Mr. CLANCY.

Of course, I would not charge these gentlemen with saying what is not true. I believe they are responsible men. I have no idea of casting the slightest reflection upon them but they state themselves in their report that they made a very limited examination in many cases. The hon. Minister of Justice declares that these I

men were under oath. While the men who have recently been on the ground swore that there was no timber there. Dr. Ami says that there is timber there. I am going to ask the hon. Minister of Justice whom he is going to believe, the men who swore to it or the man who knows nothing about it. In introducing this amendment there is no question raised as. to the possibilities or resources of the country. I believe that there are great resources in that country both in Quebec and in Ontario, although they are such that they will not be availed of for many years to come owing to the greater possibilities given in other quarters in Canada. However, this is aside from the question I am discussing now, except that it is involved in the sense that we should have complete information as to the resources and character of the country in which such a large expenditure must be made in constructing a railway. When we say that there are muskegs and rocky tracts of country and when we say that there is good land in that region, we say what is true. I do not know anything that has a greater tendency to becloud the question than to say, if one should read from a report of the Ontario government or the geological survey to show that there are most undesirable tracts of land in that region, that he is decrying the country. Surely there should be no attempt on either side to make any temporary gain in that way. We declare that there are some portions of the country in which there is good land, that there are portions in which there are large quantities of pulp wood and that there are other portions which are unfit for agricultural purposes. Now, a word as to the delay. The hon. gentleman knows that this would not delay the eastern section an hour. Does the Minister of Finance say, that if it were found impracticable to build a railway through that country of the character laid down by the government expert (Mr. Charlton), then no matter what the expense and what the difficulties, the government would construct that road. If that be the policy of the government my amendment is useless ; if, it is not the policy of the government then the amendment is apropos. What has the Minister of Finance to say ?

We regret that, whether this information takes the shape of mountains or hills, my hon. friend (Mr. Clancy) is determined to ignore it. We can only say, that there is sufficient information available to give ns a reasonable assurance that a railway can be built through the country between Quebec and Winnipeg at a reasonable cost. That being the case, and, whether the pine be red. white or blue, the intention of the government is to build the road through the northern part of Canada, believing as we do, that we have Information now which will justify us in going forward.

Mr. CLANCY.

Is that information in the index ?

There is more information in what the hon. gentleman calls the index than he will ever read, and as to the mountains, I do not believe that my hon. friend will ever attempt to climb them.

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

I noticed when the mountains of information -were placed before us, that they came about half way up to the top of the match box which decorates the Table of the House. The Minister of Finance says that the government propose to build a road through that northern country, whether the pine be read, white or blue. That is his mode of expressing his conelus-sion that a railway will be built through that country under any conditions, and at any possible cost. Has not the Minister of Finance heard the calculation made by his own railway expert (Mr. Charlton), who was put up in the first place by the government to answer the ex-Minister of Railways, and who was again put up the other night to talk about a subject which was not at all under the consideration of the House? Does not the Minister of Finance know that the hon. member (Mr. Chariton) has based his whole argument upon the supposition that you can find four-tenths per cent grades through that country, or at the outside six-tenths per cent grades ? Does the Minister of Finance say tiiat lie has any information which will enable him to state to the House within 840,000.000 of what a road of that kind wiiil cost ? I invite the hon. gentleman to make a calculation within even $40,000,000 of the cost ? I venture to say he cannot clo It. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Charlton) also pointed out to us the the Canadian Northern Railway and the Canadian Pacific Railway, both running from Winnipeg to Lake Superior, are carrying grain at rates very much higher than he estimates for the total cost of carrying grain all the way from Winnipeg to Quebec. The Canadian Pacific Railway has been charging 14 cents per hundred pounds on grain from the vicinity of Winnipeg to Lake Superior ports. The Canadian Northern has been charging 12 cents until it was forced' by the government of Manitoba within the last few days to reduce that rate to 10 cents. If grades can be procured of the character that my horn, friend (Mr. Charlton) suggests, all the way from Winnipeg to Quebec, surely they could be procured much more easily over the comparatively short line from Winnipeg to Port Arthur and Fort William. And if it is advantageous to build a road of that character for 1.875 miles. I would like to know why it is that two pretty shrewd corporations like the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian Northern Railway have not seen fit to build such a road from Winnipeg to the Georgian bay ? Does the hon. member (Mr. Hon. Mr. FIELDING.

Chariton) really suppose that lie understands the railway business better than Sir Thomas Shaughnessy or Mr. C. M. Hays, or Messrs. Mackenzie and Mann ? Although such a contention lias been put forward by the Prime Minister, apparently in a serious manner, I do not suppose that my hon. friend from North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton,) really professes to understand the business of building and operating railways better than Sir William Van Horne, better than Mr. Hays, better than Sir Thomas Shaughnessy, better than Messrs. Mackenzie and Mann, better than Mr. J. R. Booth, men who have devoted all their lives trying to understand the problems attendant on railway construction and operation. And yet, the Minister of Finance in the most flippant manner, says that through this country the government is prepared to build a railway no matter what the expense may be, and that railway, bear in mind, according to the member for North Norfolk, from Winnipeg to Quebec, and even to Moncton is to have grades of four-tenths or at most six-tenths per cent per mile. The Minister of Justice says there will be delay. Within wlmt period of time does the Minister of Justice think these surveys can be made to find four-tenths grades through that country ? Does he think the work can be commenced before the next session of parliament which must be upon us within a few months ? Does he think that the government can find grades of that kind before next session ? If the government policy is a good one, and if these grades can be found, every one is desirous that this road should be built at the earliest possible date, provided it can be built at a reasonable cost to this country. The proposal of my hon. friend (Mr. Clancy) is that you shall not proceed until you have some information on the subject. When you have found these grades-and yon cannot find them for a considerable time- submit the surveys and plans to the representatives of the people in parliament; and submit also an estimate of whether it will cost 75, 100, 150 or 200 millions to build a road of that kind, with proper grades and curvatures from Winnipeg to Quebec. Does my hon. friend the Minister of Justice suggest that there is anything in that which causes one moment's delay in the carrying out of this project? In what way does It cause delay? Can you make these surveys in less than one year or eighteen months ? Have the government any information as to the time in which they can be made ? And do the government propose to commence the construction of this road while these surveys are incomplete or before they have any accurate knowledege on which an estimate of the cost can be based ? It is not a question of delay ; it is a question of knowing what you are about before you undertake the construction of a road of such a character as the government have announced it to be their policy to construct.

Mr. ROSAMOND.

I imagine that as an authority on curves and gradients he ought to be of some value.

Mr. ROSAMOND.

The curves he is an authority on are altogether too sharp for railways. I venture to say that there is not a railway authority in the country, or any man of experience in transportation matters, who will, with any regard to consistency, approve in the slightest degree of the statement made by the hon. member for North Norfolk the other day on the question of the all-rail carrying of grain from Winnipeg to Quebec. The hon. Minister of Justice spoke of the danger of a diversion of traffic to United States ports if this railway were not gone on with at the present time; and the hon. member for South Wellington (Mr. Guthrie), at an early stage of this debate,

made reference to the same thing. He said that increased railway facilities are a matter of necessity, and that if they are not immediately supplied, we may suffer from our delay by seeing our products finding an outlet through other channels than our own-a misfortune which it might take long years and a vast expenditure of money to overcome. This shows that it is a most serious matter to venture on this enormous expenditure without a further examination of the whole matter by men who are really experts on the question of transportation. Therefore, I think it would be wise for the government to accept this amendment, and go back to their original proposition to appoint a commission of men who have a knowledge of these matters, so that the whole question may be considered before the next session of parliament. I do not think that gentlemen on this side of the House are really opposed to the construction of the railway if we had a proper knowledge of the cost, and if we had an assurance that it would accomplish the object which the government have in view. There is no doubt that it will be a good thing to a certain extent to have the large expenditure of public money which will he involved. That will create a certain amount of fictitious prosperity for the time being, and is a pleasant consideration to those who will derive a certain benefit from the building of the road. But will it accomplish the object which the government have in view, and which we would all like to see accomplished, that is, facilitating the transportation of the North-west products to the markets of the world ? Unless it does that, it will be a coiaaplete failure, while the country will be involved in a further increase of debt. I am not going to say that thei*e is not a good deal of land north of Lake Abitibi; and. by the way, I would like to ask the hon. Minister of Jaistiee whether the road is to run north or south of Lake Abitibi ?

I presume that the surveyors will determine that; but my present information is to the effect that the route north of Lake Abitibi would be the. most desirable.

Mr. ROSAMOND.

I have reason myself to believe that there is good land north of Lake Abitibi. I am told by one who knows something of the country, because he lias travelled over it, that north of Lake Abitibi there is a belt from fifty to one hundred miles wide, starting from a point about fifty miles east of the boundary between Ontario and Quebec, and extending westward for about 300 miles to a point north of Lake Nepigon, in which there is admirable land : clay loam without much pine on it, but with some large trees of poplar and spruce, some of them five or six feet in circumference The land in that belt is said to be very good; but north of that again the

laud is mostly muskeg and rock, and entirely unsuitable for cultivation. But it seems to me that it would be unreasonable to attempt to build this line of railway simply for the purpose of colonizing that country. That is an object which might be accomplished more properly by the Ontario government and the Quebec government. The Ontario government are doing something in that direction. They are building their lines northward so as to tap that good land and bring it into communication with Ottawa, Toronto and other cities of Ontario.

But to build a road that will cost $150,000,000 for the purpose of colonizing that part of the country seems to me an undertaking which this parliament ought not to entertain, more especially when it will not accomplish the object we have in view, namely, the facilitating of the (transport of the produce of the great North-west to the markets of the world. I am perfectly satisfied, from what information I have been able to obtain, that it is impossible to carry by this route the grain of the North-west to the markets of the world at such a rate as will leave to the farmers an adequate return for their labour ; and that is the object the government ought to have in view. The question to determine is whether by this scheme the grain of the Northwest will be carried to the markets of the world at a paying rate, because if not the whole expenditure will be thrown away, so far as the farmers of the North-west are concerned. I have taken some pains to gather information on that point. Some time ago I wrote to a gentleman who has a thorough knowledge of the question, who is interested in the carrying trade, and who besides is a shrewd man of business and connected with railways. The opinion he entertains is a very practical one, and far more to be depended on than any partisan statements made by such meu as the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton). The gentleman to whom I refer is Mr. Robert Meighen, the president of the Lake of the Woods Milling Company, and this is the opinion he has given me :

I have yours of the 13th instant this morning, and should be glad if any feeble effort of mine could in any way place at your disposal any information that would he of use to you in connection with the matter you refer to.

Referring to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway project I, as you know, declined to discuss the question at present, or give my opinion, either for or against the policy now brought forward in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific project. I merely give my opinion from a business standpoint, quite apart from politics, as I always give my opinion on a commercial matter without reference to any political party.

I have put my views on record in the public press nine years ago that but a small portion of the products of Manitoba or the North-west Territories will ever be brought round the north of Lake Superior by an all-rail route to tide water. My opinion has not changed-you will never bring but a small portion of the

Mr. ROSAMOND.

Mr. CHARLTON.

Who is this authority V

Mr. ROSAMOND.

Mr. Robert Meighen.

Mr. CHARLTON.

Who is he, and what is he ?

Mr. ROSAMOND.

I may say to the hon. .gentleman that not to know Mr. Meighen is to argue himself unknown. He is a shrewd, capable man, thoroughly versed in transportation matters and ajlil questions connected therewith, and I would place a thousand times more dependence on statements lie made in that connection than 1 would on the opinion of the so-called expert of the government. I was astonished the other day when I heard the leader of the House point to the hon. member for North Norfolk as the greatest expert on railways and transportation matters in the Dominion. I could hardly believe my ears when I heard him make such a statement, but we can easily see that the hon. member for North Norfolk is doing his best to live up to that character, because he has been making some of the most remarkable statements, and statements which do not do much credit to his intelligence. Ever since we had that declaration from the leader of the government, I have been expecting to hear of the hon. gentleman's promotion to the vacant Department of Railways and Canals. At a very early hour the other morning, in a speech which I then made, but which was not repoited at the time, I put the question to the Finance Minister whether the hon. member for North Norfolk had been promised the vacant portfolio, but I did not get a very satisfactory answer.

I answered.

Mr. ROSAMOND.

But not satisfactorily. INow, Mr. Chairman, this is really a very

serious question. The government propose to add greatly to the very large debt per head resting upon the people. The Prime Minister can see what a bad position the country will be in if, after that money has been expended, we find that the main object in building the railway, the transportation of the products of the west to the seaboard by its means, cannot be accomplished. What he should do, following out the advice contained in this letter is, at present to make use of the means of transportation from Port Arthur to Georgian bay ports, for only then will he be able to head off the possibility spoken of by the ministers of the products of that North-west going by United States ports and so depriving Canada of the benefits of this trade. I do advise the government, with all the energy I have and in all seriousness, to halt in their course and act upon the suggestion of the leader of the opposition and members on this side, advice given in good faith, not as intended to oppose this railway or to oppose expenditure of this kind if it is for the public benefit, but as leading to the careful consideration that is called for by the case and the delay, necessary for that consideration. It is certainly an extraordinary thing for the government to start out, as they did this session, by saying that the question demanded careful consideration and that a commission would be appointed to consider it, and then, without explanation, abandon that idea and launch out in a scheme that will add $125,000,000 to the public debt.

Mr. BOYD.

There is a matter that I think the Premier should take into his consideration. if he desires to have any practical man pay any attention to the statements of his acting Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Fielding) and of the man who would be Minister of Railways, the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton). Let me read from a speech of the would-be Minister of Railways, delivered the other day :

Of course, it is a question of grades. If this road is built with grades of fifty feet to the mile, or sixty, or seventy feet to the mile, the money is thrown away, and the purpose for which the road is built cannot be achieved. We must get a road of this class ; and we can and will get a road of this class.

The hon. gentleman was speaking, mark you, of a road of 4-10 per cent grade, in other words a rise of about 19 feet to the mile. If you do not get a road like that, the hon. gentleman tells you, the money will be thrown away. And the acting Minister of Railways, within the last few minutes has told ns that they are going to build a reasonable road at a reasonable cost. I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, that the Prime Minister, with all his astuteness in the presentations of his proposals to the country, cannot make any practical man in this conn-

try believe that both these statements can j be well-founded.