[...] been, since the lst of July, 1904, replaced by
automatic acetylene gas lights ?
2. What annual saving will these changes
effect ?
3. How many keepers have in consequence of
these changes been dismissed ?
4. Who were they, and what were their former salaries ?
1. Thirty-two.
2. $910.
3. Five.
4. Thomas Fraser, Windmill Point light,
$180 ; John Hamilton, Hamilton's island
light, $130 ; Barnaby Malette, lightship No.
1, $250 ; Vital Crépin, lightship No. 2, $300;
Michel Allard, lightship No. 3, $300.
HALIFAX FISHERY AWARD.
1. Has the government decided to distribute
among the provinces interested, the amount of
the award received by Canada, generally known
as the Halifax Fishery Award ?
2. If so, on what basis is the distribution proposed to be made ?
3. If not, is the question to be submitted for
decision to the Privy Council of England or the
Supreme Court of Canada. ?
4. Will the government take action in regard
to the settlement of this question during the
present session of parliament, if not, already
settled ?
1. No.
2, 3 and 4, answered by No. 1.
Mr. A. MARTIN. It is not answered by the first. I must
say that these questions are not answered. The third section of the
question reads :
If not, is the question to be submitted for
decision to the Privy Council of England or the
Supreme Court of Canada ?
Is that answered ?
Mr. PREFONTAINE. Yes, that is answered, 'no',
the same as the first part of the question.
DREDGING AT RUSTICO HARBOUR.
1. What has been done by the government
during 1904 to dredge the harbour at Rustico,
Prince Edward Island ?
2. Has the sandbank in the harbour been removed ?
3. If not, what steps are to be taken to remove it ?
4. How much has been spent on this work
last season ; what were the means used in
performing the work, and who had charge of it ?
1594
5. How many vessels were lost or stranded on
this bar during the season of 1904 ?
5. According to information supplied by
the Department of Marine and Fisheries,
only one vessel was reported wrecked at
Rustico, during the year 1904.
INQUIRY FOR RETURNS.
Hon. GEORGE E. FOSTER. I would like to call the
attention of the ministers to the delay in bringing down returns. The
delay seems a little inordinate ; may be it is not, but I would like to draw
the attention of the Premier to the following : There are the returns
from the Minister of Railways with reference to the hay transport
question. We think that by this time they should be ready and we would
like to get them as soon as possible. Then there is one with reference to
the Royal Mint and another, of which I cannot complain,
because it has not been passed so long, with reference to public buildings
in towns of 5,000 population, or less. That is a return which should
take a very short time to prepare and I would be glad to have it as
soon as possible.
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister of Railways and Canals).
I might explain with reference to the motion for a return for papers
connected with the transportation of hay that the mails and trains
have been so impeded in Cape Breton that we have not been able to
gather up the certificates. They have to be brought in from
the different stations to Moncton and then forwarded on here. We have been
waiting for a complete return and I can assure my hon. friend that the
information will be brought down at the earliest possible moment.
Mr. FOSTER. That is a fair excuse unless we
throw it back 9n the minister and say he is there to see that the trains are
kept running.
STEAM COMMUNICATION WITH
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.
Mr. A. MARTIN. Before the Orders of the Day are called I
would like to ask the Minister of Marine if the steamers have
succeeded in renewing communication with Prince Edward Island ? What was the
last trip the steamers made ?
Hon. RAYMOND PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine
and Fisheries). I am not informed that the ferry has been resumed. I
understand the last trip was made a fortnight or three weeks ago.
Mr. PREFONTAINE. I have not the exact date. Mr.
A. MARTIN. Has communication been renewed or is it still at a standstill ?
QUESTIONS RE TRANSCONTINENTAL
CONSTRUCTION COMMISSION.
Mr. F. D. MONK (Jacques Cartier). Mr.
Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to ask the
government if questions concerning the doings of the Transcontinental
Railway Construction Commission can be answered and information can be obtained
in regard to those questions, when they are asked in
the usual form. I am tempted to seek this information
because, on the 20th February instant, I put the following question:
1. Did the government, during the months of
October and November, 1904, employ civil engineers to make a survey for a line of
railway
in the county of Joliette, Quebec ?
2. For what object was this work and survey
undertaken by said engineers, and was this
work and survey undertaken in connection with
the proposed Transcontinental Railway ?
3. What was the total cost of this work and
survey already accomplished by said engineers
and their assistants ?
4. Have said engineers made their report concerning this work and survey ? If so,
what was
the date of said report ?
5. Who was the overseer charged with the
direction of this work, and what salary did he
receive ?
This question was answered in the following form :
Hon. H. R. EMMERSON (Minister
of Railways and Canals). The government did not during the months of
October and November employ civil engineers to make a survey for a line of
railway in the county of Joliette, but I have reason to assume that
the Transcontinental Railway Commissioners made a survey through
that county, not under the direction of the government.
The point to which I wish to draw the
attention of the government is that it
seems to me that the Transcontinental
1594
Construction Commission, is so to speak, a
department of the government. I believe
that under the rules, questions can be put
in this House to the government, to the
ministers and to individual members. This
last form is seldom adopted. Most of these
questions in fact can only be answered by
information sought in the different departments, sometimes far from Ottawa. That
information is obtained from officials of the
government at some remote places. It
seems to me that a question put in this
form is pertinent and should have been answered on the principle that this commission
is really a servant of the government.
The practical object of my question is to
know in what form, according to the rules,
questions must be put. If they are put in
the form suggested to me by the government, will questions be answered or is the
Transcontinental Railway Commission a
body independent of this House ?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. The answer to my hon. friend (Mr.
Monk) is to be found in a motion of which my hon. friend has himself
given notice, asking all information with regard to these surveys. When the
motion is reached, I have no doubt it will be carried, but it will
have to be amended, because the information has to be obtained
from the Transcontinental Railway Commission, and not from
the government.
Mr. MONK. Perhaps my right hon. friend will allow me to
say that that is not the information which I sought by my question.
The information sought by the question I put was simply in relation to the
fact. In the motion I asked for a copy of the report, detailed
accounts of expenses and the names of the parties employed. The question I
put had reference to a department of the government, and I
think should have been answered in the form in which it was put.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. If my hon. friend wants the
information, he will have to make a motion. We have not the information in our hands,
but shall have to obtain it from the
commission itself.
This individual participated in:
