GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 197) to amend the Railway Act. He said: This Bill is somewhat lengthy, and I shall briefly refer to the changes it is intended to make in .the existing Act. In the first clause it is proposed to apply the Act so as to require telegraph, telephone, and express, companies to make yearly statements of their business as do the railway companies now. The next paragraph refers to the protection of forests from fire caused by a railway company, and it has been the subject of resolutions by the Conservation Commission, and by the Forestry Association of the Dominion. It was first suggested that the law be made specific and stringent as to what the company should do, but at a meeting between the Chairman of the Conservation Commission, a representative of the western farmers, a member of the Forestry Association, and the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners, this clause was decided upon as meeting all requirements'. It makes clear that the Mr. HAGGART (Winnipeg).

Board of Railway Commissioners can compel a railway company to provide facilities for the protection of property contiguous to a railway, to say how many patrolmen should be necessary, what fences should be provided, and to make general rules in this respect. The next clause is to make applicable to telephone, telegraph, and express companies the existing law with reference to railways which names an agent in any locality upon whom notice can be served. The next clause makes clear certain matters as to the location of railways, and that I shall explain on the second reading. The next clause is to provide that lands even though they belong to a railway company and are not for strictly railway purposes, can be treated like lands belonging to any other individual in the matter of expropriation for, say, another railway. The next clause is introduced by arrangement with the Chairman of the Ontario Railway and Municipal Board, and it makes provision by which a joint board can be formed of a member of any provincial board having jurisdiction over these matters, and a member of the Dominion Board of Railway Commissioners, to compel connection to be made between a provincial road and a federal road, and to make provisions for the interchange of traffic.

Mr. LENNOX.

Will that be in harmony with the statute recently passed by the Ontario legislature?

Mr. GRAHAM.

Yes, but it will apply to any other province having a provincial board organized for similar purposes. The next clause provides for the appraisement of damages to land adjoining or abutting on a highway where the railway has been allowed to run on a highway. There is not in the present law any provision by which the owner of the adjoining property can get damages on account of the railway getting on the highway in front of his property. The next clause is to allow, under general regulations and rules of the Board of Railway Commissioners, wires to cross railways where the railway consents and where the regulations are complied with. At present application has to be made to the board in each case. The next clause is a similar clause with reference to sewers under railways where the railway consents. The next clause has reference to fencing 'along lines of railway under construction. Under the existing Act the railways do not have to fence unless ordered by the board, and the amendment will be somewhat drastic, and will compel the railways to fence unless excused by the order of the board. It places the onus on thfe railway companies to prove

that it is not necessary for them to fence. It also compels the railway company to fence right of way or take other effectual means, such as cattle-guards to prevent cattle getting on the railway. The next section repeals that clause of the Act which prohibits stock from running within half a mile of a railway. There will be some discussion as to the propriety of this in the older parts of Canada, but on the whole it has seemed to those who have considered it, that it is a wise provision in the interest of the western part of Canada where they have the right to graze on these lands that are not inclosed, and under the present Act it is impossible for them, in many cases, to get redress if their stock is killed. In the older provinces-I can speak more particularly of Ontario-most municipalities, by by-law,

_ forbid cattle running at large on the highways, and they may continue to regulate that matter by by-law if they choose to do so.

Mr. HENDERSON.

Will the railways be bound to observe those by-laws?

Mr. GRAHAM.

The by-law does not affect the railway; it affects the man who owns the cattle. But I presume that if a cow were on a highway contrary to a by-law of a municipality, it would be there contrary to law, and that would be a factor in deciding the liability of the railway. The next clause, 12, is merely to make clear a section that was passed last year. Section 13 is one giving the Board of Railway Commissioners powers, in addition to the power given to them by the Act as it now stands, to regulate the price of electric power under their jurisdiction. Further, if a person makes application to a company under the control of the board for a certain quantity of power, and the company declines to give it to him, he can appeal to the board for an order on the company to give the power asked for. Section 14 is in reference to returns to the department as to accidents. The statute says that they shall be made semi-annually. They have been made annually, and we are making it clear that an annual return in general terms is all that is required; but I w'ill introduce a clause into the Bill providing that the minister may ask for a return whenever he sees fit. This is to cover two points: first, if a question arises as to an accident in which lives have been lost, in addition to the particulars required by the Board of Railway Commissioners, the minister may deem it wise in the public interest to ask for further particulars. Power is also given to the minister, where complaint is made that a large quantity of stock has been killed, to require a return to be made more frequently than twelve months, so that

the matter can be investigated. Complaints have been made by farmers in the west that where stock has been killed, the railway company or some person has frequently buried the carcases, and it has sometimes taken a year or two for the owners to find out where the animals have gone, as no trace is left of them. This clause is desired to enable the department to get the proof of the killing of those animals if it is thought to be in the public interest, as often as may be required. Then we propose to add a section to the Act which is quite drastic and may cause some discussion. The main features of it are that where a railway company has been granted a charter by the parliament of Canada, or where a railway has passed into the ownership of a company holding a charter from the Dominion of Canada, if the line is allowed to become dilapidated to such an extent that it is unsafe to operate, the government may step in and declare that the subsidy granted to the railway company shall become a lien upon it to such an extent that the railway can be sold under it. This power may, perhaps, never, at all events not very often, be exercised; but something is necessary to give the department power to compel railway companies or companies owning railways to keep their line in a fit condition to operate. I beg leave to move the first reading of the Bill.

Mr. MACDONELL (South Toronto).

Has the minister dealt, in the Bill, with the question of commutation tickets, so as to prevent railway companies from discriminating in regard to them? I understood that the minister had some sympathy with the municipalities that made their wishes known in that respect, both in the press and by interviewing the government.

Mr. GRAHAM.

There is nothing in this Bill in reference to commutation tickets.

Mr. NORTHRUP.

Does the section in regard to railways which are allowed to fall into disrepair apply to grants made by the Dominion of Canada in the future or to grants made in the past? In other words, will it be retroactive?

Mr. GRAHAM.

That is debatable, as the Bill is drawn.

Mr. HENDERSON.

Will the joint board have power to deal with electric roads incorporated by the province of Ontario as well as with electric roads and steam railways incorporated by the Dominion? I think the minister knows the case I refer to-the Hamilton case.

Mr. GRAHAM.

The Bill gives powrnr to the board to deal with provincial roads as well as Dominion roads.

Mr. HENDERSON.

No matter whether electric or steam?

Mr. GRAHAM.

There is no distinction as to the kind of propelling power.

Mr. FOSTER.

I would like to ask the right hon. the Prime Minister if there be any truth in the statement I have seen in the newspapers that negotiations are now going on between this government and Germany for an improvement in the trade relations between the two countries?

Sir WILFRID LAURIER.

There is no truth at all in it.