THE PACIFIC RAILWAY.

The Pacific Railway bill was received from the Senate with the amendments, which were passed.

TONNAGE DUES.

Hon. Sir FRANCIS HINCKS moved the second reading of the Act to raise tonnage dues and wharfage rates for improvements in the navigation of the river St. Lawrence, between Montreal and Quebec. Carried. The bill passed the Committee, wis read a third time, and passed.

JUDGES' SALARIES.

Mr. BODWELL moved the second read. ing of the bill respecting Judges' salaries. Carried. The bill was passed through committee, read a third time and passed. Hon. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD moved the second reading of the Act to amend the Act relating to Judges travelling allow. ances to the whole Dominion. Carried. The bill was passed through committee, read a third time and passed.

COPYRIGHT.

Hon. Sir FRANCIS HINCKS moved the House into committee on the Act to amend the Act respecting copyrights.

The bill was reported with amendments, which was read a first and second time,

RAILWAY MAP.

Hon. Sir GEORGE CARTIER moved the adoption of the report of the railway committee, recommending an appropriation to complete a map for the railway commit tee-room, and that the same be paid out of the contingencies of the House.Carried.

TRADES' UNIONS.

Hon. Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD moved the second reading of the Act respecting Trades' Unions.

Mr. MASSON (Terrebonne) regretted that this important bill should have been delayed till this late hour of the session. He hoped the House would unite in appealing to the Government to withdraw it. Hon. Sir J. A. MACDONALD said there was nothing in the bill which could do injustice to either employers or employees. Its object was to repeal a harsh Act. under which mechanics could be indicted for every association they might form. The amendment had been adopted in the British Parliament without a dissenting voice, because it was felt that the old law was too oppressive to be endorsed by free men. Recent events in Toronto had shown the

necessity of adopting some amendment here.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said he saw no reason for the objections urged by the member for Terrebonne. He (Mr. Mackenzie) had only one objection to it, that quiring them to register their Unions. He it placed restrictions on workingmen, recould not see the necessity for that clause.

After further discussion the motion for the second reading was carried on a division. The bill was passed through Committee of the Whole. On motion for third reading,

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE suggested that the clause relating to the representation of Trades' Unions was beyond the jurisdic. tion of this House. It was a matter for the Local Legislature and not for this Parliament to deal with.

Mr. MASSON (Terrebonne,) renewed his request that the bill be withdrawn for this

session.

Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD said it

could not be done without injury to the Dominion, for it workingmen should learn that the old law remained unchanged, they would not come to settle in Canada. After further discussion the bill was read a third time and passed.

THE CRIMINAL LAW.

The Act to amend the Criminal Law re lating to violence, threats, and molestation, was read a second time and passed. The House adjourned at 12:45 a m.

SENATE.

WEDNESDAY, 12th June, 1872. The SPEAKER took the chair at three o'clock.

INCORPORATION BILLS.

The following bills were read a third time and passed: -Gananoque Navigation Company; Imperial Guarantee Loan Society; Quebec Pacific Railway Company; Ontario and Erie Ship Canal Company; Western Assurance Chmpany: Interoceanic Railroad Company; Thunder Bay Silver Mines Company; Queenstown Suspension Bridge Company; Sault Ste. Marie Railway and Bridge Company; Canada Pacific Railroad Company; Canada Central Rail road Company; Pacific Junction Bridge Company; New York Bridge and Tunnel Company.

SALARIES.

Hon, Mr. FERRIER called attention to

Mr. BARTHE moved for a return of the claims of Messrs. H. & A. Lemont for certain lands in Sorel. Carried.

Mr. WHITE (East Hastings) moved re. solutions on the subject of lands lying within the Indian reserves in the town ship of Tyndega, in Hastings. It proposed to sell a certain portion of these lands, by which the Indians would be largely benefitted.

Hon, Sir JOHN MACDONALD dd not see how the resolution could pass. The land was the property of the Indians and could not be fold without their sanction. Surely the territory of the Dominion was large enough to spare part to the tribes. He was not surprized that the lands were occasionally coveted, but the Indians should be treated as favoured children. If the lands must be valued, that would be done by the Indian Department and he had no doubt they kept trace of that.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said there might be reason for feeling dissatisfied at the presence of large bodies of Indians near

towns. Wherever these were, however. they must be treated faily and their rights respected.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON agreed with the Minister of Justice. but the question arose if the Indians should not be emancipated and their lands divided among heads of families so as to come under the national law of property. In some cases this, he knew, might be done without incovenience, but properly each case should come up by itselt

Mr. STEWART CAMPBELL called attention to the official name of the Indians translated into French sauvages, which was offensive to them.

Mr. BOWELL explained the object of the resolution to be to enable a portion of and the proceeds devoted to their benefit. the land had on lease by whites to be sold, There were eight hundred acres in this position out of eighteen thousand, and the land was constantly deteriorating in value.

After further discussion the resolutions were withdrawn. Hon. Sir John Macdonald promising that the attention of the Indian Department would be called to the subject.

of the reports of the Printing Committee, Mr. BROUSSEAU moved the adoption recommending the printing of certain reports, and the report of the audit of the year's account. Carried.

Mr. MACDOUGALL (Lanark) said, at the beginning of this Parliament, owing to a fit of economy, twelve and a-half per cent. was deducted from the salaries of all officers of the House. He believed that the House had gone too far in that direc tion, as the salaries were not excessive. In the Civil Service Act progressive salaries were authorized, but the officers of this House did not come within that Act, and had no chance of a raise. He thought that if injustice had been done, it should be rectified. He moved "that all officers of this House whose salaries had been reduc ed, should have an annual increase to their salaries from the date of such reduction, at the same rate as those in the Civil Service of equal rank." The House had recognized the injustice that had been done, and one or two motions had been made to remedy it in exceptional cases. There was an officer who occupied a seat at the table in this House who had been forty years in the public service, and who actually received less salary than he had fourteen years ago. He did not believe that the members of this House could plume themselves with having cut off twelve and a half per cent. from the salaries of officers. The people at large rather desire a reduction of useless offices,

if there were such, than the paring down of the salaries of efficient men.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON seconded the motion.

Mr. CAMERON had no doubt whatever that if a large number of the officers en gaged in the work of the House were removed, it would be difficult to replace them, and in any other position they would be paid larger salaries than here. The whole of the expenditure saved by the reduction of twelve and a-half per cent. was only $6000 a year. He also referred to the anomaly of messengers of this House who received $2 a day or about $120 whilst messengers of the Senate received $200, although their duties were not nearly so onerous."

Mr. CHAUVEAU quite agreed in the motion of the hon. member for Lanark. He had disapproved of the reduction of salaries when it was made, and would rejoice at this charge for the better. The hon. member for Lanark had spoken of the claims of an officer who was at the table. He (Mr. Chauveau) also saw at the table an officer who had for many years sat at the clerk's table, and who for many years had performed the difficult task of French translator.

Mr. McDONALD (Lunenburg), thought that the pay of the sessional clerks should be increased. The pay now, he thought, was quite insufficient to compensate these officers for their services. An officer thus employed could not engage in any other pursuit. He urged that a bonus should be given which should represent the amount which had been taken from them during the few years.

Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD reminded the House that the question of salaries had been referred to a Committee of the House in the first Session of this Parliament. The Committee had reported in favour of a reduction of 12 per cent., and the House had adopted the report. It would not look well in the country on the last day of the last Session to make their last vote reverse an Act of the same Parliament. It would be remembered that this report recommending a reduction of 12 per cent, was carried at the instance of the Government to prevent a still greater reduction being made. He did did not think that they should at the present time, with their power leaving their hands, pass a motion which would, in fact, involve the reversal of the policy adopted by the Committee and the House, at it proposed the payment to the officers of the amount which had been taken from them, and would involve a very large sum of money. He would have been well con

tented had this reduction not been made; but as the matter was, he did not think it would look well if such an increase were made as now proposed. If the hon. gentleman thought fit, he might refer the internal economy committee to consider during recess. That many of the officers were worthy of all consideration, he knew; and the attention of the committee might be called to their case, and they might be requested to deal with their salaries for the present year. It might be understood that the internal economy commissioners could increase the salaries to the extent of twelve and a-half per cent. for the next year, save in same exceptional cases when it might not be deserved, and leave to a new Parliament to adjust the whole system. He quite agreed with the hon. gentleman who had just spoken. He had seconded the motion, as he approved of the spirit of it, but he did not quite catch the sense of it as carrying them back over the five years. He did not think that would be proper. He thought it inconsistent with parliamentary practice to pass an act having a retractive effect; and they must, he thought, confine themselves to the pre sent and future.

Hon. Mr. MACDOUGALL said that the leader of the Government having indicated another mode of dealing with this matter, he would consent to it. His motion he thought had not gone so far as was stated. It merely asked to apply the provisions of the Civil Service Act to these salaries as regarded increase, and to put the officers of the House on the same footing as those in the Departments.

Hon Mr. MACKENZIE said that at the time that the report referred to was adopted, he had thought that it was unjust to make an indiscriminate reduction in salaries, and he thought that it would be equally wrong now to make an increase. He thought that there were many officers who deserved increases indeed he had spoken to several of the officials who would have got better salaries had they gone into other services. They, however, disliked to leave, as they preferred the service, and hoped that before long justice might be done them. He would suggest the following motion:-"That in the opinion of this House it is expedient that such of the officers and clerks of the House as the Committee of Internal Economy may consider to deserve it, should have such an addition to their salaries as would compensate them for their services for the current year."

Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD had no objection to the motion, which having been amended in two unimportant parti

culars, was put to the vote and carriedYeas, 53; nays, 21.

Hon. Mr. CHAUVEAU moved to remit the fee of J. E. Archer for a private bill. Carried.

JUDGE JOHNSON

Dr. SCHULTZ remarked that the instructions submitted to Judge Johnson in regard to the Manitoba claims, did not include the claims of one class of people who were entitled to the consideration of the Government. He would move, there fore, "That an humble rddress be presented to His Excellency the Governor General, that certain claims of sufferers by the Red River insurrection, which were not within the scope of the instructions given to Judge Johnson, be taken into consideration with a view to their compensation." He contended that Judge Johnson's instructions only covered claims for compensation for losses of property and imprisonment, and that there were many other legitimate claims outside of these. The prisoners had nearly all of them lost a year's time, with damage to their respective occupations, and some had suffered serious damage by continued illness. Then there were the legitimate claims of the halfsbreed population for various losses arising out of the rebellion, He wished to press the matter on the attention of the Government.

Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD said that the motion of the hon. gentleman was somewhat out of order, but taking it on its merits he thought it would be unwise to press it any further just now. Since it was brought before the notice of the Government, they would, as a matter of course, look into the matter, and if it was found that any just claims had been overlooked, the Government would be bound to enquire into them. He thought the hon. gentleman should be satisfied with this answer, and with the fact that he had brought the matter before the attention of the House, and would with draw his

motion.

Dr. SCHULTZ replied that on this assu rance from the Hon. Minister of Justice,

he would withdraw the motion.

RETURNS,

Hon, Dr. TUPPER presented the report of the Superintendent General of Indian Affairs; also a return on the subject of meteorological observations.

Hon. Mr. LANGEVIN presented a return on the subject of divisions C. D. & E. of the Pacific Railway Survey.

AGRICULTURAL COMMITTEE.

Mr. MUNROE, before the orders of the day were called, would ask the Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture whether they intend to make a report? He con sidered it of very great importance to the agricultural interests of the country that such a report should be presented. His conviction was very strong that the farming interests should be protected. They were deserving of such protection, and he hoped that all the information which had been gathered on the subject would be brought before the House.

Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE objected to the matter being debated by the hon. gentle

man.

He had asked a question and should confine himself simply to that. Mr. JONES (Leeds and Grenville), as Chairman of the Committee, explained that they had been unable to report, because answers to their questions had only been received within the last day or two, and it was now found impossible to get a quorum of the Committee.

CRIMINAL APPEAL.

Mr HARRISON moved the second read.

ing of the bill to extend the right of appeal in criminal cases. He urged that legislation was very much required on this subject, and thought that there should be an appeal in criminal as in civil case. He quoted several instances of injustice which had occurred under the existing law, but would not press the bill.

The order was discharged.

STOLEN GOODS ADVERTISEMENTS.

Mr. HARRISON, on the adjourned de bate on the mot on for the second reading of the bill to amend the law relating to advertisements respecting stolen goods, said the objection to the bill, he under stood, was that no particular case had been alleged showing the necessity for the proposed change in the law. It was in consequence of an actual case he had been induced to bring forward the bill. He referred to a case where two newspapers in Toronto had been served with a warrant under the existing law, and where it was and was got up for the purpose of levying found that the whole thing was a fraud, blackmail. Objection had also been taken to the use of the name of the Attorney General, as provided in the bill, and if it was allowed to go into Committee of the Whole he would strike out that portion. He would also provide that action should be commenced within six months.

Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD would have no objection to the bill with the proposed alterations.