•^'« IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 £ Iti 112.0 U 11.6 ^ ^ ^V V r ^ ^, *^ ^'^ ^j"* '> '/ <F r\^^ ^:^' '^ ^^ ^ <v CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian institute for Historical IMicroraproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Physical features of this copy which may alter any of the images in the reproduction are checked below. D D D Coloured covers/ Couvertures de couleur Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur Pages discoloured, stained or faxed/ Pages d6color6es. tachet^es cu piqu6es Tight binding (may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin)/ Raiiure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge int6rieure) L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a AtA possible de se procurer. Certains difauts susceptibles de nuire A la quality de la reproduction sont notte ci-dessous. D D D D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Coloured plates/ Planches en couleur She v through/ Transparence Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Th po of fill Th CO or ap Th fill ini Mi in up bo fo Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires Original copy restored and laminated. Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibliographiques D D Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents D D Pagination incorrect/ Erreurs de pagination Pages missing/ Des pages manquent n Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque D Maps missing/ Des cartes gdographiques manquent D Plates missing/ Des planches manquent Additional comments/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been r^' .u from filming. IS Is Ths imsgss sppssring hsrs srs ths bsst quslity possibis considsring ths condition snd isgibility of ths originsi copy snd in Itssping with ths fiiming contrsct tpscificstions. Ths Isst rscordsd frsms on ssch microfichs shsli contsin ths symboi — ► (mssning CONTINUED"), or ths symboi V (mssning "END"), whichsvsr sppiiss. Lss imsgss suivsntss ont At* rsproduitss svsc is pius grsnd soin, compts tsnu ds Is condition st ds is nsttst* ds i'sxsmpisirs film*, st sn conformity svsc iss conditions du contrst ds filmsgs. Un dss symboiss suivsnts sppsrsftrs sur is dsr- ni*rs imsgs ds chsqus microfichs, ssion is ess: Is symbols —»- signifis "A SUIVRE". is symbols y signifis "FIN". Ths origins' copy wss borrowsd from, snd f iimsd witn, ths itind conssnt of ths following institution: Librsry of ths Public Archivss of Csnsds Maps or pistss too isrgs to bs sntirsiy inciudsd in ons sxposurs srs fiimsd boginning in ths uppsr isft hsnd cornor, Isft to right snd top to bottom, as many frsmas as rsquirsd. Ths following disgrsms iilustrsts ths msthod: L'sxsmpisirs film* f ut rsproduit grAcs A Is g6n6rosit6 ds I'Atsbiisssmsnt prAtsur suivsnt : lA bibllothAqus dss Archivss publlquss du Csnsds Lss csrtss ou Iss pisnchss trop grsndss pour Atrs rsproduitss sn un ssul clichA sont fllmAss A psrtir ds I'sngis supArisurs gsuchs, ds gauchs h droits st ds hsut sn bss, sn prsnsnt Is nombrs d'imsgss nAcssssirs. Ls diagramms suivant iilustrs is methods : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 ■•' ^ 5 M \ssik House of Commons B abates m FIFTH SESSION-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT. SPEECH or NICHOLAS FLOOD DAVLN, M.P. ON THE l^v 'Mf V:\ REVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL SITUATION OTTAWA, TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1900 r Mr. NICHOLAS FLOOD DAVIN (West Asslnlbola). A number of things, Mr. Speaker, have been omitted in this debate that I do not think It would be fit to leave untouched in so important a crisis la our parliamentary history. It is perfectly clear from the speech we have just listened to, that we are on the eve of a general elec- tTon, and therefore, we are looking back over five sessions and four years and a month of the administration of the present government. The hon. gentleman who is leading the opposition (Mr. Poster) In a brilliant, cogent, convincing speech, went over a number of 'tems, a number of great questions and great administrative transactions on which this government stands convicted before the country. The hon. gentlemnn sp«ke of the dealings of the Minister of Public Works with Mr. Qauthler and Mr. Robillard. and he referred Inferentlally to the deal- ings with regard to the Edmonton bridge and a number of other matters that ha'-e disgraced the conduct of the Public Wot'ts Department. I|e referred to the Railway Department, which at this moment Is regarded as a pear that has the yellows, by the people of Can- ada. He referred to that departpea^t the ndmlniatrntlon of which, now, fflat we are closing these four years, the people are be- ginning to understand, and with regard to which a frighiail revelation has been made in another place. He referred especially and particularly to the $425 per day for the dredging of the Galops Rapids, in regard to which not one word has been said by the hon. the Minister of Finance. Why ? No doubt because not one could be said. The hon. gentleman was here the other night when we wanted In- formation from the Minister of Railways. Could we get any Information or any ex- planation ? We could get nothing from him but what I regret to have to describe as what we should not exi)ect from a minister of the Crown. What we hould expect from a minister of the Crown Is candour, confi- dence in parliament. Ingenuousness and readiness to give Information. You would not expect from him the insolence of an Illiterate and dragged un person. I do not say that the hon. gentleman Is such a per- son, but I say that I never saw a nearer approach to vulgar Insolence than we got from the hon. gentleman when we wanted to know what was the meaning of this tremendous charge of $425 per day for a dredge. Not one word was said about that incident by the hon. the Minister of Fin- ance. Not one word did he say about the oil contract or about that change of contract by the Minister of Railways, which places him In the same category as the emergency food business has placed the Minister of MlUtla. Where that has placed the Minister of Militia Is understood by the people of Canada, and all the glowing words of the hon. g<;nt)eman who has Just taken bis seat 1 mUb and given snch a nice little defence, cannot relieve his colleague, the Minister of Militia, from the charge that is In the people's minds againat him as the head of that de- partment. Either one of two things— either he is an imbecile or he is corrupt. The MINISTER OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS. That is not In order. Mr. DAVIN. If that Is out of order. I withdraw it. The hon. gentleman will sec that I put it altematlTely, and if I wished to argue the point, I think I could show that I was not out of order, but I withdraw it at once, because I have no desire to be out of order. I will say this for the Minis- ter of Finance. There is one thing great about him, and that Is his audacity. He commenced by saying that the present gov- ernment Is in no way responsible for the delays that have taken place this session. He said that there was not a day when the government was not ready with business, and tried to throw the blames on the opposi- tion. Why, it was the 23rd March before the hon. gentleman brouj;ht down his budget. Parliament opened the 1st Febru- ary, and It was the 23rd March before the hon. gentleman gave us his budget. And what is the business of the country ? It is to discuss the budget, the estimates, the supplies. What happened subsequently V We had a fire In Hull. On the day of that Are, we met here to do business, but the right hon. the Prime Minister got up and with an ingenuousness on which I cannot compliment blm, he said : We will not have any more light for some days, and had bet- ter adjourn, and on his motion we ad- journed until the following Tuesday. There was no reason for the adjournment because there was plenty of light, except the reason that the government had no business to go on with. Yet the Minister of Finance has the effrontery to stand up here «nd say that the government was always ready. Then who does not remember the junior a\ember of Halifax moving an amendment on the preferential trade on the motion to go into Committee of Sui>ply ? Is the hon. gentleman aware of the re- cord of the Liberal party with regard to railway subsidies ? Unable to defend him- self he has recourse to the plea that there had been some slight difference In the way the lilberal party has de»:I.t with subsidies as compared with that of the previous gov- ernment. I leave that to the public to judge. Then we have the hon. gentleman's de- fence of the McKenzle & Mann contract. Did he defend it on Its merits or say it was a good contract ? Did iie gay It showed the heaven born genius of the young Napoleon or the wise genius that presides over the council chamber of seventeen heaven-born ministers ? Not at all. All be lald was that it was sanctioned by Sir Charles Tnpper, sa thiat all that the Minister of Finance has to say of this scheme that was universally con- demned by the people, that was thrown out by the Senate, and that the government never dared to revive— all that he has to say is that It was approved by Sir Charles Tupper. But, as a fact, It was never approved. The defence the hon. gentleman makea has not a single inch of ground to staad upon and 1 will tell you why. Sir Charles Tupper was la Montreal when the contract with Mac- kenzie & Mann was announced, and saw the newspaper paragraphs with regard to it as he was coming upon the train; and when he got to Ottawa he gave an interview to a reporter. He endorsed the general scheme, but not one word did he say as to the merits of the transaction. So, the de- fence of the Minister of Finance falls to the ground. Now, we come to the tariff. And we need not be surprised that the hon. gentleman made no defence on that subject. He said: We are accused of only making small changes In the tariff. Well, be could not say they had made great changes, although he had on his right his leader— that leader who had declared that If he got Into power he would take a sponge and wipe away pro- tection; that leader who went from end to end of Canada declaring that the Upas tree of protection should be pulled up; that lender who came to Manitoba and the North-west Territories and who in Regina and Moosejaw declared that the farmers should be relieved of the oppression of the protective system; that leader who with his prospective Minister of Agriculture at his side allowed that hon. gentleman to declare that the 20 per cent duty on Implements was oppression, thereby declaring, by implica- tion, that if they got Into power, that duty would be done away with; that leader who afterwards took the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Sifton) into his caibinet, a gen- tleman who had run the campaign for Dalton McCarthy as well as for himself on the cry of ' free implements.' And yet they have been in power five sessions and there is still a 20 per cent duty on implements; and the cheaper cottons are taxed higher than ever; and coal oil is dearer than ever, and no relief for the consumer. The Finance Min- ister knew all these things. He was like a man skating on thin ice; he glided over the traffic as quickly as he could. As to the tariff, there is not a man, but especially the Prime Minister and the Minister of the In- terior, and the Minister of Agrlcuture— there is not a man belonging to the old leaders of the Liberal party in parliament here that does not stand before Canada forsworn— their lips are blistered with their perjury to the people of Canada. No wonder the Minister of Finance glides away from the tariff questolon. What is his defence on the emergency ration ? Why, he did not «ee the point The point is that you have a Min- ister of Militia closeting himself with a 7<^/^y < f contractor, receiving Xrom him a tender and giving blm a contract, tlie whole thing done in this sleigh t-of -hand manner. Aad you have not merely broken biscuits in paint cans sent to our soldiers— that is nut ihe grava- men of the charge ; but the gravamen of the charge is, as a Liberal speaking behind theiu said, it smelhi of something that we must not name In this chamber at least in con- nection with the name of any hou. member; but it is named and will be shouted through- out Canada. The gravaman is that it is Impossible to come to any other conclusion than that somebody in that Department of Militia was conspiring with Devlin. Who he '.8 I am not going to say. And how does tho hon. gentleman (Mi'. Fielding) defend it 7 Why, he says, it was only the small sam— 14,000. As If this would make any difference. If it were only forty cents— if there was fraud and villainy and Infamy beneath it. But the minister (Mr. Fielding) glides o£t and says that something siiuilur took place under Conservative rule. Is that any defence ? The leader of the opposition (Mr. Foster) traversed what he said. Is this the kind of government we have— thai they cannot defend a single charge except by saying that somebody else did something as bad V You call me a thief, and 1 say you have purloined a pocket handkerchief. You say my v'rtue is not what It should be, and I ask you If you are chaste ? It is talk only heard In the unnamable purlieus of great cities. You see two people with arms akimbo and jaw to jaw howling, ' you're another, you're another.' When the hon. gentleman came to the expenditure, there was the gliding ou thin Ice. I suppose he learned to slide in Halifax. I should like to see him on skates. Here is a government whose members. In a hall within earshot of this chamber, declared that If they were returned to power they would reduce the expenditure and reduce the public debt, both of which they characterized as fearful. But after four years we find that they have Increased both. And what is their defence? ' We have not Increased them as much as you did.' Why, this Is the language — I suppose I may name the hon. gentleman as he is now in Paris— this is the language of Tarte. As he says: We have spent much, but we have made much. ' We.' It Is not the ploughman In the field. It is not the mechanic in the shop. It la not the mer- chant, it Is not the toller.who have made Can- ada proeperauB but ' we,' sitting In ' our ' ottlces or making ' our ' little speeches in parliament. Why, Sir, the expenditure, as the hon. member for York (Mr. Poster) has shown, has gone up to a frightful extent. But the answer is: If you will look at it Closely, it will not look quite so bad, be- cause the country is prosperous and can bear it. This Is the language of a young spend- thrift who has come in for a great fortune. He has promised his father that he will economize and will look carefully after the estate. But after four years the father finds that he has been Indulging in the most licentious extravagance; and when spoken to about it the young spendthrift says : Is it not my own ? Have 1 not a fine income and a great estate V He has both, though he did not do anything to create them. Hun. gentlemen opposite came into a great estate. I grant you, an estate that had been man- aged for eighteen years with consummate skill, with such skill as to lay foundation for expansion to the present proportions. But, coming Into that estate, they say : It Is we who have made It all. The Prime Min- ister points to the great canals sweeping through the vast domain, canails that have been deepened by his predeceesors and says: Is it not magnificent ? I did it all. But one who hears that begins to think: Well this man has only been on the estate for tour years; and T think I have heard about one .Tohn A who used to be here; and I think I have seen these canals deepened years ago. But no, the Prime Minister says: I did It all; I made all this prosperity. The argu- ment of the hon. gentleman (Mr. Fielding) with regard to the expenditure is worth noting carefully. He says, with re- gard to the expenditure that that expenditure is not so bad, because it lias been kept within the receipts. Has he done that ? Why, Sir, one of the ways that it appears to be liept within re- ceipts, is this, that you are charging to capi- tal account things that should n<iver be charged to capital. The Minister of Rail- ways and Canals the other night had to re- duce, at the bidding of my hon. friend, one item by $7,000. The hon. gentleman saw it was improper. Among those items, we had $5,000 for a , ^,>w fence charged to capital. If we could only get a glimpse at that snow fence, we should see still more clearly that It is a ecandal to book-keeping to charge a snow-fence to capital. But in that snow fence there is a nigger. He has a rubicund face— I will go no further. Now. Sir. the hon. gentleman, in claiming credit for the extension of income, forgot to sny that the price of every commodity has gone up. You are under a complete de- lusion. You are deceiving the people uncon-. selously, when you say there have been much larger purchases than in years past. The fact is that the price of everything has so gone up that these gentlemen are collect- ing tolls on that advanced price, and they are working the whole out of the expendi- ture of the country. Then the hon. gentle- man felt uneasy about economy, he felt the dart of the leader of the opposition sticking under his fifth rib. What was his defence ? What was the final defence made by these hon. gentlemen the last time they will sit on those Treasury benches for many a year f What is their defence for not having brought about the economy they promised ? Why, Sir, they read a speech of Sir Charles Tup- ■r per made In 1878. Sir Charles Tapper said In 1878, that they would be more economical than Mr. Mackensle, and were they not ? Did the hon. gentleman prove that the Con- servative government did not carry out his promise to be more economical 1 When he said he would be more economical, he meant that the Incompetence end maladministra- tion tbttt had oharacterized the Mackenzie goveroiment, would not characterize his ad- ministration, and that he would on the lines of administration of Mr. Mackenzie be mure ecouumical than he ; and if you make a comparloon of the two administrations yon will find that th/it promise was carried out. And the hoii. gentleman to-night points to the expenditure In 1881-2, In order to show the vast extravagance of the present govemmenl was not so bad after all. When, In 1879, the Conservative administration came into power, a new sense of life rushed through the veins of the country. Great schemes were put forward. At that time the government of Sir ,Tohn A. Macdonald had entered upon the greatest work that any people of ten millions or twenty mil- lions had ever entered upon, that of build- ing the greatest railway in the world, a work which put back-bone and body, breadth, as well as length, into Canada. The government of Sir John A. Macdonald enter- ed upon a career of great public works, and yet the hon. gentleman puts his hands on bis heart, and says : It is I who built all these canals. There they are, false to every promise, false to tlie promise of tariff re- duction, false to the promises of economy, and then, strutting about like a Jackdaw in peacock's plumes, saying that the achieve- ments of bitter men who preceded them, are their achievements. It is by such means that they hope to capture the people. Sir, the people know them from the Prime Min- ister to the Minister of the Interior, from the Minister of the Interior to the Minister of Public Works, from the Minister of Public Works to the Minister of Railways and Canals. Why, there is not a man of them who is not convicted before the people of Canada to-day. And yet the minister says : We are godng before the peoiple, we will be accepted and returned again. Yes, re- . turned again. Do they indeed suppose the people at this hour, are capable of being humbugged to the extent they think they can humbug them ? The policy of this gov- ernment on which it got in, and on which it is living to this hour, can be described in jQst one word : Humbug, humbug, humbug. I was surprised to read the other day In the Qiizette of 1877, that a constituent of the right hon. gentleman, had at that period actually done what It took some of u« a eouple of years to do. A constituent of his wrote a letter to the Gazette quoting a speech that the hon. gentleman made whein he tlu>ught that only French ears were listening to him. He was talking about the tax on tea, and he said : The tax only affects Irishmen, becavMe Irkibmen only are fond of tea. pota- toes and whisky. Th» writer of this letter Is an Irishman who resented this insult to Irishmen.. And he then states that he had heard the hon. gentlemen in ddfferent parts of his constituency, and that his habit was to say one thing on one platform, and another thing on another. We kno'v^ that la his habit. But, Sir, 'in vain Is the net spread in the sight of any bird." The people of this great community have been taken once, but now the net has been spread so palpably that the game cannot work any longer. The right hon. gentleman came up west and spoke in his calm, nice way and charming manner, and the people took him at his word and they said : He Is going to give us what he promised at Moosejaw, lower freight rates, free implementp, cheap coal oil ; he is going to give us complete en- franchisement. Now, they believe that If they gave him power again, he would not touch one of the things he promised, no not with his Uttle finger. Now, Sir, need we be surprised that under these circumstances we find yourself, Mr. Speaker, and other hon. members of this House refusing, some of them refusing out of fear and same of them because they will not face the people under the weight of the odium, under the crushing weight of broken pledges and falsified promises that any maa who shoulders the task of running as a candida4:e of the right hon. gentleman has to face and to bear— refusing to again offer themselves for re-election to this House. Where are they going ? They cannot be elected. I have been In some of the con- stituencies. I have attended some picnics In the west, I have mode some speches, and the people of the country, if I may use a vulgar expression, are on to them and on to them all. The hon. gentleman glided very rapidly over very thin, thin Ice. He did not dare to touch Gauthler, my son's father-in- law, or RoblUard. The charming way that RobiUard gets a note from the sec- retary of the department : Please tender ! You remember the connection by marriage with one of the sons or daughters, I do noit know which It Is, of the hon. Minister of Public WoriM. Please tender ; and Chen Robillard tenders. Roblllard Is more wide awake than Grauthler, and wliat does he do ? Now. Mr. Speaker, I commend this to your consideration. Roblllard antedates his ap- plication so as to make ic appear that It pre- ceded the invitatfou to tender. But, he for- got, when sending It, with tbait guileless Innocent of an Israelite Indeed, to tell the clerk in the FuibUc Works Department not to stamp the letter, because it is the custom when a letter comes into the d«i>apt- ment to staonp the date upon which It ar- rives, and we have that guileless letter of UohiUard dated after the luTltatlon to ten- der was given. Then Gautl^r, I beileve. is a qnlll diUver. Fancy Oauthler adTandnff to (Sredge the rapids with Mn qnUl in hi* hand ! When the hon. leader of the oiioo- ''*• f '■X:Si-Mi'\ ■r 1 f H m ^ 1 litloD (Mr. Foster) or myaoif asked ttae bon. Minister of Public Works : ' Who la Oau- UHer ? Is be a rekitlve of yours V ' No,' Id bis rather bluff, emphatic way, ' Ue la no relative odT lulne.' ' Is he your son's father- In-Vaw V and then the heroic manner In Which tfhe bon. Minister of Public Works ■aid : ' How oau I help It if my sons do have faders-ln-law ? ' The hou. geutlemau glided over the cement busini'ss and he never said a word about $425 for a dredge. We want to know what kind of a dredge it was ? Four hundred and twenty-five dollars a day ! I wa« speaking to a maji, noit very far from a minister of the Crown, and be could not underattin4 how any di-edge would cost $425 a day. Eight dollars an hour is a good price for a dredge or $80 a day. Uigiht dollars an hour is what Oauthler gets, I believe. Ue gives $5 and alts there In his otllce. writing away with his quill ; the <lri)diging Is bedu^ done and he takes $3 an bour. Is it not a nice thing to be the father-in-law of the son of a minister ? It Is one oif the best asselis in Oauada to-day to be a relation of one of the m'nlatefs. t think we have heard of a relation of a bilnister wtho had a sleeping iuterest in a railway contract. And, we had the young Napoleon. I do not know whether the bon. leader of the opiposdtlon said anything about Burrows. These mardtaJ relations are so embarrassing to the government. One is the father-in-law of the son of a minister, another is the mother-in-law and Burrows la the brother-dn-law of lihe hon. Minister of the Interior. I exposed how Burrows got an opportunity away from all competitors, without fuLfllling the conditions of an order in council, passed to enable Mm to get hold of these timber Mmlts, and how he was en- abled to make $25,000 at a snap. These re- lationehli^M are a great thing. Then, my hon. friend gave us a proverb. This gov- eriMPSTiit Is strong on many things. It is €rtTOng on tu quoque. but it is eapecIaMy strong on proverbs. It commenced Its car- eer wJtih 'Businees is buslne.ss,' enunciated by the hon. Minister of Public Works, and now we have the hon. Minister of Finance telling us that he is a great admirer of what is written up In the west. ' Wise ex- penditure is true economy.' The Galena oil deal, the Crow's Nest deal, the Drum- mond County, the Oalops Rapids, the Ed- monton Bridge, the Mann-Mackenzie deal, and in face of these we have the pro- verb. ' Wise expenditure Is true economy.' Then we have last, but not least, the emergency ration business. It Is only $4.00<> ; what signifies It ? It Is not $4,000 that the people are caring about. We had beitter have it dmgiged out Into tbe llgM at once because we know we have a man at the head of the Militia Department whose character onght to drive him from tlmt position. We know that the Prime Mlnlmer knows It because I know that the facts are In the posseMlon of the Prime Minister, and It is scandalous cowardice en our part that we will not drag into llglat the InAunous use that Is made of Ohe author- ity oif a minister wbo uses bis ministerial power to gratify the errant impulses of a corrupt nature. There are transactions known to tbe Prime Minister in regard to that man that should have prevented tbe Prime Minister from placing him In a posi- tion where he would have Vbe opportunity of gratifying bis greed, to put it mildly. I say It Is scandalous, and if the Priime Min- ister had had a proper sense of wlhat Is due to himself and due to the people of Canada the hon. Minister of MUitla would not have been In his present place, and we should have been spared these developanents in re- gard to DerOln which are as disignaceful to Canada as they are dangerous to our young men. Then the Minister of Finance said that the aggregate taxation was a proof of pros- perity, and that the country was merelj keeping pace with it. Increased expendi- ture ; Increased income ; and he harped upon that The thing is so utterly baseless, that the strongest admirer of the Prime Minister in Canada, the gentleman who writes in tbe .s'mw", has had to abandon a defence in re- gard to these matters and to come out and say that there can be no defence for it. It is all very well to see these rainlsters In the second and third year of their term, coming to the House with their shoulders swaggering as we have seen them, coming in feeling that their pockets are well lined, and that they are iu power and can drive about In their carriages ; that Is all very fine, but now when they are about to go before the people of Canada and to render an account there is an unwonted pallor and an unused humility In their demeanour. What was the minister's (Mr. Fielding's) defence about the Yukon. He said : I have Just got the figures from the Minister of tbe Interior, and for three years. 1897-8. 1806-9, and into 1900. the receipts were $3,869,000, and the expenditure $3,215,000. That would make a surplus of $653,000. or for the three and a half years $187,000 a year. That Is tbe profit from a Grolconda ; that is tbe profit orit of the cream skimming of the richest gold-bearing land in tbe world. Why. Sir, if tlie Minister of the Interior had managed that teiTltory in the interests of Canada "hnd ■not In the interests of Wade and McGregor and his pals. Instead of having $187,000 a vear we should have had a million In the coffers of Canada. Did the Minister of Finance try to show there was no mla- raanagement ? Not at all. His duty was to have defended the sending of the mill Ha there which Is perfectly indefensible, and to have defended the numberless mal- administrations en the part of the minister (Mr. Slfton), but aill he did was to say there was 1187.000 a yenr profit out of the rlcbeat gold-bearing lands on the face uf tbu globe. It la a Bcandaioud record, and there la no part of the somewhat bold defence of the Minister of Finance bolder than that. Then, we had his peroration : Four years of good government ; four years uf clean government Olean government ! Why, Mr. Speaker : Heaven stupi the nose at It, and the moon wlnka; Tlie baudy wind that klises all It meeti I* hushed within the hollow mine of earth, And will not hear It. Clean government, forsooth. Corrupt gov- ernment, a government so corrupt that It Is putrid now. The Minister of Finance said : Look at ua. We had u bnth this morning ; our face is washed ; we have a paper collar and a new tie, and a white shirt that we got done In the Chinese laundry ; see how spick and span we are. Yes, Mr. Speaker, look closely at them. Why, Sir, you cannot go near theiu without having evidence to more than one sense that there has the foulest of all diseases crept Into that gov- ernment. You cannot talk with a man on the street car but he tells you— sometimes a Liberal, and sometimes a Conservative — that the moment this government appeals to the people, they will be swept away by the Indignation of the electors at their mis- conduct. I grant you that from a popular government or from the administration of any government, you cannot wholly kee^p away much that you would like to. Cor- ruption will steal in. But it is a form of corruption that may leave ministers com- paratively pure. Under pressure of poli- tics, sometimes more men may be employed or something of that sort, but what we see in the present government i« that into every part of the House, into their parlour. Into their study, and into the holy of holies, eo to speak, of the internal management of the government things that we do not like to speak of have crept. You cannot think of the Department of the Interior, with its Wades, its McGregors, its McCrearys, its deals— and all more or less connected with the minister— until that minister is so dis- credited, that when the Minister of Finance yesterday or the day before tried to get up a cheer for him, ana the hon. member for Grey (Mr. Landerkln) to-day, they could only just clap their two miserable hands to/»ether. There was not an echo from an- other member. And when the minister (Mr. Slfton) rose to speak after being tour months away, presumably ill, allegedly ill, and when the parly should have some tender- ness for him, when he rose in his place twice to vote, there was not a cheer. An attempt to cheer from the ministerial benches ended miserably as I have describ- ed. It was vain to try and get one up, and those who did had to clap their two miser- able palms together In vain. Let me say here in regard to the Min- ister of the Interior. We may discuss it. lie has come back, and I am florry to aay that be la not a bit improved. I know what his disease is, and I honestly regret to say that it is Incurable. The technical name for it Is non-purulent otitis media catarrahalis. In ordinary language it is called dry catarrh of the middle ear. It is Incurable. It may go on as It is for years and years, and the hearing remain about the same, but every aurist knows It is ipaposfiible to make It Itetter. One of the best aurists in the world is Dr. Buller, of Montreal, and yet we read of the Min- ister of the Interior going here and going there, spealdng in I/ondon and spenlcIuK in Paris, when he could have consulted the very best professional advice at home. What was to prevent him coming across to Can- ada ? It is only a nine days trip. What was to prevent him coming across the ocean and spending a night with us, and giving us some explanation, and going with us to one of the committees. No, Sir ; he never spread his wings for Canada until the rumour came that this House was about to close. Take .Mr. Tarte. Nobody need ^have any tenderness In speaking of his health. The man who can go about making speeches from one part of the continent to the other (and making such speeches) no- body thinks for one moment that it Is ill- ness that keeps Mr. Tarte away. The reason why both these gentlemen have kept away from this House was to prevent vs do- ing what we would have done if they were here, namely, arranging them as you could not arraign them In their absence. That !■ the reason they remained away. Take the conduct of the Minister of Public Works. Take his carpet scandal, take the scandal of the fence around the park. Take the scandal of the Edmonton bridge. Why, Sir, I saiu Id regard to that bridge, and I repeat it, that I put the handcuffs on his wrists in such a manner that no power under heaven can take them off. Mr. Tarte will stand for ever before the people of Canada with re- gard to that Edmonton bridge, with the handcuffs on his wrists, because the facts as' shown by the documents to be found in his own department, bring guilt home to bim. These things being so, fancy the boldness of the hon. gentleman. I said the other day that if my friend the member for North Wellington (Mr. McMullen) were dissected, I would like to get his gall. But -what would the gall of the member for Nort'j Wellington be to the gall of the hon. gent?e- man who has just defended his government? He told us a atory about some young lady and about marriage. It was a nice little story and very appropriate. I suppose I may tell a little story that wlU apply to this government when they go with theh* sunny waye and offer the boy Canada an orange, and he refuses, as I think he will to take the orange, or to be taken In by the smile ; and the reason will be Illustrated by this story. There -was a doctor who used to give .f^mmnni^-^^ ■weets and candles and oranges to a little boy. One day he gave tbe boy an orange, and afterwards, to see bow tbe boy would take It, he hid himself and threw aside a curtain which concealed a skeleton such as doctors sometimes have. The boy ran away frightened. The next day tbe boy was at the other side of the street, and the doctor said, ' Ck)me, won't you have an oraugc to-day ?' * No. no.' said the b^y. ' I will have no more oranges of yours ; you know I saw you naked yesterday.' When the hon. gentleman go«^s with his sunny ways and oCTers the boy Canada taffy and oranges, If his taffy and his sunny smiles do not have the same reception as they used to have, and the boy Oapada gives him the cold shoulder and a wide berth, let him remem- ber that the boy has now seen him naked. The skeleton of the Liberal party is before tbe people of Canada, and the sunny ways and the taffy will avail no more. i