1902-04-11

Mr.   B.@: RUSSELL (Hants) moved for leave to introduce Bill (No. 108) to amend the Criminal Code, 1892. He said :	The Bill
makes some amendments in the law in regard to cases stated by magistrates, by way of appeal from summary convictions and orders. It seems that at present the statute is not effective. Amongst other things it provides that rules of court be made by judges to regulate procedure, but it says nothing as to what is to be done in the event of there being no rules of court, which has occurred in our province, and may occur in other provinces. This Bill adopts the English procedure in that matter. There are other matters of procedure which it is proposed to simplify in relation to cases stated by way of appeal from summary convictions.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
Hon. Mr. BORDEN (King's).: 



SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES.

The PRIME MINISTER (Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier) moved :: That the name of Mr. George Loy be added to the following standing committees : Private Bills, Printing, Public Accounts and Agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House again in Committee of Supply.
Commissioner's branch for agriculture and dairying, including cold storage on steamships, on railways, at warehouses and creameries, and for expenses in connection with trial shipments of products, and for securing improvement and recognition of the quality of Canadian farm products, employees paid from this sum not to be subject to ths Civil Service Act, $210,000.
['The hour for private Bills has expired.']
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE (Hon. Sydney Fisher).: I suppose it will be proper for me to give an explanation in brief form of tbe considerable items of increase which are here. Tbe Item as you will see is considerably increased over the corresponding item last year, which was $188,600. I may say* that while there is some increase in a number of the branches of this department, the chief increase here is due to an undertaking which we have decided upon on behalf of the cheese industry in Canada. Last season's cheese trade was not quite so satisfactory as the cheese trade of Canada has been for many years past and the causes of this have become quite apparent not only to the Department of Agriculture but to those who are engaged in the trade. It appears evident that the demand in England has been for a slightly different character of cheese from that which Canada has been supplying in the past and that to meet that demand our people have been endeavouring to make a softer and moister cheese, sending it forward under the old conditions. These old conditions were quite satisfactory for the harder and dryer cheese which Canada has been supplying in such large quantities for many years, but are not suitable for the character of tbe cheese now demanded by the English market and which our people have been trying to send forward. That quality of cheese requires that it should be cured and handled in a cooler temperature. A great deal of tbe injury that has been done during tbe last season or two has been done in the curing rooms of the factories. It is well known that these curing rooms are not very thoroughly constructed as a general rule and that tbe heat is not under control, especially in the hot weather of summer. A series of experiments has been carried on for some years back by my department. Another series has been carried on by tbe Guelph Agricultural College and still another series with most important results in the state of New York. The results of these experi-

ments have all tended in one direction, [DOT]wonderfully coinciding one with the other, and proving conclusively that this moister and softer cheese which is to-day in demand in the English market must be kept at a temperature below 65 degrees if it is to be successfully made and handled. The question came up : How will you bring about a change of methods to accomplish this object ? My department has been for two years inculcating the necessity for this change, pointing out the results of the experiments that have been made and urging people in every way possible, by addresses at public meetings and by bulletins and reports, to improve their curing rooms so that they might be able to cure their cheese under the new conditions properly. I think, largely due to the fact that the year before last the general price of the article was pretty good notwithstanding the difficulties. the people have disregarded these warnings. During the last season, however. they got a rather severe castigation, if X may call it that, in the English market. We had report after report showing that Canadian cheese was not doing as well as it had been doing in the past, that it was arriving very deficient in the proper quality and that the price of our cheese was not as good in proportion to the price of other cheese in the English market as it had been in the past. The result was the farmers and cheese makers of Canada lost in the last season somewhere about $2,000,000 on the quality of their cheese alone. I venture to think that if the advice of the Department of Agriculture, which was given to them two years ago, had been followed that money would have been saved. No doubt a portion of it would have had to have been spent in the improvements which were required, but still, a very large amount would have been left in the pockets of the people more than they received. In investigating this question the proposition has been made that as it was pretty difficult for the people to improve their curing rooms all over the country in every individual factory, central curing rooms should be established to which the cheese of a group of factories would be brought, thus carrying out the principle of co-operative dairying a little step farther than it has been carried in the past. Just as in days gone by the milk which used to be made into cheese in the home dairy has been carried to the central factory for the purpose of making it into cheese, so, the cheese, after being made, will be carried to a centra] curing room to be cured. It is felt that some other improvements in connection with the business might be also tried and shown and that the result would be, not only on the point I have just elaborated, beneficial, but on several other points, also, improvements in the trade would be brought about. These propositions were laid before the great dairy conventions of the country during last fall and winter and
were approved by these dairy conventions. The question was : How could this change be brought about ? It means generally through the country a very considerable investment in what up to the present time is an experiment-an experiment which has borne the test of careful Analysis and investigation on the part of experts, and having been laid before those engaged in the business, has met with their approval, but still, is a thing which has never been tried anywhere else or in Canada either. We have been in the habit, in my department, of doing work of an experimental character for the benefit of the people concerned, but which no individual would be willing to undertake, and which no individual, or group of individuals, could fairly be called upon to undertake. The risk, in other words, of the results of an experiment of this kind should be undertaken by the government and paid for out of public funds rather than by individuals. I, therefore, propose to establish four such curing rooms, one in the western part of Ontario, one in the eastern part of Ontario, one in the French-speaking part of the province of Quebec and one in the English-speaking part of the province of Quebec. Some exception has been taken to the fact that only four of these curing rooms are going to be carried on. Being of an experimental character I think it is desirable that enough should be done to show that if this experiment is successful it can be fairly held to be true under different conditions and under different circumstances, while at the same time, 1 think it is wise in an experiment of this kind not to build any more than is absolutely necessary to prove the results. The conditions in the particular localities that are indicated are sufficiently diverse to be fairly representative of the conditions in Canada, and the scale on which it is proposed to carry on these experiments will be sufficiently great, I think, that if	it is successful	in
these places it will be held to be successful almost anywhere in Canada. At the same time I feel that the investment of public money in this way is warranted by the magnitude of the interests involved. I need not dwell on the importance of our cheese industry. We know that in some years as much as $20,000,000 worth of cheese has been exported from Canada, and that has been of great value not only to the farmers but to the industrial development of the industries of Canada generally. It is the one industry in which Canada has maintained a pre-eminence, and anything that tends to make this industry a continued success is worthy of attention. In doing this work we will require a capital investment of about $8,000 or $10,000 for each of these curing rooms, and we will require money for maintenance during the current year, which for the four curing rooms will amount in all to $35,000 or $30,000. I trust that the maintenance will not

be a serious drain upon tlie department. Our experiments show that the cheese cured in the cool temperature which we propose to provide will not only be of better quality and consequently bring a higher price, but there will also be very materially less shrinkage in the curing process. While we have not absolutely decided upon all the details, our proposition is that the owners of the cheese will reap all the advantage of the increased price per pound, but that the gain made by the less shrinkage shall go to.the maintenance of the curing room. I think that will pay for all the expenses of the curing room in a commercial sense. But we expect to make some other experiments and to do some other work for the benefit of the cheese trade, and I do not think that the expense of this will lie covered by the sum I have mentioned. In this estimate we are providing for not only the capital expenditure in building the curing rooms, but also for a sum to help in the management of them for rne current year. This involves altogether nearly $40,000, or a very considerable amount more than the increase which is to be noticed in this item.
In other ways the expenditure will be largely on the same lines as in the past. There will be some increases and some slight decreases. The general lines of the work are briefly these. We have the headquarters staff and expenses at Ottawa; we have the extension of markets division ; the cold storage division ; the live , stock commissioners' division; the dairy division and the fruit division; all under the general direction of Professor Robertson, the commissioner of dairying and agriculture.


Mr. CLANCY.: The committee will be anxious to know from the minister, as he has no doubt thought it out well, how the cheese is to be brought to the curing stations ?
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, I wish first to give a general sketch of the work included under this vote, and then I will be pleased to answer any questions afterwards. As I have said, we have the extension of markets division, which covers generally the work for the improvement of our products and of the handling of our products between here and the foreign markets. It includes the watching of the loading and of the unloading of vessels on this side of the Atlantic, and on .arrival in the old country. It includes the work we have been doing to improve the poultry trade in Canada, and also our efforts to improve the quality of the grain and seed which is used by our farmers. In a general way, that is what is embraced in that particular division. We have for this purpose several men in Montreal watching the loading of ships with our Canadian products, and giving us information which we are constantly laying before the different transportation companies, urging upon them Hon. Mr. FISHER.
improvement in their methods. We have men also engaged in St. John and Halifax during the winter season. We have also men in the old country watching the landing of our products there, and when time permits, watching the markets and giving information as to the condition of our products when they arrive in these markets. The advice which is given by the handlers in Great Britain is of great importance in the improvement of the packing and management of our products, and it is reported by these gentlemen.
We have also been introducing iuto this country within the last few years, entirely new methods of dealing with poultry meat. Until comparatively recently in Canada, hardly any one thought of fattening the chickens which they sent to the market. The result was, that Canadian poultry while good in quality, was generally not up to the mark in condition when put on the home market, or the British market. Some years ago, Professor Robertson and myself when in Great Britain came in contact with what was being done there. We found that a most extensive business was being done in the fattening of poultry and we found that these fattened poultry brought a very much higher price than the ordinary birds. We knew that our Canadian poultry was being sent to England in the ordinary condition, and we did not see why the advantages of this improved fattening process should not be obtained for the Canadian 1 manufacturers. We set to work to experiment with regard to this system in Canada. We established some stations where birds were fattened and sent to England. The results were extremely satisfactory ; so satisfactory that we were able to induce people to go into the business. The progress has not been very rapid, but it has been very considerable. As will be seen by the trade returns, the poultry meat exported to Great Britain has increased from something under $20,000 four years ago, to something over $200,000 last' year. In addition to that increase in the trade, I may say that there has been an immense stimulus given to the feeding of poultry for the home market, and to-day the men who handle poultry in centres like Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa are prepared to take all the fattened poultry they can get at remunerative prices, and the only complaint they have made to us is that they cannot get enough to fill their orders. This stimulus has been given by the department during the last three or four years ; and while it was originally intended for the export trade which was rendered possible by the introduction of mechanical cold storage in the steamers crossing the Atlantic, it has extended to the home market in a way which we hardly anticipated when we began it. We have been trying experiments in this line, the details of which I have in my hand and could give. They have all been published in the evidence given before the

Committee, on Agriculture and in the annual report of my department.
The next branch is what I call the cold storage division, which now involves two distinct branches. When we first discussed cold storage in this country and introduced it in its improved form, of mechanical cold storage, we wanted to provide comparatively small cold chambers on the vessels for the purpose of carrying across the Atlantic . certain perishable products which otherwise could not be carried at all and be kept in proper condition. This was chiefly necessary for butter, which up to that time had never been landed in the British market in the condition in which it had left the creamery or the producer in Canada. For some time past, practically all the butter that has gone from Canada-and the export of butter has increased from about $1,000,000 in 1896 to $5,000,000 in 1901- has gone in these cold storage chambers in a frozen condition, and is laid down in the English market in practically the same condition that it leaves the creamery in Canada. That is possible by reason, first of all, of the introduction of cold storage refrigerators at the creameries, which we have stimulated by giving a bonus.


James Clancy: The. bonus, I understand, applies also to the cooling rooms for cheese making.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No, it is only given to factories which make, butter in the summer. We have not given any bonus for cooling chambers in cheese factories. There are a large number of factories in Canada, which sometimes make butter in summer, as well as cheese, and if they do that we have allowed the bonus to them, the condition being that they must retain the refrigerator room at a certain temperature to become entitled to the bonus. At the present time I think over three-fourths of the factories in Canada fulfil these conditions. Then, cold storage is provided in iced refrigerator cars, numbers of which leave all parts of the country and converge at the ports. At the ports private enterprise hasi almost entirely fulfilled the necessity of providing cold storage accommodation, for the holding of those perishable products which the owners wish to be held. If they are to be transferred direct to the steamer from the cars, our officers watch that transference to see that no damage is done and that the goods are properly handled. If they are not properly handled, reports are immediately made, and complaints are sent to the transportation companies, and the owners are notified. On the steamers there has been for some years back full accommodation for all the product going forward which requires mechanical cold storage on the steamers. Occasionally instances may have arisen where a particular shipment was destined for some
port to which there was no regular line of steamers. I believe that in one or two instances a particular steamer at a particular time was full, and the goods had to wait for a few days or a week for another steamer; but in a general way in the last year or two there has been sufficient of this mechanical refrigeration on the vessels going from Canada to meet the demands of trade.
Now, I want to allude to another kind of what I may call cold storage, although it is different in its essence from this; that is, the principle of cooling the ordinary holds of vessels where certain goods are stored for transport. As a general rule during the shipping season of apples and the big shipping season of cheese, the owners and shippers do not care to pay the extra charges for the cold storage chambers proper, and moreover there are such large quantities of apples going forward for a few mouths in the fall of the year that it would be practically impossible for the steamers to provide mechanical cold storage for all that freight. Many of the shippers also believe-and I am not prepared to deny it-that it is not at all necessary for cheese or apples to be carried in these cold storage insulated chambers which are cooled by mechanical refrigeration. Under these'- circumstances they send their cheese and apples forward in the ordinary holds of the vessels; and when tne holds are battened down and shut up tight, without any complete system of ventilation, there is no doubt that there has been serious injury to our apples and our cheese going forward in days gone by. We have urged the steamship companies to obviate that difficulty. We have represented to them that it 'was necessary to put in not'only the ordinary ventilating shafts, but fans, so that a mechanical generation of a current of air through the holds would be obtained; and furthermore we have in the last year believed and inculcated that for this purpose there ought to be a mechanical refrigerating plant on the vessels, with a chamber where the air couldi be artificially cooled down to a low temperature, and that air forced through the holds of the vessels where the cheese and apples are stored. The plan of putting in fans and simply ventilating with the air at the ordinary temperature has been pretty successfully initiated and carried out. The other plan of a refrigerating chamber where the air would be cooled to a very low temperature and forced through has only J*en begun in the past season. We were alilfe to induce companies to put four ships under that arrangement last season, and we have received the most convincing evidence from the shippers, the receivers in the old land and the owners of those ships, that, for the carriage of our cheese and apples, that system is most eminently satisfactory. I- may : say that, with the single exception of the

257t>
newly subsidized line from Bristol to the West Indies, the ships we have been dealing with are the only ones I know of in the world fitted up in that way. This system, I am glad to say, will be very largely extended this season now opening. We have been negotiating with other vessel owners, and I am in a position to state that this coming season there will ibe at least ten more vessels fitted up in this way for trading in the St. Lawrence.


Mr. SPROULE.: What is the difference between freight rates on goods shipped on those vessels and those shipped on other vessels.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I shall tell the hon. gentleman in a * few minutes. From the experience we had last year, I am satisfied that this system will be the ultimate one adopted by all the ships coming to Canada which expect to carry large quantites of cheese or fruit. We havp had to do the same kind of thing that we did in the case of the original cold storage scheme, namely, bear a share of the cost-of fitting the vessels up, and make a similar contract. The experiment I am happy to say, has justified our expectations. By the contracts we then made with the shipowners to fit up their ships with this apparatus, we agreed to pay half the cost of fitting up, on the understanding that the cost should extend over, in the first case, three years, and in the second, two years ; and the results have justified our expectations that the ships would continue with that apparatus after the contract had expired. To-day a large number of the vessels now leaving Canadian ports and not subsidized at all by the government, are fitted up in that way, and when any new ship is being built for the St. Lawrence trade, it is well understood that it is necessary it should be fitted up with this cold storage system. Gratifying as has been the success of the work we have undertaken I am satisfied that when we have got the other system I have been describing, thoroughly into working order, similar results will follow, and that in the near future every steamer which expects to carry our apples and cheese across the Atlantic will be fitted up with this arrangement.
I shall not go into details just now on the particular expenditure in that line, although it is somewhat larger than last year. [DOT]
With regard to the railways, the system has been constantly extended. We have today a larger! number of lines fitted up with this system than we had any year before, and are occasionally receiving requests to have more put on, which we immediately act upon.
I hope this year to have an additional officer, whose duty it will be to watch more 1 closely the carriage by these railways of i our cold storage products. That work is c Hon. Mr. FISHER.
5 now being done by an officer stationed in ' Montreal, to which these lines nearly all 5 converge. He there watches carefully the ' arrivals, makes note of the shipments re-' ceived, the condition in which they arrive, 5 and the temperature maintained. His obser-; nations show that the work, on the whole, 5 has been satisfactorily done, but we have 1 complaints occasionally, especially at points * where the cars stop on their way to Montreal, and where there are converging lines , coming together, and I think it would con' <Uice to greater efficiency and the removal , of any such complaints, if we had an inspector, whose business it would be to take special charge of this particular work. I hope to be able to provide for such an officer during the coming year.
I have a statement here with regard to the creameries. I find that there are, roughly speaking, in the neighbourhood of TOO creameries in Canada, and that up to the present about 500 have been fitted, leaving in the neighbourhood of 200 which have not yet complied with the conditions , and got the bonus.


James Clancy: What is the exact number in each province ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not the number in each province, but in the whole Dominion. The great bulk of those which have taken advantage of the arrangement are in Ontario and Quebec, and but few elsewhere. There are some in the maritime provinces and possibly one or two in British Columbia. I do not think that there are any in Manitoba. From the 31st March, 1902 to the 31st March, 1903, we anticipate that 100 creameries will get the first year's bonus and the second year's bonus and about 80 will get the third year's. During this current year from 31st March, 1901 to 31st March, 1902-this statement was made out in February a few weeks ago-there were 80 creameries that got the first year's bonus of $50 each and 80 that got the second year's bonus, and about 100 that got the third year's bonus. The bonus is $50 the first year and $25 each second and third year.


James Clancy: Can the hon. gentleman tell the committee how much butter, made in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, was exported in this way.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not the figures here, and I do not know even that we have the figures available in the department, showing how much of the export comes from these two provinces. In the Trade and Navigation Returns, we have the export from the several ports, but then it must be remembered that the great bulk of the products from Montreal and westward and even from Quebec and westward, are exported from the port of Montreal, and the Trade and Navigation

Returns do not indicate the province or origin of the goods. But I may say, in general terms, that, of the butter exported from Montreal nearly all goes from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. Last year there was a little of North-west and Manitoba butter exported from Montreal. For a year or two there was scarcely any export of this kind, the great bulk of the western butter going to British Columbia and the Yukon and some little to Japan. But, during the season just jjassed, the trade there did not absorb the whole of the territorial and Manitoba production, and some was sent to Montreal and exported to Great Britain. Of the maritime provinces butter and cheese a certain proportion sometimes comes to Montreal. That depends on so many things that it is difficult to exactly gauge it. The Montreal merchants engaged in this business handle the great bulk of this trade for the country, and they buy in the maritime provinces as well as in Quebec and Ontario. Sometimes they ship direct from Halifax and other ports, but sometimes they bring the butter and cheese to Montreal and keep them in cold storage until they are ready to ship. We do not know to what extent each province contributes, so, I fear it will be impossible to give the hon. gentleman the information in greater detail.


James Clancy: I did not expect the hon. gentleman to be able to give it in minute details, but if he could state approximately the quantities made by the two provinces, it would be an interesting point.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Perhaps I can get from Professor Robertson his estimates of it.


James Clancy: Just one more question. Can the hon. gentleman say in what proportion each province is making application for the assistance covered by this vote ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I could not state that off-hand. Of course, we have in the department the details of every application that comes in, but I have not obtained the figures by provinces. I think there again the great bulk of the applications would come from the provinces of Ontario and Quebec. Speaking from memory and subject to correction which, perhaps Professor Robertson can give me, the greater number of applications lately have come from Quebec. There are more creameries in the province of Quebec, in proportion to the population, than in the province of Ontario. Ontario has taken a great lead in cheese production, but in butter production, I think Quebec has rather taken the lead, at least in the number of factories and the proportional amount of butter produced. I have just received a memorandum from Professor Robertson, saying that, so far as the exports are concerned, about three-quarters come from Quebec and about one-quarter comes from Ontario. And the bonuses to creameries are in about the same proportion.


Mr. TAYLOR.: Can the hon. minister state the amount given to Quebec and Ontario respectively ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I could not give that in more than round figures. I think about three-quarters of the amount paid in bonuses goes to Quebec. The statement I gave a moment ago indicated how much had been given in bonuses last year.


George Taylor: If the hon. minister will turn to pages D-65 and 66 of the Auditor General's Report, he will find that almost $6,000 was paid to Quebec and only $500 to Ontario. That is not in the proportion stated by the hon. minister.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: There are two circumstances that may help lo explain that. It may be that Ontario has not applied for so many bonuses, or it may be that Ontario applied earlier in the carrying out of this arrangement. The first year's bonus is $50 for each creamery, and the Second and third years' bonuses $25 each. If a hundred factories applied from Quebec this year, they would get $50 each, a total of $5,000; if, last year, a hundred had applied from Ontario, this year they would receive only the second year's 'bonus, $25 each, a total of $2,000. I have not analysed the applications or payments, and so am stating simply a suppositious case. The arrangement is that every creamery that applies and fulfils the conditions gets the bonus.


James Clancy: I think it will be found that certain individuals have been multiplying their application so that practically all this money has gone to a few persons.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: There has been no second bonus given to any building in the country.


James Clancy: The minister does not understand me. The persons controlling a number of buildings here and there have been getting first and second bonuses and will receive third bonuses this year. A few persons receive the bonuses rather than the country generally, as I understand it.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Perhaps the hon. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) does not understand the object of the bonus system. The object is to secure that at every creamery there shall be a refrigerator. ' I do not think that it matters in the least degree to Canada whether ten creameries that receive bonuses belong to one man or to ten men. We know that in some sections of the country, some men with busi-

ness capacity ancl enterprise have established a large number of cheese factories or a large number of creameries. These men would get bonuses on a number of creameries, yet every individual who asks for a bonus and complies with the conditions receives it; and it is as easy for the owner of one creamery to comply with the conditions for one building as for'the owner of ten to comply with the conditions for ten buildings. The bonus is given to the factory, not to the individual.


Mr. HENDERSON.: What is the reason tire export of butter fell off so much in 1901 from what it was in 1900 ? There seems to be a discrepancy there at which I am rather surprised, because the hon. minister seems to be doing a good deal to promote the butter industry.


The MINISTER OF .   AGRICULTURE@: The figures the hon. gentleman (Mr. Henderson) refers to. are for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 1901. The butter production for that fiscal year was smaller in consequence of the price of cheese. We have a certain amount of milk in Canada to be made up into butter or cheese. Some seasons a larger proportion is made into butter and some seasons a larger proportion is made into cheese. It happened that the season for the calendar year 1900 opened very well for cheese, and, during that calendar year there was a very much larger quantity of milk made into cheese than there was [DOT] made into butter. The year before, the butter export had been very large. The result was that, in the fiscal year commencing 1st July, 1900, and ending 30th June, 1901, there was less butter produced for export than there had been for the year before. The conditions, however, apparently, have changed a little, and last calendar year, the year just closed, we had a much larger export of butter. In this last calendar year-we sometimes reckon butter and cheese production and exports by the season, and then in the Trade and Navigation Returns they are entered by the fiscal year-in the season of 1901 again there was a much greater production of butter, as a matter of fact, about $5,000,000 worth in round figures, was exported. During the season of 1900 there was much less exported; during the season of 1899 there was about $5,000,000 worth of butter exported. I think the explanation is that the factorymen and the patrons thought that season that cheese was going to sell rather better than butter. As my hon. friend will notice, this last calendar year in which, as I have pointed out, there was a great increase in the butter exports, there was a very decided decrease of cheese exports.


David Henderson: I have not got the figures for the calendar year.


Hon. Mr. FISHER.: 


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I understand that, and it was a* complicated work to prepare the figures, because the season's make is in the calender year, and the export of it comes very nearly in the fiscal year. There is not a great deal of butter, as a rule, exported during the early months of the navigation of the St. Lawrence. The export of butter made in a given calender year does not begin to any great extent until after the first of July, it therefore goes into the fiscal year following.


David Henderson: I notice, however, that in the last fiscal year the article of butter, so much aided by the government, shows a very much reduced amount of export, and the article of cheese, that was not assisted by the government, showed an increased export, showing that the government's assistance made no difference.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have pointed out that in that season the price of cheese in England was up, and the price of butter was not up particularly, and therefore our people turned their milk into cheese.


David Henderson: So as a matter of fact the government cannot take credit for the increased export.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The government cannot make people do one thing or the other, but the government can provide facilities, and the people take advantage of them or not, as they think it is to their interest. As a- matter of fact, butter has come up again during the last calendar year of 1901, and $5,000,000 worth was exported. The hon. gentleman has not got those figures in the Trade and Navigation Returns, but they have been published in the press, and given to different dairy conventions over the country, and are well understood. During the last calendar year the cheese export has not only been reduced in price in consequence of what I explained a few minutes ago, but it has also been decreased in volume. As a matter of fact, ju the calendar year of 1901 the value of cheese exported from Canada was about $4,000,000 less than it was in 1900, speaking in round figures ; and of that $4,000,000 decrease, those who are acquainted with the trade have placed at $2,000,000 the shrinkage of quantity, and at about $2,000,000 the shrinkage in value. Now, I will speak a little about the live stock division. Here I have taken a new departure in appointing a live stock commissioner.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The minister may remember that he said the other day that he had appointed a live stock commissioner on the advice of eminent agriculturists whom he had consulted by letter, and he was pleased to see that their reports were almost uni-

yersally favourable to the appointment of i the gentleman whom he had selected. : Would he have any objections to putting those letters on the Table ?	<


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not remember the exact words my hon. friend has reference to. I looked In my office, and my secretary has not been able to find the letters in regard to it. I think what I said was that I had consulted people engaged in the live stock business. If I said letters, I have not yet been able to lay my hands on any particular letters of that nature. But I have under my hand, and will read to the House, or give them to the hon. gentleman, letters in large- numbers endorsing the appointment. *1 did consult the live stock men, and I know of my own knowledge what Mr. Hodson had been doing before in Ontario, and I felt I was right in choosing him for that position. I think the event has justified the choice most amply, and I will read later on, if the hon. gentleman wishes it, some statements that have appeared over the signatures of leading live stock men, and I have resolutions of live stock associations endorsing the appointment of that gentleman, and pointing out how eminently qualified he is for that position. But aside from the appointment of a live stock commissioner, I have endeavoured to stimulate the trade and to organize what I may call the live stock interests of the country. Witli that object in view, along with the live stock commissioners who has been working now a little over 2 years, this work has been largely that of organization up to the present time. Mr. Hodson had shown his ability as an organizer in the province of Ontario. He had been for some time, I am speaking under correction of the official name, secretary of the lave Stock Association of the great province of Ontario, which is the centre of all the live stock interests of Canada, and I may even go fur-tner and say of all the live stock interests of this North American continent. Mr. Hodson had had that experience, and knowing him as I did, I believed his services would be of great value all over the Dominion. He has been travelling about a good deal, meeting with live stock men in other provinces as well as in Ontario, and trying to introduce into other provinces the same kind of work that had been so successful in Ontario. I am glad to see that the people have responded very willingly, and to-day we have live stock associations, not altogether inaugurated since he came in, but certainly stimulated and vivified, and rendered more effective in consequence of his work. The live stock associations of British Columbia, the Territories, Manitoba, and Ontario, and the breeders associations in the maritime provinces, not only have been individually and locally stimulated, but they have been brought into relations with one another, and a large inter-provincial
trade has sprung up, which live stock men say is of great value to them. Ontario is the breeding place of the live stock interests of Canada. Ontario men a few years ago, were comparatively glutted with their own production, and they had not such a good market as they desired. That market to-day has been found for them to a large extent in the west and in the east by reason of the institution of the live stock associations, as well as through the arrangements that have been made to facilitate the carriage of live stock eastwards and westwards. The people of Ontario have been able to make enormous sales of their live stock to Manitoba, the Territories, and British Columbia on the one hand, and to Quebec, the maritime provinces, and Newfoundland on the other hand. This is largely work which Mr. Hodson has been doing, that is the line he has been taking, and which has resulted in the advantages I have just mentioned.
In connection with that I may say that we have very much increased what I may call our participation as a Dominion department in the institute work of the various provinces. Besides doing this work and making experiments in various lines it is absolutely necessary that this work and these experiments should be given to the people and brought right home to them so that they may reap the benefit of them and understand them. We have done this in the past by issuing reports and bulletins which have been spread broadcast' throughout the country, but, as is well known by those who are familiar with agricultural problems and work, by personal contact, the holding of meetings, and the impressing upon the people through personal addresses the results of our investigations and experiments, the work is more interesting to the people, more likely to attract their- attention and more likely to induce them to carry on the work themselves until these same results have been obtained. Consequently, we have to a considerable extent aided hi the local institute work. In Ontario that work is so admirably organized and so complete that we have not had to do a great deal there although we have done some. It was just beginning in New Brunswick, but in Nova Scotia and Prince-Edward Island it was hardly organized at all. I am glad to say that to-day, and I venture to claim some credit for having, by advice, incitement and work, helped to bring about that result, they have pretty well completed the organization of that institute work iu Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and the same is true of Prince Edward Island. In the west a great deal has been done of this kind of work. They had a , stock-breeders' association and a horse-breeders' association in the territories. They were, however, working at a great disadvantage without any touch between them and other organizations of the kind, and they were rather disheartened, but to-day,

25S4
they arq, encouraged, stimulated and confident and this has been very largely due to work which Mr. Hodson has been able to do in helping them, advising them, and encouraging them in their work. TJntil we went out to..British Columbia between one and two years ago, the farmers of British Columbia were hardly in touch with the farmers of the eastern part of Canada at all, but since that visit there has sprung up an enormous trade between Ontario and the far west. X will get, before I -finish this item, a short statement of the amount of stock that has been sold there. Since the 1st of January last, I think I am correct when I make the statement that the sale of $60,000 worth of stock has been arranged by the efforts of Mr. Hodson alone independently altogether of any other purchases or sales with which he had nothing to do of stock from Ontario to British Columbia and the North-west Territories. [DOT]


James Clancy: Where was that want supplied from before V


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: They did not get this stock at all. Their live stock interests seemed to be almost dead and they were not pushing ahead at all, but lately they have been trying to get live stock as they have seen an opening in the markets for it. Anything that they did get in the past they got from the south of the line. There were a few odd shipments of stockers from Ontario to the North-west Territories and British Columbia until the last year and a half, but during the last year and a half there has been a constant stream, not only of pure-bred animals for breeding purposes, but of stockers which have been bought in Ontario and shipped to the west for the purpose of feeding them and then re-selling them as finished animals. That trade has sprung up, and has been the direct result of bringing into contact the people in the east with the people of the west, and which but for this would probably have gone on in the old limited way in which the trade was going on. Then Mr. Hodson has started one or two good movements which are of value to the country. He has worked in conjunction with the farmers of Ontario in the improvement and the large increase of what is known as the Eat Stock Show at Guelph. This takes place every December, and I will venture to call it the great gathering of the agricultural interests of Canada every year, especially those connected with the live stock interests. Men go there from all over the country. They have there large audiences gathered together. They have not only the exhibition and the competition of live stock in cattle, sheep, swine and poultry, but they have also addresses delivered on practical subjects, taking the animals which have been competing in the ring and pointing out their excellencies and


Sydney Arthur Fisher: the reasons why such an animal is goochand such another animal is bad. This work has had a tremendous educative influence and it has been giving very great results from the fact that the institute workers from the province of Ontario and from the other provinces as well have been brought there and heard these addresses, have seen these animals, have mixed with one another and exchanged experiences and ideas. These men to-day are going all over the Dominion of Canada and carrying the results of what they heard at that great gathering to the people. This part of the show was organized by Mr. Hodson. For the last two years he has, with my approval and concurrence, managed practically the addresses and the gathering together of the people at this fair. In addition this winter we have organized and stimulated and worked up a similar fair at Amherst, N.S., for the benefit of the maritime provinces. We had a most successful gathering there exactly similar to the great show at Guelph, and it is an augury for the future of the live stock interests of the maritime provinces that the town of Amherst passed a by-law devoting $12,000 to the erection of buildings for the continuance of this fair, so that it is an assured thing that such a fair will be in existence in the maritime provinces in the future as that which is in existence at Guelph. Mr. Hodson has inaugurated another work which will be of the greatest benefit to the- country. That is in connection with the ordinary agricultural society exhibitions throughout the country. There has been great difficulty in regard to these exhibitions in getting competent judges, judges who were known and whose judgments would be accepted. Mr. Hodson has undertaken to help the agricultural societies to get these gentlemen. We have spent some little money in my department for this purpose. We have been able to send men who are recognized as authorities on different lines of stock. Mr. Hodson has been able to inaugurate another thing which I believe is going to be of the greatest benefit and importance, and it is the system of the judges giving to the people who are assembled to see their judgment the reasons for their judgment and explaining why it is that one animal deserves the prize and the other does not. That has been done to a certain extent last fall, and it was a remarkable success; so successful indeed that the officers of these societies have been urging on us that it should be continued. In this way, and in other ways that are contemplated. Mr. Hodson's work will render these agricultural exhibitions much more beneficial to the people.
The next division is what I might call the dairy division. It comprises the work at headquarters ; the work of running the creameries in the North-west Territories ; the work of the assistant dairy commissioner in the province of Quebec ; the grant

to the dairy school at St. Hyacinthe and to the Dairymen's Association ; the running of three creameries in Nova Scotia ; hell) to the dairy school at Sussex, New Brunswick ; and the employment of an officer to help dairying interests in the maritime provinces. It includes also the cheese curing rooms which I have already described. That takes $62,000 out of our whole grant.
The last division is the fruit division. It includes the general work at Ottawa in connection with fruit ; and the work in connection with the Fruit Marks Act which necessitated the appointment of some inspectors. It includes the experimental work, and the advice and assistance which is given in the packing of fruit, as well as to methods to secure that the fruit shall be free from spots and as fine as possible. Last season, the first season of the operation of the Fruit Marks Act, after careful consideration and consultation with those interested in the trade, we thought it best not to proceed too rigidly with the enforcement of the Act. It was an entirely new departure, and a good many people thought that the provisions of the law were extremely strict. For my own part I believe that any one who does not live up to the provisions of that Act deserves very little sympathy. At the same time the trade of the country being already well established on certain lines, a rigid enforcement might have involved consequences which it would be as well to avoid. I gave instructions to my officers to bring to the attention of those interested, the provisions of the Act and the methods in which we proposed to enforce it, so as to give them fair warning. There were doubts expressed as to the meaning of certain clauses and I consulted lawyers and got their opinions, and then tried to impress on the packers and shippers what these opinions were. 1 may say that the passage of that Act has contributed materially to an improvement in the packing of our fruit. I regret that I cannot say that last year there was not a great deal of fruit packed which was contrary to the'provisions of the Act. But, at the same time there was an effort on the part of packers and shippers to try and live up to its provisions. At first we did not undertake to impose penalties, but we found that some people were continuing in their old ways and we afterwards did impose a few penalties chiefly as a warning, and to show that the Act could be effectively enforced. We have been all the time giving information as to the nature of the Act and endeavouring to get people to comply with its provisions. Last year our inspectors have been extremely busy throughout the season doing this work. The services of these inspectors have been required for a longer period than I had expected, but I think we are in a position now to lay off one or two. An important feature of this work Is our endeavour to explain to fruit growers how they can avoid the growing of spotted and wormeaten fruit, so that next year it is hoped that our fruit will be better in quality than in the past. That will make the enforcement of the Act easier in the coming year. What is more important still, it will bring our apples up to the high reputation which Canadian apples should enjoy in the foreign market, and it will contribute much to the benefit of the trade, generally. Our inspectors did not attempt to inspect all the shipments of fruit, but they examined 33,000 barrels in Montreal up to the 1st of December last. It would be a physical impossibility for any reasonable number of inspectors to inspect all the fruit sent to Montreal, and it was not intended under the Act that this should be done. We have also had inspectors travelling around the country inspecting fruit which was not sent to the port of Montreal. We have had demands for more extensive inspection, and especially for inspection in different localities. To what extent it is possible to meet these demands I am not now prepared to say. We hope to do a good deal more of that work this season than last season, and I believe it will contribute to the improvement of the fruit sent to the home market, just as much as what we have done this year has contributed to the improvement of our fruit for the export trade.


Mr. WADE.: Is it the intention of the minister to introduce any amendments to the Act ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think any amendment is imperatively demanded at the present time. There have been one or two little hitches in the working of the Act, but we have worked these out, so that on the whole the Act is working fairly well. I thought a little of introducing a very short Bill to amend the Act in some slight particulars, but it is questionable in my mind whether up to the present time sufficient defects have been shown in it to justify amending it this session.


Mr. COCHRANE.: How many inspectors has the kon. gentleman got under this Act ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have had 12 inspectors for the whole Dominion during the past season.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Why is it necessary for 5 or 6 of your inspectors to appear on the scene at one place at once ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Unless it was to discuss a question with the trade or to take hold of some particularly complicated case, I do not think it would be necessary. I am not aware of any case where that has occurred except where there was a necessity of consultation.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What complicated case could arise ? If the inspector understood his business properly, he would surely know

25S8
whether a barrel of apples was up to the mark or not.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: On some occasions we have thought it well to have more than one inspector discuss a particular case with the trade. We have one chief inspector whose business it has been rather to guide and control the work of the others, and he might at any time be called upon by one of the ordinary inspectors to decide a point which had arisen unexpectedly or .which was not covered by the instructions which had been given. If 4 or 5 met at any one particular place, I can only believe that it was in order to discuss a number of points which had been raised by the trade.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: How much do you pay these inspectors ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The chief inspector gets $100 a month.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Where does he reside ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: He has been making his headquarters at Ottawa.


David Henderson: What are his duties ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: His duties have been, first of all, to direct generally the whole of mis work under Professor Robertson as the head of this branch. He is a lawyer by profession, and has been largely occupied in working out what I might call the legal side of the enforcement of the Act. He has also been a fruit-grower, having been raised on a fruit farm, and consequently knows a good deal about the fruit business. His name is W. A. McKinnon, and lie comes from the county of Wentworth. He is a graduate in law of Toronto University. The other inspectors work under him. One or two are more experienced than the others. Some have been appointed permanently, while others have been appointed temporarily for the months during which the fruit trade is largest.	.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: IIow much do the gentlemen get who are under him 1


The MINISTER OE AGRICULTURE.: One of them, Mr. Alexander McNeil, gets $1,000 a year. Mr. Lick gets at the rate of $1,000 a year, but is not engaged for the whole year. Sir. Vroom and Sir. Burke are also engaged at the rate of $1,000 a year.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Where do they reside ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Sir. McNeil comes from the western part of Ontario. He has had great experience in institute work, in fruit growing on his own farm, and in lecturing on that subject. Sir. Lick is also from the province of On-Mr. COCHRANE.
tario. Sir. Vroom is from Nova Scotia and Mr. Burke from Prince Edward Island. Then, I have 7 other inspectors who are temporarily engaged at $100 a month.


Sir. GILSIOUR.: Where are they stationed ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It is rather difficult to say that they are stationed anywhere. Two or three are stationed at Montreal most of the time, but are liable to be called elsewhere. Others travel from place to place. Sir. Burke and Sir. Vroom have been in the maritime provinces all the time. Sir. McNeil and Sir. Lick have been mostly in Ontario, but one was sent to the Fruit Growers' convention of Nova Scotia to give them an address on the Act and on fruit growing generally. The chief inspection has been in the port of Montreal for the export trade, but we have not confined ourselves entirely to that. There has been inspection anywhere else. The Act says that apples may be inspected anywhere that they are found, and consequently we have been obliged to have inspectors travelling a good deal of the time ; we think it is wise that they should, so that the shippers may not know just where an inspector is going to light on their shipment.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you any account of the number of inspections made and the number of prosecutions ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have the number at Montreal, but I do not think anywhere else. We have only had, I think, 9 prosecutions.


Mr. ROBINSON (Elgin).: Has the chief inspector made a report to the minister of what has been done during the last season ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We have had constant reports from the chief inspector and from all the inspectors from time to time. Those reports will all be made into a general report which will appear in the departmental report of next year. The season was hardly advanced enough to get it into the report that was laid on the Table at the beginning of this session, although there is in that report something about the enforcement of the Act. But that report only comes up to the 1st of November, by which date there was hardly time to have had a real experience of the working of the Act. But we have all the reports of this work in the department, and Professor Robertson will collate them into a comprehensive report on the working of the Act, which will appear in the annual report of the department next year.


Jabel Robinson: Will the names of the delinquents be published ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not know that it would be well to

publish those at present. Of course, when a prosecution takes place, it is usually reported in the newspapers, and the names of the parties appear there. I have not yet thought out whether it would be best to put the names into the annual report of the department or not.


Jabel Robinson: I think it would.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It might be best to do so. I may say that this Act is chiefly deterrent in its character. Its object is not so much to punish as to prevent this kind of thing going on-to try to secure honest and proper packing, and the supply to our people of just what they buy. If it should be necessary to hold the whip of publicity over the people who are thus packing, we may have to do it, but I am in hopes that the means adopted already will be sufficient, and rapidly improve the trade.


Jabel Robinson: Has the hon. minister made arrangements with the shippers to see that, the perishable products are protected or properly shipped ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: 1
am working that with the ship-owners as much as possible.


Jabel Robinson: Is the\ minister aware that there is an incongruity between the Ontario and the Dominion statutes with regard to the punishment of delinquents in the dairy business ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not any knowledge of it at the moment, Will the hon. gentleman state to what particular discrepancy he refers ?


Jabel Robinson: Under the Ontario Act respecting butter and cheese no one can be found guilty of an offence unless it can be shown that he committed it knowingly or wilfully, but under the Dominion Act such knowledge is not made an element of the crime, but on the contrary the lack of such knowledge is no defence. That appears to me very unjust. Perhaps I had better read the statutes for the information of the hon. gentleman. Here is the Ontario statute-chapter 251 of the Revised Statutes of Ontario page 3,091 :-
6. No person shall sell, supply, bring or send to a cheese or butter manufactory, or the owner or manager thereof, to be manufactured, milk diluted with water, or in any way adulterated, or milk from which any cream' has been taken, or milk commonly known as ' skimmed milk,' without distinctly notifying, in writing, the owner or manager of such cheese or butter manufactory, that the milk so soli, supplied or brought to bo manufactured has been so diluted with water, or adulterated, or had the cream so taken from it, or become milk commonly known as 'skimmed milk,' as the case may be. 51 v.c. 32 s.l; 55 v.c. 53 s. 1 (1).
T. No person who in the course of his business agrees to sell, supply, bring or send to any cheese or butter manufactory, or the owner or manager thereof, to be manufactured, the milk of any cow or cows, shall, in the course of such dealing and business, keep back any part of the milk of such cow or cows, without distinctly notifying, in writing, the owner or manager of such cheese or butter manufactory what portion of the milk be has so kept back.
8. No person shall sell, supply, bring or send to a cheese, or butter manufactory, or the owner or manager thereof, to be manufactured, any milk that is tainted or partly sour without distinctly notifying, in writing, the owner or manager of such cheese or butter manufactory of or such milk being tainted or partly sour.
The said sections 6, 7 and 8, shall not apply where the person charged with the offence proves to the satisfaction of justice or justces of the peace that the commission of the alleged offence was without his knowledge or privity, and contrary to his wish and intention, and that he was not aware thereof.
Chapter 43 of the Dominion statutes 52 Victoria provides as follows
1.	No person shall sell, supply or send to any cheese or butter or condensed milk manufactory, or to the owner or manager thereof, or to any maker of butter, cheese or condensed milk, to be manufactured, milk diluted with water, or in any way adulterated or milk from which any cream has been taken, or milk commonly known as skimmed milk.
2.	No person who supplies, sends, sells or brings to any cheese or butter or condensed milk manufactory, or to the owner or manager thereof, or to the maker of cheese or butter or condensed milk, any milk to be manufactured into butter or cheese or condensed milk, shall keep back any portion of that part of the milk known as strippings.
7. For the purpose of establishing the guilt of any person charged with the violation of any of the provisions or sections one or two of this Act, it shall be sufficient priiua facie evidence on which to found a conviction to show that such milk so sent, sold, supplied or brought to a manufactory as aforesaid, to be manufactured into butter or cheese or condensed milk, is substantially inferior in quality to pure milk, provided the test is made by means of a lactometer or cream gauge or some other proper and adequate test and is made by a competent person; provided always, that a conviction may be made or had on any other sufficient legal evidence.
In the one case a man who does not know that the milk was adulterated cannot be convicted, but In the other case it matters not whether he has any knowledge or not, he may be convicted. I think it is the duty of the minister to see that this mattter is made straight so that we will have but one law.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The only thing we can do is to change our , law. The Ontario law requires knowledge ' on the part of the person who is charged [DOT] with the offence. Does he wish to make L our law the same ?
| Mr. ROBINSON (Elgin). I am not intro. ducing a law hut asking the minister if he is aware of the fact.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not looked into the details of the two laws. I prefer the Dominion law, under which the delinquent may be punished without the prosecution being obliged to prove positive knowledge on his part. If the hon. gentleman disapproves of that he ought to introduce a motion to change the law, and I will be very glad to discuss it with him. I think that our law is the better, it being more direct and easier to enforce. Of course this parliament has no control over the Ontario law.


Jabel Robinson: I do not rise for the purpose of changing the law but to call the attention of the minister to the fact.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I suppose that a prosecution might be taken out under either law. If a prosecution be taken out under the Dominion Act, that Act will guide the judge, but if under the Ontario Act, I suppose that he will be governed by it. I would not like to give a legal opinion, but perhaps the leader of the opposition may enlighten us.


Mr. HEYD.: Have they not found bene-' ficial effects from the fact that we have these inspectors appointed, independent of the convictions secured ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, I think I can say most positively that the shippers generally and the packers generally have appreciated this law and have, in many cases, exerted themselves loyally to carry out its provisions. But, of course, they have found difficulties in the way. Long continued practices in the trade are not done away with in a day; and, even with a perfectly loyal intention to live up to the provisions of the law, no doubt many cases have occurred where the law may have been violated. That is one reason why we have not undertaken to strictly or severely enforce the law. Where we have thought that people deliberately disregarded the law, or where-as in a very few cases- they deliberately told us that we could not enforce it, we have undertaken to show that the law was enforeible and effective.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Does the hon. minister know that any of his inspectors have taken power into their own hands, and, where they found apples that were not up to the mark, have said : If you will pay so much, we will let the thing go ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I know of no such case, and if such a case were brought to my notice, the inspector would have a short shrift before dismissal. But I know the character of the inspectors, and I feel confident that not one of them is capable of such an action. I would say in general terms, before closing this general expose-


Matthew Henry Cochrane: How do I understand the minister in connection with that mat-


Jabel Robinson: ter ? Do I understand him to say that if he knew of an inspector who acted like that he would dismiss him ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: If I knew of an inspector who had made a bargain with an individual whose fruit he found to be unsatisfactory, to let him off in consideration of a payment, I would dismiss him at once.


James Clancy: I wish to be quite clear as to what the minister has said concerning Mr. McKinnon, the chief inspector. I am sure that the House and the country will regard the position of Mr. McKinnon as one of great importance. Do I understand that the minister told the committee that Mr. McKinnon was a gentleman of large and ripe experience ? Did he say whether Mr. McKinnon had served a time as a fruitgrower sufficient to entitle him to the confidence of the people of the country, and that, after giving up fruit culture he practiced his profession as a lawyer-in other words, that Mr. McKinnon had an equipment that would entitle him to the implicit confidence that men should have in one whose duties are so important and involve so much affecting the great trade that we hope to make so much greater than it is now ? The hon. minister shakes his head. If I misunderstood him, perhaps he will explain.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) has said a great deal more than I said. Mr. McKinnon is a comparatively young man. He was brought up on a fruit farm in the Niagara district, and engaged in that work until I do not know what age. He was employed by me in my department to do certain work in preparing the fruit exhibit for the Paris Exposition. He went to Paris in connection with the fruit exhibit, and showed himself eminently qualified to attend to fruit matters. He is an educated man, with a university training, and he has also a legal education. I do not think he has ever practiced the law. He obtained his degree not very long ago-if I remember well after he returned from Paris. As I say, he is a young man. I have frequently found that young men are the most efficient officers I can get, if they have had the necessary training and education to fit them for their work. The experience I have had with Mr. McKinnon in connection with his former work and in connection with this Act, convince me that he is a most efficient officer, thoroughly well equipped for his work. It is because I believed he had the necessary qualifications that I placed him in this responsible position.


James Clancy: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will permit me to tell the rest of the story. I am far from desiring to make it appear that it is a crime to be a young man, and the hon. minister will not urge that against

me. I am told that Mr. McKinnon is a young man whose father occupied a very responsible position as school inspector, but had nothing to do with fruit farming until six or seven years ago. The last six years or so, I am told, is the only time during which even Mr. McKinnon's father had any experience in fruit-growing, and I understand that it is not possible that Mr. McKinnon, jr., could have had the slightest experience, because during this whole period he was at college. Since then he has passed his examination, and, before he had time to enter upon the practice of his profession the hon. minister discovered qualities in him that caused him to send him on a trip to Paris. Now, if Mr. McKinnon has given such service as the hon. minister says, he is a very extraordinary young man, because he has succeeded in spite of not having experience or any of the qualifications required for duties of this kind. It is as well for us to 'look at this matter in a plain light. No glozing over the matter by the minister will make it appear that a man, no matter how bright he may be, can have, without experience, the qualifications for the performance of such duties as devolve upon this officer. The minister says he employed Mr. McKinnon because he was a lawyer, and that the carrying out of the law required judgment and discrimination. To use the minister's own expression, from which I do not greatly dissent, in having the Act faithfully carried out, it was thought to be as well not to be too harsh. That is what I understood the hon. minister to say.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


James Clancy: I am sure the hon. minister will admit that, if experience in the practice of his profession as a lawyer is necessary, Mr. McKinnon is destitute of a single qualification to enter upon duties of this kind. The hon. minister must see that it is not enough to say that Mr. McKinnon served him in Paris. It is not very hard to understand that Mr. McKinnon was picked up because he was a political friend. I would like to ask the hon. minister if Mr. McKinnon is not the son of the Liberal candidate for the local legislature for the county of Lincoln. Perhaps the hon. minister is innocent of that-he is usually innocent of these things. I suppose he did not even know Mr. McKinnon's politics.
Now Mr. McKinnon has also drawn considerable sums in connection with the Paris Exposition. I see he has drawn $893.56 in some three months ; that of course includes his living allowances as well as his salary. When I turn to what is called the general expenses in connection with cold storage, I find Mr. McKinnon has drawn $510.10. I am not disposed to quarrel with the sums paid him if he has given efficient service ; but I do dissent from the position that the 82
hon. gentleman can pick up any young man or any old man in this country who is without experience, as the hon. gentleman well knows Mr. McKinnon was-for he was not even born on a fruit farm, and has not been long out of college, because I am told he is under thirty years of age now-and the very moment almost that he has passed his law examination the hon. gentleman takes him into his service. Every one knows that it is a perfect farce to allege for a moment that Mr, McKinnon ought to be given charge of duties so important. I am persuaded that the thoughtful men of this country will have little confidence in such an appointment, not because Mr. McKinnon may not be a very bright young man, but because he is without the experience necessary to discharge those duties.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: In reply to the hon. gentleman I may say that I am aware that Mr. McKinnon was a Liberal, and I do not feel that I have committed a crime in appointing a Liberal to office. I do not know of any particular reason why that fact should be a disability in my mind or in the mind of any other Liberal minister. It would be a new theory entirely in this country. But I want to tell the hon. gentleman that Mr. McKinnon was not appointed to this office because he was a Liberal ; he was appointed because I believed him to be fit for the position, and I had some little experience and knowledge of what he could do in regard to the work of preparing fruits for the Paris Exposition. I found him with some administrative capacity, and some knowledge of general affairs. I knew he had had a university training, and also a legal training ; but even if he had been without experience in practising before the courts, the legal training would be no disadvantage to him. I regret to say that in our agricultural work of this country it is not always easy to get the right man for any particular kind of work ; and I daresay my colleagues in the other departments find the same difficulty when they have some special work to be done. I have found Mr. McKinnon exceptionally bright and satisfactory, and in discussing this work with him, and knowing his antecedents, and knowing his training, I believed he would be suitable for the work. The event has well justified my choice, because I have found him very judicious and very effective in the performance of his duties, so much so in fact, that I propose to continue him in that work, or in other work that may arise in my department. I would be glad if I could attach him to the department as a permanent officer, and secure his services for the country in future. So far as his father is concerned, I am aware to-day that he is a candidate in the local elections in Ontario. I am not going to allow that to stand in the way of his son being an officer in my department. I do not think that is a valid objection, nor



do I think that, if the tables were turned, the hon. gentleman would consider that an objection.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: I understood the minister to tell us in his brief remarks in introducing this subject, that Mr. McKinnon's father was the owner of a fruit farm, and that this youug man had been brought up on a fruit farm. But if the hon. gentleman is correct In his statement now, he was not on the farm at all and did not know anything about fruit.


The MINISTER OP AGRICULTURE.: Does the hon. gentleman say his father does not own a fruit farm ?


Matthew Henry Cochrane: He was a school inspector up to the last live or six years, and never had a fruit farm at all ; and when his father bought the fruit farm this young man was in college. I would like to ask the minister how a man, however intellectually bright he may be, but knows nothing about fruit, can all at once develop into such an expert.


The MINISTER OP AGRICULTURE.: I cannot tell the hon. gentleman when his father bought the farm.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Then you should not have told us that he was brought up on a fruit farm, if you did not know it.


The MINISTER OP AGRICULTURE.: He was on a fruit farm when I first heard of him, and I knew his father owned a fruit farm, and I was informed by the late Speaker of this House, the Hon. Thos. Bain, that he had a fruit farm, and that the son had lived on a fruit farm, and was as thoroughly equipped with a knowledge of fruit-growing as his father was. His father is to-day a member of the Fruit Grower's Association, and has been frequently in communication with my department in regard to the fruit interests of the Niagara district.


Mr. INGRAM.: I suppose the hon. gentleman has had several conversations with this young man as to his qualifications. Doubtless he has discussed the peach question with him. I had been at a loss for some time back to understand where the hon. gentleman got his information with respect to peaches ; I never knew before that peaches had stems on them until I heard the Eon. gentleman make that remark. Now If Mr. McKinnon gave him that information, I have grave doubts as to his qualifications. Did the hon. gentleman say that Mr. McKinnon is permanently appointed as an inspector ?


The MINISTER OP AGRICULTURE.: He has been permanently appointed for this purpose up to the present time.


Andrew B. Ingram: Does that mean for the year round ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: 


Andrew B. Ingram: When a Bill was passing through this House last session the hon. gentleman said it was not his intention to appoint permanent inspectors. The hon. gentleman was asked : Would these inspectors be only temporarily employed during the fruit season, and he answered, Yes. How does it come that the hon. gentleman has changed his policy since then ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not looked up what explanation I gave last year when this Bill was up, but I know I had in contemplation the appointment of several inspectors by the year, as well as a temporary one.


David Henderson: I have some slight knowledge of Mr. McKinnon's father, whom I have known for the past 25 or 30 years. I also know something of a cousin of his who tried to supplant me in the House of Commons a .year or two ago, and this gentleman's father was very active in assisting him to get left at home. But it is rather a serious question, whether this appointment is proper or not. Mr. McKinnon, senior, I believe, is a member of a fruit association, and is an important fruit grower. I have no desire to minimize his position in that respect ; he has taken an active interest in that industry, and I presume as a shipper and all that. Still I think it is a question whether it is proper that Mr. McKinnon's son should be over the entire department that controls the inspection of the fruit. It would be a very difficult matter indeed, no matter how honourable the son was, to avoid giving a preference. I think there will be a feeling amongst other shippers that they will be handicapped to some extent by the fact that Mr. McKinnon's son is in a position to benefit him at the expense of others. Of course it is unfortunate that this gentleman's father Is a candidate at the present time in the Niagara district, and I would not for a moment suggest that his influence would be used there ; but I do say there will be a strong supposition that his influence will be used to the detriment of a large number of people who are engaged in that industry. I think the minister might seriously consider whether the fact of the father's connection with the Fruit Grower's Association, and the other fact of the son's connection with the inspection, will be regarded as quite satisfactory by the fruit growers of the province. I fear that it will destroy confidence very much in a proper inspection.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think practically that almost everybody whose name was suggested as an inspector in connection with this Bill had some personal or business relations with fruit shippers and would be, therefore, open to any such accusation, but I have not the slightest idea that there is any such feeling of alarm of Mr. McKinnon, jr, doing anything in coni neetion with his official position which would

justify any such fear on the part of the people.


Jabel Robinson: If the hon minister had accepted the clause which I wished to place in the Bill last year this difficulty would not have arisen.


Charles Bernhard Heyd: What difficulty ?
Mr. ROBINSON (Elgin.) This difficulty in regard to the inspection. The inspection would not have been needed at all. I asked the hon. minister to insert a clause providing that if apples, not according to the regulations, or apples that were rotten, were discovered, either in Europe, or any other country, in a barrel with a brand, or the packer's name or the grower's name and if three persons who purchased these apples could give prima facie evidence before a justice of the peace and this evidence were sent to Canada and to the county from which the apples were shipped, the packer or shipper might be brought before a judge and punished. Every barrel of apples cannot be inspected as every barrel cannot be opened, and if the hon. minister had accepted my proposition last year all the difficulty that has arisen would have been avoided. But, he refused to do so, and of course, he has to take the consequences.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) This is a strange proceeding. One hon. gentleman complains that the inspector does not know anything of fruit growing, and that he had no training in that respect. Another tells us that his father is a fruit-grower and probably an exporter of apples and on that account he thinks his son is disqualified for the position which he now occupies. That might apply to other inspectors as well as to Mr. McKinnon, because I think if they are supposed to be qualified for their positions it would be well that their fathers and themselves should have been brought up on farms and have been engaged in growing apples, because that is the very thing that would qualify them for such positions. I do not think that it would at all disqualify any one for occupying this position that he had training for it by reason of his being on an apple farm.
'Mr. BLAIN. I just wish to say that Mr. McKinnon was not brought up on a farm. His father was the public school inspector in the county which I have the honour to represent and the young gentleman was born in that county. He went to the common school there and then he w ent to college and his father was not engaged in any kind of farming whatever until he removed from our county to the county where he now resides about eight or ten years ago and went into the fruit-growing business. I think the general complaint is that the hon. minister led the House to believe last year that when this Act was put into force the gentlemen who would be appointed as inspectors would
be men of experience, men who knew something about the exporting business and who understood the fruit-growing in this country. The complaint is that the most important office, that of chief inspector for the purpose of enforcing this law, has been given to a young man of no experience whatever, not having been brought up on the farm, not having been engaged in the fruit-growing business and not having a particle of knowledge in respect to the export of apples from this country. This is the chief charge and I think it would be looked upon as being rather serious. If the hon. gentleman had appointed his father who has had six or eight years experience in growing fruit there might have been some reason wliy that gentleman should have been appointed because of his experience.


Jabel Robinson: I spoke from memory a few minutes ago but I find in ' Hansard ' the clause that I wished to insert in the Bill. With your permission Mr. Chairman I will read it :
Whenever any barrel - or package of apples shall he found to he in violation of this Act or any of its clauses, on information being laid before a justice of the peace or a judge in the district in which the apples are found to be bad in any country, an affidavit shall be made by not less than three persons of the fact, whan such affidavit shall be forwarded under seal to the judge of the county or district in which the apple packers reside ; and said judge or magi s-trate shall have power to proceed under this Act, and a conviction may follow.
If that clause had been inserted in this Bill we would not have had all this trouble.


James Clancy: It is evident that if the hon. Minister of Agriculture had paid some attention to the advice tendered him we would have escaped all of this difficulty. However, as the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Robinson) has made his case so strong, I will have nothing to say about it. I think the objection taken by the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Henderson) is not without foundation. The hon. Minister of Agriculture knows very well that it is his duty, as it is the duty of the hon. members of this House, so far as possible for them to act, to avoid even the appearance of anything that will lead to wrong doing. I would be sorry to charge Mr. McKinnon, without personal knowledge, of having done wrong in the capacity in which he is now acting, but I want to say to the hon. Minister of Agriculture that he is open to the severest criticism. Let us take the position of Mr. McKinnon. He is to be the judge of fruit. He may come in contact with hundreds of people that may be influenced somewhat by Mr. McKinnon's conduct. Then, Mr. McKinnon is in the position of a prosecutor also. In accordance with what Mr. McKinnon says the case will be conducted. For a gentleman to be in that position he ought to be as free as possi-

ble, not only as regards himself, but so far as his associations are concerned, from any entanglements. If he is not, then he is not in a position in which he can even hope to have the confidence of the people. I am going to venture a statement in advance of any personal knowledge and it is that Mr. McKinnon was never recommended by the Fruit-growers Association of Canada, or of the province of Ontario, which would have the best possible means of knowing the person best fitted to discharge duties of that kind. My hon. friend is not open to censure for having made an appointment from his own party. That is the custom and no hon. member of this House will waste a moment in discussing it, but when the hon. member makes a party appointment and for that and no other reason, as he seems to have done in this case, he is open to censure. The Minister of Agriculture cannot tell this committee that he had a personal knowledge of Mr. McKinnon's qualifications. In any service at all, whether in law or in the knowledge of fruit, a man cannot possibly have knowledge unless he has experience and training. You might as well say that a bright young man would make a good lawyer without passing a single examination, as to say that a young man was fitted to be an inspector of fruit because his father bought a fruit farm while he was at college. The hon. gentleman says that he found this young man to be very useful, but he should have taken precaution to discover that before appointing him. Mr. McKinnon may know more about fruit than before he went to Paris, but it is perfectly clear that the Minister of Agriculture placed an inexperienced lawyer in charge of an agricultural branch, and that his doing so might have very disastrous results to the trade. I am not attacking lawyers.


The MINISTER OF JUSTICE.: Hear, hear.


James Clancy: I rather envy those gentlemen who have a training as lawyers, but I pity them if they try to be farmers or fruit-growers. Hon. members of this House who know the history of this young man know that he had absolutely no experience in the fruit business, but nevertheless the minister elevated him to a position of great importance in connection with the fruitgrowing industry of this country.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I cannot now remember whether I asked anybody as to Mr. McKinnon's qualifications for this office, but he had undoubtedly been recommended to me as knowing a good deal about fruit-growing.


James Clancy: By whom ?
The) MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE. By the Hon. Thomas Bain, late Speaker of this House, whose judgment I will take


James Clancy: upon such matters as readily as that of any man in Canada. Mr. McKinnon had shown in his work in the department, industry and intelligence and exceptional ability as a business man, as well as practical worth. He was a well educated man; he had a legal training, and the work he has to do as the head of that particular branch is particularly connected with the organization and administration of the Act.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: It must require a great deal of capacity to superintend eight or nine men.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It does require very considerable capacity to organize entirely new work for eight or nine men in the country. I believed from what I had seen of Mr. McKinnon's work that he was equal to the position, and after eight months experience I can say that he has proven himself to be extremely capable. I can rest upon the justification which the course of events has given for my choice of that gentleman. Hon. gentlemen opposite, I am afraid, are a little led away by the fact that they have discovered that Mr. McKinnon is a Liberal and that his father is engaged in active Liberal politics. I do not wonder at that, but I do not think that should influence me in my judgment of an effective officer who is doing effective work. I believe I was perfectly right in putting Mr. McKinnon! into that office, and I propose to continue him in it.


Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).: What are the duties of this young gentleman ? Is he required to know about fruit or fruit-growing?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I would consider it necessary that a man in charge of this work should know something about fruit-growing, and I know that Mr. McKinnon does know a good deal about fruit-growing and about fruit. In addition, he had to do a great deal of organizing and of direction in connection with the administration of this Act which was entirely a new thing. Prof. Robertson and myself gave a great deal of thought and attention to that, and we had to have some men under Prof. Robertson especially in charge of that work, whose duty it would be to carry out the details of the plan which we decided upon. I do not know that Mr. McKinnon has ever examined personally a barrel of apples, but if he had to, I believe he would be quite capable of doing so. His work has been that of administration and supervision, while the other inspectors have done the actual inspecting.


Robert Laird Borden: It is perfectly plain from the statement of the minister that this young man had not the slightest qualification for the discharge of his duties in connection with fruit.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not acknowledge that at all.


Robert Laird Borden: The minister has appointed this young man inspector of fruit, because he had studied law.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Because he did not practice law.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend (Mr Wade) corrects me; because this young man had studied law and not practiced it, and because his father had purchased a fruit farm while this young man was at college. I do not know whether the Minister of Justice would think it worth while to appoint some gentleman to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada because that gentleman had been an apple grower, but it would be just as sensible tot him to do so as for the Minister of Agriculture to appoint a man as a fruit inspectoi because he was a lawyer. If the Mimstei of Justice was able to go a little further, he would be still more in line with the Minister of Agriculture who says that this young man is qualified because his father owned a fruit farm ; carrying out the same idea, the Minister of Justice might appoint some person to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada because that person's father had owned a law library. Whatever Mr. McKinnon may develop into in the future, it is plain from the statement of the Minister of Agriculture that he had no qualification for this position when the minister appointed him. No one objects to this young man being appointed because he is a Liberal, but the objection is that he should not be appointed for that reason alone.


The MINISTER .OF AGRICULTURE.: 1 have not done so.'


Mr BORDEN (Halifax).: The fact is that this young gentleman's father was inspector of schools until after this young man began to go to college and study law, when the father purchased a fruit farm. There is no suggestion that the young man ever had anything to do with the management of that farm, although perhaps he might come home during the summer vacation and see apples and peaches growing on the trees.


An hon. MEMBER.: Peaches on stems.


Robert Laird Borden: He had the additional merit of observing stems on peach trees which I believe do not exist, but^even that did not qualify him to be a fruit inspector.
As to his having any special qualification outside of that, he has none unless, the fact that he has studied law constitutes a qualification. I could understand, if a man had practiced law, that the knowledge of business which had come to him in that way might be of some service in a matter of this kind ; but I should think that the mere academic knowledge of law which a young
man had derived at college would confer the least possible qualification for the position assigned to this gentleman. I certainly have never found in my experience that the mere academic study of law or anything else particularly fits a man to organize or transact business such as the hon. gentleman says enters into the duties of this position. I think the hon. Minister of Agriculture has been led away by his doctrine of free trade in this matter-He desires to make the occupation of fruit-growing and a knowledge of the law reciprocate with each other. If that principle be carried out in the cabinet, it will be necessary for my hon. friend the Minister of Justice to consider the agricultural qualifications of any candidate for a seat on the bench of the Supreme Court or any of the superior courts in the provinces ; because the experience of a lawyer is about as necessary or useful to the position which the Minister of Agriculture has assigned to this gentleman as the business of fruit-growing is to the appointment of any person to a place on the bench of a court.


Charles Bernhard Heyd: I have listened with a great deal of pleasure to the arguments which our friends on the other side have brought against the appointment of Mr. McKinnon, but they are not such as to influence me at all in endorsing the action of the Minister of Agriculture. It appears to me that one of the best evidences that this young man is qualified is the very fact that his father is a candidate for the Local Legislature in a fruit-growing district. If the people there feared that his appointment would result in injury to the fruit-growers, that would be one of the main reasons why his father would not be a candidate for the Local House. One-half the people at any rate in that section have confidence not only in the father, but also in the son. One of the peculiar arguments brought forward to-day,
I presume with the idea of having a little sport, is the injurious effect that will follow from the fact of this inspector's father being a candidate. Now, I would like to know where our friends are going to draw the line. Are they going to exclude a main from running for the Local Legislature because his son happens to be an official of the Federal government ? Or are they going to prevent a man being appointed to any office because his father or his cousin happens to be a candidate ? How far are the ties of consanguinity going to extend ? What do these hon. gentlemen want ? Do they want the father to stop running, or the son to resign ? It seems to me that the greatest crime the young man has committed is that of being the son of a father who is a candidate for the Local Legislature.


Fletcher Bath Wade: I think it is only fair that, representing the county where this gentleman has been performing a part of his duties, I should state to the House what opinion the people there have of him. I

dare say some hon. gentlemen opposite will not wish to hear it. I may say that very many of the fruit-growers of that county who have had business with him have expressed themselves to me as having the highest respect for this young man, and as thinking that he is well qualified, and is going to make a very superior ofiicer. If they are satisfied with him I presume that the members of this House might very well be. The hon. leader of the opposition seems to think it is an obstacle to a man being appointed to anything if he possesses a library. I do not think so myself. It seems to me that the argument used on the other side as to the father's avocation and politics, is illustrated by the story of the gentleman who was asked what his religion was, and answered that he was a Presbyterian by his first wife. Here is a clever young man who is giving every satisfaction to the people who know him and his work ; but gentlemen in this House who do not know him or the work he is doing, are entirely dissatisfied with him.
and varieties of apples. There are hundreds of varieties, and how could a young man without any acquaintance with the fruit business, or without being trained to it, be expected to designate the names and varieties of the different apples or the grade of the fruit ? One apple might be small and another large, but both good of their kind.
Ml': HEYD. How much intelligence is required to tell a big apple from a little


Mr. LANCASTER.: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will tell us what Mr. McKinnon did down there which has given so much satisfaction ; because I happen to come from the county where this gentleman has been living for the last six years, since his father has had a fruit farm ; and every one there wondered who this young man was-whether he was any relation to the man who bought the fruit farm a few years ago. It never dawned on them that it could he the young man in question, because he was at college at the time he was sent to Paris. I think the hon. member for Annapolis must have got his information from the very fact that the young man is not able to inspect fruit; because, if the fruit-growers of Annapolis are so thoroughly satisfied with the work he was doing, the only way that I can reconcile the statement made on this side of the House with the hon. member's statement is that he has not been inspecting apples in the county of Annapolis as they ought to be inspected, and that he is satisfactory to the fruit-growers because he lets everything go as they put it up.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Will the hon. gentleman explain how it would be pleasing to the fruitgrowers of Annapolis not to have the fruit inspected properly ? Does he mean that they are dishonest and do not want to -have the fruit properly inspected ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I suppose the fruit-growers were satisfied with the conditions that existed before, and if some person was sent there to inspect who did not know anything about fruit, they would be content to go on as they had been doing before. It seems to me that the question for the House is this : What are the qualifications necessary for an inspector ? What does the Act provide ? It provides that he shall know the names Mr. WADE.
Mr. SI'ROULE. The hon. gentleman has given such evidence of his knowledge and of his, desire to shield his friends that I think the House will be quite satisfied to heal but little more from him. This inspector has to see that such fruit shall consist ot full-grown specimens of the one variety, but how would he know there was only one variety in the barrel. It would take the best of experts to distinguish the varieties in some cases, they look so much alike. Even fruit-growers have to send their apples down to experts at Toronto to determine the varieties and the disputes that arise at agricultural fairs are often so animated that the judges themselves cannot decide to what particular variety an apple may belong, although they are men who have been all their lives raising apples in the district. But this young man who was never engaged or in the fruit business, is expected to teach fruit-growers the difference between one variety and another. He is also to determine whether the fruit packed is falsely marked, and if he finds it is, he lias to efface the mark and inscribe the words ' falsely marked.' But how can he do so if he has no experience or practical training ? Pie could not tell whether there was a mixture of two or three varieties or whether the apples were full grown. That could only be' done by some one who was in the apple-growing business or accustomed to handle and export apples. The information we have is that this young man cannot possibly have expert knowledge and therefore must be unfit for the position. The hon. member for Annapolis says he has satisfied the people in Annapolis and must therefore have satisfied the whole country. But that will not satisfy the fruit-growers and handlers who believe that the inspector ought to be expert in the line-one who can distinguish the different varieties, who knows what is a well matured apple and what is not, who knows what is an average sized apple, and who can tell when the Act has been complied with in the selection, packing and marking of the fruit. -


Mr. FRASER.: How is expertness acquired ? How are we to know that a man is an expert ?* We cannot always tell by reputation. The hon. gentleman would be surprised to know that one of England's greatest historians, who has recently been appointed to the Oxford Chair of History,

Mr. Stub!), was so generally unknown that everybody was enquiring who he was.


Mr. BENNETT.: Yes, and Billy Stubbs, too.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: Billy Stubbs gave a good account of himself. The mere statement that a man is not qualified or has not been a certain length of time raising apples is not proof. There' are farmers who raise apples in Nova Scotia and who could not go beyond twelve or fifteen varieties, because they have been raising only these varieties all their lives and have not expert knowledge of any others. What is required in an inspector is a knowledge of the different varieties, and he can get that without being an apple-grower. It is in this gentleman's favour that his father was a grower of apples, and then we have the admission that he has been a success. In this practical age we look at results and not at opinions. If he has proved his usefulness he is well qualified, and that is sufficient for us. I have not heard a single statement to the contrary. No hon. gentleman has said that there has been any complaint against him from the apple growers or shippers.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I asked the Minister of Agriculture if there were any complaints and he said there were quite a few.
The MINISTER OF AGRICUi.
I	did not say that there were any complaints about Mr. McKinnon.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I asked if there were any complaints regarding the enforcement of the Act, and the minister said there were.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That is quite a different thing. I never said there was any complaint about Mr. McKinnon.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: We have no evidence of any complaint either from the apple-raisers or the packers or the shippers.


Fletcher Bath Wade: Or the apple-eaters.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: If there were any complaints made against this gentleman, that would be quite different. Surely we are wasting time discussing his qualifications when we have no complaint made against him. We have the evidence that he has been a good officer and has given satisfaction.


James Clancy: Where is that evidence ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: We have it from the department, and I am bound to take that rather! than the only complaint brought against him, which is that he is a Liberal and that his father was running an election. The minister says that in his own department there is no complaint.


James Clancy: Will he say that he is a good inspector ?


Duncan Cameron Fraser: He says that he has given satisfaction, and what more does the hon. gentleman want ?


James Clancy: The minister says he does not inspect at all.


Duncan Cameron Fraser: This seems to be simply an attack on this young man because he happens to be born of respectable parents and because his qualifications have been enhanced by an excellent education. Surely in this practical age we look at results.


David Henderson: From one end of the Dominion to the other we have been told that this government has placed in the portfolio of Agriculture a practical farmer. If there is one thing which the Prime Minister takes credit for more than another throughout Ontario, it is that lie has put a practical farmer over the Agriculture Department. But what is this practical farmer doing ? In the fruit trade, the export of which ranges from $2,WJO,(Xi0 to $3,-UOO.OOO per year, we have an inspector of inspectors, who, the minister tells us, never inspects the apples, but is paid a salary of $1,200 a year to see that the fruit is properly packed. The whole thing is a farce. This' man cannot possibly have the requisite knowledge because he has never had any experience in the trade, and the sooner some change is made that will give confidence to the people, the better. What confidence will the people have in the inspection law, when its administration is in the hands of one who cannot possibly have the knowledge nr experience required ? I say they will have no confidence whatever, and the people, in that way, will not respect the law.


Fletcher Bath Wade: I would like to ask the last hon. member for Ilalton (Mr. Henderson) if it is true that this young man's father spoke against the hon. gentleman in a recent election ?


David Henderson: I do not think that makes any difference. However, the fact is I heard him try to do so, but he was an absolute failure.


Fletcher Bath Wade: It does not seem that the hon. gentleman opposite wishes to answer my question. It appears now that there is a good case against this young man and, of course, the item should be now withdrawn. We have now reached the origin of the trouble. It is not because this man's father was a school inspector, or because he owned an orchard, or because he had a library, but because he ;spoke against the hon. gentleman (Mr. Henderson). Surely the Minister of Agriculture would never ask this House to sanction the appointment of the son of a man who had done anything of that sort. As it is very near six o'clock, I trust the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Lancaster) will enable me to go to my dinner in peace by answering the question I put to him.


Edward Arthur Lancaster: If the hon. gentleman (Mr. Wade) will tell me what his question Is I shall be happy to answer him.


Fletcher Bath Wade: The hon. gentleman said that probably the reason why the Annapolis valley fruit-growers were so well pleased with this young man was that he did not insist on inspection. Does he mean to insinuate that the fruit-growers of the Annapolis valley are so anxious to pack dishonest fruit that they seek to evade the operation of the Act ?


Edward Arthur Lancaster: I cannot allow the hon. gentleman to put on his head a cap that does not fit him. I did not say what he imputes, at all events. X asked whether the fact that the people who were shipping this fruit that should be inspected were so willing to class this man as a good inspector -and I had in my mind that the minister himself had said that he was not inspecting, but was supervising inspectors, as was pointed out by the hon. member for Halton -had anything to do with the fact that he was satisfactory to my hon. friend (Mr. Wade). That is what I said. I would like to know if the hon. gentleman is satisfied 7


Fletcher Bath Wade: I am perfectly satisfied.
At six o'clock, the House took recess.
After Recess.
House resumed at eight o'clock.



[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 75) to incorporate the Knapp Tubular Steamship Company.-Mr. Belcourt.
On section 10,
The MINISTER OP JUSTICE (Hon. Charles Fitzpatrick).: How does this clause as amended by the committee read ?


The MINISTER OP FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: I may say that, in the committee it was thought that, in case of private property, there was no reason why the company should be obliged to make reference to the Governor in Council ; and, if they attempt to make wharfs on a navigable river, the Public Works Act would apply.
Bill reported ; read the third time, and passed.


CROWN BANK OF CANADA.
[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 79) to incorporate the Crown Bank of Canada.-Mr. Guthrie.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: Does the Bank Act provide for all the requirements of this corporation and for the organization of this bank ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: Yes, the Bank Act has attached to it a model Bill of which this is substantially a copy, so that all we have to do is to pass these clauses and then all the provisions of the Bank Act apply to all banks alike.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.


CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY.
[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill (No. 53) respecting the Canadian Northern Railway.- Mr. Davis.
On section 1,
Mr. McCREARY.: Before this Bill passes I want to put myself on record as objecting to this kind of a charter. It was stated a few days ago that this charter only covered about 2,500 miles of road. As a matter of fact, if the charter is looked into closely, it will be found that it covers fully double that amount of railway. This road runs all across the continent and twice across the continent from Winnipeg west with branch lines which will make the mileage upwards of 5,000 miles, a much greater mileage than was granted to the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1881. Now, there are no conditions attached to this Bill, as to the amount of road which shall be built each year, or as to the kind of rolling stock that shall be supplied. It is absolutely a blanket charter, or a roving charter, as was said by the hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) without any conditions whatever. If it is going to be the policy of this government to grant such charters and in future to continue granting them, then, let it be understood that such is their policy, but I submit, that at the present time there is no precedent for the granting of any such charter. There are some of those lines that might appear all right to eastern men who do not understand the situation, but to western men who do understand the situation, the local conditions and the geography of that country, they are simply lines running from any one point to any other point without any definition whatever. You might as well say that this company shall have power to construct a line from any one point in Canada to any other point in Canada. That is practically what the charter means. As the Bill originally appeared it authorized the company to construct a line from a point east of Edmonton to the Red Deer river. It now describes that line as running to a point between Beaver lake and Sullivan lake. When I tell hon. gentlemen that there are probably fifty Beaver lakes and fifty Sullivan lakes in the North-west Territories they will readily understand that the thing is quite indefinite. There are certain names attached to lakes such as Devil's lake which are very common in the Territories. There is nothing to show where that branch liue


Fletcher Bath Wade: 


1L 1902
[Stage Direction]
runs and I want tliis committee to understand that I object to any such charter. Then, again, in regard to the clause providing for the capitalization of this company, I trust this committee will bear in mind that last year there was ratified here an agreement by which the province of Manitoba has guaranteed the interest on $20,000 a mile on all of the line from Port Arthur to Winnipeg, and on all of the lines in Manitoba. They stated the other day they had 1.300 miles in all. I understand that this Bill-I have not been able to go into it, and the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Blair) is not here- increases that liability and that the province of Manitoba will be in rather a peculiar position, that that province will not only have to guarantee interest on $20,000 a mile but that the railway will have to earn much more than that before the province of Manitoba will be safe as guarantor. I would be glad if the Minister of Finance (Hon. Mr. Fielding), or the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals, would take this matter into consideration and explain the position that the province of Manitoba will be in if this charter passes in the condition in which it is brought before the committee. The hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Roche) is here and as he is probably more conversant with the railway deal in Manitoba than I am, I would like to hear his views upon that point. I think, also, in all fairness, that subsection (e), which authorizes the company to build a branch line from some place east of Edmonton in Alberta or Saskatchewan to the Red Deer river, should be struck out. ' To some place east in Alberta or Saskatchewan.' Now. in my humble opinion that covers 300 or 400 miles. Some place east of Edmonton in Saskatchewan or Alberta would give a starting point 400 miles-to where ? In the first place it was to the Red Deer river, and as I showed the other day in committee, that was within 600 miles of the terminus. They can do that, and it is so indefinite that they can start pretty nearly at any place and end pretty nearly at any place. There is nothing to that branch line, it should be cut out. Then, again, when do you suppose that branch line could be operated ? In the first place they would have to build their line from a point near the Swan river, away north to Edmonton, and an immigrant would have to go about 300 miles out of his way to get to the point that he could get on this branch line ; the same as if I was going to Winnipeg and went to Montreal first and then took some other route to get to Winnipeg. I submit that branch line is perfectly ridiculous. The gentleman who explained this the other day, Mr. Nash, said they were going down to the Red Deer river for coal. Well, anybody who knows anything about the Red Deer river knows there is little or no coal on that river. Coal is up on the Battle river, or on the
Saskatchewan ; on the Red Deer river there is no coal. Any one can see that it is a branch line put there purely for the purpose of obstructing some other line that may run up. Now if there is one line in the North-west Territories that is required, it is a line paralleling the Calgary and Edmonton line. From Calgary to Edmonton there is about 192 miles. There have been
40,000	to 50,000 settlers located within the last four years in that district, and the consequence is that the territory on each side is taken up. both the homestead and railway land, until parties mow have to drive about 60 to 70 miles to get homesteads. They are getting discouraged, they wont go. Now the experience in the United States has been that whenever there has been a wave of immigration going into a certain territory, that territory has become popular, it has become well known. Then if you stop the immigration at a certain point, it practically stops immigration to the entire North-west. The reason why people go to Alberta instead of Assiniboia and Manitoba is this :	The idea is prevalent in
the United States among a great many people that the climate of Northern Alberta, being near the foot hills of the mountains, is much more mild than it is in Manitoba. If a man arrives at Winnipeg and you ask him where he is going to settle, he will tell you, I want to go out into Alberta, because the foot hills of the Rocky mountains will protect us and the Chinook winds moderate the climate. That is the popular opinion that prevails both among Britishers and the people of the United States : and if you stop immigrants going to that point you may stop immigration altogether.
An hon. MEMBER.: Hear, hear.


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. gentleman is enjoying himself, but I am trying to talk a little common sense here to-night, and trying to give members a little information. I submit that in a charter like that especially, that branch line should be cut out, and the capitalization of the company should be seriously looked into before it is allowed to pass this House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think there is a good deal in some of the contentions of the hon. member. He made one statement that they had any time they liked to commence and finish this road, if I understood him correctly. In reality they have not, because it says :
The respective lines hereby authorized shall be commenced and completed within the respective delays below mentioned, otherwise the powers should remain null and void.


William Forsythe McCreary: What I said was that there was no time in which they should build any certain portion of the road, no certain number of miles they should build each year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: These lines mentioned in subsection A, that will be between Port

Arthur and Fort Francis and Quebec, shall be commenced within five years and built within ten years, the lines mentioned in subsections B, C and D shall be commenced within two years and completed within five years ; the lines mentioned in subsections E and F shall be commenced within three years and completed within six years. That seems to me definite enough.


William Forsythe McCreary: It does not limit them to build any portion in any one year.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The lines on each of these sections shall be commenced and finished within a limited time, which is moderately short. Now with reference to the objection which the hon. member has taken to that branch leading down to the Red Deer district, it seems to me, after looking at the map, as we did when we were discussing it, that it came so near to the Canadian Pacific Railway that in all probability that short length will be finished, and there will be the most direct route for immigrants into that country.


William Forsythe McCreary: Why don't they go down to the line ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I have no doubt, when they are building that line, if they find, as they will find, that it will be a matter of importance and convenience to the people to have it, they will get powers to go on and connect the two. If the one line is built so close to the other, as it seems to be, provided the map gives a correct idea, there will be a connection made in a short time, a much shorter time than it would take to incorporate a company to build another line.


William Forsythe McCreary: It is only a very short branch line ; why don't they apply for the whole thing ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I rose at the time in committee to say that it would be the part of wisdom to extend that down to the other, but the hurry and bustle were so great that I could not be heard. Now with regard to the power which enables them to bond the road, including the incumbrances that are on it, of $20,000 a mile ; at first sight it seems to be unreasonable. But we give power to nearly all these roads through that country, especially where they have to go through a country like that between Port Arthur and Quebec, to bond $20,000 and even $30,000 a mile.


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. gentleman is an old parliamentarian, and I am not. Will he tell me if this $20,000 a mile will be an addition to the powers granted them last session under the Manitoba railway deal ?


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I take it that the powers which they will have under this Bill will only give them the right to bond, including the incumbrance already on it, to the extent of $20,000 a mile. I may be wrong, Mr. SPROULE.
but that is my interpretation of it. As to the powers which they have between Port Arthur and Quebec to build roads to Ottawa and Montreal, there is no starting point given, but there is a finishing point, namely, Montreal in the one case and Ottawa in the other. I objected to that, because I thought it was scarcely definite enough, but as it -related to the indefinite future when they might require to build those lines, it would not be a serious objection. Beyond that the Bill seems to be much the same, containing much the same powers, as many other Bills we have passed. I admit it is a very long line, and the charter was somewhat of a blanket character. But after all, it contains very much the same rights and powers as we have given to many other companies.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Hon. W. S. Fielding).: The hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) made a reference to me. I think I ought to say that I have not had this Bill under consideration at all. It is true I am a member of the Railway Committee, but I was otherwise engaged, so I am not in a position to say anything. I regret that the Minister of Railways and Canals is not here, but on the point raised by my hon. friend I would not care to offer an opinion.


Mr. CLARKE.: In view of the strong statements made by the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) respecting the character of this charter, and in view of the fact that the Minister of Railways and Canals is absent, would it not be well to postpone the further consideration of this Bill until the next opportunity of taking up private Bills ? I am a member of the Railway Committee, but unfortunately I was not there when the Bill was being considered, and I have no idea as to the location or the distances which are covered by this charter. A strong point has been made by the hon. member for Selkirk as to the possible liability that may be imposed upon the province of Manitoba. In view of these statements, unless the government have made up their minds that the Bill is proper, I think it should not be proceeded with at this sitting. We should have an opportunity of ascertaining from the Minister of Railways and Canals whether he has examined all these allegations that have been made by the member for Selkirk.
Mr. McCREARY". The question of bonding the road was never touched upon in the Railway Committee.


Edward Frederick Clarke: That is an important point. Perhaps some other members of the cabinet who are present will give us further light. I was rather surprised at the statements made by the member for Selkirk.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: If the government had any objection to the Bill, of course it would have been stated by the Minister of Railways. There

was a large attendance at the committee and every clause was thoroughly discussed and the Bill was almost unanimously adopted without a vote. I do not think it is worth while wasting time discussing the matter that has been raised here. I agree with the hon. member for Grey (Mr. Sproule) that the clauses are usual. The people there want railway facilities and the limit in the Bill is two years to commence and five years to complete. If the road is completed within five years I am sure the country wnl be delighted. As to the clauses affecting the bonding powers and stock, they were well considered and the committee agreed with the views expressed by the Minister of Railways and left it to him to have the Bill amended along the line he indicated. The minister has gone further than any member of the committee thought of at the time, because he has-and I believe the committee has agreed to it-amended the clause so as not to increase the capital stock of the company beyond the powers they now possess. That has been restricted to a greater extent than any member of the committee present thought it would be.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Is it usual to give a charter covering such a large area-a charter that will enable them to start almost any place and go almost any place ?


Matthew Henry Cochrane: That question was raised, and as the Minister of [DOT] Railways stated the line goes through a wild and unknown part of the country and he did not think the power was unreasonable.


James Gilmour: As I understand the situation of that country, I agree with what the member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) has said. I can not see why the Canada Northern Railway should seek for a line from a point near Victoria down south, and land at the Red Deer and stop there. It is going in the wrong direction. They will have to haul back and go away up to Victoria and east again. I could understand it quite well, if they would come down to Medicine Hat and have running powers along the Canadian Pacific Railway, but it would seem to me very peculiar if we granted them this part of the charter because it would stop a line being built there at some future time. I could understand the Canadian Pacific Railway if they were to run a line, and I think they ought, from Medicine Hat north between Alberta and Saskatchewan, but I do not understand what the Northern Company want with this line coming there and stopping there. I do not agree with the member for Selkirk with regard to having no coal at Red Deer. There is coal at the Bed Deer but there is no necessity for the Northern Railway coming there for coal, because they can get lots of it along the Saskatchewan.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: This charter says that they shall have power to bond :
Provided the number of bonds, debentures or other securities issued by the company and at any time outstanding, including those heretofore issued, shall not at any time exceed $20,000 per mile.	.
I think that includes all the bonds that they could possibly issue over any portion of the road.


James Gilmour: I should have added to-what I said, that no part of that country up there needs a road more than this. As the hon. member for Selkirk has said, the settlers have gone in ahead of the railway and they are too far away now. It is high time a railway went there, but it should run from Medicine Hat and along between Alberta and Saaskatchewan.


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Gilmour) is well acquainted with the situation up there, and one would need to be well acquainted with it before he understood this particular branch line. As a matter of fact there is a charter before this House running from Medicine Hat north and west to the Red Deer, along ridge 16-west of the fourth meridian to the Saskatchewan river. That charter goes through a territory that is now being settled by immigrants. It will connect with tlie Canadian Pacific Railway and also with the branch line running from Lethbridge to Medicine Hat. People who come from the United States via Coutts will be able to come up and go into the northern limit by this new line parallel to the Calgary and Edmonton. It is a strange thing that the Mackenzie and Mann Company never thought of applying for this charter until the other charter had been advertised for some time.
Then it dawned upon them that they would like to have a kind of branch line starting from no place and going to no place, to take the place of the line for which there is a charter before the House. A more ridiculous piece of legislation is not on the statute-book, to any man conversant with the situation, and before I sit down, I am going to move that that branch line be struck out. With regard to the bonding privilege, l am not sufficient of a lawyer or a parliamentarian to know exactly what that means-whether the $20,000 a mile is in such a shape that this company cannot recede from the bargain made with the province of Manitoba. While the bargain made by the province of Manitoba is not exactly endorsed by me, I admit that it is turning out to be a much better bargain than I anticipated. But we do not want to jeopardize that province by placing on it a burden which it never expected to bear. If this provision is going to increase the liability of the province of Manitoba one cent, hon. members should not allow it to pass; because while it is giving us relief from a monopoly, it is an expensive bargain, which will require a great deal of careful handling in the next ten years to

help us out. If we continue to have such crops as we had last year, I believe the bargain will come out all right; but this Dominion government must not place any further burdens on the province of Manitoba, or it will bring that province to a state of very serious indebtedness in the near future. I would aslt the Minister of Finance to allow the Bill to stand until the Minister of Railways is here, because he was thoroughly in touch with the Bill that came before the House last session. The Minister of Finance was only at the Railway Committee a very little time, but the Minister of Railways knows exactly what this clause means, and I would ask him to be on hand to explain it. In the meantime I would ask that elause ' E ' be struck out of the Bill.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would rather hear from members of the committee who are more familiar with the Bill than I am. I understood that this Bill was reported with the concurrence of the Minister of Railways, and I would not like to take the responsibility of making any motion against the judgment of the committee.


Edward Frederick Clarke: Why not let it stand until the Minister of Railways is here ?


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I would like to hear what the promoters say, and also the members who were present at the committee and supported the Bill.


Mr. OLIVER.: I admire the solicitude of some hon. members in regard to the branch line provided for in subsection ' E.' As it isa branch line that entirely concerns the constituency I represent, I might possibly venture to state my views in regard to it. In the committee I objected to the section as it appeared in the Bill, and it was amended with the consent of the company, and with the approval of the committee, so that for my part I was willing to withdraw my objections to it. That being the case, and the matter having been discussed there and settled, as I understood, whether I am particularly friendly to the Bill or not, I feel bound to uphold that settlement now that the Bill comes before the House. I think that is only fair to myself and all the parties concerned. As to the merits of this proposed branch line, my hon. friend from Middlesex (Mr. Gilmour) objects to it because it does not touch the Canadian Pacific Railway. That used to be a radical objection to any railroad in the North-west.


James Gilmour: My objection is not that it does not touch the Canadian Pacific Railway, but that there is no way out to the east, without going back north 120 miles.


Frank Oliver: Once the Canadian Northern is constructed, back north will not mean anything more than back south. It all depends on where you are coming from and where you are going to. My hon. friend
Mr. McCreary.
from Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) insists on coming up to the Saskatchewan river from Montana; but he is not bound to come that way. Everybody coming to the Saskatchewan is not coming from Montana; in fact, a very small proportion are coming from Montana. As a matter of fact, the people are coming from that portion of the United States which lies south and south-easterly from the city of Winnipeg, and it is shorter for them to come to the Saskatchewan district by way of the Canadian Northern than by the Canadian Pacific Railway. So that while I do not wish to argue for the Canadian Northern Railway Company nor for this branch line in particular, I do wish to point out that the objections which are urged against the branch line are not valid objections, and did not prevail with the Railway Committee, and that an arrangement having been agreed to in the committee, it is hardly fair to raise a contention in the House against the arrangement. The country which is to be served by this branch line is already very largely settled. There is a necessity for the construction of such a road as this; and when the Canadian Northern Railway Company propose to take the responsibility of serving a certain piece of country with a certain branch line, I do not feel warranted in taking the responsibility of opposing them. As to wliat some other company has offered to do, I am prepared for my part to support the proposition of the other company too. I would not feel justified in rejecting their proposition, but neither do I consider that they are justified in asking the House to reject the Canadian Northern proposition.


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. member for Alberta (Mr. Oliver) apparently takes the same stand as did the hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr. Davis) a few days ago- that because this particular branch line happens to be in Alberta, no other member has a right to discuss it. Now, I find that great portions of this and other lines are iu the province of Manitoba, and therefore 1 claim the right to discuss all questions relating to them. The hon. gentleman seems to rest a large part of his argument on the point that a large number of the people who are going in to the country do not come from Montana or the neighbouring states; but I find by the immigration returns that nearly 97 per cent of the 3,700 people who came from the United States in the month of March struck the Canadian Pacific Railway main line at Moosejaw, or Medicine Hat. They came in either via Coutts or via North Portal. If they came via Coutts, they struck the main line at Medicine Hat and would go by the Canadian Pacific Railway to where this new line is projected. If they came in on the Soo line via North Portal, how would they reach this line ? They would strike the main line at Moosejaw, and would have to go back 350 miles to Portage la Prairie and then

north-west 350 miles. In other words, they would have to travel 700 miles out of their way to reach this northern point on the Saskatchewan river, and then go south. The Canadian Northern line starts at Portage la Prairie and goes north and west, and there is no other way for a man coming in by North Portal to reach that line. I ask the hon. gentleman if that is not so ?


Frank Oliver: I will admit that a large proportion of the settlers come in by North Portal and they do reach the main line of the Canadian Pacific Railway at Moosejaw, but I do not admit that, if the Canadian Northern Railway were constructed they would come by way of North Portal. It would be as short to come by the way of Winnipeg and take the Canadian Northern to the Saskatchewan valley. These men take the present route because there is no other, not because it is the shortest that there will be. And it is absolutely unfair to say that because they take a roundabout route now they would therefore take that route after a shorter one is provided. The bulk of these people, as <the hon. member (Mr. McCreary) knows, come in from Minnesota, Dakota and Iowa, with a few from Nebraska and Kansas. They are not going out of their way by coming in by Winnipeg and they could go west to the Saskatchewan by the direct line.
Mi-. McCREARY. Where would that be to ?


Frank Oliver: Northern Alberta, that* is where most of them are going.


William Forsythe McCreary: And how will they get to it, except by coming in by Winnipeg and going by the Canadian Northern ?


Frank Oliver: That's what I say. They will not need to come in by way of North Portal, but by way of Winnipeg.


William Forsythe McCreary: Well, take the hon. gentleman on his own ground-they would come in by way of Winnipeg. They can come in by that way now if they wish. But do they ? No, they take the Soo Line which is chiefly owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway, and the Canadian Pacific Railway encourage settlers to go in that way by giving a $9.60 rate from the boundary line to Edmonton, against a rate of $15 when they came in by way of Winnipeg. Moreover, they make no change of cars at the boundary line but the same cars run through from St. Paul and Minneapolis, so that settlers are not obliged to change cars or unload. The cars are owned by the same company. But if the settlers came in in a Great Northern car, when they got to the boundary line they would have to unload their settler's effects or pay something like one cent a hundred miles, which is the running rate to go to Edmonton. So, no
matter how many Canadian Northern roads we have the settlers from St. Paul or Minneapolis-that means also all western and southern points like Kansas city, Oklahoma, and so on, will take the Soo Line. As I say, the Canadian Pacific Railway favour that route. I have tried hard, and the Manitoba government has tried hard to get immigrants to come in by way of Winnipeg, so that they could get them into Manitoba and up on the Manitoba and Northwestern route, but they have not succeeded in doing so, because they have more favourable rates on a better train service by the other way. There is no change of cars or waiting over as at Winnipeg. A man and his family coming into Winnipeg at two o'clock cannot get a train going west until the next day. What does that mean ? A man may have a family of seven or eight children and he will have to take them up town, and it will cost him $10 or $15 for a hotel bill for his family. But, on the Soo Line he will start from St. Paul and get to his destination without change of cars.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: What has that to do with this question ?


William Forsythe McCreary: The hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) tried to show that if this branch line were constructed immigrants going into Alberta would take that line, would go up the Canadian Northern to Edmonton and then strike south. As the hon. member for East Middlesex (Mr. Gilmour) says it would be like going around two sides of a triangle.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Would it hurt that section of the country if the branch line were built ?


William Forsythe McCreary: This branch line will never be built-no fear of that. But what I say is that the branch line, a charter for which is being applied for from Medicine Hat on the Canadian Pacific Railway, will be the only proper line for immigrants to go in on.


Frank Oliver: If it is a question between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the Canadian Northern as to who shall occupy this country, I am perfectly satisfied for my part that the Canadian Pacific Railway shall be given a charter and a chance to occupy it. That country has been there a good while and the Canadian Pacific Railway has been there a good while too, and the Canadian Pacific Railway has done nothing to occupy the country yet. Now comes another company and wants to occupy it. They are a going concern. I do not know whether they mean business or not, but I ask the House if it is prepared to take the responsibility of refusing to allow a company to give the accommodation that is required and that everybody admits is required.

As to the people wanting to go to Moose-jaw by way of North Portal, of course, if they wish to that is the way they will go They are going to Northern Alberta.
Mr. MeCREARY. And how are you going to get there ?


Frank Oliver: They go to Moosejaw now because they cannot get in the other way. Every hon. gentleman understands that, I am sure, except the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) himself.
Mr. MeCREARY. I wish to tell the hon. gentleman that I do understand that people can go in by two ways, either via Winnipeg or via North Portal and the hon. gentleman is foolish to try to impose upon the House. Either he is deliberately trying to impose on hon. members or it is a case of absolute ignorance on his part-one or other. If I want to go to a point on the main line, I can go better via Moosejaw than via Winnipeg. As to any question between the Canadian Northern and the Canadian Pacific Railway, it makes no difference to me. B*ut I say the only way to get in east or the Calgary and Edmonton road will be by the Canadian Pacific Railway main line and thence by the branch line, and not by a main line that is not likely to be built for three years and thence by a branch line going south. I may tell the hon. gentleman (Mr. Oliver) that, even though I do not live in Edmonton I know the situation there so far as immigration is concerned, probably as well as he does. I had a great deal more to do with the settling of that country than he had. I have visited the immigrants there over and over again, and have had the question of immigration before me every day for three years and a half. That is why i asked the government two or three years ago-and my letters are on file in the Department of the Interior-to urge the Canadian Pacific Railway to construct this line for immigrants.
I did it as a civil servant then in what I believed to be the best interest of the public, and I do the same as a member of parliament to-day. I say this is the only practical way to build the line.
. Mr. OLIVER. I would leave it to the judgment of the committee whether the hon. gentleman or I know more about the subject in hand.


James Gilmour: As to any question between the Canadian Northern and the Canadian Pacific Railway, I have no preference. But any one looking at the map will see that it is a desirable thing not to give the charter. If it should hang fire, it might prevent the other road building from Medicine Hat. Not only should there be the road coming up from Medicine Hat, but there should be a cross road. That should have been built long ago and, had the Canadian Pacific Railway owned the Calgary and Edmonton road. I believe it would have been built before this.


Frank Oliver: 


Thomas Simpson Sproule: The argument of the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) falls to the ground in view of the fact that there is a charter to build to Medicine Hat now.
Mr. MeCREARY. No.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I understand that that was stated clearly in the committee.
Mr. MeCREARY. It is advertised and applied for and will come up in two or three days.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then, can we not put it through this House ? Certainly we can. And then let w'hichever company will build the road. We have pursued that policy in different parts of the country before now. It seems to me there is no reason why we should refuse the one that is before us for the purpose of giving it to another. Let us give it to both.


Mr. ROCHE (Marquette).: I would not object to the passage of this Bill simply because the company is asking for these branch lines. I am willing to give it this charter and to support the other charter as well. It will simply be a case of the survival of the fittest. But if there be anything in the contention of the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. McCreary) that this will increase the liability of the province of Manitoba-although I do not place that interpretation upon this Bill-I would join with my hon. friend from Selkirk in asking a postponement for further consideration, especially as no member of the government seems to be present to give us a legal opinion. I believe that the liability entailed upon the province of Manitoba was for the special lines mentioned in the Act we passed last session, and has nothing to do with any of the lines asked for in this Bill; but to avoid all doubt, we should have a legal opinion from the Minister of Justice on that point. With regard to the discrimination referred to by the hon. member for Selkirk,
I had some correspondence withi the immigration agent in the province of Manitoba in the United States, and he drew my attention to the fact that discriminatory rates are charged in favour of the ' Soo ' line. However, that has nothing particular to do with this discussion, and I would favour the postponement of this Bill for further consideration unless some member of the government is prepared to give us an opinion that the province of Manitoba will not have any more liability entailed upon it by the passage of this Bill.


The MINISTER OF MARINE AND FISHERIES.: I do not wish to speak, as a member of the government or as a lawyer, but as having some experience in the Railway Committee, and,'; speaking for myself, I cannot see that there is anything in this Bill which can increase the liability of the province of Manitoba. It does not require a lawyer to know that

there is not a word in this Bill which can have that effect. All the lawyers in the committee and in the House are satislied on that point, and unless some one can point out in a reasonable way that there is any such danger, I can see no cause for delay.
* Mr. PUTTEE. I would suggest that the Bill lay over and be reprinted. There are a number of amendments which were made in the committee, and the committee agreed to let the Minister of Railways and its chairman re-draft the clause respecting the capitalization and the bonding power. The whole Bill should be reprinted, and the House make sure that the liability of the province of Manitoba is not to be increased.
On section 2,


William Forsythe McCreary: ' I seriously object to the last part of this section. That provides that the lines mentioned in subsections E and F shall be commenced within three years and completed within six years of the passing of this Act. If branch line E is going to be a line by which immigrants are to be brought into northern Alberta, it will be absolutely useless, for long before the six years have expired immigration to that district will have stopped for the reason that there is too long a haul. If that is to be an operative clause, it should be two years and three years instead of three and six. _


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 3 expunged and the following substituted :
The directors may make regulations respecting the form of stock certificates and the transfer of stock in the capital of the company.
Section agreed to.
On section 4,
William Forsythe McCreary: Here is a clause that apparently affects the province of Manitoba. It provides that the total amount of bonds, debentures or other securities by the com-.pany and at any time outstanding, including those heretofore issued, shall not at any time exceed $25,000 per mile of the company's lines of railway, constructed or under contract to be constructed. There are 1,300 miles of their road in Manitoba and between Manitoba and Port Arthur, which, by the railway contract made between Manitoba and this company, should not be mortgaged more than $20,000 per mile, as I remember the contract. Notwithstanding the opinion of my hon. friend (Mr. Sutherland), 1 would) ask the Minister of Railways, on his responsibility as a minister, to state that -this does not affect the province of Manitoba. If necessary he should correspond with the Manitoba government, which has guaranteed the bonds to the extent of $18,000,000 in order to find out from the Attorney General of that province whether this in any way conflicts with that bargain or imposes any further increase of liability upon that province.
As a matter of fact it is now past 9 o'clock and the hour for private Bills has expired, and surely the Minister of Finance will grant us this small privilege of having the Minister of Railways pronounce himself on this subject and if necessary correspond with the premier of Manitoba and the Attorney General of that province in order to remove any doubt.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: The Minister of Justice is in the House.


William Forsythe McCreary: He is not conversant with the Bill, and was not in the Railway Committee, but the Minister of Railways was in daily session in the committee last year when the Canadian Northern Bill went through, and is thoroughly conversant with the facts. At the meeting the other day of the committee, when this Bill was passed, this particular feature of it never dawned on me, but it came to my mind afterwards. If the Minister of Railways were here and gave his opinion, on his responsibility as a minister, that this Bill in no way affected the liability of the Manitoba government, I would have nothing more to say. But I think we ought to have that opinion.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I was not before the committee, and am bound to believe that these matters were all considered in that committee. If anything new has arisen there will be opportunity to look into it before this Bill reaches its final stage, but I do not feel at liberty to interfere at all.


William Forsythe McCreary: Then I call the attention of Mr. Speaker to the fact that the hour for private Bills has expired.


Robert Laird Borden: It seems only reasonable that we should have the opinion of the law officer of the Crown.


The MINISTER OF FINANCE.: I shall mention the matter to the Minister of Railways.


Mr. SPEAKER.: The hour for private Bills has expired.



[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply.
Commissioner's branch, for agriculture and dairying, Ac., $210,000.
['That is due to the fact that a great deal of Manitoba butter was sent to British Columbia this year and some Ontario and Quebec butter. In the early spring there was some sent from the east.\nSome resolutions reported.\nOn motion of the Minister of Finance, House adjourned at 11.50 p.m.', 'Monday, April 14, 1902.']
Andrew B. Ingram: Will the minister give us the names of all the inspectors, where they are located, and where they come from, who are now engaged under the Act ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE W.   A.@: McKinnon; Alexander McNeill, who I think comes from the county of Essex; E. Lick, who comes from the neighbourhood of Cobourg or Oshawa; G. Vroom,

from the county of Annapolis; It. Burke, from Prince Edward Island; H. L. Dery, from Rouville, I think; J. F. Scriver, county of Huntingdon; T. I. Carey, also from Co-bourg, I think; E. N. Wartman, from Kingston, I think; J. J. Philp, of Winnipeg; Barton Gandy, New Brunswick; Freeman Fitch, from Middleton, N.S. The last seven are temporary appointments; the first five I mentioned are for a year.


Andrew B. Ingram: Will the hon. gentleman explain why he has changed his policy laid down last year, when he said he intended to appoint only temporary inspectors ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I am not aware that I have changed my policy. I said the inspectors would not be engaged necessarily for the whole year. But accepting what the hon. gentleman says, I found that the season for inspection lasted rather longer than I expected; and in the second place, I found that this work in connection with the fruit trade was very beneficial, and I desired to carry it on with some of those inspectors all the year round.


George Taylor: The minister spent considerable time this afternoon in giving us in detail the purposes for which this vote was to be expended, and he referred to the fruit inspection. Now, it appears he has formed a new department with Mr. McKinnon at the head of it, who has under him four or five permanent officials and seven temporaries. The seven that are temporary are not employed by the year, the other three or four are employed permanently. Any person who is conversant with the fruit business knows that their time will not be fully taken up; but he proposes to send them around as active agents ostensibly to talk fruit business generally over the country, and perhaps they will talk something else in the interest of the ministers. Now we have an Agriculture Committee which meets twice or three times a week; that committee has had before it Professor Robertson and the head of the Immigration Department, and two or three other heads of departments. Now. I suggest to the minister that at the next meeting of the Agriculture Committee he should have Mr. McKinnon, the chief officer of this inspection department, there, and then the committee will catechise him and ascertain his qualifications, and the qualifications, of these gentlemen who are under him. and the amount of work that has been done during the last year while this department has been in full swing. I think it is due to the country, and to the fruitgrowers, that the head of this department, Mr. McKinnon, should come before the committee.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I shall be glad to afford every facility for Mr. McKinnon coming before the Agriculture Committee. Of course that will have
I
to be done by the committee, but I can assure the hon. gentleman that Mr. McKinnon will be at the disposal of the committee.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Will the minister tell us if there have been any complaints against the enforcement of this Act by the fruitgrowers or shippers ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I am not aware that there have been any complaints against the enforcement of the Act. There have been occasional differences of opinion in regard to the manner of its enforcement, and the legal aspect of it. But there have been no complaints, so far as I am aware, that it has been too strictly or too laxly enforced. There have been one or two little points raised as to the meaning of the Act. 1 think one request was made for a better definition of the word ' packer ' under the Act, and a question arose as to whether more than one person could be called a packer. There seemed to be a doubt as to whether an individual workman who put the fruit into the barrel could be called a packer as well as the person on whose behalf he had done it.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: What has been the cost of the inspection, including salaries, travelling expenses and all other expenses ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Altogether the sum we have devoted to the enforcement of this Act has been somewhat over $14,000.


Mr. McGOWAN.: Would the minister tell us if there have been any shipments of fresh meat in cold storage, and what was the result ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, there was a series of shipments of beef made from Toronto to England in cold storage. The carriage of meat, as a general rule, was quite satisfactory. I believe there was one shipment in regard to which there was some rather adverse criticism as to the way in which the meat had arrived, but I understand from those engaged in the trade that the profits had been unsatisfactory and that after the trial they ceased shipping.


John McGowan: Was the transportation quite satisfactory ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think I may say the transportation was quite satisfactory. There was one shipment in which the beef was heated before it was put into the steamer and consequently it did not keep perfectly in going across. It was clearly shown that it was in consequence of the condition it was in when it was put on board the steamer and that it was not brought into that condition while on the steamer.


Sydney Arthur Fisher: 


John McGowan: I suppose it got into that condition on the way to Montreal ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


John McGowan: Then, your cars were at fault.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The cars were not the cars that we have dealt with on the railways. That beef was shipped in special cars by the people who shipjjed it.


James Clancy: It seems to be rather extraordinary that proper care should not have been taken at the outset to see that that meat was received in prime condition, because the hon. gentleman knows that these experiments are perfectly useless if we are to be told that the goods went all right so far as cold storage was concerned, but that the excuse in the end is, when they are found to be damaged, that they were not received in prime condition. It is rather discouraging and casts doubt and suspicion upon the value of cold storage as it is yet worked out. I think the hon. gentleman will agree with me that cold storage is in its experimental stage to a very considerable extent. It has not been put beyond all question so far, although, I may say there is a disposition, and a very strong one to, if possible, make cold storage a great success. The hon. gentleman has been forced, perhaps, to have it somewhat experimental all through. It seems to me that the greatest care should be taken that when perishable goods are sent as an experiment the first condition should be that they are properly received. I know nothing that will cast more discredit on the whole thing than saying that it was all right in cold storage, but that is came there in bad condition. It is the business of the department to guard against offering any such excuse as that to the public.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: In the first place I want to say to the non. gentleman (Mr. Clancy) that these shipments were not experiments of tne department, that they were entirely managed by private parties who sent them without any control or supervision on the part of the department. In the second place, I understand that this shipment of meat was made in a way in which I would not, myself, allow any shipment to be made. The meat was not hung in the compartments, but packed on its side like cordwood. I believe that under certain circumstances and conditions, if the meat is perfectly cool when it is put in and kept cool, that can be done, but in this particular instance in which this one shipment failed, the meat was known not to be perfectly cool when it was put in the cold storage chamber of the ship. That is the report of our officers and it is the acknowledged report of the shippers.

Tlie failure in carrying it across was due to that. The other shipments which were hung in the cold storage chambers, arrived in perfect condition.


John McGowan: There seems to be something wrong with this system of storing meat in cold storage when it goes bad in the way it does. I know that there are thousands of cargoes shipped from Chicago almost every day, and it does seem to me that it is a very important matter, if we are going to establish a trade in Canadian meat shipped in cold storage, that we should be careful to see that we adopt a proper system. These shipments are going every day from Chicago to Liverpool and London, and they have been for years. The Armour and Swift companies are sending meat over constantly.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That meat is always hung as far as I know, and the meat that was hung and not laid on its side went through in a perfectly satisfactory condition.


John McGowan: Does your officer not exercise any supervision over the placing of goods in the cold storage chambers ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Not over these shipments.


John McGowan: It is unfortunate that nothing has been done to perfect the system.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It must be a strong argument against the value of our cold storage system, that, whereas they are shipping meat from Australia, a distance of
7,000	miles, which arrives in perfect condition, we cannot ship it 2,000 miles and deliver it in good condition. The fact is that the department have exercised no control over it. If they had any control such as they ought to have, they should exercise it so as to prove that the system is not only feasible but useful, because, if, as has happened, a shipment is laid down in England in an imperfect condition others will not repeat the experiment. In this case they abandoned it after they had made a trial because it was a failure. It seems to me that there is something radically wrong with the cold storage system that is provided. The hon. minister spoke about three kinds of cold storage, mechanical cold storage and cold storage by refrigeration-I-persume, by ice, would it not be ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No, there is no cold storage with ice on steamers that I know of. There is none now.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: You had that system at first.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I never had it.



[Stage Direction]
number which were under. contract which are still in the trade. Prof. Robertson informs me that there were last year 77 sailings from Montreal of some 17 different steamers fitted up with cold storage accommodation.
Thomas Simpson Sproule: What are relative freight rotes on these vessels as compared with ordinary steamers 7


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Ten shillings a ton extra for cold storage accommodation, I believe, is generally charged. I also hear that sometimes fifteen shillings is charged. I suppose that when there is a great demand for accommodation fifteen shillings is charged, and that when there is less demand, ten shillings. But these vessels being no longer under contract, we have no control over the rates that they charge.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: In what kind of cold storage was the trial shipment of tomatoes and grapes made some years ago 7


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: They were sent in the regular cold storage.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Have you sent any fruit by the new system ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We have not sent any of the delicate fruits. It is intended for apples.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: * I wish to get some information which might be useful to the people of the country. I have on more than once been met on the platform by friends of the Minister of; Agriculture who have stated that the cold storage system was so perfect that our butter and cheese and eggs and fruit were now laid down in perfect condition on the English market. I contradicted that, but the statement was repeated most positively. I am glad that the minister has been frank enough to admit that in most cases it has been a failure and that they are now experimenting.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Oh, no.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: He tells us that none of the steamers are fitted with the first system of cold storage he introduced.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I thought there was cold storage with ice ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, before I made the change.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then we have mechanical cold storage for the passage of cool air in the chambers. How many vessels were fitted out last year with mechanical cold storage, and would the hon. minister give us the freight rate that is charged on such vessels as compared with the freight rate on ordinary vessels 7 Because 1 am told that many shippers choose to take the ordinary vessel rather than the vessel provided with cold storage, finding that it does not pay them to pay the additional expense incurred by shipment in cold storage.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: For what kind of goods 7


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Cheese and butter. Cheese was one of the articles in regard to which I heard the statement and that therefore they chose to send it in an ordinary vessel without cold storage.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Cheese has hardly ever been sent in what we call the cold storage chamber of these vessels. The cheese men, as a general rule, have not considered it necessary to send cheese in cold storage.


James Clancy: That was tried for a time, was it not 7


The MINISTER OF AGRICLUTURE.: A l'ew shipments were tried but very little was sent. I do not think any butter is now being sent from Canada except in cold storage chambers. I am not aware of any single shipment being made and if there has been at rare intervals a single shipment it must be very slight. There were about 420,000 packages of butter carried in cold storage last season and one solitary shipment not in cold storage.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: No cheese at all 7


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No cheese has been carried in the cold storage insulated chambers. The ventilated chambers with cold storage draught for the forcing of cool air through the holds are intended for the purpose of carrying cheese and apples and these are the cold storage arrangements which I am trying to make. During last fall I got four steamers fitted up with this kind of cold storage and I expect to have ten other steamers fitted up for the present season. That is the new arrangement which we have been pressing upon the ship owners and the public for the last year. However, as to the ships that are fitted with the older cold storage, that is to say insulated chambers which you can cool down to the freezing point and below if you choose, we have none of these under contract, but we have a Hon. Mr. FISHER.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Not at all. As a matter of fact last year seventy-seven steamers sailing from Montreal were fitted with the very system of cold storage that was first introduced by my department, j The contracts with these steamers have terminated, but the owners are continuing the cold storage system which under our contracts we required them to put in.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Has it been a success 7


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: A perfect success.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: And why are you trying something else ?


The MINISTER OF .   AGRICULTURE@: This is for a different purpose altogether. This is for cheese and apples which have not been carried in cold storage chambers. The cold storage chambers could not accommodate one-tenth Of the barrels of apples that have been sent to England; and the shippers of apples would not pay the extra expenditure necessary for that kind of cold storage.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That is exactly what I said. The fruit men could not avail themselves of that cold storage because of the expense and therefore it cannot have been a perfect success. Have we had any trial shipment of fruits this season ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think so.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Then in view of the high price of fruit in England, it would appear that we cannot send our fruit over there because there has not yet been devised any means of landing it in good condition. That is an evidence that the present cold storage is a failure.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The fruit shipments that were made by the government some years ago were experiments, and the government having proved certain things the shippers of Canada have been taking advantage of our experience and they are now shipping fruit themselves. Last year pears were successfully shipped in considerable quantities and this year in small quantities, because there was a small crop here and the price was good at home. When we succeed in showing what can be done, we leaye to the people in the trade to continue the shipments. I would point out to the hon. gentleman that butter requires a temperature under freezing, and chicken meat requires the same, whereas if apples and cheese were put in the freezing chambers they would be injured.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Why don't you provide something suitable ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That is exactly what we are doing.


James Clancy: What proportion of our butter is sent in cold storage ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Almost the whole of the buttev that went from Canada during the last five years.


Mr. BLAIN.: What proportion of the apples shipped from Montreal last year were inspected ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I stated this afternoon that about 33,000 barrels were inspected out of probably 300,-
000.	It would be a physical impossibility to inspect all the apples shipped during the three months of the shipping season.


Richard Blain: How many of these inspectors are in the employ of the government at this present time ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Practically all of them. They are coming here next week to have a conference and will spend a week at the Experimental Farm with the Horticulturalist, studying the spraying of fruit trees and their growth and their management, so as to be able to do that educational work which is part of our scheme.


Richard Blain: They are all on your pay list at the present moment ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think so.


George Taylor: When was this shipment of beef made that went wrong, and by whom was it made ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not know exactly when it was made, but it was made by the William Davies Packing Company, of Toronto.


George Taylor: That is exactly what I have been informed. Their shipment arrived in bad condition and they have gone out of the business simply because the cold storage system which the Minister of Agriculture said was perfect was found to be of no use whatever. The minister professed to take the meat in refrigerator cars in Toronto, ship it in cold storage in Montreal and land it safely in cold storage in England, and Davies and Sons sent their beef in his charge and it went wrong. His cold storage was a complete failure. One of my constituents has forwarded me a little book lately published by the Minister of Agriculture, and I presume distributed all over the Dominion. My constituent took the cover off but-


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: When was it issued ?


George Taylor: Lately. It is addressed to the farmers of Canada, and pretends to give some facts to the farmers.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think that was published in 1900.


George Taylor: It has lately been distributed.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It has not been distributed since then.


George Taylor: I got one of them through the mail the other day.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: You are behind the times.


George Taylor: I will read a sentence or two and the minister will see that there are some references in it to things that happened later than 1900.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: What is the date ?


George Taylor: Like many other documents sent out by this government, there is neither date nor signature to it. It was sent out by the Minister of Agriculture and on the first page we have the following :
In regard to the Minister of Agriculture (Hon. Svdney Fisher), I may say that I believe he is competent and able to conduct properly the duties that are impos?d upon him in his department. He is a practical farmer, and has devoted a great deal of time and energy in promoting the agricultural interests of the country ; and I am grateful to the Prime Minister for having selected a gentleman from the eastern townships, from which I come, to fill the important Department of Agriculture. (Mr. A. H. Moore, member for Stanstead, in 'Hansard' of September 15, 18S6.)
The introduction says :
Of late there has been evident a concerted attack on the part of the Conservative leaders and press upon the Minister of Agriculture and his work for the farmer. This is undoubtedly due to the discovery by these gentlemen of the feeling existing amongst the farmers of Canada that much has been done in their interests by the Liberal government and minister, and they are so frightened by this feeling amongst the electorate that they find it necessary to try to counteract it.
Then he devotes eleven pages to what has been done in the way of perfecting cold storage, and he winds up by saying that the system is perfect now.


James Clancy: Does the minister repudiate that ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I would like to see it. I do not repudiate what Mr. Moore said.


James Clancy: It seems that Mr. Moore was the only respectable witness the Minister of Agriculture could get.


George Taylor: He had to call a Conservative as a witness. He goes on to say in this pamphlet:
To-day our products are going to England in enormously increasing quantities, and our farmers are there receiving prices which they never received before.
To-day Canadian butter, Canadian chees?, Canadian fruits and Canadian flour are being asked for and searched for by the English consumer.
Under the Conservative administration the same articles were being sold in the English markets under other names and false brands.
My correspondent notes on that margin * this is a lie.'


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Do you endorse that ?


George Taylor: I do not think that Canadian goods have ever gone to the English market under false names and brands. I would not belie Canada by saying, as the minister has done, that we send our goods across under false brands and names. I am discussing this system of cold storage, which the hon. gentleman says he has so


Sydney Arthur Fisher: perfected that we could send fresh meats, fowls, fruits of all kinds over to England and they would land in perfect condition. The firm of Davies & Company, of Toronto, took the minister at his word and delivered a few car loads of fresh meat into his cold storage cars in transit to England. But they received practically nothing for their beef, and have gone out of the business. Is that statement correct or not ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It is entirely incorrect. As a matter of fact the firm of William Davies & Company last year undertook to send dead meat to England as an experiment. They sent six shipments. One turned out bad when it got there. They themselves reported to us the whole facts of the case. They said that that shipment was put upon the ship in a heated condition and that they were not surprised at its arrival in bad condition. They went out of the business because they found that the price in England and the cost of transportation and the cost of the beef here did not justify them continuing the business. Their decision was not at all due to the failure of the cold storage system, but to the market conditions and lack of profit.


Fletcher Bath Wade: I would ask the hon. minister to see, when making a contract with a line of steamers from St. John and Halifax for the London market, that the contract provides for forced ventilation so that there may be an even, cool temperature all the way across.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Only this morning, I met a gentleman desirous to tender for the contract for the ensuing year, and explained the necessities of the case to him in the presence of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


Mr. HACKETT.: I would ask the hon. minister if he is going to provide steam communication between Charlottetown and Great Britain during the coming season, and if the vessels are to be fitted up with the cold storage system ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICUI TURK.: In conjunction with the Minister of Trade and Commerce, I saw this morning the representatives of a steamship line which has made the offer of a ship, thoroughly equipped with cold storage and forced ventilation, to ply between Charlottetown and Great Britain this coming season. The contract will be made out and sent to these people for signature in a day or two.


Edward Hackett: I suppose there will be regular dates of sailing from Charlottetown?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


Edward Hackett: A gentleman who shipped a quantity of apples last fall from Halifax by the Furness line lost heavily.

owing to the want of proper ventilation, and the consequent arrival of the fruit in had condition. His English agent had sold the fruit to be delivered on arrival at good prices, but it was found in bad order and they had to cancel the sale and dispose of it on the best terms possible. It is very unfortunate that the people of Prince Edward Island should not have the same facilities for shipping their produce as the people of the other provinces.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Would the hon. gentleman be kind enough to send me the name of the shipper, the name of the vessel and the date of shipment, because the Furness-Withy line denied point blank any such condition of affairs, and I would be glad to have the details of any particular shipment.


Edward Hackett: I shall be most happy to furnish them to the hon. gentleman. There is another matter which I wish to bring to his attention. It has to do with the inspection of fruit. I find that while we have it stated here that Mr. McKinnon is a very competent gentleman, a fraudulent shipment has been made to Prince Edward Island. Although we shipped fruit from the island, yet our merchants to a certain extent, import fruit from the other provinces in their general line of business.
I find in the Charlottetown ' Patriot ' of April 9th, which is the latest date we have on file in the reading room, the following comment:
The usefulness of having a fruit inspector in this province has been practically demonstrated. During the absence of Mr. Burke, in the other provinces, a shipment of apples was received in Charlottetown from a Montreal firm. The apples were originally packed in Ontario. The packer's name was erased by the Montreal firm and their own firm name substituted. On his return to the island, Mr. Burke, in the course of his inspection, discovered that this lot of apples was fraudulently packed by the barrels being faced with No. 1 fruit while below the surface the veriest trash appeared. Mr. Burke at once made complaint against the Montreal shippers and had a fine imposed under the Trade Marks Act.
Well, Mr. Chairman, if this gentleman of all the talents-half lawyer and half fruitgrower-in Ontario had been attending to his duties there, that shipment would not have been made to Prince Edward Island. We are charged with criticising this gentleman because his father is a candidate for a certain riding in Ontario at the local elections. We are doing nothing of the kind, but I believe that if you would sift the matter out, you would find that this lot of apples came from that very Niagara district where his father is running, and where he is intrusted with the inspection of fruit, and no doubt in order to gain favour for his father in the elections, he allowed this fraudulent shipment of apples to he sent to the island. I know nothing about Mr. McKinnon, and if he be a young man and has the ability hon. gentlemen opposite
say he has, I am satisfied. I would rather give a young man a push forward than try to keep him down. But if we find such a fraudulent shipment coming from Ontario, under the immediate supervision and inspection of this gentleman, I would ask tlie minister does he think that this inspector is after all so efficient. It may be impossible for him to inspect every barrel of apples, hut the names of those parties in Ontario who shipped that fruit and the name of the Montreal firm which erased the shipper's name and substituted their own, should be made public, so that the public may judge whether the Trade Marks Act is being carried out as effectively as the hon. gentleman represents.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I suppose the names did not appear in the newspapers, although they must have been in the court record. Let me tell the hon. gentleman, who is casting this serious reflection on Mr. McKinnon, that this case was referred by Mr. Burke to Mr. McKinnon, and that Sir. McKinnon instructed him how to proceed, and that the apples did not come from anywhere near where Mr. McKinnon, senior, lives, but from Cobourg, in the province of Ontario.


James Clancy: The minister promised some information with regard to the working of these cheese curing stations. I understood him to say that there would he four of them costing about $10,000 each. It would be interesting to have him explain how the general public is to benefit by this scheme.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The general benefit will be due to the results which are found in this experimental work this year. As I explained before dinner, this is an experiment which, so far as I know, has never been tried in any cheesemaking country in the world. It has been projected because of what are considered to be the necessities of the case, and will involve the adoption of what are judged to be the best means of meeting those difficulties and overcoming them. We trust and believe, and the representative cheese-makers in the dairying associations have
tUUuiScL uiO	>.	-	-a-	vJ.j *-yj Jv,
a successful experiment. It is not being done for the purpose of helping the particular localities that have been chosen for the work. These localities have been chosen because they seem to be distinctly cheesemaking centres, where these curing establishments and the experiments carried on in them will be under the observation of those engaged in the industry. The places chosen are Woodstock, in western Ontario, Brockville in eastern Ontario; St. Hyacinthe for the French parts of the province of Quebec, and Cowansville for the English speaking parts. The general results will be published as they are learned; and if, at the end of the season those results meet

tiie expectations of those who are interested, I trust and believe that the cheesemaking centres of the country will adopt the system for themselves and carry it out in a commercial way. There is no intention on the part of the government to do this work all over the country. We shall follow the precedent set iu the case of what is called winter dairying. Under my predecessor, Professor Robertson inaugurated in Ontario and Prince Edward Island, and also, I tliiuk, in Nova Scotia, winter dairying stations, where butter was made on a considerable scale throughout the winter for the purpose of showing the butter-makers that butter could so be made as well as in summer. Certain localities were chosen because they seemed to be suitable for the experiments. So in this case. The hon. gentleman asked me how it would be worked. Without going into details, I may say generally that we are putting up a building which will be arranged so that we can control the temperature in the curing room, where the cheese will be kept. We also hope to have, in one or two of the buildings at all events, several small chambers where we can try experiments in curing cheese at different temperatures within the range that experiments in New York State and Guelph have shown to be the best. We also expect to box the cheese, and I trust and expect that our work in that respect will lead to improvement throughout the country. The boxing of our cheese, up to the present time, has not been all that we could desire. For many years the defects iu this respect have caused a serious loss annually. Arrangements will be made to bring in cheese from the factories which are to supply them to the central curing room. The cheese will be brought in immediately after it is made up in the presses-probably the next day after it is taken out of the press.


James Clancy: Is there no danger of deterioration ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We propose to arrange a special kind of hoop to carry the cheese in. The cheese will be placed on the shelves in the central curing room and will then be under the control and management of the expert in charge of the building. We do not know yet exactly how long the curing process will take, but we have a pretty fair idea. When the cheese is cured and declared ready for market, it will be at the disposal of its owners, the people who supplied it. We have no control of the sale of it or of the commerce in it. The cheese may be left iu the central curing room for a short time, we do not know exactly how long. But I do not think that these central curing rooms ought to be used as a sort of keeping warehouse for the cheese. If they were kept there for a long time the accumulation of cheese would make it necessary to increase Hon. Mr. FISHER.
the size of the building and spend money iu the care of the cheese. That is a business for an ordinary warehouse properly epuipped. We are satisfied-in fact we know from our experiments-that cheese will shrink very much less In these curing rooms than in the ordinary curing rooms in the factories. And we know also, as well as we can know anything in the future, that cheese cured in these central establishments will be worth considerably more than if cured in the old rooms under varying temperatures running sometimes as high as 85 or even 90 degrees Farenlieit. We know also that cheese cured in this way can be made softer and moister, that is, the maker will be able to make more pounds of cheese to every hundred pounds of milk than under the present system of curing. Therefore, the profit in the business will be threefold; first, a given quantity of milk will make more cheese; second, the cheese will shrink less in the curing room and so will weigh out more when it comes to be sold; and, third, the price of cheese will be better than if cured under the ordinary conditions. The buildings we propose to make in a substantial manner, in a way which may, I trust, be a model in the future for the buildings put up by companies or individuals for similar purposes. In the course of the summer's work we shall probably find many details which will have to be changed from our present plan. But we believe we have outlined the plan as well as can be done without (practical experience. For this is a pure experiment from the word ' go.' I trust that at the end of the season we shall be able to make a report to the cheese-makers of Canada which will enable them to go on to do this work for themselves as successfully as they do other work in connection with this great cheese-making industry.


Mr. FOWLER.: Is it the intention of the minister to establish a central curing house in the province of New Brunswick ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No.


George William Fowler: Why not ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Because, at the present time there is no cheese-making centre in New Brunswick which would justify the expectation that an establishment of this kind could be satisfactorily worked, besides, the results gained in Ontario and Quebec, where there are great cheese-making centres, will be equally available for New Brunswick.


George William Fowler: I think the minister is misinformed as to the facts. The county from which I have the honour to come is the pioneer of the cheese industry in New Brunswick, and is a great cheese-making centre. Within a radius of ten miles there must be twenty-five or thirty factories, some I of them with an output of 100 tons a year.

There are none of them with a smaller output than from 35 to 40 tons. 1 doubt if In any of the other provinces there is a single county with a larger cheese output than the county of King's. As the minister has taken a large vote for this purpose, I think the province of New Brunswick, although small, should not he beneath his notice, and I respectfully submit that he should establish one of these curing establishments in that county. I would like to ask him further what is the intention of the government with respect to these curing establishments after they have passed the experimental stage.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We hope to pass them over to somebody who will take them up as a commercial business, that is we intend to sell them.


George William Fowler: I would invite the minister to examine into the output of cheese in the province of New Brunswick, and to give his serious attention to the question of putting one of these curing establishments in King's county. He might place it in St. John, there would be no difficulty there, because the cheese could come 40 or 50 miles by railway.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: This last suggestion is entirely out of the question, we could not send cheese in a green condition by railway for 40 or 50 miles. It will have to be brought in by wagons constructed for that purpose. The probability is that 10 miles would be the outside limit of distance. Our present expectation is that the cheese will only be brought a distance of 5 or 6 miles into the curing establishment.


George William Fowler: About what will be the amount of cheese gathered from the section where you are going to place this curing establishment, that is to say, the section that will be served by the establishment ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The number of cheese that would be brought into these curing rooms will be comparatively small. A large section will not be able to send all its cheese in. It would depend upon the size of the factory. In the province of Quebec, as a general rule, the factories are not as large as they are in Ontario, and in the former province it will take more factories to provide the cheese which we propose to accommodate in these curing rooms. But I could not give the exact number of factories that would be accommodated. Our intention is to build rooms which will accommodate in the neighbourhood of 2,000 cheese a month. In Woodstock and Brockville there would be more factories within a narrow radius which could supply that number of cheese. The suggestion has been made that perhaps we should take half the number of cheese
from each factory so as to take from a larger number of factories, instead of taking the whole of the cheese from some factories and leaving out others.


George William Fowler: What is the average cost of eacli one of these curing establishments ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The buildings, plant and equipment will cost between $8,000 and $10,000 each.


James Gilmour: Will the minister not make a larger establishment at some places than at others ? For instance, at Woodstock there are 2,000 cheese made a month in the three factories in the immediate neighbourhood. I would suggest that Woodstock might have a larger room than some other places where there is a smaller output. I would also ask whether the department will hold these cheese until they are cured, or will allow the owner to take them out whenever he finds a market for them. The owner might find a mariret and not be able to withdraw them when he wished. There might be a variety of opinions about the time required to cure the cheese, and the right time to market them. Buyers of cheese have methods of curing and holding their own cheese for a time.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Our expectation and intention is to hold the cheese there until they are properly cured and fit for market. In these cool chambers it will take a cheese longer to become fit for market than it does where the temperature is higher. That has been the universal experience. 1 confess that I would much regret to see the owners of cheese take them away before they were properly cured and fit for market ; but I can hardly say that I would refuse to allow an owner of cheese to take them out when ever he likes. It would be rather difficult for me to say to a man : These cheese of yours are not fit for market, and you shall not have them yet, whether you want them or not. Although I would do everything I could to persuade him to leave them there long enough to have them fit for market.


James Gilmour: It would not be well to make a hard and fast rule, but the owner should have the option to take advantage of a favourable market.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think the difficulty has arisen so much in Ontario, but I do know that in the province of Quebec, in the eastern townships, a great deal of cheese has been sold too green, allowed to leave the factories before it was really fit to be moved, and that has hurt the cheese trade. I hope we will be able to induce the factory owners and the owners of the cheese to leave their cheese long enough to ripen properly.


James Gilmour: What would the minister think with regard to building a larger curing

room at Woodstock than at other places ? As I said, two or three factories could occupy all the capacity.


Tne MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: They may he built of different sizes. They are all planned in such a way that they can be easily enlarged.


George Taylor: I would like an explanation about this pamphlet sent out by the Department of Agriculture.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Is that a departmental publication, or is it a campaign document ?


George Taylor: I will send it over to the hon. gentleman. There is a photograph of the minister in the front part of it. I understood from him that this was published in 1900.
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE I thought so, from what the hon. gentleman read.


George Taylor: Then he does not know whether he has sent out only one document or not, because he has sent out none since, as I understood him.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think I have sent out anything since.


George Taylor: It says :
The following is a comparison during the last four years und"r Conservative rule and the last four years under the Liberal administration.
It gives the quantity of butter exported for the years 1893, 1894, 1895 and 1S96 ; and then for the four years under Liberal administration of 1897, 1898, 1899 and 1900. I do not know how he could publish and distribute this book in 1900, when he professes to include the exports of these four articles in 1900. It could not be until after 1900 that the hon. gentleman could gather the statistics and publish them. In another table he gives a comparative statement of the expenditure under four years of Conservative administration and four years of Liberal administration, including 1901. He is trying to prove to the farmers that he is doing more for them in the expenditure of money under these heads than the Conservative government did. So this document must certainly have been sent out to the farmers since 1901, or else he is trying to impose upon them. He can take whichever horn of the dilemma he chooses. I send this pamphlet over to the hon. gentleman.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think this is a pamphlet which was largely prepared by myself, though not altogether. It seems to have been issued in the election campaign of 1900.


George Taylor: How does the hon. gentleman account for giving these tables for the full year of 1900.


James Gilmour: 


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: When that campaign was made the shipping season from Montreal had been closed, and our butter shipments were known. They were published within a few days pf the close of that season by the Montreal papers, a synopsis is always made and given to them. We have besides that a record in our department of the amount of butter and cheese that is shipped from Montreal during the shipping season and the comparison is made with that. As far as the expenditure of the department for this season is concerned the hon. gentleman says himself that he quoted the estimated expenditure and that was included in the statement of the pamphlet and showed what my department was doing during the current year. As far as these statements are concerned I can simply say to the hon. gentleman that they went before the farmers of the country and that the farmers read them, studied them and digested them. These statements were criticised by the hon. gentlemen opposite and their candidates.


George Taylor: And they succeeded in Ontario.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: While they succeeded probably in Ontario they were !"ft in a small minority in the elections of 1909. In the province of Ontario there was a small majority I grant, you in their favour, b.'t Ontario is not the whole Dominion of Canada, and when the representation in this House, which has to deal with these matters, whicli has to judge these matters, has a majority, as we showed the other night of fifty-six in favour of the administration which was exposed and shown in that pamphlet, as far as my department was concerned, the result to me, at all events, is very gratifying, and I can well understand that lion, gentlemen are not so well pleased.


Richard Blain: Do I understand the hon. Minister of Agriculture to say that the figures contained in that pamphlet were furnished by his department ?
T1'" MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE. I think probably most of them were.


George Taylor: Then, I will take up another branch. I understand from the hon. minister that he made several trial shipments of poultry, that they were very successful, that they brought in good prices and that it was a good business for a farmer to engage in ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes. Does the hon. gentleman want the details of them ?


George Taylor: No. I want to ask the farmers of the country if they could do business as the hon. gentleman has done.
I see at page D-59 of the Auditor General's report that the hon. gentleman has ex-

pended $6,580.17 in the preparation of poultry for market. I find that a gentleman by the name of A. S. McBean of Lancaster purchased a number of chickens and furnished food to them at the expense of $321.94. They were sent over to England under this system of cold storage and they brought $78.28, the experiment entailing a loss of nearly $200. I want to know how the hon. gentleman can tell the farmers of this country that this is a profitable business for them to engage in, and how he can explain this way of doing business. Altogether the department expended $6,580.17 for the preparation of poultry for market and the receipts from the sales of this poultry amounted to $1,833.45, showing a deficiency of $4,746.72 in the experimenting feeding and shipping of poultry to the old country.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: At the Lancaster station ?


George Taylor: Lancaster was one of them. Then I see that T. L. Brant of Whitby expended $445.64 and Whitby returned $177.73. I presume that my hon. friend, wherever he made his experiments, picked out political friends to give the money to.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It would be better done probably.


George Taylor: And it was probably done. Mr. Brant got $445.00 and returned $177.73. The receipts being shown in the Auditor General's report at page D-68. The Auditor General deducts the refunds for the sale of poultry, cheese, &c. This being the fact, I wonder how the hon. minister can recommend the farmers of the country to go into the feeding of poultry and shipping it to England if better results cannot be achieved.
The MINISTER OF xVGRICULTURE. If these results were such as the hon. member for South Leeds (Mr. Taylor) has stated them there is no doubt that it would not be very profitable. As a matter of fact, the expenditure which the hon. gentleman fctatcd as the expanse on these particular lots of chickens included the establishment of the stations, and the experimental and educational work which these men were carrying on. Prof. Robertson gave the details in connection with these shipments every year before the Agriculture Committee of the House and they are published in the annual report of the department and these details show that the price of these chickens in England is about double the cost that is incurred here. As a matter of fact a number of men whom we started in this work and who at first did experimental work, such as Mr. Brant and Mr. McBean are doing to-day, are doing this work themselves now. They have left the work of the department and are no longer
doing it but have entered into business on a commercial basis and are making it pay. The results are also evident from the fact that in 1896, before this work commenced, our whole export of chicken meat to Great Britain was about $18,000 and that during this last session it amounted to $220,000. To-day our chicken exporters say that they will take all the fatted chickens they can get and pay ten cents a pound for them in the centres where they are working. They are sending them forward and making a profit on them and they are doing this business on a large scale.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: They want these chickens fattened. They do not fatten the chickens themselves.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No, they want them fattened and the price seems remunerative to those who fatten them and they make a profit in sending them forward. The result is, that from England we have had over and over again reports showing that the Canadian fattened chickens which arrived there have made a good reputation for themselves in the markets anu that the people there will take just as many of ikem as we can send.


George Taylor: The hon. gentleman informs the House and the country that the amount of money 1 stated had been expended was for building the stations at these different points.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: For establishing them.


George Taylor: 
The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have just received a memorandum from Professor Robertson which says that as far as the Lancaster station is concerned the chickens were taken with a disease and that was the only station which that occurred. At the Whitby station the expenditures were as I have stated. At Lancaster there was an epidemic of which most of the chickens died.


George Taylor: Is it not a fact that they spoiled in cold storage ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No. They did not go to England at all.


James Clancy: I think I heard it stated that Canadian birds had been fattened too much, and that they were to some extent unsaleable, because when they were sent to England they were found to be too large.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: There is a fancy market in England which takes a large bird and pays an extra price for it, and there is another market which prefers a smaller bird. Some of those dealers who wanted smaller birds complained that the birds we sent them were too large, and consequently we sent the large birds to the market which required such and which pays a larger price per pound.


George Taylor: I find here that Mr. Horace Hazard of the Charlottetown poultry station spent $499, received $94, and had a deficit of $405. What became of that $405 ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have not the details, but I can tell the hon. gentleman that the chickens sold at a good profit on the cost of the actual chickens purchased to fatten. At each of these stations we have got to do installation and educational and experimental work, which . cannot be charged in a commercial sense against the chickens. We have kept a strict account of the cost of the production of every shipment made this year, and it shows a large margin on the profit side. Last fall, on all the shipments that were made, we netted 13 cents a pound at Montreal, and to any one who has raised chickens it will be evident that there is a large profit at such a price.


George William Fowler: It strikes me that the Minister of Agriculture in his chicken experiment has had a somewhat similar experience to that Horace Greeley had with his pig. That may be occasioned by the class of men to whom he entrusted the working out of this experiment. There was a chicken fattening station in my county at Sussex, and without knowing whether the results were successful or otherwise, I can say that the gentleman who managed it had no experience whatever in that line.


William Humphrey Bennett: Was hs a lawyer V Mr. TAYLOR.


George William Fowler: No; he did not have the training that a lawyer would have. He was a sort of an agent who sold carriages and agricultural implements. I would like to know if he was successful in his operations ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I am informed that he was.


George William Fowler: I am glad to know that.


George Taylor: I can tell my hon. friend how successful he was.
Mi-. FOWLER. Perhaps it is as well, because the minister has a peculiar idea about success.


George Taylor: Well, Mr. McArthur charged $297 to fatten the chickens, and he sold them at $198, leaving $99 of a. deficit.


George William Fowler: That was very successful.


George Taylor: There was another station at Alberton, in Prince Edward Island, where the expenses were $249, and the receipts $154, leaving a deficit of about $100. Mr. Matthews was in charge of that station, and my hon. friend (Mr. Hackett) can tell whether he is a professional or not.


George William Fowler: So far as the chicken business is concerned, the Minister of Agriculture had better fly the coop.


Edward Hackett: I hope the minister will give me the information now, which I asked from him the other day as regards the sale of chickens from the Alberton station. The hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Taylor) referred to Mr. Horace Hazard, of Charlottetown. I can say that Mr. Horace Hazard knows nothing whatever about fattening chickens.. He is a commission merchant in Charlottetown, and I do not know how his name got mixed up with fattening chickens, because I think he could repudiate the idea that he is a chicken fattener. lie does a large business in Prince Edward Island; he is one of the largest exporters in the province and he is not in the chicken fattening line at all. If the hon. gentleman from West Queen's (Mr. Farquliarson) were in his seat, he would remember that Mr. Hazard was going to be his opponent at the last election, and now we find that Mr. Hazard is in some way brought in connection with fattening chickens.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: He is a kind of political rooster,


Edward Hackett: Mr. Hazard having made this amount of money out of fattening chickens with the least possible difficulty, he was able to retire to make way for the member for West Queen's. If Mr. Hazard had not that fattening chicken job, he would certainly have contested the election against the hon. member (Mr. Farquharson). But the gentlemen who now occupy the

Treasury benches always seem to be able to provide a solace for any of their friehds who get out of humour. Joking apart, it may be possible that the fattening industry would become of some importance as a by product of the farm in the province of Prince Edward Island. Mr. Gilbert, from the Experimental Farm, was in the Island last year, and he really did some very practical work, and by his addresses to the farmers he showed them, I think, that they might increase their revenue by poultry raising. I want to have it understood, however, that as a government proposition It has been a complete failure in the province of Prince Edward Island. Mr. Gilbert or a gentleman like him who so- thoroughly understands the chicken business can do a great deal of good by explaining to the farmers how to raise these chickens, the best breeds to raise, and how to place them on the market in the best shape.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The government stations are for experimenting and we give the results of the experiments to the farmers.


James Clancy: Very encouraging.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It is so encouraging that in Summerside the man who did our work gave it up, and has ever since been doing business for himself, and making money hand over fist at that business. The same is true in several other instances throughout the country. Had the government not undertaken this work, that business would not in all probability have been done in Canada for many years later than it has been. The result of our work has been that a very large number of people are engaged in this business with profit to themselves and to the country. As far as Mr. Hazard is concerned, it was two years ago when he did this work for us and consequently that could'not have influenced him very much in the election that tcok place a few months ago.


Mr. SCHELL.: With reference to the station at Glengarry, I may say a few words, as I am somewhat conversant with the circumstances. For some time the government had been issuing bulletins advising the farmers to take up the fattening of chickens as a profitable by-product, and adjunct of their general farming business. But those who had tried it up to the time the government started these experimental stations, did not seem to have made a success of it. When the station was started at Lancaster, an official came down from the Experimental Farm, and he showed us how to do the work. He showed the young men how to go through the mixing and feeding and the methods of taking care of the chickens, and the result has been that dozens of people have taken this up as a part of their business in the county of Glengarry, and have found it very profitable. I could give a number of names of prominent men who have taken the business up in connection with their farming. For instance, there is Mr. Macdonald, in the village of Glengarry, who has fitted up for this purpose a part of his stables, which he had been using for fattening cattle. And he told me a short time ago that he intended using another stable for chicken fattening, and drop the feeding of cattle' as a business to that extent. My own brother shipped last year thirty tons of chickens partly fed and partly bought.


George Taylor: That has been going on for the past fifty years.


Jacob Thomas Schell: No, it has not. These parties never shipped any before these stations were instituted. I do not think it is fair to expect that the government must make profit out of every experiment they undertake. They are expected to carry on these experiments to find out whether a certain thing may be profitable or not. AVhen they discovered it is not profitable, they are conferring a benefit by pointing that out to the people. The result of these chicken stations has been a large export of chickens to the old country. People had been talking about that business and the papers had been writing it up and the government had been urging the people to go into it during a number of years, but the people did not go into it in Glengarry until this experimental station was inaugurated.


James Clancy: I have listened to this discussion all evening and naturally expected to find that the government had made some mistakes. But it seems they never make any. Their goods shipped in cold storage arrive in bad condition, but the government is not to blame. They undertook the chicken business and the chickens got sick and died. But still the minister asserts that it has been a very profitable business. The hon. minister proves to the country by his own failures that his administration is a marked success in every respect. I cannot see the logic of it, and it seems to me that if the hon. gentleman would frankly admit his failures, the country would take that admission in the proper spirit. We all know that the work is largely experimental and must expect failure in some instances, but the hon. gentleman has an excuse in every case and makes out that he is infallible. I hardly think he will persuade the country to take this view of his administration. I did not quite understand the hon. gentleman's statement with regard to the cheese-curing stations, but I drew from it that a different kind of cheese is now required, somewhat softer in texture, aud which cannot be cured by the old process. But there can be no doubt that Canadian cheese attained great success many years ago before this process

was thought of, and I would like the hon. gentleman to explain why he suggests the manufacture of a different class of cheese requiring a different treatment from the cheese we made in the past and which met with such success.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: For a number of years the English market has been asking for a moistei- and softer cheese than the Canadian Cheddar usually has been. It is impossible to send such cheese successfully forward in heated ships or to cure it successfully in a heated room. For that reason we have been trying to get ventilated holds for the ships to carry it in and to get curing rooms where it can be successfully cured. We have not been able to make that cheese in Canada because v e had not properly constructed cheese factories. We have explained that to the people for three or four years back and have experimented to see whether that kind of cheese could be made in a cooler chamber. Our experiments show that it can be, and that there was nothing 'nherent in the Canadian climate or soii to prevent our making it. By a series of experiments extending over a couple of years, we have been trying to find the caus>' of the difficulty and a remedy for it. And we think that, to a certain extent we are likely to attain the object desired. There is no doubt that the cheese that went forward in the four ships I have referred to arrived in much better condition than others. We have the reports of the receivers, and also resolutions passed by the shippers, and resolutions passed by the produce dealers in London, declaring that they wished all cheese carried in this way. But I do not think the remedy will be complete until the place in which the cheese is to be cured can be kept at a low enough temperature. The ordinary curing room in the country is not of that construction. We have tried for a couple of years to get the people to change their curing rooms, but they have simply ignored the advice. In a few instances they may have adopted it, but so few tn.'.t it has made no impression upon the market. By inaugurating these central curing rooms, we think we may make an impression on the market and induce tne people to adopt the reform.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is there any idea that the process of making cheese may be changed as well as the process of curing ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I am not a cheese maker, but I understand that it is expected that, with the new facilities for curing, they will be able to leave a little more moisture in the cheese in the process of manufacture.


James Gilmour: I am inclined to think that factory men will not greatly favour putting their cheese into these buildings. It would be more likely that the buyers would do so. I would urge upon the minister Mr. CLANCY.
to consider the propriety of building a larger building at the places where the most cheese is made. Then, if it were near a railway line, so that cartage could be saved, it is possible that the building could be sold without much loss when the experiments are finished.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I may explain that these buildings are to be placed right in the railway yard, where there will be every facility for shipment. The cheese will be brought there from the factories and held for the owners. We do not require it to be sold to anybody. The cheese is as much under the control of the owner as it would be in the factory curing room. The only limitation, if you call it such, is that we cannot allow the cheese to remain indefinitely in the central curing room, for we should choke up these curing rooms and disable ourselves from curing the new cheese coming in. These buildings are not intended for warehouse purposes, but for curing purposes. After the cheese is cured, it must be sold or removed to an ordinary warehouse or cold storage building.


Matthew Henry Cochrane: Is the hon. minister sure that green cheese right from the press can be put on a wagon and drawn five miles in safety ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We believe so-of course, with special arrangements for transportation. And in reply to the hon. member for Middlesex (Mr. Gilmour) I may say that I have been overwhelmed with letters from the factory men asking for the privilege of curing their cheese in these buildings.


George William Fowler: If this cheese is to be hauled five miles over a country road, I do not see why it cannot be taken thirty or forty miles by rail.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: It is a different thing altogether. A spring wagon does not jolt the cheese anything like the rattling of a railway train.


Richard Blain: Is the hon minister making any arrangements for the carrying of the cheese by train from the curing houses ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: No, the owner ships in any way he pleases.


Richard Blain: Are there any cars on the different railways suitable for carrying that cheese to the seaboard ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The cheese would go from these curing rooms just as it goes from the curing rooms in use to-day.


Richard Blain: Returning to the subject of imultry. I desire to ask one question. The hon. member for Glengarry (Mr. Schell) has stated that the poultry trade in his county has developed very largely since the introduction of this system of poultry feed-
2C49

ing. But, from the presentation of the case by the hon. member from Leeds (Mr. Taylor) it appears that nearly all the experiments were failures financially. Will the hon. minister explain, if the poultry feeding station under the government was a failure, how an ordinary man commencing the feeding of chickens under the guidance of the government can be expected to make a success of it ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The stations were not failures financially.


Richard Blain: If I understand correctly, in every case they lost money.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I explained that the government carried on at these stations a great deal of educational and experimental work which the farmer would not carry on, and we have to charge up the expense of it to the several stations.


Richard Blain: How many of these were in the province of Ontario ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Four last year I am told.


Richard Blain: Where are they located ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The four last year were at Whitby, Chatham, Holmesville and Renfrew.


Mr. VROOMAN.: I understood that one of these stations at Lancaster was not successful because of an epidemic disease. Is that a thing that happens frequently, and what is the reason for it, and what is done on the discovery of it ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We had about ten stations and this is the only one at which it occurred.


George William Fowler: The minister says that the reason the fattening station cost the government more than it would have cost a private individual was the educational work they had to do. I would ask the minister what amount of educational work was done at the Sussex station which was in charge of this agricultural implement agent, and what qualifications he had for imparting this information ? I would like to know also what education he gave the people ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: His work was not a failure so far as the fattening of chickens was concerned. But besides this work the people who came to learn from these experiments had to be shown what was being done, that took time, and the time had to be paid for.


George William Fowler: I understand that the ground the minister takes is that because the chickens were sold for more than was paid for them, therefore there was a profit. They cost, I believe, $85 and were sold for $117. But there were other expenses of over $200. Because the chickens were sold
for more than they cost, the minister claims the experiment was a financial success.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Without going into details, I am informed that the original cost of the chickens bought and the feed given to them was about two-thirds of what they brought.


George William Fowler: The report that was read by the hon. member for Leeds does not bear out the contention of the minister. All these items, with the exception of a few of the crates, were the same sort of items that would have to be paid for by any private individual engaged in the same enterprise. I cannot understand how it can be, as the hon. member for Glengarry said, that on account of the success of this experiment in Glengarry where it was a dead failure and the chickens died, it encouraged the people of that community to go into this enterprise as a private speculation.
The MINISTER OF AGRICUT/*''	'
It is a kind of encouragement that brings them money.


Adam Edward Vrooman: I have heard it said the chickens died owing to the way they were fed. Has the department discovered by this time if that is the case ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I am not able to answer that question.


Adam Edward Vrooman: I have been told they were fed on buttermilk, and it caused the liver to grow'.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think they w'ere fed on buttermilk. We did not make any such experiments.


George William Fowler: Were the chickens who died of this chickenpox examined by veterinarians ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think they were.
Hon. Mr. ROSS (Victoria, N.S.) I think, to remove all doubts, W'e should issue a commission to go down to Glengarry and ascertain the cause of these chickens dying. But speaking seriously, this business of feeding and shipping chickens is now in its initial stage. Some parties have been successful, and others have not. But people are getting better acquainted with it, and if you allow this process to go on you will find that next year and the year following the export of chickens will keep on increasing in value. One man may try the business and fail, and another may try and succeed. That is the way in every business because if every man succeeded we would all be so rich that the country could not contain us.


George Taylor: The minister will persist in making a statement to this House that the business has been profitable, and he answers my hon. friend here that the cost


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Of course the milk requires to be in good condition. I am glad to say that in Canada there is practically no skim milk cheese made, nor is there any skimming of the milk at the factories. That matter has been thoroughly gone into by our dairy officers. We have our inspectors, and the cheese-makers themselves look after the quality of the milk.


Mr. KAULBACH.: Would not the milk suffer from being drawn a long distance to the factory ?
Now, Sir. Sainsburg may have been a farmer, and there is not an item there that any farmer would not have to pav for in the chicken business. There is nothing there for experimental work or instruction to the farmer. The chickens were shipped and sold, and there is $10 return, leaving a deficiency of $237. Now, did these chickens die ? There is the published statement of the hon. gentleman. I simply read the items that he furnishes the department of the Auditor General, including the expenditure for chickens and their feed, boxes to ship them in, and freight, that any other farmer would have to pay. Besides, he allowed his political friends where he established the station, some pay for looking after them. But the experimental work was done by the department the same as in Glengarry. At Bondville, Que., there was a loss of $239; at Charlottetown, a loss of $105; at Sussex, N.B., a loss of $198, and at Chatham, of $237 ; and so it goes.


George William Fowler: Is it the intention of the minister to establish more of these fattening stations the coming year, and at what points ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We will have more stations going on this year, I cannot say yet the exact points, and some will be continued where they are.


George William Fowler: Has the minister made up his mind which ones will be continued, whether it will be the most successful or the least successful ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I think they have all been so successful as to justify me in continuing them.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: As the discussion has been carried on with respect to chickens and cheese, I would ask the minister if he has given any attention to the supervision of the milk carried to the factories, so as to secure its being of a proper quality ? It needs a good quality of milk to make a good cheese for export. Has he taken Mr. TAYLOR.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The milk will be drawn to the factory in the future as it has been in the past. It does sometimes suffer from being carried too long a distance.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: Are the manufacturers confined to certain weights of cheese for shipment, or can they make a cheese of any weight they please ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: They can make it of any weight.


George Taylor: The minister did not give me information in reference to the great discrepancy in the case at Chatham, where there was a deficiency of $237.63.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I cannot explain those figures. No doubt a full explanation can be made in the department.


George Taylor: Will the hon. gentleman get it ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I have given a full statement of the expenses.


George Taylor: The minister savs that with the exception of the station at Lancaster all the others paid a profit. Now, the chickens that were sold from this station brought $16.09, and he paid out $253.72 to Mr. Sainsburg. A cyclone must - have struck those chickens up there. That is worse than a disease.


Charles Edwin Kaulbach: As to the milk, I understood the hon. minister to state that a certain test is required. What is that test ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not think that I said anything particularly about that. I do not know whether the hon. gentleman is alluding to the ordinary working of cheese factories or not. There is no change in the method of handling milk in the cheese factory. That system has been pursued for many years. ' It

is thoroughly understood and we do not propose to make any change in that at all.


Edward Hackett: After having had a fair share of chickens and cheese I wish to go back to apples again. I would like to ask the hon. minister if he has arranged for the appointment of a man to do grafting and pruning in Prince Edward Island, and to assist the orchardist there ? I understand that a gentleman down there, Mr. D. A. Sharp, has applied for this position. The hon. minister will remember that a few years ago he sent a man of the name of Ivinsman from Nova Scotia to Prince Edward Island who was totally unfit to carry on this work and made a failure of it. I understand that there is a largely signed petition in the department of the hon. minister asking that Mr. Sharp be appointed to do the work of pruning and grafting. Mr. Sharp is a Liberal, a personal friend of mine, though a strong political opponent, but he has beeu in the nursery business for a long number of years, and he is thoroughly conversant with the cultivation of fruit trees. In view of the fact that the hon. minister has a memorial in his hands signed by a large proportion of the people engaged in that industry in Prince Edward Island, I hope he will pay some attention to it. We do not want to have a repetition of Kinsman coming over there from Nova Scotia. Mr. Sharp is a nurseryman who has been selling his trees to the farmers of Prince Edward Island for a long number of years. I think he represents a' nursery situated somewhere in the vicinity of Sussex, and he deals in trees that are suitable for Prince Edward Island. He has taken a deep interest in the cultivation of these trees. He goes around as far as he possibly can, being a man who is dependent for his living on the work he is doing, assisting the parties to whom he has sold trees in the cultivation of them. But he cannot give his whole time and attention to that without some compensation from the government and I would, therefore, as far as I can in this parliament, make known the capabilities of Mr. Sharpe and his thorough knowledge of and acquaintance with orchard work in Prince Edward Island. I would like to ask the hon. minister, having this memorial signed by a large number of the people of Prince Edward Island, that he would be good enough to pay some attention to it.


George William Fowler: I would like to ask the hon. minister what his practice is in respect to giving bonuses to storehouses where butter is kept in cold storage by creamery companies, on what principle he gives these bonuses and what the initial value of the buildings is to which these bonuses are given V


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The buildings in connection with the creameries which earn these bonuses have to bo constructed according to specifications and
plans which are supplied by the department, which have been published for years, which have been explained before the committee and drawings of which were put before the country in bulletins three or four years ago. The bonus as given is $50 for the first year and $25 for two succeeding years on the condition that the buildings themselves are properly constructed, and that the temperature is kept at the right point during the hot weather. We require first of all that an inspector shall visit the creamery and see whether the building is all right, and if it is we get a report from the butter maker there who fills up the form which is sent by the department. When that is done wre pay the bonus.


George William Fowler: Then application is made for this bonus ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes. Made by the creameries and then we supply all the information necessary as to construction and forms for making reports upon.


George Taylor: Who inspects these buildings ?	[DOT]


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The officers of the department.


George Taylor: In every case ?


George William Fowler: What is the average cost of these buildings ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That would depend on whether they are built inside of an existing creamery or outside. It costs about $150, Professor Robertson says, to fit up the inside of a building, but when an additional building has to be built it will probably cost $250 or $300. The government gives $100 in the course of three years, $50 the first year and $25 for two succeeding years.


Richard Blain: How many creameries have earned that bonus ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: About 500-not the full bonus; some of them are still earning their bonuses, but about 500 have put in the cold storage chambers. Some of them will come on next year or the year after.


Richard Blain: How many of them have earned the full $100 ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: About 330, Professor Robertson says, have earned the full bonus.


Richard Blain: I notice in this pamphlet, containing figures which have come from the department, the number is placed at 317 that have earned the full $100 up to 1900.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That will be about it.


Richard Blain: How many does the hon. minister say now have earned the full $100 ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I aru only speaking from memory, but I understand about 330. If it was 317 then it must be more now.


George William Fowler: How many applications have been made from New Brunswick for this bonus ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Professor Robertson thinks about six. There are not very many creameries in New Brunswick.


George Taylor: I see, at page D-65 of the Auditor General's report, that there were 0 in Prince Edward Island, 5 in Nova Scotia, 6 in New Brunswick, 170 in Quebec, 15 in Ontario and 3 in Manitoba and the Northwest Territories. The hon. minister informed the committee a moment ago that in order to get this bonus, a room had to be built according to the plans and specifications supplied by the department, aud that in every case these compartments were inspected by an officer of the department. I would ask him to account for $485.ii>
paid out to different parties in the province of Quebec and for $22 paid out to parties in Ontario for inspecting cold storage rooms. I see here T. Corbeil Laurentides, 21 days at $2 a day, inspections for bonuses, and so it runs on.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: He was employed for that purpose.


George Taylor: An officer of the department ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


George Taylor: For twenty-one days ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes.


George Taylor: Then I asked him if these inspections were made by an officer of the department from here, and he said yes.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The hon. gentleman did not ask if he was from here. He is an officer of the department. He is one of the syndicate inspectors for Quebec, and we asked him to do that work.


George Taylor: Then there is J. O. Danis?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not recognize the name.
Mi-. TAYLOR. You will find it in the Auditor General's report, page D-64.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I dare say, but I cannot recognize the name.


George Taylor: Then, there is A. P. Purvis, Maxville, Ontario ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: He is one of the Ontario inspectors that we employed for that work.


George Taylor: Then there is A. B. Rabb. of Brockville, who got $2 a day ?


Richard Blain: 


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I do not know any one of that name.


George Taylor: These are not officers of the department but there is $485 paid to about thirty inspectors in the province of Quebec and $22 paid to six in Ontario.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: They were employed for that purpose.
Mr. TA i LOR. The minister led us to believe that before this money was paid out an officer of the department certified that these places were completed according to law. Here we find that they are not ins-spected by an officer of the department at all.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Wherever it was possible the work was done by an officer of the department and in every other case it was done by a person engaged in similar work for some provincial or local organization.


Edward Hackett: Have you one of those cold storage places at Charlottetown.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We engaged a room in a cold storage building there.


Edward Hackett: And the buyer of the cheese pays a rent for the use of this building during the time the cheese is there.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: He pays a storage charge.


Edward Hackett: You are building one of those cheese curing establishments in Eastern Ontario, another in Western Ontario ; one in French Quebec and one in English Quebec. Why in the name of all that is good and gracious cannot you build one in Prince Edward Island, where the people have gone largely into the cheese industry ow'ing to the energy of Prof. Robertson and prior to this government coming into power. Prof. Robertson came down to Prince Edward Island under the Conservative government and established these cheese factories, and they have been a great success. The cheese industry lias been a success there without any assistance from this government, only that they rented this cold storage room from the Rattenburys, friends of their own in Charlottetown. The least the government ought to do is to build one of those cheese curing establishments in Prince Edward Island. The minister tells us that when the cheese is treated in one of those places it will come out perfect and be worth from three to four cents a pound more than ordinary cheese. Why should not the people of every province have the benefit of them. Why build two in Ontario and two in Quebec and not build any in New Brunswick. Nova Scotia. Prince Edward Island and Manitoba. We should have in the province of Erince Edward Island this means of turning the dairy products of the people to ' the best advantage. I trust the minister

will see his way clear to establish one of these places in Prince Edward Island.
To promote dairying interests by advances for milk and cream, to be recouped out of the proceeds of sales of such butter and cheese, to be placed to the credit of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, $40,000.


James Clancy: What has been the outcome of the partnership business with the government in respect to the North-west creameries. As was predicted by some gentlemen here when the minister first submitted the plan, it has resulted in a loss, 1 and I think the minister told us that he was disposed to discontinue the assistance. How far has he been successful in recouping that loss.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: The hon. gentleman is correct in saying that some of these factories have not been as successful/ as we had anticipated. The late boom in grain-growing-


James Clancy: Another excuse.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Yes, another excuse ; possibly a mistake in placing some of these factories in the graingrowing region. We have discontinued one or two, and I fear that we will have to discontinue some others. We have lent altogether $43,540.63. Of that $24,528.87 has been repaid at present, leaving a balance of $19,011. Eight of these factories out of twenty-one have repaid the whole of the advances, four others have paid very nearly all, and I am certain will entirely repay next season if there is anything like the work that has been done lately. There are a few which I fear will lose money. These are, Edmonton and its tributaries, Maple Creek, Prince Albert and Duck Lake, and Wolseley and Moffat. The others owe much smaller amounts and it is likely they will be able to pay off. After all that is not a bad showing although I confess that the anticipations have not been realized as far as the actual financial view is concerned.
I think, however, that the progress of the country there has been benefited to an enormous extent, and that the encouragement to settlers on the whole is quite good compensation for the investment which was made, even if in some instances we lost.


James Clancy: Has the minister discontinued the assistance.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: I hope to be able in another year to let those who have repaid the whole amount, run their own business without any control from us. Some of the others will have to be run for a year or two perhaps to ensure tlie successful paying off of what is due. With regard to some others it is rather a blue lookout. This is very similar to the work done in Prince Edward Island some years ago, but on a smaller scale.


James Gilmour: What creameries have" paid up ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: Churchbridge, Kootenay, Grenville, Moose Jaw, Red Deer, Regina, Saltcoats, Saskatoon, Whitewood, Yorktown. These? owe nothing. Four of the others have nearly paid off everything, and seven have not paid much.


James Gilmour: Has the one at Calgary paid off its debt ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: At Calgary the money was not lent to the corporation, but to the patrons, and they have paid it off.


James Gilmour: What is the output of the whole of the creameries ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: In 1897, 473,000 pounds of butter were made, value $85,000. In 1898, 484,000 pounds value $73,000; in 1899, 501,000 pounds, value $103,000; in 1900,	637,000 pounds, value
$128,000; in 1901,	677,000 pounds, value
$129,000. There has been a steady increase both in quantity and value.


James Gilmour: Does the hon. minister control the sale ?


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: We manage the sale. Most of it was marketed in British Columbia and the Yukon, but this last season we shipped some to Europe. Some has been sent every year to Japan-not a very large quantity, but gradually increasing.


James Gilmour: I am surprised that any should be required. I thought that the Yukon would have taken the 'whole of it.


The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE.: That is due to the fact that a great deal of Manitoba butter was sent to British Columbia this year and some Ontario and Quebec butter. In the early spring there was some sent from the east.
Some resolutions reported.
On motion of the Minister of Finance, House adjourned at 11.50 p.m.

Monday, April 14, 1902.