion was introduced in the other House
by Mr. Davin to repeal the clause altogether.
That would have the effect of leaving the
settlers without an exemption whatever
from seizure. The Minister of the Interior

' did not think that that would be justice to
the settlers, particularly those who had

' selected homesteads in the North-west under
the Act providing for the exemption of 80
acres, and instead of repealing the provision
altogether, this Bill provides for the repeal
of the section limiting the exemption to 80
acres and extends it to 1 60 acres. This Bill
will confer a greater benefit on the settlers
than they enjoy ui>der the present law.

Digitized by

Google

510

The Supply [SENATE] Bill

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
passed through its final stages.

DAIRY PRODUCTS BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (125) "An Act to
prevent the manufacture and sale of filled or
imitation cheese, and to provide for the
branding of dairy products."

The Bill was read the first time.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved the suspen-
sion of the rule, and that the Bill be read the
second time at length at the Table. He
said : — The object of this Bill is to prevent
the sale of skim-milk cheese unless it is
branded as such, and to prevent United
States cheese from bein<( brought into this
country and sold in England as Canadian
cheese. It also provides that all Canadian
cheese for export shall be marked " Canada "
or "Canadian."

Hon. Mr. SCOTT — It is quite apparent
that we are having some very important
legislation introduced within a few hours of
the prorogation of Parliament. It is fortu-
nate that the proposed legislation is such
that it is not open to serious objection. At
the same time, it is scarcely fair to the
Senate to* deprive us of an opportunity of
commenting on these measures. I quite
appreciate the importance of this Bill and
think it is most desirable that United States
cheese should not be sold in the European
market under the name of Canadian, as I
am told has l)een done. How do the
Government propose to meet the difiiculty
which is sure to arise of cheese being branded,
as it can be in the United States, " Cana-
dian " and shipped through Canada to Eng-
land in bond ? Have we the power to change
the brand on these packages ? How are we
to examine them to ascertain whether they
are improperly marked? It raises a very
important international question. That is
where the great danger is to be apprehended.
I do not see how we can check the fraud
when it is perpetrated in the way I have
indicated.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— It is impossible to
interfere with goods passing through this
country in bond. If the cheese bears false
marks I do not think that we can alter those

marks. What we can do is to prevent
Canadian citizens from dealing with that
cheese — punish them for selling when they
know that it has not been made in this
country.

Hon. Mr. SCOTT— The sales, of course, are
made on the other side of the Atlantic.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS— There is always a
middle-man in Canada and we can reach him.

The motion was agreed to, and the Bill
passed through its final stages.

HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS OF
MONTREAL BILL.

COMMONS AMENDMENTS AGREED TO.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons to return Bill (99) " An Act re-
specting the Harbour Commissioners of
Montreal," with amendments.

Hon. Mr. ANGERS moved that the
amendments be concurred in. He said : — The
Bill was amended in this House to make the
Mayor of Montreal ex officio a member of
the Montreal Harbour Commission. The
result of the amendment was to equally
divide the Board between those appointed
by the Government and those representing
the city. It is desirable that the Govern-
ment should have a controlling voice ; they
are expending public moneys in Montreal
harbour, and it has always been an accepted
principle in such cases that the Government
should have the control. This amendment
is to add another member, so that there may
be six appointed by the Government and
five by the city.

The motion was agreed to.

THE SUPPLY BILL.

FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD READINGS.

A Message was received from the House
of Commons with Bill (135) "An Act for
granting to Her Majesty certain sums of
money required for defraying certain
expenses of the public service, for the
financial years ending respectively the 30th
June, 1893, and the 30th June, 1894, and
for other purposes relating to the public
service."

The Bill was read the first time.

Digitized by

Google

The [APKIL 1, 1893] Prorogation.

511

Hon. Mr. BOWELL moved the suspen-
sion of the rule and that the Bill be read the
second time.

Hon. Mr. MACDONALD (B.C.)— Before
the Bill is passed, I wish to congratulate the
Government and this House on the shortness
of the session. It has been a very satis-
factory session. We have been busy from
the first. It shows what can be done when
the Government is prepared with its mea-
sures in time. I hope they will be equally
prepared next year and that we may look
forward to having shorter sessions hereafter
than we have had of late years — sessions
extending not longer than ninety days. If
the work is pushed as vigorously rext ses-
sion as it has been this year, and the Gov-
ernment are prepared with their estimates
and measures at the opening, the session
need not last longer than ninety days at the
outside.

Hon. Mr. POWER— The hon. gentleman
from Victoria has every reason to be satis-
fied with the session. I notice in the Esti-
mates that over $300,000 has been appro-
priated to be expended in Victoria and its
imme<liate vicinity. I can readily under-
stand that the session has been exceedingly
satisfactory to him.

Hon. Mr. BOWELL— I thank the hon.
gentleman from Victoria for the remarks he
has made in reference to the action of the
Government during the present session, but
I can assure him that the length of the ses-
sion is not always the result of the Govern-
ment not being prepared with its measures,
or of the Budget speech not being delivered
at an early day. In the more democratic
branch of Parliament time is occupied
unsparingly for days and weeks, and some-
times for months, in discussing abstract
principles, discussing matters over which the
Government have no control whatever, and
in this way, to a very great extent, the ses-
sions are prolonged. However, it is not
always the fault of those who pursue that
course. On behalf of the Government I
have to thank the chairmen of the different
committees for the assiduity with which
they have discharged their duties during the
present session. Very little time has been
lost by the standing committees in the con-
sideration of the measures submitted to
them. For myself, I am extremely thankful

for the courtesy and assistance I have
received from every member of the Senate
during the session. I feel it all the more
from the fact that I entered the House as a
stranger — at least to this House — assuming
a very responsible position and following a
gentleman whose talents and ability were
universally recognized ; but I have been
relieved of anxiety to a very great extent by
the assistance received, not only from gentle-
men who are in accord with the Government
upon their general policy, but also from
those who differ from us upon the great
questions which divide parties in this coun-
try. I can only hope that as long as I
occupy my present position we may at the
end of every session of Parliament be
enabled, as we are now, to congratulate our-
selves upon the kindly feeling that exists
between all parties. As we are to a very
great extent placed in positions where the
narrow views of politicians should not pre-
vail, for the purpose of legislating in the
public interests without introducing those
acrimonious discussions which sometimes
take place in the other branch of Parlia-
ment, I hope that we shall continue to pur-
sue the same moderate course. If the mem-
bers of the House are as satisfied and grati-
fied with the conduct of the members repre-
senting the Government in the Senate as I
am with them, I can only say that we part
not only good friends, but with the hope that
our intercourse will continue and be of the
same agreeable character in the future.
(Applause.)

Hon. Mr. POWER— So say we all.
The Bill passed through its final stages.
The Senate adjourned during pleasure.

THE PROROGATION.

At three o'clock p.m., His Excellency the
Governor-General proceeded in state to the
! Senate Chamber and took his seat upon the
Throne. The members of the Senate being
assembled. His Excellency was pleased to
command the attendance of the House of
Commons and that House being present, the
following Bills were assented to, in Her
Majesty's name, by His Excellency the
Governor-General, viz. : —

An Act respecting the Hamilton Provident and
Loan Society.

Digitized by

Google

512

The [SENATE] Prorogation.

An Act to incorporate the Dominion Burglary
Guarantee Company (Limited).

An Act respecting the Central Counties Railway
Company.

An Act respecting the Grand Trunk, Georgian
Bay and Lake Erie Railway Company.

An Act respecting the Manitoba and South-
eastern Railway Company.

■ An Act respecting the St. Lawrence and Adiron-
dack Railway Company.

An Act to amend the Act to readjust the Repre-
sentation in the House of Commons. ^

An Act t« give effect to an agreement between
the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company, and the Cor-
poration of the City of Toronto.

An Act respecting the I^ke Erie and Detroit
River Railway Company.

An Act to amend the Act to incorporate the
Montreal and Atlantic Railway Company.

An Act to amend the Act to incorporate the Buf-
falo and Fort Erie Bridge (Company.

An Act to amend the Act to incorporate the
Manufacturers' Accident Insurance Company, and
to change its name to •* The Manufacturers' Guar-
antee and Accident Insurance Company."

An Act to incorporate the Eastern Trust Com-
pany.

An Act respecting the Alberta Railway and Coal
Company.

An Act to amend the law relating to Holidayt.

An Act to correct a clerical error in the Bank
Act.

An Act to amend the Wrecks and Salvage Act.

An Act respecting the disposal of moneys paid in
connection with proceedings before Parliament.

An* Act for the relief of Edmund Holyoake
He ward.

An Act for the relief of Martha Ballantyne.

An Act for the relief of James Balfour.

An Act respecting the Western Counties Rail-
way Company, and to change the name of the
Company to the Yarmouth and Annapolis Railway
Company.

An Act respecting the Canatla Life Assurance
Company.

An Act to revive and amend the Act to incor-
porate the Equity Insurance Company, and to
change the name of the Company to the St. Law-
rence Insurance Company.

An Act to incorporate the Woodmen of the
World.

An Act to incorporate the Ocean Guarantee Cor-
poration.

An Act respecting the Canadian Power Company,

An Act for the relief of Robert Young Hebden.

An Act respecting the Port Arthur, Duluth and
\>'e8tern Railway (ompany.

An Act to amend an Act respecting the Nova
Scotia Permanent Benefit Buililing Society and
Savings Fund.

An Act relating to the Harbour of Thornbur}%
on (Georgian Bay.

An Act further to amend the Act to enable the
City of Winnipeg to utilize the Assiniboine River
water power.

An Act respecting the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company.

An Act respecting the Chilliwhack Railway Com-
pany.

An Act to incorporate the Atlantic and Lake
Superior Railway Company.

An Act respecting the Columbia and Kootenay
Railway and Navigation (^ompany.

An Act further to amend the Supreme and Exche-
quer Courts Act,

An Act to incorporate the Canada Carnage Com-
pany.

An Act to incorporate the Ocean Accident Cor-
poration.

.An Act to incorporate the Canada North-west
Land Company (Limited).

An Act respecting the Grand Trunk Railway
Company of Canada.

An Act to revive and amend the Act to incor-
porate the Moncton and Prince Edward Island
Railway and Ferry Company.

An Act to consolidate and amend certain Acts
relating to the Manitoba and North-western Rail-
way Company of Canada.

An Act to incorporate the Cleveland, Port Stan-
ley and London Transportation and Railway Com-
pany, and to confirm an Agreement respecting the
London and Port Stanley Railway.

An Act respecting the Nelson and Fort Sheppard
Railway Company.

An Act to incorporate the Automatic Telephone
and Electric Company of Canada.

An Act respectmg the Loudon and Port Stanley
Elailway Company.

An Act respecting the Temiscouata Railway
Conlpany.

An Act to incorporate the Canada Atlantic and
Plant Steam-ship Company (Limited).

An Act to amend an Act to incorporate the
Eastern Canada Savings and Loan Company (Lim-
ited).

An Act respecting the British American Assur-
ance Company.

An Act to incorporate the Canadian Gas Associa-
tion.

An Act further to aoiend the Steam- boat Inspec-
tion Act.

An Act to amend the Act respecting the Harbour
and River Police of the province of Quei>ec.

An Act further to amend the Act respecting
Public Officers.

An Act to incorporate the Grand Council of the
Catholic Mutual Benefit Association of Canada.

An Act to revive and amend the Act to incor-
porate the North Canadian Atlantic Railway and
Steam -ship Company, and to change the name
thereof to **The Quebec and Labrador Railway
and Steam-ship Company."

An Act to amend the Inland Waters Seamen's
Act.

An Act for the relief of John Francis Schwaller.

An Act for the relief of James Frederick Doran.

An Act for the i-elief of Annette Marion Goff.

An Act further to amend the Act respecting
Joint Stock Ompanies to construct works to faci-
litate the transmission of Timber down Rivers and
Streams.

An Act to incorporate the Naknsp and Slocan
Railway Company.

An Act respecting the Toronto, Hamilton and
Buffalo Railway Company.

An Act to confirm the sale of the Carleton, City
of Saint John, Branch Railroad.

An Act to incorporate the Canadian Live Stock
Insurance Association.

•Digitized by

Google

The LAPBIb 1, 1893] Prorogation.

513

An Act to make further provision respecting
Grants of Laud to members of the Militia Force on
active service in the North -west.

An Act to incorporate the British Cohmi))ia Dock
Company.

An Act to incorporate the Calgary Street Rail-
way.

An Act to amend the Civil Service Superannua-
tion Act.

An Act respecting the Voters' Lists, 1893.

An Act to incorporate the North American Canal
Company.

An Act further to amend the Patent Act.

An Act to incorporate the Calgary Hydraulic
Company.

An Act respecting the Ladieaof the Sacred Heart
of Jesus. *

An Act to incorporate the Calgary Irrigation
Company.

An Act to incorporate the Alberta Irrigation
• Company.

An Act respecting Government Civil Service
Insurance. -

An Act respecting Witnesses and Evidence.

An Act further to amend the General Inspection
Act.

An Act further to amend the Dominion Lands
Act.

An Act further to amend the Ilailway Act.

An Act to amend the Criminal Code, 1892.

An Act relating to the custody of juvenile offend-
ers in the province of New Brunswick. *

An Act to authorize the granting of Subsidies in
aid of the construction of the lines of Ilailway
therein mentioned.

An Act respecting the appointment of Commis-
sioners to the World's Columbian Exposition.

An Act to amend the Act respecting the Royal
Military College.

An Act further to amend the Petroleum Inspec-
tion Act.

An Act to amend the Act respecting Ocean
Steam-ship Subsidies.

An Act respecting the Drummond County Rail-
way Company.

An Act further to amend the Acts respecting the
Duties of Customs.

An Act further to amend the Act respecting the
Senate and House of Commons.

An Act relating to the granting of subsidies in
land to Railway Companies.

An Act to amend the Revised Statutes resi)ect-
ing the Department of Public Printing and Sta-
tionery.

An Act to amend the Homestead Exemption Act.

An Act to prevent the manufacture and sale of
filled or imitation cheese, and to provide for the
branding of dairj* products.

An Act respecting the Harbour Commissioners of
Montreal.

An Act to amend the Merchant Shipping Act,
with respect to load-lines.

Then the Honourable the Speaker of the House
of Commons addressed His Excellency the Governor-
General as follows : —

** May it Please Your Excellency :

** The Commons of Canada have voteil certain
Supplies required to enable the Government to
defray the expenses of the Public Service.
33

** In the name of the Commons, I present to
Your Exciillency the following Bill : —

' An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums
of money recjuired for defraying certain expenses
of the Public Service, for the financial years

ending respectively the 30th June, 1893, and the
;iOth June, 1894, and for other purposes relating
to the Public Service ;'

I to which Bill I hni ibly request Your Excellency's
, assent. "

I To this Bill the Royal assent was signified in the
j following words : —

\ '* In Her Majesty's nan>e, His Excellency the

j Govemor-(ieneral thanks Her Loyal Subjects, ac-

I cepts their benevolence, and assents to this Bill."

' After which ilis Excellency the Governor Gen-

eml was pleased to close the Third Session of the

Seventh Parliament of the Dominion with the

following Speech :

Honourable Gentltme.n of the Senate:

Gentlemen of the House of Commons :

In relieving yon from attendance in Parliament
for this year, I congratulate you upon the energy
and promptitude with which you have disposed of
(he duties of the session just ended.

The assembly at Paris of the Behring Sea Arbi-
tration Tribunal give reason to hope that the differ-
ences which have existed between the CTOvemment
of the United States and the Government of the
Dominion are approaching a satisfactory adjust-
ment, while the nomination of the Prime Minister
of C'anada as one of the arbitrators affords a guar-
antee that the interests of our sealers will be pro-
perly though not unduly safeguarded. ^

The treaty of commerce which was negotiated
with France on behalf of Canada has been laid
before you together with the correspondence which
passed during the negotiations ; but owing to the
late period of the session at which the treaty was
received, and the pendency of communications as to
its bearing in re8j)ect of mos t-f a vcmred -nation treat-
ment and the interpretation of certain of its clauses,
my Government has thought it advisable to post-
pone for the present its ratification by Parliament.

I thank you for the ample provisions you have
made to protect the country ^rom the possible intro-
duction of cholera, and I trust that the precautions
taken will result in guarding against any danger
from that source.

The liberal proxosions made for the proper repre-
sentation of Canada at the World's Columbian
Exposition will, I doubt not, enable this country to
make a worthy exhibit of her resources and pro-
gress among the nations of the World.

The various Acts which you have placed upon
the Statute-book will contribute to the maintenance
of public security and the continued progress of the
Country.

Otntlemen of the How<e o/CommOTis:

1 thank you for the liberal provisions you have
made for the requirements of the public service.

Honourable Gentlemen of the Senate:

Gentlemen of the House of Commons :

I feel with deep regret that the period of my
official connection with the I^miuion is 'drawing

Digitized by

Google

614

The [SENATE] Prorogation.

towards its close and that in all probability I am
takinff leave of you for the last time. Lest this
should be the case, I desire to avail myself of the
present occasion to express my abiding interest in
all that concerns the welfare of Canada, and my
sincere affection to her people, who have never
failed to testify their loyalty to the person and
throne of our Sovereign, and to show kindness and
consideration to her representative. It will ever
be my sincere desire to be of service to the Domi-
nion and I shall continue to cherish feelings of the
warmest solicitude for the welfare and prosperity
of those amongst whom I have been placed auring
the past five yefjt

I pray that the blessing of Almighty God may at
all times attend you.

The Sp£ak£B of the Senate then said :

ffonourMe Gentlemen of the Senate, and Gentlemen
qf the House of Commons :

It ia His Excellency the Governor-General's
will and pleasure, that this Parliament be proro-
gued until Thursday, the eleventh day of Mty next,
to be here held, and this Parliament is accordingly
prorogue<l until the eleventh day of May next.

Digitized by

Google

I2S-DEX

DEBATES OF THE SENATE

OF THE

DOMINION OF CANADA
1893.

Part I. constitutes an Index to the names of Senators, with their action upon the
respective subjects.

Pakt II. constitutes an analytical Index to all subjects debated.

The following abbreviations are used : Addl., additional ; Amt., amendment ;
Amd., amended; Appt., appointment; B., Bill; CL, Clause; Co., Company; Com.
Committee ; Com. of the W., Committee of the Whole House ; Corresp., Correspond-
ence ; Gk)vt., (Government ; His Ex., His ExceDency ; H. of Commons, House of Com-
mons; Incorp., Incorporation; Inqy., Inquiry; Inquies., Inquiries; M., Motion; wi.,
moved ; Par., paragraph ; Ry., Railway ; Sect., section ; W., Whole House.

On a Division : C, Content ; N.-C, Non-Content.

1st R., 2nd R., 3rd R., 1st, 2nd and 3rd Readings.

*, Without comment or debate.

In Part II., Index to Subjects,
Bills which have become Statutes have the chapter added in each case :

(56 Vicl.f cap, .)

Digitized by

Google

Digitized by

Google

I.-INDEX TO SENATORS.

ABBOTT, Hon. Sir J. Caldwell, K.O.M.a
ConiplimeDtary remarks ; in seconding Address
in reply to Speech from the Throne : Mr. Des-
jardins, 10 ; in debate : Mr. Scott, 12 ; Mr.
fiowell, 22 ; Mr. Boulton, 41 ; Mr. Howlan,
95; Mr. Armand, 113.

ALLAN, Hon. Gheorffe WiUlam.

Address in answer to Speech from the

Throne. ,
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Read's

speech : pleuro-pneumonia precautions, and

Mr. Mclnnes's ques. as to necessity of expert

from England, 75.
On Mr. Mclnnes's speech : precautions against

cholera in B. C, 106.

Archives of the N. W.

On M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of their preser-
vation ; remarks on archives generally, and
on preservation of Fort Garry gate, 308.

Australian Steam-ship Line. See ** Ocean
Steam-ship Subsidies B."

Books, Purchase of. See ** Printing Com.
Report."

British America Assurance Co.'s Charter
Amt. B. (78).
Introduced*, 440.

2nd R. m., and changes explained, 452.
3rd R.*, 453.

Canada and N. W. Land Co. Incorp. B. (40).
Reported from Banking and Commerce Com.*,
379.

Canada Evidence Act. See :
** Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canada Life Assurance Co.'s B. (32).

Reported from Bcuikingand Commerce Com.*,

Canadian Live Stock Association B. (Q).
Reported from Banking and Commerce Om.,
with Amts., which explained, 440.

Canadian Pacific Ry. capital stock.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Orders in Council
authorising increckse ; ques. of order, that
form of M. should be amd., 136.

Cathouc Mutual Benefit Assn. Incorp. B.
(66).
Reported from Banking and Commerce 0>m.,
with slight Amt., which explained, 425.

Cattle Breeding. See * * Canadian Live Stock. "

Civil Service Insurance ; provision for ; B.
(11).
In 0>m. of the W. ; on Mr. Power's suggestion
that insurance should be compulsory; ques.,
if unmarried, 491.

ALLAN, Hon. Gheorffe William— Con^.
Clarke Wallace, Mr. , speech. See * * Wallace. "

Commercial poucy of Canada.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select 0>m. ; on his
request for withdrawal, and Mr. Almon's
demand for a division on the M. ; courtesy
of the House to the mover urged, 243.

Criminal Law. See —
** Evidence, law of, B."
** Juvenile Offenders, B. "

Drummond County Ry, Co.'s B. (71).

On ques. of Procedure, raised by Chairman of
Ry. Com., whether the Com. may be con-
vened within twenty-four hours of notice,
477.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 3rd R., and Amt.
(Mr. DeBouchervillc) to refer to Com. of the
W., restricting debenture issuinff power ;
reasons for declininff to vote, 502; on re-
marks of Mr. Read (Quints), 502.
Equity Insurance Co. See " St. Lawrence Ins.

O."
Evidence, law of; the accused, husband or
wife of accused, documentary evidence, &c. ;
B. (23).

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; on Mr.
Power's objection to its proceeding at even-
ing session, Mr. Poirier having the floor at
recess on another Order, 364.

On order for 3rd R. , and Amt. (Mr. Angers),
ques. as to subsects. remaining, 446.

Fort Garry gate, preservation of.

Remarks, on M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of
preservation of N.-W. archives, 306.

Insurance, Civil Service, B. See " Civil Ser-
vice."

Interest rates. See ^* Loan Ck>mpanies."

Irish affairs, speech. See "Wallace."

Justice, Administration of. See:

"Evidence, law of , B."

"Juvenile Offenders, B."
Juvenile Offenders ; separate trial ; summon-
ing of parents respecting committal to Re-
formatory, &c. ; B. (P).

Introduced*, 263.

2nd R. m., 296 ; in the debate thereon, 299,
300.

Com. of the W. ; in view of Memo, from Min-
ister of Justice, postponement m., 366.

B. xoithdraitm^ amts. suggested by Minister of
Justice being desirab^and hasty legislation
in such matters inexpedient, 424.

Law, Criminal. See :
" Evidence, law of , B."
"Juvenile offenders, B."

Digitized by

Google

518

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

ALLAN, Hon. Gheorffe WiLliaxa—CorUd,
Live Stock Association. See ** Canadian."
Loan Companies, intebest rates.
On Mr. Perley calling attention of Govt, to
high rates chareed S.-W. settlers ; remark,
no such rates, ^.-W. or elsewhere, 405.

Messengebs, sessional ; allowance to.
Remarks (on Srd R. of Sessional Lidemnity
B.), and on amount recommended by the
Com., and on the action of Commons, 507-8.

Mortgages, interest on. See **Loan Com-
panies."

N. S. Building Society & Savings Fund B. (F).
Reported from Banking Com., with Amts. ;
the Amts. explained, 244.

N.-W. Archives.
On M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of their preser-
vation ; remarks on archives generally, and
on preservation of Fort Garry gate, 90S.

N. W. Settlers, Interest Rates 0I^ Loans.
On Mr. Perley calling attention of Govt, to
high rates exacted ; remark, no such rat«s
charged by Loan Cos. , 465.

Ocean Accident Corporation Incorp. R (39).
On Order for 2nd R. ; attention called to

apparent identity with Ocean Guarantee

Co.'sR,310.
Reported from Banking and Commerce Com. *,

379.

Ocean Guarantee Co. Incorp. B. (46).
Reported from Banking and Commerce Com.,
with slight Amt., 303.

Ocean Steam-ship Subsidies ; subsidy to Aus-
tralian line ; B. (129)..
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R. ; ques., date
of line being in operation, 497.

Order and Procedure, Questions of.

Bill pro€eedin{/ during interrupted debate. On
Mr. Power's objection to Law of Evidence
B. passing 2nd R., at evening session, Mr.
Poirier having had the floor at recess on an-
other Order ; pointed out that no objection
had been raised on B. being taken up, 364.

Billf reference to Com. On ques. of Procedure,
by Chairman of Ry Com., whether that
Com. may be convened within 24 hours of
notice, 477.

Committee, proper, for report*. Held that
Library Com., not Printing Com., should
have recommended purchase of Ready Re-
ference book, 480.

Commonly criticimng action of. Right to do
so questioned, on 3rd R. of Sessional In-
demnity B., 507-8.

Commons, practice qf. As regards payment
of Messengers ; remarks on 3rd R. of Ses-
sional indemnity B., 507-8.

Criminal legislation', hasty, undesirable. Re-
marks, on withdrawing Juvenile Offenders
B (P), 424.

ALT I AN, Hon. Gheorffe William— Cbn/d.
Order and Procedure — Continued.

Inquiries, debatable. On Mr. Bowell*s objec-
tion to Mr. Power's second speech upon his
Inqy., Mr. Wallace's Orange speech at
Kingston) held that under practice of
Senate, Mr. Power has the right, although
inconvenient and irregular, 386.

Motion, form of. Mr. Boulton having made a
M., ** asking for " Orders inCouncilauthor-
izing increase of C.P.R. capital stock, held
that it should have been in shape of M. for
an Address calling for the papers, 136.

Motion, permission for withdratral. On Mr.
Boulton's request to withdraw his M. for
Select Com. on Commercial Policy, and
Mr. Almon's demand for division on the M.,
courtesy of the House to the mover urged.
243.

Senate, Speaker, temporary. On merits of the
B., making provision for appointment, and
on the constitutional points involved, 333»
360, 370, 390. 391. 399.

Printing of Parliament.
On M. (Mr. Read, Quint^) for adoption of 6th
Report of Joint Com. ; on purchase of Ready
Reference to Statutes; held that such re-
commendation should come from Library
Com.. 480.

Prohibition. See " Temperance legislation."

Reformatories. See "Juvenile Offenders B.**

St. Lawrence Insurance Co. ; Incorp. Act of

Equity Ins. Co. revived, name chanced, &c. i

B;^(62). K ' -

Reported from Banking and Commerce Com.*»

379.

Senate and Commons B. See *' Sessional In-
demnity."

Senate, Speaker, temporary, apft. of ; B. to

make provision for (N).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; on meriu of

the measure, and on the constitutional points

involved, 333; comment on Mr. Scott's

speech, 360; on Mr. Poirier's, and Mr.

I>ever's remark thereon, 370.
In Com. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Belleroee)

to insert word ** temporarily," &c., 390, 391.
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 3rd R. ; remarks as to

constitutionality of the B., 397.

Sessional indemnity ; six days' absence not to
count; B. (132).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R. ; remarks,
506 ; on M. (Mr. Bowell) for 3rd R., and
Mr. Mclnnes's call for a division ; on ques-
tion of criticising proceedings of Commons,
and on the allowance voted to Messengers,
507-8.

Sessional Messengers, pay of.

Remarks, on 2nd R. of Sessional Indemnity
R, 507-8.

Statutes, Ready Reference books. See :
"Printing Com., Report of"

Steam-ship subsidies B. See "Ocean."

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

519

ALLAN, Hon. Gheorge William-Contd.
Temperance Legislation (prohibition).
On M. (Mr. Vidal) for Commission's instruc-
tions, ftc., 100.

Wallace, Mr. N. C, Orange Speech.
On Inqy. (Mr. Power) what action taken bv
Govt. ; on ques. of Order (Mr. Bowell)
Inquies. not debatable ; held that under
practice of Senate, Mr. Power has right of
speaking again, 386.

Witnesses, Law op. See ** Evidence."

Woodmen of the World Incorp. B. (34).
Reported from Banking and Commerce Com.*,
3/9.

ALMON, Hon. WHUam J.

Address in Answer to Speech from the

Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Scott's

speech : census comparisons, ques. as to

eastern states and eastern provinces, 14.
On Mr. Power's speech : remarks, X. B. Grovt.

Liberal in politics ; Halifax Chronicle as a

Liberal autnority, 66.

Annunciation Day, &c. See " Holidays."

Apples, Inspecthon. See ** Inspection, General,
Act Amt."

Archives of the N. W.

On M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of measures for
preservation ; remarks on Fort Garry gate,
on the documents, and on proper places for
their deposit, 307.

Balfour Divorce B. (B).
On M. (Mr. Growan) for adoption 15th Report
of Com. (in favour of theB.); evidence just
distributed; held that 24 hours should
elapse for consideration, 263 ; on Mr. Kaul-
bach's concurrence herein, 263.

Burglary Guarantee Co., Incorp. B. (15).
On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 2nd R. ; notice that
exemption of N. S. from provisions of B.
will be m. , 220.

Canadian Live Stock Association Incorp. B.

(Q).
Introduced*, 287.
2nd R. (m. by Mr. Perley)*, 300.
Amts. of Banking and Commerce Com. (re-

spectins the capital stock, &c. ), concurrence

m., with remarks, 440.

See *' Canadian Live Stock

Cattle Trade.
Assn. B.'*

Cholera, Govt. Precautions Against.
On Inqy. (Mr. Ferguson), as to steps taken
and proposed; remark on Mr. Scott's
speech : Hindoos, water-drinkers, not
exempt, 176. On Mr. Power's, Halifax
experience in 1854, &c., 178.

Civn. Service Holidays.
Sufi;geetion that abolition of Annunciation
day, &c., entitles to 3 days' more pay, or
more annual holidays; in Com. of the W. on
Holiday's, change in, B. (H), 197.

ALMON, Hon. William J,^Continued.

Clarke Wallace, Mr., speech of — Se
"Wallace.'' *

Commercial Policy of Canada.

. On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. ; on his
rising to make a second speech, 242. On
his wishing to withdraw the M., yeas and
nays called for, 243 ; division on the M. in-
sisted upon, 243.

Divorce Committee, composition of.
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Select Com. ;
that Judge Gowan should be retained, 120.

Dominion Burolart Guarantee Co. See :
"Burglary."

Eastern Trust Co. Incorp. B. (41 ).
Introduced*, 287.
2nd R. (m. by Mr. Lougheed)*, 300.

Ellis, Supt., Welland Canal.
On Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) as to intention of
Govt, to act upon report of investigation,
260.

Fort Garry Gate, condition of.
Remarks on Mr. Bemier's M. in favour of
preservation of N.W. archives, 307.

Free Trade— 5«c "Commercial policy."

General Inspection Act Amt. See. "Inspec-
tion."

Halifax, Cholera of 1854. See "Cholera."

HouDAYS, Aboution OF, Annuuciation, Corpus
Christi, Sts. Peter and Paul; B. (H).

On M. (Mr. Anffers) for 2nd R.; notice of
Amt. in Com., Thanksgiving day to be h^ld
on Sunday, 182; reply to Mr. Kaulbach,
183 ; to I4r. Anders, 183.

In Com. of the \\ . ; reasons for not offering
above Amt., 197; suggestion that official
should receive 3 days^ay or 3 days' more
annual holiday, 197.

Home Rule, opposition to. See " Wallace,
Mr."

Indemnitt, Sessional. See "Sessional In<
demnity. "

Inspection Act, General, Amt.; apples, classi-
fication of; B. (V).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R.; that inspec-
tion should be replaced by stamping name
of farmer and county on barreb, 4r38.

Irish Affairs. See " Wallace, Mr."

LrvE Stock Association, ^ce "Canadian."

N. S. Building Society and Savings Bank Act

Amt. B. (F).
Introduced*, 145.
2nd R. m., 148; on Mr. BoweU's suggestion

that certain cU>. recpiire consideration in

Com., 148.
Amts. of Banking and Commerce Com. (time

clauses), concurrence m. , 244.
3rd R.*, 244.

Digitized by

Google

520

I. — Index to Senators.

[Se^

AliMON, Hon. William J.— Continued,
N. W. Archives, prj^sekvation of.

On M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of preservation ;
on Fort Garry gate, on the documents, and
on proper place for their deposit, 307.

Oranqeism and Home Rule— <Sc€ " Wallace,

Mr."
Order and Procedure, Questions of.

BillSy objections to, etc. Held that these should
be offered in Com., not on 2nd R. ; on Mr.
Bowell's remarks, 2nd R. of N. S. Building
Society's B., 148.

CoTfimitteettf compantion of. Remarks on per-
fionndot Divorce Com., on M. (Mr. Bo well)
for its appt., 120.

Debate, repeated speaking in. Mr. Boulton's
rising to a second speech (on his M. for Select
Com. on Commercial Policy) objected to,
242.

Divorce Procedure. Held that 24 hours should
elapse for consideration of evidence, before
adoption of Report of Com. (in Balfour
case), 263.

M., teitkdrawal opposed. Mr. Boulton's with-
drawal of his M. for Select Committee on
Commercial Policy opposed, and division
on the M. called for, 243.

Quarantine Matters, Halifax. See "Cholera."

Senate and Commons B. See * * Sessional Indem-
nity."

Sessional Indemnity.
Inqy., whether six days' absence is to be allow-
ed in Commons ; and whether it will be
allowed in Senate, 460.

Temperance.
Remark, Hindoo non-exemption from cholera,
though water-drinkers ; in debate on Inqy.
(Mr. Ferguson) re cholera precautions, 126.

Thanksoiving Day. See " Holidays.'*
Trade. See ** Commercial Policy."
Wallace, Mr. N. C, Controller of Customs.
On Inqy. (Mr. Power) as to action of Govt.

upon Kingston speech, respecting Orange

opposition to Home Rule ; comments on Mr.

Power's speech, 380 ; upon the subject of

Inqy., 383.

Welland Canal Investigation.
On Inqy., (Mr. McCallum) as to intention of
Govt., to take actioi;, 260.

ANG-ERS, Hon. Aufiruste R6al.
Introduced, 3.

Address in reply to Speech frobi Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Boulton's
speech , result of exports exceeding imports, 49.
On the Address : Personal remarks, and com-
pliments to Their Excies., 62 ; Welland
election, 62-3 ; census comparisons and
statistics, 63-4-5 ; the exodus, 63, 65 ; Fran-
chise Act, and revising barristers, 65 ;
Provincial Govts, and immigration, 65 ;
canal tolls question, 66-7 ; fiscal policy, ex-
port, import and shipping statistics, 67,

ANG-ERS, Hon. Auguste B>eaX— Continued,

Address in reply to Speech from Thron-e —
Conlinu£d.

68 ; banking statements, 67 ; comparisons
of imports and taxation, increased railway
facilities and public works, 68-9 ; public
debt, 69 ; wages increase, 69 ; Liberal policy
and annexation, 70 ; McKinley tariff and
increased trade, 70-1 ; Sir John Macdonald
and the N. P., 71.

On Mr. Read's speech : work of Dairy Com-
niissr. Robertson, 73 ; cheese export figure?,
73-4 ; pleuro-pneumonia and visit of English
experts, 74-5.

On Mr. Power's speech : eggs export, 78 ;
Welland election and exodus, 83 ; oeninis
systems, 83-84 ; canal tolls question, 86 ;
personal remarks on Mr. Scott's speech on
XVelland election, 86-7-8 ; census statement,
manufactures, 89, 90; banking business,
overdue notes, 93 ; Liberal annexation senti-
ments, 94.

On Mr. Mclnnes's speech : cholera precautions,
B. C, 106 ; quarantine abuses, 107.

On Mr. Macdonald 's (B. C.) : new quarantine
wharf, B. C, 110.

Annexation. See " United States."
Annunciation Day. See ** Holidays."
Archives (especially of the N. W).

On M. (Mr. Bernier) in favour of steps for pre-
servation of ; remarks on the system gener-
ally, on Fort Garry gate, Ac, 309-10.

Bank Act. clerical error, 1891 for 1901 ;
B. (I).
Introduced*, 147.
2ndR. m.y 183.
3rd R.* 197.

Ban KINO Business, State of.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 67, 81, 93.

Bellerose, Hon. J. H., Appt. to Senate.
Reply to his remarks on reason of his appt. to
Senate, (on his M. re nationalities of Em-
ployees), 274.

British (Columbia Quarantine System.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Mclnnes's

speech, 106-7 ; on Mr. Macdonald 's, 110.
In reply to Inqy. (Mr. Ferguson) Govt, pre-
cautions against cholera, 179.
R«ply to Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes) date of bring-
ing down returns, 251.

Small-pox introduction. See the

above.

Canada Evidence Act. See :
" Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canadian Pacific Rt., Capital Stock.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Orders in Council
authorizing increase ; ques., 133 ; on alleged
inaccuracies in statistics, 144.

Canal Tolls Question.

In debate on the Address, 66-7 ; remark on
Mr. Power's speech, 86.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

521

ANQ-BRS, Hon. Aufifuste lR6el— Continued.
Canned Goods, Stamping of ; R (R).

In Com. of the W. ; on proposed Amt. (Mr.
Dever, accepted by Mr. Bow6ll) to add year
to stamp ; suggested that year stamp be
separate, 400. Suggested that stamp be
impressed on the tin, 404.

Cattle Disease and Government Measures.
In debate on the Address ; remarks on Mr.
Read's speech, 74-5.

Census Comparisons and Statistics.

In debate on the Address, 63-4-5, 69 ; remarks
on Mr. Power's speech, 83-4, 80, 93.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for Manufacturing Sta-
tistics ; Amt., dates 1881 and 1891, sug-
gested, 147.

Census, 1891.

On M. (Mr. Tass^) for instructions, &c., re
French speaking race, 125 ; on Mr. Kaul-
bach's suggestion to include other nation-
alities, 126; on Mr. Scott's Amt., to include
instructions of 1881, 126 ; reply to Mr. Tass^,
date of bringing down Returns, 126.

On M. (Mr. Tasse) for corresp. re errors as to
French speaking races, 244-5.

On alleged inaccuracies in other statistics, in
debate on C.P.R. capital stock increase
(Mr. Boulton's M.), 144.

Returns, 1st Volume.

Renly to Inqy. (Mr. Wark), will be ready
snortly.

Cheese, Prevention of Fraud in Manufac-
ture, and provision for branding of Cana-
dian ; B. (125).

Ist R.*, 510.

Suspension of Rule, and

2nd R. m, ; B. explained, 510 ; replies to Mr.
Scott, goods in bond not interfered with,
but Canadian middleman, 510.

3rd R.», 510.

Chicago Exhibition. See ** World's Fair."

Children, N.B., Punishment. See "Juvenile
Offenders."

Cholera, precautions against.

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Mclnnes's
speech, 106-7; on Mr. Macdonald's, 110.

In reply to Inqy. (Mr. Ferguson), st-eps taken
by Govt., ITO.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes), date of bring-
ing down a Return, 251.

Civil Service employees, Quebec and Mont-
real.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Nation-
* alities, &c. ; remarks on the system, and on
various appointments, 273-4.

CrviL Service Insurance ; B. to make provi-
sion for (11).
In Com. of the W. ; reasons given why system
should not be compulsory, 492.

Coal Consumption in Canada.
In debate on the Address, 67.
CoLUiiBiAN Exhibition. See ** World's Fair."

ANQ-ERS, Hon. Aufiruste B^^al—Ckmtinued.
Corpus Christl /S^ee "Holidays."

Criminal Code Amt. B. (43).

1st R.», 459.

Suspension of Rule, and

2nd R.*, 459.

In Com. of the W. ; On 10th cl. (prosecutions
requiring consent of Minister of Marine) ;
replies to Mr. Power's queries as to neces-
sity ; frivolous complaints that ships are not
seaworthy, 467-8.

On sect. T& ; Amt. (Mr. Power) verdict re-
turnable notwithstanding dissent of one
Juror, opposed, 469, 470 ; on the question
of mixed Juries in Quebec, 470-1. Mr.
Power's statement that such an Amt. would
be accepted by Govt, in Commons, contra-
dicted, 471-2. That such an Amt. must
first be considered in Council, and approved
by Minister of Justice, 472. On Mr. Lous-
heed's remarks on Jury system in N.W.T.,
472.

On Mr. Power's charge that Govt, does not
desire .to perfect the measure, 473.

Criminal Law, Administration of. See :
" Criminal Code Amt. B."
"Evidence, Law of, B."
** Juvenile Offenders in N.B., B."
" N. W. T. Act Amt. (jury trials) B."

Custom* Tariff.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 68.
Dairy Products B. See ** Cheese."

Debt, the Public.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 69.

Drummond County Ry. Co.'s B. (71).
On ques. of Order as to 2nd R. under suspen-
sion of Rules ; pointed out that the Speaker
has ruled that Notice is necessary, 462.

Election, Welland, the recent.
In debate on the Address, on Mr. Scott's
speech, 62-3 ; on Mr. Power's, 83, 86-7-8.

Elections and Revlsinq Officers.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 65.

Employees. See ** Civil Service."

Epidemics. <S^ee "Cholera."

Evidence, law of ; the accused, husband or
wife of accused, documents. &c. ; B. (23).

Introduced*, 283.

2nd R. m., 363-4. On Mr. Power's objection
to the 2nd R. at evening session, Mr. Poirier
having had the floor at recess on the B. res-
pecting Speaker of Senate, 364. That full
discussion on principle of the B. will be ad-
mitted in Com. of the \V., 365 ; on notice
of Amt. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.), compellable
evidence, 365.

In Com. of the VV. ; that principle of the B. is
still, as agreed, open to discussion, 407.
That the B. is already law in Ont., as re-
gards husband and wife, 41 4-5 ; reply to Mr.
Bellerose, 415 ; to Mr. Power, 415 ; to Mr.
• Scott, 415.

Digitized by

Google

522

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

ANQ-ERS, Hon. AuffUSte B^al— Continued.
Evidence, law of — Continued.

On ques. of ** compellable " evidence ; opinion
of House requested, 415. On Amt. (Mr.
Scott) to strike out words "and compel-
lable " ; comment on Mr. Lougheed's speech,
419, 420.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) to add subsect., failure
to testify not to create presumption of guilt,
&c., 426 ; further, 426, 427. Suggested modi-
fication of the subsect., 428 ; further, 428.

B., as amd., not acoordinff with Ont. law, 3rd
R. postponed for consultation with Dept. of
Justice, 429, 430.

On order for 3rd R. ; opinion of House requested
on advisability of recommittal of B., for re-
consideration of Amts., 442.

Further Amt. m., to substitute cl. 24 as in B.
when brought up in Commons, taking out
"compellable" and inserting phrase, ' * failure
to testify not to be commented upon by pro-
secution," 442. On Mr. Power's remarks,
442-3; on Mr. Vidal's, 443; on Mr.
Power's, 444; on Mr. Vidal's, 445. Oflfer
to recommit the B. ; the Amt. explained,
445-6.

Amts. m., commissioner ** or any other person
authorized," Ac, 446.

Amt. m. (verbal correction), 446.

3rd R. of B. m., 446. Reply to Mr. Lougheed,
respecting difference from Ont. law, ^6 ; to
Mr. Dickey, 446 ; to Mr. Lougheed, law of
the N.-W.T., 447; further, 447; that the
working of the B. can be tested during
recess, 447.

B. 3rd R., 447.

Amts. of Commons ; insertion of "competent "
instead of compellable ; evidence of husband
or wife not subject to comment of Court ;
explained, 492 ; concurrence m. , 493.

See ** Supreme and

ExcHEQrER Court Act.
Exchequer. "

Exodus, the.
•Remarks in debate on the Address, 63-5; on
Mr. Power's speech, 83.

Experimental Farm. See " Farm."

Exports and Imports.
In debate on the Address, 49, 67-8; on Mr.
Power's speech, 78.

Farm and dairy matters, in debate on the
Address. See "Address."

Farm, Govt., French-speaking employees at.
Remarks on M, (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of

Nationalities of Govt, employees, 274.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Bellerose), cause of delay,

480.

Farm, Govt., Return of Employees.

Reply to ques. (Mr. Bellerose) date of bringing
down Return, 251.

Fiscal Policy, questions of, in debate on the
Address. ^S^ee " Address. "

Fish, Canned, stamping of. See "Canned
Goods."

ANQ-ERS, Hon. Aucruste B^^al—Continued,
Fort Garry Gate, preservation of.
On remarks in debate, upon M. (Mr. Bemier)
respecting Dominion archives, 309-10.

Franchise Act and Revising Officers.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 65.
French-speaking Census. See " Census."

French-speaking employees. See " Civil Ser-
vice.

Fruit, Canned, stamping of. See "Canned
Goods."

Government Farm. See " Farm."

Grosse Isle Quarantine. See " Quarantine."

Haufax Quarantine. See " Quarantine."

Holidays, Statutory, abolished ; Annuncia*

tion Day, Corpus Christi, St. Peter and

St. Paul ; B. (H).
Introduced*, 147.
2nd R. m., 182. On Mr. Almon's proposed

Amt., to. hold Thanksgiving Day on Sunday,

183.
In Com. of the ,\V. ; amt. m. (specifying

statutes affected), 197; replies to Mr.

LfOugheed'sques., 197.
3rd R.^, 179.

Immigration ; Provincial Go\-t. Action.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 65.
Imports. See " Exports and Imports."

Insurance, Civil Service, B. See ** Civil
Service. "

Jury System discussed. See :
" Criminal Code Amt. R"

Justice, administration of. See :
" Criminal Code Amt. B."
" Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
"Juvenile offenders in N. B. B."
" N. W. T. Act Amt. (jury trials) B."
" Supreme and Exchequer Ct. Act Amt. B."

JuA^ENiLE Offenders in N. B. ; Reformatory,
establishment of, &c. ; R (104).
1st R.*, 494.
Suspension of rules, and
2nd R.*, 494.

In Com. of the W. ; R explained, 494.
3rd R.*, 494.

Law, Administration of. See :
* ♦ Criminal Code Amt. B. "
"EWdence, law of , B."
"Juvenile Offenders in N.R B."
" N. W. T. Act Amt. (jury trials), B."
" Supreme and Exchequer Ct. Act Amt. ^"

Liberal Policy and Annexation.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 70 ; on
Mr. Power's speech, 94.

Liquor Traffic, ^ee "Temperance."
McKiNLEY Tariff. See " United States."
Macdonald, Sir J., and the N. P.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 71.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

523

ANGBRS, Hon. Auffuste B,4al— Continued,
Manitoba Archives.
On M. (Mr. Bender) in favour of preservation
of; remarks on system generally, on Fort
Garry Gate, Ac, 309-10.

Manufactures, remarks in debate on the Ad-
dress. See ** Address."

Manufacturing Statistics.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for Return; Amt.
suggested, 1881 and 1891 respectively, 147.

Mfjit, Canned, Stamping op. See ''Canned
Goods."

Montreal, Dominion Govt. Employees.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of nationali-
ties, Ac., 273-4.

Montreal Harbour Commissioners, B. (99).

Ist R.», 459.

Suspension of Rules, and

2nd R.*, 459.

In Com. of the W.; Amt. m., to add sect,
(making Mayor of Montreal an ex-officio
member), 467.

3rd R. •, 467.

Amt. of H. of Commons (adding another mem-
ber appointed by Govt.), concurrence m.,
510.

New BRUNS^^^CK.

Census decrease, — Remarks in debate on the

Address, 65-6.
Reformatory^ e^tablishmerU of. See " Juvenile

Offenders."

North-west Archives.

On M. (Mr. Bemier) in favour of preserva-
tion of generally, Fort Garry Gate, &c. ,
30910.

North-west Territories Act Amt. ; jury
trials under N. W. T. legislation insteaa of
IX>minion statute ; B. (T).

1st R.*, 424.

2nd R.*, 424.

In Com. of the W. ; in reply to Mr. Power,
effect of the B. explained, 439.

3rd R. m.*, 440.

North-west Territories, Jury System. See
also ** Criminal Code, Amt. B," debate on.

North-west Territories, law of evidence.
See "Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Ontario, law of evidence. See ** Evidence,
law of, Amt. B."

Order and Procedure, questions of.

Bill, dincwmon of principle in Com. — On ob-
jections taken to law of Evidence B.
passing 2nd R. when so moved, promised
full discussion of principle of the B. in
Com. of the W., 365.

Billy Oort.y Amt. of — On. Mr. Power's pro-
posed Amt. to Criminal Code B. (that
verdict be returnable notwidistandinff dis-
sent of one juror) ; held that such an
Amt. must be considered in Council, and
be approved by Minister of Justice, 472.

ANQ-ERS, Hon. Aufiruste B^aX— Continued.
Order and Procedure — Continued.

Bill proceeding, during interrupted Debate. —
On Mr. Power's objection to law of
Evidence B. being moved 2nd R. at even-
ing session, Mr. Poirier having had the
floor at recess on another Order, 364.

Bill, 2nd R. under Suspension of Rule. — On
Drummond County Ry. Co.'s B., pointed
out that Speaker has ruled Notice to be
necessary, objection having been taken,
462.

Debate, exprtHsions used, c/c— -Comments in
Debate on Address, on Mr. Scott's re-
marks upon Mr. Ferguson's defeat in
Welland, 62-3, 86-7-8.
On Mr. Power's objections to remarks made
in debate on *' Speaker of Senate B.," 389,
393.
On Mr. Power's statement that Govt, did
not wish to perfect Criminal Code B., 473.

Law, Adminiatration, Dominion and Pro-
vincial. See the debate on assimilation
of systems, on "Evidence, Law of, B."

Motion impropttiy drc^fted. — Remarks on Mr.
Boulton's request for Orders in Council re
C. P. R. capital stock having led to a
promiscuous debate, 144.

Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment of
See the B. for that purpose, under
** Senate."

Patent Act Amt. ; Deputy Commissioner author-
ized to sign ; claims required in triplicate ;
proportions of partial fees, &c. ; B. (110).

1st R.*, 474.

Suspension of Rule, and

2nd R. m. ; B. exnlained, 474 ; explanation
to Mr. Power, only claim required in tripli-
cate, 474.

In Com. ol the W. ; on Mr. Power's suggested
Amt, (to repeal only Ist cL of sect. 21),
474-5 ; the Amt. accepted, 475.

On Mr. Power's suggested Amt. to subscct. 2
(date of payment of fees), explanations, 475.

Reply to Mr. Drummond, extension of term
of patent, 475.

3rd R.*, 475.

Pleuro-pneumonia and Government Meas-
ures.
In deliate on the Address ; remarks on Mr*
Read's speech, 74-5.

Procedure. See " Order and Procedure."
Prohibition. 5cc ** Temperance."
Quarantine System.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Mclnnes's

speech, 106-7 ; on Mr. Macdonald'6, 1 10.
In reply to Ingy. (Mr. Ferguson), Govt, pre-
cautions agamst Cholera, 179.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.) as to
oate of bringing down Returns m. for, 251.

Quebec, Dominion Employees at.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Nationali-
ties, Ac, 273-4.
Quebec, mixed jury system. See : ** Criminal
Code Amt. B."

Digitized by

Google

524

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

ANQ-ERS, Hon. Auflruste BAal—CoiUinutd,

Quebec Quarantine. See **Q»iarantiiie."

Quebec, Supreme and Exchequer Ct. appeals.
See :
** Supreme and Exchequer Ct. Act Amt. B."

Railways, derates on. See :
Canadian Pacific Ry.
Drummond County Ry.

Reformatory, N. B. See " Juvenile Offenders. "
Returns called for. See the subjects.
Revising Officers. See "Franchise Act."
St. John Quarantine. See " Quarantine."
Sts. Peter and Paul. See •* Holidays."
Seamen and Unsea worthy Ships. See :
*• Criminal Code Amt. B."

Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment
of ; "B. to make provision for (N).

Introduced*, 278.

2nd R. m., 310; comment on Mr. Gowan's
speech, 318 ; speech in closing debate, 376-7 ;
verbal changes suggested by Messrs. Dickey
and Scott acceptea7378.

In Cora, of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Bellerose)
to 1st cl., adding word ** temporarily " kc. ;
pointed out that Amt. is unnecessary, 389 ;
on Mr. Power's comments, 389 ; proposed
Amt. (Mr. Allan) assimilating language of
els., accepted, 391 ; procedure of Clerk in
England, and in Commons here, defined, 392.

Amt. m. (to substitute "preside," for "act "),
392.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) to add a 4th cl., to pre-
clude additional charge on revenue ; pointed
out that it is understood, 392 ; further ob-
jections to the Amt. , 392 ; on Mr. Power's
objection to remarks, 393.

3rdR. m.,395.

Ships, Unsea worthy, prosecutions. See :

"Criminal Code Amt. B."
Small- POX. *9ee "Quarantine."

Stamping of Canned Goods. See " Canned
Goods."

Stamping of Cheese. See " Cheese."
Statistics, Correctness of. See " Census."
Statistics, Manufacturing.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for Return ; Amt.,
dates 1881 and 1891 suggested, 147.

Supreme and Exchequer Court Act Amt. ;

appeal from a judgment in Quebec ; B. (24).
Intro<luced *, 394.
2nd R. m. by Mr. Pelletier, with explanation

that it is not a Govt. B., 406.
3rd R. ♦, 437.

Tariff Questions. See " Customs."
Temperance Le<;islation (prohibition).

On M. (Mr. Vidal) for R. Commission's in-
structions ; comment on Mr. Bowell's
speech, re pesonnel (Mr. Gigault), 165.

Thanksgiving day. See " Holidays."

ANG-ERS, Hon. Augniste K6al—Condud€d.

Trade, Questions of, in debate on the Address.
See "Address."

Unffed States.

A ntieocafion, the Liberal Policy. Remarks in
debate on the 4(ldre8s, 70, 94.

Canada's prosperity compared. Remarks in
debate on the Address, 63,

Catial Tolls Question. In delwtte on the Ad-
dress, 66-7 ; remark on Mr. Power's speech,
183.

Chefsey fravdidently marked Canadian. See
" Cheese, prevention of fraud B."

Exodus to. In debate on the Address, 63, 65,
83.

McKinley Tariff and increased trade. In de-
bate on the Address, 70-1 ; remarks on Mr.
Power's speech, 78.

Wages, Increase in.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 69.

Welland Electon, the recent.
In debate on the Address : on Mr. Scott's
speech, 63 ; remark on Mr. Power's speech,
83, 86-7-8.

Witnesses, Law OF. See "Evidence."

World's Fair Commissioners ; appointment of,
authorized ; B. (124).
1st R.», 494.

Suspension of Rules, and
2nd R.», 494.

In Com. of the W. ; B. explained, 494.
3rd R.*, 495.

ABMAND, Hon. Joseph F.

Address in answer to Speech from the
Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. Compliment to
Sir John Abbott ; the French language ;
Manitoba school question, 113 ; Ministerial
representation in the Senate ; IntercoL R^.,
rumoured sale to C.P.R. Co. ; trade with
England, 114; increased sessional indemnity
advocated, 114-5-6.

BELLEROSE, Hon. Joseph Hsraointha

Address in answer to Speech from the
Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for, 58. Tariff read-
justment necessary, 59 ; Cabinet reconstruc-
tion. Ministers of Trade and of Agriculture
welcomed, 59; number of Ministers, and
French Ministerial representation in the
Senate, 59-61 ; Manitoba school question^
61 2.

Adjournment.

7th Feb.— Notice of M. of Adjt., 123.
M. for Adjt. till 27th Feb, 145; at Mr.
Bowell's suggestion, M. amd.^ till 21st, 146.

Beu-erose, Hon. Mr., appointment to Senate.
Remarks on M. respecting nationalities of
officials, 273 ; on Mr. Angers's remarks there-
on, 274.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I.— ^Index to Senators.

525

BBLIjBBOSB, Hon. Joseph H.— Continued.

Civil Service Appointments, System op.
See:
•* Montreal, Customs employees."
** Montreal and Quebec, Dominion officials."
** Quebec, Customs employees."

Contingent Accts. Committee, 2nd Report.
See:
"Messen^rs, sessional, pay of." (below).

Drummond County Ry. Co.'s B. (71).

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension of 57th
Rule, as recommended in report of Standing
Orders Com. , and Mr. Gu^vTemont's objec-
tion for want of notice ; held that on Report
of the Com., concurrence may be at once
taken, 461.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension 14th and
6l8t Rules for 2nd R. ; objection taken, B.
not printed in French, 461. On Mr. Gu^vre-
months objection for want of notice ; held
that no suspension of Rules required for 2nd
R., but 48 hours then necessary before con-
sideration, 462; further, on th^ Speaker's
ruling, 462.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 3rd R. ; ques. of
Order, that the Ry. Com. met within the
requisite 24 hours' notice ; its Report, there-
fore, objected to, 498 ; on Mr. Power's re-
marks, 499.

On Amt. (Mr. DeBoucherville) to re-commit
for insertion of cl., restricting bonding
power to $25,000 a mile, 500, 501. On being
called to order by Mr. Bowell for referring
to proceedings of Com., 501.

On Mr. Dickey's objection to above Amt.
witliout notice ; that the B. should therefore
stand, as every Member has a right to move
an Amt. to 3rd R., 502.

Evidence, Law of, Amt. ; the accused, husband
or wife of the accused, Ac. ; B. (23).

In Com. of the W. , on the principle of the B.
(by consent) ; on Mr. Kaulbach s suggestion
to strike out ** compellable," and Mr.
Angers's reply, remarks as to the possibility
of perjury by husband or wife, 415.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) to add sub-cl., failure to
testify not to create presumption of guilt,
nor he subject of comment by prosecution,
426.

On Order for 3rd R., and ques. of procedure ;

that an important Amt. , on 3rd K. , requires

notice, 445 ; or re-committal, in case of a

public B., 445.
Mmutcs ; correction, 3rd R. was carried on a

dicution, 454.

Farm, Experimental, Employees.

M. for Return of nationalities, &c., 124.
Inqy. when it will be brought down, 251.
Remarks, on Ms. respecting Queb^ officials,

271, 274-5.
Further Inqs., when Return wiU be brought

down, 480.

French-speaking Officials. See ** Montreal,''
"Quebec."

BBLLBROSB, Hon. Joseph H.— Continued,
GossELiN, Michel, losses in N.-W. troubles.
M. for all documents in the case, 342.

Indemnity, Sessional, B. See ** Sessional In-
demnity."

Justice, administration of. See :
** Evidence, law of, B."

Messengers, Sessional, pay of.

On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption of 2nd Re-
port of Contingt. Accts. Com., and Amt.
(Mr. Bowell) to strike out 6th par. , granting
the full $250 to .Messengers ; the Amt.
opposed ; comments on the procedure of
standing by Report of Com., and on the in-
demnity of members for present session,
456-7.

See also remarks on Sessional Indemnity B.,
509.

Montreal and Quebec, Dominion Officials*
M. for Return, showing nationalities, &c. ;
further remarks on system of appointments
to (iovt. offices in Canada, 2^i; on Mr.
Drummond's remarks thereon, 273 ; on Mr.
Angers's, 274 ; on Mr. Bowell's, 275-6.

Montreal, Customs Employees.
M. for Return, showing nationalities, &c. ; re-
marks on appointments to Govt, offices in
Canada, 184, 186; reply to Mr. Read
(Quint^), 190-1 ; to Mr. Tass^, 192.

N.-W. Troubles, 1869-70.
M. for correspondence upon claims of Michel
Gosselin, 3^.

Order and Procedure, questions of.

Billy printing in Freiwh nerensary. — Objection,
on this ground, to Drummond County
Ry. B. proceeding, 461.

Bill, reports of Com. upon. — That concurrence
may be at once taken on report of Stand-
ing Orders Com. , recommending suspen-
sion of Rules in favour of Drummond
County Ry. B., 461.
Report of Ry. Com. upon same R, without
24 hours' notice, objected to, 461, 462,
498.

Bill, 3rd R., Amt. — That Notice of an import-
ant Amt. is necessary, 445 ; or recom-
mittal, in case of a public B., 445.
On Mr. Dickey's oojection to Mr^ De
Boucherville's Amt. without notice, held
that the B. must therefore stand, every
member having a right to move an Amt. to
3rd R., 502.

Committte Rtitort, acceptance of, — On practice
of standing by Report of Com. ; on Govt.
Amt. to Contingent Accts. Com. recom-
mendation in lavour of granting the
full $250 to Sessional Messengers, 456-7.

Minutejt, correction of. — That law of Evidence
B. was carried on a dit^on, 454.

Quebec and Montreal, IX>minion officials.
M. for Return, showing nationalities, &c. ;
further remarks on system of appointments,
272 ; on Mr. Drummond's remarks thereon,
273 ; on Mr. Angers's, 274 ; on Mr. Bowell's,
2756.

Digitized by

Google

526

I. — Index to Senators.

[*SIe«won

BELLBROSE. Hon. Joseph B.,'-Conoluded,

S EMPLOYEES.

Q, showing nationalities, &c. ;
ystem of appointments followed,
id elsewhere, 267, 270-1.

MMOXS B. See <* Sessional In-

ER, TEMPORARY, APPOINTMENT

ake provision for (N).

igers) for 2nd R. ; on the merits

isure, and the constitutional

.ed, 361.

e \V. ; M. to insert ** tempor-

* until the Speaker resumes the

g the same sitting," 388 ; in

on, 390.

It 3rd cl., 392.

>wer) to add cl., precluding ad-

'ge on revenue, 393.

MNiTY ; six days' absence not
B. (132).

twell) for 2nd R. ; that sessional
lould be increased, &c., 509.
ks on Contingent Accts. Com.

ENOERS. -See "Messengers."

OF. See ** EWdence."
L Thomas Alft*ed.

:swER TO Speech from the

jrguson) for ; Manitoba school
;u8sed, 76-7.

! N.-W.

f their preservation, 303.

:e Hon. Senator.

!E B. (A).

jwan) for adoption of Report of
our of the B. ) ; remarks upon
, and against the B., 279.

Ry. Co. ; extension of time for
; B. (44).
51.
B. explained, 278.

)L Act.

ondence, accounts, memoranda,

uncil, Prox-incial Acts, &c., 122.

S OF THE.

' their preservation, 303.

. Joseph.

[iATED ; Annunciation, Corpus
*eter and St. Paul ; B. (H).
I Com. of the \V., with Amt.
tatutes affected), 197.

BOTSFORD, Hon. Amos Edwin.
Rules, Revision of the.
On Report of Com. , and M. (Mr. Power) for
postponement of consideration of draft
Rules until next session ; remarks on pre-
vious revision of Rules; postponement
advocated, 483.

Sackvili^e, N. B., Post Office.

Inqy. whether provision will be made this
session for construction ; remarks on system
of erection of Post Offices, 387.

Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment of ;

B. to make provision for (N).

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; comment on
Mr. Gowan*s speech, 319.

BOUCHERVIIiLE, De.

iS^ec De Bouchen'ille.

BOIJLTON, Hon. Charles Arkel.
Address in reply to Speech from Throne.

On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for ; on Mr. Bowell's
speech ; remark on trade with G.-B., 32.

On Sir J. Abbott's retirement and Ministerial
changes, 40-1 : question of national pros-
perity, 42 ; census statistics, 42-3-4, 46-7 ;
exports and imports, 43-4-5, 48-9, 58 ; pub-
lic debt, 45, 49, 50 ; population and indus-
tries of N. B., 46-7-8 ; further on the fiscal
policy, 49, 50, 51-2; coal oil duties, 51-2,
iQ ; binding twine dut^, 51 ; Intercol. Ry.
management, 52-3 ; I^ewfoimdland ques-
tions, 54 ; smuggling and Customs proce-
dure, 54 ; Manitolja school question, 54-5-6 ;
N. \V. immigration and fiscal policy, 56-7 ;

C. P. R. tariff, 57-8 ; exports, imports and
taxes, 58.

On Mr. Angers's speech : remark on census

statistics, 65.
On Mr. Read's : remark on Board of Trade

statistics, 73 ; stamp act and coal oil tax, 76.

Australian Mail Service, port of call. See
'* Hawaiian Islands," Inquies.

Cabinet changes. See "Ministerial."
Canadian Pacific Ry. See " C. P. R." (below).
Canned Goods, stamping of ; B. (R).

Jn Com. of the W. ; on Mr. Bowell's proposal

to add *' Canadian " to the stamp, and Mr.

Power's objection as to fish contracted for

by American firms, 405.

Census statistics.

In debate on the Address, 42-3-4,
remark on Mr. Angers's speech, 65.

46-78 ;

Commercial Policy of Canada.

(See previously, ** Address," debate on the).

M. for Select Com. with a view to assimilation
with policy of G. B., 198; remarks: Goxt.
policy , public sentiment, Senate Corns., Eng-
lish Coms., 199; manufacturing industries,
restriction of immigration, 200 ; the different
platfonns in Canada, U. S. and G. B., 201 ;
reciprocity treaties, 202; prosperity in G.
B., 202-3; land values, G. R and Canada,
204 ; agricultural industries, G. R and Can-
ada, 2()5-6 ; freight rates, 206 ; prices of

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

527

BOULTON. Hon. Charles A.—CimtintuxL
Commercial Policy of Canada— (7<w«/i»M€rf.
bread-stutfe, G. B., Canada and U. S., 206-
7-8 ; Bugar bounty, 207 ; free trade history,
G. B.,l»8-9.10.11-I2.13.14; volume of trade
of different countries compared, 213-14;
other statistics, 214-15; Canadian policy,
state of our industries, ^c., 216-17-18 ; bene-
fit to manufacturers by importing materials
free, 219-20.
In resumed debate : manufacturing statistics,
222-3-4 ; remarks thereon and on the policy
advocated, 225-6-7-8-9. 230-1-2-3-4-5. Com-
ments on Mr. Bowell's speech, 236-7-8. . De-
sire to answer Mr. Bowell, 242. M. unth-
drawn, 243.

C. P. R. Co., Capital Stock.

M. for Orders in Council, authorizing increase,
122 ; allowed to stand, 122.

Again m., 127 ; freight rates, 127 ; Co.'s divi-
dends, 128 ; debenture and ordinary stock,
128 ; increase of capital stock, according to
the Returns, 128-9 ; actual cost of road, 130 ;
land values, earnings, &c., 130, 131 ; divi-
dends, 131 ; freight carried, earnings, sub-
sidies, 132; comparison with U. S. freight
rates, 132-3; histoi^ of the stock, 133;
further as to freight rates, 133-4 ; location
of towns and new lines, 135 ; intervention
of Railway commission, &c., 135. Comments
on Mr. Scott's speech, 137-8-9, 140 ; on Mr.
Perley*8, 141 ;onMr. MacInnes'8(Burlington),
142 ; on Mr. Angers^s, 144. M. fcithdraicn,
144.

C. P. R. Co., Certain Debenture Stock, power
of issuing restored B. (84).
On M. (Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington) for 2nd R. ;
questions, whether mortgage indebtedness
will be cancelled, 399.

C. P. R., COST, management and tariff.

In debate on the Address, 44-5, 49, 50, 53, 57-8.
C. P. R., Reoina branch to Sault system.
M. in favour of cancellation of branch, 221 ;
on ques. (Mr. Dickey and others) that pre-
amble to M. is inadmissible under the Rules,
M. tcithdraion, 221.

Customs procedure, and Smuoulino.

In debate on the Address, 54. (For other re-
ferences to tariff questions, in same debate —
6re«" Address,")

Debt, Pubuc.

In debate on the Address, 45, 49, 50.
** Empire," Toronto, report of debate.
Remarks, on report respecting Hawaiian
Islands debate, on a second Inqy. on that
subject, 441.

Exports and Imports.

In debate on the Address, 43-4-5, 48-9, 58.

Fish, Canned, Stamping of. See ** Canned
Goods."

Free Trade. See :

** Address," debate on the ; also

** Commercial Policy," M. for Select Com. |

BOULTON, Hon. Charles A.— Gtm^tnuecf.
Freight Rates* See ** C. P. R."
Great Britain, Trade Relations with.
In debate on the Address ; remark on Mr.
Bowell's speech, 32 ; in Mr. Boulton's own
speech, 45, 47.
(See also "Commercial Policy of Canada," M.
for Select Com. )

Hawaiian Islands, Port of call at.

Inqy. as to intention of acc^uiring, in event of
change in foreign relations; remarks on
antici^ted U. S. annexation, sugar trade,
necessity for port of call, &c., 321-2; com-
ment on Mr. Macdonald's (B.C.) speech,
327.

Further remarks, on the following Inqy., 441.

Hawaiian Islands, Independence of.
Inqy., intention of taking action to represent
Canadian interests in the matter ; remarks
on Empire report of above debate, &c., 441.

Imports. See "Exports and Imports."
Intercolonial Railway management.
In debate on the Address, 52-3.

Man. a N.W. Ry. Co. Acts; consolidation B. (2)«
On M. (Mr. Lougheed) for 3rd R.; remarks on
capital stock increases, 285 ; on time exten-
sion for construction, 286.

Manitoba School Question.
In debate on the Address, 54-5-6.

Manufacturing Industries. See :

"Commercial Policy," M. for Select Com.
Ministerial Changes.

In debate on the Address, 41.
New Brunswick. «

Population and industries of. In debate on
the Address, 46-7-8, 51.
Newfoundland.
The recent conference. — Remarks in debate
on the Address, 54.
N.W. Immigration and the Fiscal Policy.

In debate on the Address, 56-7.
Order and Procedure, questions of,

CommiUeeSy Parliamentary, — Functions of,
and English procedure quoted, on M. for
Select C^m. on Commercial Policy, 199.
Neirkpaper, Govt., report, — On Toronto Em-
pire's report of debate on Hawaiian Islands
Inq^. ; remarks, in a second Inqy. on same
subject, 441.
SeiuUe, Speaker, temporary, appt. of, — See the
B. for this purpose, under "Senate."
Protection and Free Trade. See :
" Address," debate on the ; also
" Commercial Policy," M. for Select Com.
Railways, capital stock increase. See

"C. P. R,,"and "Man. & N.W. Ry."
Railways, debates upon. See :
Canadian Pacific Ry.
Intercolonial Ry.
Man. & N. W. Ry.

New Brunswick Kys., referred to under —
Canadian Pacific Ry.

Digitized by

Google

528

I. — Index to Senators.

[Se^

BOULTON, Hon. Charles A.— Concluded.

Sandwich Islands. See " Hawaii."

Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment
OF ; B. to make provision for (N).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; comments on
Mr. Scott's speech, 357, 361 ; on Mr. Poirier's
speech and Mr. Dever's qaes. thereon, 370 ;
on merits of the B., and the constitutional
points involved, 373-4, 376.

Tariff. See debate on the Address ; and ** Com-
mercial Policy," M. for Select Com.

Taxation. See debate on the Address ; and
** Commercial policy," M. for Select Com.

Trade. See debate on the Address ; and '* Com-
mercial policy," M, for Select Com.

Toronto " Empire," reports of debate.

Remarks, on report of Hawaiian Islands de-
bate, on a second Inqy. on that subject, 441.

United States, Railway Competition, &c.
^ce"C.P.R."

U. S., Trade Relations. See :

** Canned Goods " (fish, stamping of), B.
** Commercial policy," M. for Select Com.
" Hawaiian Islands," Inquies.

BOWELIi, Hon. Mackenzie.

Introduced, 3.

Address in Answer to Speech from the
Throne.

M. for consideration on 30th Jany, 4.

On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On the Address,
and Mr. Scott's speech thereon ; queries and
remarks on canal tolls question, 17, 18, 34-6,
39, 40 ; personal observations, 22-3 ; loyalty
of pities, 23-4 ; Welland and other elections
25-6 ; exodus and census, 26-7 ; C.P.R. and
canal construction, 27-8, 37-8 ; exports and
imports, 28-9; trade relations with U.S.
and G.B., 29, 30, 31-2-3 ; tariff comparisons,
32-4 ; Newfoundland questions, 38 ; reci-
procity in wrecking, 39 ; Canadian credit
and prosperity, 40.

On Mr. Boulton's speech ; census, 43 ; per-
sonal, 54.

On inquies, Messrs. Read and Mclnnes ;
pleuro-pneumonia and expert from England,
io ; Remark on B. C. land, 76.

On Mr. Power's speech ; exports, 80 ; Liberal
tariff, 80 ; Conservative policy, 81 ; trade
with G.B.. 91-2 ; business failures, 93 ; Mr.
Wiman and annexation, 94.

On Mr. Mclnnes's speech ; cattle import regu-
lations, B.C. and Man., 103-4 ;'B.U. quaran-
tine, 107-8-9.

Adjournment.
(7 Feb. ) Remarks on Mr. Bellerose's notice,
123. On Mr. Bellerose's M. (7th-27th) ; 2l8t
suggested as date, 146.

Alberta, Ry. Lands, School Sections. See
" Railways."

Apples, Inspection. See ** Inspection, General,
Act Am t."

Appointments (French, &c.) See "Civil Service."

BOWBLL, Hon. MBOk.ensie— Continued,

Appropriation Act. See " Supply BilL"

ArsTRAUA, Steam-ship Line to. See :

** Ocean Steamship Subsidies Act Amt. B."

Banking and Commerce Committee.
Appointment of, M. for, 116.
On ques. of quorum for purpose of organizing,
1167.

Bills, fees for. See ** Parliamentary fees,"
Bills, procedure. See ** Order and Procedure."

Binder Twzne duty. See " Customs Act Amt.

B."
British Columbia, Cattle Import reoui.a-

TIONS.

In debate on the Address ; on remarks of
Messrs. Read and Mclnnes, 75, 103-4.

British Columbia, Marine Hospital.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, B. C. ) ; im-
proved management, 165.

British Columbia, Quarantine regulations.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Mclnnes's
speech, 107-9.

British Columbia rA^ers, pollution of.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, B. C.) steps
taken by Govt. , 295.

British Columbia, Sonqhees Indians.
Replj[ to Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, B. C. ) ; ne-
gotiations for change of Reserve, 195-6.

Canada Evidence Act. See:
" Evidence, law of, Amt. R"

Canadian Pacific Ry.
Increase of capital stock. On M. (Mr. Boul-
ton) for copies of Orders in Council authoriz-
ing, 122, 128-9, 140, 143 ; reply to Mr.
Maclnnes (Burlington), 143.

Canadian Pacific Ry. management and freight

rates.
On the discussion on above M., 143.
On suggestion (Mr. Perley) that Govt, inte-

vene to lower freight rates in N. W., 464.

Canal Tolls and Canal Construction.
In debate on the Address; on Mr. Soott's
speech, 17-18, 27-8, 34-8, 40.

Canned Goods, stamping of ; B. (R).

Introduced*, 320.

2nd R. m., 388 : reply to Mr. Dever, as to
stamping dates, 388.

In Com. of the W. ; on stamping date of
canning, 399 ; on date of Bill coming into
operation, 4()0 ; on adding word '* Cana-
dian " to stamp, 400 ; on proposal to stamp
foreign products (especially cheese) passing
through in bond and marked CcLnadian, 401 ;
further, to Mr. Dever, 401 ; amts. accepted
as suggested, 404 ; on labels being printed
in Canada, 404 ; on Mr. Power's suggested
Amts. re penalties, &c., 405 ; they will be
considered, 406.

3rd R. m. , 424 ; explanation to Mr. Power on
his suggested Amt., 424.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

529

BOWBLIi, Hon. Mackenzie— Cbnttntierf.
Cattle Import, pleubo-pneumonia, &c.
In debate on the Address; on remarks of
Messrs. Read and Mclnnes, 75, 103-4.
Census, The.

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 26-7 ; on Mr. Boulton's, 43.
Cheese in Bond, Marking of. Set debate on
J* Canned Croods, stamping of, B."

Children, Punishment. Set "Juvenile Of-
fenders. "
Civil Service Appointments (French).

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Montreal

Customs appointments, 187.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Quebec
Customs appts. ; ques. as to case instanced,
270.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of all Quebec
and Montreal officials ; remarks on Mr.
Ryan's, Mr. Schreiber's, Mr. Catellier's, and
other Civ. Service appts., 274-5-6.

Civil Service Insurance; provision for; B.
(11).

IstR.*, 490.

Suspension of Rules, and

2nd R. m.,490.

In Com. of the W. ; B. explained, 490 ; replies
on various points: to Mr. Kaulbach, 490;
to Mr. Dever, 490 ; to Mr. Kaulbach, 491.

3rd R.*, 492.
(This subject also discussed under the ** Civil
Service Superannuation B." (below.)
Civil Service Superannuation ; future in-
creased tax on salaries, &c. ; B. (27).

1st R.*, 480.

Suspension of Rules, and

2nd R. m., 480.

On Order for Com. of the W. ; B. explained,
also the Civil Service Insurance B. (above),
483-4 ; replies to Mr. Kaulbach, 485 ; to Mr.
Power, 486.

In Com. of the W. ; replies on various points
of Superannuation and Insurance : to Mr.
Power, 486 ; to Mr. Scott, 486 ; to Mr. Mac-
Innes (Burlington), 486 ; to Mr. Power, 487.

3rd R.^, 488.

Clarke Wallace, Mr. Ste ** Wallace."

Coal Oil Dutv. Set "Customs Act Amt. B.,
debate on 3rd R."

Coal Oil Inspection. Set ** Petroleum. "

Columbia and Kootenay Ry.,&c.,Co.'s B. (68).
On M. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.), for 3rd R., and
Amt. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.), to strike out cl.
authorizing branch construction of 30 miles
lenffth, 434.
On M. (Mr. Mclnnes) to add cl. to General
Railway Act, respecting branch construction,
and discussion on the above B. and Amt.,
451-2.
Commercial Policy of Canada.

(Stt^ previously, ** Addressin reply to Speech
from Throne," indexed also under "Ex-
ports and Imports, " and * ^ Customs tariff. ")
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for a Select Com. ; com-
ments on his speech, 207-8, 213, 217, 219,

BOWBLIi, Hon. Mackenzie— Continued.
Commercial Policy of Canada— Cow/intted.
228, 2312, 235; on the M., 235-6-7-8; on
Mr. Scott's remarks, ques. , 239 ; further re-
marks on Commons Committee of 1876,
241-2; on Mr. Boulton's request to with-
draw M., 243.

Commissions, fees for. See * * Public Officers. "
Committees, Standing, &c., appointment of.

Orders and Privileges ; M. for, 4.

Library, Printing, M. for, 116; Banking and
Commerce, M. for, and on ques. of quorum,
116-7 ; Railways, Contingent Accts., Stand-
ing Orders and Private &., M. for, 117.

Divorce, M. for, 117; on ques. of its compo-
sition, 118, 122.

Rules of Senate. Appt. of Special Com., M.
for, 287.

(For Reports — See the subjects.)

Commons Representation Readjustment Act
Amt. ; clerical and other minor details cor-
rected ; B. (42).

Introduced*, 278.

2nd R. m. ; changes explained, 282.

3rd R.*, 287.

Companies Act, Timber, &c. Set ** Timber."
Contingent Accts. Committee.

Appointment of. M. for, 117.

On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption of 2nd Re-
port ; Amt. m., to strike out 6th cl., grant-
ing $250 allowance to Messengers for the
S^ion, 454 ; on Mr. Power's remarks, 456;
on Mr. O'Donohoe's, 456.

M. for reconsideration, 504 ; M. to grant 15
additional days at $2.50, 504 ; on Mr. Power's
remarks, 504.

On Mr. Mclnnes's (B.C.) remarks thereou, on
3rd R. of Supply B., 508.

CosoRovE, Mr., Dismissai. of.
Reply to Mr. Power's remarks, upon his Inqy.
respecting Mr. Wallace's speech at King-
ston, 387.

Criminal Law. Set :
♦* Evidence, Law of, B."
•* Juvenile Offenders, B."

Customs Act Amt. ; binder twine, machinery, &c. ;

B. (126).
Ist R.*, 496.

2nd R. m. and B. explained, 496.
3rd R. m., 504; comment on Mr. Power's

speech, 504 ; on binder twine and coal oil

reductions, 505.

Customs, alleged iRRBGUijiRm'.
Reply to Mr. McCallum's remarks re boots
allowed duty free (Wei land Canal investiga-
tion) 257-8, 262.

Customs appointments. See ** Civil Service."
Customs tariff.
In debate on the Address ; remarks on Mr.
Scott's speech, 32-4; on Mr. Power's, 80-1.
{Set alfio ** Commercial Policy," Mr. Boul-
ton'sM.)

Deck-loads. Set ** Merchant Shipping Act."

Digitized by

Google

530

I. — Index to Senators.

[Ses^fion^

BOWELIi, Hon. lAsLOkBnzle— Continued,
Divorce case. See * * Heward. "
Divorce Committee.

Appointment of. M. for, 117. On ques. of a
physician on the Com., &c., 117*8 ; on Com,
as finally constituted, 122.

Dominion Lands Act Amt. ; Man., homesteads
in school sections, &c. ; B. (109).

IstK.*, 490.

2nd R.*, 490.

In Com. of the W. ; B. explained, 493 ; reply
to Mr. Kaulbach, B. confined to Man., 494.

3rd R.*, 494.

Drcmmond County Ry. ; extension to Intercol. R.

line ; B. (71).
On ques. of Order (Mr. Dickey) whether

Rules permit convening of Com. within 24

hours of notice, 475.
On proposed M. (Mr. McMillan) to define the

procedure, 479.
Ques. of Order, on Mr. Bellerose's reference

to proceedings of Com., 501.

Election, new, in Vancouver, B.C.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.) as to issue

of writ, 301.
Further reply, writ not yet issued, &c., 395.

Elections, Members absenting themselves
TO ATTEND. See ** Sessional Indemnity B."

Elections, recent.
In debate on the Address; on Mr. Soott's
speech, 25-6.

Elections, results of.
Remarks, in Com. on Voters' Lists B., 489.

Electoral Lists, Revision. See "Voters'
Lists B."

Ellis, Supt., Welland Canal.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. McCallura), upon result

of investigation, 253-4 ; respecting boats

entered duty free, 257-8, 262.
On M. (Mr. Mc(>Uum) for statement of

amount paid back to Mr. Ellis, not included

in previous Return ; Amt. requested, so as

not to commit Senate to allegations, 293-4.
On Order for M. (Mr. O'Donohoe) for papers,

also acct. of expense of investigation ; on

the delay of the papers, 454.

Evidence, Law of, Amt. ; accused persons, hus-
bands and wives of accused, &c. ; B. (23).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R.; on ques. of
procedure at evening session (another Order
having had precedence at recess), and on
affirmation of principle by 2nd R., 364.

Exodus, the.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 26.

Exports and Imports.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's

speech, 28-33 ; on Mr. Power's, 80, 91.
{See alao "Commercial Policy," Mr. Boul-

ton's M.)

Fees for Commissions. See "Public Officers.'"
Fees, Refund of. See ** Parliamentary fees B." I

BOWELL, Hon. lASLOkeuEie—ConUnuad,
Fiscal Policy. See " Commercial Policy."

Fish, Canned, marking of. See "Canned
Goods. "

Fisheries, Rivbr, Pollution of.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.) steps
taken by Govt., 295.

Fort George, Niagara, Preservation qt.
On M. (Mr. Lougheed) for correspondence,
394.

Franchise, Legislation affecting. See :■
"Voters' Lists, revision, postponement, B."

Free Trade. See "Commercial Policy."

Freight Rates, C. P. R. See " Canadian
Pacific Ry . "

French-Canadians, Employment.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, Montreal
Customs appointments, 187.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Quebec
Customs appointments ; ques. as to instance
quoted, 270.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of all Que-
bec and Montreal appts. ; remarks on Mr.
Ryan's and other appomtments, 274-5-6.

Fruit, Canned, Marking of. See " Canned
Goods. "

General Inspection Act Amt. See " Inspec-
tion."

GiRARD, THE LATE HoN. SENATOR.

Remarks on the death of, 4.

Grand Trunk, Georgian Bay and L. Erie Ry.
Co's B. (25).
On M. (Mr. Vidal) for 2nd R. ; ques. as to
propriety of powers conferred, 246 ; further
in reply to Mr. Vidal, 246.

Grant, the late Hon. Senator.

Remarks on the death of, 4.

Great Britain, Trade Relations i^tth.

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's

speech, 28-9, 30-1-2-3 ; on Mr. Power's, 912.

(See also : " Commercial policy of Canada,"

debate on Mr. Boulton's M. for Select Com.)

Great N. W. Central Ry. completion.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Perley) as to steps taken
byrTOvt.,249, 260.

Hawaiian Islands, a port of call at, Ac.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Boulton), as to steps
taken towards acquiring port of call ; on
ques. of U. S. annexation, on sugar bounty
and free trade, &c., 327-8.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Boulton) as to intention
of representation to H. M. Govt, respecting
Hawaiian independence : that reports in
Govt, newspapers are not Govt, announce-
ments ; that copies of Senate debate will be
sent to Imperial authorities, 441.

Heward Divorce Bill (A).
On complaints of chairman of Com., on omis-
sions in printing, 266 ; explanations from
Printing Bureau submitted, 277-8.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Indbx to Senators.

531

BOWELIi, Hon. Mackenzie— Continued.
Homestead Exemption Act Amt. ; extension
of exemption to 160 acres ; B. (116).
Ist R.*, 507.
Suspension of Rule, and
2nd R. m. ; the B. explained, 509.
3rd R.*, 510.

Homesteads in Manitoba. Ste. :
** Dominion Lands Act Amt. B."

B. See

House of Commons representation
"Commons."

Imports. See ** Exports and Imports."
Indemnity, Sessional. See ** Sessional Indcm

nity."
Lndian Reserve, B. C. See ** B. C."
Inspection, Canned Goods, &c. See "Canned

Goods."
Inspection, General, Act Amt. ; Apples,
classification of ; B. (V).
Introduced and explained, 394.
2nd R. wi., and b. further explained, 437 ;
reply to Mr. Reesor's ques., 438. On Mr.
Power's suggestions for further Amts. , 439.
3rd R.*, 447.
Inspection, Petroleum. See "Vetroleuni."
Inspection, Steamboats. See ** Steam-boats."
Insurance, Civil Service. See "Civil Service."
Intercolonial Railway, printing, locally.
See:
" Printing Act Amt. B."

Interest charged on Loans to Settlers.
On suggestion (Mr. Perley) that Govt, should
legislate to restrict rates, 465

Ireland, affairs in.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Power) as to Govt,
action upon Mr. Wallace's Kingston speech,
383-4.

On Mr. Clemow's speech and Mr. Powers
comment thereon, 385; on Mr. Power's
request to offer explanation, ques. of Order
as to right oi discussion on Inqs., 385-6-7 ;
Reply to Mr. Power's further remarks, 387.

Joint Stock Co.'s Floating Timber. See
"Timber."

Justice, Administration of. See:
"Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
" Juvenile offenders B."

Juvenile offenders ; private trial of ; parents

to be summoned respecting committal to

Reformatory, &c.; B. (P).

On M. (Mr. Allan) for 2nd R. ; remarks on

Mr. Power's speech, 299.

Land Grants, N.-W. campaign. See " Militia."

Land Subsidies to Railways. See " Railways."

Lands, Dominion, Act Amt. See "Dominion."

Lands, N. - W . , School sections. See :
"Railways in N.W.T., land subsidies B."

Lands, N.-W., Settlement. See " Homestead
Exemption Act."
35

BOWBLIj, Hon. y[&ol£enzie— Continued.
Lands, Settlement. See "Dom. Lands Act.
Amt."

Law, Criminal. See :
" Evidence, law of, B."
" Juvenile offenders B.'*

Library Committee.

Appointment of ; M. for, 1 16.
Liquor Traffic. Su ** Temperance legislation. "
Load-lines. See " Merchant Shipping Act."
Loans, Interest charged to Settlers.
On su£ng;estion (Mr. Perley) that Gk)vt. should
legi^te to restrict ratett, 465.
Logs, Measurement. See " Timber."
Manitoba & N. W. Ry., Completion.

Reply to Inqy., (Mr. Perley) as to steps taken
by Govt., 247, 260.
Manptoba, Cattle Import Regulations.
In debate on the Address, on Mr. Mclnnes's
speech, 104.
Manitoba, Homesteads. See "I>om. Lauds
Act Amt."

Manitoba School Act.
On M. (Mr. Bemier) for all correspondence,
123.
Marine Hospital Management. See "B.C."
Measurement of Timber. See " Timber."
Meat, Canned, Marking of. See " Canned

Goods."
Members, Indemnity. See "Sessional In-
demnity."

Merchant Shipping Act Amt. ; load lines ;

repeal of portion of Imperial Act as regards

Canadian ships ; B. (92).
Ise R.*, 459.

2nd R., under suspension of Rule*, 459.
.In Com. of the W. ; explanation, to Mr.

Power, of objects of the B., 465. Amt.

(verbal) m., 466. Further explanations, to

Mr. Kaulbach, 466 ; to Mr. Power, 466 j^to

Mr. Dever, 466.
3rd R. m. ; further remarks, 473.

Messengers, Sessional, Payment of.

On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption of 2nd
Report, Continst. Accts. Com. ; Amt. m.
to strike out 6th cl., granting $250 allow-
ance for the session, 454 ; on "Mr. Power's
remarks, 456 ; on Mr. O'Donohoe's, 456.

M. for reconsideration, 504 ; M. to grant 15
additional davs, at $2.50, 504 ; on Mr.
Power's remarks, 504.

On Mr. Mclnnes's remarks, on 3rd R. of Ses-
sional Indemnity B., 508.

Military Ollege. See * * Royal Mily . College.

Militia in N. W. Campaign, Land Grants ;

time further extended : B. (G).
Introduced, 147.
2ndR. m.,183.
In Com. of the W. ; reply to Mr. Kairlbach's

enquiries, 198 ; to Mr. Lougheed's remarks,

128.
3rd R>, 198.

Digitized by

Google

532

I. — Index to Sbnators.

[Session

BOWELL, Hon. MeLokenrAe— Continued.

Moneys in Parliamentary Proceedings. See
" I'arliameutary fees B."

Montreal Employees, Nationaijties, &c.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, Customs
Dept., 187.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, all Depart-
ments; remarks on Mr. Ryan's and other
appointments, 274-5-6.

Mortgages, Interest on. See ** Loans."
Newfoundland, Relations with.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 38.

Niagara Falls Electric Ry. See:
** Railway Act Anit. B." ; cl. relating to this

Niagara, Preservation of Fort George.

On .M. (Mr. Lougheed) for correspondence,
394.

Nova Scotia Building Society Act Amt.
B. (F).
On M. (Mr. Almon) for 2nd R. ; suggestions
for Amts. in Banking Com., 148.

N. W. Campaign, Scrip. See "Militia."

N. W. Central Ry. See "Great N. W."

N. W. Lands, setolement. See "Homestead
Exemption Act,"

N. W. Rys., land grants, school sections.
See "Railways."

Ocean Steam-ship Subsidies Act Amt. ; subsidy

to Australian line; B. (129).
1st R.*, 496.

Bill explained ; suspension of Rules, and
2nd R. 7w., 496; reply to Mr. Allan, date of

coming into operation, 497 ; to Mr. Power's

objection, 497.
3rd R,*, 498.

Officers, Public, Commissions. See " Public
Officers."

OoDENSBURG AND Canal Tolls. See " Canals. "
Orangeism and Home Rule.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Power), as to Govt, action
uDon Mr. Wallace's Kingston speech, 383-4.
On Mr. Clemow's speech and Mr. rower's com-
ment thereon, 385 ; on Mr. Power's request
to oflFer explanation, ques. o^ Order as to
right of discussion on Inquies., 385-6-7;
reply to Mr. Power's further remarks, 387;

Order and Procedure, Questions of.

Bill, Amt. in pr<^r Cow,— -Remarks on M.
(Mr. Ahnon) for 2nd R„ N. S. Building
Society's B., 148.

Bills, fees for. —See " Parliamentary Fees B. "

Bille, Oovt., Introduction in Senate.-^n Mr.
Macdonald's (B.C.) Inqy., 123; on Mr.
Bellerose's M. for adjt. on 7th Feb., 146.

Bilh, Notation in Orders cut to printing.— Sug-
gestions in movine adjt. of House, 150.

Bills, Petitions for.— Enforcement of rule ; re-
marks on consideration of draft report of
new Rules, 482.

BOWBLL, Hon. Maokenzie— Con^inv^.
Order and Procedure — Cotitinued.

Bills, Principle of, oU 2nd /?. —Remarks on
difference in Senate and Commons pro-
cedure (on law of Evidence B. ), 364.

BiUs proceeding, in interrupted debate. — On Mr.
Power's objection to law of Evidence R
having been procee<led with at evening
session, Mr. Poirier speaking at recess up-
on another Order, 364.

Corn., Convening of— On Chairman's ones,
whether Com. may be convened wiUim 24
hours of 2nd R., 475, 479.

Com., Convening, M. to define Butes.—M. for
this purpose, proposed by Mr. McMillan,
inadmissible, 479.

Com. , Divorce, compositionof — Remarks, 1 17-8.

Com., Befere^i^e to Proceedings of —Mr. Belle-
rose called to order for such reference, 601.

Committees, Standing, Quorumof— On. M. for
appointment of Banking Com. ; that a
quorum be fixed for organizing, 1 16-7.

Debase, Expressions used, <fcc. — Mr. Scott's re-
ferences to defeat of Mr. Ferguson in
Welland, commented upon, in debate on
the Address, 23.
On the expressions used by Mr. Mclnncs
(B. C^ respecting Members absenting
themselves to attend elections (in Scwfliomu
Indemnity B. debate), 508.
Remarks, at close of Session, on harmonious
character of the Session's debates, 511.

Estimates overriding a Law.— See " Speaker "
(below).

Fees, B^tmdof—See " Parliamentary Fe^ B."

Inquiries not debatable.— QueB. of Order on dis-

eussion and Mr. Power's right of reply,

on his Inqy. respecting Mr. Wallace's

Kingston speech ; that Rules C-om. should

define the rule, 385^-7.

Motion, form qf.—Ur. Boulton's request for

Orders in Council authorizing increase of

C. P. R. stock, objected to, as having

sprung an unexpected debate, 143.

Amt. of Mr. McCallum's M. requested, for

account of amount paid back to Supt

Welland Canal, so that the M. shidl not

commit the Senate to allegations of the

mover, 293-4.

Motion, inadmissible.— -^ee "Com., conven-
ing " (above).

Newspaper statements.— On Mr. Boulton quot-
ing Ottawa " Citizen " as to action taken
on Hawaiian question ; pointed out that
reports in Govt, newspapers are not Gox-t
announcemcmts, 441.

Bules, Beinsion qf.—Ajppt. of Com. m., 287 ; on
postponement of consideration of new
Rules till next Session, 482.

Senate Priinleges discussed.— Under " Pta^lia-
mentary Fees* B. "

Senate Bules.— See " Rules " (above).

Speaker, Temporary, Payment o/*.— On Mr.

Power's Amt. to Speaker of Senate B.

(N), to preclude a charge upon revenue ;

pointed out that a Vote m Estimates

would override such a provision in a law.

393.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

>33

BOWELIi, Hon. MeLOl^en^e— Continued.

Parliamentaby fees ; receipt, duposal, refund,
mode of ; B. (61).

Introduced*, 295.

2nd R. m., 340; on Mr. McKay's objecticm
that Senate privileges are interfered with,
341 : on Mr. McDonald's, Auditor-Crenl. 's
obedience, 341.

In Com. of the W. ; farther reply to Mr. Mc-
Kay, on procedure for refunds, 366 ; to Mr.
Kaulbach, 366.

3rd R. m.*, 366.

Paruamentaey Representation B. See^* Com-
mons."

Petroleum Inspection Act further Amt. B.
(112).
Introduced*, 425.
2nd R. m. and B. explained, 496.
3rd R.*, 496.

Pleuro- pneumonia, fi^ee "Cattle."

Printing Act Amt. ; authorizing printing for
Intercol. Ry. locally ; B. (X).
Introduced, and reasons explained, 481.
2nd R. under suspension of rules*, 481.
3rd R.*, 481.

Printing Combottee.
Appointment of . M. for, 116.

Printing, Omissions in.
Heward Divorce B ; on remarks of Chairman

of Com., 266.
Explanations from Printing Bureau presented,
277.

Procedure, Ques. of. See ** Order and Proce-
dure."

Prohibition. iS'e« "Temperance legislation. "

Public Officers ; Definition by Go\-t., as re-
gards fees for commissions ; B. (103).
Introduced *, 453.
2nd R. m., and B. explained, 458.
3rd R. under suspension of Rules *, 459.

Quarantine, Cattle, ^ee "Cattle."
Quarantine Regulations, B. C.

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Mclnnes^s
speech, 107-9.

Quebec Officials, Nationalities, &c.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, Customs
Dept. ; quee. as to an instance quoted, 270.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, all Depart-
ments ; remarks on system of appts., and
various instances, 274-5-6.

Quebec, River Police ; relief of shipping from
tonnage tax for ; B (97).

Introduced*, 458.

2nd R. m., and B. explained, 458 ; reply to
Mr. Pelletier, river police at Quebec abolish-
ed, 458.

3rd R., under suspension of Rules,*, 458.

Railway Act further Amt. ; B. (Q).
Introduced *, 367.

2nd R. m., 424 ; on Mr. Power's remark, 425.
In Com. of the W. ; on the Ist cl., Amt. m.

(mode of protection), 448.
35i

BOWELL, Hon. Mackenzie— CotUmtMci.
Railway Act further Amt. — C<»Uinued.
2nd cL, Amt. m. (protection of crossings,

branch lines) ; reply to Mr. Sullivan, it

would apply to branch line at Kingston, 448.
3rd. cl. (weighing of cars) m. that it be

struck out ; still kept in view by Govt.,

450.
4th cl. explained (Electric Ry. at Nia^ra

Falls placed under Ont. law), 450. On Mr.

Ferguson's suggested Amt. (to restrict that

Ry. to electricity) ; that it stand till 3rd R.,

450-1.
Addl. cl. (actions for damages, within 1 year)

m., 451.
On m. (Mr. Mclnnes, B. C.) to add cl. to Ry.

Act, to authorize branch lines construction

up to 30 miles, with discussion on Columbia

and Kootenay Ry. Co. privileges, 451-2.
On Order for 3rd R. ; Amt, to 4th cL re

Niagara Falls Electric Ry. above suggested

by Mr. Ferguson, m., 454.
3rd R. m., 454.

Railways, &c., Committee ox.

Appointment of. M. for, 118.
Railways, Debates upon. See :

Canadian Pacific Rv ; see also '* Columbia
and Kootenay Ry.

Carleton Branch (St. John) Ry. See :
St. John, N. B. (Carleton Br.) Ry.

Columbia and Kootenay Ry.

Drummond 0)unty Ry.

Grand Trunk, Georgian Bay and Lake Erie Ry.

Qreat N. W. Central Ry.

Intercolonial Ry.

Manitoba and N. W. Ry.

Niagara Falls Electric Ky. See :
"Railway Act Amt. B."

N. \V. Central Ry. Se£ :
" Great N. W. Central Ry."

Railway Act Amt. B.

Railways, North-west Territories, land sub-
sidies B.

Railways, subsidies, B.

St. John, N. B. (Carleton Br.) Ry.

Railways in N. W. T. ; land subsidies ; change

in school sections ; B. (VV).
B. explamed, 462.
Ist R.*, 463.
Suspension of Rule, and
2nd R. m.y 463.
In Com. of the W. ; reply to Mr. Power,

location of school sections, 463.
3rd R. fn.*, 463.

Railways, Subsidies to ; B. (127).
1st R.*, 494.

Suspension of 41st Rule, and
2nd R. m, ; explained, the B. sinnply renews

subsidies previously granted by Parlt., 494 ;

similar reply to Mr. Power^s objection to

suspension of Rule, 494.
3rd R,*, 494.

Readjustment, Parliamentary, B. See ** Com-
mons."

Reciprocity. iS^ee "United States."

Reformatories. See ** Juvenile offenders. "

Digitized by

Google

534

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

BOWELL, Hon. MBol^enzie— Continued.

River pollution, B.C.

Reply to Inqy< (Mr. Macdonald, RC), steps
taken by Govt., 295.

RrvERs, TIMBER FLOATING. See ** TimhoT."

Royal Mily. Coixeoe Act Amt. ; new scale of
Professor's salaries ; selection of candidates
for cacletships, &c. ; B. (118).

1st R.*. 495.

2nd R. m. and B. explained, 495.

drd R. , under suspension of Rules*, 495.

Rules of Senate, Revision of.

M. for Special Com., 287 ; on suggestion of
Mr. Mctnnes (B.C.) names of Messrs. Scott
and Macdouald (B.C.) added, 287.

On M. (Mr. Power) for adoption of Ret>ort of
Com. , and suggested postponement till uext
Session, 482 ; that each member should
have a copy of draft, 482.

St. John, N.B., Carlkton Br. Ry. ; confirma-
tion of sale ; B. (122).

Ist R.*, 473.

Suspension of 41st Rule, and

2nd R. m. ; B. explained ; reply to Mr.
Dickey, 473.

3rd R.*, 474.

St. Lawrence RrvER PoucE. See ** Quebec."
Sackville, N.B., Post Office.
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Botsford) as to intention
of Govt, to provide for construction, 387.

Salvage. See ** Wrecking " and ** Wrecks."

Sandwich Islands. 5ec "Hawaii."

Sault Ste. Marie Canal. See ** Canals."

School Sections, N. W. Ry. Lands. See :

" Railways in N. W. T., land sulwidies B."

Schools, Separate, Manitoba.
On M. (Mr. Bemier) for correspondence, 123.

Seamen's Act Amt. ; liens upon vessels for sup-
plies purchased by masters, &c. ; B. (0).
Introduced*, 286.
2nd R. m., 295 ; reply to Mr. Vidal, 295 ; to

Messrs. Poirier and Kaulbach, 296.
In Com. of the W. ; B. further explained, 301.
3rd R.*, 302.

Seamen's Act (Inland Waters) Amt. ; lien on
vessels for supplies purchased by masters,
&c. ; B. (P).

Introduced*, 286.

2nd R. m., 296.

In Com. of the W. ; B. further explained, 302.

3rd R. m.*, 303.

Senate Adjournment. See "Adjournment."

Senate and Commons B. See "Sessional In
demnity. "

Senate Committees, appt. of. See ** Commit
tees."

Senate, introduction of Govt, measures in
On Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.), 123.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for adjt. on 7th Feb.
146.

BOWELIi, Hon. Meu)kenzie— Conttnu^d.

Senate, points of procedure on Bills. See
" Order and Procedure."

Senate Privileges discussed. See :
" Parliamentary Fees B."

Senate Rules, revision of.

M. for appt of Special Com., 287 ; on sugges-
tion of Mr. Mclnnes (B. C.)> names of
Messrs. Scott and Macdonal^(RC.), added,
287.

On M. (Mr. Power) for adoption of Report of
Com. , and suggestion of postponintr consid-
eration till next Session, 4&; that each
Member should have a copy of draft, 482.

Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment of;

B. to make provision for (N).
' In 0)m. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Power) to

preclude charge upon revenue ; pointed out

that a Vote in Estimates would override

such a provision in a law, 393.

Senators, Decease of.
(Hon. Messrs. Glrard, Stevens, Grant.) Re-
marks, 4.

Session, Conclusion of.

Remarks upon (at 2nd R. of Supply R), 511.

Sessional Indemnity; 6 days* absence not
chargeable ; B. (132).

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Almon) as to the inten-
tion, 460.

1st R.*, 495.

Suspension' of Rule for 2ntl R. m., 495; on
Mr. Power's objection, 495.

2nd R. m., 506.

3rd R. m.y 507 ; on Mr. Mclnnes's remarks,
upon Sessional Messengers' allowance, upon
present B., and Members absenting them-
selves to attend elections, 508.

Sessional Messengers, i^ee " Messengers. "
Ships, Legislation respecting. See :

Merchant Shipping Act Amt. B. (92) ; load

lines.
OceanSteam-shipSubsidies Act Amt. B. (129) ;

Australian line.
Quebec River Police B. (97) ; tonnage tax

abolished.
Seamen's Act Amt. B. (O).
Seamen's Act (Inland Waters) B. (P).
Steam -boat Inspection Act Amt. B. (6).
Wrecking, reciprocity in (on the Address).
Wrecks ^nd Salvage Act Amt. B. (3).

SoNGHEES Indians, Reserve, B. C.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Macdonald, RC.) ; negotia-
tions for removal in progress, 195-6.

Stamping of Cans. See " Canned Goods."

Standing Orders and Private Bilu» Com.
Appointment of, M. for, 117.

Steam-boat Inspection Act further Amt. ;
freight boats without certified Engineers;
disposal of fines, &c. ; B. (6.)
Introduced*, 453.
2nd R. m., and B. explained, 457.
3rd R., under suspension of Rules*, 458.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

535

BOWBLIj, Hon. Mackenzie— CotUtnuect.

Stkam^ship Subsidies Australian Link. See :
** Ocean SteamshipSubwdies Act Amt. B."

Stevens, the late Hon. Senator,

Remarka on the death of, 4.
Subsidies to Railways. See ** Railways."
Superannuation. See ** Civil Service."
Supply Bill, (135).

l8tR.\ 511.

Suspension of Rule and 2nd R. m., 511 ; re-
marks on the close of the session, 511.

Twine (Binder) Duty. See "Customs Act
Amt.B."

United States and Hawaiian Annexation.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Boulton) as to steps
taken by Govt, to secure a port of call, &Cj
3278.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Boulton) as to representa-
tion sent to H. M. Govt, respecting Hawaiian
independence ; that a copy of Senate debate
will be sent, 441.

United States, Cheese, marked Canadian.
Remarks, in debate on ** Canned Goods, stamp-
ing of, B.," 401.

United States, Relations with. ^

In debate on the Address; on Mr. ScottV
speech, 29, 30-1-2-3 ; on Mr. Power's, 91, 94.
Canal ToWt Quetttiaii, 17, 18, 27-8, 34-8, 40.

Tariff, the. See "Commercial Policy" (Mr.
Boulton'sM.)

Also "Customs tariff" (in debate on the Ad-
dress).

And "Customs Act Amt. B." (126).

Temperance Legislation (prohibition).

On M. (Mr. Vidal) for copy of instructions to
Prohibition Commission, and on Mr. Power's
remarks, 163, 165.

Timber, Floating, measurement of ; substitu-
tion of cubic for board measure, Ac. ; B. (S).

Introduced, and objects explained, 321.

2nd R. m., 343 ; reply to Mr. Power, rates no
higher, 343.

3rd R.», 398.

Trade Relations. See "G.B.," " U.S.," Ac.

United States, Wrecking, Reciprocity in.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 39.

Vancouver, B.C., new Election.

Reply to Inoy. (Mr. Mclnne^, B.C.); not

aware whether writ issued, 301.
Reply to his further Inqy.; writ not yet
issued, Ac, 395.

Vessels. i5ee "Ships."

Victoria, B.C., Hospital and Quarantine.
Set "British Columbia."

Victoria Indian Reserve. See " B.C."

BOWBLI4, Hon. Maokenzie~-09t»c/tt<{«<2.

Voters' Lists ; Revision of, Postponed ; B.

(123).
1st R.*, 480.
2nd R. m., B. explained, 488 ; reply to Mr.

McInne8(B.C.), 488.
In CJom. of the W. ; reply to Mr. Power, as to

promise of revision uefore last Gen. EUec-

tion, Ac, 489.
3rd R.», 490.

Waujice, Mr., Controller of Customs. ^
Reply to Inqy. (Mr. Power) as to action of
Govt, upon Kingston speech, respecting
Orange opposition to Home Rule, 383-4 ; on
Mr. Clemow's speech and Mr. Power's com-
ment thereon, 385 ; on Mr. Power's request
to offer explanation, ques. of Order as to right
of discussion on Inquies. 385-6-7; reply
to Mr. Power's further remarks, Mr. Cos-
grove's dismissal, Ac, 387.

Welland Canal Investigation.

Reply to Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) as to intention
of Govt, to take action, 253-4 ; respecting
boots entered duty free, 257-8, 262.

On M. (Mr. McCallum) for statement of
amount paid back to Mr. Ellis, not included
in previous Return ; Amt. requested, so as
not to commit Senate to allegations, 293-4.

On Order for M. (Mr. O'Donohoe) for report
of Commissioner, Ac, also account of ex-
pense of investigations ; on request that M.
may stand ; papers not yet ready, 454.

Welland Election. See "Elections, recent."

Witnesses and Evidence B. See " Evidence."

Wrecking, Reciprocity in.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 39.

Wrecks and Salvage Act Amt.; Minister to
conduct investigations, &c., without author-
ity of Governor in Council ; (3).

Introduced*, 295.

2nd R. m., and B. explained, 339.

In Com. of the W. ; B. further explained, 365.

3rd R.*, 365.

OASQ-RAIN, Hon. Charles Bus^be.

Lake Erie and Detroit River Ry. Co.'s B.
(55).
Introduced*, 278.
2nd R.*, 282.
3rd R.*, 287.

NoRT% Canadian Atlantic Ry., &c., Co. ; Act
revived, name of Co. chansed to Quebec k
Labra<lor Steamship Co., Ac. ; B. (67).

Introduced*, 320.

2ndR.»,343.

Amts. of Ry. Com. (change of name of Co. ) ;
concurrence m., 425.

3rd R.*, 425.

Wallace, Mr. N. C, Controller of Customs.
Orange speech at Kingston. On Inqy. (Mr.
Power) as to Govt, action thereon ; that
reading be dispensed with, 381.

Digitized by

Google

536

I. — Index to Sei^ators.

[Session

OIiBMOW, Hon. Francis.
Address in reply to Speech from Throne.
On M. (Mr. Fereuson) for. Remark on Mr.
Boulton's Bpeecn (direct taxation), 51 ; on
the Address: Welland election, 110; Cana-
dian prosperity, 111 ; timber trade. 111 ;
canal tolls and construction, 111; Trade and
Commerce bureau, 112; Cabinet changes,
112; tariff policy, 112; the census, 113;
N. W. immigration and the C. P. R., 113 ;
annexation talk and Canadian loyalty, 113.

Balfour (James) Divorce B. (D).

On report (Mr. Gowan) from Select Com. :

Introduced, 144.

2nd R.*, 147.

On M. (Mr. Gowan) for adoption of 15th Re-
port (in favour of B.); remarks on. delays
in printing, 264.

3rd R. 171., 265.

Ballantyxe (Martha) Divorce B. (C).
On report (Mr. Gowaii) from Select Com. :
Introduced, 124.
2nd R.*, 148.

On report (Mr. Gowan) from Select Com. :
3rd R. m., 222.

Cabinet. See ** Ministerial changes."

Canadian Gas Association Incorp. B. (85).
Ist R.*, 45.3.
2nd R.*, 453.
3rd R.*, 453.

Canadian Pacific Ry. and immigration.

In debate on the Address, 113.
Canal toli^s and canal construction.

In debate on the Address, 111.
Census, the.

In debate on the Address, remarks, 113.

Central Counties Ry. Co., extension of line,
B. (31).
Introduced*, 220.
2nd R. m., 246.
3rd R.*, 251.

Civil Service Insurance, provision for ; B.
(11).
In Com. of the VV. ; suggestions that Govt,
insurance be compulsory, opposed, 491.

Civil Service, nationalities of.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return ; ques. as to
Public Works Dept. proportion, 271.

CiJiRKE Wallace, Mr. See *' Wallace."

Customs Tariff.

In debate on the Address, remarks, 112.

Departments. See "Trade and Commerce,"
&c.

Divorce Cases.
"Balfour."
"Ballantyne.*
"Doran.'*^
"Goff."
"Hebden."
"Heward."
*'Sch waller."

See :

OIiBMOW, Hon. TiwtioiBr— Continued.
DoRAN (James F.), Divorce B. (E).
On Report (Mr. Gowan), from Select Com. :
Introduced, 145.
2ud R.*, 267.
3rd R. m., 367.

Election, recent (Welland).

In debate on the Address, 110.
Employees. •S'ce "Civil Serx'ice."
Exports, Timber, increase of.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 111.
French-speaking Employees.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return; ques. as to
proportion in Public Works Dept., 271.

Gas Com pa n y. See * * Canadian Gas Association. "

GoFF (Annette M.) Divorce B. (K).

Introduced*, 151.

2nd R.*, 287.

3rd R. m., 342.

Hebden (Robert Y.) Divorce B. (B).
On report (Mr. Gowan), from Select Com. :
Introduced, 124.
2nd R.», 148.
3rd R. m., 279.

Heward (Edmund H.) Divorce B. (A).
On report (Mr. Gowan), from Select Com. :
Introduced, 124.
2nd R.*, 148.
3rdR. m., 282.

Insurance, Civil Service. See " Civil Service. "

Irish Aefairs, Mr. Wallace's speech. See
" Wallace."

Ministerial Changes.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 1 12.
North American Can.\l Co. Incorp. B, (79).

1st R.*, 459.

Suspension of Rule, and

2iid R.*, 459.

3rd R.*, 461.

North-west Immigration.

In debat.e on the Address, remarks, 113.
Orange speech, Mr. Wallace. See "Wallace."
Order, Question of.

Debate^ remarb* in. — On remarks made upon
Mr. Scott's reference to Mr. Ferguson's
defeat in Welland, in debate on the
Address, 110.

Port Arthur, Duluth, &c., Ry. Co.'s R (48).
Introduced*, 283.
2nd R.*, 287.
Amts. of Ry. Com. ; concurrence in each m.,

321.
3rd R.*, 321.

Sault Ste. Marie Canal. iS^c "Canals."

SCHWALLER (JoHN F.) DiVORCE B. (J).

Introduced*, 151.
2nd R.*, 287.
3rd R. wi., 339.

Digitized by

Google

18^3}

I.— Indbx to Senators.

537

OLEMOW, Hon. FrwaiGbB—Chndudtd,
Tariff Question. See ••Customs."
Timber Trade, Volumr of.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 1 10.
Trade and Commerce Department.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 1 12.
United States, Relations with.
AnnexcUioH tcUL — Remarks in debate on the

Address, 113.
Canal ToUj* and Canal Construction, — Re-
marks in debate on the Address, HI.

Wallace, Mr. N. C, Controll»:r of Customs.
Speech at Kingston, Orangemen and Home
Rule ; on Inqy. (Mr. Power) as to his dis-
avowal, or the action of Govt, thereon ;
ques. on Mr. Power's speech, newspaper
([uoted from, 381 ; speech on the subject,
384-5.

Welland Election and Hon. Mr. Ferguson.
In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Scott's
speech, 110.

COCHRANE, Hon. Matthew Henry.

Address in Answer to Speech from the
Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Houlton's
speech ; remarks, farmer*s produce and
expenditure, 50 ; grain freight rates on
C.P.R., 57.

Commercial Policy of Canada.

On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. ; ques.,
numbers employeil in woollen mills, 217.

De BOXJCHBRVILIiB, Hon.C.B. Boucher.
Drummond County Ry. Co.'s B. (71).

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension of 57th
Rule, as recommended in Report of Stand-
ing Orders Com., and Mr. Gu^vremont's
objection to the M., without notice, 461.

On ques. (Mr IHckey, chairman) as to right
of convening Ry. Com., within 24 hours of
t^dR.,478.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) that Rules permit Com.
to meet ; that such M. requires notice, 478.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 3rd R. ; Amt. m.,
restricting bonding power to $25,000 a mile,
499.

On Mr. Dickey's (|ues. of Order thereon, that
such Amt. requies notice, 502.

Ocean Accident Cori»oration Incorp. B. (39).

Intro<luced*, 283.

On Order for 2nd R. ; on Mr. Allan's remarks
as to apparent identity with Ocean Guaran-
tee Co. Incorp. B., postponement of ■2nd R.
requested (for Mr. Ferguson), 310.

Order and Procedure, Questions of. Set
debate on Drummond County Ry. B. (above).

Rules, Revision of.

On M. (Mr. Power) for adoption of Special
Com 8 Report ; ques. as to printing of the
new Rules, 481.

DESJARDINS, Hon. Ali^onse.
Introduced, 3.

Address in Answer to Speech from the
Throne.
Seconded, 10. Personal remarks ; Ministers
of Trade and Commerce, and Agriculture,
in Senate, 10; Govt, pobcy and Canadian
prosperity ; steamer communication and
Treaty negotiation with France ; N. W. im-
migration and Manitoba School question,
10 ; Nild. negotiations and St. John's fire ;
U. S. relations, and annexation talk ; maiiy
tenance of existing institutions, and justice
to all classes advocated, 11.

Canned Goods, Stampinci of ; B. (R.)
Reported from Com. of the W., with Amts.,
406.

Ocean Guarantee Co. Incorp. B. (46).
3rd R. m. (for Mr. Ferguson), 303.

DBVBR, Hon. James.

Address in answer to Speech from the

Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. — On Mr. Boulton 's

speech: ques., lic^uor smuggling, 54; remark

on N.W. settler's poem, ^.
On Mr. Angers's speech : ques., decrease of

revenue, with as many duties, 69.
On Mr. Power's speech : remark, excise

duties, 91.
On Mr. Howlan's : saw-mills in N.B., 99.

Binder-Twine Duty— 6*ec '* Customs Duties Act

Amt."
Canada Evidence Act. * See :
*' Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
Canned Goods, Stamping of ; B. (R).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R.; pointed out

that date should be stamped, 388.
In Com. of the W. ; on Mr. Bowell's remarks,
intention to prevent foreign cheese paseiing
through Canada being stamped Canadian,
401. Further on necessity of date on can,
402 ; that the year would suffice, 404 ; on
Mr. Power's remarks, fish pocked for
Foreign firms, being required to have their
brands, 405.
Cheese, Foreign, 3iareed "Canadian."
On Mr. Bowell's remarks, intention of pre-
venting fraudulent marking (in debate on
canned goods, marking of, S.), 401.
CrviL Service Insurance, provision fob ;
B. (11).
In Com. ot the W.; ques. as to rate, 490;
that system should be run without loss to
country, 491 ; compulsory system not ad-
visable, 491.
CrviL Service Superannuation Act Amt. ; in-
creased i-ate chargeable, &c.; B. (27).
In C»om. of the W., on 5th cl.; instance of
abuse of ttystem quoted, 486.
Commercial Policy of Canada.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com.; com-
ments on his speech : price of bread, 207 ;
volume of English trade, 214 ; English con-
sumption of tor>€M;co and spirits, 214.

Digitized by

Google

1538

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

DBVBR. Hon. jB,meB— Continued.

Criminal Law, administration. See:
•* Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."
** JuvenUe Offenders in N.B. B."

Customs Duties Act Amt.; binder-twine, mach-
inery, Ac; B. (126).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 3rd R.; the measure
advocated, 505-6; on Mr. Power's personal
remarks as to supporting Govt., 506.

Dever, Hon. Senator.
The political course of ; on Mr. Power's ;
remarks, in debate on Customs Duties Act
Amt. B.. 506.

Divorce Committee, composition of.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for appt. of Com.;*appt.
of medical men recommended, Dr. Mclnnes
proposed, 120; his appt. m., 122.

Evidence, Law of, Amt.; the accused, husband
or wife of accused, kc. ; B. (23).

In Com. of the VV.; on Amt. (Mr. Scott) to
strike out ** compellable; " ques. uuon prac-
tice in other countries, as to husoana and
wife giving evidence, 419.

On Amt. (ifr. Power) to add sub-cl., failure
to testify not to create presumption of guilt,
nor be subject of comment by prosecution,
427.

' Canned

See

Fish, Canned, Stamping of.
Goods."

Fruit, Canned, Stamping of. See "Canned

Goods. "
Insurance, Civil Service, B. See " CiWl Ser-

vice."
Interest Rate on Loans. See " Loans."

.Justice, Administration of. See :
** Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
** Juvenile offenders in N.B. , Bill."

Juvenile Offenders, N.B. ; reformatory estab-
lished, &c. ; 6. (104).
Reported from Com. of the W., without
Amt., 494.

Load- UNE Law. See " Merchant Shipping Act. "

Loans, Rate of Interest on.
On attention being called (Mr. Perley) to
excessive rate charged in North-west Terri-
tories ; remarks on law in New Brunswick,
464.

Merchant Shipping Act ; load-lines ; repeal of
part of Imperial statute ; B. (92).
In Com. of the \^^ ; remark on reason for the
B.,466.

Mortgages, Interest Rate. See " Loans."

N. B. Reformatory. See:

"Juvenile offenders in N.B. B."

N.W.T., Interest charged on Loans.
On attention being called (Mr. Perley) to ex-
cessive rates charged ; remark on the law in
N.B.,464.

Patent Act Amt. B. (110).

Reported from Com. of the \V., with an Amt.,
475.

DBVBR, Hon. Jsxnee—Chneluded.
Railway Act Amt. B. (U).
Reported from Com. of the W., with Amts.,
452.

Senate, Speaker, Temporary, appointment
OF ; K to make provision for (N).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd K ; ques. on Mr.
Poirier's speech, Parlt. referred to in Quebec
R^lutions, 370.

Ships* Load-unes. See ** Merchant Shipping
Act."

Superannuation, CrviL Service. See ** Civil
Ser\-ice. "

Tariff Questions. See :
** Address," Debate on the.
** Commercial Policy," Mr. Boulton's M.
** Customs Duties Act Amt." B.

Twine Duty. See ** Customs Duties Act Amt."

United States.

Cheese fravdulently marked ** Canadian." — On
Mr. Bowell's remarks, intention of checking
(in debate on Canned goods, maiking of, R),
401.

Finh cabined for American ^rms. — On Mr.
Power*8 remarks as to firms requiring their
own brands (in the same debate), 405.

Witnesses, Law of, B. See ** Evidence."

DIOKEY, Hon. Robert B.
Alberta Irrigation Co. Incorp. B. (54).
Reported from Com. on Ry8.,&c., with AmU. ;
tne Amts. explained, 460, 461.

Buffalo and Fort Erie Bridge Co. Incorp-
Act Amt. ; provision for tunnel construction,
&c. ; B. (20).
Reported from Ry. Com., with Amt. (applica-
tion of General Ry. Act), 251 ; Amt. ex-
plained, 252.

Canada Evidence Act. See :
** Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canadian Pacific Ry., branch construction.

M. (Mr. Boulton) disapproving of branch line

from Regina to connect with Sault system,

objected to, being prefaced by a preamble,

221.

Canned Goods, Stamping of; B. (R).
In Com. of the W. ; specific mark *' Canadian"

suggested, 399.
On suffgestion (Mr. Power) to insert words

** which falsely represent quantity or quality

or weight"; that Minister should consider

the point before 3rd R., 406.

Carleton Branch (St. John) Ry. ; confirmation
of sale; B. (122).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R. ; ques., wheiher
arrangement carried out, 473.

Cheese, specific marking as Canadian.

In Com. of the W., on ** Canned goods, mark-
ing of , B.,"399.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

539

BIOKEY, Hon. Robert B.—Continued,
Commercial Policy op Canada.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. ; on Mr.
Scott's reference to Commons Select Com. of
1876 ; ones, as to Govt, opposition thereto,
239.
On Mr. Boulton 's request to withdraw M., and
Messrs. Almon's and McCallum's objections
thereto ; Senate usage stated, 243.

Committee, Divorce. See ** Divorce.**
Committees, Standing, Organization of.
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Corns.;
quorum being a fixed one tor purpose of
organizing, approved of, 117.

Criminal Law, administration. See :
•* Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Divorce Committee, composition of.
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Com.; re-
marks on professional men being members,
&c., 118, 120.

Drummond County Ry. Co.'s R (71).

The Speaker having overruled Mr. McMillan's
M. for 2nd R. without notice, objection
having been taken ; suggested that notice be
given of 2nd R. at next sitting, 462.

Inqy. (as Chairman) whether Rv. Com. may
be convened within 24 hours notice, 475,
476 ; remark on result of discussion, Coin,
to be called at a future date, 479.

Reported from Ry. Com., without Amt., 498.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 3rd R., and Amt.
(Mr. DeBoucherville) restricting bonding
power to $25,000 a mile, 499, 500 ; on Mr.
Bellerose's remarks, 500. Objection taken
to the Amt., without notice, 502; at Mr.
Power's suggestion, objection withdrawn,
502.

Electric Railway Crossings. See:
" Railway Act Amt. B."

Evidence, Law of, Amt. ; the accused, husband
or wife of accused, &c. ; B. (23).
On Order for 3rd R. ; on Amt. (Mr. Angers)
to substitute 24th cl. , as in B. when brouffht
up in Commons, taking out "compellable,"
and inserting, failure to testify not to be
subject of comment by prosecution, 444.
On M. ( Mr. Angers) for .3rd R. , question as to
applicability of Dominion laws to civil cases
in the Provinces, 446.

Fish, Canned, Marking. See ** Canned Goods."

Fruit, Canned, Marking. See ** Canned
Goods."

Grand Trunk, Geoimjian Bay, &c., Ry. Co.'s
B. (25).
Reported from Ry. Com. without Amt. , 252.
M. (Mr. Power) to refer back to Com. for
further consideration, (respecting applica-
tion of Ontario Act), secoudedt 253.

Grand Trunk Ry., Amalgamation of Other
Cos. ; B. (50).
Reported from Ry Com., with 3 Anits., 378 ;
the Amts. explained, 378-9.

DICKEY, Hon. Robert B»— Continued,

Justice, Administration of. See :
** Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."

Man. k N. W. Ry. Co., Acts, Consolidation
B. (L).
Reported from Ry. Com., with Amts., 284 ;
Amts. explained, 284.

MoNCTON k P. E. I. Ry. and Ferry Co.'s
B. (56).
Reported from Ry. Com., with Amts. ; the
Amts. explained, 406-7.

North Atlantic Ry. and SS. Co. ; Incorp.
Act revived; name changed to ** Quebec
& Labrador Steamship Co.," Ac, ; B. (67).
Reported from Ry. Com., with Amts. ; neces-
sity for further change of name explained,
425.

H. S., Building Society, &c., B. (F).
On M. (Mr. Almon) for 2nd R., and his objec-
tion to Mr. Boweirs suggestions for consider-
ation of points by Com. ; remarks on pro-
cedure, 149 ; on Mr. Power's remarks, 149 ;
on Mr. Vidal's, 150.

Order and Procedure, Questions of.

Billf Petition for, — Remarks on necessity of
Petition, for Bills received through Com-
mons ; in debate on draft of new rules sub-
mitted by Special Com., 483.

BUly 2nd R.y Noticerequirtd.—yiv. McMillan's
M. for 2nd R. of Drummond County Ry. B.
being overruled, objection having been taken
for want of notice ; suggested that he give
notice for next 8itting,^2.

Bill^ on 2nd R. SuggeHtiom for Com,— On
M. (Mr. Ahnon) for 2nd R. of N. S. Building
Society's B., and his objection to Mr.
Bowell's suggestion of points for considera-
tion of Com. ; remarks on procedure, 149 ;
on Mr. Power's remarks, 149 ; on Mr.
Vidal's, 150.

Bill, 3rd R,, Amt, ^dihovi -iVb/ice.— Objection
taken, to Mr. De Boucherville's Amt. to 3rd
R. of Drummond County Ry. B., without
notice, 502 ; but withdrawn, at Mr. Power's
suggestion, 502.

Committee, Period cf Convening, — Inqy. (as
Chairman) how soon after 2nd R., Ry. Com.
may be convened, on Drummond County
Ry. Co's. B. , 4J6 ; remark on result of dis-
cussion. Com. to be called at a future date,
479.

Committees, Standing, Quorum. — On M. (Mr.
Bowell) for appt. of Com. ; quorum being a
fixed one for purpose of organizing, approved
of, 117.

Debate, Expreatn&iui in, — On remarks of Messrs.
Angers and Power, as to the ** perfection "
of Senate Speakership B., 390.

Divorce Com., Composition of— On M. (Mr.
Bowell) for appt. of Com. ; remarks on pro-
fessional men for members, &c., 118, 120.

M,, Preamble to, — Mr. Boultou's M.,a^in8t
C.P.R. branch construction from Pembina to
Sault system, objected to, being prefaced by
a preamble, 221.

Digitized by

Google

540

I. — Index to Sexators.

[^Session

DIOKElT, Hon. Robert B.— Continued.
Order and Procedure— Con^twtierf.

Af.y trithdraical of. — Mr. Boulton's request to
withdraw his M. for Select Com. on Com-
mercial policy being opposed by Messrs.
Almon and McCallum, remark upon Senate
usage in such cases, 24«3.

Bulesy BevpiUmo/. — See " Rules " (below).

Sp^aker^ihip, Temporary, Pt'ovvnon for, — On
M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. of B. (N) ; on
the measure and constitutional points in-
volved. Set that B., under *' Senate"
(below).

Patent Act Amt. B. (110).

In Com. of the W. ; on Mr. Angers accepting
Mr. Power's suggestion, to retain subsect.
of sect. 21, authorizing reference of doubtful
points to Dept. of Justice, 475.

Port Arthur, DrLCTH, &c., Ry. Co.'s B. (48).
Reported from Ry. Cx)m., with Amts., 320;
Amts. explained, 320, 321.

Quebec and Labrador Steam-ship Co. See :
*• North Atlantic Ry. & SS. Co."

Railway Act Amt. B. (U).
In Com. of the \V. ; on Amt. (Mr. Scott), to
add sub-sect. , Street Ry. conductors to go
forward at crossings, and si^^l motorman
to cross, and on Mr. Smith's objections
thereto, 449.

Railways referred to. See :
Canadian Pacific Ry.
Carleton Branch, St. John, Ry.
Drummond County Ry.
Grand Trunk, Georgian Bay, &c., Ry.
Grand Trunk Ry.
Manitoba and N. W. Ry.
Moncton and P.E.I. Ry.
North Atlantic Ry.
Port Arthur, Duluth, &c., Ry.
St. John Branch Ry. See :

** Carleton Branch Ry."
Western Counties Ry. See :

** Yarmouth and Annapolis Ry."

Rules, Revlsion of the.

On Report of Special Com., and ques. of new
Rules standinjK over ^ill next session ; re-
marks on desirability of their going into
effect from beginning of session, 481.

On M. (Mr. Power) for postponement of con-
sideration until next session ; on ques. of
Petition beine required for Private B. re-
ceived through Commons, 483.

St. John, N.B., Carleton Branch Ry. See:
"Carleton Branch Ry."

Senate, Speaker, Temporary, Provision for ;

B. (X).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; remarks on

the measure, and the constitutional points

involved, 311-1314.
In Com. of the \V. ; on 1st cl. ; on Amt. (Mr.

Bellerose) to insert ** temporarily," &c.,

390, 391.

DIOKBT, Hon. Robert B.— Concluded.
Senate, Speaker, kc. — Continued.
Amt. m., to insert phrase ** until the Speaker
himself shall resume the Chair, or another
Speaker be appointed by the Governor-
General," 392.
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 3rd R. ; further re-
marks on the constitutional points involved^
Mr. Gowan's speech, kc, 395, 396.

Senate Rules. See " Rules."

Street Railway Crossings. See :
** Railway Act Amt. B."

Tariff and Trade Matters. See :

** Commercial Policy " (Mr. Boulton's M.).

Western Coun-ties Ry. B. See •* Yarmouth
and Annapolis."

Witnesses, Law op, B. See "Evidence."

Yarmouth and Annapolis Ry. Co. ; change of
name, &c. ; B. (38).
Reported from Ry. Com., with Amt. (restrict-
ing shipping operations to purposes con-
nected with the undertaking), 288.

DOBSON, Hon. John^

Wallace, Mr. N. C, Controi-x^r of Customs.
Orange Speech at Kingston. On Inqy. (Mr.
Power), action of GoH. thereon ; ques. as to
orders for arms, 380.

DRUMMOND, Hon. Gheorgre A.

Criminal Code Amt. B. (43).

In Om. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. P(»wer)
verdict of jury, in criminal cases, notwith-
standing dissent of one Juror ; ursed that
the Amt. be withdrawn, and introduced as.
a B. next session, 470.

Patent Act Amt. B. (110).
In Com. of the W. ; ques. as to term of Patent
and extension, 475.

Quebec and Montreal, Dominion Officials.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return showing
nationalities, &c. ; remarks on system of
appointments, 272.

FERGUSON, Hon. John.
Introduced, 3.

Address in reply to Speech from the Throne.

M. for, 5. Personal remarks, 6 ; oonipUment
to His Ex. on leaving Canada, 6 ; assurance
of loyalty, 7 ; pessimists, 7, 9 ; prosperity
of Canada aud trade increase, 7*8 ; U. S.
cities anil States compared with Canada^
8-9 ; Sault Ste. Marie canal construction, 9»
Newfld. negotiations, 9.

On Mr. Scott s speech, and personal remarks^
14 ; on Mr. Power's speech, further on per-
sonal remarks, and Welland election, 87-8.

Buffalo and Fort Erie Bridge Co. ; authority
to build Tunnel, &c. ; B. (20).
Introduced*, 220.

(2nd R. m. by Mr. McCallum, 246).
(3rd R. m. by Mr. McKindsey, 262)

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

541

PBRQ-USON, Hon. John—Confmticrf.
Canadian Power Co. ; enlargement of powers
of taking water from Niagara^ river ; B. (63).
Igt R. (Mr. Power)*, 367.
2nd R. w. ; B. explained. 388.
3ra R. (Mr. McKmdaey)*, 407.

Cholera, Precautions against.

Inqy. as to Govt, measures, taken and pro-
posed, with general remarks on subject of
quarantine, sanitation, &c., 166-171 ; further
remarks on debate that ensued, 179.

Contingent Accts. Committee.

2nd Report ; on M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption,
and Amt. (Mr. Bowell) to strike out 6th
par., granting $250 to Sessional Messengers,
457.
Divorce (Committee, composition of.
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Select Com. ;
remarks on Divorce question generally, and
personally as to serving on Com., 121.

Electric Railways. Set :
" Railway Act Amt. B."

Messengers, Sessional, pay of.

On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption Report Con-
tinfft. Accts. Com., and Amt. (Mr. Bowell) to
strike out cl. granting the full $250, 467.

Ocean Accident Corporation Incorp. B. (39).

(Introduced by Mr. deBoucherville*, 283).

(On Order for 2nd R. ; on Mr. Allan's remarks
as to apparent identity with Ocean Guaran-
tee Co.^ B., postponement requested by
Mr. deBoucherville, 310).

2nd R. m., the difference of the Bs. lieing ex-
plained, 342.

3rd R.*, 379.

Ocean Guarantee Corporation Incorp. B. (46).
Introduced*, 287.
2nd R.», 287.
.(Reported from the Banking and Ommerce

(jom. with Amt., and
3rd R w., by Mr. Desjardins, 303.)

Order and Procedure.

Debate, remarh* in. Objections to Mr. Scott's
reference to Welland election, &c., in debate
on the Address, 87-8.

Railway Act Amt. B. (U).

In Com. of the VV. ; on 2nd cl., and Amt. (Mr.
Scott) to add subsect., Street Ry. conduc-
tors to go forward at crossings, and signal
motorman to cross, 449.

On 4th cl., placing Electric Ry. at Falls under
law of Ont. ; addition suggested, to ensure
continuance of operation by electricity, 450,
451.

FLINT. Hon. Billa.
Wallace, Mr. M. C, Controller of Customs.
Orange speech at Kingston. On Inqy. (Mr.
Power) as to Govt, action ; comment on Mr.
Power's speech, 381.
Welland Canal, SrpT. Ellis.
On Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) what action taken
upon report of investigation ; on Mr. O'Don-
ohoe's speech ; ques. fts to evidence, 260.

G-IRABD, Hon. Marc Amable.
The decease of.

Remarks : Mr. Bowell, 3 ; Mr. Scott, 6 ; Mr.
Bernier, 5.

aiiASIBR, Hon. John.
Address in answer to Speech from the
Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Boulton's
speech; ques., binding twine, 51; ques.,
iJ. B. industries, 51.

OOWAN, Hon. James Robert.
Balfour Divorce B. (D).
4th Report presented (reporting procedure

complete) and its adoption m., 144.
15th Report (in favour of the B.) adoption m.,
263 ; on Mr. Almon's objection to djBcision
immediately upon distribution of e\ idence,
265 ; on Mr. Power's objection to summary
of evidence being offered and published in
debates, 265.
Ballantyne Divorce B. (C).
3rd Report of Com. presented (reporting pro-
cedure complete) and adoption wi., 124.
Report in favour of the B., adoption m., 221.

Books, Purchase of.
R«ady Reference to Stat-utes ; on recommenda-
tion of Printinc Com., and M. (Mr. Read)
for adoption of iReoort* 480.

Canada Evidence Act. ^ee;
" Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."

Criminal Code Amt. B. (43).

In Com. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Power) to
aiUlcl., verdict notwithstanding dissent of
of one Juror, 469, 470 ; withdrawal of M. at
present time advised, 472.

Criminal Law. See:
** Criminal Code Amt. B."
•* Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."

Sessional Messengers.

See ** Messengers."

Street Railway crossings.
** Railway Act Amt. B."

Welland Canal, Supt. Ellis.
On Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) what action taken
by Govt, upon report of investigation ; re-
marks on the case, 261*2.

Divorce Cases. Set:
"Balfour."
** Ballantyne."
•*Doran.'^
•*(;off."
" Hebdeu."
«• Reward."
"Schwaller."

Divorce Committ>:e, Composition of.

On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Com. ; on
ques. of removal of old members, appt. of
professional men, &c. ; personal oner to
retire, 120.

Digitized by

Google

542

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

Q-OWAN, Hon. James Kohert— Continued,
Divorce Rules (Gemmill's Practice).

Divorce Com. Report, recommending purchase
of 12 copies ; presented and adoption m,,
145.

DoRAN Divorce B. (E).
5th Report (reporting special steps taken to

prove service), presented and adoption m.i

145.
Report (personal service made), presented and

{Adoption m., 251.
Report in favour of the B., adoption m., 366.

E^VIDENCE, Law of, Amt. ; the accused, hus-
band or wife of accused, &c. ; B. (23).

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; comment up-
on production of documents, 364.

In Cora, of the W., on principle of the B. (by
consent) ; 407-89.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) to add sub-cl., failure to
testify not to create presumption of guilt,
nor to l>e subject of comment by prosecu-
tion, 427, 429.

On Order for 3rd R., and M. (Mr. Angers) to
substitute cl. 24 as in B. when brouffht up
in Commons, striking out ••compellable,^*
and inserting phrase, failure to testify not
to be commented on by pn^ecution, 445.

On Amt. (Mr. Angers) to ada to 27th cl., any
peroon authorized to take affidavits, 446.

GoPF Divorce B. (K).

, Report of Com., in favour of the B., adoption
m., 342.

Hebden Divorce B. (B).

2nd Report of Com. presented (reporting sub-
stitutional service), and adoption m., 124.

Report in favour of the B. ; adoption m. , 279.
Heward Divorce B. (A).

1st Report of Com. presented (reporting substi-
tutional service), and adoption m., 123.

16th Report; postponement of consideration
m., in consefjuence of printing being incom-
plete, 265-6.

Adoption of Report ?». (in favour of the B.),
279 ; reply to Mr. Bemier's objections, 280.

Justice, Administration of. See :
** Criminal Code Amt. B."
** Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."

Order and Procedure, Questions of.

Billf Amt.^ iriffidrairal adi-ised. — Amt. to
Criminal Code, verdict without unanimous
consent of Jury ; Mr. Power advised to
withdraw it, as adoption of a vital prin-
ciple at late period of session would be im-
proper, and would likely not be carried in
Commons, 472.

Bilff* poMted in Commons. — That measure passed
twice by representatives of the people
should m adopted by Senate (on Evidence,
law of, Amt. B.), 411.

Dii'orce Com. , composition of. — On ques. of re-
moval of old Members, and on appt. of
professional men, 120.

Divorce Procedure. — On objection taken to
decision upon Com.'s Report, immediately
after evidence distributed, 265.

QOWAN, Hon. James B^oibert— Conclude
Order and Procedure — Continued.

On objection to summary of evidence being
given, and published in Debates, 265.
Senate, conMtilutiomU position qf. — Remarks, on

law of Evidence Amt. B., 407, 41 1.
Senate, Speaker, temporary, appointment qf,
— On merits of the B. and constitutional
points involved: see that B., under " Sen-
ate " (below).

Printing of Parliament.
On M. (Mr. Read, Quint ^) for adoption of 6th
Report of Com. ; on purchase of Ready
Reference to Statutes, 480.

Prohimition. See ** Temperanoe legislation.^

SCH WALLER DiVORCE B. (J).

Report in favour of the B., adoption m., 339.

Senate, Speaker of. Temporary; B. (N) to
make provision for appt.

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; comments on
the measure, and the constitutional points
involved, 314, 318-9 ; on Mr. Vidal's speech,
331-2; on Mr. Power's, 344, 348 ; on Mr.
Kaulbach's, 352; on Mr. Scott's, 360; on
Mr. Boulton's, 366.

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 3rd R. ; further, on
Mr. Dickey's remarks, and on the constitu-
tional ques. , 397.

Statutes, Ready Reference to.
On recommendation of Printing Com. for pur-
chase of, and M. (Mr. Rea<l) for adoption of
Report, 480.

Temperance Leolslation (Prohibftion).
On M. (Mr. Vidal) for R. Commission's in-
structions, &c. ; on the prohibition question,
and the Conmiission's operations, 15o.

Witnesses, Law OF. <Sce ••Evidence."

GRANT, Hon. Robert P.

The Decease of. Remarks: Mr. Bowell, 4;
Mr. Scott, 6 ; Mr. Primrose, 5.

G-UEVREMONT, Hon. Jecm Baptiste.
Drummond County Ry. Co.'s B. (71).

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension of
Rules and 2nd R. ; objection taken, B. not
printed in Frencli, 459, 460.

On M. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension of 57th
Rule, as recommended in Report of Stand-
ing Orders Com. ; objection taken to M. of
a special nature without notice, 461.

On ^I. (Mr. McMillan) for suspension of 14th
and 61st Rules, and for 2nd R. ; objection
taken to M. for suspension of Rules without
notice, 462 ; on Mr. Power's remark, 462.

On ques. (Mr. Dickey, chairman) whether Ry.
Com. may be convened within 24 hours ; on
the ques. of procedure, and the merits of
the B., 477.

On ques. of passage of the B. ; further on the
merits of the B. , 503 ; M. to strike out 4th
cl., m\.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

543

HO'WIjAN, Hon. George William.
Address in Answer to the Speech from the
Throne.

On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Boulton's
speech : result of exports exceeding im-
ports, 49.

Oil Mr. Angers's speech, remark as to revising
ofEicers, 65.

On the Address and Mr. Power's speech, ques.
as to North Atlantic States, 89; personal
compliment, 95 ; increase of trade, banking
business, exports and imports ; Ministers of
Trade and Commerce, and of Agriculture, in
Senate ; compliment to Sir J. Abbott, 95 ;
Opposition charges, 95-6 ; their tariff policy
and Conservative compared, 96 ; C. P. R.
construction, 96 ; Canadian and United
States tariffs compared, 96-7 ; increase of
trade since 1867, 97. 99; N.B. and N.S.
manufacturing statistics, 97, 99; tonnage
increase, 97-8 ; taxation compared with
other countries, 98 ; annexation sentiment
and writings, 99, 100, 101 ; Imperial con-
nection and duty, 101.

On Mr. Mclnnes's speech ; ques. as to tonnage
of entries at Victoria, 105.

Canada Evidence Act. See :
«* Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canadian Pacific Ry. Construction. See :
"Address," debate ot\ the.

Canned Goods, Stamping of ; B. (R).

In Com. of the W. ; on definition of can as a

package, 399.
On lobster fishing ; on date of packing being

stamped on the can, 401.

Commons Representation Readjustment Act ;
several slight .\mts. ; B. (42).
Reported from Com. of theW., without Amt.,
283.

Evidence, Law of, Amt. ; the accused, husband
or wife of accused, &c. ; B. (23).

In Com. of the W., orogress reported, 424.

Reported from the Com., with Amts., 430.

On Order for 3rd R., and proposed Amts. ;
held that, if further Amts. are desired, B.
should be re-committed, 445.

Exports and Imports. See ** Address," debate

oil the.
French-speaking Employees. See "Montreal."

Justice, Administration of. See ** Evidence,
law of."

LoRSTER Fishing and Canning. See "Canned
(Toods."

MoNTREAi^ Customs employees.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return, showing
nationalities, &c. ; comment on his know-
ledge of English, 191.

Order and Procedure, question of.

Having reported law of Evidence B. from
Com. of the VV., with Amts. ; on Order for
3rd R., and proposed further Amts. ; held
that it should be recommitted for the pur-
pose, 445.

HOWLAN, Hon. Gheorfire V7'.— Concluded.

Seamen's Act Amt. ; lien on ship for master's

disbursements, &c. ; B. (O).
Reported from Com. of the W., without Amt.,

302.
Senate, Ministers in the. See ** Address,"

debate on the.

Tariff and Trade matters. See " Address,"

debate on the.
Tonnage. See ** Address," debate on the.
Vessei^, Lien on. See "Seamen's Act Amt. B."
Witnesses, Law of, B. See '* Evidence."

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.
Address in reply to Speech from Throne.

On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mr. Scott's
speech : canal tolls, ques., writer of article,
18.

On Mr. Boulton's speech : maritime province
exports, ques., values, 44 ; tonnage decrease,
ques., comparison with 1874-78, 47 ; exports
and imports and results, remark, 50 ; N. W.
settler's poem, remark, 57.

On Mr. Angers's speech : N. B. Govt., Liberal,
remark, 66.

On .Mr. Power's speech : political course of
Senate, remark, 88 ; census comparison with
U. S. , ques. , State of Maine, 89 ; tonnage
decrease 1874-78, 92-3 ; business failures,
cause, depression, 1874-78, 93 ; annexation
movement in P. Q., 94.

On the Address ; remarks on Trade policy de-
ferred, 101 ; pessimist doctrines of Oppo-
sition, 101-2.

Adjournments, lengthy, opposed.

On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for ad jt., 7-27 Feb., 145.
Annexation. See** U.S."

Apples, Inspection. See ** Inspection, General,
Act."

Bai^four Divorce R (B).
On M. (Mr. Gowan) for adoption 15th Report
of Com. (in favour of the B.); remarks of
Mr. Almon concurred in, protesting against
decision immediately ; evidence should be
distributed 48 hours previously ; also that a
summary of evidence should not appear in
the Debates, 263-4.

Bills, Fees for. See "Parliamentary Fees B."

Biu^, Procedure on. See " Order and Pro-
cedure."

Books, purchase of.
Held that Printing Com. has no right to
recommend (on adoption of 6th Report, in
favour of purchase of supply of Ready
Reference to Statutes), 480.

Bfrglary Guarantee Co. See ** Dominion
Burglary Guarantee Co."

Canada Carriage Co. Incorp. B. (59).
On M. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.) for adoption of
Report of Standing Orders and Priv. Bs.
Com.; the unusual powers having already
been granted by Provincial charters, report
not opposed, 437.

Digitized by

Google

544

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.— Conirf.

Canada Evidence Act. See :
** Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canadian Pacific Ry. ; additional debentures,
powers of issuing restored % B. (84).
On M. (Mr. Maclnnes, Burlington) for 2nd R.;
more definite information required, 398.

Canadian Pacific Ry., branch lines.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Resolution ; olijec-
tion taken to preamble as being contrary to
Rules, 221.

Canadian Pacific Ry., capital stock.

On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Orders in Council
authorizing increase ; correction, price of
nails, 134 ; on freight rates. Pacific terminus
site, price of oats, &c., 136.

Canned Goods, stamping of ; B. (R.)

In Com. of the W.; that cans, as well as
packages, should be specified, .399 ; as to
dates, suggested labels in Quantities, and
year added by stamp, 400 ; that regulations
should be confined to canning, not catching
(as regards lobsters), 402 ; on fish, packed
for American dealers, being stamped iiith
their brand, 405.

Census, Comparison with U. S.

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Power's
speech ; ques., State of Maine, 89.

Census, 1891, system of taking.
On M. (Mr. Tass^) for information ; suggest ion
that all nationalities be included in the M.,
126.

Children, Punishmf.nt. See "Juvenile Of-
fenders B."

Cholera, Govt. Precautions against.

On Inqy. (Mr. Ferguson) ; concerted action
with municipalities advocated, 177.

Civil Service Insurance ; B. to provide for

(11).
In Com. of the W.; questions whether Insur-
ance compulsory, 490 ; remark in favour of
a compulsory system, ques. as to employees
of Parlt. , 491 ; on ap(K)inting men m poor
health, 491 ; that system should be com-
pulsory for those appointed hereafter, 492.

Civil Service, Nationaijties of.
On M. (Mr. Bellerose) for Return of Quebec
officials ; comment on his speech, 271.

Civil Service Superannuation Act Amt. ;
rates chargeable increased, &c. ; B. (27).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) into Com. of the W., and
his explanation of the 6. ; ques. whether
new rates compulsory on present employees,
485 ; ques. as to insurance. 485.

Columbia and Kootenay Ry., &c., Co.'sB. (68).

On M. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.). for 3rd R., and
Amt. (Mr. Mclnnes, B. C), to eliminate cl.
authorizing a 30-mlle branch construction,
432.

Reference made hereto, on the Amt. (Mr. Mc-
lnnes, B.C.), to Railway Act Amt. B.
(U), 451.

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A N.—CatUd.
Commercial Policy of Canada.
{See previously, ** Address '* debate on the.)
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. ; com-
ment on hii speech ; U. S. political platform,
201 ; Sir R. Peel's policy, 209 ; Lake traffic,
213 ; agricultural implements protection,
217-18-19; blacksmithing, 225; sewing
machines, 225 ; other manufacturing indus-
tries, 226 ; taxes on wholesale imports, 229 ;
free trade, 230, 231 ; excise revenue, 233 ;
railway and canal revenue, 234. On Mr.
Power s speech ; shipping decrease, 1874-78,
243.

Committees. See the Subjects.
Contingent Aocts. Com., Composftion of.
Reduce<l number advocated, on report of Corn-
on revision of the Rules, 482.

Contingent Accts. Com., Reports of.
On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption of 2nd Re-
port, and M. (Mr. Bowell) to strike out 6th
par., (that Messengers be paid the full
$250) ; session beinff less than 100 days, the
I eduction advocated, 455.

Criminal Code Amt. B. (43.)

In Com. of the W. ; on 10th cL, prosecutions
requiring consent of Minister of Marine ;
evidence of malicious prosecution of ship as
unseaworthy, 467.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) addl. cl. to sect. 728 of
Act, verdict returnable notwithstanding
dissent of one Juror ; suggestion, after a
certain length of time, 469 ; .4mt. advocated,
469, 470 ; withdrawal advised, for the pre-
sent, on ground of expediency, 470, 472.

Criminal Law. See:
** Criminal Code Amt. B."
" Evidence, law of, B."
" Juvenile Offenders B."

Deck-load

Act."

Law. See *' Merchant Shipping

Divorce Cases.
"Balfour."
"Doran."
" Heward."

Sf^:

Divorce Committee, Composition of.
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of Select Com.,
remarks on personnel, 119 ; on retirement of
old members of the Com., 120.

Dominion Burglary Guarantee C-o. Incorp.
B. (15),
On M. (Mr. McMillan) for 2nd R. ; ques.
ae to novelty of B., 220.

Dominion Lands Act Amt. ; Man., homesteads
in school sections, &c. ; B. (109).
In Com. of the \V. ; ques., whether B. con-
fined to Manitoba, 493.

DoRAN Divorce B. (E).
On M. (Mr. Gowan) for adoption of Report of
Com. (in favour of the B. ) ; remark on the
case, 366.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

545

KAXJIiBAOH, HoiL Henry A. N.—CmucL
Election, Vanoocvkr, B. C.
On Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes, B. C.) as to issue of
writ ; remarks, 394.

Elect roNS, the By, results of.
Remarks, on Mr. Power's speech, in Com. of
the VV. on Voters' Lists revision postpone-
ment B. (123), 489.

Electoral Lists. See ** Voters' Lists B.')
Ellis, Supt., Welland Canal.

On Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) as to intention of
Govt, to take action upon report of investi-
gation ; remarks on his speech, 257, 259.
On M. (Mr. McCallum) for statement of amount
paid back to Supt. Ellis ; remark on form of
M.,294.

Employees, Nationalities. See "Civil Service."

Epidemics, Precautions. See "Cholera."

Evidence, Law of; the accused, husband or
wife of accused, documents, &c. ; B. (23).

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; on Mr.
Power's objection to 2nd R. at evening ses-
sion, another Order having the floor at
recess, 364 ; 2nd R. agreed to, on under-
standing that principles may be discussed in
Com. of the W., 365.

In Com. of the VV. ; suggestion that "com-
pellable " be omitted, Zo cl. allowing hus-
band or wife to testify, 414.

On Amt. (Mr. Scott) to strikeout "com-
pellable" as to husband or wife, 415; re-
marks on last year's legislation, 416; hasty
criminal legislation deprecated, &c., 416.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) to add. cl., failure to
testify not to create presumption of guilt,
Ac, 427.

On suggested Amt. (Mr. Angers) refusal to
testSy not to be commented upon by the
Court, 429 ; further remarks, 429.

On Order for 3rd R., and Amt. (Mr. Angers),
striking out "compellable," and inserting
cl. , failure to testify not to be commented on
by prosecution, 443- 4-5.

Amts. oi Commons (inserting " competent "
for "compellable" and pruolndin^ Judge
from commenting on failure to testify) ; on
M. (Mr. Angers) for concurrence, 493.

Exports and Imports.
In debate on the Address. See " Address."
On M. (Mr. Boultou) for Select 0>m. on
Trade. See " Commercial policy of Canada. "

Fees, Parliamentary, B. See " Parliamen-
tary."

Fish, Canned, Stamping of. See "Canned
goods."

Franchise Act, revision of.

A more liberal Franchise Act advocated, in
Com. of the \V. on Voters' Lists Revision B.
(123), 489.

French-speaking Employees.

On M. (Mr. Belleroae) for Return showing
nationalities, &c.; comment on his speech,
271.

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.—Contd,

General Inspection Act. See " Inspection. "

Hawaiian Islands, port of call at.
On Inc^y. (Mr. Boulton) what steps taken to
acquire a port, in event of changed foreign
relations ; on the procedure, that an Inqy.
should not be debatable, 326 ; on import-
ance of Hawaiian independence, 326.

Heward Divorce B. (A).
On M. (Mr. Oowan) for postponement of con-
sideration of 16th Report of Com., on ac-
count of incompleteness of printing ; that
Chairman should not assume duty of revis-
ing the printing, 266.
On M. (Mr. Gowan) for adoption of the
• Report (in favour of B.); remarks on the
eWdence in the case, 280-1.

Holidays Law Amt. ; abolition of 3 holidays " of
obligation. "
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R.; remarks on
N. S. Thanksgiving Day observance, 183.

Inspection, General, Act, Amt. ; Apples,
classification of ; B. (V).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2ud R. ; remarks on
N. S. apple growing and trade, 438.

Insurance, CmL Service. See * * Civil Senice. "

Juries, unanimous verdict. See "Criminal
Code Amt, B."

Justice, Administration of. See :
" Criminal Code Amt. B."
"Evidence, Law of , B."
" Juvenile Offenders B."

Ju^^ESiLE Offenders ; private trial of ; parents
to be summoned respecting committal to
Reformatory, &c.; B. (P).
On M. (Mr. Allan) for 2nd K; remarks as to
the age, and effect of private trials, 299.

Land Grants, N.W. campaign. See " Militia."

Lands Act, Dominion, Amt. See "Dominion."

Law, Criminal. See :
" Criminal Code Amt. B."
" Evidence, law of, B."
" Juvenile Offenders, B."

Legislation IN Senate. See "Order and Pro-
cedure."

Liquor Traffic. See "Temperance legislation."

Load-lines. See " Merchant Shipping Act."

Lobsters, Catching of. See the debate on
" Canned goods, stamping of ; B."

Man., Homesteads in School Sections ; Dom.
lands Act Amt. B. (109).
In Qom. of the VV. ; ques., whether B. con-
fined to Manitoba, 493.

Merchant Shipping Act Amt. ; Load-lines : re-
peal of portion of Imperial Act as regards
Canadian ships ; B. (92).
In Com of the Whole. ; ques. whether Deck-
loads will be affected, as well as load-lines,
466.

Digitized by

Google

546

I. — Index to Senatobs.

[Session

KAULBAOH, Hon. Hanry A. N.-Confd.
Messexoers, Sessional Allowance.
. On M. (Mr. McKay) for adoption of 2nd
Report, Contingt. Accts. Com., and M. (Mr.
Bowell) to strike out 6th par. (that Mesnen-
i^ers be paid the full $250) ; session being
less than 100 days, reduction advocated, 455.

.Militia in N. W. Campaign ; Land Grants ;
time further extended ; B. (0).
In Com. of the W. ; ques. as to cause of neces-
sity for further extension, 198.

New BRrxswicK Govt., Politics of.
In debate on the Address ; remark on Mr.

Augers's speech, and Mr. Power's comments,

66.
Nova Scotia Apples. See "Inspection Act

Amt."

N. S. Building Society and Savings' Bank
Act. Amt. B. (F.)
On M. (Mr. Almon) for 2nd K ; remark on
effect of the B., 148.

N. S. Thanksgiving Day Observance.
Remarks on 2nd R. of B. (N.) abolishing 3
holidays of obligation, 183.

N. W. Campaign, Land Grants. iS^ce** Militia."
N. W. Settlers and the " N. P."
In debate on the Address ; remark on poem
quoted by Mr. Boulton, 57.

Order and Procedure, Question of.

Adjournments, Lengthy, opposed.— On Mr.
Bellerose's M. (7-27 Feb.), 145.

BiU, Amt.t Postponement. — Mr. Power advised
to postpone his Amt. (unanimous verdict
not essential) to Criminal Code Amt. B.,
rather than jeopardize passage of the Bill,
470, 472.

Bill, DUcvMMton of Principle in Com. — 2nd R.
of Iaw of Evidence B. agreed to, on under-
standing that its principle may be dis-
cussed in Com. , 364.

Bill, Fees for, disposed of. — Remarks on the
new procedure, in Com. of the W. on
** Parliamentary fees B. (61)," ,366.

BUI proceedimjy durin{f Interrupted Debate.
— On Mr. Power's objection to law of evi-
dence B. being moved 2nd R. at evening
session, Mr. Poirier having had the floor
at recess on another Order, 364.

BUI, 3rd R., Discussion on Principle. — Pointed
out that this is irregular, at that ptage ;
on Mr. Dickey's speech, on 3rd R. of
Speaker of Senate B., 396.

Committees, ComposUion of. — Continst Accts.
Om., reduced number advocated, on revi-
sion of the Rules, 482.

Divorce Com., remarks on personnel, profes-
sional men on the Om., &c., 119; on
retirement of old members, 119.

C<ym., Printing, Functions o/.— Held that it has
no right to recommend the granting of
money (on adoption of 6th Report, in
favour of purchase of Blatch's Ready
Reference to the Statutes), 480.

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.— C%m<d.
Order and Procedure — Continued.

CrimituU Legislation, hasty, deprecated, — In de-
bate on ** Evidence, law of, Amt. B.'*
(testimony of the accused, &c.), 416.

Divorce Committee. — See "Committees"
(above).

Divorce Procedure. — Protest against adoption

of final Report of Com., less than 48

* hours after evidence distributed (Balfour

case), 263.

That suminary of evidence should not be

published in Debates (same case), 264.
That Chairman of Com. should not assume
duty of revising the printing (Heward
case), 266.

Inquiries not Debatable. — That Com. on Senate
Rules should define procedure, to forbid
debates on Inquies. (on Mr. Boulton's
Inqy. respecting Hawaiian Islands), 326.

Motions, preamble inadmissible. — Objection, on
this ground, to Mr. Boulton's M. re
C. P. R. branch lines, 221.

Printing of Reports. — On Mr. Power's sugges-
tion that Depts. should pay for printing
their Reports (on the adoption of Printing
Com. Report), 32a

Rules, revision of. — See ** Rules " (below).

Senate, Share of Legislation. — Remarks on Mr.
Bellerose's M. for adjt. (7-27 Feb.), 145.

Seimte, Speaker, temporary, appt. of. — On merits
of B. (N) to Aiake provision for, and on
the constitutional pomts involved, 350-1-2.

Parliamentary Fees, receipt, return, &c. ;
B. (61).
In Com. of the W. ; on the new procedure,
refunds by Auditor General, 366.

Printing of Parliament.
On M. (Mr. Read) for adoption Ist Report of

Joint Com.; ques., 320; on Mr. rower's

suggestion that Depts. pay for printing their

own Reports, 320.
On M. (Mr. Read) for adoption 6th Report;

purchase of Blatch's Ready Reference to

statutes objected to; that Printing Com.

has no right to recommend granting of

money for any purpose, 480.

Prohibition. See *' Temperance Legislation.'*

Quarantine Matters (Epidemics).
On Inqy. (Mr. Fer^ison) Govt, precautions
against Cholera ; joint action with Munici-
palities advocated, 177.

Quebec Officials, Nationalities of.
On M. (Mr. Beilerose) for Return ; comment
on his speech, 271.

Railway Act Amt. B. (U).
In Com. of the VV. ; on M. (Mr. Mclnnes,
B.C.), to add. cl. to Ry. Act, to authorize
branch line construction up to 30 miles;
remarks on that Senator's Amt. to Columbia
and Kootenay Ry. Co.'s B., to preclude the
same privilege, 451.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators.

547

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.—Contd.

Railway matters, Debates on. See :
Canadian Pacific Ry.
Columbia and Kootenay Ry.
Commercial policy (ques. of revenne from

Rys.)
\\ estem Counties Ry. See :
Yarmouth and Annapolis Ry.

Reformatories. See "Juvenile Offenders B."

Rules, Revision of the.
On M. (Mr. Power) for adoption of the Com.'s
report, and on the suggestions to defer con-
siaeration of new Rules till next Session,
482 ; on the reduction proposed, in member-
ship of Contingt. Accts. Com., &c., 482.

Sandwich Islands. 5ee "Hawaii."

Seamen's Act Amt.; lien on vessel for captain's

disbursements; B. (O).

On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R.; Mr. Power's

gestion, for postponement, supported,

In Com. of the W.; the measure criticized;
301.

Seamen's prosecutions. See :
*• Criminal Code Amt. B."

Sessional Messengers. See ** Messengers."

Senate Adjournments. See "Order and Pro-
cedure."

Senate Committees. See " Order and Proce-
dure."

Senate Le<jislation, share of. iS^ee "Order
and Procedure."

Senate Messengers. See "Messengers."
Senate, Poutical Action of.

In debate on the Address, remark on Mr.
Power's speech, 88.

Senate Rules. See "Rules."

Senate, Speaker, TEMPORARY, appointment of;

B. to make provision for (N).
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. ; on merits of

the 6., and the constitutional points in-
volved, 350-1-2.
In Com. of the'W.; on Amt. (Mr. Bellerose)

to insert word " temporarily "; that debate

need not be prolonged, 391.
On M. (Mr. Angers) for 3rd R.; on Mr.

Dickey's speech, that discussion of principle

on 3ra R. is irregular, 396.

Shippinc;, tonnage, decrease.

In debate on the Address.— On Mr. Boultou's

speech : ques., 1874-78, 47 ; on .Mr. Power's

remarks, 92-3.
On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. on

Trade. Replies to Mr. Power's speech, 243.

Ships, Lien upon. See " .Seamen's Act Amt."

Ships* Load-lines. See " Mercht. Shipping
Act."

Ships, Unsea worthy. Prosecutions. See : \
" Criminal Corle Amt. B.''
36

KAULBAOH, Hon. Henry A. N.—CotUd.
Statutes, Ready Reference to.
Purchase of, for Senators, opposed, on adop-
tion of ^th Report of Printing Com., 480.

Superannuation, Civil Service. See "Civil
Ser\'ice."

Tariff and Trade Questions.
In debate on the Address. See "Address."
In debate on M. (Mr. Boulton), for Select
Com. on Trade. See " Commercial Policy of
Canada."

Temperance Legislation (Prohibition).
On M. (Mr. Vidal) for R. Commission's in-
structions ; on the personnel and duties of
the Commission, and on Prohibition ques-
tion, 158.

Thanksgiving Day Observance, N.S.
Remarks on M. (Mr. Angers) for 2nd R. of
B. (N) abolishing three holidays of "obliga-
tion," 183.

Tonnage. *9€€ "Shipping."

Trial by Jury. See :
" Criminal Co<le Amt. B."
" Evidence, Law of, Amt. B."

United States Annexation, and the Liberal
Party.
In debate on the Address ; remarks on Mr.
Power's speech, 94.

U. S. Annexation of Hawaii.
Remarks on Inqy. (Mr. Boulton) what steps
taken to acquire a Hawaiian port of call, m
event of changed foreign relations, 326.

U. S. Census, Comparison with. *

In debate on the Address ; on Mr. Power's
speech : ques. , State of Maine, 89.

U. S. Dealers, Fish canned for.
Remark on labelling of packages, in debate on
" Canned Goods, stamping of, B.," 405.

Vancou\'er, Election in.
On Inqy. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.) as to issue of
writs ; remarks, 394.

Vessels. See "Ships."

Voters' Lists, Revision of. Postponed ; B.
(123).
In Com. of the VV. ; on Mr. Power's speech,
and on results of the by-elections ; that the
Franchise Act be made more liberal, advo-
cated, 489.

Welland Canal Investigation.
On Inqy. (Mr. McCallum) as to intention of

Govt, to take action ; remarks on his speech,

257, 259.
On M. (Mr. McCallum) for statement of

amount paid back to Supt. Ellis ; remark

on form of M. , 294.

Witnesses, Law of. See " Evidence."

Western Counties Ry.
Annapolis. "

See " Yarmouth and

Digitized by

Google

548

I. — Index to Senators.

[Session

XAULBACH, Hon. Henry A. N.—C<mtd,

Yarmouth and Annapolis Ry. Co. ; change of
name, &c. ; B. (28).
On. M. (Mr. Power) for 2nd R. ; remarks on
preferential stock issue, and on powers of
ship-building, 245 ; attention of Ry. Com.
requested thereto, 245.

KIROHHOFFER. Hon. John Nesbitt.
Introduced, 3.
Archives of the Dominon.

M. (Mr. Bernier) that measures should be taken
for their preservation, ttecoiukd, 306.

LOUGHEED, Hon. James Alexander.

Ai-BERTA Irrhjation Co. Lncorp. B. (54).
Introduced*. 424.
2nd R.*, 437.
Anit«. of Com. on Rvs. , &c. ; concurrence m. ,

461.
3rdR.», 461.

Alberta Rv. and Coal Co's, B. (53).
Introduced*, 287.
2nd R.*, 287.
3rd R.*, 320.

Assiniboixe Rr\ER Water Power B. See
"Winnipeg."

Bank A(t, Clerical Error, Correction ;
B. (I).
Reported from Com. of the V\ . without Amt. *,
197.

Calgary HvDRArLic Co. Incorp. B. (56).
Introduced*, 440.
2nd R.*, 452.
3id R.*, 461.

Caujary Irrigation Co. Incorp. B. (35).
Introduced*, 424.
2nd R.*, 437.
3rd R.*, 461.

Cal<;ary Street Ry. Co. Incorp. B. (52).
Introducetl*, 453.
2nd R.*, 453.
3rd R.*, 453.

Canada Evidence Act. NV^ .
** Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Cleveland, Port vStanley and Lonik)n Ry.,
&c.. Co. Incorp., &(\ ; B. (45).
Introduced*, 424.
2udR.*,437.
3rd R.*, 453.

Criminal Code Amt. B. (43).

In Com. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Power) to
add, as sect. 728a, verdict returnable not-
withstanding dissent of one juror ; remarks
on jury system in N. W. T., 472; reply to
Mr. Angers, on that point, 472.

Criminal Law, Administration. See :
** Criminal Code Amt. B."
'* Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
" X. W. T. Act. Amt. (jury system) B."

E.\sTERN Trust Co. Incorp. B. (41).
2nd R. m. (in the absence of Mr. Almon) *,
300.

LOUGHEED, Hon. Jamee Aiex.—Corud.

Evidence, law of, Amt. ; the accused, husband
or wife of accused, &c. ; B. (28).

In Com. of the W. ; on 3rd cl. ; on M. (Mr.
Scott) to strike out ** compellable " ; re-
marks upon this |)oiiit, and the other prin-
ciples of the B., 416-7, 419, 420.

Amt. m. ; competency of evidence : not to be
called without consent (Amt. of last vear to
Criminal code), 420. Comment on Mr. Mil-
ler's speech, 421 ; on Mr. McKindsey's, 422.

On Amt. (Mr. Power) failure to testify not to
create presumption of guilt, nor be subject of
comment by prosecution, and Mr. Angers's
suggest€54 modification respecting comment
by judge, 428.

On Mr. Anders's remarks as to desirability of
harmonizing %ith Ont. law, 429.

On Order for 3rd R., and M. (Mr. Angers) to
substitute cl. 24 as in B. when brought up
in Commons, taking out " compellable,*' and
inserting, failure to testify not to be subject
of comment by prosecution ; further Amt.
suggested, inserting ** compellable'' instead
of ** competent," 4&; replv to Mr. Power,
443.

Recommittal of B. to a small Com., to draft
a cl., suggested, 445.

On M. (Mr. Angers) for 3rd R. ; ques., intro-
duction of cl. with regard to civil cases, 446 ;
remarks on law of evidence as followed in
N.W.T., 446-7.

Fort George, Niagara, preservation of.
M. for petitions and correspondence, 394.

Reward Divorce B. (A).
On M. (Mr. Gowan) for adoption of Report of
Divorce Com. (in favour of the B.), and Mr.
Bernier 8 objection ; remarks on the evi-
dence, 281.

Holidays, Abolition of ; Annunciation, Corpus
Christi, Sts. Peter and Paul ; B. (H).
In Com. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Angers)
specifying statutes amd. ; original form re-
commended, 197.

Justice, Administration of. See .
*• Criminal Code Amt. B."
"Evidence, law of, Amt. B."
**N. W. T. Act Amt. (jury system) B. *

Liquor Traffic. iS^ef "Temperance."

London and Port Stanley Ry. Co.'s B. (47).
Introduced*, 440.
2nd R.*, 4.32.
3rd R.*, 453.

Man. and N. W. Ry. Co. Acts Consolidation
B. (L).

IntrmUiced*, 184.

2nd R. 7w. ; B. explained, 278.

Suspension of 61st Rule m,, to enable Com. to
be convened, 278.

Amt. of Ry. Com. ; concurrence m., 284 ; an-
other Amt. (power of decreasing stock), wi.
that it be not concurred in, 284 ; third Amt.,
concurrence m. , 285.

3rd R. m., 285.

Digitized by

Google

1893]

I. — Index to Senators,

549

XjOUGHEED, Hon. James Alex.— Oon^rf.

Militia, N. W. campaign land grants ; time
extended ; B. (G).
In Com. of the \V\ ; attention called to unset-
tled claims, 198.

Niagara, preservation of Fort George.
M. for petitions and correspondence, 394.

N. W. T. Act Amt. ; jury system. Dominion
law withdrawn in favour of local legislation ;
B. (T).
In Com. of the W. ; in reply to Mr. Power,
principle of the B. explained, 439.

N. W. Territories, jury system.

Remarks in Com. on Criminal Code Amt. B. ,

472; reply to Mr. Angers on the subject,

472.
Remarks in Com. on N. VV. T. Act Amt. B. ,

439.

N. W. T., Law of E^'IDENCE.

Remarks on 3rd R. of Law of Evidence Amt.
B., 446, 447.

Temperance Legislation (Prohibition.)
On M. (Mr. Vidal)forR. Commission's instruc-
tions, &c. ; remarks, especially on N. \V. Ter-
ritories, 161 ; replies to Mr. Vidal, 162.

Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Ry. Co.'s

B. (83).
Introduced*, 459.
2ud R.*, 459.
3rd R.*, 461.
Winnipeg City, Use of .\ssiniboine River

water power ; B. (77).
Introduced*, 367.
2nd R.*, 406.
3rd R., (m. by Mr. Sutherland)*, 425.

McOALLUM, Hon. Lachlan.

Buffalo and Fort Erie Bridge Co. ; pri-
vilege of building tunnel, &c. : B. (20).
2nd R. m. (for Mr. Ferguson), 246.
Commercial Poucy of Canada.

On M. (Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. ; com-
ments on his speech ; flower growing, 208 ;
Srice of bread in U.S. cities, 208. W ith-
rawal of the M. without a division objected
to, 243.
Ellis, Supt. See ** Welland Canal."
Order and Procedure, Questions of.

Motion of hired to stand. — Objection taken to
Mr. O'Donohoe's M. respectinc Welland
Canal remaining longer on Omer paper,
453.
Motion, modification of. — Mr. Bowell having
objected to M^ for papers, which M. com-
mits Senate to allegation of money im-
properly withheld by Supt. Ellis ; with
reference to a previous M. which included
the M'ords ** if any " ; held that on previous
occasion the proof of improper retention
had not been given ; but the modification of
present M. is not opposed, 294.
Motion^ teithdrairal of. — Withdrawal of M.
(Mr. Boulton) for Select Com. on Commer-
cial policy, objecte<l to, a two days' debate
having been had upon it, 243.
36^

MoOALLXJM, Hod. Lachlan— Con^'nu<»;.
Welland Canal Investigation.

Inqy., what action taken upon report, as to
Supt. Ellis, &c., 253; upon Mr. Bowell's
replv thereto, 254, 257, 258, 259 ; comments
on Mr. O'Donohoe's speech, 260 ; on Mr.
Ferguson's, 261, 262 ; on Mr. Bowell's
furtner remarks, 262.

On Notice of M. (Mr. O'Donohoe) for all
papers, Commissioner's report, and account
of expenses of investigation, 288.

M. for statement of amount paid back to Supt.
^ Ellis, in excess of what was proper, and not
included in Return to Senate Address of
17th June, 1891, 288, 291. On Mr. Bowell's
request that M. may be amd., so as not to
commit Senate to allegation of improper re-
tention of money by Supt., 274; Amt. of the
M. not opposed, 294. «

On M. (above) of Mr. O'Donohoe beine called ;
on his requesting that it may stand ; objec-
tion taken to its remaining longer on Order
paper, 453.

MoOLELAN, Hon. Abner Reid.

Books, purchase of. See ** Printing Com."

Columbia and Kootenay Ry., &c., Co.'s B.
(68).
On M. (Mr. Macdonald, B.C.) for 3rd R., and
Amt. (Mr. Mclnnes, B.C.) to eliminated
authorizing branch construction, 433.

Divorce Committee, composition of.
Qn M. (Mr. Bowell) for appt. of the Com.;
appt. of Mr. McKay w., 121 ; further re-
marks, 122.

Loans, rate of interest charged.
On Mr. Perley calling attention to excessive
rates charged in N. W.T., 464.

Printincj of Parliament.
On M. (Mr. Read, Quint^) for adoption of 6th
Report of Com. ; on recommendation for pur-
chase of Ready Reference to Statutes, 480.

Temperance Lecjislation (prohibition).
On M. (Mr. Vidal) for R. Commission's in
structions, &c. ; remarks on the appt. of the
Commission, its objects and results, 158.

Mcdonald, Hon. Wmiam (N. S.)

Parliamentary Fees; receipt, disposal, re-
fund of; B. ^61).
On M. (Mr. Bowell) for 2nd R. ; ques, whether
Auditor-General must obey Senate resolution
(refund of fees). 341.

McINNES, Hon. Thomas R. (B.O.)

Address in Answer to Speecth from the

Throne.
On M. (Mr. Ferguson) for. On Mi;. Scott's

speech ; correction, B.C. population, 14.
On Mr. Boulton 's speech : Intercol. Ry. deficit,

ques., 53; ques., C. P. R. grain freight

rates, 58.
On Mr. Read's ; pleuro-pneumonia and visit of

(jiglish experts to Canada, 75 ; land values,

not decreased in B.C., 76.

Digitized by

Google

550

I. — Index to Senators.

[Se.

MoINNBS, Hon. Thomas R.— Continued,
Address — Continued.

On Mr. Angers's explanation as to his remarks
upon Mr. Scott's speech, 86.

On Mr. Howlan's speech : ques. as to authori-
ties quoted from, 98, 99, 100.

On the Address : B. C. prosperity ; hampered
by fiscal policy ; comparisons with U. 8. ,
and the exodus ; Canadian taxation, 102 ;
duty on mining machinery ; mining output,
B.C;., 103; cattle ciuarantine, B.C., 1034;
population and volume of duties of Pro-
vinces compared, 104-5 ; Victoria tonnage
entries, 105 ; quarantine defects, 105-6-7 ;
marine hospital, &c., 108-9; ballot for
N.W.T., 109.

On Mr. Macdonald's (B.C.) speech: B. C.
progress, 109 ; Marine Dept. administration,
109.

On Mr. Clcmow's remarks upon Mr. Scott's
speech, in his absence, 110.

{See also, on some of above points, "Com-
mercial policy," Mr. Boulton's M. ; also
**Cholera," **Small-pox," &c.)

British Columbia Dock Co. Incorp. B. (87).
Introduceil*, 394.

2nd R. M. ; B. explained ; remarks on a pre-
vious B., 406.
3nl R*, 453.

British Columbia, Fish Canning. See :
** Canned goods, stamping of, B."

British Columbia Indians. See "Songhees."

British Columbia Marine Hospital, De-
fects OF.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 108, 109.
See also ** B. C. Quarantine Station."

British Columbia, Quarantine Station.
Remarks in debate on the Address, 105-7.
M. for correspondence respecting erection, 145.
Inqy. when papers will be brought down, 251 .
See also " B. C. Marine Hospital."

British Columbia, Ry. Construction in. See :
'*Ck)lumbia and Kootenay Ry. B."

British Columbia, Small-pox ; introduction,
1892.
Remarks in Debate on the Address, 105-9.
M. for correspondence respecting, 146.
In(|y. when papers will be brought down, 251.
See also ** B. C. Marine Hospital."

Canada Evidence Act. See :
'* Evidence, law of, Amt. B."

Canadian Pacific Rv., Branch Construction.
See :
" Columbia and Kootenay Ry. B.", debate on.

Canadian Pacific Ry. Freioht Rates.
Ques., on Mr. Boulton's speech on the
Address, 58.

Canned Goods, Stamping of; B. (R).

In Com. of the W. ; on Amt. (Mr. Bowell) ro
add date to stamp ; ques. on Mr. Prowse's
speech, 400; on fish-canning in B.C., and
difficulties as to stamping, 401, 403.

MoINNBS, Hon. Thomcus K,— Continued.

Chicago Exhibition ; Appt. of Commissioners ;
B. (124).
Reported from Com. of the W., without Amt.,
494.

Cholera, Precautions against.

Remarks in debate on the Address, 105-8.

On Inc^y. (Mr. Ferguson) as to Govt, measures
taken and proposed ; on the general subject,
and especially on quarantine requirements,
174.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Debates of the Senate. Débats du Sénat"

See other formats