1916-03-29

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Sir Thomas White (Minister of Finance), Bill No. 74, to levy a tax on business profits, was introduced and read the first time. [DOT]

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

Mr. BUCHANAN:: 1.	Who were the persons appointed to purchase hay and oats in Alberta for the Militia Department?

2.	What did they receive in each case for their services?
3.	What was the total amount purchased?
4.	What was the average price per ton for hay, and the average price per bushed for oats?


Mr. KEMP:: 1.	Lt.-Colonel A. D. McRae.
2.	Pay of rank and expenses.
3.	Nine hundred and ninety-five tons 399 lbs. hay for $18,610.10; 30,175 bushel oats for $20,637.43.
4.	Average price: $18.70 per ton for hay; 684 cents per bushel for oats.


PAYMENTS TO LA PATRIE AND L'EVENEMENT.
[Stage Direction]
* Mr. LEMIEUX:
1.	What amounts^ have been paid by the various departments! respectively, to La Patrie, of Montreal, and to L'Evenement, of Quebec, during the fiscal years 1911-12; 1912-13, 1913-14 and 1914-15?
2.	Were there any tenders called for the printing done by the above newspapers?
Mr. BLONDIN:: Agriculture:	La	Patrie-1914-15, advertising, $160; L'Evenement, advertising, 191213, $11.70; 1913-14, $63; 1914-15, $202.70.
2.	No tenders were called for advertising, but all accounts were taxed by the King's Printer.
Public Archives: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $3;
1912-	13, $3; 1913-14, $3.50; 1914-15, $3.50. Auditor 'General: 1. La Patrie-1912-13,
$168; 1913-14, $108.75. L'Evenement, 1914-15, $40.
Customs: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $14; 191213, $89.28; 1913-14, $43.20; 1914-15, $64.13. L'Evenement, 1911-12, $14; 1912-13, $56.80;
1913-	14, $11.20; 1914-15, $28.50.
Internal Affairs: 1. La Patrie-'1912-13, $3.80; 1913-14, $3.50; 1914-15, $12.70. L'Evenement, 1914-15, $6.
Indian Affairs: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $24.48; 1912-13, $47.07; 1913-14, $27.36; 1914-15, $28.80. L'Evenement, 1911-12, $22.10; 1912-13, $23.40; 1913-14, $24.70; 1914-15, $26.
Inland Revenue:	1. La Patrie-1912-13,
$7; 1913-14, $7; 1914-15, $7. L'Evenement- 1912-13, $3; 1913-14, $3; 1914-15, $3.
Interior: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $1,224.22; 1912-13, $1,040.83; 1913-14, $1,022.70; 1914-15, $1,132.80. L'Evenement-1911-12,	$2.10;
1912-13,	$701.88;	1913-14, $704.88; 1914-15,

Justice 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $7; 1912-13, $7; 1913-14, $7; 1914-15, $7. L'Evenement- 1912-13, $6; 1914-15, $6.
Labour: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $3.50; 191213, $3.50; 1913-14, $3.50; 1914-15, $3.50.
Marine and Fisheries: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $184.08; 1912-13, $227.30; 1913-14, $225.02;
1914-15, $204.14. L'Evenement-1911-12, $56.70; 1912-13, $207.40; 1913-14, $159.50; 1914-15, $114.90.
Militia and Defence: 1. La Patrie-1911-12, $105.28; 1912-13, $195.84; 1913-14, $35.04; 1914-15,	$219.24. L'Evenement-1911-12,
$22.50;	1912-13,	$75.60;	1913-14,	$204.05;
1914-15, $140.80.
Mounted Police:	1. La Patrie-1912-13,
$10.80. L'Evenement, 1913-14, $11.75.
Naval Service:	1. La Patrie-1911-12,
subscription, $3.50; advertising, $106.52; 1912-13, subscription, $3.50; advertising, $222.96; 1913-14, subscription, $8.46; advertising, $46.72; 1914-15, subscription, $3.50; advertising, $194.76. L'Evenement-1911-12, advertising, $52.15; 1912-13, subscription, $3; advertising, $214.90; 1913-14, subscription, $3; advertising, $30.80; 1914-15, subscription, $3; advertising, $196.30.
Post Office: 1. La Patrie-1913-14, $291.-6Q. L'Evenement-1911-12,	$393; 1912-13,
$895.60; 1913-14, $1,590.15; 1914-15, $3,649.45. These payments are for advertising for tenders for Mail Contracts and the figures for L'Evenement include also $168 a year for printing the Quebec Monthly Postal Guide.
Privy Council: 1. La Patrie-1912, $3.50; 1913, $3.50; 1914, $3.50; 1915, $3.50. L'Evenement-1912, $3; 1913, $3; 1914, $3; 1915, $3.
Public Works:	1.	La Patrie-1911-12,$824.86; 1912-13, $1,610.66; 1913-14, $1,830.40; 1914-15, $1,272.76. L'Evenement-1911-12,	$219.65;	1912-13,	$1,467.05;	1913-14,
$1,036.35; 1914-15, $880.30.
King's Printer:	1.	La Patrie-1912-13,
$14,172.95; 1913-14, $16,728.60; 1914-15, $24,342.03. L'Evenement-1911-12, $2.00; 1912-13, $14,610.22 ;1913-14, $21,180.53; 1914-15, $24,621.12.
2.	Work paid according to Printing Bureau rates, excepting money orders, for which a price was established in the contract dated 1st May, 1902, between the Per-rault Printing Company, of Montreal, and this department.
Railways and Canals: 1. La Patrie-1911-12,	$3,916.63;	1912-13,	$6,034.38;	1913-14,
$8,084.43; 1914-15, $7,232.82. L'Evenement- 1911-12, ,$188.05; 1912-13, $4,880.21; 1913-14, $5,194.29; 1914-15, $5,679.41.
2.	Tenders were asked for the printing of timetable folders. Tenders for other printing, such as posters, etc., not called for,
t

prices being subject to King's Printer's audit.
Secretary of State: 1. La Patrie-For department: 1911-12, $7.00;	1912-13,	$10.25;
1913-14, $10.50; 1914-15, $7.00. For High Commissioner, London, Eng.: 1911-12, $3.50. 1912-13, $3.50; 1913-14, $3.50; 1914-15, $3.50.
L'Evenement-For department:	1911-12,
$7.00;-1912-13, $9.75; 1913-14, $6.00; 1914-15, $9.00. For High Commissioner, London, Eng.: 1911-12, $3.00; 1912-13, $3.00; 1913-14, 1 $3.00; 1914-15, $3.00.
Trade and Commerce: 1. La Patrie-1912-13, $29.20; 1913-14, $28.44; 1914-15, $255.50. L'Evenement-1913-14, $27.65.


APPOINTMENT OP NAPOLEON AUBREY.
Mr. VERVILLE:: 1.	Has NapolSon Aubrey been appointed to a position in the Parliamentary Library?
2.	If so, what is his position, and what is the salary?
3.	By whom was he recommended?
4.	Has he passed the examinations required for such position?
5.	Has the position of chief messenger been filled? If so, hy whom?


Mr. BLONDIN:: 1.	An Order in Council was passed on 16th January appointing Napoleon Aubrey to a position in the Library.
2.	Housekeeper of the Library of Parliament, salary $900.
3.	Persons in whom the Government had confidence.
4.	No examination was considered necessary in view of the duties to be performed and the qualifications of the person appointed.
5.	No.


AMHERST MILITARY BARRACKS.
Mr. COPP:: 1.	What has been ths total cost of fitting up the Winter Fair building, Amherst, N.S., fcr military barracks?
2.	What materials were supplied, hy whom, and at what cost?
3.	What amount of money was paid to Charles D. Shipley in connection with this work?
4.	Is the said Charles D. Shipley a carpenter?


Mr. KEMP:: '
1.	$24,368.69.	.
2.	Lumber, etc., Rhodes Curry Co., $4,999.87; lumiber, etc., Victor Woodworks, Ltd., $2,705.99; lumber, etc., W. F. Beatty, $207.79; coall, Embree and Trenholm, $320.02; sand, Amherst Foundry Co., $16.10; plough head, shear and bolts, Amherst Trading Co., $5; slack coal, town of

Amherst, $34.65; water connections, town sf Amherst, $36.20; paint, Douglas & Co., $7.63; brooms, soap, scrubs, and soda, Barry D. Bent, $7.90; gray paint, Caverhill, Learmont & Co., Montreal, $173.60; ranges, piping and hardware, Chapman & Flinn, 835.89; chloride of lime, W. L. Ormond, $39; general hardware, Dunlap Bros & Co., $361; plumbing, labour and material, J. E. Crocker, $1,141.25; ranges, ventilators, etc., Amherst Foundry Company, $680; electricall fittings, J. H. Conn, $998.29; general hardware, David Langille, $83.64; boiler fittings, International Engineering Works, $239.28; total, $12,893.10. The foregoing comprises bills for materials which have reached Ottawa up to date of compilation.
3.	$165.15.
4.	Not known.
.	MAJOR T. A. MULLOCK.


Mr. J. J. HUGHES:: 1.	Is T. A. Mullock employed as a recruiting officer in the county of Lunenburg, N.S. ?
2.	If so, when was he employed, and at what salary?
3.	What amount has he received as compensation and expenses?
4.	If not employed as recruiting officer, in what capacity is he employed in the militia, and what does he receive?


Mr. KEMP:: 1.	No, not now.
2.	Employed as recruiting officer for 95 ' days at pay of rank, $5 per diem, between
5th November, 1914, and 27th September, 1915.
3.	'$770.
4.	Now a major in the 112th Battalion from 26th November, 1915. Receives $6.50 per diem, regimental pay and allowances, from that date.


NAVAL SERVICE DEPARTMENTTRAVELLING EXPENSES.
Mr. HARTT:: 1.	Referring to the following extracts from
the Auditor General's Report for 1914-15, pages R-45 and R-46:	Inspector Morrison, travel
and outlay, $4,023.14 ; Inspector Fisher, travel and outlay, $3,424.68 ; Inspector Hockin, travel and outlay, $2,527.87; and Inspector McLeod, travel and outlay, $2,857.93.
2.	Were these amounts actually paid for the purposes shown?


Mr. HAZEN:: The amounts charged
against these inspectors in the Auditor General's Report do not represent the true amounts expended for them by travel and outlay. The Audit Office must have in-

eluded other amounts not properly chargeable to expenses under this heading.


Mr. HARTT:: 1.	Referring to the following extracts from
the Auditor General's Report for 1913, page O__
143, where the travel and outlay of Inspector of Fisheries D. Morrison, of Newcastle, N.B., are shown as $214.29, and at page 0-144, the travel and outlay of Inspector Ward Fisher, of Shelburne, N.S, are shown as $999.43 ; those of Inspector R. Hockin, of Pictou, N.S., as $599.33,
[DOT] and those of Inspector A. G. McLeod, of Whitney Pier, N.S., as $615.35 ; and at page R-45, of the Auditor General's Report for 1914-15, the travel and outlay of Inspector Morrison are shown as $4,023.14, and at page R-45, those of Inspector Fisher as $3,424.68 ; those of Inspector Hockin as $2,527.87, and those of Inspector McLeod as $2,857.93.
2.	Why were these large increases necessary?


John Douglas Hazen: The amounts shown in the ' Auditor General's Report for 1914-15 are incorrect, as the amounts actually expended by these officers in 1914-15 for "travel and outlay are as follows: D. Morrison, $668.32; Ward Fisher, $1,236.43; R. Hockin, $609.42; A. G. McLeod, $567.47.* The figures given in the Auditor's Report are greatly in excess of the above, and a serious mistake was evidently made in the Auditor General's office.	'	,


WOMEN VOTERS IN MANITOBA.
Mr. TURRIFF:: ,
Is it the opinion of the Minister of Justice that women who are on the voters' list in the province of Manitoba, which province has granted the franchise to women, will be entitled to vote for members of the House of Commons?


Mr. DOHERTY:: It has never been the
practice to answer questions of law.


MONTREAL DISTRICT JUDGES.
Mr. BOIVIN:: 1.	What are the names of the judges of the Superior Court who are in charge of the thirteen trial roles in the district of Montreal?
2.	How many of the said judges were appointed for the district of Montreal, and how many were appointed for' other districts?
3.	What annual salary doss each of the said judges receive?
4.	If there is any difference in the salary paid the said judges, why does this difference exist?


Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	The assignment of the work of the different judges is not under the control of this Government, and the Government has no information as to the assignment of the trial roles in Montreal.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	The judges receive the salaries fixed by the statute.


RELEASE OF WALTER T. ROSS.
Mr. W. M. MARTIN:: 1.	Was one Walter T. Ross released from the Prince Albert penitentiary in the spring of 1914?
2.	What was the term for which the said Ross had been sentenced to the penitentiary?
3.	What was the offence or offences of which the said Ross was convicted?
4.	What portion of the sentence had the said Ross served at the time of his release?
5.	AVhy was the said Ross released?
6.	On whose representations was the said Ross released?


Mr. DOHERTY:: 1.	Yes, in March, 1914.
2.	Ten years.
3.	Forgery, uttering, theft, false pretences.
4.	Two years and three months' time actually served, besides remission earned.
5 and 6. It has never been the practice to make public the reasons of advice tendered His Royal Highness as to the exercise of clemency under the Ticket of Leave Act, nor the names of persons making representations with regard to such releases.


ENLISTMENTS FROM RIMOUSKI AND MATANE.
Mr. BOULAY:: How many volunteers from Rimouski and' Matane have been enlisted since the first of August, 1914?


Albert Edward Kemp: I would ask the hon. gentleman (Mr. Boulay) if he would allow this question to drop. It is almost impossible to get this information. We would have to go through 275,000 names.
Question dropped.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Copp.-For a return showing the total cost to the Government of the military barracks established in the buildings of the Canadian Car and Foundry Company, Amherst, N.S., during 1915, and to whom the money has been paid ; if there are any outstanding bills; if so, for what amount, and to whom; the amount of material supplied, from whom, purchased, and for what prices; the cost of dismantling these barracks, to whom was it paid, and at what time was the dismantling done; and the total cost of supplies and provisions for the troops quartered in said barracks, to whom paid, and at what price?
Mr. E. Lapointe.-For a copy of all petitions received by the Governor General in Council requesting the disavowal of the Act of the legislature of the province of Ontario, chapter 45, George V, 1915, concerning the School Commission of the Roman Catholic schools of the city of Ottawa, and of all documents, memoranda. reports, letters and correspondence concerning the said petitions for disavowal, or concerning the said Act of the Legislature of the province of Ontario, 5 George V. chapter 45.
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Sinclair.-For a copy of all correspondence, petitions and papers, including- the report of Charles Bruce, engineer, in the possession of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, relating to the construction of a bait freezer at White Head, Nova Scotia.
Mr. Boyer..-For a copy of all letters, telegrams, etc., exchanged between the Department of Public Works and the Department of Justce and the council of the town of Rigaud, Archibald Macdonald, Elzgar Montpetit, and the Rigaud Granite Company, Limited, in connection with the military building.

Mr. E. M. MACDONALD (Pictou) moved:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, offers, tenders, reports, contracts and documents relating to the quantity of small arms ammunition in stock in Canada on August 4, 1914, and as to the increase or decrease in quantity of the same; and as to the sale or other disposal of said ammunition or any part thereof since that time.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: I cannot agree
that the motion should pass in this form because it would necessitate bringing down information of a confidential character which the military advisers of the Government think it is not desirable to disclose.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: In the answer to a
question that I see in Hansard on Monday last a portion of this information is given.


Robert Laird Borden: Not the quantities.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I fail to see how the quantities would be important if these goods were purchased by persons in Canada. I am at a loss to know why there should be any secrecy with regard to that.


Robert Laird Borden: I could not consent to have the motion pass in its present form. If my hon. friend will suggest some alternative form that will not call for information that it is undesirable to disclose I shall be very glad to consider it. When I went to the War Office myself last summer on behalf of the Government of Canada to obtain certain information about the progress they had made in munitions, they would not give to me the amount they had on hand in August, 1914; nor, would they give me information as to what they were proposing at that time; nor would they give me information as to the increased production except in this, way, that they took a certain arbitrary figure which gave me no information whatever and said that represents what we had on hand. They took another entirely arbitrary figure, which gave me no information at all except by ratio, and they said: that represents what we [Mr. E. Lapointe.!
were producing in August, 1914; and then further figures showing by ratio the increased production in subsequent months. No actual quantities were given, or stated to me, and I accepted their view and took their statement of ratios.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I can appreciate my right hon. friend's position in regard to a statement of the quantities that were in stock at a certain time, but I can not altogether agree with him as to the difficult}* of telling how much has been sold. I would suggest to my right hon. friend that the motion might be amended to read in this way:
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, offers, tenders, reports, contracts and documents relating to the sale - or other disposal of small arms ammunition since August 4, 1914.


Robert Laird Borden: I will observe
my hon. friend's statement in Hansard and let him know to-morrow.


RELEASE OF WALTER T. ROSS.
John Gillanders Turriff: For a copy of all letters, papers and correspondence in connection with the release of Walter T. Ross from the Prince Albert Penitentiary in the spring of 1914?


Charles Joseph Doherty: We have had on different occasions in the past motions similar to this, and I think I- am quite safe in ' saying that it is a very well established practice that papers such as are asked for by this motion should not be brought down. Walter T. Ross was released from the Prince Albert Penitentiary in the spring of 1914 on a ticket of leave, and, as I have said, it is a very well established practice not t!o bring down papers in cases such as this. They are looked upon as being of a confidential nature. The matter has been dealt with by this House, the last debate I recol-leot being in 1913 when the whole question was very fully gone into. At that time I took occasion to put upon Hansard an account of the successive occasions upon which the question was raised and this House then acquiesced in the propriety of the view that the papers should not be brought down. I am not suggesting that there would not be power in this House to give such an order, but I think that the practice which has been adopted is a salutary one. It is a' matter of importance that communications upon these subjects should be treated as confidential, the reasons for that being fully set forth by me in the course of the last debate as they had been by several of my predecessors in the Depart-

inent of Justice. Any information which the hon. gentleman desires to obtain in regard te this particular case, and which would not be of an absolutely confidential nature, I would be very happy to communicate to him if he would call upon me, but I do not think we should depart from the practice in regard to not bringing down papers of this kind.


John Gillanders Turriff: Would the minister let the motion stand for the present?
Motion stands.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Robert Laird Borden: That on and after Monday next, the 3rd day of April, and until the end of the session, Government orders shall have precedence on Mondays after questions and notices of motions for production of papers.
He said:	I am eliminating from the
motion of which I had given notice, the reference to morning sittings, in accordance with the suggestion on the other side of the House and in accordance with an arrangement I have made with my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition that morning sittings of the House should not be held before the 10th of April.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Sir Thomas' White (Minister of Finance), Bill No. 61, to amend the Customs Tariff, 1907, was read the second time, and the House went into Committee thereon, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
On section 1-short title.
Mr. GRAHAM:: 1 think this is the proper time for 'me to place before the committee a memorandum, and also a copy of a communication presented to 0ir Richard McBride when he was Prime Minister of British Columbia, concerning this proposed taxation on fuel oil. As I stated on a former occasion, we in Ontario are spending a good deal of money in order to get cheap power, while this Government is passing a Bill in order to make dearer power, which is now comparatively cheap. The memorandum reads: _
Some three or four years ago, due to the representations of the Government of British Columbia and the Board of Railway Commissioners, the Canadian Pacific Railway Company changed its locomotives running in certain districts from coal to oil burners. This change was made at the expense of $600,000, and was for the sole purpose of protecting the forests of British Columbia from fire.
The initial cost of crude oil to the company at that time exceeded the cost of coal, but some of this difference was absorbed by the certainty of the supply of oil and the uncertainty of the supply of coal as in the case of strikes, congestion, etc. The present tax on the amount imported for locomotives and steamship purposes shows the following result:
Proposed new taxation on 47,398,000 gallons, $236,992. Present taxation, $81,254.52; Increase, $155,737.48.
I give that as a sample of how the change effects the Canadian Pacific railway in making its motive power dearer. This company, like the Grand Trunk Pacific, I presume, at the suggestion of the Government of British Columbia and the Board of Railway Commissioners, changed its locomotives from coal burners to oil burners. This is the communication sent to Sir Richard McBride when he was Prime Minister of British Columbia:
Vancouver, B.C., 3rd March, 1915.
Hon. Sir Richard McBride,
Premier,
Victoria, B.C.	[DOT]
Dear Sir,-It has come to the knowledge of the large and important manufacturing interests, as well as the railway and steamship transportation companies operating in British Columbia, that your Government have recently been presented with a petition from certain parties interested in coal mining, urging your Government to support their application to the Federal Government for a duty on crude oil imported for fuel and manufacturing purposes. The undersigned, therefore, beg to respectfully urge that your Government do not support an application towards imposing a duty on crude oil for the above purposes, for the following reasons:
Until crude oil for fuel became available, manufacturing in British Columbia was practically at a standstill. Such industries as had been established, were being forced to close down or greatly reduce their operations, and new industries were deterred from establishing themselves, because of their inability to obtain suitable and sufficient coal to carry on their operations, and at a price that would make manufacturing possible. Steamship lines operating along the British Columbia coast, providing the necessary transportation facilities so important to the opening up of the mining, fishing and lumber industries, were unable to provide a satisfactory service because of their inability to obtain coal, and being in competition with oil burning steamers operating from Puget Sound, were placed at a great disadvantage, and Canadian interests were suffering. Railways were unable to handle * the increasing traffic to the satisfaction of the shipping and travelling public for the same reasons. This difficulty was largely owing to the numerous and frequently occurring labour disputes, which resulted in the closing of the mines. These disputes were not between Canadian employers and Canadian labour, but were forced upon the country by the dictation of union labour leaders in the United States. In the year 1911, the Canadian Pacific railway was placed in a position that compelled them, between the months of June

and December, to import from Pennsylvania over 32,000 tons of coal, and haul it from the head of the Great Lakes to the centre of this province, involving? a cost, over the price they would have paid for British Columbia coal, of $208,000. Again, in 1912, when another strike prevailed in the mines of Vancouver island, they had to import from the state of Washing- [DOT] ton about 40,000 tons of coal, at an expense of $154,000, although, at that time, they were! burning a large Quantity of fuel oil. That railway company found itself forced to go into the use of oil fuel for the reasons stated, although they realized that it would cost them $650,000 in order to use oil fuel, and spent that sum of money on its locomotives and steamers, and in providing the necessary equipment.
Immediately fuel oil became available, a great impetus was given to the establishment of manufactories of all kinds, and the opening up the full capacity of those already established. These included, among others, pulp and paper mills, cement manufactories, gas works, sugar refineries, and iron and steel works for .the fabrication and construction of tanks and other equipment; oil refineries, which, while they do not use oil for fuel have established important industries in the refining of this crude oil, a large percentage of the by-product, viz., " asphaltum," being in competition in Canadian markets with imported " asphaltum," which is,admitted free of duty, besides oils, distillates, etc. These, and numerous other industries, have been the means of giving employment to a large number of the highest class of labourers, and have enabled British Columbia manufacturers not only, to supply their own market, but to reach foreign markets, and this condition, we state in the most positive terms, could not have been accomplished had the manufacturing and transportation interests had to depend on British Columbia coal for fuel.
In respect to the railway operations. It is impossible to estimate the enormous saving that has accrued to the province of British Columbia through the use of fuel oil in certain districts, by reason of the elimination of the numerous devastating forest fires which were constantly occurring during the dry seasons, and which could not possibly be avoided in the operation of heavy grades with coal fuel. This has resulted in such an enormous saving to the lumber interests of the province at large, that the Commission on the Conservation of Forests have warmly commended those railways which have adopted oil fuel, and have urged that no other class of fuel be used through districts adjoining timber lands. In fact, the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada have issued an order that coal which throws sparks must not be used from April to October, which places a ban on a large proportion of coals of this province.
Many strong reasons could be advanced in support of our contention, but we would briefly reiterate our statement that the absolute inability of the coal mines, for reasons explained, to supply sufficient and suitable fuel, caused great delay to the development of the industries of the province, and consequent heavy loss; but the introduction of fuel oil, although it involved heavy expenditures on the part of the transportation and manufacturing interests, has enabled these industries to establish themselves, and although difficult, under present conditions, to. continue their operations, we submit that it would be not only an injustice but 
it would be fatal to the continuation of their' operations, should a duty such as suggested, be placed on this class of fuel, which is not, at present, produced in Western Canada. .
We desire to refer to the temporary war tax referred to in the budget by the hon. Minister of Finance, of 7} per cent on crude oil. ,
He is referring to last year's Budget.
The undersigned, in common with all other Canadian industries, stand ready to bear their share of the burden assumed by the Dominion of Canada, in its avowed policy of supporting the Empire in the defeat of the nation's enemies in the present war, and, therefore, if this tax is necessary for that purpose, we offer no protest, but gladly assume our share. At the same time, it might be pointed out that in view of the very large importation of crude oil into this province, necessary for the foregoing reasons, the war tax derived therefrom will, we believe, produce a larger revenue per capita from this province than from any other portion of the Dominion. We submit that the principle of the war tax is an equal distribution over the whole Dominion and we fear such will not be the result, for the reasons given. The undersigned, therefore respectfully request that you should place our views before the hon. Minister of Finance, so that should the demand of the coal mine interests go before the Federal Government, our views may receive their consideration :
The British Columbia Sugar Refining Co., Ltd., B. T. Rogers, president; British Columbia Electric Railway Company, Ltd., George Kidd, general manager; Union Steamship Company of British Columbia, Limited, E. H. Beasley, managing director; Imperial Oil Company, L baited, C. M. Rolston. manager: The Canadian Pacific Railway Company, British Columbia Division, F. W. Peters, general superintendent: The Pacific Great Eastern Railway, A. H. Sperrv, general manager; North Vancouver City Ferries, T. M. Heard, superintendent; The Grand Trunk Pacific Coast SS. Co., C. H. Nicholson, manager; British Columbia Steamship Service. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., J. W. Troup, manager; The 'Associated Cement Company (Canada), Limited, Edwin Tomlin, local secretary; for Sir John Jackson (Canada), Ltd., H. A. Elgee. agent; Sidney Rubber Roofing Co., Ltd., Bert D. White, manager; A. J. Woodward, Florist, Victoria and Vancouver; Wilkerson & Brown, Florists, Victoria and Vancouver; The Griffith Company, per James A. Griffith ; R. W. Comnton & Co., agents, Union Bank Building; McPherson & Fullerton Bros., T. S. McPherson ; Central Building, per A. M. Fullerton; Pantages Theatre Co., per T. S. McPherson; Victoria Machinery Depot Co., Ltd., per C. J. Savage; Vancouver Island Power Co., Ltd., A. T. Goward, director; Victoria Gas Co., Ltd., A. T. Goward, manager; Belmont Buildings, Ltd., E. J. Hearing, asst, scy.; D. E. Campbell, druggist; Victoria Chemical Co., Ltd., Edward Less supt.; Grant Smith & Co. & McDorald Ltd..' bv H. W. Bassett.
At this stage, I wish merely to read that communication sent to the Premier of British Columbia, and to add that if, in addition to the 71 per cent tax now existing, this extra tax-


Sir THOMAS WHITE:: The 7i per cent tax is taken off.


George Perry Graham: Then the tax is fixed at this specific rate?


William Thomas White: Half a cent a
gallon.


George Perry Graham: But to one company it
makes a difference of $155,000 a year on the present consumption. So, it is obviously an increase in taxation as compared with the 74 per cent formerly imposed. That being the eSect, it will be seen that it gives rise to a serious situation. British Columbia is anxious to have manufacturing establishments of all kinds introduced, but this taxation will very much hamper the development of these industries, and that is something which no person wishes to see result from any method of taxation. In Ontario, the slogan to-day is " cheap power," but this taxation imposed by the Federal Government will make power which is comparatively cheap dearer in British Columbia than it is to-day. I do not wish to say anything more just now; but I bring this to the attention of the committee as coming from reliable sources.
On section 2-Schedule A amended:


Mr. PUGSLEY:: I do not wish to take
up time at this stage, but a few words ought to be said as to this increase in the duty on apples. It is extremely unfortunate that, at this session, when the Government have sought to make Parliament and the country believe that they do not intend to deal with any contentious measure, but to confine attention chiefly to measures connected with the war, they should have introduced a proposal to increase the tariff upon an article of food so universally used by the people of Canada. The proposal is of a most controversial nature. It is in no way connected with the war, but has been introduced for the , declared purpose of encouraging the fruit-growing industry in British Columbia. It ought to be borne in mind that the three Prairie Provinces are not able to raise fruit. Fruit from outside their own boundaries is a necessity of life and not a luxury to the people there. It is very objectionable that at this time, when the people of the Prairie Provinces are bearing cheerfully their Share of the burdens which Canada is called upon to bear in connection with the war, an jincrease of taxation should be imposed upon an article so necessary for them. It is peculiarly unfortunate -that this should
be done at a time so closely following the action of the Congress of the United States in reducing the taxation upon this very article of food. Hon. members are no doubt aware that until 1914, that is until the Wilson tariff was enacted, the duty upon apples entering the United States was 25 cents per barrel, the Canadian duty being 40 cents per barrel. The Congress of the United States has reduced the tariff on apples from 25 cents to 10 cents per barrel, while now it is proposed by this Government to increase our tax from 40 cents to 90 cents per barrel. I should like to know what my hon. friend the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster) thinks. My hon. friend from Vancouver (Mr. Stevens) when asked what the Minister of Trade and Commerce had said upon certain important matters, replied that he did not care. He is one of the young men on the Conservative side who have nq respect, apparently, for the opinion of -the elder statesmen of Canada. I can remember reading not many years ago an eloquent and forcible statement by the Minister of Trade -and Commerce addressed more particularly to the people of the United States on the subject of trade relations between the two countries, and in that speech or it may have been a magazine article -he said to the people of the United States: Lower your tariff wall, and you will find the people of Canada prepared, and joyfully prepared, to meet you.
But this Government is proposing to increase the duty on apples from 40 cents a barrel to 90 cents a barrel, thus making the Canadian duty on this most important article of food 900 per cent greater than the Lnited States tariff. This proposal is most objectionable, and extremely undesirable. It is placing in the hands of that section of the people- of the United States who would like to do away with the reduced tariff in respect of Canadian produce and get back to a high protective tariff the very weapon which they want and which they may use with good effect against Canadian produce in the not distant future. At the same time that the United States reduced the duty on apples, they reduced the duty on hay from $4 a ton to $2 a ton, under which vast quantities of Canadian hay have been sent into the United States, much to the advantage of the Canadian people. At the same time the United States Congress took off entirely the duty on lumber, and vast quantities of lumber have been sent into that country, where a market



of enormous importance for Canadian lumber is being found. Congress at the same time reduced the duty on oats from 15 cents a bushel to 6 cents a bushel, under which millions of dollars worth of Canadian oats find a ready and profitable market in the United States. In view of the fact that the United States have made these concessions to Canada in response to what has been thought to be the general desire of the public men and the people of Canada, is this the time for the Government to increase the duty on this important article of food and make it 900 per cent greater than the United States tariff on the same article? It is said that this action is necessary in order to prevent the ruin of the apple industry in British Columbia. Sir,
I do not believe it.' I believe that every skilled farmer in British Columbia engaged in the production of apples can compete against the importation of apples from the United States under a reasonable tariff. The fruit growers of British Columbia do not want and do not need a duty of 90 cents a barrel on apples. The proposed duty is altogether exorbitant, and altogether out of proportion to the cost of the production of this article of food. From the experience which I have had in travelling through that province, I know that the trouble with British Columbia arises through the booming methods which in recent years have been carried on there. Land suited only for mixed farming and ordinary agricultural purposes has been boosted and boomed as being adapted for fruit growing. Many big companies have bought out the farms, and have been the means of doing away with mixed farming and inducing the people to go into fruit growing upon land which is no more adapted for the growing of fruit than any of the agricultural lands in Eastern Canada. Ask the fruit growers of the Okanagan valley as to their experience last year, and they will all tell you that the experienced fruit growers made money out of the products of their orchards, and that they do not need this protection. They regard it as unreasonable and unfair to the rest of the people of Canada that this very high rate of taxation should be imposed on this most important article of food. I desire to protest in the strongest way possible against the action of the Government in regard to this duty. I say that it ought not to be imposed at any time, least of all at this time, when the Government is pretending to the people of this country that they desire not to introduce controversial mea-
sures, but to devote their attention to purposes connected with the successful carrying on of the war.


Mr. OLIVEB:: 
Mr. GREEN:: The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) made a statement that the experienced apple grower of British Columbia was quite satisfied, and was able to produce apples at a profit at the present-market. T.he hon. gentleman evidently is not aware that a delegation- of British Columbia fruit growers visited the Capital in the early days of the session, among whom were two of the largest and most experienced fruit growers in the province of British Columbia. The statement of the fruit growers of British Columbia is that they canpot produce apples at less than $1.08 per box, 3 boxes making a barrel, whereas last year they had to sell their apples at 80 cents per box. The hon. member from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) attributed some remarks to me which I did not use. I may look vary innocent, but I am not innocent enough to say, or to have said in this House, that the producer will not receive any more for Ihis fruit under the new conditions than he did under the old. What I did say was thait, the slaughtering of American fruit will be shut out of the prairie markets, the producer of British Columbia -would have a stable market in which to place bis- fruit; that he would be enabled thereby to get into closer touch with the actual consumer, and for that matter keep out the middleman, the net result being that the consumer would pay very little more for his apples, and the producer would get a greater price. As it is under present conditions, it i-s a well known fact that the producer in some of the western American states has over planted, he has more product than he can- take care of and get rid of in his logical market, and he has been making a slaughter market of our Prairie Provinces. Not only do they offer to the prairie market apples at a certain price in competition with other apples from British Columbia and
4 p.m. Ontario, but they send apples in there on consignment, and many consignments have brought less than the freight and duty. Apples have been sent to the Prairie Provinces for as low as 30 cents per box. Surely we must protect such an industry as the apple growing industry of this Dominion. It is certainly a growing industry, it is certainly an industry that is entitled to protection; and if we can get the market of Canada the other

things will follow, and the producer will get into close touch with the consumer. The consumer will pay very little, if any, more for his product. The producer will get the addition that is now eaten up by the middlemen owing to the fact that he can get quotations and consignments from the United States producers and thereby cut our product out of our own market.


Mr. MICHAEL CLARK:: I do not want to delay the committee for more than a minute, as I have already expressed my personal views on this alteration of the tariff; but I have had sent to me a copy of a letter written by a gentleman who has for some years been resident in British Columbia, which I think ought to be read for the benefit of the minister and of the committee. The letter gathers interest from the fact that it was sent to the Canadian Horticulturist in confirmation of views upon this subject which had apparently been expressed in that paper. The Canadian Horticulturist ought to know something about the growing of apples and about the effect of such a duty as this. Without further comment, I shall ask the committee to listen to this letter:
Dear Sir,-I have read with interest your editorial upon the increased duty on apples, and desire to express my belief in the correctness of your view that, while it will give some temporary relief to the growers of British Columbia, it will not be of permanent benefit. Not only will the financial benefits be capitalized upon the value of the land, but it will act as a hindrance to prevent the removal of the real handicaps which burden the development of all land property in that great province.
Our protective tariff policy imposed a greater burden upon the agricultural progress of British Columbia than upon that of our other provinces, owing to the expense of irrigation in the dry districts and the high cost of clearing the heavily-timbered lands of the coast and of other districts.
The high cost of living during the years of bringing the land under cultivation, and the necessity for intense cultivation of the available lands, has led largely to the growing of truck crops and of fruits, the perishable nature of which, from local points makes it a practical impossibility to obtain a fair return in the provincial or prairie markets open to them. Not only has this prevented profitable results, but the high tariff caused a special injury to the fruit industry: 1st, by encouraging the dishonest booming of land; 2nd, by leading growers in reckless planting of all kinds of fruit of almost every variety known, which too often was planted so close together that proper development was impossible, until one marvels at the folly and waste of a large part of the British Columbia orchards.
The high tariff was also used to bolster up the prohibitory railway and express rates which have so seriously militated against the well-being and progress of the province.
Two illustrations may make my argument clear:
CM". Green.]	.
The freight charge last year upon commercial fertilizers from Victoria to Summerland, on lake Okanagan, was $18 a ton, making the cost of superphosphate about $40 a ton, while here it was bought for $22 a ton, while ground rock phosphate from the state of Tennessee was delivered here by the carload at $9 per ton.
Grain from Calgary points to British Columbia buyers In the interior and at Vancouver was charged 19c. per bushei freight for a distance of 500 to 650 miles, while from Calgary to Fort William, 1,227 miles, the freight was but 13 3-10c. per bushel.
In such ways high tariff has worked to cause that province far greater losses than the extra price it brought to fruit growers could begin to pay for.
My conviction is that only after high tariffs are removed will the Pacific province fully come to its own. I believe that a fair competition with the Oregon and Washington growers would in the results be better for the fruit growers of British Columbia than protection, which in the end costs more than it benefits.
I am sure the minister will sympathize with a solitary free trader in this House in asking for a little information and in putting on record so much sound doctrine from a province where one did not expect to find it after having listened to the utterances of the members from that province. It would rather seem that in so far as tariff matters are concerned they will find a great deal more of it than they expect. If it surprises them, and causes them to change their attitude, so much better for them; if not so much the worse for them, but they can rely upon the fact that the sentiment is growing.


Mr. W. M. MARTIN:: Coming from a portion of the country where we pay higher prices for fruit than are paid in any other part of Canada, I cannot allow this resolution, increasing the tariff on apples from 40 to 90 cents per barrel, to pass without uttering a word of protest. To give an illustration of some of the prices that we pay for apples in Regina, and at other places on the prairies: For No. 1 Northern Spies I have paid at Regina as high as $8 per barrel; for ordinarily good British Columbia apples the lowest price we paid last fall that I have personal knowledge was $1.90 or $2 per box, and these same prices apply to apples coming from Oregon and Washington. In my part of the country the average wage earner cannot afford to buy apples.
I am not sufficiently aware of the situation in British Columbia to express an opinion with regard to that province, but as far as the members from the prairie provinces are concerned, I do not believe they will be properly representing their

constituencies in this House if they support this increase in the duty on apples. The duty means that we shall have to pay more for every box and barrel of apples we buy in Western Canada. The hon. member for Kootenay (Mr. Green), and other British Columbia members, say that so far as the apple growers in British Columbia are concerned the increase in d,uty will not mean an increased price to the consumer. If that is so, why in the name of common sense do they want an increase in duty? My opinion is, however, that just as soon as this increase in duty comes into force every consumer in the prairie provinces will have to pay an increased price on every box and barrel of apples he buys. If it costs $1-06 to produce the average box of apples in British Columbia, and we have to pay on an average $2.50 a box in Regina, the difference must go by way of illegitimate profit to some person. What that person is I do not know. I have never been able to figure it out. I remember years ago, when I lived in the province of Ontario, it was a common thing to buy apples for $1.50 or $2 a barrel in the orchards.


William Pugsley: And in Nova Scotia.


William Melville Martin: Where does the difference go? Perhaps, the minister can tell us. It surely does not all go to the middleman. The point I wish to make is this-if this tariff will benefit any one at all it will benefit the fruit growers of British Columbia, and it is therefore simply another discrimination against the consumers of the prairie provinces. In the prairie provinces, unfortunately, we do not produce any fruit. But fruit is a very necessary article of food, and it is in the interests of a man's health that he should be able to get it. Thte duty, however, will only make it more difficult for men in my part of the country to get the fruit they desire to consume. I fail to see how the Minister of Finance can come to the conclusion that a duty of this kind is in the national interest. I have repeatedly heard him say that if such and such a thing were in the national interest he would put it on the statute book. He is apparently satisfied that to give more pro-.tection to a small class of the community in British Columbia is in the national interest. I am of the opinion that you cannot pick out any one item in the tariff and say that it is in the national interest. All tariffs are class legislation, and are passed for the benefit of a very few, at the cost of
the rest of the community. This increase in duty is simply another attempt, whether designedly or not, to throttle the people of the western provinces.


Mr. SCHAFFNER:: What is the percentage of American apples imported?


William Thomas White: We imported
200.000	barrels.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I suppose there are in the three Prairie Provinces at least
1.500.000	consumers of apples. I agree with the hon. member for Regina that it is good for people to eat apples, but my experience is that the people in the western provinces do not eat apples to the extent they did when they lived in an apple-growing country.


William Melville Martin: Does the hon. gentleman mean that they have not got the habit of eating apples?


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I say, that as a fact, they have not the habit to the extent they had when they lived in parts of the country where apples were cheaper. I, of course, believe my hon. friend when he says he paid $8 a (barrel for Northern Spies. I would not suggest that he was exaggerating, but I am afraid that he was taken in.


William Melville Martin: I have never paid less than $6.
Mr. (SCHAFFNER:	The difference in
price of Ontario apples at Brandon and Regina should not 'be very much. In my town, the price of Ontario winter apples, such as Northern Spies, Greenings, Russets, etc., ranges from $3.75 to $5 a barrell. The apple question has been before t'he Agricultural Committee, of which I am a member, a great many times. I have often heard it said in the committee, that the apples in Ontario are not worth picking, and are left on the trees. I do not think I am far out when I say that apple growers in Ontario consider $1.50 a barrel a good price for the fruit as it stands in the orchard.


Mr. WEBSTER:: Not last year.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: I think that is a good average price and if that is so, there is no reason why the people of Regina should have to pay $8 a barrel for the same fruit. My hon. friend from Edmonton (Mr. Oliver) mentioned the middlemen, and I should like to ask him a question on that point; I ask it entirely for information. The hon. member attributed the high pric*

of fruit largely to the middlemen. That has been the case in the past, and it is perhaps true to a certain extent to-day. Speaking of >my own district, I know that in Boissevain, the so-called middleman has very little opportunity of selling apples or any other fruit, foT practically all the Ontario fruit used by the prairie consumers is brought in by the grain growers. The grain growers can bring in winter apples from Ontario, and perhaps from Nova Nova Scotia, at from $3.75 to $4 a barrel. I think this is one of the ways in which the grain growers have been useful to the consumers on the prairies. It has always seemed to me that the high price is not attributable to the middleman. I think that freight and express rates have a great deal to do with the cost of apples, in my part of the country at all events. In my district we use very few American apples; what we do import are almost entirely early apples ripe in the month of September. As soon as the fruit grown in the east has matured, ninety per cent of out total consumption, if not more, comes from Ontario. If a certain article can be produced in Ontario at a Certain figure, and the people of the West have to pay a great deal more for that article, it seems to me it would be a splendid occupation for any Government that happened to be in power to ascertain the reason for the difference in price. The people of the Western Provinces are willing to pay their full sfiare of taxation, whether war or ordinary taxation, but on this question of apples-and I am by no means a free trader; with the light I have, it seems almost useless to be talking about free trade in a country like ours-I am bound to say that I most heartily sympathize with the idea that the duty on apples should not be increased, for it will mean an increased price to consumers in the Prairie Provinces.


Frank Oliver: The hon. member for Kootenay (Mr. Green) said, on the authority of an association of apple growers in British Columbia, that it cost $1.06 a box to produce apples in that province.


Robert Francis Green: As a matter of fact, it is $1.08.


Frank Oliver: Now, the apple growers received last year 80 cents a box. That means there is a difference of 28 cents between the selling price of the apples, and tlhe price they can produce them at. Apples were higher last year than the year before;

I think it is generally conceded that the British Columbia grower got a better price for apples last year than he had been getting for many years previous. He got 80 cents a box, and there was a duty, of 20 cents a box.


Robert Francis Green: The duty was about 15 cents.


Frank Oliver: The duty is 40 cents a barrel until this new tax comes into effect; then there is a 7J per cent ad valorem duty, which brings the total duty to about 20 cents a box. The increase the minister proposes is an increase from 20 cents to 30 cents a box; that is, an increase of 10 cents a box. This duty, we are told, is to save the apple industry of British Columbia. But let us see. The British Columbia grower got 80 cents a box last year. The increase the Minister of Finance proposes works out, at the most to 10 cents a box, and that gives 90 cents a box on last year's price, which is still 18 cents a box less than the hon. member for Kootenay says the apples can be profitably produced for. Therefore there is no salvation for the industry in this proposition. As a matter of coming to the assistance of the apple growers of British Columbia, it may have merit, but to save the apple industry of British Columbia, it has absolutely' no merit, on the statement that my hon. friend has made. Let me make this suggestion first of all in line with what has been said by the hon. member for Regina (Mr. W. M. Martin) and the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Schaffner). The high cost of apples in the prairie provinces has kept down the consumption of apples there. The lower the price the greater the consumption, and the higher the price the less the consumption. What the producer of British Columbia wants is an ample market at his door. If the price of apples is such as to keep down the consumption, then he has not the market. If the price of apples is kept down, then the market is there for him to get. There are other and better ways of affecting the cost of apples to the consumer and the price to the producer than by a readjustment of the tariff. The freight on a box of apples, weighing fifty pounds gross, from Salmon Arm to Edmonton, 525 miles by rail, is 38 cents; the freight on a barrel of apples, equal, to three boxes, from Ontario to Edmonton is $1.95, which would make the proportional freight on a box 65 cents.


Mr. MORRISON:: Is that by the carload or by the single barrel?


Frank Oliver: By the carload. 65 cents a box is the proportionate rate from Ontario to Edmonton as compared with 38 cents a box from Salmon Arm to Edmonton; that is 65 cents for hauling 50 pounds of apples 2,200 miles and 38 cents for hauling the same weight of apples 525 miles. Therefore the rate from Salmon Arm to Edmonton is four times, per mile What it is from Ontario to Edmonton. If we cut the rate from Salmon Arm to Edmonton to the same basis as the Ontario rate, the former rate would be about 17 cents a box as against 38 at the present time. I submit that a readjustment of the freight rates would be an elementary proposition looking to the expansion of the apple industry of British Columbia by cheapening the cost of apples to the prairie consumer and thereby enabling the British Columbia producer to get some part of the difference. Supposing that they were able to split between them the difference in the freight rate, it would be to their mutual advantage and it would double the advantage to the producer, because it would widen his market by reducing the price.
There is no argument in regard to extortion in the distribution of apples. Those who have control of the apple trade simply take advantage of their situation to levy an unjust toll upon the consumer and unduly to depress the price to the producer, and the higher the tariff is the more effectually can they do that work. My hon. friend, says that by this increase in the tariff the British Columbia producer is going to be protected against apples imported from Washington being slaughtered on the western market. Apples, he says, are being slaughtered on the western market to-day with a protective duty of 20 cents a box.


Robert Francis Green: My hon. friend is wrong as to that. The duty is not over fifteen cents or seventeen cents at the outside. When you ad,d the percentage for the straight duty it is from fifteen to seventeen eents, an average of about fifteen cents.


Frank Oliver: The straight duty of forty cents a barrel will be thirteen and a third cents per box. The seven and a half per cent ad valorem duty added to that will, I maintain, und,er the very drastic conditions imposed by the Customs Department, bring the duty up to approximately twenty cents a box. The hon. Solicitor General, when he was addressing the House on this subject.
explained that that was how the duty figured out; in fact, he made it worse than that, because, he said, as Hansard will show, that the additional duty now being proposed was adding, not thirty cents, but only twenty-five cents a barrel. The exact amount of the duty, however, depends on the actual figures calculated by the Customs Department, with which figures, of course, we are not acquainted, but it is a fair proposition to say that the protective duty on a box of apples will be twenty cents, and in the face of that protection apples were slaughtered, they say, in the western provinces. If that were the case with a protective duty of twenty cents a box, will they not be slaughtered equally with a protective duty of ten cents a box more? The producer declared that he needed to get 26 cents a. box more to make his business a paying proposition. He surely expects to get the full benefit of the ten cents a box increased duty, and if he gets it, that is all the protection he has against the slaughtering of apples from Washington; and, if he does not get it, he has not even that much protection against that slaughtering of apples. It is a truism to say that the men, who control the market to-day under present conditions by reason, in large measure, of the tariff which now exists, will be able proportionately to increase their control with the increase in that tariff, and that instead of the tariff working to the benefit of the apple producer of British Columbia, it will work to his injury, because he will be that much tighter in the grip of the combine that handles the apples. That is my contention in regard to the matter and I respectfully submit it to the consideration of the Minister of Finance. This is a far-reaching and very important question. The Minister of Finance in some of his remarks saw fit to minimize it and so did the Solicitor General in some of his remarks, but it is a most important question in fact and in principle. We, in Alberta, are interested in the development of the orchards of British Columbia, naturally expecting to get some benefit' from that development, just as the people who produce the apples expect to derive some advantage from the development of the farms in the Prairie West. But if the middleman stands straddling the Rocky Mountains and robs them with one hand and us with the other, we are of no benefit to them and they are of no benefit to us. That is the point I wish to bring to the attention of the minister.


William Thomas White: The hon. gentleman speaks of the middleman straddling the Rocky Mountains and taking a profit from the residents of the Prairie Provinces and also from the fruit growers of British Columbia. As I followed his argument, it seems to me it would apply in all matters of tariff. If he is logical-and he assumes to be, and I think likes to be logical -then his argument means that the mines of Nova Scotia derive no advantage from the duty on coal. Let him test that theory by the good sense of the people of Nova Scotia. I invite him to go with the member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) to that hon. gentleman's constituency, and promulgate that doctrine there. I do not believe he will find it received with great favour, or that it will carry the popular judgment. According to the hon. gentleman's argument the steel industries of Canada are not in the least degree benefited by the tariff which protects them from dumping by American producers. But I think he will meet very hostile opinions if he puts that view before the steel manufacturers of Canada, who ought to know their own business best.
I hope the committee will not think I am discourteous if, in view of the very full discussion which took place upon the resolutions, I do not go over the same ground again. But there have been questions as to cost of production, and when there is a dispute upon a question of that kind, it always seems to me advisable to call in an impartial witness, an expert who can have no object in misleading the House or the country. I will quote again what I quoted when the resolutions were in committee, an extract from the report of Mr. D. Johnson, the Fruit Commissioner, with regard to this matter of the cost of production in British Columbia and the price the fruit grower there was able to obtain for his product. It seems to me that Mr. Johnson might be looked upon as an impartial expert witness. He said:
It has been shown at the Experimental Station that it costs $1.08 per box, equal to $3.24 per barrel, to produce apples in British Columbia, yet the average price (f.o.t>.) obtained for this fruit in 1914 was 80J cents per box, equal to $2.41 per barrel.	*
That is to say, in the opinion of the fruit commissioners, there was a loss to the fruit growers of British Columbia of 27i cents a box, or 83 cents a barrel, though some hon. gentlemen opposite seem to think that the fruit growers of British Columbia are mak-

ing money on their industry. There is another report to which I call attention, that of Mr. Flack who is Chief Fruit Inspector for the Dominion. He ought to be an impartial expert witness. He says:
Many Washington growers are unable to continue with the low prices realized for their fruit. Foreclosures, I was informed, were quite common. It has often been asked me, " How is it that the Washington growers can sell so cheaply and make money and the British Columbia growers cannot? " My observations were that the Washington grower is not making money and cannot survive the low prices. The British Columbia situation reminds me of a merchant endeavouring to compete with a bankrupt stock.
This shows the character of the competition to which the British Columbia fruitgrower has been exposed, by reason of the abnormal situation existing in the northwestern states of the American Union. The producers there have a large market in their own country, where their better grades of fruit can be disposed of to good advantage, while their lower grades are shipped away, to be sold at such prices as they may be able to obtain. My hon. friend from Regina has questioned my statement that this matter was of national importance. As I said in committee, it would seem to me that anything that concerns agriculture-and fruit-growing is a part of agriculture-is of national importance. And, in order that the committee may know that this matter is not purely one local to British Columbia, I desire to read for the information of the committee an extract from the report of the Fruit Growers' Association of Ontario, held in Toronto, January 18-20 last. Ontario, we all know, is one of the principal, if not the principal, fruitgrowing province in Canada:
A new and very serious situation now faces the men who have, at large expense, established extensive orchard holdings throughout the province, i.e., the enormous and what is considered unfair competition of the surplus fruit of foreign countries in our own markets during the fruit season. This competition is considered unfair and destructive for several reasons, of which the following might be mentioned:
The fruit areas in the United States are very extensive, and, owing to climatic conditions, many of them are able to ripen and put their fruits on the market a few days to several weeks in advance of similar varieties of the home grown product. These fruits are put on our markets at the height of the shipping season, often at very low prices, with the result that when the home grown fruit appears the consuming public has already been largely supplied with fruits of these kinds, and a very poor market is the result for the Canadian producer. At times serious over-production occurs in the American fruit districts, and, in order to save their own markets, heavy supplies of surplus fruit are dumped on the Canadian market and

sold for what they will bring, causing complete demoralization of the fruit market for the time being.
With regard to the importation of apples, there are two important phases to the trade worthy of notice. These importations consist of two classes or grades: first, a limited importation of extra fancy or fancy fruit, and, second, very large consignments of "C" or third grade western apples. These latter are consigned more particularly to the markets of our Northwest provinces.
In regard to the former class of fruit, this is sold chiefly to restaurants and fruit stands, which are largely controlled or owned by foreign dealers, whose habits of life are distinct from those of British or Canadian born, and who reap large profits owing to their methods of living and to the sale of these fruits in small lots at fancy prices.
An increase of duty on this fruit would not be seriously felt by the consumer, but would largely come out of the profits of the foreign dealers.
With reference to the latter grade, as before stated, immense shipments of this class of fruit finds its way into the consuming centres of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and is frequently sold to the wholesale trade at below cost of production in order to relieve the American market, thus supplanting the legitimate market of Canadian producers both from the eastern provinces and British Columbia.
It is felt that this competition is unfair and destructive, and not particularly in the interests of the western consumer, from the fact that with a little encouragement home grown fruit can be supplied in sufficient quantities and at reasonable prices to amply supply this section of Canada from the provinces previously mentioned.	>
It appears to me that, as Canada is an agricultural country, it is a national policy, a proper policy, to protect the products of agriculture if they need protection. Do they need protection where, as in the apple industry, they are exposed to a competition from the United States, whose apple growers have a market for their better grades and so can sell at much below their cost of production their inferior grades by dumping in this market? Is that fair to the agriculturists of this country? I believe in protection, I believe in protection for the agriculturists of this country as much as for the manufacturers of this country. I claim to know something about the sentiment in agricultural Ontario, and many agriculturists of that province, and, I believe, many agriculturists in the eastern provinces generally, and I believe many agriculturists in the Prairie Provinces, as well as the fruit growers of British Columbia, are in favour of a reasonable degree of protection to Canadian agriculture. This Bill will inure to the benefit not only of the fruit growers of British Columbia, but of every farmer in the province of Ontario, every farmer in the province of Quebec, every farmer in the Maritime Provinces.
It will inure also, if apples can be raised in the Nort'h-West, to the ultimate advantage of the Northwest itself, because I believe that industry can be encouraged, whether agricultural or otherwise, by a proper tariff. I rose merely for the purpose of bringing these expert opinions to the attention of the committee and of showing how this matter is Regarded by the fruit growers of Ontario and by the farming' community of that province as well. The result of this tariff will be this: I do not say that it will shut out American fruit wholly-I do not think that desirable-but it will have a tendency to prevent the slaughtering of apples in Canada by American fruit growers at prices 'below the cost of production. I do not believe that the people of Canada desire to buy the products of our agriculturists at less than the cost of production to the farmers. I think if that were put fairly to the people of any community, in Canada they would say: we want to pay at least the cost of production to the agriculturists, and we are willing to pay a little more, because we would like to see our fellow-citizens get a reasonable profit upon their industry. I am not at all afraid that this is going to have a serious effect on the consumer of the West. It will tend to give a larger market in the West to the fruit growers of British Columbia. It will also have the tendency, so far as the whole of Canada is concerned, to promote the great fruit growing industry, which is capable of indefinite expansion. What is the reason why a community which is, and I hope always will be, practicallly agricultural, cannot raise all the fruit that is required by its inhabitants?' Is there any reason why Canada should have to look to another country for fruit?' Our climatic conditions are such that we can compete with any country in the world. I believe that our apples are of a better flavour and quality than apples grown to the South. Should we not so arrange our fiscal policy that the farmers and fruit growers of this country should be able to supply the consumers with such fruit as they require? That does not mean that fruit growers will take a toll from the consumers, because in this country, so largely agricultural, we shall have the benefit of competition; the farmers and fruit growers all over this country will be competing one with the other in the markets of Canada. No one will suggest a combine among all the farmers and all the fruit growers in this country to maintain a

high price against the consuming public. That is the safeguard against oppression or injustice to the consumer-the competition -which will result of the agriculturists all over this country in the production of *agricultural products and of fruit. This legislation is designed to save the agricultural community and the fruit-growing community from a competition, which, on the lace of it, is manifestly unfair to them, and which would ultimately have the effect of destroying, or at least severely injuring, their industry.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: Just a word in connection with the hon. minister's reference to the report of Mr. Johnson. In view of the fact that he gives the average cost of producing a barrel of apples in British Columbia as $3.24, I think we should have a statement as to why it costs so much more to grow apples in British Columbia than it does to grow them in other parts of the Dominion. I am sure that $3.24 a barrel is much beyond the cost of producing apples in Eastern Canada.
Sir THOMAS WHITE-. Mr. Johnson states that it has been shown at the Experimental 'Station that it costs. $1.08 a box, equal to $3.24 a barrel, to produce apples in British Columbia.


Frederick Laurence Schaffner: Why does it cost so much more in British Columbia?


William Thomas White: He does not say why; he simply says that as a matter of fact it does cost that amount. I cannot give his reasons, but he is an expert, official and impartial, and he says that that is the cost.
Mr. MoCRA'NEY: Do I understand that Mr. Johnson says that there is a loss of U cents a barrel?


William Thomas White: He says that the eost of production par barrel is $3.24 and the average price obtained in 1914 w as $2.41 per barrel; that is a difference of 83 cents.


Mr. McORANEY:: Is the minister taking the Teport of Mr. Johnson as being a fair estimate of the - condition of the apple market from year to year, and as indicating that there is a yearly loss in the neighbourhood of 80 cents a barrel?


William Thomas White: I think that for some years past the fruit growers of British Columbia have been conducting their business at a loss. One reason for that is that the planting has greatly increased in

British Columbia. In 1911 there was in British Columbia 1,976,425 trees, and in 1913, 2,291,173 trees. There has been an increase in production from 210,000 boxes in 1910, to 787,750 boxes in 1915. The number of carloads in 1910 was 350 and in 1915, 1,313. W'hile planting has been on the increase in British Columbia, and while new trees have been continually coming into bearing, in Washington and Oregon there has been over-planting and over-production. The result is that the British Columbia fruit grower, the number of whose trees has been increasing, and whose pro- . duct has been multiplied four-fold in five years, finds himself in competition with the greatly over-produced 'situation in the United States, and in competition, as one of the experts of the Agricultural Department has put it, of a .character similar to that which a merchant experiences in competition with a bankrupt stock.


John Gillanders Turriff: It seems to me from the report of Mr. Johnson that it costs $3.24 *to produce a barrel of apples in British Columbia is a Teason why the duty on apples should not be increased at the present time. If it costs $3.24 to produce a barrel of apples, we cannot hope by any duty that we can put on to put the grower of British Columbia in a position to grow apples successfully. I have been making some in-' quiiy as to the cost of apples-not having reference to the Northern Spy and one or two of the better grades. My. information is that the apple grower of Ontario does not receive an average price of one dollar per barrel for his apples at the orchard. It costs probably $1 per barrel for picking the apples, packing them and hauling them from the orchard to the railway station, so that when the minister imposes a duty of 90 cents a barrel on apples, he is putting on a duty of from 75 per cent to 100 per cent on the cost of the apples at the orchard. I ask my hon. friend the Minister of Finance if it is reasonable to impose a duty of practically 100 per cent? If our friends growing apples in British Columbia need a duty of from 75 per cent to 100 per cent on apples, is it fair to the balance of the people of Canada, the great consuming classes of Canada, that this industry should ,be protected to such an extent? You might as well say that we could grow oranges and lemons in Canada. You could grow them under glass, and if you put the duty high enough and prohibited .the importation of other oranges and

lemons, we could probably produce some, but it would be at a great loss. Why should the people of the whole of Canada practically be made to pay extra prices when it has been shown very clearly this afternoon that, even with the duty that is being put on, you cannot hope to protect the industry in British Columbia to an extent that will make it profitable, according to the figures delivered by the Minister of Finance. I ask the Minister of Finance if he will not soften his heart and listen to the plea of the farmers from the Prairie Provinces who will pay this increased burden. Will he not listen to the plea of the hon. member for Cape Breton, and let the baby in the western provinces have its apple at the old price?


George Ewan McCraney: We had this matter
of the increased duty on apples before us some few days ago, and I had hoped that, in the meantime, additional information would have been brought down to the House as to the principles upon which the proposed increase is made. I wish to emphasize	the point	made by my hon.
friend from Souris (Mr. Schaffner) that the	Government has given us very
little information indeed.	The
only statistics which we have before us are the conclusions of a Mr. Johnson, an inspector of the Department of Agriculture, who shows, according to the figures quoted by the minister this afternoon, that there is a loss in growing British Columbia apples of over 80 cents a barrel. The proposal of the minister is to increase the duties by 30 cents a barrel. It is quite evident that there will still be a loss of 50 cents a barrel, which the minister has not provided for, and which causes one to ask on what principle the increase of duties is based. I could understand the minister trying to make up the loss and saying that he would give them .a chance to come out even, toy endeavouring to provide for the 80 cents. I-eould understand that he might say: Well, we will let the people of British Columbia do as the people of Saskatoon have to: If they make unprofitable investments they may have to let them go to tax sale. I could understand that, because that is what we are having to do. But I cannot understand on what basis the minister arrives at the conclusion that am increase of 30 cents a toanrel is going to make up a loss of 80 cents a barrel. Surely, as has been pointed out by the hon. member for Edmonton (Mr. Oliver), other elements enter into the price
which is obtained by the grower of British Columbia, or in fact of any other part of the country, such as the relation of freights to cost of growing, the elements of marketing. I should like to know from the minister whether he has conducted any inquiry along those lines, so that by reducing the expenses of marketing or of growing or of freights, that loss could toe overcome, rather than by additional taxation. My hon. friend from Souris pointed out what is absolutely correct, that the western farmers are willing indeed to endure their share of the burden of raising the revenues of the country. This, however, is not a duty which will raise revenue; it is a purely protective tariff. It is an increase which will probably bring about a loss in revenue, so that the proposed duty will result im an increased price to the farmer through taxation which it is intended to hand over to the fruit-grower of British Columbia. Then, too, the prairie farmer must share in any deficit which
5 p.m. is brought about by decreasing the importation from cutside. I would simply ask my hon. friend the Minister of Finance to reconsider this item, to let it stand and get more information. 1 had hoped that he might come to the conclusion that there were other methods of benefiting the apple producers of British Columbia than the imposition of this increased duty.


Mr. COPP:: I understood from the figures which the minister read that it costs $3.21 a barrel to produce apples in British Columbia. Does that mean in the orchard, or packed?


William Thomas White: Packed, produced, ready for shipment.


Frank Oliver: It has been said by hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House that inferior apples from the state of Washington are slaughtered on the prairie markets, and that it is that slaughtering at low prices that prevents producers in British Columbia from making profits. As a matter of fact, in the city of Edmonton, Washington apples are sold, I shall not say in preference to British Columbia, but they are sold on the same counter, for the same price, on their merits; and it is a very great question if, on the average, the quality of the Washington fruit is not superior to that of British Columbia fruit. I do not wish to make any comparisons; but I wish to place that statement of fact before this House, as showing that the conditions indicated by

hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House are exaggerated, so far as the experience of one who lives right in that country and buys those apples would indit cate.
As far as the price is concerned, I verily believe that the apple dealers' combine buys these apples in Washington and Oregon, at low priees. I do not know whether they do or not-I presume they do-but they do not sell them to the consumers of Alberta at low prices. They get exactly the same price for the same quality of goods whether they come from British Columbia or from the state of Washington. Therefore, the idea that has been put forward on the other side of the House that the trouble with the British Columbia fruit growers is that inferior Washington and Oregon fruit is slaughtered in the Canadian market is simply an error; that is not the market condition at all.
The minister has given his statement to the House. He has not questioned the figures I have given as to freight rates or as to the proper and fair cost of boxes and distribution. He has given us no suggestion as to any reduction in these intermediary charges which are really what is the matter with both the consumer and producer of apples, in the Prairie Provinces and in British Columbia. Assuming that it cost $1.08 to produce a box of apples in British Columbia and that the intermediary charges are 80 cents, out of which there will be 38 cents freight, which is exorbitant and almost double what it should be compared with the rate on apples from Ontario, we should be able to buy apples in Alberta at $1.88 a box, giving the producer his full price, giving fair charges for carriage and distribution we should be able to buy our apples at $1.88 instead of paying $2.25 for apples for which the producers only get 80 cents. I do not think there is any argument proving that the fact that the tariff being low is what is wrong with the apple industry, and an increase of the tariff to an amount of 10 cents a box is not going to save the situation. It will make it worse for the producer as well as for the consumer, because it gives that much more liberty to the apple combine to depress prices at one end and increase them at the other.
Bill reported.



ST. PETERS INDIAN RESERVE.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. J. ROCHE (Minister of the Interior) moved the second reading of Bill

No. 67, relating to St. Peters Indian reserve.
Mr. SPEAKER:: With reference to Bill No. 67 entitled, "An Act relating to the St. Peters Indian Reserve," the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley), on Thursday last, when the resolution on which the Bill is founded was reported to the House, raised the question as to whether this was not a measure that required the consent of the Crown before proceeding further. The Bill was allowed its first reading and a second reading ordered for a future day on the understanding that I would consider this point in the meantime and give a ruling upon it.
Upon looking into the authorities on the subject, I find that where the consent of the Crown is required it may be announced by a minister at any stage of the Bill in question, in this respect differing from that class of bills where a preliminary recommendation of the Crown is necessary. The consent of the Crown is required when property rights of the Crown are postponed, compromised or abandoned, or where some prerogative of the Crown is to be waived. See May (Ilth edition) pp. 448, 561; also Bourinot (3rd edition) pp. 576, 578, and notes.
In the Bill under consideration it appears that certain grants made to the Crown by virtue of statutes in force at the time are confirmed. This confirmation does not, in my view upon a study of the authorities, require any additional consent of the Crown to Ihat already presumably furnished when the statutes were passed. The present Bill, however, appears to grant in addition to a confirmation of title, power to the Government to release liens held and liabilities due or to become due by virtue of the enactment. In this aspect of the case, I am of the opinion that the measure would require that the consent of the Crown be announced to the House at some stage of the Bill before its*final passage.


Mr. ROCHE :: The subject matter of the Bill has been submitted to His Excellency the Governor General, who has consented to the same.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, Bill read the second time, and the House went into Committee thereon, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
On section 2-patents confirmed:
Frank Oliver: I should like some information as to the effect of these subsections. I see that subsection (a) provides

that the lands still held by the Indians are to be patented without any further consideration, and that subsection (b) provides that where the lands have passed out of the hands of the Indians, the sum of one dollar per acre, with five per cent interest per annum, is to be paid as a condition of the patent being confirmed. A patent was issued by the Dominion Government to the purchasers of these lands. Has the Government cancelled that patent?


William Roche: No.


Frank Oliver: The course of events was that the registrar of land titles for Manitoba, acting under the Manitoba legislation, refused to register the patent which had been issued by the Dominion Government. Until the patent was registered under the laws of that province, the land could not be legally transferred. Is that the case?


William Roche: Yes.


Frank Oliver: So the refusal of the registrar to register the title had the effect, not of depriving the purchaser of his property, tout of creating the property a non-negotiable .asset; that is, the purchaser's ownership in the property remained absolutely as it was before, tout he was prevented from selling it. Of course, the refusal to register had the effect of prejudicing the value of the property, .and to that extent deprived the purchaser of the advantage he hoped to gain by the purchase of the property. Now, this patent was issued, and has not been cancelled. For what reason is it believed that the registrar of land titles in Manitoba would [DOT] now refuse to register these titles, irrespective of the legislation now proposed ?


William Roche: Before the registrar would undertake to pass favourably upon the titles, he made the request that either the Superintendent 'General of Indian Affairs, or the Solicitor General, or some other officer representing the Department of Justice, should guarantee that at the present session of Parliament legislation would be introduced, and if possible passed, confirming the patents. I, as Superintendent General of Indian Affairs, stipulated last fall that such legislation would be introduced this session, and from that time on the registrar has been passing favourably upon the titlesi


Frank Oliver: I think I understand the situation, tout I should like to have it made
perfectly clear. This legislation is not mandatory, either as regards the registration of these titles, or as compelling the registrar for Manitoba to refrain from registering until this legislation is passed and complied with.


William Roche: The hon. gentleman has stated the case very fairly. He knows why the registrar would not pass favourably upon the titles: Doubt was cast upon the titles owing to the surrender having been declared invalid, and there was the report of tlhe commission. The Government do not at all recede from the position they took some years ago, that it was not a valid surrender, but still maintain that view. But it was decided that it would be best in the interests of all parties-it would avoid the delay that court proceedings would entail, and would give the purchasers clear title to the lands, and allow the district around Selkirk to develop-if we enacted the legislation asked for by the registrar of land titles for Manitoba.


Frank Oliver: The action entered by this Government in the Exchequer Court was * an action attacking the validity of the title which the previous Government had issued. That action has been entered, and prosecuted to some degree, I presume. Is that .action to be withdrawn as a result of this legislation toeing introduced?


William Roche: If any purchaser of these lands does- not desire to avail himself of this legislation, he is still at liberty to prosecute his own case. The action has not been withdrawn from the Exchequer Court. Those Who wish to avail themselves of this legislation, by paying an aditional one dollar for the registration of title, can have their title favourably passed upon. Those who do not wish to do so need not do so.


Frank Oliver: I hope the minister will
pardon me for pursuing these inquiries so very strongly, but I merely wish to have the matter on record that we may understand it properly. This Government entered suit in the Exchequer Court to invalidate the titles that had been issued to this property. Is that action to be continued or is it to be withdrawn?


Mr. MEIGHEN:: I would say that it will be continued as to any who do i.ot come in under this settlement. There may be none who will decline to come in under the settlement, and in that case the action will be at an end. If there are some who decline to come in, the action will continue.
2,'il8


Frank Oliver: Then the effect is hardly as it was previously presented to the House. It is a fact that this Government is still pressing its attack upon the validity of the titles issued by the previous Government, and will continue to press that attack until the purchasers pay one dollar additional per acre.


Arthur Meighen: The balance of the litigation, i;f -any, will apply to sudh lands as belong to those who refuse to pay. As to pressing the action, I do not know if there will be any pressing of a defendant who refuses to come in. He himself, of course, will want the suit to be disposed of, and the suit will go on; and our side of the litigation will be upheld, at all events until the matter gets to the court. The balance of the litigation will not affect at all any lands the title to which is validated by this legislation.


Frank Oliver: I quite understand, but what I wanted to get straight was this: as I understood the case as presented by my hon. friend and by the Minister of Justice, further legal proceedings would be taken on the initiative of the purchaser^ of the land in maintaining their titles; but, as a matter, of fact, proceedings have been taken by the Government to invalidate the titles, and those proceedings will stand and be pressed unless and until the purchasers pay up the additional dollar per acre. That is really the situation. What I want to have on record is that this Government is continuing its action against these purchasers ; it is not the purchaser who has to take action against the Government.


Charles Joseph Doherty: If the purchaser is satisfied with his title as it is, I presume he will defend it and not settle. This legislation confirms the title of every one who chooses to avail himself of it and make' settlement.
. Our action against anybody who does that necessarily falls because that man's title is confirmed, even assuming that we -were perfectly right in our contention. As regards the others, the status quo is theirs, action having been taken. I presume, if a man does not want to settle, he will want to go on and have the question determined, because he will not want to hold property with this doubt cast upon his title to it. In any event, in the case of those who do not want to settle, the action is standing against them, and I do not see why it should not be proceeded with in the interest of both parties to the litigation.
[Mr Meighen.]


Frank Oliver: That is what I want demonstrated.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I am sorry if any misapprehension has been created. I certainly had no intention the other day to cause any, and I think the Solicitor General and myself said that it was optional to the parties holding the property to avail themselves of this legislation or not, just as they thought best.


Frank Oliver: I understood it was optional to the parties whether or not they should press a case on their own behalf against the Government in connection with the granting of the titles.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I did not mean to convey that impression.


Frank Oliver: The matter is a complicated one and I merely want to get it as straight as possible on the record. This Government having entered action to invalidate those titles now decides that on the payment of an additional dollar an acre, they will withdraw their action so far as those lands are concerned, tout it will stand so far as the other lands are concerned. That, however, has no effect, whatever, except by understanding, upon the action of the registrar, Which after all is the essential point in the matter. This legislation does not presume to control or direct and it could neither control nor direct the registrar of Manitoba. As I understand the matter, he is at liberty to register or not register as he pleases, whether this legislation is passed or not.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I presume, of course, he would act rationally; he would not refuse to register on a mere arbitrary ground. As' 1 understand the situation, the registrar refused because there was at all events a doubt as to the validity of the title. This , legislation will remove that doubt so far as those are concerned who avail themselves of it, and I should assume that, when the reason which moved the registrar to refuse to register disappears, he will no longer refuse to register. He is not, however, an officer of this Government, and is not under its control.


Frank Oliver: I desire to have this
thoroughly understood, that this legislation neither controls nor directs the actions of the registrar of Manitoba, and that it is upon the action that he takes that these people depend for their right to transfer their property, and not upon this legisla-

tion. I do not wish, to enter into a controversy in regard to this matter and I do not want to discuss the motives of the registrar of Manitoba. I will, however, take the liberty of putting this point before the committee. Assuming that the registrar of the Land Titles Office in Manitoba refused to register because he believed that the Indians had been illegally and improperly deprived of valuable rights in that land to anything like the amount that had been stated upon the responsibility of members in this House, when he finds that this Government introduces legislation, which is not necessary at all and which is not effective in any way except as a noth fication that a certain action that the Government entered has been withdrawn, conditioned upon the payment of an additional one dollar an acre by those men who bought land from the Indians, if he were an honest man, which I may isay I do not think he is, or if he were moved by honest motives, which I do not believe-I take the *liberty of saying .so here-I would say that as an honest man he would be compelled by the action that is taken by this Government under this legislation to register all the titles presented to him for legislation, on the purchase price agreed upon in tho.se titles having been paid.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. C. J. Doherty (Minister of Justice), Bill No. 68, relating to the Superior Courts of Saskatchewan and to amend the Judges Act was read the second time, and the. House went into committee thereon, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
On section 1-Salaries of Judges of Superior Courts of Saskatchewan:
Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: May I ask
some explanation of paragraph a:
The Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, if he is also the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, and if not to the Chief Justice of Appeal, $8,000.
I infer from this that there are two chief justices, the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, and the Chief Justice of Appeal. Is that right?


Charles Joseph Doherty: No. There is at present a chief justice of Saskatchewan. There is only one Supreme Court in Saskatchewan, and the appeals go to the full bench of
judges of the Supreme Court, and the chief justice of the court is at present the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan. He was appointed Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, and it is not proposed to deprive him of the office. He may be appointed to be Chief Justice of Appeal; he may not. The purpose of making the distinction is that we want to give the salary of $8,000 to the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal. It will go to the present Chief Justice of Saskatchewan should he be appointed to the position of Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal. Should he not be so appointed the $8,000 salary will go to the gentleman who is appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal.


Wilfrid Laurier: The chief justice will have the title and nothing more.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Perhaps there is not very serious Teason to apprehend that he will be without right to the title. He might be chief justice of the new Court of King's Bench and. retain his title as Chief Justice of Saskatchewan. But he would not, because of 'his title of Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, have the salary of $8,000. The intention is to attach the salary of $8,000 to the chief justiceship of the Court of Appeal.


Wilfrid Laurier: After the law of the province comes into force there will be a chief justice of Saskatchewan and a chief justice of the Court of Appeal?


Charles Joseph Doherty: It might so happen, unless we do something to alter the commission of the present Chief Justice of Saskatchewan. I do not think there is very serious ground to apprehend that.


Mr. LEMIEUX:: Is this legislation in consequence of a statute passed by the Legislature of Saskatchewan ?


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes; we should not have the power to pass this Bill if they had not constituted these new courts.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Is there a separate court of appeal in Alberta? *


Charles Joseph Doherty: No, the court in Alberia is similar to the court in Saskatchewan to-day. They have a Supreme Court of Alberta, and appeals go from the judge to the court en .banc, composed, I think, of three judges of the court.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Although what I am going to say does not apply to tlhe courts of Saskatchewan, I think it is germane to the present Bill. I wish to speak about the number of judges in the province of

Quebec. My hon. friend (Mr. Doherty;, who for many years sat on the Bench at Montreal and who made a distinguished reputation for himself there, must have observed that there were complaints on the part of members of the Bar, the board of. trade, la ehambre de commerce, manufacturers and business men, on account of the delays, which are indeed too many, in cases brought before the courts. I have in mind just now a protest to which much prominence has been given of late, made by Hon. Mr. Amyot, who is a leading manufacturer in the city of Quebec, and a member of the Legislative Council. He has a large business which extends beyond the bounds of Canada. He said that the judicial system as it was organized in Montreal-even as it had been reorganized- did not meet with the approval of the public; that business men were discouraged; that something should be done by both the Provincial Government and by the Federal Government, to improve the situation; that cases which had been before the courts for a year, or even two years, had not been heard; and he thought the time had come when there should be a change in the judicial system of the province of Quebec. Hon, Mr. Amyot only voiced the feelings of a great dumber of people. It is true there are some districts of the province of Quebec in which the judges have very little to do. The business seems to be concentrated in the city of Montreal, and also partially in the cities of Quebec, Three Rivers, and Sherbrooke. I have some statistics on. the subject, but I will not weary the House by reading them. One can assert that more than half,' and perhaps three-quarters, of the judicial business of the province of *Quebec, is centered in Montreal; I have forgotten the number of judges whose residence is at Montreal, but perhaps my hon. friend the Minister of Justice can tell me. ^t all events, their number is certainly inadequate to the business, which is increasing year by year. The Minister of Justice listened to public opinion two years ago and increased the number of judges of the circuit court. And, although he increased their number by only one, yet that increase proved a real benefit to the litigants in that district. Besides, my hon. friend was good enough to specially appoint some judges of the Superior Court to. take up the arrears, so as to bring to a. hearing the cases which were pending. 3 must say that his plan worked very sue-fMr. Lemieux.]
cessfully. What I would suggest is that my hon. friend during the parliamentary recess take up this question with the Attorney General and the Bar of the province of Quebec with a view to seeing whether or not reorganization of the system in that province could be effected along the lines of the Ontario plan. In the province of Ontario the judges of the high court, rather than being domiciled in rural districts in the province, are centered in Toronto, and from Toronto they go to every district in the province. That system has worked most satisfactorily. Although I do not practise in Ontario, I have the honour of being a member of the Ontario bar, and I have often discussed this matter with members of the bar. I have been surprised to see that in this great province there is no complaint as regards the management of the laTge amount of judicial business that is carried on. Cases are heard and judgments rendered with practically no delay. We do not hear in the province of Ontario the complaints that we hear in the province of Quebec, where, for reasons well known, the litigants are face to face from the beginning of the year to the end, with the same person as judge in one district. I quite understand that when our judicial system was established before confederation by Sir George Etienne .Cartier, that system was really the proper one. Railways did not then extend their lines all over the province and give easy communication to the travelling public, and it was impossible to have the judge domiciled at the shire town or chef-lieu of the county or district. But to-day things are quite different. You can travel from one end of the province to the other within a few hours. You can send the judge from Montreal to the most distant district-even the district of Gaspe-and have him return within a few hours after he has finished his work. It seems to me that in view of the growing business in the larger districts, the judges from the rural districts should be brought to Montreal, where they would have the benefit, first, of an excellent library; second, of the advice and opinion of their brother judges, and, third, of sufficient business to occupy their attention from the beginning of the year to the end. In some districts the judge works perhaps only four or five days during the month; in other districts the judge may work during even a lesser period. Why should not these judges be called to Montreal and there help their, brother judges to

expedite business? But, as these judges are not obliged to go to Montreal, they may always find an excuse for disregarding the appeal that may be made to them-although I do not say that this happens, or that it has happened. Some years ago the present Postmaster General (Mr. Casgrain), then Attorney General for the province of Quebec, had a Bill prepared with a view to reorganizing the whole system upon the same plan as that which is followed in the province of Ontario. I had a copy of that Bill, but unfortunately it was destroyed in the fire; my hon. friend will remember the principal features of it. At that time there were some prejudices against that legislation because it is always difficult, as in the case of weights and measures, to change old habits and old customs. The people of the province of Quebec are of a conservative disposition, generally speaking, and they are accustomed to see at the shy-e town the judge of the district. There they have the court of the district, the officers of the court, the residence of the judge, and all the social duties that the office of judge entails. Therefore it was in those days almost impossible to bring about the change which was the object of the legislation introduced by the then Attorney General of the province, the present Postmaster General. But quite a change has taken place in the province of Quebec, and I think that if my hon. friend would have a friendly round-table conference with the Attorney General, the Bar, and the judges of the province of Quebec, he could bring about the change that I am advocating. So that, after all, we can increase the number of the judges in the province of Quebec by bringing about that change, so as as to give justice to the litigants. I do not advocate at the present time any increase in the number of the judges, although by the change which would come as the result of the conference of my hon. friend with the Attorney General and judges of the province of Quebec, my hon. friend would not overburden his appropriation. In the province of Quebec we have now many judges of the Superior Court?


Charles Joseph Doherty: There are forty-five or
forty-six.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Anyway, there are not
more than fifty. If we compare the number of judges in Quebec with the number in Ontario, we will see that the difference is very great in favour of Ontario.
At six o'clock the House resumed and then took recess.
At eight o'clock the House resumed and again went into committee on Bill No. 68, relating to the Superior Courts of Saskatchewan and to amend the Judges Act; Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.


Rodolphe Lemieux: When the House took recess at six o'clock I was about to give a few facts and figures. By consulting Cartwright's Annual, .published in Toronto, I have ascertained the population of Quebec, Ontario and the_ Maritime Provinces, and also the number of judges in each province. According to the last census, the population of Quebec was 2,346,000; the population of Ontario was 2,725,000; and the population of the Maritime Provinces was 1,109,000. I find that for our population in Quebec, namely 2,346,000, we have 75 judges, 52 of these being Superior Court judges and 23 magistrates. I have found that in the province of Ontario, with a population of 2,725,000, they have 343 judges, 250 of these being magistrates and 93 High Court judges, and, I suppose, County Court judges. In the Maritime Provinces, with a population of 1,109,000, there are 112 judges, magistrates and County Court judges. I have not a detailed statement of the number of County Court judges and magistrates in the Maritime Provinces. It is not at all surprising, in view of the large population of the province of Quebec and the antiquated system of judicial districts in force there, that with the increase in the judicial business of large districts like Montreal, Quebec and Three Rivers, there should be many complaints on the part 'oi litigants. In order to show the disproportion between the number of judges and the business in the various districts, I shall give a few .statistics published by the Department of the Provincial Secretary in Qudbae. I find these in a blue-book, "Judicial Statistics for the year 1914." This book contains information concerning the Commissioner's Court, the Recorder's Court, the Justices of the Peace, the Court of the Sessions of the Peace, the District Magistrate's. Court, the Circuit Court, the Superior Court, the Court of Review, the Court of the King's Bench, the Sheriff's, and the Registrar's. Let us take the Recorder's Court. In cities and towns in the province of Quebec, for the year 1913-1914, which are the last available statistics, I find that the total number of complaints for the whole province was 33,518.


Mr. DAVIDSON:: How many judges did
the hon. member say there were in the Maritime Provinces?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I said that of magistrates, judges and County Court judges, there were 112.	,


Avard Longley Davidson: Magistrates	are noi
paid by the Federal Government, only the County and Superior Court judges.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: I do not think it would be fair to count the magistrates and judges in together. The magistrates are as thick as blackberries, but there are only about 14 judges in Nova Scotia.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I know, but I am speaking of the total number of those who administer justice, both civil and criminal. It is for the sake of argument. I am not disputing that the magistrates are paid by the provinces; our magistrates are also. I find that in the year 1913-14 we had 33,518 cases in the Recorder's Court, of which 27,106 complaints were made in the city of Montreal alone. In order to show the disproportion in the administration of justice as between the different districts, if we take the other large districts, take Quebec for instance, we find that there were only 3,342 cases before that court. I now pass to the justices of the peace. I find that the number of complaints sensibly diminished on an average from the quinquennial period of 1905-09, to that of 1910-14, from 6,302 to 4,102. Still, in 1914 the number of complaints was larger by 171 than in the previous year. For the year 1913-14 there were in the whole province 2,264 cases before the justices of the peace, and of this total number Montreal alone gave 718 cases.
Let us take the comparative statements of the number of cases before the Courts of Sessions of Montreal and Quebec for the same period, 1913-14. It will be noticed here that there were 652 convictions in speedy trials in 1914 against 576 in 1913. To these figures Montreal alone contributed 638 in 1914 and 565 in 1913. Let us come now to the Circuit Court. The writs of summons for the average year of the three of 1910-14 numbered 4,407. But for the years 1910-14, on an average, Montreal alone contributed 23,832. The contested cases increased from 4,138 in 1913 to 6,238. Of course, out of the total number of summons issued many are disposed of without any contestation.
Now I pass from the Circuit Court to the Superior Court, and there I find again a very large disproportion. The number of

writs issued for any amount passed from 11,028 for the average year of the period 1905-09, to 15,653 on an average for the period 1910-15, or an increase of 4,635, equal to 42 per cent. The activity of the Superior Court was manifested in 1914 when 21,007 writs of summons issued as against 17,786 in 1913. Of this number Montreal contributed 2,800 additional while in Quebec the number was slightly higher. In the years 1913-1914, out of the total number of writs issued, namely, 21,070, Montreal alone contributed 12,886. I take the Court of Review. The number of cases inscribed in this court has more than doubled in ten years, but the increase has been most marked in the last quinquennial period from 1910 to 1914. The number of cases inscribed from 1905 to 1909 was 319 and from 1910 to 1914 it was 490. Take now the comparative statements of the Court of Review at Montreal and at Quebec during 1913-1914. The Montreal court rendered 390= judgments and the Quebec court 104. You can see the disproportion there again. The same disproportion exists in the Court of King's Bench. Whilst in Quebec 67 cases were heard during the years 1913 and 1914, 164 were heard in Montreal. I would suggest to my hon. friend the' Minister of Justice to initiate, at . the earliest possible moment, a conference between, let us say, representatives of the Bar, the Judiciary, the Attorney General of Quebec and himself, so that a reform might be brought about which will remedy the present unsatisfactory situation. My hon. friend the Minister of Justice is well aware that there are loud complaints not only from the ranks of the legal fraternity, not only from the judges themselves who would like to perform their duties in a speedy way, but from the business men from the boards of trade and from litigants, and it seems to me that the Minister of Justice, who is so conversant with the situation, in Montreal and in the province of Quebec generally, should see that a reform is brought about. The time has come for reform. A system which has been in existence since before Confederation was good enough when the demands upon the judiciary were much less than they are to-day. Various rural districts took some pride in their judges residing in the shire town and in the officers of the court remaining in the various districts. The officers of the court can remain there but in the interest of the administration of justice I think we should have the system, which prevails in Ontario-and other provinces. In Ontario, for in-

23&3
stance, they have the judges domiciled in Toronto. In tRe province of Quebec we will always have the old rivalry between Quebec and Montreal. But, let us see the judges domiciled at a central point, as in the province of Ontario, and then spreading themselves throughout the various districts and changing districts at every session- of the court. In that way there would be less prejudice against the judges, it would be more in harmony with the feelings of the judges themselves; justice would be more respected and the districts of Montreal and Quebec which are the largest, would have, the whole year round, the value of the presence of these judges to take up the cases which are coming before the courts. These judges would have the benefit of the experience of their brother judges and also the advantage of the law libraries of those cities. I do not say that my hon. friend should increase, with the present system, the number of judges, because I know the difficulties which always surround him. In certain districts like Gaspe, Rimouski, St. Johns, St. Hyacinthe and Richelieu, the judges will admit themselves that they are . not busy more than five or ten days during the month. If they were transferred to Montreal, from where they could travel to other districts the administration of justice would benefit. I have to apologize to the House for having brought this matter up on this Bill but I thought the ques tion germane to the principle involved.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I shall have very
much pleasure, indeed, if my hon. friend does not see fit to do it himself and save me the trouble, to transmit his speech to his friend, and my friend, Sir Lomer Gouin, the Attorney General of Quebec. It sounds very like what I have, in the course of quite a number of conversations, had occasion to point out to the attorney general of the province. There is not any doubt that there is loud complaint, and a very real grievance, in the district of Montreal, but that grievance exists, not because the province of Quebec has not a sufficient number of judges but because, being supplied with a sufficient number of judges, it is pleased to badly distribute them. The remedy is absolutely in the hands of the provincial authorities. I particularly desire to make that clear because I saw it recently reported-I do not know whether it was correctly reported or not- that the Attorney General of Quebec had said in the Legislature that he would provide for no further judges in the district of Montreal because the Minister of Justice . had said that the Dominion Government were not prepared to provide additional salaries for additional judges. It is quite true that I have said, following absolutely the line of argument of the hon. member for Rouville, that the evil lay in the had distribution of the number of judges and that I would not feel justified in increasing the number of judges provided for the province, to meet a difficulty resulting exclusively from the fact that the province, being provided- with a sufficient number of judges, chose to so badly distribute them that some of them have nothing to do while on the other hand, in the district of Montreal, there is very much more than work enough for the judges allocated to that district. Without waiting for the suggestion of the hon. member for Rouville, I have had occasion to discuss this subject with the Attorney General of the province. I may say that the acting chief justice of the province of Quebec has also made representations to me as to the necessity for a change in the system, very much, if not entirely, on the line suggested, 'by the hon. member for Rouville. I told him, as I have told everybody else who has spoken to me on the subject, that so far as I had any say in the matter I would be most happy to endorse any efforts to bring about an improvement of the system. But I can do no more than advise. I have no more to say about it than has the hon. member for Rouville, or any other gentleman who may be interested in the administration of justice in the province of Quebec. The matter is absolutely and, entirely in the hands of the provincial authorities, and I am sorry that they have not found it possible to bring about the obvious remedy-a redistribution of the judges-which it is within their power to make, and within their power exclusively. I do not understand that the hon. member for Rouville suggests that the province has not enough judges; we have not had that established. But what is established is that the province may distribute the judges as it sees- proper. I should be glad to see a reform in that direction, and so far as my advisory voice goes-, and so far as any endorsement coming from me would be useful, I shall be most happy to help. I have already had occasion to speak on this subject with the Attorney General and the acting chief justice of the province, and as a result of our discussion I understand that the acting

chief justice is bringing the matter before the provincial authorities, with the endorsement of the bar, and certainly with mine. If it were in my power to hasten in any way the remedying of the present state of affairs I should certainly 'be more than glad to do it. As the hon. member for Eouville has said, a great many years ago my hon*. friend the Postmaster General, then Attorney General of the province, introduced a measure seeking to bring about that reform. Unfortunately it did not meet with the support necessary to carry the proposal, and I am not aware that the effort has ever been renewed. I have been glad to hear what the hon. member for Eouville has said, because I trust that it will have weight in the quarters where the power is to remedy the evil complained of. In the meantime, I think it is only fair that it should be made quite clear to the people in the district of Montreal, who, as I have said, and as the hon. member for Eouville has demonstrated, have a very real grievance, that the cause of the grievance is not to be found here, but in the system which is maintained by the will of the legislature of the province of Quebec, and which can only Ire altered by that legislature, at the instance of those who have the leadership.


Mr. MAECIL:: Is it not a fact that in
the province of Quebec there are not more than half a dozen judges living in the rural districts? The rest of them are living in the cities of Montreal, Quebec, Sherbrooke and Three Eivers. My experience is that as soon as a judge is' appointed he removes to one of the big cities.


Charles Joseph Doherty: The provincial legislature determines where the judges shall reside. There are 41 Superior Court ,judges in the province of Quebec. Twenty are resident-I am speaking of their legal residences-in the city of Montreal, six in the city of Quebec, two in the city of Sherbrooke, and two in the city of Three Eivers. Then there are fifteen rural districts, in each of which there is one reisdent judge.


Charles Marcil: I think the minister would find it hard to find fifteen judges in the rural parts of Quebec.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Of course, I do not follow the judges around to see whether they are obeying the law. I was speaking on the assumption that the judges reside .where the law says they ought to reside,

and I have no knowledge of disobedience to that law on the part of the judges. If there are jpdges who are not conforming to the law in that respect, I regret the fact; though I do not know that I can say more on the subject at the moment.


Charles Marcil: I do not claim that they are violating the law, but I do say that they must have received permission from some authority to reside in the cities, because with few exceptions all the judges	reside in	the cities.	For
instance, the judge for Gaspe lives in Quebec, the judge for St. Hyacinthe lives in Montreal, the judge for Pontiac lives in Westmount, and so on down the list. So they have plenty of judges in Montreal, but whether they are properly distributed or not I do not know.


Charles Joseph Doherty: There are twenty-one judges whose residences are legally fixed in the city of Montreal. That also is determined by the Provincial Legislature; so if the hon. member for Eouville thinks there are too few judges in Montreal, and the hon. member for Bonaventure thinks there are too many in Montreal and too few in the rural districts, I can only refer them both to the authority that .alone is competent to deal with the question. For myself, I share the view of the hon. member for Eouville that the workers should be *sent where the work is, and if that were done I think there would be less ground for complaint with regard to the sufficiency of the number of judges provided. The twenty or twenty-one judges in the district of Montreal are not, as the hon. member for Eouville has demonstrated, in proportion to the work that has to be done there. The problem, however, is one to .be solved by the Provincial authorities. I share the views of the hon. member for Eouville, and I shall be glad to do everything in. my power to bring about a system that will bring the work and the workers together, in preference to a system under which a large number of workers are scattered around where there is not enough work for one man to dp. I know that there still persists in the rural districts a desire to have a resident judge, whether the work to be done justifies it or not, and I realize that that makes a difficulty in the way of those who seek to bring about the reform which the hon. member for Eouville advocates, and which has my sympathy.	.


Mr. STEVENS:: I am very pleased to learn that the distribution of judges is vested in the provincial- authorities, and that the Minister of Justice is in no way responsible. I wish to draw his attention here, and in this way to a matter about which I have already spoken to him, and that is the very small remuneration of the County Court judges in the city of Vancouver. Compared with judges in other parts, they have a very wide jurisdiction. The County Court judge in our city has a jurisdiction in debt and damage up to $1,000, and a jurisdiction in equity up to' $2,500. This, I think, is very much in advance of the jurisdiction of County Court judges in any other province and yet these judges receive a salary of ,only $3,000 a year, which is entirely inadequate. The barristers of Vancouver and, I think, of British Columbia met some time ago and passed a very strong resolution on this subject, feeling that the judges of the county courts are underpaid, and their work, I know, is of a very heavy character. A year ago, when the fall session opened, there were over three hundred cases on the list awaiting the judges, an -almost insuperable task for them, and I simply take this opportunity of calling the matter to the attention of the Minister of Justice. I understand that it is rather difficult for him to deal with the matter now, but I do wish that he would take it into consideration and deal with it as early as it is possible for him to reach that phase of the subject.
Mr. .ROGERS: I am going to try to bring the House hack to order again. We have been discussing the judges in the various provinces of the Dominion of Canada. I would like to say a word about the judges mentioned in the Bill before the committee.
Mr-. LEMIEUX: Carried. Why do you obstruct the Bill?


Mr. ROGERS:: My hon. friend has been obstructing it for several hours. Surely I am entitled to say a word in regard to the matter. I see by the Bill that:
The salaries of the judges of the Court of Appeal and of His Majesty's Court of King's Bench for Saskatchewan shall he as follows:
The Chief Justice of Saskatchewan If he is also the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, and if not, to the Chief Justice of Appeal.
Then again there comes the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench; does my hon.
friend propose to have three chief justices within the province of Saskatchewan?


Charles Joseph Doherty: The same question was asked this afternoon by the right hon. leader of the Opposition. It is . not intended to have more than two chief justices, but the provision that is placed in the Bill with, regard to the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, as -my hon. colleague will notice, is restricted by the condition:
-if he is also the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, and if not, to the Chief Justice of Appeal.
There is at present a chief justice of Saskatchewan, who is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. There is only one high court there. The gentleman who holds that title may or may not be appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal or Chief Jus- ' tioe of the Court of King's Bench. What is desired to make clear is that the mere title of Chief Justice of Saskatchewan does not carry with it the right to the salary of $8,000. It is the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal who is to have the $8,000 salary; if he happens to be the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, why, he will have that salary just the same. If the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan does not happen to be appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal he will simply retain the salary pertaining to the position which he at present holds. We do not intend to make any special salary because of the holding of the title of Chief Justice of Saskatchewan.


Mr. PROULX:: Is that not unusual? In all the other provinces the Chief Justice of the province is President of the Court of Appeal. This is the first instance in- which the Chief Justice of a province may not be the President, of the Court of Appeal.


Charles Joseph Doherty: In the province of Quebec, for example, there is not any chief justice who is designated by the title of the Chief Justice of Quebec. We have the Chief Justice of the King's Bench and the Chief Justice of the Superior Court, both of them in the province of Quebec, and, by courtesy I have no doubt, the people designate the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal as the Chief Justice of Quebec, but he is not officially designated as the Chief Justice of Quebec. In the province of Saskatchewan there is to be a Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal and a Chief Justice of the Court of King's	Bench;-I
think that is the court of first instance that is provided for. Perhaps

it was not necessary to mention in the Bill the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, but the draftsman mentioned it because it happened that the Chief Justice of the only court that is there is designated as the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan, and this provision is inserted in order to make it clear that the salary is assigned to the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal. If the Chief Justice of Saskatchewan is appointed Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal, of course, he will have the salary attached to that position.


Robert Rogers: As I understand from my hon. friend the Minister of Justice, although the present Chief Justice of Saskatchewan is named in this Bill, it does not necessarily follow that he will be the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Certainly not.


Robert Rogers: He might be the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.


Edmond Proulx: In the province of Ontario there is the Supreme Court of Ontario composed of two divisions, the Appellate Division and the High Court Division, but the Chief Justice of the province is the president of the Appellate Division.


Charles Joseph Doherty: Yes.
Mr. PROllLX:	It has always been the
case in Ontario that the Chief Justice of the province is the Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal.


Charles Joseph Doherty: I understand that in Ontario there has been a Chief Justice designated as the Chief Justice of Ontario, and I believe that is also the case in Saskatchewan; but, as I pointed out, it is not so in all the provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time, and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Rhodes in the Chair.
Mines and Geological Survey-Investigation of ore deposits, economic minera's, peat deposits, clays, structural materials; determination of fuel values of coals, lignites, peat, petroleum, and natural gas; investigation of ore dressing and metallurgical processes; investigation of clay products and non-mstallic structural materials, and mineral waters; provision for additional machinery required for the testing laboratories; wages of mechanics and

labourers; collection of information regarding minerals, and the mining and m:tallurg cal industries and their operations, $76,000.
['This has nothing to do with the Secretary of State.\nAmendiment of Mr. Boivin negatived: yeas, 16; nays, 24.\nProgress reported.\nOn the motion of Mr. Rogers, the House adjourned -at 11.56 p.m.\nThursday, March 30, 1916.']
George Perry Graham: I see that in this year
of war there is an increase here of $14,000 for investigations of ore deposits, economic minerals, etc. Would not the hon. minister think it wiser to go slowly on these new things when we need the money so badly for war purposes, when our debt is increasing so rapidly, when we have just made provision for another war loan of $75,000,000, with another one to come in a very short time? Does it not strike him that some of these things that would be necessary and useful for the development in Canada in time of peace might well be delayed a little under present conditions? How can he explain satisfactorily this increase of $14,000 at this time when the country is looking to us to economize in everything that is not absolutely necessary?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I think this item reflects credit on the department. The same item in 1915-16 was $86,000, and so this is a decrease in the vote for the coming year. I should say it was a noble effort to economize.


George Perry Graham: It does not say so in the Estimates.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Yes, this vote was reduced in the Estimates from $86,000 to $62,000. The latter sum proved insufficient to carry on efficiently the work of the branch. In addition, a new division, that of ceramics, has been organized during the year.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Will the minister please explain that;, has it to do with the ancient Assyrian potteries?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: 
George Perry Graham: I understand that it is quite commendable that the department should experiment with a view to the future, in order to manufacture in our own country goods that we have hitherto imported possibly some from countries that we will not want to import from after the war is over. But I woulld like more particulars from the minister as to this one particular item. He tells us this is a reduction. It is an increase, according to the Estimates. The vote last year was $62,000 and this year it is $76,000, and the minister tells us this is not sufficient for the work done in 1915-16. How did he get the money to make the expenditure, $85,000?


Rodolphe Lemieux: While the minister is answering, he might also explain to the committee how it comes that the minister who preceded him spent as travelling expenses for the Mines Branch $1,020.34, while the real head of the department, Dr. Haanel, spent only $118.10. The other scientists attached to the department have spent only small amounts aJlso. I find that Mr. Boyd spent $108, Mr. Brock $631, Mr. Bruce $50, Mr. Burling $67, and so on.
Coming to the merits of the case, I quite agree with the minister that this is a very important branch of the service. At the same time it is more or less experimental, and we cannot expect results in the immediate future, or even in the rather distant future. Having sat .in this House for the last twenty years, I know as a matter of fact that we have been testing peat bogs in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec and other provinces as well, for about that length of time, and with no result. So, in these hard times, when the people are being bled white, when we are borrowing money from the Americans, when we are spending right and left for war purposes and other purposes, I think we can well afford to bring this estimate to the original figure and even wipe it out completely.
This is an item which could well come under the head of a technical institute or institute of technology, if we had one in Ottawa, and it was promised by some of my hon. friend's colleagues in the Government that we should have one. When I brought to the attention of the House the other day the question of technical education, I reminded the Minister of Labour that in 1909, when the question of technical education was brought up in the House on the motion of the member for South Wellington, tlhe Minister of Militia stated that we had in his country natural resources which were in the experimental stage, and which required the testing of our scientists. He said that the Government would be justified in having in Ottawa, for the benefit of industries growing out of these natural resources, an institute of technology. We go on testing every year on ceramics, peat bogs,, ore dressing and metallurgical processes, but with no avail; whereas if we had an institute of technology from>
which all the provinces would derive some benefit, it might be of general advantage to the country to spend the money that we are spending in this connection.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The increase of $14,000 is accounted for as follows: Ceramic division, $6,000. I have just given the committee the details of that amount. $6,000 are required for additional equipment to the ore-dressing laboratory. The class of work now coming to the laboratory requires that a free screening ball mill of the Gates type, and a Wilfley table, be installed. The installation of a small electric furnace, and necessary equipment is contemplated. For field expenses, including collection of samples, investigations, and all travelling expenses, including contingencies in connection with the work of the division, $2,440 is required.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The Minister of
Finance always gives us a great homily about his financing. Last year it was patriotism and production; this year it is to be economy all along the line-Allison and commissions, an hon. member suggests. He and his colleagues, when they get through with these homilies, one after the other tell us: We cannot save anything; we cannot make this item less than it was last year; there is this to be done and there is that to be done. All this would be very beautiful and very lovely if the people of this country were not being compelled to submit to direct taxation for the first time. Allison can get off with a swag of three-quarters of a million, and no investigation, hut hon. gentlemen in the Government, with the responsibility of ministers, ask this Parliament and this country _to give them just as much money as they require, as if no war was going on and as if conditions were normal. This minister is in the same position as all the
9 p.m. rest. Has it dawned on my hon.
friend that when he comes to Parliament with an estimate of this kind, he is coming under exceptional conditions? Does he realise that a war is going on, that there must be economy, that the people are being subjected to direct taxation for the first time? This work in connection with ceramics, and the other things to which my hon. friend refers, might be all right in normal times, but the explanation that my hon. friend has made with regard to the necessity for this expenditure is of no value in this year of grace 1916, having regard to the present conditions. The explanation that the hon. minister has given us is made without regard to the fact that there is war, or to the fact that there is taxation. Will the minister be good enough to tell us whether he took into consideration the

necessity for economy when he drafted this estimate?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: This branch is a branch for publication and investigation. I think it is more important than ever, even in this time of war, that every possible effort should be made to obtain information as to the natural resources of the country. I have no other answer to give the hon. gentleman.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Does my hon. friend not think that he should economize in his department, in view of the war?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: 1 have stated that the expenditure of this branch in 1914 was $85,000. This amount was afterwards reduced to $62,000, which has been found insufficient. In order to help the country, and to fulfil the duties that are imposed upon this branch, we require an additional amount of $14,000 for the purpose which 1 have stated.


Air. NESBITT:: Will the minister tell me if any people who go into the mining business ever use his reports? I get them constantly, and frequently send them out to mining men, but they do not pay any attention to them so far as I know. They always investigate for themselves; they do not rely at all on my hon. friend's reports. If that is the case why go to this expense?" Last year the minister's predecessor told us a long and beautiful story about how they were making peat down here in Alfred. You know that they are not making any peat for commercial purposes, although the Government have spent money year after year. I told the minister at that time that mo benefit would accrue to the country from these peat tests, and that they were on the wrong track. Apparently they were. The minister told us then that private parties had taken over the peat deposits and were making peat commercially for the people. Aly hon. friend knows that is not correct, and that the production of peat has not been a commercial success.


Edmond Proulx: My hon. friend from Oxford (Air. Nesbitt) is mistaken in respect to the peat industry, especially with regard to the manufacture of peat in my county. Some thousands of tons have been manufactured since 1912. Last summer they manufactured 9,000 tons, some of which is now on sale in Ottawa by Mr. Donnelly. There is now some 600 tons on sale at Alfred, by Mr Daoust and Air. Belanger who exploited the

plant last summer under rental from the Canada Peat Society, with which Mr. Moore and Mr. Shuttleworth are associated. Peal is a good substitute for coal, and I would urge the department to encourage the industry as much as possible. I would especially urge on the Minister of Public Works that he should heat the public buildings of Canada with peat, with a view tc advertising it as a substitute for coal and furnishing a good example. Experiments have shown that it is a good substitute for coal, especially for grates. A report has recently been published showing large areas of peat lands in different parts of Canada. Coal for the use of the central provinces must be imported from Pennsylvania and in case of a shortage of coal or of unusually high prices, such as we experienced a few years ago, peat forms a valuable substitute. The plant at Alfred is complicated, and all the machinery has been imported from Sweden. The Government bought ,300 acres there, and have exploited not more than 10 acres.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The remarks of my hon. friend, I think, justify the department from the standpoint both of experimentation and of publication. In 1910 the Government of the day decided to buy a certain peat bog in Alfred, Ont., in order to make experiments. The cost of the purchase of the peat bog and the installation of the original plant was as follows:	Purchase of bog,
$1,874.84; building two peat sheds, blacksmith shops, office, platform for loading peat into cars, and movable house for peat machinery, $1,844; rail-way sidings, $500; machinery brought from Sweden, $7,600; blacksmith tools and implements, $863.78; labour preparing bog, draining, levelling, including salary of manager, $3,722; sundries, travelling expenses, $380; total, $17,122.15. This was for 'the purchase and installation of the plant. The labour cost of operating peat manufacturing plant during the two seasons 1910 and 1911 was for 1910, $2,857.08, and for 1911, $3,107.54, making a total of $6,764.62, which includes the salary of the manager for those seasons. To this figure must be added for new implements bought $183, repairs, etc., $427.24, living expenses $46, quilts and blankets $158, loading peat $282.30, which makes a total for the season, of 1911 of $5,022.15. The cost of operating for the two seasons 1910 and 1911 is therefore $7,879.23. This brings the total expenditure on bog, including capital expenditure, to $26,023.73, which includes freight
and cartage on the peat sold towards the latter part of 1911. The bog, exclusive of machinery, tools, stock, etc., but including railway sidings, was sold to private parties for the sum of $2,284.25.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Does that include the
peat?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Yes. Mr. G. M. Shuttleworth was the party who purchased it. and he sold it afterwards to the Canadian Peat Society.


John Howard Sinclair: Did you go out of the
business?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The Government ceased exploiting the bog for reasons which I shall give later on, and preferred to allow outside parties to find out by experience the best means of producing peat.


George Perry Graham: The Government became discouraged.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: No.


George Perry Graham: They have great courage if they did not.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Personally, I am sorry that this Government property has been sold. I have had no time to go into all the details, which might have resulted in a revision of my opinion, but I feel very sorry that the bog was transferred to outside parties. I want to give these details to the House because they have been asked for .on a number of occasions in the past.


George Perry Graham: Not to interrupt the hon.-gentleman I can tell him where he can get other bogs if he is sorry about selling this.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is not for the bog itself but for the plant that was sold that I am sorry. The two peat sheds, blacksmith shop, office, light rails, peat care, pulp mill and portable engine are still the property of the Government. The money originally expended on this item was $10,634.35 but little or no value could at present be realized on the -small implements, cables, light rails and peat cars. The loco-motive valued originally at about $3,000 is as good as new and is now installed in the roaster building of the Mines Branch laboratory where it furnishes power and steam to the ore and metallurgical and fuel testing laboratories. If the l-ast item be deducted, say, $3,000, the total cost of the experiments in manufacturing peat will be in round numbers $15,800. It may be interesting to note the expenditure made

by other countries for developing the peat industry. Sweden, with a population of 6,000,000 people, has expended the following sums to encourage the peat industry of Sweden:
Grant to the Swedish Peat Soc'ety at Jonkbpihg, from 1886 to 1910, annually-
Prom Government	$	4,050
F.om Conservation Commission	 3,133
From Provincial Government		2,242
$	9,405
For 23 years: $9,405 x
23	= $216,415
Income of society from 1910 to present time, annually, $14,603.20 :
6 x $14,603.20 rz $ 87,619

Grant to Peat School since 1904-
Annually, $1,350 for 9
years	$12,150
Annually, $2,000, from
1913 to	present time ..	4,000

 16,150 00
In 1914 the Swedish Government granted for an experimental wet carbonizing
plant	  ..$27,000
To which the Local Government added	13,500

 40,500 00
Total cash expenditure to date.. ..$360,684 00 During 1903-1911 the Swedish Government granted for the development of the peat industry 111 peat loans, representing
a total of	$1,129,718
In February, 1916, the Government loaned for the erection of a peat powder plant		135,000
Total loans	$1,264,718
'Very few of the loans have been repaid. Assuming that 30 per cent of the $1,129,718 loaned has thus been lost, which is reasonable ...$338,915 40

The Swedish Government maintains five peat experts yearly; their salaries, and expenses of the investigation of peat bogs would require to be added to above figure. This amount is not known. The Federal Government of Canada 6pent $16,000 on demonstration of process for making air-dried machine peat'-the only process which has been successfully practised in Sweden and Russia. This $16,000 represents 2.4 per cent of the amount spent by Sweden, which has a population less by 1,000,000 rthan that of Canada.
If I was not afraid of tiring the House

I could go into details and show that very large sums of money have been invested by people in this enterprise and I give this fact to the committee as evidence of the substantial results achieved by the experiments carried on there.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: How much peat was sold, and what did we get for it?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The figures are as follows :
Peat, 1,811 tons, 1,338 lbs.. .$5,458.96 Peat dust, 48 tons, 1,159 lbs. 68.55

Less freight and cartage.. .. 1,522.35

Amount received from E. V. Moore
for sale of bog at Alfred	 2,284.25

Mr. PROUiLX:	I think some peat was
used during the year at the concentration plant.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Yes, they are using peat every day at the concentration plant in Ottawa. Experience has shovfn that it is the best and cheapest gas producer. In fairness to the industry, .1 think I should read a few sentences I picked from a report. This will give my hon. friends an idea of the utility of the department's publications.


John Howard Sinclair: I do not think we are very much interested in hearing that; we pan read the reports ourselves. We are asked to vote $63,000 in this item. The minister has given a long explanation, but it referred entirely to the peat that had been sold; he has not told us what is going to be done with this $63,000. How much of it will be spent in peat investigation, and what is the minister's policy in this respect?


Edward Walter Nesbitt: The minister was answering a question I asked, and he has answered it conclusively, to my mind. He said that we have spent $18,000 in experiments on peat, and that it has not been a commercial success. I know other people who have experimented with peat, and have not made a commercial success of it. With all due deference to my hon. friend from Prescott (Mr. Proulx), those friends of his who turned out nine hundred tons of peat last summer would have to turn that much out in a week, if it was to compete at $3 a ton with anthracite coal at $7 a ton. If my hon. friend invests any money with those friends of his he will be sorry only once,

and that will be all the time. My hon. friend read something about a weatherdrying process for peat, and said that somebody 'had told him that that was the usual process in Russia. Now, to my certain knowledge, it is not the process used ip Russia, for they use very strong hydraulic pressure, and make a peat that is something worth while. We are still continuing experiments in Canada with the dry air process. It has never been a commercial success-, and I doubt if it ever wil-l be, because, as the drying process continues, the briekettes disintegrate.' That is why that process will never be a commercial success. My hon. friend from Prescott ought to have turned out the 900 tons he speaks of for $18,000, and I guarantee it cost three times that. My hon. friend knows that Shuttleworth did not make a success of it either. W'hat I object to is thiat the department should continue investigating ore deposits, economic minerals, peat deposits, etc., when the public has never received any benefit from their reports in the past. I do not think there is a mining man in Canada who uses the department's reports on these deposits. If a man has any sense he will find out for himself before he invests his money, and if he has not any sense he will 1-ose his money anyway.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I find in the Auditor General's report, 1914-15, that the expenditure of the Department of Mines for that year was $759,862.46. The Estimates this year are $937,000, a difference of $178,000, roughly speaking. Now, the complaint I have is that ministers ask us to vote money without ever having sat down and considered their Estimates with relation to present war-time conditions. Let us see how some of the moneys of the Canadian people were spent last year. Under the Geological Survey Branch, I find that a gentleman by the name of J.'D. Evans, of Trenton, disposed of a collection of insects to the Government for $2,000. Now, what in the name of all that is decent and sensible, does this country want to buy $2,000 worth of insects for in war time? The Foote Mineral Company, of Philadelphia-no truck or trade with the Yankees -got $3,874.96 for meteorites, agate, sero-lites, and siderites, and uraninites. Then a gentleman by the name of S. G. Ford, of St. John's, Newfoundland, disposed of an Eskimo bird-skin suit to an unsuspecting Government, who alleged that they were trying to economize, for $35. S. H. Harris,
of London, England, had a collection of Indian and Esquimaux native articles, which he sold to the Government for $500. E. W. Hawkes, of Ottawa, sold some Eskimo specimens, models, one limestone kettle, one walrus tusk, and sundry other specimens to the Government for $675, in war time. Then there was a lady called Mrs. O. Heidemann-it sounds German- who lived in Forest Glenn, Md., and who got $210 for some enlarged models of insects. Then the Government went down to Old Town, Maine, and bought a collection of Micmao Indian relics from G. A. Paul)-I do not know whether he was an Indian-for $175. Mr. A. B. Regan, Nett Lake, Minnesota, received $50 for Medicine lodge parchment; manuscript, 20 pages, $20; birch bark phonograph records, $50.50. There is a messenger pigeon, $50, and then in Philadelphia some gentleman by the name of Shotridge sold a Chilkat blanket for $200. Mr. F. G. Speck of Philadelphia sold Labrador, Eskimo, Montagnais and Micmac specimens for $38; Micmac-Montagnais collection from Newfoundland, $153; Abenaki, Penobscot, Temagami specimens, $53; Iroquois specimens, $69; drafting map, $12; a total of $325; and so on right through the list, collections of birds, etc. No less a sum of money than $607.10 was spent on freight to the express companies. These absurd and ridiculous purchases in war time meant a total expenditure of $15,585 for which this minister in previous year took the money of the people of Canada, which they were taxed directly to obtain. What I say to my hon. friend-and I do not say it to him more than to any of the other members-is that no minister has yet come before this committee this session who has shown the slightest appreciation of the fact that in this year we must economize as we have never economized before. The war has made no difference to them. The taxation has made no difference. My hon. friend is going on purchasing these geological curiosities just the same as if everything was all right, although all this money is being dug out of the pockets of the people of this country. Does my hon. friend mean to say that he would defend such absurd expenditure during this year? Is he going to spend a dollar along those lines? Cannot >
the people of Canada wait for these Eskimo specimens and relics and other peculiarities to be gathered until we have plenty of money in the treasury? $15,000 is $15,000 at the present time. Some company in this
2.332

country that has been struggling along without a dividend until the 1st of January, 1915, will be compelled to disgorge a portion of that $15,000, and my hon. friend will take it, not for the war, but for buying birds' nests and Miemac relics. Is my hon. friend going to do that this year? Why does he not reduce the Estimate by the amount of money that he spent last year on such things?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: As I have already stated, we have been doing our best to decrease all the expenditures of this department, but at the same time I may safely state that the needs of this department are increasing every day, and I think if we stand by the expenditure of last year we shall be doing extremely well. We have cut a good many expenditures that we deemed very expedient to make this year; we have cut - out an old appropriation for the building of an experimental station for explosives, in order to put into force the Explosives Act which was passed by this House. We have not spent and we do not intend to spend a cent on that in order to save money in this time of war. We are, however, asking this House to vote what we deem to be absolutely necessary to carry out the objects of this branch. If my hon. friends are anxious to have the details of this vote,
I can give them. These are the details of the expenditure in the branch of the Metalliferous Division, $2,500. Molybdenum and copper. The bulletins issued by this department are asked for and we cannot sup- , ply the demand in this country and in all European countries. Throughout the whole world in fact, these bulletins are in great demand. The first edition of our bulletin on molybdenum has been exhausted and the demand is such that a new edition is required as soon as possible. This will be prepared by Dr. Wilson and much new material on the metallurgy of molybdenum will be incorporated in this reprot.
Dr. Wilson has been preparing a series of reports on the copper resources of Can-. ada and the associated industries. The third report of the series on copper and copper mining in Canada is in course of preparation.
In regard to this item I might ask my hon. friends if they do not think that it is most important that experiments should be proceeded with on molybdenum and copper, and that these bulletins are of great interest, not only to Canada, but to people in other countries where there is capital

that may be invested in the development of these mines.
There is $6,000 for the continuation of the investigations into the iron ore resources of Canada. Two field parties are proposed, and areas in Canada not yet examined by the engineers engaged on this work will be surveyed during the field season. The location of the parties cannot be determined until the close of the present field season, but one party will probably be sent to British Columbia. I would draw the attention of iny hon. friends to this item and ask them if they do not think it is to the interest of Canada that we should proceed with this work.
Mining and metallurgical industries of Canada, $1,500. Under the general direction of Mr. John McLeish, chief of the division of Mineral Resources and Statistics, a new edition of our report on the Mining and Metallurgical Industries of Canada is in course of preparation. The first volume dealing with the metal mines and smelters is to be prepared by Mr. Bolton, in association with Dr. Wilson, chief engineer of the Metal Mines Division. This report will -contain a brief business statement of the organization and equipment of the various operating companies in Canada and is of the nature of a business directory.
There is $2,000 for the Non-metalliferous Division, limestones and their uses. Limestones of special grade are required in large quantities for the manufacture of calcium carbide, wood pulp and paper, glassware, limes, cements, plasters and for numerous other purposes. The department is endeavouring to obtain full information regarding the limestone resources of the various provinces and their suitability for various uses. During the field seasons of 1914 and 1915, Mr. Frechette has been examining the limestones of the province of Quebec and collecting samples. The laboratory investigation of these samples is now in progress. It is proposed that this work be extended to the province of Ontario during the season of 1916 as the results are of immediate importance to many industries and particularly to the manufactures of wood pulp and paper.
There is an item of $1,000 for the investigation of certain non-metallic minerals. Mr. de Schmid has been preparing a series of special monographs regarding one occurrence in Canada, the mining, and preparation for the market of certain non-metallic minerals, including mica, apatite, and feldspar. Reports relating to these materials have already been published or will be

issued shortly. Other materials for which we have received inquiries are to be investigated as far as possible. They include barytes, pyrolusite, talc, fluor-spar and infusiorial earth. There is a constant demand for these minerals from Canadian manufacturing industries, and also from the United States. Previous to the present war, supplies were drawn from foreign countries, but these have been cut off. It is, therefore, important that this work should be continued as expeditiously as possible. The next item is for $2,500. Sands and their Uses. While there are in Canada very extensive deposits of loose sands, sandstones and similar materials, no systematic study has been made of them from an economic point of view. The sands are put to a multitude of uses, and many different grades of material, varying in character, position' and physical properties, are required for industrial purposes. Supplies formerly imported from Europe for the manufacture of glassware are now cut off. Some sands used in the ceramic industry were also imported from Europe and in part from the United States. Moulding sand is largely imported from the United States. In building construction, immense quantities of sand are employed, often without sufficient attention to the nature and quality of the material and its suitability for the work required. The strength and durability of imortars and cements depend in part upon the kind of sand used. It was, therefore, deemed advisable to institute technical investigations of sands and related materials which occur in Canada; to ascertain if we do not possess materials in every way equal to the imported sands used in the various industries, and to study sand deposits in the vicinity of the principal industrial centres to ascertain their nature and their value for industrial purposes. In addition to the field work in sand deposits, this investigation will include a series of physical tests at the departmental laboratories, as well as in a commercial foundry to ascertain their, qualities under actual working conditions. Mr. Cole has been investigating sand deposits in Quebec for two seasons, and has extended his investigation into Ontario. It is proposed that this work shall be continued in Ontario in 1916. There is an item of $4,000 for the continuation of the examination of the bituminous sands of Alberta. Also, there is $3,500 for the examination of the building stones of Canada. During the past five field seasons
Dr. W. A. Parks, of the Royal Ontario Museum, has been engaged in the work of preparing a series of monographs on the building and ornamental stones of Canada. Volumes dealing with Ontario, Quebec and the Maritime Provinces have been published. The fourth volume on the Central Western Provinces is in course of preparation. It is proposed that the work in 1916 be carried on in the province of British Columbia preparatory to the report on the building stones in that province, which will complete the series.
I pass now to the Fuels and Fuel-testing Division. This vote is for the salaries of the employees, additional labour which may be required from time to time in connection with the investigations conducted in our laboratories, technical assistants, chemists, and technical engineers who may be required for temporary work in connection with the investigations carried on in the fuel-testing laboratories and field work. According to arrangements made some time ago this branch is conducting large-scale tests on commercial samples of coal obtained from operating mines of Eastern and Western collieries. The sample of coal, approximately thirty tons in weight, is furnished free by the mine sampled, but the freight is paid by the department, special rates being granted by the railroads for this purpose. This money is for the purpose of defraying the cost of carrying the coal from the mines to the experimental plant at Ottawa. The work includes the investigation of methods employed in Canada for the production of power, with a view to ascertaining the most efficient fuel to employ in the various sections interested. Money for this purpose was voted for 'two consecutive years, but the limited staff of the division made it impossible to use the money voted.
_Mr. GRAHAM: I do not wish to interfere with the minister, but I was going W suggest that this item .pass.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Mr. McKENZIE:: No, not carried. I am glad to see the Minister of Labour (Mr. Crothers) here and I hope he is taking in the essay which was being read by the Secretary of State. One thing we would like to know is the capacity and efficiency of the men who are in charge of these investigations. I suppose, to be fair to the minister, that he has to deal with what has been handed down to him in connection

with this department. I take it that all the operations of this department, under ordinary conditions, are useful and necessary. But we are more or less in the dark as to the men who are in charge of this work. We .are paying out money and we should like to know that we are paying it to the right class of men. We are curious to know who they are, where they received their education, .and what experience they have had in other places to enable them to obtain this information and perform these experiments. If they are only experimenting among themselves, or upon one another, with no particular knowledge about the business except yvhat they gather among themselves, I think the money is wasted. This is along the line of technical education, and that is why I am so glad that the Minister of Labour is here, so that he may see the necessity of' having first-class men connected with a piatter of this kind. I do not say we should not publish these reports. I think they are useful. But I think the minister should inquire how many of them he should issue. The demand, so far as Canada is concerned, must be somewhat limited. I .would like to see some reciprocity established between this department and the mining departments of the various provinces. I am not aware that there is very piuch exchange of knowledge between the .Department of Mines at Ottawa and the different mining offices and mining departments in the provinces. If information of that kind acquired among these mining engineers is of a reliable character, this money is well spent. But, if the engineers connected with the department are men who, .though they talk of mining coal and the working of a coal mine, and yet we have Reason to fear that if they were up against a coaJhmine there would be an explosion in a short time, that would be a different matter. I would suggest that we should have practical men connected with these things, and should establish institutions in Ottawa that would give technical education. If the minister will not do it in the different provinces, let us have one big institution in Ottawa in connection with this branch, in which our young men who desire to do so may qualify as engineers in the different branches spoken of by the minister.
At the head of this department let us have the very best men that the world can produce-or, to use the words of the Prime Minister, that science can devise or money buy. If this money is used along the line

of proper development, we do not begrudge it, but if it is wasted in useless experiments; if the work is not developed and expanded, I think we should begrudge the expenditure of this money. I heard the minister talk about the testing of coal. The coal mines in Canada are much older than Confederation, and I am surprised that it is only -lately that the department has acquired knowledge of the qualities of the different kinds of coal found in Canada. The minister mentioned the fact that thirty tons of coal were lately obtained from somewhere for testing purposes. If that is coal -that was never tested before, that is all right, but if up to this time we have not been able to obtain from his department a knowledge of the different qualities of the coal in Canada, I think we have been moving too slowly. I hope, in spending this $76,000 in these days of storm and stress for the education of the people along the lines suggested by the minister, that we are getting education that is first-class, not education that we shall have to unlearn when practical problems arise.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: In order to relieve the
mind of the hon. member, I refer him to the statute creating this department. By article 10 of the Geology and Mines Act, it is provided that:
No person shall he appointed to the department as an officer having- such special, professional or technical qualifications under schedule A of the Civil Service Act, unless he is a science graduate of either a Canadian or a foreign university, or of the Mining School of London or the Ecole des Mines of Paris, or of some recognized science school of standing equal to that of the said universities and schools, or a gradute of the Royal Military College.
We are doing our best to get the best men we can, but it is not very easy to get men who have bothi scientific knowledge and experience. I agree with my hon. friend that if technical schools could be developed in this country they would help us a great deal. The hon. gentleman has inquired about the testing of coal. We have' a plant for testing the calorific power of coal, peat, lignite, or any other fuel, in order to find out whether they can better be used as fuel or for the production of gas. The hon. gentleman suggests that the work of the department is not proceeding very fast. This department is, comparatively speaking, a new department; it was created only in 1907, and is far from being completely organized. In asking to-night for these amounts I am sure that I am not

asking for all the things that are necessary for the good operation of this department in the service of the country.


John Howard Sinclair: I do not want the committee to run away with the idea that the Mines Department is no good. My experience is quite different. I think we have some very good men in the Mines Department, who are doing very good work, and . I should like, if I say anything at all, to say a worc( to encourage the department. I think that it is creditable to the minister that he is making investigations and trying to disseminate knowledge among the people of Canada. As the Minister of Labour has gone to sleep during the last three or four years, and has utterly failed to do anything in the matter of technical education, it is to be commended that this minister has at least attempted to do something. In my province the Geological Survey has been of great advantage to the gold mining industry. By referring to the
10 p.m. plans that they have in the offices here a great deal of useful information can be obtained with regard to our gold mines in Nova Scotia. Every Nova Scotian who knows anything about the mining industry in that province will tell you that this work has been very useful. I had hoped that the minister would outline what he intends to do during the coming year, and tell us something, without reading from books, with regard to the work in his department. If he would promise that he will not spend the money that he is asking us to vote in the purchase of Indian blankets and relics of that kind, and that the money will be devoted to proper purposes and to maintain the good work done by the Mines Department, I should hold up both hands for having the item put through. He has not given us any explanation as to who is responsible for the expenditure of $15,000 for foolish relics last year. '	.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is a rather technical matter for me to give general statements without following my notes. I have tried my best to give some of the information coming from my department, and to impress on the members of the committee the purposes of the proposed expenditures. Of course, we will do our best to economize, but I must tell my hon. friend that in order to economize we shall have to fight against the interests of those who will benefit by this work. If the hon. gentleman wants us to proceed to make investigations,
and to buy the necessary things for the making of experiments in order to help the development of manufactures in this country, these appropriations are necessary.


Mr. EDWARDS:: Have any investigations been made with regard to the use of feldspar in the production of potash?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Investigations have been made, and the hon. gentleman can get the reports from the department.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Can the minister tell me whether he has employed in his department a man by the name of McLeod, who is supposed to be making some investigation in connection with mines?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Not that I know of.
W. iH. BOULAY:	('Translation.) Mr. Chairman,, I would like to ask the hon. minister whether or not the reports or publications of the Department of the Geological Survey branch are sent to the several educational establishments in the province of Quebec, such as seminaries, colleges and others.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: (Translation.) The papers and publications of the department are sent to all the educational establishments from a list very similar to that which is used for the delivery of the ordinary records of the House. Moreover, the department sends the said reports and publications to all institutions or schools applying for them.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why is it that there is an increase of estimated expenditure of $178,000 over the actual expenditure shown in the Auditor General's Report for 1913?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There is a vote of $55,000 for the Explosives Act. We are not proceeding with the construction of the plant.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why are you voting it?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is my intention to ask that this vote be reduced to $5,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister is to
be congratulated on reducing the vote. He is the first minister who has shown any desire to do anything of the kind.


Mr. HUGHES:: I listened to the minister's description of the experiments being carried on in the manufacture of peat.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: We are no longer experimenting with peat except by locating bogs, determining their area, and depth, and

testing samples in Ottawa to determine their calorific value and their gas producing power. That varies in different parts of the country.


Edmond Proulx: Are other peat bogs being exploited?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I think there is one at
Farnham. My hon. friend will find literature on this subject in the Department of Mines that will interest him.


Edmond Proulx: I have received some of that literature and it is very good. The difficulty with the peat industry is the lack of markets. Montreal coal merchants tell me that they have tried it as a substitute for coal and find it good, especially for grates, but there is not much demand for it, as the people find it takes more storage space than coal and the transportation charges are also quite heavy.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is only in parts of
the country where wood and coal are dear that peat production has a chance to become a success. The general conclusion of all experimenters is that peat will be of general use in this country when coal reaches a price not much higher than it has to-day.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: If peat became an
article of general consumption for domestic purposes would we have an ample supply?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Reports are that we have immense areas of peat bogs all through the Dominion.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I should like to get the details of the travelling expenses of the former Minister of Mines. I find that as Minister of Mines he received $1,020.34 in 1915, and the same gentleman happened to be Secretary of State and he received in that capacity as travelling expenses, $600. That is to say, he received $1,620.34 as Minister of Mines and as Secretary of State. Why the distinction? When he was travelling as Minister of Mines did he deprive himself of his capacity as Secretary of State, and when he was Secretary of State did he travel without his dual personality as Minister of Mines? I say that this is simply scandalous and should not be allowed to pass.
Are the reports to which the minister referred a moment ago translated and would the minister be ready to give to the committee a list of the translators? I am informed that nearly all of the translation is made outside of the staff appointed a few years ago. I remember that my hon. friend

and a few others obtained the appointment of a staff of translators for the blue-books. I am informed that there are outside the Civil" Service, a large number of gentlemen who do translation, whereas a few years ago when the translators were appointed, it was perfectly understood that no more translation would be sent outside. I am bound to say that many of the reports which have been translated outside the department are translated very badly indeed, and do no credit to the translators who have been selected.
I am not speaking of the permanent officials; generally speaking they are very good officials, but there is some work being done outside of the official staff which is not creditable at all. I would like to know if my hon. friend has a list of the translators who receive work outside of the official staff.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: A distinction should be made between the staff of translators which was created a few years ago and the present translators of the Mines Branch. My hon. friend knows that the staff of -translators created two years ago was created to attend to the translation of blue-books and the documents passing through the House of Commons.


Rodolphe Lemieux: When the amount was voted in the House, and when that staff was created, my hon. friend said: Now, we shall never have to wait any more for blue-books; we are appointing a new staff, and the papers in the province of Quebec blazoned forth the patriotism of the hon. gentleman. He had obtained a large amount for the creation of that staff of French translators, and it was distinctly understood that no more work would be sent outside of the staff; whereas, at the present time, a large number of people are getting work from various departments, and especially- from his department.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: If my hon. friend understood the question of translation better he would not speak as he does. He knows that under the late Government money was expended for translation outside of the staff, and that bad translation was the result. There is now in each department a special translator. The Public Works Department, for instance, is entitled to a translator, and every year Parliament votes his salary. The same is true of the other departments. This work is altogether different from the general work of translation that is done for the House of Commons, and which consists of the translation of the reports of the dif-

ferent departments and all the literature that goes through the House. We have, for the House of Commons, two staffs of translators-the hlue-book staff and the Hansard staff. Their work is altogether different from that of which we are now speaking.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What are the names of the gentlemen who do translation work outside of the official staff of the department?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I will give them in a minute. The Department of Mines and the Geological Survey are departments whose business is that of publications. The special work of these departments would be of no use if the results of their investigations and experiments were not published throughout the country. I think that the item for publication in my department amounts to $76,000 a year. It is the most important work of my department. Then, these are departments that require technical translators. Mr. Desaul-niers will tell you that when my department sends a report to him to be translated by his staff, he will not take the responsibility of asking his men, who are trained for the translation of blue-books, to undertake that special translation. We receive letters from almost every country in the world asking for these reports, all in Erench, these letters coming from Russia, Italy, the Balkans and even from Constantinople.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Who were the translators?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: We take such translators as we can find. I admit that sometimes the translation is not as satisfactory as I would like. The gentleman who has charge of the work for the Mines Branch is Marc Sauvalle.


Rodolphe Lemieux: But he is the permanent official; he was appointed years ago. I am asking my hon. friend who are the gentlemen outside of the official staff who are doing this special work in the Mines Branch and the Geological Survey.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There are none. My hon. friend is aware that Mr. Marc Sauvalle is the gentleman who is in charge of this translation, hut he cannot do it alone. He does what he can but he has to ask for help. He is himself responsible for the engagment of these people. He is left free to take the translator tlhat he recommends to me.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Whom has he taken?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Mr. J. E. Belanger.
Mr. LEMIiEUX: Where is he from?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I cannot tell the hon. gentleman tout I will get all this information. Mr. C. R. Daoust, J. A. David, Theo. Denis, E. Dulieux, P. Edgerley, J. A. Fortier, Oscar Lanctot, J. H. O. Lang-lois, A. Mailhiot, J. H. Palardy, E. Roehon are for the Geological Survey Branch. For the Mines Branch the officials are:	A.
Bouesnel, J. L. Binet, O.M.I., B. H. Charle-bois, C. R. Daoust, D. Laframtooise, M. LeFranc, W. E. Morgan, A. A. Taillon.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Have you a man named Sauve?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I have no man named Sauve, but I will bring a full list to-morrow and, give all the details.


Edmond Proulx: Is Mr. David from Montreal?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I do not know.- I might almost say that I do not know one of these people. I do not know that one of these men has 'been changed since I have been in this office.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am not saying that my hon. friend bias been appointing them. Outside of Mr. Sauvalle, who has belonged to the official staff for many years, and who is a competent officer, and outside of two or three names which the minister gave to the House, I dare say there is not one competent translator for this technical work.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I will be most grateful to my hon. friend if he can recommend some competent man to me, and I will be very glad to take him.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It would be very easy for my hon. friend if, instead of appointing translators for political purposes, he would follow the advice of Mr. Sauvalle, who has technical knowledge.


Mr. BUREAU:: I understand the minister >
make the statement that Mr. Sauvalle is responsible for the translation of his department as far as the Mines Branch is concerned. Do I understand the minister to state that when Mr. Sauvalle can not do the work-and I do not think there is a man in the world who could do all of this work-he has power to send a document to be translated to a man of his own choice without any further consultation with the



minister? Is that the statement made by the hon. gentleman?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Every time a name is submitted to me of a person said to be qualified for the work of translation, I send it to- Mr. Sauvalle. Mr. Sauval'le tries the man, and if his work is satisfactory he retains hiis services. I am not aware that two new men have been given work since I have been in this department. Mr. Sauvalle has absolute liberty to make a choice amongst those I recommend,, and once more I invite my hon. friend to give me the names of competent men whom they may know.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Any man from L'Ecole Polytechnique could do that work efficiently. As long as my hon. friend takes briefless lawyers to do the work-and he does-he cannot expect them to succeed with what is purely technical work.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is not fair for my hon. friend to make that statement. I never took briefless lawyers.


Rodolphe Lemieux: My hon. friend is responsible for the appointments in his department.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Does my hon. friend object with regard to Mr. Daoust?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I do. Mr. Daoust was on the staff of the House of Commons. He was an excellent translator, but my hon. friend put him out and appointed another man, just because Mr. Daoust happened to be a Liberal. Mr. Daoust's place was in the House of Commons where he was doing excellent work. My hon. friend dismissed him and appointed one of his own friends.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Has my hon. friend any proof of that? Does he not know that according to the Civil Service Act a man cannot enter the Service if he is over thirty-five, unless it is for technical work. I did my best for Mr. Daoust and I am still doing so.


Jacques Bureau: I heard the name of
Laframboise mentioned. I see a man by that name in the Auditor General's Report., The initials are not the same, but I should like to know the relationship that exists between the two. This gentleman makes a specialty of ore deposits along the Gatineau river.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I could not give my hon. friend the information, for I do not know these people. As I said to my hon. friend from Rouville, I am willing to submit a

complete list to the House. I am anxious to get the best-men available, and shall be glad to accept any suggestions from hon. gentlemen opposite that would lead to an improvement in the translation of the blue-books.


Jacques Bureau: They say that ignorance is bliss. If that is so, the minister should know what bliss is because he does not know what is going on in his department. It is a poor plea for a minister of the Crown to make.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It shows that I gave Mr. Sauvalle a free hand ,in selecting the men. The hon. member knows that when it is1 a question of qualifications only, the head of the department is the best judge. Ministers are attacked whenever they depart from that practice.


Jacques Bureau: For a minister of the
ability and reputation of my hon. friend, and occupying the place he does, to try and hide behind the Civil Service Act-well, I think it is a bit too -thin. We know what that means. Does my hon. friend mean to say that there are no translators over thirty-five employed by the department? I know some of them myself.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I would be in favour of abolishing the thirty-five year limit. I hadi a fight with the Civil Service Commission before they would admit that translation came under section 21. Translators are technical officers.


Rodolphe Lemieux: That was decided long
ago, when I appointed a translator for the Labour Gazette.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: They must have forgotten since.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I wanted to appoint a gentleman by the name of Lanctot as translator for the Labour Gazette. He was over thirty-five, so I applied to the Civil Service Commission. The question whether translation was technical, and should come under section 21, was referred to Sir Allen Ayles-worth, and he decided that translation from English into French, and presumably French into English, was technical work, and came under section 21. So my hon. friend should have no difficulty in getting properly qualified officers appointed in accordance with the Act.


Jacques Bureau: Would the minister, without reading a brief, explain the increase of .$14,000 in this item?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I read the explanation.


Jacques Bureau: Nobody understood it.
Would the minister explain in a few words? Give us the items.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I thank my hon. friend for the compliment he is paying to my English, which I know is not very good.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: It is all right.


Jacques Bureau: I was not reflecting on
my hon. friend's English but if his thinking is as clear as mud, it cannot be as clear as crystal.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The Ceramic division
accounts for $6,000. Would my hon. friend like a lecture on the Ceramic division? Then additional equipment for the laboratory at Ottawa accounts for another $6,000. Temporary labour which we have to engage from time to time when experiments are going on, accounts for another $2,000, making a total of $14,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What kind of labour is that?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Day work by labourers. I beg to move that this item of $60,000 for the organization of the exclusive division be reduced to $5,000.


Mr. VERVILLE:: I would like to ask the Secretary of State if tlhere is much printing in connection with this work. As one of the items in this appropriation refers to publication of reports, I thought I might bring the matter up under this heading. There seems to be quite a complaint in the Printing Bureau of some men working overtime while there are a number of printers in the city of Ottawa and in other parts of the Dominion who are walking the streets. There are men in the Printing Bureau who are working above their physical capacity to work; lit is impossible for some of them to work the number of hours for which they are paid, as same of them would have to work twenty-six hours in a day, and there are only twenty-four; so that the wages received by some of those men are absolutely unfair. My hon. friend may know that or he may not, and I do not say that he knows anything about it, but it is the case. There is, for instance, a printer who has earned $101.75 in a fortnight, although his wages are $21 a week.


The CHAIRMAN:: Is the hon. member discussing the Printing Bureau?


Alphonse Verville: I asked the minister if I could discuss this matter, as there is
147i
an item referring to printing in this Estimate.	.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The hon. member is not in order in discussing a matter of printing under the Mines Branch. I might point out at the same time that there are items still unvoted in the Printing Bureau.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I shall be very glad to see my hon. friend to-morrow outside of the House and discuss the matter with him.


Alphonse Verville: T have brought this matter up because in this estimate there is an item relating to publication of reports, translation of reports into French, etc. I thought under that heading I could bring this matter up. Of course, if I am out of ordeT, I will not do so, but I thought I might as well bring the matter up now.


Robert Rogers: We have been out of order all night, so we might as well continue.


Alphonse Verville: I do not often take up the time of the House, and I am seldom out of order. I do not think it is right of my hon. friend to make that remark.


Robert Rogers: I was not thinking particularly of my hon. friend. A number ol hon. gentlemen have been out of order.


Alphonse Verville: Am I permitted to proceed ?


Robert Rogers: Certainly.


Alphonse Verville: I bring this matter to the attention of the minister so that he may look into it and remedy it if possible. There is trouble brewing amongst many of the men working in the Printing Bureau.
I do not want my hon. friend to ask me to give the names, because, if I give the name of any one who furnishes information of any kind, he is liable to be regarded as an informer and to lose his position. I have seen that happen on so many occasions that I do not want to give the names. One man received $81.79 in a fortnight, although he is supposed to have a salary of $21 a week.


Avard Longley Davidson: Out of curiosity I
would like to . know the name of that individual.	,


George Perry Graham: The hon. member has
just said that he does not want to mention names.


Alphonse Verville: I do not want to mention names because I know enough of labour. troubles to appreciate what it is to be placed

on the black list when one gives information of any kind. As I have been blackballed myself more than once, I know whereof I speak.
Another man received $96 in two weeks although his salary is $24 a week. There are four men whose salaries are only $15 a week, and in a fortnight one received $65.42, another, $42, another, $47.47, and another, $46.09. If I bring this matter up, it is because there are many printers in the city of Ottawa as well as in other cities throughout the Dominion walking the streets and my hon. friend, if he has not room enough to enlarge his staff, could easily give some of the work he has in hand to outside firms, although I know he is giving a certain amount of work to such firms. It seems to me there is a pact amongst a few men to make a certain amount of money per week regardless of others, and that is absolutely unfair. A few men have control of a certain little ring, and they get men to come whether they work or not and they are paid just the same. Although I do not intend to prove that to-night, I am able to do so. I know even of men who come and sleep all night and who .are paid for it.


Mr. W. H. BENNETT:: You do not want them to sleep in the day time, do you?


Alphonse Verville: It all depends. We often have to do that ourselves when we stay here all night. When a man works all night he has to sleep during the day time. This method of working is creating a good dead of hard feeling and I am bringing this matter up for the good of the department. I know that there has been a delegation, not to my hon. friend, but to his predecessor in office in regard to that matter, and although I appreciate the fact that my hon. friend has recently taken charge of the department, I shall be very glad if he will look into the matter and endeavour to find a remedy.


Mt. BLOND  IN@: I will certainly investigate the matter and I shall be very glad to discuss it with my hon. friend at any time.


Frank Oliver: As I have just come in, I did not know what particular part of the item bias been under discussion. I would like to ask the minister what the proposals are with regard to the last item of this vote, which reads: For practical tests of bitumenous sands of Alberta, for Toadmaking and other purposes, $5,000.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I understand that we have officers on the spot experimenting, and we are making experiments in the department here on these bitumenous sands. This appropriation is to continue these experiments.


Frank Oliver: 
Pierre Édouard Blondin: As my hon. friend has
said, we have experimented in the streets of Edmonton. This item is specially designated for experiments in road building.
Maintenance of assay office, Vancouver, B.C., $25,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: In the Auditor General's Report of 1914-15, it is shown that the expenditure of the Assay Office in Vancouver, when deductions of $3,259.29 are made, amounted to $15,955.88. This proposed vote of $25,000 is an increase of

$5,000 over last year, and would indicate that the minister intends to expend $9,000 more than he spent in 1914-15.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: This assay office is to
help the men who come in from the mines by exchanging their gold for cheques which they can cash at the bank. The reason for the increase this year is that the business has been increasing by leaps and bounds. The following statement will show the increase in five years:
Value of deposits.
1911		$ 641,416
1912		 914,000
1913		   1,448,000
1914		 2,029,000
1915		 2,136,000


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: But even such an
increase as that would not justify an increase of fifty per cent in the expenditure.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The increase in business involves a greater amount of assay work which is costly. In order to cope with the increased business, it is necessary to increase the staff, to purchase more chemical supplies, apparatus, etc., and to have available a large sum to meet miscellaneous expenditures and express charges on the more frequent gold shipments.


Jacques Bureau: But there is no proper
ratio between the increased business that the minister has shown and an increase of fifty per cent in the expenditures.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There is an increase of only $5,000.


Jacques Bureau: But the expenditure last year was only $16,000, and this proposed vote would authorize an increase of over fifty per cent.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There is a profit made
by this assay office on its operations, which may account for the difference.


Jacques Bureau: That simply strengthens my argument. The ratio of increase in the appropriation is far in excess of the ratio of increase in the number of assays.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The vote of last year was


Jacques Bureau: You did not expend it.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Yes, we spent it, but we are crediting against the $20,000 the profit on bullion to March 13, 1916, $3,105.65. The amount voted last year was $20,000, which has been spent, and the profits are deducted from that amount.


Jacques Bureau: I understand that. This business, although involving an expenditure, is attended also by a certain amount of profit, and that profit depends on the amount of work you are doing. An appropriation of $20,000 was made last year. Either you did not spend that $20,000, or the spending of it brought you a profit of $4,000. This year, if you are going to increase this work, your profits must necessarily increase. If you did not spend the full amount of your appropriation last year, and if the ratio of increase in the work is very small as compared with the ratio of increase in the appropriation, an explanation is surely necessary.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: All I can say is that in these Estimates there is always a certain amount of uncertainty. That we did not spend the whole vote last year is proof of the fact that we spend just what we need.
My officers this year foresee an
11 p.m. expenditure of $25,000. They may not have to spend it all, but they may need that amount. The details of the expenditure for this vote are as follows: salaries of staff, $16,025.


Jacques Bureau: What is the increase over last year?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I have not under my hand details of the expenditure of last year, but I could get them for my hon. friend. I think the statements made showing the increase of work in this assay office justify the estimate of my officers as to the expenditure for this year.
Geological Survey Branch-for explorations and surveys; ethnological, archEeological and palaeontological investigations; wages of explorers, topographers, draughtsmen and others, $185,000.


John Howard Sinclair: I have here the following item from the Ottawa Free Press of Feb. 26:
The Government is doing some real estate business in the Arctic seas. It has sold for $1 per acre some 20 acres of land on Bylot island in Baffin Bay in north latitude 72 degrees, 53 minutes, to the Arctic Gold Exploration Syndicate, Lt., of Torotno.
The land is as yet of course unsurveyed, and the sale is subject to the proviso that the Surveyor-General may later determine the boundaries. *
Apparently the syndicate has found traces of gold in the far north.
Can the minister tell the committee if it is true that a new gold mine has been found in the region referred to, and if it is open to the. public to make application for areas?


Robert Rogers: Ilf any purchase of land has been made in Baffin bay, it would be through the Interior Department.


John Howard Sinclair: Mining land?


Robert Rogers: Any land. I a-m inclined to think that such a eale has .taken place; if the hon. gentleman wants information he can get it from the Interior Department.


Frank Oliver: On the other hand, if there is a valuable deposit of 'mineral there, the Geological Survey Deparment would naturally have cognizance of it and would be'in a position to answer the question.


Robert Rogers: I do not think there is any question about the matter of a valuable deposit, in so far as we have heard. There wa^ a sale of 20 acres of land, or some small amount like that, in Baffin Bay for a site for certain buildings-not in the sense of there being a valuable mineral deposit.
Mr. 'SINCLAIR: Is gold mining being conducted up there?


Robert Rogers: Not that I am aware of.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: This department has received no communication' in the matter.


Frank Oliver: During the last session of Parliament I had occasion to draw the attention of the Minister of Mines to reports of important discoveries of metals in Lake Athabasca. An expedition was sent in the spring to make explorations and examination of alleged mineral deposits at the eastern end of Lake Athabasca.
If such an exploration has been made, could the minister inform us how soon the results will be published, and if there is a probability of further research being made in that locality?	.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The report is now in the printer's hands and will reach my hon. friend very soon.


Frank Oliver: Could the minister give us any indication of the results of that exploration? Before he replies, I would again call attention to the desirability of securing the earlier publication of the reports of the work of that department. This exploration was made in the early part of last summer, and the report should have been available before now. The delay in the publication of such a report greatly detracts from its value. Before the information becomes available the interest in any alleged discovery is eclipsed by that in the announce-

ment of some new discovery, and so the report fails in its purpose. I would also call attention to the desirability of carrying on exploratory work in connection with petroleum in northern Alberta. On the Athabasca and Peace rivers there are extraordinary evidences of petroleum. Large amounts have been lost by private individuals who have undertaken to bore for petroleum in that country, hitherto without result. Let me suggest that a more thorough examination of the country adjacent to those evidences of petroleum be made by the Geological Survey, with a view to informing- the public in what localities it would be advisable to bore for petroleum. The country is of vast extent, and this course might save further heavy losses. If there is virtue in the science of geology as understood in the Geological Survey Department, surely this is an occasion and, a place foT the application of that scientific knowledge to the most practical purposes. There is to-day a vast and growing demand for petroleum for fuel purposes, We have recently had a discussion in this House on a proposal to impose an increased duty on petroleum for fuel purposes, and large quantities of oil are now being used, in this way on the Pacific coast. The evidences of petroleum of which I speak are immediately east of the mountains. They are in our own country, and are adjacent to the railroads that are now operating with crude oil, and measurably adjacent to the Pacific coast, where the steamers are using crude oil very largely. I would urge upon the Mines Department that the work of their Geological Survey take possibly a more practical turn in the immediate future than it has done in the past, and that the solution of this problem, which is of stupendous economic importance, be given special attention by the department during the coming year. We know there has been an enormous investment in boring for petroleum in southern Alberta, perhaps well advised, perhaps not well advised, but in southern Alberta there is not the enormously widespread evidence of petroleum that there is in northern Alberta. The petroleum'problem in southern Alberta may be too difficult of solution-I am not saying it is-but I say it may easily be. The greatest scientist in the world cannot be expected to know everything below the crust of the earth. But in northern Alberta, where the evidences are so numerous and so plain, there surely is an opportunity for the application of scientific knowledge In
)

demonstrating where it is advantageous to spend money in actually boring for oil and where it is desirable not to spend such money. What I have said in regard to petroleum applies in a somewhat lesser degree to boring for gas. There is gas in that north country. At some places it is in vast quantities and at other places it is not in commercial quantities. I would suggest that along with a closer, more widespread examination for petroleum in that country, there should be an examination and exploration for natural gas. So far as scientific knowledge, under the direction of the minister can be brought to bear, it should be brought to bear in order to reach these practical results which, if reached, would justify all the expenditures which have been made with regard to the Geological Survey. The minister is probably aware that because of the application in a large measure of the energies of the Geological Survey to what might be called academic explorations, there is a question in the minds of many people as to whether the money is well spent. Such explorations as I have suggested, if they resulted either in absolutely establishing that there was not oil, or that there was oil, would well repay the expenditure of the Geological Survey.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I can assure my hon.
friend that it is the intention of the department to proceed along the lines that he has just suggested.


Mr. BOIVIN:: A moment ago, while item 275 was under discussion, my hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) asked the minister if it was his intention to continue this year the purchase of specimens for the Victoria Memorial museum. My hon. friend from Pictou read a partial list of the specimens which had been purchased for the museum in 1914-15, as appeared in the last Auditor General's Report which we have before us. He did not exactly complete the list, but he asked a question which remained unanswered. We are on item 277, and as I understand, we are discussing the different sub-items all together. One of these sub-items reads:
For collection and purpose of specimens for the Victoria Memorial Museum, $15,000.
I see that this is practically the amount which was expended in 1914-15, it is the amount which was voted for 1915-16, and the minister is asking for the same amount for 1916-17. At the present time we are occupying the Victoria Memorial Museum as a home for the Parliament of Canada.
It has been magnificently fitted up at very short notice by the Minister of Public Works and it has made for us a very comfortable home. But in order to do this, the department which is now under discussion was obliged to remove from this building and store in the attic or elsewhere the many specimens which had been placed upon exhibition here. It is understood that oui new home on Parliament Hill will not be ready for some time to come. It may take two or three years and at this war time, when we are straining every nerve and every muscle to do all we can for the Empire and for civilization, it appears to me that it is absolutely ridiculous, when the Museum is occupied by Parliament, and there is no place to put specimens, to put a vote in the Estimates to provide for the purchase of $15,000 worth of specimens. I want to know from the minister if it is his intention to buy any more wooden whales with this $15,000. I find that in 1914-15 some of this money was. spent for wooden whales. W. F. Williams of Alberni, B.C., received $10 for a wooden whale and $6 for a mask. That-is not the only thing. The Government paid $247.25 this year for skeletons of buffalo and elk, $200 for a collection of birds, $145 for 32 baskets, $114 for 38 tent mats and $307 for Indian specimens. There are many other items of the same nature in addition to those given by my hon. friend from Pictou. I think it is ridiculous to spend the country's money for specimens, especially when we have no place to put them, and especially in a time like this when we are taxing the publid by direct taxation to pay for the expenses incurred by this war. This item of $15,000, in my humble opinion, and I think in the opinion of hon. members surounding me, should not be placed in the Estimates for the year 1916-17. I therefore beg to move:
That item No. 277 be reduced by $15,000, and that it be $314,400 instead of $329,400.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I may tell my hon.
friend that we did not put this vote in the Estimates with the definite intention of spending it all, or even spending it in part.


Georges Henri Boivin: Why put it in?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The law which constitutes this department divides it into two branches-the Geological Survey and the Mines Branches. The duty of the officers of the Geological Survey is to maintain a museum of geology and natural history for the purpose of affording complete and exact knowledge on these subjects. I have no

intention of buying here and there everything that may offer without any exercise of judgment. Does the hon. gentleman not think that it is wise to keep a certain amount at the disposal of the officers so that if the opportunity should occur to secure valuable articles for the department they can be purchased?
It might happen that some very valuable specimens were offering cheap, and that it would be in the public interests to buy them. I have in mind no particular object; I cannot foresee just what will be bought. But as a museum has been built, and officers have been appointed to collect specimens, I do not think it would be wise to cut out this item absolutely. I realize, of course, that we have some very interesting specimens in the museum at the present time.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I see mentioned among the specimens, a burial box. Is that for the Minister of Militia and Defence?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I think that was bought about 1911.


Mr.   BUBEAU@: Does the minister intend to purchase, and keep in the museum as a souvenir, the old flag that bullet holes were shot through'


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I thin* that flag is more the property of my hon. friend, who invented it


Jacques Bureau: Well, will the gentleman who invented it please present it to the museum.


Georges Henri Boivin: Were the holes in that flag patented?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister made a good start by cutting $55,000 out of his Estimates, and I thought he would allow the good impulse to carry him further, and cut out this $15,000 item. According to the press, two ministers of the Crown are going to issue special appeals to the people of this country to economize in their private expenditures. My hon. friend says that he wants this $15,000 item, in case some fellow comes along with a chse of bugs or insects and offers to sell them to the Government for $2,000, like that Yankee did last year. Can my hon. friend imagine a wife when her husband tells her they will have to economize and live on $10,000 instead of $20,000 in the coming year, saying: "Oh, but you must lot me have $15,000; I want $5,000 on hand in case a man comes along with
tj[r, Blondin.]
some curios that I could put in the front parlour." My hon. friend can see how ludicrous that would 'be at a time when economy was very necessary. If .my hon. friends buys any insects or wooden whales, he has no place to put them; he will have to rent a warehouse to lodge them in. Perhaps those gentlemen who came in a few moments ago, in expectation of a vote, would like to hear what this $15,000 is for, and it is well that the country should know how this Government proposes to spend the people's money. One man by the name of Evans got $2,000 for a collection of insects. The Foote Mineral Company of Philadelphia got $3,874 for meteorites, aerolites, sdderites, and uraninites. Another gentleman disposed of an Eskimo birdskin suit to an unsuspecting Government, who 'alleged that they were trying to economize, for $35. Another man by the name of Harris, from London, England, who had a collection of Indian and Esquimaux native articles sold them to the Government for $500. Mr. E. W. Hawkes, of Ottawa, sold some Eskimo specimens, models, one limestone kettle, one walrus tusk .and sundry other specimens to the Government for $675. Then the Government went down to Old Town, Maine, and bought a collection of Micmac Indian relics from G. A. Paul for $175. There were other items, bringing the expenditure up to $15,585. My hon. friend from Shefford (Mr. Boivin) moves that this item be struck out. Why the minister should want this money is - incomprehensible. He cannot possibly house any specimens he buys in this museum. There can be no possible reason for any expenditure under this head, no matter how rare the specimen, until the war is over and normal times have returned.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The only answer I can
give is that the department will not. spend the money except in case of necessity. This vote has always been provided in the past. We have not spent a cent under this head since the -war.
Mr. MACDONALD; You did up to March 31, 1915.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: We did not expect the war would last so long. I can assure my hon. friend that if we can possibly avoid it nothing under this head will be expended.
I would not ask that the money be voted if I did not think it was in the interests of the country. I think it would be unwise to cut out the item .altogether.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Why not boil the item down in that limestone kettle that the department bought?


Georges Henri Boivin: The figures that the hon. member for Pictou and I have quoted from the Auditor General's Report covered expenditures for the year 1914-1915. Part of these expenditures were made before the war, and part after. I should like the minister to tell us how this $15,000 was spent last year. What curios were bought during 1915-16 when the war was on?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I see the department
also bought a messenger pigeon at the price of $25. Was it alive or dead?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I have done my best to master the work of my department since I took charge, but I have not yet reached this most interesting branch. That is why I am at a loss to answer all the questions of my hon. friend.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Perhaps that pigeon might replace some of the messengers.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I have not the details to answer my hon. friend, but when my Estimates are called again, I will be prepared to give all the details.


George Perry Graham: Will you bring the pigeon if you can find it?


Georges Henri Boivin: If we can discuss upon this amendment of mine also the original item, I would like to ask the hon. minister why it is that his department acts in a different manner from other departments, that is, in regard to clothing for the attendants. I see in Estimate No. 277 an item for $54,000, which is $125 less than last year, and in that item, after providing for temporary clerks and other assistance, he provides for clothing for five attendants. Will the minister tell us why he is kind enough to buy clothing for his attendants while the attendants in the other departments have to provide their own clothing?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It would be very hard for me to give my hon. friend any other answer than it is the usage in this department.


Georges Henri Boivin: While this may be an absolutely legitimate expenditure, I think it would be only fair to tell the committee that is being asked to vote this money how it happens that these attendants require this clothing. Is it for some special work in the department which might ruin their clothes that this special clothing has to be provided? I am not saying that it is a
wrong expenditure; I am merely asking for information to which I think the committee is entitled.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The information given me is that the officers who are in special charge of the museum have special clothing because they are called upon to serve the public.


Jacques Bureau: You mean uniform.


Georges Henri Boivin: If the word "uniform" had been used, we could have understood the expenditure better.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: In the other departments there, are officers in special uniforms, and in this department, as it is a place where visitors come, I suppose the reason for providing uniforms for these men is that they must be well clad, and that they should be dressed differently from the other employees of the building.


Georges Henri Boivin: I thought this was for clothing used when making special tests. If this item is for uniforms for the guardians or for the officers in charge of the Victoria Memorial Museum, I respectfully request that it should be cut out this year, because there is now no Victoria Memorial Museum to be guarded; it has been transformed into the home of Parliament. We have here as guardians the guardians we had up on Parliament Hill, and I do not know why this vote should go through this year. If the employees are not going to 'work for the Government this year, or if they are going to receive their salaries and remain at home, I think we could dispense with supplying them with uniforms.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is explained that these men are no longer in the department. If they are not employed as they have been in the past, they will not need these special clothes, as they will not have to wear them. We shall therefore not have to expend the money.


Georges Henri Boivin: The item remains in the Estimates, and I would like to know how much of this $54,000 is devoted to clothing for these special attendants. That is certainly a question to which we are entitled to receive 'an- answer.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is about $450.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I notice there are 21 nests, $28.06. I wonder if it is one of the nests of traitors of 1896.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It would need to be very large, because there would be many

if I judge them on the gauge that my hon. friend is using.


Georges Henri Boivin: Might I also ask very seriously an explanation of the last paragraph of estimate No. 277. I see here an item to compensate John F. Lyons for quarters, fuel, light and water supplied him as resident caretaker of the Geological Museum, Sussex street, vacated on removal to the Victoria Memorial Museum, $400. I see that the same $400 was voted last year to compensate the same Mr. John F. Lyons for absolutely the same thing. Are we going to -compensate Mr. John F. Lyons every year for having removed from one building to another?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The information as to
that item is as follows: undet the terms of his appointment as resident caretaker of the Geological Survey, Mr. Lyons was supplied with living quarters, fuel, light and water, and so were his predecessors, both at Montreal and at Ottawa. In the new building, living quarters have not been provided for a resident caretaker. The value of the above was officially estimated at $400 per annum. In addition to his duties as caretaker he has supervision of messengers and labourers, stationery, office supplies, freight and express shipments. This is part of his salary, and as he has been deprived of part of his salary it is only fair that he should be reimbursed.


Georges Henri Boivin: At what time was he deprived of this portion of his salary?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: When the department moved from Sussex street, about four or five years ago.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Would it not be very much less trouble to add this $400 to his . salary and let him get -the money in that
way?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: That would be better,
and I really wonder why it was not done before. I will take the advice of my hon. friend and try to have the amount paid in that way.


Georges Henri Boivin: That would be much better because it would allow the minister to show a reduction of $400 in this item.


James Joseph Hughes: The minister has mentioned about Mr. Lyons having supervision of stationery. Is that the stationery supplied to the House of Commons?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Mr. Lyons is the caretaker of the Geological Survey.


James Joseph Hughes: There is an expenditure on stationery in this item. Does that belong to the Department of the Secretary of State?


Pierre Édouard Blondin: This has nothing to do with the Secretary of State.
Amendiment of Mr. Boivin negatived: yeas, 16; nays, 24.
Progress reported.
On the motion of Mr. Rogers, the House adjourned -at 11.56 p.m.
Thursday, March 30, 1916.