Mr. ONESIPHORE TURGEON (Gloucester).

I will not detain the House more than a minute, for I have, on previous occasions, explained my views with regard to the Intercolonial and the extension of branches required. I extend congratulations to the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) on the very interesting and forceful manner in which he placed his request before the House; and I trust the discussion will bear fruit in the near future. I desire to corroborate what was said by my hon. friend from Northumberland (Mr. Loggie) when he advocates the construction of a branch line from Newcastle to Tabucintac. I would go further and say extend to Tracadie and give railway communication to the northern peninsula of New Brunswick, where there is a population of 20,000 with resources of land and sea at their command which they cannot develop properly because, as has been stated, they are so 'far from railway facilities. Petitions have come to the government from time to time on this subject. I hope that the recommendation of my hon. friend from Northumberland will be given due consideration equally with that of my hon. friend from North Cape Breton.

GAUVREAU (Temiscouata), (Translation). Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to prolong this debate which, has already lasted long enough, but I do not wish it to be stated to-morrow in the papers throughout the country that whenever that important question of the Intercolonial is brought up'in this House only hon. members from New Brunswick and Nova Scotia raise their voices.

The Intercolonial runs through the province of Quebec, and I would not like this opportunity to go by without saying a few words. I would have rejoiced if hon. members whose views carry greater weight than my own had taken part in the discussion, but in the words of Victor Hugo:

" S'il n'y en a qu'un seul, je serai celui-15."

As to one fact, I am satisfied, and I cannot be very far out in stating so here: there is not a single member from the province of Quebec who is in favour of the idea of our getting rid of the Intercolonial. Whoever has experienced the rule of the private corporation system, and is acquainted with the management of things on the Intercolonial, has come to the conclusion that of two evils we should prefer the least, that is to say the Intercolonial should remain in the government's ownership, in spite of the grievances which may exist. _

I may be allowed to suggest to the minister two means for improving the condition of things on the Intercolonial: the first would be to acquire branch lines

destined to become important sources of revanue. And by the way, as the English motto reads, chaffity begins at home, the Temiscouata railway should be purchased at once. Judging from the report of the commissioners who have looked into the question of the location of branch lines, the Temiscouata railway is one of the local railroads of the province of Quebec, I should say of the Dominion, yielding the largest revenue, and likely to pay heavy dividends. It would be in the interest of the Intercolonial to acquire this line. I may add that the minister should make haste, as the Quebec Central, starting from Beauce county, has a branch running towards the Temiscouata railway and having its terminus at Cabano. It is likely that before long that branch will deprive the Intercolonial of all that portion of the traffic which is shipped from Cabano to Riviere du Loup. Instead of going to Riviere du Loup, that traffic will take the direction of Levis via the Quebec Central. Moreover, it should not be forgotten that the Canadian Pacific railway has an eye on that line and that they are interested in securing a hold on it for the benefit of their branch railway which runs through Maine and New Brunswick. At all events I may remind the minister that it is important he should make haste to secure the ownership of the Temiscouata railway, with a view to using it as what is termed in English a feeder, a most important feeder for the Intercolonial.

The second means of improving the position of the Intercolonial which I would like to point out to the minister, has reference to the qualifications of the men we have appointed as commissioners. I stated the other day in this House that perfection was not a thing of this world, and I believe that saying to be doubly true as regards the Intercolonial and its commissioners in particular.

I call the minister's attention to, the fact that Mr. Brady is not a suitable choice as commissioner. Had I time this evening- and on some later occasion I mav take it- I might read some comments from the New Brunswick and Quebec press, which are not flattering for Mr. Brady or the Intercolonial. It seems as though the general superintendent were purposely acting in such a way as to antagonize irretrievably m their attitude towards the railway, himself, or at any rate the minister, all who have dealings with the Intercolonial. Here is a government official, here is a man depending on the Railway Department who thinks he can dispense in his intercourse with the public with the ordinary courtesy which one would expect from government officials in the pay of the country.

Now I stated a moment ago that I did not think there was a single member for Mr. GAUVREAU.

the province of Quebec who would favour the sale of the Intercolonial to a private corporation; and that whoever had experienced both systems had been driven to the conclusion that it was preferable that the government keep the railway. At any late, should there be any hon. member in favour of such a policy, I hope he will have an opportunity of so stating before the session closes.

The Intercolonial, even with the commission as it is now made up, in spite of all its defects has succeeded in getting a surplus. The public may complain of the commission, find its ways intolerable; hon. members may not be pleased in this connection, but after all, in the public interest, one should bow his head and put up with it, though bound to protest until matters are set right. That is what I am doing.

For these reasons, I hope the minister will see his way to improving matters in connection with the railway, and I may add: the commissioners should see to it also, in order to retain for the benefit of the people that railway which is rightly termed the people's railway.

Mr. CYRIAS ROY (Montmagny.) (Translation).

Mr. Speaker, before this debate comes to a close, I beg, as the representative of a constituency through which the Intercolonial runs, to be allowed to say a few words. The resolution is of interest for other provinces besides Nova Scotia.. It is worded as follows:

That, in the opinion of this House, the time lias arrived in the commercial and industrial development of the province of Nova Scotia when the Intercolonial railway of Canada should be extended into the nonrailway counties of the eastern section of that province.

Now, I do not wish to make a plea on behalf of local interests, I do not wish to specially advocate the claims of the province of Quebec; but if the resolution before the House is worthy of our support- and I think it is-it seems to me the province of Quebec should not be forgotten when the time comes.

For some length of time, the Intercolonial has brought some revenue to the government. For a protracted period it has invariably shown a deficit from year to year; but for a few years back a small surplus has been obtained. What provinces are responsible for these surpluses? If we refer to the government reports, we shall find that the larger part of the surplus for the current year originated in the province of Quebec. That induces me to entreat the government, should their future policy be to build branch lines instead of acquiring those already in existence, as feeders for the Intercolonial, and should they decide to build such branch railways in

the various counties of the province of Nova Scotia, wherever they are needed, not to forget the province of Quebec. 1 concur in the remarks made by the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Gauvreau) in this connection.

The hon. member for Hants (Mr. Black) advocated the sale of the Intercolonial to some private corporation. In support of his views he suggested several considerations, some of which I have noted. He' stated in the first place that the Intercolonial is not a paying proposition, and as evidence of the truth of that contention he claimed that the rates on the Intercolonial are higher than those which a private corporation acquiring such a road would charge.

Well, in my opinion, that statement has been disproved by another statement to the effect that the passenger rates on the Intercolonial and especially the freight rates wore lower than on other lines.

The hon. gentleman also stated that, in the interest of the province which he represents here, should a private company acquire the Intercolonial, hotels would be built, which would attract tourists, create a tourist trade, thus increasing the traffic and the revenues of the Intercolonial.

If there are to be found in his province such charming and magnificent spots as he describes and such fine sites for the location of hotels, and if that province is really blessed with such a magnificent summer climate, it seems to me that there should not be wanting private companies with enough enterprise and capital to build those hotels. Therefore that is no sufficient reason why he should ask the government to sell the Intercolonial to a company.

Moreover, supposing that the interests of the Intercolonial were so inadequately protected in the present state of that railway that the government should be called upon to acquire branch lines connecting with that railway, is the hon. gentleman prepared to say that those interests would be better protected, in the event of the Intercolonial being sold to, a private company? I merely put that question, which I think is easily answered.

The hon. gentleman further stated that he had consulted his constituents-and, by the way, he says that they are very intelligent-and they are all agreed that the Intercolonial should be sold to a private company.

I do not wish to indulge in boasting and I do not mean to say that my constituents in Montmagny are more intelligent than those of another riding; but I think I am voicing the feeling of my electors in saying that they are entirely opposed to the sale of the Intercolonial. I do not wish to go into the reasons that have been adduped for and against that proposal during this debate, as I do not wdsh to take up the

time of the House. But let me remark that if the government is in favour of acquiring branch railways as feeders of the main line, I consider that the claims of the province of Quebec should not be forgotten. Some one stated, during the debate, that the Intercolonial had been extended into Prince Edward Island when it joined confederation. That was one of the conditions of the entrance of that province into confederation. It was the fulfilling of the bi-latoral contract. But is Prince Edward Island or Nova Scotia to be permitted to build branch railways at the public expense, without the other provinces having any voice and being consulted because, although they did give their consent and approval to the building of the main line, they have never been consulted as to whether branch lines should be built hejre and there.

I do not wish to protract this debate. But I wanted to give my support and en-dorsation to the remarks fallen from the lips of my hon. friend from Temiscouata, while at the same time I depreciate any desire to make political capital for the province of Quebec, which I have thq honour of representing, as I sit here for Montmagny. Justice and fair play is all I ask for the province of Quebec as well as for any other province.

In conclusion, I may say that should the government deem it desirable to build branch lines in Nova Scotia, I am willing to give their policy my support. But let me call their attention to this consideration: in the event of those branch lines being built, I would object to the province of Quebec sharing in that responsibility with the maritime provinces, should our province not obtain any branch railways; because, later on, the members from the western provinces might complain that they are being saddled with the burden of the maintenance of railways from which they derive no return, in case the revenues yielded by those branch lines proved inadequate to ' meet the charges of capital expenditure incurred for the construction.

Mr. A. B. CROSBY (Halifax).

It appears to me that scarcely one of the hon. gentlemen who have spoken on this subject have given any attention whatever to the resolution before the House. The hon. member for Northumberland (Mr. Loggie) got up and read the resolution, and said he was going to speak upon it, but he went on and gave a splendid oration and sat down without having said scarcely a word about it. As to the two hon. gentlemen (Mr. Gauvreau and Mr. Roy), who have just spoken, I do not know whether they spoke to the resolution or not. I want to say, Sir, that my hon. friend from Cape Breton North has said about everything in favour of the resolution that can be said. I am in

perfect sympathy with it. He did say, however, that he didn't want to make a speech. Now, if he is as earnest in pressing the government to put his resolution into effect as he was in carrying out his intention to make a speech, there is no danger but something will be done by the government. Everybody who knows that hon. gentleman knows that when he goes after something he means business. But I am doubtful whether he means to press the government to do anything.

Mr. McKENZIE.

The hon. gentleman may be at ease; I intend to press forward the object of my resolution.

Mr. CROSBY.

Time will tell. We will see whether he is really in earnest, and intends to press the government to carry out what they should have done long ago. Now, Sir, we are very much interested in this subject down in Nova Scotia, and we want the Intercolonial extended to some very important parts of Nova Scotia that are not touched by it to-day. We hear some talk about a railway from Dartmouth down to and through the county of Guys-borough to Canso. And here let me congratulate the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) on his able and eloquent speech in support of the resolution. The idea is to couple with the Intercolonial at Canso and run from St. Peter's down through the county of Richmond, thence to Louisburg "and, from there to Sydney joining the Intercolonial again. I believe, although I am not a railway expert, that there is no possibility of any company undertaking to build that road from Dartmouth to Canso, a road which has been projected so often, and about which the local government has done so much talking. I believe that such a railway could be made a paying concern, though there is no doubt that for a few years after construction it would be difficult, perhaps, to make it pay. That is the reason why it would be necessary to call upon the government for assistance. We know that financial men are often unwilling to put their money into a concern unless they can see some immediate return for it. They must have the people's money in their hands before they start out to expend anything, the government must give them a subsidy, either the local or the Dominion government, or a combination of both, in order to guarantee them a return for their money before they will invest it. So I believe that the only hope we have in Nova Scotia to-day is in the way of building branches to the Intercolonial. Now, there are many who think that the Intercolonial is no advantage to us. I am not going to discuss that question, because it is not before the House. I am not going to discuss the question whether we should give the In-Mr. CROSBY.

tercolonial away for $80,000,000, or for nothing. What we have to discuss is this resolution, whether this parliament is prepared to endorse this resolution, whether they are prepared to go into the province of Nova Scotia and the province of New Brunswick and connect the Intercolonial with branches or feeders in both provinces. I say our only hope in Nova Scotia is bound up in the intercolonial. Now, the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) made a very eloquent speech, and he complained that we had not one transcontinental railway running into Nova Scotia. Well, he was the very last man to speak in that way, because he had a seat in this parliament when this parliament decided to bring the transcontinental down to Moncton, and he never raised his voice in favour of Nova Scotia, never stood up and demanded that this government should bring that railway down to Halifax and St. John. Now he stands up and makes an apology because neither one of these transcontinental railways goes to Halifax.

Mr. McKENZIE.

It is only fair to the hon. member for Pictou to say that he was not in this parliament when that point was decided.

Mr. CROSBY.

I may be mistaken, but I think he was elected in 1900.

Mr. CARVELL.

No, he came for the first time in 1904.

Mr. CROSBY.

Perhaps I am mistaken. Anyway, in 1904 there were 18 Liberals from Nova Scotia sitting on that side of the House , and not one of them raised their voice to say that he wanted one of these transcontinental railways in Nova Scotia. Of course, the rest of the House was guided by what was supposed to be their opinion. Not one of them made an intimation that there was such a place as Nova Scotia in existence. But you may say: What about the Conservatives? We were standing by the Intercolonial, we wanted to double track the Intercolonial into Halifax and St. John, in order to have a government line from the Pacific to the Atlantic ocean-not a transcontinental line railway stopping at nowhere-I say nowhere, because you couldn't expect that the Transcontinental railway going down to Moncton was going to find an outlet there for goods carried over that line. I want to say, and I want to emphasize the fact, that I am here for the purpose of supporting the resolution of my hon. friend from Cape Breton, although I must say I doubt very much that his resolution will amount to anything. There is a possibility of the government forgetting all about this resolution. I was amused to hear the hon. member foT Hants (Mr. Black) speaking of the Minister of Rail-

ways, and describing what a lovely Minis- 1 ter of Railways he was. But he says: Oh i that rascally commission. Where did that ] commission come from? Who appointed the ( commission and who rules the commission to-day?-the deputy minister, taking his advice from the Minister of Railways, with- ' out any doubt in my mind, and no doubt ' in the minister's mind either.

And, Mr. Speaker, it would be fair for me , to say here that we have a branch of the , Intercolonial railway going around from . Halifax to Dartmouth and therefore we , have the commencement of an eastern j branch down through the Musquodoboit Valley and the fertile county of Guysbor-ough, represented by the hon. gentleman who seconded the resolution. We have really built part of the road, because part of it runs out to Windsor junction, and all we have to do is to follow it up and I am sure that, although the minister has not really been converted by the hon. member for ; North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie), by the way he looked at me just now there is a possibility of his taking the matter up.

A number of hon. members have complimented the Minister of Railways and also the ex-Minister of Railways (Mr. Emmer-son). The ex-minister had a good deal to sav about branch lines and J listened to him with a great deal of pleasure a year ago discussing this question, I followed him very closely and what he said assisted me in coming to a conclusion. The Intercolonial railway has more to do to-day than it is able to do. The country is wide enough for double-tracking down there and if the minister would double-track the road, and, in accordance with my advice, secure the Cunard property in Halifax and cover it with accommodation, there would be facilities for the beautiful steamers which come to Halifax. I believe that they have at St. John all the steamers that they can accommodate, and it would be well for both St. John and Halifax if greater accommodation were provided than that which is to be found at either of these places to-day. I am not standing up here to speak for Halifax and against St. John. I believe that if the Intercolonial railway were double-tracked both port3 would have all they could do. Of course those who come to Halifax will find more conveniences than at St. John. I only rose for the purpose of giving my endorsation to the resolution moved by the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) and to say that we indeed will benefit very largely if the Intercolonial railway would take this matter up and carry it out to an immediate conclusion. I trust that the hon. member for North Cape Breton will do what he said the other night about a Liberal who was written to by the Minister of Customs and who stood to his guns. I hone that the hon. member for North Cape

Breton will stand to his guns, because then we may expect to have some results, but,

I am afraid that he may take up one of the old Ross rifles before he gets through.

Hon. GEO. P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals).

Mr. Speaker, I am afraid that the width of this discussion compels me to almost do like my hon. friend from Halifax (Mr. Crosby) violate the strict rule of adhering to the question under discussion. I may say without any hesitation that the management of the Intercolonial railway and everything connected with it form one of the most difficult problems that the government has. I imagine that I have some difficult ones in my department, but the management of that railway, taken ah. together, is perhaps one of the most difficult that I have in the department. There is such a diversity of opinion not only among opponents but among friends of the government. On one side: 'Sell the railway'; on the other side: 'Do not think of such a thing'; friends behind me saying that the Conservatives get everything there is to be got on the railway; the enemy in front of me saying that they do not get anything. All these things go to show the great difficulties surrounding this road. I might make another statement, and I agree fully with my hon. friend from Westmorland (Mr. Emmerson) that the Intercolonial railway does not get a fair show. I might startle some of the members of the House when I, having given the question some study, say that from a business standpoint the very rules of parliament make it harder to manage the Intercolonial railway than it is to manage any other railway in this country. When the Canadian Pacific railway, or the Grand Trunk railway, or the Canadian Northern railway, desire to undertake any work, particularly the Grand Trunk railway, and the Canadian Pacific railway, how do they go about ll? They have a board and every man on that board has made some study of the question, and has no other interests but the financial interest in what is about to be discussed. It is not composed of 225 men, all of whom at least have not given great attention to the subject, but it is composed of a few men whose interests are locked up for the time being in the enterprise. They are not going to take into consideration minor effects, but they are going to take a broad view of what they think will be best altogether for the road even though what they decide on will not please a lot of people. They decide 'it from a business standpoint as business men and they carry it through. If it is a success they are successful, if it is a partial failure few people know it but themselves. There is as great a number of failures in small projects undertaken by big railways as there is with respect to any of the projects undertaken by the Intercolonial

railway. When you consider that seventy-five per cent of the railways on this continent have passed through the hands of liquidators you will realize to some extent what I mean. We talk a great deal about the capital put into the Intercolonial railway not making any return. In the great majority of the railways of this country the original capital has ail been squeezed out long ago without getting any return and it never will get any return. AH along the line, if you make comparisons, you will find that arguments are used against the Intercolonial railway that are not used against a private road and it is hampered in its way of doing business as no private road is. Take the question of buying for the Intercolonial railway, and this is but incidental. If I were managing a private road I would have a purchasing agent. If something come on the market that I felt the company would need in six months, or a year, or two years, I would toe at liberty to go out and make a contract for the material. I might save my company hundreds of thousands of dollars. I have no hesitation in saying that if the management of the Intercolonial railway were at liberty to go into the open market and buy what they wanted, and if, when they found a first-class and reliable contractor they could give him a contract without asking any one else for a tender; if they could do as the management of a private company is able to do I believe thousands of dollars would be saved every year. But, under our parliamentary system that cannot be done. It is a mistake to run away with the idea that purchase by tender is a panacea for all the evils that accrue; it is not. If .you have a reliable firm that gives satisfaction in every respect either as a contractor or a purveyor of goods, nine times out of ten the railway would get better service by dealing with that firm than they now do by calling for tenders in every case. Then, we have to put in our Auditor General's Report all the details of expenditure, but you never heard of the Canadian Pacific railway telling every detail of their business to all their competitors in a published document. If we buy goods from Mr. A. and get them at a fair rate we have to publish that. .

Mr. HUGHES.

At a fair rate?

Mr. GRAHAM.

I *will say at a low rate if you like, and I can tell my hon. friend that we buy our goods at as low a rate as any of the railway companies.

Mr. HUGHES.

The hon. gentleman said ' if '.

Mr. GRAHAM.

This is of as much interest to my hon. friend (Mr. Hughes) as it is to me, and I hope he will not drive me away from the point. If, when we do buy Mr.i GRAHAM.

goods at a certain low price, that price were not published we could perhaps year after year buy at that price. The Canadian Pacific railway does that, the Grand Trunk does that; but we cannot do it. When we buy goods from Mr. A. the price is published in the Auditor General's Report and it is discussed and talked about from every point of view, and every man whether he is trying to sell the government good goods or bad goods at a high price, or a low price, immediately has his member send him the particulars of what is paid for a certain article. And, if by any stretch of imagination any member can be made to believe that that man has not been treated fairly, it is all discussed in the House and an attempt made to show that the government has not dealt fairly, while as a matter of fact the goods which the other man tried to sell were not up to the standard at all. I speak with knowledge of the subject, and I say that if the Grand Trunk and the Canadian Pacific railways had to publish all the details of their business as the government has to, they would not be in such a good position as they are to-day. It would be in the interests of the people of Canada if the details of the business of the Intercolonial should be scrutinized say, only by a small committee appointed for the purpose, rather than we should be obliged to publish east and west and north and south what we are paying for everything we buy. No genuine business man in this House would carry on his own business as he compels the government to carry on the business of the Intercolonial.

Mr. MIDDLEBRO.

How does the minister account for the success of the government railways in Australia?

Mr. GRAHAM.

If my hon. friend has a friend who has come from Australia I would like him to ask him to compare the railway accommodation afforded in Australia where the government has practically an entire monopoly of the railway business, and the rates charged in Australia, with the rates and the accommodation afforded by the Intercolonial.

Mr. REID (Grenville).

The Ontario railway publishes everything.

Mr. GRAHAM.

The Ontario railway is a new railway carrying high class freight into a new country, and it has practically a monopoly of the territory. I admit that the Ontario railway is well managed, and I am not intimating that it is not, but if my memory serves me right the Intercolonial railway publishes its business far more in detail than does the Ontario railway. However, that does not alter my argument, because even the Ontario railway may be hampered in that respect. I think practical business men will agree with me that if

they had to make known to their competitors every detail of their business they would find it more difficult to transact their business than they do.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I refuse to discuss this question of the Intercolonial as a sectional one, it is a Canadian question, 1 feel that I would not be doing my full duty if I, as an Ontario man, discussed the Intercolonial as a maritime province and Quebec institution, any more than I would if I were to discuss the canals as an Ontario or Quebec proposition. The Intercolonial is part of the assets of the entire Dominion of Canada, and I feel that I have just as much interest in it as any man who comes from the maritime provinces. I believe further that the people of Ontario have benefited from the Intercolonial railway, and I believe that the people of the east have indirectly benefited from the canals. Every community which has any business intercourse with Montreal or Quebec, or any other port where there is waterborne traffic, must in some way be benefited by our canal system, and consequently I wish to look at and to discuss this question as a Canadian question in which we all have equal interest. My hon. friend has pointed out that we have very many large projects on hand at the present time. To-day there was a deputation here discussing the Georgian Bay canal, tomorrow there will be a deputation to discuss the Welland canal, and on Friday there will be a deputation which among other things will discuss the Hudson Bay railway. And then we have the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, all of which are large projects. I am not at all pessimistic, I am on the contrary very optimistic, but our expenditure has grown to pretty large proportions, and we can only move as rapidly in all these directions as our finances will warrant. It is true that this year our finances are in magnificent condition, and we all hope they will continue to increase so that all these works for the benefit of Canada may be carried to successful completion.

But notwithstanding what I have said, I agree largely with the argument of my hon. friend from North Cape Breton. There is the situation that confronts us in the east and that we have to face. The Grand Trunk Pacific will shortly be at Moncton. It has running rights over the Intercolonial railway to St. John and to Halifax. The Canadian Pacific railway is at St. John, and by arrangement its trains are hauled to Halifax. These two have steamship lines-one has, the other

practically has. The Canadian Northern asserts that it will soon be in the east as well. All these lines are great arteries for through traffic. The Canadian Pacific railway says : We want to run our own

trains to Halifax. The Nova Scotia people almost unanimously say : Make some

arrangement by which they can do it. The Grand Trunk Pacific must have running rights over the Intercolonial railway on terms. I just want to point this out to hon. gentlemen, so that they can think it over. If these roads get running rights over the Intercolonial, with the right to pick up local traffic, then for every train that is running, that is picking up local freight, either the Intercolonial will have to drop a train or go with partial business. It is said, in reply to that, these other lines will pick up local traffic, but they will account to the Intercolonial for it. That is true. That is the plan under which the Delaware and Hudson railway has running rights to Montreal over the Grand Trunk. But that would not make any difference so 'far as the employment of the men is concerned. We may be able to work out an arrangement in some way, but there seems to be a unanimity of opinion in the east that these roads should get into Halifax from the west. In working, out that problem we must try to protect the interests of the Intercolonial, and I can assure hon. gentlemen it is not an easy problem. Another point mentioned is the question of rates. That question is simple. From competitive points the rates are the same. No matter what the Intercolonial rate is, the Canadian Pacific railway rate must be the same, and vice versa. But where there is no competition between a company road and the Intercolonial, you will find the Intercolonial rate every time lower than the other. Another point which ought to be borne in mind is this : The Intercolonial for many years had practically a monopoly, yet its rates were always low. Suppose a company road had had that monopoly, without the Railway Commission's control, what rates would have had to be paid during all those years? I think it is not too much to assume that during the years during which there was no competition, there has been enough saved to the people on the Intercolonial to nearly pay the interest on the cost of construction. These questions perhaps lead us toward government ownership. I am not going to discuss that question to-night. I may say to my hon. friend that the Finance Minister is away at present. I am giving away no secrets when I say that the question of branch lines, both as to leasing and building, is now under the consideration of the government. It would have been farther on in that consideration had tire Finance Minister not acted on advice and gone for a short rest which he so well deserves. When he returns, which we hope will not be very long hence, I hope to take up this question of not only leasing branch lines, but constructing branch lines, and one or two other large

projects, and arrive at a policy which we. hope to submit during the present session. If my hon. friend will allow me, having got started on these questions, I will move the adjournment of the debate.

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

Before the debate adjourns, I would like to say two or three words upon it. In the first place, I would like to inquire whether this debate will Ibe resumed this session? Will the government give an opportunity to have this motion disposed of?