Mr. ALEX. HAGGART (Winnipeg).
I listened with a good deal of interest to the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Emmerson), who held a brief for his colleague, the Minister of Public Works. And he followed the usual tactics-'No case; abuse the plaintiff's attorney.' There were the usual charges of exaggeration and insinuation. But it appeared to me, upon an attentive hearing of what has been said * by both sides, that the hon. member for York (Mr. Crocket) was. very clear, very distinct and very direct in his charges. He framed an indictment covering a direct charge of maladministration, and every count in that indictment was in unmis-takeable Anglo-Saxon. The parties against whom these charges were directed are the Minister of Public Works and his political friends from the province of New Brunswick. The minister is charged with being
at least an accessory before the fact in that he enabled these political friends of his- and social friends also; I believe they were called cronies-to make money from the public treasury in a way which the statutes forbid. It was not an evasion of the statute which required works of this kind to be let on tender, but it was a direct violation of that statute. The statute says that it must be by tender. The minister (Mr. Pugsley) himself tries to get away from that and to say that this case comes within the exceptance that exceptions are allowed. He says this was a case of urgency and so comes within the exceptions. If that were the case, why in Heaven's name did he advertise for tenders? No doubt after he had determined to give these men that work to do his attention was called to the fact that work of this nature must be given by tender. Was this a case of emergency? We are told by the counsel for the Minister of Public Works that this matter was brought before the late Hon. Mr. Tarte when he was Minister of Public Works and before some of his successors. Was it any more a case of urgency in 1908 than it had been when Mr. Tarte and his successors were in office?
Topic: J. B. H.,