Mr. R. G. MACPHERSON (Vancouver City).

In presenting a petition, I rise to a question of privilege. The petition is signed by Daniel McLean and forty-one others, declaring themselves to be electors of the electoral district of Vancouver. I may say that not one of the forty-two names is on the voters' lists in my constituency of Vancouver.

Mr. BENNETT.

They will be there next time.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

They are not residents of the city of Vancouver.

Some Lon. MEMBERS.

Order.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

I am speaking to a question of privilege. This petition Las been sent to me

Some Lon. MEMBERS.

Order.

Mr. SPEAKER.

Order. Tbe rule is that if there is any question of the authenticity of the signatures, a member presenting a petition may call the attention of the House to that fact. But he is not at liberty to make a speech in presenting a petition.

Mr. MACPHERSON.

I do not wish tc infringe the rules of the House. But I have always understood that a member presenting a petition is responsible for the authenticity of the signatures unless he disclaims that responsibility. I know, as a positive fact, that not one of the forty-two names signed to this petition is on the voters' list of the electoral district of Vancouver.

That a select committee, composed of Messieurs Burrows, Smith (Nanaimo), Johnston (Cape Breton, South), Grant, Demers (St. John and Iberville), Monk, Maclean (York), Boyce, Roche (Marquette), and the mover, he appointed to inquire into and report regarding the various public telephone systems in operation in Canada and elsewhere, as the committee shall determine ; and to consider and report what changes, if any, are advisable in respect of the methods at present in force for furnishing telephone service to the public. Such committee to have the power to send for persons and papers, to examine persons under oath, to engage stenographers, clerical and other assistance, and to report from time to time.

He said : Mr. Speaker, It is not necessary, I think, for me to occupy the attention of the House at any length in order to induce it to adopt, as I trust it will unanimously, this resolution. Although the telephone is of recent invention, yet, the wide extent to which it is in use throughout the civilized world testifies to its usefulness to the public and demands from a representative institution such as this its best consideration in order to discover whether, and if so, in what manner its further usefulness may be accomplished. In its inception the use of the telephone was confined chiefly to cities, towns and centres of population connected S6J

together by degrees by trunk lines. Of later years it has found its way into rural districts, into comparatively sparsely settled districts, and it seems that the time has arrived when we might study the question with the view, if possible, to making the telephone as widespread in its usefulness in connection with the people as the post office itself. I can conceive of no utility that more touches the people, leaving aside the post office, than the telephone. At the present time in Canada we have one great company. There are many other smaller companies and there are telephone systems conducted as private enterprises. Of late years the subject has received attention at the hands of the imperial parliament and in the course of a few short years that great system will, in England, pass under state control. I do not at this stage indicate what should be our decision. It will be premature to prejudge the ease, but I do think that a careful and thorough inquiry into the conditions in Canada and in other countries might furnish us with a useful and safe guide and aft^r the information is gathered together by a committee that will, I feel assured, give every attention to the subject, the House will then be in a position to make some substantial progress with this measure. There are some who have already made up their minds as to what should be the future destiny of the telephone. There are others whose minds, perhaps, are yet in an unsettled state. Some perhaps are of the decided opinion that the government should have nothing to do with such a service. With all these conflicting views it is right, I think, that the public should be put in possession of evidence and arguments collected after careful, thorough and impartial study to enable us to reach the safest conclusion. I shall not prejudge the subject myself, although, perhaps, if I must confess to a bias as regards the telephone, that bias would be that I cannot see why it is not as much the duty of the state to take charge of the telephone as it is to conduct the postal service. However, as I say, I will endeavour to approach the subject judicially notwithstanding that bias which I think it my duty to announce in advance so that I may not be allowed to give a too unlimited rein to that view in the committee if others should feel that I was proceeding rather to carry out a view of my own than to investigate the case judicially and then reach a conclusion. Some people are willing to rush at conclusions even where large interests are involved. It Is the duty, I think, of the House to be careful and guarded and safe so that we may take wise, safe and prudent steps. I do not think it is necessary for me to do more than observe that these existing systems in Canada, although they have been of very great use and have rendered great public service, still have occas-

ioned friction and dissatisfaction as is always more or less, perhaps, the outcome of conflict between consumer and producer, and so in this case it is possible that the committee may find grievances existing that their inquiry will help to remove. X have nothing further to add except to state that I would be glad to be allowed to suggest another name to the committee, that of Mr. Zimmerman, of Hamilton.

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York).

Mr. Speaker, I think I can congratulate the hon. gentleman who has introduced this motion (Sir William Mulock). I can congratulate him on his own view. I think he has long held that view but I think I can congratulate him also that he has converted the right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) who sits alongside of him. The right hon. gentleman, not very long ago was very much afraid of state ownership in any form, but now that he has consented to this motion being presented to parliament, I suppose X am to assume that he has changed his mind. The test of the value of this committee will b<* the work accomplished by it. The extent of the investigation and of the information elicited, and the report which the committee may make will be a matter of deep public concern. I have no doubt what the result of a full investigation will be; I have no doubt the committee will recommend some kind of public ownership; some kind of public control of the telephone system in this country. Public ownership and public control of the telephone has succeeded in Europe, in Australia, in New Zealand, and I do not see why it should not succeed here. Only the other day the Postmaster General of England, a young man whom we knew in this country, succeeded in presenting a Bill there to nationalize the whole telephone system, and that Bill is said to have the merit of doing justice to the public and justice to the existing companies. I trust we will be able to adopt some such scheme in Canada. The statement of the Postmaster General that he regards the telephone system as a natural portion of the Post Office Department of this country, is good sound doctrine. Let roe suggest that when he applies that doctrine to telephones he should follow the example of the mother country and take in the telegraph lines also. I trust that during his tenure of office we shall see him adopt a national telephone system and a national telegraph system as they have it in England. All these things are in the line of progress, and I trust that the hon. gentleman will organize the committee at once so that this very session a Bill may be presented to parliament.

Mr. HANCE J. LOGAN (Cumberland).

I also desire to congratulate the Postmaster General upon his action in reference to the telephone system of this country, but I Sir WILLIAM MULOCK.

must express my regret that he does not include in this investigation the telegraph system as well. It would seem to me that if it is in the public interest that the government should enter into the ownership of the telephone system, it is even more important that they should own and control the telegraph system of this Dominion. Those who use the telegraph know that there are exhorbitant rates charged in many parts of the country where there is no competition, and it seems to me it is high time that the' matter should be inquired into. I do not understand that the government in proposing this motion is committing itself to the public ownership of telephones, and that being so it seems to me there would be nothing to prevent this inquiry including the telegraphs as'well. Government ownership of telegraphs is in existence in the motherland, and I believe for my part that we should investigate the whole matter here at an early date so as to arrive at a conclusion as to whether it is not in the best interests of Canada to make the telegraph system a government owned institution.

Mr. J. BARR (Dufferin).

I am very much pleased indeed that this motion has been made. I believe that the time will come when telegraphs and telephones will be taken under the control of the government, and I believe further that it is one of the most important questions we have to deal with in this parliament. If we could have a telephone in every post office throughout the rural districts of Canada, it would confer a greater benefit upon the farmers than perhaps even a rural mail delivery would. If there was a telephone in each post office, farmers could ascertain the state of the market, and learn of the most advantageous time at which to bring in their produce. This would be a great boon to them. One advantage which the telephone has over the telegraph is, that the person in charge of a post office can attend to the telephone whereas the telegraph requires an expert operator, and consequently the telegraph could not be used to the same extent throughout the rural districts as could the telephone. Private companies have found the telephone a paying institution, but one great difficulty under present conditions is that one telephone company has a monopoly of the "connection with railroad stations, and other companies are consequently deprived of this advantage. I have no doubt, however, that this difficulty will be overcome in the near future. I believe that a government-owned telephone system in Canada, extended throughout the entire Dominion would not only be one of the greatest benefits that could be conferred upon the farming community, but that under proper management it would be a revenue producing concern for the government as well. The

farmers would have telephone communication with the villages, towns and cities, and there would be complete machinery for easy intercourse between the people of the Dominion. I trust that some good will come out of the appointment of this committee, and that it will be able to devise a scheme under which the government of Canada shall become the owners of the telephone system.

Hon. H. R. EMMERSOX (Minister of Railways and Canals).

On the third reading of the Bill that was then under the consideration of the committee I shall be in a position to make an announcement.