66 which they assembled, namely, the release of the prisoners, to go on and attack Fort Garry and drive RIEL out, many others said, no, we will not pull a trigger for the sake of saving the Hudson Bay Company's rum and pemican which RIEL and his men are destroying." That is the reason why that force did not go to Fort Garry. Mr. D. A. SMITH-Then how is it that the hon. gentleman said it was on account of the action taken by me that they were prevented from attacking the Fort? The member for Selkirk saw fit to make a statement concerning a letter purporting to be signed by some one of the name of O'DONOGHUE, whom the hon. gentleman opposite seems to know all about. While it was quite proper for the House to hear that statement it is entirely irregular to have a discussion upon it. Hon. Mr. HOLTON-I am speaking to the question of adjournment. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD—Who moved the adjournment ? Mr. SPEAKER-The First Minister moved the adjournment, but it was not seconded. Hon. Mr. HOLTON-Then I second the motion. I think this discussion having gone on so long it should not close without some light being thrown upɔn this subject by the right hon. gentleman, who of all members of this House is in a position to elucidate this whole matter. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD—I do not know what my hon. friend wants me to say. I only heard the fag-end of the speech of the member for Selkirk, and therefore I could not at all follow the reply of the member for Lisgar. Hon. Mr. HOLTON-The hon. member for Lisgar charged the right hon. gentleman's envoy with treason, or something approaching to it, to the British flag while representing the Government of my friend the member for Kingston in the North-West. I think, therefore, it is the duty of my right hon. friend to say whether in his judgment, he being master of all the facts, the hon. member for Lisgar is, as the representative of his Government fairly open to the imputation cast upon him by my right hon. friend's present supporter, the member for Lisgar. Mr. SCHULTZ-I would like to know from the hon. Premier what words I used which indicated that I knew anything more about O'DONOGHUE than he did. The Premier has made that statement and I would like an answer. I am afraid it is like other reckless statements he has taken occasion to make in this House. Mr. SPEAKER-The whole discus-rect my hon. friend from Chateaugay as sion has been irregular. Mr. D. A. SMITH—I wish to say that I did not interfere with that meeting, was not present at it, but, as already stated, at the time a prisoner within Fort Garry. Hon. Mr. HOLTON-I think there is one hon. gentleman we should hear before this discussion closes, and that is my right hon. friend from Kingston, with respect to the decided conflict of statement that there is between his present supporter, the hon. member for Lisgar, and his official envoy representing his Government during the troublous period of 1869-70 in the North-West. Of course the right hon. gentleman is responsible for the acts of the hon. member for Selkirk while acting as his envoy. Mr. JONES (Leeds)-I rise to a point of order. The SPEAKER has decided that this discussion is irregular. Mr. Schultz. KKK Mr. SCHULTZ-I would like to cor to my being a supporter of the right hon. to Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE The hon. gentleman called my attention a moment ago to my saying that he seemed to know all about Mr. O'DONOGHUE. I supposed he did from his speech. I can only say that I did not intend to impute anything whatever to the hon. gentleman except a too intimate knowledge of the facts which he was controverting. I had no intention to impute to him anything disreputable in connection with his knowledge of Mr. O'DONOUGHUE. The subject then dropped. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said he hoped the motion for adjournment would now be withdrawn and they would be allowed to proceed with the Orders of the Day. THE ANNUAL SUBSIDY TO MANITOBA. Mr. BOWELL complained that while the Government had continued the sittings of the House until two and three a. m., to advance their own measures, they had sought to adjourn the House at an early hour when private members sought to press their motions. He desired to ask the hon. First Minister whether the facts contained in the published report purporting to be a summary of the speech of the Lieutenant Governor of Manitoba was correct, in which the following occurred: "The income of the Province being wholly inadequate, negotiations with the Privy Council are in progress to place Manitoba on a better footing. As a result, the Privy Council have adopted a Minute of Council, providing for an increase of the annual subsidy until 1881, to the sum of one hundred thousand dollars." If the report was correct, he desired to to inquire whether it was the intention of the Government to lay the Minute of Council on the table of the House, and ask the approval of Parliament thereto. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE in reply said that no arrangement could be made except under the Act of last session, which enabled the Government to advance money to those Provinces who had not drawn the full quota of their subsidies, when of course they would cease to obtain the 5 per cent. interest on the balance. There were considerable balances due to Nova Scotia and Manitoba. The Government could not, without application to Parliament, increase the amount of subsidy to any of the Provinces. MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL desired to read a letter addressed to the hon. member for Cumberland by one of the large colonial shipping firms in relation to the Merchant Shipping Bills before the Imperial Parliament. The letter was as follows :Hon. Mr. Mackeuzie. "I take the liberty of addressing you on the subject of the Merchant Shipping Bill now before Parliament which no doubt has come under your notice before this, and I trust. your Government have taken some action to avert the passing of the Bill which would be a death-blow to the colonies. For the details I must refer you to the two Bills, viz., Sir CHARLES ADDERLAY'S and Mr. PLIMSOLL'S, both of them as bad as they can well be, and if by be totally annihilated. The shipping trade of chance they become law, British shipping will the Dominion will be ruined as completely as possible. I believe your Government have the power to stop the passing of either Bill if you take immediate action. Our Government are afraid of offending Canada, and will do a good deal to keep her quiet. Therefore the louder the noise the better chance we have of escape. The two Bills have been sent to Mr. PALMER. Kindly peruse them and you will see the blockheads we have in this country to manage affairs... "I remain, Dear Sir, "Yours truly, "JAMES R. DEWART." He was informed that the Government The motion for adjournment was then p. m. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the chair at three CORRECTION. Mr. SPEAKER-Before the Orders of the Day are called I wish to direct the attention of the House to a matter of some importance. A Bill was sent down from the Senate with certain amendments which were concurred in by this House. At that time the hon. member for Hamilton drew attention to the fact that a certain amendment which he told us had been adopted in the Senate did not appear among the amendments sent down to us. # The Clerk of the Senate has since informed the Clerk of this House that such an amendment did pass and that the omission of it was unintentional, and he has since written the amendment upon the margin of the paper containing the amendments. He concluded by citing from May the rule on the subject. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE—If I understand the fact it is that the body of the of the Bill is not changed, but only the title. The this section was forty-five miles. Mr. SPEAKER-It is an unimportant change, but it is establishing a pre-Lake and Red River, about 77 miles in cedent. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD-I think it is clear that we should have a message from the other House asking for the correction, and a memorandum to that effect could then go upon our journals. Because it is absolutely necessary that there should be no chance of a clause slipping into a Bill which is not authorized by both Houses. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE agreed that a message should be sent from the Upper House with the Bill and the amendments as really adopted by that House. The subject then dropped. THE SUPPLY BILL. length, at a cost of $402,950, the said parties having been the lowest tenderers. willing to proceed with the work, and furnishing the required security." Mr. PALMER asked how much of the work these contracts provided for. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-For the grading, bridging, and practically preparing the road for the road-bed, but they did not include rails, ballasting and ties. The first contract is for about forty-five miles, and the other 77 miles, and the price is nearly $5,500 per mile. The motion was carried. Mr. MACKENZIE then moved that the House do now ratify the contract now upon the table proposed to be entered Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT moved the into with Messrs. SIFTON & WARD, for second reading of Bill for granting to HER the construction of that portion of the MAJESTY certain sums of money required Pacific Railway extending from Fort for defraying certain expenses of the William to Shebandowan, a distance of Public Service for the financial years end-about 45 miles, at a cost of $406,194, the ing respectively 30th June, 1875, and the 30th June, 1876, and for other purposes relating to the Public Service.-Carried. PACIFIC RAILWAY CONTRACTS. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE laid on the table two contracts, one for No. 13, being the distance from Fort William to She bandowan, of the Pacific Railway, and the other No. 14 from Cross Lake to Red River. These contracts had only been signed to-day, and it would be impossible to do anything upon these sections, unless the approval of the House was got at present. The information that he could give the House respecting them was simply this, both contracts were those of SIFTON & WARD,the one for Number 13 amounting to $406,194, that being the lowest tender but one. One tender from New Brunswick was lower, but the tenderer declined to proceed. The length of Mr Speaker said parties having been the lowest tenderers willing to proceed with the work, and furnishing the required security. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said of course he could object to this motion on the ground of want of notice, but he did not wish to take that course. At the same time he could not allow this motion to pass without moving an amendment, and taking the sense of the House upon it. The objection he had to the motion was substantially this, it was either intended to make this a portion of the Canadian Pacific Railway or it was not. As he had stated before, the First Minister led the House to suppose that the Canadian Pacific Railway was to run from Nipegon to Red River, and the hon. member for South Qruce admitted that he so understood the Premier. This was what the hon. gentleman said :— "I “ quite admit that it was a general belief Hon. Mr. BLAKE-Will the hon. gentleman read the rest of what I said? Hon. Mr. TUPPER-I will. "Not "that the Government committed themselves, as I recollect the assertions made upon the point." The First Minister had not yet stated that it was his intention to make this line from Thunder Bay a portion of the trunk line, because if that were his intention it would involve the building of sixty miles of additional railway, and the making of the trunk line sixty miles longer. A proposition so monstrous as that could hardly be contemplated, and that was the reason why the First Minister had never stated that he intended to make this a part of the trunk line. He would read what the hon. member for South Bruce had said on the occasion he referred to :— “As I recollect the discussions, it was left to be decided upon by subsequent surveys, but there was certainly in my own mind, and, I belive, in the minds of others, an impression that it was more likely that Nipegon would be taken as the Lake Superior terminus." The hon. gentleman had been very careful to guard himself against stating that the line from Thunder Bay was to be a portion of the main line. The Government, therefore, had let these contracts without any authority in law to do so. This was either to be their trunk line or a branch. If it was a branch, Mr. FLEMING'S map showed the distance to be 150 miles from Thunder Bay to the main line. But assuming it was only one-half of that, and the hon. First Minister had admitted himself that it would be seventy miles—that would involve an expenditure at the lowest calculation of $2,800,000. Therefore if this line was not to be a part of the maine line, the contract now before the House involved the expeneiture of that enormous sum of money without any authority for it in the Statute Book. And as he said before, if it was to be part of the maine line it involved the construction of sixty miles additional railway. The law only provided for two branches-one from Georgian Bay to a point south and Hon Mr. Tupper. east of Lake Nipegon, and the other from Pembina to Fort Garry so that there was no authority for the building of the Thunder Bay line, if it was to be regarded as a branch. He therefore proposed the following resolution in amendment, seconded by Sir JOHN MACDONALD, "that the said contract be not approved.” Mr. SPEAKER-That is hardly an amendment. It is a direct negative. Mr. PLUMB-Is the Mr. SIFTON mentioned in that contract the partner of Mr. GLASS of the Telegraph Company, who is surety for the contractor for the telegraph line. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-I think he is. Hon. Mr. TUPPER moved in amendment "that the consideration of the approval of said contract be postponed to this day three months." Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he had a few remarks to offer in reply to the hon. member for Cumberland, who thought that the line should be commenced at Nippissing and continue westward. The reason why the Government did not adopt that policy was simply that their object was to obtain the shortest and best summer route to the North-West country in the meantime. If they had gone to Nipegon a line between that point and Cross Lake would have been to construct, over a distance of 320 miles, with no water navigation available between those two points; but by the construction of 45 miles of lines of railway to Lake Shebandowan they obtained the advantage of that chain of water communication for a distance of 246 miles after some slight improvements carried out at Fort Francis which were provided for in the Estimates. By these a means of communication would be established which would suffice for some years to come, and it would be obtained some years before the line proposed from Nipegon could be constructed. The plan adopted by the Government was approved by all who were acquainted with the country, and consulted the map, and especially by the Chief Engineer, their object being simply to obtain access to the country as soon as possible. He was somewhat amused the other day to find the principle organ of the Opposition declaiming against the Government selecting Thunder Bay as their terminus and imputing im. were proper motives to him in making the and being a shorter route, could successselection, and that he desired to serve fully compete with the Northern Pacific. personal or political friends, thus enhancThe amendment was lost on division. ing the value of their property-in fact Mr. SCHULTZ asked for information doing everything but what was in the public interest. How was it that last year when the Government proposed to begin at Nipegon that organ wrote as follows: "With such a concurrence of testimony in favor of Thunder Bay as the terminus, how comes it to pass that it is deemed necessary to petition Parliament, and to make the most pressing representations to the Government, in order to prevent the suitable terminus of Nipegon Bay being selected? In the absence of unreasonable explanations, it need not be surprising that people should say that Mr. MACKENZIE and a number of political friends have strong personal interests to serve in the Nipegon country, and that such private interests are likely to overide all considerations of public benefit." But no matter what place had been selected for the terminus, the same kind of argument would be repeated, for it comprised almost the entire stock in trade of the Opposition. Hon. Mr. TUPPER regretted that he had not been so successful in convincing the hon. Minister of Public Works as he had been with the newspaper editor referred to, who had not been ashamed to frankly acknowledge that his previous information was incorrect, and that he should advocate to-day a different policy from what he did a year ago. If the policy of the Government would accomplish what was anticipated, viz., provide at once a short, and easy and cheap line of communication through that country, even from Thunder Bay to Red River, he would not object to it. The Hon. First Minister had, however, stated that two and a half years would be occupied in constructing the line as proposed, and that the journey from Thunder Bay to the Red River by that road would take four or five days. Inasmuch as there would be an all-rail route from Duluth, even when the Government line was built and the large sum expended, it would not secure any passengers, because they would go by the Duluth route; whereas, if the route proposed by him (Mr. TUPPER) was adopted, and even a longer time was occupied in constructing the road, it would be a permanent work, Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. why the contract from Cross Lake to Rat for that section had been asked for some Portage had not been completed. Tenders time ago. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said his rea son for not letting the contract was this: tenders had been received for this section, a distance of 37 miles, but the amounts were SO enormous compared with his expectations, that he did not feel justified in accepting any tender that had been offered. He proposed having a review. made of that 37 miles of the route, and he would ask the assent of the House to enter into a contract if a change for the better could be effected. would have some idea of the difficulty he experienced with this section when he The House informed them that the difference between the highest and the lowest tenders was $2,000,000. The motion was carried. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE moved that the Government be authorized to enter into a contract during the recess with the parties sending in the lowest available tender for the construction of that portion of the Pacific Railway extending from Rat Portage to Cross Lake a distance of about 37 miles. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said that while he was prepared to give his hearty concurrence to this motion, he would just say that the statement made by the Premier afforded one of the most apt and forcible illustrations of the unwisdom of undertaking to let contracts without any such survey as would put contractors in a position to know anything like the amount of work required to be performed. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said it so happened that a most elaborate survey had been made of this section. It would be impossible to have a more careful survey, a closer examination or a more careful calculation than had been made on these 37 miles. There had been no such survey on the Intercolonial. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said that made his statement all the stronger. If with such a careful survey, contractors differed to such an extent on a section 37 miles in |