The hon. gentle cultural interests of the Dominion, but | and still remained so. not one word did he say with respect man also said that, during the election to the coal mining interests. He advo- campaign of last spring, he (Mr. Curcated protecting the salt mining inter-rier) had taken credit to himself for ests of Ontario, but said nothing about having had a motion in his desk protecting the coal mining interests of to remove the duty from pork. It Nova Scotia. He might, if he had seen was true he had that motion in his fit, put in his resolution words showing desk, and he looked through the House his views with regard to these mining for a seconder, but was unable to get interests; he might have inserted the one. The hon. member for Glengarry words "that in the opinion of this (Mr. McNab), in an excellent speech, House it is desirable to impose a duty had claimed that he had a right to of 17 per cent on all imported coal." speak for the farmers of this country, But he had not seen fit to bring for- and that they wanted no Protection ward anything but the bald reso- whatever; and yet, to his astonishlution, which might mean every- ment and surprise, that gentleman thing, but which he (Mr. MacKay) had seconded his motion. He did not believed meant nothing at at all, propose to argue on the question of so far as the coal mining interests of Free-trade or Protection that evening. Nova Scotia were concerned. Protect- He had only wished to clear himing the salt industries of Ontario self from the charge of inconsistency. would certainly not be of any benefit With reference to the election of last to Nova Scotians, because, such a large spring, he might say that certain hon. quantity of salt being used by their gentlemen on his side of the House fishermen, it would be very detrimen- had discovered a mote in Mr. Speaker's tal to their interests, and to many eye and in the eye of the hon. memother interests which were dependent ber for Lincoln, and measures were upon the fisheries for their support, taken to remove it. It resulted that for the fishermen there would be com- an hon. gentleman opposite thought pelled to purchase salt from the Pro- he had discovered a beam in his (Mr. vince of Ontario. The hon. member Currier's) eye, and, in order to pluck for Cumberland (Mr. Tupper), who out this beam, he was obliged to vacate spoke now and again in the interests his seat, in which act he was followed of Nova Scotia, had it in his power to by the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. retain the duty of 50c. per ton to Norris). He was glad to see the hon. protect the coal interest, but, instead of gentleman re-elected, and his first that, he voted for the duty being taken words of greeting to the hon. gentleoff. That was the time he should have man at the opening of this Session shown his solicitude for the coal were to congratulate him on his interests of the Province, and not now, return, and to say that, had he had a when he was in the cold shades of vote in the county of Lincoln, if he Opposition. He did not see that any could have been there on polling day, assistance was intended to be afforded he would have cast it in favour of to the coal industry by the resolution, the hon. gentleman He could say the therefore he begged to state his inten- same thing with regard to Mr. Speaker. tion of opposing it. If he had been present when the vote was taken in the House, and he was very sorry that this was not the case, he would have voted for Mr. Speaker. His excuse for making these remarks was merely to answer accusations which had been made against him by the hon. member for North Lanark (Mr. Galbraith) and the hon. member for North York (Mr. Dymond). MR. CURRIER said the hon. member for North York (Mr. Dymond) had pointed out that he had acted inconsistently-and the fact had been commented upon by another hon. gentleman-in moving to have the duty removed from pork and have it placed on the free list. He contended that this was not an act of inconsistency on his part, because, in doing this, he was giving Protection to an industry-the lumber trade-that at that time was very much depressed, MR. MCGREGOR said that the object of the amendment was to protect the miner and the manufacturer as well as the farmer. He was strongly in A Jones (South Leeds), favour of protection to the farmer, but, | Harwood, That all the words after the word "That" be left out, and the following inserted in stead thereof: "It be resolved that this House is of opinion that the welfare of Canada requires the adoption of a National Policy, which by a judicious readjustment of the Tariff will benefit and foster the agricultural, the mining, the manufacturing and other interests of the Dominion; that such a policy will retain in Canada thousands of our fellow countrymen now obliged to expatriate themselves in search of the employment denied them at home; will restore prosperity to our struggling industries, now so sadly depressed; will prevent Canada from being made a sacrifice market; will encourage and develop an active interprovincial trade, and moving (as it ought to do) in the direction of a reciprocity of tariffs with our neighbours, so far as the varied inrerests of Cañada may demand, will greatly tend to procure for this country, eventually, a reciprocity of trade."—(Sir John A. Macdonald). will Motion in amendment negatived on the following division: Thompson (Cariboo), Wallace (S. Norfolk) NAYS: Messieurs Appleby, Bain, Bourassa, Bowman, Boyer, Brouse, Buell, Burpee (St. John), Kerr, Charlton, Mills, Cheval, Norris, Christie, Oliver, Church, Paterson, Cockburn, Perry, Coffin, Pettes, Cook, Pickard, YEAS: Davies, Pouliot, DeVeber, Benoit, Macdonald (Kingston), Dymond, Blanchet, McDonald (Cape Bre'n) Ferris, Bolduc, McDougall (Three Ri's), Fiset, Richard, Roscoe, Ross (East Durham), Ross (West Middlesex), Bourbeau, McKay (Colchester), Fleming Ross (Prince Edward), Bowell, Macmillan, Flynn, Rymal, Brooks, McCallum, Forbes, Scatcherd, Brown, McCarthy, Fréchette, Scriver, Bunster, McQuade, Galbraith, Shibley, Geoffrion, Sinclair, Caron, Methot, Gibson, Skinner, Cimon Monteith, Gillies, Smith (Peel), Colby, Montplaisir, Gillmor, Costigan, Mousseau, Goudge, Smith (Westmoreland), Coupal, Orton, Greenway, St. Jean, Currier, Ouimet, Guthrie, Haddow, Daoust, Pinsonneault, Hagar, DeCosmos, Platt, Hall, Desjardins, Plumb, Higinbotham, Dewdney Pope (Compton), Holton, Domville, Pope (Queens, P.E.I.), Horton, Donahue, Robillard, Huntington, Dugas, Robinson, Farrow, Robitaille, Ferguson, Rochester, Flesher, Rouleau, Motion made and question proposed: That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to go again into Committee of Supply.-(Mr. Cartwright.) Motion agreed to. SUPPLY. III.-CIVIL GOVERNMENT. House again resolved itself into Committee of Supply. (In the Committee.) 3. To defray the salaries of the Resolution ordered to be reported. House adjourned at Five minutes before HOUSE OF COMMONS. The Speaker took the Chair at Three o'clock. PRAYERS. INDIAN EDUCATION IN ONTARIO. QUESTION. MR. MCCRANEY enquired, Whether it is the intention of the Government to hand over the appropriation made for the education of the Indians in Ontario, and the management of the Indian Schools to the Government of Ontario? MR. MILLS: I may say that I have had some communication upon this subject with the Minister of Education in Ontario, but no conclusion has as yet been arrived at. The correspondence is of very recent date, and it is now incomplete. CHESTER EAST POST OFFICE. QUESTION. MR. BOURBEAU enquired, Whether it is the intention of the Government to transfer the post office of Chester East, County of Arthabaska, to the Village of Chester East; if not, whether it is their intention to establish a post office in said village? MR. HUNTINGTON: I may say that some representations had been made to the Department that such a change would be desirable, and our officers have been consulted; but that is all I know about it. [By Telegraph from our own Correspondent.] "WINNIPEG, Man., March 7.-The St. Paul Pioneer Press states editorially that the purchasers of the bonds of the St. Paul and Pacific Railway,are Messrs. Hill and Kittson, associated with Mr. Stephens, of the Bank of Montreal, and Mr. Donald A. Smith. It asserts that, through the influence of the latter, the support and co-operation of the Dominion Government have been obtained in the adjustment of their connections with the Railway system of Manitoba. "It affirms also that they have, in fact, effected a lease on favourable terms of the Pembina Branch, and that this intimate alliance furnishes an ample guarantee that it will be forever free of the competition of the Chicago lines." "The article concludes :-'It is deemed proper to make public these facts to disabuse antagonistic parties of misapprehensions which may lead to a useless waste of valuable time.""" MR. MACKENZIE: The Govern ment know nothing about who all the parties are who are connected with that road; but Mr. Stephens of the Bank of Montreal, has been in communication with the Government about the transfer of the traffic at the boundary, from the Pembina branch, upon the ground that he has made arrangements for the furnishing of the road which is now partly finished to that point; and the Government propose to make some arrangements with that company for the transfer of traffic. No lease has been offected, and no lease will be effected, without the sanction of Parliament. CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY-RED RIVER CROSSING. QUESTION. MR. CASGRAIN, for MR, Schultz, enquired, When the Government intend to compensate the owners of lands taken by the Government at the cross-› ing of the Red River by the Canada Pacific Railway? MR. GOUDGE moved for a return of all expenditure for repairs and additions incurred by the Intercolonial Railway Department on the Tupper House, Hollis Street, Halifax, used as a Ticket Office for that Department. He said he would explain the object he had in making this motion. In February, 1873, a certain property in Hollis Street, Halifax, was owned by the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Tupper), who then was a member of the Government. It had been decided, it appeared, by the railway authorities, that they should have an office more in the centre of the city than the office they had previously had for the sale of tickets in connection with the Intercolonial Railway, and the hon. member's building was considered convenient for the purpose. No doubt the hon. gentleman thought it desirable that he should have the opportunity of making as much out of the revenue of the country as anybody else; as he (Mr. Tupper) had boasted in a speech made in Halifax during the election of his hon. friend the hon. the Minister of Militia. Before he entered the Government, he dispossessed himself of all public property. Having in view, without doubt, the leasing of this property to the Government, the hon. gentleman had caused it to change hands, and on the 8th of February they found that the hon. gentleman deeded this property to his son, Stewart Tupper. He (Mr. Tupper) told them in his speech that this was done for the sum of one dollar, plus the natural love and affection he bore that son, which, without doubt, was very proper; but, nevertheless, he (Mr. Goudge) thought that, in connection with this natural love and affection, the hon. gentleman had his eye on greater advantages to accrue to a member of his family. He Mr. Goudge) found that in May, 1873, an arrangement was made with the Intercolonial Railway Department whereby this property was to be leased for the term of three years, and that the lease was sent to Stewart Tupper, to the Intercolonial Railway Department, though it was never perfected by the then Superintendent of Government Railways. The consideration given for the lease of this building was $600 a year, and, although it was stated by the hon. gentleman that this was not a greater sum than had previously been received by himself for this property from the former lessee, yet, while this statement was to a certain extent true, it did not contain all the truth; for this building which was leased by the Government for $600 a year had, he believed, something like $1,500 spent on it for repairs and additions and other purposes. He also found that no provision was made whereby, at the termination of the lease, the Government should be recouped for the money thus laid out. This lease was never signed; and when the present Government came into power, they, in view of these circumstances, in their wisdom, and very properly too, felt that it was very desir able that this state of things should not continue; and, consequently, at the end of seventeen months, they cancelled these arrangements and closed this office. He found that something like $850 was paid in rental for this building, while something in the vicinity of $1,500 was paid for repairs, thereby making this a very expensive building for the purposes in question. He did not hesitate to say that a building suitable and properly equipped for the sale of tickets, with every necessary convenience and appliance, could have been obtained in Halifax for, at least, the sum that was paid for the rental of this property, which would have saved the $1,500 mentioned. If the latter sum had been expended solely to fit up the office, this expenditure might seem to some extent legitimate; but but when it was known that this money was applied to the building generally for repair, thereby enhancing the value of the property, he thought that a person having the close connection that the hon. gentleman had with the Government, should not have asked the Government to spend such a large sum of money on it. This transaction certainly savored of the character of job; and, therefore, he considered that the House should be put in possession of this information. The transfer to the son, was made on the 8th of February, 1873, and on the 1st day of May that year, the arrangement was entered into, whereby the Government were to become the lessees of this building. It must have been a very expensive arrangement to cost in the vicinity of $1,200 a year for the sale of tickets there, in addition to the salary of the person who was charged with this and no other business. He was not aware that this building was let for any other purpose. The transactions were very costly and the Government had very properly, on acceding to power, made a change whereby a large saving was effected, while the public were quite as well served. When the return came down, he would take the opportunity to address the House at greater length on this subject. MR. TUPPER said that having on a previous occasion stated to the House that he would be extremely glad if hon. gentlemen opposite would raise the question, and take means to examine into it, he did not at this time feel called upon to say much. The mover of the resolution had stated in his remarks that he (Mr. Tupper) had no connection whatever with the transaction to which he referred, and stated also that he had ceased to be the owner of the property months before it was leased to the Government. He defied hon. gentlemen opposite to prove that the transfer of the property was an improper transaction, and at the time the lease was entered into he had no more interest in the building than the hon. move of the resolution. He was aware that when the Railway department leased the property, they had to make certain alterations on it for the purpose of adapting it to their own purposes; but what the cost of the alterations amounted to he was not able to state. The amount for which the house was leased to the Department was the same as that for which it was leased to a tenant, $600 a year, and under the lease, any alterations or repairs required, must be done by the tenant. He did not think it necessary to say much more on the subject than this: that the charge made by the present Government, whereby the sale of tickets in Halifax was handed over to a private firm, involved a much greater expense than was caused by the previous arrangement. He thought he was correct in saying that the property had not been offered either to the Government or the Railway department; but it was sought for by them, because, as the hon. gentleman knew, it adjoined the Halifax hotel, which was in the most central part of the city. It was leased to the Department at the same rate as it had previously been to a private tenant, and had since been sold for $9,500 in cash. While in the occupation of the Railway department, it was not only used as a place for the sale of tickets, but there also was a residence for the officer who took charge of the sale of tickets, and who was always accessible to the public. He was glad the hon. gentleman had made the motion which he had just proposed, for the giving of the publicity to the transaction could not be more |