Hon. R. LEMIEUX (Postmaster General) :

-

1. Yes.

2. There is no substantial difference. What axe known as Dominion Government Savings Banks are the remains of an old system which began in some provinces prior to confederation. This system is being gradually abolished. Whenever vacancies occur in the management of Dominion Government Savings Banks through death, resignation or other cause, the business is transferred to the Post Office Department, it being the policy of the government that the whole savings system be managed by that department. Since the 1st June, 1888, thirty-two agencies of the Dominion Government Savings Bank have been abolished and the business transferred to the Post Office Department.

3. Post Office Savings Bank-28th February, 1909, $44,447,567.21. Dominion Government Savings Bank-31st March, 1909, $14,748,436.12.

4. The figures referred to include all salaries at head office, commissions to postmasters, and cost of printing and stationery.

1. When was W. W. Wells apnointed judge of the Westmoreland county court?

2. On what occasions, for what reasons and for what length of time has leave of absence been granted by the Department of Justice to W. W. Wells?

3. Has the government or the Department of Justice knowledge of W. W. Wells, judge of Westmoreland county court, being absent from the province without leave? If so, when?

. 4- What judges have acted for W. W. Wells, judge of the Westmoreland county court,

when on leave of absence or when absent without leave?

5. Is there an application for leave of absence on file in the Department of Justice from W. W. Wells, judge of Westmoreland county court, at the present time? If so, for what length of time, and on what grounds is the application made?

1. 21st October, 1893.

2. In 1894 for six months, ill health; in 1902, for 3 months, ill health; in 1903, for three weeks, ill health; in 1907, for six months, ill health; in 1908, one month, ill health; in 1909, for 5 weeks, ill health.

3. The department is aware that in 1906

the judge was, for a few weeks, absent without leave. j

4. Judge Wedderburn of Hampton and Judge Forbes, of St. John.

5. No.

1. $1,698,006.91.

2. $1,717,648.08.

The periods for which the loans are made vary from time to time.

1. Has the government taken any steps to investigate the report that labourers from Siberia are being brought into Canada under contract to work on the Grand Trunk Pacifio Railway ?

2. If so, by whom is the investigation being conducted, and have precautions been taken to prevent the entry of further consignments of these labourers?

Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Minister of Labour.) The Department of Labour has received no report as described by the hon. gentleman (Mr. J. D. Taylor) in this question. The only notice we have had of the matter is the mention that was made of it in the House.

1. Was a sum of money received by mail at the New Westminster penitentiary for the convict Bill Miner shortly before his escape?

2. If so, what was the nature and amount of the remittance, by whom was it sent, and in whose care was it addressed?

1. Yes, on 28th March, 1907.

2. Postal order, for $100. Sent by J. C. Budd of Princeton, B.C. Received by Deputy Warden Bourke. Deposited in Bank of Montreal, New Westminster, in Savings Bank Account.

3. Yes, $49.10, and interest from the time it was deposited. From Miner when received into the penitentiary.

4. No.

5. Yes.

The following memo, appears on page 36 of the return made in compliance with an order of the House of Commons dated February 17, 1909.

New Westminster, September 6, 1907. Memo for inspector Stewart, re convict Edwards (Bill Miner).

His effects consist of cash $149.10, a gold watch, chain and charm. The statement that he had $500 here is incorrect.

(Sgd.) G. W. DAWSON.

1. Has the government contemplated or decided that a reference shonld be had to determine differences as to classification and other matters between the Grand Trunk Pacific and the railway commission, which would probably be proceeded with the 1st of April instant? If so, has the reference been proceeded with, has it been concluded or what progress has been made, and what is the result ?

2. If not, when will it be proceeded with, and what is the cause of delay ?

3. What are the terms of the reference, if any?

4. What matters were referred?

5. Will the minister bring down the formal instrument of reference?

1. The government has decided on a reference. The reference has not been proceeded with.

2. It will be proceeded with as soon as the chief engineer of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway is able to give the matter attention. The causes of delay are, that early in April the conditions were not favourable to an intelligent investigation on the ground, and latterly the chief engineer of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company has been absent in British Columbia and the Northwest on other business.

3. The matters in dispute are left to the award of the chief engineer of the Transcontinental Railway Commission and of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company and a third arbitrator to be chosen by them, Mr. Schreiber having been agreed upon by them and he having accepted the duty under the clause of the schedule attached to the Act of 1903, chapter 71.

4. No statement of the matters has been drawn up at present and placed before the arbitrators.

5. The minister has no objection to bring down the instrument of reference. It is as follows:

Ottawa, March 1G, 1909.

Collingwood Schreiber, Esq.,

General consulting engineer to the government. Ottawa, Out.

Dear Sir,-By clause 7 of the agreement between the government of Canada and the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, dated July 29, 1903, being schedule to 3 Edward VII., chapter 71, in regard to the construction of the eastern division, it is provided that the work shall be done according to the specifications approved of by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, and shall be subject to the joint supervision, inspection and acceptance of the chief engineeer appointed by the government and the chief engineer of the railway company, and in the event of differences as to the specifications, or in case the said engineers shall differ as to the work, the questions in dispute shall be determined by the said engineers and a third arbitrator to be chosen by them.

Some such differences having arisen as a result of objections filed by the, company, we hereby beg to choose you as third arbitrator for the determination of the questions now in dispute, and on which we have failed to agree after visiting the work, and shall be pleased if you are agreeable to accept the office. In the event of your acceptance, a formal submission will be prepared and handed to you later.

Yours truly,

(Sgd.) HUGH D. LUMSDEN,

Chief Engineer, Trancontinental Railway.

(Sgd.) B. B. KELLIHER,

Chief Engineer, Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.

I hereby accept the above appointment.

(Sgd.) COLLINGWOOD SCHREIBER. Ottawa, March 22, 1909.

1. In respect of sections 16, 20, 22, the west half section 28, and the northern quarter section 21, in township 28, range 31, west 1st meridian, have patents been issued for these lands? If so, to whom?

2. If patents are not issued, by whom are they occupied, and under what title ?

3. Who is responsible for payment of municipal ischool taxes on these lands?

4. If taxes are not paid, can the lands be seized by the proper authorities for such nonpayment?

1. No, except the north east \ of section 21, which was patented to the Winnipeg Western Land Corporation, Limited, on the 4th November, 1902.

2. Reserved during the pleasure of the government for Doukhobor communities, village of Wozsiennie, by order in council of the 7th December, 1907.

3. The title to these lands being vested in the Crown they are not liable to taxation.

4. Answered by No. 3.