Right Hon. Mr. MEIGHEN:

For a copy of all correspondence, papers, communications, cablegrams, telegrams, writings, documents, etc., passing between the government of Canada or any

member thereof and the government of Great Britain or any member thereof or the representations respectively of other governments referring to the recent negotiations for and to the execution of a treaty with the United States respecting halibut fisheries, and also between the government of Canada or any member or representative thereof, and the British Ambassador at Washington respecting the same subject.

Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:

For a copy . of all papers, correspondence, letters, documents, telegrams and other writings exchanged between the Post Office Department, the Civil Service Commission, at Ottawa, and Mr. Camille Bolt6, an employee of the Post Office, at Montreal; also between Mr. Gaboury, Superintendent of Post Office, at Montreal, Mr. P. E. Coolican, at Ottawa, Mr. Lionard, Postmaster, at Montreal, and the Post Office Department, in regard to Mr. Camile BoltA

Mr. ANDREW KNOX (Prince Albert) moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Canada give further consideration to the report of the Senate committee on the Hudson Bay railway with a view to safeguarding the investment of public moneys made in the construction of that portion of the work completed to date and that the government recognize the priority of this undertaking with reference to other transportation projects started subsequent to the Hudson Bay railway.

He said: Mr. Speaker, in moving this resolution, which is seconded by the hon. member for Nelson (Mr. Bird), I wish to say that we have no apologies to make. The resolution should be its own justification, because the matter has been before the people of Canada for the last forty years and has been discussed annually from every angle. I admit that some of the more enthusiastic supporters of the scheme may have painted the picture in colours that would not stand the acid test; on the other hand, we know that its opponents have in many cases tried to enlarge the difficulties. No great project has ever been carried through without the overcoming of difficulties. In the observations I intend to make I shall try to be fair and to lay the facts dispassionately before the House.

The Hudson Bay railway project has been investigated time and time again, and as the result of the various investigations held, both the old historic political parties have endorsed the scheme. Nothing has ever been brought forward to prove that it .is not feasible or not workable. For the benefit of any hon. members who may not have heard the discussions of previous years, I should like, by way of introduction, to draw attention to a few facts in connection with the project.

Hudson Bay Railway

Work on the Hudson Bay railway was started by the government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1910. The present Acting-Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) turned the first sod at that time, and I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that it would give us a great deal of satisfaction if before the end of the present season we could see the same hon. gentlemen [DOT] drive the last spike. When Sir Robert Borden assumed office in 1911 he and his party again investigated the scheme, and the result was that they also were convinced of the feasibility of the work and the advisibility of carrying it on. Work proceeded slowly during the war years up to 1918, when, without any apparent reason, except possibly that of necessity for economy, the work was stopped, and during the past four years or more nothing has been done.

The railway consists of 424 miles from the Saskatchewan river at The Pas right to the bay. The grading has been done to the bay, but there still remain 92 miles of steel to be laid, and it is for the purpose of asking the government to proceed to lay that 92 miles of steel and to bring the road up to the necessary standard that we are pressing for a reconsideration of the matter.

Mr. MACLEAN (York):

Is any part of that line in operation to-day?

Mr. KNOX:

Yes, a part of it is in operation, but only once every two weeks. I have not the exact mileage-

Mr. GRAHAM:

Two hundred and fourteen.

Mr. KNOX:

Two hundred and fourteen miles; a train goes out every two weeks. The amount of money expended on the road up to the time the work was stopped was something like $14,000,000, and on the terminal at Port Nelson, nearly $6,000,000. It was shown on the evidence of the Deputy Minister of Railways, Mr. Bell, before the Senate committee which sat in 1920, that the balance of the $25,000,000 which had been estimated as the amount necessary to complete the whole work, would actually have completed it, terminals and all.

It is not my intention to discuss at great length on this occasion the feasibility of the project, because that has been established time and time again. The report of the Senate committee, in which the view was expressed that the project was feasible and would likely be profitable, was placed on Hansard by myself last year; I do not therefore, care to take up the time of the House now by going into it further. I would like, though, before leaving the question of the feasibility of the

scheme, to read a short extract from a speech delivered by Sir James Lougheed in the Senate on May 15, 1918. He said:

I have no doubt that when that road is completed, as completed it will be, it will be found of inestimable advantage to the development of that western country.

Further on he said:

Permit me to say that so far as the carriage of materials is concerned, construction work has not been proceeded with seriously since 1914, but in that year no less than 36 passages through the straits, through the bay, and through the estuary were successfully made, over 20,000 tons of freight for the construction of that road being carried. The ships which navigated the straits were not built for the ice traffic they were simply tramp steamers without any special constructive features for this particular navigation; yet during that year those ships, not at all adapted for the navigation of the waters in that Hudson straits, made no less than 36 passages. It seems to me that should be unanswerable evidence of this fact.

I would also like to read a short extract from a speech delivered by the late Hon. Frank Cochrane, who was Minister of Railways in the government of Sir Robert Borden. After making a personal inspection of the proposed route, this is what he had to say:

I have every faith in the scheme and I will push the Hudson Bay road for all I am worth. We intend to make this a good road-we have a four-tenth grade; we are using 80-pound rails. I believe the Hudson Bay route will mean much to the West in the way of lower freight rates.

If the Solicitor General (Mr. McKenzie) were here I would call his attention particularly to this:

Just consider how much cheaper iron, steel and coal, for instance, from Sydney, N.S. would be shipped to the prairie. It would be the greatest advantage to the East and I believe eastern opposition is dying out. We found the bay free from ice, in fact the only ice we saw to amount to anything were the bergs near Belle Isle where all the Atlantic steamers encounter them. The straits are very wide and with the aid of wireless I believe can be kept open for a long period. The early settlement in the North West was made through Hudson bay and straits and what sailing vessels have done steamships can accomplish with much more ease.

I think I am justified in dismissing that side of the argument. Taking it for granted that the feasibility of the undertaking has been demonstrated, and nothing to the contrary having been established, I think we can dismiss the argument in that respect. What I want to impress upon the House is the absolute necessity for more outlets.

Mr. CLARK:

How many months of the year would the route be open?

Mr. *KNOX: The senate committee state, from the evidence laid before them, that they consider that the route could be kept open four months of the year, and, with up-to-date appliances, probably much longer.

Hudson Bay Railway

Mr. CLARK:

What are these months?

Mr. KNOX:

I believe they are July, August, September and October. And I would point out that these are the months during which it would be most beneficial to the western provinces for the route to be open, because it is during this period that the grass-fed cattle, which we hope we shall now be able to ship to the British markets in view of the removal of the embargo, would be ready for shipment overseas. And with the route open during these four months, we should have had during the past season two clear months for the shipment of grain. Grain was going to Port Arthur about the first of September, and if the route were open for these four months that have been mentioned, it will be seen that in the past season we could have had two clear months in which to ship grain. But we believe the route could be kept open much longer than that.

It will be observed that in the resolution I ask that the government shall:

-recognise the priority of this undertaking with reference to other transportation projects started subsequent to the Hudson Bay Railway.

Now it has been suggested to me that some people have interpreted this request to apply to branch lines. I wish to point out at

once that I had no reference whatever to branch lines when wording this resolution, because I realize quite well that there are some branch lines in the West that are an absolute necessity at the present time; and I may say that there are some that are urgently needed in the constituency I represent. Although there are no better districts in the West than those which these branch lines would serve, at the same time I must say that unless these people obtain the necessary railway connection they will be compelled to pull up stakes and leave. I have in mind the line running north-east from Prince Albert to Paddock-wood, and the line extending from Melfort north-easterly. Let me emphasize the fact that there is no opposition between the branch lines and Hudson Bay line; they are both necessary. And there is no more relationship between these two classes of railways than there is between the branch lines and Welland canal or some of the.other big projects which have been started and which are consuming a great amount of money without giving any adequate return. As a matter of fact, the Hudson Bay railway is*not in the same position as these other undertakings, for the building of this railway was provided for by the sale of western lands which were especially earmarked for that purpose. The

[Mr Knox.]

road was intended to be built from the sale of these lands. Whether the proceeds will be enough to complete the project I cannot say, but I know that enough has been raised up to the present practically to cover all expenditures; and we believe that the amount still to be obtained from these sales will pretty nearly provide all that will be required to complete the road. I think that those who try to drag the branch lines into the discussion might just as well come out in their true colours and show themselves as being opposed to the scheme, because there is no connection whatever between the building of branch lines and the completion of this railway.

I have no quarrel with the Vancouver route, because I know that what we want

to-day are more outlets. It is imperative that the West especially should have more outlets than it has at present. The cost of getting our produce on the markets of the world is consuming the profits which formerly probably went to the producers. It is therefore absolutely essential that we should get more outlets. I want to say here that in spite of all we are passing through to-day I have every confidence that the West-and when I say the West I include British Columbia-has ahead of it such a future that it will be absolutely necessary to provide more outlets for its products. We know the congested state of the grain route last fall, and we hope that we shall be able in some measure to relieve that condition. It requires no great stretch of imagination on my part to foresee the time when the Pacific ports will not only be used as outlets for our own produce but will be utilized in connection with the trade from the Orient, which will be landed there and transhipped to the port of Nelson and thence across the ocean, thus effecting a saving in both time and expense in getting shipments from the Orient to European ports. The strongest argument in favour of the Hudson bay route in preference to any other is the short railway haul, which is necessarily the cheap haul, and in that connection I might give some of the distances. The distance from Winnipeg to Port Nelson is 892 miles as against a distance from Winnipeg to Montreal of 1,422, which shows a saving of 530 miles. Brandon is 870 miles from Nelson and 1,555 from Montreal, or a difference of 685 miles. Regina is 694 miles from Nelson, via Sturgis-the line is not yet quite completed-and to Montreal it is 1,78# miles, a saving of 1,086. Medicine Hat is 996 miles from Nelson and 2,082 from Montreal, a saving of 1,086 miles. Calgary is

Hudson Bay Railway

1,176 miles from Nelson and 2,262 from Montreal, a saving of 1,086 miles. Edmonton is 1,038 miles from Nelson and 2,247 from Montreal, a saving of 1,209 miles. Battleford is 766 miles from Port Nelson and 1,994 from Montreal, a saving of 1,228 miles. Saskatoon is 736 miles from Port Nelson and 1,924 from Montreal, a saving of 1,188 miles. Prince Albert is 670 miles from Port Nelson, and 1,958 from Montreal, a saving of 1,288 miles. The fertile Swan river valley in Manitoba and other good wheat producing areas are still nearer to Port Nelson.

Mr. MANION:

In regard to these figures, of course my hon. friend will admit that the distance to Montreal is less from a practical standpoint, due to the fact that much of the route is by water in the summer season?

Mr. KNOX:

Yes, Mr. Speaker; but I think my hon. friend .will admit that the distances to Nelson which I have shown are in nearly all cases less than the distances to Fort William and Port Arthur. However, even if they were the same to these respective points, it would enable us to eliminate the carrying charges on grain from Fort William to Montreal, which, during the past year, have been particularly heavy. The transhipping charges as well would be saved.

Mr. MACLEAN (York):

Is there a net saving in freight rates by way of Hudson bay as compared with any other route?

Mr. KNOX:

If the freight rates are the same per mile as they are by any other route-and I see no reason why they should be higher-there certainly must be a great saving.

The ruling grade on this road is particularly good-only four-tenths. Besides this favourable feature, the natural watershed of the prairies is towards the bay, so the route would be practically all down grade, but in any case there is nothing worse than a four-tenth grade, and, with 80-pound steel, we have one of the best roads for carrying grain that can be found on the continent.