I promised yesterday jthn t 1 would give certain information asked for upon the item of pensions on account of the Fenian raid. The details are to be found in the Auditor General's Report, Yol. 1, G-16. In regard to pensions to militiamen on account of the Northwest rebellion, the accounts are to be found in detail in the same volume, same page. As far as I remember, these pensions were granted to some of the men in the force upon the report of the board appointed for that purpose.

My hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Foster) asked me yesterday about the number of persons naturalized last year. The number is 4,402.

Mr. FOSTER.

In what report is that ?

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

The details are iu the report of the Secretary of State, page VI. But this information I have received indirectly from the Secretary of State.

I was also asked for some information with regard to another item in the pension list, that is the amounts paid to pensioners in lieu of land. This is such an old item that it is somewhat difficult to get the information ; hut I understand that the amount paid so far has been $8,900. A pensioner gets $19.14 per annum. So far as we can ascertain, there are only two now living.

I was also asked for information about the item in the estimates of $2,000 granted to the Academy of Arts. This amount is paid to the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, at Toronto.

Mr. FOSTER.

Then with reference to the issue of patents, in relation to scrip.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

I am sorry to say I have not the information yet; I may get it to-day.

Mr. J. BARR (Dufferin).

Whilst we are waiting for the Supply Bill, might I ask the Prime Minister whether he has a copy of that circular from the Post Office Department to lay on the table of the House ?

Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture).

Speaking on behalf of the Postmaster General, we have not a copy of the circular to which the hon. gentleman refers, but I may say that circular was sent

out pursuant to regulations of the Post Office Department dealing with the conduct of postmasters generally. The department issued instructions that postmasters must not distribute matter which was sent to them in hulk, as it interfered materially with the collection of revenue, inasmuch as such mail matter would pass through the mails at cheaper rates than it otherwise would. That of course would not apply to a frank, but at the same time the post office authorities have found it necessary to deal with the postmasters on general principles and to instruct them as to their conduct with regard to all mail matter whether franked or stamped. If discretion were allowed to postmasters as to when they should carry out the departmental instructions, we would have endless difficulty and the postmasters would be constantly contravening their instructions in a way which would very materially interfere with the postal revenue. In this particular case the postmaster seems to have received a parcel of something sent by a member of this House. The post office authorities have no information as to what instructions the postmaster received from the sender of the package. However he was doing what was contrary to his instructions in taking the contents of that parcel and distributing them. Under ordinary circumstances if that parcel had been stamped the revenue received from it would be very much less than if the documents had been sent separately and each stamped. It is therefore evident that in the public interest postmasters s'hould not be allowed to follow the practice complained of. If postmasters could exercise their discretion to do or to refuse to do what they are requested, it might lead to complications in regard to the personality of the postmaster and result in postmasters doing what would entail dismissal or severe reprimand from the postal authorities. The post office considers that a frank is merely a substitute for a stamp, and that franked matter is subject to all the regulations which govern stamped matter sent through the mails. The frank is accepted by the authorities as entitling a letter to go forward, but at the same time it carries with it no privilege which stamped mail matter would not carry. I do not think there is any further information to be given, but if my hon. friend desires further explanation I will be glad to ascertain it from the Post Office Department.

Mr. D. HENDERSON.

We are all very glad to hear the statement of the Minister of Agriculture, because we have no desire to put the postmasters of the country in an improper position. I may say that I have been a frequent offender under the rule laid down by the Minister of Agriculture. We receive a great many bulletins, not only those emanating from the Commission on Agriculture and Colonization of the House, but other documents of a character such

as pass through the mails without postage, and I have had no hesitation at any time in putting these up in parcels of from ten to twelve, addressing them to a particular country postmaster, and writing upon them 'parliamentary papers,' and a request to distribute them. I have found the postmasters always willing to hand these out to the farmers, exercising, X presume, a discretion in giving them to such farmers as are likely to make a proper use of them. I do not think that is an improper use of the post office. These bulletins are entitled to go free through the post office, whether sent from Ottawa or from our homes ; and this method of sending simply avoided the necessity of my addressing them separately. I have made it a point to ask the farmers in the section of country to which they were sent, and I have found that the postmasters did, at my request, distribute these bulletins. I know no better way of getting this information into the bands of the people of the country, and I think the Postmaster General is placing undue restriction upon the liberties of members of parliament in making a strict rule of this kind. The question of revenue is not involved at all, because if a member has a right to frank a parcel containing a dozen documents, he has a right to frank each one separately. If he franks each one separately and addresses it to the individual into whose hands he wishes it to go, there is nothing lost to the revenue, and there would be nothing lost to the revenue if he sent ten or a dozen of these to the postmaster and asked him to distribute them. I do not presume that any member of parliament would think of sending out mail matter that was not entitled to free delivery, and ask a postmaster to distribute that. I do not think such a practice has taken place ; I have not heard of it; nor do I think that any member of parliament would jeopardize his position by presuming to do anything of that kind. I think the Postmaster General might reasonably make an exception of parliamentary documents bearing the impress of the King's Printer, which are entitled to go through the post office free of charge. The Minister of Agriculture is certainly mistaken in regard to the loss of revenue. The revenue would not be affected one whit. I fail to see that any wrong would he done to the country, and so long ns the postmaster is willing to do this slight service in accommodating his neighbour by banding around sucb documents as bulletins, I think there is practically no ground for complaint. I would ask the Minister of Agriculture, who is acting for the Postmaster General in his absence, to point this out to the Postmaster General, and ask him not to deprive us of this privilege *which we have enjoyed, legally or illegally. I never thought that I was doing anything wrong when I was using the postal service for a very proper purpose-to promote the Mr. HENDERSON.

work of the Minister of Agriculture. Now he seeks to impose a restriction upon us. I think the farmers of the country will not care to have him stand up in the House and say that their privileges should he interfered with in this way. This is a matter of convenience to members of parliament, who are busy people when they get home. If we get four or five hundred bulletins, and have to sit down and address each one separately, and look up tbe post offices, my impression is that they will be found in tbe waste basket instead of going into the hands of the farmers. If an exception were made in this case, I am satisfied that no loss of revenue would result, and no harm would be done in any way.

Mr. FISHEIi. My bon. friend does not seem to have caught the point I was making. I had no intention of expressing the idea that the mailing of matter by members in that way affected the revenue. What I did point out was that the franking privilege carries with it no privilege that stamped mail matter does not. The frank simply takes the place of the stamp. The regulations and rules of the office have to apply to franked matter just the same as they do to stamped matter. If postmasters are to be allowed to do this work for correspondents, whether members of parliament or not, it will interfere, very materially and seriously, with the collection of revenue in the case of stamped matter. That is tbe view of tbe Post Office Department. If they are to allow a postmaster to do this under certain circumstances and not under other circumstances, tbe authorities contend that it would bring about confusion iu tbe post offices. Postmasters would very often do it when they were not allowed to do it as well as when they were allowed to do it. I am informed by the deputy Postmaster General that there has to be ou the part of the authorities a very constant and close watch, especially over country postmasters, because they are con-stanly being asked to facilitate the use of the post office for the carriage of matter without payment. It is very common for people in a country village to put things into the post office without placing stamps ou them for somebody else who collects his mail at that office. That of course is clearly contrary to the interest of the postal revenue, because all such matter ought to be stamped. That is only one of many ways in which postmasters are tempted not to collect revenue which ought to be collected. Every exception made tends to increase that confusion and tbe chances of loss of revenue. My bon. friend has said that it is a great convenience to members to be able to call on postmasters to do this work for them. I grant that ; I have no doubt of it. At tbe same time, the post office authorities consider that tbe calling on postmasters to do that is a distinct interference with their work as postmasters,

and is detrimental to the public service. If postmasters are asked, they do not like to refuse. They will probably find a great deal of difficulty in refusing their representative in the House ; and yet the doing of. it might seriously interfere with the performance of their duties for which they are paid by the Post Office Department. For that reason the Post Office Department does not consider that it is in the public interest that such a request should be made to the postmaster. My hon. friend speaks about the distribution of literature to the farmers. No doubt it is very desirable that that should be done as widely as possible. At the same time, I do not think that the farmers of the country are asking any special privileges or advantages which other people should not have. If this concession were to be made to members, there is no evidence or knowledge as to the kind of literature that would be sent.

A member can send a bundle to one postmaster and a bundle to another, but unfortunately in the country post offices that opportunity has been taken advantage of for the distribution of circulars and advertisements and things of that kind-I do not mean with the frank but without the frank -in the ordinary course of business. Consequently the post office authorities had to exercise very considerable supervision over the conduct of the post masters in this respect.

Mr. BARE.

I regret very much that the department should have seen fit to change the present practice which has been in vogue for the last quarter of a century ; not only in this House but in the provincial parliament as well. Of course in the latter the postage must be paid. The custom is one which is worked, not only to the convenience of members but to the interest of the public. As regards the plea that this occasions trouble to postmasters, I can assure you. Sir, that such is not the case. No member would think of imposing additional trouble on the postmasters if the latter were not willing to do that work. In fact the work in that connection is exceedingly trifling. I hardly think that the Postmaster General understands the position in the country districts or he would not have made the change. All that a postmaster in a rural district has to do is to open the package and place the documents on the counter and let those who call at the office take them. In that way a great deal of useful information can be spread throughout the country and no loss of revenue occasioned. This change will put the members of this House to great inconvenience and deprive the country of those bulletins, because members will not have the time to send out each bulletin separately. It would be impossible for members of this House to do this when, as at present, they have to do so much of their own writing, unlike the practice in some of the local legislatures,

where the members can avail themselves of the staff of sessional clerks for that purpose. Here, however, there is no such staff which members can utilize by dictating their correspondence to shorthand writers and having it typewritten and transmitted through the mails. I hope that the hon. the Postmaster General will consider this matter of sending out packages of official documents and also the suggestion of endeavouring to place members in the position of being able to attend to the wants of then-own constituencies without the great labour, inconvenience and expense now entailed upon them.

The object of this resolution is to found thereon a Bill which I will introduce presently, if the resolution carries, which will provide that the salary of the commandant shall not exceed $3,200 a year, and that the salaries of the staff adjutant, professors, instruc-

tors, assistant instructors and staff, shall be fixed, and may be readjusted from time to time toy the Governor in Council; and that the details of such salaries shall appear in the annual report laid before parliament toy the Minister of Militia and Defence. In fact it wiH be an Act to amend the existing provisions in the Act respecting the Royal Military College, which are as follows ;

The salary of the commandant shall not exceed $3,'200 a year ; the salary of the staff adjutant shall not exceed $1,400 a year, and the salaries of the professors, instructors and assistant instructors shall not exceed the total sum of $26,000 annually. The Governor in Council may from time to time readjust the number and duties, and, within the limit above mentioned, the salaries of the staff, and the details of such salaries shall appear in the annual report laid before parliament by the Minister of Militia and Defence.

Now, Mr. Chairman, the college has grown, and we have now reached the limit of $26,000 for salaries provided in the existing Royal Military College Act. I think it desirable, as later on there may he a further growth and expansion, that the limit of $26,000 should he removed. Parliament always controls these votes, and I thought it better that an amendment should be passed adhering to the limitation of the salary of the commandant, and to the provision with regard to the other professors, but withdrawing from the Bill the limitation of $26,000; leaving it to the Governor in Council to fix the amount of salaries, and leaving it to parliament to vote such sum as may he considered necessary.

Mr. DANIEL.

Do the present salaries appear in detail anywhere?

Sir FREDERICK BORDEN.

Yes, my hon. friend will find them in the Auditor General's Report, and they are in the report of the Minister of Militia.