1915-02-19

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called:
Hon. CHAS. MARCIL: Mr. Speaker, will you allow me to ask the right hon. the Prime Minister if he will give me a moment of his attention with respect to what I consider an urgent matter on account of the times of stress through which we are passing. The Department of Agriculture- I am sorry that the minister is absent today-has been following up the custom established by the department of sending agricultural lecturers to the province of Quebec, as well as to other provinces, for the purpose of furthering the interests of agriculture which is a very laudable purpose and should be continued. I hold in my hand one of the circulars which have been distributed by the department by authority of the Hon. Martin Burrell, in which the province of Quebec has been divided into five groups for the purpose of these lectures. This series of lectures is to be given in the district comprising the counties below the city of Quebec, or a majority of them, such as Bellechasse, Montmagny, L'Islet, Kamouraska, Temis-couata, Rimouski, and Bonaventure. These lectures, one hundred and one in all, extend throughout the whole province of Quebec. The object for which they are to be given is the promotion of patriotism and production which is certainly a very laud-
[Stage Direction]
able object at the present time. These [DOT]words convey the object of these conferences:
(Translation.) The lecturers who will address these meetings are agricultural experts for the campaign of "Patriotism and agricultural Production " inaugurated throughout Canada. " Let us serve the Empire by increasing the means of re-victualling." Such is to he the text of their speeches. Every farmer should attend those lectures. Ladies are specially invited.
Those lectures are organized by order of the Hon. Martin Burrell, Minister of Agriculture for Canada.
I approve entirely of this campaign, hut I am sorry to say that in some of the more remote regions of Quebec, and in some of the new settlements, especially in my own constituency, with which I am more familiar-I am not speaking of the older parts of the province but of the remoter districts and newer settlements-the farmers have *been through a very hard winter, and I am informed on reliable authority that many of them have not the means of raising the seed that is necessary to put in the ground for ordinary production. In the one or two districts in the county of Bonaventure that have been called to my attention the farmers have been entirely deprived of the means necessary to carry on work of this kind. I would ask my right hon. friend the Prime Minister to give this matter his attention, if he has not already done so, because it is probably the most important question that could come before him at the present time, and I would ask him if he cannot extend to at least some of the more deserving parts, not only of Quebec, but of the other older provinces, the benefits of the campaign which has been undertaken and of the aid which has been given in Saskatchewan and other parts of Canada. The farmers of the eastern provinces have borne the burden and heat of the day and they are willing to do their share to preserve the Empire and Canada. If you send an agricultural lecturer down to these poorer settlements and ask the people to go in for this new campaign of production without providing them with the means to do so this work will be useless and Canada will suffer from a declining production. I hope that the Prime Minister will give this more consideration and that he will, if possible, have an investigation and find out exactly to what extent this aid might be given.
Hon. W. J. ROCHE (Minister of the Interior):: Inasmuch as the matter referred to comes more particularly under the department over which I have the honour to preside, I would call my hon. friend's

attention to the fact that he apparently confuses the propaganda that is being carried on under the auspices of my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Burrell) for greater production with the matter of seed grain relief in the western province. The one is under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Agriculture and the other under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. They are entirely separate and distinct.


Mr. MARCIL:: I thought both were under the Department of Agriculture.


William James Roche: No, we are granting assistance of the character referred to by reason of the exceedingly dry season in certain districts in Alberta and Saskatchewan, which has deprived settlers of their crop almost in their entirety. It has been the habit to a limited extent each year for some years past for the Department of the Interior to come to the relief of settlers de7 prived of their crops who were resident on their homesteads and not the owners of the land. The reason is that we have encouraged immigration and we look upon those people, until they become the owners of the land, as in a certain sense wards of the Government. In the past owners of their land who have been deprived of their crops through drouth or otherwise have been provided for by the provincial governments, but the provincial government felt themselves unable to cope with such a huge proposition as presented itself this year and we have arranged with the Provincial Governments of Alberta and Saskatchewan that we would look after the seed grain of those who were deprived of their crops last year, while, the governments have agreed to pass legislation at the next sessions of their legislatures giving priorty to our liens over those mortgages for our advance of seed grain. Wherever we have advanced provisions for people who are actually in need of food, either for themselves or for their stock, we have secured a promise from the provincial governments to give our lien against the crop priority in the same manner as they are giving priority to our liens in connection with mortgages against land for seed grain. Petitions along much the same lines have been presented to me from the northern provinces of Ontario, and I have referred back these petitions with the statement that the people should apply to the provincial government, which has handled

this matter iri the past, and is in the best position to give aid to them. The difference between the western provinces, in which farmers are receiving aid, and the eastern provinces, in which a certain number of settlers appear to be in need, is that the provinces of Quebec and Ontario are the owners of their natural resources, whereas the Dominion Government is the owner of the natural resources of the western provinces. In consequence of that we feel under an obligation to supply those of our homesteaders who are in need.



COMFORTS FOR THE CANADIAN EXPEDITIONARY FORCE.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day being called:
Mr. TURRIFF:: I should like to bring an important matter to the attention of the Government, and I can best do so by reading a short article headed "Our sockless soldiers again," which is as follows:
Once more Canada is placed in the humiliating position of having to appeal to private benevolence for the common articles of clothing needed by our troops who have crossed the ocean to fight for the Empire. The extraordinary part of the present appeal is that it is made by a member of the Canadian Government, Sir George Perley, who is temporarily acting as High Commissioner for Canada in London. The despatch comes from Ottawa, and reads as fellows:
Ottawa, Ont., February 16.-The first ofnctal announcement that the Canadian troops are in France was made this morning, and carries with it an appeal which will doubtless evoke a prompt and ready response from all parts of Canada.
Sir George Perley cables urgently for a large stock of comforts for the use of the Canadian contingent. All kinds of warm clothing is needed, and Sir George undertakes, through the Canadian War Contingent Association, that the requirements of the Canadian troops shall be met as far as possible. He is in constant communication with the commanding officers and is, therefore, in a position to know the exact nature of the supplies required. The association, how- [DOT] ever, cannot supply comforts unless it receives a constant stream of goods from Canada.
The National Service Committee of the Canadian Woman's organization, therefore, appeals to the people of Canada for a prompt response to Sir George Perley's request.
The articles asked for at present are all kinds of heavy woollen articles, especially socks, while later it would be better to confine attention to socks and mitts, woven belts, and coloured handkerchiefs, well knit socks being the most important.
Gifts of money to purchase woven body belts, sweaters, tobacco, and such comforts will also be most acceptable, especially if sent promptly.
All donations of money should be sent to the officer of the National Service Committee, 77 King street East, Toronto, and parcels, freight charges collect, to the Toronto office or to the warehouse. 1 Campbell Road, Halifax, N.S.
This appeal for the men in the trenches should
take precedence of all local appeals for field comforts, and the cable received definitely requests that all supplies should be sent through the National Service Committee to the Canadian War Contingent Association in London, and not to Salisbury Plain.
Then the paper adds on its own account:
What can the Canadian people think of the situation when, not merely for tobacco or other ' comforts' of that class, but for the common necessary articles of clothing, especially socks,' an appeal of this kind has to be issued?
If out of the millions of dollars that are being poured out like water for war expenses, the Canadian Government cannot supply the soldiers with such necessary articles as ordinary wool len clothing, what is the money being spent for? If the millions that are being voted so readily at Ottawa are not enough, then let the Government ask for more millions, which will be readily granted, and see that the Canadian soldiers are supplied from the Government stores with the clothing that is so urgently required.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: What is that from?


John Gillanders Turriff: From The Journal ol Commerce, Montreal, under date of February 18, 1915. This is a matter of such importance that I thought it advisable to bring it to the attention of my right hon. friend the Prime Minister, because every one in Canada will agree that, while gifts are very acceptable to the soldiers, it surely should not be necessary, in view of all the socks and other articles of clothing that have been purchased for the soldiers, for Sir George Perley to make a request that the people ' of Canada should, supply such articles as a necessity. It is all right to send socks as extras; but our soldiers should he properly equipped by the Government, and they should not have to go to the front wearing boots without socks, especially the class of boots that have been supplied to them.


Robert Laird Borden: If the hon. gentleman had made inquiries, as he might easily have done, he would have found that the troops going to the front are supplied with clothing and socks precisely on the same scale as the British armies in the fields; but perhaps it served his purpose better to endeavour to cast some discredit on the Government by the remarks which he has made.


John Gillanders Turriff: It is not my remarks
that are against the Government.


Robert Laird Borden: Pardon me a
moment. The hon. gentleman is, or ought to he, perfectly well aware that in Great Britain as well as in Canada efforts have been made by private individuals and associations of various kinds .to supply to the troops who have gone to the front comforts

of the character mentioned, in addition to those supplied by the country; and I would not think that any hon. gentleman in this House, or any person in this country, would find fault with any Government because those efforts had been made by private individuals and associations. It is a highly commendable course that they have taken to endeavour to add to that which in the ordinary course is supplied by the country, because we know that this war is being waged under very difficult conditions, and it is desirable that our men and the men who go from the British Isles into the field should be furnished with any additional comforts of the character mentioned that patriotic benevolence, whether in this country or in the British Isles, may desire to supply. I am informed by the Minister of Militia-and I have no reason to doubt his word-that the scale upon which our men are supplied with clothing and socks is precisely the same as that upon which the British soldier^ in the field are supplied; and whenever any requisition for that purpose is made, the Department of Militia uses its best endeavours to fill it, and I believe that up to the present time always has filled it. The hon. gentleman knows that not only in this country, but in every other dominion of the Empire, in the British Islands and in the United States as well, women, inspired by a patriotic desire to assist, have been furnishing socks, comforters, caps, belts, and articles of that description, and that these have been sent forward under private organizations so that they might be placed at the disposal of the troops for use whenever required. It is only for that purpose, so far as I understand, that this appeal has been made by my hon. friend'Sir George Perley. I know nothing of it except what has appeared in the press.


John Gillanders Turriff: Mr. Speaker, will you
allow me to say one word?


Mr. SPEAKER:: The hon. member is presuming a little too far upon the courtesy of the House in bringing in a long article and reading it, on which to found an argument. It is not in order to do that, although it would be in order to ask a question. Therefore I would ask that the House do not encourarge this practice. '



QUESTIONS.

[Stage Direction]
[Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.]

Mr. MICHAUD:: X. What quantity of fuel oil was imported into British Columbia during the years 1911, 1912, 1913 and 1914, respectively?
2.	What was the value of said oil in each of these years?
3.	What quantity of coal was imported into British Columbia from the State of Washington, Australia and Japan, during each of said years?
4.	What was the value of same?


Mr. J. D. REID:: 1. Imports entered for consumption through customs ports in the province of British Columbia during the fiscal years ended March 31, 1911, 1912, 1913, and 1914, respectively, of " petroleum, crude, fuel and gas oils, .8235 specific gravity or heavier at 60 degrees temperature " under the provisions of tariff item 267, were as follows :
19H	 7,299,727 gal.
1912	'.. 20,454,309	"1913	
79,233,053	"1914	110,547,653	"2.	1911	$ 151,0281912	
446,7181913	
1,443,5191914	
2,278,9183.	Customs	returns	do	not show	localorigin of	imports	from	United States.Australia.	Japan.1911	Nil.	Nil.1912	Nil.	Nil.1913	Nil.	9 tons.1914	13,430 tons. Nil.
4.
Australia.	Japan.
1911	Nil.	Nil.1912	Nil.	Nil.1913	Nil.	$34.1914	$51,573	Nil.


CREAM EXPORTS TO UNITED STATES.
[Stage Direction]
#Mr. KAY:
1.	How much cream was exported to the United States from the counties of Brome and Missisiquoi during the year 1914?
2.	How much was exported from each port in these counties and what was the value thereof in each case?
Mr. J. D. REID:: .
1.	The Department of Customs has no returns showing the local origin of goods exported.
2.	The exports of fresh cream to United States through customs ports of exit in the counties of Brome and Missisquoi during the year were as follows:

Abercorn	
340,615	gals.	$440,746Highvvater	
132,608	"	121,150Mansonville..	..	81,910	"	59,685St. Armand	..	..	60,818	"	40,463


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Bemieux:	For a copy of all Orders in
Council, letters and telegrams exchanged between the Dominion Government and the several provinces, concerning the proposed transfer of fisheries in tidal waters from the provincial to the federal control.
Mr. Marcil:	For a copy of all correspondence and other documents relating to the awarding of the mail contract at Maria Capes, Bonaventure county, in 1914.
Mr. Macdonald:	For a return showing the
names and addresses of all persons in the county of Pictou who have been paid the Fenian raid bounty, and of all persons in said county who have made application for said bounty and who have not yet received it.
Mr W M. Martin : For a copy of all correspondence between the Dominion Government and the governments of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta relating in any way to the supplying of seed grain to settlers for the season of 1915.	..
2. A copy of all memoranda and instructions given by the Government, or any department thereof, to any of its officials regarding the purchase and distribution of seed grain to settlers in the provinces referred to.
3 A copy of all circular letters whether written; printed or typewritten, together with forms of application, forms of security and all such other forms or circulars as were issued by any department, or any official of the Government in dealing with the seed grain probl™r W M. Martin:	For a return showing
the total duality of seed grain purchased to date, specifying in each case the number of bushels of wheat, oats, barley and flax; the average price per bushel paid for each class 3. seed grain secured to date; the names and addresses of all persons employed to purchase seed grain and the amount of salary and expenses paid to each; and the name and addresses of all persons empowered to take applications from settlers for seed grain, and a copy of all instructions sent to such persons in connection therewith, and the amount of the salary or remuneration paid to such persuiia.	_
Mr. W. M. Martin : For a copy of all Orders in Council, letters, memoranda and all documents issued by the Government, or any member or department thereof, which contain instructions or directions regarding the distribution of relief or assistance of any nature whatsoever to settlers in Alberta and Saskatchewan, owing to the partial crop failure of the past season.
2.	With a return showing the total amount ol such relief or assistance actually granted to such settlers in each of the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta, exclusive of the cost of administration and exclusive of all expenditures made in connection with the purchase and storing of seed grain.
3.	The total amount of such relief or assistance actually granted to settlers in each of the provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta, being within the area recently fixed by the
Interior Department and referred to as the ' drouth stricken area,' such amounts to he exclusive of the cost of administration and exclusive of all expenditure made in connection with the purchase and storing of seed grain.
4.	The names and addresses of the committee, board or other body appointed by the Government to take charge of the distribution of such relief, and a statement as to the provision made by the Government for their remuneration and expenses.
5.	A list of any persons appointed by the
Government, or any department thereof, since July 15, 1914, to assist in receiving and approving applications for such relief; such list to include the names of the persons so employed, theif addresses, monthly, daily or other salary, date of employment, length of time employed, total salary paid each and total amount paid each for expenses.	.
6.	The provision made by the Government for getting security for loans advanced by way of such relief, and
7.	The steps, if any, taken by the Government to prevent duplication of relief to needy settlers by the federal and provincial authorities.
Mr. Sinclair:	For a return showing the
names and post office addresses of all persons in Guysborough county, N.S., to whom the bounty under the Fenian Raid Volunteer Bounty Act has been paid; the names and post office addresses of all persons whose applications have been rejected, and the reasons for such rejections ', also the names and post office addresses of all person whose applications have been received but have not yet been paid, distinguishing between those who have been dealt with and allowed, and such applications as have been received but not yet considered, if any.
Mr. Carroll: For a return showing the names and addresses of all persons in South Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, who have been paid! Fenian raid bounty; the names and addresses of all persons in South Cape Breton, N.S., who have made application for said bounty and who have not yet received it.
Mr. Michael Clark: For a statement in detail of: The number of prisoners of war in this country; the number under parole; the num [DOT] ber held in detention camps ; the number of detention camps, where situated, how accessible, and the number of prisoners in each. The amount of cost to Canada in each of these camps, respectively, for subsistence, pay, clothing, transportation and supervision; the nature of work done by prisoners, and the total value of same to date.
Mr. A. W. Chisholm:	For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, petitions, letters and all other documents in any way referring to the dismissal of Mr. Mallet, captain of the life boat in the life-saving station at Cheticamp, and the appointment of his successor?
Mr. A. W. Chisholm: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, letters, petitions and documents of all kinds in any way referring to a proposed change in the mail route from Inverness railway station to Margaree harbour.
Mr. A. W. Chisholm:	For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda, pay-lists, recommendations and any other documents whatsoever in anywise appertaining to the construction of a wharf at Dower Burlington, in the county of Hants.
20C

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JOHN H. SINCLAIR (Guysborough) . moved:
That, in the opinion of this House, it is expedient to amend section 3 of chapter 65 of the Acts of 1908 by repealing- the said section and substituting therefor the following:
(f) "Coasting voyage" means a voyage between any port or place on the eastern coast of Canada, and any other port or place on such coast, or in Newfoundland, Labrador, or St. Pierre or Miquelon, or any other port or place on the eastern coast of the United States of America or Mexico or Ceneral America or in the West Indies, or on the eastern coast of South America not further south than forty degrees south latitude; and also means a voyage between any port or place on the western coast of Canada, and any other port place on such coast, or on the western coast of the territory of Alaska, or of the United States of America or of the western coast of Mexico or Central America or South America, not further south than forty degrees south latitude."
He said: This resolution will be followed by a Bill, the object of which is to amend the Canada Shipping Act so as to enable certain captains holding coasting certificates to visit or clear for ports in South America. In our Canadian Shipping Act provision is made for two kinds of certificate. The first is what is publicly known as a deep-sea certificate, which enables those holding such certificates to clear for any port in the world.
I do not propose to interfere with that certificate in any way. The other class of certificate is that which is known as a coasting certificate, which enables a captain holding it to sail his ship within a certain limited area. My complaint is that the limitations of this area are too much restricted. At present the master of a Canadian ship holding a coasting license can sail his ship only as far south as 5 north latitude, which is somewhere in the vicinity of the mouth of the Amazon river. This shuts our vessels out from a very profitable trade in South America. So far as I am aware, there is no reason why this restriction should be maintained. Before Confederation no such restriction was in force; a coasting captain in my province was allowed to take his ship to any port on the coast of South America. He was permitted to go through the Straits of Magellan, to sail up the coast of Chile, and thence to California, British Columbia, or Alaska. For one hundred years Nova Scotia ships were seen in all these parts, but when the seat of Government was changed from Halifax to Ottawa some meddlesome official for some reason which I have been unable 
to ascertain, decided that the coasting captain should be restricted in his movements. The rule was then laid down that coasting captains should not take their ships farther , south than Cape Hatteras, thus shutting them out from a very profitable trade in the West Indies. It was the custom of persons owning large schooners in those days to engage them in fishing duxing the summer and in the winter season to send them with cargoes of fish to the West Indies and have them bring back molasses. In this way a very good trade was carried on, but by stopping these ships at Cape Hatteras this business was entirely wiped out, and a great deal of trouble ensued among shipping people on the coast of the maritime provinces. Protests were made here, but they were apparently of no avail. This has never been a political question. It is simply a matter of business, and I do not want the minister or any body to suppose that I am endeavouring to make it a political question now. I regret to say that Governments of both political parties have maintained this provision, when, I think, they should not have done so.
By reason of this condition of affairs, owners were compelled to seek a remedy in some other way. One plan to which they resorted was that of securing a retired captain holding a deep-sea license and putting him as a figurehead on board the ship. In this way they were enabled to clear their ship from a Canadian port and get out of the custom house. The next thing was to get rid of the figurehead. Sometimes he went ashore in the pilot boat; sometimes the ship was stopped at the headland, he was sent ashore, and the real captain boarded and took charge of the ship and was generally successful in his voyage. No trouble ensued; the only difficulty was that shipping people had to resort to this subterfuge in order to get away from the Canadian custom house. There was no escape from the regulation; these plans were unsatisfactory, people began to transfer the registry of their ships to other ports. The registers of many Canadian vessels were transferred from Canadian ports to Barbados, which was the favourite port for that purpose. Some were transferred to Newfoundland, and some to Bermuda-anywhere where they could enjoy the protection of the British flag and at the same time escape the restrictions imposed upon them by the Canadian Government.
I have here a partial list of ships owned in the maritime, provinces, which, were-

compelled to seek refuge in Barbados. These inces. In order that the minister may see ships comprise some of the largest freight how far this matter has gone, I will read a vessels that we have in the maritime prov- portion of the list:
Name of Vessel.	Owner.	Residence of Owner.	Port of Registry.Annie M. Parker . . . .	R. C. Elkin	4	St. John	Barbados.Adonis	Cushing & Co	4	t. John	Annie L. Warren . . . .	F. K. Warren	4	Halifax	Alvina Theriault	P. A. Theriault	1	Belliveau Cove	Archie Crowell	C. W. Anderson	Sherbrooke, N.S	Bessie Crooks	Arthur Crooks	Liverpool	Beryl Corkum	William Duff	4	Lunenburg 	Coral Leaf	J. F. Whitney & Co. . .	New York	[DOT]David C. Ritcey	Capt. D. C. Ritcey.. ..	La Have	E. M. Roberts	R. C. Elkin	St. John	Earl of Aberdeen.. ..	C. C. Langill	4	Parrsboro	Edde Theriault	F. K. Warren	Halifax	Edyth	J. Ernest & Son	Mahone Bay	Emily Anderson	F. K. Warren	Halifax	Fleetly	Zwicker & Co	Frances	F. K. Warren	Halifax	General Laurie	Wm. McMillan	Lockeport	:	H. R. Silver	W. C. Smith	Lunenburg	:	Inga	La Have	J. L. Nelson	.>	F. K. Warren	Halifax	Laura C	4	Lemuel Creaser	Ri verport	Lavengro	George A. Cox	Shelburne	Lavonia	J. Willard Smith	st. John	Lillian Baluvelt	H. Jones	Weymouth	Maple Leaf	Wm. Arenburg	Lunenburg 	Melba	R. C. Elkin	St. John	Mineoia	J. Willard Smith. .. .4	" 	
Mary Hendry		Henry Ltd		Liverpool		
			
Ronald		J. B. Waggoner			
And so I could go on with a large number of vessels once registered in the Maritime provinces but now registered in the Barbados and in other ports. The question arises, why should the people of the maritime provinces transfer their ships from Canadian registration to the Barbados? The answer is very plain: it is because the British law is in force in Barbados, and by transferring to Barbados they get rid of Canadian regulations and are able to sail ships with captains having only coasting licenses. They are able in this way to take cargoes to South American ports, as they are bound to do if they are to carry on a successful business. Competitors in the United States are able to do this without restriction, and consequently, as our vessel owners have to compete -nitti coasting vessels of the United States, they have to get rid of the customs regulations of Canada and, leaving the Canadian fag, go to some place else. I venture to say that by reason of the change no calamity has overtaken the ships that left the Canadian flag and registered in the
Barbados. They have been carrying on a successful business. I do not think the minister has ever heard that they were unable to find their way to South American ports or back again. This regulation has been maintained from year to year, and the only result has been that we have driven the ships belonging to the people of Canada away under some other registry.
In 1908, with the assistance of some of my colleagues, I brought this matter to the attention of the Government then in power. At that date I had the same view as I have to-day, that captains holding coasting certificates should be allowed to sail anywhere on the coasts of North and South America. However, I was unable to induce the Parliament of that date to adopt my views. They did compromise: they agreed to fix the southern limit of coasting voyages instead of at Cape Hatteras, at the fifth degree of north latitude, which, of course, was a measure of relief, enabling the ships of the Maritime Provinces to carry on their business in the waters of the West Indies. This
[Stage Direction]
was a very valuable concession, but it did not open to these vessels the trade of South America. The question has arisen recently in an urgent form owing to the fact that the coasting trade in Canada is not profitable at present and has not been for a number of years, whereas the trade with South America is profitable and our vessels are very anxious to get a share of it.
This is not a new question; I have brought it to the attention of the present Minister of Marine more than once. I attempted last year to have the law amended. My hon. friend expressed himself, I thmk, in favour of some relief; but he informed the House when I introduced my Bill that he intended to revise the Canada Shipping Act and that within two or three weeks from the date on which I made my motion the Bill for that purpose would be introduced, which would be the proper time for me to deal with this question. .My hon. friend kept his promise and introduced his Bill, but I was disappointed to find that the old clause defining a coasting voyage was re-introduced. Some change was made in the size of vessel that required a certificated captain, but there was no change of the character that I am asking the House to make. If my hon. friend had adopted my view of last year and allowed my Bill to go through, it would have meant tens of thousands of dollars in the pockets of the shipping people of the maritime provinces since that time. That money has gone to the ship owners in the United States, because the people of the maritime provinces were unable to take advantage of the freights because their captains could not clear to a point south of the 5th degree of north latitude.
This restriction, I submit, cannot be justified. It cannot 'be said that our captains [DOT]are incompetent, for they can sail anywhere and have always done so. It cannot be said that it is unsafe. I do not think there is any record in the department or anywhere else that will show that there has been anything risky or unsafe in allowing a coasting captain to take his vessel anywhere in North or South America. There is no such rule in force in Great Britain, the greatest shipping country in the world. There, a ship engaged in deep-sea foreign trade or in the home trade carrying passengers must have a certificated captain; but a vessel not carrying passengers in the home trade is not required to have a certificated captain. No matter what the size of the ship, the captain is allowed to go anywhere 
on the coast of Britain. In the United States any ship of less than 700 tons register is also allowed that privilege; the smaller ships are allowed to go to South America or wherever they please-to clear from any American port without restriction. If we had the same law as the United States there would be no trouble, because nearly all the sailing ships I have referred to, and nearly all the ships owned in the maritime provinces, are under 700 tons. As we compete with the United States in this business, it is very important that we should give our people some relief and put them in a position to take advantage of the profitable trade that offers in South America. I think we ought to feel that the rule tnat obtains in Great Britain, the greatest ship-owning country in the world, should be good enough for us.
There is another reason why prompt action should be taken, and that is that since July last the registry of the United States has been thrown open to foreign shipping. Prior to that date you could not register a ship in the United States, and an American citizen could not buy a ship; he had to build it in the United States. Protection had gone so mad in that country that they would not allow an American citizen to import a ship and put it under the American flag. The consequence was that the American flag was driven off the seas, altogether. The United States found that they had made a mistake, and they are now endeavouring to build up a merchant marine. They have gone to the limit; they have thrown the door wide open, and if a Canadian citizen wishes to register his ship under the American flag, he can now do so in the name of some American Associate without any trouble and without paying any duty. That is what our 'shippers generally will do if my hon. friend does not give them some relief in this direction. A few days ago I asked his department for some information as to the number of ships transferred during the past year. The questions and answers were as follows:
Mr. Sinclair:
1.	How many vessels of all kinds were withdrawn from the Canadian Shipping Registry since July 1, 1914?
2.	What is the gross tonnage of such vessels?
3.	What are the countries to the registry of which such vessels were transferred?
Mr. Hazen:
1.	Twenty-two vessels of all kinds.
2.	Gross tonnage, 28,791.
3.	Three to Newfoundland; three to Barbados; one to France; fourteen to United States of America.
These fi gures do not cover the whole year,

but only a period of six or seven months. They show what is going to happen. Since July 1, just about the time when the American registry was thrown open, fourteen vessels formerly registered in Canada have transferred to the United States; and after the war is over and Canadians can sell or transfer their vessels, practically all the coasting vessels will go over to the United States flag if something is not done in regard to this matter. This resolution deals with the coast of British Columbia as well as with the coast of eastern Canada. I have no mandate to speak for the Pacific
4 p.m. coast, but I am assuming that it is just as important for a coasting schooner owned in British Columbia or in the West to have this privilege as for a schooner owned in eastern Canada. I understand that the present limit is the harbour of Portland; but as the Panama canal is now being opened, and will probably result in a very profitable trade for our coasting vessels carrying lumber and other products from British Columbia through the canal to the eastern coast of Canada or the United States, I regard it as very important that the western limit should be moved as -well as the eastern limit. I propose that instead of five north, the latitude should be fixed at forty south. That would allow our vessels to go to Rio de Janeiro and the River Plate on the eastern coast of South America, and the vessels on the western coast could go as far as Valparaiso, in Chile.
A few days ago I wrote a letter to the secretary of the Maritime Shipowners' Association in Halifax, asking for his opinion ^of this resolution, and this is his reply:
Maritime Shipowners' Association,
Secretary's Office, Halifax, N.S. February 12, 1915. John H. Sinclair, Esq., M.P.
Ottawa, Canada.
Dear sir,-I thank you for your favour ol the 9th inst., enclosing a copy of Orders of the Day, and in reply would beg to say that this association heartily endorses your resolution regarding coasting voyages, and I trust that you will be successful in getting it passed, as present regulations prohibit vessel owners from sending their vessels to Brazil if registered in a home port, unless both the master and the mate hold foreign-going certificates and it is needless for me to tell you that it is an impossibility to get masters, and far more so to get mates (because any mate holding the necessary certificate would have no difficulty in getting command of a vessel) and consequently in order to evade the restrictions of the Canadian Shipping Act, we are compelled to register our vessels in Barbados.
Tours very truly,
(Sgd) J. K. Warren,
Secretary.
That will show my hon. friend why so many of our vessels are leaving Canadian ports. The question is, what ought to be done? I submit that this resolution should pass and the Act follow at once. I have no objection to a committee except that a committee, as the minister knows, generally ends in delay, and in that case we might not get the Act passed this session. If a committee is granted I have not the slightest doubt that the shipping people will be able to show that there is a complete case for a change. The minister no doubt knows the facts already, and I would much prefer that he deal with this matter himself rather than refer it to a committee. It is a business proposal that ought to be patent to everybody without being threshed out before a committee. I therefore beg to move, seconded by the hon. member for Cape Breton, that this resolution be adopted.
Mr. PUGSLEY:: Why does the hon. gentleman limit his resolution to vessels doing a coasting trade on either the eastern or the western coast? If, for instance, a Canadian coasting vessel wanted to go south of the Panama canal, why should she not be allowed to go through that canal and along the west coast?


Mr. SINCLAIR:: I did not intend to.
Does not this resolution cover that?


William Pugsley: No; it simply allows vessels on the eastern coast of Canada to trade up and down the eastern coast, and vessels on the western coast to trade up and down the western coast. I do not see why a vessel on the western coast should not be allowed to go through the Panama canal and up the eastern coast, and vice versa. That would greatly encourage trade between Eastern and Western Canada, and between Canada and the United States.


John Howard Sinclair: I hold the view that
this resolution would enable coasting vessels to go through the Panama canal. It would certainly enable them to go to the mouth of it.


William Pugsley: But not through.


John Howard Sinclair: That is really one of the objects of the resolution, and if there is any defect in the wording, it must be amended to allow vessels to go through the Panama canal.


Hon. J. D. HAZEN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: My hon. friend from Guys-borough (Mr. Sinclair) has introduced a


FEBRUAR Z 19, 1915
[Stage Direction]
tries in the world for the purpose of considering the question of the safety of human life at sea. Canada was represented at that meeting, its representative being the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries.
A convention was concluded, Canada was a party to it, and the terms, which I fully explained to the House last year, will become operative on the first of July next. Under the terms of the convention, vessels employed on voyages between Canada and ports out of Canada which take them two hundred miles off shore are to be regarded as " foreign-going " vessels, and they are to be subject to the terms of the convention in regard to life-saving equipment and matters of that sort. In the revised Act, laid on the table last session, wherein it is proposed to terminate " coasting " voyage at Galveston on the Atlantic and at San Diego on the Pacific, due regard was had to the provisions of the convention, and on examination of the chart it will be seen that at no point on such a voyage unless extraordinary conditions occur, would a ship be taken two hundred miles off land. But the convention has raised a different question, one which has to be carefully considered in any legislation that we may pass unless we are prepared to withdraw from the convention and not be parties to its terms which, I believe, are in the interest of the travelling public and of the people generally. If the limits as proposed by the resolution moved by the hon. member for Guysborough are adopted, it will be at once observed that on a voyage from Halifax to Brazil, for instance, by the shortest route, a vessel would at one point be 700 miles off land and for a distance of 3,000 miles of the journey the same vessel would be an average of 300 miles off land, which is in excess of the distance allowed by the London convention. It would scarcely seem consistent to designate a voyage of that nature as a coasting voyage.
John Howard Sinclair: At what point would it be 700 miles off land-in the Gulf of Mexico?


John Douglas Hazen: I presume in the Gulf of Mexico. In the revision of the Canada Shipping Act the department endeavoured to deal with the proposals contained in the resolution under consideration by creating another class of voyage to be known as " limited foreign-going voyage." I see that my colleague from St. John (Mr. Pugsley), who has taken a great interest in this question in the past, has just come in, and I shall repeat what I have to say. I was saying
that if the limits as proposed by the resolution before the House are adopted, this would be observed that on a voyage from Halifax to Brazil, by the shortest route, a vessel would at one point be 700 miles off land and for a distance of 300 miles of the journey the same vessel would be an average of ouO miles off land, and it would scarcely be consistent to designate a voyage of that nature as a coasting one. In the revision of the Canada Shipping Act we endeavoured to ueal with the proposal contained in the resolution placed before the House by the hon. member for GuysboTough.


William Pugsley: Suppose a coasting ship were to leave Halifax to cross by the shortest route to Charleston, how far off land would it be?


John Douglas Hazen: I am not prepared to answer.


William Pugsley: It would be 500 or 600 miles, would it not?


John Douglas Hazen: Perhaps it would. Of course, the idea of a coasting vessel is a vessel that follows from one point on the coast to another point on the coast, and so on. The certificate for a coasting vessel is different from a deep-sea certificate, which is for a vessel that crosses the ocean. It may not in many cases be more dangerous to navigate a vessel across the ocean than to navigate a vessel along the coast.


John Howard Sinclair: Much easier.


John Douglas Hazen: In some cases perhaps not so dangerous, but by legislation in Great Britain and also in other countries a distinction has been drawn between the two classes of voyages. In the revision of the Canada Shipping Act, we endeavoured to deal with the proposal contained in the resolution under consideration by creating another class of voyage to be known as " limited foreign-going voyage." This voy-age-and I would ask hon. gentlemen's attention to this is defined in the new Bill as follows:
A voyage between any place or places in Canada and any place or places in the West Indies, or on the continent of America or the islands adjacent thereto not within the limits of a coasting voyage.
Under that " limited foreign voyage," a vessel could go to any port on the continent of America or the islands adjacent thereto. If that idea is adopted by the House, we shall have three classes of voyages, namely: the deep sea voyage, the coasting voyage, and this other voyage which I have referred

to as being described as the "limited foreign-going voyage;" and certificates will be granted for this limited foreign-going voyage, not of such a character as is required for the ocean going voyage, but to some extent requiring a little more skill than is required for masters and mates of coasting vessels.
Hon. gentlemen will see at once the difficulty, in view of the London Convention, of adopting the resolution moved by my hon. friend the member for Guysborough, unless we are prepared to say that we shall withdraw from that convention, which was entered into in good faith by all the maritime nations of the world. Masters wishing to trade only on coasting voyages can at present be given certificates for a coasting voyage, the qualifications for which need not necessarily be as high as those required for a limited foreign-going certificate. Similarly, it is proposed by the department, if the terms of the proposed Bill should be adopted, to provide that limited foreign-going certificates should issue to masters who desire to engage in trade to the larger areas. The qualifications for this certificate would not be so high as those required for foreign-going certificates.
With a limited foreign-going certificate, a master would be enabled to take charge of a vessel to trade between ports in Canada *and ports in the West Indies, the United States of America, Mexico, Central South America, or the islands adjacent thereto. It seems to me, that this is the more desirable way to deal with the situation; and with that end in view, I would suggest to the hon. member for Guysborough that, instead of asking for the adoption of his resolution as it stands, he should agree to refer it to the Committee on Marine and Fisheries, where the merits of his proposal and the proposals to which I have referred, would be more fully and carefully considered. I have an amendment prepared to refer to the Committee on Marine and Fisheries, and I am not suggesting this course with any view of delaying action in the matter. While a great deal of time may be taken up in discussing the whole of the Canada Shipping Act, which is a very large measure, it seems to me that this one proposal might be dealt with. The committee would have before them the proposal embodied in the resolution introduced by my hon. friend, the proposal embodied in the Bill introduced by the department last year, and other matters which might be considered by the committee as well.


John Howard Sinclair: Will the minister tell
the House if he intends to re-introduce at this session the Bill consolidating the Canada Shipping Act?


John Douglas Hazen: 
William Pugsley: I understand from my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that, while it is not intended to [DOT] introduce a Bill providing for general amendments to the Canada Shipping Act, there will be no objection to making, at this session, amendments along these lines or along the lines of a limited ocean voyage.


John Douglas Hazen: I know of no reason at the present time why that should not be done.


John Howard Sinclair: I am very much pleased that the minister has shown that he is really interested in this matter, and that he has told us that he intends to put through some kind of a measure dealing with it before this session is over. At least, I understand him in that way. I am not very clear as to the way in which this proposal interferes with the Hague convention, because I do not see how a question of this kind could be before the convention at all. Our Act is a peculiar one. There is no similar Act either in the United States or in Great Britain, or, so far as I know, in any other country. The same restrictions on coasting voyages are not imposed in any other country so far as I have been able to find out. The safety of human life at sea is, of course, very important; but has there been any evidence submitted to show that the proposal to allow coasting vessels to trade to South American ports will endanger human life at sea? I do not think so. I do not think that there is such evidence available anywhere. Ships meet with disaster out at sea, but the most dangerous place where a ship can be is close to the land. A good captain does not take a sleep until he is far enough away from- the land to feel that he is out on the ocean. The simplest kind of navigation is that far from the land. Two years ago when we had an investigation of this matter before the Marine and Fisheries 'Committee, one official told us that his view was that coasting captains went along the shore till they found one lighthouse, then looked for the next, and in this way crept along by the points on the shore.


John Douglas Hazen: They have an expression that they " spell '' their way along.


John Howard Sinclair: That is what this man understood, and he was an employee in the department of my hon. friend and might reasonably be supposed to know something about shipping. Perhaps he never saw salt water in his life; certainly he did not know much about it. The captain who leaves a harbour in Nova Scotia for the West Indies never sees land again until he arrives at the port of destination. He is a navigator and knows how to figure out his position at sea. So long as he sees the sun that is all that he cares about; he can figure out his course. I see no reason why the coasting captains should not be allowed to sail across the ocean; it is much simpler sailing by latitude than by longitude. As a matter of fact these men are crossing the
ocean. Some of the registered vessels in Barbados not more than ten days ago were chartered to carry cargoes to ports in Europe. It is commonly done, and there is no record that it is dangerous to human life or to property to carry on this business. The hon. gentleman says that the London convention fixes the limit for coasting captains at 700 miles from land. If that be so it is a very curious condition for the convention to impose. I venture to say that all the convention ought to require is some special appliances on board the ship. It would not be necessary to interfere in any way with the license under which the captain runs his ship merely because he happens to be more than seven hundred miles from land. But it might be necessary to have an extra boat or some life preservers aboard. I think my hon. friend will find that is all that is required in order to comply with the order of the convention.
However, I am not opposing the proposal of the minister. On the contrary, I am glad he is taking this course, and hope will invite a number of the shipping people of the Maritime Provinces to come here before the committee. My main purpose is to arrive at a result, and to arrive at it during the present session.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: It appears to me that the proposed amendment is not in very good form. It goes on to say " that the Committee of Marine and Fisheries be instructed to inquire and report." Yet the matter is not referred to the committee.


John Douglas Hazen: I would suggest that that be made to read in this way, which is practically in the same form as an amendment made in the case of the Bill with regard to cigarettes proposed by the hon. member for Dundas (Mr. Broder) :
That all the words after the word " that " in the first line of the proposed resolution down to and including the word " following " in the third line of the resolution he struck out and the following substituted therefor: " The Committee of Marine and Fisheries be instructed to inquire and report whether it is expedient to enact as follows ", and by adding to the proposed resolution at the end thereof the following words: " or whether it is expedient to make any other amendment and if so what amendment to the existing laws defining a coasting voyage."
That gives the committee full power to inquire into the amendments proposed by my hon. friend, and also to consider whether any other amendment, and if so what amendment, should be introduced.


John Howard Sinclair: Would it enable the committee to send for and examine witnesses?


John Douglas Hazen: As this is one of the standing committees, I take it for granted that it has the power to send for persons and papers and to examine witnesses under oath; but I have not looked into the matter. In order to be on the safe side, perhaps we ought to add the ordinary words which give the committee this power.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I think that the committee already possesses this power under the resolution of the 11th of February:
That the Select Standing Committees of this House shall severally be empowered to examine and inquire into all such matters and things as may be referred to them by the House; and to report from time to time their observations and opinions thereon; with power to send for persons, papers and records, with the exception of the Committee on Debates and that on the Library of Parliament.


John Douglas Hazen: That does not give power
to examine witnesses under oath.


Thomas Simpson Sproule: I am not certain, but 1 think that under our rules that power is given to committees of the House.


John Douglas Hazen: If we find that we have not the power, we can ask for it later.
Amendment agreed to and motion as amended agreed to.


CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. JOHN H. SINCLAIR (Guysborough) moved the second reading of Bill No. 40, to amend the Criminal Code. He said:
When introducing this Bill I took occasion to explain shortly its provisions. Perhaps the simplest way for me to proceed now would be to read the two clauses of the Bill. They are as follows:
Every person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for two years, with or without' hard labour, or to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or to both imprisonment and fine, who knowingly with intent to defraud, sells or delivers, or causes to be sold or delivered, to His Majesty or to any officer or servant of His Majesty, any defective military, militia or naval stores of any kind or description, whether such stores are for His Majesty in the right of His Government of Canada or in the right of any other of His Majesty's dominions, or who in any way commits any act of dishonesty, fraud, or deception upon His Majesty or any of His Majesty's officers or servants in connection with the sale or lease or purchase or delivery or manufacture of such military, militia or naval stores.
If any offence referred to in this section is committed by a body corporate, every director 
and officer of such body corporate who has taken any part or share in such fraud, dishonesty or deception, or who knows or had reason to suspect that such fraud, dishonesty or deception would be committed, or knows or had reason to suspect that such fraud, dishonesty or deception has been committed, and does not at once inform His Majesty thereof, shall be liable to the penalties imposed by this section in all respects as if such offence was committed by said directors or officers themselves, and every such body corporate, director or officer convicted of such offence shall be thereafter incapablp of contracting with His Majesty or with any of His Majesty's officers or servants, or of holding any contract or office with, from or under him or them, or of receiving any benefit under any contract so made.
The necessity for such a measure as this will, I think, be admitted by the Minister of Justice and by every member of the House. I was looking over the criminal law to ascertain whether we really had any provision for punishment of those who defraud the Government in the sale of military stores, and I was unable to find that Parliament had legislated on this question at any previous time.
There is a-large number of provisions relating to military affairs; for example, we have imposed penalties for persuading soldiers to desert, for concealing a deserter, for attending a drill without lawful authority, for obliterating the marks on military stores, for being in possession of stores without lawful authority, for receiving clothing, etc., from a soldier or deserter. We have a large number of provisions in the code that relate to minor offences of that kind, but no provision that punishes a contractor who deliberately and with intention of fraud palms off shoddy goods on the Militia Department. We know that at a time like this, when there is great excitement and when everybody in the department is busy with matters of great importance, the dishonest man is also busy. It is his opportunity to get contracts, to supply articles that are not up to the standard, and in this way to deceive the Government, and so do far more damage to the public interest than could be done by men who might commit the minor offences to which I have referred; but at the same time no provision has been made for such cases. 1 do not know to what extent these things are carried on, but if we are to credit the press we must believe that they are carried on to some extent. The press of Great Britain has made reference to them. The London Times, even, has discussed the question of -the character of some of the supplies that have been furnished to the Canadian soldiers. I have

seen frequent references in the press to this subject, and what startled me most was the reference of the Minister of Militia himself, who in Vancouver said that he would like to have authority to shoot the dishonest contractors who were imposing upon the Government in this way.
John Douglas Hazen: Does the hon. gentleman propose shooting as a penalty under the Bill?


John Howard Sinclair: I do not. I propose two years' imprisonment, which is a much milder form of punishment; but it will be fqr the Minister of Marine, if he thinks the penalty is not severe enough, to ask the House to add to it.
In the Ottawa Evening Journal of the 12th of January reference is made to a letter from a prominent Canadian officer at Salisbury, whose name for obvious reasons is withheld, in the course of which he says:
Outside of certain discomforts, we get plenty, and all that money can buy, but I would ask you to appeal to the Government contractors with a view to touching their sense of honour. It seems to me that all they care about is to produce some kind of article that has appearance. They evidently do not stop to consider that these sons of Canada are roughing it for the specific purpose of fighting, and sacrificing their all In order to defend these same contractors' factories and personal liberty. The principal trouble has been in boots, and it is not fair to the soldier to allow these contractors to reap a harvest at his expense. An officer is in a position to purchase his own equipment, but the man behind the gun must take what he is served out with. Of course, there have been some good boots issued, which have been manufactured by a certain two firms, but the others are absolutely unserviceable after a few days' wear.
No later than yesterday morning I myself received a letter from a person who wished me to inform the inspector of military stores that shoddy blankets were being manufactured for the Government at Toronto. I do not know whether that is true or not, but the person who wrote me said it was true. I did not know who the inspector was or to whom I should go. It is well, I think, to have these contractors understand that while they may be able to deceive the department and sell them shoddy and useless stuff for the present, there is a day of reckoning ahead, that these things generally come out; and, that when fraud is discovered they will be liable to criminal prosecution. I think that such a provision would deter many people from undertaking a crime of that kind. All the money that we spend should be well spent at a time like this. Money, as we all know, 20
is the sinews^of war. The Finance Minister has his own troubles in securing enough cash to carry on our share of this dreadful conflict, and every dollar should be used to the very best advantage. Everybody remembers the scandals in Europe at the' time of the Crimean war. The soldiers suffered in the trenches before Sebastopol because defective clothing, blankets and boots were furnished to them by worthless contractors in Great Britain, who were reaping a rich harvest from contracts. The facts all came out later on. People ought to be punished for a crime of this character in connection with military affairs. The German spy who secures information for his government and is paid for it suffers death; but he is a gentleman compared with the Canadian contractor who, when his country is engaged in such a desperate struggle as the present, when the life and the future of the Empire and of civilization are at stake, plots and schemes to defraud the Government by selling shoddy blankets or boots, or a spavined horse, or something of that kind.
I think that no penalty is too severe for men who do these things, and I hope the Minister of Justice will aid me in placing either this provision or a provision of this ' kind on the Canadian statute-book.


Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice):: I do not think many of us will hesitate in agreeing that persons guilty of offences such as those referred to by the hon. member should be condignly punished.
I have great deference for the,hon. gentleman's statement that he has not been able to find in the existing criminal law any provision that will cover the cases he suggested. Inasmuch as he has carefully gone into it, I have some hesitation in suggesting that there may be some provision to cover such a case as he speaks of. It seems to me surprising that there should not be some such provision. If there be any doubt upon that, under the method I propose to suggest we shall be able to make it quite clear. For the reasons I gave last evening with regard to the Bill introduced by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. McCraney), I propose to move that this Bill be referred to the committee which, in accordance with what was said last evening, is to be constituted to take in to consideration suggested amendments to the Criminal Code. I suggested last evening the reasons that led us to the conclusion that it was desirable to proceed in that way.
I am quite willing, therefore, having it

4

understood that by doing this we are not necessarily accepting the principle of the Bill, to have the Bill go to a further reading, and then I will move that it be referred to the committee I have just mentioned.
Motion agreed to and Bill read the second time.


Robert Laird Borden: I understand
that we have gone through the entire order paper, and would move that the House adjourn.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House adjourned at 4.56 p.m.
Monday, February 22, 1915.