April 7, 1904

LABOUR UNION LABELS.


Mr. RALPH SMITH (Vancouver) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 35) respecting Labour Union Labels. Some lion. MEMBERS. Explain.


LIB

Ralph Smith

Liberal

Mr. RALPH SMITH.

The simple object of this Bill *is to provide for the registration by the government of union labels. At the present time union labels are being used in this country by certain labour organizations, in agreement with the men who produce the article, and it has been found by experience that these labels are counterfeit. The object of this Bill is to provide for the registration of these labels and, to this extent, to protect union labour.

Topic:   LABOUR UNION LABELS.
Permalink

Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.


QUESTIONS.


been paid. 6. Mr. B. C. Rayworth. ,..ne to 7. No ; the department had no 1 call for tenders, as trains on the ilW^ wick and Prince Edward Island were blocked by snow, and anan=e js*1*' had to be made without delay to hat forwarded by stage. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WOR# ' i. lias any uroer m uuuiicn viaPte. aC' virtue of the Act 3 Edward VTI** cal)d transferring the management, charge «_ dUt? ^ tion of any public work, or any ' daSljte function, with respect to any work std^r wnrlrs which is assinnod or vested " v d


CON

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND MAILS.

CON

Mr. LEFURGEY asked :

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. How many times were Prince Edward Island mails conveyed by train to and from Sackville and Cape Tornientine, during the winter of 1904 and what were the exact dates ?

2. What amount was paid for each trip ?

3. What was the rate for carrying mails on the Intercolonial Railway in 1903, and is it the same now ?

4. What is the present rate for special trains

carrying mails on the Intercolonial Railway, and was it the same in 1903 ? .

5. How many trips were made by stage for carrying mails between Sackville and Cape Tor-mentine ? What were the dates of the several trips, and the prices paid for each, during the winter of 1904 ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND MAILS.
Permalink
CON

REPORT PRESENTED-


DeP Report of the Inland Revenue >art III.-Hon. L. P. Brodeur (Jll° inland Revenue). INQUIRY FOR RETUl^- ^ir


?

Mr. T.@

sider the enormous value which these great seaports on the Atlantic coast have for this country ? Do they stop to consider the enormous amounts of money which have been spent by other countries to construct artificial seaports when we have them naturally ? When the maritime province members put forward their first fight for the extension of this road to those provinces, I am glad to say that we had the assistance of very many of the hon. gentlemen who sit on the opposite side of the House ; but afterwards these hon. gentlemen turned completely on their tracks, and they have since opposed us with all their might and main. I understand that their object in supporting us in the first instance was this. They thought that if the government compelled the Grand Trunk Pacific to have its terminal point in the maritime provinces, it would kill the whole scheme. I say we of the maritime provinces had the right to expect, and iVe did expect to receive the full support of the representatives of the maritime provinces who sit on the other side of the House, and we were disappointed when we found them seceding from the position which they had taken. Especially had we the right to expect the hearty co-operation of the hon. leader of the opposition, who represents the city of Halifax, a constituency which is more 'interested than any other in the whole Dominion in the construction of this road. I was disappointed, Sir, that we did not receive that assistance. I was disappointed when he told this House the other day that he would go down to the province of New Brunswick and would have surveys made there, anil that if a line of railway could be obtained, be was willing that it should be constructed, if thereby the maritime provinces could get a better ' fighting chance.' That is not sufficient for us, Mr. Speaker. We have a right to the same chances down there that the people have in other parts of the Dominion, and I am glad to bear testimony that from all the gentlemen on this side of the House, be they from British Columbia or the great west or Ontario or Quebec or the maritime provinces, we have received the full measure of support and recognition of our rights.

Now, Sir, when this contract was first brought down during the last session, the m was a measure of disappointment visible upon the countenances of my hon. friends opposite. That disappointment was occasioned by the fact that the contract was so much more favourable to the Dominion than they had anticipated, that they could scarcely believe their ears when it was read to them.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS

Oh.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink
LIB

Fletcher Bath Wade

Liberal

Mr. WADE.

Well, I do not want to harrow the feelings of these hon. gentlemen, but I fear I cannot help it. It always troubles them to hear the truth, and they cannot keep still when they are affected.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink
LIB

Fletcher Bath Wade

Liberal

Mr. WADE.

section, not to exceed $30,000 per mile. The limit is removed from the latter. That is, if the mountain section costs more than $40,000 per mile then the government is obliged to guarantee more than that amount. I think that this is reasonable ; I think it is fair that the government should guarantee the full three-quarters of the cost, and _ it was scarcely necessary that any discrimination should be made in this connection. The next clause provides that the government may implement the amount of their guarantee to offset the uncertainty of the money market at the time the bonds are placed upon. it. That is to say if when the bonds are placed on the market when they are worth only 90 cents on the dollar, the government undertakes to guarantee bonds to a sufficient amount to produce three-fourths of the cost of the road. That I submit is reasonable and fair.

There is a further concession here which should not cause very much trouble to any of us, that is the provision that the government will not take action in the way of foreclosing or taking possession of the road unless and until the company is in default in the payment of their interest, which is not provided for, for the period of five years. In other words we give the company just that much further time to get fully and completely upon their feet and to get their business into working order. I uo not think that is unreasonable. We must remember that this company has not only to build its line of railway from Moncton to the Pacific ocean, before it can commence to do anything like a reasonable amount of business, but that it must also reach out with branches hither and yon, must complete its steamboat service and do very many other things. I do not think tne time we are allowing them in which to get fully under headway is unreasonable, and when we withhold our hands for five years after this interest becomes due it is a reasonable provision. Closely connected with this company and with its future success as the government and people of Canada are, it would not be wise on the part of the government to exact any conditions which would have the effect of injuring the company or to refuse to give any concessions which would have the effect of benefiting them. Let them give every assistance to the company that they reasonably can without loss or injury to the country ; in doing that they will strengthen the hands of the company and in strengthening the hands of the company they will enable them to go forward and accomplish a greater amount of good for the Dominion of Canada, and make it more certain that the company will carry out their obligations. The hon. member for South Lanark (Mr. Haggart) took very strong exception to the seventh paragraph of this agreement. The hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) did not refer to it in his address.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink
LIB
CON

John Graham Haggart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. IIAGGART.

Would you challenge a statement issued by the Grand Trunk authorities themselves ? _

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink
LIB

Fletcher Bath Wade

Liberal

Mr. WADE.

A statement made by the Grand Trunk authorities themselves will

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   REPORT PRESENTED-
Permalink

April 7, 1904