1. Continuing the experiments of last year.

2. Yes.

3. Yes.

4. Five dollars per day whilst engaged in connection with the work. Mr. Cowie has received, up to date, $1,585.

The question is under consideration. An answer will be given at an early day.

1. How many dredges, dredging scows, and dredging plants were imported into Canada in the years 1902, 1903 and 1904 ?

2. By whom, respectively, were such dredges and dredging scows imported 1

3. By what names, numbers or other method were such dredges and dredging scows described in the entry ?

4. What was the valuation placed on each dredge and dredging outfit ?

5. What was the amount of duty paid on each dredge or dredging scow ?

Hon. WILLIAM PATERSON (Minister of Customs).

Dredges, dredging scows and dredging plants imported into Canada have not been classified in the Trade and Navigation tables under these headings. Dredges, dredging scows and dredging plant are not mentioned under these terms in the customs tariff, and when entered for duty are classi-172-

tied as ' manufactures of wood,' ' machinery,' &c., according to material. The extent of the importations in 1902, 1903 and 1904 could not be ascertained without a lengthy examination of entries at various ports covering these years. It is not usual to disclose the particulars of individual entries made at the custom-house.

1. What was the total amount expended by-the government upon purchase, construction and extension of the government dock at Sault Ste. Marie, and to whom were suoh amounts paid, respectively ?

2. How was the contract for construction of extension (1904) let ?

3. If by tender, were there more tenders than one, and was the lowest tender accepted ?

4. Was the contract let to the firm or person whose tender was accepted ?

5. Was the work carried on and completed by the person or firm to whom it was let ? If not. why not ?

6. What was the contract price, and did it include timber ?

7. Who was the contractor, and who supplied the timber ?

8. Were any extras allowed ? If so, what was the amount of same, and of what did such consist ?

9. Was any dredging included in said contract or incident thereto ? If so, what amount, at what rates ; and was such dredging performed according to plan and specifications ?

10. Under whose immediate local supervision was the work performed ?

11. What salary or remuneration was paid for such superintendence ?

12. During construction of extension of dock was a wharfinger employed ? If so, who was he, and at what rate was he paid ?

13. Does the government maintain a cartage system in connection with the dock ?

14. Has the government granted exclusive privileges to any person or corporation of draying and carting freight delivered on the dock ? If so, to whom and upon what terms, and when was it granted ?

15. What applications, if any, have been made to the government by steamship lines or other persons or companies for privileges of (a) landing and storing coal on said dock, (b) landing passengers and freight ? If so, upon what grounds were applications based for storing of coal on said dock ?

16. Have any such applications been granted 1 If so, upon what ground, to whom, on what date, and upon what terms ?

17. What rates of dockage are charged on freight landed at the dock ?

18. Is there a dockage tariff now in existence? If so, when was it framed ?

19. What were the running expenses and revenue of dock during years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903 and 1904 ?

20. Has any application been made to the government for construction of a warehouse or other building on said dock ? If so, when, and by whom ?

21. Is it the intention of the government to erect any such warehouse, offices or other buildings thereon ? If so, has any contract for such been let, to whom and upon what terms ?

1. Total expenditure to date, $49,415.32. Paid W. H. Plummer, purchase price, $7,000; Joseph Battle, on contract, $41,500 ; advertising. &c., re contract, $441.32 ; O. A. Boyd, inspector, $474 ; expend ture incurred from date of taking possession of wharf, in 1888, and the letting of contract for extension in 1904, $9,894.78.

2. Contract given by public tenders.

8. Twelve tenders received ; contract given to lowest tenderer.

4. Yes.

5. Yes.

6. $65,000 ; yes. -

7. Joseph Battle; contractor supplied timber.

8. Yes ; $1,200 ; quarter oak walling not provided for in contract.

9. No.

10. Under supervision of Geo. A. Boyd.

11. $3 per day.

12. The wharfinger appointed by the De partment of Marine and Fisheries was retained in office. George A. Boyd. He was paid at the rate of $142 per month during the season of navigation, to be paid out of the fees collected by hdn. The wharfinger pays for all necessary assistance.

13. No, so far as the Marine Department is concerned.

14. No, so far as the Marine Department is concerned.

15. None, so far as the Marine Department is concerned.

16. No, so far as the Marine Department is concerned.

17. The rates fixed by the tariff of tolls contained in the regulations for the government of wharfs, piers, &c.,. under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries.

18. Yes ; 1892.

19.

Collections. Expense.

1899- 1900 .... $1,612 98 $1,017 851900- 1901 .... 2,093 18 1,253 751901- 1902 . . .. 4.163 75 3,498 711902- 1903 .... 3.120 21 1,759 981903- 1904 .... 1,321 30 1,211 6820. Yes, by town council, on the loth February, 1905.21. Matter under consideration.

Mr. BENNETT asked :

Who are the tenants of the government dock premises and storehouses thereon at Midland ? What rent is annually paid therefor ?

Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).

The storehouses at Midland are occupied jointly by Playfair, Preston & Company and the wharfinger. The rent is $100 per year, fixed in accordance with value thereof, as estimated by resident engineer.

Sir WILFRID DAURIER.

Mr. Speaker, some few days ago my bon. friend from Leeds (Mr. Taylor) asked me a question with reference to a rumour to the effect that all the shipping space available in the harbour of Montreal for the shipping of cattle had been obtained by the Armours, of Chicago. The inquiry I made leads me to the conclusion that there is no foundation for the rumour. I have received information to this effect, dated 28th of April. Regarding the cattle situation, there is no space let to American shippers, either on the Cana dian Pacific Railway line, the Allan line, the Dominion line, the Donaldson line or the Manchester line. For the month of May there is available at the present time 9,000 spaces, and probably 100,000 for the season.