[DOT]lust a casual thought of his to send for this information-

I sent the geographer

That is, from the 733rd road mile, post.

the survey line turns south eastward by the

Metagami and other rivers to North Bay.

There is where the survey has been coining to and the only survey that has been made. They have surveyed from Winnipeg to White Earth Lake, 300 miles; the location survey-probably most of it bad already been done in the surveys for the Canadian Pacific Railway years ago, and then they have made some preliminary survey for part of the distance to where they want to diverge to North Bay. And that is the report that the Minister of the Interior reads to this House as a satisfactory report to be laid by tlie government before the House, upon which we are to determine so important a question as that now before us. Then the hon. minister goes on to speak of the increased guarantee as a matter of no importance-Mr. Toots would say it was ' of no consequence.' It was given to create confidence in the Grand Trunk shareholders, gentlemen who do not know as much as we do. It can make no difference apparently whether the guarantee is larger or smaller, for tlie road will pay its way ! And another gentleman adds, ' It will not cost us a dollar.' I shall have something to say later on about the question whether it will cost us a dollar or not. But I wish to read again, on page 799 tlie exact words of the Minister of the Interior I would like to give these words

Let us see where it comes from.

-consisting of agricultural material, dry goods, hoots and shoes and all class of merchandise that a new and rapidly developing country requires.

Where does the Grand Trunk get that class of traffic ? It is the cream of the business. It will get it in the province of Quebec, in the cities of the maritime provinces, in the province of Ontario and through the old settled districts. Oars that icome down loaded with wheat will go through these old settled districts and they will go back loaded with this merchandise. The Grand Trunk will not send that traffic 400 miles to the north. The oars will return by the route they have come by and the traffic will be by way of North Bay or the lake route. Mr. Hays knew what he was speaking of. He knew that these men, were aware that through the older provinces they reaped all their earnings and he was pointing out that the life of the new line, the line from North Bay to Winlipeg and onward, will be the return west-iound traffic that it will get to enable them ;o haul wheat cheaply to the east. But some ion. gentlemen ask : What have we to do vith what passes at the Grand Trunk meet-ng ? Surely hon. gentlemen in this House ,vho do not profess to be experts would like :o get the opinion of an expert like Mr. Hays. When Mr. Hays points out where the traffic svill come from, that it will come from these old settled portions of the country, that it s here that he gets all the best rates 011 Merchandise, boots, dry goods and clothing, everything that is lU&nuf&cturGd in oui n and and that he is going to take that up to :he west filling the returning cars lie has brought down with wheat surely he knows what he is talking about. He was pomt-ino- out to the shareholders of the Grand

n,m

$45,000,000. The Pacific Company have the power to give the Grand Trunk Company or anybody else, the whole $45,000,000, and if the Grand Trunk Company do not take all they can get, I ami very much mistaken.

There is another little clause in the new Bill just introduced which is very significant. In the original charter passed less than a year ago, it was provided that this Pacific company, which was going to have such an important undertaking on its hands, should begin operations when it had subscribed $2,000,000 of stock, and when $200,000 of it was paid up. That was not very much for such a company. One would have thought that they would have been content; but they were not content. Section 6 of chapter 122 of 1903, is amended by striking out in the first line thereof the word ' two ' and substituting the word ' one ; ' so that the company will have to get subscribed only $1,000,000 of stock before they begin this undertaking and the amount to be paid up is reduced to $100,000. The $2,000,000 was so startling that they had to come to parliament and get the amount reduced to $1,000,000 ; and when 10 per cent is paid on that, they will have $100,000 with which to begin the undertaking. I wonder if they expect the country to subscribe the $1,-. 000,000 and pay up the $lo0,000.

Then, there is the question of the $20,000.000 of rolling stock.' If that were to be paid for out of the bonds or stock, it would form part of the $60,000,000 I have mentioned. But it is not. A trust company is to provide that roiling stock, and no doubt it will be rented to the railway company. I do not wonder that the Grand Trunk Company wanted to have a few alterations of such an unimportant character as these. The right hon. First Minister said they were of such trifling importance that he thought it was hardly worth while for us to discuss them. That $20,000,000 is now reduced to $f5,000,000. I do not make much of that. Of course, the government were not obliged to sign their guarantee until the $20,000,000 of rolling stock should be-not paid for or acquired, but supplied : and all the security they will now have for the last five millions of the rolling stock, is the covenant of the Grand Trunk Pacific Company. But what is the value of the Grand Trunk Pacific's covenant. The whole thing is in the hands of the Grand Trunk Company. You cannot call on anybody to pay up stock, because the stock is all ' paid up There is no liability of the Grand Trunk, and the covenant of the Grand Trunk Pacific Company is not worth anything. Yet this is all you have got for your extra $5,000,000. It is a small point, but it is worth nothing !

, We pointed out last year that the clause relating to the rolling stock simply called on the company to equip the road with a

Mr. BARKER.

trivial. Why, they were so trivial that it was a wonder these lion, gentlemen took any trouble to explain them at all. I believe that the right hon. the First Minister did say that the opposition were so perverse they would try to find some ground for objection, but he did not think we should find any. We should have swallowed the whole thing. That 1,000 miles of railway, built by the country, with the hard cash of the country; we should give free to the Grand Trunk Pacific for six or seven years, or whatever period elapses before the whole 1,900 miles are completed ; and then, when we come to make a lease for the whole division, they will have it for seven years more for nothing and three years after that on the same terms, because, according to the hon. member for Haldimand (Mr. A. T. Thompson), capitalization does not count. And this is the marvellous third section of the supplemental agreement. I think that the Grand Trunk Railway must have laughed in their sleeves when they got that clause accepted by the government. I would like to see the private correspondence between Mr. Hays and the directors of the Grand Trunk Railway. If we could, by an order of the House, have Mr. Hays brought up here with his letter-book, it would be delightful reading to have his view of how successfully the government had forced the company to accept the use of this line during seven years for nothing. But that is only a trifle to what is coming. Take clause 4.

Well, Sir, the change made by this clause is highly important. And, read with clauses 5 and 6 of the supplemental agreement and with section 32 of the original agreement it is so far-reaching that not one gentleman on the other side has understood the effect of it. By the old agreement the government was to guarantee the bonds up to 75 per cent of the cost of the prairie section and the mountain section also, the maximum guarantee for the prairie section fo be $13,000 per mile and for the mountain section $30,000 per mile. But some notable changes have been made. The limitation of $30,000 per mile has been wiped out. Then the guarantee is to be not merely 75 per cent of the cost, but a guarantee of bonds to an amount that will produce the money on the market. I think that applies also to the $13,000 per mile of the prairie section. That point has not been discussed, and the charge was not made in the statement of the leader of the opposition. But I have no doubt at all tint the government is bound to guarantee the bonds that will produce that $13,000 per mile, which will mean a million and a half more-another little addition made by these trifling alterations. The Grand Trunk people say that the mountain section will cost $50,000 per mile. Let me call your attention to the fact that Sir Charles Riv-ers-Wilson had every motive not to add a dollar unnecessarily to the estimated cost.

Mr. BARKER.

tile ?ay add that if the bonds sell at 90. ftharantee for the prairie section will

be increased from $13,000,000 to $14,500,000. Although, as we do not pay seven years' interest there, it is not so important. I do not deal with any increase on the prairie section, because 1 am dealing mainly and particularly with the interest account which involves cash outlay.

I have already read from the words of the Minister of the Interior. It will be remembered that he said-page 799 :

By releasing the old provision and inserting provisions which can only come into effect in case of default which we do not anticipate.

That is all. They can throw the burden upon the country only in case of default. But the Minister of the Interior seems to be oblivious to the fact that whether there is default or not, if you increase the principal of your guarantee by $6,000,000 or $8,000,000 you have to pay the interest on that for seven years and you do not get it back. And yet, one after another these hon. gentlemen get up and boast, as the hon. member for Annapolis (Mr. Wade) did, that these changes would not cost the country anything. At page 872, he says :

I wish to place myself on record as saying that the agreement as amended will not cost the Dominion one extra dollar.

It was as the hon. member for Haldimand said, as if they were backing the note of a millionaire and it would not matter. But if the millionaire wanted you to pay the interest on his note for seven years you would soon find out that it mattered ? The hon. gentlemen overlook the fact that under ne clause of the agreement, clause 32 I think, we agree to pay the interest for seven years upon every dollar we guarantee, and when you add six or eight million dollars to the guarantee you agree to pay interest on that amount for seven years. The hon. member for Annapolis (Mr. Wade) was satisfied that it was quite right to guarantee the additional amount. He said :

I think that this is reasonable ; I think It is fair that the government should guarantee the full three quarters of the cost and it was scarcely necessary that any discrimination should be made in this connection.

If the government bad said : 1 We are not to pay the interest for seven years on the increased amount,' then there would be something in the statement of the hon. the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Sifton) that it would make no difference, that the property was good for it. and that you were only guaranteeing it. But when the Gianu Trunk call upon you to pay the interest on Tie increase and without recourse, the laugh will be against the government.

Mr. CLANCY.

Or against the people rather.

Mr. BARKER.

The people will have to pay " That is one result of it. When the hon! member for Annapolis made that state-

ment and when the Minister of the Interior (Sir. Sifton) spoke on that subject and made the suggestion that the increase in guarantee really made no difference, the right hon. Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) evidently approved, the Postmaster General (Sir William Mulock) sat by his side and called out, ' hear, hear ' in stentorian tones, the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) was present and applauded ; he seemed to regard it as a happy thought; and all of the government supporters were applauding. I am sorry that the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) is not here. I intended to ask him if he was going to ask this House to validate this agreement without showing that I am mistaken in my statement that the interest on the additional amount of guarantee has to be paid by the government. How is he going to ask the House to adopt an agreement which puts that additional cash burden upon the people of this country when the hon. gentleman did not know that he was imposing any such burden? Is the right hon. the premier going to ask his followers to swallow that. Is he going to ask his followers to adopt an agreement which does not express what it was intended to express ? Is the right hon. gentleman going that far ? Is the Finance Minister (Mr. Fielding) going that far ? Is the Solicitor General (Mr. Lemieu.x) going to commence his career by dofng that ? What position will hon. gentlemen be in. They are either going to do that, or else they are going to say that they knew that this was the intention of the agreement, but they sat silent and applauded when the hon. member foi Annapolis (Mr. Wade) and the Minister of the Interior said that that was not the agreement at all. Is the right hon. the premier going to take the position that he had done right to deceive this House-not intentionally but to deceive the House in fact and to deceive the country, by representing that this change did not mean one dollar of additional expense to the country ? Will they dare to say to

this House that they knew it did impose large cash payments upon the country and not only remained silent while the hon. member for Annapolis (Mr. Wade) spoke but applauded him ? Surely not. I do not think that the right hou. the premier is going that far and if he cannot take either horn of the dilemma what is he going to do about it ? I would like to know what the government are going to do about this ? If we are to endorse an agreement that does not express the intention of the parties to it, what is the use of our being here ? The government might as well send us home and transact the business by Order in Council, and not put us to the ignominy of validating an agreement under such circumstances. We ought not to be asked to do it; the hon. gentleman's followers should not be asked to do it. I do not know whether they are going to respond to the whip and kiss the rod.

Yes, they are.

Mr. BARKER.

Mr. CAMPBELL.

Do not be alarm** about this side.

Mr. BARKER.

Mr. BELL.

He will vote all right.

Mr. BARKER.

Mr. BARKER.

Under tlie old contract the country knew pretty well where it was. We had nothing to do with the selling of the bonds under the old contract. We guaranteed them to the maximum amount of $30,000 per mile for the mountain section, and it did not matter to us in the least what the bonds were sold at. We guaranteed $13,000. per mile for the prairie section and it did not matter to us in the least what the bonds sold for.

Mr. WILLIAM ROCHE (Halifax).

How much of the bonds on the western section will be sold this year or next year on which the hon. gentleman anticipates there' will be a discount?

Mr. BARKER.

I can answer that very quickly. I do not think there will be a dollar's worth sold this year or probably next year, but I take it with the right hon. gentleman that there will be a heavy discount. I do not profess to say whether, it will be 1 per cent, or 5 per cent, or 10 per cent, but whatever it is the country takes the risk of it.

Mr. A. T. THOMPSON.

They may be at a premium.