Mr. LENNOX moved:

That the fourth report of the Special Committee appointed to investigate the charges , and allegations made by Hugh D. Lumsden against a portion of the engineering staff of the National Transcontinental railway be taken into consideration on the 31st instant.

He said: I would suggest this date if it is convenient to the leader of the government.

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

Quite so.

Mr. A. H. CLARKE.

Mr. Speaker, before the orders of the day are called, I wish to bring to the attention of the government, especially the Minister of Public Works, a complaint made by the people in the western part of the province of Ontario in regard to the lease by the government of Ontario of the privilege of

taking sand and gravel from the Detroit river, or rather the River St. Clair, which is an international stream. That privilege has been granted for five years to a Detroit concern over a district running from the Indian reserve to the head of Point Edward, and comprising some 2,025 acres. Heretofore it has been the custom of the people of Sarnia, Wallaceburg, Dresden and other places desiring sand, to go to the neighbourhood and take it. They find now that before they can get any sand they have to pay a royalty to this Detroit concern, without whose consent they are not able to avail themselves of this public property. A great deal of feeling amounting to indignation has been aroused over the matter, and it seems to me that by reason of the interest which the Dominion has in a stream of this character, some action might be taken by this government to protect the rights of the people of Canada.

Mr. PTJGSLEY.

I am glad that my hon. friend has brought up this very important matter. I may say that my attention has been already called to it by persons who complain of this exclusive right being granted by the government of Ontario to the company to which my hon. friend refers. Of course, if the sole right to the bed of the river is vested in the Ontario government, it would be impossible for the Department of Public Works to take action unless the operations of the company might be injurious to navigation. I am rather inclined to think that is the case, because a company dredging simply for the purpose of taking out sand would not be likely to have very much regard to navigation, and the result would be that deep holes would be left in certain parts of the river, which would prevent proper anchorage, and in other respects might be injurious to navigation. I may say to my hon. friend that I will have the matter looked into, and will see whether it is possible or desirable that action should be taken by the Department of Public Works in the matter.

Mr. JAMESON.

If the minister will permit me to refer back to section 3, I would like to ask him if he thinks that the words ' persons afflicted with loathsome diseases, or with disease that is contagious, or infectious, or which may become dangerous to the public health,' would cover tuberculosis? I see, by the amended immigration regulations of the United States, adopted in 1907, that w'hile they have made provision practically along the lines which the minister has followed in this Bill, they have expressly included tuberculosis. If the hon. minister thinks this clause will cover that point, I suppose there is no necessity to make an amendment, but otherwise, it would be well to consider the matter. .

Mr. OLIVER.

I may say that the matter was considered when we were drafting the Bill. Our view was that tuberculosis is such an insidious disease that if we mentioned it by name, and specifically included tuberculous people among the prohibited classes, the provision might be used to work unnecessary hardship, whereas the section, in its present shape, is sufficiently operative in cases where the disease is so developed that there can be no question about its existence. In such cases, the immigrant may be excluded under it. But if we were to include the word ' tuberculosis ' in the section, it would cover cases which might show a tubercular tendency or a tubercular condition which it would not be right to exclude on that account. By leaving the section as it is, if the disease has reached such a stage as to be a danger to public health, the patient can be excluded.

Mr. JAMESON.

As long as the minister thinks the section sufficiently broad to cover cases of tuberculosis, and the officers of his department are so instructed, I shall be perfectly satisfied, but I hope that the minister's view will be understood, because it is very important that we should guard against the introduction of that loathsome, and most deadly disease.

Mr. OLIVER.

This provision is practically identical with that in the Act to-day, and which is operated under the interpretation I have given. We employ the section for the purpose of excluding patients who are evidently tubercular and whose condition is such as to constitute a public danger.

On section 28,

Medical officers appointed under this Act shall make a physical and mental examination of all immigrants and passengers seeking to land in Canada from any ship or vessel, except in the case of Canadian citizens. Such examination shall he made in accordance with and subject to regulations prescribed by the superintendent of immigration under the direction or with the approval of the minister.

Mr. JAMESON.

Does the hon. minister contemplate having any examination of intended immigrants at the port of embarkation? I have alluded several times to the United States regulations, and I do not wish to unduly bring them into this discussion, but it does seem to me that, with

their very long experience, they ought to be in a position to know what is required. I find that, according to the provisions of their Act of March 3, 1893, they require the shipmasters to furnish a list of all passengers, and that the passengers shall be examined by the master of the ship or its surgeon at the port of embarkation. If that be not done, they are liable to heavy punishment-both the master, and the ship owners. When the Bill before us was under discussion on its second reading, my hon. friend from .Tacques Cartier (Mr. Monk) made a suggestion along this line, and I do not know whether the minister said that any regulations of that character would be enforced. But it seems to me such a regulation would relieve in a large measure the pressure on the officers on this side. I should like to have the minister's views.

Mr. OLIVEB.

Section 26 might be utilized to require the information which my hon. friend has suggested, but our view is that we cannot accept any inspection by any person who is not responsible directly to us, and therefore we have not provided for any examination. Section 26, however, would enable us to require the master to give us the information on the manifest. That, however, is a question of detail, and not of principle. Our principle is that the examination made by the officers responsible to us is the only one we can recognize. In that way we place the responsibility absolutely on the steamship company. If the company take passengers who do not meet the requirements of our law, they have to take them back, and the responsibility is theirs, not ours..

Mr. PAQUET.

This section concerning inspection is perhaps the most important of all. What we should insist on is moral, physical and mental inspection.

Persons who have been convicted of any crime should not' be permitted to land in Canada. In that connection, I express the opinion, founded on the statement of Mr. Scott, that we should provide for the moral examination of the immigrants on the other side. Whoever intends to settle in our country should be the holder of a certificate stating that he has committed no crime. This certificate might be issued by a magistrate, by the clerk of a court of justice, ot by a clergyman. Let us insert a similar test in our legislation, and we shall have at our disposal a further means of keeping away undesirable immigrants. On the twenty-first of April. 1909, in the Committee on Agriculture, Mr. Monk put this question to Mr. Scott: 'What objections do you see to it if the immigrant should hand to the examining authority on the other side that document which would show that the immigrant is not a criminal?'' Mr. JAMESON. \

And Mr. Scott said: ' I would have no objections.'

I desire to make another suggestion. The ideal system would consist in a medical examination performed on board ship by a Canadian physician, appointed and paid by the Department of the Interior. He would be permitted to take the necessary time to make an inspection of a very scientific character.

You will allow me to make a few remarks concerning the medical inspection of immigrants at Quebec. Dr. Page has thoroughly organized the system of medical inspectors at that place. Those having any experience in the practice of medicine know how7 difficult it sometimes is, to discover mental disease. The physician is obliged to make long and repeated examinations. I think Dr. Burgess, medical superintendent of Verdun Asylum, is right when he says:

But, apart from the question of heredity, there is another and more remediable cause for the rapid increase in our asylum population, namely, the defective class of immigrants being dumped upon our shores. That a country so vast as ours should be more densely peopled is ' a consummation devoutly to he wished,' hut the question of number should be secondary to that of character, and quite a large proportion of the immigrants brought in are of a low standard of mentality, some of them even having been inmates of asylums before coming to this country.^ In our own establishment, of the admissions since its opening, over forty per cent have been of foreign birth, and there are in residence at the present time not a few patients, who, if subjected to any proper examination, would never have been allowed to set foot in the country. The new Immigration Act, assented to in July, 1906, by which an immigrant probationary period in this country was extended to two years, has certainly been a great help toward reducing the number of undesirables foisted upon us, and by its aid we were able last year to bring about the deportation of some fourteen patients. There are, however, still resident no less than eleven persons whom we are morally certain come within the provisions of the Act, but in regard to whom we have been able to get no positive proof that such is the case. Insane, they are unable or unwilling to give any reliah'e information about themselves, and friendless, we have no one to whom to apply for it. This fact alone proves the crying need for a much stricter examination of every alien seeking our shores. All persons wishing to emigrate to Canada should he rigidly examined by liberally salaried medical officers appointed by the Dominion government, before being allowed to embark, and should furnish proof that they have never been insane or epileptic, and that their parents have never been affected with such diseases. The examining medical officer should be held strictly accountable for the mental calibre of the applicants for emigration passed by him.

I hope the minister will be able to go along these lines. I believe this Bill is a

step in advance. I would like a perfect Bill, and I believe that there is room foi great improvement, even upon the present legislation. The government would be accomplishing a progressive work should they appoint a commissioner with power to investigate in order to enlighten the legislators of this country with regard to this great question of immigration.

Mr. OLIVER.

In reply to the suggestion of my hon. friend (Mr. Paquet) that there should be a moral examination of the immigrant before he leaves his own country, I would point out that, while that would be possible in the case of immigrants from the continent of Europe, it seems to me it would be either difficult or ineffective in the case of immigrants coming from the British islands. On the continent there is a general system of supervision of the people; a record is kept of every individual. Consequently, as I have suggested, it would be possible, in the case of immigrants from the continent of Europe to arrive at a very fair idea as to their conduct by such a scheme of investigation as my hon. friend suggests without unduly and unreasonably hampering the immigration movement. But I fear that, in the case of British immigrants who come from a country where there is no such system of keeping records of individuals, the result would be to hamper desirable immigration to a degree that would be beyond the benefit that we should derive. The deportation provisions of our Act are, I think, reasonably effective in getting rid of the morally unfit. That is the purpose, at any rate. And I think that the purpose is fairly served. So that, when an immigrant arrives in Canada, if we find within a reasonable time that he is morally unfit, we can, under the Act, return him to the country from whence he came at a minimum of expense to Canada. This fact -that they can be returned and that the expense of return has to be borne by the transportation company, and the effect of failure by the unfortunate person who is deported-seems to me to be a fair deterrent. I think the House will find, as we wrork along the lines of our present Immigration Act, that the effect will be to restrict the coming of the undesirables through the knowledge that if they come they can and will be sent back.

As to the suggestion that there should be a medical examination on board the ship on the way out, I quite appreciate the great advantage there would be in adopting such a plan. Certainly, it would give an opportunity for physical examination which does not exist in the rush and hurry that occurs in the landing at the ocean port. But, on the other hand, there would have to be considered the very large expense that would be involved in making such an examination as is proposed. But, if the matter is fairly examined, and if the

immigrants who came last year and those who are coming this year be considered rather than those who came years ago before we put in force the restrictive and selective provisions of the Act under a selective and restrictive policy, I think it will be found that the conditions are not such as would reasonably require the additional expense that would be involved in my hon. friend's suggestion.

Mr. J. D. REID.

I do not quite understand what rule the minister follows. At many of these points where immigrants arrive, he has physicians to examine them, and I suppose they also see at the same time that the immigrants fulfil the law in other respects. At many other important points his officials are not medical men, and therefore are not in a position to judge whether the immigrants are proper persons to allow into this country. As long as they have the necessary funds, which I think is $25 each, the immigration officers allow them to come into this country. They may be persons who are not .altogether mentally right, and yet these officers are not qualified to judge, and therefore undesirables are allowed in. As an instance, take Sault Ste. Marie, where tlm minister stations medical men to examine immigrants coming in. But opposite my own town there is no medical officer. There are men there acting as immigration agents, and I am not saying anything against them, they are all good men. But how are they to decide whether a person is fit to come into this country? As long as they have the funds they are allowed to come in. There are other cases where I think this immigration law is violated, and the minister knows it; it is violated on account of the kind of officers he appoints. We all know that it is not very long ago when thousands of Japanese were allowed to come ^ in at Vancouver. After one immigrant' was allowed in -yvith $25, he handed that money over to another one who is also allowed in, and so they kept the thing going on, and the official allowed immigrants in who were not able to comply with the law. We had another case at Halifax or St. John, where one of the minister's officers was letting in immigrants that were diseased, and that were certainly not the proper kind of citizens to allow into this country. But he was allowing them to come in and getting a rake-off for doing so. In that case all the minister did was to dismiss this official-at least I think he did, but he did not prosecute him for violating the law; and the Tesult is that the next man he appoints is probably doing the same thing. But that is not the only case. There is a case before the public at Quebec to-day where an official appointed by the minister himself has been,

I understand, allowing these _ people to come in, though they have violated the law; he allowed a lot of them to come in that had not the necessary funds. The way they do it is a contractor will go down and hand the men the $25, and then they are allowed in and remain here as citizens. Yet the minister pays noi attention to that. People can get into this country, no matter whether they have $25, or whether they are filled with tuberculosis, or anything else, because of the class of men the minister has acting as inspectors. When I read of these things taking place at Vancouver, at St. John, and at Quebec, and the minister paying no attention to them, I think it is time the people should rise and rebel against the kind of officials he puts there to carry out the inspection law.

Mr. OLIVER.

I have not in mind all the instances my hon. friend has mentioned, and cannot reply as exactly as I would wish. He mentioned one case where thousands of Japanese, he says, were allowed to come in at Vancouver; and he placed the responsibility upon the immigration official at that place. My hon. friend is entirely in error. At that time the law did not permit the agent at Vancouver to prevent these people from coming in, nor was he able to prevent them until, as I mentioned last night in reply to the hon. member for Kootenay (Mr. Goodeve), we got legislation which enabled us to put up a barrier against undesirables, then no more of them came in, and I think we have the same agent.

Mr. J. D. REID.

Did not each one have to have $25?