Mr. BOULAY:

As I understand, the Railway Act applies to all railways.

Mr. BOULAY:

1 wish to move an amendment to the schedule of Bill 118 as regards section 302 of the Railway Act concerning the Government railways. I wish to add to section 302 practically the same words that I proposed on the 18th of July, as follows:

All employees of government railways in the province of Quebec that have to deal with the travelling public shall be conversant with the English and French languages, and this provision to be in force from the first of January, 1919.

As this affects only the Government railway employees, there should not be any such objection as that referred to by the Minister of Railways on the 23rd of July as regards other railroads. This- would meet the approval of all the employees of the Government railways in Quebec, because I [DOT]have here a statement signed by four of the presidents of their societies from Montreal to Campbellton. They all approve this amendment saying that it would be largely in the interest of the travelling public. The statement is dated 28th July, 1917, and reads:

The hon. member for Rimouski has caused to be inserted in the Bill No. 13' entitled: An Act for the consolidation of the railway laws of Canada, on the 18 th instant, an amendment which reads as follows:

" All railway employees on local passenger trains running in the province of Quebec, having to deal with the travelling public, shall be conversant with the English and French languages from and after January 1, 1919."

Now, on Juy 23rd instant, this amendment, although it had been adopted by the House, was dropped and another one has been substituted to it which does not give any satisfaction. The

reason given for dropping this amendment was that the railroad companies were opposed to it.

Now we, railway employees on the division

of

and representing the International

Association of railroad employees, do declare hereby that we have seen with pleasure the amendment proposed by the member for Rimouski, and fully and sincerely approve of it; in fact, we state that it will not entail any hardships to any one of the employees, but on the contrary, that it would be a notable improvement, which has been demanded for many years by the travelling public in the province of Quebec.

Therefore, we ask that the amendment moved by the hon. member for Rimouski, should be fully reinserted in the Bill.

In witness thereof, we have signed :*-

Phy. Tardif, C.G.R., conductor, president of Levis employees association.

Jos. Robin, president of the Montreal employees association.

J. B. DubS, conductor, president of the Mont-Joli employees association.

E. H. Dionne, conductor C.G.R., president of the Transcontinental employees association.

Mr. BOULAY:

Let me give my hon. friend .an example of the w.ay in which the Liberal party used to treat us. One day during the political campaign of 1904 I was in a station on the Intercolonial. One of the railway employees had left his station and come down on a handcar to the next 3tati'on, at which I was, a distance of about fifteen miles. He amused himself for about half an hour in insulting me on the station platform, although I had my ticket in my pocket and was waiting for the train and was quite within my rights in being there. I reported the matter at the time to the Minister of Railways, who, of course, was a Liberal, and gave him all the facts. Did I receive any justice? No, No investigation

was held. The superintendent wished to have an investigation because he thought it was only fair for a citizen to have one so that he could prove his charge. The Minister of Railways, however, acting differently from what a minister should do, forbade an investigation, and I did not have an opportunity of proving what I had stated. The result was that the man was retained in his position, and, of course, he w.as encouraged, and the other employees were encouraged, to insult poor fellows who happened to be Conservatives. That was the way in which we were used during the Liberal administration, hut such a shameful thing has never happened on the Intercolonial since 1911.

We axe satisfied with the administration of the Intercolonial. We do not expect it to do any better under the circumstances under which that road is run, and we do not wish any change. If I have said in this House anything against the administration it has not ibeen against the w,ay in which the road is administered, but it has always been in connection with the fact that the people of Quebec, on account of the lack of French employees, cannot get proper justice, .and in what I have stated I am perfectly right. I am sure, however, it is impossible for the administration to do any better so far as the operation of the road is concerned.

The hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Car-veil) spoke this afternoon about sidings. I know something about the way in which sidings are obtained on the Intercolonial. The old method used to be satisfactory, but that has been changed during the last few years. Ido not object to the way in which the matter is conducted so far as the big companies are concerned. The big companies have the means to pay the expenses in connection with the building of a siding, which runs into from $500 to $1,000, but in the case of poor settlers, who very often want sidings along the Intercolonial, I think the old method should be reverted to; that is, those sidings should be built by the railway and at the expense of the railway, because a poor farmer asking for a siding is not able to pay $500 or $1,000 to a railway to build a siding. The Government would, therefore, do well to make a distinction between a siding built for a big company and one built for a private party, such as a poor settler or farmer in my province.

I would like to make a suggestion to the minister in connection with the running of the big engines that we call Santa Fe

and Mikado on that part of the line between Mont Joli and Campbellton. Those engines are too large to run over that part of the road. The men whom we engage as firemen cannot stand the work on those big engines; they have to shovel ten to twelve tons of coal every day, and that is too severe a strain for a man unless he is as strong as two ordinary men. I would prefer that smaller engines be used on that part of the road, because it is physically impossible for firemen to stand the work, the reason being that there are too many grades on that part of the road, and the grades are so heavy it takes a long time to run the 105 miles between Mont Joli and Campbellton. On other parts of the road east of Campbellton and west of Mont Joli, the runs are shorter, the road is more level, and the men. are better able to stand the strain and fulfil their duties. I have heard complaints from firemen who have been working on those engines, and they all say they cannot stand the work they have to perform on account of the size of those engines.

In reference to section 302 of Bill 13, I see in the schedule of this Bill that this section is included-

The CHAIRMAN Order. I wish to remind the hon. member that we are discussing section 4 of Bill No. 118, and the hon. gentleman's remarks must be relevant

to this section, and he is not in order in making a general speech.

Mr. BOULAY:

I have no objection, but I will come back to it.

Mr. BOULAY:

He did not want to follow exactly the methods followed by the Liberal party in 1896. I say that from an ifide-pendent point of view, and if I have become so independent since I have been in this House-because I was quite a Conservative when I became a member1-it is because the Minister of Railways has not been running his railway from a/partisan standpoint. Ilf there is any one who deserves praise for his . non-partisanship it is the Minister of Railways.