1916-03-09

[Stage Direction]
Mr. BLAIN moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 54, to amend the Insurance Act, 1910.
Mr. GRAHAM:: What is the amendment?


Mr. BLAIN:: This is a Bill which was introduced at the last session of Parliament by the late Mr. Lancaster. It was simply placed in my hands, and I thought that if it were presented to the House it would, when printed, explain itself much better than I could.


George Perry Graham: Does it relate to life insurance or to fire insurance?


Richard Blain: Life insurance.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. J. DOHERTY (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 55, to amend the Winding-up Act. He said: The purpose of the Bill is merely to correct an anomaly that exists. The Supreme Court of Ontario includes two divisions- the High Court of Justice, and the Court of Appeal. All the rules of practice, generally speaking, are made by the entire court, comprising the two divisions. The provision in the Winding-up Act defines the court in the province of Ontario as the High Court of Justice, and confides to that court the making of the rules. The result is that, whereas all other rules of practice are made by the entire court, comprising the two divisions, the rules under the Winding-up Act are made by only one division of the court. This is anomalous, and it is on the suggestion of the Chief Justice of Ontario, with, I understand, the concurrence of the other judges of both divisions of the court, that we seek to amend the Act, so as to put the rules under the Winding-up Act in the same position as all other rules of practice in the Courts of Ontario.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.

(


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 52, for the relief of Henry John Thomas Wardlaw.-Mr. Wallace.
Bill No. 53, for the relief of Robert William Thompson.-Mr. J. E. Armstrong.

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

Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Were tenders invited for the construction of a retaining wall and sidewalks at the Customs building, Sussex street, Ottawa?
2.	If so, who were the tenderers, and what was the amount of their respective ibids?
3.	(a) To whom was the contract awarded, and (b) when is the work to be completed?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1 and 2. The P. 'Lyall & Sons Construction Company, contractors for the Customs building, were invited to tender by the Chief Architect, and the tender submitted, amounting to $22,637.50, was accepted.
3.	(a) The P. Lyall & Sons Construction Company; (b) the contract called for the *completion on 26th January, 1916. Owing to severe weather work had to he suspended, but the wall will be completed early in the spring.


A. KASTELLA.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	What position did A. Kastella hold in the Department of Public Works?
2.	When was he appointed?
3.	Has he been removed from his position?
4.	If so, for what reason?
5.	Is the said A. Kastella of German extraction?
6.	Is he a British subject?
7.	If so, when was he naturalized?


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	Mechanical superintendent of dredges.
2.	May 28, 1914.
3 and 4. No; he resigned on February 15, 1916.
5. Yes.
6 and 7. Yes, by naturalization. Mr. Kastella came to Canada about fourteen years ago, and claimed to have been naturalized in 1904 before a Justice of the Peace. Not having his papers in accordance with the law, he was again naturalized on December 5, 1914.


SUNNTBRAE MAID SERVICE.
Mr. SCHAFFNER:: 1.	What is the difference in cost between the railway mail service and the rural mail service actually in existence at or near the place called Sunnybrae, N.S., mentioned by the member for Pictou, pages 1304 and 1305 of unrevised Hansard?
2.	What, if any, advantages have accrued by reason of the establishment of the rural mail service in question?


Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Present cost by rural mail delivery, $901; former cost by railway, $895; increased cost, $5.10.
2.	Under the old system, mails were distributed by train running from Sunnybrae to Ferona Junction, leaving Sunnybrae at 9.55 a.m. and arriving at Ferona Junction at 10.55 a.m. This train, of course, carried mails from local points only, and at 3.15 in the afternoon returned carrying all mails from western and eastern points, and the distribution throughout the localities from the side stations was made only from the 3.15 train. Thus these mails arrived at the different post offices on an average between 4 and 5 p.m. Under the present system, all western mails, without exception, and all eastern mails from Sydney up to 8.40 p.m. the night before, representing over 95 per cent of all such mails, are distributed between 12 o'clock noon and 4 p.m., a gain of from two and a half to four hours. In addition, these mails are delivered not at post offices some distance from the houses of the farmers, but at their doors, along the whole route, and the best proof of the
, usefulness of the service is that rural field officer McLeod reports through the inspector that, upon making inquiries amongst the box holders, they all expressed themselves as well pleased with the rural mail delivery, and under no conditions would they wish to return to the former service.


VICTORIA, B.C., RIFLE RANGE.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Does the Department of Militia and Defence hold a conveyance of the property at Heals, B.C., on which the new rifle range has been constructed?
21 Has payment been made for this property? If not, why not?
3.	If the department holds the property, under what terms and conditions did it enter into possession?


Mr. KEMP:: It is presumed that the above questions have reference to the Heal property, which has been acquired as an addition to the new rifle range site, Victoria, B.C. If so, the answers are as follows:


J550 COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
1.	The department acquired title under the provisions of the Expropriation Act.
2.	Yes.
3.	See reply to No. 1.

Mr. LACHANCE:: 1. During the course of 1915, did the Government receive any complaints against Doctor Boucher, as physician in charge of the medical service for the Lorette Indian reserve, county of Quebec?
t. If so, what were such complaints nnd by whom were they made?
3.	What action has the Government taken
regarding such complaints against Doctor Bcuc ler?	-
4.	Will the Government order an investigation into such complaints? If so, when?


Mr. ROCHE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Moise Gros Louis, of the Lorette reserve, complained, in connection with his wife's confinement, that the child died at the time of birth owing to negligence on the part of Dr. Boucher.
3 and 4. The facts on which the complaint was based did not, in the opinion of the department, show negligence on the part of the doctor, but the matter is being inquired into.


ENLISTMENT OF JEWS.
*Mr. BOULAY:: How many Jews have- enlisted in French-Canadian or English-Canadian battalions since the beginning of the war?
Sir dOBERT BORDEN: A largo number of Jews have enlisted in tlie overseas force since the beginning of the war. It would be a work of very great labour to go over the whole list of 275,000 men for the purpose of ascertaining the information asked for in the question. We do not think it is desirable in the public interest to take that course.


George Perry Graham: Hear, hear.


MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT SERVING WITH THE FORCES.
*Mr. J. J. HUGHES:: Is the Government aware that the British Government has, as reported, decided that no member of Parliament serving -with the forces of the Crown may draw both indemnity as member of Parliament and his service pay? If so, does the Government intend to follow the example of the British Government in this respect?


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: The Government is informed that up to the end of the present fiscal year members of Parliament of the United Kingdom serving with the

forces of the Crown, draw the|r sessional indemnity and also their service pay. We are also informed that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has announced his intention of introducing a resolution on the-subject before the Easter recess. As far a-s-the Government of Canada is concerned,, the subject is under consideration.
MOOSEJAW EXAMINING WAREHOUSE. Mr. W. M. MARTIN:
1.	(a) When, (b) at what price, and (c>
from whom was land bought in Moosejaw for an examining warehouse?
2.	What other properties were offered, by whom, and at what prices?
3.	Who appraised the present site on behalf of the Government?


Robert Rogers: 1 (a) Order in Council dated 20th February, and certificate of title dated 3rd March, 1914.	(b) $60,000.	(c) iFrom Mr. Jacob
Erratt.
2.	No record in the department that any other properties were offered.
3.	Mr. W. T. Mollard, Clerk of Works, Regina.


POST OFFICES IN INVERNESS.
Mr. A. W. CHISHOLM:: 1.	How many families is each of the following post offices supposed to serve: Gillis-dale, Kupoch, Kiltarlity, Mount Borden and Seotsville?
2.	What is the revenue of each office?
3.	What is the distance between each of these offices and the next nearest office?


Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Gillisdale, 16 families; Keppoch, 7 * families; Kiltarlity, 6 families; Mount
Borden, 6 families; Seotsville, 33 families.
2.	Gillisdale, $27.50; Keppoch, $11; Kiltarlity, $28; Mount Borden, $9; Seotsville, $110.41.
3.	Gillisdale, nearest office South West Margaree, 2J miles; Keppoch, nearest office, Mount Borden, 2i miles; Kiltarlity! nearest office, Seotsville, 2i miles; Mount. Borden, nearest office Keppoch, 2J miles; Seotsville, nearest office Kirkwood, 2 miles.


OIL-BURNING LOCOMOTIVES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA.
Mr. OLIVER:: Did the Railway Commission issue an order requiring the Canadian Pacific and the Grand Trunk Pacific to burn oil in their locomotives on lines in British Columbia? If so, when was sudh order issued?


Mr. REID:: 1.	No such order has been issued by the board.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


CANADIAN OFFICERS IN ENGLAND.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	How many Canadian officers are employed In 'the Canadian Pay and Record Office in England?
2.	How much Is paid out monthly in England to Canadian officers not attached to Canadian units there?


Mr. KEMP:: 1.	The latest information up to January, 1916, is that there were 54 officers employed in the Canadian Pay and Record Office, London.
2.	All Canadian officers in England are attached to some unit.


SUBSIDIZING SHIPS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	Has any request been made by the Provincial Government of British Columbia to the Federal Government, asking for the subsidizing of British Columbia ships?
2.	Has any request been made by said Government for the laying down and constructing or assisting in the construction of twenty-five ships by the Federal Government?
3.	What action has been taken in regard to said requests or either of them?


Robert Laird Borden: Any necessary
answer in regard to the matter alluded to in this question will be made in due course.


SMALL ARMS AMMUNITION.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	Was any small arms ammunition disposed of by the Militia Department since August 4, 1914? If so, to whom?
2.	What was the price received?


Albert Edward Kemp: All servicable ammunition
has been issued to Canadian contingents. It would not be advisable to give the details during the present emergency, in the public interest.


P. M. FIELDING.
Mr. MACDONALD:: How much has been paid P. M. Fielding, of Windsor, N.S., for services as recruiting officer and for expenses in that connection?


Albert Edward Kemp: No payments made to P. M. Fielding, Windsor, N.S., for recruiting.


BAY ST. LAWRENCE TELEGRAPH OFFICE.
Mr. McKENZIE:: 1.	What was the cost of running the telegraph office at Bay St. Lawrence, Nova Scotia, during the years 1911, 1912, 1913, 1914 and 1915, including salaries?
2.	What was the number of messages sent from the above office during the years 1914 and 1915?
3.	What was the revenue from the above office during the years 1911 to 1915, both inclusive ?
4.	On whose recommendation was Vilkren Theriault dismissed from the telegraph office at Bay St. Lawrence, Nova Scotia, and on whose recommendation were the two present operators at that office appointed?
5.	What was the salary paid to Vilkren Theriault while in charge of the above office, and was his salary the only one paid in connection with the said office during the years that he was in charge of it?
6.	(a) When were new poles furnished for that section of telegraph line between Bay St. Lawrence and Money Point, and (b) who furnished them?
7.	Were they examined? If so, by whom, and were any of them rejected, and what was the cost per pole?


Robert Rogers: . 1. 1911, $1,333.75; 1912,	$1,243.35;	1913,
$1,210.33; 1914, $1,253.01; 1915, $1,198.30.
2.	1914, 110 messages; 1915, 92 messages.
3.	1911, $46.19; 1912, $20.63; 1913, $39; 1914, $30.70; 1915, $29.49.
4.	By order of the Minister of Public Works, for political partisanship; the two present operators appointed on recommendation of Mr. John McCormick.
5.	$720 per annum; and Mrs. V. Theriault was paid $420 per annum as assistant agent.
6.	(a) In June, 1915; (b) J. R. McNeil.
7.	Yes, by C. P. Livingstone, superintendent of construction, a few rejected and replaced by others of proper size and quality, 90 cents per pole.	*


ANTOINE GOBEIL.
Mr. KYTE:: ^
1.	How much money has Antoine Gobeil, latq Deputy Minister of Public Works, received from the Federal Government since December 31, 1914?
2.	How much of the amount so received was for superannuation allowance, and how much, for other services?
3.	'If any amount was received for services performed for the Government, what were those services? -


Mr. ROGERS:: 1.	$2,756.66 to February 29, 1916.
2.	$2,520 for superannuation and $236.66 for services in January, 1915.
3.	Preparing a history of the port of Quebec in relation to the St. Lawrence trade, and compiling other information required by the department.


WEST ROCHDALE POSTMASTER.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Who is the postmaster at West Rochdale, Guysboro county, Nova Scotia?
2.	When was the present postmaster appointed?
3.	On whose recommendation was this appointment made?


Mr. CASGRAIN:: 1.	Thomas Kelly.
2.	January 28, 1916.
'	3. On recommendation of Mr. G. A. R.
Rowlings,


EMPLOYMENT OF DR. HJORT.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Is Dr. Hjort still in the employ of the Naval Service Branch?
2.	Has he made his final reports?
3.	If so, when will the report be available?


Mr. HAZEN:: 1. No.
2 and 3. No. Dr. Hjort is at present in Bergen, Norway, where he is preparing his final report from information obtained during his investigation of the Canadian herring fishery.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Paquet.-For a return showing: What are the names of the lawyers of the province of Quebec who have been entrusted with certain cases or given work by the Government between the 1st September, 1908, to the 1st October, 1911; what amounts were claimed by each of such lawyers for each case or matter in which he acted; and what amounts were paid to each of them.
Mr. McKenzie.-For a return showing: how much was collected in wharfage on goods landed on Government wharves in the county of Victoria, at Neils Harbour, Ingonish, English-town, South Gut, . Baddeck, Little Narrows, Nyaiga, and Big Bras d'Or; and how much was collected at each of the above places, by whom collected, and how much returned to the Government In each case.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. McCOIG:: Mr. Speaker, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to the market quotations in the Lofidon Free Press. The quotation for hogs is as follows :
Hogs, fed and watered, $9.50, less one-half of one per cent for Government inspection.
I would like to call the attention of the Government to the fact that hog buyers throughout the country have been deducting the price of hogs one-half of one per cent for the Government inspectors. As I understand, the inspectors who are employed by the Government are paid by the Government. If these men have been collecting this percentage, have they been returning it to the Government, or have they any right to make this claim upon the farmers who are selling hogs to them?


Mr. HAZEN:: I am sorry that I am unable to give my hon. friend the information off-hand. The matter was not called to my
	I
attention before. I shall be very glad to . get the information and answer my hon. friend's in4uiry at question time to-morrow.


SHELL CONTRACTS.
[Stage Direction]
Consideration of the proposed motion of Sir Wilfrid Laurier for a committee to inquire into purchases of shells or other munitions or goods by/the Shell Committee, resumed from Tuesday, March 7.
Mr. F. B. CARVELL (Carleton, N.B.):: Mr. Speaker, I crave the indulgence of the House for a short time in order to conclude the remarks which I have to address to the House upon this very important resolution. I had covered, before midnight on Tuesday, the most important points raised by my right hon. friend the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden), and most of the reasons given by him why this resolution should not carry. I desire to refer to a few more, and then I shall be through.
Just before adjournment I was discussing the question of fuses. I had described, as generally as I possibly could and yet to make it intelligible, the construction of a fuse and the manner of its operation. On a former occasion I stated in this House that the Shell Committee had given two contracts to firms in the United States. One was to the American Ammunition Company of New York for 833,334 fuses at $4.50 each, and 1,666,666 at $4 each. This, figured out, made a total of $10,416,667. Then, they gave another contract to the International Arms and Fuse Company of New York for 833,334 fuses at $4.50 each, and for 1,666,666 at the same price, making a total of $11,250,000. In other words, we have here contracts for almost $22,000,000 given to firms in the United States. When we find contracts of that immensity given to our neighbours, we naturally commence to. ask, why is it that the Canadian manufacturers could not have produced these necessary articles? A fuse is not a very big article; it cannot be the size of it that prevents the Canadian manufacturer from making it. It is only made of brass, a little copper and a few steel springs. The steel springs are so minute that a few thousand pounds of them would be all that would be necessary for the whole 5,000,000 fuses. It cannot be for lack of machinery, because we can get machinery in Canada that will make anything. It certainly cannot be for lack of workmen, because it has been demonstrated during the last year or two that Canadian workmen can make shells and anything else

in the line of warlike supplies, and therefore I believe they can make fuses. Why is it? This Shell Committee was organized away back in September, or October, 1914, and it was not until the summer of 1915, or until pretty nearly a year had gone by, at least nine months, before these gentlemen even commenced, as far as the public are advised, to consider the question of fuses. I pointed out on Tuesday the absolute uselessness of shells unless you had fuses to explode them; and yet these gentlemen sit around taking contracts unto themselves and giving contracts unto their neighbours, friends, and associates, entirely disregarding the whole question of fuses, which is the very life of the transaction, and without which every dollar expended is absolutely thrown away.
When we come to investigate this question, we arrive at some most remarkable conclusions. I have not had time thoroughly to digest all the remarks made by the Minister of Militia, but I think I am correct when I say that he stated very near the close of the debate on Tuesday evening that the graze fuse, or the fuse that he calls the No. 100, is being made in England to-day for $1.95. I proved to him out of his own records-I took no garbled reports or anything of that kind-that from 1909 down to 1914 he bought exactly the same fuse, the No. 100, or graze fuse, from firms in England, from Vickers & Co. on a contract, a quantity of something like 25,000, at $2.26 each. He says that they are being manufactured in England to-day for $1.95 each. After spending nine months of precious time, and taking chances of the British army being annihilated for lack of ammunition, this Shell Committee gave a contract in the United States for 1,666,666 of these fuses, not at $1.95 each as in Britain, not at $2.26, the same as was paid for the same article just one year before, but at $4; that is they paid $3,000,000 more than these fuses could have been bought for in England at that time. I have positive information here as to the price of the T & P fuse, or the timefuse, as it is called. I find he bought these fuses for $2.26 each in Britain. I see that he gave contracts in the United States for 2,500,000 and 833,000 of these time-fuses at $4.50, although he had bought the very same fuse in Britain a year before for $2.26. I have proof of that right from his own documents. Why is it necessary to pay such an enormous premium as this in order to get these very necessary articles? If the minister said that he could not get them in Britain, that might be an answer. But he has not said so, and he won't say so, 98
because he can't say so. He has not said that they could not be made in Canada, because that would not be true, and I know the Minister of Militia would be the last man to state what was not true. In the month of June last a contract was given to the Russell Motor Car Company, of Toronto-if the contract was not in their name it was given to that company ar way-for 500,000 graze fuses; half of thcee fuses were to be supplied at $4 each, and the other half at $3 each. So the minister was able to get fuses manufactured in Canada for $3.50 each, and that on a small contract of 500,000. Yet he placed a contract in the United States for 1,666,666 fuses, and paid $4 each for them. Will any hon. gentleman in this House who attempts to defend these transactions say that these fuses could not be made in Canada?
We had an almost unpleasant exchange of compliments across the floor of this House on Tuesday evening last, because in my judgment the Minister of Militia did not do himself justice. He tried to get behind the quibble that no fuses had been furnished the Shell Committee, and no contract made by the present Munitions Board. But it turned out that what he meant to say was that fuses had been furnished to the Shell Committee, and, that they had made contracts. The Shell Committee made a contract with the Russell Motor ' Car Company, and that company have manufactured fuses in Canada, and are manufacturing them to-day. Only yesterday I saw Mr. T. A. Russell, and he told me they were carrying out their contract, and delivering more than 3,500 fuses a day. He said that they would, not only be able to fill their contract, but fill it ahead of time, after complying with every condition and requirement. And yet these Americans who got this enormous contract at this horrible price have never furnished a solitary fuse,, and the British Empire might have been smashed to pieces by the German armies if it had relied on the Canadian Shell Committee to supply fuses for their shrapnel and high explosive shells.
Why is it that they had to go to the United States? You have to go to New York to find, out. I am sorry I have not been there many times myself in the last year, but there are many people in Canada who have. And it all comes back to the same dirty trail-J. Wesley Allison. Every dirty trail in the whole transaction leads to Allison, and there is not a



dirty trail' that J. Wesley Allison has not trodden in the last year and a half. This is the gentleman who is playing sick down in New York; the man who has pneumonia, according to the newspapers; the man who, for the last three nights, including last night, has taken a seat in a Pullman from New York to Canada, and had his grips stowed away on board by the porter, and then just before the train pulled out, has sneaked out by the back door and gone back to his hotel. He thinks somebody is watching him, and he is quite right. He is trying to put people off the scent; he does not want us to know where he is. But we know where he is all right, and we know who will be closeted with him to-morrow morning about eight o'clock. We know there was an hon. gentleman of this House who was very brave here on Tuesday evening,-simply dyifig to jump into the breach. He could not wait until this afternoon to answer the remarks I was making. He is the man who is primarily responsible for all these nefarious transactions, perhaps more responsible than any of Kis colleagues. This man, who has not the manhood to stand up here and answer these charges, and who, when brought face to face with the untrue statements made by him, and made advisedly and deliberately-


Mr. SPEAKER:: The hon. gentleman is certainly going too far. It is out of order to say that an hon, member of this House deliberately made an untrue statement.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I gladly withdraw that expression. It was this man who told us that the prices of shells in Britain were greater than the prices in Canada, and I have proved that every word he said in that connection was not true in fact. This is the man who is not here to-day to answer these charges, but finds it necessary to go to Montreal to address some sort of a meeting before the board of trade, and then go south for his health. This is the hon. gentleman who will be consorting with J. Wesley Allison to-morrow morning in New York, and they will be consorting with a lot more of their ilk in the next few days, down in the balmy atmosphere of Florida. This hon. gentleman leaves it to somebody else to defend these transactions, and the man who attempts to do it has certainly got a thankless task. This J. Wesley Allison, who the Minister of Militia says has saved this country and

the Allies $50,000,000 in the purchase of munitions, is the man who, along with Carnegie, a member of the Shell Committee- and I want to bring him in because he is just as responsible as Allison; he was in New York consorting with these gentlemen just as much as Allison was-these two gentlemen went to the United States, representing the Shell Committee, and made the nefarious transactions I have described with these American firms; firms who had never manufactured a fuse before, who never intended to manufacture a fuse, and who have never manufactured a fuse to this day. These firms sublet the contracts to other contracting firms, of which J. Wesley Allison is a member, at prices which will net millions and millions to them. And then they come back to the Canadian Parliament, and say: "You have no right to investigate transactions of this kind; you are disloyal; you are not good Canadians; if you ask to have these matters investigated and brought out in the light of day, you are not good Britishers."
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that if there is anything in the whole history of Canada which ought to have the light of day shed on it, it is the transactions of the Shell Committee with regard to fuses. I have not told one-half of the iniquity. My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition gave the beginning of it in his address on Tuesday, when he said that before these contracts were consummated, or even entered into, the Shell Committee advanced to these American gentlemen over $3,000,000. This money was advanced before a blow was struck, and hon. gentlemen opposite say that it was necessary to advance this money in order to get the firms organized and doing business. They did not tell the Russell Motor Car Company of Toronto that they had advanced to these American firms $3,000,000, or nearly 15 per cent of the contract. I am told, however-I did not get this from Mr. Russell-that when the Canadian manufacturers found out that the Shell Committee had advanced this enormous sum-to American manufacturers, they went to the Shell Committee and that committee was compelled to give them an advance in order to help to finance the work. The result is that the Canadian manufacturers are furnishing the fuses, exactly as per contract, for $3.50 each, whereas the American manufacturers, who have received over $3,000,000 of good British and Canadian money, have never furnished a fuse, but have simply sublet the contracts

to the friends and confreres of J. Wesley Allison, and I do not think, Sir, you would have to make half a dozen guesses in order to name his principal confrere.
Now, Sir, why could not fuses be made in Canada? A fuse consists simply of between twenty and twenty-five pieces of brass which have to be turned to certain shapes and certain sizes and which must measure up to a certain gauge. Every watchmaker in Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific, is in a position to do something toward manufacturing these fuses. Of these twenty to twenty-five different parts one is a little ball, another is a little pin, another a disc, another an oval, and so on, and they need not all be made in one factory. The Munitions Board, if they would mobilize the industries of this country, could have, not one factory, not twenty factories, but a hundred, yes, five hundred places in Canada where fuses could be made to-day, and in that way they would be able to give work to thousands and tens of thousands of Canadians who are idle at present and who would be glad to have an opportunity of earning a livelihood. The Minister of Militia is always speaking about the manufacturers. Why does he not do something with the manufacturers in regard to the making of fuses? Why does he not put tens of thousands of people in a position to earn their livelihood in an honest way, by doing something to aid this country in bringing this war to a successful issue? It is no wonder the Minister of Militia is not here this afternoon to reply, to these statements.
I was also very much surprised at the attempt made by the right hon. Prime Minister to make the people of this country believe that my right hon. leader and myself and every other hon. gentleman on this side who have discussed this question, were having a fling at the manufacturers of Canada and were trying to prevent them from doing a legitimate business. [DOT] I would like any hon. gentleman opposite to point his fipger at one statement that I have made against the Canadian manufacturers making shells, fuses, clothing, and everything else which could possibly be used in the conduct of this war. I would like him to point his finger at one such statement made by any hon. member on this side of the House. We find fault to-day with the Shell Committee because of the prices which they have given to some of the manufacturers for making these various articles. I have commended them; I do now commend them for many things that they have
done. I made the statement a month ago; I repeated it on Tuesday last; I repeat it now: that if the only company capable of doing this work consists of the Prime Minister, let them give the contract to the Prime Minister, let them give it to the man who can do the work quickest and best; let them give it to the company which can turn out the finished article in the shortest possible time.
I have made a list of some things for which I can commend the Shell Committee. By going over some notes that I have been able, with a good deal of difficulty, to prepare, I find that up to the month of January last when the minister made his speech on the Address-and it is as of that date I am now speaking-orders had been given for the manufacture of about 11,000,000 18-pr. shrapnel shells; that at that time there had been delivered to the Shell Committee about 5,750,000, and that the Shell Committee were able to find in Canada fifteen firms capable of doing pretty nearly .three-quarters of that work and they did pretty nearly that amount. I find no fault with that because those were the people to whom the business should have been given. These are the names of these fifteen firms, with the number of shells ordered, the number delivered, and the highest prices paid:
Companies.
Canadian Allis Chalmers Co	
Canadian Bridge Co. Can. Car and Foundry Co	
Canadian Fairbanks
Morse Co	
Canadian Ingersoll
Rand Co	
Canadian Locomotive
Co	
C.P.R. Co	
Canadian Westinghouse Co	
Chapman Bdge. Bldg.
Co	
Dominion Bdge. Bldg.
Co	
Goldie & McCullough. Massey-Harris Co. . Montreal Locomotive
Works	
National Steel Car
Company	
Steel & Radiation Co.
No. of	No. of	Highest	shells	shells	price	ordered.	delivered, paid.	235,000	185,000	$3	75655,000	141,000	3	80235,000	134,000	5	15775,000	384,000	5	15752,000	400,000	5	15160,000	128,000	5	15752,000	482,000	5	15480,000	213,000	3	80202,000	108,000	5	15675,000	378,000	3	80367,000	187,000	5	15338,000	129,000	o	80477,000	284,000	3	80430,000	336,000	3	80272,000	116,000	3	80
6,845,000 3,605,000
I may say, however, that at about the same time the Massey-Harris Company got an order for 100,000 high explosive shells at the top-notch price of $5.70. In the total list there are 57 companies, and the total order for shells was 11,223,000

and the total deliveries were 5,750,000. In other words, these fifteen big companies that were properly equipped to do the business delivered 3,605,000 out of a total of
5,750,000,	and the other forty-two companies delivered only about thirty-five per cent of the whole order. Why was it necessary to travel throughout Canada in order to bring in these mushroom companies for the manufacture of shells, when there were real, genuine, honest manufacturing concerns in Canada by the dozen that were willing and anxious to throw their plants open for the manufacture of shells and who did manufacture shells? In addition to the fifteen firms that I have mentioned, there is not an industrial centre in Canada where the committee could not have found firms who had the organization, the machinery, the plant, the money, and the workmen idle, and who would have been glad to have had an opportunity to manufacture these shells. The Shell Committee, however, allowed their political friends to organize mushroom companies from one end of Canada to the other, and these companies up to the present time have hardly commenced to scratch the surface of the business.
As my hon. friend from Calgary (Mr.R. B. Bennett) is going to follow me, I will give him an idea of how these orders were placed, simply to make these companies feel good, and for political reasons. Take for instance the 18-pr. high explosive shell, because the further one goes the worse the business gets. In the beginning, I must confess that the big companies were made use of to a greater extent than they were later on, and the only fault I have to find with those transactions to which I have referred is the question of price. When I am told it was necessary for the Canadian Pacific Railway, or the Canadian Westing-house Company, or any other of these large concerns to get $5.15 for machining a shell, when they are glad * to make them to-day for $1.35, and are hunting for orders at that price, I must say that the percentage, of profit was far too great in the beginning. Of course, I know these companies will say: " Oh, but we had to take such terrible responsibility; we had to buy plant; the banks were timid and did not want to advance money; we had to experiment; we went into this thing with fear and trembling, and we did not know but that we were going to be ruined in the'process." I* described the process on a previous occasion, and I am not going into it again. Occasionally some of these

gentlemen come to me-not the big ones, but the small fellows, the mushroom company men, the political friends who go into this thing for what there is in it regardless of whether they furnish a shell or a particle of ammunition or not. I had a very interesting conversation witn one gentleman from Toronto. I do not know that I ought to give his name here, but if I did I am sure a smile would go around this House, especially on the faces of members of the Public Accounts Committee. I will only say that he was one of the boys, one of the good boys. He had in his vest pocket a friction tube, which is used for discharging guns up to the 15-pounder-guns above that calibre are discharged by a percussion primer in the base of the cartridge. This friction tube consists of a square block about two inches long, filled with some material like that on the outside of matchboxes. A piece of metal goes inside, with a surface like a file, or rasp, and when you pull out the file it lights the match. There is a tube about an inch and a half long that goes down the breach of the gun into the powder; the fire goes down the hole, explodes the cordite, and the gun is fired. This gentleman told me what an awful time he toad in working out this proposition. He said toe had had his whole organization at it for three or four months. They had wrestled with it day and night, they toad worked at it unceasingly, and finally they won out and were able to make the article. He said that when Mr. Thomas was here in the summer Mr. Thomas told him that he had sent representatives from the Woolwich arsenal to India to show them how to make friction tubes, that they had taken seven months, and had not done as well as Canada had done in three months. And Mr. Thomas, he said, patted toim on the back and said: "Well done, Canada!" Why, if I had a piece of sheet brass as big as my hand, a hammar, a hack-saw, a file, and a soldering-pot I could make one myself in two hours. The thing does not go inside the.gun and does not need to be made to the thousandth part of an inch. It is just a thing that you put into the hole, and hitch the lanyard string into the rasper file, so that when it is pulled it lights the match and the fire goes into the gun and explodes it. But this gentleman toiled and worked until he got an order for 200,000 of these friction tubes at twenty-eight cents each. That was worth working for. But I find on going over my notes that he is not the only one to make friction tubes, because

I see that about one million of them have been ordered. I merely give this illustration of what the manufacturers tell you of the horrible chances they took in trying to get ready to go into this business.
Dealing with the question of shrapnel, I have given the highest price, but not the lowest price, and my objection to this whole transaction was as to the prices paid. Let me tell you, they are manufacturing that same shrapnel at $1.35, and are not only willing to take the business but anxious to get it. At these prices, the present Munitions Board, I believe, could give contracts to manufacture shrapnel shells to the number of 50,000,000 in Canada at $1.35 if they were able to give the orders. And when I tell you that out of 5,500,000 shells delivered, the average cost up to -a month ago was $3.50 each, you will have some idea of why we find fault and why we are asking for an investigation.
When you come to the 18-pounder, you find that the thing gets worse. This is just as easy to make as the other-I believe it is easier, for there is less machining about it and less nicety. The only difficulty is that they have to bore the hole in the middle, whereas in the case of the shrapnel the hole is forged beforehand. The highest price paid for these 18-pounders was $5.70. No big orders were given for these-this is where the political part of it comes in. The Dominion Bridge Company got an order for 600,000, and the Canadian Westinghouse Company an order for
400,000.	Outside of these, no big orders were given until you come down to the political end of it. I am not going into a long dissertation upon these transactions, but will merely point out some things which will interest my hon. friend from Calgary (Mr. R. B. Bennett). I find that the Dominion Harvester Company, of Medicine Hat, were able to get an order for 10,000, and up to a month ago they had not delivered a single shell. The International Supply Company, _ of Medicine Hat, got an order for 10,00)3, and not a shell has been delivered. The Manitoba Bridge and Iron Works, of Winnipeg, got an order for 20,000, and not a shell has been delivered.


Mr. HANNA:: What is the date of those orders?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I could not say exactly; it was during the summer of 1915. I am only giving these to show the political end

of the transaction. The. Manitoba Shell Company of St. Boniface, got an order for
10,000,	and nothing has been delivered. The Medicine Hat Pump and Brake Company got an order for 10,000 and nothing delivered. The Transcona Shell Company of Winnipeg got one order for 250,000 and nothing delivered. It would be interesting if the Government would tell us who are the officials of this company. We know that the company is occupying the Transcona shops in St. Boniface. These shops were erected at public expense, and they were all prepared for the manufacture of shells, but the order came from Ottawa, and these gentlemen stepped in and took charge. We know that they got an order for 250,000 of these shells, and this, after the Minister of Railways (Mr. 'Cochrane), had promised Mr. D. A. Thomas that the Government *would manufacture sheels in these shops and so bring the prices down to a minimum and show how cheaply they could be manufactured. The Vulcan Iron Works of Winnipeg got an order for 20,000, and not a. shell delivered. The Western Shell Committee got an order for 300,000 and not a shell delivered. Then we come to British Columbia, and we find that the Vancouver Engineering Works got orders for 340,000, of which they have delivered about 39,000; the Victoria Machinery Depot of Victoria got an order for 220,000, and about 10,000 have been delivered; the Vulcan Iron Works of New Westminster, got orders for 150,000, and about 35,000 have been delivered. I wish to ask my serious friends opposite- I know many of them are serious-if they really believe that they were helping to fight the battles of the Empire^by carrying on transactions of that kind. Yet hon. gentlemen opposite object to our discussing the conduct of this committee- the conduct of this Government, really; because, Sir, we know that members of this 'Government have interfered in the letting of these contracts. Make no mistake about that. We can pick out not only one member, but two, three, four; we can name them; we can tell you when they interfered, how they interfered, and what results followed. It is no wonder that they do not want an investigation. Up to the present time about 1,700,000 of these 18-pounder high-explosive shells have been delivered, of which the average cost has been $4.75. People are tumbling over themselves to-day to get contracts for the machining and assembling of these shells at $1.75; millions of orders have been given

matter how bad the Shell Committee may have been; no matter how toad the Minister of Militia may be, they -could not be within o-ne hundred per cent as toad as a Minister of -Munitions looking -after these things in the present Tory Government. May we be spared from that infamy, and may the British Empire be spared from that sh-arne and disgrace. I have nothing more (to say about that, except this: We do have a suspicion on this -side of the House th-at the Minister of Militia is not going to Florida for his health, that he is not going to Europe in order to visit the firing line. We believe that he is going to Britain in order to induce the British Government, if possible, to di solve the Munitions Board and to give the (Government the right to appoint one who shall be called the Minister of Munitions to carry out their nefarious schemes.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: There is one other matter at least to which I desire to refer. If I was able to understand the arguments of the right hon. the Prime Minister on Tuesday; in the first place, he said there were no politics in the Shell Committee and I have disposed of that. In t)he second place, he argued that they had succeeded in distributing money among the manufacturers and labouring people of Canada, regardless of whether the war was being won or not, and that he would be satisfied so long as he got the money distributed and that I have also disposed of; in the third place, he said that the prices in Canada, with one exception, were cheaper than they were in Great Britain and in the United States at the beginning of the war. I do not think it is necessary for me to go into that. Surely even the most pessimistic of my hon. friends opposite are -convinced, surely I have convinced every man from the dispatches and -documents which I produced, that these statements are not according to the facts. Fourthly, if I understood my right hon. friend rightly, the reason given by him why an investigation should not be granted, was, in substance, that in the middle of the war, it was not the proper time to grant an investigation; that it is not, and that it ha-d not 'been the custom in Great Britain to do so. To avoid being charged with misrepresenting the actual statements of the Prime Minister I will read hi-s own words from Hansard of March 7, page 1589:
There is another matter which I would like to bring to the attention of the House and the 	j | r
attention of my right hon. friend. It was not during the Boer war, nor has it been during this -war, the practice of the British Government to favour or to grant inquiries into such matters during the progress of the war. The subject came up during the Boer war. An inquiry was moved for in the British House of Commons. The question which arose and which had to be determined by the leaders on that occasion was not as to whether an Inquiry should he held, because all agreed that an inquiry must -he held, but as to whether or not that inquiry should be interjected into the middle of the war, or whether it should form part of a general inquiry into the conduct of the war to take place at its conclusion. This is what Mr. Balfour said on that subject.
Then he read a quotation -from Mr. Balfour's speech. You will remember, Sir, that the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour, now First Lord of the Admiralty, was the leader of the Conservative or Unionist Government of that day. The Prime Minister further said:
Mr. Balfour answered that this would form part of the general inquiry to he held at the end of the war.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier: What date is that?
Sir Robert Borden: February 25, 1901. When the war was over and not before, they proceeded with a general inquiry into these matters.
These are the words of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister also referred to the fact-I will not take the time to read dt- that they had sought an investigation in the British House of Commons during the Crimean W-ar and that that also had been refused. First, I am going -to give the House the facts regarding what took place' during the Crimean War and then I am going to give the facts regarding matters during the South African War.


Mr. BURNHAM:: Supposing, which would be a large order, that these allegations were found to be true, and that this Government were turned out of office, would that be advisable at this crisis?


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I know of no greater blessing that could befall Canada. There are evi-ls and evils, Sir, but, in my judgment, the greatest evil that ever befell this country, or any portion of the British Empire, is the present Tory Government, which is mismanaging things during this war. First, I want to give my right hon. friend the Prime Minister a statement of what happened during the Crimean War of 1855 and then a statement of what happened during the Boer War. On Jan. 22, 1855, Mr. J. A. Roebuck, who, I think, was a Canadian, gave notice in the House of Commons that he 'would move for an inquiry into the state of the army in the

Crimea. In consequence of that notice, Lord John Russell resigned the next day, Jan. 23. On Jan. 27, Mr. Roebuck moved:
That a Select Committee, be appointed to inquire into the condition of our army before Sebastopol, and into the conduct of those departments of the Government whose duty it has been to minister to the wants of that Army.
Though opposed by the' Government, the motion carried by a majority of 157. The Aberdeen Ministry immediately resigned. Lord Palmerston formed a new Government with little change in its personnel. Speaking of the difficulty of getting witnesses to give evidence Mr. Roebuck said:
I feel corruption about me, but I oannot place my hand on it.
Mr. Roebuck did not make charges, he honestly admitted the difficulty of getting evidence, but he said: I feel corruption' about me. Even with a statement of that kind Lord John Russell resigned, the British House of Commons voted for an inquiry two days afterwards [DOT] and the Government was compelled to resign as well. The report of the committee was published in June, 1855. On July 17, 1855, Mr. Roebuck moved a separate resolution. This resolution, I see, was not granted, but the first resolution was granted, am investigation was held and the committee reported in June, 1855. Was not that an investigation during the war? Did not the Crimean War begin in 1854 and end in 1856, and did this not take place in 1855?
Coming down to iSouth African War, in the early part of the session of 1900-the Government was harassed by questions, speeches, motions, etc., regarding the frauds of contractors and the connivance or incompetency of officials. Bad boots, bad hay, the cordite scandal, and otheT kindred topics were kept before the House and the country by the Opposition until one of its members succeeded, on Feb. 27th, 1900, in getting the House to pass an order for a return.
Showing (1) the names of contractors who have been struck off the Government' list for misconduct in connection with the sending of stores for the use of Her Majesty's Field Force in South Africa; (2) the names of the officers no longer employed by the Government who passed defective stores for the use of Her Majesty's Field Force in South Africa.
Having admitted the wrong-doing, the Government was pressed to grant an inquiry, but it put off a reply on the ground
that it was consulting with the law officers as to criminal prosecutions, etc.
The Opposition resumed their tactics, and on March 26, 1900, exacted from Mr. Balfour a promise that the Government would grant a Committee of Inquiry, in connection with the army and navy contracts. Finally, on May I, 1900, the House adopted the following motion:
That a Select Committee be appointed to consider and report upon any allegations of fraud and irregularity in connection with War Office contracts during the last twelve months; that the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records; that five be the quorum; that Colonel Denny, Mr. Elliot, Mr. Fairbank, Mr. Houston, Mr. Howell, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Herbert Lewis, Colonel Lockwood, Mr. Lloyd, Mr. McKenna, Mr. Patrick O'Brien, Mr. Paulton, Major Raseh, and Sir Robert Reid be members of the committee.
Mr. Balfour also agreed that the committee might extend its inquiry farther back than twelve months, if it desired to do so.
On August 1, 1900, the committee made its report. It was published as Sessional Paper No. 313 in Volume 9 of the Imperial Commons Papers of 1900. Any man can go to our library, get the document, read it for himself, and see that every statement I am making is borne out by the facts. Among other things, the report stated that it was undesirable that the negotiations for contracts should be conducted personally between members of Parliament and the departmental officials. I wonder what they would have said about the financial transactions of the Minister of Munitions. With these facts before me, I wonder if the hon. member for Calgary (Mr. Bennett) is going to argue that this Parliament ought not to grant an investigation. I wonder if the hon. member for Calgary will take the trouble to look into these matters and see if my citations are correct. I wonder if, with this staring him in the -face, he will - take the ground that there should not be an investigation because it has not been the practice in the Imperial Parliament. I do not believe that all the hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House want to put the lid on and to keep it there. I believe that the great majority of our Conservative friends would like to see the affairs of this country run honestly and uprightly; I believe that they would like to see this war won just as well as we would, and if they do they will only have to assert their independence, force the Government to obey public opinion, and see that this matter is given attention and that it is thoroughly investigated. Under the actual condition of affairs there can only be one possible

result of doing what was done in 1855, and that is that the Government will have to resign. Would that be an unmixed evil? Can you imagine any greater benefit that could be conferred upon the people oi Canada under present conditions than that that should happen? Turn the light of day upon these transactions, and there can simply be one result, and that is the result which I have just referred to.
I have taken a little more time than I intended to, but I want for a moment to summarize very briefly the salient points of the situation as it stands to-day. My honoured leader has asked this House to grant a committee to investigate the conduct of the Shell Committee in carrying on the business transactions entrusted to it since the beginning of the war in 1914. The Prime Minister refuses that, because he says it is not in the interest of the public that these matters should be investigated during the war, and it is not following the precedent laid down in Great Britain during the Crimean War and the Boer War of 1899-1902. If you accept the truthfulness of the citations which I have just read, you will see that they absolutely shatter the last contention and common sense, decency and the ambition for honest Government in Canada absolutely shatter the former contention. Because something happened ten years ago, or fifty years ago, is not a good reason why, under another condition of affairs, we should not investigate things here to-day. Are we always to be tied to the apron-strings of somebody, have we no initiative, have we not the right to investigate our own affairs because in past days somebody has done something else? Surely the Conservative party can furnish some better argument than that, in order to show that there ought not to be an investigation into these transactions. Then, I promised you, Mr. Speaker, that I would try and give you some additional reasons why this committee should be granted.
I have now for something like three or four hours been labouring to show these reasons, and as I have watched the faces of hon. gentlemen opposite during that time I have seen that they are convinced that there ought to be an investigation. It is all very well for the Premier to turn his back on members of this House, and appeal to his followers to stand behind him and vote down this resolution, in order to keep the lid on, and keep the country in the dark. They may support him, but the people of this country want more than that, and they will get more than that the first

time they have an opportunity of telling the Prime Minister so. The right, hon. gentleman has had a few reminders in the last few weeks; he had a reminder in the county of iPeel a week or two ago, and, more recently, in the city of Vancouver, and less than a week ago, in the city of Victoria. But I am not going into that. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, the biggest thing before the people of Canada to-day, outside of the winning of this war, is the conduct of the Shell Committee, and the conduct of this Government in placing the Canadian soldiers in a position in which they cannot help in the winning of this war.
I have shown that the Shell Committee gave orders to themselves. The Bertram Company got business to the extent of $1,339,000 in manufacturing shrapnel shells at an average price of $3.50 each, when to-day manufacturers are tumbling over themselves to get contracts at $1.75. I have shown that the Shell Committee had given contracts to the Chapman Engine & Manufacturing Company (which is a subsidiary company of the Bertram Company), for machinery and assembling the ordinary 18-pounder shell, and one-third of these shells	were to	be supplied at
$5.70, and the other two-thirds at $4; and those 18-pounder shells are being produced by the million to-day at $1.75 each. I have shown that the Shell Committee had given contracts for boxes to another subsidiary company, the Valley City Seating Company, amounting to $230,000 at prices away above and beyond the prices that are being paid for the same article today. I have shown that the Universal Tool Steel Company (the company of which the Minister of Militia had never heard in his life), had received contracts for $1,735,000; a company with which was connected Mr. Watts, a member of the Munitions Board. I want to say here that probably Mr. Watts had nothing like as much to do with these transactions as Bertram and Carnegie. However, he is a member of the Board. I have shown that this company got $850,000 worth of contracts for 18-pounder high explosives at an average price of $4.40, when to-day, the same article is being made for $1.75. I have shown that the Electric Steel and Metals Company, with which was connected Mr. Carnegie, another member of the board, had received contracts for $1,885,000 worth of business, at prices three and four times the prices that is being charged to-day for the same article. I have shown that the Nova Scotia Steel Company had received contracts for
/

something over $15,000,000 from the Shell Committee. I admitted that many of the articles this company was furnishing were things that they should have furnished, and were in a position to furnish, hut I claimed that the prices were too great, and I gave two specific instances: one in the month of February, 1915, and the other in the month of May, 1915. Just here let me say that I am always glad to throw light upon a subject when I am able to. Since I discussed this matter before, I have learned that Mr. Cantley was in England at the time these contracts were let, and that he personally had nothing to do with the awarding of the contracts. They were given out by the committee, and it has been stated time and again that Bertram gave out the contracts himself. As I said, these contracts were given on the 15th of May, and the 15th of May seems to have been a regular clearing-house day for the old (Shell Committee. On the 15th of May, 1915, Bertram and Sons got an order for
100.000	18-pounder shrapnels at $3.15, and
100.000	high explosives at $4. On the same day the Chapman Engine and Manufacturing Company, a subsidiary company of the Bertram Company, got a contract for 35,000 high explosives at $4 each. On the same 15th of May, the Universal Tool Steel Company got a contract for 20,000 18-pounder high explosives at $4. On the same 15th of May the Electric Steel and Metals Company got a contract for 35,000 18-pounder high explosives at $4. On the same 15th of May the Nova Scotia (Steel Company got a contract for machining 50,000 4.5's at $6 each. In addition to that, I have shown that a company controlled and managed by a member of this Government sold to the Shell Committee over $300,000 worth of goods.
As to prices, I have shown that every statement made by the Minister of Militia, and the conclusions drawn therefrom by the Prime Minister, are entirely void of any foundation in fact. I have shown that the Minister of Militia claimed that when the war broke out the experts of the Department decided that $8.55 was a reasonable price for manufacturing 18-pounder shrapnels. The minister stated that that was cheaper than they could be bought for in England at that time; but I have proven by his own records, that a few months before he himself had bought 18-pounder shrapnels in England, not for $8.55, but for $3.15 each. I have shown where the *minister (Stated that at the beginning of the war the 18-pounder shrapnel shell cost
$10.33 in .England and that in Canada it was purchased at ia much lower price, when, as a matter of fact, the first shell produced in Canada cast $13.37. I have .shown where he said that the 4.5 shell was purchased for $7.35, and the first price of the Canadian shell was $9.80, which, he said, was lower (than the price in England. I have. proved by his own documents that only a few months before the war broke out he bought tho.se articles for $2.65 each.
In the face of such facts, in the face of the proofs that I have given, I ask my right hon. friend the Prime Minister if he does not now think that sufficient information has been given to make him change his mind. In the face of the fact that his Minister of Militia, the man who has been advising him, the man who, he says, is responsible for the whole transaction, the man who stands as father and godfather to the Shell Committee, the man who says he is proud of it, the man who gave us the incorrect figures, has not the hardihood to come- here and answer these allegations and charges, does my right hon. friend not. think there is sufficient justification now for him to change his mind} and grant this investigation, and let the people of Canada learn the truth in regard to these transactions? The conduct of the Shell (Committee, the (conduct of the Minister of Militia, the conduct of the Government of Canada during the last year and a half has shown that the question has not been' whether or not we are going to play our part in winning this war, but how much political and business capital the Government can make out of it from one end of the country to the other. It has been a question of whether or not they can strengthen themselves here or there. It is known that, when a delegation from British Columbia came to Ottawa, they told the Prime Minister there would be the very dickens to pay in British Columbia if they did not get an order. They got the order; but it did not do any good politically, and it has not done any good from a military standpoint, because hardly a shell has been delivered.
The Prime Minister has defended these transactions; he has known of the condition of affairs in New Glasgow; he has permitted men, who sent condemned shells back the second time, to go on manufacturing shells. There is no protest from hirq against such an occurrence. I ask him again, in the face

of all this additional information, does he want to assist in this war or does he want to play the game of politics? Is he willing, at this date after the war has been in progress for a year and a half and not a solitary completed shell produced, to turn over a new leaf and try to do something better? What has he accomplished so far? He has not produced, in the whole year and a half sinde the war commenced, as much munitions as were used by the German army during the first four days' battle before the forts of Verdun, and not a single Canadian shell could have been used in any of the conflicts unless the British Government furnished the fuse, which is really the important part of the shell. When one considers these things in the broad light of day, one is driven to ask the question which I have just asked of the Premier, and it is up to the Premier and the Conservative party of Canada to answer the question, either in the affirmative or in the negative.
I am not in tne habit of reading newspaper clippings, and my right hon. friend severely castigated my right hon. leader for doing so, but even at the risk of a lecture from the gentleman who, I presume, will follow me, I am going to take the liberty of placing upon Hansard an editorial which appears in this morning's Citizen and which expresses the true condition of affairs much better than I can.


Mr. R. B. BENNETT:: There is one in
the Free Press to-night on my hon. friend.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: This article in the Citizen is headed, "The (Shell Profiteering," ana goes on to say:
By refusing an inquiry and defending the Canadian shell profiteering, the Government is lending itself to the internal enemies of the nation and the Empire. Nowhere in the history of Canada has there been a more disgraceful and unpatriotic orgy of greed and revolting indifference to human suffering than in this profiteering out of the nation'k agony.
Canadian soldiers, for lack of shells, were compelled to hold positions and be mangled and torn and maimed hy Germany's artillery and poisonous clouds and flame projectors. While the brave men stood with only their rifles to reply to German terrorism; groups of shell profiteering interests safe at home were wading in the fat of war contracting, and Government shops were being kept in idleness lest they should cause the profiteering game to come to an end hy increasing the output of shells and reducing the prices thereby.
It is no defence to say, as the Dominion Government is trying to make out, that in some instances higher prices were paid in the United States or in Britain than in Canada. Some Canadian profiteering interests, with high-sounding patriotic names too, condemn themselves in their own stock boosting circulars. They boast of supplying shell work at a rate of
 *
$380,000 when it cost only $180,000, including all expenses, to produce. At such a rate, plainly, the British armies were getting only 100,000 shells where they might have been supplied with 200,000 .. . and still have left a fat surplus for profiteering interests.
What if profiteering did take place in the-United States and Britain too? Is Germany excused for the Lusitania crime, because evidence is produced to show that Austria or Turkey committed similar crimes in the Mediterranean? Furthermore there is this difference-between the position of national leaders in Canada and in Britain. Profiteering has been roundly condemned by leading public men in Britain. What responsible Canadian public man has expressed himself as the chairman of the Steel Company of Scotland, and other men with ideas above the service of greed, have done? What Dominion minister has spoken out from the treasury bench, as Mr. Bonar Law did in the British Parliament, against the rapacity of the war contractors?
What effort has the Federal Government of Canada made, as the Governments of the Motherland and the Commonwealth and states; of Australia and other parts of the King's dominions are making, to apply the principle of national service to the munitions industry? Has the Dominion Government done anything but oppose national service in shell making lest it should interfere with private profiteering?
This is its proud record. While Canada's men were bleeding on the fields of Flanders, Sir Robert Borden delivered a brave oration in London, saying what Canada would do : " The whole-power of the nation must he consecrated to the task." Invited by the British authorities to begin consecrating the power of the nation by organizing the National Transcontinental railway shops for national- service, the Dominion Government at first consented. Then after being publicly thanked in Montreal hy Mr. Lloyd George's representative, Canada's Government failed to live up to its word. Instead of the whole power of the nation being consecrated to the task, the only national shop in use is one placed at the disposal of one more private profiteering group ... so private that the country is not even told the names of the profiteers in possession at Transcona.
So, the Dominion Government has chosen. Shell profiteering is to be defended and shielded by the responsible leaders in the Federal House of Commons. The whole power of the nation, and all its flowing oratory and sophistry is to be consecrated to the task of defending war loot. But does the Dominion Government truly represent the spirit of the Canadian people?
Sir, that is the question I ask. Does the attitude of the Canadian Government to-day truly represent the spirit of the Canadian people? If this thing was all right, why is the old Shell Committee not at work to-day? What sent Mr. Lloyd George's representative over here in the month of July, 1915, if the British Government were satisfied with the condition of affairs on that date? If this Shell Committee was acting honestly and uprightly and above board, and if this Government was doing its whole duty, do you suppose that Mr. Thomas would have been sent over here? When he came to Ottawa, did he not have-

a delicate mission to perform? Can you imagine a man handling a delicate subject with greater diplomacy than did Mr. Thomas? He had to say in effect to the Government of Canada:	" The committee
that you have appointed have fallen down; they have not been straight and honest with the Government; they have charged two prices for shells and everything else, and' the British Government must kick them out. We want to do it as politely and decently as possible and with the greatest diplomacy." He remained here for three months, and before he went away they were kicked out. Now, what is the use of asking why they were kicked out? What is the use of the Prime Minister reading extracts from letters written to him by somebody whose name he does not give? What is the use of reading extracts from letters which Mr. Hiehens wrote to him? Mr. Hichens is not the people of Canada; he does not pay a cent of taxes here, nor does he represent one Canadian voter. Would you expect a representative of the Imperial Government to come here to a government to whom they ate looking for favours, whom they are asking to do their duty in carrying on this war to a successful conclusion, and say: "You are a gang of crooks and I am going to put these men out?" Men in high positions do not say such things. But these men were put out just the same. There is no use in trying to argue the thing away, no use in the Prime Mininster reading long extracts from documents, no use in sophistry. The facts are: Mr. Thomas came; Mr. Thomas saw; and the Shell Committee was conquered. That is all there was to it. And the new commission are now in their places, a commission that, I know, is doing infinitely better than the old committee did, a commission which, I hope, will continue to carry on the good work. All I have to say, in conclusion, is this: If the Government will not grant a commission, - and will not allow the people of Canada to learn the inside facts of the transactions of this Shell Committee, this political organization of theirs, then, in the name of Heaven, let them keep their unholy hands off the present Imperial Munitions Board.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Sneaker, I rise with some diffidence to address the House at this time. I believe that the part of an ordinary member in this great crisis of our country is to assist by kindly suggestion those whose position places upon them the greatest responsibility that has ever fallen to the lot of statesmen
in this Dominion. I cannot for a single moment believe that the discussion which has taken place can assist in any way towards winning the great war in which we are engaged. When I listened to the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Carvell)-I say it frankly-I was tempted to reply in kind. But I conceive that I have a larger duty and a greater responsibility; and, although I may do it poorly, I hope to be able to discharge that responsibility in a somewhat different manner from that in which the hon. member has discharged what he believes to be his. I do not usually quote from newspapers, but I am content to leave it to the Ottawa Free Press of this evening to summarize the speech of the hon. member for Carleton. I do not think that any other language could more fitly describe it:
The speech of Mr. Carvell was of the kind which in recent years have become a habit with him. "We are not making charges against the Government," he said, adding, " no one is saying, either, that any member of the Shell Committee stole anything." Yet, in the next breath, he made the amazing assertion that " the whole trend of the Prime Minister's speech had been that the prime object of the Shell Committee was the distribution of patronage," and that "the members of the Shell Committee had placed enormous orders with themselves at exorbitant prices, and to keep the prices up for themselves they had to give these same prices to all other companies which got contracts."
Mr. Carvell has become a past master in the art of using half truths to make them appear as gospel; but this game, when long continued, grows tiresome, and achieves its own undoing. A comparison of the speeches of Sir Wilfrid Laurier and Mr. Carvell on the same day tempts one to remark that " fools step in where angels fear to tread." If indulgence in reckless and irresponsible condemnation of opponents is an essential to political partisanship, there are not wanting tens of thousands of Canadians, especially just now, who will pray to be freed from political partisanship. Liberalism as expounded by a Carvell in indeed a fearsome thing.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Will the hon. gentleman read what the same editorial has to say about the Prime Minister?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I leave that delightful task to the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdpnald), who seems to have been able, since Tuesday evening, to induce his hon. friend from Carleton to believe that Mr. Thomas Cantley's hands at least are clean. For it will be noticed that while on Tuesday Mr. Thomas Cantley was worthy of condemnation for awarding orders to himself, to-day the hon. member has learned that Mr. Thomas Cantley was in England. I hope he has not overlooked that fact.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The hon, gentleman need, not avoid the question. I asked the hon. member if he would read from the same editorial what is said about the Prime Minister.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am delighted to see such a manifestation of temper on H- part of the hon. member; it is always amusing and sometimes interesting.
I leave the remarks of the hon. member for Carleton at that, except for one further observation. He has stated that it would be a good thing for Canada if the Government could be changed at this time. I do not believe that the Liberalism of the province in which I reside is represented by an observation such as that. The thousands of young Canadians who have left Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba to fight for this Empire at this time are not actuated by political motives, and not concerned about what party is in power, but they are infinitely concerned about the conduct of the war and the success of our arms on the plains of France and Flanders. It ill becomes any man to talk- about a political truce with one breath, and to talk of the defeat of the Government with another. I do not believe that the genius of Liberalism is reflected by such arrant hypocrisy; I do not believe that such cant adequately expresses the mind of the Canadian people, or of Liberalism, or of the members of the Liberal party throughout Canada. But I do believe that, east, west, north, and south respectable, sober-minded Liberals, whose opinions are not voiced by the scavenging observations of the member for Carleton, believe that our first duty, our paramount duty, our prayerful duty, is to see that this war is carried to a successful conclusion. But when men prate and talk about political "truce" and "neutrality," and then give voice to observations and sentiments such as those expressed by the hon. member for Carleton, it is no wonder that you read editorials such as that in the Ottawa Free Press; it is no wonder that people are praying" to he delivered from such hypocrisy and cant as characterizes the observations of that hon. gentleman.
I desire to direct the attention of the House for a few moments to the official attitude of the Liberal party as distinguished from what may be called its semi-official attitude as shown in the remarks of the hon. member for Carleton. I am not one of those who believe that it is impossible for Liberalism to share with us

the responsibilities and the burdens of this war. I have seen enough of the war to be impressed with it as the most serious and solemn thing that a man ever thought about. Nothing has ever made a like impression on my mind; nothing, I believe, will ever make such an impression on my mind.
On August 19 last, the right hon. leader of the Opposition, from his seat in this House, said:
Speaking for those who sit around me, speaking for the wide constituencies which we represent in this House, I hasten to say that to all these measures we are prepared to give immediate assent. If in what has been done or in what remains to be done there may be anything which in our judgment should not be done or should be differently done, we raise no question, we take no exception, we offer no criticism, and we shall offer no criticism so long as there is danger at the front.
Sir, since this debate commenced, at least
1,000	women have become widows; 10,000 children have become orphans, and before the fortresses of Verdun the greatest danger that has menaced the French Republic since the battle of the Marne, is now imminent. The danger at the front that the right hon. gentleman spoke bf is still with us. I ask him, as a great patriot, as one with wide knowledge of our constitution, and having behind him the longest political history of any man who sits in this House, once more to assert that wholesome doctrine, that great truth which he upheld when on August 19, 1914, he made those observations.
I go further. When in December of that year the right hon. gentleman spoke before the Montreal Reform Club, he used these words:
As soon as war was declared we thought it was part of the duty we owed, not only to our policy, but also to our country, to lay down, for the time being, all party discussions, and to give our whole thought and energy to the new problems which were brought by the war, and not in any way embarass the Government, but on the contrary to facilitate its duty which this new situation created for the Government.
Noble language, lofty sentiments, high ideals of great responsibilities and of splendid patriotism. But how are they being carried out this day by the party that sits opposite? In view of the fact that thousands of men are laying down their lives to-day for the cause of liberty, I ask whether or not hon. gentlemen opposite are endeavouring to embarrass the hands of this 'Government by the "piffle" they are talking-no other word adequately describes the language of hon. gentlemen opposite.

The right hon. leader of the Opposition, speaking before the Ontario Federation of Liberal Clubs on May 21st last, said:
Let the Prime Minister and his colleagues say that there shall he no election as long as the war shall go on, and I will pledge myself and the party, that we shall stop all preparations and think of nothing hut the war.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. gentleman
says, " Hear, hear," while from the basement of this building tons of political literature are to-day being sent throughout Canada by the Liberal party organization. Already this session 4,000 columns of Hansard have been filled with the bitterest attacks that have been levelled against any Administration .since Confederation; the most virulent and violent attacks that, I think, you vwill find in the pages of any Hansard. Night after night, day after day; in the Address in reply to the speech from the Throne, in the Budget; attack after attack against the Government, the whole forces of Liberalism, with many noteworthy exceptions, have been hurled against this Administration. Then this party ammunition is being sent out to the electors, and for what purpose? It is designed to endeavour to solidify plastic public opinion against this Administration, while the Administration, all through the day, all through the long watches of night,
. is endeavouring to fight the Huns. While we are being fought from within, the foe is still without. While this Administration is night and day striving to meet the great difficulties that have arisen by reason of this war; while men are assuming responsibilities as large as ever fell to the lot of men, hon. gentlemen opposite are sending out literature, charging, by half-truths and idle insinuations, -that the trusted servants of the people are derelict to their trust and guilty of the highest crimes and misdemeanors. Is that a party truce? Is that the kind of truce of which hon. gentlemen opposite speak? Is that the kind of assistance that the right hon. leader of the Opposition purposes to give to the Government of the day? Is that the method he would employ to avoid embarassing the Government? Is that what high-minded statecraft and noble patriotism inspires in any man? I leave the problem with the people of this great Dominion. I believe that at this time the people are not interested in the differences between Conservatives and Liberals. Speaking for the community in *which I reside, and the province in which
I make my home, I say that men whether they be Liberals or Conservatives have forgotten the signs and nomenclature of party-ism. I wish I could visualize to this House the situation as I see it. No language that I can use would picture the gravity of the situation as it appears to me; no words by which I am capable of giving expression to the thought that is in my nnind could for one moment present the picture as I see it. We idly discuss fiscal questions, while the real problem is whether it will be in our power when the war is over to determine what our fiscal policy shall be. We talk of woman's franchise; how do we know that the Parliament that sits here will be the Parliament of a British people? We waste our time in dealing with questions upon the Order Paper, resolutions here and there, asking something to embarrass an individual or a minister while, Sir, these ministers may not be the ministers of the Crown of Britain to-morrow.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: Have no fear on that
point.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have no fear of the
ultimate end of this great war, but I am concerned as I have never been concerned about anything in my life as to what may happen before that great end is achieved.
What is going on in France to-5 p.m. day? A few months ago I saw
Paris in black, as I had never seen black before. I saw the women of France working in the fields tilling the soil, while their fathers, their sons, and their husbands were doing battle in the trenches. I saw 5,000 French horse, foot and artillery march by, going to face death. I saw 4,000 of the very best of my fellow-Canadians salute the Prime Minister of Canada as they went by in the dusk to the trenches. And when I think of the multiplication of the loss to the state of the men that are dying, of the blood that is being spilled, of the economic waste that is going on; when I see the best men of the Empire being drained from it; when I see the population of the province in which I live being lessened day after day by the departure of men who are so willingly, so gladly, so nobly, so patriotically giving their services for the cause of freedom, I ask myself: where will it end? Sir, we may win a great war, and we may lose an Empire. The discussions the dissensions, the talk such as went on to-day from the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Carvell)-are the things that bring about that very end. He talked to-day in

this House about the war that we were asked to go into, or coaxed to go into. Sir, this is as much a war of the Canadian people as it is of those who live in the city of London or in the city of Paris.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I made no statement that we were asked or coaxed to go into this war. My hon. friend certainly misunderstood me, because I made no such statement; I think he ought to withdraw the remark.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If the hon. gentleman did not say it, Hansard will properly indicate what he did say. My understanding of it was that he said we were asked to go into this war.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I never said such a thing.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If I thought that I had done my hon. friend an injustice, I should certainly not hesitate to withdraw the remark.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I made no such statement; on the contrary, I said that it was our duty to go into this war, and to help win it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And it is. I should like to make it clear that according to my conception of the situation, there are three lines of defence for Canada. The first line of defence lies out yonder at Verdun; the second line of defence is with the reserves at Shorncliffe and Bramshott; the third line of defence is the reserves in the training camps throughout this Dominion. And just as surely as the freedom and liberty of the men of France and Belgium are at stake, it is my profound conviction that my liberty and my freedom, the institutions under which I live, and the civilization that has been created by the races to which we belong are at issue right here in Canada. When I speak of the noble sentiments of my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier), I know it was not easy for him, or for those who support him, to express those views. It is not easy for a man holding different views from the Government, having intense political convictions in a democracy such as this, to readily give utterance to those noble sentiments, for they were noble sentiments; they breathed the spirit of the purest patriotism; they are the very noblest and highest sentiments that man can hold. I repeat: it was not easy. During the long years in which he has done so much to shape the public thought and opinion of this Dominion, from

his youth up, my right hon friend has held a political philosophy that looked, ultimately perhaps to that theory of the great French philosopher who saw in this Dominion a land of new republics or independent states. It was a view that men might properly hold, and yet, with the first blast of war, so spontaneous and general was the response of a great people to the cry of the Empire, to the sob of the mother overseas, that my right hon. friend recast for himself, and for those who sit about him, his political creed and political faith, and declared, as I expected, and, in fact, knew he would: that it was the duty of all men who called themselves Canadians to associate themselves at such a time with the Government, and to do their part in preserving our civilization. It was not easy, I say, to discharge the duty which in such a magnificent manner he discharged for himself and his party.
Let us go a step further, and see what we have now. I cannot possibly think for a single moment that the speech of the hon. member (Mr. Carvell) reflects the opinion or the spirit of the right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier). By his long and patriotic history, by his long and noble career, I do in all seriousness appeal to the right hon. gentleman to say again in this House that he is content-for the reasons which have been urged upon him so strongly by the Prime Minister in no aeriminious or partisan spirit-to say what he would have done in this crisis had he been Prime Minister. I feel absolutely certain that he would say to this House, as he said when the comparatively trifling war in South Africa was on: we can wait a bit for the consideration of comparatively petty things. He would use more graceful language, but that- the substance of it would be: we can wait a bit, there is surely no hurry to hold up to shame and execration the names of our fellow Canadians who are suspected by political antagonists of doing wrong. I trust he is not one of those who rejoice in the vilification of his fellows and in the slander of Canadians; I trust that that is reserved for the hon. gentleman from Carleton (Mr. Carvell). Sir, I believe the right hon. gentleman had he been Prime Minister, would have said that when this war is over, great problems must arise for solution; thiat there must be inquiry into the whole conduct of the war, whether it affects the Australians in Gallipoli, the Canadians at Ypres, the British at Mons,

or the French on the Marne; that there must be by all the Governments, who are taking 'part in this war, official inquiry that will take cognizance of every action, of the general conduct of affairs, whether in the field or in the office, whether in regard to administrative or to operative affairs.
I believe he would say that with the end of the war must come great constitutional changes, a new statue for Canadians, for Australians, for New Zealanders, equality of citizenship under the flag, great social and economic problems to engage the best attention of the best minds of this Empire.
I feel that that is what my right hon. friend would have said, and gladly said, if he were Prime Minister to-day, and I am certain it is what his followers should join with him in saying: Wait until this war is over, and then we will take stock of all the charges made against individuals and companies, and we will punish them as they deserve.
There has never been a war since the earliest days, in which there were not men who took advantage of their country's necessities to improve their own opportunities. It has been so in the past, and it will always be so. I recall that in the reign of Queen Anne one of the great commanders in chief of the British forces was not beyond doing business for' himself at the expense of the public. The military genius of that man made him one of the great men of history, and yet he took advantage of his country's necessities to promote . his own financial advancement. It. has always been so, and 1 suppose it will continue to be so. What I suggest is, that had my right hon. friend (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) been leading this House, he would have said: I do not propose at this juncture to enter into inquiries, but I will leave them, quoting the words of Mr. Asquith and Mr. Balfour in the Boer war: until the war is substantially over, until by the proper perspective we can understand the situation, punish where crimes have been committed, and give reward and praise where men have nobly discharged their duties. And, I say, that there are in this Dominion to-day poor men and women who have not been sparing in their activities, and who have honourably discharged duties to the state, without receiving recognition or reward. Think of what men and women have done, think of what mothers have done in giving their sons freely, of what fathers have done, pinching and paring in order to give to
the Patriotic and Red Cross funds. We will take more stock of all these things after the war is over. 1 am not defending the Shell Committee, I am not attacking it; but I am going to make the argument that this is not the opportune time to have an inquiry of this character, and I am going to give reasons, in the light of the experience which I gained the last time I was across the Atlantic. I shall conclusively show to this House that at least one investigation that has been carried on since the war began did not good to the Canadian people, but on the contrary did them incalculable injury.
Some hon. gentlemen opposite speak of ministers of the Crown as though they lived on a bed of roses. Does any man, for a single moment, think that the duties and responsibilities that have devolved upon the Prime Minister since the war began are lightly to be undertaken or easily to be discharged? I have had many differences with the Minister of Militia, but I do say that no man has more energetically or tirelessly discharged the duties of his office than General Sir Sam Hughes. He has been attacked by men who may have had some reason for their attack, but I say, whatever may have been his faults, that he at least has been a dynamo of human energy, and he has been able, by reason of his great and tireless energy, to accomplish that which men of calmer minds, of more equable temperament and less energy, might have failed to accomplish. I state that publicly in this House, because I think it is fairly due to him.
Does this House forget what took place last year? Does this House remember that my right hon. friend the Prime Minister, in the midst of the -war, discharged what 1 believe was the most painful duty that ever fell to the lot of a Prime Minister in Canada? Naipe me an occasion during fifteen years of piping times of peace when any such duty was discharged by the predecessor of Sir Robert Borden in the office of Prime Minister. Be it an Arctic expedition, a Yukon scandal, a failure to give Parliament the names of the shareholders of the North Atlantic Trading Company, stolen ballots enabling a man to sit in this House' who- had no right to sit here, or timber 'scandals, was any punishment ever meted out to those who were guilty? Yet, in the midst of this war, the Prime Minister performed, the most painful duty that, in my judgment, ever fell to the lot of a Prime Minister of Canada. And he did it because it was in



keeping with what he thought it was right to do, and it was in line with the principles expressed by him, that if it was suggested that a crime or fraud had been committed, it was his duty to see that this crime was exposed and punishment meted out. If there is one thing more than another, which places the Prime Minister high in the estimation of this House and of the country, it is the part my right hon. friend took, when, regardless of feeling, of sentiment, of all those ties that bind party leaders to their followers, he stood out as the great Canadian that he is, and declared that there would be no graft or corruption within his party during this war. If. there is one thing more than another which will always be a matter of pride to me, it is not the noble achivements of our Canadians upon the field of battle-I knew they would acquit themselves well-but the fact that at this time we have at the head of the Government a man of sufficient moral character and force to stand in his place and repudiate two of his followers, a thing that has never been done before in the Canadian Parliament. I commend the Prime Minister's high conception of duty, as being Worthy to rank alongside the achievements of our brave Canadians on the battlefield.


Mr. PROULX:: Does the hon. gentleman not think that it might be possible that he sacrificed his followers in order to save the head of the Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The hon. gentleman suggests that possibly the high-minded action of the Prime Minister was taken for the purpose of saving himself, but I have not seen any evidence of cowardice upon the part of the Prime Minister in dealing with questions of this kind. Possibly the hon. gentleman had in mind an episode that happened in his own county of Prescott, and possibly he thought that Mr. Rowell dic^ something of a like kind for the purpose of saving his own head.
May I now point out that as Canadiaiis we have taken part in this war voluntarily and gladly. I aim not here to-day to speak of the part that our noble Canadians have taken upon the battlefield. Some of them will unfortunately return no more, but their memories will be blessed down through the years, and their example will lead men to nobler thoughts and higher ideals of public service and public life. I heard it from the lips of the great Commander in Chief of the French Forces, I heard it from every one who was present

to judge, that Canada had saved the day in that great battle that took place nearly a year ago, nor is there question as to the noble achievements of our fellow British subjects from Australia. Gallipoli will live as long as history is written and read. What was done by the Guards division will ever live in the traditions of the British service as the embodiment of all that is glorious. We Canadians are sharers in that glory; we are participants in these great achievements.
But, Sir, there is another ground upon which I should like to consider the position of Canadians. What has been our attitude in relation to finance, internal development, and the conduct of the war from the standpoint of administration? Have we less cause to be proud in the one case than in the other? We raised a great internal loan, twice what was asked; and we are now financing the operations of the British Government and stabilizing and adjusting exchange. We have been enabled by an appropriate campaign in reference to production, to ensure the largest crop that has ever been reaped by the tillers of the soil; we have been able to keep our people fairly employed, but more, we have been enabled to show an adaptability, and a skill in invention and achievement, which have challenged the admiration of our Allies, and I doubt not of the enemy as well. I should like this House to understand the greatness of these achievements. I did not realize how great they were until I heard men, who were competent to express an opinion, piay tribute to Canada. It is not a question of munitions alone. It is a question of wheat, of coal, of flour, of barley, of oats, of hay- it is the great question of the production of all those things that make possible the successful carrying on of the war. This House little realizes that after the war broke out the British Government was confronted with a startling shortage of munitions. Our heavy artillery, even obsolete artillery, rifles, even obsolete rifles, were sent across the Atlantic with all speed and haste. Then what followed? England said to Canada: Can you get us 200,000 shells, 100,000 18-pounders and
100,000	15-pounders. They were told we could do it. They said: Get them for us, get them in the United States, get them somewhere, we do not know where you will get them. Then, that spirit of enterprise, that spirit of pride, that spirit of patriotism that manifests itself equally in achievements in times of peace as in war, asserted itself and the Canadian people
said: we will not only produce you 200,000 18-pounder and 15-pounder shells, but we will undertake to produce ammunition on a large scale to enable this war to be carried on with munitions produced within our own Empire. . This was the idea of Major General Sir Sam Hughes. You may condemn him. you may not agree with him, but when the authorities in Great Britain realized that they were confronted with a practical difficulty, he rose to the occasion and he said: We will not get this ammunition outside of this country, we will get it right in this Dominion, and you will get not only what you want but so much more that you will be surprised. In December last I was in England and I made it my business to get information at first hand both from Ministers of the Crown and from the head of the High Explosives Committee .a gentleman who, as all the members of my profession know, left his place in the Privy Council, and, at the direct invitation of the Prime Minister of Great Britain gave his attention, as the supreme authority upon chemistry to the production of high explosives. I refer to Lord Moulton. I was told that Canada had so far exceeded the expectations of the British people as to cause them to wonder whether or not we really made these munitions in Canada. I was proud then of being a Canadian, I was proud of our achievements industrially as I had been pTOud of the part that Canadians had taken upon the field of battle. Let us view calmly, and not as bitter partisans, what was done.
My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition on Tuesday last read from the speech of Earl Curzon, Lord Privy Seal, as to what our position was in the matter. I shall not trouble the House by reading it but I shall summarize what he said. He said.: "We made the Canadian Government our agents to name'a committee to buy munitions; we asked the Canadian Government to name a committee to buy munitions for us; the Canadian Government acceded to the request and gave the British Government certain names."
Did it ever occur to this House that the Hudson Bay Company is the purchasing agent in Canada for the French republic, and that since the war began the Canadian Pacific has purchased no inconsiderable quantity of supplies for the British Government? The Hudson Bay Company has also made considerable purchases for the Russian Government, and, to a more limited extent, for the Italian Government. I do 99J
not know, but I doubt not that before the Hudson Bay Company was named, inquiry was made of this Government through the Embassy in London as to whether the Hudson Bay Company was a reputable firm, and that the answer was given in the affirmative. In the case of the Shell Committee the British Government-not knowing Canadians and being unable to tell whether Mr. So and So would be able to do such and such a thing-said to the Canadian Government: "Give us the names of a committee that will serve for this purpose." The leader of the Government, with his Minister of Militia and the Cabinet, said: "We know six, or seven, or ten men of great repute and experience who will admirably suit your purpose." And they named General Bertram, Mr. Carnegie, Mr. Watts, Mr. Cantley

and will the hon. member for Pictou say that his appointment was not a wise one-and other gentlemen; it is not necessary for me to go over the whole list. The British Government said: "We assume that, when you put your imprimatur upon these men, they are fit for the purpose." And so the business was conducted by these gentlemen, in the manner that has been described. Now, that is exactly what happened with reference to the French republic, only that they named the Hudson Bay Company.


William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend suggest that the members of the Shell Committee became the appointees of the British Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Absolutely.


William Pugsley: When they were called! on to resign then, why did they resign to' the Minister of Militia and not to the British Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The reason is easily given, and Mr. Hichens gave the ..reason in his letter. The Minister of Militia was the person responsible in the first instance for the appointment of these gentlemen, and naturally they turned in their resignations to the same source. In other words, the Minister of Militia said to General Bertram: "I have named you, and you now become an official of the British Government." The cable that the hon. member for Carleton read distinctly and positively indicates that the committee was acting for the British Government. I may as well read it again. It is found on page 1598 of Hansard:
Reference your cipher September 17 Committee reports price of 100,000 shrapnel 18-pr.

as per your cablegrams and specifications will be $S.55~ each delivered at Montreal, 200,000 by November 1, and at least 30,000 monthly thereafter. Usual inspection charges. Shall we proced? If so, please arrange line of credit through Canadian High Commissipner and in favour of Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence, Canada. Specifications 15-pr. just to hand. Price later. Please answer. Committee wait.
The credit itself was an Imperial credit, absolutely. The money was the. money of , Britain, not of Canada. It was arranged through the High Commissioner and transferred in a proper manner, I assume, not to the credit of this Government, but to that person who was persona designata for the purpose of handling the money, namely, the Deputy Minister of Militia. That is the transaction, and I think we should be proud of everything up to that point.
When my hon. friend from Carleton (Mr. Carvell) points out that small orders were given, he is pointing to what was a fact. I interested myself in connection with Western Canada, and I am going to say more about that later on. Mr. David Carnegie travelled to Victoria and back, and investigated most of the machine shops. I myself urged him to give small orders. I met him and his committee together, and pointed out that at Medicine Hat-which I do not represent-there' were four very good machine .shops which could be utilized for making shells; that there were two small factories in Calgary, and two in Edmonton, that could be used for the same purpose. Mr. Carnegie awarded small orders to each of them. Why? Because he said that these communities had done nobly in the war; they had sent their best sons to the front, and those who were too old to serve on the field should be given an opportunity to help the Empire by making shot and shell to kill the enemy. And so, in Medicine Hat, and in Calgary, and in Edmonton on a smaller scale, and in Vancouver, and in Victoria, men were working during the winter making shells. I leave it to the sense of this House and of the country to say whether it was not just and right that every factory, however small, should be utilized in making munitions, in order that those who wrere too old to serve in the trenches, but who were skilled mechanics and machinists, could still do their bit for the cause of the Empire. .
It ill becomes the hon. gentleman from Carleton (Mr. Carvell) to say that the great manufacturers and the so-called trusts are

the only people to whom orders should be given, and it still more ill becomes him while the representatives of the British Government may be satisfied to award those orders to the small Canadian shops, to be so unpatriotic a Canadian as to condemn their action. My hon. friend has said that these orders were given to favourites and even to members of the She'll Committee themselves. I am not going to traverse those statements, I have not the slightest interest in the world in them beyond what I read in the newspapers and why? The hon. gentleman from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) knows why; every hon. gentleman knows why. He knows it is of supreme importance to get something to fight the enemy with, and not ourselves. Does the hon. gentleman from St. John regret that orders were given to the town of St. John? Does the hon. gentleman who represents Medicine Hat (Mr. Buchanan) regret that a few orders were placed there? I am sure that my hon. friend from Red Deer (Mr. Michael Clark) does not regret what Mr. Carnegie said as to what could be done in Red Deer, and my hon. frien-d from Edmonton (Air. Oliver), I am sure, will agree with me that he has no regret that a couple of orders were placed in his city, even if only for 10,000 shells each. Not being concerned then as to whether the Shell Committee gave orders to their uncles, their cousins, and their aunts-for I really am not interested, and I do not think this country is interested-


William Pugsley: Even at treble prices?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I will come to the prices presently. This country, if I understand a little of its spirit, takes more interest in the war than as to whether General Bertram gave an order to hie brother's cousin's aunt. My hon. friend speaks about the Canadian General Electric and the Allis Chalmers Company, in order to becloud the issue and to throw us off the track. The Canadian General Electric had all the work they could do, and the Allis Chalmers is owned by the Canadian General Electric. If my hon. friend does not know that, he ought to. I have this on good authority. I do not know nny reason why David Carnegie should tell me an untruth; his name is a good Scotch name-


Air. BRODER:: He might.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend says he might tell an untruth even though he is

Scotch. He himself being Scotch is perhaps a better judge than I am as to that. All I can say is that I was informed by Air. Carnegie in all seriousness-and I think he knew what he was talking about-that his sole purpose was to award contracts to every factory in Canada that could make munitions of war. 'I am not going to discuss the question as to whether or not he was logrolled into giving contracts where he should not; whether political pressure was brought to bear upon him, I do not know. I heard something the other day about the right hon. leader of the Opposition having introduced a friend of his to the Munitions Board-a very proper procedure-and I am very glad his friend got a contract. As a Canadian, I was very anxious that every Canadian who could work, but not serve, should be given an opportunity to make munitions of war and thus do his little bit. Air. Carnegie, having awarded a certain (number of orders, returned to England. Poes this House realise' that he left this country for the express purpose of getting definite instructions from the War Office? He went to England I think in the early part of December, 1014, and remained there until I think the early part of January, 1915. In my private opinion, Mr. Carnegie, as a stranger to this country and to the way in which business is carried on here, may have done things that I probably would not have done.


William Pugsley: What were they?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Those things in which the hon. gentleman is a past master in; Mr. Carnegie did not take advice from any one and relied upon himself to the exclusion of those who knew better. That is all.
Air. PUGSLEY": There is not much harm in that. I want to know what those mistakes were.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I want to discuss that if I am not trespassing too much upon the time of the House. I know, at first hand, that the British Government and the British War Office did not believe what Mr. Carnegie told them as to the capacity of Canada. They could, not realize what we were able to do in Canada, and when Mr. Carnegie spoke of the manufacture of shells in a country like Canada, with 7,000,000 people scattered over a wide area, they thought it nonsense to suppose that we could make shells. Mr. Carnegie said to them: "I have travelled from one end of Canada to the other, and I have seen their factories and
they can manufacture shells." That statement impressed, them, and finally they said to him: " Go back to Canada and see what . you can get out of that country in the shape of munitions." He came back to Canada and orders were let for large quantities of shells: 100,000 in one place, 200,000 in another, and so on.
I should like to discuss what I conceive to be an all important question: it is that it is not ah easy matter to make shells.
I am not a machinist, nor a mechanic, like tlie hon. gentleman .from 'Carleton. Neither am I a tinsmith.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I think that is true.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I do not claim to be as was John Bunyan, a travelling tinker. My hon. friend spoke about what he could do with a soldering iron and, pot. I thought lie could do much better at that than as a member of Parliament, and when he said that if he were given the brass he would be able to do the work of a tinsmith I was perfectly conscious of the fact that he was taking stock of the only asset he possesses.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: That is very strong language.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is not an easy matter to manufacture shells, notwithstanding what my hon. friend says. If it does not give any offence to my hon. friend I really prefer to take the judgment of those mechanics and machinists with whom I have discussed this matter to that of my hon. friend, the barrister member from Carleton.
I am told that, first of all, excepting in a very few cases, it was necessary to install, special machinery, and that machinery my hon. friend said was manufactured by the Bertrams.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I did not say so.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Well, I think some hon. member said so.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I did not say so.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then it was the one thing my hon. friend did not say; he must have overlooked it.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: My hon. friend will pardon me. I had no evidence of it, and therefore I did not make the statement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If lack of evidence is the only reason why the hon. gentleman, did not make the remark, then he need not have inflicted this House with a speech lasting four hours.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Give me a committee and I will produce my evidence.


Richard Bedford Bennett: 
Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Why do not they make them in Canada?


Richard Bedford Bennett: These were being made in Canada. I do not wish to be understood as seeking to magnify the difficulties that confronted the Canadian manufacturer; but we must recognize the fact that this was new work, that it was undertaken by people unaccustomed to it, that it was a work requiring great skill in the final analysis, though upon the surface it looks simple. In 'spite of all this, we have great factories where three months ago there was nothing but vacant ground. In the city of Montreal, they have a factory that is declared by those most competent to judge -namely the British inspectors-to be the finest factory of the kind that they have ever seen. I only give you these facts as I receive them. I know that in one place where six months ago there was nothing but an old building, to-day they have a factory in which shell cases are turned out at the rate of one every two seconds. That is great work. In Western Canada, they installed the machinery to manufacture shells in Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, Medicine Hat-in a small way-Vancouver and Victoria. A little brass factory in Medicine Hat was able to adapt its machinery ,so as to make the brass bands and base plates used in ithe production of shells. I submit with confidence that, if the judgment of the experts of the British Ordnance Depai*tment is to be regarded, if the word of the British experts of artillery is to be taken, if the opinion of American manufacturers is to be regarded as worthy of consideration, we in Canada have made more progress and done more work in the production of munitions than has any other country, barring the work,of the ordnance departments of the Allies themselves. I take th-e facts as they are presented to me, together with the dispassionate opinions of men who have no prejudices and no object to serve in misrepresenting the facts. Why should we vilify our fellow-Canadians at this time?


William Pugsley: Who is doing that? Nobody on this side is doing it.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have a profound regard for the magnificent intellect of the hon. member for St. John. I know that

he has been accustomed to read for at least fifty-five years. If he will read the speech of the hon. member for iCarleton, N.B., delivered here on January last, and also his speech delivered on Tuesday and today, and if he will then*say that that is not a slander upon our fellow-tCanadians, then I will be forced to say that he is unable to appreciate the use of the English language.
Thev tell us that the British Government was dissatisfied with the work of the Shell Committee. Mr. D. A. Thomas came to Canada clothed with all the power of Lloyd George himself. Lloyd George said: I constitute you, Mr. Thomas, my minister qua Canada. And Mr. Thomas came . to Canada. He investigated, remaining here for three months. Mr. Thomas is a man of very large business experience; and head of the great Cambrian Coal Association of South Wales. He brought with him Mr. Carr, who is permanently associated with the Education Department in England, and another gentleman. For my part, I do not believe that Mr. D. A. Thomas deliberately wrote what he believed to be untrue. If I must make a choice, I prefer to take the statement of Mr. D. A. Thomas to that of Mr. Carvell, of Carleton. I prefer the statement, clear and straight, of the man who has recently been honoured by his ' Sovereign, and elevated to the peerage, to the statement of one who has been guilty -not according to what I say, but according to what his own organ says-of dealing in half-truths and insinuations. Now, Mr. Thomas either knew what he was talking about or he did not. Is he a commanding business man in the life of the British Island or is he not? If he is, he knew what he was talking about. Then, either he told the Prime Minister and this Government the truth, or he did not. If he told the truth in the letter which he wrote to the Prime Minister, that Shell Committee satisfied the British Government. If he did not tell the truth, then you are at liberty to believe the hon. member for Carleton. Take your choice. We might as well deal with this matter .plainly and fairly. Mr. Thomas was sent here by the Right Hon. Lloyd George to investigate .conditions and report. I happened to cross the ocean with Mr. Carr; il was with him for eight days. The gentlemen who came here to investigate .conditions .say that the conditions did not reflect upon the honesty, the integrity, or the capacity of Canadian manufacturers. They say that, the prices
paid in the first instance were larger than those paid afterwards; but I should like my hon .friend to remember this, .and I had it from Mr. Thomas himself-as I had it from Mr. Carr, and as I have had it since from British statesmen-that they paid in the first instance a price to manufacture shells that was sufficient to pay the initial cost of machinery before making a profit. That is the reason for the high prices. The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) asks why the prices were what they were, and why present prices are what they are. This .statement explains it.
When it was .ascertained what these factories were spending for equipment, .Mr. Carnegie said he would give them an order and fix the price at $5.50 and .supply them with the billet, in order that out of the first revenue .that .came froth the shells they would be able to repay the cost of the machinery, which has tout scrap .value after the war is over. After that, he Said, the prices would be reduced to such -a sum as would enable them to make a fair profit upon their investment, and no more. These are the facts about this thing. There is no secret, there is no .mystery as to $6.'50, $6.75, $7, $.10 or $30 being paid. Mt. .Carnegie wanted to pay a .price of $90 for a certain kind of shell, and when he was told of the possibility of being able to manufacture it at $55, the price then prevailing throughout the length and breadth of Britain, and pay the cost of machinery, he hesitated to believe that it could be done. But the figures were put before him; and ultimately he was "convinced that it could be done; and the fact is that we are now making 9-inch shells in Canada at the same prices as that which it costs for the manufacture of these shells in Britain, the initial cost of machinery being repaid. In every factory in Canada- in Edmonton, Medicine Hat, Calgary, Vancouver, Victoria, St. John, New Glasgow, Pictou, Halifax, everywhere in this Dominion, it was the .avowed purpose and policy of the British Government, speaking through Mr. Lloyd George, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Hichens-and it is the policy to-day -to absorb from ithe revenue from the manufacture of the first shells the initial cost of the machinery, which, as I have said, has but scrap value after the war is over. That is the answer I make to the hon. member for St. John, when he asks me about prices.
At six o'clock the House took recess.

House resumed at eight o'clock.


Richard Bedford Bennett: 
William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend refer to the plant of the Canada Cement Company?


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is one of them;
there is another.


William Pugsley: It took Mr. Jones seven months to get the contract.
Mr.'BENNETT: My hon. friend says it took the manager of the Canada Cement Company seven months to get the contract from the Shell Committee.


William Pugsley: And- at a reduced price.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend says at a reduced price. Let us assume that that was so-1-I am not going to argue that-but what does it prove? That is the question. Does that prove that they were a dishonest committee?


William Pugsley: If my hon. friend asks me for an opinion I will give it. It proves that the Shell Committee would not reduce the price because they were keeping up prices with the little .mushroom companies all over the country.
(Mr. BENNETT: My hon. friend says that it proves that the committee were keeping up prices for the small companies. I would like to ask him whether or not he gives his dissent to the arguments which I advanced this afternoon that the small companies in various parts of Canada were entitled to some consideration in view of the fact that men who had passed the age for military service were pleading to find employment in the manufacture of shells.


William Pugsley: I dissent entirely from
that mode of putting it, because as the re-. suits show they were giving the same prices to established manufactories that could have produced goods at perhaps one-half or one-third of what they were giving to the small firms; they were giving uniform prices all round.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I think my hon. friend will admit that that is hardly a correct statement of fact.


William Pugsley: It is absolutely correct.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What is my hon. friend's evidence for saying that Mr. .Tones was seven months trying to, get an order?


William Pugsley: It comes direct.


Richard Bedford Bennett: From Mr. Tones?


William Pugsley: Direct from Mr.	lone,?.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Is it in the form	of	a
letter?	-


William Pugsley: If we get a committee it will be shown absolutely.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I doubt not that the
hon. gentleman who is president of the Canada Cement Company, and who occupies a seat in another chamber, may have informed my hon. friend that it took seven months, but I think he is mistaken in that. My information is that Mr. Jones never seriously considered the production of munitions, it being no part Of the business of his company and not being .authorized by its charter, until six weeks before he actually got the order. It was necessary for him to go to the Secretary of State here and get an amendment of his charter before he could manufacture a single shell or raise a dollar for that purpose.


Mr. NESBITT:: Mr. Jones told me that he besieged the Shell Committee for seven months.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am bound to accept my hon. friend's word and I am very glad that he has given a definite statement as to that. Mr. Jones may have gone to the Shell Committee and asked for an order but he did nothing to indicate his willingness to undertake a contract, his company had no charter to authorize it to undertake work of that kind, it was necessary for him to get his charter changed, and it was not until November, 1915, that Mr. Jones was serious in wanting a contract.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Yes, he told them that
he was prepared to back it up with all the means behind the cement company and that he would show his bona fides.


Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: He could have got his charter amended afterwards.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He got supplementary
letters patent in November, 1915, or January, 1916-I am not sure which. But let us assume, for the purpose of my argument, that every statement by the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley), the hon. member for North Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt), and the hon. junior member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean) is true. What does that show? It merely shows one of two things, either that the orders which had been authorized by the Imperial Government had at that time been exhausted; or it shows, according to the contention of my hon. friends opposite, that there was some feeling against awarding the contract to Mr. Jones. My information may, or may not, be correct, but the information I have is that th'is Shell Committee could only award contracts as they were authorized by the Minister of Munitions and there was no standing order from which millions of shells could he placed, but, from time to time, orders were sent forward. To my certain knowledge, when I was in London in December, certain questions were under discussion as to orders that should be awarded, and they could not award orders to this country until Mr. Lloyd George had decided that further orders would be given to Canada. This question could not be settled until such time as it became clear that this Dominion was prepared to finance to the extent of $50,000,000 for the purpose of stabilizing exchange. Many orders that were ready to be awarded to us were not awarded because the difficulties in connection with exchange were too great, During the last few weeks, to

my knowledge, it would be possible for certain shell orders to be awarded to Canada if we were in a position to absorb the cost and thus stabilize the exchange between the two countries. This war has become a war of enormous monetary proportions, and the question of the power of Canada to finance the orders for shells given by the British Government has become a matter of vital importance. If Mr. Jones of the Canada Cement Company did not get an order, and if he was seven months trying to get it, from what I know of Mr. Jones ,and I know him well, he did not go after it with that persistency that is so characteristic of him and which he manifested for the last seven days before he got it. I know Mr. Jones, my hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) knows Mr. Jones, and my hon. friend from Halifax (Mr. Maclean) knows him, and, from what we know of him, we know that if Mr. Jones had gone after a shell order for seven months with the persistency, perseverance and determination for which he is noted, and if there were any orders to be given, either Mr. Jones would have had one or more shell orders or there would have been no Shell Committee. But he finally got orders and at low prices.
Have any gentlemen conducted any propaganda against what they used to call a trust in this House? Have any gentlemen ever held up their hands in holy horror at capital being directed against the small enterprise and the poor man? Have any gentlemen ever poured out vials of their wrath against watered stock in times long past? Tiie cement trust is a very powerful organization. It is administered by very competent men. It is managed by the most astute industrial manager in Canada to-day-Mr. Jones. It was much to be preferred that small companies in Port Arthur, Fort William, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Calgary, Medicine Hat, Vancouver, and Victoria should be giving employment to men who are best able to &erve the state in the manner which I have indicated, and which could take
10,000,	15,000 or 20,000 shells, than that Mr. Jones should absorb the sum total of all the work that should have gone to these factories, even if he got lower.prices for it. Let us have no misapprehension about that, because I happen to be in a position to speak with some authority, if I were absolutely free to do it. This I desire to say further:	The Imperial Shell Committee
was just as fully advised of those facts as I am now, and the view that I now hold was the view of that committee.


William Pugsley: You mean the present committee?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The old	committee.


William Pugsley: That ik not the Imperial committee.
Mr. BENtNIETT: My hon. friend is fearful lest the use of the word "Imperial" should jar upon his nerves. It is surprising that the learned and distinguished gentleman representing the loyal city of St. John should have his nerves disturbed by the word "Imperial." If it means anything, it means what I have said. They had no order, for 9.2 shells to award, and in that connection I may say that Mr. Jones has undertaken the production of 100,000 9.2 shells. There is one now over at the Shell Committee offices, weighing 242 pounds. He is also undertaking the forging of a certain kind of steel, being a steel expert. But during the time my hon. friends say he was clamouring for orders, there were no other orders for 9.2 shells to award. Does that explain it? If I have no cotton to sell, obviously an offer of $1 a yard gets no cotton from me; and if there are no .shell orders to award obviously the expression of willingness to make shells at $20 a shell will get no shell orders, even if the market price was $55. That is the position. This Mr. Jones' business has been much talked of in the press, and much exploited, I am perfectly cognizant of what he has said; I have, I think, as full a knowledge of that as my hon. friend from St. John. But Mr. Jones has never said, nor could he properly and truthfully say, that the Shell Committee awarded orders for shells that he undertook the production of, to any manufacturer in Canada during the time that my hon. friends say he was clamouring for an order. Let ns understand that clearly. If it be true, what does it show? My hon. friend from St. John, like myself, has at times speculated in what we call real estate, and sometimes I think our judgment has not been as sound as it should have been. My hon friend in the early days had great faith in the Northwest Territories of Canada, a faith which did him credit, and he invested largely in farm lands, away out around Regina and along the Long Lake line. Years and years passed, and those lands did not grow in value.


William Pugsley: Steadily grew in value.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They steadily grew out of value. Then there came a change, and they steadily grew in value.


William Pugsley: They began to grow in value about 189Q.


Richard Bedford Bennett: About the time my learned friend ceased to be a Conservative candidate in Kings, N.B.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: That shows he was a shrewd man.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He is about due for another change now.


George Perry Graham: There were other changes about that time.


Richard Bedford Bennett: During the years I 'have had the great pleasure of knowing my hon. friend from St. John, he has occupied many political positions. I have known him as Speaker of the Legislature of New Brunswick, perfectly independent in his views; as a disciple of Liberalism under mugwump politics; as the Conservative candidate for Kings before the election of 1896; as the independent and indefatigable candidate for fit. John in 1896; as the Liberal candidate in 1900 and then as Minister of the Crown under the Liberal Government, and I am perfectly sure that after the next election, when we are returned to power, he will say: we must all get together and work for the benefit of Canada, and he will want to come over to us.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: That is a splendid way of getting away from Jones.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have no desire whatever to get away from Jones.


William Pugsley: Rather frivolous talk now that the war is on.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, nothing
could better illustrate my argument. 1 have been contending that my hon. friend from St. John has been endeavouring to stir up partisan strife in this country, and I have merely given a little of his political history on the principle that: "while the light hangs out to burn, the vilest sinner may return," and in the hope that he may cease to be the rabid partisan he has been in the recent past. I am quite sure there is nothing partisan,in that. It is simply holding out a hope for his regeneration, and there is room for it. I do not want to get away from Jones. I am .prepared frankly to concede, for the purpose of my argument, that Jones did not get an order.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why didn't he?


Richard Bedford Bennett: If I could answer that question I would, and if my hon. friend can answer it I will take my seat for the purpose of enabling him to do so.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You knew all about it.	.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have no such encyclopedic knowledge as my hon. friend from Pietou.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I thought you had.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I said that I had perfect knowledge of the circumstances under which he sought an order. -


William Pugsley: Tell us why he did not get the order.


Richard Bedford Bennett: If my hon. friend can
answer that, I will sit down while he does so.
Mr. PUGSLEY-: I have already told my hon. friend-the price at which he wanted to get it was too low in the opinion of the Shell Committee.


Richard Bedford Bennett: What does that show?
Does it show that these men were dishonest? If it does, the hon. member for Carleton is wrong; for he says they are honest. Mr. Thomas had full knowledge of that fact, and he did not condemn; Mr. Hichens had full knowledge of that fact, and he did not condemn; Mr. Lloyd George had the report of Mr. Thomas before him for at least three months, and he did not complain. What T desire to know is this: Do hon. gentlemen opposite say that because Jones did not get an order on the terms they suggest, the Committee was dishonest? And if they suggest that the committee was dishoqest, do they suggest also that this Government was dishonest because the committee was dishonest? That is all it means. For my purpose, it may well have been that there was favoritism, and that the prices were higher than they should have been. For my purpose, it may well have been that the orders were not allocated and allotted as they should have been; but at the utmost what does that show? It shows nothing more nor less than possible negligence or the lack of business capacity. Let me see what the right lion, leader of the Opposition says it means. What does he charge them with, and this is important. He says:
I say that, owing to dereliction of duty on the part of the Shell Committee time has been lost, and, owing to that time so lost, battles have been lost, thousands of lives have been sacrificed, victories have not been carried to a

final issue, the enemy has not been pursued as he retreated, and the war has thus been prolonged.
Glorious rhetoric, but without reason; beautiful word-painting, but without facts to back it up; beautiful to read in the country school-house, but no advance as far as argument is concerned. The charge is, dereliction of duty. And this charge should be read in the light of what my hon. friend from Carleton said later on, and which is found on page 1593 of Hansard:
We are not making charges against the members of the Government; we do not say that members of the Government made a million or two or ten million dollars out of the operations of the Shell Committee. No one makes such a charge, and no one says that any member of the Shell Committee stole anything, although I will try, before I get through, to show that they made pretty big profits. I have no criminal charge to prefer against the members of the Shell Committee; hut I suppose that unless I can go that far my right hon. friend will tell me that X have not complied with his requirements, and so cannot have an investigation. We stand on our sovereign rights as rep-' resenting the people and demand an investigation of the expenditure of our money.
1 would point out to the hon. member for Carleton and the hon. member f-or St. John that at the present moment, not one dollar of [DOT] Canadian money, not even one cent, has been paid for munitions of war in Canada that has not been charged against the British Government itself.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Bookkeeping.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Bookkeeping of the kind that the blockers' brigade was accustomed to, but not the kind we are accustomed to.


William Pugsley: In the meantime, has
there not been an advance by this Government on account of the partnership between the British Government and the Canadian Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Not at all, as I shall show. The next charge of the hon. member 'for Carleton is:
Our complaint [DOT]about the Shell Committee is that they did not get the munitions in time and did not get them at a reasonable price.
Further on he says:
What we complain of is that the Shell Committee, instead of organizing the industries of Canada for the purpose of turning out a shell that was some good, made it their principal object in life to get business for themselves and their own companies.
Those are the chargee preferred by the leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Carleton against the Shell Committee. That is a charge of negligence. The
Shell Committee is acquitted of dishonesty, acquitted of any fraud, but they are charged with negligence. Since when did a charge against an agent for negligence, by a third party, when the principal is satisfied, ever entitle anybody to an investigation? I read this afternoon from the right hon. leader of the Opposition, quoting the words of Earl Curzon indicating that this Shell Committee was the agent of the Imperial Government. The agent:	the
principal is the Imperial Government. And we in Canada should 'be proud that the British Government, instead of sending out men from their own country, selected as their agents men nominated by the leader of this Government.
The principal says: "I want no investigation; I want no inquiry; I am satisfied that my agent has accounted to me for every cent he has expended, and for all the work he has done." But some outsider, some intermeddling busybody says: "No, I am not satisfied, let me investigate the work of your agent." Since when was that the law of the country? Since when is that a principle upon which parliaments act? If that be a sound principle upon which parliaments may'act, then all I can say is this: in times of peace the time of Parliament will be mostly taken up in investigating; but in time of war, when the very life of the nation is at stake, does the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) say that it is the duty of an intermeddling busybody, representing some people in a remote portion of the King's dominions, to demand an investigation as to how the King has discharged his duty to the country? That is what it comes down to. I appeal to the right hon. leader of the Opposition if, in his long experience, he has ever known under our constitutional system, a principal, satisfied, contented, absolutely demanding no inquiry, and on the contrary, giving a certificate of character to his agent, to find his time taken up by some outside third party setting up the right to investigate the operations of the agent as between him and the principal. Such a practice is unsound constitutionally; it is at variance with all political practice and with the long ..istory of our parliamentary institutions, and every one knows it.


William Pugsley: I desire to call my hon.
friend to order. He quoted from what he said was a statement made by my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition, to the effect that Lord Curzon had stated in

the House of Lords that the Shell Committee was the agent of the Imperial Government.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


William Pugsley: I challenge my hon.
friend to read from Hansard where my right hon. friend made any such quotation. The quotation which he made was that the Imperial Government entrusted the purchasing to the Canadian Government, and it was the Canadian Government that appointed the Shell Committee. (Reading):
In Canada the system. adopted by the War Office has been this. They have made their orders from an early date, through the Canadian Government, treating the Canadian Government, in fact, as their agents for the supply of munitions of war. Any requirements from the War Office here are communicated by letter or telegram to the Canadian Government, or rather, to the Minister of Militia there. This officer constituted quite early in the day the Shells Committee to which the noble Lord referred. That is a body presided over by a gentleman whose name is mentioned, a General Bertram, and upon it are representatives of the various manufacturing interests in the Dominion, and the function of the committee is to advise the minister as to the contracts which, on behalf of the Imperial Government, he shall conclude. All applications are made to him.
The Minister of Militia is the gentleman who concludes the contracts.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am delighted that my hon. friend has directed the attention of the House to this quotation, because it was only to save time that I did not read it. The minister referred to is the Imperial Minister of Munitions, as the hon. member well knows.


William Pugsley: Not at all.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And what is more, the fact is and the records show, that not a single contract for shells was closed between that Shell Committee and a contractor without the cabled consent and advice of the Minister of Munitions in London. The absolute fact is that General Bertram and his committee, as shown by the documents that are now to be found in Hansard, did not close a contract for shrapnel, high explosives, 6-inch, 8-inch, or 9-inch shells, without communication by cable with the Imperial Minister of Munitions and without receiving from him his o.k.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Will the hon. gentleman tell us what Imperial Minister they communicated with before there was a Minister of Munitions?


Richard Bedford Bennett: The Minister of War.
Lord Kitchener, had a branch in his own

department over which General von Donlop, I think presided. Before Lloyd George was made Minister of Munitions, the application's were sent to Lord Kitchener.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: There is nothing of that in Lord Curzon's statement.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have read Lord Curzon's statement, and the minister to whom he refers is the Minister of Munitions in London.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Such an argument would not stand in any court of law.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There need not be any discussion as to what Lord Curzon meant. Let us divest ourselves of all these technical discussions and get down to the facts. The Shell Committee communicated with the Minister of War or the Minister of Munitions, whoever happened to be in charge, first Lord Kitchener, with General von Donop, and later, Mr. Lloyd George. More, over, the facts can be learned by any hon. gentleman opposite by going down to the offices of the Shell Committee and aseer-taining them, and my hon. friend from Carleton, who has been so studious in his examination of the papers in the back room of the Shell Committee, could easily have ascertained the facts.	*


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I want to emphatically deny that I have ever been in the back room of the Shell Committee.
Mr. BiENNEITT: The front room, then.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I have never seen the papers, and I do not know anything about them. '


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am bound to accept that statement, but I have it from a member of the Shell Committee that yesterday my hon. friend was perusing the papers of the Shell Committee for the purpose of speaking in this House.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I want my hon. friend to withdraw that statement because it is not true. I never saw any files of papers;
I never went to the Munitions Board to look up files of papers. I went to the Munitions Board to look over shells.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yesterday?
Mr. CIAR,VELL,: Yes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then you were there?
Mr. CARVElLiL: I saw no papers; I perused no files, and I will not allow my hon. friend to make a statement like that without challenging it.	[DOT]

Mr. SPEAKER. Order. According to the rules of the House, the hon. member for Calgary is bound to accept the statement made by fhe hon. member for Carleton.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I accept his statement
gladly. The hon. member says he attended the Shell Committee's office yesterday for the purpose of obtaining information as to the shells.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Exactly.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And doubtless he obtained the information he required.	[DOT]


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I did.


Richard Bedford Bennett: And I am perfectly satisfied that if he had pursued his inquiries to the extent he should, he would have found that the Shell Committee concluded no order for shells without communicating with the Imperial Minister of Munitions, or the War Office, as the case might be. I merely mention that in passing.
I desire to point out just one further fact and I have done with that side of the issue. After Mr. Thomas and Mr. Hichens investigated, they made a report which according to a well-defined policy, will not be brought down until after the war is over; but they named a new Imperial Munitions Committee, and what was the personnel of it? My hon. friend, who descanted this afternoon upon the terrible evils of General Bertram and Mr. Carnegie, and who descanted at equal length upon the personnel of the new Munitions Board, overlooked the fact that both Mr. Carnegie and General Bertram are members of that board.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What has General
Bertram done since the new board began work?


Richard Bedford Bennett: He has been doing his
share of the work.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: He has been in
Florida.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He may have been in
Florida on account of his health having been injured by the attacks of hon. members opposite. His work has been appreciated by every one else. It may be that, having won the commendation of the British people and having been knighted by his Sovereign, and then denounced by a misguided minority in the Canadian Parliament, he has been compelled to go to another clime for his health, but at the outset he advised the board in their work, and he has gradually got the prices of shells reduced. Mr. Carnegie has been over Canada ; he has been to England doing what he could in presenting the claims of the Canadian manufacturers and people to the Minister of Munitions for the purpose of increasing the number of orders to be received by the Canadian people, to give employment to larger numbers of our workmen, to found new factories and to create new industries in this country. That is what he has been doing. Mr. Carnegie, when he first came to Canada, was a doubting Thomas, who did not believe in the potentialities of this country. Returning to England with the accomplished facts to show for his activity, he comes back to us again with fresh orders. So that, now we have four hundred factories with 136,000 workmen ready to resume work to-morrow at the sound of the whistle, where previously less than 36,000 were employed.
This Munitions Board thus reconstructed, the old committee being honourably discharged, is now charged with the responsibility of carrying forward the work. And now that the old committee is dead, the right hon. leader of the Opposition and his followers propose to hold a post-mortem. They know that they cannot in this way usefully serve the state. The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) will not, say that anything a committee of investigation could do by way of post-mortem could in any way assist or serve the state. They know that the iGovernment to whom the committee were answerable, the Govern mant whose servants they were, the ministry in Great Britain, declare that the committee's work has been done to their satisfaction. I say it guardedly, (but I say it emphatically, that these hon. gentle-know that no useful purpose would be served, except one, and that would be described in the language of Beaconsfield when he came back from Berlin-" It might at least serve the purpose of maligning their opponents and vilifying the people of the country in which they live." Let us be frank and fair ,about this. Not only does it serve no useful purpose, but it Pauses great harm. When the hon. member for Carleton this afternoon referred to the fact that a Liberal government should be in power, and that it would give great pleasure to the people, I know the people to whom it would give great pleasure-the -people who occupy the central empires of Europe. They are the ,people who would be pleased, who would be delighted. The enemy whom


William Pugsley: I rise to ask a question for information. Was the money that was being deposited to the credit of the Shell Committee deposited by the Government of Canada?


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend knows that, in the first instance, the credit was wired through the High Commissioner's office, from the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the Deputy Minister of Militia as persona -designate, for the purchase of shells. We made the loan of $ 100,000,000- $50,000,000 more than was asked for-and

that $50,000,000 is being loaned to the British Government to pay for the purchases in Canada. That $50,000,000 is to be lent to the British Government* for the purpose of paying for their purchases in Ganada-hay, oats, wheat, rye, and various other commodities that are bought here, including munitions of war.


William Pugsley: With regard to this loan which my hon. friend says is being made to the Imperial Government to pay for munitions, etc., is the money deposited directly to t!he credit of the Shell Committee by the Canadian Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: My understanding of it is this: the credit is a credit that is arranged for the Imperial Government. Our money is placed to their credit, and then' the Imperial Government advises the Shell Committee as to what their expenditures may be, and as to what money they have avail-, able for checking against.


William Pugsley: I understand, then, that the money is put directly to the credit of the Shell Committee by the Canadian Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No. The right hon. Chancellor of the Exchequer has arranged a special account for the Imperial Munitions Board, not the Shell Committee. The Imperial Munitions Board gets money from one source, the Imperial Government; and the Imperial Government borrows part of it from the Canadian Government.


William Pugsley: I am speaking of the old Shell Committee.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The old Shell Committee went out of business before the Canadian loan was made. On November 20, 1915, the old Shell Committee was superseded by the Imperial Munitions Board, and the credit arranged by the Imperial Government for the old Shell Committee was a credit created by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, transferring the money as such from London to Canada.


William Pugsley: Do I understand, then, that no part of the money that was handed to the Shell Committee was placed directly to their credit by the Canadian Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No part of it; that is my understanding. It was all Imperial money that they had; the Imperial Government became responsible for finding the money. For instance, let us say that we owed the Imperial Government $2,000,000, and the Imperial Government owed us $2,000,000 100 .
for munitions; book-keeping entries would be made by .way of arranging exchange and saving trouble-that is all. But it must be remembered that in so far as the financial side of it is concerned, the paymaster at the present moment is the British people, not the Canadian people. Tnat is what I want to make clear; let there be no getting away from that point.


William Pugsley: As the contracts which were let by the old Shell Committee are being completed and paid for, is or is not the payment being made directly by the Canadian Government?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Aly information upon that point-and I think it is correct-is this: the Canadian Government is not buying a single dpllar's worth of anything so far as the Imperial Munitions Board is concerned. This Board, presided over by Mr. Flavelle, issues its own cheques, and pay their obligations alike for those liabilities that were created before they came into being, but which -they assume by reason of their having taken over the responsibilities of the old Shell Committee, and for the new burdens which they themselves have created.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: But the money comes from the Government of Canada.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It does not in any sense come from the Government or from the people of Canada. We lend money to the British Government and they lend money to us; it is a debtor and creditor transaction from start to finish.
The next point is the constitutional question: should this Parliament ask for an investigation if the principal whose money it has and to whom the agent is responsible not only does not ask for, but says he does not want an investigation?


William Pugsley: Has the Imperial Government said that?


Richard Bedford Bennett: It has.


William Pugsley: Through whom?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Air. Hiehens, representing the Minister of Munitions.


William Pugsley: He does not profess to speak for the Imperial Government in the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He did speak for them.


William Pugsley: He speaks personally.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Then, Mr. Hiehens, speaking personally, though representing him-
ItEVISED EDITION

self as having the power of the Minister of Munitions, Mr. Lloyd George, told the Prime Minister of this country that Mr. D. A. Thomas or his successor had in Canada all the powers of the Minister of Munitions himself. Perhaps he did not know-I suggest that.
9	p.m. Has my hon. friend looked the facts, in the eye? Why do my hon. friends desire to make party capital of this matter? Why not be good enough Canadians to be proud ot what has been done? I am doing nothing more than reciting the facts as I understand them; I have no prejudices in the matter. I do. think, as a student, in a small way, of constitutional principles and the political history of our cwuntry, that two propositions are firmly established, namely, that we have no power to investigate the expenditure of other people's money in this country, and that, if the Government whose money it was says that it has no desire for investigation, we should respect its wishes. Tell me this: should we investigate the expenditures of the Hudson Bay Company in Canada for the French Govern-ernment, for the Russian Government, for the Italian Government, for the British Government? Should we investigate the expenditure of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company for the rather large sums that they have expended for the British Government?


William Pugsley: We appointed them
agents; why not?


Richard Bedford Bennett: We did not appoint them agents.


William Pugsley: We appointed the Shell Committee.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, we named them as being the persons who were fit to be agents, and the principal has said that he is well satisfied.


William Pugsley: The Minister of Militia appointed them.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: He says he did.


William Pugsley: And they say that they reported to the minister once a week.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Certainly, in order that he who recommended the agent to the principal might know that his faith in the agent whom he had named had been warranted. Suppose the hon. member for St. John said to me: I should like to have an agent out your way to look after some matters for me. I say : I think Smith would make a

good man; my hon. friend says, very well, Smith makes no bargain, no sale, no purchases, without telegraphing the hon. member for St. John. I say: I have named you, Smith, as a fit person to be agent for Dr. Pugsley; I want you to report to me every week what you have done, in order that I may know that I have made no mistake in naming you and that my faith in your capacity as agent has not been unwarranted.


William Pugsley: Suppose I were to name Smith in Calgary to do my business. Smith says: I will have to employ three clerks to attend to this business-Mr. Jones, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Robinson. I will appoint these gentlemen as my clerks to attend to this business which you have entrusted to me. Does my hon. friend say that afterwards Smith could not investigate the conduct. of the three clerks that he appointed?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Why, certainly; that is the very point I am trying to make.


William Pugsley: Let me carry it a little further.


An hon. MEMBER:: You had better go
back.


William Pugsley: Not at all. The Minister of Militia, as representing the people of Canada, appointed this Shell Committee to look after the business with which he, as representing the people of Canada, was entrusted. All we ask is that the people of Canada shall be allowed to investigate the conduct of the eight or ten members of this Shell Committee whom the Minister of Militia appointed.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend has got a little confused, which is indeed rather surprising. I must say that in all my long experience with the hon. gentleman I never saw Rim muddled so badly.


William Pugsley: The matter is quite
clear in my own mind.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Well, it is a matter of expressing it, probably.


William Pugsley: Probably so. If I could talk the one-hundredth part as fast as my hon. friend does, I should be all right.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am bound to say that my hon. friend can always talk rapidly enough to disguise his real meaning.
* I leave the constitutional phase of the matter, and the next point I desire to make is this: is it expedient

from the national, not the political standpoint-that this investigation should be held?


William Pugsley: It certainly is.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend saye that it is. With that I join issue. He is only saying that in an academic sense to see if I have any reason for the 'faith that is in me. I urge that it is inexpedient for these reasons, (1) from the standpoint of manufacturing in this country; (2) from the standpoint of our credit; (3) because our energies should all be used for the war; and lastly that nothing will suffer by waiting, which is very important.
Let us see how the manufacturing interests are affected. Last summer I was in Paris, and while I was there, a gentleman representing Canadian manufacturers came to the hotel and asked me if I would endeavour to intercede with the Premier and with the Minister of War to say that Canadian boots were such as might safely be ordered by the French Government and worn by the French soldiers. I inquired, and this was the answer: It was explained to me that because of the damning given to the reputation of Canadian boots by men, such as the hon. member for Carleton and others of that type at the last session of Parliament Canadian boots and shoes were not held in high esteem in France. I /say to-day in this House that not les3 than $10,000,000 worth of boot and shoe business was lost to the Dominion of Canada by the slanderous attacks made upon them by the Opposition in this House. I say that in all seriousness. No statements or representations that could be made were sufficient to overcome the prejudice that had been created in the minds of those people by the attacks made in a committee of this House.
Further, when I was in London I picked up the Daily Chronicle. The Times, and the Morning Post, and the Daily Telegraph had been telling the people of England of the possibilities of Canada, and of how our business men might assist in the conduct of the war, and' I read an article signed by a man, whose name I forget, in which he said: what have we to expect from Canada in the matter of help in t'he war; they are such a corrupt bunch over there that at the last session of Parliament so and so took place. And, Sir, my country, and your country, and the country of the Canadian people was held up to the British people and to t'he citizens of the great Republic of France as a country which, in this great crisis of the world's history, thought more of dollars than of the fate of 100J
the Empire, and more of partyiem than of patriotism.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Is my hon. friend aware that the committee for the consideration of the question of boots was moved for- by the Prime Minister himself, and not at the instigation of any one on this side of the House?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am aware of the fact that the Prime Minister, yielded to the unconscionable importunities and cries and howls of tale bearers. But if I know the Prime Minister, he is not going to see his country vilified and slandered a second time at the instance of the hon. member for Carleton and his friends.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You are keeping the lid on this time all right.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My hon. friend talks about keeping the lid on. Patriotism with him spells keeping the lid on. His idea of patriotism consists in advantage to a party; that is all. I say that when you are confronted with a situation such as this war has produced, we can at least afford to wait a day or two. What man in this House whose residence is burning, whose business is being destroyed, and the hose bursts, would stop putting out the fire because the hose bursts, to investigate the town council that bought the hose? I put that to the House and to the country. I ask the fathers whose sons are at the front whether or not they want this war stopped while the hon. member from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) and the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Carvell) investigate as to who is responsible for the hose. Is it not a lovely spectacle; is it not an elevating spectacle of Canadian patriotism to see the brains and the genius of one party of the State being used in the middle of a great war for the purpose of slandering, vilifying, and holding up to execration their fellow Canadians, lessening the respect with which they are held by the peoples of the world, destroying the proud position which we have attained by the greatness of our troops on the field of battle, and causing the name of Canadians to be a by-word and a reproach in the market places of the world. That is my hon. friend's idea of patriotism, but it does not reflect the genius of the Liberal party as represented by the people of this country, however much it may represent .the highest ideal of the hon. member for Carleton.
Let me go a step further. It hurts our credit. Who so avaricious as the money

lender in a neutral state? Who takes advantage of every opportunity to take the last cent of interest out of the country at war so much as the neutral state? I do not know, because I am riot sufficiently a student to express a sound opinion, but from the greatest financial men whom I saw in England, I learned that the economic side of this war is transcendently the most important. Some of them said they almost despaired of our ability to meet the great drains made on our financial resources. We are borrowers in the United States; we are borrowers at home. We are part of the British Empire, and our credit must suffer if the credit of the Empire suffers. In floating the Anglo-French loan, they pledged the credit of France and the credit of the British Emfpire, and here in this Parliament of ours, in this new democracy, there are men so little concerned with the tremendous issues of this war as to fritter away the time of the State and of Parliament by attacking the Shell Committee, which bought munitions of war to the satisfaction of the British Parliament, but which did not please a couple of hon. gentlemen. Is our credit thus to be destroyed? One-quarter of one per cent on our loans, one-half of one per cent more interest on the moneys we must borrow, means a charge upon the people of this country that, measured month by month for five years, will amount to $5,000,000 and, for ten years to a sufficient sum to enable us to complete great national undertakings, or to provide for the readjustment period after the war, or for larger pensions for those who are dependent. Is it a right thing to thus hurt our credit, is it right to thus destroy and injure the reputations of our manufacturers? I should like this to be placed on Hansard; one of the great purchasing agents for the Allies, representing a foreign government, said to me that Canadian manufactured goods were better than any goods he had bought upon the American continent. I was proud of it. Now, I am told that a committee is needed to investigate and hold up to scorn and obloquy the men who are devoting their energies and time to this work for the purpose of assisting in ending this war.
But that is not all. I should like to make this clear. You say: '"Why should we not hold- an investigation?" I say: Why should you not hold an investigattion later on if you want it? If the constitutional repuixements are met, and a dollar 0=1 expenditure goes through the public accounts, you are entitled to an investigation. If we pay out a dollar you can demand an

investigation. Who will be injured if an investigation is delayed?, Who stops in the midst of a conflagration to investigate who bought the hose? Do I understand it to be the policy of the Liberal party to say to the people of the British Empire: We want to stop^war until we find out if the agents of the Imperial Government did their duty? No, no. My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition says no to that? Surely he says no. With his large experience and his great knowledge of the constitution and the political history of our country, he must say no to that. The position he took on the South African war question was sound absolutely from the const!-' tutional standpoint.
Do you realise what an investigation means? Let us concede that you have it. [Over three hundred concerns, large and small, would be affected.' With, a parliamentary committee sitting at- Ottawa men would be brought from Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Medicine Hat, Winnipeg, Moosejaw, Saskatoon, Port Arthur, Fort William, St- John, Halifax, Orillia, every little town in the country, to attend this investigation. You, sirs, talk of delay. Axe you going to stop the wheels of Government and industry until you can get these little vaporings before the people of Canada? You are going to stop the highly skilled business of the country and these men are going to be dragged away from their businesses and brought here while an investigation is held. That is what is going to happen and you call that states-craft and patriotism. You cannot seriously mean that. Can a man like Colonel Cant-ley leave the operations at New Glasgow- for the purpose of coming here and sitting around listening to learned questions about steel being asked of him? Can the managers of the Dominion Iron and Steel Company come here and attend an investigation of this kind? What is to happen these great businesses while these men are here? Last year we saw the Militia Department disorganized while Parliament investigated boots. What are you going to do now? Not only are you going to disorganize and dislocate industry but, more, you are -going to place an intolerable burden and responsibility upon the Government while this investigation continues. I appeal to the patriotism, to the humanity, of the men of this House to say whether or not they are living up to the highest ideals of Canadianism when they say that the Prime Minister, already over.-weighted with matters of Government, is to have this added to the burden, if min-

isters of the Crown already overburdened with responsibility shall have this parliamentary investigation thrust upon them for ' the purpose of making a little cheap glory for a man like the hon. member for Carle-ton, N.B. Is that the idea that prevails in this House and throughout the country? I think it is not. I should like to say this in all seriousness; there is ample time for this matter to be dealt with when this war is over.
I alluded'-a few moments ago to the observations of the right hon. gentleman who leads the Opposition. He pointed out that there had been dereliction of duty, that as a result there had been a shortage of shells upon the battlefield, that retreats of the enemy had not been followed up and that great vantages had not been pursued to the full. What does that mean? That means an inquiry into the operations of the war. Why should we undertake an inquiry, in the midst of the war, as to its operations? Does the right hon. gentleman say that, sitting here in all their wisdom, five or seven members of this Parliament can determine whether or not the Gallipoli operations were properly carried out? Can he say that at the battle of NeuVe Chapelle the failure of , munitions wras traceable to the failure of Canadian manufacturers? Can he say that at Loos the attack failed because of the shortage of Canadian munitions? Does he ask for an investigation into the operations of this great conflict? A few days ago Mr. Asquith refused absolutely to consider it. We all know the great discussion that has . taken place between Lord Kitchener and Lord French in relation to the failure of munitions at Neuve Chapelle. Mr. Asquith said at Newcastle that he had ample information from Lord, Kitchener himself that the supplies of munitions were double the demands that might be made upon them. In terms Lord Kitchener said that be had received this information from General French. It turned out that there were not supplies of munitions sufficient for carrying on the operations for five days. What happened? In Parliament an investigation was demanded and brushed aside lay Mr. Asquith as a petty piffling thing which could only be considered when the war was over. Though challenging the operations of Sir Ian Hamilton at Gallipoli, where thousands of Australians made the supreme sacrifice, the Australians, angry though they were, are yet still content to wait till the war is over, till the victory is won. The same is true of New Zealand, and the same is true in regard to operations
in France. General Joffre, the great commander-in-chief, has found it necessary to dismiss some of his generals, and he has dismissed them without an investigation, because the investigation can wait until the war is over. The British Government has dismissed and superseded generals who have been in charge of divisions and army corps. It is true that the British Government has wiped out the Shell Committee. It has appointed a Munitions Board, but on that Munitions Board it has appointed to membership two gentlemen who were members of the late Shell Committee. But, Sir, do hon. gentlemen for a single moment say that it is our dpty at this time to endeavour to hold a post mortem examination upon their conduct when no crime is charged, when they are said to be free from dishonesty in their condpet, and when all that can be said about them is that they have been negligent ?
Sir, I have a profound conviction that when this war is over and when an investigation into its conduct has been held alike in the Mother Country and in the overseas dominions, some reputations that are now looked upon as great will fall. I have a profound conviction, too, that men who have profited by the necessities of the state, who have washed their hands in blood money,, go to speak-they and their children's children-will be remembered with execrations and curses by the men who come after. But now is not the time, in the midst of this great eonflict, to cease our activities, to wear out our energies beating against the rock. The function and duty of the Opposition is fearlessly to oppose and boldly to criticise; but they can dothatconstruotively as well as destructively. Every thoughtful suggestion offered by an Opposition should be considered, and, if possible, acted upon by the Government of the day. In a great war, where unity of purpose is absolutely necessary, where cohesive and co-ordinated effort is demanded by every father, mother, wife, son and daughter within the state- oh, in such a war as this, let us show to the world the spectacle of a people united; determined that come what will, let it be for good or ill, we may be able to say when history is written that we have .neglected no opportunity, and overlooked no possibility; but that we have devoted our energies fearlessly, determinedly, and unitedly for the purpose of making victory assured, that liberty and freedom may continue among the sons of -men, and that

our civilization may be preserved to *posterity.


William Pugsley: Am I right in supposing 'that an arrangement was made for this debate to go over until Tuesday?
Sir' ROBERT BORDEN: We proposed in the first place adjourning the debate until next (Tuesday, but continued it to-day for ' the accommodation of the Iron, member for Carleton.
On motion of Mr. Pugsley, the debate was adjourned.



SUPPLY.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
Railways and Canals-Railways-anti-creepers and tie plates, $20,000.
[u'I wished to make some rather extended remarks. It is pretty late now, and I would suggest that we adjourn.\nProgress reported.\nOn motion of Mr. Roger\xae, the House adjourned at 10 45 p.m.\nFriday, March 10, 1916.']
Hon. J. D. REID (Acting Minister of Railways):: It has been customary, when
taking up the Estimates of the Department of Railways and Canals, for the minister to make a general statement of the work of his department. I am sorry to have to inform the committee that the hon. Ministei for Railways and Canals is ill at the present time, and therefore unable to be present. Two years ago it fell to my lot, for a similar reason, to deliver this general statement, and I regret the circumstances which make it necessary for me to do so again. However, I hope his illness will be of short duration, and that the short rest, will speedily restore him to* health, and that we shall soon see him back again in [DOT]charge of his department.
Since prorogation last year, the Government railway system has been very materially enlarged. At that time we had the Intercolonial railway, with some branch lines, and were operating the Transcontinental between Levis and Moncton. We have since taken over the whole Transcontinental railway system between Moncton and Winnipeg, and have also leased from the Grand Trunk Pacific that portion of their line between Superior Junction and Fort William.


William Pugsley: Temporarily or permanently? I ask this because the part of the Dominion from which I come is intensely interested in the matter. Is there any agreement or Order in Council with regard to the taking over of the road?


John Dowsley Reid: There has been an Order in Council authorizing the lease of that part of the road between Superior Junction and
r.Mr. R. B. Bennett.]	,
Fort William. In addition to that, under virtue of an Act passed last session, we have taken over two lines in the province of New Brunswick, namely: the International from St. Leonards to Campbellton, and the New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island Railway, running from Sackville to Cape Tormentine. The acquisition of the latter road was necessary in connection with the operation of the proposed car-ferry between qape Tormentine and Carleton point. We have also during the past year been operating the completed portions of the Quebec & St. John railway between Gage-town and Fredericton and Fredericton and Gentreville.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You had better draw
that statement a little milder.


John Dowsley Reid: We have been operating it-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: One train a week.


John Dowsley Reid: -and we are also now oper- . ating the Dartmouth-Dean's branch of the Intercolonial railway. The total mileage of the railways operated by the Government at the present time is as follows:
Miles.
Intercolonial railway	
Prince Edward Island railway. .	. .
Transcontinental railway, Moncton
to "Winnipeg	
Lake Superior Branch	
International railway . .	....	. .
New Brunswick and Prince Edward
Island railway	
Dartmouth-to-Dean. railway..	. .
Quebec and St. John Valley railway	
Total	 4,057
The operation of these roads is, as I explained two years ago, under the direction of one general manager, with two general superintendents, one for the Intercolonial railway and thfe various branch lines, and the other in charge of the Transcontinental and the Lake Superior branch.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: Who are the general superintendents?


John Dowsley Reid: Ml. Brady and Mr. McNellies.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Are there two superintendents on the Transcontinental?


John Dowsley Reid: Mr. Brady is General Superintendent of the Transcontinental; under him is Superintendent Gorrie.	.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Not Mr. McNeillie.


John Dowsley Reid: Mr. McNeillie is on the Intercolonial, but Mr. Gorrie is at Quebec assisting Mr. Brady.
1,457
1,804
18S
36
121

The arrangement of the staffs as outlined at that time continues, with very satisfactory results.
I will first deal with the Intercolonial railway, and I am pleased, tp be able to say that during the present year the Intercolonial has received its share of the increased business enjoyed by railways generally, so much so that the result has been that the current year will be the best in the history of the road. The Minister of Railways and Canals has always been of the impression, and I concur with him, that, with the staff at present operating the road, and its good roadbed, increased . traction, stronger bridges, and other facilities, if we could get an increased share of freight business, we could handle it successfully and make a much better showing. We have been able to get that extra business, and have been able to handle it with a very slight increase of cost in operation.
To put it in concrete form, our gross earnings at the end of December were increased by $1,191,000, while the increase in working expenses amounted to only ' $43,000. The particular items of economy which worked together for the above result are as follows: Fuel economy campaign, which-covers the cost of coal, loading on locomotives and economy in firing; engine house expenses Teduced by improved methods of handling work at round houses; closer supervision of stores and stores accounting; increased tonnage on freight trains due to the use of heavier locomotives made possible on account of strengthening bridges; great efficiency in Moncton and Riviere du Loup shops occasioned by re-organization of staff. To this should be added the economy that is being practised in every branch of the service on account of a desire of the officers and employees generally to make the Intercolonial a railway of which every man connected with its operation may be proud.
I am therefore glad to bear tribute to the fact that the various classes of employees on the road have been doing their best to make the operation of the Intercolonial as successful as that of privately-owned roads. Having secured connections from the West, and also enjoying better connections in the other proyinoes, I believe the Inter- . colonial will in the future be in a position to show better results than it has done in past years.
Operations.
I will now give a statement showing the results of the operation of the road during the present year. Part of it must, of course, be estimated, as the fiscal year does not close until the end of March; but in making the estimate for the balance of the fiscal year, I feel that we have arrived as nearly as possible at the approximate figures:
Actual earnings to
Dec. 31 1915.. $10,613,264 99
Estimated for Jan,, Feb,, and March, 1916....	3,800,000 00
Total	$14,413,264 99
Actual expenses to Dec. 31st.
1915		 $8,896,754	84
Estimated e x -
penses for Jan.,
Feb. and Mar.,
1916	
3,360,000	00Transferred during year to renewal of equipment account. .	600,000	00Rail renewal acdount	
400,000	00Fire renewal account	
100,000	00Total	$13,356,754 84Showing a surplus of	$ 1,056,510 15
The sums which have been 'transferred to the three renewal accounts already mentioned will be used entirely for the providing of new equipment on 'Government railways, and at no time in the history of Government railways has new equipment been more needed than at present, owing to the fact that we have taken over a couple of thousand miles of railway on which there -was very little, if any, equipment, and to which we must add as fast as we possibly can in order to cope with the traffic now being offered.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why should you need a surplus; you are only taxing the people for it.


John Dowsley Reid: This is freight over and -above what the railway had before, and the pfofits are really as stated. However, this surplus will all be used for new equipment.
Mr. 'MACDONALD:	Have you to take
that extra earning of the Intercolonial to provide equipment for the 'Transcontinental?


John Dowsley Reid: Some of the earnings have come from the Transcontinental, but it is



[Stage Direction]
course, be used on the whole Government railway system.
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You are going to tax the people of the Maritime Provinces exclusively, for the purpose of providing this equipment.


John Dowsley Reid: We are not taxing the people a cent more; the rates are the same as they were before.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: My hon. friend, in
answer to a question which I put on the Order Paper the other day, stated that the freight rates on lumber had been increased in the last six months.


John Dowsley Reid: That was done in order to equalize the rates, and the hon. member knows it.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Before we conclude, I will show my hon. friend that the rates have increased.	.


John Dowsley Reid: The several accounts mentioned, to which these sums have been transferred, are accounts which I am informed by the officials of the department were opened by the hon. member for 'South Renfrew (Mr. Graham), while Minister of Railways, and his practice in this regard, which I believe was a very wise one, has been since adhered to.
Capital.
There was in last year's estimates a vote of $9,290,650 for capital expenditure. The estimated expenditure under this head is expected to be about $7,100,000. One of the most important and necessary works undertaken has been the strengthening of bridges to allow the use of the heavier power rendered necessary by modern railway practice. This work of strengthening the bridges will, it is expected, be completed during the coming fiscal year.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: What will that work
cost?


John Dowsley Reid: 
Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Would the statement of passengers of 1914-15 include soldiers?


John Dowsley Reid: Yes. But the hon. member knows that this is for the fiscal year ending 31st March, and as the war started on 4th August, 1914, few soldiers would go up to the end of that fiscal year.
Tons (revenue) and passengers moved one ton mile
	Passengers	Freight
	Number.	. Tons.
1914-15 . .	. . .. 176,189,749	1.189,017,9141913-14 . .	. . . . 159,843,276	970,395,253Increase.	. . . 16,346,473	218,622,661Docomotive mileage:	Passengers	FreightNumber.	Tons.1914-15 ..	. . . . 3,234,202	5,893,0031913-14 . .	. . . . 2,355,268	4,869,879Increase .. ..	8fs,934	1,023,124
Prince Edward Island Railway.
Up to iJovember 30 we have succeeded in reducing our operating expenses on this railway $34,200. Our earnings, however, were $8,700 less than for the same period last year.
The deficit on this railway this year, as compared with the same period last year, has been reduced $25,500, and unless winter conditions are severe, the same relation should continue until the end of the year. Last year our deficit in the operation of this road was $182,731.53.
Safety First.
The Minister of Railways, the management and the employees are taking a keen interest in the Safety First movement on these railways. This accident prevention work for the two years ended December 31, 1915, as compared with the two preceding years before Safety First work had been undertaken, shows the following decreases: 30 fewer persons killed, a decrease of 33 per cent; 401 fewer persons injured, a decrease of 27 per cent.
Provident Fund.
The Provident Fund, whicn is an employees' pension department, to which the railway' contributes $100,000 per year, has on its rolls 657 ex-employees, who are receiving pensions which amount to $19,278.03.
Employees' Relief and Insurance Association.
This is a life and accident insurance institution, supported by contributions from employees and $10,000 per annum paid from earnings of the" railway.
During the past year 86 death claims and two total disability claims were paid, amounting to $38,750. Sick benefits to employees, medical and surgical attendance and other expenses in connection with the association show a gross expenditure on' this account of $91,585.56.
The Minister of Railways introduced an innovation on the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island railways in connection with beautification in the way of lawns and flowers of its stations, and with the idea of interesting the employees a system has been arranged whereby the agent making the best showing in each district in station beautification receives a cash prize of $50. These prizes last year were distributed to the agents at the following stations: A. Routhier, Routhierville, P.Q.; W.' Parsons, St. Germain, P.Q.; Angus T. MacDougall, West Bay Road, N-S.; T. P. Grady, Sum-merside, P.E.I.	-

Efforts last summer in regard to station beautification were confined to 35 stations. It is expected during the coming season to have this beautification work extended to at least 75 stations.
Owing to the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company not having taken over the National Transcontinental railway, the Government was compelled to undertake the operation of this property, and a train service was inaugurated between Superior Junction and Quebec on June 1, 1915.


William Pugsley: Would the hon. minister submit to the committee any correspondence or Orders in Council bearing upon the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company not taking over the road, the Government thereby being compelled to operate it? There must be correspondence on the subject. I asked for it twice last session and the session before; the minister promised to bring it dow'n, but we have not had it.


John Dowsley Reid: If the ihon. gentleman will give me a note of what he wants, I will get it for him.


William Pugsley: The minister knows what we want-everything bearing on the subject,


John Dowsley Reid: The hon. gentleman's question will ibe in Hansard, of course; I will look it up in the morning before we take up that item, and I will try to get the information for the hon. member.
The Lake Superior Branch of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company, extending from Superior Junction to Fort William, a distance of 188-8 miles, was so closely associated with the operation of the Transcontinental railway east of Winnipeg that negotiations were entered into with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company which terminated in the lease of this property-to the Government. The property was, therefore, taken over by the Government on the 1st of May, 1915, under the terms of this lease. I shall be glad to bring down a copy of the lease, so that the hon. gentleman may see it. He asked me as to the term of the lease; I have not that in mind at the moment, but I shall be glad to get that information.


Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:: Has the Grand Trunk proper had any connection with this
lease?


John Dowsley Reid: It was the Grand Trunk Pacific Company only. They owned this portion of the" road, and it was absolutely

necessary that this portion should be operated, as otherwise there would 'be no connection with Fort William. In fact, that was the key to the situation so far ' as operation from Winnipeg east was concerned.
The Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company operated the line from Winnipeg to Fort William as agents of the Government for the months of May and June, thus en-* abling the management of the Canadian Government railways time to organize and equip the same for operation under its own management. On July 1 this change was made, and Grand Trunk Pacific employees were retained so far as they desired or their services were necessary.
The terminals at Transcona were, under . the agreement, made joint terminals between the Transcontinental and the Grand Trunk Pacific, and repairs are
10	p.m. made to the latter company's locomotives at the Transcona shops at cost plus ten per cent.
We are operating a tri-weekly passenger service between Toronto and Winnipeg over the Grand Trunk, the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario and the Transcontinental, and the business secured has justified this service. A daily through westbound freight - service between Cochrane and Winnipeg was installed in August, which gives us an average of 15 paying loads per day. A daily passenger .service is given between Quebec and La Tuque and between Levis and Monk.


William Pugsley: I do not think that is
correct. The time table shows a service twice a week.


John Dowsley Reid: The information has come to me from my officials; I shall make inquiries in the matter.


Wilfrid Laurier: What is the
service between La Tuque and Cochrane?


John Dowsley Reid: Bi-weekly mixed trains are
run between La Tuque and Cochrane, and tri-weekly mixed trains between Moncton and Chaudiere, and as many freight trains are run as the traffic requires.
Mr. PUGSLEY. The hon. gentleman has just said that there is a daily service between Levis and Monk; now he says that there is a tri-weekly service between Moncton and Chaudiere. ChaTudiere is just alongside of Levis.


John Dowsley Reid: The statement says that there is a daily passenger service between Quebec and La Tuque and between Levis and Monk.
Mr. PUGSLEY':	That must be wrong.
The time table does not show a service of that kind.


John Dowsley Reid: That is the information which is given to me: if it is wrong, I shall correct it.


William Pugsley: There is great complaint about the insufficiency of this service too.


John Dowsley Reid: That is only within the last three or four weeks, owing to the heavy storms that have taken place in the lower provinces. The same has occurred in the western provinces; they say that the storms there are the greatest that they have had in twenty-six years.


William Pugsley: I may be wrong, but I think that somebody has misinformed the minister. It is my information that during the whole of the past summer there was a service between Monk and Levis only two or three times a week by mixed train-passenger and freight. It was a very inefficient and unsatisfactory service. Who could have told the minister that the service was daily I cannot imagine. I am speaking now in accordance with my information, and, I think, in accordance with the time table as well.	.


John Dowsley Reid: These statements were given to me by the officials of the department; they ought to be correct, and I must take them as correct until I find that they are wrong. I must say that I think the statements are correct.
From early in September to the end of the season of navigation we delivered 26,173 cars of grain at Fort William, which is about two and one-half times that handled last year under Grand Trunk Pacific operation. To relieve the grain blockade at Fort William and take advantage of elevator space at Quebec and Montreal, an emergency freight rate which would compare favourably -with lake and rail rate was put into effect, under which the Transcontinental undertakes to handle grain from Armstrong, the geographical position of which corresponds with Fort William, to Quebec and Montreal at 6 cents per bushel. A considerable amount of traffic is being arranged for in this way.


Mr. ROBB:: How many cars of wheat
have been carried on that road from Armstrong to Montreal and Quebec?
- Mr. REID:	That question was asked
within the last week and was answered by me. I have not in mind just at this moment

the answer that I gave, but the hon. member will find it in Hansard. If he wishes, I will give him the information when I have the figures before me. To relieve the Fort William situation further we are now hauling grain from Fort William to Atlantic ports, which requires a back-haul to Superior Junction, and in this way 50 cars of grain a day are being moved.
To organize the initial service on the Transcontinental railway in the limited time at ouir disposal, 98 locomotives, 33 passenger cars, and 1,300 freight cars were transferred to the West from the Intercolonial. We were able to transfer locomotives from the Intercolonial for the reason that, during the dull times of last winter, we repaired all our Intercolonial locomotives, and were able at the opening of the Transcontinental to utilize 95 per cent of our power on the two railways. Ordinarily, 20 per cent of the locomotives of a railway are out of commission for repairs or other causes. These locomotives, with the assistance of 13 rented from the Grand Trunk Pacific, have enabled us to handle the grain situation as well as we have. In addition to this equipment loaned, much of which will be absorbed permanently by the Transcontinental, we purchased 1,000 [DOT] feel frame box cars, at a cost of $1,095,000, which were delivered, in September.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Where did you get
these-in the United States?


John Dowsley Reid: I think we bought most of them in Nova Scotia. We bougfat from the Eastern Car Company and the Nova Scotia Car Company, but I will give the information later.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Where did you rent the box cars?


John Dowsley Reid: I said that we rented some engines and cars from the Grand Trunk Pacific, but I have no knowledge of renting from any other railway corporation. On December 1 the gross earnings on the Transcontinental from Moncton to Winnipeg and, Fort Willjam were $2,296,113.40. The operating expenses for the same period were $1,975,994.36, to which should 'be added rental for the Lake Superior branch for seven months, $350,000, which shows a deficit in Transcontinental operations to that date of $30,000.
Our reports indicate that the traffic handled during the month of December will give us a small surplus for that month. For

the remaining three months of the fiscal year we may expect deficits, the amount of which will depend upon the severity of the winter and the amount of through traffic which we can secure.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend is right in saying that there is a daily service between Moncton and Levis if he means that a train goes one way one day, and goes back the next day.


John Dowsley Reid: That is a daily service.


William Pugsley: No, that a tri-weekly service. On Tuesday the train goes from Moncton to Edmundston, stays over night, and goes on to Levis the following morning so that according to this time table it is a tri-weekly service.


John Dowsley Reid: What is the date of that
timetable?


William Pugsley: 16th .January of this
year.	[DOT]


John Dowsley Reid: In one sense my hon. friend is right, and in another sense I am right.


William Pugsley: It is like a service in the south which is called a by-weekly service; you try to get one way one week and' to get back the next-


John Dowsley Reid: That is all I have to say about the Transcontinental railway. I will now deal with the Quebec bridge and also with the ferry that is being used while the bridge is being erected. The car ferry Leonard is now in service between Quebec and Levis and handling very satisfactorily the Transcontinental and Intercolonial railway business at that point. The car ferry was rendered necessary owing to the delay involved in this project because of the collapse of the first Quebec bridge. Work- is now progressing rapidly on the construction of the second bridge. On the north shore the entire cantilever arm has been completed, thus practically completing all the steel work on that side. On the south side the steel work has been completed up to and including the main post over the main pier. This year the south cantilever arm will be erected, and the work of erecting the suspended span will be commenced early in the spring at Sillery Cove and will be completed by the time the cantilever arm is ready to receive it. It will then be floated into place and suspended from the two ends of the cantilever arms. Thus, it is expected that all the main members of the bridge will be erected this year, and the

connection from shore to shore made, though it will take another year to finish riveting and painting and .to dean up the work. The expenditure on the Quebec bridge to date amounts to $18,257,621, of which amount $10,473,346 has been on the new bridge. The estimate to complete is about twenty-seven millions; that is, the total cost of completing the bridge, taking the old bridge and the new bridge together is estimated at $27,000,000.
There are certain large works in connection with the Government Railway System which, when completed, will form part of that system, and a brief explanation concerning these is, I feel, due to the House. I will first refer to the terminal arrangements under way at Halifax and St. John.
When the improvement of our terminals at Halifax and St. John was first considered by the minister with a view to the necessity of providing for the future increase in the business of the Government railways, we all agreed that it was necessary that some provision should be made to properly take care of the increasing development of the Dominion, and this is more than ever true now that we have the Transcontinental under Government control. My own opinion is that the necessity for this terminal work is much greater than ever before, and the work of providing the required accommodation is being pressed as fast as possible.
The situation so far as Halifax is concerned is as follows:	Sections 1 and 2 of
the railway from Rockingham- to Jubilee House, His Majesty's Lumber Yard and Reid Rock in Halifax Harbour, are under construction for a total distance of 71 miles. The contract was awarded to The Cook Construction Company and Wheaton Brothers in September of 1913 and work to the value of $1,574,834.71 has been done. Good progress is being made on the first unit of docks. Six thousand five hundred lineal feet of quay walls have been dredged and filled. Also substructures for buildings, sewers, etc., have been completed. The contract for these docks was awarded to Foley Brothers, Welch, Stewart and Fauquier in January 1914, and work to the value of $1,349,119.64 has been done. The work is about 30 per cent completed and the unit should be finished by November 1, 1917.
The St. John harbour work is, I may say, under the direction of the Public Works Department, so that it will not be necessary for me to refer to it in detail here.


William Pugsley: What will that unit at Halifax cost?


John Dowsley Reid: I have not a statement as
to that before me, but I will give the information when the item comes to be considered.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: What is the total expenditure at Halifax?	'


John Dowsley Reid: The expenditure in connection with the contract awarded to the Cook Construction Company and Wheaton Brothers has been $1,574,834.71, and in connection with the contract awarded to Foley Brothers, Welch, Stewart and Fauquier, $1,349,119.64. On the opposite side of the harbour at Halifax, from the town of Dartmouth, we have completed the construction of a line of railway locally known as the Dartmouth to Deans branch and which at present extends to Upper Musquodoiboit, 67 miles. The contract for this work was let to M. P.
& J. T. Davis in February of 1912, and was completed in January last. There still remains a number of station buildings to be erected, tenders for which are now bbing called for by the department. A tri-weekly service bias been installed 'by the Intercolonial Railway since January 1, 1916. The total expenditure to the end of January, 1916, has been $2,189,485.81. This has been on construction and chargeable to capital account.
P. E. I. Car Ferry and Terminals.
The work connected with the provision of a car ferry service to Prince Edward Island has not made such progress as was desired and expected. The New Brunswick & Prince Edward Island Railway has been acquired and is being put into shape to form an adequate link between the main line of the Intercolonial Railway and the ferry landing with the existing system of island railways. The contract with the Armstrong, Whitworth Company was satisfactorily completed, and the steamer [DOT] Prince Edward, Island delivered over to us during the summer notwithstanding war conditions. Its appearance has been the subject of high praise from all those who have examined the vessel. The situation has not been as satisfactory with respect to the terminal works. At the outset a season was lost at Carleton Point through the default of those to whom the contract for this terminal was at first awarded. Further serious delays have, resulted from

the stormy weather and exposed conditions under which the work has necessarily had to be carried on. With the advance of the breakwater these conditions improve. At Cape Tormentine the principal work remaining to be done is the completion of the breakwater, the dredging, and the placing of riprap on exposed faces of the pier head. At Carleton Point several more cribs are necessary to complete the steamer landing, some dredging is to be done, and further work done on the breakwater and rock approach pier. The contract for the steel transfer bridges, to. connect the deck of the steamer with the pier, has been let, and works are ready for their reception. The total estimated cost of the car ferry and terminals is $2,850,000, of which $1,975,000 has been expended.


William Pugsley: The minister started in at Halifax and, St. John and,then skipped St. John.


John Dowsley Reid: I stated the reasons why I would not go into that; the work there is being done by the Public Works Department and they will have to explain it.
Hudson Bay Railway.
I am well aware that the construction of this railway has been a matter of considerable public debate for very many years. During the time that I have been a member of this House prior to the commencement of the construction of this railway, I believe not a single session passed without a discussion, during which members from the West advocated the construction of this railway. There was at that time, and there are now, possibly, many who doubt the advisability of the construction of this road. However, the construction of the road was decided upon by the late Government, and the hon. member for Soutli Renfrew (Mr. Graham), as Minister of Railways, let the first contract to J. D. McArthur & Company just before the Liberal Government was defeated. .
I may say that while I myself may have had grave doubts as to the feasibility of this undertaking, yet I have come to the conclusion, after seeing the reports in the department and discussing the matter with those who are at work in connection with the railway, that this road will be of value to the country in time to come.' It will serve a useful purpose in opening up a large extent of territory of considerable agricultural value, and those portions of ' 
the country which are not agricultural are believed to contain mineral resources which only await development. There will also be opened for development fisheries which will, it is expected, rank with those that have made the Newfoundland waters famous.
Further, there is no doubt in my mind in reference to the navigability of Hudson bay and straits for several months of the year.


William Pugsley: Is that the minister's
own opinion?


John Dowsley Reid: That is my personal opinion after having got all the information I could. Perhaps I was of the same opinion as that entertained by .some other members in the past and perhaps I did not have the confidence in this project that I have now.


William Pugsley: The statement is evidently a prepared typewritten statement, and I was curious to know whether it was the minister's statement or the statement of the acting minister.


John Dowsley Reid: I never discussed anything
in connection with this matter with the Minister of Railways.


William Pugsley: Then it is the acting
minister's statement?


John Dowsley Reid: This statement is my own
and it expresses my own opinion and not that of Mr. Cochrane. He was too ill to discuss anything. This statement is one that I dictated to my stenographer, and i am giving it as dictated by me and as representing my'own opinion and no other.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You are not able to say whether he agrees with it?


John Dowsley Reid: No, I am not, because, as the hon. member knows, he was away for a couple of months ill, and during the time he was here I did not discuss with him anything in connection with his department.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You are only speaking for yourself?


John Dowsley Reid: I am only speaking for myself.


John Howard Sinclair: For how many months in the year does the minister regard this route as practicable for commercial purposes?


John Dowsley Reid: I had a discussion with my hon. friend the Minister of Railways and Canals just after he returned from Hudson bay a couple of years ago. He went overland to Hudson bay and he came down by *steamer. He stated then that he believed Hudson bay was safe for navigation from some time in the middle of June to the middle of October.


John Howard Sinclair: How do you explain the report of the expert who went there to examine into this matter- and which report has been laid before this House since the commencement of the present session?


John Dowsley Reid: You mean for the Marine and Fisheries Department?


John Howard Sinclair: Yes.
- Mr. REID: The writer of that report was an officer acting for the chief engineer of the Marine and Fisheries Department, but the Marine and Fisheries operations were more along the shore than through the strait. I would like to give a little more information to show why I believe, and the chief engineer believes, that this route is navigable for a considerable period of the year. I was saying that there was no doubt in my mind as to the navigability of Hudson bay and straits for several months of the year. That is my own opinion. I believe this is not only possible but that it is assured. This has been demonstrated to my satisfaction since the Department of Railways and Canals, for its own purpose, purchased three vessels for use in its Hudson bay service, as well as chartering several others, and so far as these vessels are concerned, they have navigated this route without meeting with any accident of importance. It is true that during the first season two vessels were cast away right at Nelson under circumstances which have never been satisfactorily explained and which have absolutely no bearing upon the practicability of the Nelson route. The vessels that were purchased were not built purposely for this route, and other vessels would perhaps be found safer.
It is. not expected, of course, that there will be any great rush during the first few years after the completion of this road and harbour, but the time will come when this road will be of immense value to Western Canada. I believe also that for the amount which it is to cost it will in years to
come have a military value which will be well worth while. It is, of course, unfortunate that this great expenditure was commenced only a short time previous to the outbreak of war, but since that time the Department of Railways and Canals has been doing its best to keep the work down to a minimum, so that the burden each year may be as light as possible, with due consideration to proceeding with the work without resultant loss or claims for damages against the department.
The length of this line from Le Pas to Port Nelson, as finally revised, will be 424 miles, and the road has been graded to Mile 378. Steel has been laid, including sidings, to Mil^ 242, at which point erection is proceeding with the Manitou Rapids bridge over the Nelson river. This work is expected to be completed in April, when track work will be resumed. The track is surfaced to Mile 225, and has had a final lift of ballast to Mile 150. The telegraph line keeps pace with the steel, and has now been laid to Mile 242. This work is divided into three sections, and all three contracts fell to J. D. McArthur & Company, the first having been let by the hon. member for South Renfrew, as Minister of Railways for the previous Government. On section No. 1 $3,229,994 has been expended to date, and on section No. 2 $1,602,300, and on section No. 3 $1,865,795, or a total of $6,698,089. The total value of the work under contract is estimated at. $9,629,605. During the coming summer the track will be carried forward to the second crossing of the Nelson river at Kettle rapids, at Mile 332. Here we have a large bridge to construct, and it is not expected that track work can proceed beyond this point until the spring of 1917, but, when resumed, it will be carried through to Port Nelson without further delay.
Port Nelson Harbour Work.
At Port Nelson good progress was made on the permanent work of harbour development. Previously the work done at this point has been of a preliminary character, consisting of the establishment of the camp, construction of plant, shops for repair of plant, temporary wharves, drydock, etc., necessary for the prosecution of the work. The substructure for the bridge approach to the main dock has been carried out half a mile from shore, and the whole of the bridge superstructure will be completed this coming season. The suction dredge was employed excavating the approach channel

with satisfactory results, the remaining dredges, tugs and scows being chiefly occupied in procuring stone filling for cribs and riprap.
The total expenditure upon the Hudson Bay railway and terminals to December 31, 1915, was $15,465,304, made up as follows:
General expenses, engineering-, ete....$ 721.974
Pas bridge and terminals	  3S8.1T2
Pas Thicket Portage:
On contract account. . .. $3,229,094
Rails, bridges, etc	 2,680,896

 5,910,890
Thicket Portage to Split Lake Jet. .. 1,661,291
Split Lake Jet. to Port Nelson	1,S15,S69
Port Nelson terminus	 4,977,208
Canals. ^
As is well known, the canal system of Canada includes:
Sault Ste. Marie canal.
Welland canal.
St. Lawrence canals, extending from Prescott to Montreal.
Chambly canal, in Quebec.
St. Peter's canal, in Nova Scotia.
Rideau canal.
Trent canal.
Carillon and Grenville canal.
On the majority of these canals we have attempted nothing during the year in the way of construction, and they merely required the attention of the pfoper maintenance and operating staffs.
Welland Ship Canal.
We are continuing the construction of the Welland ship canal, which we commenced in the year 1913, and the work under contract at present consists of sections No-. 1, 2, 3, 4-A and 5, no additional sections having been placed under contract during the past year.
Section No. 1, which is under contract to the Dominion Dredging Company, Limited, consists of the construction, principally, of the new harbour at the lake Ontario entrance to the canal, which covers one and one-half mile of dredging in the lake, and considerable pier work, one and one-half mile of canal excavation inland, and the construction of lock No. 1, with its weirs and entrance walls. This contract is progressing satisfactorily, and a very good showing has been made during the past year on the various works comprised within the contract. The estimated cost of section No. 1, based on schedule rates, is $3,487,725, and $1,529,120 has been paid to date.

Section No. 2, which is under contract to Messrs. Bauldry, Yerburgh and Hutcheson, includes, in addition to the excavation of the canal prism, the construction of locks Nos. 2 and 3, with their regulating and waste weirs, the substructure of four . bridges, in addition to the one over the head of lock -No. 2, and a large amount of watertight embankments, and the contractors have been prosecuting the work vigorously during the past season. Their operations, in the main, have consisted of prism excavation, building watertight embankments, and the construction of the breast-wall and upper west entrance wall of lock No. 2. The estimated cost of section No. 2, based on -schedule rates, is $5,377,135.75 The amount paid to date is $2,351,970.
The work on section 3 is under contract to Messrs. O'Brien & Doheny and Quinlan & Robertson, and comprises a very large amount of work, aggregating about $10,000,000 in value, and consisting principally oi the excavation of 2,700,000 cubic yards of rock and 3,400,000 'cubic yards of earth, the diversion of the Grand Trunk railway (Welland division), which was rendered necessary in order to obtain satisfactory location for the canal, the building of a large earth dam with concrete core walls, the building of twin locks Nos. 4, 5 and 6, in flight, and single lock No. 7, which, together with their entrance walls, etc., will contain about 1,200,000 cubic yards of concrete. The contract . also comprises, thfv crushing and furnishing of 1,250,000 tons of stone for concrete for sections Nos. 1 and 2. On this contract $2,249,290 has already been paid.
Section No. 4-A is a small contract for certain portions of work which were to have been included in section No. 4, which could not be deferred when it was decided to postpone the letting of the larger contract. This has been completed by the contractors, Messrs. Maguire & Cameron. The work was estimated to cost about $80,000, and did cost $72,731.31. It consisted of the construction of a new supply weir opposite lock No. 25 on the present canal, to supply water to the old canal in place of the one at Allanburg, which is being discontinued as the old canal between Allanburg -and the new weir is being filled in with excavated material from section No. 5, also the construction of two reinforced -concrete culverts to take the place of open ditches across the area between the present and the old canal, which is also being used as a dumping ground for excavated material from section No. 5.

Section No. 5 is under contract to the Canadian Dredging Company, Limited, and consists of the deepening and widening of the "deep cut," in the present canal between Allanburg and Port Robinson, to the new dimensions. Dry excavation above the waterline in canal has progressed continuously during the past year, with the exception of a short interval last winter. Four or five steam shovels are operating day and night, the material mostly being disposed of on the dumping ground on section No. 4 between the present and the old canal. A long embankment dumped from a trestle has been formed which, with the present canal towpath, encloses a large area of low ground which has to 'be filled to canal towpath level by the hydraulic suction dredge, thus reclaiming and making it valuable. The balance 'has been used lo fill in low ground near Port Robinson. On schedule prices this contract should cost about $1,945,788, and $903,720 has been paid to date.
Domestic Water Supply.
The construction of the Welland Ship Canal will interfere with the domestic water supply of several municipalities. This has been the subject of negotiations and conferences between the municipal representatives and Mr. Cochrane and his superintending engineer, and a tentative agreement has 'been entered into between the department and the different municipalities under which the department is to assume the cost of building a pipe line to carry water from Lake Erie to the reservoirs of the municipalities of Welland, Merritton, Thorold and St. Catharines, to supply pure water in place of the polluted water which will enter the canal through the Welland river, when that river is absorbed in the canal system. The department assumes the cost of building the pipe line, an$ the municipalities are to pay a fixed annual rental for the same. No actual work has been done in connection with the proposed pipe line, although experiments are being made on a three hundred foot piece of thirty-inch reinforced concrete pipe, which is being 'built at Port Colborne. Should these experiments be successful, this system of construction will be recommended for adoption. It will take about two years to complete the line after active operations on it are begun.
The work( in connection with these ship canal contracts and the letting of further contracts is not being pressed by the Gov- , eminent as fast as probably it might have been had war conditions not rendered advisable the keeping of departmental expenditures as low as possible while the conflict continues. Although this may delay the completion of the work for a time, it is felt to be the proper course to pursue.
St. Peter's Canal.
The improvement of this canal, as designed, consists of the construction of a new lock and entrance at the Atlantic end. v The contract was let to W. H. Weller, of St. Catharines, and work was commenced in May of 1912 and continued through the seasons of 1912 and 1913. As a result of new borings taken in February, 1913, to more accurately determine the surface of the rock, it was found that the greater part of the new lock, as designed, did not rest on solid rock. It was considered advisable, therefore, to adopt a new location for the lock and make a radical change in the entrance. A supplemental agreement to the contract was accordingly entered into in June of 1914 under authority of order in council, and in accordance with conditions as explained by me to the House on May 29, 1914. (Hansard proceedings, page 4480). The changes decided upon necessitated the closing of the canal to navigation for one year and work was immediately undertaken for the unwatering of the canal. On the outbreak of war, however, it was considered advisable to keep the canal open for navigation, and the contractor was obliged to stop all work in connection with the unwatering. In March of 1915, Mr. Cochrane considered that the time had come when the canal might safely be closed so that the construction work might be completed, and since that time satisfactory progress has been made.


Mr. McKENZIE:: Can the minister give
us any idea when the work on the 'St. Peter's canal will be completed?


John Dowsley Reid: I was speaking with the
chief engineer about that yesterday and he said it would be open for navigation this spring, but I shall probably be able to give my hon. friend more accurate information when we come to the item in the estimates.
Trent Canal.
This canal is familiar history to most members of this House, having formed a



part of the annual Budget of the Minister of Railways and Canals for a couple of generations. It is very satisfactory to know that our engineers hope to have that portion of the canal between the city of Peterborough and lake Ontario known as the Ontario-Rice Lake division completed and open to navigation by the spring of 1917. The work remaining to be done consists of the dredging out of river channels. All the structures have been completed except the reconstruction of the Grand Trunk railway bridge at Campbellford, the completion of a few sluices in dam No. 10, which have been held back pending the execution of the bridge reconstruction, and the hanging of lock gates between Glen Ross and Healey falls. Upon completion vessels having a draft of eight feet will have access to Peterborough from the Great Lakes. This will be an event of considerable importance to the communities along that section of the canal. The total estimated cost of the Ontario-Rice Lake division is $7,660,000, of which about $750,000 remains to be expended.
Negotiations have been concluded with officials of the railway for an agreement whereby the bridge will be reconstructed as a high level structure instead of a swing span, as originally proposed, and the work will be proceeded with this season.
On the Georgian bay end, of the Severn division, the Port Severn lock and the approaches thereto have been completed giving access to Gloucester pool from Georgian bay. Good progress has been made upon sections Nos. 2 and 3, which provide for the canalization of the upper reaches of the river. Owing to the war we have held back the letting of section No- 1, which will be necessary for through navigation. The total estimated cost of the Severn division is $3,575,000, of which work to the value of about $1,250,000 has been done!
The construction of tne Trent canal has resulted in the development of a 'large amount of water-power, which will be of very great assistance in the industrial upbuilding of Eastern Ontario. In fact, this electrical development is the key to the situation. Unfortunately, some years ago these powers were leased to parties at nominal rentals on the understanding, as I am informed, that they were to be developed and the people would enjoy the benefits of this development. Now these powers have been alienated but the people are not obtaining the benefits they expected. For instance, some of these powers have now been under lease for ten

or fifteen years and no development whatever has taken place. The people of Eastern Ontario must have electric power, and I understand negotiations are on at the present time between the Ontario Government and the lessees of these water powers, and the Ontario Government is trying to airrange that these powers shall be developed. If these negotiations do not succeed, and should it become necessary, I shall recommend that a Dill be brought down cancelling these leases and returning these powers to the Crown so that the people may have the benefit of a new deal.
Five hundred and seventy-three employees of the Department of Railways and Canals and Canadian Government Railways have been granted leave of absence to enlist for overseas service under the various Orders in Council dealing with, the enlisting of government employees. The list is as follows :
Departmental staff, inside service	 5
Hudson Bay railway	 14
Dartmouth-to-Dean's branch	  4
Welland ship canal	[DOT]	.,	24
Welland canal	 4
Rideau canal		5
Sault Ste. Marie canal	 1
Trent canal	 15
Quebec bridge	 2
Car ferry terminals, Cape Tormentine and
Carleton point	 1
Commissioners of the Transcontinental railway	,	 S
Board of Railway Commissioners	 3
Canadian Government railways:
Intercolonial railway	 455
Transcontinental railway	 IS
Prince Edward Island railway	 12
St. John and Quebec railway	 1
Total	573
Eight of those who have reached the front have been killed in action, two have died since enlisting, and, a number are included among those who are missing or wounded.
The officers and employees of Canadian Government railways have made two contributions of one day's pay to the Canadian Patriotic Fund, amounting to $37,973.64.
In connection with the inside service, I think it is only fair to state that a number of officers and clerks have applied for permission to enlist, whose services it was felt could not be spared at the present time because of their close and intimate knowledge of departmental matters under their immediate charge. I have particularly in mind two officers viz.: Mr. Graham A. Bell, financial comptroller and Mr. L. Sherwood, assistant to the chief engineer. Both are keen military men who have been anx-

ious to enlist for active service, and who would be at the front now but for the fact that they occupy executive positions of such importance that they cannot well be spared.
Before concluding I wish also to add, that since war was declared in August, 1914, the work of the Railway Department has been very greatly increased, thus entailing much extra work on our officials, and I desire to place' on record here my appreciation of their good service in these trying times. I may say, Sir, that having been only a few days in the department, I collected from the members of i^he staff the information contained in the statement that I have just made, and I thought it better to put it in this form so that all hon. members could understand it. I thank the members of the committee for listening to me, and I hope the information I have given will be of benefit. As we proceed with the items of Supply, I shall be very glad indeed to give the very fullest information that may be required with regard to the several appropriations.


George Perry Graham: