Mr. GLEN moved:

That the recommendation contained in the seventh report of the select standing committee on miscellaneous private bills, respecting a refund of the fee and charges, less the cost of printing and translation, in connection with Bill No. 34. an Act to incorporate the Canadian Bible Society Auxiliary to the British and Foreign Bible Society, be concurred in.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I regret to say that this motion is not in order. The moment that fees are paid to the Clerk of Petitions of the House of Commons for the introduction of a bill or of any other measure, that money goes to the Receiver General, and a special vote in the estimates is required in order to return such fees or charges. The ruling was made last year after being considered by the Department of Finance that any money deposited in the House of Commons cannot be returned even though a bill is either withdrawn or passed. I declare this motion to be out of order.

1. Has a contract recently been let to a private dredging company for the dredging of Coal harbour, Vancouver, British Columbia?

2. If so, to whom was the contract let?

3. Were tenders called for this contract, and, if so, how many bids were received?

4. Did the said call for tenders and the said contract (if any) include provision for the disposal of the material so dredged?

5. Has the government or any Department of the government made arrangements with the Parks Board for the dumping of the said material at any point within Vancouver harbour, if so, where?

6. Has the government, harbour commissioners, Parks Board or any other public body undertaken to pay for the dumping of the said material?

7. In a previous contract, did the harbour board pay the sum of 24 cents per cubic yard for the dumping of waste material dredged at the First Narrows and deposited at the new pier site at Hastings mill?

1. No.

2. Answered by No. 1.

3. (a) Yes. (b) two.

4. Form of tender calls for dumping of material within two miles from site of dredging.

5. and 6. Material dredged is proposed to be dumped in Vancouver harbour in deep hole, as harbour commissioners and Parks Board consider material unsuitable for filling purposes and do not wish to make use of it.

7. Yes, which price included the dredging of 85,680 cubic yards of mud from the pier site before the fill was deposited.

1. Having reference to the dredging of the First Narrows, Vancouver harbour, during the past few years, was this work done by contract ?

2. Was the government dredge Mastodon in operation elsewhere during the period this work was carried on?

3. Why was not the Mastodon used for this work ?

[Mr. Marril.j

4. What was the name of the dredging company that got the contract?

5. Was the work of this dredging company as contracted satisfactory?

6. What was the contract price per cubic yard for the said contract?

7. How many cubic yards were actually removed ?

8. VThat is the total amount paid by the

government, or the harbour board, to the said dredging company from the letting of the contract to date for: (a) dredging in the First

Narrows; and (b) the sale or disposal of material?

9. What government engineers acted as: (a) inspectors of work; or (b) special inspection?

1. By contract and also by government dredge.

2. No.

3. Dredge Mastodon was used for the work except the last year when it was considered it could be done cheaper by contract.

4. Northwestern Dredging Co., Ltd.

5. Yes.

6. 18-7 cents per cubic yard, place measurement.

7. 736,426.

8. (a) 8123,940.51 (b) The Vancouver Harbour Commission paid $183,290.64 to North Western Dredging Company for dredging 85,680 cubic yards of mud from the site of the new pier at Hastings Mill and depositing thereon 763,711 cubic yards of material dredged at the First Narrows, Vancouver harbour.

9. (a) and (b) Work was supervised by district engineer of Public Works department and the dredging of pier site and depositing of fill was performed under the direction of the Vancouver harbour commission's engineer.