Last Months

Administra

tion and the 11th Parliament

III.-DOMINION PUBLIC AFFAIRS

Apart from the engrossing public issues of Reciof the Laurier procity and the General Election there were no outstanding events in connection with the Laurier Government during 1911 except, of course, its retirement in October. Sir Wilfrid Laurier received the usual number of deputations and on Feb. 3rd held a conference with Messrs. Roblin and Rogers of the Manitoba Government as to the long-pending question of Provincial boundaries. On May 5th a delegation of workingmen from Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton and Quebec waited upon the Premier and presented a Memorial containing 18,000 signatures to a request for the continuance of bounties on wire-rods and in support of the Bounty system, generally, as of great importance to the workers in iron and steel industries. Several deputations, headed by J. H. Plummer and others interested financially in these industries, also waited on Sir Wilfrid or Mr. Fielding.

The Premier visited England, was a conspicuous figure at the Coronation and the Imperial Conference, fought the Reciprocity issue in Parliament and the country, and presented in the Commons (for Mr. Fielding) a re-modelled Bank Act which did not become law but proposed important provisions for publicity in connection with the double liability of shareholders, for greater safeguards in the starting of new Banks, for establishing a Shareholders' Audit when desired, for increased penalties as to false official Statements, for the signature of official reports by the President and three Directors. Amongst the many United States comments on the Premier during this year was an article by Senator A. J. Beveridge, in McClure's for July, in which Sir Wilfrid Laurier was described as "a tradition, a legend, an institution in the country." He never made an issue but let events create it and then "became the personification of that issue."

For Mr. Fielding, Minister of Finance, the year was a most strenuous one. He started with the Reciprocity negotiations, presented the results to Parliament and the country and fought a hard fight in his own constituency. He had to face much criticism in connection with the Farmers Bank failure-not the least of which was the assertion that W. R. Travers, its General Manager, contributed to the $120,000 Testimonial given to the Minister in 1910. This was emphatically denied by P. C. Larkin and Senator Jaffray, who had received the Toronto contributions. The acceptance of this Testimonial was, in itself, denounced by the

Conservative press in the strongest terms and an unanimously passed Resolution of Parliament dealing with such matters-Aug. 13, 1891-was widely quoted. On Jan. 31 Mr. A. C. Boyce (Cons.) moved a Resolution in the Commons worded exactly as the preceding one with an addition, however, at the close; and in his speech quoted Liberal opinions against a similar Testimonial once presented to Sir Hector Langevin. The Resolution was as follows:

That the acceptance of gifts or testimonials of any kind on the part of Ministers of the Crown or of any member of their families, from con. tractors, Government officials, or other persons having pecuniary relations with the Government is entirely opposed to sound principles of administration and is calculated to bring Parliamentary Government into contempt, and that the example thus given tends to corrupt and demoralize the officials serving under Ministers who have accepted or permitted the acceptance of gifts or testimonials as aforesaid. That in order to maintain this principle the source of any gifts of money to Ministers of the Crown ought not to be surrounded with secrecy and that an authentic statement of the names of the donors should forthwith be made public.

Mr. Fielding, in reply, related the circumstances leading up to the presentation and the conditions under which it was accepted, as follows: "With the assurance that not one penny would be accepted from any Government contractor, from any person who was likely to be applicant for any fee, patronage or favour from the Government, with the assurance that I would not even know the names, and with the further assurance that the matter had been mentioned to my good friend the Prime Minister and that he had given his approval to the movement, on these conditions, with those assurances, I agreed to accept the Testimonial." After various speeches had been made Sir Wilfrid Laurier eulogized his Minister as a man of honour and integrity and described the Resolution as a vote of non-confidence while Mr. R. L. Borden declared that it could hardly help but be felt by any intelligent man that the sources of such a Testimonial could not remain permanently secret. He took the position that if gifts were made to Cabinet Ministers they should come from untainted sources and be made publicly. At the same time the Opposition Leader paid the highest compliments to Mr. Fielding personally: "I accept absolutely, not merely in the Parliamentary sense, every word he (Hon. Mr. Fielding) stated and I desire to pay tribute to his indefatigable service, his hard and earnest work in the administration of his Department." The Resolution was lost on a party vote of 118 to 63. Coupled with his other responsibilities or difficulties Mr. Fielding had to face impaired health during a part of the year and, early in June, went to Europe for a holiday. While in Paris he made arrangements for better-located Canadian offices in the French capital.

The usual rumours as to Sir Frederick Borden being appointed High Commissioner in England were current during the year

and early in July the matter seemed to be settled with the selection, also, of E. M. Macdonald, M.P., as successor in the Ministry of Militia. The Winnipeg Free Press of July 21st accepted the announcement as of semi-official authority. In the House on May 5th Sir F. Borden stated the position of the Government as to General Sir John French's Report: "The Militia in Eastern Canada will, as recommended, be organized into cavalry brigades and infantry divisions. The ten Military districts will form six divisional areas, each of which will furnish one division, and, collectively, four cavalry brigades. This re-organization can be effected with practically no dislocation of the existing system, as each divisional command will include one or more of the present Military districts. The result of this change will be to place under each Divisional Commander the troops to form the division he would command on mobilization and tend to associate, during training, the units which would work together as a division in the field."

More units would be raised in cavalry, infantry and artillery; about seven years would be required to carry out the entire plan; no increase of expense would be incurred until 1912-13, and no change would take place at present west of Port Arthur. It may be added that the passing of Sir Frederick Borden from the Department, after the General Elections, evoked various tributes to his efficient work-the Canadian Military Gazette of Sept. 26th expressing much public opinion in this comment: "To have been Minister of Militia and Defence for Canada during a period of fifteen years is a unique record, and during that long time he has set his stamp upon the Force. Unlike many of his predecessors, Sir Frederick desired no other portfolio-he was satisfied with the Militia and the Militia was satisfied with him."

Mr. Oliver, Minister of the Interior, was warmly attacked during the Session and in the Electoral contest. He had to contend with a divided household in his own constituency at Edmonton and only obtained re-nomination after a keen fight within his party. In the Toronto Telegram of Apl. 27 there appeared details of the McGillicuddy charges made in letters to the Prime Minister and discussed with him on 7 different occasions by appointment. In the Commons on the 28th Sir Wilfrid Laurier said that "the gentleman in question (D. McGillicuddy) called on me and gave me the name of one of my colleagues and said that he had lost the confidence of the party, particularly in his own Province, that he was a boodler and a grafter, and for these reasons should go out of the Government. I said that I had no reason to doubt the honesty of my colleague, who is not only a colleague but a personal friend, and that I would accept the alternative." This alternative was to place the documents, etc., in the hands of the Opposition. The charge or inference, as afterwards amplified, was that Mr.

Oliver as Minister of the Interior obtained an Order-in-Council on the 8th May, 1907, giving the Canadian Northern Railway Co. power to select in the Province of Saskatchewan 600,000 acres of land in place of lands granted to the Manitoba and South Eastern Railway Co. and that on 3rd October in the same year $50,000 was paid into the Imperial Bank at Edmonton to the credit of Mr. Oliver, and that about one year later the further sum of $19,000 was similarly paid into the same Bank to the credit of Mr. Oliver.

In the House on May 2nd the Minister did not deny the statement of facts but did deny the inferences made or suggested. On the 3rd Sir Wilfrid Laurier moved the appointment of a Special Committee of five Members to investigate and inquire into the matter dealt with in Mr. Oliver's statement of the preceding day. Mr. R. L. Borden objected strongly that the Inquiry was useless unless its terms included the source of the money so deposited. He moved an amendment that the Committee should deal with all the charges and allegations made without the limitations proposed by the Government. Mr. Oliver followed and refused to state where the money came from on the ground that it was his private business and described his critics as the assistants of thugs and blackmailers. The amendment was voted down by 102 to 69 and a further one proposed by Mr. H. Lennox (Cons.) that a Royal Commission be appointed to inquire as to the origin and use of this money was also rejected by 99 to 65. The Premier's motion was then accepted and the Committee named by him on the 11th was composed of A. H. Clarke, F. B. Carvell, Victor Geoffrion (Liberals), with Arthur Meighen and T. W. Crothers (Conservatives). The Inquiry opened on May 18 and the evidence seemed to indicate that the transfer of land grants was put through by the Minister on the advice of his Departmental officers. Other meetings were delayed and the Opposition witnesses from Edmonton had not been heard when Parliament was dissolved. In his first Manifesto Mr. Borden denounced this action, in particular, as an evasion of these charges and of the Inquiry.

Mr. Pugsley, Minister of Public Works, was not especially before the public during 1911-except of course in the Elections and in respect to the large appropriations given his Department. Opposition charges were made as to a Dredging contract at Dalhousie, N.B., in the Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 2 and 3; a heated discussion took place in the House on July 26th as to a Dredging arrangement in the Gaspereau River, N.B. On Feb. 16 the Minister announced in reply to a query from Colonel Sam Hughes that, in future, the Union Jack would fly on all public buildings in border cities and towns and seaports every day in the year. On June 13 Mr. Pugsley was able to advertise for tenders in connection with proposed Harbour works at St. John involv

ing an expenditure of millions. Ultimately, under another Government, the Norton Griffiths firm obtained the contract.

To the St. John Telegraph the Minister said at this date that his Department and that of Railways had many large undertakings in hand-the Hudson's Bay Railway, improved terminal facilities at Halifax, new branch lines to feed the Intercolonial Railway, surveys for the projected deepening of the Welland Canal, a contract with the Canadian Northern for guarantee of its bonds and immediate construction between Montreal and Port Arthur, assumption of Government control over lines subsidiary to the Intercolonial, improvements in Fraser River (B.C.) navigation, work upon the Western system of waterways extending from near Edmonton into the Peace River country and between Edmonton and Winnipeg, the dredging and building of breakwaters at the head of Lake Superior, improvement of the harbours on Georgian Bay, much building of wharves and dredging of harbours everywhere. The expenditures of this Department in the year ending Mch. 31, 1911, were $11,807,350.

The Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) during the Session introduced a measure authorizing the Federal Government to lease the St. John Valley Railway when completed, under the auspices of the Provincial Government; stated on Mch. 10 that the Government had definitely decided to construct the Hudson's Bay Railway and present to Parliament a plan for its operation, for construction of Elevators and terminal facilities for its use and the establishment of a steamship service between Hudson's Bay and Great Britain. He expressed himself as favourable to both the Georgian Bay Canal and the Welland Canal deepening projects. On May 5th the Minister presented Railway Act amendments providing (1) for a joint Board to hear Crossing disputes between Provincial and Dominion Railways and to order the interchange of traffic; (2) requiring annual returns to Government from Telegraph, Telephone and Express Companies and reports from Railways as to accidents, when desired; (3) giving Government certain powers over a Railway allowed to fall into dilapidation and the Railway Commission power to compel railways to provide fire protection along their routes with authority as to regulation and price of the electric power sold by Power Companies; (4) allowing expropriation of unused railway lands for the purposes of other railways and the repealing of certain prohibitions as to cattle at large near a Railway; (5) providing conditions under which property owners could obtain damages from railways and compelling railways to fence the right of way during construction; (6) giving the Railway Commission regulating powers over the crossing of railways by wires and sewers.

In the House on May 11 Mr. Graham explained the terms of the Canadian Northern Railway guarantee. The proposals involved a total outlay by the Company of $50,000,000, a total