"The population of the State of Kansas in 1870 was 360,000 and in 1879-850,000 making an increase of 490,000 in the nine years. In this was to be included a large natural increase,

of

that steel rails ought to be taxed. The Mr. Blake, in a discussion on the settlereason there was no duty imposed on ment of that country, is reported to have them is that there are none manufactured said that he could not tell what the in the Dominion and it was important, increase would be, but judging by comas far as possible, to aid in the construc-parison, he could infer what it might be. tion of lines of railway, and Parliament He says:sanctioned the proposal to exempt steel rails from taxation until 1882. I can sce no reason whatever for putting a duty on steel rails. It is merely a taxation on that particular interest until steel as well as an increase, owing rails are manufactured in the country. to large immigration from the Eastern States. This was not an indication that the These are all the exemptions, and aggre- population of the North-West would, in ten gating them they are less than the ex-years, reach 550,000. But the state of things. emptions and services to be performed by was not equal. What was the position of the Government in selling the lands as Kansas at the commencement of the epoch contained in the Act of 1874. Now, which the hon. gentleman had taken as his starting point? Besides a population of while it is claimed by those who support 360,000, it had no less than 1,500 miles of this measure that it is the very best railway in operation, so that at the commenceoffer which has been made, the question ment of the epoch of rapid increase there had might come up in the minds of hon. been a considerable development of railway members, is it desirable, or in the inter- had increased, so that there were 2,300 miles facilities, and during that decade those facilities ests of the country that it should be ac- in operation in 1879. In 1866, Kansas ranked cepted? I have no hesitation in coming twenty-fourth among the States of the United to the conclusion that it ought to be acStates as a corn-growing State, while in 1879 cepted, and I think those who in their cool it had gone up so that it was the fourth. In the earlier period it was the twenty-fourth as moments and apart from political feeling a wheat-grower, while by 1878 it had run up consider this question will come to so it was almost the first in that respect, the same conclusion that in the inter- having produced thirty-two millions ests of this country it is desirable that bushels. With all these evidences of progress, this contract as made should be consumand all these advantages, with a large natural increase from a population of 360,000, we find mated, by Parliament sanctioning it. I but 490,000 added to the population of thathave no doubt whatever that the gentle-State in nine years; and yet we were told that men who compose this Syndicate are able to raise the necessary capital to construct the 2,000 miles of railway; that they will be able to put a sufficient quantity of rolling stock and equipment of every kind upon it, and not only do that, but complete the larger portion, to my mind, of the undertaking, that is, to run it when it is built. We can tell about what the road will cost. Mr. Mackenzie and Mr. Blake have named $120,000,000 as its cost. Mr. Fleming has estimated that it would cost about $8,000,000 a year to run that road. Mr. Mackenzie placed the sum at between $6,000,000 and $7,000,000. Mr. Fleming says that the road will not cover running expenses until there are about 3,000,000 people in that country. When do you suppose there will be 3,000,000 people in the North-West? I do no. know how many hundred thousand people there are in that country, from Nipissing to the Pacific Coast, but I do not think there are a great many. Hon.

over 550,000, irrespective of the natural increase, would altogether be added to the population of the North-West in ten or eleven

years."

Now, these are Mr. Blake's statistics. If that was the increase of Kansas when she had so many miles of railway, I would like to ask the hon. gentleman when there would be two or three millions of people in the North-West? Why, at that rate, there would not be a population so large as that in 25 years, and yet the increase of population in Kansas has been large and rapid. If you take this $8,000,000 which Mr. Fleming estimates as the running expenses of that road, for 25 years, you have $200,000,000. It is true you have to deduct the earnings, but what will they amount to for some years after its construction 1. They would, I fear, be so infinitesimally small that they would be scarcely worth subtracting from the expenses. No person can suppose that the road can be kept open and run at a profit by the

Syndicate until there is a very large population in that country, and yet hon. gentlemen think when the road is constructed the great difficulty is over

to use that route, these railway companies who have lands to settle will hold out quite as large inducements to settlers as we can, and in place of settling in Manitoba and the North-West, Hon. M1. FERRIER-- Only begin-States just as they have been doing. our people will settle in the United

come.

ning.

to

the construction

The Government has been assisting imHon. Mr. AIKINS My hon. friend, migration for many years. Hundreds of who knows something about running thousands of dollars have been spent in railroads, says the difficulty will only be that way, and I am sorry to say - and beginning. What I hope is that this hon. gentlemen, I am sure, will share in Company will find itself sufficiently strong my regret that after all that expense to keep open this road when it is con- we will have acomplished very little. In structed, so that we may have access to the United States, I am not aware that that country through our own territory. the Federal Government assists immiNow, the hon. gentlemen oppo-gration in any way. I am not aware site have taken a peculiar liking that the State Legislatures give any of the such assistance. The immigration that Sault Branch. Well, I have no ob- is carried on so successfully is through jection whatever to the construction of the agency of the railway companies who that road, providing that we could not have lands to dispose of. They have get our own line north of Lake Superior. facilities that no Government can posI think it would be in the interest of this sibly possess for inducing immigration, country to build it very much more and the hope is expressed and indulged in our interest than to adopt the course in, that this Company, having large inpursued by the hon. gentlemen when terests interests quite as large, I was they were in power, and that is to try going to say, as the Government themand reach the waters of Lake Huron by selves in the North-West would act building the Georgian Bay Branch, when as a great immigration agency for the purthese waters were tapped by some half pose of getting settlers into that coundozen roads already. I do not think | try. We have interest as a peothat the Georgian Bay Branch was cal-ple in getting that country settled, culated to benefit any section of country. because when it is settled we will have But, if you take the benefits which large resources in the shape of customs would result from the construction of the duties, etc. They will be consumers of Sault Branch as compared with the bene-dutiable goods and exporters of produce, fits to be derived from the construction of a through line north of Lake Superior, the latter is infinitely preferable to the other. We know what the result of passing through Americau territory has been. Six years ago this last summer I went to the Province of Manitoba, and in passing down the Red River from Moorehead at that time they had to use the river, there was no railway I found at places where the boat stopped in Minnesota and Dakota, those who came down to the wharf were nearly all Canadians. Two-thirds at least of all those who are settled now in the Valley of the Red River in Minnesota and Dakota are said to be Canadians. And why are they there? Simply because in passing along, they found what suited them and they did not go any further. experience, and if we should

but the Railway Company has as large an interest, at least in the first instance, to get settlers in that country as we have, and I have not the slightest doubt from their connections at home, and on the continent, that they will be the means of inducing an immigration into the North-West which the Government would be unable to reach. Something has been said in reference to this second offer

I

which was made to build this road. It has been dealt with by my hon. friend from Toronto this evening in a way that I do not think any of those who are connected with it could take offence. know many of those gentlemen, and would not say anything to offend them, but I do say this: it is a most extraordi nary circumstance, when under the That is our Act of 1874 an advertisement apcontinue peared in the papers asking ten

ders for the construction of this road, gentlemen who are opposing this Bill: knowing the offer that was made by the that exemption from taxation on their Government, of $10,000 per mile, and lands would be worth some $20,000,000. 20,000 acres of land per mile, and that Now, this statement was made by gena further sum might be granted, tlemen who knew, I suppose, what they that during all that time those gen- were talking about. Another gentletlemen never thought of making an offer, man, the leader of the Opposition in the if there was so much money in it as is now other House, is reported to have said discovered? And this thing has not been that exemption from customs duties done in a corner; it was known when would be equal to $1,500,000. The Parliament rose last year that negotia-exemption, on roadbed, etc., are said tions were talked of with the Govern- also to be worth millions of dollars. ment in reference to the construction of Altogether, those exemptions amount to this road. It was stated in a speech by something like $25,000,000 according to Sir John Macdonald at Bath, a speech their estimation, and I suppose they will that was copied into the papers through- not object if I adopt it. Do you supout the country, that offers were then pose that any company, whatever their under consideration, yet those gentlemen station might be, when they were not never thought of sending a telegram, or going to risk their personal fortunes, writing a letter to the Govern- could go to any of the money markets of ment asking if they were in the world and raise money knowing their a position to accept tenders. lands would be subject to taxation until There is something more: after the they were sold; that if they pushed them Ministers had returned from England, on the market they would get little for and after Parliament had been sum- them, and that taxation for twenty years moned and was in session, a month would be equal to $20,000,000? I should elapsed before those gentlemen could like to know what strength that would make up their minds as to what they give them. were going to do. They knew that the Government were not in a position to accept an offer of that kind, and they were quite safe in putting up $1,400,000 as security. If they were anxious to get the contract, they should have made overtures in time, and their proposition would have received every consideration. If overtures had been made when Sir John Macdonald delivered his speech at Bath in June, or when he was in England, the conclusion might have been indulged in by those gentlemen that they had a chance at least of obtaining the contract, but they must have known that when a contract had been entered into by the Government, a second offer could not be entertained. I do not suppose that that Syndicate or the present one would base their success on personal finances. I think if they are I think if they are able to raise money, it is upon the subsidies afforded by the Government. My hon. friend will admit that.

Hon. Mr. REESOR But the bonds

would be endorsed by the Govern

ment.

Hon. Mr. AIKINS The Government would have to be satisfied of the ability of the company to raise the money before the bonds would be guaranteed. The thing is so perfectly absurd, it appears to me that, if they did not want to damage this Company they would not have made such disparaging statements. Gentlemen opposite would not say, even if the Government were prepared to accept that offer, they would vote for it. My hon. friend for King's would not vote for it, I am sure, and the ex-Secretary of State took very good care to guard himself, and would not say that if it was $12,000,000 less than the present contract he would vote for it. I think, under the circumstances, we may fairly come to the conclusion that, so far as this offer now before the House to build the railway is concerned, it is the best that has been made; that it is quite within the power of the country to carry out; and, moreover, that it is in the interests of the Dominion that it should be carried out.

even

.

Hon. Mr. DICKEY moved the adjournment of the debate.

The Senate adjourned at 11.05 p.m.

THE SENATE.

Friday, February 11th, 1881. The Speaker took the chair at three

p.m.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

day

action of the Senate on that occasion turned out to be quite right. Nor was I surprised at that avowal when I re collected that only four or five short months after the vote had been given in this House on that Bill, the Government of the day the Government of which the hon. gentleman was a member himself adopted the very reasons given by the majority in this House for opposing that Bill as an excuse for not carrying out its provisions. This is the spirit in which the Senate generally discusses public questions, and in the same spirit I propose to deal with this question. I must confess to a certain feeling of disappointment as to some of the proPetro-visions in the contract which we are (Mr. asked to ratify. I would particularly specify, as one of the minor provisions, this point that by clause 7, when a scetion of twenty miles is built, equipped and ready for working, the contractors are thereupon entitled to ask for their subsidies in land and money for that section, which thus becomes their property. There is also this condition of things that might occur: the contractors might in the space of three or four years build and equip the easiest portion of the line - the 900 miles to the base of the Rocky Mountains — and at the same time have the benefit of the portions of the railway already constructed and about to be constructed by the Government within that period; and if they chose not to go on, how can they be prevented, and how can the Government resume possession of the property with which they will have thus parted? In other words, how is it to be forfeited by the Company to the Government in case the whole line is not built and continuously worked? I am quite aware that there are provisions in reference to land and railway mortgage bonds, a proportion of 20 per cent. of which is to remain in the hands of the Government. After all, the great security we shall be told, no doubt, on this point, consists in the fact that this percentage is to remain under the control of the Government. At the same time, I should have had some misgivings on this point, had the House not been assured in the most solemn manner by the ex-Secretary of State that these gentlemen were contractors, not only of character and experience, but

having been called: resuming
the adjourned debate on Hon. Mr.
Scott's motion in amendment to the mo-
tion of the Hon. Sir Alex. Campbell,
"That the Canadian Pacific Railway Bill
be now read the second time," by leaving
cut "
now" and after "time inserting
"this day three months,"

Hon. Mr. DICKEY said: Hon. gentlemen, I entirely concur in the sentiment expressed by previous speakers that no more momentous question than the present one has ever engaged the attention of the Parliament of Canada. After the able and exhaustive speeches on the one side by the hon. the leader of the Government, and on the other by the hon. the leader of the Opposition, and after the almost wearisome iteration here and elsewhere of the history of this question, I do not propose to refer, except incidentally, to its historical aspect. We have been called upon by the hon. the leader of the Opposition to deal with this measure in a liberal and independent spirit. Now, distasteful as was the avowal of that hon. gentleman to the people locally interested, I am quite sure that the majority who voted against him on the Esquimalt and Nanaimo Bill must have been exceedingly gratified to find by his assurance that the