1914-03-04

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 94, respecting Intel-urban Company, Limited, and to change its name to ' Interurban Telephone Company, Limited.' Mr. Northrup.
Bill No. 95, respecting The High River, Saskatchewan and Hudson Bay Railway Company.-Mr. R. B. Bennett.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions to be answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Were Messrs. Lynch-Staunton and Gutelius

sworn to faithfully and impartially perform their duties?
2. If so, who administered the oath in each case, and what was its full text?


Mr. REID:: Messrs. Lynch-Staunton and
Gutelius were appointed commissioners by Order in Council in the usual way. They were not required to be sworn.


Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Were the witnesses caned before Messrs. Lynch-Staunton and Gutelius sworn?
2.	Were any of the parties whose names are mentioned in the report of the said commissioners represented by counsel?
3.	Were the sessions of the commission open to the public?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes, counsel was present at some of the sessions.
3.	No; in most part where evidence was taken sessions were held along the line of railway.


Mr. EMMERSON:: 1.	Is the F. P. Gutelius who signed the report of the commissioners to investigate matters connected with the construction of the National Transcontinental railway the same man who is now and has been for the past year general manager of the Intercolonial railway? If so, when was he appointed on the said commission, when did he enter upon his duties or work as such commissioner, at what salary and at what date did his pay begin to run?
2.	When did he cease to act as such commissioner, up to what date was he paid as such, and on what date did He sign the said report?
3.	In whose employ was the said F. P. Gutelius at the time of his appointment as such commissioner, or if not then employed by any person or corporation, or otherwise, what was his last employment preceding his engagement and employment as such commissioner, by whom was he employed, in what capacity and at what 33.lo.ry ?
4. When did the said F. P. Gutelius first come to Canada to engage in any work, in whose employ was he at that time, how long did he remain in said employment and at what salary?
5.	What was his citizenship at that date, and was he then an American citizen? If so, how long did he so remain?
8. Has he ever changed his citizenship? If so, at what date, and has he ever been naturalized as a Canadian or British subject? If so, on what date and where?
7.	Is the said F. P. Gutelius a British subject? If so, how long has he been such?
8.	Was the said F. P. Gutelius an employee of the Government as general manager of the Intercolonial railway at the time he signed the report referred to, what salary was he then in receipt of from the Government of Canada, and for how long is his term of engagement as such general manager?
9.	At what place was the said report signed by him, and if at Ottawa, for how long had he been continuously in Ottawa previous to his placing his signature to said report?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes. Appointed commissioner January 29, 1912. Entered upon duties as commissioner February 1, 1912. Salary $65 per day.
2.	Commissioner during pleasure; report signed February 6, 1914. Paid as Commissioner up to May 1, 1913, the date he assumed his present position. Signed letter transmitting commissioner's report February 6, 1914.
3.	At the time of appointment as commissioner, in the employ of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company in the capacity of general superintendent. No information as to salary.
4.	The Government has no information.
5 and 6. Naturalized as a British subject February 23, 1912. District of Montreal.
7.	Answered by numbers 5 and 6.
8.	At the time of signing such report Mr. Gutelius was a commissioner (but not drawing salary as such) and an employee of the Government as general manager of the Canadian Government Railways, at a salary of $20,000 per annum. Term of engagement for two years from May 1, 1913, and thereafter during the pleasure of the Minister of Railways and Canals for Canada.
9.	Report signed at Ottawa after being continuously there for a period of about one week.


NATIONAL TRANSCONTINENTAL RAILWAY CONTRACTS.
*Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Was an agreement entered into by the Transcontinental Railway Commissioners to retain ten per cent from the moneys earned by O'Brien, Fowler and McDougall on contracts 16 and 17, and pay the same to M. P. and J. T. Davis?
2.	Did the commissioners retain ten per cent from the moneys so earned by O'Brien, Fowler and McDougall, and pay the same to M. P. and J. T. Davis?


Mr. REID:: 1.	No; but the commission ratified' an assignment of these contracts, and the consideration of the transfer was 10 per cent.
2.	No; the 10 per cent retained by the commission was the regular drawback and was released to O'Brien, O'Gorman and McDougall. The latter, it appears according to the report of the investigating commissioners, paid M. P. and J. T. Davis the 10 per cent consideration mentioned in
' the transfer.


*Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Under contract No. 16 on the National Transcontinental railway, were payments made on account of drawback in the months of January and June, 1911?
2.	If so, what were the amounts paid and the name or names of the person or persons to whom the said payments were made?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes.
2.	January, $50,000; June, $50,000; deposited to credit of O'Brien, O'Gorman and McDougall in Merchants Bank of Canada, Ottawa.


BARRINGTON PASSAGE WHARF.
Mr. LAW:: 1.	What was the cost of material used for recovering- the public wharf at Barrington Passage, Shelbourne county, N.S. ?
2.	From whom was the material purchased?


Mr. ROGERS:: Frank Nicoll, Clyde
River, $422.75; Curtis Atwood, Riverhead, $31.20; Crowell Bros., Halifax, $24.97; Edgar S. Wilson, Crowell, $7; Josiah P. D. Crowell, Crowell, $1.19; Jas. H. Banks, Crowell, $6.53; John R. Gammon, Barrington Passage, $7.50; Mildred L. Wilson, Barrington Passage, 80 cents; total, $501.94.


BEAR POINT WHARF.
Mr. LAW:: What was the cost of material used for recovering the public wharf at Bear Point, Shelburne county, N.S., and from whom was it purchased?


Robert Rogers: Jas. A. Kenney, Barrington, $670.17; Frank G. Nicoll, Clyde River. $129.88; W. W. Brannen, Lower Woods Harbour, $94.64; John Williams, 'Shelburne, $49; E. R. Nickerson, Shag Harbour, $35.63; Ethren Wickens, Bear Point, $14; Eugene Nickerson, Bear Point, $5.62; David E. Watkins, Atwoods Brook, $14.07; John R. Gammon, Barrington Passage, $6.18; Lovitt Stoddart, Lower 'Shag Harbour, $2.23; total, $1,021.42.


PORT LA TOUR BREAKWATER.
Mr. LAW:: 1.	What quantity of material was used for breakwater at Upper Port La Tour, Shelburne county, N.S.?
2.	What was the price paid for same?
3.	From whom was the material purchased?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	20,800 feet of 4-inch plank; 216 logs 11 feet long; 91 logs 5 feet long; 28 window sills, 5 feet long; hardware costing $70.51.
2.	$667.39, which does not include towing, teaming or freighting.

3.	Charles Warrington, Thomas Ross, Geo. W. Lyle, Charles Herbert, E. Smith, Albert Ross, Frank Nicoll, F. H. Nicoll, Consolidated Transportation Company.


CUSTOM HOUSE, ST. JOHN.
Mr. CARVELL:: 1.	How many new employees have been added to the Customs Department in the city of St. John since September 21, 1911?
2.	What were their names and their salaries at the time of their appointment and what are their respective salaries now?
3.	Did all of them pass the necessary Civil Service examination for the service?
4.	How many temporay clerks are there upon this staff, who are they, and what were the dates of their appointment?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Nineteen.
2.	Their names, initial salaries and present salaries are as follows:
Names.	Initial salary.	Present salary.Carloss, A. R.	$900	$900Campbell, W. M.	800	900Catherwood, W. R.	750	750Cunningham, R. J.	800	900Hayter, J. H.	800	800Hetherington, G. G.	500	500Lanyon, W. P.	700	800Lawson, F. P.	750	800MacFarlane, F. S. P.	800	900McKinney, Jas. (jr.)	1,500	1,500Murphy, R. J.	800	900Powers, A. C.	800	900Seaton, A. T.	800	900Trafton, Leonard	700	800Weston, B. V.	1,000	1,000Wetmore, C. P.	500	500Willet, A. S.	800	850Willis, E. N.	360	360Wilson, F. J.	800	9003.	These employees are preventive officers, to which office persons may be appointed without examination under the provisions of the Civil Service Act; and may be employed temporarily by authority of the Minister of Customs under the provisions of the Customs Act.4.	Ten temporary employees, whosenames and dates of employment are as follows:	Carloss, A. R., March 26, 1913;
Catherwood, W. R., February 20, 1913; Hay ter, J. H., October 10, 1913; Hethering-ton, G. G., April 21, 1913; Lawson, F. P., March 3, 1913; MacFarlane, F. S. P., March 1, 1913; McKinney, Jas. (jr.), January 30, 1913; Weston, B. V., October 20, 1913; Wet-more, C. P., April 21, 1913; Willis, E. N., December 5, 1913.


ST. JOHN HARBOUR DREDGING.
Mr. CARVELL:: 1.	What amounts have been paid to Gershon
S.	Mayes for dredging in and about the harbour of St. John since January 1, 1913?
2.	Were tenders asked for the dredging done by Mr. Mayes? If so, who were the tenderers and what was the amount of each tender?
3.	Have any tugs owned by Mr. Mayes been employed by the Department of Public Works since January 1, 1913? If so, for how many days and at what cost per day?


Robert Rogers: 1 and 2. None.
3.	None.


INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY TIE TENDERS.
Mr. BOULAY:: 
Mr. REID:: 1.	Dalhousie Lbr. Co., Dalhousie, N.B.; Shives Lbr. Co., CampbeLton, N.B.; Richards Mfg. Co., Ltd., Campbellton, N.B.; C. A. Peck, Hillsborough, N.B.; Bathurst Lbr. Co., Ltd., Bathurst, N.B.; .7. H. Redfern, Montreal, P.Q.; Price Bros., Quebec, P.Q.; Wm. J. Scott, Fredericton, N.B.'; Ed. Sinclair Lbr. Co., Ltd., Newcastle, N.B.; J. B. Snowball, Lbr. Co., Ltd., Chatham, N.B.; John Fenderson & Co., Inc., Sayabec, P.Q.
2.	John Fenderson & Co., Inc. offered, 2-inch spruce plank, at $21 per M; 4-inch at $21; 6-inch x 8-inch at $20; 4-inch x 6-inch at $19; 2-inch x 12-inch at $25; 8-inch x 9-incli at $19.
C. A. Peck offered 2-inch spruce plank, at $23 per M.; 4-inch x 6-inch at $25; 6-inch x 8-inch at $25; 4-inch x 6-inch at $21; 8-inch x 9-inch at $21; 2-inch x 12-inch at $27.
Bathurst Lumber Co. offered 2-inch x 12-inch plank only, at $25 per M.
J. H. Redfern offered 2-inch plank only at $23 per M.
R.ehards Mfg., Co., Ltd., Dalhousie Lumber Co., Shives Lumber Co., Price Lumber Co., Wm. J. Scott, Ed. Sinclair Lbr., Co., and J. B. Snowball Co., couid not supply in time.


WHITE WATER LAKE.
Mr. OLIVER:: Has the Government made any disposition of the area covered by White Water lake, southwestern Manitoba? If so, what has been done?


Mr. ROCHE:: No.


KAMLOOPS DRILL HALL.
Mr. OLIVER:: 1.	What are the names of the persons or Arms who tendered for the erection of a drill hall at Kamloops?
2.	When were their tenders received?
3.	Who drew the plans upon which they tendered?
4.	Why were the plans upon which tenders were called rejected ?
5.	Who is drawing new plans?
6.	What is the estimated cost of the building?


Robert Rogers: 1 and 2. Tenders invited by public advertisement by Militia Department and received on August 16, 1913:	Campbell and
Wilkie, Herbert and Davis, Johnston and Company, McAlpine Robertson Construction Company.
3.	Militia Department.
4.	Site has been changed.
5.	Public Works Department.
6.	Impossible to say until plans are com pleted.



GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS WATER SUPPLY.

['It might stand while the Speaker considers it.\nMotion stands.']
Mr. BORDEN:: The proposal and the
reply thereto are embodied in correspondence which will be brought down and laid upon the Table of the House at once. Wbh regard to the latter portion of question No. 2, in which the hon. member desires to know whether the Government intends to make any recommendation to Parliament in the matter, it will be impossible to give a definite answer at the moment, because the answer would depend to a certain extent upon the course which the city of Ottawa may pursue in the matter.



Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	Have the contracts for coal for the Intercolonial railway been awarded?
2.	If so, what is the price paid, and what is the amount allotted to each company?


Mr. REID:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS FIRE ALARM SYSTEM.
Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Were tenders invited by public advertisement for the installation of a fire alarm system in the Western Departmental Block at Ottawa?
2.	In what papers and on what dates did the notice inviting tenders appear?
3.	What are the names of the tenderers and the amount of each tender?
4.	To whom was the contract awarded, and what is the date of the contract?


Robert Rogers: 1, 2 and 3. No; an agreement was entered into which the chief architect considered fair and reasonable, and the work was authorized.
4.	Ontario-May-Oatway Fire Alarms, Limited, January 27, 1914.	*


HALIFAX OCEAN TERMINALS.
Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Who are the contractors for the construction of the Halifax ocean terminal clocks?
2.	What is the amount of their tender?
3.	What was the amount of the deposit made with the said tender?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Foley Bros., Welch, Stewart & Fauquier.
2.	$5,208,743, based on schedule prices.
3.	$200,000.


GOVERNMENT STEAMER REPAIRS.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: Referring to an item of $1,050, found on page No. 8, Vol. 2, Auditor General's Report, paid to Burns and Kellehar, Halifax, for repairs to the D.G.S., Aberdeen, what are the names of the newspapers in which the advertisements calling for tenders for this work appeared, and the dates of such advertisements?


Mr. HAZEN:: The call for tenders was not advertised in the newspapers. The usual practice of the department in this respect was followed, viz., submitting specifications, etc., to a number of the leading contractors and inviting them by circular to tender.


John Howard Sinclair: Referring to an item of $1,125, found on page No. 19, Vol. 2, of the Auditor General's

Report, paid to Fred. S. Heans, St. John, N.B., for repairs to the D.G.S. Lansdowne, what are the names of the newspapers in which the advertisements calling for tenders for this work appeared, and the dates of such advertisements?
2. What are the names of the tenderers and the amount of each tender?


Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	The call for tenders was not advertised in the newspapers. The usual practice of. the department in this respect was followed, viz., submitting specifications, etc., to a number of the leading contractors and inviting them by circular to tender.
2.	For capping blocks and removal of
same: Fred S. Heans, $210; R. Retaillick, $215. For repairs to the hull of the Lansdowne:	Fred S. Heans, $915; R.
Retaillick, $1,890; Rudolphe Belyea, $1,875.


John Howard Sinclair: Referring to an item of $2,133.43, found on page No. 19, Vol. 2, of the Auditor General's Report, paid to the Union Foundry and Machine Works, St. John, N.B., for repairs to the D.G.S. Lansdowne, what are the names of the newspapers in which the advertisements calling for tenders for this work appeared and the date of such advertisements?


John Douglas Hazen: It is not customary to advertise in the public .press for tenders for repairs to vessels, but to submit specifications tb the leading firms in the respective lines with a request that they tender.


NEWPORT CUSTOMS SERVICE.
Mr. BOIVIN:: At whose request did the Minister of Customs recommend the appointment of Messrs. Chas. A. Boright and Frank S. Baker to the Canadian Customs Service at Newport, Vermont?


John Dowsley Reid: Mr. Charles A. Boright and Mr. Frank S. Baker were employed in the Canadian Customs Service at Newport, on the authority and recommendation of the Minister of Customs.


CANADIAN IMPORTS AND EXPORTS.
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What were the imports of Canada for home consumption in the fiscal years 1893-1894, 19051906 and 1912-1913?
2.	What were the exports for the same fiscal years?


Mr. REID:: 1.	The value of total imports to Canada for home consumption was, in 1893-94, $113,093,983; in 1905-6, $290,360,807; and in 1912-13, $675,517,045.
2.	The value of total exports from Canada
was, in 1893-94,	$117,524,949; in 1905-6,
$256,586,630, and in $1912-13, $393,232,057.


UNOPPOSED AND UNDISCUSSED MOTIONS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Turgeon.-For a return showing the freight rates on flour, hay, oats, lumber and firewood per 100 pounds or per ton, between Bathurst, N.B., and Nepisiguit junction, Red Pine, Bartibogue, Beaver Brook, and between Bathurst, Beresford, Petit Rocher and Belle-dune, before the changes made in August, 1913, and the freight rates on the same articles, between the same points, under the new schedule of rates.
Mr. Turgeon.-For a return showing the freight rates under the old tariff of the Intercolonial railway, per 100 pounds or per ton, on fresh, dried and cured fish, molasses, coal oil, nails hardware and anthracite coal from Gloucester junction and Bathurst station to and from St. John, and the present rates for the same articles between the same points.
Mr. Marcil.-For a return showing how much money has been expended in public works in the counties of Rimouski and GaspA respectively, since October 11, 1911 ; of the money so expended, how much of it was provided for in the Estimates of 1911-12; and what amount was expended on the works for which money was not included in the Estimates of 1911-12.
Mr. Law.-For a return showing what was the amount of timber used and the price paid for same in renewing and repairing the wharf at Port Clyde, Shelbourne county, N.S.; what was the amount of wages paid on same, and to whom; and what was the number and price of ballast poles used in the above work.
Mr. Lemieux.-For a copy of all papers, evidence, etc., in connection with the investigation held by the Department of Marine and Fisheries against the light keeper of Cape Cove, county of Gasp6, in 1911.
Mr. Law.-For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams and documents in connection with the removal of ice in Yarmouth harbour, N.S., by C.G.S. Stanley in February. 1914.
Mr. Boulay.-For a return showing the total revenue of the Intercolonial railway during the fiscal year 1912-1913, and the revenue from Campbellton and all stations east of Campbell-ton, and from those west thereof as far as Halifax, on the main line, including the branches east of Campbellton, Prince Edward Tsland railway excluded.
Mr. Proulx.-For a return showing how many persons have been appointed to the inside service of the Post Office Department by the present Government, with the names of the appointees, the grade each of them was appointed to, and the salary in each case; how many of these appointees passed the Civil Service examination, and how many did not do so, with the names in each case.
Mr. Marcile.-For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, petitions, recommendations and other documents relating to the establishment of the rural mail service in the parish of St. Theodore d'Acton.
Mr. McKenzie.-For a return showing how much money was expended on repairs to the Englishtown wharf, county of Victoria, in the summer of 1913 ; how much on labour and how much on material, respectively; who the foreman was, by whom he was recommended, and his rate of wages per day; how many days he was employed as foreman; how many men he had working for him on the wharf each day, and the wages paid each man; from whom the 85
material was purchased, of wnat it consisted, and the price paid per foot; who the paymaster was on this work, and when the men were paid ; when the work was begun and when completed.
Mr. McKenzie.-For a return showing how
much money was expended on the repairs to the wharf at South Gut, Victoria county, during the summer of 1913 ; how much on labour and how much on material, respectively; who the foreman was, by whom recommended, and his rate of wages per day; how many days he was employed as foreman; how many men he had working for him on the wharf each day, and the wages paid each man; how much was paid for material for the repairs, and where it was obtained; from whom the material was purchased, what the nature of it was, and the price paid per foot; who the paymaster was on this work and when the men were paid.
Mr. BQivin.-For a return showing how many employees of the federal Government of Canada, including all services and all departments, have'been dismissed from October 10, 1911, to the present date; how many have resigned; how many have deserted the service; how many deserters have been punished; how many new employees have been engaged or appointed by the present Government during the same period.
Mr. Lemieux.-For a copy of the application, correspondence and papers generally concerning mail lock patent No. 151043.
Mr. Lemieux.-For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and papers generally concerning the increased railway mail subsidy recently agreed upon by the Postmaster General and the various railway companies.
Mr. Lemieux.-For a copy of all papers, correspondence and telegrams concerning. the deportation of Bhwagan Singh, a Sikh priest, in defiance of a writ of habeas corpus.
Mr. Pardee.-For a copy of all correspondence and other documents in connection with the letting of the construction for the Toronto harbour works.
Mr. Sinclair.-For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, petitions, Orders in Council, and other papers and documents, relating to subventions or assistance given, or to be given, by the Department of Marine and Fisheries or the Department of Agriculture to firms or joint stock companies, or persons operating cold storage plants for the preservation of fish products'in Nova Scotia during the years 1908, 1909, 1910, 1911, 1912 and 1913, excluding such correspondence, etc., as relates to companies known as Fishermen's Bait Association.

Mr. G. W. KYTE (Richmond) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, an old age pension system for Canada should be inaugurated.
He said:	The subject of old age pensions has been before this House in one form or another for years. Two years ago a committee was appointed to inquire into the matter with a view to making a report. That committee met during the last session of Parliament and a great volume of evidence was obtained. No report of this committee was submitted to the House last


EBYISED EDITION
[Stage Direction]
session, though I think a tentative report was in course of preparation. I purpose before I close making some quotations from the evidence given before that committee. The subject is one of such great importance that the time must come, sooner or later, when some government will be obliged to deal with it. The population of this country, like that of other countries, is divided largely into two classes-those who are wealthy and those who are in need. Fortunately the conditions in Canada are more favourable to the even distribution of wealth than those existing in many older countries, but it still remains true that great disparity exists, even amoung our people, in wealth and in wealth-producing ability. As long as the world lasts and human nature retains the qualities which have characterized it from the beginning, there will be these differences between wealth and poverty. Of two young men, born of the same parents and starting out in life practically at the same time, one will succeed in acquiring considerable wealth, whereas the other, without any cause assignable for the apparent anomaly, such as misconduct or want of energy or thrift, fails absolutely in acquiring a competence for his old age. This has been true of men from the earliest ages of the world. We have the instance in the Scriptures of the sons of Isaac and the bargain which they made. Esau on one occasion was hungry, and Jacob had prepared a mess of pottage. The brotherly instinct did not suggest to Jacob that he ought to share with his brother, but he made a trade with him agreeing to give the mess of pottage which he had prepared on condition that he should be given his brother's birthright. It was an indefensible bargain, consummated under duress, but Esau's necessities were great, and apparently he was one of those who have not that eye to the future which appears necessary to the acquiring of wealth and provision against old age. So, for the temporary relief afforded him by the mess of pottage Esau bartered away his birthright. Another instance of the difference in men in this respect is found in the story of Joseph and his brethren. Joseph was sent into Egypt as a bondsman by his brothers, yet, by reason of talents with which he was endowed, he not only acquired a considerable competence for himself, but' became the great financial ruler of Egypt. The qualities that are shown in men in these ancient instances exist to-
day. But, as I stated a moment ago, if we have wealth-producing potentialities in this ' country, we have also amongst us those who have been less fortunate than their brothers and who must be provided for in one way or another that they too may enjoy at least some of the comforts which should always*accompany old age. I am not of those who believe that the fact that' a man is in an impoverished condition is proof of his want of capacity or possession of slothful or wasteful habits. We are not the arbiters of our own destiny, and our misfortunes are but little due to our own misconduct.
Systems of old age pensions have been adopted in various countries. I do not make that suggestion as proving that Canada should follow the example thus set. Nevertheless, human instincts are the same the world over and human necessities do not greatly differ in different countries. So, if we find that a great question has been dealt with by almost every civilized country in the world, or if we find that pioneer countries, after having devoted time and care to the investigation of methods of handling a problem that is universal, havf adopted certain measures which in their judgment afford the best means of dealing with that problem, that fact affords a strong presumptive reason to justify Canada in following whither these countries have led. Some of the countries that have adopted old age pension systems are Denmark, Iceland, Italy, France, Germany, Belgium. England, New Zealand and Australia. The first five named countries have old age pension systems either contributory or noncontributory, whereas England, New Zealand and Australia have non-contributory systems. I think it would be well for ns to look into the reasons why the non-contributory system has been adopted in England, Australia and New Zealand rather than the contributory system which has been adopted in other countries.
To a certain extent, we already have pension .systems in this Dominion. Certain people who have been employed in various occupations in this country, after they reach the age of sixty or sixty-five years, enjoy pensions which relieve them of any further obligation to provide incomes for themselves. Ninety-five employees of banks in Canada are in receipt of pensions. The Montreal Police Benevolent and Pension Society provides pensions for 96 persons who were at one time in the employ of the Montreal Police Committee. In the city of Toronto forty policemen are pen-

sioned. The Great Northwestern Telegraph Company pensioned eight of its employees. The Government of Prince Edward Island provides a system of pensions for its officials; the Governments of Nova Scotia and Ontario do likewise. Of the employees heretofore in the service of the Canadian Pacific railway, 532 are in receipt of pen: sions involving a total expenditure on the part of the Canadian Pacific railway of $149,655. The Grand Trunk Railway Company has pensioned 584 former employees. The Intercolonial railway has upon its pension roll the names of 290 former employees, and the Employees' Provident Fund of the Intercolonial railway provides for 29 more. The industrial corporations of Canada have pension'ed 1,271 of their former employees. According to the statistics for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1911, under the Civil Service Pension Act, 750 former employees were pensioned, involving a total expenditure of $405,341. Thirty-seven judges of Canadian courts are pensioned, drawing a total amount of $151,428 out of the public revenues of this country. The Militia Pension Act provides for the pensioning of 69 employees or officials, making a further draft upon the public treasury of $38,483. Mounted policemen to the number of 84 are pensioned to the amount of $24,463. Under the Pilotage Act, 19 former employees receive pensions amounting to $4,922. Ninety-five militiamen, survivors of the rebellion of 1885, are pensioned, drawing the sum of $17,620 out of the public revenues of the country. Thirteen mounted policemen, survivors of the rebellion of 1885, are pensioned, drawing the sum of $1,874. The city of Winnipeg has pensioned 17 of its forint r employees. The Civil Service of the province of Quebec has provided for a pension system under which 130 former officials of the Quebec Government are enjoying pensions amounting to $62,624. Three judges of sessions in Quebec draw pensions amounting to $5,043. School teachers in the prov

nce of Ontario to the number of 298 are pensioned, drawing altogether the sum of $51,007. Seven hundred and eight school teachers in the province of Quebec enjoy pensions aggregating $72,195. In the province of Nova Scotia school teachers to the number of 62 are pensioned, drawing the sum of $6,345 from the revenue of' the provincial Government.
The question arises-and we are asked this question whenever the matter is discussed in public-whether there is a demand for a pension system in this 85*
country. The number of persons who are already enjoying pensions at the expense of the Government, or of corporations which formerly employed them, goes to show that there is a feeling that .after employees have served a certain number of years und old age comes upon them, it is desirable and proper and necessary to pension them. If that principle had not been accepted by the governments and corporations I have just mentioned, these employees would not now be pensioned. Before the Old Age Pension Committee last year, Mr. John J. Joy, a prominent labour leader in the city of Halifax, who has had much to do with the subject of employment and the providing of retiring allowances or gratuities to the men .associated with him, gave the following evidence;	-
Q. Do you approve of old age pensions?.- A. Yes, I approve most heartily of that pro-" posal.
Q. Do you happen to know much about public opinion with regard to it in your part of the country?-A. Well, to the best of my opinion

 my carefully formed opinion-there is a considerable public opinion favourable to it, in fact, among all those to whom I have spoken in regard to the matter I have heard nothing but favourable opinions. I have not heard a single adverse opinion expressed among the class of people with whom I come in contact.
Mr. J. J. Kelso, superintendent of children's aid societies of Toronto, was examined, and testified as follows:
Q. Do you think it desirable that it should be brought into effect?-A. I do.
Q. Would you give your reasons for that opinion?-A. I have found in mixing around with the people generally that there are a great many who live in dread of their old age, and who have the fear that they will come to want, though they live industrious lives they find they are becoming poorer, and that knowledge has militated much against their happiness.
Q. Do you think it would interfere with the exercise of thrift in any way?-A. No, I do not think it would. I am sure it would not prevent any man from saving, and it would not prevent his doing his best in every way for himself and for his family.
Q. Do you find a sentiment in favour of some sort of pension?-A. I do. I believe that it is coming nearer every day. I believe that the people are now coming to the conclusion that we ought to spend money to create better social conditions instead of spending so much money on general utility schemes.
Mr. F. A. Ack 1 and, Deputy Minister of Labour, was examined, and testified as
follows:
Q. Do you consider the principle of old age pensions attacks thrift?-A. No, I do not think it attacks thrift.
Q. An objection to old age pensions is that it tends to make people lazy?-A. I should think that hardly likely.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. C. Watters, president of the Trades and Labour Council, gave the following evidence:
Q. Instead of discouraging thrift and propriety of conduct, it would encourage them?- A. It should encourage a higher type of citizen in every way to provide for old age.
An Australian commission took some evidence some yeaTs ago in regard to this matter. I may say that one of the arguments used against the system of old age pensions was the fear that it might encourage thriftlessness and indolence on the part of those enjoying pensions. On this point the Australian Commission reports as follows:	*
We do not consider that the grant or pension discourages thrift, and suggest that a spirit of independence will be encouraged by the establishment of an insurance system enabling those who work to provide for old age, to do * so under the assurance of a Government guarantee.
A commission was also ' appointed to inquire into the working of the system in Denmark where this subject was up for consideration some years ago, and on the subject of thrift the commission reported.
I find in Denmark that the people who had most right to speak with authority on the subject maintained that the law has not acted in a way detrimental to thrift. The Inspector General of the Sick Relief Fund holds that they are more thrifty-never so eager to insure against sickness than now.
I quoted a moment ago from the evidence of Mr. Kelso to the effect that the fear of inability to provide for one's self in old age causes worry, which renders a person less capable of discharging his duties than he would be if he were rid of that fear. On page 159 of the evidence taken before the Old Age Pension Committee, we have the opinion of Mr. J. Morgan Shaw.
Mr. J. Morgan Shaw called, sworn and examined.
By the Chairman :
Q. What is your occupation, Mr. Shaw?- A. I am connected with the Department of Prisons and Public Charities, particularly the branch of hospitals for the insane.
Q. In what capacity?-A. My duties Mr. Chairman-
Q. Are you inspector?-A. No sir, I am not. I am an agent of the inspector.
Q. Are you in the employ of the Government?-A. Yes.
Q. You understand you have been brought here to give evidence respecting your opinion as to the advisability or otherwise of a system of old age pensions for the aged and deserving poor of Canada?-A. I do, sir.
Q. Will you give us your opinion in that respect?-A. In connection with my work I visit all parts of the province, coming in contact with the relatives and friends of those who
tMr. Kyte.]
are inmates of the hospitals for the insane. I believe if a fund were established it would end that never-ending source of worry to a great many-the support of the future. I find that the admissions in the Province of Ontario" in 1911 were 1,144; in 1912 it was 1,247. Of that number 17 per cent of the cases of insanity were due to adverse conditions and worry. Take the months of January and February and March of this year the total admissions were 311 and of tnese 56 were over the age of 55 years, about IS per cent. I believe all would agree that it is not the young people who worry, but the people advanced in years where there are adverse conditions. If we had a pension fund for them they would have that peace of mind that would in many cases prevent mental derangement.
The obligation to provide for persons who in their old age are not able to provide for themselves is a very heavy one throughout the Dominion of Canada. I have not been able to find out the exact amount of money that is being spent in all the provinces of Canada to supply maintenance to those who are too poor to provide for themselves, but 1 have the figures showing the total amount that is being expended in the province of Ontarjo for this purpose. The figures for the County Houses of Refuge in the province of Ontario for the year ending September 30, 1911, are as follows: Maintenance, $230,000; interest on the cost of building and land at four per cent on $974,683, $38,987; cost of city and town houses of refuge, $800,000, amounting in all to $1,068,987. On that basis, the amount expended by the whole Dominion of Canada for supporting, not the insane, but those who are unable to provide for themselves and who are supported by Government institutions, would be $3,1161,961. Therefore when objection is urged to a system of old age pensions on the ground that it would involve too great an expend.ture out of the treasury of this country, we must not forget that large sums of money are being expended at the present time for this purpose, and that if a system of old age pensions were established the present expenditure on houses of refuge would no longer have to be made. It may be urged that these houses of refuge are maintained by provincial Governments and by municipalities, and that the obligation to maintain these houses should continue to rest there rather than be a tax upon the federal treasury. Before I close my remarks I hope to be able to show reasons why this burden, or a portion of it at all events, ought to be undertaken by the federal Government. One of the principal objections urged against a system of old age pensions is in respect to its cost.
Robert Laird Borden: Before the hon. gentleman leaves the question of supporting houses of refuge, has he investigated the conditions which prevail in Austria-Hungary? I remember reading some years ago a very interesting article as to what had been done there. If I remember correctly, it involved the provision of a certain pension coupled with another provision by which the state provided accommodation in the way of cottages, so that an old couple for example, would not bo separated from each other in their old age. In the art.cle to which I allude, it was represented that the system had been very satisfactory and effective. I am merely asking for information, whether my hon. friend in the researches which he has made, wh'ch have evidently been very extensive, might have investigated that system.


George William Kyte: 
Mr. W. T. WHITE:: How were the figures arrived at as to the number who would be recipients of the pension?


George William Kyte: Professor Mavor and M'.
Finlayson both went into a very elaborate system of calculation. This is to be found in the blue-book published by the Government and entitled 'Old Age Pension System in Canada.' After deducting a fair proportion for those who would not be in need of any assistance at that time of life and making all such deductions as the experience in Great Britain and other countries with old age systems show it is possible to make, the number arrived at was as I have stated. In making this calculation they did not take into account the number of men over sixty-five years of age who are already pensioned in Canada. I read a list a few moments ago, including those who were enjoying pensions at the hands of corporations and civic and provincial governments, in whose employ they had been, whirh showed that the number was very considerable. In making their calculations as to the number who would enjoy the advantages of an old age pension system in Canada, Professor Mavor and Mr. Finlayson do not appear to have taken these into account.


Mr. MACDONALD:: Did you make up
the total number of those who are already receiving pensions?


George William Kyte: I gave the figures to the
House, but I did not add them up to ascertain the total number.


Robert Laird Borden: Did the hon. gentleman
include all corporations and similar institutions-not only industrial concerns, but banks and institutions of that kind?


George William Kyte: I included, all the figures
that were available in the blue-book that was prepared by the Government at the last session of Parliament. Besides those who are in the enjoyment of pensions paid directly by this Government, there is a very considerable portion of our population Who are in the enjoyment of advantages which are the result of paternal legislation passed by this and preceding governments. We have in this country a system of raising the revenue by means of a tariff. There is a large number of people employed in manufactories in this country. It is true there is a large sum of money also employed in these manufactures, but the profits derived from these manufactures and the celerity with which large fortunes are accn-
1.338

mulated by those who are engaged in them are accounted for in a very large degree by the fact that we have in this country a system of protection which gives the manufacturers certain advantages in respect to the home market and in respect to the consumption of the wares which they supply. All of these industries and enterprises benefit to a very great extent from the operations of the tariff. When we take into account the number of men who are enjoying pensions directly or indirectly in this country I think in all fairness that we should not shut our eyes to the fact that this large army are enjoying advantages and increased income by virtue of legislative enactments which have 'been passed by this Parliament.
Up to a short time ago bounties were provided for the encouragement of the manufacture of iron, steel and nickel in the Dominion. A very large number of men engaged in these manufactures, and who have money invested in them, had considerable additions made to their worldly wealth by reason of these bounties which were voted to them from time to time by this Parliament. There are also railway corporations. It is well-known to hon. gentlemen on both sides of the House that railway corporations are in the habit of coming to the Government for financial assistance and support. A certain number of men band themselves together in one part or the other of this Dominion for the purpose of building a railway, they get a charter, they elect directors, they make certain arrangements for the purpose of carrying on their undertakings, but before they do that they come to this Government for the purpose of getting assistance in the way of subsidies and subventions. This is a system that has existed in Canada for many years and I presume that is a system that will not ,be speedily terminated. But in addition to the Government paying the ordinary subventions to the large railway corporations to assist them in carrying on their undertakings, they very frequently, after they have expended the ordinary subventions, and after they have carried on their railway projects to some extent, come back to Parliament; they are not content with the ordinary subventions that have been voted in the past, and which have been voted to the smaller and weaker corporations, but they demand further assistance in the form of a bonus or a loan. We had an experience of that at the last session of Parlia-
3 p.m. ment, when a large railway corporation came before this Gov-
IMr. Kyte. ]
ernment for the purpose of getting financial assistance, not in the way of a loan, but in the way of a bonus, the granting of which diverted a large sum of money from the public treasury. I am not going to argue at the present time whether the payment of that bonus was justified, but I shall satisfy my object in referring to it when I point out that these railway owners and the holders of stock in railway corporations have benefited very largely by the paternal legislation and the paternal conduct of the Government.
A system of old age pensions would return to the taxpayer a large amount of money that is now being expended in the support of persons who are unable to provide for themselves. I stated a moment ago that it was argued that the proper persons to provide homes and comforts to those aged people are the provincial and municipal taxpayers. My contention is that those men who have lived to be 65 or 70 years of age, under a system of government whereby everything they consume, everything they purchase, is levied upon by the Government in the way of - tariff exactions, have contributed a sufficient sum by the time they have reached the age that I have mentioned, to entitle them to some consideration from the Government. As respects our municipal institutions and provincial governments, there is no contribution made by the taxpayers of the province of Nova Scotia, for instance, in respect to carrying on the government of that province. The taxpayers contribute towards the support of the municipal institutions and I do say that, following the lead that has been set by the other countries I have mentioned, the time has come when some federal assistance ought to be given towards the support and maintenance of the aged people throughout this Dominion.
This system of old .age pensions would relieve municipalities and governments very largely from the obligation of providing homes for the feeble-minded. In the evidence I quoted it was pointed out that the worry which is inseparable rrom a condition of life in which a man finds nimself verging upon the age of 65 or 70 without having any competence laid aside is likely ro oe injurious not only to his physical condition but to his mental system as well. If every man felt that, having done his duty towards the state and towards his family, even if he had failed to lay by a sufficient competence to provide for him in his old age, the state would come to his assistance and see that want would not cast its shadow over his

declining years, it Would give him more confidence. It would make him more of a man than would be the case under the circumstances which I have described. It has been pointed out that a universal system of old age pensions is preferable to a system whereby pensions are jlaid out to the deserving poor because discrimination between the man in need and the man not in need sets upon the recipient of the pension the stamp of charity.
It is also said that any attempt to distinguish between the needy and the affluent would stamp a pension with .the taint of pauperism. To show that suck objection is not tenable I cite a provision of the law in Great Britain, which stipulates that if an ex-cabinet minister, who has served his country for a number of years, has not sufficient means to maintain him in the position he ought to occupy as a former adviser of hi$ Sovereign, he can apply to the Exchequer and get a pension. In this instance, there is a marked distinction drawn between the ex-cabinet minister, who is well to do, and the ex-cabinet minister who is poor. But excabinet ministers, whose means are not sufficient to maintain the dignity of their former office, have not hesitated to go before the officials of the Treasury Department and make the statutory declaration necessary to obtain a pension. If the excabinet ministers in Great Britain do not feel humiliated because they are obliged to make a declaration that they are unable to live without a pension, I certainly think the ordinary individual in this country, after reaching the age of 65 years, would not feel humiliated by having to make special application for a pension.
When this subject was discussed in this House some time ago, there seemed to be a disposition to draw a distinction between the man who works for daily wages, and the fisherman, the farmer, the seaman, and others who, are not employed by others but work for themselves. While the men who work for a daily wage in the mines and the mills and other industrial institutions ought to be included in any pension system, there is also a large body of men who make their living as fishermen, farmers, and seamen, whose necessities are quite as pressing and wno would be'deserving of a pension under any proper pension system. Take the case of a fisherman in the Maritime provinces, who, by tne exercise of great economy and frugality, has been able to maintain a large family
on small earnings. His children go away to provide for themselves; he is left alone, and in his old age he is unable to go out on the deep to pursue his calling. Surely such a man is entitled to the same consideration as the workingman living in the city, and should have a yearly pension. Again, take the case of an old fisherman, whose son is his only support. The son goes out upon the stormy deep, and is perhaps drowned, leaving a family unprovided for and his aged parents as well. Surely such a case would be entitled to consideration, under any system that would provide ordinary comforts of life for the aged people of this country. Take the case of the man who all his life has gone to sea, and whose wages would not amount to more than $25 per month. The time comes when that man is too old to engage in his calling, and he is deficient in health and in poor circumstances. His impoverished condition is not due to any misconduct on his part, but solely to the fact that he did not have the adventitious surroundings which enabled his neighbour to lay by a certain competence for his old age. Some time ago I met a man on the street in my county 86 years old, and I asked him what he was doing. He said: -'I was on the Grand Banks fishing last summer, but as I was unable to go out on the stormy days in my dory, my catch was small, and as I was paid on the basis of the catch my earnings were so trifling that I could not support myself. I have shipped on board a vessel, and I am now ' before the mast ' in a coasting vessel.' Here was a man 86 years of age, .an eminently respectable man, who all his life had been sober and thrifty, a man who had raised a large family on his small means, and a most estimable citizen in every way; but .at the age of 86 he was obliged to ship before the mast at possibly the reduced pay of $20 a month, for he could not expect the higher wages paid to able seamen. All over this country examples might be given to show the absolute necessity there is for providing for people in their old age.
It is said that we are fortunately situated in Canada; that Canada is a prosperous country, that there is great employment, and that there is no need for any one in Canada going hungry or unclad. That impoverishment is not general, it is to my mind all the more reason why steps should be taken to deal with the isolated and sporadic cases which deserve assistance. Can a country of seven and a half millions

of affluent citizens afford to close its heart to the 72,000 aged and infirm who may be in want? The fact that we have a large and prosperous country ought to make us more able to do our duty in this respect, and to provide the means of a decent livelihood for those exceptions to the universal rule of wealth, affluence, and comfort. We ought to deal with these cases systematic-* ally, so as to relieve them of the worry, which Professor Mavor refers to as the inseparable lot of those who see poverty in their old age, staring them in the face.
According to the experts of the Finance Department, and the expert evidence given before the Old Age Pension Committee, $7,250,000 will be quite sufficient to provide old age pensions at the present moment for all those in Canada who would be entitled to consideration. I pointed out that over $3,000,000 is being expended to provide homes of refuge for the deserving poor of this country, and that would be saved to the taxpayers of Canada if a system of old age pensions were inaugurated. I point to the great number of people who are now being provided with pensions by provincial governments, banks, and other industrial corporations, but, deserving as those classes are, they are no more deserving than the artisans, the labourers, the farmers, the fishermen, the seamen of Canada, who have contributed towards the upbuilding of the nation. The time has come when a practical system of old age pensions ought to be adopted by Parliament, and when some measure of relief or of remuneration, if you will, ought to be paid out to the old men in every walk of life who have contributed by their manhood and their citizenship to the upbuilding of this country. The assistance to which I refer is well worthy of the attention of the Government and is one that can easily be accomplished out of the resources of this great country.


Mr. J. H. BURNHAM (West Peterborough):: I am sure we have all listened with great interest to the speech delivered by the hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Kyte) in support of his resolution.
It will be remembered that this matter was brought up two years ago. The first intimation in Canada that it was considered necessary or desirable to bring to the attention of Parliament matters affecting the aged and deserving poor was by Mr. Pringle of Stormont, then a member of this House, but he did not refer to old age pensions. Some of the most distinguished 
men in the House spoke on the question and seemed vitally interested in it. Then we had the Old Age Annuities Act of 1908, which has nothing whatever to do with old age pensions, because the annuities have to be paid for, and you can only get what you pay for, the annuities being a system of national insurance. Later on, I put on the Order Paper a resolution to the same effect as that of my hon. friend (Mr. Kyte). that it was desirable to have a system of old age pensions inaugurated in Canada. That resolution was spoken to, and on the 31st of January, 1912, the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Borden) moved:
That a select committee be appointed to make an inquiry into an old age pension system for Canada as set forth in the resolution of the House passed on the 24th January.
That committee was appointed and straightway began operations. As regards the question whether other countries should have old age pension schemes or not, they have old age pension schemes in other countries and we must rest assured that they know their business best. As a rule, the system in other countries is con-tributary ; but speaking generally, it is regarded as necessary in all countries that what we may call the balance of life should be made as nearly as possible to produce restfulness in the vast body of the people by means of a little levelling up here and there; that is to say, by assistance from the State, because whatever the reason is. the fact remains that some people have a great deal more than they want and others have a great deal less than they should have. Bearing in mind that people 'are people; that is to say, that some people have more brains than others, but they have no greater necessity for living, we see that the comfort of people is precisely in the same position of what we may call an individual unit; one person is precisely the same as another in that respect. From that point, however, there is every possible variation and deviation, and it is this vari-tion which produces that extraordinary condition known as dissimilarity of sphere and of comfort in life. Granted that it is our duty as a cosmopolitan commun.ty to assist each other as best we can, and bearing in mind the various other conditions, we plainly see that, if we can duly and properly produce this levelling up process, we should do so. Therefore, it may be taken for granted that the principle underlying old age pensions is right and good.
In taking evidence 1 do not think that we left a stone unturned. We took evid-

ence during the course of two sessions. We called in witnesses from the Atlantic to the Pacific. We spared no expense. We lud fishermen, coal miners, every form of industrial artisan; and when we came to what might be called the conclusion of our committee work, I asked the Minister of Finance if there was anything further he would like to hear, because when we came to impress upon the Government the necessity of establishing a system of old age pensions, we did not want them to say to us: We want you to go on and do so and so and so and so. The M.nister of Finance said, ' We want a very full list of witnesses from the farmers. We all know that the people in the cities approve a system of old age pensions, but we want to hear from the farmers.' We had already called some farmers, but we then had a further number of farmers brought from all parts of Canada.
I am not now making a report as chairman of the committee. I am not authorized to do so, and I am ady.ised that th.s Government has all it can do in the way of financing without being burdened at the present time by any scheme no matter how desirable it may be. Therefore this is not the time I think to press home all our arguments and all our evidence with a view J;o the consummation of our scheme. This therefore may be considered as more or less of an academic discussion. This is not the presentat on of the repoit of the committee. I have been advised not to make the report and I do not wish to take it upon myself to do so, because this occasion is not the proper one for application to the Gvern-ment for this measure.
1 wou d l.ke to refer to the evidence of Mrs. Henderson of Montreal. Of all the evidence taken from the c.ties, of experts, of offic.als, the members belonging to the trades unions, of members belonging to the various classes of artisans, there was nothing that seemed to impress us so generally and so powerfully as the evidence of Mrs. Henderson of Montreal. The committee seems to have agreed with me, and therefore, with your permission I will read portions of this evidence:
Mrs. R. M, Henderson, called, sworn and examined :
By the Chairman:
Q. You live in Montreal?-a. Yes.
Q. What institution are you in the employ of?-A. The Juvenile Court.
Q. Are you in the employ of the Government or the city?-A. The Government.
Q. The Government of Quebec?-A. Yes.
Q. You have, of course, in that way, met with
what I might call the general conditions of life?

A. Yes.
Q. You understand that the old age pension system is a non-contributary scheme by whicii a government proposes or might propose to give a certain sum yearly to what they call the aged and strictly deserving poor?-A. Yes.
Q. What is your opinion of- such a scheme?-
A. My opinion is that such a plan would be of infinite benefit to the people themselves, and certainly it must revert to the good of the nation. In our own country wages are so low that it is impossible for a man-no matter how steady he may be, and no matter how steady his work may be-to put away for his old age.
It is beginning to be impossible for the workers to pay their union dues, much less dues to insurance. These are the conditions 1 find, in going amongst the children of Montreal. Within the last two or three years the cost of living has gone up tremendously. Daily I go into homes ' in Montreal and find two or thre extra children above what there were two or three years ago, and the elder children have to go out, to supplement the family income, two or three, and sometimes several days a week. Under these conditions it is absolutely impossible for a man or woman to put away for their old age.
I had hoped the Minister of Finance (Mr. White) would be here throughout this discussion, because I wanted him to hear such things as that. It is impossible, even under the best conditions, in view of the wages paid, for people to lay by money.
Then, I favour the old age pension system for the reason that we, as a nation, ought to benefit by the mistakes of uie older nations. By reading the reports of Mr. and Mrs. Sydney Webb and Mr. Beaumont, and people of that kind engaged by the Government; we realize all the mistakes England has made by establishing a system of poor houses, a system which is a national disgrace, and they .are beginning to realize that more and more every day; and 1 think Canada, with her wealth and her prospects, and, as it were, better manhood and womanhood, on account of being a new country and, having a newer life, should devise some better means of caring for the old. I think it would be a national disgrace to have a system of poor houses established in Canada. It is an insult to the men and women who have borne children, because the majority of them have contributed not only to the material wealth of the nation, but have contributed their children, and these children, when they grow up, marry and have families of their own, and so cannot protect and care for the fathers and mothers now in their way.
Where the old age pension scheme would help is in the matter of our children. I go into a great many homes and I find the mother is a widow. That mother has to take her children to the day nursery while she goes out to work; and mothers have said to me, ' My child would never have got into the juvenile court if I had been able to keep it at home. He would never have deteriorated as he has.' Now, if that mothe!- had a small income, so that the children could he kept at home, it would he a great help to the nation, and to the mother in the matter of taking care of these children.

You see, Mr. Speaker, the children cannot cut in and talk to the Government the way those can who have other interests to serve; the children have to take what they get.
So that, from every point of view I can see that such a scheme as is proposed would he a great help to the people, and the people in turn would be a help to the nation. When people are kept in institutions they have that feeling, of being paupers and dependents, and the consequent humiliation. They lose their civil rights, their life in the community. Segregation is another objectionable feature. Segregation is just as harmful for old people as it is for young people. When a man and woman have lived together a number of years in the community, it seems to me the nation ought to hold out some better return than segregation in old age in an institution. They should not be separated, from a humanitarian point of view. It is a disgrace to make them associate with old and tottering people, instead of being associated with their sons and daughters and grandchildren.
By Mr. Macdonald:
Q. How long have you been occupied in the Juvenile Court?-A. The Juvenile Court has only been established within the year, but before that I was a' member of the board of the Children's Aid Society. They had a probationary officer but my services were voluntary; and as soon as the Juvenile Court was established I was asked to take this position, for the first year at least, so that I have really been engaged as a paid probationary officer by the Government.
Her evidence continues in much the same way. Time and again, in the most sane, quiet, practical, yet often pathetic manner, she told us how necessary it was that to better the condition of the people we must lend a hapd. These people with the burden of life upon them, with occasional unemployment, sickness, low wages-fair wages if you like, but too low to enable them to set money aside-simply are not able so to manage as to provide the ideal condition that we must have if we aie to have the highest type of manhood and womanhood in Canada. It is not necessary for us to read the evidence out of a book, we can read it everywhere. Go into the slums and lower quarters of any city, or even town. I have had experience and know something about it. I was connected with a children's aid society for manjy years, and I know something about the conditions of life in this country. Knowing these conditions, I submit that people have to lend a hand in a sensible way, not by occasional doles of charity-promiscuous charity is a curse. You say: We have to help people in a legitimate way. That is exactly what the people are after. If there is a better scheme than old age pensions,
[Mr. Burnham,'1
produce it. The wage system of this country at the present time and with things as they are tends to go down. If that system tends to go down, the means of providing home life tend to go down, and if the means of providing respectable home life tend to be lowered, then we shall have a pretty state of things in this country- our civilization will consist on the one hand of people in airships and automobiles, and on the other hand of people wliom we have let go to the devil.
Mr. GRAHAiM:	A good many go there
in automobiles.


John Hampden Burnham: And I am not sure
that we are unwilling to let them go. I take little interest in the people who always go in automobiles and devote their lives to the automobilious system of life. These people can take care of themselves. They drink costly wines, and smoke costly cigars and enjoy life in general. My experience is that they know nothing under God's1 heaven but their own comfort and their own selfish interest. But we are dealing with something better than that. And it is time, I would respectfully inform the ex-Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham), for us to talk about a serious question. We want the ear of the House. If hon. members think this a joke, something to be. laughed at, then we can sit down and wait for a more convenient and favourable day. But we cannot be cowed nor can we be laughed out of court. We can only regret that there are people who, probably with hearts good enough, yet have not acquired that steadiness of head in this particular which would enable them to be of service to their country.
So much for the industrial side of the matter; I have no doubt the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) will take up the evidence that came from the East; he understands it much better than I do. The overwhelming trend of the evidence in an industrial way was in favour of the old age pension system which has been mentioned. The same may practically be said of the evidence affecting the farmer. Not only did we call farm witnesses, but we sent out communications to the county councils generally, in order that we might get their opinions without any bias. If you get the opinion of a county council that such a thing is desirable, you can make up your mind that they think it is desirable, for there are no persons on earth less inclined to impose burdens on the communities than

the farmers. The committee has this to say with regard to the opinions of the wardens of county councils:
The committee at its last two sittings held in May, 1913, was engaged in the consideration of evidence given very largely by representative farmers of the older provinces of Canada and Manitoba; also, in the consideration of communications received from wardens of county councils. Additional communications from this same.source have been since received, but before proceeding to their consideration it may be well to summarize briefly the contents^ of the fifty-two communications which were printed in the last copy of minutes of proceedings of the committee at pages 255 and 259 of No. 6, for May, 1913. Of the fifty-two wardens' opinions reported therein, three are adverse to a system of pensions for Canada's aged poor, four are either doubtful or noncommittal in expressing an opinion; 43 wardens express views more or less forcible in favour of a pension system; one would like to see federal Government allowances made to municipal homes which care for the aged poor; and one would much rather favour the savings banks system.
What data have we to act upon? Simply the testimony, without bias, of numerous witnesses taken before a committee of this House. Any gentleman who had a witness of any importance, and who suggested the name of that witness, had the liberty of bringing that witness before the committee and having him examined. The testimony obtained by the committee is absolutely unblemished. and that testimony, taken from all over this country, is overwhelmingly in favour of an old age pension system for Canada. I have no hesitation in saying that if the matter comes to an argument, any objection to an old age pension system would not have a ghost of a show. If it is a matter of money, and we have not the money, I regret to say we will have to wait *until such time as the money is forthcoming. In any event, the old age pension system has universally proved to ibe, and unquestionably will , be, of the greatest possible service. Whether the people like it or whether they do not, what about the widows who have been suddenly bereft of their husbands, and who have been left a legacy of children, without any money to bring them up? What about the widows who have to. go out to work by the day or by the week, and who, of necessity, leave their children alone while they are out? What happens to these children? Every conceivable influence may be exerted against them. The handicap is too great, and almost without exception our criminals are drawn from that source. We spend money to root out weeds and to repress crime and punish criminals, but we do not
or cannot expend money to provide a system by which mothers may be assisted and helped during those days when they ought to be in a position to stay at home to bring up, superintend and educate their little ones. To suppose that a man's leaving a wife and a family of small children without support is a condition that, without some intelligent and practical assistance and supervision, can possibly inure to the prosperity and welfare of Canada, is supposing too much altogether. Experience has shown that no matter what else we may do, at all hazards and with the least possible delay-railways or no railways-we ought to provide some means for assisting mothers who are left widows with very small children.


Mr. W. F. CARROLL (Cape Breton South):: It is not with a desire of having my opinions on this question placed on record that I wish to discuss the resolution brought before the House by the hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Kyte). I may say that my opinions in regard to this matter, if they are worth anything, are well known not only to this House, but in the particular part of the country from which I come.
Two years ago a resolution proposed by the hon. member for West Peterborough (Mr. Burnham), who has just spoken, was discussed in this House, and as a result of that resolution a committee was appointed by the Government to investigate the matter of old age pensions in Canada. I had the privilege and the honour of being a member of that committee. With possibly two exceptions, I attended each sitting of that committee from its inception until last June, and if when I became a member of that committee there was any doubt in my mind as to the advisability of an old age pension system in Canada, it has since been dispelled by the evidence which was adduced before that committee -evidence of persons coming from various points between the Atlantic seaboard and the Pacific coast.
The question of old age pensions, from the national Canadian standpoint, must be viewed differently from old age pensions in England. Canada has no general poor law. Our paupers, and those who are poor but not in the pauper class, aTe looked after by our local and civic governments; the Government of Canada does not contribute anything directly towards the maintenance of the poor. There will, therefore, be no saving to the treasury of Canada by


Mr. SPEAKER:: Many quotations have
been given from the evidence taken by this committee, but, if I understand it correctly, this committee has never reported to the House; and, of course, unless the committee reported to the House from time to time, portions of the evidence should not be quoted here. Quoting and commenting on evidence taken before a committee that has not reported is distinctly irregular.


William F. Carroll: I may say that the
evidence was published under instructions from this House, and presented to the House.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: That being the case, I
am mistaken; I was not aware of that.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The hon.
member is right; the evidence was printed from time to time under leave of the House.


John Hampden Burnham: Reports were made
from time to time, but no final report was . made.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand that the
evidence was all reported to the House at the conclusion of the session.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: Of course, if the evidence was reported from time to time, then it is available.


William F. Carroll: I was saying that Professor Mavor gave very .strong evidence of the necessity of an old age pension scheme at the present time. Mr. John P. Joy also testified that in the organization to which he belongs, the longshoremen's organization of the city of Halifax, there were 650 men whose earnings averaged only $8 per week. I think that is very strong evidence of the necessity of an old age pension system.
If the testimony of the professor from the University of Toronto is correct, that on $15 a week a person with a family cannot save anything, what is going to become of men like the longshoremen in the city of Halifax whose earning ability per week is only $8? Some evidence was presented to the committee by the miners of the East and more particularly by the miners of the West. We learned from the testimony given before that committee that the miners of the East, are much better off financially than the miners of the West. Taking it as a whole, there is no doubt that organized labour to-day is very much in favour of old age pensions. There is no doubt of the fact, judging by the evidence given by the men who represented organized labour before that committee and by others, that it is essential. There is no doubt that the artisans and labourers, whether they belong to organized labour or not, are in need of old age pensions and very much in favour of them.
But we were told, by my hon. friend the Minister of Finance, when this discussion was up in 1912, that this being an agricultural country and the majority of the people being agriculturists, there was
not that necessity for an old age pension system which exists in the older countries of Europe. We had at least ten or twelve farmers from the province of Ontario before that committee, and while many of them realized that they will never be undjr the necessity of accepting an old age pension from the state, they yet gave evidence to show that even in Ontario, the banner agricultural province of Canada, there was a necessity for an old age pension system. This necessity existed especially among the farm labourers and smaller farmers in Ontario whose children were leaving their homes and who perhaps, after they had attained the age of sixty or sixty-five years would be under the compulsion of s lling their farms, perhaps for $2,GOO, or $1,500, or $3,000, the interest on which sums would not be sufficient to enable them to eke out an existence for the remaining days of their lives. These are the people who are in need of an old age pension system-the people who strive to earn a livelihood, and who, in the declining days of their lives, have found themselves
4 p.m. unable to support themselves, their wives, a crippled son, ot perhaps an invalid daughter.
There was a consensus of opinion among the farmers who appeared as representing the province of Ontario that an old age pension scheme was a very advisable thing.
Now I come to the province of Quebec. Strange to relate, while the farmers from that province admitted that there was a necessity for an old age pension system, yet there was a feeling that it was too much of a charity and that they would not accept it themselves. The farmers from the province of Quebec all gave expression to the same view. They said that as far as they were concerned they had too much pride to accept a penison of this kind, but notwithstanding the fact they gave evidence to the effect that in the large industrial centres and even in the agricultural centres there was a necessity for some assistance from the state. They did not like to call it a pension and they did not like to call it a charity. I am going over the evidence for the purpose of showing that from coast to coast and from north to south there is an overwhelming public opinion in Canada that a system of old age pensions should be inaugurated.
My hon. friend the Minister of Finance asked my hon. friend from the county of Richmond (Mr. Kyte), when he spoke as to the possible annual outlay that a system of old age pensions would entail, how he ar-

rived at his conclusion. The number of possible pensioners in Canada at this time is approximated by Professor Mavor at 72,000, which would necessitate an expenditure of $7,500,000 a year providing the pensions were $2 a week. Taking the evidence given before that committee and the figures as appearing in the census statistics of Canada, it seems to me that there is a rather better and fairer method than that pursued by the learned professor of ascertaining the actual number of pensioners in Canada at the present time. In 1901 there was a popu-* lation of 5,371,315 of all ages. The statistics show that at that time there were 137,848 male persons in Canada over 65 years of age and 131,541 females over 65 years of age, or
5.01	per cent of the population over 65 years of age. When this list was prepared we did not have available-I do not think we have available at the present time-the census returns of Canada showing the actual number of persons in Canada in 1911 over 65 years of age. But I have arrived at a conclusion, approximately to be sure. We had a total population in Canada in 1911 of 7,204,527. By the census of 1901 we had 269,389 persons over the age of 65 and by taking the same rate of proportion-five per cent-I would compute that in the year 1911 there were in the Dominion of Canada 320,999 persons over the age of 65.
Another problem is as to what proportion of that 320,999 would be fit recipients of old age pensions. We have to go to other countries to ascertain what percentage of the people in these countries, over 65 years, are getting old age pensions, and I find that in England the percentage is 35. I consider, Sir, that would be rather high for Canada. My opinion is tnat not more than 15 or 20 per cent of the people over 65 years in Canada would be looking for an old age pension. My hon. friend from Richmond, basing his opinion on the figures given by Professor Mavor, has figured out a higher percentage, but I think it is reasonable to assume that if in England 35 per cent of those over 65 years of age are receiving pensions, there would not be more than 15 or 20 per cent in Canada, because tnis is a young country, and we have the West, where the percentage of old persons is small. Few in the West, except perhaps in industrial centres, would be seeking old age pensions for many years to come. This would, of course, necessitate a large expenditure, and I think the Dominion treasury in the first place should contribute, either directly or indirectly, to-

wards the maintenance of our aged poor. That work at present is cast upon our provincial and municipal treasuries. There is not a person in this country, who nas attained the age of 16 years, who does not contribute in some way to the ever-expanding revenue of the Dominion. They receive returns for it in the way of subsidies to railways and steamships, and such as that, but they receive none of the profits. The wealthy man in this country, who can afford to undertake to build a railway, receives from tnis Government *the money which has been paid into the treasury by the aged and deserving poor, who receive nothing directly in return for their contributions. I therefore say that the Dominion treasury should contribute something for the maintenance of the aged poor
One could go on almost indefinitely elaborating arguments in favour of this system, but let us see what arguments have been used against it. Looking over former debates in this House, the most obvious objection to it was, that there was no necessity for it in this country, and that there is no public opinion in favour of it. But surely no man who has read the volumes of evidence accumulated by the committee, will say that there is not a strong, and matured, and considerative public opinion in Canada in favour of old age pensions, or, that there is not a necessity for it in this country, a necessity which will he increasing as the years go on. Another argument against the old age pension system is that it will interfere with thrift upon the part of our people. Speaking on this question a few years ago, an hon. member of this House, a member of the party to which I belong, used these words:
What I feel on the general principle is, that if you go on indefinitely along the lines of helping men to do what they should do for themselves, you will inevitably, in the end, undermine the virility and the strength of your people.
That argument, on its face, appears to be sound, but applying it as an argument against the system of old age pensions it is, I contend, not applicable. The idea of those in favour of old age pensions is not to go on indefinitely along the lines of helping men to do what they should do for themselves, because the very basis of the system is to help the deserving poor, and the man who does not help himself when he has the opportunity would not be eligible for a pension. The argument I have cited was used by the hon. member

for Red Deer (Mr. Clark), whose logic is generally very keen, and who is one of the very best reasoners in this House, but when he used the word ' indefinitely ' and when he uses promiscuously the language that we should not help the people to do what they should do for themselves, his argument has "no application whatever to a system of old age pension, such as has been discussed in this House. We may be told by some hon. members that this discussion is not opportune, owing to the fact that a committee has been sitting for the past two years and has not yet finally reported. There may be some ground for that contention, but unfortunately the committee was not reappointed this year, and I have no doubt my hon. friend from Richmond, when he moved the resolution, had in mind not only a fair and frank discussion of this matter, but also to remind the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister that this question has not been forgotten in this Parliament. The zeal in this question, I am pleased to admit, is not all on this side of the House; it is equally divided. On this side of the House we have opponents to the scheme and we have also strong supporters. On the other side of the House we have opponents and we have also very strong supporters' Therefore one thing to be very thankful for is that it cannot be made a political question.
The hon. member for West Peterborough and myself always agree on this question of old age pensions. We have stood side by side and have done our utmost, especially in that committee, to forward this scheme. There is no man in this House, and I dare say in this country, more zealous in' forwarding this scheme than my good friend from Peterborough; but when he says that this is not the proper time to ask the Government for such financial aid as would be necessary for such a scheme, owing to the fact that the Government is not financially strong, while I think he is speaking in the best of faith, I do not think he is taking the proper course; because even if the Government does not see its way clear at once to inaugurate a system of old age pensions, and to start paying those pensions, it should inaugurate the system and wait until times get better, if you will, before putting the scheme into actual operation. I do not see, however, that even at the present time the Government of this country cannot afford to spend what, according to my calculation, would be about $5,000,000 a year in actual pensions, plus
perhaps $125,000 for clerical assistance. 1 do not think the Government would be embarrassed financially by this expenditure. I do not intend to go over the list of expenditures to show how the hon. Minister of Finance has been spending the money. No doubt he has been spending it in the way he thinks best. But I ask him, in the name of the deserving poor of this country, to take this matter into immediate consideration. He displayed a keen interest in the subject when it was up before, and he has given evidence that he is sincere in the matter; but if his sincerity has continued since 1912 to the present time and if he is still of the same opinion on these matters as he was then, he should inaugurate the system; he should enter into a calculation to ascertain approximately the annual outlay necessary to put this scheme into operation. We give assistance to our railroads, to our steamboat lines, to our steel companies, to our coal companies, to our shoe companies, in one way or another. Surely we are not going to turn our backs upon the aged and deserving poor and say that we do not intend to give any assistance to them. I do not think that the hon. Minister of Finance or any other member would take that nosition. I ask him and I ask the Government to give this question their very best consideration. If they do so, I feel that within two years we shall have inaugurated in this country a system of old age pensions which' will be a lasting monument to whoever is the person that puts it into practical effect.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: 1
desire to say a word or two in support of this resolution. On different occasions in the past I have put forward the idea, and supported it to the best of my ability, that Canada should follow where the mother country and all the other dominions of the empire have led in regard to this question of old age pensions.
I was not in the House when my hon. friend from Peterborough (Mr. Burnham) made some remarks which, as I gather from hon. gentlemen who have spoken since, would indicate that he thought that this proposal at this time was somewhat inopportune.


John Hampden Burnham: I have been so advised.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I would like to dissent from that proposition. In the first place, I think that the hon. gentlemen con nected with the committee which invest i

gated this matter last year have a right to complain of the method in which the report of that committee was dealt with by this House. A reference to ' Hansard' of last year will show that my hon. friend who acted as chairman of the committee presented his report and in some way His Honour the Speaker came to the conclusion that the Printing Committee had some jurisdiction over this matter and that because the Printing Committee had recommended that certain things which we wanted printed should not be printed, this House had no jurisdiction over the matter and it was impossible for the House to discuss the report or to pass a resojution. This occurred during the last few days of the session, and there was some malign influence at work which prevented the committee's report from being dealt with by the House.
This proposed system of old age pensions in Canada and its discussion in this House can never be said to be ill-advised. I do not know from what source my hon. friend from Peterborough has received his information, because I am utterly at a loss to understand on what he bases his theory.
Canada has been very slow in - dealing with all questions of social reform. Why is it that in our great rush for expansion and development in regard to transportation and all lines of industry, the question of legislation providing for social reform such as has been placed upon the statute books of almost every other English speaking country, has never been considered in Canada. The academic question of the relation between capital and labour does not obtain from this Parliament that full attention that it deserves. The right of the toiling masses in regard to their sphere in the state and in reference to social organization generally, is the paramount question in every country where there are public spirited men. We have been too sluggish and indifferent in approaching this question. This subject is not inopportune; it is not ill-advised; it is not being dealt with a moment too soon and this House and this Government cannot turn too speedily to the active consideration of this problem. I have been amazed at hon. gentlemen in this House and at some of the gentlemen who appeared before the committee in their misconception of what an old age pension scheme really meant. Some said: Are you going to give to any drunkard or to any criminal, when he is sixty-five or seventy years- of age, money
fMr. Macdonald.]
from the state which he can spend as he pleases? Is that what you propose? A great many people think that it is. Some people say: Are you going to give to a man when he reaches the age of sixty-five or seventy, whether he is willing to work or not, absolute provision for his needs by the state? That is another* common delusion. Thus we have these misconceptions in regard to the matter. If not the present Premier of England, I think a man of equal pre-eminence in the mother country declared that, when England propounded and placed upon the statute-book the provision under which old age pensions were guaranteed to the aged persons in that country over sixty-five, that England had made the greatest advance in the way of legislation that she had made since the day of the first Reform Bill. Let us go to England to find out whether that compliment wh ch was paid to that legislation by that English authority was one worthy of it, and whether we in Canada are justified in looking to England in this regard in order that we may see if they have a system which is of so much importance to that great country.
Now, what is the old .age pension system? Perhaps I may be pardoned if I go into some of the details of the British Act. In the first place, the beneficiaries of the system are a certain class. To take advantage of an old age pension, one must be sixty-five years of age, British, and' with a residence of twenty years in Britain. He must have an income of at least $100-the pension is given as a supplement to such income. This is an answer to the objection we sometimes hear that under this system the state is to hand out money ad libitum to people merely because they have reached the age of sixty-five years. Neither in Great Britain nor in any of the dominions where an old age pension system is in force is a person entitled to benefits under the system unless he has a certain minimum income. Those who have no income are taken care of as paupers, and not as beneficiaries under the old age pension system. I have here a little book called ' The People's Guide ' which, under the heading ' The Pension and its Payment,' explains the method by which this assistance is given. It shows the amount of pension granted by this Act is in proportion of the means of the pensioner. Changing the figures from pounds to dollars approximately, we find that the person who has an income of $100 receives a pension at the rate of five shillings a w'eek; the person whose income

is more than $100 and not more than $115, receives four shillings a "week, and, the one whose income exceeds $115 but does not exceed $125, receives three shillings a week.


Mr. NESBITT:: Suppose they have nothing? *


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Then they are paupers and do not receive that pension.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What do they do with
them-drown them?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: No, but they are not beneficiaries under the Pension Act, but are objects of charity. The 'hon. gentleman knows that the charity and philanthropy of the British people to their poor is probably greater than that of any other country.


Mr. MICHAEL CLARK:: Civilized country.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Yes, I thank my hon. friend for the word. A person who has nothing in the world cannot be the recipient of a pension, but is counted a pauper. I am obliged to my hon. friend from North Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) for affording me the opportunity to accentuate that point. This income, which is a preliminary condition to a pension, may be received as the result of the earnings of work- for a person of sixty-five or over often engages in some employment less strenuous than that in which he engaged in his years of greater vigour-or in some other way. There are many cases in the country districts in England, as in Canada, where an old couple live together and may have some interest in a cottage or a cultivated piece of land. It is the duty of the commission which decides whether a person is entitled to a pension or not, to take into consideration the yearly value of the home or the land, as constituting part of the income which qualifies for a pension. There are other technical conditions which I need not go into in detail, but which are to be taken into consideration by the commissioners in considering the eligibility of the party to a pension and the amount of that pension. There are certain people who are not permitted to receive a pension regardless of other considerations. As I have shown, paupers are not included among those to whom the Act applies, and, in order to make this clear, it is provided that it does not apply to one who receives ' such other supplementary relief as would disqualify the recipient from being a voter ' under their 86
parliamentary law. Such a person is not entitled {o receive pension aid. A man who has failed habitually to work according to his ability, for his own maintenance or the maintenance of those dependent on him, is debarred,-one who has shown no sense of responsibility for those depending upon him, is not entitled to receive a pension. The same is true of lunatics, criminals and habitual drunkards-these classes are absolutely disqualified from becoming recipients of a pension. Now, that system has been in force in Great Britain for quite a number of years. Any one who has studied the question and who is familiar with its effects upon the life of the people in the old country, must have a sympathetic regard for the old age pension system. I have in mind a man whom I met, who came out from a mining district in England, who told me of his father seventy years of age, living with a daughter, and able to live in absolute comfort, having a cottage home to begin with and his old age pension. This old man felt, as a Britisher and a worker, that pride which can only come to one whose independence and comfort were assured notwithstanding that advancing years had made him less fit for the keen and strenuous battle of life. And the gratification of the son with this condition was an instance of the appreciation which is shown, not only in England, but by everyone who understands the system, of the wisdom and usefulness of that system. I think the conditions verify the statement of the Prime Minister of England, as a result of his study of the situation, as to the advantages that flow from the system.
Then, take Australia. I have here the 'Year Book of Australia,' which deals with this question of old age pensions in a summary and interesting way. It says:
The credit of introducing old age pensions into the southern hemisphere belongs not to the Commonwealth, but to her sister dependency, the Dominion of New Zealand, where pensions have been payable since 1st April, 1898. The first state of the Commonwealth to make provision for the payment of oid age pensions was Victoria, whose legislation on the subject came into operation on 18th January, 1901. Later in the same year, viz., on 1st August, 1901, the pension system of New South Wales came into force, while in the case of Queensland old age pensions became payable from 1st July, 1908. Finally, an Act providing for the payment of old age pensions throughout Australia was passed by the Commonwealth Parliament in 1908, pension payments thereunder commencing on 1st July, 1909. This Act superseded the State Acts in so far as provision for old age is concerned.

and I entirely agree with what he has said as to the benefit and advantage that come from the periodic discussion of this question in the House of Commons. It is one of those .questions which in time will arise and be dealt with; but at the present time, in my view, public opinion is not ripe for legislative action.
Old age pension legislation, is not an experiment; it has been proved of immense benefit in Great Britain and on the continent. That I think would be unchallenged in any of those countries. The question is no longer raised or raised widely as to the propriety of old age pensions for the aged and deserving poor of those countries.


Michael Clark: I think the
minister will find that there are quite a number of economists in Great Britain today who contend, and with a considerable show of facts, that in the very short period which has elapsed since the so-called social legislation of Mr. Lloyd George, of which the system of old age pensions was the beginning, there has been not a large but a perceptible depreciation in the wages of the working classes, which they attribute to that class of legislation.


Robert Laird Borden: In what way is it suggested that that has come about?


Michael Clark: There is only so much commercial product of industry, and if you give it to the people in one way, it cannot be given to them in another. Industry can only supply so much to capital and so much to labour; if labour gets its share in old age pensions, there will be so much less in wages.


John Hampden Burnham: But does the hon. gentleman realize that though the totality remains the same, it is the distribution we are talking about?


Michael Clark: I realize that, and I am
obliged to my hon. friend for having confirmed my point.


William Thomas White: I am obliged to the hon.
member for Red Deer for bringing to my attention what I had not known before- that some economists in Great Britain had urged with more or less force that the effect on old age pensions had been a diminution in wages. Personally, I should hardly expect that; and I think my hon. friend would find that in this as in all matters of political economy there would be exponents of the diametrically opposite view. I am quite sure there would be an equally large number of economists in England who would not
[Mr. W. T. White. 1
subscribe to the view to which he has referred. But the point I was making is that, so far as my information goes, an old age pension system is no longer questioned as being a proper subject for the action of the legislature. If I am wrong in that, I shall be glad to be corrected. I was going on to say, and it has been drawn to the attention of the House more than once, that the conditions in Great Britain and on the continent are essentially different from the conditions here. I shall not dilate upon that except to say that it has appeared to me that there is in Great Britain a very much larger proportion of those classes who are likely to require assistance in old age, and who consequently would form a substantial public opinion in favour of that system, than is to be found in this country. In Canada we have a population that is between fifty and sixty per cent agricultural. Some agriculturists of more or less prominence have appeared before the committee and expressed themselves, as I understand it, in favour of old age pensions. But so far as I can gather, and I have given the matter a good deal of consideration, it is not true, speaking generally of the agricultural population-and I do not desire to confine my arguments to them -that there is any large body of public opinion keenly desirous of the establishment of the old age pension system in Canada. There are, no doubt, men of humanitarian feeelings and kindly instincts who have brought to their attention the condition of the deserving poor ;n their municipalities who will say: Let us have a system of old age pensions for the Dominion. But this is very different from that active public opinion without which legislation cannot well proceed. I think that any legislation which is a marked departure in the way of social reform and involves the expenditure of large sums of money in a field not hitherto covered by the Dominion Government must necessarily be preceded by not only a friendly but a keenly interested public sentiment, a public sentiment that demands action.
I think the Australian situation also differs materially from ours. My hon. friend from Stormont (Mr. Alguire) has pointed out in what way we differ from New Zealand. So far as Australia is concerned,
I speak with comparatively little information, not having specially looked into this aspect of the matter; but I do not beliAve that Australia ha3 had the problems with which Canada has been confronted and is confronted to-day and to which I have

already referred. We are in the constructive stage in this country; and, while we have large revenues and shall continue to have large and increasing revenues, yet our expend'.ture for many years to come will be required, so far as I can see, upon those great national undertakings to which I adverted earlier in iny Temarks.
The question comes up also whether an old age pension system is necessary for Canada at this stage. I do not mean to say that there are not very many people in Canada to whom old age pensions would be a very great boon indeed. We may talk about our prosperity, and that, prosperity has been, over a course of years, most marked, but poverty you will always have with you in any country, though I believe in less measure in Canada than in any other country I know of. But poverty you will always have; and as stated by other speakers, with the increased wealth, unfortunately, you have an increase of poverty. Men have mastered very largely the production of wealth, but the problem to-day is the fair distribution of wealth. That is the most difficult problem before us at this time. But I think we may say, that notwithstanding any advance that may be made in the way of improved distribution of wealth, we shall have with us always-in our time, at all events- the rich and the poor, and the more wealth we have in the country the more poverty we are likely to have in the slum districts of great cities and other places. So, unquestionably it is only the truth to say that there are large bodies of people in Canada-a comparatively small proportion of our population, I should think, but making a large number in the aggregate, who would be very much in favour of a system of old age pensions, because under the conditions that prevail or are likely to prevail, there can be no assurance to these people that when they reach the age of sixty-five or seventy they shall not De confronted with poverty and left helpless and dependent either upon the municipality or upon private charity. It goes without saying that it would be a very desirable thing to meet that situation provided it were a proper subject for political action at this time. This resolution declares for the inauguration of a system of old age pensions at once. While it is true that many people in Canada would be advantaged by and are favourably disposed to an old age pension scheme, my observation is that the great majority have hardly given the matter a thought. I should not be surprised if to
seventy-five or eighty per cent of our people the subject of old age pensions is simply an academic question. That being so, my view is that any legislation at the present time-and I say nothing as to the future-such as this resolution has in contemplation, is premature and in advance of public opinion. Whether I am right or not, that is my view, and I know it is the view of many members of this House, because I have discussed the matter with them. While it is a tribute to the humanitarian instincts and kindly hearts of all the members of the House that theoretically they feel kindly disposed towards an old age pension scheme, they do not hesitate to say-at least many of them did not hesitate to say to me-that any such legislation now would be decidedly in advance of public opinion, and, consequently, unwarranted. We must not forget that the people of Canada are a kind-hearted people, and that there are not very many cases of extreme .suffering on the part of aged and deserving poor, provided they apply for relief. I am quite well aware that men who have led respectable lives and who, from no fault of their own, have become confronted with poverty in their old	age, find it
humiliating to make application for relief, and	that	the	principle involved in any old age pension scheme is to avoid that and to give such persons, as a right involved in their citizenship, an amount which will support them in reasonable comfort and render it unnecessary for them to humiliate themselves by being made the objects, of private or public charity. But it [DOT] is a fact that in Canada there are few cases of hardship to which relief is not immediately afforded either by private or public charity. In connection with the public opinion which, in my judgment, should precede legislation in a matter of this kind, I am given to understand-and the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Clark) would be, I think, an authority on that-* that providing for old age pensions in England was preceded not merely by years of academic discussions in the House, but by years of active agitation on the part of the public. It seems to me that it is very essential that we should take that into consideration.
The hon. member for Stormont (Mr. Alguire) has pointed out that similar conditions existed in New Zealand, where they have an old age pension system. As to what the charge upon the public treasury would be, I think that is a very difficult

matter to forecast. My predecessor some years ago dealt with this matter upon the basis upon which it was then discussed by some members of the House, namely, that the legislation should be of a universal character, and that every one, rich or poor, might take whatever the Government should contribute under old age pension legislation, so that there would be no invidious distinctions, and so that no one would be in any way humiliated by receiving a pension where his neighbour did not. In a debate in February, 1908, my predecessor, Mr. Fielding, said:
If I am correct in my estimate that there are 270,000 people above the age of 05 in Canada, and if it is right to admit at a rough calculation that about $150 per year is as low a pens'on as one would care to offer if we want to make a man comfortable at all in his declining years, we find that to apply that system generally to all persons above the age of 65 years would cost us. on the basis of the population of the last census, $40,000,000 per annum. As our total taxation only a few years ago was about $40,000,000 and as it is, roughly speaking, about sixty-five or sixty-eight millions, I suppose at the present time, it will be seen that the proposition from the financial point of view is a very grave and serious one.
The ex-Minister of Finance was dealing with the matter from a financial standpoint, but, as I have explained, his calculation was based on the assumption that every one over 65 years of age would receive this $150 a year. The total number of persons in Canada over 65 years of age, as disclosed by the last census returns, is 333,763. What proportion of them would make application for or become recipients of the bounty of the Government under an old age pension scheme, I am unable to estimate, but with all due respect to Professor Mavor and the actuaries who advised the committee, I do not believe that the amount is susceptible of anything like exact calculation; I think it would be necessary to make a more or less rough and ready estimate of it. Whether the amount would be seven, ten or fifteen millions, we can be assured that a very substantial sum indeed, and an increasing amount from year to year, would have to be provided from the revenues of the Dominion. Having regard to the programme that confronts this Government and will confront governments in Canada for many years to come, I can forecast that our expenditures upon public works of all character will be very large, probably sufficiently so not only to exhaust our revenue, but to compel us-and there could be no serious criticism of the wisdom of that-to borrow abroad, especially for a

part, if not the whole, of our capital. expenditure. Under these conditions, the financial side of the matter does become important. I am not putting that forward as the sole reason that the present is an inopportune time for taking action in this matter; I have advanced the argument in regard to public opinion, and the fact that in my view this kind of legislation is premature. But the financial side cannot be lost sight of, nor would it be lost sight of by that 75 or 80 per cent of the people who, as I say, are not keenly interested in the matter.
My remarks have been more or less discursive, because I have really not had an opportunity of going into the matter as fully as I should desire. But my view is that, having regard to all the considerations I have mentioned-the state of public opinion in the matter and the obligations that will devolve upon Canada to furnish money for the development of the country, its coasts, waterways, transportation routes and public buildings-having regard to all these considerations, and the fact that Canada can be differentiated without difficulty from other countries that have successfully adopted old age pension systems, I am of the view and the Government is of the view that the legislation contemplated by this resolution is premature and in advance of necessity and public opinion. In consequence, I beg leave to move the adjournement of the debate.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned.

John Hampden Burnham: -That in the opinion of this House, it is desirable that manufactured goods ani natural products coming into Canada from any other country where the rate of wages of those employed in the making or raising of the same is below that prevailing in Canada, be subjected to a tariff duty sufficient to preserve the standard or rate of wages of those in Canada employed in making or producing like goods and products.
He said: In rising to move this resolution, I wish to say that in my humble opinion it involves one of the most im-iportant facts relating to Canadian national and industrial life. It does not, I fancy, come within rule 50 or rule 77. It is simply a reference to an opinion, and is therefore academic. It does not involve a charge upon the people, and therefore perhaps it is not necessary for it to come from the Government.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I would be inclined to *think that this resolution is out of order.


John Hampden Burnham: I looked carefully into that question.


Robert Laird Borden: It might stand while the Speaker considers it.
Motion stands.



OTTAWA WATER SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called:
Robert Laird Borden: I would like to lay upon *the table of the House the correspondence with regard to the proposal made by the city of Ottawa in connection with its water supply, and the reply of the Government to the proposals of the city.
At six o'clock the House adjourned without question put, pursuant to rule.
Thursday, March 5, 1914.