Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX:

I notice in this morning's paper that the question of the representation of Canada at Washington was raised yesterday in the Imperial Parliament. The following question was asked by Mr. Arthur Murray:

Has -any communication yet -been received from the Canadian Government in regard to the announcement made in the Dominion House of Commons recently by the president of the Privy Council (Hon. Mr. Rowell) that a permanent Canadian representative at Washington its shortly to be appointed?

Col. Amery, Un-der-iSeoretary for the Colonies replied; " No."

Mr. (Murray: Is the House to understand

that this proposed change has been arranged without consultation between the two governments?

-Col. Amery: I do not think the House should understand that. Undoubtedly when the matter is advanced to a further stage the Government will be consulted.

As the representative in Washington will have no ambassadorial powers but will act -simply as the Canadian agent, as our agent in Paris or in London acts, may I ask the

Government if it intends to submit to the Imperial authorities the name of the proposed agent and will they consult with them as regards the right of Canada to appoint such a representative?

Hon. Mr. ROWELL:

The Canadian representative -at Washington will be very much more than the Canadian agent. His status will be very different from the status of the Canadian representative in Paris or London. Therefore, there is consultation with the Imperial Government with reference to the appointment. I stated the other evening that confidential communications had been held between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Imperial Government in reference to this matter but that these were not yet concluded and that when they were the House would be advised of the whole purport of them.

Mr. J. FERNAND FAFARD (L'Islet) (Translation):

I would like to inquire from the hon. minister of Railways whether, he proposes building a carriage road between Monk Station and the main road to St. Perpetue.

Several times I applied to the hon. gentleman for the building of that road, the last time on January 4, 1919, and I have here his answer dated February 20th, in the following terms:

(Text.)

Dear Sir,-With reference to correspondence in connection with improvements at l'lslet, I beg to advise that it is the intention of the railway officials to have this work performed during the coming session, providing- satisfactory arrangements can be made.

Yours faithfully,

J. F. Fafard, Esq., L'Islet, P.Q.

G. A. Bell.

(Translation) It is to the knowledge of the hon. gentleman that such roads connecting stations with a main road have been built at the expense of the Government.

It is also to the knowledge of the hon. gentleman that the land adjoining the stations of the Transcontinental railway is the property of the Government.

Mr. SPEAKER (Text):

Order. The hon. gentleman, as I understand, is putting a question of a purely local character. He has the machinery for placing his question upon the Order Paper, or when the Estimates of the minister come up for consideration.

Mr. FAFARD (Translation):

It is also

to the knowledge. . .

Mr. .SPEAKER: Order.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

Per ton?

Mr. BAULANTYNE:

Are they fitted with cold storage?

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

Not yet, that matter is under consideration.

Sir SAM HUGHES:

I did not hear the minister mention the Midland Shipbuilding Company.

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

No orders has been placed with the Midland Shipbuilding Company-I will deal with that a little later.

The value of the contracts which have been placed is, in round figures, about $52,000,000. and up to the end of the present fiscal year $20,000,000 of that will have been paid- The item that we are asking the Committee to pass is for $30,000,000, which with the $20,000,000, constitutes, in round figures, the total amount of all the contracts, $52,691,450.

Mr. LEMIEUX:

That is for the twenty-five ships?

Mr. BALLANTYNE:

No, for the forty-five ships; all that are under contract.

I stated in the House a year ago that it was the policy of the Government to utilize only existing s'teel shipyards. But there existed at Prince Rupert a large shiprepairing plant and floating dry dock, and considerable pressure was brought to bear upon the Government, especially as the war was proceeding at that time in a way that did not look favourable to us, and tonnage was very badly needed, to place some orders out there. I took the ground that the Government were not investing money in shipyards, but that if any firm would come along with the necessary capital the Government would be! willing to give them a share of their business. That accounts for the placing of orders for two ships of 8,100 tons at Prince Rupert

Victoria, B.C., likewise did not have a modern shipyard. The Victoria Machinery Depot had a small place there, and our Victoria friends, especially the late Premier

fMr. Ballantyne.]

Brewster, were very anxious that we should give the city of Victoria part of the Government business. We therefore placed an order with the Victoria Machinery Depot for two ships of 8,100 tons each

Enterprising capitalists of Halifax, Captain Norcross and R. M. Wolvin, said that they were prepared to put $5,000,000 into a modern shipyard there if the Government would give them some business. I shall not weary the Committee with an account of all the interviews that I had and of the requests that these gentlemen made and which the Government could not see their way clear to grant. They wanted us to allow them to bring in free of duty what plant they required; I told them we could not agree to do that. They also wanted a very large order for ships, as their capital expenditure was great; but I told them that all we could do would be to give them an order for four ships, which we have done. When that yard is fully completed- and it will be completed shortly, because the keels of two vessels have already been laid there-it will be one of the finest and best equipped shipyards in the country.

Mr. MURPHY:

What will be the cost of these four ships?