February 6, 1911

L-C
LIB

George Perry Graham (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. GRAHAM.

The difficulty about a clause of that kind is that it does not have any effect in making them build. You say that they must build a certain number of miles within a limited time, but the only result has been that they come back and ask for a renewal just the same as if there'had not been any condition of the kind. It is a difficult question to determine how to induce the railway companies to build a little more rapidly than they are doing. My own private opinion is that no clause of this kind will make them build a mile of railway any quicker. When the railway company want to build they will do it. The only alternative is not to renew their charter if such a renewal is interfering with the construction of a railway. The fact that this company came back for a renewal of the local charter instead of building thirty miles of road within a year, proves that the imposition of that condition did not result in expediting the railway. I suggested once or twice to railway companies that we would have to impose some such condition and they said: All right, do not renew the charter for we will only have to come back for another renewal; we cannot build the road in the time stipulated. If my hon. friend wants to do something practical in order to get the railway constructed I am afraid such a clause as he suggests will not accomplish

legitimate excuse for asking for another renewal. It is getting to be a perfect humbug to put in conditions which are never observed and which the companies do not intend to observe at the time they accept a renewal, and largely the members of the committee, I believe as a rule, and the Minister of Railways, judging from the result, do not intend to hold the company to the condition at the time. It is getting to be more or less of a scandal. Year after year we are granting these renewals and it is thoroughly well known that railway companies snap their fingers at us and that we have no way of enforcing the conditions imposed by us. If we cancelled a few of the charters, or if we refused to renew them, we would have a different condition of things altogether.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   CANADIAN WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY.
Permalink

CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-THIRD READINGS.


Bill (No. 61) respecting the Pontiac Central Railway Company.-Mr. Bickerdike. Bill (No. 63) to incorporate the British Columbia and Dawson Railway Company. -Mr. Burrell.


SECOND READINGS.


Bill (No. 105), to incorporate the All Red Steamship Company.-Mr. McKenzie. Bill No. 106), to incorporate the Lake Erie and Northern Railway Company.-Mr. Harris.


QUESTIONS.


the object.


CON

Haughton Lennox

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. LENNOX.

As long as the minister recognizes that a clause such as this will have no effect and that we will grant renewals just the same he cannot expect such a clause to have any different effect from that which he speaks of. When people come to ask for a renewal of their charter, if we would require them to show reason for their default and grant the renewal only if they were able to show a satisfactory reason and we give them a reasonable time within which to build the railway there would be some sense in putting in this condition. But, if we are going to concur in this practice in every instance and they are going to continue ignoring and defying parliament we had better drop it altogether. My idea is that when a company come for a renewal of their charter they should be asked within what time they can commence to build the road, and having stated that, it would be for the committee to consider whether it was a reasonable time or not. If it appeared to be reasonable and in the interest of the public then grant a renewal and insist in every case when they get their renewal they build the road or come back with some 1

[Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.!

TR AN SCOXTIN ENT A L RAILWAY- ru s'l'FRX mVTRTON.

* Mr. BORDEN:

What was the total cost up to the 31st day of December, 1910, of the eastern division of the National Transcontinental railway?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Permalink
LIB

ST. JOHN RIVER SURVEY.

CON

Mr. CROCKET:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Prom whom does the Public Works Department rent the premises at Fredericton which are used as an office in connection with the survey of the St. John river channel between Fredericton and Woodstock?

2. On what street are said premises situated?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ST. JOHN RIVER SURVEY.
Permalink
LIB

Mr. PUGSLEY: (Minister of Public Works)

Liberal

1. When in use for departmental purposes, these premises were rented from A. E. Hanson.

3. On Queen street.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   ST. JOHN RIVER SURVEY.
Permalink

WAGES AND COST OF LIVING.

LIB

Arthur Ecrément

Liberal

Mr. ECREMENT:

1- What is the increase in the wages of workingmen since 1891 ?

2. What is the mean increase in the cost of living during the same period?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   WAGES AND COST OF LIVING.
Permalink
LIB

George Gerald King

Liberal

Mr. KING.

The increase varies so considerably as respects different trades and localities that, the information cannot be given in the form of an answer to a question. Much of the information desired will be found in a special Report on Wholesale Prices 1890-1909 inclusive, issued by the Department of Labour, 1910.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   WAGES AND COST OF LIVING.
Permalink

THE MONARCH BANK.


* Mr. FOSTER: 1. When was the Monarch Bank incorporatn wi,i° were. its provisional directors? 2. Were the preliminary conditions required by the Bank Act complied with, and a certificate applied for or granted by the Treasury Board? 3. If not, did the government take any steps to ascertain, or does it know if the requirements of section 17 of the Bank Act were carried out, and the amounts paid in by subscribers duly returned to them? A. Has the government in its possession the list of subscribers and subscriptions to the stock of the Monarch Bank?


LIB

Mr. FIELDING: (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

1. July 20, 1905. The provisional directors were: William Samuel Cochrane, of the city of Montreal, Thomas Henry Graham, David William Livingston, Edward James Lennox, Thomas Marshall Ostrom, and Alfred Harshaw Perfect, all of the city of Toronto. (Cap. 125, Acts of 1905; extension one year, Cap. 127 Acts of 1906).

2. No. No money was paid to the Minister of Finance, and no certificate was granted.

3. In view of the answer to the preceding question there were no requirements of section 17 of the Bank Act to be carried out. The provisions of section 17 had no application to the return to the subscribers to the stock of the Monarch Bank of the amounts paid by them to the provisional directors.

4. No.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   THE MONARCH BANK.
Permalink

February 6, 1911