he, at the same time, desired to state that every liberty and the benefit of every doubt would always be given to the merchant in case of trouble and difficulty.

It being six o'clock the SPEAKER left the chair.

AFTER RECESS

best of his ability, he could assure the cases of a similar character had also been House that if there was any laxity at any brought to light in the Upper Provinces. port he was ignorant of it. It was true While he mentioned those facts to show that under the old system in that irregularities did exist, and had been Nova Scotia, there was considera- | discovered by the Government inspectors, ble freedom allowed the collectors; that in country towns and villages it was the practice for collectors frequently to allow goods to pass into the hands of merchants without pre-payment of the duties. It was quite possible that this system might to a certain extent have been adopted by some of the officers; but on all those occasions the officer was held to be responsible, and he was not aware of a single case in which a single dollar had been lost to the revenue from any laxity of that kind. If any case If any case could be mentioned, he would be glad to give explanations in respect to it. What he complained of in the statements made by the Finance Minister was that the charges were insinuated rather than made in terms which would enable a member who had occupied the position of Minister of Customs to meet it promptly and deal with it as might be required, and in a manner which he was convinced, would meet the satisfaction of the House.

Hon. Mr. BURPEE said he did not understand his colleague, the hon. Minister of Finance, to have charged the member for Cumberland with any neglect of duty while Minister of Customs. It was quite true, however, as his colleague had said, that irregularities did exist while the hon. member for Cumberland was at the head of the Department. They had been revealed by Inspectors, appointed by the present Government, who had been inspecting the offices in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario, and in some instances the irregularities had been going on since 1868. These irregularities were found to involve a loss in two places of $16,000, and they had been going on since 1868. It appeared that the collectors had been in the habit of allowing merchants to take goods from ware-houses, steam vessels or cars, without any regard to their being in bond, and without duty being first paid on them. At another place merchants had been allowed to bring goods into the Dominion across a river which formed the boundary between Canada and the United States, and make their returns for the duties at the end of one or two months. Some Hon. Mr. 1upper.

The House again went into Committee of Supply, Mr. SCATCHERD in the chair. The Committee resumed consideration of the item of $721,520.25, collection of customs.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK said he thought it right to call the attention of the Committee to the amount of $10,000, to cover appointments, promotions, &c. It was very strange that the Government should ask for a sum of money like this without any statement of its purpose

The system

further than that quoted. Hon. gentlemen opposite, when they were in opposition they cried out against the voting of money when its purpose was not clearly specified, and he thought they were justified in doing so. was a most reprehensible one, but in this case they could not make use of the tu quoque argument and reply that hon. gentlemen on his side of the House had done the same thing when they were in power, for the item appeared in the estimates last year for the first time.

Hon. Mr. BURPEE thought this money had been voted in some way for a considerable number of years, and he knew at any rate that there was likely to be use for it. The estimate for the port of Halifax, for example, would be exceeded he had no doubt, and it was to meet contingencies of this kind that the vote was asked. Of course if it were not needed it would not be used. He might add that it often happened that they had to appoint extra inspectors to go to certain ports of the Dominion, and this item would meet expenses of that kind.

Mr. BOWELL asked if these expenses were not covered by the vote of $15,000 for contingencies of head office.

Mr, JONES (South Leeds) complained of the small salaries paid the officers at a

number of ports, many of whom had been | and then distributed the balance in the induced to accept situations at a small outside service, but it fell far short of remuneration in the hope that they would what was required. receive promotion under the Civil Service ..Act. The only complaint he had to make against the $10,000, was that it was not sufficient a larger sum should be asked for.

with the necessary

On item 172, for standards of weights | flour, fish, &c., with and measures ordered in England, but not standards.-Item passed. yet delivered, $25,000, in answer to Hon. Mr. MITCHELL,

Hon. Mr. GEOFFRION said the $70,000 voted last year was found not to be enough to buy all the required standards, and therefore this additional vote was called for.

Mr. DOMVILLE asked whether the Government intended to put the Act respecting weights and measures in force at once, and whether they would extend the Act to all the cities and towns of the Dominion.

Hon. Mr. GEOFFRION said the Act provided that it should come into force six months after a notice to that effect appeared in the Official Gazette. The notice had been delayed till the standards had arrived from England. It has now been published, and the Act would come into force on the 1st of July.

Mr. JONES (Halifax) said he had hoped that the Government would not put this Act into force at all, as he considered it a step in the wrong direction. It would be much better to assimilate our weights and measures to those of the rest of the continent, as we had done our currency and our railway guages. The Imperial standard, which was to be introduced by this Act, would cause a great deal of inconvenience throughout the country, and if it was made compulsory it would be very unpopular.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER said the late Government had introduced this measure under an imperative sense of their duty to the country, and he believed that although it might be attended with temporary inconvenience it would prove to be a substantial reform. He hoped the Government would take steps to make public the general terms of the law before it went into force, so that the people would become familiar with it.

Hon. Mr. GEOFFRION said that would be done.

Item passed, also item 173, salaries of Inspectors of Weights and Measures, $60,000.

On item 174, for the purchase and distribution of standards of flour, &c., $3,000 in answer to Hon. Mr. MITCHELL,

Hon. Mr. GEOFFRION said this vote was required to provide Inspectors of

Hon. Mr. Mitchell.

On item 175 to meet expenses under the Act 36 Vic., Chap. 49.,

Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked what steps it was proposed to take under this Act.

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the present idea was to appoint medical officers familiar with chemistry in the large cities of the Dominion, whose duty would be to examine samples of different articles of food, and if they found any adulteration the parties guilty would be prosecuted. Item passed.

Items 176, salaries and contingencies of canal officers; 177, collection of slide and boom dues; 178, repairs and working expenses of ditto, were passed without discussion.

On item 179, $2,055,000 Intercolonial and other Government Railways in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,

Mr. DOMVILLE inquired whether that amount of money was to be applied to what we understood as the Intercolonial Railway proper, or whether all the Government railways in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were included. There did not seem to be any well marked distinction between the railways in this respect. He would have referred to this subject before now, but as it had been relegated to a sub-Committee, and as Mr. BRYDGES and others would be called before that Committee, he had refrained from doing so. We could not, however, allow this amount to pass en bloc without asking whether the Government had placed it to the account of construction or maintenance.

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the hon. gentleman would see the details at page 69. He added that the term "Intercolonial Railway" included all the Government railways in the Maritime Provinces.

Mr. YOUNG called attention to the fact that there was $447,000 of a reduction in the expenditure in this one single branch of the public service, and the mere statement reflected, he thought considerably, upon the character of the management of the late Government. He did not intend to make any remarks upon this point, seeing that the whole subject had been referred to a committee, but would simply say that it was a very good proo of the energy and economy which the

Minister of Public Works had been able | was formerly known as the European and North American Railway.

to infuse into his Department.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK said the hon. gentleman for South Waterloo was in too great a hurry to take credit to the Government. The fact was that last year they had increased the estimate by $496,000, and this year they had reduced it about $447,000, leaving a net increase over the highest estimate of the late Government of $40,000.

Mr. YOUNG said the increase last year was accounted for by the changed system of making up the accounts, charged, as much of the expenditure was, to working expenses instead of capital account. Surely the hon. gentleman was not so ignorant as not to know of the mismanagement on the Intercolonial Railway which had been brought to light by Mr. BRYDGES, If he were acquainted with the facts, his temerity in challenging comparision was extraordinary. He (Mr. YOUNG) took for granted that the reduction accomplished by the Government was a bona fide one, while it was well-known that the increase last year was not due to any greater expenditure, but to a desire to have the expenditures which already existed charged to their proper account.

Mr. WRIGHT (Pontiac) would like to know whether the reduction was upon capital account or working expenses, because until that was explained, it was impossible to say whether the Government was worthy of praise or blame. If the diminution were chargeable to construction, he thought the eulogiums of the hon. member for South Waterloo were uncalled for, as there was nothing more natural, now that the road was finished, than that such a reduction should take place. He hoped soon to see the day when there would be no charge against the Intercolonial Railway except for running

expenses.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said they were returned as "stores sold."

Hon. Mr. MITCHELL desired to know whether the amount realized was charged to cost or deducted from the actual expenditure of the year.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he was not quite sure but he would find out. Mr. DOMVILLE maintained that there was no reduction but rather an increase in the expenditure on the Intercolonial Railway.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked the leader of the Government to postpone the discussion which he knew must take place upon item because there

this

were statements made in that regard, especially in the report laid before the country by Mr. BRYDGES, which his hon. friend could well understand it was quite impossible for him (Mr. TUPPER) to allow to pass without notice.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he was most willing that the hon. gentleman should have a chance of making any statement, or entering into any discussion on the subject he might desire.

Hon. Mr. MITCHELL did not desire to enter into a discussion on this subject at the present stage, but the hon. member for South Waterloo had challenged comparison between the administration of the affairs of the Intercolonial Railway under Mr. BRYDGES and the present Government, and under the late Government. He did not desire to bring the name of Mr. BRYDGES before the Committee, but that gentleman's name having once been before us it was made public property. He (Mr. MITCHELL) was quite prepared to discuss the management of the Intercolonial Railway under both parties, and although it might be true that some of the things referred to by Mr. BRYDGES were open to criticism and censure, he held that Mr. BRYDGES should be subjected to the same treatment as Mr. CARVELL. felt very doubtful whether in the end it would turn out whether the hon. member for South Waterloo had been wise in chal

Mr. DOMVILLE contended that the expenditures for several new works on the railway, to the amount of $47.000 should have been charged to construction, whereas they had been charged to maintenance; the same principle, in his opin-lenging this comparison. ion, being applicable in this case by which merchants spread the expenses of starting in business over a series of years. He would like to know what had been done with the old rails taken up and replaced on what Mr. Young.

He

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said it seemed to him an extraordinary thing that the hon. gentleman should make an attack of this kind, particularly after having said that he did not intend to

enter into any discussion on the sub- addition to maintaining those they already ject. had.