ments. The policy of the late Government was to construct a line by which direct communication would be obtained with the Pacific, and they proposed to subsidize a company with $30,000,000 and 50,000,000 acres. A company was formed to undertake that work, and attempted to float its bonds in the English market, which it would have succeeded in doing but for the denunciations of the Opposition Press. The present Government proposed a different scheme, which included the Georgian Bay Branch, which would be closed during 5 months in the year. build to They proposed a short link of the railway from Thunder Bay to Lake Shebandowan, a distance of 45 miles. Then there was to be another stretch of water, and other railway and water stretches were to be utilized. The proper principle he held upon which the railway should be constructed was that communication should be had with the Pacific by means of a through line. On looking at the history of the Pacific Railway, he held that the late Government had done more than the present Government was going to attempt to do in the direction of constructing the Pacific Railway. where there was now a good waggon road. No doubt the announcement of this policy would be sent forth through the country in the belief that in carrying it out, the Government were accomplishing a great work towards opening up the North-West, and it would be carefully kept out of view the number of portages that intervened. He believed that the building of these portions of the road between the water stretches would answer no good purpose towards opening up the North-West, as the American route would be preferred. Moreover, the country between Shebandowan and Rat Portage was not sufficiently well known to enable us to decide whether the connecting link could be built or not. It would have been more honest if the Premier had frankly con fessed at once the difficulties in the way. In the matter of the Pembina Branch he must entirely disagree with the policy of the Premier. It was a fallacy to suppose that because the American road was extended only to within 65 miles of Pembina that therefore rails and rolling stock could not be sent in for the Pembina branch. The Red River was navigable from the junction with the railway, and such goods could be brought in more MoreMr, SCHULTZ desired to make some cheaply by the river than by rail. observations in regard to that portion of over, the American line was being extendthe national work between Fort Garry and ed, and if the Premier had promised to Thunder Bay. The announcement made go on with the Pembina branch as soon as by the Premier in respect to the policy of the American line reached Pembina he the Government on the whole line, and (Mr. SCHULTZ) would have more confiparticularly on that branch, pointed to the dence in the whole railway scheme of the necessity of its early construction, as one Government. He entirely dissented from of the most important points to be secured the view that the stretches of water was to obtain a speedy means of ingress between Lake Superior and Red River The only from Lake Superior. It was felt exceed- could be utilized to any extent. ingly difficult to obtain a large share of stretches of water that could be used were immigration when immigrants had to pass Lakes Winnipeg and Manitoba, and these round by the United States. If it could unfortunately ran north and south. With be shown to him that the policy of the regard to the Saskatchewan, it was fitly Government, enunciated by the Premier described by the member for Marquette bars and in respect to the Fort Garry and Thunder shifting sand Bay Branch would fulfil the requirements It was said that a Hudson of the Province of Manitoba and the Bay Co's boat had navigated that river, country, then he would be one of the most but it only went up on a trial trip after the hearty supporters of the Government, but fall rains in September, and drawing perit seemed to him that so far from meet-haps only about eighteen or twenty ing the requirements, it no more fulfilled inches of water. That proved noththem than did the Dawson Route fulfil ing What the objects sought to be obtained. did the Government propose to do? They proposed simply to construct a railway parallel with the portion of the route Mr. Monteith. as one low water. of as to the river being navigable. He believed that river except for flat boats was practically useless for He would repeat commercial purposes. that the failure to go on at once with the Pembina branch would be a serious injury to Manitoba, and there was no just cause for the delay. He could say nothing more except to correct a false impression some members had taken from the remarks of the hon. member for Marquette. That hon. gentleman stated he believed that the people of Manitoba would rather have a through rail line through our own territory than a mixed water and rail communication to Lake Superior as well as the Pembina branch. He entirely agreed with that statement. They had patriotism enough to desire a through line of railway over our own territory so that immigrants on their way to Manitoba would not be enticed to stay in the United States as many of them were. desired to close the debate to-night, but he was willing to leave the question of adjournment in the hands of the House. After a brief discussion on that point the debate was adjourned, on the understanding that the subject would be taken up as the first order to-morrow, and disposed of before six o'clock. THE PETERSON DIVORCE BILL. Mr. MACLENNAN moved the first reading of a Bill; from the Senate, for the relief of HENRY WILLIAM PETERSON. Mr. STIRTON said it would be taking an unfair advantage of this measure to deal with it in such a summary manner. The proper course would be not to oppose it on the first reading, and to take the vote on the second reading. At this hour in the morning (2 o'clock) it would be most unfair to take a vote. Mr. SPEAKER said the rule of the House was that there must be no debate on the first reading of a Bill. A division was then taken, and the motion for a first reading was carried on the following vote : Mr. D. A. SMITH stated that for many years it had been the custom of the Hudson Bay Company to navigate the Saskatchewan River with boats carrying from ten to twelve tons, coming down from Edmonton one thousand miles and returning with the same freightage. He had already mentioned that he came down that river in a boat last summer, and though it was in July the water was at least four feet higher than it was in September on the occasion referred to by the hon. member for Lisgar. So that he was mistaken when he said that trip took Archibald, place when the river was high, for it was Aylmer, when the river was comparatively Bain, low. In the remarks he had Bertram, made he did not wish it to be understood Biggar, that he was wedded to the scheme of a mixed land and water system of communication. He was glad to have that system in the meantime, but he did not wish it to hinder the progress of a through rail line. Mr. SCHULTZ asked whether the hon. gentleman considered that his having gone down the Saskatchewan in July last a proof that the river was navigable. Mr. D. A SMITH said he came down all the way on the river, there being no portages. Appleby, Blackburn, Borron, Casey, Cockburn, Oliver, Coffin, Palmer, Paterson, Ray, Ross (Durham), Ross (Middlesex), Smith (Peel), it Flesher, Smith (Selkirk), Hon. Mr. TUPPER asked that the debate be adjourned, as it was evident a number of members still wished to speak on this very important question, which might be made the first order for to-morrow, and with the understanding that would be disposed of before six o'clock. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said Mr. Schultz. MM Wright (Pontiac), Irving, Lajoie, Hagar, White, Haggart, Wilkes, Kerr, Wood, Killam, Kirk, NAYS: Messieurs Baby, Béchard, Bernier, Bunster, Caron, Langlois, Casgrain, Lanthier, Cauchon, Laurier, as political union with the rest of the McDonald(Cape Breton) from a Reformer and he believed it was Macmillan, Pelletier, Pouliot, Taschereau, Tremblay, Wallace (Norfolk), Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE introduced a Bill respecting the lien of the Government on the Northern Railway of Canada. The Bill was read a first time. THE PACIFIC RAILROAD. Mr. WHITE (Hastings) resumed the adjourned debate on the motion to concur in the report of the Committee of Supply. He said he regarded the Pacific Railway as the most important project ever brought before the people of Canada since Confederation. Certainly this Dominion could only expect to be great by carrying out, in good faith, the obligations entered into with the different Provinces in the Union. It was necessary that we should use all our exertions to bring the Pacific Province into commercial as well Hon. Mr. Mackenzie. the opinion of a great majority of the people of Ontario. They would prefer to see this contract with Mr. FoSTER cancelled and the money appropriated for it expended in constructing a line to connect the great lakes with Manitoba. The House had heard the remark of the hon. member for Marquette that the people of Manitoba were unanimously in favor of an all-rail route between Thunder Bay and Winnipeg in preference to the Pembina Branch and the two sections of railroad along the Dawson Route. There could be no doubt that the money expended on the construction of a railroad across the continent would be well invested, and he hoped the Premier would cancel the contract with Mr. FOSTER and apply the sum to the construction of a road from Georgian Bay to Winnipeg. It was Mr. McCALLUM said that it had been argued during the debate that the House should pass the Pacific Railway item because the Government policy had been ratified by the people at the last election. The fallacy of this argument was proved by the fact that the policy of the Government was not known at that time beyond what was indicated in the speech of the hon. the First Minister at Sarnia. held that for the prosperity of Canada we must have a railway through our own territory from the Pacific which should be the back-bone of the Dominion. It would be a singular back-bone, however, when it diverged from a straight course in order to reach Georgian Bay, and when the route was alternately rail and water. If the railway could not be constructed in a more satisfactory manner, it would be well for the Dominion to at once tell the people of British Columbia and Manitoba that the Dominion could not afford to build it. Before the Government expended so large con-, been discussed from a British Columbia point of view, from an Ontario and Quebec point of view, and from a Manitoba point of view, and it seemed to him that the Provinces which were getting all the concessions, all the expenditure and all the advantages, if there were any, had the most complaints to make. He refered to British Columbia and Manitoba. Ontario and Quebec were largely interested in this road, from the fact that the line which is to connect the eastern end of the Canada Pacific Railway with the Atlantic, is to traverse and open up many miles of the interior of the former Province, and from the fact that the Atlantic terminus of the road is to be at the great commercial centre of Quebec-the City of Montreal. It was true that these two Provinces had another consideration in the matter, and that was the paying by far the largest part of the cost. Still, as he had already said, they have a direct interest in the construction of the road, from the fact that a large subsidy will be spent by the DominionGovernment in the territory of the one, and from the fact that the other will possess the great eastern terminus of the road. There was one other point of view from which this undertaking had not been viewed, and that was the Maritimethe point of view of the Provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia. These Provinces composed a very considerable portion of the population of the Dominion, a very considerable portion of the trade of the Dominion, they paid a very considerable portion of the taxes of the Dominion, and they would be called upon to pay a very considerable portion of the cost of this railway. On the other hand he maintained that they did not in the slightest degree participate in the direct advantages of the proposed expenditure, and the indirect advantages were so very remote and imaginary that he did not think they could be fairly considered. Hence, he contended that no portion of the Dominion would contribute so far beyond and out of proportion to the benefits to themselves, which could be fairlyclaimed to result from this expenditure, as the Maritime Provinces. The hon. member for Marquette found fault with the Government because they would not deviate from a straight line in the construction of this road to accommodate a few hundred families in his Province, and argued an amount of money in Mr. BORDEN said the question had that those people would be disappointed. | whole bargain. He could but regret, too, But where he had a few hundreds of dis- that the Colonial Secretary of the British appointed people because this road did not Government should be so ready to hold take a deviating course, he could tell him this country to a bad bargain, which of thousands who were bitterly disappointed meant almost certain financial ruin to us, that it should ever be built at all. That and which to Great Britain was only the hon. gentleman thought it an outrageous realization of a pet fancy to connect the thing that the shortening of the road thirty British Provinces of the Atlantic with miles should be used as an argument. He the Pacific at their expense. As regards had come to the conclusion that the smaller the scheme proposed by the hon. Premier, the Province the larger were the ideas of he was bound to say, in view of the fact its representatives. It was easy, however, already stated that we were pledged as a to be lavish with what does not belong to nation to the work, and in view of the ourselves. If there was any one thing fact that the gentleman leading the Oppocommendable more than another in the sition in this particular was largely scheme of the Government, it was this instrumental in entangling this country thirty-mile abbreviation, and if this in their difficulty, and in view of the fact country were not pledged to this insane that he believed the hon. Minister of Works project he should like to advocate, not is competent and conscientious in the disthe reduction of its length by charge of his duties, and in view of thirty miles, but by its whole distance, the fact that he believed the Governand he was quite ready to plead guilty to ment of this country was in safer hands the charge of holding contracted views, if then it ever was before,-in view of these it was contracted not to desire to expend facts he (Mr. BORDEN) should support the millions for an imaginary population-if scheme proposed by the Government, it was contracted not to wish to construct a believing as he did that, coming from such road down the inhospitable slopes of the a source, the opposition of the hon. memRocky Mountains, which involved the ber for Cumberland was prompted by the building of five hundred miles in order to desired to offer obstruction for party purgain a distance of two hundred and fifty, poses. every mile of it at a frightful expenditure in overcoming engineering difficulties. This country has had some sad experiences already in railway construction-in its Grand Trunk and Intercolonial; and he appealed to hon. members, and to the country to say whether those experiences seemed to justify any such undertaking. The United States was often quoted on was often quoted on account of its Pacific Railway; but what had been their course? They first opened up their Western country, established great cities, and then with a population of forty millions accomplished with the greatest difficulty what we were attempting to do with a population of less than four. But he (Mr. BORDEN) would be told that this work was a foregone conclusion-that the country was pledged to it. Well, he supposed this was the fact, and it was a most melancholy one. But the present Government were in no way responsible for this insane project-it was, one of the unenviable legacies of the late Government. The present Government had succeeded in getting somewhat better terms. He could only regret that they were not in honor, able to repudiate the Mr. Borden. Mr. PATTERSON said he had noticed the Government had been very strongly attacked, and perhaps there was an impression in the minds of some that the opinion of the House was adverse to the vote of concurrence in this item of six and a quarter millions asked by the Premier. Very few of the supporters of the Government had taken part in this discussion, as they had with their usual generosity given most of the time belonging to them to the Opposition; recognizing the talent they brought to bear on the discussion. In this question of the expenditure of six and a quarter millions for the construction of a part of this great national undertaking was involved the whole scheme of the Government in reference to the construction of this railway. Their whole policy had been attacked. The points made against them were rather difficult to be seen, as there was a conflict of testimony by those opposing it; and there did not seem to be concert of action on the part of those opposing the Government. Opposition was taken from Manitoba point of view, from a British Columbia point of view, from a Maritime a |