June 3, 1913

CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

I do not know how

it would interfere. We should run our own trains right up to Grand Falls.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

The minister will re-

. member that last .session this Parliament agreed to lend $1,000,000 to the St. John and Quebec railway for the purpose of helping to construct three bridges. If this proposed agreement with the Canadian Pacific railway goes through, it will be unnecessary to construct the Andover bridge.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

At present, anyway.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

Will the minister pay that $1,000,000 to the company or will he retain a paTt of it?

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

No, the vote is for

three bridges and we should not have authority to pay it out for only two. We shall have to deduct a portion for the Andover bridge.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

I am glad to hear that

statement. But I want to tell the minister that they will be here inside of one month to have that $1,000,000 voted for the two bridges, the Mistake and the Kennebecasis; and more than that, the minister will give it.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

The hon. gentleman

may know more than I do, but the minister will not give it.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

Well, we have accomplished something. I must say this is the first time I have ever been able to accomplish anything with the Minister of Railways. I am delighted to hear that from him. A year ago, when this legislation was going through, we knew what was going on. We have known for two years that they had no intention of building this road from Andover to Grand Falls. In a small place like New Brunswick the minister will understand, we probably know more about one another's business than do people in a bigger place. My hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Michaud) last session moved an amendment in this House, and it was voted upon, to provide that at least $250,000 should be appropriated to the bridge at Andover, but the minister and his friends voted that down. We knew this was coming; we knew that the St. John and Que-hec Railway Company never intended to go beyond the village of Andover, and we even had some doubts of their going that far. We knew they would go as far as the parish of Andover, but if they are talking about getting running rights over the Canadian Pacific railway, that means that they would go to the village of Andover. But we knew-or believed, at least-that they had no intention of building the bridge. It was to test the matter we moved the amendment, and of course the minister had' it voted down. I am delighted to hear him make the statement that he will not allow them to take all the money on the lower bridges. Will he go so far as to say that

be will reserve a quarter million as we proposed last year?

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

I could not say that, for, not having 'the report of the engineer, I do not know how it should be divided. I do not know the character .of these streams well enough to give my hon. friend that promise. But it would have to be in proportion to the cost of the three bridges.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

That is a fair proposition and I am glad to hear the minister make that statement. Of course, I realize that no man can say that a quarter of a million dollars would be the exact proportion of cost of this bridge, though I believe it is pretty nearly correct. But I am willing to trust the minister when he gives me his word to that extent, that he will carry it out exactly as given.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

I do not realize that we have a good thing in this.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

No, I do not think the minister has a good thing in this; it is the other fellow who has the good thing. That is exactly what I want to tell him. The other fellow is getting something which no railway company in Canada has ever had before, and which I hope no railway company in Canada will ever get again. I tell the minister that there is nothing in his department that requires looking into so much as this St. John and Quebec Railway Company does. I cannot tell him all I know, but I can tell him enough to make him suspicious, and doing that, I shall accomplish my purpose. When he grows suspicious, and puts a man on the work in whom he has absolute confidence and who will tell him the truth, he will have something to do to straighten out the tangle. The scheme at first was all right; in my judgment it was one of the finest railway schemes proposed in eastern Canada for a long time. The original scheme was that a road should be built from Grand Falls to St. John, passing through a territory that is now without railway communication and making a connecting link to the. city of St. John for the Grand Trunk Pacific traffic. Now, I wish to point out the changes that have been made-not made by the minister, because I do not think he realized what was going on or the extent to which they were departing from the original proposition. Legislation was enacted on the 19th of May, 1911-chapter 11 of the statutes of that year -providing that the Intercolonial railway should have the right to lease this road when constructed and pay forty per cent of the gross earnings over to the company, which money would really go to the government of New Brunswick in so far as it was necessary to pay the interest on the bond guarantee, the balance remaining in the coffers of the company. That road was to be the very best railway which could be

1X675

constructed according to the nature of the country. The clause read:

Provided however that the said contract shall he entered into only upon the condition that the said railway be constructed upon plans and specifications to be approved by the Governor 'in Council upon the recommendation of the Minister of Railways and Canals and shall be up to the standard of the said National Transcontinental through the said province.

Now, the minister knows that the standard of the Transcontinental railway through New Brunswick is the standard of that railway through all the rest of Canada, except that there is one place from Plaster Rock eastward for about fourteen miles where they have a pusher grade of 1 -10 per cent. Except for that, the general make-up of the road, the width of embankments, width of cuts, curvatures, alignment, grades, station houses, rails, ties, fastenings [DOT]-everything that makes a road, is of the highest standard known in Canada; and the road we proposed building was to be up to that standard. But we have to admit that it would be necessary to depart from that standard so far as grades are concerned, because the standard of the Transcontinental in New Brunswick admitted of higher grades, though only in one place where it was absolutely necessary. In other words, we proposed a road which would be a real extension of the Grand Trunk Pacific to St. John and make the outlet to the Grand Trunk Pacific business for the port of St. John. Now, hon. gentlemen opposite came into power, and I will show the minister what this did. They passed an Act, chapter 49 of the statutes of 1912, and whoever drew that statute drew it very cunningly. The whole difficulty rests in the provisions of section 10, which is as follows:

Notwithstanding anything in any other Act, the agreement set out in the schedule to this Act is hereby ratified and confirmed and declared to be binding upon the respective parties thereto, subject to the provisions of this Act, and the Dominion may do whatever is necessary to give full effect to the said agreement and specifications to the provisions of this Act.

It will be seen that by this section the Act of 1911, which provided not for a tramway but for a railway, was entirely discarded. Then they proceed to ratify and affirm the provisions of an agreement attached to the Act as a schedule. Section 2 of the agreement is as follows:

That the company shall complete the construction and equipment of the said railway in all respects up to and according to the specifications hereto annexed and the requirements as in the preceding clause set out on or before the first day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and fifteen. i

Mr. CARVELL.

But there is no schedule attached, and the result of that legeislation was that the minister absolutely abrogated the provisions of the Act of 1911. He makes law an agreement made between the railway company and the province of New Brunswick, in which it is stated that the specifications shall conform with the specifications in the schedule attached to the agreement, but no specifications are to be found. The whole matter was left wide open, and these people were free to do as they pleased.

It would amaze the hon. minister if he knew what they were doing. I know that the St. John Standard to-morrow will come . out with great headlines to the effect that Mr. Carvell is opposing the construction of the Valley railway, and all the lesser lights will do the same thing; but I consider that I have a duty to perform, and I intend to perform it. I wish to put the minister on his guard; I wish to acquaint him with the facts, and if he is not sufficiently interested to investigate the matter, I at least will have done my duty. I tell the minister and tap the Grand Trunk Pacific; other-word I know that will express the condition of affairs that exists. The only justification for the construction of that road under the conditions under which it is beipg constructed would be to go to JGrand Falls and tap the Grand Trunk Pacific; otherwise the minister was never justified, in making the contract which he did make. We are giving these people a subsidy of $6,400 a mile; the province of New Brunswick is giving them a bond guarantee of $25,000 a mile, and they are therefore receiving $31,400 a mile of public assistance. The Intercolonial is leasing that road, and paying back to the company 40 cents out of every dollar,,no matter-how much it costs to earn it. The minister is right in saying that this is a wonderful contract. It would be absolutely justified if we had a railroad connecting two competing points; a railroad which could get business, and which could handle the business lf it did get it. But the kind of Toad the minister is getting cannot get business, and could not handle it if it did. In my judgment the Government are going to suffer an enormous loss in the operation of this road. It they had carried out the original arrangement and built a road according to the standard provided in 1911, the results would have been satisfactory, and even if they had tapped the Grand Trunk Pacific at Grand Falls, sixty per cent would have paid runing expenses, the people would have got the benefit of it, and the Inter! colonial would not lose any money. It may ' be said that I am opposed to the local Gov; ernment of New Brunswick and opposed to [ this Government, and that I am trying to ; find fault. It is true that I am opposed to

the Government, but it is not true that I am trying to find fault. I am just as anxious to see the railroad built through that country as is any person in the province of New Brunswick. This railroad passes my home, where my mother and brothers live, and where our property is situated. The presence of the railroad increases the value of the property, and I therefore have a personal interest in its operation. It runs through fifty miles of my constituency, and it will provide railway facilities for the people throughout the whole of that district. I am interested privately and publicly; I want to see the road go through, but I want to see it go through in such shape that it will redound to the benefit of the people and not be a sink-hole for the funds of the Government that tries to operate it. I am not alone in my protest in regard to this matter. I call in evidence a member of this House who feels just as strongly over this matter as I do; a gentleman who perhaps is not in a position to protest as lustily as I do, but who is just as much interested in the matter, and who realizes just as well as I do the iniquity of this proposition. I refer to the hon. member for York, N.B. (Mr. Crocket). I have in my hand a return brought down by the minister; and I want to read the first public protest received from one of his friends with regard to the character of the roads they are building in the province of New Brunswick. It is in the form of a telegram. and is as follows:

Fredericton, N.B., July 11, 1912.

A. W. Campbell, C.E.,

Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals, Ottawa.

Construction is now proceeding on St. John and Quebec railway location which has been condemned by Dominion inspecting engineer. Think you should intimate to company that location must be approved before construction is proceeded with and that your department will not consider itself bound in reference to subsidy by approval of local government. Understand there is no need of any seven degree curve between here and St. John, yet company's plans show great number. There is one of them on one of the highest fills on the road within two miles of Fredericton on which construction is now proceeding.

Oswald S. Crocket.

I submit that my hon. friend did his duty; he pointed out to the minister what was going on at the earliest stages, before the plans had been approved, and before the construction of the road had been commenced. This was followed by a protest on the part of Mr. Sherwood, the chief engineer, who points out dozens of places in respect of which in his judgment the plans should be revised and made to conform to a proper standard. His letter may be found in this return under date of July 25; I have not time to read it, but I desire to call my hon. friend's attention to it.

He will find that at eight different points they put in 7-degree curves which his own engineers deemed unnecessary. The engineer pointed out dozens of things that were not necessary, but they have all come to pass. The St. John and Quebec Railway Company owns the Government of New Brunswick and owns the Government of Canada, and they are able to do whatever they please. Every objection urged by the Government engineer, Mr. Sherwood, was simply brushed aside, and the company went on to complete the road according to their own wishes. There was some dispute just below Fredericton as to the location of the road; whether it should go along the river where the people lived, or whether it should go back among the hills. In this matter the company won out; as they always do. They fought it out for a year, but the company won out, as they always do, and they tried to show, as I find by this return, that it would cost more to build a railway along the river than to put it out where nobody lives. It would cost only $16,000 a mile to build the road up to subgrade, even in the expensive places, and not more than half of that in the other places, and this company has received $31,000; and yet, with a confession like that, my hon. friend's department allows them in the end to have their way and go back in the woods and build a cheap road. They agreed that the road from Fredericton to St. John should have no greater grade against eastbound traffic than .4 per cent and against westbound traffic of .6 per cent. But there came a place where they had to cross a creek, just below Fredericton. This is a small creek which it would cost a few hundred or a thousand dollars more to bridge if they built it to grade, and a few thousand dollars to build the approaches if they were built up to grade; yet they asked permission of the Government to change the grade at that point. Mr. Taylor, the department engineer in New Brunswick, who, I judge, is a conscientious man and anxious to do right, is over-ruled in every case. My hon. friend's department came in, and they are putting in nearly a one per cent grade over this creek, a velocity grade, they call it, down one hill and up another and over the bridge in order to avoid building the road up to the proper standard. Yet they received $31,400 per mile of public money. That is south of Fredericton where they are supposed to be building a .4 per cent grade one way and a .6 per cent grade another way. My hon. friend should go north of Fredericton to see these people doing business in their own Yankee style. I do not know that my hon. friend is responsible for this, but his friends are. Of all the people -willing to build that railroad no

man would be listened to, let alone contracted with, except a shrewd Yankee named Gould, from the state of Maine, a bright fellow and a man against whom I have not a word to say. I rather admire a man who has sand enough to come over and clean up the whole province of New Brunswick, and I tell my hon. friends he will go away with $500,000 of clean, cold cash. There was no man on earth to whom they would talk except Mr. Gould, and they finally signed a contract with him, and he has them just where he wants them, he is doing up both this Government and the Government of New Brunswick.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

Is it not the same company you were doing business with?

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB
CON
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

Oh, but I know better. I do not want to say that offensively, but I am so positive that I am compelled to use pretty strong language.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

My department informs me to that effect.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Frank Broadstreet Carvell

Liberal

Mr. CARVELL:

My hon. friend the

Minister of Railways is referring to an

agreement made in 1911 before he came into power; but that agreement was entered into when the local Government of New Brunswick would not agree with anybody else.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Francis Cochrane (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. COCHRANE:

I do not know that.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
?

Adam Carr Bell

Mr. CARA ELL:

We all know it in New Brunswick. We know that the local Government would not even talk to anybody else. My hon. friend knows that Mr. Malcolm made an offer to take the bond guarantee and subsidy and build the road under the legislation we passed in 1911, and to build a railroad and not a tranrway; they treated him with contempt and laughed at him. I repeat that the only man they would consider for a moment was this Vankee, Gould, and they have got him and he has got them. The file is not nearly complete, because I have seen myself letters from Mr. Taylor ordering the contractors on that road north of Fredericton to stop work because he would not approve of the grades and curvatures. The work was stopped for two or three weeks, the contractors being held up; but finally Mr. Taylor was turned down and they went on, and. put in seven-degree curves the same as before and gradients the same as before. More than that, there were no specifications put in this legislation; and so the Government have agreed, by Order in Council, that they shall put in seven-degree curves wherever they want to and one per cent grades wherever they want to. I can take the minister to places in Carle-Mr. CARVELL. :

ton-I have been on the ground myself, and I have seen plans and profiles that Show four seven-degree curves in one and one-quarter miles on a one per cent grade- and the minister talks about transporting freight over a road like that. I find in one of these documents a confession from the company themselves. When the Government engineer was trying to make them put on certain track fastenings to make the road safer from a transportation standpoint, and the company objected, they said: Over thirty per cent of our

road is on curvatures, and less than seventy per cent is on tangents, and if you ask us to straighten up the rails on curvatures, you will make us spend too much money. The Yankee has had his' way every time he has gone up against the minister. I point to a dozen instances, and every time the Yankee comes up to the minister he wins.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink

June 3, 1913