I suppose that is something that might be placed to our credit-that we do afford a military education to officers which go into the service every year. Is the education provided by this institution regarded as at all equivalent to the training given by similar institutions in England ?
I see by the Auditor General's report, page Q-91 that William Allan and Son of Kingston received $2,430.15 for boots. &c., and at page Q-93 C. Livingston and Bros., received $7,649.99 for clothing. Were these goods purchased by tender ?
I should think not by the prices that I see charged here, and by the fact that these gentlemen are very strong partisans of hon. gentlemen opposite. Messrs. Allan supplied 49 pairs of long boots at $10, and 10 pairs of riding boots at $10 a pair, also 194 pairs of short boots at $6 a pair. Then, Messrs. Livingston supplied, for instance blouses at $2.50 each, 4 great coats and 2 capes, $73 ; 30 coats at $10.50 ;
8 pairs of gloves at 25 cents and 170 pairs at $1 a pair. I suppose these are kid gloves for the young gentlemen we have there. It seems to me the furnishing of supplies for that Military College ought to be by tender and not by going to a friend of the party at Kingston and paying these large prices, when the amount is over $7,600.
That has never been done, and it would be very difficult to do. These young gentlemen have to be measured for the boots or clothing they get. It is not like asking for a large quantity of clothing for general use to be distributed among men according
as it happens to fit. In this case they are the prices of the tailor and shoemaker-retail prices.
That is for the manufacture of cartridges. This increase of $32,000 is taken from what would have been the vote for annual drill and stores. As I pointed out, we are increasing the output of cartridges enormously, and this is to pay for wages, as we must employ more labour.