States and the Imperial authorities should previously agree to some arrangement, the American Commissioner would dissent from the opinion of the majority, and we might never arrive at a settlement.

Washington. There was no reason in the world, in his opinion, why the commissioners could not define the amount of remuneration due to us for our fisheries under the Treaty of Washington, and while that arbitration was pending he could Mr. BUNSTER was surprised to hear assure his hon. friend that the result of the the hon. member for Northumberland course proposed would simply be to create defend the Treaty of Washington in which national antagonisms without bringing any the existence of British Columbia had benefit to this country in the end. In been entirely ignored. He complained. conclusion he apologised to the House for that British Columbia was practically shut having occupied so much of their time, but out of the San Francisco oil market, and as the subject was so very important, he the Hudson's Bay Company and other oil thought it due to the House and the exporters had their profits greatly curcountry that he as one who had had some-tailed by the cost of transportation to the thing to do with the fisheries; one who | European market. had given to them no small amount of Mr. MILLS said it was not his intenattention; one who had done his best to tion when he introduced the resolution to encourage and develop them, that he should enter into any historical discussion of the put upon record what he believed to be a various treaties between Great Britain correct historical statement of the facts, and the United States. It seemed to him which had led up to the present situation. that it would be moro proper to enter into Hon. Mr. BLAKE said he had intended such a discussion at a later stage when to make a few remarks on this motion, the House had all the papers before it. but the hon. gentleman's speech had been He was surprised when he heard the hon. so long that if it had not exhausted the member for Northumberland observe that subject it had at least exhausted the it would be a highly imprudent proceeding House. The hon. gentleman had made on our part to ask that the limit line lengthened references to the Treaty of should be drawn while the question of Washington, which he admitted was not compensation was under consideration. all that he expected or desired, but was He was all the more surprised at this when nevertheless in the hon. gentleman's he remembered that the hon. gentleman opinion very good. He (Mr. BLAKE) was a member of the Government which desired to point out something which to sent a Commissioner to England to invite him appeared very material to the question the Imperial authorities to bring this of whether we were likely to arrive at any matter before the Government of conclusion in regard to the compensation he United States with a view due to us by means of arbitration. The to its settlement. It was very treaty provided in several distinct parts extraordinary, if to ask this much would for the settlement by arbitration of several compromise our rights. The American distinct questions. In regard to the Ala- Government had shown a disposition so bama question, which was provided for in the to construe the treaty of 1818 as to 2nd., article in the treaty it was expressly exclude us from the very rights which the stated that all disputed points considered hon. gentleman said were established by by the tribunal should be decided by a usage and practice. The Government of majority of the arbitrators. In like man- which the hon. gentleman was a member ner it was stipulated that questions to be issued licenses to American fishermen determined under the 10th and 13th sec- because of this difficulty, but the system tions should be settled by a majority of proved a complete failure in one year. the arbitrators, but in regard to the 23rd He had called the attention of the House section, in which provision was made for to this subject on a former occasion, as on the appointment of the Fishery Commis- this occasion, with the object, when the. sioners, it was not stated that the decision papers were brought down, to submit a of the majority would be final. The result motion asking that the Imperial Governof that would be that the Americans ment might take the initiative in a correswould insist that a unanimous decision pondence with the United States to finally was required to a final settlement, and dispose of this question. It was all the unless the Government of the United more necessary that this should be done How. Mr. Mitchell,

and he was therefore surprised at the hon. member having raised the question. Whether that proposition would be recognized by both powers was quite another matter. By the terms of the Treaty of Washington he believed the settlement of the controversy had been made as difficult as possible, but the Government would endeavour to secure the greatest possible benefit to the country. He hoped his hon. friend, the mover of the motion, would withdraw it.

because it was quite clear that the parties | proposition as logical as it was self-evident, who negotiated the Treaty of Washington had shown a disposition which he characterized as almost cowardly to let our rights go by default. Those rights, which were considered of great consequence by the Americans themselves, should not be disposed of in this indirect manner with out our having an opportunity of securing a formal decision upon the convention of 1818. The hon. gentleman had discussed not only everything which was pertinent to the subject, but many things which were not at all connected with it. fact, his speech reminded him (Mr.MILLS) very much of Knickerbocker's History of the World. If we were to receive value for our fisheries we must first construction of

secure

fair a

In

any

the

convention of 1818, by which an understanding would be arrived at as to what our fishery rights really were. Then the commission appointed under the Washington Treaty would be in a position to go on with the inquiry with which they were charged, but until the fishery boundaries were defined he did not see how they could proceed with their labors in an intelligent way. It could not be held that we had abandoned our just pretensions because we asked to have our rights defined.

Motion withdrawn.

RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

On motion of Mr. OLIVER, the Bill to amend the General Railway Act was read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraphs.

TRADE MARKS.

On motion of Mr. BERNIER, the Bill to amend the act respecting Trade Marks and Industrial Designs, was read a second time and referred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce.

Items 93 and 94 were passed without discussion.

On item 95, $364,000 on penitentiaries, Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE referring to an amount of $100,000 for a general penitenHon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he did tiary for the Maritime Provinces, said not propose to enter into any discussion on there was at present no penitentiary upon this matter. We were not in a position to Prince Edward Island, and the prisoners discuss the question at present, nor yet sentenced to a long term of penal serviwere the Government in a position to tude had to be taken to the penitentiary bring down the papers. The arbitration in Nova Scotia. The penitentiary at St. had to be proceeded with, and was pro- John was practically useless as such, and ceeding at present. All necessary steps besides the Dominion had only temporary had been taken by the Government, and possession of it. It was thought desirable although some of the papers might be laid to have one central prison or penitentiary on the table without any harm, they would to which prisoners from the three Provlead to no result, and he, therefore, con- inces might be sent. The Government sidered it was not advisable to bring asked the appropriation to be made withany of them down in the meantime. out having decided precisely as to the spot With respect to the point that before any on which the building would be erected, proper arbitration could be had as to the but it was proposed to place it somewhere exclusive right of fishing in bays more between Truro and Moncton, which it was than six miles wide at their mouths, he thought would be a convenient position. understood the hon. member for North- No time, he thought, should be lost in umberland to maintain that the point proceeding with the erection of the buildshould not be even raised until the ques-ings, and therefore the vote was asked tion of compensation was settled. He Ho without their location being exactly thought, on the contrary, it would be very determined. desirable to know what rights we possessed Hon. Mr. MITCHELL concurred in before we were asked to determine upon the desirability of erecting a general the value of those rights. That was a penitentiary for the Maritime Provinces.

Mr. Mills.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE explained, in reference to the item for penitentiaries, that the Government had decided to place the whole architectural management, in respect to these institutions, under the care of the Public Works Department. The $119,000 for Manitoba, and $100,000 for British Columbia, were asked to carry out contracts under progress for the erection of penitentiaries in those provinces; and $20,000 were asked for such additions and repairs to penitentiaries as might be found necessary.

&c.,

The item was passed.

On item 96, $230,500 for rents, repairs,

Mr. YOUNG asked for explanations in respect to the proposed appropriation of $170,000 for rents, repairs, furniture and heating, &c., which he thought was a large sum to be required.

further required for canal purposes. Last year's survey was very imperfect, for it was then considered that a very small amount would be required to remove the shore. This, however, proved to be a mistake, as the depth of water had been under-estimated, and the expenditure of the amount obtained had only resulted in the removal of a small portion of the shore. $24,000 added to the $6,000 represented the total cost of removing the shore, whereby a depth of 13 feet of water would be obtained. The Government proposed during the coming year to remove a portion of the rock from the shore at a cost of $6,000, and it would afterwards be a question for consideration whether the balance should be expended or not. With respect to Cobourg harbor, that was simply a re-vote. The work was placed under contract one year ago, and the contractors failing to carry out the arrangements made, the work was re-let to other contractors. The town of Cobourg paid onethird of the entire amount expended in building the break-water for the protection of the harbor. In regard to the proposed vote for Port Hope, the work was also under contract. The vote of $7,000 for Port Stanley harbor was first taken two years ago, and an arrangement was made by the late Minister of Public Works with the Railway Company to have that sum expended by it in improving the condition of the harbor. The Government now proposed to have the money expended under the direction of the Public Works Department. Bayfield Harbor was also under contract, the Township of Bayfield paying $10,000 of the amount, which sum had already been paid in to the Government. The sum of $12,000 for Kincardine Harbor was to continue the work which

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the item included the entire expenditure for heating the public buildings, and for rents, repairs and

similar matters.

A

last

very large proportion of
year's vote was expended in finishing
the attics of the Departmental Buildings,
running up brick fire-proof partition walls
to the roof, and completing the whole of
the unfinished part of the buildings. For
heating there was expended in 1873, $38,-
894; in 1874, $39,390; and the appro-
priation asked for next year was $40,000.
$3,500 were asked for removing snow.
The expenditure during the past year was
very much less than that, but that was an
exceptional year. For supplying gas to
the public buildings $12,000 were asked.
Under this item, too, a great many repairs
and additions to public buildings, custom
houses, post offices, &c., throughout the
Dominion, were included.

The item was passed.

On item 97, $387,500, for Harbors and

Break-waters,

Mr. WOOD inquired if the House proposed to expend $24,000 on the Kingston Harbor. Works, which he thought were of a local character.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said it did not constitute a local work. The amount placed in the estimates was for the removal of a rocky shore at the entrance of the harbor, where it was absolutely necessary to have the entrance for vessels coming in from the lakes, and where 12 feet of water were Hon. Mr. Mackenzie,

had been carried on in that harbor--the most important, next to Goderich, on Lake Huron, and one at which a very large number of vessels sought trade and shelter. A large proportion of the amount would be necessary for dredging work, as the depth of water was entirely insufficient for the class of vessels which now visited the port. The Government owned a dredge which was at present engaged in the Sydenham River, and as soon as it had completed its work it would be taken down to Kincardine. At Owen Sound the local authorities had contributed an amount for the purpose of carrying on the dredging at

the entrance to that harbor so as to enable position of the work, but the appropriation
access to be had by vessels in all weather. taken would be sufficient to renew the
Port Darlington was a harbor owned by whole structure if it had been
a private company who had expended washed away. The work at Pointe
$78,000 upon the work. It was at pre- du Chène was in connection with
sent filling up so as to make it impossible the railway, and was absolutely necessary.
for vessels to enter it which drew more For Richibucto Harbour the vote asked
than 9 feet of water. Port Burwell was was to carry out the present contract.
also a harbor owned by a company whose The amount for Shippegan Breakwater
trade had fallen off very materially recently, was a re-vote, For St. John Harbor the
it being a large lumber exporting locality. A vote taken was simply a continuation of
considerable amount had been expended by the vote proposed last year for the con-
the company on the harbor, and all the struction of the break-water between Par-
revenue that could be collected for harbor tridge Island and the main land.
purposes had proved to be entirely insuffi- The vote was passed.
cient. The engineer of the Public Works
Department had reported that to preserve
the harbor for the purpose of shelter it
was necessary for this appropriation to be
made. Chantry Island harbor and Goder-
ich harbor on Lake Huron were simply
appropriations to carry out works entered
into three years ago.

Mr. WILKES hoped the Government would be able to place an amount in the supplementary estimates with the object of carrying out the experimentary works in Toronto harbor.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he was not prepared at that moment to state what would be done in regard to that question. After the conversation in the House a few evenings ago the Chief Engineer of the Public Works Department received instructions to again consider the position of the entrance to the Toronto harbor, with a view to ascertain if it was possible to carry out some experimental work in order to determine the proper mode of protecting the entrance and securing free access to that harbor. He hoped to be able in a few days to ascertain precisely what could be done in regard thereto.

The item was passed.

Item 98, for harbors and break-waters in Quebec, was carried without discussion. On item 99, $183,000, for harbors and break-waters in New Brunswick,

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that Dipper Harbor was situated some distance from St. John. There was no particular trade at the place, but it was a point where a harbor of refuge was required. Unfortunately, during some heavy storms of last year, the works were almost destroyed. He had not at that moment accurate information with regard to the present Hơi. Mr. Martelli

On item 100, $151,500, Harbors and
Break-waters in Nova Scotia,

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that the
amounts for Jordan Bay, Oats Point, and
Pictou Landing were re-votes. $50,000
would be required to repair the break-
water at Cow Bay, which had been seri-
ously injured by storms. That harbor
was owned by the Messrs. ARCHIBALD &
Co., colliery proprietors, who obtained an
annual vote of $14,000 from the Nova
Scotia Government. They had expended
$86,000 on the break-water previous to
last year, and $3,500 last year. The value
of the work erected by themselves, exclu-
sive of the amount given by the Province
of Nova Scotia, had been estimated by the
engineer of the Public Works Depart-
ment at $25,000, and the Government
proposed under the authority of the Act
passed last session to purchase that har-
bor from Messrs. ARCHIBALD & Co., pay-
ing them $25,000 therefor; and they pro-
pose to expend $50,000 upon it, in order
to put it in thorough repair; and they
would levy a tax on all vessels entering
the harbor either for trading purposes or
for shelter.

The item was passed as were also items 101 to 104 inclusive.

On item 105 dredging $110,500.

Mr. KILLAM inquired when they might expect to have the dredge at Yarmouth. They expected the dredge "Canada" there this winter, but it was frozen up at Pictou and was unable to proceed further. If it had reached the harbor it could have worked two or three months this winter when it would have been impossible for it to do anything in any other harbor. It was important that the work needing to be done at Yarmouth should be done as soon as possible.

sity of some improvements being made at Two Mountains, having been introduced,

The SPEAKER took the chair at three P.M. herein otherwise specially provided for, there

shall be charged and paid one uniform rate of three cents per half-ounce weight, any fraction of a half-ounce being chargeable as a half-ounce ; The following Bills were introduced and such postage stamp or stamps at the time of and read the first time :

posting the letter, otherwise such letter shall not be forwarded by post, except that letters addressed to any place in Canada on which one full rate of three conts has been so prepaid, shall be forDo-warded to their destination charged with double the amount of postage thereon not prepaid, which shall be collected on delivery.