Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked the hon. | MAJESTY's Government to decide whether gentleman to indicate about the time when it was a subject upon which we had a the Bill would go before the Committee so right to legislate, and whether that legisthat parties interested might have an lation was of such a character as should opportunity to be present. receive the sanction of HER MAJESTY'S Hon. Mr. FOURNIER-About the end Government. He would state the facts of next week, I suppose. The Bill read a first time. GAS INSPECTION. Hon. Mr. GEOFFRION introduced a Bill to amend the Gas Inspection Act of 1873. He said that some difficulty had been found in applying the Act passed some few years ago. The most important alteration proposed to be effected by the new Act was this :-The law provided that in the immediate vicinity of the gas works an office should be placed in which the gas was tested. In England the law said that such office should not be placed within one thousand yards of the works. It was proposed in the Bill that the office should be established at a distance of not less than five hundred yards. The Bill was read a first time. MARINE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE, in moving the second reading of "An Act to regulate the construction and maintenance of the Marine Electric Telegraphs," said he had to give some explanations to the House to account for the Government taking possession of the Bill which was passed last Session through the hands of a private member. The correspondence that had been laid before the House would show that the Government felt impelled to take direct interest in the obtaining of the sanction of HER MAJESTY'S Government to the Bill of that Session. It was reserved, not because the Government had any doubt as to the perfect right of Parliament to pass the Act, or as to the perfect equity of the proceeding, or that any right, legal or equitable, would be injured under it, but simply because strong representations had been made to the Parliament of Canada and to HER MAJESTY'S Government in England, concerning the supposed rights of certain parties connected with the Anglo-American Telegraph Company. And in order that there should be no possible reason for complaining that the rights of parties living out of the Dominion of Canada had been sacrificed or injured by that legislation, it was left to HER Hon. Mr. Tupper. N as succinctly as possible, and then he intended to send the Bill to the Railway Committee, and give every one who desired an opportunity of appearing in order to represent their own views. HER MAJESTY's Government, in the despatch that was before the House, concluded as follows:-"While, therefore, I entirely appreciate the action of your Ministers in reserving the Bill, I am of opinion that any further consideration of the subject should be given by that body whose province, as I have observed, is to deal with such questions, and that I cannot properly assume the function of deciding between the conflicting views of those who have addressed me, whether in favor of, or against the policy embodied in this measure. In order to enable this to be done, I have decided to leave the present Bill in abeyance, and to tender no advice to HER MAJESTY respecting it." The Government took the ground, as would be observed by the Minutes in Council, that there was no reason for disallowing this Bill. HER MAJESTY'S Government had assented to that proposition, but deemed it proper, instead of giving the formal assent, to leave it to this Parliament to act afresh, after tendering the advice that they had perfect confidence in leaving the matter to be dealt with by the Canadian Parliament. The object of the Bill was to terminate a monopoly practically enjoyed in the Province of Nova Scotia, and consequently in the Dominion, and prevent the establishment of any monopoly in cable telegraphing; and it became all the more necessary to do this as the Island of Newfoundland had practically established a monopoly which extended to the whole Dominion, and he might say to the whole of America, the Island being used as a telegraph cable station in the middle of the Atlantic. The policy that this measure embodied was one that was entirely consistent with the policy of the British Empire and with the policy of Canada, and was in accordance with all the legislation that had taken place in the United States, for the United States refused to cede any special privilege to ་། $ 66 to furnish the Province "" with the means of telegraphic "communication for a period of 25 years. "I wish to refer you to the despatch "addressed to you by Sir George Grey, "when holding the seals of this depart"ment, on this subject, under date of the "22nd March, 1855." He (Mr. MACKENZIE) had searched for this despatch, but had failed to find it. "HER MAJESTY'S "Government sees no reason to modify the "views expressed in that despatch and its the French Telegraph Company, which" to the conclusion of the agreement sought to obtain a special concession for a specified in Section 6) the exclusive length of time in bringing that cable to their "right shores. The Act under which the company enjoyed their monopoly in Newfoundland was passed by the Legislature of Newfoundland in 1854, and they had by its terms a fifty years' concession, but it was provided in the Act that the Island Government might at any time after the expiration of twenty years exercise a right of pre-emption. It was generally supposed, he observed in the papers, and in some of the speeches of gentlemen who had discussed this matter, that this monopoly embraced" enclosures, which have, on the contrary, the cable between England and New- "gained additional force by later experifoundland. That was an entire mistake. 66 ence. They consider that the grant for The Newfoundland Company simply had "such "such exclusive exclusive privileges is highly a monopoly upon the Island, and in the "inexpedient, not only for the interests of cable, so far as they could give it, stretch- "the Province, but of the Empire in ing from the Island to Cape Breton, and general. They are fully aware that it from Newfoundland to the Island of was urged that similar privileges have Prince Edward. The cable from New- "been conceded by the Legislatures of foundland to Prince Edward Island was "Newfoundland and of Prince Edward never laid, and it was a question whether "Island without the disallowance of the they enjoyed any rights at all in reference" Crown. But they must reply that the to that at the present moment as the implied sanction of these acts, given Company transferred their supposed rights" without fully adverting to considerations, without the sanction of the Prince "the magnitude of which has been ever Edward Island Legislature before the "since acquiring a greater development, Confederation of that Island with the "does not bind them to a continuance in Dominion,--without the sanction of the a course of policy, which, they are Dominion Legislature since the Union-" satisfied, cannot but prove extremely without the sanction of either party who injurious, and thus beyond the limits of were capable of giving that sanction. But "the colony immediately concerned." in order that there could be no possible Such was the view of HER MAJESTY'S difficulty on that score he had provided Government at that time, and he had no in the Bill this year that whatever rights reason to doubt that such was the view they might possess that was the Com- entertained by them still. At the present pany to whom the transfer was made-of time the position of the matter was this: a legal character, in Prince Edward In May or June, 1873, the NewfoundIsland, would be reserved to them. In land Company which possessed the limited 1856 the Government of the United monopoly that he had adverted to,—that States passed an Act which had for its is, merely the privileges of the land of the object the promotion of cable telegraph Island and the cables to Cape Breton and communication, and which contemplated Prince Edward Island-effected an amalthe granting of a monopoly to some Com-gamation with the English Company, pany in order to attain that object. It was known to those who were conversant with the matter that HER MAJESTY'S Government at the time, disallowed this Act. The reason was given in a despatch dated 18th January, 1858, in which Mr. LABOUCHERE, the then Colonial Secretary, states, "This Act purports to give the "New York, Newfoundland and London "Telegraph Company (subject to their performance of certain conditions, and 66 Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. formed, he believed, under the English Joint Stock Act which owned the cable between the Island and Ireland. This amalgamation was effected under powers given by the Act of the Colonial Legislature under the name of the AngloAmerican Cable Company. That was the company that now presumed to assert the right of monopoly upon the Island, and also to land their cable on Nova Scotia. To be sure they did not assert that they had any legal right to land their cable on the shores of the Dominion. They merely asserted that having possessed the right for twenty years their privilege of exercising that right should not not now be interfered with by any legislation of the Dominion. That ground, of course, the Government did not admit, and besides the stock of the company was chiefly held, and the greater portion of the value of the property was owned by those who never did possess even the limited monopoly that he had referred to, and had only acquired the rights they now possessed by the amalgamation effected nearly two years ago. In the controversy that had arisen and in the allegations made last year chiefly before the Senate Committee, but also to some extent before the Committee of this House, it was assumed that about seven millions sterling, the capital that this company possessed, was the amount of property that this Bill affected; but we now know from the opinion of the highest legal authorities in England that it only affected the property that was comprised within the terms of the Act of 1854, meaning the shore privileges and the minor cables across the straits. They had the opinions of Sir RICHARD BAGGALLAY and Sir HENRY JAMES to this effect; and they had even more than that in the recent despatch of Lord CARNARVON to the Governor of Newfoundland of the 17th November, 1874. In that despatch he stated :— "But having regard to the conflicting legal opinions to which you refer in your despatch, I have thought it desirable, in the interests of your Government, to consult the Law Officers of the Crown as to the subject-matter comprised within the power to purchase conferred upon the Newfoundland Government by section 15 of the Act above referred to; that is to say, whether that Government could claim to buy out the whole interest of the Company for the actual appraised value of the telegraph lines, wires, cables, apparatus, vessels and all other appliances connected therewith; or whether any further claim could be made by the Company for compensation for the loss of the monopoly which would be terminated by such purchase, or for any other right or interest conveyed by the Act, and further as to the course which it might be advisable that the Government of Newfoundland | should take with a view to determine its power to purchase. mediately preceding those expressions, and This clearly established the fact that in tial reason why this notice should be given at the present time. On the amalgamation of the Companies in May or June, 1873, the Anglo-American Company distribute stock according to the agreement entered into by the shareholders of the Amalgamated Company, but there was the sum of £135,000 sterling in round numbers reserved, which would only be distributed in the event of the Newfoundland Government not assuming the lines under the Act on or before the 1st day of May, 1875, so that the Island Government had a direct interest in terminating the monopoly by pre-emption at the present time; and the parties chiefly interested-CYRUS FIELD princi"I am accordingly advised that the expres- pally, who conducted, he believed, the sions, other property' and all other property opposition to this Bill in this quarterconnected therewith,' used in the 15th section had a direct interest in desiring the proof the Act of 1854, were intended to comprise merely property of the same nature as the pro-longation of their monopoly because this perty mentioned in the parts of the section im- £135,000 would not be distributed if the Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. Island took the matter in hand as he understood they had done. He would be prepared to give any further explanations that might be desired regarding the measure. The Bill now presented to the House was exactly similar to the one of last Session with the exception of the proviso to the 15th section, and the subsection of section 16 and section 17. Section 17 simply provided that any acquired rights that this Company might possess on Prince Edward Island should be reserved, and the other two sections were simply intended to make the Bill more complete by providing for certain circumstances that might possibly arise. Hon. J. H. CAMERON asked what would be the position supposing no right of pre-emption was exercised, but an absolute stop was put to the monopoly. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE-I do not exactly understand my hon. friend. Does he mean our position, or the position of the Company? Hon. J. H. CAMERON-My hon. friend says the opinion of the law officers is that only certain matters can be estimated in damages. Other parties have given opinions that something very different can be estimated in damages. But what I want to understand is supposing, instead of the right of pre-emption being exercised that the whole thing was put at an end, so that the cable was useless is the damage merely to be estimated as the hon. gentleman has stated, or has he any view on that subject? Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he had a very decided view on the subject, and that was that they had nothing to do with the question of damages. That did not concern them. What concerned them was; were they doing any damage to any parties who had any right to anything at their hands. Did the company possess any privileges legal or equitable within the Dominion of Canada that the Government were bound to consider. He did not think they did. But in any case, supposing that some party was bound to pay some compensation, the compensation could only extend to rights acquired under the act of 1854. That he took it to be quite clear so far as a layman was capable of forming an opinion upon the subject. Of course he gave his own opinion with great deference, and in a matter of this sort it might not be worth much, but the opinion of the Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. English law officers of the Crown was worth a great deal, as was also the opinion of the hon. gentleman opposite, a distinguished lawyer in this country; but in a matter of this sort he was bound, so far as legal opinions had any weight, to be guided by the opinions of the law officers of the Crown. But he did not for a moment admit that this was a matter thatconcerned us further than that it was desirable to present a fair view of the whole subject to the House in introducing this Bill. This company claimed that because they were allowed practically to enjoy a monopoly for twenty years they should be permitted to enjoy it for the future. That was a claim that, of course, the Government could not admit; it was based on neither legal nor equitable grounds. The company practically received notice from the Colonial Ministry in 1857 that nothing in the direction of a monopoly could be permitted by the Imperial Parliament, even if the Provincial Legislature was disposed to sanction it. Hon. J. H. CAMERON approved of the proposal to send the Bill to the Railway Committee, where all the parties interested could be heard. The leader of the Government had very fairly laid the whole matter before the House from his point of view, and aside from that statement, any discussion, until the Bill came before the Railway Committee, would be premature. When it came before the Committee, other considerations than these submitted by the Premier might be brought forward, which might lead to other conclusions than those arrived at by the hon. gentleman. He would not now take up the various clauses of the Bill, but in view of the importance to this country of not being suddenly deprived of telegraphic communication with the other side, he thought it would have to be considered how far it would be advisable to adopt the concluding terms of the 14th clause. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that while it was convenient to have a Bill of this sort considered in Committee, should be discussed in the House in the first place. Either it was right in principle or it was wrong. If any members thought it was wrong in principle, now was the time to oppose it, and show wherein it was wrong. If it was wrong in principle it should not go to the Rail way Committee at all. It was only when it was admitted that a Bill was one which should pass in some shape that it should go to a Committee. 'Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD said it was impossible for them to enter into the discussion of the Bill until they had the despatch the hon. gentleman referred to in their hands, and therefore if the hon. gentleman wished the Bill fully discussed before it went to the Railway Committee, the second reading would have to be adjourned. Bill read a second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Railways and Telegraphs. CRIMINAL LAW IN NOVA SCOTIA. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER moved the second reading of the Bill to repeal certain provisions of an Act of the Legislature of Nova Scotia. He explained that these provisions were overlooked at the time the criminal law was re-enacted in this Parliament, and now the, Nova Scotia Legislature had no power to repeal them. They gave power to a Justice of the Peace to try persons charged with larcenies not exceeding $100 and offences committed by juveniles except capital offences. The repeal of these provisions would leave the general criminal law to apply in these cases. Bill read a second time, referred to the Committee of the Whole, reported without amendments, read a third time and passed. FOREIGN ENLISTMENT ACT. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER moved the second reading of the Bill to prevent enlistment in the service of any foreign State in certain cases not provided for by the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870. He said he had nothing to add to the explanations he had made in introducing the Bill. It was simply to make the law the same all over the Dominion. The motion was carried, and the House went into Committee of the Whole on the Bill, Mr. GOUDGE in the chair. The Bill was agreed to clause by clause without amendment and reported. The report was agreed to. SUPPLY. On motion of Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT the House then went into Committee of Supply. Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. On the item $106,540, salaries and contingencies of House of Commons. Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT explained the $8,000 for the Hansard, which appeared for the first time, and $7,500 for expenses of Committees. At Hon. Mr. HOLTON desired to call the attention of the Committee to the claims of an old and valued officer of the House who died, he might almost say, in harness, and who left his family comparatively unprovided for, he referred to the late Mr. ALFRED TODD, so long Chief Clerk of the Private Bills' Committee. It was perfectly unnecessary to say a word as to his ability and assiduity as an officer of the House. He was an officer of this branch of the Legislature since 1841, before the union of the old Provinces of Canada, and retained the same position at Confederation. the time of his death he had been in the service of the Legislature of his country for a period aprroximating 40 years, during the whole of which time he (Mr. HOLTON) believed, he was never known to have failed in his duty, but year by year had been improving in the manner of its performance. He had studied, thoroughly the whole subject of Parliamentary law; he was in all respects a valuable officer, and an exemplary man; and he (Mr. HOLTON) was grieved to say that having been taken away suddenly, he left his family badly provided for, owing to circumstance which, it was unnecessary to pain the Committee by repeating. It had been a very common practice since he (Mr. HOLTON) had been in Parliament to vote gratuities of moderate amounts to families of officers who had died under similar circumstances. What he desired to do was to elicit the sense of the House as to the propriety of pursuing a similar course in this case, in order that the Finance Minister might know whether he would feel justified in placing an item in the estimates for this purposes. He was sure all he had said with reference to Mr. TODD would be borne out by gentlemen on both sides of the House who knew the value of his services. Hon. J. H. CAMERON had the greatest pleasure in endorsing all that had been said of Mr. TODD, and he hoped the |