The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

ed. In: 1884 a re--vote was taken for the bnl:nce. and the amount of the re--vote and the expendi= ture for that year appsar in the Public Accounts for 1884, making the apparent expenditure $50,008. He complains of over--expenditure in 1884, and yet I say thero was no over--expendi-- ture, as will readily be seen from my statement. {(Applause.) The hon. gentleman compiains of some over--expenditure for sessional writers, and endenvours toshow that we haiave been extrava-- wvant as compared with Sandficid _ Mac-- dona'd's Government. Well, as has been pointed out, the hon. gentlieman is him-- self as much responsible for this as any member of the House on account of the number of returns be moves for and which are ordered to be brought down. 'These necessitate the eimployment of extra sessional writers, and for this he must nssame the accountability, Let me refor to the Dominion Government Mr., M EREDITH--Is that the true standard ? Hon,. T. B. PARDEE--Hon. gentlemen al~ ways point to the Domimon Government when it is to their interest to do so, but whenever it is ngainst them they ignore it. 'They arvo in favour of going back to the Sandfisld M';lc')onald Gov. ernment of 18 years »go, and object to a com#« parison -- with the Domimon _ Government | of -- 1884. In his report on last ysear's \ Public Accounts the Dominion Auditor--Ganeral | calls attention to the extra clerks employed, and | shows that in the Interior Department the sum | paid tor them was $54,902, in the Department of | Public Works $53,051, Railways and Canals $34,9397, Agriculture and Cansus $82,801, and Geolog:cal Survey $13,280. The total sum amounts to about two hundred thousand doliar« expendad for extra clerks, and y--t with tii large sam before them hon, gentiemenoppo-- . complain of the slight increase of expenditure of this Government over that of Sandfield Mac-- donald. They do not refer to this because they are ashamed to, and I must confess that I was astonished when I saw the immense «ums, and as | I looked into the Public Accounts I almost doubt-- | ed imy own eyes. Now the hon,. gentleman comes | to the subject of and I will deal with it, The hou, gentleman (Mr. Carnegie) revels in colonization roads ; this is the one subject on which the hon. gentleman delhights to dwell. It appsars to be the only part of the financial statement to which he had very serious objections, and he has charged the Com-- missioner with all sorts of crimes, and stated that the sorvants of the Department are guilty of ali kinds of corrupt acts, -- He has not said thatevery scoundrel is a colonization road overseer, but he wished us to believe that every colonization road overseer is a scoundrel. He implicated almost overy one from the iCommissioner down. He asserted that the maney of the Department had been used for electionsering purposes, and as I had control of the money so I was responsible for it. 'The hon,. gentleman asserted in tones of great indiguation that the colonization road money had been used for clectioneering purposes in Muskoka and Algoma. 'The hon. gentleman stands= here in his place and makes cowardly at-- tacks upon respectiable men, almost every one of whom is as able as himself. 1 say it is a cowardly attack, becinse it is made in a place whera the wen cannot reply to him. e says these over. seors have takon the colou'z tion usona{ and used it for electioneerin@ purpo«es in Muskoka and Algorma, I woald dike to know what wort of agents the leader of the Opposition employs there? Who are' they that nfre ienz' nl'l over the ount using tho corrupt funds of the pirty? §V¢ nlrl'knmv Wi'kinson and John Shields, These gentiomen aro in the constant employ of hon, 'c"u""\a" ()ppuni'fi and usinz the weanons of & C Wt itnaintinngitatichchaiihodcadt 4. 2: 4b i1 2 4 it 1J do with men who aAre in many cases in districts removed from all facilities for condusting busi-- ness by the usual methods ; they are distant from banks, and we have to send money to thein in bidls, and I contend that though the system is not one we would willingly have chosen, it is one which it seems impossible to avoid. I would be gad to avoid it and so I have tred to get out of it. The hon. gentleman in making the statement that the expenditure of 1884 islarger than that of 1883 knows very well how the matter atands, for he has had the system explained to him in the Pablic Accounts Com-- mittee, and yet ho contends here that there has been a large increase when there has been no in-- crease at all. Mo also claiims that thero has been a large increrss in surveys, Now I want to ex-- plain to the House and the country that there has been no increase for 1884 over the amount for 1883. _ In 1883 the amount voted for surveys as per estimates was $40,600 ; the Public Ac-- counts for 1883 show an expenditure of only $20,.501, whoreas the whols amount was expand-- «k t C m ming onl o yib W L P $ RECET CY C200 C00 . 970 PV ROR zo6 for 1834 of $907,148, whereas we only» really took for the service in 1884 $83,400, and the amount actually expended was $89,257, being an over--expenditurae of 8~ £*7 a af Gx ove _ "C"3°C0, VOUg an over--expenditure of $5,857. Mr, MEREDITH--Is that shown by the Public Accounts ? Hoo, T. B. PARDEE--It is shown by the Crown Lands report, The Crown Lands Departs ment pays its expenditures out of its special uc count, and at the end of every mouth takes out an accountable warrant from the Treasurer for the amount, Mr. MEREDITH--Is not that a bad system ? Hon. 'I. B. PARDEKEK --It may be, but it is one which is difficuit to avoid. For you have to do with men who are in many cases in districts removed from all facilities for condusting busi-- ness by the usual methods ; they are distant from banks, and we have to send money to thein in bids, and I contend that though the system is mat ama wra asaw1) cutino 3 . 3 COLONIZATION ROADS, $13,749, Q_huwing & tofil £7° non. genlieman in that the expenditure of of 1883 knows very well for he has had the system shown by the Lands Dep'xtu )E its special uc mouth takes out e 'Treasurer for ® se * my, . SArpeit i in eagnccatementtnnaees <---- ---- -- | corruption wrainst the friends of Ontario. 'They fends in the Government at Ottawa ; lump» | | have used these mon against us whonever OpPPOr® e@ -- all 'together they will not amount | tunity «ffered, and they sent them first through to one Ondardonk or Section B scaudal, I desire Muskoka and Algoms. _ 'Thorch they Were to makea fow statemenis in connection with the efl--etuaily employed in Muskoka, in Algoma sy.5ch of the hon. member for North Grey. The they were rnos quite so successiu'. Again )gouae must have been struck with the great the leader of the Opposition took the difficulty be had to tind objections to the state-- chief of those two men to West Middlese® in mont made by the Treasurer. _ Moe started off order that he might exercise his wiles upon the with the statoment that the $3,100,000 received honest electorate, He took hiin there in order that from Crown Lands and timber by the Sandfield he might elect that poor man Johnston, who had MacdonaldGovernment had been treated ascapital, just been unseated for bribery by the courts, and and that, therefore, this Governmen' ought to be only escaped disqualification, as the Judgo t#®* oondemned because they had not hoarded up the « marked, by the skin of his teeth. 'The leader of $10,000,000 received by them from the same | ths Opposition and this man Wilkinson were on source. _ How does the hon. gentieman know that " the platform togeth*r, and what did they do? Sandficld Macdonald treated this sun. as capital * Mr, Wilkinson denounced the Commissioner of Mr. MEREDTTH--The Treasurer said it was | Crown Lainds for making any oxpenditare upan s0 treated. Manitoulin I<land, whones the Crown Lands D = Mr. PARDEE--~I believe that if the Trer-- | partment did not demive any revenue, as the surer, who is dead and gone, could hear that ! dands there wore Inditan fauds. o dn uie n t en m ol n hoi Aaamiine Sestns hnd bremies --| pvgnlnts n ond t NoTHING To CONCEAL, and I want this House and the country to fully understand my position in the matter. We pro-- posed to take for 1884 $122,550 ; we had over-- expended up to then $36,5096 which had not beeu charged up to 1883, making $159,000. Now, Sir, thers was $12,447 or the accounts of 1883 which had not been included in the $36,596. This $12,447 was paid in 1884, and thero was over--expended in 1884 $14,178, making in alt $18%,772, though the total actually expended in 1884 was $136,723. Then the hon. gentleman states that there hal been an expenditure of $7,000 upon three inspectors, when he must have knowu that the expenditure was not all for 1884. Mr, CARNEGIE--I so stated. Hon. T. B. PARDEEZ--HBut what are the facts? We said that these three inspectors were paid $7,000 amoug them, which amounts to $7 a day for iths wholo year, when he mast have known that this sum covered a greater poriod than the year, and that part of the expenditure was for 1883, Asa matter of fact, the averags pay for each imnsprctor amonuts to $1,0600 or $1,700 a year, or they roceive $7 a day and pay their own expenees. EFach one has to kaep a hore, and one keeps two horses in order to enable him _ to do his work. In the_ large District of Muskoka and Parry Sound, Inspec-- tor Card keeps two horses, ana 1 do not think thas $7 a day for mon who have to pay their owa expouses is extravazaont remuneration. 1 shall not follow the hon. member into ns dusters, his ico, and his vexetables, but w l1 leave him among the cabbages. (Laughter.) If he will take a cartload of such little petty charges, and put them all togother, they will not make up one of the scandals which the hon. gentlemen des atmbAlPitPrgricntin-- Untaiaisibric SitiscD Wls is ind dint tih Th is s 2 k ih 334 entitled to the benelit of the expenditures from the Provincial exchequer, My hon. friend did not then demur to that, and yet he allows this man, Wuiikinson, to @snounes the Govern-- ment because we had expended money upon that very island. 1; is upon such a basi< as this that chargos oi corraption are made ngainst the D»-- partment. My hon, friend cites particular cases where two or three members of a family avre em-- ployed upon a road, aud gives this as the rea-- son why he charges that the colonization road funds have been improveriy administered. I am not aware that any more money went to the persons than they were properly entitled to, or tuat the Province got any fewer miles ofi road in consequense of their being einployed. -- Taen azain, he says that we havo over--expendeid,and this I admit. but it is not true or correct that we ex-- pendad $1835,000 in 1894 as shown in the Public Accounts for that year, and this the hon, mm bar for Wost Poetorborough knew prettvy well. The over--expenditure for 1880, 1881, 1882, 1883 amounted to $36,596, and these over--expend.tures the Government had charged up and put in the Public Accounts for 1884. Suppose the over: expeadituro in 1880 amounted to $10,000, the very moment that our appropriation was ex-- hausted the Treasurer cioses his accounts for that year and the am--unt over--expended is carried forward to tho next yoar, and is shown in the Public Accounts as having been expended in 1881; aud so this goes on through the years until $86,586 bad accumulatod in 1883. 'There is no deception in placing them in the Public Accounts for 1884, and if you will take the Public Accounts for a number of years and compare them with the report of the Com-- missioner of Crown Lands tor the same years it will be lound that they agree exactiy, There-- fore thero is no wrong done, and no wrong in-- tended. If hor. gentlemen were honest in their eriticism they would attack the system and not attemmpt to show that $185,000 had been spent in 1884 Lot me point out exactly what was spent in 1884, because 1 have which the expon liture was made. hss P Hon. T. B. PARDEE--I will just explain what it was, I have got The Free Pross here. " Mo denounced the Crown Lands Ds partment, for the Government had actu-- ally expended money upon. Manitoulin Island, which is Ind:an land from which we lorive nc revorno." That is thostatement he made, and yet when Mr, M. C. Cameron berated the Government for not expending monsey on Manitoulin Island because we were not getting revenue from it, the hon, leader of the Opposition siood by and had not a word of dissent, Then the case of these settlers was taken ap; they were stated to be citizens of Ontario; that Manitoulin Island was p.u't'nf the Province, and, therefore, they wore Mr, MEREDITIH--It was for the way in Mr. PARDEE--~--I believe that if the Trew-- | surer, who is dead and gone, could hear that ' statement made his bones would turn over and | shake in the grave. Because the report of the | Treasurer happened to show that the surplus in one year was $3,100,003, the hon. gentleman couc{udes that the surplus comprises all the re-- ceipts from the Crown Lands Department. How does he know that that is not subsidy? 1 | desire to refer to another statement somewhat more important. The hon. gentieman said there was only $2,500,000 not accounted for, and was a good deal more easy upon us than the member for West Peterborough was. -- Me says the $2,500,000 can only ba accounted for by the extra cost of civil government and legislation, and he lot this statement go to the country, that the extra cost of civil government since Randfield Macdonald's time had been $2,500,003. _ Here is the future Minister, the emoryo Treasurer, making such a statement, I will call attention to the statement that the extra cost of legisiation and civil goy-- ernument had been $2,502,000, The average amount expended by the Sandfield Macdona.d government on civil government and legisiation was £174,233, and the average since has been $279,610, and I have not deducted some ser-- vices which were not in existence in Sandficld Macdonald's time--loaving a difference of $105,= l 877 against us 'This muitiplied by 13 will give us $1,369,800, which will give the amount by us expended on civil government ard legisla-- tion over the sum which would have been expend-- | ed had the cost bsen continued ut the same rate ; as thirteen years ago. This shows that the hon. | gentleman was only $1,132,000 wrong. (Applause.) HMe should not muke such reckless statements as ! these calculated to misleaq ths House and the country, I don't deny that there has been an increase of expenditare. Thee must neces-- sarily be an increaso of expendiure, and I am only repeating a platform plattude when I say that there must be an increasoe of expenditure, with the increase of population. Let us compare the immcrease which hbas taken place in Ontario with the increase which has taken place in Quebec. This is a tair comparison and one which they are constantliy making when serves their purpose. The imncrensed cost of civil government|n1883 as compared with 1873 in Onta-- ri0, has been 10} per cent., while in the samse period the popuiation has increased 18} per cent. in Quebec the cost of civil government for 1882 was 32 per cent. over that of 1873, while the pop-- | ulation had increased 12% per cent. 'The cost of | legislation in Ontario in 1883 increased over 1873 | 114 per cent., population 18 per cent.; while in ' Quabec the increased cost of legislation was 214 | | perfcent. and the population, as I have said, only | 12} nercent. It may be said, however, that we E ! don't take into consideration the fact that they | have two Houses, but thero are disadvantages | | against us sufficent to make up for that. Ins | stoad of finding fault with the imerease, the true and mauly course {wou'd have been to point | out what fncreases ars wrong instead of : harpinz upon the fuct that there has been | an increase, -- Let them then make their charges in an opon manner against our educational management, the mainterance of public institu-- tion«, or any other machinery of government, I'pr'l we wiil moset tnem fairlvy and squarely. he bon, memver for West Toronto hss admitteu that the mere faet of au increas» of expenditure over the amount spent by SandSed Macdcuald was no evidence of extravagance, and I would recowmend the hon. member tor North Grey to take a lesson from him. Let me make a reter-- ence t~ another statement of the members for North GUrey and Woest Peterborough. 'They say | the Treasurer stated that unless the Dominion | Governiment came to our help nothing | stood _ between us and direct taxation, | Now, the Treasurer said nothing of the | | kind. What the Treaaurer did say was that the | | fixing of the subsidy for ail time to come at the | | tune of Confederation was a mistak», and that | | the present plan of giving special grants and f subsidies to several Provinces was most unsatis-- | factory,. Now I am sure that every gentleman | who has given the subject any consideration wili say that the presont basis of Confederation is working most unsatisfactor ly. Many Provinces ' have already received special aid and subsidies, _either directly or indirectly, and as Ontamo pays three--fifths of all the _ money that goes into _ the -- Dominion _ treasury, -- therefore three--filths of these special subsidics and grauts comes from Ontario. Ontario therefore in addition to paying the expenses of her own government has to bear an undue share of the EURDENS OF THK OTHER PROYINCES. This is most unsatisfactory, and I entirely agre® with the Treasurer that if it continues Con» and that, therefore, this Governmen' ought to be condemned bacause they had not hoarded up the $10,000,000 received by them from the same source. -- How does the hon. gentieman know that Sandfiecld Macdonald treated this sun. as capital * t# q8