July 22, 1903

?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

The deputy informs me that the commissioners left Victoria on the 28th of April to commence their work. They had previously had a meeting to organize and authorize the issuing of notices to the public. Speaking from memory, it was on the 28th that they left Victoria and proceeded first of all to Ladysmith, and thereafter to other places where the commission sat, and they were engaged continuously from that time, and from the 30th of June onward to the 8th of July. The fact that during that period they had taken down about 3,000 foolscap pages of typewritten evidence shows that they were pretty well occupied. They ex a mined over 100 witnesses, to say nothing of the time devoted to hearing the arguments of counsel.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

So we may conclude they began on the 28th of April and closed on the Stli of July. The point I want to get at is, did they receive payment for the time between the 22nd of April and the 28th of April, and between the 8th of July and the 18th of July, at the rate of $40 and $35 a day ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

Their p>ay will cease on the 8th of July.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Sir. INGRAM.

And they did not receive pay previous to the 28th V

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

They have not been paid anything yet and will not be paid anything before the 27th of April.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Now with respect to publishing the evidence, of course I expected the department would publish it. if any suggestion I can make would be of any service I would simply say that we have spent a very large sum of money iu sending out these commissioners for the purpose of making an inquiry, and if it has been made simply for the purpose of making a report from that evidence, I do not think it will be satisfactory at all. Having spent a large sum of money for the purpose of securing that evidence, if the evidence is to be of any advantage at all, we should be in possession of it in order that we may judge as to that report these commissioners have made upon the evidence. I would like to see the evidence published and circulated amongst the members of this House at all events in order that we mfiy have it for future reference. I am stating my own mind in respect to this and not speaking for any person else. I would like to know from the hon. minister if the department have made up their minds to publish this evidence or not.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

[DOT] I have already intimated that the case is a very important one, that the report is of very great value and it would almost follow from that statement that it would involve the pub-

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

William Mulock (Minister of Labour; Postmaster General)

Liberal

Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.

lication of the evidence itself. The question of the printing is a serious one and it may be that the Printing Committte of the House would deal with the subject when I lay a copy of the evidence upon the Table. I think the evidence would have to be published.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Is that not rather an extraordinary proceeding ? Here is evidence produced as a result of investigations made by the head of the department. Other departments have their departmental reports prepared and submitted to parliament. This is a labour department and it is necessary for it, when evidence of this kind has been taken, to come to parliament and ask the Printing Committee of the House if the evidence shall be printed and circulated ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

The hon. gentleman forgets the arrangement. This expenditure for the committee is under a special vote for this particular purpose.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
L-C

Andrew B. Ingram

Liberal-Conservative

Mr. INGRAM.

Asked for by the department ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The POSTMASTER GENERAL.

No matter who asked for it. It is not a sum voted to the department. It is a sum voted for this commission only. The department have a copy of the report of the commission and they intend to make use of that report and publish it as a supplement to the Labour Gazette, and if $10,000 is sufficient to pay for a copy of the evidence, then there would be no objection to its being ordered to be printed. But, if it is found that it is not sufficient the question of cost arises as to how it shall be paid for. The hon. gentleman need not be at all concerned upon this subject. I am sure it would be printed either by the department or the Printing Committee of this House.

Some resolutions reported.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding) moved the adjournment of the House.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Robert Laird Borden (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).

What will be the order of business for to-morrow ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

The Railway Commission Bill will be taken up tomorrow as the first government order, and it will depend on how long it takes whether we shall reach supply later on.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

Has the Railway Commission Bill been printed and circulated amongst the members ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

I understand so, but I have not seen it myself.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
CON
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

If the hon. gentleman looks up the files he may find that it has been printed.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

It will be very inconvenient to take it up if hon. members have not had an opportunity of looking it over.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink
?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE.

I quite agree that we could not expect to go on if the Bill has not been reprinted.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   IlEVISEI) EDITION COMMONS
Permalink

July 22, 1903