Mr. MONK.
Were they getting this over and above their own salary ?
Yes, and it was very reasonable that they should have it. It is quite impossible for people travelling to make up 'for themselves their legitimate disbursements. There are many small items of disbursement, which are not strictly taxable in their living expenses, but which they have to pay.
Mr. MONK.
Their expenses were paid, apart from this $5.
The $5 was to cover any expenses over and above living expenses.
Mr. INGRAM.
What was the pay of the commissioners per day ?
I think the Chief Justice was paid $40 per day. I do not remember what the others were paid. There will be some printing to pay for too.
Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).
Did the hon. gentleman not pay a substitute for Rev. Mr. Rowe ? While he was away, who looked after the spiritual wants of liis people ?
I do not know that he has any charge.
Mr. BLAIN.
What demand was there for the appointment of this commission ?
What does the hon. gentleman mean ?
Mr. BLAIN.
I remember the hon. gentleman making the statement that the Labour Department were now ready to cope with strikes in the different parts of the country. He instanced Vnlleyfield, and sent his deputy to Rossland to look after a gold strike. I would like to know whether the hon. gen-
Mr. INGRAM.
Will the hon. gentleman give us the information later ?
Yes; of course these items will appear in the Auditor General's Report.
698S
tleman has found his department unable to cope with these strikes, and for that reason has appointed a commission.
The object of this commission was to take evidence. It was a semi-judicial tribunal, clothed with the power to take evidence and examine witnesses under oath. The chief justice is eminently qualified to weigh evidence and draw conclusions. That commission has rendered great public service. I have already heard from British Columbia satisfactory expressions of opinion as to the good it has accomplished, and my hon. friend will put himself and his friend in a false position in the eyes of the people of that province, if he should assume an attitude of hostility to that commission. The commissioners were men of eminent standing and knowledge and had the confidence of both parties. It has restored harmony and brought to light circumstances which were hidden and will be most interesting and valuable to the industrial world.
Mr. INGRAM.
Two or three years ago serious difficulty arose in the mining districts in British Columbia. The hon. minister sent his deputy out there for the purpose of bringing about a settlement; and I think that both sides were dissatisfied with his ruling. I suppose the state of feeling was such there that those who had invested capital and those employed in the mines thought it was as well a commission should sit for the purpose of inquiring and placing the facts before-the House, so that members could find out where the cause of the trouble lay. I presume that the hon, gentleman from the North-west Territories who introduced the Bill in another portion of this legislature for the purpose of preventing foreigners coming into this country to agitate strikes was largely prompted by the difficulties that occurred in British Columbia. If we have the information that this commission have to-day, it may be useful for us, and if the hon. minister will lay it before the House before some of the Bills now coming up for consideration are passed, it may assist in the discussion of those Bills.
I requested the deputy to-day to have the report printed with all despatch, and I have no doubt he already has placed it in the hands of the printer. He only arrived to-day. My hon. friend from East Elgin (Mr. Ingram) is entirely misinformed as to the supposed state of feeling in Rossland and of the opinion of the Deputy Minister of Labour. The Deputy Minister of Labour was invited to Rossland to deal with troubles between employers and employees in the mining districts. There was a strike-
Mr. INGRAM.
A couple of years ago.
Not so long ago as that, I should think. He -went
Mr. BLAIN.
there and investigated the cause of the strike and made his report. I do not wish to be bound by what I say now, because my recollection of the facts may be astray. But, as I remember it, this report was to the effect that the strike ought not to have taken place. His verdict was against the strikers. It is hardly likely that both parties would be satisfied with the verdict, but I have reason to believe that some of the strikers have come to the conclusion that they were in the wrong, and that the report was justified. I think probably the report of the commission may incidentally explain the causes that led to the strike in Rossland. It was not necessary to go to Rossland, because peace had been restored, the parties were at work again, and a united effort was being made by both sides to revive the mining industry.' The commissioners thought that, under the circumstances it would be better not to go there and inquire into the causes of the trouble in Rossland. That was the decision of the commissioners in their wisdom, and I agree with it; it was not in the public interest to revive the feeling that existed so long between the parties.
Mr. BLAIN.
That was the reason I asked the question. The Postmaster General has stated that when the strike took place in Rossland an invitation was extended to his department to send the deputy minister there, and he agreed to the request and sent the deputy minister. But what I wanted to know was why, when a strike took place in another part of the province, he did not send the deputy minister there rather than appoint a very expensive commission ?