1916-01-26

PRIVATE BILLS INTRODUCED.

[Stage Direction]
Bill (No. 11), respecting British America Nickel Corporation, Limited.-Mr. North-rup.
Bill (No. 12), respecting The Calgary and Edmonton Railway Company-Mr. Douglas.
Bill (No. 13), respecting The Canadian Pacific Railway Company.-Mr. R. B. Bennett.
Bill (No. 14), respecting The Central Western Canada Railway Company.-Mr. Green.
Bill (No. 15), respecting The Pacific Northern and Omineea Railway Company. -Mr. Green.
Bill (No. 16), respecting The Quebec, Montreal and Southern Railway Company

Mr. Lemieux.

[Stage Direction]
Copies of general orders promulgated to the Militia for the period between November 25, 1914, and December 24, 1915.-Sir Sam Hughes.


[Stage Direction]
Consideration of the motion of Mr. Alfred Thompson for an address to His Royal Highness the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, resumed from Tuesday, January 25.
Hon.   S@: Permit me, Mr. Speaker, at the outset of the few remarks which I purpose making, to offer you my hearty congratulations upon your being called to fill the high position which you now occupy. I know that you will pursue the line of your predecessors, and reflect nothing but credit, honour, and dignity upon the position.
I scarcely know, Mr. Speaker, how to begin my remarks. Thus far, nothing of an adverse nature of any importance has been said concerning the department over

which I have the honour to preside. There has been more or less talk concerning the organization called the Shell Committee, but, as was the case with like expenditures at the time of the South African war, the expenditures in connection with the Shell Committee and the conduct of its business do not appertain to this Parliament- In 1890 and 1902 large sums of money were placed by the British Government to the credit of ministers of the Crown in Canada and they were checked out by the ministers or by their attorneys, and when inquiries were made by members of the House as to the disposition of these moneys, they were met with a prompt refusal. On that occasion I myself had a thirst for knowledge. In my locality in the central part of the province of Ontario, rumor had it that a large number of horses had cost the British Government the sum of $157 or $160 each on an average, were, within three or four weeks of the closing of the war, sold for the sum of $38 each- It was in vain that I made inquiries in regard to this matter, so I promptly dropped it, and I have never been enlightened as to the real facts of the case, from that hour until the present. At the outbreak of the present war I declined to follow the line set by my predecessors in that regard, and accordingly, the funds for all these shell contracts uTere placed to the credit of a special account under the control of the Shell Committee. For a double reason, therefore, I do not see that it is the function of this House specially to inquire into any of the transactions in connection with that committee; although I should be more than pleased, so far as I am able, to give all the elucidation of the facts, and all the enlightenment as to them which it is possible for me to give. I attended two meetings of the Shell Committee, the first and the last-but I shall take that up later.
I wish to deal, as briefly as possible and yet as fully as possible, with some of the statements that have been made by gentlemen on the other side-possibly by gentlemen on both sides-as to the impatience of the troopts to get across the water. We all realize that the troops are impatient to get away, but I am sure that every one who understands the situation knows that upon the British Government and the British Government alone depends the calling of the troops across the water. Canada today stands prepared to send twenty regiments as soon as transports can come for

them, but the British Government have not the transports available, nor have they huts available for winter quarters. In general, without going into the details of the matter, 'it is impossible for us to send the troops over until they are asked for on the other side. We feel that it would be good for these splendid fellows to get over and 'to obtain a stepping-stone training in England before they cross to the front to do their duty for King and country. However, it does not necessarily follow that because the troops are kept in Canada their training is not good. We feel that -the troops that were trained in Canada for the first division were second to no troops in the world; I know that the troops that have recently gone over are favourably reported upon. Our boys who have gone across the . water aTe better trained in shooting and manoeuvring than are any troops on the other side that have been under training for a similar length of time. This speaks well for the training of our troops in Canada. This impatience to go to the front is a matter, affecting not only those who are now training for overseas service. Personally, my own heart's ambition was to go to the front, but my duties at home prevented me from doing so. Possibly I am filling a better job here than I could at the front. It is true that I had my own ideas of how this war should have been conducted at the beginning. It is true, as everyone knows, that your humble servant, before the war began, predicted that this war would be a trench war, and endeavoured to lay plans to have it thus carried out from the beginning. However, I feel that my position here is much larger than it could possibly be in command of a mere division or corps at the front.
I d-o wish to say a word for a great many of my officers who cannot go to the front. Surgeon-General Fiset served in the South African war with great distinction, under fire and not under fire. He was always a friend of the soldier and was always ready to do his duty fearlessly and well. It would have been the joy of his life had he been able to go to the front; but it was impossible to spare him. The same thing is true of General Macdonald, Quartermaster General, was anxious to go overseas to look after his department, but he could not be spared. So with many more, General Gwatkin, General Hodgins, Colonel Winter, every officer on the staff has been anxious to go to the front, but we could not spare them.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: General Lessard-do his duties prevent him going?


Sir SAM HUGHES:: And there is General Lessard also. No doubt he is anxious to go to the front, although I have not seen an application from him. We know that his health is not good. There are -also General John Hughes, General Logie, Colonel Mew-burn, soldiers second to none, some of whom have distinguished themselves in war before, who have had more experience than others, but wiho have not been sent to the front, because they cannot possibly be spared. Therefore no one has been invidiously selected to remain at home. I think that if [DOT]any one has a right to go to the front General Fiset or I would have that right; but we realize the situation and aTe content to stay at home and do our duty in Canada, be that duty well performed or ill performed.
Reference has been made to machine guns. That subject, in fact, has been discussed very fully in the House, and I am sure every one here will agree with me that this is one topic that ought not to be openly discussed in Parliament. I will gladly furnish to the Prime Minister, and I am sure he will be only too glad to give to the leader of the Opposition, a full statement in connection with the disposition of machine guns, under our own purchases and under the purchases made with the sums that have been contributed from time to time. I may say that the guns are coming in now with considerable rapidity, and I am satisfied that the statement, when it is furnished to those who have a right to see it and who are concerned in it, will more than satisfy them that everything is being done that could be done, that the wishes of those who contributed money to this cause are being carried out to the letter, and that the wishes of the Canadian people and the Canadian Government in the same regard are also being observed to the letter. If that will satisfy the Tight hon. the leader of the Opposition, or any member of Parliament who chooses, we will show the details in connection with the matter and I am sure when they see them they will.be more than satisfied.
Reference has been made to the discharge of soldiers, and to returned soldiers, and to pensions. I believe that these matters have been satisfactorily explained to the House and disposed of. However, if there is any question put to me at any time I will be only too glad to give any data in connection with these subjects.
I might point out in connection with the training of officers, that when the war broke out we had a large number of very finely trained officers. A great many of the best of these naturally were selected to go with the first contingent. But we had to keep a lot of them home in order to supervise the training of the new regiments. However, as contingent after contingent went over, we were obliged-and we were glad in one way and sorry in another to do so-to send these good officers to the front, until we must now train up in their place a large number of officers to fill the gaps in the new regiments1 which are1 being raised all over Canada. In order to get the best men for these positions we are about to open military schools in every military district in the Dominion of Canada, and these will be opened at a very early date. Admission to them is practically open to every man who has any sort of a decent education and shows any fitness whatever for soldiering. Certificates will be issued to men who attend these schools, showing the qualification which they have attained, whether it be sergeant, lieutenant, captain, major or so on. In order to make it as democratic as possible, we are taking men in from week to week and giving them as thorough a training as possible, graduating them from class to class and stage to stage, until they are finally able to get the certificate of whatever grade they aspire to and are .able to attain. It is partly on the lines of the old military schools which we had in the old military days in Canada, and partly on more democratic lines. The plan is meeting the approval of all those who have had an opportunity to look into it, and I am satisfied that the success of .these schools will be such that every one will have the same good opinion of them that we have already formed.
In connection with every overseas battalion organized, we immediately organized schools for the training of non-commissioned officers, and also for the training of officers in the district. At the present moment we have hundreds of officers in the schools. But under this system, if an officer has not been able to attend on .the date set for the opening of a school, he has had to wait for three months in order to take his course. Under the new policy they will be able to enter every week, and thus we will prevent useless delay in the case of many excellent men. A splendid lot of men are coming forward and offering themselves as privates, non-commissioned officers and



officers. In this regard I wish to point out that a large number of men of the class of engineers, business men, men of strong character and superior education are tearing themselves away from their occupations in life and are coming forward. They are put into training at once and from these the most efficient will be chosen to fill up the new corps.
I might say, in passing, that the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) last session brought up the question of the purchase of the Valcartier camp site. I am pleased to inform him that the claims of the proprietors have been before the Exchequer Court, and, I think, have now practically all been settled.
I have also observed that some question was raised in this debate about Colt pistols and Colt machine guns. As this is a Canadian matter, I wish to give the fullest information at once. At the beginning of the war, as every one knows, the United States manufacturers doubted whether they could legally contract during war time with a foreign government engaged in war for the delivery or sale of munitions of war. Ihe United States Government, after a month or two, settled that matter in the affirmative, deciding that the manufactu-ers could sell. In the meantime the British Government was purchasing a very large supply from the United States. The problem was how to get these supplies out without pos-' sibly involving the manufacturers in trouble, because they would not assume the responsibility of shipping direct to a belligerent power. I took the matter up. I se ured the services of a life-long friend of mine Col. J. W. Allison, a man in whom I have had life-long confidence, a man who is the soul of honour and kindness. Thou' sands and tens of thousands, yes, millions of dollars' worth of war materials were brought in from the United States to Canada by arrangement with our Customs Department, and were then shipped by way of Canadian routes to the old land. Finally, Col. Allison followed the matter up, and it was arranged with Washington that a declaration should be made that these commodities could be shipped by these people direct from New York, or any other United States port, or directly to Canada, without violating any United States law. That accounts for 'the letter read by the hon. member for Carleton, N. B. (Mr. Carvell), yesterday as being sent by the director of contracts of the Dominion of Canada to Col. Allison in regard to these shipments. He 
was the officer I had employed, he was kind enough to oblige me in this regard. It is true that the matter of the Colt pistols has been before the Davidson Commission. Inasmuch as this matter has also been referred to, I may be permitted to read to the House a letter which I received from the Colt firm. At the time the question of Colt pistols was brought before Judge Davidson, a wire was sent to the Colt Company asking how they happened to he selling these pistols in Canada to commercial dealers at a lower price than the Government had paid for them. I had had the assurance of the Company-I did not observe at the time that the words " sold to any Government " had been introduced-that the lowest price at which they sold to any Government was $18.50. I naturally concluded that the Government would get a better price than the wholesale merchants, but I was very much surprised to learn that great as our business with the Company had been, it was small compared with their business with some single wholesale merchants. I may say that an officer of the Company and another officer came promptly to Ottawa, and knowing that Judge Davidson was going to hold an inquiry, promptly offered to appear before him and give a full explanation concerning the prices. This company has an arrangement with the United States Government providing that the United States Government in their own factories can make one of those pistols to two made by the company, and they control to a certain degree the price of the article. The United States Government takes hundreds of thousands of pistols, and, as probably the House is aware, the different states in the Union have for war purposes an agreement with the Federal Government that the equipment and material and weapons of the Federal Government should also be adopted by the various states of the Union. This is the letter received from the Golt Company:
Hartford, Conn., U.S.A.,	*
13th January, 1916. Major-General Sir Samuel Hughes,
Minister of Militia and Defence, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
,Sir,-In reference to the price at which this Company has sold and Is selling automatic pistols, Cal. "45, to the Government of Canada and to wholesale hardware or sporting goods concerns throughout the Dominion, we desired to place you in possession of facts which we1 believe fully justify our position and account! for the difference in price to the wholesale distributers.
Policy.-For many years this Company has marketed its product very largely through the

medium of the wholesale distributers who in turn sell the arms to the small retail dealers, by whom the arms are again sold to the individual consumer.
The established wholesale list price of the automatic pistol, Cal. *45, in the United States of America is $18.50. From this price the distributer is allowed a discount of 12J per cent and 2 per cent for cash, also an additional commission of 5 per cent, provided he agrees to co-operate in the upholding of the resale price and to assist to the best of his ability in creating a demand for the Colt's arms.
These concessions in price we believe he is entitled to for the advertising done through the valuable space given in his catalogue for illustration and description of the pistol, to compensate him for investment represented by stock of pistols carried in his store, some of which he often keeps on hand for many months before selling, and to help share in other selling expenses involved in the conduct of his business.
Our customers in Canada are requested to use as their selling price the United States price of $18.50, plus duty into Canada, which at present is 371 per cent, plus an amount sufficient to cover carriage charges and incidental expenses.
Government business.-This company has in its selling arrangements with the dealers, reserved government business to be handled direct. Such business is of a spasmodic nature, not coming with any regularity as commercial business does, and usually when it comes in any volume, is due to abnormal conditions requiring special attention.
Since the outbreak of the present war, we have had very large orders from several governments involved and each one, like your own, has requested us to do everything possible to effect speedy deliveries. This we have done at very great inconvenience and largely increased expense of manufacture. We have had to provide a large amount of additional space, procure a great many new machines, pay a much higher rate of wage to workmen, and in addition, have given each and every workman a bonus of 12 i petr cent of his regular wage in order to get the fullest measure of co-opeiaf'on and loyalty. All pistols made for governments are subjected to unusual tests ard most rigid inspection which involves extra expense.
These very unusual expenditures have added materially to the cost of the automatic p stol, Cal. *45 and in consequence this company has not since the beginning of the war, sold any of those pistols to any government other than the United States of America at a price lower than $18.50, neither is it prepared to consider doing so. We have supplied and are at present suppling a great many of these same pistols to other governments involved in the war, at same price you paid. This price has been uniform, regardless of quantity purchased.
The fact is, we consider the price most reasonable in view of the service desired during a period of great stress, and we are proud to be able to serve so well -as we have succeeded in doing, our friends who have wanted help. Had we selfishly cons dered only our own interests, we could have placed much of our product at prcm:um prices, but have not done this, preferring to be loyal to our friends.
These pistols are made under a license for wlrch wa pay a considerable royalty to the in-19}
ventor who also has licensed a European manufacturer to make pistols of his invention, giving to them the exclusive right to sell in certain countries where we are not at liberty to offer our pistols. This fact makes it incumbent upon us to render strict account of the ultimate destination of each pistol we produce under the license, necessitating our exercising very rigid control of the sales. We would not consent to the resale of the pistols at a price less than $18.50 by any dealer who buys from us.	_____
Your orders to us for automatic pistols, Cal. .45, aggregated 5,000. We have regular wholesale dealers who each year purchase a greater number of pistols and revolvers than that from us. Business coming to us regularly from month to month, year by year, is much more profitable than irregular orders which demand unusual facilities to supply.
This Company has its regular corps ot travelling representatives throughout the world, who each year devote considerable time to the negotiation of government business, although in many countries, as in your own, many years pass without any business being secured. In consequence, a portion of the selling expense involved during each of these several years must be taken into consideration when the selling price to governments is arranged. Commercial business each year bears its own apportionment oif the selljlng expense but in government business, the sales for some one particular year or season, such as the present, must bear the allotment of several years selling expense.
We are not unappreciative of the orders with which you have honoured us, hut we want you to fully understand the conditions under which we have to operate.
I may say further concerning Ool. Allison-I shall refer to the matter of fuses in a very short time-that in all his dealings with business firms in the United States he has in each instance, so I am informed and believe, given those with whom he dealt the following letter, or one similar:
May 14, 1914.
Confirming my verbal statements to you of yesterday and in order that there can not be any room for misunderstanding, I now reaffirm in writing my position in connection with the fuse question.
I have been and am doing my very best to secure the lowest prices possible for the Government, and above all things wish to do whatever I can to aid them in procuring the best workmanship, lowest prices, and largest deliveries possible; and if you are bidding for the manufacture of this fuse for the Shell Committee or the Canadian Government, I want it distinctly understood that I do not want any profit added to the price under any conditions, with the intention of providing a commission for me, as I would not under any circumstances accept a commission of any kind from anybody, in connection with this matter.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) J. Wesley Allison.
At this point I may be permitted to state briefly where our soldiers are stationed. At the present time we have about 60,000

soldiers in France, nearly 60,000 in England, and the balance of 250,000 odd training in Canada. We have three divisions at the front, and a fourth is in course of preparation. Other troops are ready in Canada to cross to England, and the troops in England are getting ready to cross to France. We trust that in a very short time we shall have the different units, the artillery, infantry, army medical corps and army service corps complete for the four divisions at the front.
I observed a remark concerning complaints as to recruiting. For the first contingent, our recruiting plans were, I (think, different from anything that had ever occured before. There was really a call to arms, like the fiery cross passing through the Highlands of Scotland or the mountains of Ireland in former days. In place of being forwarded to the district officers commanding, the word was wired to every officer commanding a unit in any part of Canada to buckle on his harness and get busy. The consequence was that in a short time we had the boys on the way for the first contingent, whereas it would have taken several weeks to have got the word around through the ordinary channels. Tinder that plan the contingent was practically on the way to Europe before it could have been mobilized under the ordinary plan. For the second mobilization, during last winter and summer, there was no immediate hurry, and we followed the ordinary routine of going through the divisions. It was found that recruiting still kept up well. For the contingent which is being recruited this winter, realizing that we would have a large number of troops for which the British Government would not likely have use for another month or two; at all events, we followed the plan of billeting them in their own localities. For example, in my own county, there are twenty or thirty places where troops are being billeted during the winter. A great many people say that you cannot control men if you keep them isolated. I believe that nearly all of those gentlemen who are wearing the uniform are just as capable of governing themselves as are the people who take so much interest in looking after them. These men are good, law-abiding citizens of Canada, decent, respectable fellows, the best in the land. In the county I have the honour to represent we have turned out upwards of 3,000 men, and we have about 700 there still, and not one solitary case of misconduct has occurred since the beginning of the war amongst those troops, except in the case of a couple of fellows who got boozy one evening, and I do

not know that that is limited to soldiers. The same record holds good throughout the country. The consequences are that, where the system which has been inaugurated has been properly carried out, we have these men billeted in villages here and there and all over the country, many living at their own homes at night, going to drill every morning, surrounded by the best associations and, little by little, acquiring that discipline, self-control, and knowledge of military drill that are essential to the upbuilding of the soldier. Morover, we find that in all these localities, they can engage in military sports. We furnish them with miniature rifles and dummy targets, and these fellows put in a very entertaining, instructive and upbuilding time. This system also saves us the trouble and expense of furnishing large buildings in the principal centres, renting buildings at enormous expense wherein to house these men. It must also be remembered that when you bring men to the larger centres you bring them, not to the comfort and convenience of these localities, but to temptations which do not certainly contribute to the upbuilding. I do not know that I need add anything to what I have already said with regard to the plan of recruiting.
I wish to take up for a few moments that very-much-discui&sed question in days gone by, the Boss rifle. The proof charge calibre of the Boss rifle, following the former Lee-Enfield rifle, was .459 at the base. I have given all the figures to the leaders on both sides of the House, and I would be glad to supply them to any hon. member who may wish to see them. This was the exact size practically of the cartridge of the .303 British rifle. It was found soon after the war broke out and before a Canadian rifle was fired at all, that the brass of the cartridge case was too soft. The many troubles and disasters that from time to time befel the British rifle and the soldiers between Mons and the Marne, and in subsequent en0agements, were found to be traceable to bad ammunition. The Princess Pats, who used the Lee-Enfield rifle, met with disaster and trouble owing to the bad ammunition supplied them-it was not due to the rifle but to bad ammunition. When the Canadian division fought at St. Julien -that magnificent and memorable fight- they largely used our own Canadian ammunition, which was absolutely perfect, as were some other brands of ammunition. Some of the American ammunition was good, a great deal of the British am-mujnitioim was good, but there were

three lots of British- ammunition! that were had, and t/hey were not recognized at the time by our boys or by the British regiments as being bad). The consequence was that both at St. Julien and Fastuibert, where the Canadians used our own Canadian rifle and our own Canadian ammunition, there was no trouble. At Festubert there were a number of rifles that jammed, but it was found to be due to the fact that the ammunition was defective and not the rifle. I may say that as soon as the cry went up about jamming rifles, I immediately took steps to have the Ross rifle chamber enlarged to .464, which is two-thousandths of an inch larger than the Lee-Enfield, which is .462. A good deal of fault was found at the time about this, but the House, I am sure will be glad to learn that now the British Lee-Enfield is being enlarged to exactly the same size, one more instance in which they are following in the steps of the Canadian people, they realizing that it is better to have the ammunition slightly emaller than the 'chamber of thei rifle rather than that it should be too tight a fit. The reason is that dirt will get on the cartridge; the brass of the cartridge case will sometimes be soft in consequence of too much annealing, and if it is too soft there is going to he jamming. Therefore, at the present time, I am in a position to state that reports from the front say that both rifles, with the enlarged chamber, are giving the best satisfaction. On January 18 General Carson sent the following report:
Full report from General MacDougall states that no cases of jamming of either rifles have occurred in England for months and the confidence of the men in hoth weapons and ammunition has heen fully established. Bad ammunition which formerly jammed in both rifles has been withdrawn.
Another report received by Col. Helmer with reference to the cause of jamming, said that it was due to defective ammunition. He says:
A large amount of "B," "G" and "N" ammunition in some mysterious way again found its way to the Canadian trenches. This ammunition was condemned a year ago nearly. Result: when rifles were used for rapid Are, after about 60 rounds, bolts began to hang- an entirely expected result. What the men do not know-and what no one appears to have had courage to demonstrate to them is that with the same ammunition the Enfield rifle cannot be relied upon to fire 15 rounds.
The House will be glad to know that both rifles are now in perfect condition, and that the supply of ammunition is very
carefully watched to see that nothing goes wrong.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: Has the Lee-Enfield rifle been enlarged?


Samuel Hughes: The new British
Lee-Enfield rifle has been enlarged to exactly the same size as the Canadian rifle-.464 and corresponding sizes right down through. There has been a reference made to the last Lee-Enfield rifle, and it was only about three weeks ago that I learned that the new British rifle had been enlarged to the same size as ours, namely, -464.
When the war broke out, hon. gentlemen will remember that my right hon. friend the Prime Minister stated in the House that in so far as he was concerned, the conduct of this war would be non-partisan and non-political. As far as my observation goes, and I have observed very carefully, he has religiously carried out his promise. On that same occasion, or a couple of days afterwards, I also made a similar statement in so faT as I was concerned, following the lead set by the Prime Minister. I said that in the conduct of the militia of this country, where Liberals and Conservatives were facing the music alike, there would be no party politics.
My good friend from Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Carvell), in the course of his address yesterday, trusted that I would raise the veil with regard to shells, and explain some party politics in that connection in my own county. I will do so with the very greatest pleasure. In my county there are twenty-seven to thirty organizations where shell boxes ' could readily be manufactured. I think only two or three of those organizations, in my county, have obtained orders for shell boxes. I was amazed and very angry when I saw that so few contracts had been given. I certainly thought that the Shell Committee, knowing that my time was occupied elsewhere, should have looked after the county I have the honour to represent a little better than it did. Let us see who these three firms were.
The first is a firm in Fenelon Falls, a most charming town. Mr. Tiers, a very estimable gentleman, who runs a little planing mill there, had not the necessary facilities, and so he obtained the assistance of Mr. Burgoyne, who put up considerable money. Mr. Tiers is one of the most intelligent and decent Liberals you can find in the whole community, and I was only too glad that he and Charley Burgoyne

were in a position to get the contract. The veil has been lifted as regards Fenelon Falls.	.


Mr. CARVELL:: 1 am afraid the veil will have to 'be rent again before all will be plain.


Samuel Hughes: The next firm is F. W. Wilford-a good name, whether as surname or Christian. Mr. Wilford is from a staunch old Liberal family in the Eastern Townships of the province of Quebec. He saw fit to marry a charming Lindsay girl some years ago. I have never asked him for a vote, or offered him any advice on the subject, so I am not in a position to say how he votes, but all the evidence I have on the subject points him out as a staunch Liberal, well acquainted, I believe, with the leader of the Opposition. I hope, however, that he has become intelligent by this time.
The next firm is the Digby Lumber Company. I do not know who the members of that firm are, but the gentleman at the head of it is a good Liberal.
The next is a firm by the name of the Stinson Company. Stinson's father was a good honest old Tory, and young Stinson is a partner of Mr. E. J. McLaughlin, a bosom friend of the leader of the Opposition. He, McLaughlin, is a gentleman whom it has been my privilege to trim on two or three occasions at election time, a very estimable gentleman in civil life, but in politics, Oh dear! The veil has now been lifted so far as my county is concerned. I think the Shell Committee has neglected my county shamefully, and the next time I meet Sir Alexander Bertram I shall tell him so. My time was so occupied that I could not join the horde of promoters and others who were hanging around the doors of the Shell Committee.
Let us take up next the Militia appointments. Two divisional commanders out of three are good staunch Liberals. I refer to General Currie, of Victoria, and to General Turner, of Quebec, two of the finest fellows who ever stood inside jackets, and two of the best men to be found in the Dominion.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Samuel Hughes: Not a solitary Conservative in the whole Dominion objected when I nominated these men for brigadiers long ago. The other one is General Mercer. As regards the politics of the brigadiers, I understand they are about half and half. I do not know what my own son's politics

may be, but I know he will vote straight anyway. As regards the lower commanders, I am told by those who have looked up the matter-I have not looked it up myself, it would make no difference anyway-that three-fourths of them are Liberal and one-fourth Tory. That is only what we should expect to find, and I say this seriously. The Liberal party was in power sixteen years, and naturally under the system that was first used a number of young gentlemen of the Liberal persuasion would come to the front, just as a number of young Tories are coming to the front to-day because -the Conservative party is in power. That is only human nature. When I took office a great many of the gentlemen occupying senior positions in the service were Liberal. I might point out that a gentleman has written me-I do not know whether it is true or not-that in one regiment in Nova Scotia twenty-four of the twenty-eight officers are Liberals and the other four Tories, that three of those Tories are at the front, but the Liberals are all occupying soft jobs at home. Whether that is true or not I can not Shy. I would not recognize such twaddle anyway.


Mr. CARROLL:: What regiment is that?


Samuel Hughes: I shall be glad to tell my hon. friend privately, but I can assure him it is not the regiment to which he belongs. As regards the medical men, I am told that of the forty-eight senior officers only four or five are Conservatives. General Jones is a good staunch Liberal. General Roberts, one of the loveliest boys and best soldiers and best medical men that was ever in a hospital, is also a staunch Liberal. Fotheringham is also a Liberal, and so is Scott, who is my own nephew; he is a black Liberal. Dr. McEwen, of Toronto, is a most magnificent man. I took him on account of his long medical service. I also picked out Dr. Bruce of Toronto. I found that Dr. Bruce, Prof. Anderson, Dr. Orr, and others had been in the service years ago as regimental surgeons. I have in my possession a notification, sent to one of these gentlemen who had applied to join the new Army Medical Corps. The writer of this note, a Liberal doctor, regretted that he could not accept him for the medical corps, as he was a Tory. I had, therefore, no hesitation in granting Dr. Bruce, who is a famous surgeon in Toronto, the same status he would have had he remained in the corps. He has been over on the other side.

As regards shell contracts, I am informed by those who have looked into the matter that four-fifths of the contractors are Liberals and that seven-tenths of the shell-box contractors are Liberals.
I now come to a very interesting part of the discussion, namely, the Shell Committee. And here let me frankly admit to the House that it is my baby; I am the father of the concern, be it for good or be it for bad, and I purpose sticking to it as long as it has a button left on its jacket. Let me point out the facts of the case, and when I get through I purpose giving some evidence-not hearsay, but evidence. In July, 1914, owing to the fact that the Kaiser had been rattling his sabre up and down the streets of Berlin for a year or two, and that the clang of the Krupp forges had been keeping the financial and commercial world a little uneasy for some considerable time, business in this country was at a stand-still. Factories were closed, dinner pails were empty and commercial and financial disaster faced Canada, Great Britain and almost every country on the face of the earth. That was the general condition prevailing when war broke out, and the breaking out of war did not make the capitalists of the country any more ready to invest their money, or bankers any more ready to back up commercial men in any enterprises they might undertake. When war was declared Canada fearlessly did her duty. The right hon. the Prime Minister immediately cabled to the British Government an offer of a division comprising from 17,000 to 20,000 soldiers. On the night of the 7th of August, 1914, this offer was accepted. Accordingly, the soldiers were summoned to Valcartier-but of that I will speak later-
On the 24th August, 1914, the War Office sent us -a letter, asking if we could procure for them a small order tor shells in the United States, On reflection, it struck me that the highly equipped industries of Canada, which were standing idle at the time, could readily manufacture shells. I I had seen shrapnel shells being made in the arsenal at Quebec, and it is merely a blacksmith's shop. Accordingly, we called a meeting of the Canadian manufacturers.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Do I understand the minister to say that shells had been manufactured in Canada 'before the outbreak of the war?


Samuel Hughes: Yes, at the arsenal at Quebec. About 75 shells per day was our output, and 75 per cent were bad. The
hon, member will understand that an inquiry was made some time ago, and it was found that out of 75 shells that we picked out to test, fifteen would not go into the guns, I know whereof I speak.
At that meeting of manufacturers, which was a very large one, they were so nervous over t'heir capital that only a very small number-I forget the exact number-could be induced to enter into the business at all, and they could not be induced to do so until we took them down to Quebec and showed them during a period of several days bow the manufacturing of shells was done, comparing our not up-to-date equipment with the splendid machinery in their -big factories. In some cases we had to get them financially encouraged by the banking institutions before we could induce that small number at the beginning to enter into the shell business. We lent them our military experts, officers of the department; and, in passing, let me say that we lent these experts also to the big firms in the United States which had been making shells and which had asked the privilege of consulting our experts and seeing our factories turning out -shells. We also sent our experts from factory to factory m the United States to give instruction in the making of shells for the British Government, because the urgency was so great. The Shell Committee was then formed. Inis is a sample -of a shrapnel shell (exhibiting shell.) I do not purpose to cause an explosion.


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: Is it full?


Samuel Hughes: No, it is empty. I take the liberty of bringing this -shell down in order -that the House may understand the matter. Thi-s is what we term an empty shell (showing the whole shell). This is the -steel -shell case (showing), with the copper driving band on it fitting into the grooves of the barrel. The brass part wfaich. fits on the top < f the shell 3pm case is called the fuse-plug, and in the shell at the present time is a powder cup empty.


Mr. GRAHAM:: That is a shrapnel shell?


Samuel Hughes: Yes. There is a tube connecting the upper part with the powder cu-p at the base, and the shrapnel charge lies around this tube above the powder oup, and is filled in with resin so as to keep it as tight as possible. The fuse screws on, connecting with the tube, and when the fuse is put on the time is set for the number of seconds it takes for this shell

to reach its destination, and when it does so it is supposed to explode.


George Perry Graham: That is a time fuse?


Samuel Hughes: Yes. The time fuse explodes the powder cup at the base and the bullets are driven out through the resin, the end of the shell is blown out, and the bullets scatter broadcast. This is called the cartridge case (showing), which is made of copper, and a primer which fits in at the end is fired by a spring. The powder propelling the shell, the cordite or gun cotton, is confined in this cartridge case. In the high explosive shell akin to this we use the high explosive bursting charge 'to smash the shell case all to pieces and scatter it broadcast. The two parts together make a complete filled cartridge. The fuse is made either empty or filled, either with the gain or without the gain, and it is filled with the gain subject to inspection. Number 80 is the time fuse and number 100 is the detonator or concussion fuse.
This is a cablegram from the British War Office to the Militia Department under date of August 24:
Can you provide or obtain from American trade shell empty shrapnel, Q.F. guns, 18-pr., without cases or fuses. If so, what rate delivery could you promise?
The Militia Department cabled the War Office in reply:
Re yours August 24, concerning 18-pr. shrapnel. Can get large quantities from neighbours speedy delivery. Please advise.
On the 26th of August, the War Office cabled the Militia Department:
Tour telegram August 26. Please cable quotation 100,000 segment shells, Q.F. guns, 18-pr. shells only. Presume you have detailed drawings and specifications. Can you arrange inspection. Am sending specifications of 15-pr. shrapnel shells, quotation required 100,000 of these.	.
The Militia Department cabled the War Office on the 2nd of September in reply:
Am arranging Canadian manufacturers turning hydraulic presses 'to work on shells. Had meeting to-day with number. Arranging for many more. Already can oontract for 4,000 shrapnel weekly, delivery to begin in about four weeks time. This could be increased to more than double that quantity. Believe could produce 75,000 before November 1st. Do you want shell Q.F. empty shrapnel 18-pr., without fuse, as per vocabulary stores 1912, part 2, page 480. Have all details, plans and specifications for 18-pr., but have none for 15-pr. Please send latter immediately. Price not determined yet. Please advise. "

On the same day, September 2, we sent the following cablegram to the British War Office:
Have organized committee of manufacturers on shells. They guarantee 20.000 by first November and 30,000 monthly thereafter. May be ab.e to largely increase this amount.
The following telegram was sent on September 11:
Regarding shells. Have discovered one firm, Canadian General Electric, which guarantees alone to manufacture by the first of January 100,000, either 18-pr. or 15-pr., and 100,000 monthly thereafter. Important to know will you want more than the 200,000 already placed.
The following was received by the Militia Department from the War Office on September 12:
Tour telegram No. 121. We still await your quotation for 100,000 18-pr. shrapnel shells with plugs. 100,000 shrapnel shells, 15-pr. with plugs, 100,000 cases for 18-pr., and boxes with in my telegram 954 9th inst.
The following cablegram was sent by the Militia Department to the War Office on September 18:
Reference your cipher September 17. Committee reports price of 100,000 shrapnel 18-pr. as per your cablegrams and specifications will be $8.55 each delivered at Montreal, 20,000 by November 1, and at least 30,000 monthly thereafter. Usual inspection charges. Shall we proceed? If so, please arrange line of credit through Canadian High Commissioner and in favour of Deputy Minister of Militia and Defence, Canada. Specifications 15-pr. just to hand. Price later. Please answer. Committee wait.
I may say that later we arranged to have the credit note placed to the credit of the Shell Committee in Canada, and not as is suggested in this message. The price of $8.55 was arrived at by the experts of the Militia Department, who made their calculations with the assistance of machinists and large steel workers throughout the country. Another cablegram follows, from the Militia Department to the War Office, dated September 18:
Committee reports 100,000 shrapnel 15-pr. shells, price $S.30 each, delivered at Montreal. Assuming proceeds with 18-pr. first, can make delivery of 18-pr. already cabled, and follow with 20,000 15-pr. November, and 30,000 per month thereafter.
I should like the House to note that we made the offer of $8.30 for the 15-pounders and $8.55 for the 18-pounders. On September 19 the War Office cabled as follows:
With reference to your telegrams numbered 132 and 133, we accept the prices as offered for 100,000 each 15-pr. and 18-pr. shells. Please proceed. We trust you will ensure punctual delivery.

At that time the Shell Committee was formed, and, until they were dissolved some time ago, took over entire control of the whole business. Neither directly nor indirectly did the Militia Department or I as Minister of Militia ever interfere in any shape, form or manner with the contracts, or with the price. In each instance the price was fixed by the British Government.
At this same time, I obtained many offers from American firms. I will take one as an example, to show what credit is due the Canadian manufacturer for standing by his guns to help the Empire, .as compared with the concessions given to United States and other manufacturers, which were really freely conceded to them by the British War Office. Our manufacturers never got one cent of bonus, never got one cent of cash payment, never got anything. They took their own risks, put in the machinery, turned out the shells with their own capital and under their own arrangements, and delivered the goods; I will show before I have finished that they delivered the goods at a lower price than any other country, not even excepting Great Britain. The course which the Canadian manufacturers pursued in this connection will stand to their credit for all time, the little handful of them that we could induce to take hold of the business at this time; later they were more numerous.
The Crucible Steel Company, one of the largest concerns on the continent of North America, on September 10, wrote me as follows:
We are prepared to make the following proposition: three weeks after the receipt of order for 200,000 shrapnel shells complete, without explosives, and absolutely in accordance with blue-print already submitted. We can ship 1,000 per day for three weeks; after six weeks we can ship 2,000 per day until the order is completed.
You will remember that our price was $8.55 foT the 18-poundeTS and $8.30 for the 15-pounders. Their price was as follows:
Price, $12 each.
Mark you, our manufacturers undertook the work at their own risk, put in their own machinery, financed their own business, did everything. I will read on:
In view of the fact that very speedy delivery is required, it means we will have to put an extension to our plant, and also purchase additional machinery. While we do not feel that there is any likelihood of the passing of legislation by the United States Government which would interfere with the shipments of these shells, we are willing to agree that in such
event we would be willing to absorb the cost of all the small tools and the extension to our plant, but the Canadian Government would pay us the actual cost of the extra machinery, in which event it will become the property of the Canadian Government and subject to their disposal. The contract not being subject to cancellation,

The contracts of the Canadian manufacturers were all subject to cancellation.
-suspension, or reduction, for any other cause than above referred to.
That is, the passing of legislation by the United States.
All of the above quotations f.o.b., Harrison, New Jersey. Cash in gold on surrender of bill of lading.	.
It will be seen, therefore, that the famous Crucible Steel Company, one of the best institutions of the kind on the continent of North America, made a price, of $12, while our manufacturers did the work for $8.55 and $8.30. Not only that, but the proposal of the Crucible Steel Company was such as to give rise to the possibility that at the close of the war the Canadian Government would have some thousands of tons of scrap iron on its hands

and that is what the British Government is doing in the United States to-day. To one United States firm with a branch in Canada $12,000,000 in cash was advanced by the British Government to carry on the work; the Canadian industry has not been advanced one dollar to carry on the work. It will be seen, therefore-, that the Canadian Shell Committee is not subject to condemnation, and that the Canadian manufacturers are worthy of every support, encouragement and blessing that Can be heaped upon them.
On April 25 I had the honour to receive the following communication from His Royal Highness the Governor General. I did myself the honour of asking the permission of His Royal Highness to lay this before the House and the country, and he cheerfully acceded to my request:
Government House, Ottawa,
25th April, 1915.
Dear General Hughes:
I have received the enclosed telegram from Lord Kitchener, which speaks for Itself.
Believe me,
Yours sincerely,
(Sgd.) Arthur.
This is the telegram, dated April 24, which was the third day of the fighting at St. Julien:
London, April, 24th, 1915. His Royal Highness Duke of Connaught, Ottawa.
Will your Royal Highness he good enough to thank General Hughes, the Canadian Shell

Committee, and Canadian manufacturing firms, for their satisfactory delivery of shells. I hope that the future deliveries will come up to anticipation.
(Signed) Kitchener. Let me point out that on that occasion at St. Julien, our hoys were 'armed with Canadian rifles, shooting Canadian ammunition, and firing Canadian shells. Having no shells to fire on Thursday, General Morrison found on Friday afternoon that a shipment had come to one of the stations eight or nine miles back. He sent his wagons back and commandeered 8,000 shells, and found that they were Canadian. Then, on Friday evening and Saturday, Canadian riflemen, armed with Canadian rifles, firing Canadian ammunition, and Canadian artillery, firing Canadian shrapnel shells, held back upwards of one hundred thousand of the best soldiers the world has ever produced. More than that, the records show that 12,000 Germans dead and 22,000 German wounded fell before our boys in those four days fighting, a record of which we are proud.
The history of the shell industry in Canada divides itself naturally into three periods. There is first what I should call the initiatory stage. Let me point out-I do not know whether the First Minister will remember this-but after we had met at Valcartier for upwards of a week studying this matter, working at it from every viewpoint, and when we had finally arrived at the figure of $8.55, the manufacturers of this country were so nervous, and capital was so sensitive, that they came to me and demanded that I give them a guarantee that they would he recouped for any loss they might sustain at this figure. I told them that my guarantee would not probably be worth the paper it was written on, but I said that if the Prime Minister of Canada would give a guarantee, he, as Prime Minister, would see that it was carried out. The Prime Minister will remember that they waited on him the next day when he came down, and he assured them that in case they found, after making this experiment, that they were losing money at $8.55, he would use his best endeavours with the British Government to see that they were recouped whatever their loss might be. Stt these manufacturers entered into this enterprise with a great deal of trepidation and, to their credit, they succeeded. The orders were spasmodic, each might be the last.
Then came the second period, when the British Government no longer required empty shells, but wanted filled shells, with

the cartridge case and component parts, all except the fuse. It took some time to get that started, but we tackled it, and our manufacturers again succeeded.
Then, later on, the bankers became more confident; and towards the close of what I term the second period we found the bankers and financiers, every one who had money tied up in a stocking, wanting to bring some blacksmith shop or some shoeing forge back in the woods into the game of making shells. The trains to Ottawa were packed with promoters. Young barristers, their hair parted in the middle, armed with a sheet of paper and a pencil, came down here and all wanted to make shells. They were going around the country saying: If yon will put up machinery I will guarantee to get you an order for 100,000 shells, 200,000 shells, any number you like. These young fellows would go around looking for orders for 300,000 or 400,000 shells as though they were selling eggs.
This was all done on a pretty definite business basis; all they asked was 50 cents a shell. That was the commission regularly asked for and I heard a great deal of it. Dear old General Bertram and David Carnegie got so that they could size them up, and the first question they asked was: " Where is your machine shop," and before the machine shop could get orders it had to be inspected,-and of course in fully ninety cases out of a hundred it was knocked out. I heard a great deal of talk then, and as the one who had induced the British Government to trust the Shell Committee of Canada, I felt my personal responsibility, not the Government responsibility in all this matter. Whenever I heard any of these yarns-and my dear friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) has not commenced to touch the fringe of the yarns yet, he has only given about what we would get in an ordinary afternoon-we investigated them, and I challenge the Dominion of Canada to show one solitary instance yet that has come before my notice that had a tittle of foundation for it. Not one. I felt that, having got the British Government into the scrape, it was my personal business to see that the thing was run right, and I have yet to learn that it was not run right; and therefore I am at General Bertram's back morning, noon, and night in this business. In the early part of the game we were told:	Oh, but your
steel will not do, you must get your steel from certain companies in the United States or elsewhere. I found that about four or

five hundred tons of steel was all we could get. I consulted the Prime Minister in nearly everything I did, as I bad great faith in his wisdom and judgment. Some them might think I might be a little erratic and all that sort of thing, but I felt that the balance wheel would be found in the Prime Minister. So I consulted him in this matter. Now, I am not' a scientist; and I know nothing about steel.
I know powder, I know lead, I know a rifle as well as any man; I know what is wrong with a rifle cartridge, but I do not know the first definite thing about steel, and I never could understand why, when our Canadians could make stoves and railway rails and all that sort of thing out of our steel, they could not make shells. But we were told: Oh, no, acid steel must be used. I was as wise as ever; I did not know what acid steel meant. So I said to the Prime Minister: "Who in - Canada could teach me this?"


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Samuel Hughes: I may have used
the other, too. I said: "Who can teach me something about steel5" "Well, he said, "Cantley, of New Glasgow, was here just a few minutes ago; he is an expert steel man." So I hunted up Colonel Cantley and got him to explain to me the difference between acid steel and basic steel. I said: "Why will not basic steel do?" "I do not know," he said. I said:
" Will you undertake experiments with basic steel and see if it will stand up under the heat test and the annealing, and if it is short of carbon cannot you chuck a little more into it and get it up to the standard, so that it will .stand the test?" He started on his experiments and expended on the work for the Shell Committee $500,000 before he received one cent in return. He tested the steel, we tested the shells on our own ranges in Canada and we found that the contraction was nil; that they lived up to the standard. We sent a shipment over to Woolwich arsenal and they more than stood up to the test. So to-day the Canadian industries have been benefited to the extent of eight hundred millions of pounds of steel made in Canada by Canadian workmen, turned out of Canadian shops, and turned into shells by Canadian enterprise.
ft might say that as regards the first contract I handed it over promptly to the Canadian Shell Committee and that commit-tee -carried on all <th*e business. The Shell Committee took the first contract and
they delivered the shells, allowing for the delay in producing plans, gauges, etc., on the part of the British Government, practically on time; whereas a contract let in ' the United States a short time afterwards to one of the established firms, a regular shell manufacturing concern, has only recently been completed. The Shell Committee was made up of Col. A. Bertram, who I believe is a. Tory; Brig-Gen. T.Benson, who, I believe, is a Tory; Lt.-Col. i. Cantley, who, I know, is a great friend of my good friend Col. Macdonald, the hon. member from Pictou-I do not know whether he is a- Liberal or a Conservative, 1 think he has voted both ways.


Mr. ROGERS:: The .member for Pictou
voted both ways?


Samuel Hughes: Oh, no, but he is
croing to. Col. Greville Harston is, I understand, a Tory, and Col. Lafferty is a Liberal, a splendid fellow, and one oi the best experts in Canada, but he has the misfortune to be a Liberal. Yet I appointed him to the Dominion Arsenal. Mr. George Watts is I am informed, a Liberal. Mr. E. Carnegie is a member of the Shell Committee, but had nothing to do with the letting of contracts; his brother David is an expert, and two finer men, two more skilled men, cannot be found in the Dominion, and they are both Liberals. Then there is J. W. Borden; he was appointed Paymaster General, and be has the misfortune to belong to the Liberal brand of the Borden family. Incidentally, I may say there is another of the fraternity who at the last election stood at the poll and-I will not say intimidated-but at all events urged the soldiers as they went to the poll to cast their ballots against the present Prime Minister of Canada. The young gentleman was brought before me and, seeing he was a manly straightforward fellow who openly admitted the corn, I sent him over to England


An hon. MEMBER:: And would do so
again.


Samuel Hughes: Certainly I would
do so again. He is a splendid, manly fellow, one of the best fellows in Canada; he bears the name of Borden and is a Grit. My hon. friend from Pictou (Mr. Macdonald) will endorse all I say about him. t want it to be understood that I did not allow politics in any sense whatever to enter into these matters, and if my hon. friend the leader of the Opposition knows of any Liberal in his following who is anxious to go to the front, let him send him

to me and I will put a uniform on him, give him his training, and let him do his best.
I may point out that although Britain gave a bounty in advance to every industry in the United States which made shells for her, we got nothing. Canada furnished the parts so that we could distribute them throughout the different factories. We got them to work, we got one factory to produce the steel, another to produce the billets, another to do the turning, another to do the fuses and so on; the Shell Committee distributed the work up and down the country, to the great advantage of the people of Canada, and to the great advantage of the British Government. It gave the small dealers an equal chance with the large factories, and the prices were uniform, thus avoiding any unhealthy competition'
I here was no object in scamping the work the inspecting company examined the work of the different firms, and I may here say that they had considerable difficulty in get-tmg gauging machinery.
I shall not discuss the question of basic steel; I have a prepared statement here on the subject, which I shall be glad to show any of the members privately if they care to see it.
price to as low as $1.85, and, of course, the quantities are much larger. In the United states the cost of machining the Russian orders was $2.20, and that despite the fact that they got an advance in cash. ,
With regard to Australia, I may say that what Australia knows about shell-making she owes to our Shell Committee. Australian officers came here and spent considerable time going into the whole business, and at the time Australia was given orders the Australian officers were here and the prices were arranged here. It was considered to be a fair and reasonable price for Australia considering everything. At that time our price was $3.80. In Australia it was $5, because facilities there were not what they were here.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: include the billets?
Did the price of $3.80


Samuel Hughes: and assembling.
I said machining


William Pugsley: What would be the cost of the steel billets? Would that not make the price of $3.80 still higher than the original price in Australia.
Now I come to the question of shells. The price for the first order, for 18-pounders, was $8.55; machinery and assembling, $5.15. The second order was for 400,000 shells, and the price was reduced to $6. The third order was for the completed shell filled, and for machining and assembling the price was reduced to $3.80. Our manufacturers had to pay the cost of the machines out of the first order. I may say that once in a piano fac-ory the first polisher could only earn $2 and something over a day; at the end of two months he had become an expert and was able to earn $20. They reduced his pay, but after a few months more he was able to earn $25, and he was again reduced. I mention this to show that these men soon became experts at the work. At the beginning, we did not have the facilities that we have now, and we did not have the men so well trained as we have now to do this class of work. Some of the dealers spoilt 0 per cent of the shells they made at first.
I understand that Colonel Cantley's people and many other firms spoiled a good many at first and lost on them, and are trying to recoup themselves now selling the shells for fancy lamps, etc. But they took risks on those first orders, and they lost money in many instances. Because they have now the men skilled and expert at the work the orders recently given 'have come down in lSir Sam Hughes.]


Samuel Hughes: Not if you add the price of the billets in each. case.


William Pugsley: The billets were included m the $5 paid in Australia.


Samuel Hughes: No. My information was obtained from those officers who came from Australia, and it was to the effect that they were not included.


William Pugsley: My information is to
the contrary.


Samuel Hughes: industries of Canada for the last year before the war would have given employment on the work done to 30,000 skilled workmen, to meet the ordinary commercial needs of our people in brass, copper and zinc alone. There will be an asset at the conclusion of the war when these machines stop turning out shells. These workmen and these machines, with very little adaptation, will be enabled to turn to these various commodities of zinc, copper and brass in Canada, and we will be able to produce our copper at minimum rates and develop our great water powers by transmission lines and	associated	industries
at the lowest possible figure. The prices of copper and zino were high, and that is why we began to manufacture them in Canada. In this connection there is a point that is worth noting. As you know, zinc is found in association with silver and in lead. Formerly Canadian ores were penalized by the presence of the undisposable zinc in them. The lead and silver in these ores were of no use because they could only be extracted at a loss. To-day, the extraction of the zinc puts a premium on the ore, and more than pays for the work in connection with the silver and lead, the result being that we have the value of the silver, the lead and the zinc, and instead of the presence of zinc penalizing the ores as it formerly did, it is putting a premium upon them. Engineers and mining men had been directing the attention of the Government to this matter, and -I entrusted Colonel Carnegie and General Bertram with the solution of this problem. We have worked out all the side issues, and the result has been to confer great benefit on the Dominion of Canada.
I have not had the privilege, since the war began, of addressing the House on the question of the formation of the Canadian force. I would ask the indulgence of the House for a moment while I say something with regard to that subject. On August 4, 1914, war was declared; on August 7 the Canadian division was authorized, the offer of the Prime Minister having been accepted. That was on Friday. On Saturday, the 8th, " Yalcartier was taken over, and on Monday the 10th ranges and waterworks were begun. By the 20th three and a half miles of ranges were completed, and 1,500 targets were put in position. Up to the same date 12 miles of watermains had been laid in, and 15 miles of drains, open and covered, had been located. Army Service Corps and Ordnance buildings were constructed, railway sidings

laid in, fences removed, crops harvested, ground cleared, streets made, upwards of 200 baths for the men put in, water chlorinated, electric light and telephones installed, wool made into cloth, cloth into uniforms, leather into boots, equipment provided, supplies collected, transport of all kinds purchased, and 35,000 men got under canvas in less than three weeks from the acceptance of the call.
The men were trained in marching, manoeuvring, and shooting. The men would fire five rounds in 40 seconds at the targets from five hundred yards, then they would run to the next range and fire five more rounds, and so, on to the next range, and down to one hundred yards. The result was that when the troops marched out, some of the regiments scored over seventy per cent of hits on these targets, and the lowest was fifty-two per cent of hits; whereas the average number of hits in the service of any other nation is about twenty per cent. When our boys marched away from Valcartier they were an army of free men, trained to handle a rifle as no men had ever handled it before.
Canada has developed confidence in her manhood and confidence in her womanhood. The women of this country have performed noble service, perhaps even better than the men, and they continue to give great encouragement to the work that is going on. We have turned out 250,000 soldiers who have already made a historic record in the world and 100,000 skilled mechanics. Our manufacturers at the present time are capable and ready for any undertaking. As I have said, at the outbreak of war, Canadian financial and industrial life was paralyzed. After making due allowance for the imported products which went into the shells made in Canada, there has been added to the wealth of Canada, through the action of the Shell Committee, $250/000,000; or $30 each for every man, woman, and child in the country.
j\lr. MACDONALD: Would the minister be good enough to say why there was a change from the old Shell Committee to the Imperial Munitions Board?


Samuel Hughes: The early part of the work was what I might call scientific.
I chose the very best men I could get who would do the work. Bertram, Carnegie, Cantley and the others were all experts.
I also picked the very best military men I coulcl get, such as Col. Lafferty and Col. Weatherbie. I don't remember the names

of the others, but they were men who had been accustomed for years to this highly technical work. Before the Shell Committee was dissolved there were in the factories of Montreal and Toronto and the other big cities of the Dominion hundreds of men who were just as expert as these men were at the beginning of the war. So the Shell Committee became a commission to look into the question of the steel production of this country, -and to look after the best interests of the steel work, for steel is the basis of the industry of any prosperous nation. I think that should be a satisfactory answer to my hon. friend.


Mr. MACDONALD:: Why were the services of these men dispensed with, and new men who knew nothing about the business taken on to purchase shells?


Samuel Hughes: I am not aware that there has been any purchase of shells. Orders have been placed with certain firms. Before the Munitions Board was formed the arrangement was that a certain number of shells would come in automatically from month to month.
I should be lacking in justice if, before concluding, I did not express my appreciation and sense of gratitude -to the press of this country. Let me give just an instance of how matters were managed with regard to the Ottawa papers, and the same procedure was carried on throughout the length and breadth of Canada. In Ottawa there are the local papers and the representatives of the great dailies of both political parties. I say "political parties," but I hope that party politics is ancient history now, and that there .is no such thing in the country to-day. I called the representatives of these papers together and explained the position. I said that if there *vas any item of news that we could legitimately give them for publication we would do it, and they agreed with me that anything which was not in the interests of the Empire and the service to publish should be withheld. I explained to them that occasionally a newspaper got hold of an item of news in some back-handed fashion and published it, and very often such an item would do harm. I took these men into my confidence and gave them everything that could be legitimately published. We further let them know about the movements of troops, and transports, too, on the understanding that such items were not to be published, and in not a single instance has any of those newspaper men violated my
confidence. Their conduct has been simply perfect.
I trust that no one will suggest that there has been anything like party politics in the Militia Department. Whenever I found them, I took the sons of our best men on the other side of the House out of the ranks and put them where they belonged. For instance, I knew that the son of the late Finance Minister of Canada (Mr. Fielding), who is a very excellent young man and a splendid fellow, was serving in a subordinate capacity at the front, when he was capable of filling a superior position, and without any suggestion whatever from his father, I placed him where he belonged. When I was in France I found among the fifteen men of the original Princess Patricias who had fought right through from the beginning of the war, the son of the hon. member for Red D-eer (Mr. Michael Clark). I took 'him out of the ranks and I was proud to do it, and I have done the same with others. I have already pointed out that the women of the country have helped us in every imaginable way, and so have the clergy. Hundreds of them are at the front to-day, and many of them are going as combatant officers when they cannot go as chaplains. They are showing a splendid spirit. Members of all churches are actively working f-or the -cause in every part of the country.
I had the honour recently of standing on -the same platform with th-e Roman Catholic Bishop of Peterborough, and it was a most enjoyable sight to see the orange and the green standing shoulder to -shoulder. I enjoyed it, as no doubt -did- -His Lordship. In the trenches to-day French, English, Scotch and Irish soldiers are standing shoulder to shoulder, all doing their duty fearlessly and well; and let me say to the credit of the German-Canad-ians, that many of them have already given up their lives for the cause, and they are doing their duty just as well as the other boys.
Mr. DANIEL D. McKENZIE (Cape Breton, North): Mr. Speaker, this being the first time that I have had the privilege of addressing thi-s House since you were elevated to the high office of Speaker, let me congratulate you on the distinction. Let me -hope that the n-ow regime will be able to hold a just balance between the parties, and- that liberty shall exist in this House in debating the many questions that come -before it consistent with the dignity of the Chair.
I realize that in rising in my turn to

address the House I am taking a great responsibility. I shall be expected, X suppose, to make some reference to the very wise and 'Strong address presented to the House by the Minister of Militia this afternoon. Would it be expected that I, myself, or any other member of this House would make any adverse criticism of the standing that the Canadian people have attained for themselves in connection with this war? Was it contended for one moment that from start to finish the yeomanry of Canada were not ready to sacrifice their lives, their property and everything near and dear to them for the general advancement of our country, and to lay everything within their reach upon the altar of our country? Was it necessary for the minister to come here to-day and make a defence for Canadians along that line, as if anybody was taking the other position? Nobody has taken the other position and nobody in Canada will do so, but we do take the position that there has been politics from the very beginning in the department over which the hon. minister presides; there is politics in it to-day, and there will be politics in it while he presides over it. It is all very well to speak in broad and vague generalities and to tell us that this, that, and the other thing has been done. It is very well to tell us that the Canadian people can do practically anything to which they put their hand. I am glad to see that a change of heart has come over not only the Minister of Militia, but his " balance wheel " as he is pleased to call the Prime Minister. Only three or four short years ago the Prime Minister, and the Minister of Militia, reached the conclusion that Canadians could hardly do anything but the most commonplace things; that it was unsafe to break them away from anything but the ordinary humdrum tasks of every day life; that if they were asked to build ships in this country, they were absolutely unequal to the task, and it would be wasting time and energy to ask them to do so. If it is true that we can turn our hands to the making of shells and high explosives, of which we had previously no knowledge at all, and in the short period of a fortnight or three weeks or three months become experts at it, what can be said now about Canada being unable to build ships of war and commerce? I am sure that the Minister of Militia and the Prime Minister have changed their views absolutely upon that question, and if the time comes when they will have an opportunity of formulating a 
policy on the question of shipbuilding in Canada, we shall never again hear the argument put forth that the Canadian people are not capable of performing that task.
I wish to follow for a little some of the points made by the Minister of Militia in the order in which he made them. He has told us that hundreds of millions of dollars of our money and of the money of the British Government are being expended in this country. He has told us
4 p.m. that that money has been spent in divers ways, of which he has given us very few particulars, although he is well aware that a strong contention has been made in this House and throughout the country that a proper accounting should be given to the Canadian people of the expenditure of that money. It will not be contended in this democratic country, u ^ere we have free institutions, where we have responsible government, that millions of the public money can be taken and expended at the beck and call of a few individuals, however worthy they may be, and that we can never call upon them to account for what they have done with that money. But the very first sentence uttered in this House this afternoon by the Minister of Militia and Defence, who is particularly responsible to this House and the country for this expenditure, was that it belongs to and was subject to the control of another Parliament and another country; that we have nothing whatever to say about it, and that we are only wasting our time when we think of asking the Government to account for the manner in which they have dealt with the affairs of the country in that regard. That answer will not do, and the people of the country will not be satisfied with it from the Prime Minister or from any other member of the Government, or from any member supporting the Government. In this country we must know first the necessity for the expenditure, and secondly, that the money was spent for the public benefit, and also that every cent of it was spent in the war and for the protection and advancement of the Empire. If that is not the case, we shall hold rigidly to account those who are responsible for doing otherwise. The quotation has been given already, but in view of the statement made by the Minister of Militia and Defence, who is the responsible head of his department and who above all others must be accountable to us for this war expenditure, I think it is incumbent upon me once more to place upon record

the exact position which the Opposition occupy in regard to the expenditure, and the position which the Canadian people are occupying in respect to it. I refer to the statement on page 42 of Hansard of this year on this very point. The hon. Mr. Pugsley said :
Hon. Wm. Pugsley: I desire to ask my hon. friend the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) if he will kindly lay on the table of the House, or if he can give now, information in a concise manner as to the arrangement between the Government of Canada and the British Government as to what proportion of the expense in connection with the carrying on of the war, in so far as Canadian soldiers are concerned, i's to be borne by the Government of Canada. I desire to know whether all the expense of ammunition, guns, equipment, etc., is to be borne by the Government of Canada, or what the arrangement is.
Sir Thomas White (Minister of Finance): The matter will be dealt with probably by my right hon. friend the Prime Minister in introducing the War Appropriation Bill, which will provide means for continuing our participation in the war, or, if not, by myself in the Budget Speech, which will be brought down at a later date. In a general way, I may say to my hon. friend that the Government of Canada is bearing the entire expense of Canada's participation in the war. There will necessarily be certain accounts which cannot be adjusted until the war is over, or until a later date. Recently I had a conversation with Colonel Ward, who is immediately in touch with the situation in London, and I understood from him that the Canadian Government is to-day paying all the expenses connected with the Canadian Expeditionary Force at present in England, and is paying the men of the Canadian Expeditionary Force in France, and Belgium, but that there will be certain adjustments of accounts necessary between the Government of Canada and the British Government at a later day covering such items as rations, supplies, and other equipment for the Canadian troops who are actually on the firing line. That matter is not susceptible of calculation and adjustment from to-day, but the Canadian Government is bearing the entire expense of the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
Mr. Pugsley: That means, of course, all the ammunition, all the guns, all the boots and shoes, and all the clothing used by the Canadian soldiers at the front?
Sir Thomas White:	Our understanding is
that the Canadian Government will pay all, but that an adjustment is necessary and will have to take place later.
That, Mr. Speaker, without equivocation and without varnishing one way or the other, is a clear-cut statement of the situation in which we are placed. We are furnishing the money for the soldiers at the front in the same way that we furnished the money for the Hudson Bay Railway; there is not the slightest difference between the one and the other. If we have a right, therefore, to ask ithe Minister of Railways and Canals for a just and proper
accounting of the expenditure in connection with the Hudson Bay Railway, we' have an equal right to ask for an accounting of the moneys that are >to be expended in connection with the war. The Canadian people do not propose to apply the same rigid form of inquiry to this matter as they would to a matter like the Hudson Bay Railway, because they are in such a frame of mind with regard to the war that they are not going to stick at trifles or ask for very close calculations. But in a general way, we have .a right to make these inquiries, and we have a right to receive a proper answer to them. I submit that the minister cannot dispose of the matter by telling ns, with a wave of his hand, that this is a question for the home Government; that this is a question with which we have nothing to do. The minister told us that the precedent for his course was the fact that some years ago, at the time of the South African war, an inquiry was asked by the then Opposition in regard to expenses in connection with certain provisions required by the home Government for the expeditionary forces that went to South Africa. I need hardly mention thd fact that the two cases are entirely unlike. On that occasion, as I remember, there was not the slightest hint of wrong-doing; there was not a word from anybody to the effect that one dollar had been misappropriated or that there had been any graft or political favouritism in connection with the expenditure. Further, there was not the slightest hint that one cent of Canadian money went towards defraying the expenses in that connection. That being the case, it was clearly a matter which was entirely within the purview, scope and authority of the home Parliament, and only the home Parliament could deal with it. The mere fact that on that occasion we did not choose to exercise authority which we did not possess is no justification for saying that the same course should be followed now. Even if 'any wrong had been done-I am not admitting for one moment that there was any wrongdoing, because we had no authority or jurisdiction to enter into an investigation of the matter-but even if we had done something twenty years ago that was not quite right, is that a justification for blindfolding the people to-day and preventing them from having a thorough knowledge as to the expending of their money?
We have had a very long-not too long, perhaps, for the occasion-and a very



smooth glossing of different points by the hon. gentleman who has just addressed us. I venture to say that not a man in this House, whether he be of the Opposition or of the Government, is very much wiser now than he was when the hon. gentleman took the floor. His remarks consisted of mere generalities, with no attention to details. We are told that there are no politics in his department. I know nothing about the provinces of Quebec, of Ontario, or, indeed, of New Brunswick, but I do know that in the province of Nova Scotia, from which I come, the political line is drawn just as closely in the Militia Department as it is in the Department of Customs, and that is close enough. You have just as much right to expect an appointment from the Department of Customs if you are not recommended as a solid Tory as you have to expect any standing or any inside advantage from the Militia Department.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: You have to go through the patronage committee.


Mr. McKENZIE:: The patronage committee, pure and simple; that is the position in Nova Scotia, and I can prove it. I should not mind, Mr. Speaker, if that committee were used in what we might regard as a decent and proper manner. But I do charge, in the presence of the Prime Minister, who is a Nova Scotian of whom we are proud, that in the county of Halifax, where I hold him responsible for the patronage, the vilest sort of partisans are put at the head of battalions, in the highest positions that they can be given. If the Prime Minister, or anybody else who cares to look the matter up, will turn to the files of the Halifax Herald-the organ of the right hon. gentleman-of a few days ago, they will find on the front page the picture of a distinguished gentleman who some time ago fled the country on the pretext that he was going to the war. He will find that this gentleman is back in Nova Scotia with the title of major, and that he is going to be given a battalion in the province of Nova Scotia and sent back to the front. Why was he sent away? Why did he leave the country? He left the country, Sir, because the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia was entering upon a trial at that time, in which trial he has been found guilty of forgery; in which, in not less than eight cases, he has been found guilty of being an accessory before and after the fact to perjury. He was blacklisted and disqualified by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, and 
under that cloud he left the country.
But he came back-he came back promoted to the position of major, and he is to-day honoured and petted and advanced in the county of Halifax, where the patronage belongs to the Prime Minister, and with the knowledge that the records of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia prove to the hilt everything that I say in respect of him.


Robert Laird Borden: I have no idea to whom the hon. gentleman is referring. If he desires to connect me with the person mentioned, I can say I never heard of him. I have not the slightest idea whom the hon. gentleman has in mind.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have reference to
Major Muirhead, and I have nothing to take back of what I have said. The Prime Minister cannot be ignorant of the fact that, in my place in this House last year, before Dr. Hayes, who is now a captain-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: A colonel.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: A colonel. Yes, if you please, he was appointed to the position of colonel. I pointed out to the minister that not only should he not be promoted in the army, but that he should occupy no position whatever in connection with public affairs in this country. This gentle-man was the chief organizer of the Conservative party in the province of Nova Scotia. Without repeating the same language, I submit that he went through the same condemnation, the same charges, the same blacklisting, as this Major Muirhead, in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia. I venture to assert that they could not keep him any longer in connection with the party, the thing was too nauseous altogether, and his reputation was such that they were ashamed to have him. They dumped him off on the Militia Department, and he was made a colonel by the hon. gentleman who says there is no politics in his department. That is the class of men who are being promoted in the province of Nova Scotia over the heads of good, honest, old, officials of those regiments who have, to use a vulgar expression, not got a look in -at all, when there is one of these other men to be picked up anywhere and promoted to office. That, Sir, is what I complain of. And I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that it is the most marvellous thing that ever could happen in any country, the magnificent stand that the people of Nova Scotia have taken in the face of the way in which they are treated tby the Militia Department, and the class of men who

are being placed in office in that province. But so strong is t'he feeling, so sturdy and strong are the Acadians, Irish, Scotch, English and every one else, in our determination to do justice to our country, to our King, and to the great institutions which we are proud to defend, that we will not for a moment allow a Minister of Militia, or even a Muirhead or a Dr. Hayes, or anybody else, to stand in our way. We shall have the reputation of being a great province, a great people, and a great country when they are forever forgotten and wiped off the slate, and receive that oblivious forgetfulness in which such characters ought always to be left.
We were told this afternoon that the minister had done great things for us for which we ought to he glad. We were told that we can .make shells, that we have copper, that we 'have brass and zinc. Of course we are well aware that for the last two or three years copper, and brass, and zinc, and the more shining metals have not been lacking at the head of the Militia Department of this country. But it is extraordinary that there should be any wonder or any surprise expressed that the Canadian people should take advantage of having great resources within their land, and that they should utilize them to the full? It would be surprising, indeed, if the contrary were the condition. Of course some marvellous things could be expected and might be	expected from	a great	man	atthe	head of a great party, and	nodoubt -we are not entirely disappointed in	the wonderful	things	that	thiswonderful man has done. I am sorry that the	great statesman	has not	thought it
worth while to stay a few minutes in this Chamber, that we might be able to give him some sort of an idea of what the people of this country think of the wonderful man whom they are so fortunate as to have at the head of military affairs in this country. But, of course, he would not for a moment think of staying in his seat in the House when one of the ordinary laymen of this country, one of the people of this country, was addressing the House. That would never do. But the Government of which he is a member, himself and the whole outfit, if I may use the expression, will learn, not many days hence, that there is a people in this country and that it is the people that speak, and that it is the opinion of the people that will count, that I am one of the people, here for the purpose of knowing what is being done, and that the people cannot be wiped aside by the glitter and 204
glare of red coats and buttons, or by the rattling of the sword of so great a man as the Major General-promoted to that position, I believe, on his own recommendation. I suppose the people of this country, for many months, thought that Major General Hughes, later Sir Sam Hughes, was promoted to the major generalship on the recommendation and, of course, as the gift of the home Government. Imagine their astonishment when they found that, after a great deal of consultation with himself, after gathering his war counsel around him a great many times, taking the closest observation of his own military record and examining himself from the spurs up to the top of his head, he reached the conclusion that he could go down to the Council and present a recommendation that Mr. Hughes should be made a major general, that it was a well deserved and proper recognition of his services to his country. That is how the promotion came, and I want the people of Canada to have some conception of the inordinate vanity of any man who would think for one minute, in this democratic country, of thus trying to raise himself by pulling on his own boot straps. That is how this great distinction has come to our great friend. He has done some great things, and there have been, perhaps, a few great men to whom he can be properly compared. I heard a distinguished clergyman of this town giving a discourse on some heroes of olden days who were warriors, and I was thinking how they compared with our man. I thought of Moses, who was a warrior and a leader. Well, what did he do? He is said to have struck the rock and to have got water out of i,t. Well, perhaps our man did not strike any rock, but he is supposed to have struck Webster one time, with what result I do not know. This clergyman talked about such men as Joshua who did great things; he made the sun to stand and go back. Well, our great man, the general, did something perhaps better than that. I understand that he made one of Poster's hoTses stand up one time; I do not think that he ever made him back, because he could not hack. So far as making anything stand is concerned, I do not think that Mr. Joshua has anything on the Hon. Mr. Hughes. We are told that Moses had a rod. Yes, [DOT]so he had, but the hon. gentleman has a shovel that is of equal importance. There was no hole in the handle of Moses' rod, so far as we can find, but there is a a hole in the shovel that we hear so much
:sos

about. There is another peculiarity about this shovel that was not found in the rod of the great statesman and leader of ancient days. I must tell you, Mr. Speaker, what that peculiarity is, so that you and I may understand it. Will you permit me to tell a story about a man who sold a coach dog, that is a dog with spots of black and white. This coach dog was sold, and when it went out into the rain the man who bought it discovered that there was some fraud about it, that the spots which were black had become white and that the white spots had become black. The new owner of the dog, feeling very badly about it, went to the man who had . sold it to him and said, " What sort of dog is this? it has all gone to <pot, and is no good." " Oh," said the man, " I forgot to tell you 'that an umbrella goes with that dog." He had sold the dog without the umbrella. Now, about this shovel with the hole in it, which is the great wand by which the Minister of Militia and Defence performs all his miracles-let me tell you that it is a well understood thing that a woman goes with this shovel. There is a hole in the shovel so that the minister may look through and see the woman. It is impossible to use the one without the other, and in that way this shovel is a companionable sort of article which performs wonderful things with its proper concomitants. Of all the discoveries that our good friend has made, there is none really different from the mass of ordinary humdrum business connected with the running of a department except this shovel, and I waited with the greatest patience, and looked very closely at the minister, to see if he would give us some account of this shovel, or of what goes with it; but I am sorry to say we were not enlightened upon the subject.
'These, Sir, are some of the great achievements of this great man who will not for a moment condescend to listen to one of the ordinary members of the House. I am pleased, not sorry, to say that on this side of the House, possibly with very few exceptions, we are ordinary people with ordinary common sense, who represent the ordinary brain and brawn and business of this country. We were told that there were no politics in the department, but, Mr. Speaker, let me put to you in the form of a few questions, some things that were put up to the minister, and let me point out to you that when these matters were put up to him he was aware that the affairs of his department were not being [Mi-. McKenzie.]
conducted as they ought to be. I am now going to quote from a letter put upon Hansard by the Prime Minister on April 15, 1915, a letter which gives us an idea and a clear understanding of the fact that at all events from that date the Minister of Militia and Defence had knowledge of the fact that things were not regarded as being right in his department. On page 2611, volume 3, of the Debates of 1915, we find this letter:
Ottawa, November 18, 1915.
Dear General Hughes,-When acting as Minister of Militia during, your absence at Val-cartier I instructed Colonel Fiset,, Deputy Minister, that the use of outside agents and middlemen should be avoided and that contracts should be made directly with manufacturers so that any unnecessary commissions or increased prices might be avoided. This is undoubtedly the wise policy and is entirely in accordance with the principles laid down by our party during the years past. If for any good reason you may think it desirable in the public interest that a different course should be pursued in any particular instance by reason of conditions arising out of the war I hope that you will first consult me as I consider the principle to be of prime importance.
Yours faithfully,
R. L. Borden.
Major General,
The Hon. Sam Hughes,
Minister of Militia,
Ottawa, Ont.
That, Sir, was on the 18th November, 1914, after the Prime Minister had had an opportunity of presiding over the Militia Department for a short time, and, no doubt, of learning for himself the condition of things in that department. Six months afterwards, while the department was still, of course, under the control of the same minister, and after he had been told that things were not going right, we find a strong Conservative coming down to this House with a report upon the affairs of that department which says:
In* view of the evidence adduced during the course of their inquiry into the matters referred by the House to them, your committee desire to draw the attention of the House to the requirement for the inauguration of a system of purchase, inspection and audit that will adequately protect the country from irregu-1 larities and frauds.
That, Sir, is the condition which had prevailed six months after the Prime Minister had warned the Minister of Militia that things were not going right in his department. A like report was brought down from the Public Accounts Committee. It had been moved by the hon. member for Kingston and carried unanimously in a committee which had an overwhelming majority of the supporters of the minister

and of the Government. That shows that six months after the warning he had received it was absolutely impossible for the gentleman at the head of the department to get things straight.
I said, Mr. Speaker, that I was going to put to you, in the form of a few questions, certain propositions that came before the Minister of Militia and Defence in regard to the running of his department. After he had received the warning which I read a moment ago he was asked by his party heelers: " Can we send the soldiers to the trenches with improperly made shoes, practically with paper shoes, and with bare feet?" The answer was: " iSo far as the department is concerned, yes, if you can make money out of it, and can conceal it,
I have no objection." "Can we send our soldiers to the front with horses with heelspring, horses that are spavined, horses that are blind, horses that are ring-boned, horses that are winded-can we send such horses as those for service with our troops?" "Yes, so far as General Hughes is concerned, if you can manage to do it without being found out." "Can we send the boys to the front with defective and treacherous field glasses that cannot be depended upon?"
" Certainly, if you can get away with it; I will stand behind you as far as I can protect you in doing it." That is what happened in so far as these things are concerned. As we heard here last night, the question is naturally put: can we take a monopoly of the hay and oats required in any province of the Dominion of Canada, fix the price just to suit ourselves, take the farmer by the throat, take his goods whether he likes it or not and sell at our own price at the most extraordinary profit we can make? Can you stand by that and will you stand behind it? That has been done, and we have not heard a murmur from any member of the Government saying that the thing was wrong. That is what is being done to-day in the province of New Brunswick and I have no doubt in other provinces all over the country. The most extraordinary thing is that they feel called upon to fix the price for the farmer so that the farmer cannot get anything but what they are pleased to give him. After commandeering his hay at a starvation price, Tory heelers ask and receive at the hands of this Government the right of monopolizing the traffic in this country so that this hay cannot be sold in any other province or in any place outside of the Dominion except as it may please the Government to permit
the farmers to do it. This is a most extraordinary condition of things and a state of affairs that was never known to have existed anywhere else, or under any government, except the Government which is presided over by the present Prime Minister and under the department with which I am dealing particularly at the present time, presided over by the hon. gentleman who has addressed us this afternoon.
In so far as the management of that department is concerned, it could not be worse than it is. There is not a thing upon which they put their hands but they leave the ear-marks of mismanagement and the ear-marks of what appears to the ordinary looker-on as dishonesty and lack of proper business principles. When this Government comes to this House, or goes to the country, and asks for a further lease of power, they are presuming to a most extraordinary degree upon the patience of the people of Canada. The war question is the paramount question, and the people of Canada, and the people of Nova Scotia, for whom I speak most particularly at the present moment, will be united in the desire to place at the disposal of the Government everything that can be used for the promotion of the war and the final and ultimate success of the Allies. But it is putting the patience, the endurance, and the loyalty of the people to the most extraordinary test when you ask to be permitted to extend the principal beyond those proper constitutional limits which should govern the management of the affairs of the country.
I pointed out a few minutes ago, and I point out again, that no minister of the Crown can come to this House and say that he never knew about wrong doing in his department until it was brought out by the Public Accounts Committee. What was brought out in connection with the Garland and Foster business was well known to the public before it was disclosed by the Public Accounts Committee. Does anybody tell me that the gentleman who was then the member for Carleton county did not go to the minister for his contract? Will anybody tell me that he was willing to play second fiddle, that he would go to anybody around the department to get his contract except to the minister himself? He certainly did not, and he certainly got his contract from the minister. Will anybody tell me that the minister did not know that he was the member for Carleton? Will anybody say that the poor innocent boy who was led to the


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I want to inform the
House that he is the nominee of the Conservative party in my constituency, so that he is not disgraced in their eyes.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Well, he has evidently been disgraced in the eyes of some decent people, because there are some decent people in New Brunswick. But he evidently has been promoted to a certain level at which certain parties are supposed to be fit to be supporters of this Administration. That is what is happening in New Brunswick. Now let us see what has happened in the little province in the bosom of the Gulf. A very few years ago we had only one man supporting the Liberal party in the legislature of the province of Prince Edward

Island. To-day the Conservatives are hanging on by their eyebrows; and at the very first opportunity, because the Liberals did not know how strong they were so far as that province was concerned, the people will go back to their old life and to Liberalism. I need not tell you, Sir, what has happened in the province of British Columbia. You know that the people there are rising in their might to have clean government and clean administration and to have back again the condition of things which we brought to them when we put the Conservatives out of house and home before, and the time will come when our old grand chieftain will once more give clean government to the people of this country, and when we shall all rally around him and the old conditions will prevail.
I wish to say a little in regard to the partyism which has been rampant in this country since the Conservatives came into power in 1911, and to point out that, in so far as my part of the country is concerned, this Government has been to us a disappointment. We had laid out for ourselves certain schemes, and it was the policy of the Administration of Sir Wilfred Laurier that large developments in railway matters should be brought about in our part oi the country so that our fisheries and our farming industry and all our other large industries should be put in touch with the heart pulsations of this country- A railway policy was adopted by Sir Wilfrid Laurier's Government for the province o' Nova Scotia, but I am sorry to say that with the exception of that part of the road which is in the constituency of the present Premier, everything else was cut out. I am sure that the Premier himself cannot be to proud of this matter. For years before 1911 the hon. member for Pie-tou (Mr. Macdonald), the hon. member for Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair), and all the members for the island of Cape Breton, including myself were pulling on the same oar with the then leader of the Opposition for the obtaining of better railway facilities in the eastern part of the Maritime Provinces. While our railway was to be built, his railway was to be built as well; but when the wheel of fortune turned and we had no further say as to the expenditure of money, the present Prime Minister built his own railway and pitched us over the side of the boat into the sea and would not look at us at all. That is not a very big way for a big man to deal with a question of such importance to us and to our people.

We were told by Conservatives at that time that they would build the railroad that we were to have, but one year, two years, three years, four years have passed and the fifth year is passing and nothing has been done. They do not intend to do anything and nothing will be done until the Liberals come back into power. It would not be so bad if our friends had been saving the money, if it could be said that although they were not building the rail-5 p.m. ways for us, the money was in the treasury. We left them with all bills paid, everything squared up and the finanoes of the country in first-class condition. To show you, Sir, in how excellent a condition the finances were, I simply refer to the first Budget speech delivered by Sir Thomas White when he became Minister of Finance. We were told by the present Prime Minister, a few months before our friends came into power, that an expenditure of something like $87,000,000 was the clearest evidence of dishonesty and v misappropriation of the money of the people of this country, and that, if they came into power, they could run the country with much less money and show better results for it. If the Prime Minister had been in earnest about that, we should have had some evidence of it when he came into power, and that evidence would be that he would reduce the expenditure. What do we find? The first year our friends were in power, the expenditure was $98,000,000, or 11,000,000 more than this horrible expenditure of which the Prime Minister spoke. The second year the expenditure was $112,000,000, or $25,000,000 of an increase. The next year the expenditure was $127,000,000, or $40,000,000 of an increase, and the fourth and last year of which we have an account the expenditure was $140,000,000, or $53,000,000 of an increase. That shows that the expenditure was growing by leaps and hounds, and that the Government was absolutely regardless of the promise of retrenchment that we had heard so much about a few years ago.
What about the interest charges? When we came into power in 1896 the interest expenditure of this country was $10,000,000. We went out of office in 1911, the interest expenditure was only $12,000,000, or an annual increase during the fifteen years of the Laurier Administration of $135,337. The interest expenditure, or the interest appropriation for the last year of which we have an account, that is so far as the ordinary expenditure is concerned, outside of war

expenditure, was $21,'500,000, or a yearly increase since the Conservative party came into power of ?3,166,000, and this expenditure is getting worse instead of better as time goes on.
It is up to us all to put all our energies together in order to put an end to this war, to do all that we can as a great country, to put forth all our resources of men and money in order to bring about a victorious ending to this struggle. But let us not forget and let not the people of this country forget the conditions which prevail to-day in British Columbia, in Manitoba, in Prince Edward Island, and in New Brunswick, or wherever else the Tories have sway in this country. We must not forget that our great duty is not only to bring back to power the leader of the Opposition, who is the old political physician in this country, but to bring back the conditions, both financial and moral, which he created in this country, and which no other party than that of which he is the leader is capable of restoring and perpetuating in this great country of ours.


Hon. MARTIN BURRELL (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, you will permit me, in rising to speak on, the motion for am Address to His Royal Highness the Governor General in reply to the speech from the Throne, to join with the other members of this House in congratulating you upon your being elevated to the office which you now occupy. I am not a very old member of this House, but I have had the pleasure of sitting under the administration of three Speakers. I think that those of us who sat in the House during that length of time realize, as I do, that the task of the Speaker is not by any means easy; that it calls for qualities of an exceptionally high character; that it calls not only for great tact and great impartiality, but for great firmness as well. Upon many occasions these qualities have been tested to the very uttermost, and it is inspiring to find in the young democracy of Canada, where we are carrying on institutions British in character, that under those tests the Canadian character has risen to the, same level as that of their Anglo-Saxon forebears, and that democracy has held its own in the conduct of the affairs of this House.
I wish also to congratulate the mover of the Address, the hon. member from the far West (Mr. Alfred Thompson), and the seconder, the hon. member for L'Islet (Mr. Eugene Paquet). I was particularly glad that the hon. member for the Yukon had the honour of moving the Address in reply to the speech from the Throne. I myself am a western man, and, as the northern part of my constituency touches that great country from which the member for Yukon comes, naturally we have a good many things in common, and, perhaps, look at national questions at a different angle from that of other members who have not been familiar with the West.
I noted with a great deal of interest the length at which hon. gentlemen dealt with the question of the war, which, after all, occupier, our thoughts to the exclusion of almost everything else at this time. I suppose there is not a member in this House, from the leader of the Government to the leader of the Opposition and down to the youngest member, who does not feel, in common with the rest of the people of this country, the presence of the shadow of this great conflict. I think that every waking moment of our lives is to some extent affected by the grave and tragic character of the struggle that is now going on. My light hon. friend the leader of the Opposition, in opening his remarks, observed that we meet again under the shadow of this disastrous war. We unquestionably do, and it is, perhaps, a sad feature of our democratic life and of our party government that we lay too much stress on -these -smaller affairs of party interest, to the neglect of the paramount issue that is before the Canadian people at the present time. The morning after war was declared, I happened to be in the c-ity of Vancouver, that beautiful, far-western province with which so many members of the House are familiar. It -so happened that the Prime Minister had asked me to address a convention of Canadian Clubs; it was on August 5. War was declared late in the night of August 4, and I reached Vancouver the night before. I am not likely to forget the deep emotion that stirred all those -people on that occasion. I am not likely to forget the wave of passion- that swept over every man and woman present, or the profound conviction that these people had as to the underlying justice of the -cause which had at last -driven Great Britain into the war on the side of the Allies. Nor am 1 likely to forget the determination that moved every heart and every mind, out in that far-western province, to stay with this thing and to see it through, no matter what it

might cost. It was with a recollection of this incident, which would naturally burn itself into one's brain, that I watched with ithe deepest sympathy and the deepest pride the generous response that was made by our far-western country when the Empire called for their support in this great struggle. I recall many instances of men in my own constituency in the far north who walked twenty, even thirty and forty miles from distant and isolated sections of the country in order that they might be on hand at the earliest possible moment to answer the call. I remember one typical instance: that of a man, living in one of the beautiful valleys in the northern part of British Columbia. He was English by birth; he had been in the country a great many years, and had finally built his house, developed his small farm, and arrived at the point where he expected to get some little comfort from his labours and some little enjoyment from his life. His mother was still alive; his father was not. His mother *had three sons in the war: one in the navy and two in the army. Not very long after the outbreak of war she wrote her son that one of his brothers had been wounded and another killed, and that she thought the hour had struck when he too should take his turn. He did not hesitate. He packed the few small things that he wished to take with him on his journey, nailed fast the door of his small house, took the train and answered the call, believing that he was fulfilling the highest duties of a British subject in his country's hour of trial. It is that spirit, fSir, that has dominated the people of the West generally in regard to the call which was so strong and which came with such sudden and terrific force. The fact that they responded to that call and that they responded to it in that spirit is the best .guarantee of the final outcome of this war.
I should be a very poor Canadian if 1 did not share the pride of those who are living in eastern and central Canada that the response which I have described in the far West was also made, with equal vigour and equal patriotism, throughout the length and breadth of the eastern country. Certainly, if there should be any inspiration to those of us who are not at the front to do our duty here, it should be the feeling that those men have given up everything they possess in the world-home, comforts, even honourable and distinguished positions-in order that they might fight our battles. I have seen these

men march through the city of Ottawa; it has been my pleasure to be present on many occasions, especially when the western divisions have gone through, when the Duke of Connaught, whom we are all so delighted to have with us in this time of stress, and the hon. Minister of Militia, were present to review the troops. I have seen scores of personal friends amongst them; I have watched their career. I have, as every man in	this House
has, lost by death	in the	battle
trenches many a warm personal friend. I have known others who were wounded, and some have returned. It has been an immense satisfaction to a man from my province, who has known these men, not only to watch the response that they made, but to see that they have borne themselves not only as we would expect a Canadian to bear himself, but in such a way as to line up with the very finest traditions of the whole Empire. I do not dwell on these things, because it was not for that purpose that I rose to speak. My hon. friend who has just sat down (Mr. McKenzie) will perhaps pardon me if I do not allude to the matter he has given us in the last hour. I found it, I confess, a little bit mixed. He was talking about chaos, and the sun and stars and military shovels, and the iniquities of the Conservative Administrations in Manitoba, New Brunswick and British Columbia, and the rampant partyism that has been observable in this country since the unfortunate hour when the Conservatives assumed office in Ottawa. I think, perhaps, we can take all that for what it is worth; at least my hon. friend will not think I am discourteous to him if I do not touch on the matter which he produced just now. No man could take any exception to the tone of a good many of the speeches that have been delivered. No man could take exception to the tone of the speech of the rigid, hon. leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) or that of my hon. friend from the West who sits behind him (Mr. Michael Clark), or those of several other hon gentlemen opposite. It is true that some of those speeches have contained a goi d deal of criticism of things in connection with which we must expect criticism. I do not know that any man can object to having strong and keen criticism levelled against him, when he is placed in a position of ie-sponsibility, as members of a government are. Nobody will complain of that. But I think, also, we can realize that there is a good deal of criticism that is expressed, and a certain amount of criticism has been

heard in this debate, which is not of a helpful character, but is entirely designed to make political capital for the man who advances it. The suggestion that the recruiting meetings addressed by members of this Government and others on this side of the House during the past year have been simply instruments to advance the political interests of those who have taken part in them, I regret. It has been my pleasure to take part, as it is every man s pleasure and duty to take part, in meetings of that kind, not only in other parts of Canada, but in Ontario. I attended one or two with my hon. friend from North Renfrew (Mr. Graham). I would just as little think of accusing him of trying to make political capital out of a speech of that kind when appealing to the best instincts of the Canadian people, in a common cause, as he would think of accusing me of trying to make political capital out of such a>
meeting.
While we have had several speeches in which there might be nothing to object to, we have had two speeches to which there has been every reason to object, both as to their tone and their matter. I refer particularly to the remarks of the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) and the hon. member for Carleton, N.B. (Mr. Car-vell). We all know our hon. friend from St. John. He is a gentleman who has occupied a prominent position in the coun-' sels of the Liberal party and of the late Government. He is a Privy Councillor, a man who has been a distinguished member of the Bar, and who, of all men, should weigh his words when he speaks in public. We know his methods, we know that particularly suave way of his. There is an old saying of a certain man, that the words of his mouth were softer than butter, but war was in his heart. I do not know that the words could be as applicable to anybody else as to my hon. friend from St. John. He is very astute. His methods are of such a kind that he can suggest all sorts of desperate and sinister motives in those whom he politically opposes without coming out flatfooted in such a way as to expose himself to be called to order for transgressing the rules of parliamentary procedure-although he must be accused of coming very near the limit of parliamentary debate on some occasions this session.
The hon. member for Carleton, N.B., is a man of different mould altogether. In his tactics and his manner, if he will permit me to say so, he could never be accused of
suavity, whatever else we may accuse him of. I think we can say that he is of the sand-bagging, bludgeoning type, using that expression in a parliamentary sense; and I think it is perhaps fair to say that he is not at all handicapped by any lack of recklessness or inaccuracy in a great many of the statements he makes. The members of this House have long learned to take anything that the hon. member for Carleton, N.B., may say with a very large grain of salt. I shall have occasion later on to touch on some of the utterances of my hon. friend; ~as They were directed to myself.
I wish first to refer to a subject which has been freely discussed in this House, which happens to affect me in a rather important way, inasmuch as I am the minister representing the province of British Columbia in this Government, and because, particularly, I happened to be in Victoria on the day that war broke out; and it happened to fall to my lot to have something to do with the purchase of the submarines about which so much discussion has waged in this House. I shall not discuss the evidence, which is bulky, which has been open to the inspection of members on both sides, and which has been extensively quoted from by both the hon. the Solicitor General and the hon. the Minister of Marine. I regret, in the deepest way, the language that has been used in the discussion of that question by both the hon. member for St. John and the hon. member for Carleton, N.B. I do not know Sir Charles Davidson very well. I know him, as a good many members of the House know him, on a slight personal acquaintance, and from hearing of his reputation from others who are able to judge. Never, until the hon. member for St. John and the hon. member for Carleton referred to that distinguished gentleman in the way they did, did I hear one word of blame or harsh criticism, or criticism that could be looked upon as regrettable in any way, applied to the exChief Justice of Quebec, Sir Charles Davidson. Perhaps the best answer that could be given to either of these members is the answer that was read by the Solicitor General, from the chief Liberal organ in this country, the Toronto Globe. If my hon. friend from Carleton and my hon. friend from St. John are not satisfied with Sir Charles Davidson, if they think he is the type of man who "has been biased, superficial, shallow, I think they could be referred to no better authority than the leading organ of their own party, the

Toronto Globe, which has expressed a very-different opinion of that distinguished man. It was not, however, so much in regard to Sir Charles Davidson that I wanted to speak. he is a man well enough known to be able to take care of himself; and he has friends enough, on both sides of the House, to resent the references made to him. I wanted to say half a word in regard to the counsel appointed, not, as has been stated again and again by these two members, as a party counsel, to look after the interests of the Conservative party, but as a counsel who was looking after the interests of this country. I refer now to Mr. John Thompson, who happens to have been for years a strong personal friend of my own, and who, as many members of this House know, is a distinguished and honourable son of a distinguished and honourable father. I think that the references that were .made to him, the contemptuous references made by my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley), who has just come in, and the references which were made only yesterday by the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Carvell), who I think, used the phrase that Mr. Thompson pursued the police court methods-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I made no such reference to Mr. Thompson.


Martin Burrell: I beg my hon. friend's pardon; I think he applied these words to the Solicitor General.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I did.


William Pugsley: Will my hon. friend
allow me to correct him? I made no contemptuous reference to Mr. Thompson; my reference was entirely to the shallow investigation which Mr. Thompson conducted.


Martin Burrell: The astute and sophisticated mind of my hon. friend very often sees fine distinctions that are not differences.


William Pugsley: I have known some very able counsels conceal the facts.


Martin Burrell: I think that is the last conclusion which any one would reach regarding Mr. Thompson. At all events, I think I am fully justified in using the words 1 did in characterizing the references of my hon. friend. Both of these hon. gentlemen certainly gave the impression that not only was this commission conducting a very shallow and partisan commission, but that

the methods employed by Mr. Thompson, to whom, I think, my hon. friend from St. John referred as an ordinary student-


William Pugsley: Not at all. What I said was-


Martin Burrell: Excuse me, I have the
floor. If my hon. friend will allow me to finish my sentence-


William Pugsley: I wish to correct my hon. friend right now. I rise, Mr. Speaker, to a point of order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I understand that the
hon. member for St. John rises to a point of order. When the hon. member states his point of order I shall rule upon it.


William Pugsley: My point of order is this. My hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture says that I compared Mr. Thompson with a law student. I did not. I said that any law student would have known that, in order to obtain the truth, and to get out the facts, it was necessary to ask the question which I suggested.


Martin Burrell: If my hon. friend can take any comfort from that difference, he is welcome to it. If my hon. friend had allowed me to finish my .sentence, which he would not do.-he is always so ready to interrupt-he would have heard me say that his reference to Mr. Thompson was that he did the work in a>
way an ordinary law student would do it. It was a slighting reference. I say to hon. members opposite that if they would put aside their desire to make political capital out of a commission which has done its duty to this country in the fullest sense, they would at least give credit to these gentlemen for the highest possible .motives, and show some recognition, as most people have shown, of the way in watch they have done their work.
Mr- KNOWLES:	Knowing Mr. Thompson, does my hon. friend say that he proved 'himself equal to the onerous work of investigating a $50,000,000 transaction?


Martin Burrell: My hon. friend must
not expect me to answer questions like that. T think Mr. Thompson was capable of doing the work. I am not a lawyer-I understand my hon. friend has the distinction of being a lawyer, and possibly he is a better judge-but a good many lawyers think so. On this subject of interruptions I would like to point out that when my

hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries was speaking he was interrupted I think forty or fifty times, -certainly thirty or forty times, by hon. members on the other side of the House, especially -by my hon. friend from Carleton (Mr. Carroll), and sometimes by my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pug-sley), and yet when my hon. friend from Carleton was interrupted twice yesterday he said, " I will not be interrupted; I do not want to be interfered with." The hon. member for Frontemac (Mr. Edwards) asked a perfectly natural question, and my hon. friend from Carleton told him to -sit down, that he had the floor, and Would not be interfered with. That may be one way of playing the game, hut I do not think it is one which can appeal to the fairness of hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House who have observed these things. I hope I will not object to answer any proper question which may be put, but my hon. friend would not be interrupted at all, and I think that at least he might extend some courtesy to members on this side of the House.
Before I leave the subject of Mr. Thompson, let me say to my hon. friends from St John and Carleton that Mr. Thompson, who is, at all events in the opinion of some people, well qualified for the work which he undertook,-my two hon. friends are both lawyers, and I presume they are regarded, by some people at all events, as something more than ordinary members o the bar-gave his services in the finest spirit of patriotism for absolutely nothing all through that Commission, and he is now in the King's uniform ready to go and flo-ht for his country. When my two hon. friends can rise to that height, it will be time for them to criticise.


Robert Rogers: Rise to a point of order
now. '


William Pugsley: Will my hon. friend
allow me?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.
Mr- SPEAKER: It is my duty to remind the House of Rhle 23 which says: "No member shall interrupt another member.


Mr. DEVLIN:: Except with his permission.


Auguste-Charles-Philippe-Robert Landry: The rule does not mention that, but if the hon. member who is asked a question is willing to be interrupted, of course I will not interfere. t.hink it is the desire of the hon. minister not to be interrupted, and he is entitled to have Rule 23 applied.


William Pugsley: I understood that my
hon. friend did not object.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: If my hon. friend wants to know why I am not in uniform, I have the answer here in a file of correspondence, which I will show him if he wants to see it.


Auguste-Charles-Philippe-Robert Landry: The hon- Alinister oi
Agriculture has the floor.


Martin Burrell: I am not complaining
of these hon. gentlemen if they interrupt to ask a question; I simply ask that the same -fair- play which is extended to hon. gentlemen opposite will be shown to hon. gentlemen on this side of the House.


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: My hon. friend should
not fire shots across the floor.


Martin Burrell: To return for a minute
to the question of the investigation of the submarines, I am not going into the evidence, as I have stated, for various reasons. My hon. friend from St. John rose, as he has risen a great many times during tie debate, to interject a criticism and some remarks. The last time the subject came up when, I think, he made a speech on a point of order, he asked again about the three cheques; he asked why these three cheques were given instead of one cheque. Now, all that matter was fully gone into arid thoroughly explained by my hon. friend the Solicitor General. The statement is on page 140 of Hansard, and I am not going into that question again because my hon. friend knows all about it as well as I do.


William Pugsley: It does not explain it
at all.


Martin Burrell: I am not going into the question of buoyancy and efficiency, because my hon. friends are perfectly familiar with them. They have had the evidence placed before them, the cumulative evidence of experts who know what they are talking about. It is only beating flair to go on suggesting-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: Hear, hear.


Martin Burrell: I say that it is absolutely beating the air to go on suggesting that the matter which has been referred to exhaustively in the evidence as proved under the testimony of experts can be insufficient in the belief of this gentleman who -has never given it any close study at all. A discussion took place as to the price of these vessels and it fell to my lot to be in Victoria when the matter first came up.

I was asked to go down to the Navy yard by the commanding officer and I went down with Captain Logan. I was there two days running and when the question came up as to the possibility and advisability of getting these submarines at a time when there was critical danger to the coast cities of British Columbia the commanding officer was urging in the strongest way possible that they should be got. Captain Logan, whose testimony is given in the evidence, was comparatively familiar with the type of these vessels, the class to which they belonged and to some extent with their efficiency. He did not know anything about the price. I was standing at the "phone" when Captain Logan asked the agent in Seattle to quote a price if these boats could be procured. My recollection is now-and I think it is pretty clear-that they did not know at Seattle and had to obtain that information from the Electric Boat Company in New York. At all events, the price was quoted over the phone as $1,150,000 or $575,000 each. That amount was inserted in the telegram advising my hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Hazen) of the fact and it was stated from the commanding officer: I thoroughly concurred as to the advisability of getting these boats but the question of price, or anything of that kind I left to the Government to deal with. I cannot see, in view of the evidence that there can be the slightest question in any reasonable man's mind as to the value of these boats. Let me ask my hon. friend from St. John:	Why was there all this
suspicion? Why was it that from the start he was so suspicious of these boats?


William Pugsley: Does my hon. friend desire an answer?


Martin Burrell: Oh, no, I do not think I will ask the hon. gentleman to give an answer.


William Pugsley: I would be very glad to give the answer.


Martin Burrell: I know perfectly well that my hon. friend would be quite willing to talk for half an hour if necessary, but I do not think it is necessary at all. When a man is in serious danger of his life and finds that a rifle is the only weapon he can get to save his life, and it is a question of whether the rifle is going to cost $10, $15, or $20 he is not very much concerned whether he is going to pay $10, $15 or $20 * he is going to get the rifle in order to save his life. I cannot understand my hon.

friend not giving credit to the situation which existed in British Columbia at that time. He ought to know, as every man in this House should know, that at the particular time at which this transaction took place the declaration of war was a matter of hours, that there was no time to enter into lengthy negotiations, even if we had disputed the price of these boats. It was a matter of necessity to get them. I know what the condition of things in Victoria and Vancouver was at that time, and I know how seriously alarmed the people were. It was a matter not only of possibility, but of probability that the German fleet on the Pacific were liable at any time to steam in and shell the two cities of Victoria and Vancouver.


William Pugsley: They had a Japanese cruiser there.


Martin Burrell: The only thing that saved the western coast from a possibility of the kind that I have described was the presence of the submarines that we purchased at that time.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: There were no guns on them.


Mr. MURPHY:: And no torpedoes.


Martin Burrell: 
An hon. MEMBER:: He was out there.


Martin Burrell: Yes, and could have been given an opportunity-


Frank Broadstreet Carvell: I could have got a Davidson investigation, I suppose.


Martin Burrell: Yes, or anything else; or, the hon. gentleman could have said this in such a way that the gentleman to whom >, he referred would have had an opportunity of replying. There is nothing more regrettable or deplorable, amongst all the phrases that have been put upon Hansard than the statement of my hon. friend. Speaking as a British Columbian, knowing something of the facts that existed at that time, knowing the gravity of the situation, as it affected a large part of the Canadian people in the far West and they are no less Canadian because they live in Victoria or in the province of British Columbia, whatever opinion my hon. friend may have of that province-knowing the situation as I do, Sir Richard McBride is to be congratulated and he is to be admired for the efforts which he made, financially and otherwise, through his Government to . enable this Government ^ to obtain possession of these two boats which practically made the Pacific coast immune from danger in tha/t particular.
My hon. friend from St. John never seemed to have realized that there was a
situation of considerable gravity at that time in the western coast. He is all the time harping on suspicions as to the fact of a possible rake-off. I presume he will find time to thoroughly examine the evidence that has been submitted. He is a good enough lawyer to sift that evidence and I venture to say that if^ he gives an honest opinion upon it he will admit that there never was a more thorough examination into anything and that there never was a clearer transaction put through, in our country's history than that which was put through in connection with this matter Let me say to my hon. friend, who is so regardless of the position and the perils of the people of Victoria and Vancouver, how differently would he have spoken if a German cruiser had been within fifty miles of St. John He would have been down on his knees begging the Government to do something. One million, three millions, would not have been enough if it were necessary to ensure protection, and he who so lightly disregards the peril of a city on the far western coast and would have taken a very different tone if the danger applied to his own city, should be the last man to cast reflections on those who had anything to do with that matter. As I have several letters here which I wish to put on file in connection with another matter to which my hon. friend from Carleton referred yesterday, I trust, Mr. SpeakeT, that you will
nnll if


William Pugsley: Will the minister allow me to ask him who actually purchased the submarines? Was it Mr. Logan or Sir Richard McBride.


Martin Burrell: My hon. friend can find out all that information without any trouble. This Government bought the submarines through the good offices of the British Columbia Government, who helped us because those people had to have the money then and there, or we should never have had the submarines before war was declared. I should think both governments were fully justified.
At six o'clock, the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to rule.
Thursday, January 27, 1916.