April 30, 1913

DISMISSALS.

LIB

Mr. FORTIER:

Liberal

1. For what reason was Francois Dore, caretaker of the two lighthouses near the church of St. Antoine de Lotbiniere, Quebec, dismissed ?

2. Has he been replaced by Gedeon Demers?

3. Did Mr. Demers take a very active part in the last federal and local elections?

4. Was there an inquiry, and who recommended this change?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSALS.
Permalink
CON

Mr. HAZEN: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Political partisanship.

2. Yes.

3. The department has no information upon this subject.

4. (a) No; (b) Hon. L. P. Pelletier.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSALS.
Permalink
LIB

Mr. FORTIER:

Liberal

1. Why has Philias Abel, keener of the lighthouse of the Cote de Lotbiniere, in line with those of La Barre a Boulard, been replaced by Omer Lemay?

2. Is Omer Lemay a political canvasser of all parties?

3. Has an inquiry been held concerning

Abel?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSALS.
Permalink
CON

Mr. HAZEN: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries; Minister of the Naval Service)

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Lightkeeper, Phileas Abel, has been removed for political partisanship.

2. The department has no information upon this subject.

3. Yes. [DOT]

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   DISMISSALS.
Permalink

UNOPPOSED AND UNDISCUSSED MOTIONS.


For a copy of the report made by the inquiring commissioner, Mr. J. H. Bergeron, in the inquiry lately held by him, at Quebec, re Doctor J. D. Page, of Quebec, and of the reports made by the advocate of the complainant and defendant in the same cause, at the request of the inquiring commisisoner.- Mr. Boulay. For a copy of all letters, papers, memoranda and other documents, dated since January 1, 1912, relating to the Kitsilano Indian reserve in the city of Vancouver.-Mr. Oliver. For a return showing a list of all the newspapers in Canada in which advertisements 'have been inserted by the Government, or any minister, officer or department thereof, between the 10th day of October, 1906, and 10th October, 1907, and between said dates in each of the years following up to the 10th of October, 11911, together with a statement of the gross amount paid therefor for the years mentioned, to each of the said newspapers or the proprietors of the same.-.Mr. Thornton.


PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.

LIB

Frank Oliver

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER moved:

For the production of the original papers, letters, memoranda and other documents comprising file No. 726a, being file quoted from by the Minister of Public "Works on Tuesday, April 17, :19il3.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers (Minister of Public Works)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

Stand.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Oliver

Liberal

Mr. OLIVER:

Might I ask why this

motion has stood since yesterday?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
CON

Robert Rogers (Minister of Public Works)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ROGERS:

My hon. friend is asking for the production of original papers, which I understand is contrary to the rules of the House, and I want to look into the matter.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Wilfrid Laurier (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Sir WILFRID LAURIER:

It has been done before.

Motion stands.

INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY BRANCH LINES, &c.

House again in Committee on the following proposed resolution-(Mr. Cochrane):

Resolved, that it is expedient to provide that the Minister of Railways and Canals may, subject to the authority of the Governor in Council, construct, .purchase, .lease or otherwise acquire, in whole or in part, any _ railway, railway bridge, railway station, railway terminal, railway ferry or other railway work; and that any such railway or other work shall become a part of the government railway system.

(Mr. Deputy Speaker in the Chair.)

Mr. COCHRANE moved to amend the resolution by inserting after the word * work ' in the fourth line the words:

Mr. HAZEN.

For the construction, purchase, lease or acquisition of which special provision has been made by Parliament.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSCN:

The minister is asking for large powers in connection with railway construction or purchase. Are there any particular railways which he wishes to purchase or which he desires to have power to construct and if so what are they ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

It is impossible to

say where railways will have to be constructed. We have had quite a discussion in this House on the question and demands for the construction of railways, particularly in Guysborough, Pictou, Cape Breton counties and also in other parts of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The lines which are to be purchased or leased is a matter for investigation. We are only taking authority to do it. If the hon. member would wait until the introduction of the Bill so that he would have a copy of it we could proceed with the discussion more intelligently.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON:

No Bill can be

brought in except in conformity with the resolution and it would be much better for the House if the minister would be more direct and give us this information. Does it relate to the branch line Dolicv in connection with the Intercolonial?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

Yes.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON:

Why does it not so

state? In 1904 when I was minister and brought down a resolution with respect to the Canada Eastern Railway from Fredericton to Loggieville in New Brunswick

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

You had already purchased it?

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON:

We had entered into an arrangement. We were required to go into the most minute details. Subsequently when the hon. member for South Renfrew (Mr. Graham), in 1910, came to Parliament asking for authority to acquire these selfsame branch line railways, he was required to name them with particularity and indeed exception was taken to the character of his resolution because he did not give in it the full particulars. Exception was taken in 1904 to the character of the information which I laid before the House in support of that resolution which related to one particular railway. Here my hon. friend asks for power, subject to the authority of the Governor in Council:

To construct, purchase, lease or otherwise acquire in whole or in part any railway, &c.

Anywhere, it is not confined to branch lines of the Intercolonial, it could be in the West. It seems to me that before we come down to a discussion of this one subject of the branch lines in connection with the Intercolonial, the resolution should

state just what is in the mind of the hon. minister and the Government. My hon. fnend says that hon. members have been urging construction of this or that line. That is not relevant, that is not an answer to the objection which I make. Hon. members may desire to have certain lines constructed and other hon. member may desire to have certain branch lines acquired but the point is, what has my hon. friend in his mind in respect to the lease or purchase of these lines? If a policy has been decided upon by the Government it should be laid before Parliament and we should have particulars of the lines that it is proposed to acquire, or at least some details. It may be applied to the lines which it is intended to construct. Surely we are entitled to have that information before passing this resolution. We cannot intelligently discuss it without such information. I have asked time and again what the policy of the Government is with respect to the purchase or acquisition of those branch lines and I have been told: Wait, wait,

you will learn of it at some time in the future. Even now, when a resolution of this far-reaching character is brought here, no information is vouchsafed to us as to any of the particulars in regard to it. I remember that in the discussion on the Canada Eastern Railway resolution the hon. member from Kings took exception to the passage of the Bill till the Government had declared their policy as regards the other branch lines in the maritime provinces or other branch lines connected with the Intercolonial, and that objection taken by him was repeated by other hon. members. They thought it the duty of the minister to say what was the policy of the Government with respect to_ other lines connecting with the Intercolonial. The minister does not indicate that this relates to the Intercolonial or any particular railway which he proposes to acquire or construct. It seems to me that he nas not been direct or frank, that them is something veiled about this. I would like to know what the policy of the Government is in regard to this. Have they in mind the acquisition of any branch lines and, if so, what branch lines have they under consideration? My hon. friend has had an official of his department, a very highly paid expert, during the past year and a half going over these railways. Surely the Government have had a report from that gentleman and surely they have considered that report and the whole question before bringing down this resolution. Or, does the minister seek to get this authority and then afterwards determine upon the policy in respect to the matter? If so, 1 do not think it is treating the House fairly. It is certainly not treating the country fairly and it .is not treating the owners of many branch lines connecting with the Intercolonial fairly. He is seeking power to expropriate any of these lines. I am

quite in accord with him if he comes before Parliament and declares frankly what his policy is and if he states that his policy is to acquire such branch lines as may be even deemed desirable among a certain number of those that will come up to a certain standard. I would heartily approve of such a proposition and I would go further, as I went in 1910 and 1911, I would support the granting of powers of expropriation, not that it may be necessary to expropriate, but that it may facilitate the acquisition of lines by arrangement. I think it is very desirable that the power of expropriation should be in the Bill. I know that in the year 1911, on the occasion when my hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham), then Minister of Railways and Canals, moved his resolution, I took exception to it because it did not contain powers of expropriation and because I thought it was in the interests of the country and of the Intercolonial railway that those powers should be taken by him in order that the Government might be able to gdt these roads, if possible, on fair and reasonable terms. Where the owners of the branch lines were unreasonable, it was desirable that the Government should have the power to bring them to book in the interest of the people served by these roads. I shall not refer to my remarks, which were uttered, I think, in May, 1911. But in that instance my hon. friend from South Renfrew was frank in his statement as to what he wanted to do. He was outspoken. I did not think he went far enough and I so said on that occasion. I do not think that my hon. friend (Mr. Cochrane), in this instance is frank with the country in regard to it.

Topic:   QUESTIONS.
Subtopic:   PRINCE ALBERT HOMESTEAD ENTRY.
Permalink

April 30, 1913