Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

Acreage. Bushels. Yield Per Acre.2,951 62,945 21-342,982 1,428,325 33-2372 10,718 28'910,751 267,597 24-83,329 336,802 101-1

Variety.

Wheat

Oats 42,982

Barley

Buckwheat.. .

Hay-25,000 tons were shipped over the Canadian Pacific Railway, valued at $250,000.

Cheese.

Pounds. Value.

Manufactured In county.. .. 294,307 $29 430 70 Exported 210,450 2R450 00

Butter.

Pounds. Value.

Manufactured iu county .. .. 124,229 $24,845 SO

Exported 115,052 23,010 40

A county that can present such a record is not to be treated in the way in which the non. gentleman who last spoke referred to it. This does not by any means represent to the fullest extent the resources of that very flourishing county. There are many other crops which have not been mentioned. It is a splendid fruit cotintry, as my hon. friend will testify. This statement has reference only to the settled portions within sight of the valley of the St. John There are undeveloped sections of that country, to the development of which this railway will contribute, which I am sure will be equally productive. This is only a slight evidence of the richness of other sections of that portion of New Brunswick through which this railway will run, and I could not allow to pass unchallenged the remarks of the hon. member for Peel. There appears to be on the part of some hon. gentlemen opposite an antipathy to that section of the proposed railway between Moncton and Quebec which is unwarranted by the circumstances and by the past political history of this country. My bon. friend the leader of the opposition was quite willing that such a line should be constructed. He was not quite certain as to the time when it should he constructed; but he recognized its value to this Dominion, and he recognized the fact that it brought his own city of Halifax nearer to the other cities of the Dominion and clasped the different sections of the Dominion altogether. He was willing to aid in accomplishing this desirable object-desirable by his own admission ; but his colleague sitting beside him, the hon. member for South Lanark (Hon. Mr. Haggart), declared the proposition to build a shorter line between Levis and Moncton to he an absolutely senseless proposition. He declared that such a line was not required, and that even though it was proposed in this Bill, it would be generations before it would be an accomplished fact. How many generations we would have to wait for it if hon. gentlemen opposite had the control of the matter, I am not in a position to say ; but I do say that until we have this shorter line, until the several parts of the Dominion are brought together in the way- pro-

posed by the terms of this Bill, there cannot be that interchange of trade, commercially, politically, and socially, that there should be. I am sure that the cities of Halifax and St. John are suffering, and have been suffering since this country became a Dominion, for the want of that interchange. Certainly the province of Nova Scotia has been suffering in a way that cannot be adequately de-{ scribed here. The province of New Brunswick has had advantages which the province of Nova Scotia has not enjoyed. The city of St. John has been connected through the state of Maine with the city of Montreal by a short line ; but the other sections of the province of New Brunswick and a great section of the province of Nova Scotia have not enjoyed that advantage. Now, there is no doubt that the antipathy and antagonism shown by lion, gentlemen opposite is injurious to the interests of the maritime provinces. The hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule), yesterday afternoon, in a spirit which was most sectional and narrow, and in a way indicating a small-bore idea *of the needs of this Dominion, complained of the disadvantages of the province of On

tario. That province has had advantages and has enjoyed them, and she certainly should not now complain if other sections of the Dominion are to have some advantages. Under these circumstances, the amendment of the hon. member for Peel, based as it is upon his antagonism to the line through New Brunswick, is unwarranted, and I have a right to assume that his objections to the other sections of the line are *equally faulty.

Mr. 1<\ IT. HALE (Carleton, N.B.). Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to take up the time of this committee, and I did not intend td rsay anything on this subject ; but in view of what my hon. friend from Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) has quoted from the -pamphlet he had in his hand, I desire to say a few words in regard to the county of *Carleton, which I have the honour to represent. It is well known that Carleton county is one of the most fertile districts in the Dominion of Canada, and all that the hon. gentleman has read from the pamphlet is no doubt correct. It is a very productive county, but I am sorry to say that not one pound of the produce of that county will ever be carried over the proposed road. It will pass so far to the east and through so poor a section of the county that it will be impossible for us to reach it. I am sorry that the government propose to locate this road where they do. In that location it will' never be of any use to the county of *Carleton or to the province of New Brunswick. It is a great pity that the road, if it is to be built, is not to be taken down the valley of the River St. John, where it'would be of some benefit to the people of New Brunswick, and where it would find a good outlet in the harbour of St. John. I am *sorry that this road is to be forced along

without any survey or any knowledge of the country through which it is to go. I can *speak from personal knowledge of the section of the country through which this road is to go. So far as the county of Carleton and the county of York are concerned, it is going where it will never be of any use to that section of the country.

Mr. W. J. ROCHE (Marquette).

The hon. member for Westmoreland has just stated that these petitions do not make any reference to the alternative policy of my hon. friend the leader of the opposition. One would surely expect that a prospective cabinet minister would be intelligent enough to see that in a case like this, the alternative policy submitted by the leader of the opposition is not usually referred to in petitions against the legislation introduced by the government. However, the hon. gentleman has evidently not read all the petitions. He has probably taken up one of them and concluded that all the others were counterparts. But if he had looked at some of the petitions he would have found that not only is the government scheme condemned in unmeasured terms, but that practically the scheme of the leader of the opposition is endorsed, and parliament is asked to take it up instead of the other. I happen to have a petition which is the same as that which is being circulated throughout Manitoba.

Mr. EMMERSON.

It is not the same as that circulated in the eastern provinces.

Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).

I am speaking of the petition circulated in that portion of the country which this projected railway is particularly supposed to benefit. It is that portion of the country to relieve the congestion of traffic and lower the freight rates this government measure was introduced, and it is the people there who are protesting against the government scheme and asking, in effect, that the scheme propounded by the leader of the opposition be adopted in its place. Let me read the petition :

The petition of the undersigned electors of the Dominion of Canada humbly showeth :-

1. That western Canada is vitally interested in questions of transportation and that its progress win he checked by inadequate facilities on the one hand, or, on the other, by excessive transportation charges.

2. That it is of the utmost importance to the prosperity and development of western Canada that transportation facilities be afforded at the lowest possible rates, upon both products exported and merchandise imported.

3. That in this connection it is absolutely essential that the combined rail and water routes to the east should receive proper development.

The people of the west realize that it is by the combined rail and water routes they will get the required relief.

4. That ample and extensive railway construction in the west should be, and can be,

secured upon such terms as will safeguard the public interest in low rates and abundant car supply, and will thus avoid the recurrence in the territories of the grave public injury and discontent formerly caused in Manitoba by excessive charges.

5. That the over capitalization of transportation companies is one of the. most important conditions leading to unduly high rates, and should be prevented.

They see the significance of the $45,000,000 of capitalization in connection with this road, which I referred to yesterday, and which, in connection with the bond issue, will make the fixed charges so very high that it will he impossible for the company to give low freight rates.

G. That a railway system designed to move the products of the west should not be burdened by the addition of costly and needless sections ; that the proposed eastern section of the Grand Trunk Pacific would be of value chiefly for the purpose of colonizing the territory it traverses ; and that the western lines should not be obliged to impose rates fixed with a view to providing for the annual fixed charges upon such a section, between one and two thousand miles long, built many years in advance of settlement in the James bay basin.

This is the very scheme propounded by the leader of the opposition.

7. That the country should not be committed to the construction of the eastern section over the proposed route until full information is obtained as to distance, grades, cost and the possibilities of local traffic.

Exactly as propounded by the leader of the opposition.

8. That the effective exercise of government control of rates upon the lowest practicable basis must be the object of government policy.

Notwithstanding this, the government voted down a resolution which would place the control of the rates absolutely in the hands of the government and make the maximum rates not greater than those charged by the Canadian Northern Railway, whose rates are controlled by the Manitoba government.

9. That because of the effect it would have upon the rates and general facilities the Intercolonial should he extended to Georgian bay, with party politics excluded from its administration and its management made non-partisan and business-like, and that under these conditions its field of operation should be extended to Manitoba and ultimately across the cont'n-ent.

Almost the identical words of the leader of the opposition in his speech formulating his policy.

10. That the arrangement in the Bill now before parliament by which the government is to build the section between Winnipeg and Moncton. at a large cost, and then lease it for 50 years, is unsatisfactory, because so large a pledging of the public credit as would be required may prevent the undertaking of more effective transportation measures ; and also because! there being no option of purchase on the western division, the government at the end of 50 years would not have the alternative

Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).

of obtaining a complete transportation system under government operation.

11. That the proposed western section of the Grand Trunk Pacific from Winnipeg to Edmonton should be constructed as an additional line opening up new territory ; and that the Grand Trunk Pacific Company should not be allowed to purchase the Canadian Northern Railway line instead of constructing an additional line.

The government has refused to incorporate a clause to that effect. I had the honour of introducing one myself to prevent amalgamation with the Canadian Northern Railway, but the government absolutely refused to accept it. As regards tbe opening up of new territory, the government do not know where the road will be located west of Winnipeg. They cannot say whether it will be north of tlie Canadian Northern Railway or south. Unless it be north, it will not open up the new territory referred to in this petition.

12. That provision should be made in the Grand Trunk Pacific agreement for an outlet from the Grand Trunk Pacific's western lines to Lake Superior.

The people of the west realize that no matter how many railways they may have, the grain will travel by lake and rail.

Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the transportation Bill now before parliament be not passed in its present form, but that it be altered to provide for the above-menti :ned conditions, and that the commission on transportation should consider the whole question of the proposed eastern section and report, and that complete surveys and estimates should be made.

It seems to me that this petition is a complete endorsation of our leader's policy, just as much as it is a severe condemnation of the government's policy. And I merely rose for the purpose of drawing the attention of the House, and particularly of the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Em-tnerson), to the fact that the people of the west generally are opposed to the scheme propounded by the government.

Mr. TALBOT.

With the hon. gentleman's permission, I would ask him if he is aware that in the province of Quebec agents are going from house to bouse getting signatures to these petitions, and that notwithstanding the very strong representations they have made, they have not so far got ten per cent of the people of these parishes to sign these petitions ?

Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).

I am not personally aware of that fact, but would require a little stronger testimony than that of the hon. gentleman to make me believe it.

Mr. S. HUGHES (Victoria).

The hon. member for Westmoreland endeavoured as usual to bring in the locality question. He said he was surprised to see the antipathy displayed by the opposition to that section

of country between Moncton and Quebec. ( I want to .Joint out to bim that the policy of the opposition is not to (belittle one part otf the country as compared with another. But when hon. gentlemen on that side claim they are going to get a line 140 miles shorter from Quebec to Moncton -via the Btchemin valley and the Maine border, they do not know what they are talking about, or are endeavouring to deceive the electors. Take the figures given in the report of the engineer of the Quebec government. They show that with grades almost as low as 53 feet to the mile, and some of them rising as high as 71 to 79 feet, that road surveyed between Quebec and Edmundston is 209 miles in length.

Mr. TALBOT.

If my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes, Victoria) will permit me, I would say he is mistaken in his figures. He will find several reports, which give it at 186 miles following the railway showing that it can be done within thirty days.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).

If my hon. friend (Mr. Talbot) will read the report, he will see that that line is across the state of Maine.

Mr. TALBOT.

No, Sir.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).

I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. He cannot find an airline of 186 miles around the point of the state of Maine.

Mr. TALBOT.

I will get it and read it to the hon. gentleman.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).

I shall be glad if the hon. gentleman will do so. What we want is to have the facts of these lines referred to by the hon. member for Belle-chasse, one goes by the Etchemin and Daagnam rivers and down the valley of the St. John across Maine, while the other is still further to the south. Now, it is for me to go into these elevations and grades, which are given in my former remarks at page 11951 and succeeding pages of ' Hansard.' I have pointed out the report of the engineer of the Quebec government which says :

I again took up my work which I had left oft at the west of Lake Long, behind St. Paul de Montmagny, distant sixty-three miles from the original point of departure at St. Anselme in the county of Dorchester.

And he goes on to say :

I should here observe that Long Lake is really only thirty-eight miles from St. Anselme in a direct line.

That is, the line has to cover a distance of 63 miles in order to reach a point distant 38 miles in a direct, line. And he points out that the grades are about 53 feet to the mile, being about the old standard one per cent grade. .

And he points out further on, with regard to the grades on this line :

I started from the Etchemin valley line, eight miles south of St. Anselme, and half a mile from the north bank of the Abenakis river.

The grades on this line can be made 52 feet per mile and under for a distance of 6J miles, after which there is a continuous grade of 79 feet per mile for 4J miles, rising to Lac Vert, hut by lengthening the line and increasing curvature by actual location, that grade could be reduced to 53 feet per mile.

But our lion, friend the expert, the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) tells us that no road need hope to secure a share of through-traffic unless its grades are reduced to twenty-five feet to the mile. This would stretch the line out still longer. So, for every one of these grades, where it is from seventy-five to seventy-nine feet to the mile, you must multiply the distance by three in order to give you the one-half per cent grades. Here is a distance of sixty-three miles and you must multiply it by two in order to get your mileage. Taking these elevations and gradients with an admitted length of line of 205 or 209 miles these are the extremes and hon. gentlemen will remember that I took the middle distance of 207 as my figures, in order to get grades of one-half per cent, I venture to say it will be nearer 300 miles than 250 miles between Quebec and Edmundston. A little further on, this engineer points out that near the foot of Lake Pohenegomook the grade rises at the rate of 71-28 feet per mile for a distance of nine miles. Multiply that by three as will be necessary in order to secure the one-half per cent grade, and you get a distance pf twenty-seven miles, instead of nine miles. Then he goes on :

In that next four miles the summit between the Smoky and Noire rivers was reached with a grade of 65 feet per mile, at an elevation of 1048 feet above the initial point in the Temis-couata Railway.

Multiply that by three again, and instead of four and a half miles you get thirteen and a half miles.

Mr. EMMERSON.

That is not the route.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).

What does the hon. gentleman propose, then ?

Mr. EMMERSON.

The frontier route.

Mr. HUGHES (Victoria).

That is what I am quoting.

Mr. EMMERSON.

No.