North upon

Mr. SMITH said the hon. member for Lanark, who seemed to take himself the championship of the North West people, had declared that the statements he (Smith) had made would not be borne out by facts. He merely wished to say in reply that he could substantiate every stateinent he had made.

Hon. Mr. DORION said if proof was necessary to corroborate the denial of the hon. member for Provencher, none better could be asked for than that furnished by the hon. member for Selkirk. Yet, in the face of all this an hon. member rose in his place and moved a resolution to try an hon. member on a mere rumour. It was most unfair at this late hour of the session to treat any member of this House in such an unfair manner-to send him home with the imputation hanging over him that he was guilty of so great a crime that it was found necessary to bring him to trial. There was no positive declaration that the hon. member had done anything wrong and the House should be very careful, therefore, before proceeding to such an unjudicial act. He hoped the hon. member for Lanark would withdraw his motion. If not, he (Hon. Mr. Dorion) would move an amendment to it, that there was no case to bring before a Committee of this House.

Hon. Sir GEO. E. CARTIER said this discussion only proved how right he (Sir George) was in raising a point of order at the outset. He knew very well that there was no actual charge to proceed upon. He merely moved his amendment to show that the Government had no hesitation in giving the best opportunity of investigating the matter. The view taken by the hon. member for Hochelaga, was the view taken by the Government, but they did not wish to give any pretext whatever for a charge against the members for Quebec, that they wished to screen a man who had been guilty of a crime, from justice.

Hon. Mr. MACDOUGALL said that he would not withdraw his motion, believing as he did, that it was in the interests of this House and of the country that this case should be investigated by a Committee. He dissented entirely from the doctrine propounded by the hon.member for Hochelaga, that the statement of an hon. member, affecting himself, should be accepted

without discussion. He had no desire to see the hon. member found guilty, but he would show the House a photograph of Riel's Privy Council, in which the picture of the hon. member for Provencher appeared in proof of the statement of the hon. member for Prince Edward. There

was a Pierre Delorme, a member of that Council, was it the hon. member for Provencher? The hon. gentleman might not have been one of those implicated in the murder, but there had been no proof, except the hon. gentleman's own statement, that he never had been a member of Riel's Council. The hon. member for Selkirk did not corroborate that denial, and there was every ground, therefore, for investigating the case.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON said some hon. member must take upon himself the responsibility of reading some direct charge against the hon. member for Provencher before putting him on his trial. On no other ground could a Committee be granted.

Mr. DELORME, (Provencher), said he had no objection to have the matter tried. He was present with a number of Indians when the photograph in the hands of the hon. member (for Lanark, was taken and his picture was among the number, but there were several there who were not connected with the Council and his picture was among these latter.

House could not grant a Committee to Hon. J. H. CAMERON argued that the whom to refer a mere rumour, which was affected. It would be establishing a pernicontradicted by the hon. member whom it cious precedent to carry this motion.

Mr. BLAKE said he understood the hon. member for Provencher to deny that he ever was a member of Riel's Council. On that ground he (Mr. Blake) had asserted that there was no ground for sending this matter to a Committee.

Mr. DELORME.-I never was a member of Riel's Council.

Mr. WHYTE, (Hastings), said if the hon. member for West Durham had pursued the same Course in this Legislature that he had followed in the Local House, he (Mr. Whyte) would have aided him to the best of his ability in pressing upon the Government the neces sity of punishing the murderer of Scott. bers who were so anxious to prevent the He (Mr. Whyte) believed the hon. memappointment of a Committee to investigate this matter, desired to make political capital out of it. He would vote for the original motion.

Mr. FERGUSON would support the motion of the hon. member for Lanark on the same ground.

Hon. Mr. DORION moved an am end. ment, reciting the points brought out in the discussion and resolving that no case had been made out for sending this case to a Committee. He stated that he held in his hand a copy of the photograph

which had been referred to by the hon. member for Lanark, and there appeared in it the portraits of Mr. Spence and other gentlemen who were known to have never been connected with Riel's Council (hear, hear).

Mr. SMITH corroborated the statement of the hon. member for Hochelaga respecting the photograph.

Mr. D. A. MACDONALD thought that the discussion should be brought to a close, and hoped the hon. member for Lisgar would inform the House what he knew of the matter.

Dr. SCHULTZ said he had not purposed to speak of the matter at all. He would vote for the amendment of the Hon. Minister of Militia, and when the case came before the Committee, he would tell all that he knew about the matter. He might say now, however, that when Riel's Council was in session, he (Dr. Schultz) was in prison, and that when Scott's murder took place, he (Dr. Schultz) was making his way to wards Lake Superior.

Mr. MACKENZIE said he would have preferred to allow this matter to stand over till next session, but, under the circum:stances, he saw nothing for it but to vote for the motion of the Hon. Minister of Militia, especially as the hon. member for Provencher had asked for the appointment

of a Committee.

Hon. Mr. HOLTON said there was but one view to take of it. Was there any case to bring before the Committee? He had not heard any made out, and whether the hon. member for Provencher desired to have his case sent before a Committee cr not, the House should consider the matter as it stood, quite irrespective of the wishes of any member in this House,

Hon. Dr. TUPPER quite agreed with the remarks which had just fallen from the hon. member for Chateauguay. He challenged the hon. member for Lanark to find a precedent in British Parliamentary practice for the course which he had taken. He (Dr. Tupper) approved of the motion of the hon. member for Hochelaga, although he could quite understand the motives which had induced the Hon. Minister of Militia to propose the amendment which he had moved. Mr. O'CONNOR would vote for the amendment of the hon member for Hoche. laga.

Mr. FORTIN denied that the hon. member for Provencher had asked for a Committee, he had merely said he had no objection to have the case investigated by

the Committee.

Mr. MACDONALD (Antigonish) approv. ed of the motion of the hon. member for Hochelaga.

Some misunderstanding having arisen as to the statement made by Mr. Ross, out of which the discussion arose, he was requested to repeat it, which he did.

Hon. Dr. TUPPER said it was obvious that the hon. member was mistaken as to the basis of his motion, and he hoped the hon. member would withdraw or modify it.

Hon. Mr. MACDOUGALL refused to do 80. He said he was not mistaken, and that he desired to have a record of the events placed on the journals of the House.

Hon. Sir GEO, E. CARTIER hoped the hon. member for Lanark would not press his motion after the distinct denial of the hon. member for Provencher and the discussion to which the House had just listened.

Hon. Mr. MACDOUGALL said he would consent to let this matter remain over till

next session (cries of "no, no," and "withdraw," from the Ministerial side of the House).

Mr. MACKENZIE said it would be bet

ter to adopt the suggestion of the hon.

member for Lanark.

Mr. MASSON (Terrebonne) said the suggestion was unfair to the hon. member for Provencher. In fact, the whole disAfter his public denial it should have been cussion was unjust to that hon, member. unfounded charge hang over the hon. dropped. It would never do to let this member's head till next session.

He

Hon. Mr. MACDOUGALL said the hon. member entirely misunderstood him. was willing to withdraw the motion (cheers).

Mr. MACDONALD (Middlesex) said this matter had been used in the local elections of Ontario and had caught many a good Conservative vote. It was, brought into this House at this late hour no doubt, of the session for the purpose of making political capital out of it in like manner.

The House having refused to allow Hon. Mr. Macdougall to withdraw his motion a

division was called for. The amendment

moved by Hon. Mr. Dorion was first put, and the vote resulted as follows: Yeas, 94; nays, 46; and the House passed on to the

next item.

Baker, Barthe, Beaty, Bechard, Bellerose, YEAS.-Messrs. Anglin, Archambeault, Benoit, Bertrand, Blake, Blanchet, Bolton, Bourassa, Bown, Brousseau, Cameron (Inverness), Cameron (Peel), Campbell, Caron, Cartier [Sir George E.], Cayley, Cheval, Chipman, Cimon, Costigan, Coupal, Crawford [B.], Currier, Daoust, Delorme [St. Hyacinthe], Dorion, Dufresne, Dunkin, Ferris, Fortier, Fortin, Fournier, Gaucher, Gaudet, Geoffrion, Gendron,

Gibbs, Godin, Gray, Heath, Hincks [Sir Francis], Holton, Howe, Hurdon, Jackson, Keeler, Lacerte, Langevin, Langlois, MacDonald [Glengarry], McDonald, (Antigon ish), Masson [Soulanges], Masson [Terrebonne], McDougall Three Rivers], McKeagney, McMillan, Mills, Moffatt, Morris, Morrison [Niagara], O'Connor, Pâquet, Pelletier, Pinsonneault, Pope, Pouliot, Pozer, Ray, Renaud, Robitaille, Ross [Champlain], Ross [Victoria N. S], Ross [Wellington, C. R.], Ryan [King's N. B.], Savary, Shanly, Simard, Simpson, Smith (Selkirk) Sproat, Stephenson, Street Tilley, Tourangeau, Tremblay, Tupper, Webb, and Wright (Ottawa County)-94. NAYS.-Messrs. Ault, Bodwell, Bowell, Bowman, Brown, Burton, Dobbie, Drew, Ferguson, Grover, Jones (Leeds and Grenville) Killam, Lapum, Lawson, Little, McDonald [Lunenburg], Macdonald [Middlessex], MacFarlane, McKenzie, Magill, McConkey, McDougall [Lanark], McMonies, Metcalfe, Morison [Victoria O.], Munroe, Oliver, Perry, Pickard, Ross (Dundas), Ross [Prince Edward], Rymal, Scatcherd, Schultz, Snider, Stirton, Thompson [Ontario], Walsh, Webb, White [Halton], White [East Hastings], Whitehead, Willson, Wood, Wright (York, Ontario, W. R.,) and Young.-46.

MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY.

Mr. BAKER, in the absence of Mr. Workman, moved the second reading of the Bill to incorporate this Company.-Motion carried, and the Bill passed through Committee and was read a third time and passed.

DOMINION TELEGRAPH Co.

Mr. CAMERON, (Peel), moved the second reading of the Bill to incorporate this Company-motion carried, and the Bill passed through Committee and was read a third time and passed.

and if it had extended there, it did not include the crime of high treason, or murder in furtherance of high treason. As to the second question, the administration of criminal justice did not rest with the Dominion Government, but with the Local Government, and as to any instructions to Governor Archibald, all such instructions had been laid before the House, but no instructions could be given him on such a subject, as the matter rested with him and his responsible advisers selected under the Constitution.

INSPECTION OF FISH.

ADMISSION OF PROVINCES INTO THE
DOMINION.

Mr. MILLS moved that the House should go into a Committee of the Whole to consider certain Resolutions on the subject of the admission of Provinces into the Union. He said he did not desire any discussion, but simply that the Reso. lutions should be recorded on the Journals of the House,

Hon. Sir GEO. E. CARTIER said as the hon. member only desired to record his Resolutions he would move that the debate be adjourned.—Carried.

MILITARY EXPEDITION TO MANITOBA.

Mr. MASSON (Soulanges) moved an ad. dress for all correspondence respecting the soldiers forming part of the military Expedition.

Hon. Sir GEO. E. CARTIER said there was no such correspondence in the posses. sion of the Dominion Government though there might be some between the Imperial Government and its officers.

Mr. MASSON said many reports had reached Canada of disorders created by the soldiers, and he desired to know whether there was any official information on the subject in the possesion of the Government. When Riel and the unfortunate half-breeds created some disturbances, troops were at once sent to quell the disorder, but instead of keeping the peace they had broken the peace, and He maintained that the people had the no steps were taken to punish them. right to resist the entrance of one who was not their proper Governor, and to ask the protection of the British flag, A man nained Goulet, on suspicion of being one of Riel's Cabinet, had been pursued by the soldiers to the bank of the river and killed there, and another man nimel Lepine,

was threatened with assault and death if he were seen in the neighbourhood. One of the volunteers had been put in jail for some offence and had been rescued by his comrades, and one of the officers had been insulted and even wounded. He did not desire to defend Goulet or Lepine, but such acts as these on the part of the volunteers ought not to be passed by unnoticed. Mr. BOWELL said he understood the remarks of the hon. member referred to the Volunteers from Ontario.

Mr. MASSON said he had not mentioned the Volunteers of any particular Province. Mr. BOWELL said he thought he was justified in considering that the Ontario Volunteers were referred to, and he desired to say that the member for Lisgar had had pointedly and distinctly stated in his seat that the reports in circulation in reference to the Volunteers in Manitoba were totally untrue. He held in his hand a copy of a resolution passed at a public meeting in Manitoba, stating that the Volunteers had been insulted, abused and misrepre sented without just cause, and that the meeting could testify to their excellent conduct. He thought it was only justice that the facts should be known.

Mr. MACKENZIE said that though the Committee might be appointed, nothing further could be done by it, and he had quite enough confidence in the Minister of Public Works to sustain his decision.

Hon. Sir F. HINCKS said there were

many difficulties in the matter, but he thought there was no harm in getting the report of a Committee. He thought the claim was rather one against the old Province of Canada.

Mr. BLAKE opposed the reference as the Government ought to be the judges in the matter.

Hon. Mr. WOOD said that if there might be no legal claim and it were paid, the Ontario Government might object to have it charged against them. He opposed the reference to a Committee as equivalent to a vote of want of confidence.

Dr. GRANT testified to the justness of the claim, and thought a Committee should be appointed and the matter considered.

The motion was put to the House with the following result; yeas, 44; nays, 72.

YEAS.--Messrs. Archambeault, Barthe, Beaty, Bellerose, Blanchet, Bown, Burton, Caron, Cartier [Sir George E.], Costigan,

Carried.

Fortin, Gaucher, Gaudet, Gibbs, Grant, Heath, Hincks [Sir Francis], Howe, Lacerte, Langevin, Langlois, McDonald (Middlesex), Masson (Soulanges), Masson [Terrebonne], Morison (Niagara), Pope, Renaud, RobiMcKeagney, McMillan, Moffat, Morris, taille, Ross [Champlain), Shanly, Simard, Sproat, Tilley, Tourangeau, Tupper, Webb, and Wright (Ottawa County).--44.

NAYS --Messrs. Anglin, Baker, Bèchard, Benoit, Bertrand, Blake, Bodwell, Bolton, Bowman, Brousseau, Brown Burpee, Bowell Cameron (Peel], Campbell, Cayley, Cheval, Cimon, Coupal, Delorme, [St. Hyacinthe], Drew, Dufresne, Ferguson, Ferris, Fortier, Fournier, Genderon, Gray, Holton Huntington, Hurdon, Jackson, Keeler, Lapum, Lawson, Little, MacDonald [Glengarry], McDonald (Antigonish), Mackenzie, Magill, McConkey, McDougall, [Lanark], McMonies, Metcalfe, Mills, Morison [Victoria, O.], Oliver, Pâquet, Pelletier, Perry, Pinsonneault, Pouliot, Pozer, Ray, Ross [Dundas], Ross (Prince Edward), Ross [Victoria, N. S.], Ross (Wellington, C. R.), Scatcherd, Snider, Stephenson, Stirton. Street, Thompson [Ontario], Tremblay, Wallace, White [East Hastings], Whitehead, Willson, Wood, York, Ontario, W. R.), and Young.-72.

INDIAN LANDS.

Mr. MILLS moved an address for corres pondence in reference to public lands in