EN
🔍

House of Commons, 4 July 1905, Canadian Confederation with Alberta and Saskatchewan

8701 JULY 4, 1905

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.

House in committee on Bill (No. 70) to establish and provide for the government of the province of Saskatchewan—Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
On section 2, British North America Acts, 1867 to 1886, to apply.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I beg to move:
That section 2 be struck out and the following substituted therefor :
2. The provisions of lthe British North America Act. 1867 .to 1886 shall apply to the province of Saskatchewan in the same way and to the like extent as they apply to the other provinces heretofore comprised in the Dominion, except such provisions as in terms or by reasonable intendment are specially applicable to or affect one or more only and not the whole of the said provinces.
Amendment negatived on division.
Mr. MONK. It was in amendment to section 2 of the Alberta Bill that I moved my amendment to that Bill the other day. As I desire to move a similar amendment to this Bill I suppose I had better move it now?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. Very well.
8703
Mr. MONK. I move:
Either the English or the French language may be used by any person in the debates of the legislative assembly at the province and in the proceedings of the courts, and both these languages shall be used in the records and journals of such assembly, and all laws made by the legislature shall be printed in (both languages : provided, however, that the said legislative assembly may by law or otherwise regulate its proceedings and the manner of recording and publishing the same, and the regulations so made shall be embodied in a proclamation which shall be forthwith made and published by the Lieutenant Governor in conformity of the law and thereafter shall have full force and effect.
Amendment negatived on division.
On section 4,
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 4:
The said province and the province of Alberta shall, until the termination of the parliament of Canada existing at the time of the first readjustment hereinafter provided for, continue to be represented in the House of Commons as provided by chapter 60 of the statutes of 1903, each of the electoral districts defined in that part of the schedule to the said Act which relates to the Northwest Territories, whether such district is wholly in one of the said provinces, or party in one and partly in the other of them, being represented by one member.
This is to make this Bill conform to the Alberta Bill.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I assume that in every case where the government makes any amendment it is, ipsissimis verbis, in the terms already moved and carried with respect to the Alberta Bill.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. That is the assumption on which we are proceeding.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Upon that assumption I make no further comment.
Section as amended, agreed to.
On section 5,
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 5 :
Upon the completion of the next quinquennial census for the said province, the representation thereof shall forthwith be readjusted by the parliament of Canada. in such manner that there shall be assigned to the said province such a number of members as will bear the same proportion to the number of its population ascertained at such quinquennial census as the number sixty-five bears to the number of the population of Quebec as ascertained at the then last decennial census; and in the computation of the number of members for the said province a fractional part not exceeding one- half of the Whole number requisite for entitling the province to a member shall be disregarded, and a fractional part exceeding one-half of that number shall be deemed equivalent to the whole number, and such readjustment shall take effect upon the termination of the parliament then existing.  
8703 8704
2. The representation of the said province shall] thereafter be readjusted from time to time according to the provisions of section 51 of the British North America Act, 1867.
Motion agreed to, and section as amended agreed to.
On section 9,
Mr. FITZPATRICK. There is no question about the seat of government in Saskatchewan. An amendment was moved to the other Bill with respect to the seat of government.
Mr. BERGERON. It is understood it is to be at Regina.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I do not think there is any discussion in regard to it.
On section 12,
Mr. FITZPATRICK. The words:
Having due regard to the distribution of population and existing local divisions. are struck out.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. We have a schedule to this Bill have we not?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Yes, and I now move that Schedule 'B' be adopted.
Mr. LAKE. When the Alberta Bill was before this House the statement was frequently made that the desire to make Calgary a capital was at the bottom of a great deal of the opposition which had been raised by members on this side of the House to the schedules as they were presented. Occasion was taken several times by members on this side to repudiate that statement. I certainly did so for my part and others did the same. We objected to the proposed distribution on the ground that it was a most unfair distribution of representation. In the present Bill there is no question about the capital; there is no doubt as to the proposition that Regina should be selected for the first meeting of the new legislative assembly, but an examination of the schedules as attached to this Bill shows that there is apparently a deliberate intention on the part of the government to deprive the older settlers in the new province of their fair and legitimate share in the representation of that country. Under the schedule those older settlers who have mainly made that country what it is, who have borne the burthen and heat of the day, who have legislated in the past for that country and successfully legislated, are to be deprived of an equitable voice in what the future of that country shall be, now that it is made into a province. 1 say there ought to be no mistake whatever as to What we are contending for in this matter. We simply ask that every vote in that new country shall have an equal value, that the vote of the old- timer shall have a value equal to that of the new comer to the country. We ask no more and no less. We ask simply for equitable treatment to all. Taking a general aver 8705 JULY 4, 1905 age we find that with the distribution proposed, the vote of the new—comer shall be equivalent in value to the votes of two of the older settlers in that country. That is the general effect of the proposed distribution. We desire that the principle of representation according to population should be adhered to, and this distribution does not adhere to it. In the old legislative assembly, in so far as concerns the present proposed province of Saskatchewan, there were two distinct legal divisions, there was the provisional district of Saskatchewan in the north and that of Assinibola in the south. Those two divisions have been recognized in all distributions of representation from the beginning up to the present time and we find that to a certain extent they have been recognized in the schedules which have been placed before us. All the seats with the exception of three are completely in either the northern district or the southern district. In three cases the seats, while properly belonging to the north, have been run into the south and take in a considerable slice of the southern districts. I intend to show that it is proposed to give a far larger representation to the northern parts of the province than it is entitled to, and a far smaller share of representation to the southern part of the province than it is entitled to. For that purpose I will take the old division as between the provisional district of Saskatchewan, which I shall call the northern portion, and of Assiniboia, which I shall call the southern portion. This Bill, roughly speaking, gives nine seats to the north and sixteen seats to the south. The original schedules which were laid before the House gave ten seats to the north and fifteen to the south. I did not catch what the right hon. Prime Minister moved when these schedules were brought up, but I understand he moved the amended schedules as laid on the table of the House a few days ago :
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. I moved the original schedule, not the amended schedule, but of course, my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) has notice of the amendment which it is proposed to introduce and which modifies to some extent his argument.
Mr. LAKE. May I ask the right hon. Prime Minister if it is his intention to move the amended schedule ?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. Yes.
Mr. LAKE. I think, therefore, that I might as well base my argument on the amended schedule.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. Hear, hear.
Mr. LAKE. The original schedule, of course, shows far more in favour of the argument which I propose to make than the amended schedule, but if, as I understand the right hon. Prime Minister, he intends to move the amended schedule then I suppose 8705 8706 it would be more satisfactory to this committee if I based my argument on the amended schedule. Since the Bill was in. troduced we find that an amendment has already been made to the original schedule as brought in. I am very glad to find that the amendment has been made. It has made things slightly better, but this distribution is still about as bad, in my opinion, as it is possible for any distribution of seats to be. Now, in dealing with the question of Prince Albert the government laid down certain principles which they said would govern them and which did govern them in the distribution of seats. At page 8000 of, 'Hansard' it is stated by the right hon. Prime Minister that :
The prime object——
of the distribution—
——was as far as possible to give equality of numbers in the different electoral districts Mr. FOSTER. How equality of numbers 7 The PRIME MINISTER. Taking the unit of population.
On the following page he used language:
That was the first consideration, at all events —the existing representation. The next was the geographical distribution of the population. These are the three principles which we have in mind and I do not think it possible to have any other guides.
Later he went on to elaborate this a little farther. At page 8100 of 'Hansard' he said :
I stated yesterday at the opening of the discussion that we took as the basis of the distribution which we made, the condition of things existing at the present time, the number of seats assigned to the province of Alberta in the present legislature of the Territory, which amounts to 16. First of all we had to increase that by 10, we had to give to Alberta 10 more seats than there are to-day in the legislature of the Northwest Territories within the limits of Alberta. How are we to come to that conclusion? We come to that conclusion upon information derived from three sources which we submit to the House to be challenged. We take first the number of votes recorded. We do not say to the House that this is the only thing we should take into consideration ; we say that is one thing which ought to be taken into consideration but not alone. We take next the number of votes registered ; we do not say that is the only thing to be taken, that is only one of many things on which we should form our judgment. Then we take the census of 1901. That is the best thing of all. If we had a census for 1905 we would not have to consider the number of recorded votes nor the number .0: registered' votes, nor the number of post offices, school districts or improvement districts ; we would take only the census for 1905. But we have no census of 1905 and therefore we have to make up our minds as to what is the actual population at the present time. We know that the population at the present time is double what it was in 1901, and we have to make our calculation accordingly. But though the population 8707 has doubled, I think it is only a fair suggestion that, we must find a wealth of information in the census of 1901. We say moreover that We think this is something to go on, not the number of post ofiices, school districts and improvement districts.
That was the basis upon which the distribution in Alberta was made, according to the statement of the right hon. Prime Minister. I would like to read also a statement which was made in this respect by the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Oliver). He was more definite. He said :
The definite division of the constituencies is based on the vote actually polled on the 3rd November as we believe that was the closest and most recent date upon which we could get information we could rely upon. The information with regard to post offices, homestead entries ancl other matters of that kind was arrived at in order to bear, not upon the question of division of constituencies, but on the question as to whether the bulk of the population was in one end of the country or the other. That information therefore would not have any direct bearing on the propriety of the actual division made, but would be merely corroborative evidence to show whether the trend 0! population was in this direction or that.
Later on the Minister of the Interior made another statement as to the basis upon which they proceeded. At page 8118 he is reported to have spoken as follows :
The basis of the division of the constituencies was necessarily, I said, the vote cast. That was not the question that he was arguing about 8707 8708 at all. That question has not yet arisen. I said that we took the actual vote cast, because it was the latest and most accurate information we could get for the purpose of drawing a dividing line between the constituencies. But that was not, it he followed my remarks of yesterday, the sole basis, from my point of view, of the general arrangement that was made. He speaks of my having introduced the question of the dividing line at township 38. I do not know whether it is to the purpose in this argument to shut our eyes and ears to what we have seen and heard ever since these Autonomy Bills came up for consideration; but I instanced the increase of population, the number of post offices, the number of statute labour districts, the number of school districts and other matters connected with the northern country, as evidence.
I would like to ask now how this basis of calculation applies to the distribution which we have before us. A number of figures have been brought down by the government showing the populations in the various proposed districts, the votes cast, the voters   on the list, the area and so on. I would like to get this statement upon 'Hansard.' I have had an abstract made of the figures given by the government in a more concise form than their figures are given and I think it will be found correct. If hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House would kindly correct me if I misquote any of the figures I would be very much obliged. The following is the statement given by the government :

GOVERNMENT DISTRIBUTION— PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN.

Constituency. Total Population. Indians. Votes Polled Names on List Area without Athabaska.
1 Souris............................ 5,704 None. 2,544 3,348 3,190
2 Cannington .................... 3,485 173 1,684 2,432 2,575
3 Moosomin ................................... 5,163 None. 1,397 1,897 1,165
4 Whitewood ................................ 3,775 181 821 1,377 1,335
5 Grenfell .............................. . . 3,956 304 934 1,389 1,440
6 Wolseley .................................. 4,059 283 1,122 1,466 1,120
7 Saltcoats ..................................... 11,004 633 1,478 2,327 3,225
8 Yorkton ................. .. 5,116 8 1,144 1,674 3,195
9 South Qu'Appelle ........................... 5,530 638 1,930 2,692 3,820
10 North Qu'Appelle ............................. 3,157 701 927 1,398 3,245
11 South Regina. .................... 1,724 None. 1,282 1,694 4,285
12 Regina city ............. 2,442 8 740 933
13 Lumsden ................................... 3,096 None. 1,122 1,405 4,285
14 Moosejaw.................................... 4,025 91 1,172 1,578 12,425
15 Moosejaw city................................... ........ ......... 786 1,037
16 Maple Creek ................................. 1,841 48 846 1,196 20,669
17 Humbolt ................................... 582 311 178 298 7,657
18 Kinistino .. .. .................... . ............ 4,288 1,839 1,029 1,775 25,652
19 Prince Albert ................................. 3,469 1,235 484 717 6,555
20 Prince Albert city................................. 2,275 165 542 740
21 Batoche ................................... 1,970 94 659 1,042 3,746
22 Saskatoon ...................................... 3,008 50 1,017 2,314 5,998
23 Rosthern ..................................... 4,899 159 808 1,381 1,010
24 Redberry ......... . ..................................... 2,619
25 Battleford. .................................... 4,275 2,220 725 1,499 22,877
91,460 9,684 25,648 ........... .........
8709 July 4, 1905
These are the figures as given by the government.   I do not think they are absolutely   correct; I compiled figures on my own account, but I find my figures and the government figures sufl'iciently near to enable me to accept the government figures as sufliciently accurate for the purpose of the argument which I propose to make. In the original schedule proposed by the government there was an average of 1,328 votes cast in each electoral district in the south, while there was only an average of 571 votes cast in each electoral district in the northern constituencies. It would be seen therefore that considerably more than double the representation to which they were entitled was given to the people in the north. according to the original schedules, than was given to the people in the south. There was also an average of 1,856 names on the voters' lists of each constituency in the south as compared with an average of 1,036 nameson the voters' lists in each constituency in the north. Under the proposed original distribution, also, there was according to the census a population of 4,067 in each electoral division in the south and an average population of 2,076 in each electoral division in the north. I wish to put this on record as showing the way in which the original distribution proposed by the government worked out.
Mr. SPROULE. One man in the north seemed to be equal to two in the south.
Mr. LAKE. Under the amendment proposed by the Prime Minister which has been laid on the table of the House and which gives sixteen seats to the south and nine to the north, instead of fifteen seats to the South and ten to the north as originally proposed, I find that, taking the census of 1901, there was an average population for each of the twenty-five constituencies, omitting Indians, of 3,222. Taking the votes polled on the 3rd November, 1904, there would be an average of 1,026 to each of the twenty-five constituencies, and an average of 1,529 names on the voters' lists of each constituency.
We find that the distribution provides for sixteen seats in the southern portion. There are to each of these constituencies, according to the population of 1901, omitting Indians. 3,813 persons ; according to the votes polled on the 3rd of November, 1901, 1,245 votes; and, according to the number of voters on the list at the same date, 1,740 votes. In each of the nine constituencies in the northern portion of the district. the old district of Saskatchewan, there is according to the population of 1901. omitting Indians, an average of 2,307 persons, an average of votes polled on the 3rd of November, 1904, of 635, and an average number of votes on the list, 1,151. These were the three main bases on which the government proceeded' with the distribution of 8709 8710 the post office guide I estimate that the number of post offices in the northern portion of Saskatchewan is about 100, and the number in the southern portion 285. The number of schools was also taken into consideration. I find that in the northern poro tion of Saskatchewan there are, roughly speaking, 200 schools, and in the southern portion 575. As further corroborative evidence, the number of local improvement districts in Alberta was quoted. I am informed by a telegram which was sent to me yesterday by Mr. Bulyea of the Public Works Department at Regina, that in the northern district of Saskatchewan there are only eight districts organized, as against 151 in the southern portion. He goes on to say:
A large portion of Saskatchewan is eligible for organization, but information and petitions come too late for action this year.
We were told that the number of homestead entries should also be taken into consideration as evidence of the trend of population. I find that in the nine northern constituencies, from 1901 to May or June, 1905, there were 17,424 homestead entries, and in the southern portion 31,611, which also goes to show that there has been a larger immigration into the southern portion of that district than there has been into the northern portion. It will of course be readily understood that when a new population comes into a new district, practically everybody who goes in takes up a home. stead. I well remember that in the early eighties, when the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway first opened up the Northwest, practically every man who came to the country and was eligible to take up a homestead, made his entry. It cost him only $10, and he could take up a homestead quite close to a town. A great many of these entries were subsequently abandoned. I fancy that this will be found to be the case very largely in the northern part of Saskatchewan. Almost every railroad man who came into that country took up a homestead. as it might become very valuable to him if he could keep his hold on it without goingupon it and putting in his settlement duties. In the last three or four years matters have been very ditterent. In the southern portion of the province it has been practically impossible to get a home stead within a reasonable distance of the railway. People have been going into the older and well known districts, where it II known that farming can be satisfactorily carried on. As they have purchased land, we do not of course find their names among the homestead entries. A great number have also come in to work for farmers. These have not been able to find homesteads near at hand. and we do not find their names among the homestead entries. A great 8711 COMMONS number of business people have come to settle in the towns, and their names are not among the homestead entries. So that I think an examination of the homestead entries will be found to bear out my contention that the larger proportion .of the immigration has been going into the southern portion as against the northern. However. it is not necessary to the argument which I wish to place before the House, to press that point home. Even supposing that a larger proportion of immigration has not been coming to the southern portion, it will be found that the distribution of seats will show that a most unjustly excessive proportion of the representation is being given to the northern portion of the province of Saskatchewan.
Mr. SCOTT. What dividing line is my hon. friend adopting as between north and south Saskatchewan?
Mr. LAKE. I am taking the dividing line as shown by the constituencies in the   amended schedule.
Mr. SCOTT. Of course, certain constituencies as proposed by the amended map lap over from Saskatchewan into Assiniboia. and vice versa.
Mr. LAKE Yes, but I have no doubt  that the hon. member for Saskatchewan will endorse what I say when I say that the figures were given by the officer of the government for each of the amended constituenceis. At least, he had them so on his statement.
Mr. LAMONT. I am not disputing the figures at all, but that does not meet the point which the hon. member for Western Assiniboia raised. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Lake) is classing them as north and south. There is no north and south according to this schedule. and what the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) wanted to get at was on what basis the hon. gentleman was speaking of northern seats and southern seats? Where does he make the dividing line? According to the amended schedule, some constituencies extend down to Assiniboia, and vice versa.
Mr. LAKE. I thought I had already made that plain. There are nine seats which are entirely or mainly in the old district of Saskatchewan. Six of them are entirely in the old district of Saskatchewan. and three of them extend some little distance into the old district of Assinlboia. Those are what I call the northern seats. and those which are entirely in the old district of Assiniboia I call the southern seats.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Numbers 17 to 25.
Mr. LAKE. In this statement numbers 17 to 25 comprise the nine seats. All of them are either entirely or to a very large extent in the province of Saskatchewan. The other sixteen seats are entirely in the old district of Assiniboia.
8711 8712
Mr. SCOTT. Would not Saltcoats and Yorkton be as fairly classed as northern districts? I find the southern boundary line of Yorkton is only eighteen miles further south than the southern boundary at Batoche, Saskatoon and Battleford.
Mr. LAKE. They are entirely in the district of Assiniboia.
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, in the old district, but they are in a federal district made two years ago in this House, which we looked upon as a northern district. the district of Mackenzie.
Mr. LAKE. I am not dealing with a federal district. I am using this for the purpose of argument, to show that what has always been considered part-of the present province of Saskatchewan has been given an undue amount of representation, and 1 take the seats which are entirely or mainly in the province of Saskatchewan. These we call northern seats, and the seats entirely in the old district of Assiniboia I would call southern seats.  
Mr. FOSTER. Just as well call them 9 and 16. The inequality would be just the same.
Mr. LAKE. I have given the vote and population to each seat, and I would like the matter looked at from another point of   view. Instead of giving nine seats to the north and sixteen to the south, if a fair division were made, based on the population as given by the census of 1901, there would be six and a quarter seats, to be exact, in the north and eighteen and three—quarters in the south. If it had been based on the votes polled and the Minister of the Interior said this was necessarily the basis in the distribution in Alberta—then there should be only five and a half in the north and nineteen and a half in the south.
Mr. LAMONT. If it were based on the Haultain redistribution in 1902, what would you be entitled to ?
Mr. LAKE. If it had been based on the Haultain redistribution, we should have had a fair distribution of the seats, and there never would have been a word raised on this side.
Mr. LAMONT. You said that that was a fair redistribution in 1902 ?
Mr. LAKE. We are not dealing with Mr. Haultain's redistribution at present ; but as between the districts of Assiniboia. Saskatchewan and Alberta, it was the fairest possible redistribution which could have been arrived at. Had this government adopted a redistribution anything like that, there would be no dissatisfaction.
Mr. OLIVER. What Was the basis of that redistribution ?
Mr. LAKE. The population of 1901. took place within a year of that census.
8713 JULY 4, 1905
Mr. OLIVER. We gave the district of Edmonton 2,500 and Cardston 611.
Mr. LAKE. Does the hon. gentleman know how many votes there were then in those two townships ?
Mr. OLIVER. I know how many were cast in 1905.
Mr. LAKE. There is considerable difference between 1901 and 1905. The Minister of the Interior will admit that there has been a slight change in the number of people living in the Northwest.
Mr. LAMONT. What is the difference between the votes cast in Moosejaw in 1902 and the votes cast in Batoche on this fair redistribution ?
Mr. LAKE. I am not dealing with the Haultain redistribution of 1902. I think the hon. gentleman's cross-examination on that point is entirely irrelevant. I have made the statement that if as fair a redistribution had been made in this case, there would not have been a word said.
Mr. OLIVER. Will the hon. gentleman show how fair that redistribution was ?
Mr. LAKE. If the hon. gentleman will bring up that question later on, if he thinks it relevant to the point at issue, I will have the figures and satisfy him as to the fairness of that redistribution. I was comparing the effect of the various grounds upon which the distribution was made in Alberta if applied to Saskatchewan when I was interrupted. If the distribution had been based on the names on the voters' list there should be only 6 3/4 seats in the north and 18 1/4, in the south. If based on the number of schools, or post offices, or local improvement districts or homestead entries, there would be about the same results. We claim also, apart from the fact of this very undue representation being given the north, that the distribution of seats among the various constituencies is exceedingly uneven. Compare, for instance, the district of Humboldt with the district of Maple Creek, each of them very large in area.
Mr. SCOTT. If the hon. gentleman insists upon treating the province in sections— for instance he classes a certain part as north and a certain part as south—does he not think it unfair to make a comparison between a district in the south and a district in the north? Let him compare districts in the same section or compare the whole south with the whole north. It is not fair to take districts out of the south and compare them with districts in the north.
Mr. LAKE. I can see absolutely nothing unfair in showing the incidence of this redistribution. To compare one district with another and one constituency with another is the only way in which the House can be thoroughly seized of the fact of the distri 8713 8714 bution under consideration. Compare Humboldt with Maple Creek. Humboldt had 198 votes polled on the 4th November last and has an area of 7,657 square miles. Maple Creek had 846 votes polled and has an area of 20,669 square miles.
Mr. LAMONT. Is that any greater variation than the difference between Batoche and Moosejaw at the last local election, which you say is fair ?
Mr. LAKE. These hon. gentlemen apparently have been brooding over the distribution of 1902 and cannot throw it off.
Mr. LAMONT. You say it was fair.
Mr. LAKE. We will have ample time to consider that redistribution later on, if the Chairman considers it relevant to the question at issue. Batoche had 1,659 votes polled on November 3rd, and its area is 3,746 square miles. Souris had 2,544 votes polled on November 3rd and its area is 3,190 square miles. Let us group a few of these constituencies together and see how it works out. If you take Humboldt, Prince Albert, Prince Albert city, Redberry and Batoche ; the total vote polled in these five amounted to 2,140. They are to have one member each. Compare this with Souris, which, under this distribution, is to return only one member. Souris polled 2,544 votes, over 400 votes more for this one constituency than were cast in these five northern constituencies. With two exceptions, every one of the sixteen southern constituencies polled more votes in the last election than the northern constituencies. The question might well be asked : How comes it that the voter in the south is not considered equal to the voter in the North ?
I find that there has been a radical departure, in the case of the province of Saskatchewan, from the rule laid down by the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Oliver) in regard to the representation of cities. The hon. gentleman was very positive that certain principles ought to be adopted in dealing with rural populations as compared with urban populations. As reported in 'Hansard,' page 8300, the hon. gentleman said :
Mr. OLIVER. Population is one thing and there are many others. But there is one universal principle and it is that a purely rural population, a population of producers creating wealth in the country is always given a greater share in the government than an equal number of consumers. Mr. HAGGART. That is so in no place. Mr. OLIVER. In every place. On what other grounds are the cities of our country so unjustly treated by comparison of population in being under-represented compared with the rural constituencies ?
Later on he said :
The rule has always been applied throughout the provinces of the Dominion, and it is being applied in the Northwest now, and it would be improper it it were not so applied.
8715
Now, this is a very definite statement of policy. How is that policy applied in the province of Saskatchewan? It is applied in the case of Alberta in a way that may be quite satisfactory to the hon. gentleman himself. But in Saskatchewan we find that the government propose to give one member each to the city of Regina, with 740 votes polled on November 3rd. and 933 votes on the list ; Moosejaw, with 786 votes polled and 1.000 on the list; and Prince Albert, with 542 votes polled and 740 votes on the list. Why should these three cities be given separate representation, when you have such thickly populated rural constituencies in the province? Compare any of these cities with the district of Souris, which polled 2,544 votes and had more than 3,348 names on the list, the area of this constituency being upwards of 3,000 square miles. Or compare any of them with South Qu'Appelle. with 1,930 votes polled and 2,692 on the list. Or compare it with Saltcoats with a population of 11,004 according to the last census, with 1,478 votes polled, and 2,327 names on the list. If these three cities are to be given separate representation why was not the town of Medicine Hat treated in the same way ? The town of Medicine Hat has a larger population, a larger number of votes on the list and a larger number of votes polled than has the city of Prince Albert. If Prince Albert is to be given one member, why should not the town of Medicine Hat also be given one member ? But we find that it has not suited the Minister of the Interior or the government to carry out in its entirety the principle so definitely laid down in the case of Alberta. It seems to me that in every single particular, they have departed from their principles in distributing the seats for the province of Saskatchewan. It will be within the memory of the House that, a few days back, the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) stated that in view of the fact that the Prime Minister had stated that it had been his desire on one occasion to have the distribution of seats submitted to a conference to the Northwest members 'on both sides of the House, be (Mr. R. L. Borden) was perfectly willing and anxious to have a conference in regard to the distribution of the seats in the province of Saskatchewan, if it was not too late. This suggestion was acted upon by the Prime Minister. The committee met and discussed the situation generally, I was one of the members of that committee, but, of course, I do not speak omcially for the committee in any way. In the discussion it was found that the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Lamont) took an uncompromising position. He took the position that upon no consideration would he agree to fewer than nine members being given to what I have described as the northern part of the province.
8715 8716
Mr. LAMONT. Was not the position taken by the hon. member for Qu'AppeIle (Mr. Lake) just as uncompromising, that he would not give nine members to that district ?
Mr. LAKE. I will come to that presently. But the position that I have described was taken. The suggestion was then made by myself that although the northern portion was not even entitled to as many as seven members, I was prepared to give way to this extent—I would compromise on eight members for the north. I said: If you will come down one member I will compromise, I will take what I consider something a little better than you propose to give and I will compromise on eight.
Mr. LAMONT. The hon. gentleman is aware that I stated the government had already come down from ten to nine according to the government's first proposition.
Mr. LAKE. The government had come down apparently because they found their position too untenable even for their following on that side of the House. They had come down of their own accord. Then this conference was to take place and surely if the conference had been arranged there should have been some give and take on both sides. The member for Saskatchewan. however, took that position and I was not backed up by the other gentleman who was present at that time, at least not to the extent of voting down the member for Saskatchewan, and consequently it resulted in a deadlock. As to the distribution of representation between the northern seats and the southern seats I made the offer to compromise although from the figures I have shown. the northern portion was not entitled to seven seats, still I was prepared to say: We will settle this matter without further dispute, let us say eight.
Mr. LAMONT. Which of the northern seats would the hon. member cut out?
Mr. LAKE. Of course there would have to be a general rearrangement of the northern seats made after mutual discussion of the counties. This, as I say, limited the discussion just to the limits of the constituencies in the north and the limits of the constituencies in the south. I took the position at that time. and I took it strongly, that cities of such comparatively small population should not be given separate representation, that they should be thrown in with the rural constituencies. I took the position that a member for a city in the legislative assembly of Saskatchewan will have very little to do, that, as is well known, the members for rural constituencies have a very large amount to do in connection with the representation of their districts; they are constantly applied to in regard to public works and many other matters of local interest. I took the ground that the city members would have little to 8717 JULY 4, 1905 do, and it would be better to put the cities in with rural constituencies and to redistribute these rural constituencies, and to give every member of the legislative assembly a certain amount of country to look after. I thought that would be the fairest distribution to ask, but this was met with a positive refusal and a statement that it was impossible to go back and take away the representation which had now been pro mised to the difierent cities.
Mr. SCOTT. My hon. friend is aware that it is only to cities which are incorporated by the legislative assembly, of which until recently he was a member, that the members are being given. There are only five incorporated cities in the Territories and each one of these has been given a member.
Mr. HAGGART. What difference does the incorporation make?
Mr. SCOTT. It shows that they are people of great enterprise.
Mr. LAKE. It shows a certain amount of ambition, nothing else. The member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) then proposed to group certain constituencies together to provide for a seat which appeared to be very badly needed in the southern portion of the province. I disagreed with him in reference to one of his proposals, but I am prepared to agree to such a redistribution if a suggestion which I made would be accepted. I do not know whether the hon. member is prepared to bring a suggestion based on that.
Mr. SCOTT. Is my hon. friend prepared to say that his suggestion would bring about that equality for which he is arguing this afternoon ?
Mr. LAKE. It .wouid be bringing it about considerably better than by the plan proposed by the member for West Assiniboia. He proposed to take Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley, four of the oldest constituencies in the country, which are filled with the pioneers who have made that country, to group these together and give them three seats and to take the seat we thus save and place it where I think a seat is badly needed, along the Soo line. I proposed that this seat should be provided for in another way.
Progress reported.
At five o'clock, House took recess.

After Recess.

House resumed at eight o'clock.
MESSAGES FROM THE GOVERNOR GENERAL—FURTHER SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) delivered a message from the Gover— nor General.
8717 8718
Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER read the message as follows:
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons supplementary estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1906, and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Act, 1867, the Governor General recommends these estimates to the House of Commons.
(Sgd.) GREY.
Mr. FIELDING moved that the message of His Excellency, together with the supplementary estimates, be referred to the Committee on Supply.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. FIELDING delivered a message from the Governor General.
Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER read the message as follows:
The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons further supplementary estimates of sums required for the service of the Dominion for the year ending 30th June, 1905, and in accordance with the provisions of the British North America Act, 1867, the Governor General recommends these estimates to the House of Commons.
(Sgd.) GREY.
Mr. FIELDING moved that the message of His Excellency, together with the further supplementary estimates, be referred to the Committee of Supply.
Motion agreed to.

PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.

House again in committee on Bill (No. 70) to establish and provide for the government of the province of Saskatchewan—Sir Wilfrid Laurier.
On section 12, Legislative Assembly.
Mr. LAKE. Mr. Chairman, I was referring this afternoon to the proposal which had been made by the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) in regard to grouping four constituencies on the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, adding to them small portions of two constituencies, which lie to the north, making three new constituencies out of the original four and giving the one constituency which has been thus saved to the 800 line. While I am strongly in favour of a constituency being given to the Soo line, I object to the constituency being formed in that way. I held that these four constituencies on the main line were settled in the earliest stages of the country. The greater part of this area is occupied by people who are amongst the oldest settlers, who have exercised their franchise for years and who have contributed largely to the building up of the country. In addition to that I have another objection, and it is that these four seats have a larger average voting population than 8719 the average voting population which the whole of the province has as obtained by the even distribution of the voting population of the province into 25 different seats. I find that the average number of names on the voters' lists in these districts is 1,554, while the average for the whole of the province would be 1,529. I suggested as an alternative. provided there was a positive refusal to grant the extra seat from the northern portion of the province where I consider it should come from. that the three Regina seats should be altered as regards their area and that one of the seats, the south Regina seat, or a portion of it, should be given to the 800 line. I found that the three Regina seats, Lumsden or North Regina, Regina city and South Regina, on the average had only 1,344 voters on the voters' list, and I thought that the adoption of my suggestion would be a proper way of finding an additional con« stituency to provide for the people along the SOO line, who, I think, are justly entitled to have a representative of their own. They have forwarded to me a copy of a resolution. which they have also forwarded to the hon. member for West Assiniboia and the hon. Minister of the Interior. on the subject. During the discussion which took place in this committee I submitted a tentative suggestion of my own showing how the constituencies might be divided up in the new provinces in such a way as to give a fairly even distribution of votes to each constituency. I did this for the purpose of demonstrating that it was possible to make a comparatively even distribution, a distribution based on existing conditions, that is to say, by preserving as far as possible the constituencies as they exist at the present time and giving additional representation where the additional population and the additional number of votes on the list appear to demand. This distribution which accounted for seven seats in the northern portion of the district and eighteen seats in the southern portion, even then gave an advantage of 8 per cent to the northern constituencies. The suggestion was, of course, purely tentative: it was drawn up after a pretty close examination of the vote that was polled and was marked on the map which I had in my possession, but without any very prolonged consideration of the matter. On the whole, I think it met the purpose fairly well, and I believe it could have been made into a very good distribution indeed if the committee had discussed the details and had made alterations here and there Where the local conditions would appear to demand them. Although I left the map with the constituencies marked in it and the figures showing the vote of each constituency with the Liberal members of that committee, I have heard nothing more on the subject from them since; it appears to have been ignored. I would like to put on record the constituencies which I proposed. the area of each and the number of voters in each according to the lists, as near as I 8719 8720 could estimate. I first proposed to divide the present constituency of Souris into two constituencies. one of which, the old district of Souris, would have 1,684 voters on the list and an area of 1,188 square miles. The second, constituency—to be named as the committee might decide—would have 1,593 voters on the lists.
Mr. SCOTT. Would the hon. gentleman say how many votes were cast last fall in the proposed district of Souris ?
Mr. LAKE. It was absolutely impossible to say how many votes were cast in any of these constituencies; the government may be able to find that out by some method unknown to me.
Mr. SCOTT. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Lake) took the responsibility of preparing a map based entirely on the vote polled last. fall. He has contended strongly that the vote cast last fall, and that alone. was the proper basis for this distribution.
Mr. LAKE. I have never contended it was the proper basis. I have said it was not the proper basis on every occasion I have had an opportunity of speaking on this question.
Mr. SCOTT. Was not that the plan on which my hon. friend prepared the map ?
Mr. LAKE. Certainly not ; it was based on the number of voters on the lists. How is it possible for any one to say how many votes were cast in each of these districts ? It constantly happens that a polling division which was created for the purpose of the Dominion election lies in two different local constituencies. We could tell exactly how many voters there were on the lists in each of these constituencies, but it is practically impossible to tell how many of them cast votes unless you get at the returning oflicer's book, which, I believe, is under seal in the hands of the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery. I do not know if that is the way in which the government have got at the figures they have submitted; I have taken the figures of the government all through, not that I think they are absolutely reliable, but at all events sufficiently so to enable one to make a comparison. I said that the second constituency into which the old constituency of Souris is divided would have 1,593 voters on the list and 1,836 square miles. A part of Cannington would also go to a new constituency, which would take in the Regina-Arcola branch, from Arcola some little distance westward. Cannington would have 1,460 voters on the list and an area of 1,332 square miles. The other Cannington constituency would have 1,456 voters on the list and 2,340 square miles of area. The old district of Moosomin would have 1,895 voters on the list and an area of 1.165 square miles; Whitewood would have 1.357 voters on the list and an area of 1.335 square miles; Grenfell would 8721 JULY 4, 1905 have 1.497 voters on the list and an area of 1,440 square miles ; Wolseley would have 1,441 voters on the list and an area of 1,120 square miles ; Saltcoats, 1,663 voters on the list, area, 2,736 square miles ; Yorkton, 1,711 voters on the list, area, 2,484 square miles ; North Qu'Appelle, 1,541 voters on the list, area. 4,536 square miles ; South Qu'Appelle, 1,655 voters on the list, 900 square miles ; North Regina, 1,600 voters on the list, area, 3,780 square miles ; South Regina, 1,600 voters on the list, area, 540 square miles ; Soo, a new constituency along the Soo line, which was to take in a portion of South Regina, South Qu'Appelle, Souris and a small portion of Cannington, would have 1,504 voters on the list and an area of 8,016 square miles. I proposed to divide Moosejaw, and instead of giving a city constituency and a country constituency I proposed two constituencies which would probably meet in the near vicinity of the city of Moosejaw. North Moosejaw would have 1,313 voters on the list and an area of 8,820 square miles ; South Moosejaw, 1,550 voters on the list, area, 5,184 square miles ; Maple Creek, 1,303 voters on the list, area, 28,152 square miles. This will give an average of 550 voters on the list of each one of these eighteen constituencies in the south. Then I proposed to divide the northern constituencies as follows : Kinistino, 1,385 voters on the list, area, 22,716 square miles.
Mr. LAMONT. How many square miles in Kinistino ?
Mr. LAKE. 22,716.
Mr. LAMONT. I do not think that is right ; you are not taking in all of the district.
Mr. LAKE. It is not the old original district of Kinistino ; a good many of the constituencies I propose are slightly changed.
Mr. LAMONT. You are not taking in the whole division of Kinistino according to your own map ; you are not including Athabaska.
Mr. LAKE. Of course, this is exclusive of Athabaska, and the figures which were given this afternoon were also exclusive of Athabaska. In regard to Athabaska, as the Prime Minister said, there are only a few wandering hunters and Indians there, and I thought that for such a purpose as this it would be unnecessary to include that area. I continue : Prince Albert, 1,427 voters on the list, area, 7,572 square miles ; Batoche, 1,551 voters on the list, area, 10,908 square miles ; Rosthern, 1,601 voters on the list, area, 950 square miles ; Saskatoon, 1,535 voters on the list, area, 1,280 square miles ; Redberry, 1,200 voters on the list, area, 14,292 square miles ; Battleford, 1,279 voters on the list, area, 15,552 square miles. This is the division of constituencies I proposed, given in tabulated form :
8721 8722
Voters on list. Area exclusive of Athabaska.
Souris .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,084 1,188
Alameda.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,593 1,836
Cannington .. .. .. .. .. 1,460 1,332
Forget.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,456 2,340
Moosomin.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,895 1,165
Whitewood.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,357 1,335
Grenfell.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,479 1,440
Wolseley .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,141 1,120
Saltcoats .. .. .. . 1,663 2,736
Yorkton.. .. .. .. .. . 1,711 2,484
North Qu'Appelle.. .. .. 1,541 4,536
South Qu'Appelle.. .. .. 1,655 900
North Regina.. .. .. .. 1,600 3,780
South Regina.. .. .. .. 1,600 540
The Soo.. .. .. .. .. .. . 1,504 8,016
North Moosejaw.. .. .. 1,313 8,820
South Moosejaw.. .. .. .. 1,550 5,184
Maple Creek. .. .. .. .. 1,303 28,152
Average 1,550.
Kinistino.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,385 22,716
Prince Albert.. .. .. .. .. 1,427 7,572
Batoche.. .. .. .. .. 1,551 10,908
Rosthern .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,601 950
Saskatoon .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,535 1,280
Redberry.. .. .. .. .. 1,200 14,292
Battleford .. .. .. .. .. 1,279 15,552
This will give an average of 1,425 voters on the lists of each of these Saskatchewans, or I should say northern constituencies. I have avoided as much as possible using the word Saskatchewan as applied to the old district of that name, for fear it should get confounded with the name of the new province. As I said before, the distribution which I propose does give an advantage of about eight per cent in favour of the northern constituencies. This is practically unavoidable, because the number which would be given under a fair distribution based on the number of voters on the list would give a fraction of a constituency both north and south. As I have said, I do not consider that the proposal which I made was in any way perfect. I thought, however, that I should not go to this committee prepared only to criticise the existing schedules, but prepared to make an offer of something which I considered to be a fair distribution, and I hoped the committee might take this as a basis for working out something that would be satisfactory to all the members of the committee. However, that apparently was not to be, and I have heard nothing more about that proposal. It seems to me that the result of the conference is one which was to be expected under the circumstances, when certain members took an absolutely uncompromising attitude which made it impossible to arrive at anything useful in the way of readjustment. It seemed to me that the only possible way to get a fair distribution of seats was by an independent commission, and I am very sorry that the government did not take this opportunity, which I consider was a very good one, to initiate this principle of distribution by commission. I think it would have been much to the credit of the great party now in power if they had been the first 8723 to take practical steps in that direction. I greatly regret that from the action taken by the government it seems impossible for us to obtain that independent commission for this purpose. There is just one thing further I want to say, that is, that I have been making this argument on the basis of the votes polled. I consider that that was the only fair way to look at the matter, because the Minister of the Interior had told us most distinctly that that was the basis upon which he had made the distribution.
Mr. SCOTT. That is the point I questioned my hon. friend about a few moments ago—whether he had not made his map on the basis of the votes cast.
Mr. LAKE. I made that map on what I considered to be the fairest basis—the number of voters on the list. I have made my criticism of the government's proposal on the basis of the number of votes polled, because that was the basis on which they had made the distribution. In criticising their distribution, it seems to me to be only fair to take the basis they set for themselves. This is what the Minister of the Interior said :
The definite division of the constituencies is based on the vote actually polled on the 3rd November as the closest and most recent date upon which reliable information can be got.
I myself consider the fair basis on which to make the distribution is the number of voters placed on the list for the election of the 3rd of November last. The enumerators who drew up those lists were government employees of the administration here at Ottawa, and I presume that they would endeavour to do their duty to the best of their ability. At any rate, they would endeavour to put as large a number or names on the list as possible of persons entitled to vote. That was the nearest I thought we could get to a fair distribution. I do not pretend that that would be an absolutely positive standard. It is imposible to declare that of any basis, except a census taken within a month of the drawing up of the schedule, because of the rapidity with which the population of the Northwest is changing at the present time. I do not think I need add anything further to what I have said With regard to this distribution. The figures which I have read, provided by the government in regard to the schedules which they have submitted to the House, speak for themselves far more eloquently than I could possibly hope to do.
Mr. LAMONT. Would the hon. gentleman state which of the northern constituencies he objects to, or which he has cut out in his distribution ?
Mr. LAKE. I handed the hon. gentleman my map a couple of days ago, and he knows exactly what it is.
8723 8724
Mr. LAMONT. I am at liberty, then, to lay that on the table ?
Mr. LAKE. I have no objection at all. He can put it anywhere he likes ; he can put it on ' Hansard ' if he likes. I am prepared to stand by that distribution as a far fairer one than that presented to us by the government, I merely desire to point out and to accentuate the fact that in spite of the statement of the Prime Minister that the prime object was as far as possible to give equality of numbers in the different electoral districts, and in spite of the statement of the Minister of the Interior to which I have just referred, that the definite division of the constituencies was based on the votes actually polled on the 3rd of November, I find that the schedule has apparently been drawn up with an absolute disregard of all the principles which were laid down as those which guided the government in making the distribution. A distribution has been made based, it seems to me, if it was based on anything at all, on the vaguest and most sanguine estimates of the prospective population of the northern part of the province, and less sanguine estimates of the prospective population of the southern portion of the province. This distribution practically gives double the representation, man for man, to the newer population who are going into the newer country which is being opened up to the north. That population is composed largely of late arrivals who do not understand the political questions of the day in Canada, and who are far too busy, as all men who go into a new country are, in getting started, to study these questions and to form personal opinions upon them. And over this population it cannot be doubted that the Dominion government exercises a considerable amount of influence. Only half the representation to which they are entitled on a fair distribution is apparently given to the older settlements of the south —the men who have built up the country, who have taken such a leading part in governing it up to the present, and who, I think, have governed it with a very fair amount of success. The distribution shows the most extraordinary discrepancies in individual constituencies, varying from 178 votes cast in Humboldt and 277 east in Redberry in the recent election—and the votes cast at the recent election is the basis upon which these constituencies were constructed —to 1,930 in South Qu'Appelle and 2,594 cast in the district of Saltcoats. That is to say a voter in Humboldt practically exercises as much voting influence as fourteen in the old district of Saltcoats, and a voter in Redberry exercises as much influence as seven in the district of South Qu'Appelle.
Mr. LAMONT. Will the hon. gentleman say whether in his opinion those American settlers have gone into Humboldt and Redberry in such large numbers, but who had not been long enough in the country to vote 8725 JULY 4, 1905 last fall, are entitled to representation in the local House ?
Mr. LAKE. Why did not the Minister of the Interior make that the basis of the distribution of seats ?
Mr. LAMONT. As a matter of fact, does the hon. gentleman think they should be represented ?
Mr. LAKE. I certainly think the population of this country should be represented in the legislative assembly no matter who they are. One man's vote should be just as good as another.
Mr. LAMONT. Even although they have not been long enough in the district to vote?
Mr. LAKE. The hon. gentleman will have an opportunity in a moment or two of making his speech. In one of his constituencies, to which they are only given one member, and which cast a very large number of votes last year, the district of Saltcoats, there were upwards of 11,000 inhabitants. Should they not have a proportionate say in the representation of the country just as well as the other new settlers. If the hon. gentleman will take one basis and go on that throughout, I am willing to support him. I believe the fairest basis to be just now the number of votes placed on the voters' list by the officials of the Dominion government on the 3rd of November last. Here is another comparison I would like to make before sitting down. Ten southern constituencies cast upwards of 1,100 votes each— one of them as high as 2,500. There are three northern constituencies which, grouped together, did not cast 1,000 votes among them. That appears to me an extraordinary condition of affairs. The three northern constituencies are Redberry, Humboldt and Prince Albert. Prince Albert city and Prince Albert rural district get a very ample representation—far more than they are entitled to on an even distribution. I might refer to that question of Prince Albert which I mentioned just now. Prince Albert, city and country together, cast 1,026 votes. There is another constituency in the northern part of the district, the district of Kinistino, which the government proposes to form. That district has an area, outside of Athabaska altogether, of 25,000 square miles odd. The two districts of Prince Albert have between them only an area of 6,555 square miles. The vote cast in the district of Kinistino was 1,029. That is to say, even with that enormous area the vote cast in the district of Kinistino was in excess of that cast in the two constituencies alongside, to which the government proposes to give two representatives. I may have something more to say on this matter later on. For the present I shall content myself with submitting what I consider a fair and moderate criticism on the question before the committee.
Mr. SCOTT. My hon. friend's criticism on the Saskatchewan redistribution schedule 8725 8726 is very much milder than a great deal of the criticisms we have seen in the Conservative press throughout the country during the past three or four months, or some of the criticisms we have heard in this House. I think it was the hon. gentleman's leader who said that he found in these distribution schedules the worst gerrymander that had ever been perpetrated anywhere in the world, even the United States.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I was not speaking of this one. I was speaking of Alberta, and may speak of this one presently.
Mr. SCOTT. I am very glad to find the hon. gentleman much more disposed to agree that the Saskatchewan schedule is fair.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. You will find out about that.
Mr. SCOTT. My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) feels disposed to make his criticism milder. He has within recent days taken the responsibility of making a map and has found that it is much more difficult to make a proper distribution than offer criticism. When he spoke a few evenings ago in criticism of the Saskatchewan schedule, he was horrified to find the area of the district of Maple Creek in comparison with the area of the district of Rosthern. I am surprised to find that in the map—
Mr. LAKE. The hon. gentleman is not giving a fair estimate of my remarks on that point. I compared the area and the vote.
Mr. SCOTT. For what purpose ?
Mr. LAKE. The two together.
Mr. SCOTT. My hon. friend asked the committee to look at the area of Maple Creek in comparison with the district of Rosthern. I find upon his own map that he has actually added to the area of Maple Creek by something over 6,000 square miles. And in the district of Rosthern he has cut off a township or two and actually makes it smaller than it is in the Schedule presented by the government. I find also that one of his pet districts, the district of Wolseley, which is certainly not a very large district even upon the government map, he has reduced by some three townships. Wolseley did not cast a very large vote either last fall. They didn't have a large registered vote last fall. And, consulting other statistics, we are led to believe that the population of Wolseley has not been increasing as fast as that of other places.
Mr. LAKE. How many votes were cut off the district of Wolseley ?
Mr. SCOTT. If my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) found a district that was not exceptionally large, that was, in fact, rather on the small side, which did not cast a vote last fall equal to the average, what was his purpose in reducing the size ? I am not offering these observations in criticism 8727 of the hon. gentleman's map, but I am trying to show the committee, and particularly my hon. friend (Mr. Lake), that it is much easier to criticise a distribution map than it is to frame one. We have had, as I have already said, from the Conservative members, the most vehement denunciation of these proposals. The leader of the opposition declared that the distribution of Alberta was the worst gerrymander there had ever been in the world—he could not find anything to equal it in the United States. When my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) was criticising the Saskatchewan distribution a few evenings ago, he referred to the last federal redistribution. It may not be out of order for me to make some observations on the redistribution made by this parliament in 1903. In the first place, who made the federal redistribution of 1903, so far as the Northwest Territories are concerned? Was it the bi-party committee of which the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Hyman) was chairman ? No. We have the evidence of the leader of the opposition himself that the matter of redistribution of the Northwest was referred to a committee of gentlemen representing the Northwest Territories, senators and members of this House, representing both sides of politics. It did not take us more than fifteen minutes to reach an agreement. Does the hon. gentleman think that that redistribution was not a fair one? Does the hon. member for Qu'Appelle claim that it was unfair? Does the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Herron) claim that it was unfair?
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. If you will adopt it for Alberta.
Mr. SCOTT. I am speaking of the federal redistribution two years ago.
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. Adopt that and we will be satisfied.
Mr. SCOTT. The hon. gentleman (Mr. M. S. McCarthy) is willing to admit that it was a fair redistribution —
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. For Alberta.
Mr. SCOTT. Perfectly fair as between the parties.
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. For Alberta.
Mr. SCOTT. Yes, and for Saskatchewan. And perfectly fair as between the north and south. At that time those who made that redistribution did not look upon it as a matter involving a division between north and south or any difference between the parties. At that time the northern part of the country was not looked upon as more Liberal than the southern part. I will recall to the memory of members of that committee—and I think that they will say that I am stating the facts correctly— that prior to the 3rd of November, nobody had any idea that the vote would be as it proved. In fact many expected that the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Oliver) was go 8727 8728 ing to be defeated in the district of Edmonton. On the other hand the Liberals were just as confident that they would carry the district of Alberta as they were that the Liberals in the person of the Minister of the Interior would carry the district of Edmonton. The 1903 distribution was not looked upon as a disputed question between the north and south or as between the parties. There was in that sub-committee on redistribution no consideration of party or any other advantage; we approached the work with the simple desire to make a fair and equitable distribution on the basis of census figures, allowing for expected increase of population to take place within the next few years. If hon. gentlemen will look at the map of this federal distribution, they will find that there were five southern seats, as they may be called, south of the north line of township 34 between the Rocky Mountains and the elbow of the Saskatchewan, being about north of Swift Current, and the line north of township 24 from the elbow of the Saskatchewan to the Manitoba boundary line. And as there were five constituencies south of that line, so there were five to the north. I think every one will admit that that redistribution was perfectly fair in a party sense. That being admitted, let us consider how it was as between the north and the south. We find that in two western ridings of the north district there was a total of 11,000 votes in November, as against 9,000 in the two ridings in the south district. So, there was no unfairness to the southern part of the country in that.
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. I pointed out, when discussing this matter before, that the constituency of Alberta did not go as far east as the fourth meridian.
Mr. SCOTT. There were two constituencies in the western part of the north district and two in the western part of the south district. And the division of 11,000 votes to the north and 9,000 to the south was certainly not unfair to the south. I think that it must be admitted that that redistribution as adjusted to the circumstances then known, was a fair and equitable distribution. Now, as between the three north districts in the proposed province of Saskatchewan and the three south districts in the same, there was a great disparity of votes on the 3rd of November last. Nobody expected anything else. Those who prepared this redistribution expected that there would be a larger vote in the three ridings of the south than in the three ridings of the north ; and that expectation was realized. It was also expected that the population in the northern part would thenceforth increase very much more rapidly than that in the southern part. And if that expectation was reasonable two years ago, it is more reasonable now, because two lines of railway are now being constructed across the northern 8729 JULY 4, 1905 part of the country; and everybody who knows anything about that country and the effect upon a new country of railway construction knows that in the near future there will be an enormous increase in the population of the northern part. I venture to say that at this moment there is very much less disparity between the populations of the three northern federal constituencies and the three southern federal constituencies than there was last November. And it may be that before this parliament dissolves the lines will have to be recast, because of there being a majority of people in the north. Now, it is perfectly proper for this committee to consider how this local distribution fits in with the federal redistribution of two years ago. And, if we keep in mind this line between the north and south that I have given, it will be found that twenty-six seats are given by this Bill to the south five ridings as against twenty- two to the north five ridings, the other two going to the far north country which, up to this moment has been unorganized territory. I may not be able to make that as an absolute statement. If we split hairs we may find a slightly different result. I will take the calculation made the other evening by my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) who stated that the three south ridings in Saskatchewan are given thirteen and one-half seats as against eleven and one-half to the three north ridings. It seems to me that if the federal division of three to three was a fair division two years ago, and is a fair division now, and likely to be fair up to the end of this parliament, it cannot be contended that there is unfairness to the south in the present proposed distribution of 11 1/2 to 13 1/2. And as a matter of fact the map has been amended taking one seat from the north and giving it to the south. We have then, according to my hon. friend's calculation, 14 1/2 seats given to the three federal ridings south of the dividing line as against 10 1/2 for the three north of that line. I might call to the attention of the committee the fact that a portion of one of the south ridings is taken away and put into the province of Alberta, the Medicine Hat constituency. Thus really the proper calculation would show 15 1/2 to the south three ridings as against 10 1/2 to the north three. So really without splitting hairs it may be stated that the south country, the old Assiniboia district, is getting 16 seats while only 9 are given to the north or Saskatchewan district. I ask any fair-minded person where he can find unfairness in this new redistribution. In 1903 certain areas were treated equally, and in this redistribution any difference that is being made is largely to the advantage of the south country. It seems to me it is impossible for any person to find any outrage in this. I do not think the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Bor 8729 8730 den) will be able to find, in this Saskatchewan plan at all events, those evidences of gerrymander which seemed to bother him so much in the case of Alberta. It seems to me it will be difficult for any one to find in this Saskatchewan redistribution traces of that Italian hand, of the work of that Italian gentleman of whom we have heard so often, Monseigneur Sbarretti. I say that no cry has ever been uttered in this country with less justification than the cries in regard to these plans of redistribution. I had a brief dispute with the leader of the opposition one evening with regard to the question whether or not any parliamentary body had ever considered the question of area together with the matter of population in making a redistribution. I asked my hon. friend how he explained the disparity that was permitted by this parliament when Manitoba was first given representation, in the year 1870. Manitoba was at that time given four members, when the population of the province did not entitle it to one member. A few years later the Northwest Territories were given representation in this parliament and although their population would not have entitled them to one member, parliament made provision for four members, and in like manner when British Columbia was brought in provision was made for six members when the population would not have entitled that province to one third of that number. My hon. friend took very strong grounds ; he declared absolutely that area was never made a basis of representation in a redistribution and he challenged me to produce the contrary evidence. I have gone to 'Hansard' of the year 1886, and at page 1205, I find that in the case of the Northwest Territories when the late Sir John A. Macdonald brought in a Bill to grant representation to the Territories he uttered these words:
The population would scarcely allow of so many members, but, although the settlers are so few in number the country is large—
I think my hon. friend's predecessor was considering the question of area.
—the country is large and has many different interests requiring many legislative measures, and following the example set by giving representation to the province of Manitoba, many years ago——
Evidently the same rule was applied in Manitoba, area was considered.
—when it had a very slight population, we propose to give the Territories four members——
Now I wish to repeat that, in my opinion at all events, all this talk of gerrymander that has been going on for the last three or four months, since these plans were brought down, is pure and arrant nonsense. If any political advantage was to be found in these schedules does my hon. friend think the Liberal journal in Calgary would be complaining or that the Liberal candidate 8731 COMMONS in Calgary at the last election, Dr. Stewart, would be complaining, or that that very pronounced Conservative journal, the Edmonton 'Journal' would be strongly maintaining these schedules ? Would we see these things if any political disadvantage was to be found in the schedules against the interests of my hon. friends opposite ?
My hon. friend from Calgary (Mr. M. S. McCarthy) took the responsibility one evening of saying that there was a gerrymander involved in the dividing line selected, the 4th meridian, but it remains for him or any other person to show how the political interests of the Liberals or Conservatives are affected in any way by the selection of that line or could be affected by any other line.
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. The fact is, as my hon. friend knows, that two Liberals were elected in the northern part and two Conservatives were elected in the southern part. I made the statement that the line had been moved too far west, further west than the point they adopted when dividing the country two years ago into federal seats. That was done for the purpose of throwing population to the north.
Mr. SCOTT. My hon. friend thinks the line should be placed further east?
Mr. M. S. MCCARTHY. Yes.
Mr. SCOTT. That would not help his friend in Southern Alberta. The further east the line is put the more Liberals you have. If Alberta had been placed further east in the redistribution two years ago my hon. friend (Mr. Herron) would not be here. I make this proposition to the hon. member for Calgary : He can take the map and divide the country in any way he chooses, he may apply a mathematical rule with regard to area or with regard to population and see what he gets. Or let my hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) set the best expert on gerrymander that he has to work on these maps, and I venture to say he cannot produce a map in any manner or shape which will not show a Liberal majority in both provinces. What is the use of charging gerrymander simply because possibly these plans when worked out on last fall's vote show a Liberal majority in these provinces, if my hon. friend cannot produce any map which will not do so ? It is not only the northern part that is Liberal, even by last fall's vote. It is true the north gave a Liberal majority of 7,000, but the south also gave a Liberal majority, and the best possible proof that there is no injustice is that in the five south ridings there was a Liberal majority of fully 1,000, but nevertheless our friends opposite have three members to our two. If the lines had not been put just where they were some of our hon. friends opposite would not have been here. If you change Qu'Appelle in 8731 8732 almost any conceivable way, take off or add on a range on the east, or take off or add on a range on the west, or take off or add on a line of townships on the north to the district of Qu'Appelle and my hon. friend would not be here. It is the same with regard to the member for Alberta, as I have stated. If he had the whole southern part of Alberta, the province as produced down to the 4th meridian, he would not be here at all. I got a considerably larger majority in the Medicine Hat country in the province of Alberta than the total majority upon which the hon. member sits in this House. I am going to say that, so far as I am concerned, I do not propose to attempt to justify this distribution by the plethora of figures which were produced in the case of the Alberta Bill. I shall not attempt to justify the Saskatchewan schedule on such a basis, in fact I was discouraged at the commencement from going into figures by the action of the hon. member for North Toronto. The Minister of the Interior produced figures with regard to post offices, school districts, local improvement districts and all manner of things, but the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) at once said that these were all nonsense and had no bearing on the question. so I shall not attempt to inflict the same figures on the House.
Mr. M. S. McCARTHY. You had better not.
Mr. SCOTT. I will say this, that there never was a redistribution plan presented in this parliament, or in any provincial parliament in this country, that could be so absolutely justified as that Alberta redistribution was justified by the Minister of the Interior. However, there was a very material difference in the cases of Alberta and Saskatchewan. In the case of Alberta ten seats had to be added to fifteen, and it was necessary to very largely recast the lines of the old districts as they had existed for the purposes of representation in the legislature. In the case of Saskatchewan, on the other hand. we were only compelled to add five to twenty seats, making it a very materially different proposition. Following the general plan which was agreed upon at the outset, of giving incorporated cities a seat, we found it possible, by allowing three of the five to go to the north and two to the south and by putting the two in the south in the two cities of Regina and Moosejaw, to leave the lines as arranged by the legislature three years ago absolutely untouched. There is not a single point of material change in the whole district of Assiniboia. I would say to my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle that if we take his word for it, and he has given us his word, that the distribution made by the legislative assembly was as near perfection as it was possible to make it, we will have to come to the conclusion that the greater part of this 8733 JULY 4, 1905 plan—because the greater part applies to Assiniboia—is perfection too. I would ask the committee, fairly looking at the subject, looking at the maps and at the facts before it if it is not fair to give the north country three of these five additional seats and the south country two of these seats ? The fact is admitted by the committee that we cannot afford to go on the census of 1901, that the changes since that time have been too great, and I say it is not fair to go exactly upon the vote of last fall, because there were in some parts of the country large blocks of men who, although already in the country, had not been there long enough to enable them to be naturalized, and were therefore not permitted to vote. We must go to some extent upon estimate, and the best estimate that can be made in regard to that part of the country will be somewhat speculative. I would not take the responsibility of saying that the government plan will work out absolutely fairly. If we may be permitted in two, or three, or four years hence to get the actual population within these lines, it may be found in some surprising ways that the plan the government asks the House to adopt at the present moment is not an absolutely fair plan. I would not say that if we had given Saskatchewan four of these additional members, as was proposed in the first government plan, that would be found in the end to work out unfairly, or if we turned the proposition around and gave the three additions to the south and only two to the north, it might be that in two or three years hence that would be found to be a perfectly fair distribution. It must be remembered that we are providing for the next four years. It must be expected that the first legislature of the province of Saskatchewan will live out its life of four years, and keeping in mind the trend of immigration as we have had it in the past, as we have it at the present time, and as we may expect to have it, and remembering the new railway construction in the northern part of the country, I may say, as a southern man, as a man who lives in and represents a southern constituency, that I am prepared to agree to the giving of nine of the seats under this redistribution to the north as against sixteen to the south. The point of difference between hon. members opposite and hon. members on this side of the House has come down to whether three of the additional seats should go to the north country or whether only two of them should go to the north country, and it may not be uninteresting for the committee to look at the history of the Northwest Territories in so far as representation is concerned. Some of these figures that I am going to give to the committee I would call the particular attention of the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. Borden) to. He may finally come to the conclusion that there has been in past years in this country worse things 8733 8734 done than ever were done in the United States in regard to gerrymanders. The first plan for representation in the Northwest Territories was based purely and entirely upon population. That was for the election of members to the old Northwest Council prior to the creation of the legislature. It was provided in the original Northwest Territories Act that as soon as any area of 1,000 square miles had 1,000 population it should be made a constituency and elect a member. Under that plan I find upon looking at the records that in the year 1885 Assiniboia had eight members in the Northwest Council, Alberta had four and Saskatchewan had only one. In 1887 I find that Assiniboia had eight members, Alberta five and Saskatchewan one. The population of Saskatchewan only entitled it to one member in the Northwest Council. In 1888 this parliament created the first legislative assembly in the Northwest Territories. A Conservative government was in power then, and, strange to say, they made a redistribution for that legislature. They did not refer the matter to the courts. That redistribution was made on this floor. Twenty-two elected members were provided for the legislature, and of these eleven were given to Assiniboia, six to Alberta and no less than five to Saskatchewan. What was the population ? The previous census showed that Assiniboia had 16,408, Alberta 4,871 and Saskatchewan 1,792, exclusive of Indians. Those 1,792 people were given five members as against only six members for the 4,871 people in Alberta and the eleven members for the 16,408 in Assiniboia. Surely a terrible outrage was committed there. But nobody seemed to think it. Nobody said anything about it. Saskatchewan, in 1888, was given five members in a house of twenty-two members on a census population of 1,792, or an average unit of 358 souls for each seat ; Alberta was given six members on a population of 4,871, an average of 812 per seat, or more than 100 per cent difference ; while Assiniboia, with eleven members, had a population of 16, 408, with a unit of roundly 1,500 as against a little more than 300 for Saskatchewan. On previous days we have been asked to point to a parallel case of this parliament providing a redistribution for a new provincial legislature. Here is a parallel case. This parliament did exactly what we are doing now in 1888 when creating the first legislature.
Mr. LAKE. In what year was the census taken ?
Mr. SCOTT. Probably in the year 1885. I may say that I have gleaned these figures from discussions out of 'Hansard.' That was a real and terrible outrage, and doubtless the first thing the assembly did when they got an opportunity was to remedy this outrage. Five members given to that popu 8735 lation ! Of course, they represented a very large portion of the country, and possibly area was considered, a very heinous offence in the opinion of the hon. leader of the opposition. Surely the Conservative government must have considered the area in granting five members to 1,700 people. Well, now, the legislature was convened, but there was not a word said in the legislature, as far as I can find, about that awful outrage ; but, on the contrary, three years afterwards, although the population of Saskatchewan had not increased probably any faster than the population of other parts of the country, the first legislature in their first redistribution increased the representation of Saskatchewan to six members. Possibly in the year 1891 they had very recent census figures to guide them. I find that by the census taken in 1891 Saskatchewan had a population of 11,150, Alberta 25,277 and Assiniboia 30,372. Saskatchewan was given six members by the legislature, not by this parliament, with an average of 1,858 souls per seat, while Assiniboia was given eleven seats on a population of 30,372, or an average of 2,531, while Alberta was held down to 8 seats with a population of 25,277, or an average of 3,159, or pretty nearly 100 per cent there again, done by the legislature itself. I find that sixteen years ago this parliament gave Saskatchewan a representation of 5 seats out of 22, with a unit of only 358 population as against Assiniboia's unit of no less than 1,500. And 13 years ago the legislature itself gave Saskatchewan a representation of 6 out of a total of 26 seats with a unit of only 1,858 as against Alberta's unit of 3,159. Now we are giving the same district of Saskatchewan out of practically 50 —because keeping in mind the province of Alberta we are dealing with the whole Territory—we are giving the Saskatchewan area 9 seats out of a total of 50. I find upon making a calculation—like my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) I would not be willing to swear to the last figure of this calculation, but roughly speaking it is correct—we are giving the Saskatchewan area 9 seats with a unit of roundly 2,850 population as against a unit of 3,250 for the balance of the Territory, if we take the last census, or a unit of 830 votes cast as against a unit of 930 votes cast in the balance of the Territories, if we take the vote last fall. If there was no outrage perpetrated by this parliament in 1888 and no outrage perpetrated by the legislature 3 years later, it seems to me it will be difficult to work up an outrage out of what is being proposed in this Bill. My hon. friend (Mr. Lake) has referred to some of the alternative propositions which were made at this recent conference between himself and his leader and some members on this side of the House. He complained very grievously in his criticism the other evening against the disparities not only between the north and the south, but against the disparities that existed in 8735 8736 the part of the new province which is composed by the old district of Assiniboia ; or at all events some of his complaints were based upon discrepancies which we find do exist even in that perfect distribution which was made by the assembly three years ago. He complained that Moosejaw had a very large area and a disproportionately large population. That is being remedied by this Bill. A seat is taken from the north and is given to the city of Moosejaw, leaving the district of Moosejaw in a fairly average position so far as population and votes cast is concerned. He complained also that certain of the other districts, Souris, Cannington and South Qu'Appelle, had disproportionate votes compared with some other districts, and what he said in that regard was perfectly true. But I think my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) himself will be the first to admit that there was no disadvantage to the Conservative party in any of these disparities to which he drew pointed attention. Take the district of Souris and the district of Cannington, which have a large population, these are the parts of the country in which my hon. friend from East Assiniboia (Mr. Turriff) got his majority last fall, and even the fact that Moosejaw had a disproportionate vote and a disproportionate population did not involve any disadvantage to the Conservative party, because Moosejaw is a part of the country which never gave anything else but a Liberal majority since it has existed. However, when the conference met, recognizing very clearly that there were unfair disparities in the old district of Assiniboia under the assembly's plan, and some of these disparities being such that the people of the local communities have sent down grievous complaints, I took it upon myself to suggest that even if we gave 9 seats to the north and held the south down to 16 seats, that did not compel us to have these disparities remain if we could arrive at an agreement as to the remedy. I suggested to my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) that there was a part of the country on the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway to the eastern part of the province where the assembly's redistribution left the area very small, where also the vote last fall was comparatively small, and where the most reliable information that we can get goes to show that the population increase is almost infinitesimal in comparison with the increase in other parts of the country. I suggested that there were four districts. Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley, which might very fairly be put into three districts and that would enable us to provide a new district in the Soo line country with regard to which my hon. friend has made complaint. I may say that I have taken the liberty of drawing a map showing these changes. The officials of the department so far have been too busy to draw up the schedule to describe this map, but I think I can give in a very few moments a brief statement of the changes I propose 8737 JULY 4, 1905 from the government map. Maple Creek is an enormous district in area, and I think it would be fair to cut it down a little, and so I propose to take off three ranges from the easterly edge and throw these three ranges into the district of Moosejaw. I think the district of Moosejaw can very well stand the addition of these three ranges. I change the northern boundaries of the districts of Maple Creek and Moosejaw from the north line of township 27 to the north line of township 26, thus taking an additional line of townships off Maple Creek and off Moosejaw and adding that line of townships to the northern districts, Battleford, Saskatoon and Batoche. Coming to the other part of the map I propose to add a range line to the district of Moosomin on the west side, taking it off the district of Whitewood. Coming over to the district of Wolseley I propose to take a range line off Grenfell and add it on to Wolseley, and then throw the districts of Whitewood and Grenfell into one. Thus I propose to make four districts into three. I propose to remedy the grievance with regard to Souris and Cannington by cutting off four ranges from the west of these districts. Then I propose to draw a line through the district of South Qu'Appelle on the north line of township 10. These portions taken off the districts of Cannington, Souris and the south part of Qu'Appelle will form a new Soo line district, according to the suggestion of my hon. friend (Mr. Lake).
Mr. LAKE. How far west does that district go?
Mr. SCOTT. I propose also to take two ranges off the district of South Regina. By this map South Regina would lose two ranges on the east side up as far as the north line of township 10. I have already said that we should not go on the population of last census as a basis, and I do not think it would be fair to go entirely on the vote last fall. I think the committee will agree with me that possibly the fairest basis that can be obtained is to take the census population together with the homestead entries that have been made in the various parts of the country since the census was taken four years ago; calculate that each entry is worth so many people, say three if you like; multiply each homestead entry by three, and by that means we will, arrive fairly at what is the present population of these various parts of the country. Does my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle suggest that that is not a fair method?
Mr. LAKE. Certainly it is not a fair basis, to consider that a homestead entry in a new district will bring as many people into the country proportionately as a homestead entry in an old district. It is not a fair basis for showing the increase of the population.
Mr. SCOTT. I think the committee will agree with me that it is an approximately 8737 8738 fair basis. We cannot arrive at the absolute facts with regard to the present population of that country. If we find a number of homestead entries in a particular area, and calculate that each entry will account for a certain number of people, and apply the same rule in all parts of the country we shall not be very far out. I find that in these four districts of Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley, which my hon. friend thinks is so unfair to suggest should be thrown into three, there was a census population in 1901 as follows : Moosomin, 5,163 ; Whitewood, 3,733 ; Grenfell, 3,956 ; Wolseley, 4,059 ; making a total of 16,911. There have been homestead entries in these four districts since the census was taken as follows : In Moosomin, 631 ; in Whitewood, 690 ; in Grenfell, 1,038 ; in Wolseley, 1,131 ; a total of 3,490. Now, I propose to multiply these homestead entries by three, and I get this result—that the homestead entries mean an addition to the population in these four districts since the census was taken of 10,470. Add that to the census population, we get 27,421 as an estimated present population in these four districts. I may say that these four districts cast an aggregate vote last fall of 5,071. If we make them into three districts, we shall have a population unit of 9,140, and an average vote cast last fall in each of the three districts of 1,690. Now, my hon. friend objected very strongly to my proposition to make four districts out of Souris, Cannington and Qu'Appelle. I am going to present the same calculation in regard to them. The census population of these three districts in 1901 was as follows : Souris, 5,704; Cannington, 3,485; Qu'Appelle, 5,530 ; a total of 14,719. There have been homestead entries made in these districts as follows : In Souris, 2,998 ; in Cannington, 2,354 ; in Qu'Appelle, 2,865 ; a total of 8,217, as against a total of 3,490 in my hon. friend's four districts. Multiply this total of homestead entries by three, and we get an estimated increase of population in these three districts of 24,651. Add that to the total census population of 14,719, and we get a present estimated population for these three districts of 39,370 as against 27,421 in my hon. friend's four districts which I propose to make into three. Now, if I make these three districts into four, there will be a population unit for each of the four districts of 9,842 as against a population unit of 9,140 for each of the three districts which I make out of the four districts of my hon. friend ; and I find that last fall we had an average vote in each of the four districts which I make out of these three districts of 1,889 as against an average vote in each of the three districts which I make out of my hon. friend's four districts of 1,690. Does my hon. friend tell me that that is not fair ? Does he tell me that the suggestion he has made is a more equitable one ? His districts are less in area, less in votes cast, less in 8739 COMMONS registered votes, less in homestead entries, less in every respect, than the three districts out of which I propose to get an additional district for the purpose of the new population on the Soo line. My iron. friend says these four districts are old settlements. So they are; but what does he propose to do ? He proposes to get a district for that Soo line country from just as old a settlement as the district he is speaking about. He proposes to take the district of Lumsden, which polled a vote last fall considerably larger than the votes polled in some of these four districts which he has taken under his care, and which has so large an area that you could put almost the whole of those four districts into it, and which had about four times the number of homestead entries since the census was taken of any single one of those four districts of his, and he proposes to take twenty-one townships just south of Regina, the most thickly settled in the Northwest Territories, and add them to the district of Lumsden ; and he calls that fair. He calls that leaving undisturbed the old settled areas. I have occupied the attention of the committee a great deal longer than I should have done or than I had any intention of doing. As we sometimes do the work in committee by conversation more than by set speech, some of the other information which I have may more properly be presented in that way.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. The curious part of the schedule proposed for the new province of Saskatchewan is that every one of the arguments made by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House, and especially by the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Interior, in the case of Alberta, is absolutely destructive of 'the schedule now proposed. In Alberta reliance was placed by this side of the House upon the federal distribution of 1903. A resolution based upon it was voted down. The hon. gentleman who has just spoken relies upon it in Saskatchewan. Reliance was placed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Interior on the principle that electors in rural constituencies should have a greater voice in the legislature than those in urban constituencies. That principle has been shown by my hon. friend from Qu' Appelle to have been entirely cast aside in the proposed distribution. Reliance was then placed on the voters' lists, coupled with information derived from the number of schools, the number of post offices, and the number of homestead entries. If you take the voters' lists, the schools, the post offices and the homestead entries, you will find that this proposed distributiop cannot be sustained as an equitable divisron for one moment.
Take the census of 1901, which was relied upon to some extent in Alberta, and apply it to this, and you have most extraordinary results. In other words. if you take all the 8739 8740 information and data, which were used for the purpose of supporting the Alberta division and apply it to Saskatchewan, you have the best possible argument to show that the latter is absolutely unfair, unjust and improper. My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) has gone over the whole subject so thoroughly that not very much needs to be said in addition. Let us just take two illustrations—the district of, Humboldt and the district of Souris. You will find that by the census of 1901 there were 582 souls in Humboldt and 5,704 in Souris, or nearly ten times the population in the one that is contained in the other. Each one of these is given a member. If you eliminate the Indians, you find the comparison still worse. Humboldt had in 1901 a population of 271 souls and Souris a population of 5,704. Each one of these districts is now entitled to a representative. Take the votes recorded—178 in Humboldt, 2,554 in Souris; votes registered, 298 in Humboldt, 3,348 in Souris. Between these two extremes you have every possibly variety of constituency that can be imagined, both as regards area and population. Another principle which has been absolutely cast to the winds is the supposed principle, relied upon in the case of Alberta, that the area was to be taken. into consideration—that a constituency with a very large area might be entitled to a representative although it had a comparatively small population. Well. observe numbers 16 and 17. Number 16, Maple Creek, with votes polled to the number of 8-16 and registered to the number of 1,198, and an area of 20,699 square miles, is given one member. Humboldt, with 178 votes polled, 298 registered, and an area of 7,057 square miles, or about one— third the area of the other, is given one member.
Mr. ADAMSON. Are you aware of the present population of Humboldt ?
Mr. R. L. BORDEN: I am not aware of it nor has any one been able to state it.
Mr. ADAMSON. I can state that the present population of Humboldt is between 8,000 and 10,000.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. We are bound to give the hon. gentleman's statement all the consideration it deserves; but when we are told that a population of perhaps 1,500 has increased in less than a year to 8,000 or 10,000, that affords the best possible reason for having the delimitation determined by a tribunal which could investigate the accuracy of such statements. We do not want to delimit these constituencies according to what one or another may tell us some unnamed person has told him. We heard from the Minister of the Interior that some unnamed person had told him there were 5,000 persons, exclusive of Indians, in that portion of Athabaska to be included in the new province of Alberta. We have no evidence beyond 8741 JULY 4, 1905 that statement. I am willing to give my hon. friend's statement every consideration, but I have yet to learn that he is absolutely infallible in these matters, which are matters of opinion and not of personal knowledge.
Mr. ADAMSON. I have been frequently through that district on business. The homestead entries will show there must have been a large influx of settlers. There are now four towns there.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Very good, let us take the homestead entries, and we find a very great discrepancy in the representation given to the 16 and the 9 constituencies. There are 31,000 homestead entries in the 16 constituencies in the south as compared with 17,424 in the 9 constituencies in the north, yet not very much regard seems to have been attached to that consideration in the making out of this schedule. Although we have a population nearly three times greater, according, to the census of 1901, in the south we have 16 members allotted to one portion of the province and 9 to the other. Assuming that the population has increased in the same ratio as the homestead entries, we would not find any change such as would justify the distribution the government proposes to make.
Mr. LAMONT. Is not the proportion of 9 members to 17,000 homestead entries just about the same as 16 members to 31,000 homestead entries ?
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Suppose it is, that would seem to indicate that the population in the south has increased as much as in the north.
Mr. LAMONT. Would not that also indicate that 9 members for the 17,000 is the same proportion as for the 31,000 ?
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Not at all. The population of the 9 constituencies, as I have heard my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) give it, was about 26,000 according to the census of 1901, out of a total of 90,000.
Mr. LAMONT. That would be for Saskatchewan, but these 9 take in a considerable portion of Assiniboia as well, which would not be considered as belonging to the Saskatchewan population.
Mr. LAKE. The population was exclusive of Indians, 20,769 in Saskatchewan, and 61,008 in Assiniboia.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. The difference to which the hon. gentleman has just referred would not very much affect the result of the calculation. You have a population of 20,000 against a population of 61,000. You have homestead entries in the north to the number of 17,424 and in the south to the number of 31,611. The inevitable result is that if you base a distribution upon the population, according to the census of 1901, 8741 8742 and according to the subsequent homestead entries, you could not possibly arrive at any such result as that which the government is attempting to embody in the proposed schedule. Let us take their number of post offices, on which great reliance was placed in the case of Alberta. There are 100 in Saskatchewan and 285 in Assiniboia. Then take the schools, upon which the Minister of the Interior placed perhaps the strongest reliance and so did the First Minister, when dealing with Alberta—according to a return brought down to the House from the government of the Territories, there are 200 schools in Saskatchewan and 575 in Assiniboia. Base it on any information you like, you cannot work out any such result as that which the government desires to enforce in making its distribution. I have looked over, with some interest, the proposal which my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) has submitted to the committee as a basis of what may be accomplished if you propose to distribute the seats in Saskatchewan upon an even basis of population. He has divided the province into 25 constituencies. I observe that the least number of voters which he gives to any constituency is 1,200, and the highest 1,825. The average in 16 constituencies in the southern part of the province is 1,550, and in the 9 constituencies in the northern part of the province, 1,425. There is not, it is true, absolute equality of population. It would be difficult, if not impossible to work that out. But when you consider 1,200 on the voters' list in the lowest division and 1,825 in the highest division, and compare that with what is proposed by the government with respect to Humboldt and Redberry on the one hand and Souris and South Qu'Appelle on the other hand, it seems to me absolutely obvious that it is possible without any difficulty, to make a fairer and more equitable distribution of seats in this province than is proposed by this Bill. I regret that the efforts made to bring about some compromise with regard to this vexed matter have not been successful. I am bound to say that I think that my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle is not in fault in that regard, because while he has strong opinions on this question, I have always found him moderate in his views and willing to accept any reasonable compromise. I do not think that the distribution proposed by the government in Saskatchewan is any better than that in Alberta. I say that for the information of the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). I think that they are very much alike, except that, if possible, there is even a greater discrepancy between Humboldt and Souris in Saskatchewan than any that is to be found in the province of Alberta, if we accept the evidence of the Minister of the Interior as to the northern ridings of the province. It is perfectly obvious that no principle was selected in the first place upon which these 8743 8744 provinces should be divided into constituencies. There was a delimitation made of Alberta, and then principles were sought upon which to base that distribution. There was a delimitation of Saskatchewan and entirely different principles are invoked to support it. It seems obvious that in each case the redistribution was made first and the principles to justify it sought afterwards.
Mr. LAMONT. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) has submitted to this House a mass of statistics which, perhaps, have satisfied his mind that he has a grievance against this redistribution. He has made a number of comparisons in order to show that the schedule submitted by the government works an injustice to the south as against the north. He does not complain that the government has made a gerrymander in the ordinary sense of the word—that is, that it has hived the Conservatives in the north in order to enable the surrounding districts to return Liberals. His whole complaint is against the representation given to the north as against that given to the south. And he has, as has already been stated, submitted a schedule of his own under which two seats which are given to the north according to the government schedule are taken away from the north and given to the south.
Now, let us see where we stand in this matter and what are the conditions fronting us as a committee in distributing the districts of the province of Saskatchewan. We find that the Northwest Territories are divided into two provinces, the dividing line being the 4th meridian. In the province of Saskatchewan, there were, according to the territorial redistribution, twenty seats out of thirty-five in the territorial legislature. And we also find that, according to this Bill, we are to give twenty-five seats to the new province of Saskatchewan. So, the task before us is to divide the province of Saskatchewan in such a way that it will have twenty-five seats distributed as fairly as possible. My hon. friend (Mr. Lake) has made his comparisons as between the north and the south, and he has taken as his dividing line the line between the old districts of Saskatchewan and Alberta. Now, I propose to make several comparisons between the north and the south, but I do not propose to follow the line heretofore followed and take the district of Saskatchewan as the north and the district of Assiniboia as the south. It seems to me that that is a most unfair way to divide the two districts into north and south. I am going on another basis. I find that in the Haultain redistribution of 1902 there were twenty seats in the new province of Saskatchewan. My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) and the hon. member from Calgary (Mr. M. S. McCarthy) have 8743 COMMONS stated to this committee that the Haultain redistribution of 1902 was absolutely fair and just. Well, I am prepared to take it as a basis. I will take the ten southern seats according to that redistribution and the ten northern seats, and then I will endeavour to ascertain into which of these districts—the ten northern seats or the ten southern seats— we ought to put a majority of the new seats which are to be given to the province of Saskatchewan. We have five new seats to be added to the twenty under the Haultain redistribution, and the question, to my mind, is where should these seats be put in order to make a fair distribution. Now, if the ten northern seats show a vastly greater increase in population than do the ten southern seats, it is reasonable that the majority of the five should go to the north. If the ten southern seats show the greater increase of population, the bulk of the five seats should go to the south. The ten southern seats are as follows : Souris, Cannington, Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell, Wolseley, South Qu'Appelle, South Regina, Moosejaw, and Maple Creek, I call these the ten southern seats for the following reason : They are the ten seats which touch the southern boundary line of the new province or are the nearest to it according to the Haultain distribution. They correspond practically to the three southern seats of the federal redistribution of two years ago. Maple Creek, Moosejaw and South Regina are in the district represented by my hon. friend from Western Assiniboia (Mr. Scott). The other districts correspond very closely to the district represented by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) and the hon. member for East Assiniboia (Mr. Turriff). The ten northern seats correspond very closely to the northern seats as laid down by the federal redistribution. Whatever difference there may be is in favour of the south. I find the actual difference to be that there are 124 townships which should belong to the north that are included in the south in the eastern part of the territory, and 264 townships that should belong to the south are included in the north in the western part of the territory. So that there are 140 townships, according to that calculation in favour of the south. Now then the question is, do these ten southern districts show a larger increase of population since the Haultain redistribution than the ten northern seats. I have based my calculation upon the census population of 1901 and upon the homestead entries since, for notwithstanding what my hon. friend for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) may say, it does seem to me that the homestead entries form one of the soundest bases on which to calculate population. Have there been more homestead entries since 1901 in the ten northern than in the 10 southern districts ? I find the following :
8745 JULY 4, 1905 8746
Ten northern seats. Ten southern seats.
(Not including Arthabaska.)
Sq. miles. Sq. miles.
Area.. .. .. .. .. .. 91,330 57,460
Census population in 1901 . . 50,818 38,369
Homestead entries since 1901 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 30,576 18,449
Of homestead entries since 1901 we have, roughly speaking, 30,000 in the north and 18,000 in the south. If that is a fair basis —and I submit it is a fair basis—then the fairest division of the five new seats we can make is to give to those ten northern seats, in which there is an increase of 30,000 homestead entries, three seats, and to the southern group, in which there is an increase of 18,000 homestead entries, two seats. This is still giving an advantage to the south. There cannot be any dispute as to these figures, because they are official, and there is a reason why the increased population should appear in the north. Those who are familiar with the country unhesitatingly say that the increase of population during the last three or four years has been largely in the north, and the reason, as was pointed out by the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott), is that in the north two lines of railway have practically been built —the main line of the Canadian Northern running right across the province, and the northern branch of the Canadian Northern from Erwood, which is now built up to within a few miles of Prince Albert. Then, too, the Grand Trunk Pacific line has been surveyed there, and every one knows that a great number of settlers have gone in along that survey and taken up homesteads. As a matter of fact, we know that the northern country has progressed much more rapidly than the south. We know that from the homestead entries, which demonstrate beyond question the fact that the settlement in the north is proceeding much more rapidly than in the south. Therefore, taking the homestead entries as a basis, 30,000 as against 18,000, it seems to me that no fairer distribution of the additional representation could be made than to give three to the north and two to the south. I have estimated the population upon these figures, and have taken the same basis as the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) ; for each homestead entry I have allowed three persons, and I have added to that the census population of 1901. I find, according to that calculation, in the ten southern districts the present estimated population is 92,254, while in the ten northern districts the estimated population is 141,646. These figures not only justify the distribution of three new seats in the north as against two in the south, but taking into cousideration its prospective increase of population, it certainly would justify four in the north and one in the south, as in the government's first schedule.
I shall compare a few of the figures that 8745 8745 have been given for the northern and the southern seats. I might point out that my hon. friend for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) proposes to allow four of the new seats to the south, while to the ten northern seats he is only allowing one new seat. Comparing the figures for the two groups of districts, I find that he has retained unaltered according to his map, a certain number of seats in the south. I shall take the districts of Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley. He has pointed out that these are old districts, and he has objected very strongly to any lessening of their representation. These four seats have a census population of 16,051. Since 1901 there have been 3,480 homestead entries made in these four constituencies. Allowing to each of these homestead entries three persons, those four constituencies have at the present moment a population of 26,491, or an average for each seat of 6,622. Compare these with the four districts in the north which my hon. friend says are so much over-represented. Take Saskatoon, Battleford, Kinistino and Batoche according to Mr. Haultain's redistribution. These four districts have a census population of 14,123, but since 1901 there have been 15,386 homestead entries made within their limits. Comparing these with the four seats in the south, which have a census population of 16,051 as against a population of 14,123 for these four districts in the north, and we find that the four southern seats have only added to their population, in so far as homestead entries would indicate, the population represented by 3,480 entries, while in these four northern divisions in the same time there have been added the population represented by 15,386 homestead entries. Following the same principle of allowing three persons to each homestead entry, we have a present population in this northern district of 61,281 as against 26,491 in the south, or, while in these four districts in the south 6,222 people can elect a member, it requires 15,320 people in the north, and yet my hon. friend says that the north is being over-represented.
Now, I need not follow out these figures. My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle has submitted a map, and in so far as he lays out the same divisions as are laid out in the government schedule I think we may take it for granted that the government schedule is perfectly correct. I find that the hon. gentleman has made some criticism in regard to Redberry, but according to his own schedule he makes a district of Redberry. which corresponds fairly with the government one ; Battleford is practically the same ; Rosthern is made a little smaller ; Saskatoon is made smaller ; Prince Albert city is cut out altogether and Humboldt is cut out altogether and added to Batoche. I want to call the attention of the committee to the facts in regard to Humboldt. The hon. gentleman says that Humboldt should not have separate repre 8747 COMMONS sentation because it only cast 178 votes at the last election. Any one who knows anything about that district, knows that two years ago a German settlement went into Humboldt from the United States numbering 4,500 people, and, as has been pointed out by my hon. friend from Humboldt (Mr. Adamson), there is to-day in that district a population of from 8,000 to 10,000 people.
Mr. LAKE. How does the hon. gentleman get at that calculation? Is he just accepting the statement of the hon. member for Humboldt?
Mr. LAMONT. Just wait a moment and I will show you how I arrive at that. The census population of Humboldt in 1901 was 582. But since that time there have been made 2,274 homestead entries. Following the same principle of allowing three persons for each homestead entry that gives as far as homestead entries are concerned a population of 6,822, and including the population of 582 as set out in the census of 1901, a total population of 7,304 without counting any of the town population, and everybody who has gone over the main line of the Canada Northern Railway knows that there are very considerable towns growing up along that line. Therefore, I think that my hon. friend from Humboldt is well within the mark when he says that there is a population in the district of Humboldt of between 8,000 and 10,000 people. My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle thinks that population is not entitled to one representative and that Humboldt should be added to Batoche. Now, I have here the figures which my hon. friend has read showing the homestead entries for the different districts, and I find that in Batoche in 1901 there was a census population of 1,970 and in Humboldt a census population of 582. In addition, in Batoche, according to this list, there have been since 1901 2,594 homesteads entered and in Humboldt 2,274, making a total of 4,868. Following the same principle of allowing three persons to each homestead, we have a present population in the district to which my hon. friend would only allow one member of over 16,000 people.
Mr. LAKE. I had better say right here to my hon. friend from Saskatchewan that I think he certainly is not correctly describing the boundaries of any of the districts which he has referred to as my distribution.
Mr. LAMONT. In order that I shall not misrepresent my hon. friend I will put his map on the table so that it may be seen by any one who wishes to refer to it. I think, Mr. Chairman, I ought to call the attention of the committee to this map and to show the committee the beautiful redistribution of my hon. friend. Whether or not he felt that the member for the Cannington district would have some difficulty in getting to Regina I cannot say, but he has built a beautiful series of steps that look as if they were calculated to assist him very ma 8747 8748 terially in getting there. It seems to me that the only difference between my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle and hon. members on this side of the House is that he refuses to consider that these citizens who are from the United States or from Europe and who had not been in the country for three years before last fall so as to be able to get their names on the voters' list should be entitled to representation. We think they should be entitled to representation. They are there on the ground and developing the resources of the country, and the fact that they are yet American citizens is not in my opinion a sufficient reason, although it may be a sufficient reason in the opinion of my hon. friend, for depriving them of a voice in the affairs of this country.
Mr. LAKE. I have no intention of depriving American citizens of fair representation. They are scattered through the whole length and breadth of the country from north to south.
Mr. LAMONT. My hon. friend cannot deny, as the homestead entries prove beyond a doubt, that the number of new settlers who have gone into the north far exceeds the number who have gone into the south.
Mr. LAKE. I do not think it does.
Mr. LAMONT. Well, I submit that the homestead entries demonstrate that the ten northern districts, according to Mr. Haultain's redistribution which my hon. friend says is fair, shows 30,000 entries as against 18,000 for the southern districts. To my mind that is conclusive. Even though a very large number of these 30,000 people had not been in the country for three years last fall, yet we know that they are improving their farms, they are improving the country, they have come here on our invitation and they require roads and bridges and schools to as great an extent and perhaps greater than the settlers in the older districts of whose interests my hon. friend has been so solicitous. In the older districts the settlers have better roads than in the newer districts. Their interests have been looked after in the past ; their schools are established and their roads and bridges are practically built, and they will not require the same amount of attention on the part of the government that the newer settlers will. It seems to me that this ground of difference is the only one between us. The hon. gentleman has made a calculation of the voters on the lists, but there were thousands and thousands of settlers in that northern country who had not been there three years and were consequently not entitled to have their names on the lists. The hon. gentleman cuts out Humboldt and Prince Albert. As the member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) has said, we have adopted the principle of giving to incorporated cities a member, and if we 8749 JULY 4, 1905 give a member to Calgary, Regina and Moosejaw, I do not see on what principle Prince Albert can be cut out. There are a few facts to which I will call attention in reference to the Prince Albert seat. Until the redistribution of 1902, which my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) says was fair and just, Prince Albert had two seats, East and West Prince Albert, and the Haultain administration in 1902 cut out one of these seats, putting a large portion of it into Prince Albert West forming one seat, and putting the polling divisions down the Saskatchewan river into Kinistino. To my mind and to the mind of the Prince Albert people that was most unjust. It was stated in the district, it was stated in the legislature that it was an unjust gerrymander, and the votes cast at the next election proved that to be the case. The Haultain government took away one seat from Prince Albert and formed a new seat of Saskatoon. Prince Albert at the next election had a vote of 771 while Saskatoon had a vote of only 376. Between Prince Albert and Kinistino was divided the extra territory which up to that time had been in Prince Albert. Up to that time there had been three seats, but by the 1902 redistribution they only were given two. These two seats provided a vote of 1,453 at the next election whereas the three other seats in Saskatchewan in which elections were held gave only 1,065 votes, so that the Haultain administration divided 1,065 votes into three seats, whereas they only divided 1,453 votes into two seats, taking one seat away from Prince Albert. Yet my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) says that was a fair redistribution.
It was stated over and over again on the platform and elsewhere that the reason for cutting off one seat from Prince Albert was because Prince Albert East and Prince Albert West returned two strong opponents of the Haultain government, while Saskatoon was supposed to be friendly, and at the next election Saskatoon returned a government supporter, while in the two seats that had been fused into one in Prince Albert the government nominee lost his deposit. Now, Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to take up the time of the committee further. It seems to me that if we look at this question on fair and broad principles, if we take the 10 southern and the 10 northern seats as laid out by Mr. Haultain—and in which distribution my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) had a part—and if we take the homestead entries in each of these 10 seats since 1901 we are forced to the conclusion that a fair distribution of the extra five seats we have to add to Saskatchewan, would be 3 to the north and 2 to the south. In my opinion if we were to consider the prospective increase, it should be 4 in the north and 1 in the south, but certainly not less than 3 in the north and 2 in the south. I believe that before the next local election, if the term of the legislature runs four years, there will be a vastly 8749 8750 greater population in the north than there is in the south.
Mr. LAKE. My hon. friend (Mr. Lamont) has taken up a great deal of time trying to prove what a terrible gerrymander was made by the Haultain government in 1902, but the opinion of the gentleman (Mr. Scott) who sits beside him was very different at the time the Haultain redistribution was made. The Regina ' Leader ' of the 24th of April, 1902, says :
The other matter is the Redistribution Bill, in regard to which not even the faintest odour of gerrymander could be detected. The prevailing idea in the distribution is the basis of population and area combined, and the principle acted upon is very similar to that in the Dominion Acts for a similar purpose ; these have the population of Quebec as a starting point, and Mr. Haultain takes the population of Saskatchewan.
Mr. HENDERSON. Whose paper said that ?
Mr. LAKE. The paper of the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Scott).
Mr. LAMONT. The hon. member for West Assiniboia was a very strong supporter of Mr. Haultain's then, I would presume from that article.
Mr. BARKER. But he would not say what was not true ?
Mr. LAMONT. Read what the Prince Albert 'Advocate' said about it and you will get the other side.
Mr. HENDERSON. The Regina ' Leader' is a better authority.
Mr. LAKE. I was in the legislature at that time, and I know that there was no criticism to amount to anything of that distribution. It was generally accepted as fair.
Mr. LAMONT. Did not Mr. Mackay state on the floor of the legislature that it was a very bad gerrymander?
Mr. LAKE. Mr. Mackay was the only one who suggested the idea of gerrymander at all, and he did it, not in a very determined manner. He was a member of the opposition at the time and if the rest of the members of the opposition had any idea that there was a gerrymander, the Bill would not have gone through as it did in the course of a few minutes, accepted practically by the whole House without discussion. In the distribution, as the Regina ' Leader ' said, Saskatchewan is taken as a basis and one member was given for every 4,279 of the population according to the census of the previous year. In Assiniboia one member was given for every 4,492 of the population, and in Alberta one member for every 4,700 of the population. It was as even a distribution as it was possible to make. If there had been only the same differences in the present Bill we should not have had much to say against it.
8751
Mr. SCOTT. Will my hon. friend (Mr. Lake) permit me to point out that if he will calculate the result of that redistribution upon the basis of the most recent vote in the Territories at the previous federal election, as we are compelled to some extent to do in this case, he will find a very great disparity. Saskatchewan was given 6 seats, and the old Assiniboia 15 seats, while the vote polled the previous November showed 11,857 for Assiniboia as against 2,529 for Saskatchewan, being an average in Assiniboia of 790 votes for each member as against only 420 in Saskatchewan. This will tend to show to the committee what an insecure basis we are obliged under present circumstances to go upon.
Mr. LAKE. The hon. gentleman is referring to the votes polled ?
Mr. SCOTT. The votes polled in 1900.
Mr. LAKE. That is the basis the Minister of the Interior took for the distribution he has given in both of these Bills.
Mr. SCOTT. Not absolutely.
Mr. LAKE. I quoted the Minister of the Interior's own remarks, which I think were pretty absolute in regard to that matter. That was the first basis of distribution. He said : ' The basis of the division of the constituencies was necessarily the vote cast ; it was the latest and most accurate estimate we could get.' In another place he said : 'The definite division of the constituencies is based on the vote actually polled on the 3rd of November.' The hon. member for Saskatchewan made a very long argument in regard to north and south, as he would make the division. I do not propose to follow him into that question. He makes a very arbitrary division when he brings one of his northern constituencies apparently down to the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway. I think that will be sufficient for any one acquainted with that country to estimate the value of the hon. gentleman's remarks in that respect. Then, in endeavouring to prove from the homestead entries what a very large population had gone into the north, he took an all-round estimate that three would be about the proportlon of individuals who would go with each homestead entry. When he endeavoured to apply this principle to the absolute statement of the hon. member for Humboldt (Mr. Adamson) as to the population in that constituency, he found that it fell short of the estimate made by the hon. member for Humboldt. In order to make up for this deficiency, he immediately said this was outside of the numbers who had gone into the towns which were springing up all along the line. Once he departs from that general basis of three to every homestead entry, his whole argument falls to the ground ; because I contend that he cannot compare an entirely new country, which is being opened 8751 8752 up for the first time, and in which every man who goes into it for business purposes or any other purposes, immediately makes a homestead entry with the older settled portions of the country, such as the Indian Head district, which has been referred to, in which every bit of vacant land has for years been taken up, and into which great numbers of new population have been coming. There people who go in to farm, being unable to find homesteads, buy lands. Then, an immense number of labourers go in to work, and business men to carry on business in the towns ; and these have no opportunity of finding homesteads. So that it is absurd to take for granted generally that for every homestead entry in a particular district, three people have come into that district. Certainly three people would be no fair estimate in the older districts ; probably four would be nearer the mark ; whereas in the newer districts probably every other person who comes in makes a homestead entry. As I said when the hon. member for Saskatchewan was speaking, his verbal description of the distribution which I submitted to the committee was an absolutely incorrect one. I do not think I need go any further. Any one who chooses to look at that map and compare it with his statements as they appear in ' Hansard ' will find [that he has not correctly described the constituencies which he undertook to criticise ; so that I do not think I need follow his remarks in that respect.
Mr. LAMONT. Will my hon. friend state what the inaccuracy in my description was ?
Mr. LAKE. He said I left the district of Redberry as it was.
Mr. LAMONT. I did not say that. I said that the hon. gentleman had made the district of Redberry, and had added to it Battleford.
Mr. LAKE. The hon. gentleman also said that I added Humboldt to Batoche. I did not add the whole of Humboldt to Batoche. The hon. gentleman, perhaps unintentionally, did not give a fair description of those constituencies. My hon. friend from Western Assiniboia proposed to cut up four constituencies in Eastern Assiniboia—Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley—and make three of them, and he compared that proposal with the alternative suggestion I made on the spur of the moment, to the disadvantage of that suggestion. The hon. gentleman's proposal would work out on the basis of numbers on the voters' lists as follows : Moosomin, 2,282 ; Broadview, 2,280 ; Wolseley, 1,850. These are figures which I took from the figures at my disposal. The average of these four constituencies, as I have stated before, is already above the average throughout the whole province of Saskatchewan. I suggest that we should take the three constituencies around Regina, which are considerably below that average, 8753 JULY 4, 1905 and add to the portions of south Qu'Appelle, Souris and Cannington, and thus remove a certain amount of congestion in those three districts.
Mr. SCOTT. The vote polled in Lumsden was just about up to the average, and since the census of 1901 almost as many homestead entries have been made in Lumsden as in the four districts. Yet my hon. friend proposes to add to that district of Lumsden, which is already big enough, both in area and population, a portion of the thickly settled territory in the neighbourhood of Regina—twenty-one townships as thickly settled as any in the Territories, with an area almost as large as Wolseley.
Mr. LAKE. The figures which my alternative suggestion shows would give to Lumsden 2,230 votes. That is less than two of the constituencies which he proposes to create in the eastern part along the main line. It would still leave the city of Regina, with a very small vote under 1,000, and it would make South Regina up to about 2,270. Curiously enough they work out in exactly the same figures, according to the calculation which I made.
Mr. SCOTT. According to my figures I find that Lumsden had 3,096 of a population according to the census of 1901, and cast a vote last fall of 1,122 and there have been homestead entries, since the census of 1901, in that district to the number of 3,254. Does my hon. friend contend that these new homestead entries do not mean population ? Lumsden shows 3,200 entries as against only 3,400 in the whole four districts of Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley, and Lumsden is in the same class as the other districts practically, except in the northern portion. The southern portion, particularly in the neighbourhood of Regina, is entirely the class of old-settled district to which he refers and to which belong Moosomin, Grenfell, Whitewood and Wolseley. The old settlers are to be found there. According to my suggested division, by putting these four districts into three, we will have a record of the vote polled last fall in the new districts of as follows : Moosomin, 1,573 ; Broadview, 1,383 ; Wolseley, 1,366. Compare those with the two districts on the north : Saltcoats, 1,473 ; Yorkton, 1,081. On the other hand, take the districts to the south, Souris will have 2,114, very much larger still than in the other three which I make out of his four ; Cannington, 1,508.
Mr. LAKE. How many will the three Reginas then have ?
Mr. SCOTT. I will give the figures for each of these according to the map I have suggested. I take the votes polled : Souris, 2,114 ; Cannington, 1,508 ; Moosomin, 1,593 ; Broadview, 1,383 ; Wolseley, 1,366 ; Saltcoats, 1,473 ; Yorkton, 1,081 ; Weyburn— 8753 8754 this is the new district on the Soo line which I propose to create—1,282 ; South Qu'Appelle, 1,383 ; North Qu'Appelle, 927. I do not propose any change in the North Qu'Appelle district. South Regina, 1,153 ; Regina city, 740 ; Lumsden, 1,122 ; Moosejaw district, 1,168 ; Moosejaw city, 786 ; Maple Creek, 783. If my hon. friend will look at that a moment, he must agree with me that it is a fairer redistribution than the government plan, observing what was done three years ago by the legislature, and very much fairer than his alternative suggestion, by which he proposes to add to a district, already fairly large in votes cast, large in area, and exceedingly large in the population which we must conclude has come into it, judging by the number of homestead entries made since the census was taken.
Mr. LAKE. If hon. members on that side would take one basis of calculation, we should begin to know where we are, but it is absolutely impossible to follow all their different positions. When it suits their arguments in one district, they use the basis of population according to the census of 1901 and add to their calculation the homestead entries. When it suits them in another district to use another basis, they take the votes polled. Let them take one basis and hold to it all through. I could not find a moment ago the average of the votes on the lists in the three Reginas, but I have it now. I am not taking the votes polled in my calculation. The average on the voters' lists was 1,344 in those three Regina seats. The average voters on the lists for Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley, was 1,554, so that the hon. gentleman is taking four constituencies which already, on an average, have a larger number of names on the voters' lists than the average for the whole of the province. He has just told us exactly how many votes were polled in each of these new constituencies, which he has been redistributing. How does he get at that ? For instance. here I find the polling division of Yellow Grass for the federal election had a voters' list of 300 names. Right through the centre of that polling division, which is a very large one, containing some eight townships, goes the dividing line between the two constituencies. How many does he reckon cast their votes on the west side of the dividing line and how many on the east side ?
Mr. SCOTT. It seems to me that when we have to come down to a dispute about individual cases in a matter dealing with so large an area, we pretty nearly bring the whole thing down to the level of farce. Nobody imagines that these figures are accurate, but they are approximately so. If there are divergencies on the one side, there will be corresponding divergencles on the other.
8755
Mr. LAKE. No one pretends they are absolutely accurate, but I object to having the number of votes polled taken as the basis, because it is impossible even to get near the number of persons qualified to vote even in that way.
Mr. SCOTT. If my hon. friend will compare the number of votes polled with the number given on the lists, which he contends are absolutely accurate, he will find that the number of votes polled are given with approximate accuracy, which is my contention.
Mr. LAKE. The number of votes polled as compared with the number on the lists vary considerably in the different constituencies. In one of the northern constituencies only 49 per cent of the voters on the lists voted, whereas in one of the southern constituencies, that of the hon. gentleman's himself, there were 76 per cent votes polled of the voters registered. If the government would only take one basis and stick to it, that would give some chance to members on this side to offer alternative suggestions, which could not fail to be an improvement on their schedules. I do not propose to follow this matter very much further. I do not think that the argument made by the hon. members for Western Assiniboia and Saskatchewan have added anything to the information of members of this committee. I think they have not proved the case they started out to prove in any particular. They depend on vague calculations as to prospective populations and so on. In reference to the accusation made against me that I wish to deprive the newcomers of their right to representation, that is absolutely incorrect. Incoming American citizens were especially mentioned in this connection by the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Lamont). These American citizens have not settled in one corner of the country, but have spread everywhere. They have come in very largely into my own neighbourhood. Within a very few miles of me there are a considerable number of American citizens who were not entitled to vote at the last election. A great many of these American citizens, men of means, have determined to settle in the districts which have proved their capacity for growing grain. They have not struck into the remote districts whereit is not finally established that wheat can be profitably grown. A very large proportion of the best class of these new-comers have settled in the older districts, where they know they can make a success of farming. I propose that all should be treated alike, both those who go into the north and those who go into the south—all should be given their fair share of representation.
Mr. SCOTT. I daresay we are to take it for granted that the division between the north and the south is going to be maintained by the committee—nine to the north 8755 8756 and sixteen to the south. But I am going to appeal to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) that we should join hands on the suggestion I have offered, which, to a great extent, would remove the disparities and discrepancies in Assinibola which exist in the plan presented by the government, that being the redistribution made by the assembly three years ago. My hon. friend, like myself, knows very well that the people on the Soo line contend, with a great deal of justice, that a different distribution ought to be made of Assiniboia to serve their purposes. They feel themselves at the extremes in South Regina and South Qu'Appelle. They feel that the weight is against them, and they have sent down a great many strong representations asking that different lines be run to create a district, the centre of which would be one of the towns on the Pasqua branch or the Soo line. I have made a proposition that I think is fair. These four districts on the main Canadian Pacific Railway line at the east of the province are comparatively small in area and in vote, and are exceedingly small in increase of population, if we take the homestead entries as being any proper guide in that respect. I feel somewhat strongly in regard to this, and I am satisfied that the committee would be willing to agree to my suggestion if the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) would accept it.
Mr. LAKE. I am quite prepared to agree with the hon. member for Western Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) in so far as he asserts that there should be a constituency given along the Soo line, taking in a portion of the districts of South Regina, South Qu'Appelle, Souris, and possibly Cannington. But I cannot agree with him as to where he is to take off one constituency in order to place a new constituency in that district. He proposes, as I have said, to go into the old districts of Moosomin, Whitewood, Grenfell and Wolseley and cut off one member from there. I have shown that already they have a very large vote in those four districts.
Mr. SCOTT. They are under the average of the sixteen Assiniboia districts.
Mr. LAKE. But they are over the average for the whole province of Saskatchewan. The only difference between my hon. friend (Mr. Scott) and myself is that I suggest that he should get this extra seat from the three constituencies which now group around Regina—Lumsden, Regina and South Regina—and that he should redistribute these seats. The average for these seats is 1,344 as against an average in the constituencies he proposes to cut up of 1,554. I contend that it would be very much easier and a much more suitable and fairer distribution to do as I suggested—to make the new Soo district out of a portion of the present district of South Regina, adding to it a por 8757 JULY 4, 1905 tion of South Qu'Appelle, a portion of Souris and possibly a small portion of Cannington, and extending the North Regina or Lumsden district south to the 15th township line. As I have said, it would work out that the two constituencies of Lumsden and the Soo line would have something over 2,200 names on the voters' list ; and Regina city, which would have a member, who, no doubt, would be approached by farmers in either of these constituencies if they wished to see him, would have a very small proportion of votes. Of course, I am agreeing to this suggestion on the assumption that the government are determined to force through this distribution as between the old district of Saskatchewan and the old district of Assiniboia.
On schedule 'B,' Grenfell.
Mr. SCOTT. I made a suggestion the other day in the conference to my hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Lake) that the boundary of Grenfell should be slightly changed by taking away from the district of Yorkton five townships, in the southwest corner of the district of Yorkton. Owing to the building of the Kirkella extension of the railway these people will be nearer to that railway than to the Manitoba and Northwestern Railway, and their interests will be much better served by adding these five townships to Grenfell. The member for Qu'Appelle said that he would have no objection to this being done.
Mr. LAKE. I do not remember this question. As in the case of the Alberta constituencies an agreement was arrived at in the conference as to some changes of this nature, and the understanding was that some authority would make the changes and have them properly arranged the next morning.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. If my hon. friend agrees, all right.
Mr. LAKE. It is a matter that I have not looked into and without having the figures of the votes and settlement there I am not prepared to make any particular suggestion in regard to that.
On schedule ' B,' Lumsden.
Mr. SCOTT. I have another suggestion to make with regard to Lumsden. There should be a slight change made here which affects Lumsden, Moosejaw and Batochc, on account of a lake, Last Mountain lake, through which the boundary runs, leaving on the east side of the lake, cut off from Lumsden, about a dozen or perhaps twenty or even forty people living in there separated by the lake from the district in which they are placed by the present boundary and cut off from the neighbours with whom they would naturally vote.
Mr. LAKE. I think there would be no objection to that.
8757 8758
On schedule ' B,' Moosejaw.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I have a memo. referring to a new district of Moosejaw city. Are you making such a division or are you simply making a change in the boundaries of Moosejaw ?
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. I do not think there is a change in the boundaries of Moosejaw ; it is simply taking out the city of Moosejaw from the constituency of Moosejaw. I suggest that we suspend the consideration of the schedule until the draft suggested by my hon. friend from Western Assiniboia (Mr. Scott) be completed. We will pass to section 13.
Section 12 allowed to stand.
On section 15, law courts and officers continued.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 15 :
15. Except as otherwise provided by this Act, all laws and all orders and regulations made thereunder, and all courts of civil and criminal jurisdiction, and all commissions, powers, authorities and functions and all officers and functionaries, judicial, administrative and ministerial, existing immediately before the coming into force of this Act in the territory hereby established as the province of Saskatchewan, shall continue in the said province as if this Act and the Alberta Act had not been passed ; subject, nevertheless, except with respect to such as are enacted by or existing under Acts of the parliament of Great Britain or of the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to be repealed, abolished or altered by the parliament of Canada, or by the legislature of the said province, according to the authority of the parliament or of the said legislature under this Act : provided that all powers, authorities and functions which under any law, order or regulation were, before the coming into force of this Act, vested in or exercisable by any public officer or functionary of the Northwest Territories shall be vested in and exercisable in and for the said province by like public officers and functionaries of the said province when appointed by competent authority.
2. The legislature of the province may, for all purposes affecting or extending to the said province, abolish the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories, and the offices, both judicial and ministerial, thereof, and the jurisdiction, powers and authority belonging or incident to the said court.
3. All societies or associations incorporated by or under the authority of the legislature of the Northwest Territories existing at the time of the coming into force of this Act which include within their objects the regulation of the practice of, or the right to practice, any profession or trade in the Northwest Territories, such as the legal or the medical profession, dentistry, pharmaceutical chemistry and the like, shall continue, subject, however, to be dissolved and abolished by order of the Governor in Council, and each of such societies shall have power to arrange for and effect the payment of its debts and liabilities, and the division, disposition or transfer of its property.
8759
4. Every joint-stock company lawfully incorporated by or under the authority of any ordinance of the Northwest Territories shall be subject to the legislative authority of the province of Saskatchewan if—
(a) the head office or the registered office of such company is at the time of the coming into force of this Act situate in the province of Saskatchewan ; and
(b) the powers and objects of such company are such as might be conferred by the legislature of the said province and not expressly authorized to be executed in any part of the Northwest Territories beyond the limits of the said province.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN: I understand that this is exactly in the form in which we had it in the Alberta Bill ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Yes.
Section as amended, agreed to.
On section 16:—legislation respecting education—separate schools.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 16 :
Section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867, shall apply to the said province, with the substitution for paragraph (1) of the said section 93, of the following paragraph :
1. Nothing in any such law shall prejudicially affect any right or privilege with respect to separate schools which any class of persons have at the date of the passing of this Act, under the terms of chapters 29 and 30 of the ordinances of the Northwest Territories, passed in the year 1901.
2. In the appropriation by the legislature or distribution by the government of the province of any moneys for the support of schools organized and carried on in accordance with the said chapter 29, or any Act passed in amendment thereof or in substitution therefor, there shall be no discrimination against schools of any class described in the said chapter 29.
3. Where the expression ' by law ' is employed in paragraph 3 of the said section 93, it shall be held to mean the law as set out in the said chapters 29 and 30 ; and where the expression ' at the union,' is employed in the said paragraph 3, it shall be held to mean the date at which this Act comes into force.
Mr. BOURASSA moved in amendment that :
The provisions of section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867, shall apply to the said province as if, at the date upon which this Act comes into force, the territory comprised therein were already a province, the expression ' the union ' in the said section being taken to mean the said date.
2. In the appropriation by the legislature of public moneys in aid of education, or in the distribution by the government of the province of any moneys arising from the school fund established by the Dominion Lands Act, there shall be no discrimination against the schools of any kind organized according to law.
Amendment (Mr. Bourassa) negatived.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN moved in amendment that :
That section 16 be struck out, and the following substituted therefor :
8759 8760
16. The provisions of section 93 of the British North America Act, 1867, shall apply to the said province in so far as the same are applicable under the terms thereof.
Amendment (Mr. R. L. Borden) negatived on division.
Motion (Mr. Fitzpatrick) agreed to.
Section as amended, agreed to.
On section 18 :—interest to be paid to province on a certain sum.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 18 :
Inasmuch as the said province is not in debt, it shall be entitled to be paid and to receive from the government of Canada, by half-yearly payments in advance, an annual sum of four hundred and five thousand three hundred and seventy-five dollars, being the equivalent of interest at the rate of five per cent per annum on the sum of eight million one hundred and seven thousand five hundred dollars.
Motion agreed to.
On section 19 :—compensation to province for public lands.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 19 :
19. Inasmuch as the said province will not have the public lands as a source of revenue, there shall be paid by Canada to the province by half-yearly payments in advance, an annual sum based upon the population of the province as from time to time ascertained by the quinquennial census thereof, as follows :
The population of the said province being assumed to be at present two hundred and fifty thousand, the sum payable until such population reaches four hundred thousand, shall be three hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars ;
Thereafter, until such population reaches eight hundred thousand, the sum payable shall be five hundred and sixty-two thousand five hundred dollars ;
Thereafter, until such population reaches one million two hundred thousand, the sum payable shall be seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars ;
And thereafter the sum payable shall be one million one hundred and twenty—five thousand dollars.
2. As an additional allowance in lieu of public lands, there shall be paid by Canada to the province annually by half-yearly payments in advance, for five years from the time this Act comes into force, to provide for the construction of necessary public buildings, the sum of ninety- three thousand seven hundred and fifty dollars.
Motion agreed to.
On section 20, lands vested in the Crown.
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved that the following be substituted for section 20 :
20. All Crown lands, mines and minerals and royalties incident thereto shall continue to be vested in the Crown and administered by the government of Canada for the purposes of Canada, subject to the provisions of any Act of the parliament of Canada. with respect to road allowances and roads or trails as in force on the 8761 JULY 4, 1905 thirtieth day of June, one thousand nine hundred and five, which shall apply to the said province with the substitution therein of the said province for the Northwest Territories.
Mr. LAKE moved in amendment :
That section 20 be struck out, and the following substituted therefor :
All lands, mines and minerals and royalties incident thereto situate or arising within the limits of the province and now vested in the Crown, and all sums due or payable in respect of the same shall belong to the province subject to any trusts existing in respect thereof and to any interest other than that of the province in the same except those portions thereof now used or occupied for the public works, the public buildings or otherwise for the public service of Canada which are more fully set forth and enumerated in schedule ' C ' to this Act, and which shall continue to be the property of Canada.
Amendment (Mr. Lake) negatived, on division.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
On the preamble,
Mr. BARKER. I have an amendment to more similar to that which I moved in regard to the other Bill. I have added two clauses referring to Rupert's Land but otherwise the amendment is the same. I beg to move :
That the preamble be struck out, and that the following preamble be substituted therefor :
Whereas, in and by the British North America Act, 1867, being chapter 3 of the Acts of the parliament of the United Kingdom passed in the session thereof held in the thirtieth year of the reign of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria, it was, among other things, enacted that it should be lawful for the Queen, by and with the advice of Her Majesty's most honourable Privy Council, on an address from the Houses of parliament of Canada. to admit Rupert's Land and the Northwestern Territory into the union on such terms and conditions in each case as are in the addresses expressed and as the Queen should think fit to approve, subject to the provisions of the said Act ; and that the provisions of any Order in Council in that behalf should have effect as if they had been enacted by the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
And whereas in and by the Rupert's Land Act, 1868, of the parliament of the United Kingdom it was, among other things, enacted that it should be competent to Her Majesty, by Order or Orders in Council, by and with the advice of Her Majesty's most honourable Privy Council, on address from the Houses of the parliament of Canada, to declare that Rupent's Land should from a date to be therein mentioned be admitted into and become part of the Dominion of Canada.
And whereas, pursuant to such powers and authority, and to such addresses, by and with the advice aforesaid, the Queen by Order in Council on the 23rd day of June, 1870, did order and declare that from and after the 15th day of July, 1870, the said territory should be admitted into and become part of the Dominion of Canada upon the terms and conditions set forth in schedule ' A ' to the said Order in Council, and that the parliament of Canada should from the 8761 8762 said date of admission have full power and authority to legislate for the future welfare and good government of the said territory ; and it was thereby further ordered that, without prejudice to any obligations arising from an approved report therein recited, Rupert's Land should from and after the said 15th of July, 1870, be admitted into and become part of the Dominion of Canada upon the terms and conditions in that behalf in the said Order in Council also set forth.
And whereas, in and by the British North America Act, 1871, being chapter 28 of the Acts of the parliament of the United Kingdom passed in the session thereof held in the thirty-fourth and thirty—fifth years of the reign of Her late Majesty Queen Victoria, it is enacted that the parliament of Canada may from time to time establish new provinces in any territories forming for the time being part of the Dominion of Canada, but not included in any province thereof, and may, at the time of such establishment, make provisions for the constitution and administration of any such province, and for the passing of laws for the peace, order and good government of such province and for its representation in the said parliament of Canada ;
And whereas, in and by the British North America Act, 1886, being chapter 35 of the Acts of the parliament of the United Kingdom passed in the session thereof held in the forty-ninth and fiftieth years of the reign of Her said Majesty, the parliament of Canada was empowered to make provision for the representation in the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, of any territories which for the time being form part of the Dominion of Canada but are not included in any province thereof ; and it was thereby also enacted that the said Act, and the British North America Act, 1867, and the British North America Act, 1871, shall be construed together.
And whereas that part of the said land and territory hereinafter described has not been included in any province of the Dominion and has heretofore been provisionally governed by and pursuant to legislation of the parliament of Canada.
And whereas it is expedient to establish as a province that part of the said land and territory hereinafter described, and to make provision for the constitution and administration of such province and for the passing of laws for the peace, order and good government thereof and for its representation in the parliament of Canada.
Therefore His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows :
Amendment (Mr. Barker) negatived on division.
Preamble agreed to.
Bill reported as amended, and amendments read the first and second time and agreed to.
Mr. SPROULE. I would suggest that it would be well to have both of these Bills reprinted. They are amended so much from what they originally were, and I think it is important to understand what the amendments are.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER. My intention was to take up these Bills to-morrow for the third reading. The amendments are very 8763 few and the only important ones are well known. In the meantime if I can have them printed by to-morrow I shall endeavour to do so.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. My hon. friend will find almost all of the amendments in the reprint of the first Bill.

THE BUDGET SPEECH.

Mr. FIELDING. If the Bills respecting the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan are disposed of to-morrow, I hope to present the budget statement on Thursday.

THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES.

Mr. FITZPATRICK moved the second reading of Bill (No. 160) with respect to the Northwest Territories.
Mr. SPROULE. This is a Bill dealing with the powers of the Territories, and I think it would be well to have the explanation before we go into committee on it.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. This Bill is intended to provide for the government of that part of the Northwest Territories which is not included in the two provinces, that is to say, all that part of Rupert's Land and the Northwestern Territory which is not included in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, the district of Keewatin and the Yukon Territory, and it provides for it by continuing all the provisions of the Northwest Territories Act which are already in existence and which are already applicable to these Territories.
Mr. SPROULE. I understood that you repealed that clause of the Northwest Territories Act.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. The Northwest Territories Act is still in force with respect to the two new provinces, subject to be dealt with by them as they deem best, except so far as there are constitutional restrictions placed upon the powers of the new provinces.
Mr. SPROULE. What law would apply, to the Territories now ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. The law that has been in existence since 1875 without any change.
Mr. LENNOX. Whatever state of law applied to the Territories in 1875, now made into provinces, the same state of law would apply to the Territories we are now dealing with.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Will be continued on.
Mr. LENNOX. The same law as governed the two new provinces down to 1875 will now govern the Territories. Therefore by passing this Act we will be giving our sanction to the continuance to that state of law. We are affirming the state of law said to exist in these Territories at present.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I would not like to put it that way.
8763 8764
Mr. LENNOX. We are re-enacting in a certain sense and giving our legislative sanction to whatever state at law exists in the Territories at present. The result would be that in giving our sanction to the existing state of the school laws there, whether those laws be good or bad, we may be confronted in the future with the same unfortunate condition as we had to face this session. When we come to establish this remaining portion of the Territories into a province, we may be met with the same argument on the school question as we were met with this session and be told that we are bound by what happened years before.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I think my hon. friend the Minister of Justice inadvertently misstated a little the condition of affairs. The Bill, as originally drafted, contemplated the repeal of the Northwest Territories Act. That was abandoned afterwards. The position now is that that Act is left exactly as it is but these provinces are withdrawn from its operation to a certain extent. Any provision of the Act particularly applicable to a new province remains in force until repealed by a provincial legislature, so far as it has jurisdiction, or by the Dominion parliament, in so far as its jurisdiction extends. The Northwest Territories Act, as a statute, remains, and what is intended by the Bill is to make certain supplementary provisions which the government believe to be necessary, in view of the fact that a very large portion of the Territories is about to be established into provinces. The Northwest Territories Act is really not repealed.
Mr. SPROULE. In what position will the schools be in the future ? Will there be any authority to amend this law in any direction after we dispose of it here ? This Territory is outside the two new provinces. There is no council outside the two new provinces. What authority would there be which could amend the Northwest Territories Act in any direction ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK The parliament of Canada has the absolute control of the Northwest Territories Act.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. The Northwest Territories Act will stand subject to be amended or repealed by this parliament at any time. It will be open to us at any time to deal with it in any way we see fit.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the second time, and House went into committee thereon.
On section 3, delimitation of the Territories.
The Northwest Territories shall hereafter comprise the territories formerly known as Rupert's Land and the Northwestern Territory, except such portions thereof as form the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, the district of Keewatin and the Yukon Territory, together with all British territories and 8765 JULY 4, 1905 possessions in North America and all islands adjacent to any such territories or possessions except the colony of Newfoundland and its dependencies.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. These are all embraced in the Dominion ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. We are taking in a part of territory about which there may be some doubt—the part, lying between the height of land in Ungava and the Labrador coast. It would appear at first sight as if Rupert's Land included all the territory watered by the rivers that run from the height of land into the Hudson bay, but between the height of land in Ungava and the Labrador coast there is a small strip of territory which is apparently no man's land at present.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Is there any danger of this expression taking in all the British West India Islands ?
Mr. FIELDING. If they are in North America.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. The section says ' adjacent to.' I think there is a piece of British territory on the mainland in Central America.
Mr. FIELDING. The hon. gentleman refers to British Guiana ?
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. No; near Honduras, on the mainland of Central America. I confess I do not know the names of all the British West Indies.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. As far as a declaration of this parliament can affect it, we might bring it in ; but I think a declaration of this sort would be exceedingly useful to us, because there are islands in the north that belong to Canada, and already two foreign states have entered into possession of a portion of our territory. In order to make my position clear, I may say that this is taken from the Order in Council which was passed July 1st, 1880—it is an adaptation of that description.
Mr. BERGERON. Is that covered by the Northwest Territories Act, or is it something new ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. It is covered by the Northwest Territories Act, except a little piece between Ungava and the Labrador coast.
Mr. BERGERON. Would it not be better to avoid a description by saying that the Northwest Territories Act is withdrawn so far as the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta are concerned ? If that is done, it will remain just as it is for the rest.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. This is intended to adapt a description of this country contained in an Order in Council passed by the Imperial authorities. If we take the suggestion of the leader of the opposition (Mr. R. L. 8765 8766 Borden), I do not think there need be any discussion about it.
Mr. BERGERON. There would be no discussion on my part—the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fitzpatrick) may be sure of that. But he has heard some discussion, and that kind of thing would be avoided if he would simply withdraw the Northwest Territories Act so far as it relates to Saskatchewan and Alberta, leaving it to apply to the rest.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I am satisfied with it as it is.
On section 4—commissioner.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I suppose this is a reversion to what was the original form of government of the Northwest Territories ? Does the hon. minister follow the exact language ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. It might be possible to have a commissioner appointed who is not in the Territories. It might be possible to have a commissioner with his headquarters here. There would be no reason why the Minister of the Interior should not be commissioner of all these Territories, in view of the fact that they extend over such an immense area.
On section 5—council.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Is it intended in the immediate future to act upon that, or is it a power that—
Mr. FITZPATRICK. It is a power that is taken.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. No immediate necessity to exercise it?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. No immediate necessity.
On section 7—disallowance of ordinances.
Mr. SPROULE. Is this the same law that relates to the Council of the Yukon Territory ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Yes.
Mr. SPROULE. Exactly?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I would not say that it is exactly the same language, but it is the same thing. It is the law applicable to all these territories originally before they had power of legislation. It refers to the power which the Governor in Council exercises with regard to disallowance. A statute of a province goes into effect unless disallowed within a certain time. But in the Yukon and other territories ordinances come into effect after they have been submitted to the Governor in Council.
Mr. SPROULE. I was referring to the previous section—No. 6, ordinances by the Commissioner in Council. There appears to be a difference between the Yukon and the Northwest Territories in this respect. 8767 COMMONS We have the Northwest Territories Act, which provided that no matter what authority was governing the country they shall provide a certain system of education. In the Yukon there seems to be no such provision whatever, but the Yukon Council goes on and provides a system of education similar to what they have in the Territories. I asked on one occasion before, by what authority this was done. I would ask again is it under such a clause as this clause 6 that this has been done in the Yukon Territory ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Under section 6 they would have authority to legislate only on those matters, jurisdiction over which is assigned to them by the Governor in Council.
Mr. SPROULE. I do not find any evidence that jurisdiction has been given by the Governor in Council with reference to the Yukon.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. My hon. friend knows more about the Yukon than I do.
Mr. SPROULE. I tried to look it up, but could not find it.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I could get at it if the hon. gentleman (Mr. Sproule) wants it.
Mr. SPROULE. I would like to be informed as to the matter during the discussion of these Bills, because it seemed to me that there was no authority for these ordinances to establish an educational system passed in the Yukon.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. If my hon. friend (Mr. Sproule) will refer to section 6 of the Yukon Territory Act, he will find that this is practically a re-enactment of it.
Mr. SPROULE. That is why I asked the question. This section 6 of the Yukon Territory Act says :
The Commissioner in Council shall have the same powers to make ordinances for the government of the territory as are at the date of this Act possessed by the Lieutenant Governor of the Northwest Territories, acting by and with the advice and consent of the legislative assembly thereof, to make ordinances for the government of the Northwest Territories, except as such powers may be limited by order of the Governor in Council.
So far as I can find, no instructions have been issued to them, either to establish this educational system or not to establish it, yet they have established it.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I will have that looked into.
On section 8—Supreme Court disestablished—stipendiary magistrates.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. That is the law as we had it.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. This is a reversion of the old system ?
8767 8768
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Yes.
Mr. LENNOX. This provides for the disestablishment of the Supreme Court in this territory. There has also been, up to this time a territorial assembly of the Northwest, which met at Regina and whose authority extended over these Territories.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Not to all—only to Mackenzie.
Mr. LENNOX. If it is necessary to disestablish the Supreme Court it is equally necessary to say that the legislative assembly shall no longer continue.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. The Act of 1888, section 2 provides that the jurisdiction of the legislative assembly shall be restricted to the electoral districts and the electoral districts are not to continue.
Mr. LENNOX. Are all the electoral districts comprised within the two provinces ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. And more, Athabaska.
On section 14,
Mr. SPROULE. The wording of that section would seem to imply that the provinces were insolvent.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. There are some assets that have to be distributed, and I thought instead of having an involved scheme such as that employed with respect to the old provinces of Canada, as these Territories are not quite so pretentious in their belongings we would appoint a liquidator to distribute the assets between them.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. It seems curious to use the word 'liquidator.'
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I may say that I did this myself and I am open to receive any suggestions that may be made.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Why not call him a ' provisional treasurer.' ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. All right.
Mr. HENDERSON. I would suggest that a time limit should be placed so as not to have it continue for 30 or 40 years.
Mr. FIELDING. I would suggest that no lawyer should be allowed to touch it.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. You might do that in order that it may be badly done.
Mr. BARKER. I would suggest the word ' adjuster.'
Mr. HENDERSON. Would not the provinces have power to appoint arbitrators or commissioners ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. No, this officer will have the power to distribute ; we want to avoid what occurred in the case of Ontario and Quebec. I think the word ' liquidator ' will serve as well as any. I move:
8769 JULY 4, 1905
That the word ' provisional ' in the third line of subsection 1 and in the first line of subsection 2 be struck out.
Mr. MONK. Had you not better fix the salary ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. I really intended to take an official from the Northwest Territories who is familiar with that work and has a large amount of experience.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 15—commencement of Act—
Mr. FITZPATRICK moved :
That the word ' July ' in first line be struck out, and that the word ' September ' be substituted.
Section as amended agreed to.
Bill reported.

DOMINION CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS ACT—AMENDMENT.

Bill (No. 159) to amend the Dominion Controverted Elections Act—Mr. Fitzpatrick— was read the second time, considered in committee, and reported.

NORTHWEST TERRITORIES REPRESENTATION ACT—AMENDMENT.

Bill (No. 156) to amend the Northwest Territories Representation Act—Mr. Fitzpatrick—read the second time and House went into committee thereon.
0n section 2—section 30 amended ; posting of lists ; notice by enumerator.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I want to suggest an amendment to that. The third subsection which has been read provides that the enumerator shall put up a written notice stating that he will attend, but it does not go on and impose upon him an obligation to attend. Perhaps my hon. friend the Minister of Justice has an amendment in that regard.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. No, I have a general amendment imposing penalties all around.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I would move in amendment :
That section 2 be amended by adding to subsection 3 at the end thereof the words ' and the enumerator shall attend for that purpose at the time and place so designated for at least two consecutive hours on each of the said eight days.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. All right.
Mr. SCOTT. Does the government propose to provide for additional remuneration to the enumerators ?
Mr. FITZPATRICK. Why ?
Mr. SCOTT. For this additional duty which will tie them up for two hour for eight days.
8769 8770
Mr. FITZPATRICK. When the elector has the right to go to him at any time during that period the least we can expect is that the enumerator, who is our officer, shall be in attendance at the place appointed.
Mr. SCOTT. There is not a very heavy remuneration provided in any case for the enumerators.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. And worse than that when they earn it they do not always get it.
Mr. SCOTT. That is another point. In many cases the Auditor General has interposed objections to their getting that which they ought to have under the existing law. I venture to say that the average enumerator has not been necessarily obliged in the full performance of his duty to remain tied up for sixteen hours for the purpose of providing these certificates.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. It is fair, I think, that they should be paid.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. Is not the remuneration fixed by Order in Council so that it can be dealt with at any time?
Mr. SCOTT. I am not certain, but I think there is a schedule provided in the Act.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. If there is a schedule provided in the Act, I think it should be taken into consideration.
Mr. FITZPATRICK. The remuneration is fixed by Order in Council.
Mr. SCOTT. Oh, well. I think they should have special remuneration for this.
Section as amended agreed to.
On section 3,
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I beg to move that after the word ' certificates ' in subclause A, the following words be added :
For use in any one polling subdivision.
This is evidently the intention of the clause, and these words have been apparently omitted.
Amendment agreed to, and section as amended agreed to.
On section 5.
Mr. R. L. BORDEN. I beg to move that the following be added as section 6 :
That Bill (No. 156) be amended by adding the following as section 6 of the Bill :
The said Act is amended by inserting the following as section 8 1/2 thereof :
8 1/2. Every person employed or acting at any time during an election for an electoral district as agent for or on behalf of any candidate in such election in the management or conduct of such election, or in the canvass for votes, or in the organization of the contest for such election, or otherwise in the promotion of a candidate's election, who shall act in such electoral district for such election as deputy returning officer, election clerk, poll clerk or in other
[...]

Source:

Canada. House of Commons Debates, 1875-1949. Provided by the Library of Parliament.

Credits:

.

Selection of input documents and completion of metadata: Gordon Lyall.

Personnes participantes: