a com Census 1873-74. 187 -77. Difference. $39470 34 7546 75 12262 60 31923 59 426924 40 563178 76 12262 60 79293 60 79263 60 2430 001 Survey with Customs Re funds 69330 02 2430 00 144906 00 69330 02 Total ..... 3151070 671820821 89 1330248 78 the question of economy, and expose | but, deducting the items under the several extravagances of the Govern- following heads from both years: ment, to the people of this country. For that purpose, he would take out of the account, in the first instance, the expenditure upon several items; the Militia service, and the Public Works chargeable to revenue, and he would add to those items, other items which, it appeared to him, ought to be treated separately, because there was no corresponding expenditure in the year 1876-7 to answer that of 1873-4. They should remember this was parative statement of expenditure. And on this, again, the question did not arise as to whether the expenditure of last year was improper, or whether the expenditure of 1873-4 was right or wrong. But the point sought to be established by the hon. the Finance Minister was that they had cut down this ordinary expenditure, while the gentlemen who had preceded them in office, had permitted it to grow to a very large amount. The items he would take in the first place, were: first, the census, upon which there was a difference of expenditure of $31,923.59. This was a small item, it was true, but it was a fair item. The census expenditure was larger in 1871, 1872 and 1873 than in 1873-4, and it was constantly decreasing; and before long, until the next census was taken, it would altogether disappear from the Public Accounts. Taking the items of Militia and Defence, Public Works, and the North-West Territory organization, the Boundary Surveys between this country and the United States and between Canada and Ontario, and the item of Military Stores, the Customs refunds, of which they had heard a good deal, viz., the $69,000 paid to the Great Western Railway, it would be found that, while in 1873-74 there was an expendian expenditure upon those different items of some $3,151,070.67, during last year there was only an expenditure of $1,820,8-1.89. These items when compared showed : Showing that on these items thero was expended in 1873-4, $1,330,248.78 more than in 1876-7. So far as the Census was concerned, owing to the gradual decrease in this item, he thought it was quite plain that there could be no economy claimed in that item of expenditure. With respect to the item of Militia and Defence, it was quite true they had cut it down nearly, or over four hundred thousand dollars, the exact figure being $425,924.40. It was probable that this retrenchment was necessary in the altered state of the finances of the country, and he would not find fault with the Administration in this respect. But he could not help recognizing the fact that, in 1873-74, the military forces of the country had been kept in a state of efficiency, while they had been starved by the present Administration. Then, upon the item. of Public Works chargeable to revenue, he found there was a dif ference of expenditure between the two years of not less than $563,178.76, but was it a proof of economy to charge certain sums to capital instead of to revenue? of to revenue? This sum which the late Government had charged to and included in the ordinary expenditure, chargeable to revenue, would,under the management of the present Government, have been paid out of capital, and so our debt would have been increased, and it made little dif ference to the taxpayer 1876-77. whether head of "Ordinary Expenditure".....$8,324,076 17 6,835,078 18 Showing an apparent difference in favour of 1876-77 of $1,488,997 99; this sum would $563,000 more expended upon public | not parsimony. On looking into the works than during the last year of statement which showed this apparent 1876-7. Now they had heard a good reduction of $85,000, what did deal from the hon. gentleman at the they find? They found that, in head of the Finance Department, about the year 1873-74, the item of the sums that the Administration had Legislation alone, owing to the second to pay last year in connection with the Session, was something in the neighNorth-West Territory. He was will bourhood of $200,000, the exact figures ing to compare accounts on that point being $194,281.38; the items of Penalso. He thought those were items sions and Superannuations showed an which ought, properly, to be deducted increase of $5,250.25 and $11,962.84 from both sides of the account. In a over-paid, as compared with Mr. Tilley's comparative statement they were bound estimate. So, taking these figures, in fairness to eliminate these which amounted to $211,494.47, as items from both sides of the accounts. against $85,000, they had this result: They amounted to $764,865.93 during that, whilst the Government expended last year as compared with $838,000.65 upon these items $85,615.49 less than the former year. In other words, the their predecessors, if they added to that expenditure of the Administration in the amount incurred on account of the connection with the North-West, em- second Session and overpaid on Penbracing the items Indian grants, Dom- sions, Superannuations, etc., they inion lands, Dominion forces of Mani- found it left a deficiency of $125,878.98. toba, and Mounted Police of the North- He thought the matter had West Territory, were heavier during been put fairly, and it simthe year 1873-74 than during the year ply amounted to this: Taking out 1876-77, as shown on this statement:- the North-West expenditure, which was large in 1873-4, and large last year, but not so much as in the former year, and also the items of Militia and Defence, Public Works, expenditures in the North-West Territory, Survey of Boundaries with the United States, Boundary Survey of Ontario, the item of Military Stores, which was nearly $150,000, and Customs refund, there being no corresponding expenditure in this last year -taking, he said, these items out, the result was fairly deducible in the manner he had attempted to show; namely, that, while the expenditure upon these items was greater in 1873-4 in the North-West, Public Works, Militia, there was no reason to complain of that expenditure; that, in the one case, these charges had gone against revenue and not capital account; while, in the other, the large item in Public Works had gone to capital account, or as much money had not been expended. The result might thus briefly be summarized: 1873-74 Indian Grants......... $146,068 31 }. 209,169 42 Mounted Police,... 199,599 14 Manitoba. N. W. T. Total...... Or an excess in the 838,000 65 766,865 93 1876-77. 301,596 00 352,749 05 766,865 93 and year 1873-74, of...... $71,134 72 The balance were items which belonged to both periods, which could be fairly and properly contrasted together, which he would proceed to do. Taking, for the balance of these items, these two different sets of figures and comparing them, they obtained the following result: That in 1873-4 there was expended upon those items $4,335,005.35; in 1876-7 this expenditure amounted to $4,249,390.35, an apparent difference in favour of the Administration of $85,615. To this reduction they were fairly entitled to credit unless it could be shown that there were exceptional items of expenditure during that period which would take away very much from the hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches the claim they advanced fhaving reduced. the expenditure during that period, and of having practiced economy, if items of Census, tary Stores and Customs Refunds) $4,335,005 85 $4,249,390 35 Or an apparent .... 194,281 38 17,213 09 $211,494 47 $85,615 49 125,878 98 ter of economy of the present Government-fairly analyzed and judged, and fairly contrasted with the year 1873-4, gave, not a decrease, but a slight increase of expenditure over the latter Concerning the item year. of Militia and Defence, before passing it, he had a word of complaint to make. While the present Government had starved the service, while they had, in 85,615 49 point of fact, no substantial body of men drilled in this Dominion sufficiently large to be depended on in a case of emergency, they had, in a manner most inconsistent with their professions of economy, increased the expenditure in one matter connected with the Service, the Military College at Kingston, in a most extraordinary way. This College, to which his hon. friends opposite were entitled to all the credit, which was condemned by all the practical militia officers in the country, and which could hardly be justified in view of the poverty of this country, had cost. up to this period, the sum of $89,389.05 for construction, and there had been two Estimates since then submitted to this House for further expenditure amounting to $70,000, making a total of $159,389 for construction. He believed one of these items proved very essential in the former Kingston election, and this year's estimate of $30,000 was no doubt inserted in view of another bitter election contest in that city. Whether that were so or not, the construction of the Military College had cost $159,000; and its management, including actual expenditure and amounts estimated, formed a sum of $127,466 more, and all this to educate thirty-eight cadets, to teach thirty-eight young gentlemen to be as efficient as West Point cadets, he presumed. They had no money to expend Showing that the expenditure of187677 was the most by Items under head of North-West Expenditure...................... 838,000 66 754,865 93 Census, &c 3,151,070 67 1,820,821 89 Comparing these two years, therefore, they found this result: that last year -the year in which the Government had cut down everything they possibly could, with the view of meeting the electors, in which they had reduced the expenditure, as compared with the former year, from from $8,569,774. to $6,835,078.18, with the preceding year, for both of which years they were responsible, they had not yet succeeded in reducing the expenditure of this country to the same state in which it was in the year 1873-4, when the pre sent Government succeeded to office. He had not attempted in this statement to deny the responsibility of the late Administration for the expenditure of 1873-4; he had not attempted to quibble about that point, because it was almost impossible to say whether the present or the late Administration were responsible for that expenditure. They knew, however, one fact that the former Government submitted their Estimates to this House, and it would be, probably, not unfair to bind them to their Estimates, though, if they went into a very careful analysis, they sumed from the other side of the line. might find that these Estimates had been exceeded in some cases, as some They would have skilled officers, fit branches always were. Acknowledging to be major-generals, but would lack the responsibility of the late Adminis- company officers and men to be led. tration for 1873-4, he had been able to He submitted to the House that, in show that the expenditure of last year view of the economy which had been —the death-bed repentance in the mat-practised; in view of the wonderful officers or : to in instructing company in drilling men, but they had something like $300,000 expend in teaching thirtyeight cadets how to direct great bodies of men when this country might be invaded by great armed forces, he pre prescience which the hon. the Finance | might again cry out for triennial ParMinister always had of the reaction liaments. But, taking the year 1875-6, which had overtaken the country, and he thought they had a right to deduct in view of the declining revenue, this ex- from the expenditure of 1873-4, the penditure on the Military College was items of Census, and North-West Terwholly unjustified and should not be con- ritory organization, the boundary surtinued, considering the other circum- vey of Ontario, Military stores, Cusstances to which he had referred. toms refunds, extra Session; and adding But, if the Government were entitled to the expenditure of 1875-6, which to credit for the reduced expenditure they had a right to do, the amount last year, what could be said on their given to the relief fund in Manitoba, behalf respecting the expenditure of $83,000; the result of the expenditure 1875-6. It was idle to tell the House, of 1875-6 as compared with 1873-4, and could impose on no reasonable mind, was that, the hon. gentlemen who that the gentlemen who succeeded to talked of economy practised extravapower in the fall of 1873, were not in gance to the extent of $604,781.14. He a position before the financial year of had spoken so far, simply with regard 1875-6 to practice that economy of to what was called "Ordinary Expendiwhich they had heard so much, when ture," but would now consider "Charges these hon. gentlemen were in Opposi- on Revenue, " as to which, there was no tion. And yet this item of ordinary doubt but that the present Government expenditure, in that year, was greater had paid considerably more than than this last year, 1876-7, as he had their predecessors. In any comparaalready shown, by $1,488,997.99, and tive statement, it would not be fair to it was greater than the expenditure of contrast the item of Charges on Public 1873-4 by a very considerable amount, Debt, which could not be controlled, $235.697.94; that was, the expenditure which he did not pretend the Governof 1875-6 was $8,569,774.11, which, ment could control, and which would, contrasted with that of 1873-4, probably, have risen to the same, or $8,324,076.17, gave a difference of nearly the same amount, had the hon. $245,000. The gentlemen opposite gentlemen of the former Administraunderstood practising economy only tion remained in power. But let them for the purpose of catching the consider Charges on Revenue, which electoral vote. He did not under- were items within the control of the stand practising economy for the Administration of the day. He found sake of catching the electoral vote. that Charges on Revenue had swollen The economy which they preached from $4,736,442.28 to $5,196,896, an while in Opposition was a searching excess of $458,154.36; that was on economy. He would again quote the charges on revenue, fully, as he subwords of the resolution of the Reform mitted, within the control of the AdConvention previously mentioned. ministration of the day-an increase "They were to apply themselves to a of expenditure by very nearly half a thorough overhauling of the Depart- million dollars. The item of public mental system, the contraction of the works would not explain this increase. lavish annual expenditure, the enforce- It had been said by hon. gentlemen ment of strict economy in every branch opposite that the cost of public works, of the public service." And yet they Intercolonial Railway, Prince Edward were in power during eight months of Island Railway, etc., had been neces1873-4, also during the financial year of sarily greater under the present than 1874-5, and each year the expenditure under the former Administration. increased and reached its maximum That plea would not answer, because, in 1875-6, when it was $235,000 more in 1873-4, the amount expended on than 1873-4, and one and a half million these items chargable to revenue was dollars more than this last year. If $37,847.32 more than last year. He this approaching appeal to the people had a right to add that to the $458,000, had such a beneficial effect on the and found, thereby, the extravagance management of our finances, as was in this branch of the public service apparent by comparing the expen- amounted to half a million dollars, diture of this year with last, the people during the time of admitted depression. The hon. the Finance Minister ad- | responsibility. As an example of this mitted frankly that the expenditure increase of expediture he would take of $300,000 was attributable to the the port of Montreal. In the year Post-Office Department. He (the 1873-4, there was $5,639,008.80 of Finance Minister) admitted that, duties collected, the expense of which under the circumstances, that was collection amounted to $95,765.68; not a proper expenditure. When this expenditure was extravagant, acan hon. gentleman admitted all they cording to the hon. gentleman opposite, had to say against him, not one and ought to have been curtailed. word could be added. But even that How was it curtailed? The next admission would not help the hon. year, that amount of $95,000 became gentleman. With regard to the Weights $99,823,09; the year following it beand Measures Act, the hon. the came $117,275.43; and the last year it Finance Minister threw the onus of was $117,989.20. During the period the the Act on the hon. member for amount of receipts has been decreasCumberland, who, he said, had insisted ing; last year the collections were on having it placed on the Statute-book. $3,878,507.28. While the work deThe House would remember that the creased, the expenditure in connection hon. the Minister of Militia was very with the work, in this particular port, active last year in moving the repeal and he expected others would show a of the Act, and no doubt he did not like result, increased in inverse ratio. accept office until he understood that That might be accounted for in the his policy with respect to Weights and same manner as the expenditure in Measures would be carried out. What connection with the Military College. were the facts about the Weights and It had been said at the time that the Measures Bill? Not one dollar had expenditure was increased in order to been spent on that service in 1873-4. aid in defeating Mr. White and electHe believed the hon. the Finance ing a supporter of the Government Minister had stated that a large sum from Montreal. So much for the of money had been expended by the annual expenditure of this portion of former Administration on this service; the statement. He now desired to but,on reference to the Public Accounts, draw the attention of the House to he would find he was mistaken. another argument of the hon. the one dollar was spent in 1873-4. Finance Minister, which appeared to law was on the Statute-book, but it him to be an exceedingly unfair one; was clear that the Act did not come namely, that the late Administration into force until an Order in Council were responsible for the position in was passed in the month of December, which they left the affairs of the 1874, more than a year after the late country; that this Administration had Government had been out of office. no power, in consequence, to reduce Why was the responsibilty of this Act the expenditure, no matter how always cast on the hon. member for strongly they desired it, owing to the Cumberland, when the present Govern- numerous public works entered upon ment, knowing that this Act of Parlia- by the late Administration. What ment could not be carried into effect had been the public expenditure until an Order in Council was passe, of which these hon. gentlemen so loudand knowing that the revenue of the ly complained? On turning to the country was decreasing, passed this public records, he understood the Order in Council and insisted on put- complaint referred to expenditure in ting this hundred thousand dollars connection with the Pacific Railroad per annum upon the people of this and expenditure on canals. He undercountry, and then tried to escape the stood the complaint was that that odium by charging the responsibility expenditure was unjustifiable, and that of the Act to the hon. member for Cum- the hon. gentlemen in the present Adberland? He contended that for this ministration had no power to reexcess in the charges upon re- duce it that they were obliged venue, somewhere in the neighbour- to go on finishing these pubhood of half a million dollars, lic works. He could satisfy any the Government could not escape the man that the late Administration Not |