Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD contended that the resolution was in order, but since the Premier declined to allow a Committee to be appointed, the hon. member would be obliged to withdraw it. What must strike every fair minded man in this House was this: that the Premier had placed this subject altogether on the ground that it was simply an investigation into the accounts of the hon. member for South Norfolk-that the question to be inquired into was simply whether he was a defaulter or not, and whether he was able to account for all the moneys he had received. It was charged that he had acted with great impropriety in receiving money after becoming member of this House. This was being investigated, but there was something more that the hon. gentleman had avoided. He (Sir JOHN) asked not only that Mr. WALLACE's conduct should be investigated, but that the conduct of the First Minister should also be investigated. The Premier was on his trial as well as the hon. member for South Norfolk. The charge was that, on the eve of an election, in order to defeat a person seeking the suffrages of the constituency, in order to defeat a candidate opposed to him in politics and to secure the election of a friend, the Premier had written a letter and sent a subsequent telegram to be used at that election, not for the purpose of obtaining justice or restoring to the public treasury, money feloniously taken therefrom, but for the purpose of defeating his political opponent and electing his political friend. The Public Accounts Committee could not deal with this matter. They could simply make a report with reference to Mr. WALLACE'S accounts. However, the hon. member for South Norfolk must submit and withdraw his motion. The SubCommittee would report to the Public Accounts Committee, and if justice were not done the hon. member there, he was sure there were enough honest men in this House to see justice done him. Although the member for South Norfolk was one of a small minority in this House, he could appeal to every fair minded man for justice, and for a decision as to whether a Minister of the Crown can write a letter for an object that was so plain that everyone must understand it. He could pardon a good deal at election times, but it was not fair that the First Minister in his zeal

Sir John A. Macdonald.

to elect a friend, should take the course he had pursued in the South Norfolk election.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON said he thought the charge made by the First Minister would be a very grave one if, on investigation, it was found that he had written what was untrue of Mr. WALLACE, now the hon. member for South Norfolk. The hon. the First Minister admitted that he had written the letter, and the leader of the Opposition was in as good a position. now to move a vote of censure as the writer of the letter-if it was wrong to have written it--as he could possibly be on the report of any Committee whatever. He desired to call attention to the point of order-whether the hon. member could change a motion of which he had given notice in a sense entirely contrary to the notice given.

Sir JOHN MACDONALD-That I. did not hear; that point has not been taken.

Mr. CAUCHON-I raised it myself.

Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD--That point has never been raised up to this moment.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON-It seems to me that is the only point.

Mr. SPEAKER-I so understand the member for Quebec Centre. But when the hon. member for South Norfolk put the motion into my hands I directed his attention to the order, and suggested the easiest mode of remedying the defect, and I understood the sense of the House was that he should have permission to remedy the defect. I, therefore, accepted the motion put in my hands, and considered it put in Ly hands with the consent of the House. I so understood it.

A

Mr. CAUCHON-I never so understood it. Any member can object to any change, and I do so.

Sir JOHN MACDONALD said that the Prime Minister had addressed the House on the motion. However, it was a matter of no consequence, if the motion was not to be granted,

Hon. Mr. HOLTON said he was not in the House during the earlier part of the discussion; but he did not desire that the motion should go off on a point of order. If the hon. member for South Norfolk was well advised, however, he would withdraw the motion. If he pressed the motion, it being in Mr. SPEAKER's hands in order, it

would be for the First Minister to consider whether they should have a motion of that kind negatived purely and simply, or whether he would move an amendment, and if he did not do so whether some hon. member should not exercise his right, and move an amendment in order to put the real issue fairly before the House. He did not desire it to go on the journals that the House negatived a demand, purely and simply, made by the hon. member for Norfolk for a Committee of inquiry into the matter.

Mr. WALLACE-As the hon. the First Minister has stated that the whole matter will be investigated-his writing the letter as well as my connection with the matter and as I am not afraid of any Committee, I will withdraw the motion, and allow the question to go before the sub-Committee of the Public Accounts.

way of amendment; but I hope the same principles will be embodied in the new as in the old Act, if we are to have an Insolvency Act at all. So with regard to the Superior Court Bill. It will be a matter of very great interest, especially to members of the bar in all the Provincess; and I am quite sure I am speaking the sentiments of all who hear me, and the sentiments of the country when I say that the leader of the Government would confer a favor by having the measures brought down without any delay, so that the House may deal with the questions as soon as possible.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE—I quite concur in the remarks of the hon. gentleman as to the propriety of having these measures brought down immediately. We did expect to bring them down on Tuesday, but as the Budget Speech and the speeches which followed occupied the whole of the evening, they were unavoidably postponed until to-morrow. The Insolvency Bill will be brought in tomorrow, and the Supreme Court Bill will be introduced on Monday.

Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD-When will the Bills be printed.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE—They are now in print. The Insolvency Bill will be distributed to-morrow or the next day, and the Superior Court Bill during the early part of next week; so that not much | time has been lost.

Sir JOHN MACDONALD-No; I don't complain at all.

Sir JOHN MACDONALD- Before the Orders of the Day are called I would ask the hon. the First Minister when we are likely to receive the Insolvency and Superior Court Bills. They are mentioned in the Speech from the Throne, and both Bills will be regarded by the country of so much importance and general interest that it would be well they should be laid before the House as soon as possible. For instance the Insolvency Bill interested all merchants from British Columbia to Cape Breton, and it would be well that it should be in the hands of members as soon as possible that its main principles should become widely known; and I hope it will be a final Bill, and that the subject will not be treated again for years after it has passed this Parliament, as no doubt it will be. It would also be desirable if it could be speedily known whether the Bill is in substance the old Bill, and if there are any material alterations and amendments, a printed synopsis of the alterations and amendments calling the attention of the House and the country thereto, should be prepared and distributed, because commercial men cannot readily read through an Insolvency Bill and understand its provisions, and any proposed changes. I hope the Bill will be very nearly identical with the old one. No doubt there will be numerous suggestions On the order for further consideration of made to the Minister of Justice, and he the proposed motion of Mr. BROUSE for the appointment of a Select Committee on

will most likely adopt some of them by Hòn. Mr. Holton

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-My hon. friend the Minister of Justice will be able to state very fully the changes made in the Insolvency Act, and it is the intention of the Government (it was done formerly, and is a very proper proceeding)—to refer the Insolvency Bill to a special Committee of perhaps twelve or fifteen leading professional and commercial members of the House, with a view to obtain such amendments as might be thought desirable in Committee, so that, when it came before the House at its next stage, it will pass through almost as a matter of form. Sir JOHN MACDONALD— Hear, hear!

MILITARY DRILL.

gentleman opposite would provide in his of $500 in the office of the Assistant election bill some remedy for it.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE remarked that it would be more interesting to include in the motion the two last Parliaments as well as this one, and suggested the following addition to the motion :-" And also a similar statement respecting the vacancies occurring during the last two Parliaments."

The motion with this addition was carried.

GRANTS TO MANITOBA VOLUNTEERS.

Right Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD moved for an address to HIS EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR GENERAL, praying that he may be pleased to cause to be laid before this House a return of all applications made by persons who served in the Militia Volunteer Force in Manitoba, and who have been invalid or discharged before the termination of their term of enlistment, for grants of land in that Province. It was known that the volunteers first sent to Manitoba were promised grants of land in addition to those they might receive as settlers if they filled the term of their enlistment. Before the time expired applications were made by volunteers who were invalided for these grants, but they were not received with much favor, for the very obvious reason that it would encourage others to leave the force whenever they could get the pretext for doing so. However, that reason had no force now, and if it was true, as he was informed it was, that applications had been made by parties whose health had broken down in the service before their time expired, he thought their cases should be considered. He himself was personally aware of some such cases, and he thought they were as much entitled to the grant as those whose health having been preserved had remained in the service to the end. Some he knew had died, and their families should receive the grant.-Motion carried.

SUPPLY.

On motion of Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT the House went into Committee of Supply, (Mr. SCATCHERD in the chair.)

The item "Charges of Management" was first taken up.

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT explained that there was an increase over last year Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald.

Receiver General at Toronto, caused by increasing the salaries of two or three clerks who had been a long time in the service. At Halifax there was a decrease of $2,000, and at St. John an increase of $2,000, the salaries at both places having been revised. At Fort Garry there was an increase of $2,500, the total amount being the amount that was actually expended last year. There was a decrease in the charges for seigniorial tenure and commission of $3,500. Most of the claims had been paid and the balance would be closed within a few weeks.—Item adopted.

ITEM ADOPTED.

Civil Government, $715,025. Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said there was an increase in the Privy Council of $1,580. The Chief Clerk received an increase of $300, his former salary being $1,900, the three next officers had their salaries increased, and a junior second class clerk had been added. In the Department of Justice, there was an increase of $2,900, two additional officers having been found requisite, and who, having to be professional men, had to be paid a higher salary than first class clerks.

Hon. Mr. FOURNIER also stated that the gentlemen added to the staff were required to perform professional duties.

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said there was an increase of $1,900 in the Militia Department, $700 being caused by the increase of $50 a year provided for by the Civil Service Act, and the remaining $1,200 was the salary of an additional first class clerk that was found necessary.

Hon. Mr. VAIL was understood to say that this additional officer was required in consequence of the clothing for the Militia having been contracted for in this country. Item adopted.

On the item of $28,930, Secretary of State's Department,

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the increase of $2,230 was to some extent caused by an Order in Council passed by the right hon. gentleman opposite before he went out of office, which the present Government confirmed. The other addition was caused by the appointment of a private secretary not formerly employed, who received some four or five hundred dollars, and an additional clerk in the department.

On the item of $39,390, Department of the Interior,

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the increase of $3,120 was merely due to numerous treaties with the Indians of the North-West, and the increase of staff necessary to perform the duties. There were also statutory increases in this department, and one or two promotions from second to first-class clerks.-The item was carried.

On the item of $20,898, Receiver partment, General's Department,

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the he came into office he found fourteen clerks increase was statutory.