Government would during the recess obtain complete surveys and have the contract ready for submission to Parliament at its next session. If this proposition was not accepted the hon. gentleman would find from bitter experience that he had assumed a responsibility which he would regret. Mr. DE COSMOS said it had been stated that the work of construction could only be carried on for three months in the year. That was entirely incorrect as the work could go on for the whole year. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said that was an additional reason why Parliament should be allowed the opportunity of passing upon the contract because immediately after the contract was confirmed the parties could go to work. any such contract shall have the previous approval of Parliament." A division was taken on the amendment with the following result : Archibald, Cook, Farrow, Gordon, Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said the Dugas, leader of the Opposition had assumed that they did not intend to have a complete survey. They did intend to have a com- | Fraser, plete survey; but if contrary to the Gaudet, opinion of the engineers it could not be Gill, completed in time to have the work begun before the meeting of Parliament he would, Haggart, as he had done with the Georgian Bay Harwood, Branch give Parliament an opportunity of pronouncing upon the contract. on the other hand they were obliged to lay on their cars and do nothing, waiting for the meeting of Parliament, he knew what the cry would be and it would come from more than one quarter. But if The amendment of hon. Mr. TUPPER was then put and declared lost. Hurteau, Thompson(Haldimand), NAYS: Messieurs Casgrain, Metcalfe, Cauchon, Oliver, Church, Paterson, Cockburn, Hon. Mr. TUPPER moved that the Bill be not now read the third time, but Cushing, that it be referred back to the Committee Davies, DeCosmos, of the Whole with instructions to add the Delorme, following words to the 8th sub-section of De St. Georges, the third clause, "provided always that De Veber, Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald. : Taschereau, Thibaudeau, Thompson (Cariboo), Thompson (Welland), Tremblay, To provide for the amalgamation of the Niagara District Bank with the Imperial Bank of Canada (from the Senate). To incorporate "The Canada Land Investment Guarantee Company (limited).” To incorporate the Pictou Iron and Coal Company. To incorporate the Canadian Gas Lighting Company (from the Senate). To incorporate a company to construct, The Bill was then read a third time and own and operate a railway from Red passed. QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE. Hon. Mr. TUPPER stated that it had been currently reported that the hon. President of the Council had stated that at the time of the Northumberland election, when Mr. COCKBURN was SPEAKER of the House, he had declared it to be six o'clock when it was only half-past five o'clock, at the suggestion of the hon. member for Kingston. Hon. Mr. HUNTINGTON said he was not surprised that gentlemen without Parliamentary experience had misunderstood the statement, but hon. members would have no difficulty in understanding that he meant that the SPEAKER left the chair before six o'clock because he was asked to do so, and because the Government wished time to consider certain matters. Sir JOHN MACDONALD said he was glad the matter had been brought forward because he never asked the late SPEAKER to declare it six o'clock when that hour had not arrived. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said the only point he wished to raise was whether the hon. President of the Council wished to reflect on the impartiality of the late SPEAKER, for he believed the hon. gentleman had no such intention. THE SUPREME COURTS. On motion of the hon. Mr. FOURNIER, the House went into Committee on the Superior Court Bill, Mr. CASGRAIN in the chair. River, in the Province of Manitoba, to a point in British Columbia, on the Pacific Ocean. To legalize and confirm certain agreements made between the Niagara Falls International Bridge Company, the Niagara Falls Suspension Bridge Company, and the Great Western Railway Company. To authorize the Canada Southern Railway Company to acquire the Erie and Niagara Railway, and for other purposes. The amendments made by the Senate to the following Bills were concurred in :— Act relating to the Upper Ottawa Improvement Company. Act to incorporate the Lower Ottawa Boom Company. Act to incorporate the Industrial Life Insurance Company." Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE moved the The House adjournment of the House. adjourned at 1.20. On motion of Hon. Mr. SMITH the The Bill was reported with amend-' House in committee resumed consideraHon. Mr. Tupреr. tion of Bill to amend the Act 37 Vic., Cap. 34, appointing harbor masters; Mr. BURPEE (Sunbury) in the chair. Hon. Mr. SMITH said he had con sidered the suggestion of the hon. member for Chateauguay made yesterday, and would agree to the insertion of a clause giving the GOVERNOR GENERAL in Council power to appoint harbor masters at ports on the Lower St. Lawrence. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL said the Bill provided that a ship should not have to pay the fees more than twice a year, no matter at how many ports or how often it called. Take the Gulf Ports' ships for instance. They called at eight ports every trip. He wished to know if they paid at any two of these parts they would have to pay again. Hon. Mr. SMITH said they would only have to pay twice, and they might pay both times at one port. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL-Have they their choice of where they will pay. Hon. Mr. SMITH-They pay where they first call. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL-Had not my hon. friend better put that in the Bill so as to prevent any difficulty? The Bill was amended so as to provide that a ship shall pay the fees at the first and second port it calls at. The committee rose and reported the Bill with amendments, which were read a first and second time, and the Bill was read a third time and passed. SUPREME COURT. Hon. Mr. FOURNIER moved the third reading of the Bill to establish a Supreme Court and Court of Exchequer for the Dominion of Canada. Mr. WHITE moved that the Bill be not now read the third time, but that it be read the third time this day six months. His reasons for making this motion were, in the first place there was no petitition from any of the Provinces asking for this Bill; in the second place when this Government came into power they thought it necessary to tax the people of this country to the extent of $3,000,000 in order to meet the requirements of the Dominion; and, in the third place, all the public money of this country was more required for public works than for a Supreme Court. During the time the late Govern Hon. Mr Smith. ment was in power, the Ministerialist representatives from Quebec declared that they would not support the Ministry in this measure. In Ontario, as the hon. member for Leeds had remarked, there were enough courts to meet the requirements of the people without establishing another court which would cost this country $100,000 a year. Petitition after petition had been presented in this House asking that the canals be deepened to 14 feet. Why not apply this money in that way ? This House should not forget that thé country was pledged to build the Pacific Railroad, and that the Premier was bringing in Bills to construct branches of that road. Some of the Ministerial journals claimed credit for the Government because they had dismissed public officials and saved $30,000 to the country, but they omitted to mention that the same Government was imposing an unneceessary burden of $100,000 per annum on the people. For these reasons he submitted his motion. Mr. JONES (Leeds), in seconding the motion, said he did not look upon this Bill as a party measure because it was a bantling of the old Government which the present Ministry had adopted. As he had remarked on a former occasion, our judiciary was in a very good state; justice was at every man's door, and he did not approve of expending $100,000 for something that the country did not need. Hon. Mr. MITCHELL said he was not in the House when this Bill was under discussion. He merely rose now to say that while not approving of some features of the Bill, its general principles met his approval and would receive his support. The House divided on the amendment, with the following result: yeas, 38; nays, 121. Baby, Béchard, Bernier, Biggar, Bourassa, Bowell, Caron, Cheval, Cimon, Cuthbert, Coupal, Farrow, Ferguson, YEAS: Messieurs The amendment was therefore declared lost. Mr. OUIMET moved, seconded by Mr. MOUSSEAU, That this Bill be not now read the third time, but that it be referred back to the Committee of the Whole, with instructions to amend it so as to exclude from the appellate jurisdiction given to the Supreme Court of Canada all cases involving questions relating to property and civil rights and civil procedure. Mr. TASCHEREAU moved in amendment to the amendment, seconded by Mr. SCATCHARD, That all the words after "House" be struck out and the following substituted: to amend the same by striking out all provisions conferring upon the proposed Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction in suits arising under Provincial law and within the Legislative jurisdiction of the Provinces, so as to make the proposed Supreme Court a General Court of Appeal for Canada solely. Mr. WRIGHT (Pontiac) said it appeared to him somewhat extraordinary that when they were endeavoring to establish a Court of ultimate appeal they should find arrayed against it the legal talent of the Province of Quebec. As an humble member of the profession, he was at a loss to understand how any lawyer in the Province of Quebec could have more confidence in the ultimate appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council than to a court constituted as this would be. He hoped the Bill would pass in its present shape; and he could only express his astonishment that any Quebec lawyer would seek to oppose it. Mr. OMIMET said that the amendment to the amendment covered the same ground as his motion, and, as it was more explicit, he had no objection to accept it. The opponents of this Bill had never said that they had more confidence in the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council than they would have in this proposed. Supreme Court. On the contrary, for himself, he would be very glad to have the appeal to the Privy Council abolished. But that was not the question now before the House. Certainly this Bill did not propose to abolish that appeal. If the hon. member for Pontiac wished to get rid of that appeal, he should have moved an amendment in that direction. For the reasons which he had expressed the other day, he would support the amendment Brown, now before the House. If they could not, Borden, Delorme. Flynn, with the practice of the law which he is Fournier, to administer. principle that a Judge should be fai The House divided on the amendment to the amendment which was rejected on the following vote :-Yeas, 40; Nays, 118. Fraser, Fréchette, Galbraith, Scriver, Geoffrion, Shibley, Gibson, Sinclair, Gillies, Skinner, Gillmor, Smith (Peel), YEAS: Gordon, Smith (Westmoreland), Hall, Béchard, McCallum, Higginbotham, Holton, Horton, Huntington, Snider, Stirton, St. Jean, Thibaudeau, Thompson(Haldimand), Irving, Trow, Costigan, Mousseau, Jodoin, Vail, Coupal, Orton, Cuthbert, Ouimet, Kirk, Mr. LAFLAMME moved that this Bill be not now read a third time, but that it be referred back to Committee of the Whole to be amended by adding the following words after the word "court" on the 18th line of the fourth section of the said Bill :-"Two of whom at least shall be taken from the Judges of the Superior Court or Court of Queen's Bench, or from amongst the Barristers or Advocates of the Province of Quebec." He said this motion was merely to carry out the idea which he had expressed the other night— that he believed under the peculiar circumstances in which the Province of Que |