Mr. E. F. CLARKE (West Toronto).

Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to draw the attention of the

Prime Minister to a cable which appears in the London Times of May 2nd from its Australian correspondent. The cable reads as follows :-

Melbourne, May 1.-Mr. Muloek, the Canadian Postmaster General, is empowered to conler with the Federal government and with a view to adoption of an Imperial tariff policy, preferential duties being mutually allowed between Great Britain, the Dominion, the comjnonwealth and1 the colonies generally. Mr. Muloek thinks there' is considerable room for an increase of trade between Canada and Australia.

I would like to ask the Prime Minister as to the accuracy of the statement in that cablegram and whether, on leaving Canada, Mr. Muloek received instructions to enter into negotiations with the Australian Commonwealth, the Dominion and the mother country. Any information the Prime Minister can give the House and the country, I am sure, will be received with a great deal of interest.

I may say to my hon. friend (Mr. Clarke) and the House that Mr. Mul-ock is the bearer of no specific formal instructions. But he has received informal instructions to ascertain to what extent it would be possible to promote trade between Canada and Australia and to make a report upon the subject on his return.

Mr. MACLEAN.

In connection with this matter I would like to ask the Minister of Finance to tell the House and the country now whether any other claims of the provinces for better terms have been filed, and of what nature they are.

I do not regard this as a claim for better terms, therefore my hon. friend's remark about any other claims for better terms is calculated to mislead.

Mr. MACLEAN.

Then are there any claims from any of the provinces ? We are laying down a principle here, we have opened the door again. We are taking up one case, others are to follow. Now I would like the minister to tell the House and the country what those other claims are that have been made on the government from different provinces of this confederation, if any.

I think I can say that at the present moment there

is no claim from any of the provinces which is being made the subject of any very serious consideration. The various provinces from time to time have correspondence with us on matters of account and otherwise, but I would not like to treat these as serious claims. So far as the government is concerned, I think I am correct in stating that at the present time there is no claim from any of the provinces which the government are seriously entertaining, or which they contemplate submitting to parliament. The province of Prince Edward Island, and for that matter the maritime provinces generally, have from time to time advanced a claim on account of the fisheries award. It was represented that that award was peculiarly the property of the lower provinces, and should have been paid over to them. That matter, in one form or another, has been before parliament for twenty years, or for a very long period, and I have no doubt that for twenty years to come somebody will be found to advocate such a view. The province of Prince Edward Island recently referred to that in the course of representations by a delegation, and dwelt upon the fact that by reason of a decision of the courts the rights of the provinces in these fisheries have become much stronger than they were before. Our answer to that was that in connection with the fishery award, if not directly arising out of that, there was the grant of the fishing bounty, and we have gently intimated to the provinces that if they should see fit to test their possible technical legal rights in the matter of this fishery award, they would also have to take account of the fishery bounty winch the parliament of Canada grants. They could not expect to get the money and get the bounty also; and therefore, I assume that that question is not likely to be seriously presented. At all events, if it should be presented, I do not hestiate to say that they cannot claim to be repaid the amount of the jaward and at the same time receive the fishing bounty. Therefore. I do not treat that as a very serious matter.

Then there was a claim-I am speaking entirely from memory-there has been a claim standing for many years from the province of Manitoba, that is to say, they regard it as a claim. There was a sum of $110,000 at one time placed to the credit of Manitoba, but in subsequent legislation that sum was wiped out and other provisions made in lieu thereof, and covering, as we think, that amount. The province of Manitoba several years ago brought that up and insisted that the later legislation had not wiped out the $110,000. We considered that matter, and this government declined to recognize the claim. They had also another claim arising out of the construction of public buildings in Manitoba that we did recognize, and provided for some three years ago. The other claim this government refused to entertain. Within the last few Mr. FIELDING'.

months it has been brought forward again by the government of Manitoba, but we have nothing new to communicate to the House. We have not officially given the government of Manitoba an answer, but we shall be able to do so very quickly ; but I know no reason why we should depart from the conclusion previously reached. Now I believe I have mentioned all the claims from the maritime provinces, concerning which I have any knowledge.

Now what about Nova Scotia.

Nova Scotia has made no claim for better terms, and speaking, not by any authority, but for myself as a representative from the province of Nova Scotia, I will engage that no claim should be advanced by Nova Scotia by reason of this grant to Prince Edward Island. I will undertake to say that I will not myself support any claim that might be made, if it should be made by the government of Nova Scotia, by reason of this grant to the province of Prince Edward Island. I think this grant stands upon its own merits, and should not be mixed up with any question of other claims or of better terms.

With respect to the fisheries matter which the hon. gentleman referred to, it is not correct to speak of it as a claim made by one of the provinces, or by a number of the provinces ; it is a contention as to the construction of the Act. It is a legal contention, that legal contention was submitted to parliament in the year, I think, 1880, by the then hon. member for Halifax, Mr. Richey, when Sir John A. Macdonald returned to power, and it was passed upon by parliament adversely to the contention of the province. That contention has been floating more or less in the air since parliament passed upon it at that time. That claim remained quiescent, but was revived by the decision of the Privy Council, which seemed to give some colour to the contention of the provinces with regard to their jurisdiction extending territorially over the three mile belt. Whether it does or does not, has not yet been decided ; but if eventually it is decided by the Privy Council that the contention of the maritime provinces with respect to their jurisdiction is as sound as they make it, even then if parliament did yield to their claim it would only be on the ground that my hon. friend has referred to, that the capital sum which Is now placed to their credit, and upon which they are receiving interest in the shape of bounties, being the amount awarded by the Halifax International tribunal, should cease to be paid to them afterwards. If they got the principal they could not get the interest in the shape of bounty, that would be perfecly clear, I take it. Therefore, it is not fair to speak of it as a claim ; it is more in the nature of a contention they make with regard to the

legal construction of tlieir rights under the British North America Act, and that never will be decided nor can be decided by any government until the Privy Council positively passes upon the matter again ; and Hf it is decided it must be decided on the lines my hon. friend the Minister of Finance states, that if they get the principal they certainly cannot get the interest which they are now getting in the shape of bounties.

Mr. CLARKE.

Is there any complaint from the province of Ontario with regard to those bounties ?

The province of Ontario has no connection with it at all.

Mr. CLARKE.

I ask the Minister of Finance, as he was speaking about the other provinces, if any claim has been made respecting a readjustment of the sums paid to the provinces ?

No claim has been made from any of the provinces respecting a readjustment of its subsidy.

Mr. MACLEAN.

Or of any kind ?

I know of nothing from the province of Ontario.

Mr. MACLEAN.

We are opening the door now. The hon. gentleman's own supporters 'behind him have said they intend to file their claims. The member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) filed a claim on behalf of the province of Quebec five minutes after this grant to Prince Edward Island was proposed. I believe that other claims will be filed now, and no doubt there are a number of claims.

To relieve the suspicions of my hon. friend (Mr. Maclean) I may say that they are all groundless, and that all the claims that have been made up to this date are in the hands of the Governor General.