of raising a general discussion upon the Militia estimates upon these resolu

tions.

Hon. Mr. MITCHELL contended that the hon. member for Compton was quite in order because he was only replying to the arguments of the Minister of Militia which were based upon the alleged extravagance of the late Government.

Hon. Mr. VAIL-It the hon. gentleman was so anxious that a volunteer officer should be appointed to command the Militia, why did he not repeal the Act when he was in power?

Hon. Mr. POPE said his remarks would not bear the construction which had been put upon them. He thought the present appointment was a good one, but he did not think it wise to pass an Act which was so drawn as to bar volunteer officers from ever obtaining the command of our Militia forces.

Mr. KIRKPATRICK hoped the hon. Minister of Militia and the hon., the First Minister would take sweet counsel tegether and endeavour to reconcile their statements. The former stated that after Parliament rose the Government would take the report into consideration, and consider what was proper to be done, while the latter Minister said that if any change was made, Parliament would obtain the first intimation of it. It was due to the people's representatives that they should know what changes were proposed.

The motions were carried.

On motion of hon. Mr. VAIL, the resolutions were referred to the Committee of the whole House on Bill No. 4.

The House then went into Committee on the Militia Bill.

Mr. ROSS (Prince Edward), in the Chair.

Hon. Mr. VAIL moved that the blanks in the Bill be filled by inserting $4,000 and in the Bill be filled by inserting $4,000 and $2,600 according to the resolutions passed by the House.

Mr. BOWELL asked the hon. Minister of Militia to explain his intentions with respect to the payment of bonuses.

Hon. Mr. VAIL said it was unfortunate that the hon. member had not asked the Minister of Militia two or three years ago for those explanations. He was, however, prepared to give the hon. gentleman and the House every information in regard to that matter as early as possible, and he Hon. Mr. Mackenzie.

would submit a paper containing the necessary details in the course of a few days.

Mr. BOWELL said the hon. Minister of Militia did not know what he spoke when he said it was unfortunate that these explanations had not been asked for before. Every member of the House knew that for the last six years he had been asking for explanations on that matter.

Hon. Mr. VAIL said :-If the hon. member had been asking for explanations for five or six years without effect, he might give him the space of a day or two to make them now.

Hon. Mr. TUPPER congratulated the Government upon the fact that they always fell back upon the actions of the late Government when they wished to excuse themselves, and no explanation they could make to the House and country would be so satisfactory as that.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said if he had ever made such a statement he took that particular opportunity of making a full and complete retraction.

The Bill was reported as amended, and the report received.

CONCURRENCE IN ESTIMATES.

CART

On motion of Hon. Mr. WRIGHT, item No. 2 of Committee of Supply, $8,025, to defray salaries of the Governor General's Secretary's Office, was concurred in ; as also was resolution No. 1 of Committee of Supply, $68,600, charges of management.

Items 3 to 18 inclusive were concurred in without discussion.

On item 19, $70,000, re-adjustment of salaries,

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT, at the request of Hon. Mr. TUPPER, repeated his explanations of the proposed amended system of increasing the salaries of civil servants, the hon. member for Cumberland having been absent when those explanations were originally given.

Mr. JONES (Leeds) inquired whether any of this sum could legally be applied to increasing the salaries of the outside service.

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said there could be but little doubt as to its legality, but the increase of outside service salaries was more а matter to be dealt with departmentally than otherwise.

The item was concurred in.

On item 21, $15,000, circuit allow ances, British Columbia,

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT explained, in answer to a question, that the Minister of Justice did not consider the former vote of $10,000 sufficient for the service.

Items 22 and 23 were concurred in

without discussion.

On item 24, $185,000, Manitoba Mounted Police,

Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked whether it was in contemplation to make alteration in the constitution of that body. The experiment of the past year-for it was a mere experiment would have satisfied the Government, whether it was proper or otherwise, to incorporate the Mounted Police with the regular force in Manitoba. He had been following as closely as possible the statements from the best sources at the command of gentlemen on his side, that was to say the press, and they were to the effect that the system provided by the Government and sanctioned by the House for the administration of the Mounted Police had been attended with a good many serious difficulties, that the powers possessed by the officers had been insufficient to preserve that degree of subordination and harmony which was necessary to prevent desertions; and the question must force itself upon the attention of the Government as to how far it would be advisable to change the organization of that force. It appeared to him that it would be a very great advantage to incorporate it with the standing force in that Province, the result of which would be that the Government would have at their command for whatever purpose it might be required, a compact body which could be detailed to the different parts of the country when their services were necessary. He thought it was unfortunate to have two forces in the same Province organized upon entirely different systems, and considered they would be more effective for every purpose if consolidated. He was very happy to believe that the prospect in the North-West was such that a very large standing force would soon become quite unnecessary, but under the present circumstances he believed neither the House nor the country would be disposed to dispense with the services of that force, and therefore Hon. Mr. Cartwright.

Hon. Mr. FOURNIER stated that it was not the intention of the Government to incorporate the mounted police with the militia force. It had been stated in the House that the mounted police had been an entire success, certainly beyond been a failure. On the contrary it had the expectations that might fairly be formed of it. It was true there had been difficulties, but they were entirely due to the novelty of the organization, and the inexperience of the men. He was glad that the hon. gentleman had given. him an opportunity of denying the statement that there had been many desertions. The total number of the force was in the neighborhood of 250, and the desertions which took place were only some sixteen. Those who had deserted were enlisted in the force from the beginning, and it was calculated that a great many of those who had already been in the service would leave it, and in order to meet that contingency a number of men were engaged before the expedition started to be in readiness to fill up vacant places. force was a much superior one to that of the United States, and the good effects of it had not been confined to Manitoba, but had extended to the American territory bordering. He hoped that a report on the subject would be laid before the House shortly when the beneficial results of the force in every respect, and the part it contributed towards maintaing peace and security all over the territory would be shown to be greater than could have fairly been anticipated.

The

Mr. MASSON said his remark was not that he was in a position to state that the force was not a success, but that it was commonly reported in Manitoba and in the press generally that such was the case. The hon. gentleman, by stating there were 36 desertions, out of a force of 246 men, gave some confirmation of that report. He (Mr. MASSON) found no fault with the hon. gentleman for this; he merely drew the attention of the Government to the fact, and suggested that the force should be included in the militagy organization of the country. The officers should have more command over the men, and should be empowered to punish for desertion and refusal to obey orders, with something

Hon. Mr. FOURNIER said his Bill contained a clause increasing the powers of the officers to prevent and punish desertion.

Hon. Mr. MITCHELL asked why $25,000 was asked for the Dominion Police. Last year the expenditure was only $17,490.

Hon. Mr. FOURNIER said the police force for guarding the public buildings had been found insufficient, and the number had been augmented. Hence the increased appropriation.

that occurred.

The item was concurred in.
On item 26,

Mr. KIRKPATRICK asked whether anything was being done under the Act passed a few years ago giving power to transfer Rockwood Asylum to the Province

of Ontario.

The item was concurred in.

tentiaries"

Mr. KIRKPATRICK called the attention of the Government and the House to the unfortunate position of the guards and officials of the Penitentiaries. While their duties were, perhaps, not very laborious, they were very hazardous. They carried their lives in their hands, and it frequently happened that they were killed or maimed for life by sudden outbreaks among the convicts. Although these men might spend their lives in the service of the country, and discharge their duties faithfully and efficiently, in old age, when they were no longer fit for service, they were turned adrift without any provision being made for their families. The Government could when they pleased grant a gratuity extending from half a year to a year's salary, but what was that for a man who was turned adrift on the world in his last years. He wished to know whether the Government proposed to put these civil servants on the superannuation list and allow them the same payment which was given to other civil servants. might mention an instance where a storekeeper, who was obliged to give large security to the Government, received only $700 a year, a small salary for such a responsible position. He asked the Government to take these cases into their consideration.

He

Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said the expenditure was already very large for the number of convicts in the penitentiaries, and the Government could not see their way clear to increase it. It was true there was some risk attending the positions referred to, but for all that there was never Mr. Masson.

valuation would be arrived at, and the institution would be handed over to them. In the meantime the Province of Ontario practically paid the expenses of the insti tution, as they were charged so much per patient for every one kept there.

The item was concurred in.
On item 27,

Hon. Mr. TUPPER drew the attention of the Minister of Justice to the fact that a rumor existed that it was the intention of the Government to supersede the Warden of Halifax Penitentiary, who was still as capable of discharging his duties as at any period of his life. He would be glad to hear from the Minister of Justice that there was no ground for the rumor.

Hon. Mr. FOURNIER said it was only a rumor. He might add that this officer would be treated with the justice due to all public officers. There would be no exception made in his case.

The item was concurred in.
On item 28,

Mr. DOMVILLE asked why the salary of the Warden of St. John Penitentiary had been increased $400. He believed that the salary should be proportionate to that of the Warden of Halifax Penitentiary, and therefore did not object to the increase, but he asked the question, seeing that the late Warden had been removed and a new one appointed at an increased salary. Why was the old Warden removed, and why was the salary of the new one increased?

Hon. Mr. BURPEE said the removal was recommended by the Commissioners more than once, and particularly so during

1

last summer, and for reasons which the hon. gentleman could see in their report. The increase of salary was also made on the recommendation of the Commissioners, and he had already saved more than two years' salary in orders for clothing. Although cloth and clothing had been ordered by the old Warden, the new one found enough on hand to last for two or three years.

Mr. DOMVILLE said he had not seen the report of the Commissioners, but the community in general did not believe that the removal was made in consequence of any dereliction of duty or incapacity on the part of the old Warden; it was looked upon as a removal for purely political

reasons.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said it was out of order to discuss the question in this The hon. member way on concurrence. should move for the papers, and on receiving them bring the matter before the House.

Hon. Mr. MITCHELL admitted that would be the strictly Parliamentary course. but reminded the Premier that a great deal of latitude in discussion had always been allowed on concurrence. The Government should not keep hon. members to the strict letter of the rule in discussing matters of this kind; the late Government had not done so.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he had always been careful when in opposition to state when in committee he would discuss certain items on concurrence. He did not wish to prevent the discussion now, but merely to point out the proper mode of bringing the matter before the House.

Mr. DEVEBER concurred in all that the Minister of Customs had said, and If the Government had invesmore too. tigated the matter they would not only have removed the old warden, but also taken away his allowance. The public were satisfied that the Government were justified in removing him.

The item was concurred in.

Items 29 to 43, inclusive, were concurred in.

On item 44,

Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked when the census returns would be published. Unless they appeared within a reasonable time after the taking of the census, the object of the work would be defeated.

Hon. Mr. Burpee.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE replied that the officer in charge of the Census Department said the returns were now in the hands of the printers, and he expected in a short time to be able to give the results of the census.

The item was concurred in.
On item 45,

Mr. CURRIER asked whether $40,000 would meet all the expenses that would attend a proper representation of Canada at the Centennial Exhibition at Philadelphia. It appeared to him to be a very small sum for the purpose.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that depended entirely upon the extent of the plan which might be adopted. That was in course of preparation now, and he could not say what amount would be required. He might say, however,

that he did not think this sum would suffice.

Mr. YOUNG said if Canada was to put in an appearance at all at the exhibition, we should make a creditable appearance. He was not an advocate of lavish expenditure, but he thought it would be a great mistake not to vote enough to make such an appearance as would attract the attention of European visitors.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE observed that from all he could learn since the vote had been passed in the committee, they would require at least $100,000.

Mr. CURRIER thought that $150,000 or $200,000 would be little enough to do credit to this country. If we were to put in an appearance at all, we should do it with credit to ourselves.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE It is expected that the Local Legislatures will aid to some extent.

Mr. CURRIER-Even if they do,more will be required than appears in the Estimates.

Item concurred in.

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

AFTER RECESS