Mr. PATERSON.

Oh, no. I have only this to say, that I believe the hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennett) is correct when he says that what I say will not make much impression on him. Well, what I did say was for the benefit of gentlemen opposite who recognize what is proper and what is not. I did not say it for the benefit of the gentleman who himself acknowledges that he is past being helped in that direction. While the hon. gentleman says that i?e forgot that he had asked that question, he will remember that the very part that he alluded to was where I said that it was not usual to give the names of individual importers, which he had asked for. That is how it came out. How is it that he saw the answer to that part of the question and forgot about the question ? I might ask him that.

Mi\ H. H. MIDLER. The hon. member for East Simcoe has stated that Mr. McKay, of Owen (Sound, is in Ottawa to-day and has endeavoured to make out that he is after .some dredging contracts, and that .this is not the first time that he has been here on the same business. I do not know whether Mr. McKay owns or is interested in a dredge or not. I do know, and it is well known, that Mr. McKay's presence in Ottawa to-day is for the purpose of transacting important business before the Railway Committee in the interest of the citizens of Owen Sound and the town of Mea-ford. Mr. McKay was accompanied on that business by another prominent resident of Owen Sound. He has before this been accompanied to Ottawa in reference to the same Bill by prominent citizens of Owen Sound and the town of Meaford, some Reformers and some Conservatives ; mid after a similar visit to Ottawa, Mr. McKay was publicly thanked by a prominent Conservative of Owen Sound for the manner in which he attended to the Mr. BENNETT.

business before the Railway Committee. The hon. member for East Simcoe who appears to have a very lively and not always well guided imagination, has, I presume, made all his insinuations to-day upon charges equally .baseless and without any foundation in fact.

Motion (Mr. Clements) to adjourn, negatived. * .

Hon. GEORGE E. FOSTER.

Before the Orders of the Day are called, I want to call the attention of the Minister of Railways to a return that was brought down in answer to an order of the House in reference to the correspondence that took place before, during and after the dismissal of a mason inspector at Gamebridge. That return is very incomplete. I called the attention of the First Minister to it about a fortnight ago, and I have since had "no answer as to the missing parts of the return. I would like the minister to have the return completed and brought down as soon as .possible. The returns ordered in February and March, to which I alluded at the same time, are all yet on the list of the not-brought-downs-one in reference to public buildings, one in reference to rails on the Intercolonial, one in reference to the capital expenditure on the Drummond Counties Railway, and one in reference to the building of wharfs and public buildings. These have been ordered for nearly two months, and I think they ought to be on the way down.

Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).

With reference to the return relating to the mason inspector, my information from the- deputy minister was that the whole correspondence was [DOT]included in the return. I have not been able to question him further .because of bis absence since the attention of the House was . called to the matter by my hon. friend. I have the return with respect to the expenditures on the Drummond Counties section of the Intercolonial Railway, which I shall take the liberty now of laying on the table of the House. This only came into my hands yesterday afternoon. The return with respect to rails is one that I have re-peatedlv asked Mr. Pottinger for, and he has stated that he is furnishing it with all the expedition possible, but that it covers a wide field and the information takes a great deal of time and labour to secure. I have urged him to have it forwai-ded as soon as possible.

Mr. FOSTER.

With refei-ence to the return of which the minister has spoken, there must be some mistake, because I have in my possession two or three letters and allusions to other letters, and it is the latter I want brought down.

Mr. EMMERSOX.

On the return of the deputy minister, I will get full particulars in reference to the matter.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

What is the respective area of each of these provinces as they are laid out at present ?

Mr. FITZPATRICK.

Paper No. 9T. which has been brought down, shows the area and the population of each province and also the population of each territory.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

I thought that the area was given for the whole of the Territories, but I do not observe in the statement the area of the respective provinces.

Mr. FITZPATRICK.

I shall give the

area of each province separately. The area of Alberta will be land 250,653 square miles; water 3,312 square miles. Total 253,965 square miles. Population, according to the census of 1901, 72,924. Estimated population, January 31, 1905, 173,043. Saskatchewan, land area, 243,192 square miles ; water area, 6,929. Total, 250,119 square miles. Population according to the census of 1901, 92,231. Estimated population, January 31, 1905, 244,913.

Mr. BERGERON.

We were led to understand that tlie population of each province was about 250,000 ?

Mr. FITZPATRICK.

One is 244,000 and the other 173,000.

Mr. BERGERON.

The other day we were told that in each province there would be 250,000.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

On the 1st of July next.

Mr. FITZPATRICK.

We estimated that the total poulation of the 1st of next July will be 500,000. I might give the estimates as we have them here. I have the figures on which we based our estimate. The additions to the population of the Territories, estimated by the immigration commissioner, are as follows :

From April 1st, 1901, to July 1st, 1901.. 12,213

Fiscal year, 1901-02

44,070" 1902-03

79,327" 1903-04

75,042

July 1st to 4th May, 1905, approximately.. 53,500

To which probably may he added, as our estimate of immigration during May and June, 25,(XX), making the estimated popula-454,737.

Mr. BERGERON.

That is not quite evenly divided.

Mr. FITZPATRICK.

No, rather larger in Saskatchewan.

Mr. R. L. BORDEN.

Would the minister be good enough to give us the data on which these estimated increases of population are computed ?