John COSTIGAN

COSTIGAN, The Hon. John, P.C.

Parliamentary Career

September 20, 1867 - July 8, 1872
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
October 12, 1872 - January 2, 1874
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
January 22, 1874 - August 16, 1878
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
September 17, 1878 - May 18, 1882
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
June 20, 1882 - January 15, 1887
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
  • Minister of Inland Revenue (May 23, 1882 - June 6, 1891)
February 22, 1887 - February 3, 1891
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
  • Minister of Inland Revenue (May 23, 1882 - June 6, 1891)
March 5, 1891 - April 24, 1896
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
  • Minister of Inland Revenue (May 23, 1882 - June 6, 1891)
  • Minister of Inland Revenue (June 16, 1891 - November 24, 1892)
  • Secretary of State of Canada (December 5, 1892 - December 12, 1894)
  • Minister of Marine and Fisheries (December 21, 1894 - April 27, 1896)
  • Minister of Trade and Commerce (January 6, 1896 - January 14, 1896)
June 23, 1896 - October 9, 1900
L-C
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
  • Minister of Marine and Fisheries (May 1, 1896 - July 8, 1896)
November 7, 1900 - September 29, 1904
LIB
  Victoria (New Brunswick)
November 3, 1904 - September 17, 1908
LIB
  Victoria (New Brunswick)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 15)


May 1, 1908

Mr. COSTIGAN.

I can move the second reading another time when the amendments are prepared.

Topic:   EDITION
Full View Permalink

May 10, 1905

Mr. COSTIGAN asked :

Has any request been made to the Grand Trunk Pacific commissioners in connection with the preliminary surveys through the western part of Madawaska county, N.B., to examine a line up the St. John river to the mouth of Little river, in the parish of Saint Francis, N.B., and up the valley of the Little river, and on to or near the function of Blue river with the Saint Francis river, in the province of Quebec? If so, has any examination of that route been made ?

Topic:   GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC SURVEYS-MADA-WASKA.
Full View Permalink

February 28, 1905

Hon. JOHN COSTIGAN (Victoria, N.B.).

While this matter is up, I would like to say a few words on it because my attention has been drawn to it before and I have discussed it with a number of members. There is another feature about the franking privilege which has not been touched on. In former years it was a greater convenience

to members than it is to-day for we used to be able to frank our letters with our initials or our stamp and we could mail them from our hotels or private residences at the nearest post office box in the city, which was a great privilege. An abuse grew up and the attention of the House was called to the fact that the initials were easily imitated, and this led to such an abuse that the Postmaster General of the day very properly put a stop to that system and ordered that our frank should be good only in the post office in the House of Commons. It is a great inconvenience not to be able to post letters at post boxes through the city and to have to bring them here to the House of Commons. Those who discussed the question know that there is good reason for res-tr'eting the privilege to the House of Commons post office, but we suggest to the Postmaster General that he might extend that privilege so that any member who chose to frank a letter by writing his full name on it could post it in any part of the city. There would be little danger of the full name being imitated, while there was evidence that initials were being frequently copied. Members have received several letters from the post office with apparently their initials, although they had never seen the letters. The Postmaster General has said that he would accept a suggestion in favour of doing away with the stamp and requiring the use of initials. That is all right, but I ask him to take into consideration the suggestion that such members as choose to frank their letters with their full names should be allowed to post them at any post box in the city.

Topic:   SUPPLY-ABUSE OF FRANKING PRIVILEGES.
Full View Permalink

August 18, 1903

Hon. Mr. COSTIGAN.

I think the hou. gentleman is about as near the mark as he is in regard to this railway contract.

Topic:   IS, 1903
Full View Permalink

August 18, 1903

Hon. Mr. COSTIGAN.

I will not take up much more of your time. We had hopes In the west of the province that at the time Sir Charles Tupper made the proposition some line like this proposed line would he found through Canadian territory shortening the distance to St. John. And our hopes were reasonably well founded, and I think they would have been realized had it not been for the fact of existing lines constructed then, reaching towards Mcose Head lake, and leaving the shorter distance to be constructed. To our western friends I would say that the transportation problem after all arises in that country. There is no doubt that the future welfare of Canada depends on the successful solution of that question. What the people of the west want is a cheaper outlet for their products, and no Canadian would be patriotic if he did not endeavour to secure for them that cheap outlet. We want their produce to come through Canadian territory to build up our ports in the east, as we will endeavour to help building up their country in the west. In that way the people of the west and the people of the east will have a common object in view. One hon. gentleman stated to-day that he took a broad position as a Canadian, and that he -spurned the idea of sectionalism. But he complained that the government were by this sclnin" pro itling a through line for freight so that the labourers along the route would get no toll out of it, and he pointed out to the member for Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy) that Collingwood was going to be destroyed by this policy. Well, that was not a very broad view of the case, because the proper Idea is to get as little toll as possible out of the western grain as it passes through Canada, and the labourers will be compensated In other ways than by* taking this toll.

In conclusion, I wish to say, Mr. Speaker, that I have spoken on this subject chiefly because I know that there will be an effort to misrepresent this scheme, especially that part cf it which passes through the central part of New Brunswick, and which s me pretend to regard as the weak spot in the project. Well, Sir, I am sorry we have not the help of the ex-Minister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) to promote the interests of New Brunswick on this'occasion. I am quite sure, however, that these gentlemen on the Conservative benches who now praise him so highly, would pepper him just as hotly if he were to open his mouth in favour of this project, or in favour of his province. He has risen high in the estimation of our friends of the opposition

very suddenly. He deserves their respect and good opinion. He is a capable and able man, but their attitude towards him has very quickly and very materially changed. I must express my deep sympathy however, with one old friend in this House, I refer to the energetic and talented member for St. Mary's (Hon. Sir. Tarte). When he ceased to be a minister of the Crown he was deified all at once by his former opponents, and instead of being in their eyes an avowed traitor to his country as they had termed him, he became the ablest minister that ever sat in the Laurier cabinet. His stock went up wonderfully ; he was received with open arms ; he was courted and complimented and flattered. But since-the ex-Slinister of Railways (Hon. Mr. Blair) has appeared upon the scene, I notice that my hon. friend (Hon. Mr. Tarte) seems to have dropped into oblivion There is not half the importance attached to him now that there was a few months ago, and lately the affection of the members of the opposition has been centred upon this greatest man that ever was at the head of the Railway Department. But, Sir, remember that these very same gentlemen are those who denounced the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Blair) not so long ago as anything but honest or moral. I have to say that the hon. gentleman (Hon. Mr. Blair), has been a strong man in his province. The hon. member for East Grey (Mr. Sproule) made it a leading feature in his speech to attack the hon. member for Westmoreland (Mr. Emmerson) who is an old personal friend of mine, and a gentleman whom I have known for a great many years. The member for East Grey dealt with the member for Westmoreland without gloves, hut if he did not hurt the member for Westmoreland any more than he hurt the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway scheme, the member for Westmoreland will long survive.

Topic:   IS, 1903
Full View Permalink