On orders of the day being called.
Mr. FOSTER.
If my right hon. friend would allow me, I intended to make a motion. I move for leave to lay on the table of the House a copy of the findings of the Royal Commission appointed by the government of New Brunswick to look into the Central Railway affairs and report thereon.
Mr. CASH.
Mr. FOSTER.
It depends on whose ox is gored.
Mr. SPEAKER.
Would the hon. gentleman kindly state what motion was made without notice?
Mr. HENDERSON.
The hon. member for Maisonneuve (Mr. Verville) was allowed to move to drop an order from the Order Paper.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
He was allowed not to add to the load on the Order Paper, but to remove an item from it.
Mr. HENDERSON.
The motion was out of order without notice.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
It depends on the object.
Mr. SPEAKER.
I asked if the hon. member had the consent of the House to make the motion.
Mr. HENDERSON.
I am not objecting to your action, Mr. Speaker; I think you were quite right. What I say is, that the right hon. gentleman should not give consent in one case and not in another.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER.
It depends on the object altogether.
Mr. J. D. REID.
And the man.
House again in Committee on Bill (No. 128), to authorize a loan to the Grand Trunk Pacific.-Mr. Fielding. On the preamble.
Mr. FOSTER.
I asked several questions of the Minister of Finance when we were last in committee, and he said he would endeavour to get the information. I asked whether the $205,000 which is mentioned as having been paid on the Grand Trunk Pacific stock went into the actual construction
of the Grand Trunk Pacific, and how it was paid.
Mr. FIELDING.
While reference was made in the debate to a number of points,
I do not recall that any specific question was put on which I was expected to procure additional statements, hut I shall have the matter looked into further.
Mr. FOSTER.
Several questions were asked about the $9,000,000 said to have been invested in the railway by the Grand Trunk Pacific, and whether that included the $9,000,000 invested in equipment or rolling stock? The minister was not sure, but he was of the opinion that the rolling stock could only be provided for by an issue of equipment bonds, and that, therefore, it could not be called an investment.
Mr. FIELDING.
I did not understand I was to get further information. I gave my hon. friend the information I had, and thought with that he was content; that is to say, that the rolling stock was provided by an issue of equipment bonds, and that, therefore, it could not refer to the item which he mentioned. The chief engineer of the government informs me that is his idea of the matter also. I would not consider that an investment by the company of the company's funds; it is an investment by the people who purchased the bonds.