$9,605 profit, while for the last year, 188182, the amount is $10,547. So that the hon. gentleman can hardly deny to the Government credit for good manageinent in this direction. I have also a statement shewing the working expenses per mile of road per year; they are, for the same years,-90 cts, 83 cts, 95 cts, 63 cts, 62 cts, 64 cts, and 65 cts. HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-The Railway, as shown by the returns from that road; "but," he said, "that is simply stating the fact that the Intercolonial Railway has shared in the general prosperity of the country." I rejoice to believe that it has, and let us see in this respect if the Government has not added something, done something towards taking advantage of that prosperity, making the most of it, and whether it is not entitled to some credit for what it has done in that direction. HON. MR. SCOTT-Some of the items The hon. gentleman will not surely say may be charged to capital account one that the expense of management of the year, and to running expenses another Intercolonial Railway is part of the results year; that is one way in which I can of the general prosperity of the country, understand it. and if there has been a diminution of the actual expenses of management that, certainly, is not to be laid to the credit of hon. gentleman is ingenious in making the general prosperity of the country. That surely is a point for which the Government may take credit, and upon which we may pride ourselves, and in that respect we are not "flies upon the wheel,' which the hon. gentleman speaks of, a term which was used originally, I believe, to describe, in their later years, the course taken by the Government of which the hon. gentleman was a member. Now, the returns for the Intercolonial Railway show very clearly that the expenses of management diminished very much under the present Government, and from the time that we took office there has been increased prosperity, and we did our part towards taking advantage of it. I will take the expense of management on the Intercolonial Railway from the time it began to operate over 714 miles, and will just read them to the House, from which it will be seen that from the date we took possession of this property and had control of it, the expenses of management were very much diminished. The gross losses on the operation of the road (I will omit the hundreds) were as follows, viz: In 1876 $507,000 that suggestion, but I apprehend it is an unfair one, because the accounts have been kept in the same Department and by the same persons, and so are probably made out upon the same rule. The working expenses are given in the way that I have mentioned, per mile for train run, so there is not much room for error. HON. MR. SCOTT-And run by the same officers, I suppose? HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL—Yes, but by a much diminished staff, and at diminished expense. The stock and road has nevertheless not been allowed to run down, but on the contrary the property is as good to-day as it ever was; in fact I am told it has improved, and that the track, locomotives, passenger cars, and all the paraphernalia that go to make up material for running the road, are quite as good now as they were at any time during the three years that the hon. gentleman was in office. HON. MR. POWER-If the hon. gentleman will allow me, I think I can explain that HON. MR. ALMON-Order, order. HON. MR. POWER—I did not ask my hon. colleague if he would allow me to explain,-I asked the leader of the Government— while in 1879-80, the first year during which this Government had the complete management of the road, during the whole year, the loss was reduced to $97,131, so that as between the two last years there was no less a gain than $542,000. The HON. MR. ALMON-The hon. memnext year, 1880-81, the figures stand at ber for Halifax has already spoken very fully on this question, and he should now is "I have seen the statement in the let the leader of the Government finish. sons. papers that I send you, by which statement it appears that the immigration into HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-Now, the United States from foreign countries the hon. gentleman also threw great doubt was so and so," but there is no official upon the returns which were made with statement, nothing to indicate that the reference to immigration to this country, British Minister at Washington has adoptand seemed to doubt whether the con- ed that statement in any way whatever. I gratulations which are in the Address am sure my hon. friend and the House were just and proper. I may say that will be glad to know that, because repeatthis information is taken from the ordin- ed misrepresentations have been made on ary agents employed by the Government, that point from time to time, and it is a and the statements are made up just in subject in which one feels very interested. the same way as they were prepared by I should be very much distressed indeed the hon. gentleman when he was in the if I thought the information was true, but Government-when he was acting Minister I believe it to be incorrect. The great of Agriculture, and when he defended, from bulk of those who cross into the United the place which I now occupy, the very States are merely going through that same returns, made by the very same per- country to the North-West. These returns show that in 1878 Another statement which I desire to there were 29,000 immigrants; in 1881, speak about, is one which was made, I 47,000; in 1882, 112,000, and in 1883, really do not know whether by the hon. 133,000-showing a gratifying increase,member who leads the Opposition, or the not so large certainly as one would desire, hon. gentleman from Halifax-perhaps by but still a very satisfactory showing, and both. It was a statement throwing more one which, I think, will justify the para- or less obloquy (that is a rather stronger graph to which I have referred. But the expression than I desire to use) on the hon. gentleman says, there was an equally course that has been pursued in the large exodus, or a very great exodus, and he stated that a certain return or despatch made by the British Minister at Washington shewed clearly that the exodus was as great as the newspapers in the interest of the Opposition in this country have reported it to be. Now, I have taken some pains to inquire into that, and the House will be surprised, and my hon. friend and other members will be glad to know, that this is not an official return in any sense. Consolidation of the Statutes, and the loss of two years time and the expenditure during that period without much appreciable result. Now, during those two years the Consolidation of the Statutes was entrusted to a late friend of my own and of the hon. gentleman's, Mr. Cockburn, and I should be much pained indeed to see any statement go forth calculated to cast any reflection upon the course pursued by that gentleman during his life, with reference to this work, in which he HON. MR. SCOTT-I said at the time took a deep interest. I had not the figures. During those two years the expenditure consisted merely of the salary paid to Mr. Cockburn, $4,000, and the salary paid to his assistant, Mr. Ferguson, $1,000. HON. MR. POWER-A year? HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-The hon. gentleman thought it was an official return, or those who listened to him were led to believe it was; but it was not a compilation made up in the embassy at Washington by the Minister there for HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-Yes. which he is responsible at all. It is merely The work they were engaged in was the a despatch based on statements appearing preparation of a digest of the various acts in American newspapers. I have the passed, not only by the Dominion Parliaevidence in my hands, that the British ment, but by the legislatures of the several Minister at Washington finding those provinces before confederation on subjects statements in the American newspapers which have fallen within the scope of the writes to the foreign office, saying that so legislative authority of this Parliament. and so is the case. All he means by that To show the extent of that work, I have brought with me printed copies of the results of their labors which have been laid before the Commissioners. I have seen from time to time the works themselves of which these printed papers are the outlines. They embrace twelve large octavo volumes of manuscript. They contain in the first place a chronological list of all the acts passed prior to confederation by the various Provinces now forming the Dominion of Canada, and by the Dominion Parliament. There are 128 pages in this book, and the House will judge of the labor bestowed upon it when they know that each statute passed by the Dominion Parliament from confederation is contained in this table, and then is added to that the acts passed at each session by the several Provinces of the Dominion. It is a complete list of all the acts passed by this Parliament, by the Parliament of Canada before confederation, and by the Parliaments of the other Provinces. Each session is gone through from beginning to end, commencing with the first chapter and ending with the last, with notes referring to any subsequent legislation that has taken place on the same subject, and notes also showing the Provinces to which it applies. HON. MR. POWER-That begins only at the time of the last consolidation. HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL--It began in 1858. They also prepared an analytical digest containing a list of unrepealed acts of this Parliament, and of the acts of the Parliament of old Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. The value of this little digest to the present Commissioners was very great indeed, and they, I am sure, will be the first to acknowledge their indebtedness to Mr. Cockburn for having prepared it so carefully and correctly. In the digest the various subjects in the chron ological list are classified under different heads, as for instance, under "Administration of Justice," courts, procedure, evidence of witnesses, &c. Take any one of those at hap-hazard and you will see the labor that was given to it. These two books, one of 128 pages, and the other of 28 pages, involved an amount of work on the part of Mr. Cockburn and Mr. Ferguson which, I am quite sure,my hon. friends will be glad to acknowledge. HON. MR. SCOTT-Hear, hear! HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-One of my hon. friends, I do not know which of them it was, wondered why we should hasten the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway and asked "why not go more leisurely? Why the necessity of this additional expenditure to obtain this rapid construction?" Well, one can only say that there is an object in the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway. That object is to promote the prosperity of this, country, and increase its population. Does it not follow that the sooner we arrive at that end the better? That is the general reason why it is desirable to proceed rapidly with the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway. But there is also the financial reason. The sooner that road is constructed and a revenue is derived from it the better will it be for the Company and the country, and therefore there is an advantage in constructing it with as reasonable rapidity as we can throw into it. One of my hon. friends-I think it was the hon. member for Ottawa-alluded to the $150,000 which the Government gave to be distributed among the fishermen, and thought it would have been better to have given them assistance by way of remission of duty. That point was considered, but it was very difficult to give them that relief in any way. By a direct vote they could be aided without interfering with other classes in a way that was not desirable. They suffered particularly by the Treaty of Washington. They had, for years, enjoyed the exclusive right of fishing within the three mile limit, and that exclusive right was taken from them by the Treaty. It was unfair, therefore, to consider what should be done for them to compensate for the loss they had sustained, and it was considered best to give them $150,000. It was thought also, that, by giving them this encouragement, we could keep them at home, and lead them to build such vessels as sail from United States ports, and especially from Gloucester, and which induce many of our own people, from Nova Scotia particularly, to sail under the American flag. It was thought by this encouragement we could, to some extent, prevent that. HON. MR. KAULBACH-That is a fact. HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-That hon. gentleman from Ottawa will not is the reason given in Parliament by the acknowledge it-that the Government is Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of being carried on in such a way as to proRailways and Canals, when the money mote the prosperity of the country, and was voted. Then the hon. gentleman that we are doing all that can be done to criticises an omission from the Speech. maintain that prosperity which he reHe thought that something should be said cognizes although he says no part of it is about the notice which has been given for attributable to us. the termination of the Washington Treaty. It so happens that the official notification for the termination of the treaty only reached this Government to-day. If I had spoken yesterday I should have said that we had not received notice. HON. MR. SCOTT-Have you the date of the notice? HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-I have the date of the Foreign Office, it is dated the 19th December. HON. MR. SCOTT-What is the date of the notice? HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-Last August, but they did not communicate it to the Imperial Government until November, and the Imperial Government communicated it to us in December. The despatch has been received to-day, so at all events no time has been lost by us. It was impossible for us to inform the House of our conclusion on a subject of which we had no official notice. I do not know whether my hon. friend was correct in supposing that the portion of the treaty relating to the bounding system goes with the portion relating to the fisheries. HON. MR. SCOTT-It was one of the provisions of the Washington Treaty It had been in force before, but it was revived by that Treaty. One will fall with the other. I HON. SIR. ALEX. CAMPBELL apprehend that is the case, but I do not know it. At all events, the explanation I have given to the House will satisfy them that we were not guilty of any remissness for the non-mention of that notice in the speech from the Throne. I do not know that I need detain the House longer. I am very glad to recognize and thank the House on the part of the Government for the manner in which the speech has been received by hon. gentle men. We believe-though I am sure the HON. MR. BELLEROSE-My intention was not to take part in this debate, but I regret that the stand taken by the Hon. Minister of Justice forces me to do SO. me. HON. SIR ALEX. CAMPBELL-If the hon. member means my failure to reply to the speech of the hon. member from Repentigny, I may say that I did intend to refer to it, but my voice was rapidly failing My hon. friend referred to speeches which I made in this House, in which I expressed my regret that the French element was not represented on the Treasury benches here. I can only say that I regret it now, but it is not in my power to prevent it. It rests with the representatives of the Province of Quebec. I can only repeat what I said in former sessions on the subject, and express a hope that a remedy may be found. HON. MR. BELLEROSE-At each session, in years past I heard complaints from members representing the different Provinces of the Dominion, and I must say that they were always courteously attended to, even when their grievances could not be redressed; but the hon. Minister of Justice has not thought proTrue, he has referred to the complaint of per to pursue that course on this occasion. the hon. member from Repentigny (Mr. Armand), since I rose to address the House, but he is rather late. I remember many occasions in the past, when votes were needed in either House, how the French members were courted; but it so happens that to-day the circumstances are not pressing. The Government is not in need of votes now, and since the Premier is now working, as best he can, to do without Quebec. He employs all the means he can to secure the Irish vote. If he can win back those who have deserted him, he may do without the Province of Quebec, but if the Irish will look at his Yet treatment of his French supporters they he acknowledges the justice of our claim. will see that they will be neglected the Now, gentlemen, has there been an opmoment their services are no longer portunity since 1880 when justice might necessary? One would think that our have been done to us? Isay there was when protest for years past would force the Gov- Mr. Mousseau left the Government. ernment to do us justice-that our claims it was not done, and why? As I have would receive some consideration at their told you, when Mr. Mousseau entered the hands, that our constitutional rights would Cabinet he was nothing else than a "locum be left to us; but no, Quebec must be tenens." The situation had been promised crushed and her influence annihalated. to another gentleman who then occupied Some two years ago we heard it declar- a high position in the Province of Quebec, ed that the true interpretation of the Con- and that gentleman is now a member of stitution was that one French member the Cabinet here. This I predicted, and should have a seat on the Treasury now it is un fait accompli. Who was that Benches of the Senate. Now, if that is gentleman whom Sir John, putting aside the law of the land, have we not a right the constitutional right of Quebec, took to to expect that there should be one of us replace Mr. Mousseau ? Mr. Chapleau, sitting there ready to understand and to the same gentleman who has done so answer all those who are not acquainted much towards ruining the Province of with the English language, and so give Quebec, that her best men now refuse to effect to that clause of the Constitution which undertake the task of forming a governstates that the French language shall be on ment. Had Mr. Chapleau been actuated equal terms with the English in this Cham- by a sense of duty: had he any sense of ber? That right was acknowledged 24 patriotism in his heart, ought he not to months ago, and yet it has not been conced- have declined and refused to join this ed. I feel that this is a hard case, and I can- Government until the claims of Quebec not allow it to pass without comment. It were attended to, like the Morins, the is true that His Excellency the Governor- Lafontaines and the Cartiers have done in General is reported to have uttered, some the past? Who does not know all the story few days ago in Toronto, words which of Quebec's shame? His not the public would lead us to believe that he himself press made it known to all the world? holds an opinion which is contrary to our And yet last year I was almost brutally contention. But, gentlemen, I must be attacked because I dared to speak honestlieve that His Excellency never considered ly of an absent, and, it was alleged, sick our position in this country, or he would and, perhaps, dying man, who, however, never have committed himself to such was well enough to appear in Parliament views. I have too much confidence in the a few days afterwards. I was accused of new representative of Her Most Gracious attacking a sick man, of whose death we Majesty in this Dominion to think other- might hear of at any time. yet, the next wise. The Hon. Minister of Justice has day this dying man appeared in Ottawa declared, and I have reasons for believing in good enough health to laugh it is so, that he himself would be ready, with his friends at the rumors in the interests of justice, to give us that circulated about him. Who has which we ask, believing, as he has often not been told by the newspapers of admitted, that the French minority had the injuries that gentleman inflicted on a constitutional right to have one of Quebec? It is well known that that their nationality occupying a seat on Province is now burdened by a debt of the Treasury Benches in this Senate. $19,000,000, that it has been looking for When I speak on this question, I attack the Government as a Government: I do not attack the Minister of Justice in particular. He of course has a share of the responsibility, but I must give him credit for his willingness to do whatever is right. I must give him credit for the courage, the honesty, he showed in denouncing his own leader (Sir John) when money to pay the balance of interest of that debt, which the Federal Subsidy was not sufficient to pay some 12 months ago. The world knows that now since the press has published it abroad. And the man who did all that evil and who knew well he would have been defeated had he gone back to the Local Legislature, resigned in Quebec and was received by Sir John in |