Mr. F. T. CONGDON (Yukon).

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who has introduced this amendment (Mr. Burrell) told me some days ago that he proposed to direct the attention of the House to the matter of deferred elections and if there is any member of this House who is interested in deferred elections I think it will be generally conceded that it is the representative of the Yukon. Not only in this parliament, but in a former parliament, the member for the Yukon, by reason of deferred elections, was obliged to wander around the corridors of this building very much like a dismembered spirit seeking admission to the Elysian fields and only securing it after a long wait. When the hon. gentleman announced to me that he intended to introduce this subject, I expressed the greatest interest in it and I added that I hoped he would bring it before the House in such a manner as would enable the House to arrive at a practical solution of the difficulty that presents itself. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman is aware of the fact but the amendment which he has proposed to the House has eliminated altogether the question of elections in the Yukon from the consideration of this matter, because, as I understand, it is limited purely to the provinces and the Yukon is not yet a province of the Dominion.

Mr. BURRELL.

I did that for the reason that as I was not thoroughly familiar with the conditions of the Yukon, it might perhaps be difficult for me to include it in the amendment, but I spoke of it and I specifically said that I believed it might or it would include the Yukon. However, I desire to say that I am entirely in sympathy with the abolition of deferred elections in the Yukon.

Mr. CONGDON.

At all events the resolution will work no cure for the Yukon and will work no such cure as is desirable possibly for any of the other constituencies. The matter of these deferred elections is not a matter of fair play or justice; it is simply a matter of geographical considerations, and if it is possible that the election in any constituency can be held at the same time as the elections _ generally throughout Canada I think it will be conceded by both sides of the House that it would be desirable that it should be so held. With regard to the Yukon, when the hon. gentleman mentioned the subejct to me, it did seem to me that there might possibly be some practical way of holding the election in that constituency at the

same time as the elections in the rest of Canada, and no one, I am sure, in the Yukon -will be better pleased if that result can be arrived at than I will be, because, undoubtedly, there is always a very much greater interest when the result of the election does not merely mean the selection of one man or the other but may possibly mean the determination of the fate of the government. I have looked over the various periods allowed since 1874 between the date of the issue of the writ for a general election and the date of the nominations for general election, and I think it must be generally admitted that these dates selected, partly by one political party and partly by the other, are fair indications of the periods which should elapse between the issue of the writ and the election. I find that in 1878, twenty-four days elapsed between the date of the issue of the writ and the date of the nomination; in 1882, 26 days; in 1887, 29 days; in 1891, 22 days; in 1896, 53 days; in 1900, 22 days; in 1904, 28 days, and in 1908, 31 days. So that these figures will give an average period, which I think is a reasonable period for a general election throughout Canada, of thirty days between the date of the issue of the writ and the date of the nomination. Now, it simply comes down, in my humble judgment, to a question of whether, in these various constituencies in which the elections are now deferred, it is possible to hold the elections within that period, allowing thirty days between the issue of the writ and the date of the nomination. I had thought at one time, considering the period of thirty-eight days which elapsed between the date of the issue of the writ and the holding of the last general election, that possibly in the Yukon it would be possible to hold the election within that period. It certainly would not be possible under the existing Act, but with the permission of the House I propose later to introduce some amendments to the Dominion Elections Act with the view of shortening time. The present Act does not contemplate at all possibility of an election in the Yukon concurrent with other elections. Under the Act it is absolutely essential to allow twenty-one days for the writ to reach Dawson from Ottawa. I think that period might be greatly shortened by making provision for telegraphic communication on this subject, as also there might be provision for telegraphic communication in other regards. But, as there needs to be a difference between the issue of the writ and the general election of somewhere about forty days, it is, in my opinion, utterly impossible to bring on the election in the Yukon at the same time as other elections. I can only say that in regard to this I would be most anxious that the election should be held there on the Mr. CONGDON.

same day, but it comes down simply to the question of whether the House deems it advisable, and will pronounce itself to be of that opinion when the question is brought before it in a proper way that the Elections Act should compel a longer period than that which at present elapses between the issue of the writ and date of a general election.

Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance).

Mr. Speaker, the principle of simultaneous polling is one which has been accepted in Canada for a very long time and I suppose we can accept it as a general principle. Strange to say, it is not so accepted in the mother country to which we usually look for our example, and I do not know that any very good reason can be given why it has not been adopted in the United Kingdom. There the conditions of transportation, the density of population, the means of communication by mail and telegraph all seem to make for the convenience of simultaneous elections. For reasons which seem to them sufficient that method has not been adopted, while we in Canada, with the many disadvantages in the way of communication, have, for a long time, found it possible to carry out that principle with very few exceptions. With our geographical conditions it might very well be expected that there should be occasional exceptions. In the resolution which the hon. member for Yale-Cariboo (Mr. Burrell) has put before the House he does not leave room for any exceptions whatever. I think we will all agree that as time passes and as distant places in the Dominion are brought into easier communication, as the population becomes thicker, and as the facilities for communication become better, we will be able from time to time to drop out some of those exceptions and apply the general principle of simultaneous polling, perhaps to some of the constituencies in which to-day we have deferred elections. My hon. friend, however, makes the general statement and declaration that there shall be no exceptions. He will take no account of any geographical conditions. I have not the knowledge of British Columbia which my hon. friend (Mr. Burrell) has nor am I familiar with the topography of the several constituencies in which elections are now deferred, or the transportation facilities available within them, but I am advised on good authority that even to-day it would be difficult to adopt without any exception the principle which the hon. gentleman has embodied in his resolution. Therefore, it would not be wise for the House to adopt the resolution, even though the general purpose my hon. friend has in mind might commend itself to us. I am obliged to take exception to the resolution on another ground. I was rather surprised to find my hon. friend (Mr. Burrell) stating that this

was not to be regarded as a vote of nonconfidence, because if the hon. gentleman desired to move non-confidence in the government, the procedure he took would be the most effective for his purpose under our parliamentary practice. If we assume for the moment that there is need of reform in this matter then the question comes as to which is the best procedure to accomplish that reform. The hon. gentleman might have introduced a Bill striking out these exceptions from our Elections Act, or he might have put on the Order Paper a notice of motion-as my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) aid with regard to a matter which he considered for the public welfare-a discussion of which would have opened up the whole subject and probably laid the basis for the introduction of an amendatory Bill. The hon. gentleman has brought this motion as an amendment to Supply, so that the House is confined to a consideration of the words of his motion and these words only, without being able to offer an amendment. Under the practice established in parliament his motion moved in this way must be regarded as practically one of non-confidence. I regret that the hon. gentleman-for whom I have the highest respect as a new member and an old friend-should have taken the wrong way to bring about a reform which in his mind he thinks necessary. I do not for the moment say there is no room for change; I do not say that the experience of the last few years may not have shown that some of these exceptions in the Elections Act might be removed without inconvenience, but since my hon. friend offers his suggestion in the form of a non-confidence motion I am obliged to ask the House to not approve of it.

Mr. F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier).

I could not help thinking, while the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fielding) was speaking, of the lines:

On forms of government let fools contest

What s best administered is best.

because my experience in this House tells me that in many instances supporters of the government of the strongest dye have proposed amendments to Supply and have had public questions discussed in this form, and then we have seen occupants of the treasury benches arise and gracefully accept these motions. I remember that a supporter of the Minister of Finance, who now sits on the bench of Nova Scotia, moved an amendment to Supply in exactly the same way as did my hon. friend (Mr. Burrell) this afternoon, and I think my memory does not fail me when I say that the Minister of Finance himself, speaking for the government, declared that the amendment would be accepted.

Mr. FIELDING.

Probably it was a very good motion.

Hear, hear.

Mr. MONK.

That is just the point. The government certainly does not regard all the amendments to Supply as motions of non-confidence, but I suppose it depends to some extent on the political complexion of the hon. gentleman who moves the amendment. For my part I think the1 procedure adopted by my hon. friend (Mr. Burrell) is quite appropriate to the ventilation of this grievance. He has brought before the House a long standing grievance, and I trust that after the very eloquent appeal he has made the government will take steps to end an abuse which has become intolerable all over the country. I rose merely to speak of this grievance as we experience it in the province of Quebec, where we have not the spirit of resistance which the people of British Columbia apparently have. We have in the province of Quebec the counties of Gaspe and Chicoutimi, which since confederation have been practically disfranchised by the system of deferring the elections in them. I do not say that at one time, because of the lack of communication within these counties, it may not have been necessary to defer the elections, but that day has oast. It might be necessary in these counties to notify the returning officers a few days before the other returning officers were notified, but surely there could be no objection to that. The turmoil of a general election begins months before the day of nomination, and even if it were necessary to notify by telegram the returning officers in these counties the same day that the writs were mailed to the other returning officers, there would be ample time to have the general elections in Gaspe and Chicoutimi on the same day as the others. These two Quebec counties require public works, and post offices and government aid in one way and another, and so for twenty years it has been an understood thing that they would elect supporters of the government. In these counties they wait until the result of the general elections is known all over the country, and then they proceed as it were pro forma to the election of a government supporter.

Mr. TALBOT.

Is that what happened in British Columbia this year?

Mr. MONK.

In British Columbia they seem to take a different view, and that is why I spoke of the independence of the electors of that province. It is well known by those who take an interest in politics in Quebec that no serious candidature is offered in Chicoutimi and Gaspe until it is ascertained what party has been returned to power. These counties as I have said require public works and aid from the government in a multitude of ways, and under the shameful system of patronage, which is the bane of this country.

they can only get these necessary public works if they are represented by supporters of the party in power. I apply that to all parties. And that is the way the electors of these two counties have been obliged to proceed ever since confederation. Is this necessary P Is there any reasonable ground why the electors of these two large counties should not enjoy the franchise exactly as it is enjoyed everywhere else in Canada-perfectly independent electors to select to represent them in parliament an absolutely independent man. I say we have had conclusive reasons this afternoon why the present system should be abolished. I did not hear what was stated by my hon. friend (Mr. Congdon), representing the Yukon, but I understand that the rule could be made to include the Yukon also. After all, there are a great many people-and I am one of them-who think we should have the general election on a fixed day, without interfering with the prerogative of the Crown to have a dissolution when that is necessary. I think it would be far less unsettling to the country than the present system. At any rate, if the old custom is to be continued and a dissolution must proceed from the government, I do not see any reason why we should continue to persecute- because it is nothing else-a certain class of our electors.

Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Postmaster General).

I protest as vigorously as I can against the statement made by my hon. friend (Mr. Monk) that since confederation the county of Gaspe has been practically disfranchised. It certainly has not been disfranchised, if I have heard correctly the very severe criticisms during the discussion of the estimates in this Chamber. The county of Gaspe, as a matter of fact, has been represented by the true representatives of its people. There is in Gaspe a strong opposition; I have been favoured with it ever since 1896, and I have had to fight for my life at each election. But the hon. member (Mr. Monk) is not well informed concerning the peculiar geographical position of the county of Gaspe. Should a dissolution take place at this moment, or had a dissolution taken place say a month ago, it would not have been humanly possible to hold an election in Gaspe. This applies even to the mainland. We have there a stretch of 250 miles of coast without railway facilities-that is, the railway is under construction but, even when it is finished it will not be sufficient to meet the requirements of the case. In the course of this stretch of 250 miles of coast there are twenty-five or twenty-six rivers, some of them quite large, to cross. Unless the returning officer had the use of one of the government steamers to carry the ballot boxes, posters and other supplies necessary for the election, he could not Mr. MONK.

cover the ground within the period allowed for the general election.

Mr. MONK.

Do I understand the hon. gentleman to say that on the mainland the ground cannot be covered within the period?

Mr. LEMIEUX.

On the mainland it can hardly be covered within a month-that is if the returning officer does his duty, chooses the polling booths, posts his proclamations, delivers his ballot boxes and so on, unless he divides the work with other people. There are three municipalities in the county of Gaspe. We have three court-houses, three jails,-they are always empty, I must say-and all the machinery of three municipalities. It is an immense territory. My hon. friend (Mr. Monk) has visited only that section of the coast which is frequented by the tourists in summer; but the other section, the portion traversed by. what is called the maritime road is very hard to cover at any season of the year. But this is only the mainland. We have also the Magdalen Islands, one or two hundred miles distant from the mainland. At this season of the year, you simply could not hold an election on the same day as a general election-unless you wired the proclamation, the instructions to deputy returning officers and so on. But, even so, what about the ballots ? There is no printing establishment on the Magdalen Islands; would you favour the system once followed in the county of Chicoutimi, where a match box was used as a ballot box, and the ballots were not printed but written by some of the officers ?

Mr.'MONK. If the law were amended so as to permit the instructions to be telegraphed to the Magdalen Islands, what possible difficulty would there be in holding the election on the same day as elsewhere?

Does not the hon. gentleman see that that is a system open to very serious objection ? The date might be telegraphed wrongly. There might easily be an error in wiring the name of one of the candidates. It certainly is not a proper way of holding an election to wire the instructions, the names of the candidates and so on.

Mr. MONK.

I only urge that point because I have taken the trouble to inquire of people who reside not only there but lower down the river, and I am informed that there is no obstacle to holding the election in Gaspe on the same day as elsewhere.

Mr. LEMIEUX.

I have pointed out what seem to me very serious difficulties. II we had nothing but the mainland to consider, when the railway is completed from Pas-pebiac to Gaspe, the territory can be covered easily within the election period, but,

so long as the Magdalen Islands form part of the county it would be impossible to cover the whole county within the time at certain seasons of the year. At the last election-I was not there on the day of election, but I am aware of the fact, the returning officer had the use of two of the government steamers for the delivery of the ballot boxes on the Magdalen Islands and the mainland.

Mr. MONK.

The hon. gentleman knows that they are not always used when necessary.

Mr. LEMIEUX.

In this instance they were used because it was necessary in order to hold the election on the day fixed in the proclamation. Now, this point is not a ground of complaint on the part of any of the parties in Gaspe. Before 1896, and since, the two parties have admitted that the election cannot be held in Gaspe on the same day as elsewhere. Nor is this regarded as a grievance in that constituency. I repeat that the county has not been disfranchised. Ever since confederation there have been the two parties, well organized in that county. The county was Liberal when hon. gentlemen opposite were on this side. It so happens that the county has been Liberal ever since 1896, but that does not mean that it has been disfranchised. As regards Saguenay and Chicoutimi, the hon. gentleman is in error, because in the last general election the polling took place there on the same day as elsewhere.

Mr. MONK.

But the law allows a deferred election.

Mr. LEMIEUX.

If the election had taken place in winter, I suppose it would have been impossible to have the polling there on the same day as in the rest of the Dominion.