length, hon. members could imagine how | half of them he believed were elected bemild must be their calculations where there was no survey and no calculation. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the hon. gentleman was never at a loss to make contradictory statements tally. Hon. Mr. POPE wished to know what the word "available" in the motion meant. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-Whoever, from the lowest going upwards, enters into the necessary requirement by giving security, has the lowest available tender. The lowest will have it in all cases if he can furnish the security required. The motion was carried. NORTH WEST TROUBLES. Mr. SMITH (Selkirk) asked the indulgence of the House to make a personal explanation with regard to the accusations made against him by the hon. member for Lisgar of acting in what certainly must be considered a very improper manner in the position in which he was placed at Fort Garry. That hon. gentleman had stated that at a mass meeting a request was made that the British flag should be hoisted that he (Mr. SMITH) had declined to do so. That statement was the reverse of the fact. It was he (Mr. SMITH) who made that request at the meeting, and that fact was well known he believed by every one in Manitoba. In proof of this he might state that this matter was brought before his constituents by the hon. member for Lisgar, and there and then refuted, it having been proved that there was no foundation whatever for the hon. gentleman's charge. The hon. gentleman had asserted that the difficulties at Red River would have been got rid of but for his (Mr. SMITH'S) cowardice and incapacity. It was true he (Mr. SMITH) went round to the different parishes to keep peace and quietness in the settlement and to save the life of one of the prisoners and insure the safety of the lives of others, but that was done simply with the view of impressing on the people the necessity of uniting together for the purpose of bringing the country into the Dominion, and of assuring Canada that they were ready at any moment to enter the Confederation, The hon. gentleman's statement was therefore wholly incorrect. The clergy of the country, seeing the necessity of keeping peace, had advised their parishioners to elect delegates, and Hon. Mr. Tupper fore he had an opportunity of seeing them. It was well known that in the autumn, Colonel DENNIS for a short time endeavored with a number of other persons to oppose the rebellion, but could make no head against it; and yet the hon. gentleman would have the committee imagine that the insurrection was a mere nothing. Everyone else in the Red River country knew that it was a most formidable combination for what those people believed to be a good purpose, namely, that of asserting and holding their rights. He hoped that as the hon. member for Lisgar knew that such were the circumstances of the case, he would not fail in his duty to the House to withdraw the expressions he used last night. The hon. member was well aware that a few months' afterwards he came to him (Mr. SMITH) and was quite desirous, indeed anxious. that he (Mr. SMITH) should be returned as a member for the county he now represented. Mr. SCHULTZ denied that he had ever so expressed himself. Mr. SMITH said the hon. member had been willing to do so for certain considerations. The hon. member was quite ready, as he expressed it, to bury the hatchet as between the Hudson's Bay Company and himself, and that the hon. member and himself (Mr. SMITH) should for the future go hand in hand. If that hon. gentleman believed he was a poltroon and recreant to his QUEEN and country, would he wish to have it supposed that he, (Mr. SCHULTZ), a loyal man, came forward and desired to assist him in his election. The hon. member had never come forward from the time of election meetings, and made the assertions which he had made before the House. The hon. member well knew that such statements would not be believed in the North-West; but it was generally thought in that country where the hon. member was best known that the hon. member was capable of making almost any assertion. Mr. SPEAKER called the hon. member to order and requested him to withdraw his last expression. Mr. SMITH withdrew the remark. When he went to the North-West as Commissioner from Canada, (he continued) he did not go there for payment. To the credit of the late Government he said that they Mr. SPEAKER called the hon. member to order, remarking that it was improper to make a personal attack on another hon. member when offering a personal explanation. Mr. SMITH withdrew the expression and said he would content himself by saying that the hon member for Lisgar was now a rich man. While he did not question the propriety of the decision given by the commission in respect to the claim of that hon. member, but if there was one thing one thing more than another that had given dissatisfaction throughout the North-West, it was the large amount awarded to the hon. member for Lisgar, while other persons who had suffered severely had received a pittance. The CHAIRMAN called the hon. member to order, and said that the House had nothing to do with the amount awarded to the hon. member for Lisgar. Some discussion took place on the point of order, and the SPEAKER finally said that the hon. gentleman could proceed with any personal explanations which he had to make. Sir JOHN MACDONALD said it was quite evident that the time was being made a waste of time until six o'clock, in order to prevent motions being made. Mr. D. A. SMITH said he had no desire to prevent any motions being made. He was proceeding to refer to certain invoices made by a certain gentleman, when Mr. SPEAKER said he must call the hon. member to order, as he was plainly invading the rules of the House. If the hon. gentleman had any personal explanations to make, he could do so; but he must not attack any other hon. member. Mr. SCHULTZ said he would confine himself to the subjects referred to by the hon. member for Selkirk. The first subject was the reference he had made last night to the occasion when after the Mr Smith. release of the prisoners it was proposed to raise the British flag and take Fort Garry. What he stated last night, and what he was prepared to say before a commission, if the Government would consent to appoint one, as he thought they should investigate the whole cause of the insurrection, was that the hon. member for Selkirk had lost the opportunity for nipping the rebellion in the bud. That gentleman knew that a proposition to raise the British flag was made, and had he seized upon that opportunity the rebellion would have been stopped at that point before any property had been destroyed and blood shed. He had expressed last night as he did now his regret that the hon. gentleman had not seen fit to take that course, With regard to the other occasion to which he had referred, what he stated last night was that a force of which he was a member, threatened an attack upon Fort Garry, and succeeded in securing the liberation of the prisoners. They then raised the question whether they would not march to Fort Garry and put an end to the Provisional Government and restore anthority, and the hon. member for Selkirk prevented that action from being taken. The hon. gentleman came to the general meeting of those who were desirous of securing this end, and who with arms in their hands had it in their power to accomplish it; and deliberately advised in his (Mr. SCHULTZ's) presence those men not to take that action, but to submit to the rule of the Provisional Government, acknowledged RIEL as the dictator of the settlement, and send delegates to the Convention which he proposed to be held. Mr. SMITH-I ask the hon. gentleman to state when and where that meeting took place at which I was present. Mr. SCHULTZ-It was held in the school house of the Parish of St. Andrews in the spring of the year 1870. Mr. SMITH-I would ask the hon. gentleman if I was present at that meeting. Mr. SCHULTZ-You were. Mr. SMITH—Then, Mr. SPEAKER, I say most positively that I was not at any meeting where any such proposition was made. I was in the house of the Rector of St. Andrews, but I was not any meeting in St. Andrews where such a proposition was made. It was, I believed, at St. Andrews that delegates to the Convention were elected before he arrived. that if that gentleman or the Hudson's Bay Company gave him so much money he would join with that body in the political objects which it was evident it had in view. Now he did not know how far the rules of the House would allow him to make a contradiction to that statement. He was aware that any strong expression of Mr. SCHULTZ repeated that the hon. gentleman was present. Moreover, the chairman of the meeting, addressing the meeting, stated on behalf of the hon. gentleman, and I believe also of Arch-deacon MCLEAN that they both strongly wished of contradiction was out the people to submit to the Provisional and order, that Government and elect delegates to the of being the convention, on that occasion he (Mr. case he would simply content himself with SCHULTZ) combatted that view. He said, making the most positive contradiction of "By the demonstration of this force you both those statements made by the hon. have shown you have the power to take gentleman. In regard to the statement Fort Garry whenever you choose; you have made against him that he was a very rich compelled RIEL to release the prisoners man in consequence of having received a and the same force will restore British certain amount of money as indemnity for authority." He used that argument, but losses from the Canadian Government, he unfortunately for him and those who had had simply to say that the hon. gentleman lately been in arms with him ; unfor- not having been at Red River before the tunately for the Red River settlement spring of 1870, could not have possibly and the whole country that proposition was known of the business carried on by him voted down through the action which the for nearly ten years previous to that time. hon. gentleman took when he, coming It is safe to assume that without that with the authority he did, advised the knowledge, his statement that he knew, as people to submit; they felt they would not a matter of fact, that many of the invoices be acting lawfully in attacking Fort which he (Mr. SCHULTZ) presented were Garry. The hon. gentleman is primarily false, was not worthy of the slightest responsible for the loss of that credence. Now, he would refer the hon. favorable opportunity, and certain clergymen were secondarily responsible. When he (Mr. SCHULTZ) found that the last hope of resistance was gone, he a few days afterwards left the country. What was the remote consequences of the advice of the hon. gentleman ? Had the action which he (Mr. SCHULTZ) advised at that meeting been taken, he believed RIEL would have left Fort Garry without firing a shot; he had afterwards sources of information which led him to that belief. The cost of the expedition under Col. WOLSELEY would have been saved; the life of THOMAS SCOTT would have been saved, and the agitation and bad feeling created throughout the country would have been averted. That was why he said last night that he regretted his failure to seize those two opportunities which he had to put down the insurrection. With regard to the accusation made against him by the hon. gentleman that he had offered to work with him politically in Manitoba on the occasion of his first election, he would ask leave to say one word. The hon. gentleman said he had offered for a consideration to bury the hatchet, meaning by that in plain English | Mr. Smith. gentleman to the report of the special He Mr. D. A. SMITH said the hon. member for Lisgar had stated that at a public meeting in the Parish of St. Andrews, at which he was present, he gave expression to his views with regard to what ought to done in this position of affairs. He (Mr. SMITH) had tried to impress on the people that they ought not to go to Fort Garry or the Lower Fort, but on the contrary they ought to be peacable and go in with RIEL. He stated most emphatically that to the best of his (Mr. SMITH'S) knowledge and belief he never saw the hon- gentleman all the while he was at Fort Garry, or heard He be- to their rank, but while at home and drill him give expression to one word. lieved that he never saw the hon. gentleman's face. If he had he would have recollected his countenance, and the hon. gentleman's statement was entirely without foundation in fact or truth. With regard to the other matters which the hon, gentleman alluded to, he (Mr. SMITH) did not think it was necessary that he should say anything further, and if it were not unparliamentary, he would throw back on the hon. gentleman the imputation of cowardice which was cast upon him. The Bill to make further provision respecting the constituting and management of Building Societies in the Province of Quebec was discharged. THE PLIMSOLL BILL. THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILROAD TELEGRAPH. Mr. SCHULTZ asked whether Messrs. GLASS, SEFTON & Co., Telegraph Contractors have not completed twenty-three miles of Telegraph Line under their contract, and whether the Canadian Pacific Railway or any branch thereof has been located along or near the said line? Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE I do not know how many miles they have completed. I do not think that we have any exact information on the subject and I cannot answer the question. SALE OF ORDNANCE LANDS. Mr. CUTHBERT asked whether it is Mr. PALMER asked whether any, or what measures have been taken by the Government, in view of the Imperial Legis- the intention of the Government to alienate lation affecting Canadian ships, and the rights and liabilities of Canadian shipowners, to prevent Imperial Legislation on that subject, without the consent of the Parliament of Canada; and if so, what are the results of such measures? Hon. Mr. SMITH-I may say to the hon. member that no decided step has yet been taken, but it is the intention of the Government to send a carefully prepared remonstrance against any legislation in the Imperial Parliament affecting shipping in this Dominion. It is our intention at once to make communication with the Imperial Government by cable on the subject. THE MILITIA. Mr. CARON asked whether it is the intention of the Government to allow Volunteer Companies to fill up to 55 men and 3 officers as formerly, instead of 42 non-commissioned officers and men per Company and 2 commissioned officers as at present; and whether men are to be paid according to rank? Hon. Mr. VAIL-The Active Militia liable to be called out under law numbers about 45,000. It is very desirable that enrollment to that extent should be kept up. The number that will be called out this year depends altogether on the means at the disposal of the Government. The amount voted will enable us to call out only 28,000 men, which is equal to 42 men and two officers for each company. While in camp, officers are paid according Mr. Smith' the Ordnance Landsat Sorel otherwise than by sale at auction? Hon. Mr. LAIRD-The Government have not yet decided how to dispose of the Ordnance Lands at Sorel. The policy of the Government with regard to the Ordnance Lands is to sell them by auction. NATURALIZATION OF ALIENS. Mr. YOUNG moved " That the House go into Committee of the Whole, on Monday, to consider the following resolu tions : "That this House was pleased to learn from the despatch of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, of date the 3rd September, 1873, that HER MAJESTY received very graciously the Address of this House passed in the same year on the subject of the Naturalization of Aliens, and begs respectfully to represent as follows: "1st. That the extension of the Act passed in the 33rd year of HER MAJESTY's reign entitled The Naturalization Act of 1870,' would not meet the just expectations of the Germans and much as the passports granted under the said and other naturalized foreigners in Canada inasAct, although permanent, are expressly declared to be invalid in the Foreign State of which the persons naturalized were formerly subjects-the place of all others in which they desired to be protected in their acquired rights and privileges. 1870, aforesaid, it is provided that Great Britain "2nd. That by the Naturalization Act of will thereafter recognize and protect in any part of the world all persons legally naturalized as British subjects, provided they cease by the laws of their native State to be subjects thereof has been made between Great Britain and the on changing their allegiance, or when a Treaty said State to that effect. 3rd. That such a Treaty was negotiated between Great Britain and the United States of America in the year of Our Lord 1871, and a further and supplemental Treaty in the following year 1872, both of which are working satisfactorily. "4th. That a Treaty similar in character was negotiated between the United States of America and Germany, in the year of Our Lord 1868, and is now in operation. "5th. That it would promote the public interests and afford much satisfaction to HER MAJESTY'S naturalized German subjects in Canada, if a Treaty under the provisions of the Naturalization Act of 1870, aforesaid, were entered into between Great Britain and the German States, so that such persons naturalized in Canada, after a residence therein of from three to five years (as may be agreed upon by the contracting Powers) may become entitled to all the rights, privileges and immunities of British subjects in any part of the world, and in as full a measure as if they had been subjects of Great Britain by birth. "6th. That an humble Address be presented to HER MAJESTY setting forth the foregoing resolutions.' The motion was adopted. The House adjourned at six o'clock. Right Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD called the attention of the House to a paragraph which had appeared in a Ministerial newspaper charging him with lobbying Bills in the Upper House. He had a perfect right to do so if he liked, and it was a matter of impertinence to refer to it at all, but as a matter of fact he had had no communication with any of the Senators on the questions they were discussing. It so happened the other evening, while the House was engaged in a very unprofitable debate on the Prohibitory Liquor Law, he went to the Upper House to listen to the discussion there, but he had no conversation with any member of the Senate with respect to any motion or other matter before the Senate. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE was quite sure no person could object to an hon. gentleman going to lobby in the Upper Mr. Young. THE PUBLIC REPORTS. Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked when the report of the Marine and Fisheries' Department would be laid on the table. A great deal of credit was taken by members supporting the Government this year for the remarkably early day on which they had laid the reports of the departments on the table, and so far as the Premier's and one or two other departments were concerned, they deserved that credit; but he was afraid that the praise would have to be balanced by the blame that was due to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries for allowing the House to rise without furnishing it with the report of one of the most important departments of the service. He was not quite certain as to the law, but as far as he could recollect it was obligatory on each Minister to have the report of his department on the table within fifteen days from the commencement of the session. Hon. Mr. SMITH said that all the law required him to submit to the House had been submitted within the fifteen days. The report of his department was ready two or three weeks before the House met, and in the hands of the printers, but he had been unable to get it published. He thought in the course of a few days the whole of the remaining part of the report would be issued. The printer was the party really to blame for the delay. i Mr. BOWELL said the same complain applied as regards the report of the Post Office Department. It was now about the end of the session, and the report had not yet been laid upon the table. The statistics furnished in that report would have been exceedingly valuable to the House, before discussing the important measure introduced by the Postmaster General. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the report had been ready some weeks before the House met, but the contractor was so crowded with work that it was found impossible to get it under way at the time, and the Postmaster General proposed to send it to another office. That he (Mr. MACKENZIE) declined to accede |