The hon. gentleman has only to talk about five minutes to show his absolute ignorance of the subject under discussion. When the work started and the engineers got their instructions from the officials in St. John they were directed to do the very thing, he has advocated, to take ten or twelve spots along the river and make a report. I recommend a prominent engineer and he spent a week on the work. He then said: I might as well stop the work and save money unless I am allowed to make a thorough survey and give information of some value. He said that if, he surveyed the six or seven places pointed out to him they would have no knowledge of the condition of the river between these two points, would not know whether there were three feet .or sixteen
feet, and at his solicitation I took up the matter with the Minister of Public Works and orders were given to make a thorough survey. It is just as well that my hon. friend and the people should know this. I have seen the plans and profile of the upper 25 or 30 miles of that work and there are three or four dozen places in this 24 miles that required the survey without which the department would have no knowledge on which to come to the conclusion as to the dredging of the river. If my hon. friend would spend as much time trying to find out /the facts of each case, as in reading a paper called the ' Gleaner,' published in Fredericton, which throws insulting terms at everybody employed by this government to do anything, he would know more about the subject than he has given evidence of to-night.
Subtopic: INTERNATIONAL WATERWAYS TREATY.