Charles Tupper.

The Canadian Pacific Railway : annual statement online

. (page 5 of 7)
Online LibraryCharles TupperThe Canadian Pacific Railway : annual statement → online text (page 5 of 7)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

partly on guarantee, that interest up to 30th June next will exceed $1,250,000- Taking the estimate of
ten days ago, if $60,000,000 are expended in the next ten years, there will be a total of over $24,500,000 for
interest, calculating interest on future loans at 5 per cent., the lowest rate, as I believe, at which the
money can be raised."

Now, my hon. friend will admit that the Canadian Pacific Railway Committee cannot
raise money at 5 per cent interest, and consequently he will require to add to his
$120,000,000 $24,500,0' 0, as the cost of the road, plus the increased interest which the
Canadian Pacific Railway Company will have to pay over and above the rate of 5
per cent, which my hon. friend has fixed. I am glad that the opportunity has oc-
curred of drawing attention to that, because I think the hon. . gentleman's statement
would not be quite complete without it. And I may say, Sir, in speaking of capital
on which the Canadian Pacific Railway Company are entitled to obtain 10 per cent,
under the law on our Statute-book, and under the contract we have made with them
because the hon. gentleman will remember that the Consolidated Railway Act was
amended, and the contract made to embrace the amendment there is a provision
which declared that the capital of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company should be
held to be the amount of money which the Company was obliged to put into the work,
plus the subsidies received from the Government

Mr. BLAKB. Less the subsidies.

Sir CHARLES TUPPER. Less the subsidies received from Government So that
the moment that the Company obtain 10 per cent, on their capital, on the
amount they had put into the work, less the subsides they had received from
the Government, these tolls are subject to revision. The hon. gentleman will
see, therefore, as I stated before, that whatever money the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company are obliged to raise upon the sale of bonds, in order to honestly implement
the amount received from the Government of Canada for the construction of
the work, whatever discount there is on that amount will fairly be chargeable under
the head of capital It is not to be supposed that any railway company will sell:


their bonds for any smaller amount, at any lower rate than the very highest
rate they can obtain in the market, and having obtained on the best terms
possible the amount of money absolutely necessary to implement, whatever that may
be, the subsidies furnished by the Government, that will be the capital on which they
will be en titled to receive 10 per cent, profit before the Government can interpose and
forcibly reduce or require a reduction of the tolls on the road. Now, Sir, I have re-
ferred to a good many of the objections which the hon. gentleman made in the course
of the two speeches which he delivered and the criticisms that he offered upon this
subject. The hon. gentleman, as I said before, objected to their eastern engagements,
and thought it was quite possible they had gone too far, and the hon. gentleman
seemed to think that they had behaved somewhat imprudently. Well, Sir, from my
knowledge of those gentlemen up to the present time, I had supposed they were tol-
erably well qualified to take care of their own interests. During my acquaintance
with them, I have found them not at all wanting in a knowledge of what the inter-
ests of the Company required-, or in any amount of vigor in pressing those interests ;
and I think he will find that, in the eastern engagements they have made, they have
consulted the interests of Canada as well as their own by having an extension of their
line from Callander to Montreal. I have already stated that not a dollar of the money
of the country has been required to be used in connection with these engagements,
because those sections of the line yielded a profit over and above the interest required
to meet the entire expenditure which the Company had to make. The hon. gentle-
man's mind may, therefore, be relieved upon that point. Then the hon. gentleman
refers to the subject of monopolies. He says "we declared the provisions as to mono-
poly were unnecessary in order to procure the construction of the work, and were
calculated to retard the settlement and impair the prosperity of that country, and to
create great dissatisfaction and discontent within its bounds." I want to know where
the hon. gentleman gets the impression that this road could have been constructed at
all without the monopoly to which he refers. I want to know where the hon. gen-
tleman obtains the information that it would be possible for any person or any body
of capitalists, on the security offered, to obtain the means that are required to con-
struct this road unless this Parliament had given them all the advantages that that
contract provides. The hon. gentleman has the fact before him of the difficulty of
floating the stock of the Company, noUyithstanding all the advantages which the
contract provided. I deny altogether, Sir, that if the terms given by the Government
of Canada to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company had been impaired in the
slightest degree, there would have been the least chance of the successful carrying out
of that great project. The hon. gentleman says it has been held that the Company
was not merely entitled to, but could compel the Government of the day to exercise
its power of disallowance. He says : "I myself have never been able to understand
it being held that the Company was not merely entitled to, but could compel the Gov-
ernment of the day to exercise its power of disallowance, to veto charters for local
railways within the borders of the Province of Manitoba, contrary to the bargain
with the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. I say that that construction of the
bargain is not merely contrary to what we were told the terms were to be, but con-
trary certainly to what we were told its terms were when the bargain was laid before
us by the Minister of Railways." Now, Sir, I ask my hon. friend to produce the state-
ment made by the Minister of Railways.

Mr. BLAKE. I said we were told that when the bargain was before us, but I did
not say by the Minister of Railways.

Sir CHARLES TUPPER. Then the Minister of Railways did not tell it ?

Mr. BLAKE. But the hon. First Minister did.

Sir CHARLES TUPPER. All I can say is that as the humble mouthpiece of the Gov-
ernment, I undertook to state the terms of the contract, and the position under which
the Government and the country under that contract stood in relation to the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company, and the hon. gentleman knows that no man in the House can
charge me with ever having receded in the slightest degree from the position I have
ever taken upon that subject. Sir, I may recall to the hon. gentleman the fact that
this has not been the policy of one Government, but the policy of all Governments.
The poliry of the Government of which he was a member was just as strongly pro-
nounced upon that question of the disallowance of local charters which were calculated
to interfere with the traffic of the Canadian Pacific Railway, as the policy of the present
Government has been. The hon. gentleman knows that during the term of office of
the late Government, a charter was given, subject to its being brought into operation
by proclamation, for the construction of a line of railway from Winnipeg, on the west


side of the Eed River to the United States boundary. The hon. gentleman knows, too,
that my hon. predecessor, then Premier of the country, was applied to by Mr. George
Stephen, to issue a proclamation making that charter* law. What did he say? He
refused to issue the proclamation. He vetoed the Bill. That is the position the hon.
gentleman took. And why did he take it ? He took it upon the plain and palpable
ground that the Government of the country had undertaken the construction of the
Canadian Pacific Railway, and they would not permit competing lines from the United
States of America, or anywhere else, to come into competition with that undertaking.
That is the position the hon. gentleman took. I say he took a sound and statesman-
like position, a position which vigorously as he was pressed by his then opponents in
Parliament, vigorously as the hon. gentle'man's policy was being criticised by the
Opposition of the day no man in this House would have been so recreant to what
we all knew to be the true interests of this country as to assail. But what more ?
Applications were made by companies who came down to Government and Parlia-
ment for the passage of Bills that would secure competition between the Canadian
Pacific Railway and those companies. What did we do, Sir ? I went down, as Minis-
ter of Railways, to the Railway Committee, composed of 100 of the leading members
on both sides of the House, and declared in most positive terms that the policy of this
Government was to steadily refuse any company permission to build a line of railway
in competition with the Canadian Pacific Railway or its branches. That was the posi-
tion we took, and I say it unhesitatingly, and in the presence of hon. gentlemen
opposite, that that policy met with the universal assent of the Railway Committee, of
hon. gentlemen opposite, as well as ourselves. I say that the policy, neither in the
Railway Committee room, nor in this House, was challenged ; it was accepted as a sound
unquestionable policy in the interest of the country. Then parties came down in the
following Session, and appealed to the Government to allow rival lines to be built in
the Province of Manitoba, running to the American boundary, and they were again
refused. So I say there was no person in this House, or out of it, that did not know
that the policy of the Government was never more pronounced or declared than it was
upon that question of the prevention of the construction of any railway in Manitoba
that was going to interfere with the Canadian Pacific Railway. Now, what was the
Canadian Pacific Railway in those days ? The Government had not undertaken to
carry a trunk line of railway through Canada, nearly 650 miles along the north shore
of Lake Superior, where not a single inhabitant was to be found from the time you
left Red Rock at Nipigon, until you came down to Callander. No Government was
prepared to undertake the construction of the work. No Government this Govern-
ment had not proposed at that day to do it. And notwithstanding that was
the state of things, we refused to allow competition with the Pembina Branch
of the Canadian Pacific Railway running to the boundary of the United States.
Now, there is not a fair-minded man in Canada, a man who is not blinded
by party feeling, who will say that when the Company are bound not only to do all
we were doing, when we refused competition, but to supplement that by building 650
miles through the desert between Callander and Thunder Bay we were not & fortiori
toound to carry out the same policy regarding the Company that we adopted for the
protection of the Government irrespective of any contract at all. It is only necessary
to apply the commonest principles of justice to this question to be convinced of that,
and that is what I have invariably done in this House and out of it in discussing this
question. I say the interests of this country demand that the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way should be made a success, and the man who does any act by which that success is
imperilled takes a course which is hostile to the interests of Canada. But somebody
may ask what about the interests of Manitoba ? Are interests of Manitoba and the
North- West to be sacrificed to the policy of Canada ? I say, if it is necessary yes. I
met a deputation when visiting that country three years ago at Emerson, who put
this subject before me, and I told them then and there that the Government of
Canada made it its first consideration to do everything it could do to develop the great
North- West Territory ; then we were asking the people of the older Provinces to take
hold of this gigantic work to push it forward and to develop and build up that country.
And I said, under the circumstances, anxious as we are to do everything that would
promote your interests, we would feel that we were traitors to the North- West, to
Manitoba and the rest of Canada, if we were to allow ourselves to be swerved from
that policy which we have declared hitherto honestly and plainly to be absolutely
vital to the success of the Canadian Pacific Railway. On this ground I ask the ap-
proval of this policy, not only by all parts of the Dominion, but I ask Manitoba and
the North- West to concur in it as a part of that railway policy which has vitalized
and developed that country with such wonderful rapidity and energy. That is my


answer to the hon. gentleman in relation to that. He says there is a great deal of
dissatisfaction in this country on that subject. Who stirred it up, Sir ? Who are
the men, where is the press, where are the people that hounded the Government of
this country, and assailed it day by day, and tried to influence the people of the
North- West to believe that they were bejng prejudiced and injured by the policy of
this Government ? The same who when on this side of the House had propounded
and acted upon the same policy as the only just and reasonable policy they could
offer in relation to the interests of the whole of this country. So much, Sir, for disal-
lowance. I think I have noticed and done justice to all the leading positions taken
by the hon. gentleman in the speeches which he delivered. I now will refer, for a
few moments, to the last and most important statement that he made, and that was
the point at which I had arrived when the House rose before Recess. I said that
when the hon. member for Westmoreland propounded the broad, statesmanlike policy
that was in the interests of Canada that the Canadian Pacific Railway should have
a good bargian, he propounded a sentiment that will be echoed and reechoed from
one end of this country to the other as a sound and judicious sentiment. I believe-
they have a good bargain. I do not hesitate to say so, and I trust they will make
great fortunes out of their venture in undertaking the construction of the Canadian
Pacific Railway an enterprise beset with difficulties as it is ; a gigantic enterprise,
from undertaking which both Governments in this country shrank ; a work so-
gigantic that alarm was created in the minds of both the great parties in this country
at the idea of taking it up as a Government work, with all the resources of the Gov-
ernment of the country, with the means of bringing everything free into the country,
with every facility and advantage, with the means of getting any amount of money we
wanted at 4 per cent. Notwithstanding all these advantages, both the great parties
shrank from the contemplation of the Government of Canada constructing this gigan-
tic road for 3,000 miles through a comparatively unpeopled country. It was a source
of great relief to the people of this country when the Government were able to come
down and lay upon the Table of the House a contract which provided for the construc-
tion of that work upon terms more favorable than had ever been propounded by any
member of this House on either side, and which were eminently advantageous to the
people of this country. I say that at this moment, if the Canadian Pacific Railway
Company are successful, they owe it to the undivided energy with which, heart and
soul, all the leading members of that corporation have thrown themselves into this
work and made it the business of their lives. If this enterprise is made a success,
and it has been trembling in the balance more than once, notwithstanding all their
resources, it is because the Government were fortunate enough, not only to get men of
vast experience and great resources, practically acquainted with aH the work they had
to do, but men who themselves possessed great fortunes upon which they could fall
back, to implement any want of funds, while they were endeavoring to obtain the ne-
cessary means from that which had been an unpeopled desert the North- West
Under these circumstances, I rejoice to believe that they have met, and will meet,
with great success, and ultimately obtain a valuable property which can be worked,
not only in their interests, but in the interests of the people of this country. Having
said that much, I say that I believe my hon. friend never made a greater mistake as a
stateman, and I believe that hon. gentlemen opposite never in the course of their lives
committed themselves to an unsounder policy, looking at the interests of their party,
than their hostility to this great work. They could not afford to take the position
they have taken. Their past record year after year ; their long struggles in connec-
tion with this question ; their statements again and again to which they were com-
mitted in this House in relation to the enterprise, in relation to the value of the land,
the character of the territory that had to be pierced, and the enormous responsibility
that was going to be thrown upon whoever constructed the Canadian Pacific Railway,
by its operation I say that in view of these public statements and their past record
a record they will find to be an indelible record they could not afford to take the
position of hostility they have taken in relation to this great work. I say if they were
capable of learning anything, if anything could make an impression on them, if hon.
gentlemen could be taught anything by experience, the experience of the past two'
years ought to have convinced them of the fatal mistake they had made, and induced
them to abandon that line as soon as possible. Looking to the interets of the great
Conservative party in this country, I want to see them pursue to the bitter end the
policy they are now pursuing. Looking, I say, to the interests of the great Conserva-
tive party, I want these hon. gentlemen on this question, just as they are on the
National Policy, to remain in clear and well defined antagonism with the great mass
of public sentiment in this country. Sir, I speak of what I know when I say for I


have not spent twenty-eight years of continuous public life, and in the study of public
questions, and the public mind, without being able to form some judgment of the
public sentiment of this country I say there never was any question before the
people of Canada upon which the overwhelming masses of the people of all parties and
of all classes had their minds more completely and thoroughly made up than on the
question of this Canadian Pacific Railway contract. In the debate on the
Address my hon. friend declared, in reviewing the statesmanlike utterances of
my hon. friend from Westmoreland, that the advantages were all on one
side. Why, Sir, is it possible that the hon. gentleman was candid? Is it possible that
anything can so blind his eyes, so deafen his ears, so obtund every sense by which a
gentleman learns what is transpiring around him, as to induce the hon. gentleman to
venture such a statement ? Let mo ask him what has been the effect of this measure
upon the great vital question of population for Canada ? The hon. gentleman knows
that there is 110 question upon which our rapid progress and continued prosperity so
entirely depend as the means by which we shall be able rapidly to fill up that great
North- West and bring population into all sections of this country. When my hon.
friend the Minister of Agriculture brought down his estimate for immigration, the
lion, gentleman said : "Why, what does this mean? We thought we were to be re-
lieved of ail this ; we thought the Canadian Pacific Railway Company were going to
spend aX the money and bring the immigration into the country, and that we were
going to fold our arms." Sir, nobody ever thought anything of the kind. I admit
that my lion, friend behind me has exhibited wonderfui industry, wonderful energy
and wonderful skill in attracting immigration to Canada, and I say that all his efforts
would have been comparatively futile but for the construction of the Canadian Pacific
Railway. I say that no one factor has produced the influence upon our country in
that great, that vital question of immigration that the construction of this Canadian
Pacific Railway has produced. I say the very fact that you have capitalists every-
where, capitalists in London, capitalists in France, capitalists in Germany, capital-
ists in New York, capitalists in Amsterdam, all interested in this great national work
of Canada, and the fact that through every avenue that will reach the public mind of
Europe from end to end, hundreds of thousands of documents are sent out that no
Minister of Agriculture could ever have sent out without the aid of the Canadian
Pacific Railway Company I say that all these facts are entirely ignored by the hon.
gentleman. And. what d*o these documents show ? They have shown the world, they
have shown the people of the over-populated portions of Europe the fact that they will
not have to remain pent up in Winnipeg, unable to get land for settlement, but that a
rapidly constructed railway will carry them the day after they reach Winnipeg, 500
or GOO miles out through the prairie country where they can choose land to the right
and to the left upon which to locate and build up their own fortunes. Now, Sir, what
do our statistics show ? The hon. gentleman has only to look at the report of my hon.
friend to find that the immigration went up from 40,000, in 1878, to 193,000 in 1882.
Of these there came by the St. Lawrence, in 1878, 10,295, and, in 1882, 44,850 settlers.
In 1878, 29,808 settlers came to the country ; and in 1882, no less than 112,458. In
1882 no less than 70,532 settlers went to Manitoba and the North- West, and no less
than 13,325 were from the United States. Now, what do these figures show? Why,
Sir, every person knows that the great disadvantage under which Canada has labored
in times gone by was that the United States of America had a North- West to attract
immigration, while Canada had none. Every person who has studied this question
knows that there is nothing more true than that " Westward the star of Empire wends
its way." Every person knows that the tendency is to go West. Look at the Eastern
States of the United States, and what do you find ? Look at their population to-day
compared with what it was long ago, and you find it comparatively stationary be-
cause of that constant drifting to the west that takes place on this American
Continent. The same took place in Canada. The tendency was to go
West and as Canada had no West they went to the United States. How is
it now ? Why, Sir, not only is the current westward to the United States stopped,
but it is reversed and now flowing back over the 49th parallel of latitude are the peo-
ple that went out of our country into the West, and those who have always lived in
the United States until some 13,000 of them during last year came over. And I say
that if the railway lias done nothing else, if this development of our North- West had
done nothing else than to turn this current of immigration into our own country, and
invite people from across the boundary into our North- West, if it had done nothing
-else it would have accomplished all that would bo necessary to commend it to the
judgment and the regard of any patriotic Canadian. Deduct the floating population
out of the whole and you have of remaining settlers in the North- West, 58,751. But,


Sir, that is not all. I will read, as the authority is better than any statement I can
make and I am sure the House will permit me to do so I will read one of the most
interesting extracts that ever graced the report of an hon. Minister of Agriculture
since Canada was a country :

" It thus appears that the value in money and property ascertained as brought by the immigrants
into the country in 1882 was $3,171 501.59, besides a very lurjre amount unascertained taken into Mani-
toba, and which it is impossible to approximate. In addition, there were the very considerable values
in tools, implements and effects.

"The amount of money taken to Manitoba by intending settlers during 1882 was very considerable.
It was stated by a hanker that $8,000-000 were on deposit in Winnipeg, which sum had been taken in
for investment before the middle of the year- Still further capital no doubt, was brought in afterthat
date, of which no record is available. Part of this was Irom the older Provinces, but having in view the
fact the capitalists from the Eastern Provinces, intending to invest in Manitoba, or the North-West Ter-

1 2 3 5 7

Online LibraryCharles TupperThe Canadian Pacific Railway : annual statement → online text (page 5 of 7)