1917-06-05

PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 60, respecting The Essex Terminal Railway Company.-Mr. Wilcox.
Bill No. 61, for the relief of Charles Frederick Reuben Jones.-Mr. Kay.
Bill No. 02, for the relief of Florence Amelia Kennedy.-Mr. Edwards.
Bill No. 63; for the relief of John Bassnett Parker.-Mr. A. H. Clarke.
Bill No. 64, for the relief of Amy. Beatrice Mathews Hilton.-Sir Herbert Ames.

[Stage Direction]
Sir Robert Borden moved:
That Sessional Paper No. 1S3, laid on the table of the House on the 1st June, instant, comprising reports from the several departments of the Government in respect to printing, etc., pursuant to a, resolution of the House of the 18th May, 1916, be referred to the Joint Committee of both Houses on the Printing of Parliament.
He said: The C mmittee on Printing last year made a very full report with regard to printing, and poirted out that a saving in expenditure might be effected in several directions, which they enumerated. That report was referred to the several departments of the Government with a direction that as soon as possible after the opening of the next session a report or memorandum should be laid on the Table indicating to what extent it might be possible to carry . out the recommendations of the committee, and in what respect, if any, those recommendations were not feasible. The reports of the several departments have been received and laid on the Table, and it is now proposed to refer them to the committee which initiated the matter.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: I remember perfectly well the report on printing which was presented by my hon. friend from North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) last year. I thought at the time that it contained some very important suggestions which, if followed, would result in a saving to a very considerable degree. I have not yet seen the Sessional Paper laid on the Table on the 1st instant, and I would ask my right hon. friend to let his motion stand over until tomorrow.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN:: Certainly.
Motion stands.



MINISTER OF MINES.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. G. P. GRAHAM:: For some reason I have received several telegrams urging the establishment of a separate portfolio of mines with a ministei at its head, two of them, I think, comirif; from officials of the Mining Institute. W< uld my right hon.

friend say whether the Government are considering taking any action in that regard?


Robert Laird Borden: I really have not given very much consideration to that in the immediate past. My hon. friend's experience in receiving telegrams on that subject is not an unusual one, for I have received a very great many communications [DOT]on the subject myself during the last three -or four years.


George Perry Graham: But why should I get .them?


Sir GEORGE FOSTER:: Query.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: Coming events.


Robert Laird Borden: I must permit my hon. friend to make any conjecture on that subject that he thinks desirable.



BANK ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
vDn the Orders of the Day:
Sir THOMAS WHITE:: I would direct
the attention of the House to Order No. 21, referring to Bill No. 56 to amend the Bank Act. I introduced this Bill some little time ago. It has received its first reading and now -stands on the Order Paper for its second. After introducing the Bill I found that it had been the practice to proceed with a matter of this kind, which is connected with Trade and Commerce, by resolution in the first instance. The same Bill now appears under Order No. 26; as Bill No. 65. I therefore beg to move:
That the order for the second reading of Bill No. 56, to amend the Bank Act, be discharged and the said Bill be withdrawn.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. MARCIL:: Has the Government
[DOT]under consideration at the present time any measure looking to the national prohibition of the use of intoxicating liquor as a beverage? Has the Government received certain communications which have been sent members? One letter stated that the legislation was to be introduced this session.


Robert Laird Borden: The Minister
of Justice (Mr. Doherty) has under consideration some suggestions that have been made to him on behalf of organizations throughout the country respecting an amendment of the Act which was passed last year. It is very likely that the suggestions placed before him embraced the wider
fMr. Graham.!
question to which my hon. friend (Mt. Marcil) has referred. But with respect to both these matters, I am not in a position to make any announcement at this time.



CIVIL SERVICE ACT AMENDMENT.


[Stage Direction]
On motion of Sir Thomas White (Minister of Finance) the House went into Committee to considerable following proposed resolution, Mr. Blain in the Chair:
Resolved,-That it is expedient
1.	To repeal subsection two of section twenty-six of the Civil Service Amendment Act, 1908, and provide that any person placed in the Third Division upon the coming into force of that Act, and who had theretofore passed the Qualifying Examination, may be promoted from the Third Division to the Second Division by the Governor in Council upon the recommendation of the head of the Department based upon the report in writing of the deputy head.
2.	That sections twenty-nine and thirty and subsection one of section thirty-two of the said Act be repealed and that it be provided that in the Second Division the minimum and maximum salaries shall he as follows:-
In subdivision A, $1,600 to $2,100 ;
In subdivision B, $1,000 to $1,600 ; that in the Third Division the minimum and maximum salaries shall he as follows:-
In subdivision B, $500 to $1,000;
In subdivision A, $1,000 to $1,300 ; and that the minimum and maximum salaries for the positions of messenger, porter, sorter and packer and such other positions in the lower grades as are determined by the Governor in Council shall be $500 and $1,000 respectively.
3.	That it he provided that the Governor In Council may grant an increase of one hundred dollars to any clerk in the Third Division of the Inside Service of the Civil Service and to any person holding any of the positions mentioned in section thirty-two of the Civil Service Amendment Act, 1908, who
(a)	is reported by the deputy head to be deserving of such increase; and
(b)	is in receipt of a salary of less than one thousand dollars.
4.	That it he provided that any person now serving in either the Second or Third Division of the Inside Service whose salary is less than the minimum salary for such division as proposed by the second of the preceding Resolutions shall have his salary increased to such minimum.
5.	That it be provided that all increases granted under legislation to he based upon the third and fourth of the preceding Resolutions shall take effect from the first day of April, one thousand nine hundred and seventeen.
6.	That it be provided that nothing in the legislation to be based upon these Resolutions shall prevent any person from receiving any annual or other increase that may he granted to him under any other Act.
7.	That it be provided that any payments or increases authorized by any legislation based upon these resolutions he payable out of any unappropriated moneys in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada.
William Thomas White: Owing to the
conditions which have prevailed for some

time past, and which have been accentuated during the last few months of the war, it has been considered expedient to bring down legislation to provide for the increases and other changes set forth in this resolution. When I placed the resolution upon the Order Paper, I was under the impression that under section 33 of the Civil Service Act it* would be open to the Government to grant a minimum salary of more than $500. I find that that is not quite a correct understanding of the position, and I therefore have to suggest an amendment to provide that the minimum salary in subdivision A of the Third Division be $600 instead of $500. This minimum salary of $600 will also apply to the messenger, porter, sorter and packer class referred to in one of the provisions of the Civil Service Act, I have a further amendment to propose with regard to those in the Second Division, to the effect that the annual increase be $100 instead of $50 as at present provided. Substantially what is proposed is this: In the Third Division, the salaries in subdivision A, which are now from $900 to $1,200, will be from $1,000 to $1,300; and in subdivision B, where the salaries now .are from $500 to $800, they will be from $600 to $1,000. We further provide, with respect to the messengers, porters, sorters, packers, and certain other positions in the lower grades determined by the Governor General in Council under the Civil Service Act, that the minimum and maximum shall be $600 and $1,000 respectively. It is further provided, in order tr meet conditions as to the higher cost of living, that the Government may grant an increase of $100 to any clerk in the Third Division of the Inside Service, or to any person holding any otheT position mentioned in Section 32 of the Civil Service Amendment Act of 1908,- that is, messenger, sorter, or packer-who is reported 'by the deputy head to be deserving of such increase, and who has now a salary of less than $1,000.
The legislation will also provide that any person now serving in the Third Division of the Inside Service, whose salary is less than the minimum salary for such division, as proposed by these resolutions, shall have his salary increased to such minimum. That is, if a clerk is getting $500 he goes to $600, as that is the minimum which we provide. We propose further that the increases granted under this legislation shall take effect from April 1 last-that is they shall begin with the present fiscal year.
In order to meet what has been regarded by the Service and the Government as a grievance on the part of certain of the Service in the Third Division, who had passed the qualifying examination prior to the enactment of the present Civil Service Act, we provide that they may be promoted from the Third Division to the Second Division, upon the report in writing of the deputy head. I shall, if required, explain that more in detail when the section concerning it is under consideration by the committee. In order to provide for the amendments I have- indicated, I- beg to lay upon the Table the resolution in full, with the changes which I have suggested-namely,, the minimum salary raised from $500 to $600 in respect to those I have named; and' an increase of $100 per annum instead of" $50 -per annum in the Second Division.
'Mr. MURPHY:	Would the minister be
kind enough to explain the application of subsection 6 of the resolution?


William Thomas White: That means that they proceed as they do now, getting the annual increase to which they are entitled under the Civil Service Act.	.


Mr. MURPHY:: It will not prevent them from receiving any other increase?


William Thomas White: 'No. For example, a clerk receiving $600 will receive his $50 increase and he will receive in addition to that, if deserving, as I assume all or nearly all would be, $100; so that he will receive $750 or $150 over and above what he is getting now.


Charles Murphy: The phraseology seems
to indicate some other Act than the Civil Service Act " under any other Act."


William Thomas White: This will 'be the Act-the amending Act. The intention is that the present provisions of the Civ: Service Act will continue to apply.
iMr. DEVLIN: Will the minister be good enough to tell the House what the letter carriers will get by this resolution?


William Thomas White: This applies to
the Inside Service. I understand that the case of the letter carriers is under consideration 'by the Postmaster General. I stated some time ago that in so far as the Inside Service is concerned, we should deal with it by legislation and that in so far as the Outside Service is concerned, the matter would be dealt with in the Supplementary Estimates. Provision will have to be made in the Supplementary Estimates to the ex-

tent of the amount necessary to take care of the recommendations of the ministers with respect to the Outside Service.


Mr. DEVLIN:: Will the labouring classes, the carpenters, electricians and others receive absolutely nothing under this resolution?


William Thomas White: This resolution
's an amendment to the present Civil Service Act. Being an amending Act, it does not cover more than is covered by the present Civil Service Act. The case of those in the Outside Sewice as distinguished from the Inside Service will be dealt aa it is now dealt with under existing legislation in the Estimates and upon the recommendation of the minister. Take, for example, a customs official; the Minister of Custom's may bring before the Treasury Board, and through the Treasury Board to Council, a recommendation that $50 or ?100 be added to the salary of that , customs official. The money to pay for that increase is provided for in the Estimates. The Outside Service is always dealt with on the recommendation of the ministers through the Treasury Board 'by Council and by Parliament toy. assenting to the votes, which are contained each year in the Estimates.
' Mr. DEVLIN:	Does not the minister
think that the better way to meet the increased cost of living would be by giving the Service all round a bonus of $100 and by raising the yearly increases from $50 to $100?


William Thomas White: There are many considerations arising in connection with this question. In the first place, there is a desire on the part of all of us to do justice to the Civil Service. On the other hand, we cannot lose sight of the public. The salaries of the civil servants run from $500 to $5,000. When we get up to salaries ranging from $2,000 to $3,000 and $4,000, they are fairly substantial as compared with salaries outside. It is in connection with the lower grades of the Service that the pinch comes. I think we must have regard to public bpiiinionj I should doubt as to whether public opinion would be favourable to a wholesale increase in the salaries of civil servants. We have thought that we have reasonably met the situation-and I believe the Civil 'Service feel that we have done so-in dealing with the Third Division and with the Second Division by increasing the minimum and the maximum in the
fSir Thomas White.!
Third Division, by providing for annual increases of $100 instead of $50 in the Second Division and by dealing with messengers, sorters and packers in the way 1 have indicated. Having given the whole matter a great deal of consideration and having been in consultation with the representatives of the Civil Service, unless I am entirely misinformed, I think I am safe in saying that this Bill will substantially meet the situation as far as the Inside Service is concerned with which it purposes to deal. This does not mean that the Outside Service will not be dealt with. We are introducing legislation for the purpose of amending the. existing Civil Service Act which applies only to the Inside Service and which is necessary to meet present conditions.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: There is only one more point and I shall have finished. I have received several communications in connection with this .resolution and a good many along this line. Here is a man who writes to me and says that he was appointed in 1902, that he passed the qualifying examination in 1904, that in 1906 he was appointed to the junior second class, and that in the spring of 1908 he passed the promotion examination. In the spring of 1908 he had all the papers necessary for his appointment to the senior second class settled, but owing to a delay caused by the Treasury Board they were left on the shelf too long. The result was that on September 1, 1908, the Civil Service Act was passed and his papers were of no value. He was classed, a3 he then was, as a junior second class clerk and went automatically into class A of the third division. He was then getting $1,150. He got the $150 increase that was given to all the service at that time, but that only benefited him by the s.um of $50, as that put him to the maximum of $1,200. He represents that he has lost $2,000 since.


William Thomas White: You mean that he cannot take the examination that would take him out?


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: No. This particular man whose letter I read is in charge of a branch. He has a secretary and four clerks working under him and the clerks are receiving a higher salary than he gets. Others in the same department who have been working there 20 years are getting $1,200. I understand there are some such in the Post Office Department, others in the Interior Department, and others, again, in other departments. Will this resolution benefit that class in any rvay?


William Thomas White: If my hon. friend will observe "the first section of the resolution he will see that we propose to provide that any person placed in the third division upon the coming into force of the Civil Service Act, and who theretofore had passed the qualifying examination, may be promoted from the third to the second division by the Governor General in Council upon the recommendation of the head of the department, 'based upon a request in writing from the deputy head.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: At what salary would he go in? At the minimum, he gets $1,000.


William Thomas White: No. The point is this: when the Civil Service Act was passed in 1908 there were men in the Civil Service who had passed the qualifying examination and some the promotion examination. I believe I am within the mark in stating that the Government of the day did not intend that these men should be obliged to pass an academic examination to 'qualify them for higher positions. Nevertheless, on account of the attitude taken towards the legislation by the Civil Service Commission, men in that class have found themselves obliged either to take the [DOT]academic examination or to remain in that class, no matter what their office qualifications might be.
Now there are many men who have passed the age at which they could get up the work necessary to pass a stiff academic examination, quite the equivalent of university matriculation. I doubt very much if there is a man in this House who to-day could pass the matriculation examination, or even the entrance examination to the high school. I do not believe there is a man here who could pass the matriculation.


William Pugsley: I would not emphasize that too much.


William Thomas White: I doubt if even the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugs-ley) could pass the matriculation examination. I do not mean to say that if he applied his intelligence, great as we know it to be, to study for say six months or a year he would not be able to get through- barely get through.


Mr. MICHAEL CLARK:: Does not my hon. friend think that the hqn. member for St. John would persuade the examiners -that he had passed?


William Thomas White: Yes, I think if he tried to pass he would manage in some way to pass. At all events, it has seemed to us that this constitutes a real hardship. I am not blaming the Civil Service Commission. I am not passing any censure on them. No doubt they are discharging their duty as they see it, but it does seem to me that it is a real hardship that those men who had been in the service prior to the passing of the legislation should be forced to pass an academic examination to get out of that class, notwithstanding that they might be exceedingly competent in the duties of their office. Without elaborating too much on that, I may say that I have looked up the matter and I find *that in all Civil Service legislation passed prior to that date, the rights of those in the service were observed; and, further than that, I may say that, so far as I can gather from the debates, it was not the intention of the late Government that these men should be compelled to pass an academic examination in order to get out of that class. In proof of that I propos'e to read to the House one or two extracts from Hansard. For example, the Hon. Mr. Fisher, who I believe had charge of the Bill, said in the debates of the session of 1908, on page 11378:
The Civil Service is to-day established on certain lines; the men who have entered the Civil Service have entered it on certain conditions and are entitled to the consideration due to those who are in the place which they have attained to under certain laws, rules and regulations. We are proposing a new and more difficult entrance to the Civil Service, but we have to recognize the rights of those who are to-day in the service.
And then in the Senate Sir Mackenzie Bowell, at page 1600 of the debates of 1908, referring to the third class clerks, asked:
Will that officer be compelled to go before the new Commission and be examined again before he can be promoted?
The Hon. Mr. Scott, representing the Government in the Senate, replied:
I think not. It would not be fair. I do not think the Bill is intended to be ex post facto ; it is intended to be prospective. The Act will not go into force until September, because it will take some time to organize under it. It is quite impossible to fathom exactly where it will lead to, but I think I am quite safe in saying that an official who is now qualified for promotion could not be disturbed.
Then, Mr. Fisher, in dealing with the provision of the Civil Service Act which provided that men of this class might be eligible for promotion with or without examination, said:
With or without examination, as is determined by the regulations of the commission.
Then he goes on to say:
The principle adopted is to leave to the Commission the way in which they would obtain their information on which to base their certi-

ficate of qualification. They may do that on the record of the clerks in the department without making any examination, and they might on it give a certificate of qualification for a promotion. Or they might not think that conclusive, and they might prefer to hold an examination. They might also think it better to hold a competitive examination. They would not hold a competitive examination unless the head of the department nominated two or three different clerks in it for promotion.
It is perfectly clear to me that when the Civil Service Act was brought down, following the practice that had been adopted in previous legislation of the sort, it was the intention of the Government that those who were in the third class in the -Service should be eligible for promotion without having to pass a stiff examination, that is to say, if they had passed the qualifying examination. There has undoubtedly been a great deal of feeling in the Civil Service that there has been an injustice to that class. I think there is substantial ground for that feeling. I do not pass any adverse criticism upon the Civil Service Commission. They, no doubt, as I have said, are carrying out their duties as they think they	ought, but	the fact remainsthat under	that Civil	Service Act
a number of very capable men have been denied promotion because they have not been able to take the academic examination. I have taken the trouble to* make inquiry among deputies on whose judgment I feel I can rely, and they tell me there are many cases indeed of hardship in which men such as the man referred to by the hon. member who has just taken his seat, well qualified men, c-annot get out of that class because they cannot take a stiff academic examination.


William Pugsley: How would this work
out? I know a man who has been thirty years in one of the departments in the position the minister speaks of. He has three boys, I believe at the front. He is getting 81,200 after thirty years' service, being at the maximum of the third division. Under the resolution of my hon. friend, as I understand it, he can be promoted to the second division. That is the intention. But where would he go in the second division? You see the minimum of the second division, subdivision B, is 81,000. If he goes into the second division, unless the minister makes some provision, he cannot go in at a higher salary than he is now receiving, 81,200. Therefore, though he would get an increase in the future, he would get. no immediate increase, and I understood one idea the minister had, in view of the

present condition of affairs, was to give these junior clerks some immediate advantage to the extent of a couple of hundred dollars.


William Thomas White: Up to $1,000.


William Pugsley: It is not intended to go beyond that? Then the case of the clerks to whom I referred and whom my hon. friend has in mind-there are seventy or eighty of these who have been a long time in the service-would get no immediate benefit. The only advantage would be that they would get promoted to subdivision B of the second division without passing an academic examination.


William Thomas White: That is it.


William Pugsley: That is the only benefit these men would get.


William Thomas White: The benefit they get is that if they are recommended by the head of the department and by the minister, they are put in precisely the same position as if they had passed an academic examination. In other words, they are eligible for promotion as positions are vacant to which they may be promoted.


William Pugsley: They get no immediate
benefit.


William Thomas White: They get no -immediate benefit except this, that if they remain in the third division, we have extended the maximum of the third division, as my hon. friend will observe, to $1,300.


Mr. W. F. MACLEAN:: Can the minister say approximately to how many individuals these resolutions would apply and how many in each class; and also the total amount approximately of the increase in the Budget under these resolutions?


William Thomas White: I will toy to find out how many are in the Third Division and how many are in the class which we have just been discussing; namely, those who were in the service prior to 1908. My recollection is that about 400 who were in that class prior to 1908 may now the eligible for promotion if recommended by the deputy minister and the minister, without passing an academic examination. I will have the information when we are in committee after the second reading of the Bill.


William Pugsley: Why should n.ot a man who is by this measure promoted from the Third to the Second Division, and who has been for years at the maximum salary of $1,200, receive the new maximum of $1,300?


William Thomas White: I think we could provide for that in the Estimates.


William Pugsley: I would not do that; I would make it general.


William Thomas White: I would not think it desirable to lay down a general rule as to the amount an person should receive upon moving from the Third to the Second Division. Under the present Act the salaries ,of those in the Third Division run from $500 to $1,200, and in the Second Division from $800 to $2,100. The same anomaly, therefore, if there is an anomaly, exists under the present legislation; it has never been drawn to my attention That there was any hardship. I am rather of the opinion that promotion could take place to an equivalent salary in the Second Division; I will look into that point.


Mr. MORPHY:: The minister has not
' been been any too generous to what might be called the under-class of the service. Having regard to the present cost of living,
I do not see how any one, especially if he ' be a married man with children, can live pn $600 a year.


William Thomas White: We are giving
him more.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: 
William Thomas White: My hon. friend regards the minimum salary of $600 as too small. Some of those who entered the service are quite competent, others are entirely untrained. Very often these are young girls.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: Messengers, packers'and Sorters are not young girls.


William Thomas White: I am speaking of the third division; I will speak later of the class referred to by my hon. friend. In the opinion of some of the ablest deputies whom I have consulted about the matter, even $500 is a fair salary, having regard to conditions that prevail outside, for many at least of the young people who come into the service, and who have no practical training. On the other hand, that amount is, of course, not enough for a grown man, especially one who has a family, to subsist upon. We are regardful of that situation, and even at the risk of paying $600 to some of those whom I have mentioned-young, unqualified, not practically trained-we have determined, in view of the prevailing cost of commodities of all kinds, to make $600 the minimum salary for the third division. This, of course, applies to those clerks of whom I have been speaking. We have provided further-and I think this will apply to practically all in the third division-that for the present year the Governor in Council may give them $100 to meet the existing conditions. In addition to that, they get the annual increase of $50 provided by the statute, so that a clerk who is now getting $600 will receive this year $750.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: May receive, I should say, if he has somebody to get him a proper entre.


William Thomas White: I think that the ministers can be depended upon to see that the Act is fairly administered. We are establishing at $600 the minimum salary of that class, which includes messengers, packers and sorters, and the maximum at $1,000. The existing legislation provides a minimum salary of $500 and a maximum salary of $800. They also receive the $100 increase and the statutory increase of $50 as well, so that a messenger who received $600 last year will receive $750 this year. As to safeguarding the Tights of those who have gone overseas, I think that there are Orders in Council which have regard to those rights. It goes without saying that

anyone who is overseas and whose position is being preserved for him must, when he comes back, be given as good a position as he had when he went away.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: The minister thinks
there are Orders in Council? [DOT]


William Thomas White: I am positive
that there are Orders in Council. Unless I have the documents in front of me, I do not like to commit myself definitely, because I want to tell the truth, hut I believe that is the position. At all events, the hon. member may be assured that the Government will have in mind the right of those who have gone overseas to take up, when they return, as good a position as they would have had if they had remained here instead of doing as they have done, going to the front and offering up their lives.


Samuel Hughes: Are the civil servants who are serving at the front receiving the statutory increases the same as those who remain at home? I am told that they are not.


William Thomas White: I am speaking
again from recollection, but with some positiveness. I believe that this is the situation. At first, when a civil servant enlisted, it was provided that he should receive the salary which he was getting in the Civil Service. I think the annual increase was overlooked. My recollection, and my advice from my colleague here (Mr. ' Crothers), is that an Order in Council was passed to provide for the statutory increases being given.


Samuel Hughes: To those at the
front ?


William Thomas White: To those at the front, so that they will find themselves when they come-back in the same position as they would have been if they had not enlisted. If that has not been done, I can say it will be done, but I think it has been done.


George Eulas Foster: If it has not
been done, it will be done.


William Pugsley: I am informed that a
third Order in Council dealing with civil servants has recently been passed, under which a civil servant if he enlists receives no portion of his salary. Is that the case?


William Thomas White: I think an Order in Council of that nature has been passed, but that was in view of the. compulsory service legislation which is about to be brought down.	.


William Pugsley: That is not passed yet?


William Thomas White: At all events that point does not seem to be relevant to this matter.


William Pugsley: It is peculiar that the Government should pass an Order in Council in view of legislation that has not yet been considered.


William Thomas White: In regard to enlistments from the Civil Service, I have been informed by Civil Service representatives that the total enlistments
4 p.m. from the Civil Service at Ottawa are 981, and that the total enlistments from the Civil Service outside of Ottawa are 2,^27, making a total enlistment from the whole service of 3,808. That is stated to be an incomplete return, as no records of new enlistments have been received from several departments for some weeks past, and there is one department in which there is no complete record. This legislation applies to all who are at present in the Civil Service. If the compulsory service legislation is passed, as I believe it will be, then the Civil Service will be subject to its provisions just the same as individuals outside of the Civil Service. The Civil Service, it seems to me, is in the same position to-day as the rest of the community; that is to say, there has not been compulsory service enforced by the Government; the enlistment so far has been voluntary; it has been open to a member of the Civil Service, as it has been open to any one outside, to volunteer or not to volunteer, and this resolution which I have brought in applies to the Civil Service as it stands to-day, those who have enlisted and those who have not enlisted,


William Pugsley: It is a most extraordinary thing for the Government to pass an Order in Council discriminating, from the date of the passing of the Order, which I understand was about a week ago, against civil servants who may enlist, irrespective altogether of the coming into force of any compulsory service. I have seen it stated in the papers, and I am told it is true that an Order in Council has been passed providing that those members of the Civil Service who enlist after the passing of the Order shall not be entitled to receive any portion of their salary. That Order, in Council has been passed altogether irrespective of compulsory service, and indeed I think it is an extraordinary assumption for the Government to pass an Order in Council

the effect of which is to discourage civil servants from voluntary enlistment, and to state that that Order is passed in view of a compulsory measure which may or may not be passed. If I were a member of the Government I would not like to assume what the House of Commons or the Senate might do; I would rather wait until the measure was explained to Parliament and until Parliament had taken action with reference to it. The effect of this Order in Council is to say to every civil servant: If you enlist after this Order is passed you will be discriminated against; you will be treated in a different way from that in which other civil servants have been treated. It is in effect the Government saying to every civil servant: We do not want you to enlist. If my information is correct we have three distinct and contradictory provisions in regard to the Civil Service. We have one class of enlisted civil servants, who receive not only their military pay, but their full Civil Service pay; we have another class of enlisted civil servants who receive their military pay and the difference between their Civil Service pay and their military pay, and now, under this last Order in Council, we have another class of enlisted civil servants who will receive simply their military pay, and who have been deprived altogether of their Civil Service pay. It seems to me that is an extraordinary state of affairs to have three different provisions relating to the same class of boys who may enlist for service at the front.	-
While I am on my feet let me ask the minister why he makes this provision in paragraph " 3 " of the resolution:-
That it be provided that the Governor in Council may grant an increase of one hundred dollars to any clerk in the Third Division of the Inside Service of the Civil Service and to any person holding any of the positions mentioned in section thirty-two of the Civil Service Amendment Act, 190S, who
(a)	is reported by the deputy head to be deserving of such increase; and
(b)	is in receipt of a salary of less than one thousand dollars.
I know some seventy or eighty men who have been in that division of the Civil Service for 15, 20 or 30 years, and who, by reason of their long service, have risen to the maximum of $1,200. Why should not an increase be given to such men who have been so many years in the service and who have families? I know men who are receiving only $1,200 a year, who have sons at the front, and who, by reason of the high cost of living, are really in a state of distress. Yet they cannot get any increase at all because they have reached the maximum of $1,200, while a young man without any family, or a young woman who may have been but a few years in the service, will immediately receive an increase of $100, simply because, by reason of the short period of service, bis or her salary is less than $1,000. Why is that distinction made?


William Thomas White: The reason is that the man who has been those years-in the service receives a salary of $1,200, which, having regard to conditions outside, is a fairly substantial emolument. We are dealing with cases of hardship which arise in the Civil Service in cases of salaries under $1,000. If a man is receiving $1,200 a year he is 'better than a man who is receiving $700. There is more reason for granting an increase to a man who has only $700 a year than there is for granting an increase to a man who has $1,200 a year. My hon. friend is mistaken in his assertion that the man with a salary of $1,200 gets no increase.- We have increased the maximum from $1,200 to $1,300.
Mr. PUG8LEY: He does not receive that immediately?


William Thomas White: He will receive the annual increase this year. That is another point in connection with the service, and it answers the question that has been raised: Why not an increase over the whole service? It must not he overlooked that under the provisions of the Civil Service Act those who are in the first division, with a salary from $2,100 to $4,000, receive an annual increase of $100; that is, the man with $2,100 this year gets $2,200 next year, and every year he is $100 better off in salary.


William Pugsley: Where is that provided in the resolution?


William Thomas White: It is in the Act, which is not affected b'y this resolution.


William Pugsley: I thought it was $50.


William Thomas White: It is $100 in the first division, and $50 in the lower divisions. My hon. friend has referred to what he regards as the extraordinary anomaly of some members of the Civil Service receiving both military ^nd civil pay, while others receive only their Civil Service salary if that is greater than the amount of military pay they would draw, and he also referred to the latest Order^m Council. I am unable to speak authoritatively at the present time with regard to that Order in Council.


William Pugsley: Perhaps the minister
would bring it down.


William Thomas White: I would suggest that my hon. friend ask the Prime Minister with regard to that Order in Council; it is not immediately under consideration by the committee. With regard to the other two classes, when the war broke out we decided that those who enlisted from the Civil Service should receive both their civil and military pay. That was a generous action on the part of the Government, possibly over-generous, but I think at that time nobody imagined the war would extend over such a long period, or would develop on the scale it has. Many of the large companies in this country did the same thing. I think it was not believed by any one that our expeditionary force would grow from 30,000 to 50,000, to 200,000, to
300,000,	to 400,000, or 500,000. Having regard to the size of the expeditionary force which it was then thought we should send overseas, the. Government thought it proper at that time to do what many of the large companies were doing, namely to pay those who enlisted their full civil pay in addition to their military pay. Afterwards, when recruiting went on on the scale it did, we came to the conclusion that the civil servant would be put more on a par with those outside if he was paid only the amount of his civil pay, if that should be in.excess of his military pay. That appeared to be a fair dealing with the situation, and the expense runs into a very substantial sum of money indeed. That was the position up to the time the Order in Council was passed which my hon. friend has referred to, and about which I suggested that he speak to the Prime Minister, as I am not sufficiently familiar with its terms myself.


William Pugsley: Perhaps the minister would ask the Prime Minister. He is nearer to him than I am.


William Thomas White: I do not wish to discuss the Order in Council now, as it is net immediately before the House, but I _ will have no objection at all to bringing his suggestion before the Prime Minister.


William Pugsley: I thought that perhaps the Minister of Finance, being so prominent a member of the Government, might be able to get the Order in Council with less difficulty than I could, as it would take some time to get it by a formal motion. There are undoubtedly very great anomalies in regard to the pay of enlisted civil servants, and I think it is important that we should have this Order in Council.


Mr. J. L. CHABOT (Ottawa):: As one of the members representing the city of

Ottawa, where a large number of ladies and gentlemen are employed in the Civil Service, I desire to offer my thanks to the Government as well as to the Minister of Finance for their determination to do something to assist the civil servants, especially those of the lower grades. I think the proposal of the Minister of Finance is a fairly generous one, but I am sorry that he has not seen fit to increase the minimum salaries, especially in sub-division B of the third division, and also the salaries of messengers, porters, sorters, packers and such like. I think the minimum salary should have been made $600 or $700 instead of $500.
I wish to say a few words regarding the repeal of subsection of 2 of section 26 of the Civil Service Amendment Act of 1908. Personally, I have always looked upon that subsection, not merely as a hardship, but even a cruel measure, against the men who had been working in that class for many years. When that Act was put into force the men who had passed the qualifying examination were debarred from further promotion because they were unable to pass an academic examination such as few men in this House could pass without long preparation, and I am exceedingly glad that this subsection is going to be repealed.
I also hope the Minister of Finance will not overlook the claims of the men and' women of the Outside Service, who are working for a very low salary, and are certainly entitled to as much consideration as members of the lower grades of the inside service. I am sure the Outside Service here and elsewhere are performing their duties just ae efficiently as are the members of the Inside Service, and I venture to hope that the Government and the Minister of Finance will not overlook their just claim for an increase. They have to live in the same place as the inside servants, and the high cost of living affects them just as much as it does the inside-servants.


Mr. J. G. TURRIFF:: A civil servant
who joined the first contingent would get both civil and military pay. Will this increase apply to him?


William Thomas White: Yes.


John Gillanders Turriff: Does- not the minister
think that will cause some ill feeling? There may be two men side by side, one getting only the military pay and the other both military pay and say $1,200 a year. Now the Government proposes to increase the pay of the man who is getting $1,200-

more than the man beside him, and does not increase the other man's pay. That does not seem to one to be reasonable, and I think it will cause a great deal of dissatisfaction. Those civil servants who first enlisted are getting quite a big bonus over those who enlisted later. This seems to be a case of "For he that hath to him shall be given; and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath."


William Thomas White: Personally I do
not like to deprive any soldier of any emolument that he is receiving at the ^present time. There is this to be said for those who are receiving double pay. These men went forward on that understanding, and it does not seem to me that it would be just or proper to revise the conditions under which they enlisted.


Wilfrid Laurier: No one is suggesting that.


William Thomas White: After all, I do
not think the public interest is likely to suffer if these men who went forward with the first contingent, or shortly afterwards, and are in receipt of the double pay, are given a little more than possibly what on a strict business basis they might be entitled to. The same remark would apply to those who went forward on the understanding they would get their civil pay if that were in excess of their military pay. To meet the point raised toy my hon. friend, aJbout having to go to the deputy to obtain this increase, I would be willing so far as I am concerned to amend subsection A of section 3 if in the opinion of the committee any hardship is likely to result therefrom, and allow the Governor in Council to grant the increase upon the recommendation of the minister. If there is any considerable opinion in favour of it, on the part of the committee, I am willing that this should be done, but I believe that the matter is in good hands, that the Act will be administered fairly, and that no hardship will result.


John Gillanders Turriff: The minister evidently misunderstood the tenor of my remarks. I do not want to prevent the man who comes under the Order in Council from getting an increase. But why not give an increase to the man beside him, who is getting from $600 to $1,200 less? [DOT]


William Thomas White: That does not arise under this resolution.


George Perry Graham: This Government seldom does anything that pleases me, and when it
does I feel like making note of it. I am not sure that the Civil Service Act has hampered this Government as much as it hampered its predecessor. I find, for instance, that section 21 has been overworked by this Government. That is the section that provides that a person may enter the Civil Service without passing an examination, on the ground of having some technical qualifications. The action taken by the minister in allowing civil servants to be promoted from one class to another without passing an examination which he calls "academic," I think, is a good one, particularly as it applies to the old employees. A good deal of nonsense is . talked about Civil Service examinations-at least I think so. I always imagined, until I was enlightened on the subject by a few months' practical observation, that promotions would largely remain as they were and would be made on the recommendation of the deputy minister. Speaking practically, if I had my way, promotions should be altogether upon the recommendation of the deputy, he acting on the recommendation of the head of the branch in which the civil servant is employed. It is all very well to have an examination, but it may be that the individual who is least competent to pass an academic examination may be the one best fitted from the practical point of view for promotion. The same applies in any business; any one can apply it in his own office. While, generally speaking, it is better to have a high standard of education, yet education and practical qualifications are not always united in the same person. I found that in several cases when I was in charge of a department. The person who could pass the examination had to have the promotion, while the one who could not pass the examination . was, to my mind, better qualified for the position. "But," you say, "will that remove political pull and influence?" There must be a certain amount of confidence in a department, just as in a business establishment. The deputy minister must be a man in whom the Government and the public have confidence, one as well able to judge of the ability of officers of the department as the heads of branches under whom they work. Not many agree with me, perhaps, but I would go so far as to say that all promotions ought to be on recommendation, not of the minister, but of the head of the branch, countersigned and approved by the deputy minister. My hon. friend from North Perth (Mr. Morphy) rather thinks

that this power should be removed from the deputies. I think if he were at the head of a department, or sat at the council board for a time, he would change his mind.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: The hon. member misunderstood my views. I think the minimum salary should be fixed.


George Perry Graham: I was referring to promotion, not salaries. A member of tl)e Government is human; the members of this Government are exceptionally human so far as their friends are concerned. I am afraid that if the two members from Ottawa, whom I see here to-day and working very hard, both attacked the minister at once the minister could hardly repel them, he could hardly withstand their seductive influence. If the authority were in the minister's hands, he might suggest-the promotion of an individual whom the deputy would not recommend on his or her qualifications. Leave it in the hands of the deputy minister, and it will be near enough to the minister, while at the same time the minister will not be liable to the charge of exercising political preference as he would be if the matter were left in his own hands.
'Mr. CHA130T: I would go further than the hon. member for South Renfrew (Mr. Graham). I believe it would be in the interests of the country if the civil servants, Inside and Outside Services, were entirely under the control of commissions and beyond the pale of politics, both in regard to appointment and promotion.	,


Mr. FRIPP:: I have had some experience, as hon. members know, with regard to the Civil Service. I agree with the hon. member for South Renfrew that it would be the greatest mistake in the world to do away with the recommendation of the deputy minister. It would mean that the members for Ottawa for the time being would be deluged with requests from members of the Civil Service. I believe that it is in the interest of the Civil Service that promotions should be made on the recommendation of the deputy minister. My five years' experience leads me to believe that it would be in the interest of the Service if the civil servants were removed from politics and disfranchised. That is my judgment. If the minister would go that far, and not allow the civil servant to* vote or have any interest in the country politically, I think it would be to the interest of the civil servants as well as to the interest of the country at large: At present, there is a certain influence unnecessarily brought to bear on
[Mr. Graham, [	~
the members that I think should be avoided. I certainly think that the resolution, on the whole, is in the interests of the civil servant as well as of the country. Let the deputy minister recommend the increases. I am sure the civil servant himself [vill be perfectly satisfied to allow that recommendation to decide whether he is entitled to the increase or not. With regard to the members of the Third Division whp are to be promoted without passing an academic examination, there are between four and five hundred men who have reached the maximum of their class and cannot get out of that division, and who are earning $1,200 a year. They have certainly been under great hardship for some years past, particularly since the high cost of living has attacked us all. We all know that the man on salary is particularly hard hit by the increased prices. Another point to be remembered is that the civil servants cannot, like our trades unions, demand increases; they must depend altogether upon the generosity of the government of the day. I hope the House will accept the resolution as it stands. I am sure it will be acceptable to the Civil Service and that they will do their duty all the better as civil servants in consequence of the -legislation that it is now proposed to pass.


William Findlay Maclean: I also am in
favour of the Civil Service of this country, both inside and outside, being taken absolutely out of politics and put under the administration of a commission. I believe that all recommendations as to the promotions of civil servants should come from that commission and that there should be no outside influence as to appointment, promotion or anything else. I was under the impression that we had attained that some years ago when what we considered to be a sweeping Ao$ was put through this House and we established a Civil Service Commission of some character. Just what it is now, I do not know. But I am convinced that public opinion is in favour of taking the Civil Service, outside and inside, away from political influence and putting it in the hands of a board, non-political in character. I believe that appointments and promotions should be made absolutely from the point of view of the Civil Service, and I believe in treating fairly and paying decently those wlm are in the service. I believe that reasonable promotion ought to be provided for and that when promotion does take place it should be on merit and on the recommendation of a responsible officer of the department,.such as the deputy

minister or the officer in charge of the branch.


Mr. CURRIE:: There is just one word I
wish to add to this discussion. The idea of putting the service entirely under a commission is all right, but there is one objection to it as the system is carried out now. I think that the Government should take steps to see that appointments to the Civil Service are more equitably distributed. I have no objection to my hon. friends from Ottawa getting a fair proportion of the appointments, but -as nearly as I can make out sixty or seventy per cent of the appointments to the Civil Service in Ottawa-and now it ie getting worse-it is eighty or eighty-five per cent-are of people belonging to the city of Ottawa. There are other men and women in other parts of the country who are entitled to a look-in in the service. I took up the' matter of finding out who were in the Inside Service when the patronage of my. riding came under my purview, and on looking over the whole list I found that there had been just one man appointed to the Inside Service from North Simcoe in thirty years. I have no doubt there are other ridings in a similar position. I do not believe in this policy of the pork barrel, especially when the hand that goes into the pork barrel is only one hand, but I think we ought all to get a fair trial and that some new rule should be adopted by the different departments so that young men and women, and especially returned soldiers from other parts of the country outside of Ottawa might have a fair share of the jobs in the Inside Service.


Mr. BURNHAM:: The finest Civil Service in the world is the Indian Civil Service and appointment to it is altogether by examination. There ie no such thing as recommendation. The most influential man in England could not get an appointment to, or promotion in, the Indian Civil Service unless he passed the examination and got the proper standing. The door is open to the least influential person in the country if he has brains, aptitude and fitness. This business of recommendation is absurd. That there should be a difference between the conduct of the Inside and Outside Service is something that I cannot understand at all. Surely it is only reasonable that a commission should be allowed, without regard to partisanship or political preference, or anything of that sort, to manage the affairs of the service in such a way that those whose ability and fitness are indicated by their examinations should receive the preference. It seems to me strange that it should have been taken for granted that an examination must be on some abstruse mathematical problem or some extraordinary question in geography or history that a person might not be able to answer although he might have the aptitude and business for the work he undertakes. The examination ought to be of such a character as to have some reference to the man's employment. Surely it is not beyond the power of human brains to launch something of that sort. At any rate, we are not following out the best examples in other countries where the system has been worked out satisfactorily. It cannot be said that political recommendations by members for the Inside or the Outside Service-of course it is not for Inside Servio now-are in any sense to the advantage of the country.


William Findlay Maclean: Of all the absurdities of the present system one of the most conspicuous is that the men who happen to be the members for Ottawa should have the patronage of recommending people for appointments to a great service that should draw its candidates from all parts of the Dominion. We are creating by this partisan and political system a professional class of civil servants resident in the Capital. The service is administered largely on the recommendation of the local members and not with regard to the public interest. Again I desire to say that it is high time, especially in these critical war times when we wish to get value for every dollar that is voted by this House, that the administration of the Civil Service, outside and in, should be absolutely non-partisan and should be in the hands of a competent commission, and should not be the subject of political patronage. I am prepared to endorse what has been said by the hon. member for West Peterborough (Mr. Burnham) in regard to the Indian Service, from the very limited knowledge I have of it. Everybody knows that in England they have a much better administration of the public service than we have here, that the examinations are fair, that there is reasonable promotion, and that, most important of all, those in the service are not discouraged by the knowledge that unfair preference will be given to another member of the service by reason of political influence. That is the most disheartening thing in a service of this kind. By political influence people can get preference, better salaries and advancement over those who are perhaps doing better work but who have not the necessary political influence. Surely,

it is time to bring all this to an end and instead of patching up this Act as we are doing now-and it is only being patched up now in order to do justice to the lower grades of the service-we should take the service out of politics and put it in the hands of a commission where it will be fairly and justly administered. The commission should present to Parliament, or to the minister, a report reviewing the whole condition of the service, suggesting improvements and, if in times like this they think it is necessary to increase the pay of the service, recommending it to us. This would be an intelligent way of dealing with the matter.	'


John Léo Chabot: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a few words in reply to the hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) and the hon. member for South York (Mr. Maclean). I am sure they are labouring under a misapprehension in so far as the political power and authority of the Ottawa members is concerned. They could not at all have exaggerated, if they had attempted to describe, the tribulations and vicissitudes that we have to undergo with regard to the duties to be performed in connection with the appointment and recommendation of men and women to the Outside Service only. We have nothing to do with appointments to or promotions in the Inside Service than any other hon. member of this House because since 1908 all appointments to and promotions in the Inside Service are supposed to be made by the Civil Service Commission.


George Perry Graham: That word "supposed" is a good qualification.
Mr. C'HABOT:	Not only "supposed"
but should be made by the Civil Service Commission, which was appointed by the late Government. With regard to outside appointments, probably the Outside Service in Ottawa is more varied and more extensive than it is in any other constituency in Canada and that may toe the cause of so much trouble for the gentlemen who happen to represent this city when their party is in power. As I said, I agree with the hon. member for York (Mr. W. P. Maclean) that all civil services should be directly and absolutely under Civil Service Commissions, either under the present Commission, numerically increased, or a separate Commission outside of politics altogether. If that were done I am satisfied that this country would get a more efficient service.


William Findlay Maclean: If it is put forward that these promotions are to be political, I would keep a party ledger and I would make it the duty of the whips of the party in power to keep a ledger for each constituency, having regard to the population of the constituency.


George Perry Graham: Why not the card index system ?


William Findlay Maclean: Hold on nowand I would say that it would be their duty to see that outlying counties get their share of this patronage, if it is to be patronage. So I protest against it on two grounds, not only do I think it unfair and that it should not exist, but if that system is to be maintained, it should toe maintained on the basis of a fair distribution of these offices among the outyling constituencies as well as in the large centres, like Toronto, where there is a great deal of patronage in connection with the Outside Service. A large portion of that Post Office patronage might toe fairly distributed to other ridings adjacent to that city. I do not advocate either of these things. I agree with the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Chabot) that the Outside Service should be taken out of politics and administered by a Comission.


John Gillanders Turriff: I should like tp emphasize the remarks made by the hon. member for Ottawa (Mr. Fripp) that the Civil Service should be disfranchised. That is a position that I have taken ever since I have been a member of this_ House. It seems to me that there is no good reason why they should not he disfranchised. It does not injure anybody, and if a civil servant does not wish to lose his franchise it is easy for him to drop out of the service. I would even go so far as to say that we should not disturb the franchise of any man or woman now in the service, but that we should make a start and provide that from this time forward any man or woman accepting service under the Government should know that he or she no longer had the franchise.


William Thomas White: Like the judges.


John Gillanders Turriff: Exactly. I think it
would be a good move, a move in the right direction. I should like the Minister of Finance to give that phase of the subject some consideration. I should like also to emphasize what was said by the other member for Ottawa (Mr. Chabot), that is th]it the Outside 'Service should be put in the

same -position as regards recommendations tor appointments as is the Inside Service. The fact that the Inside Service was taken [DOT]away from politics -and put in the hands of the -Civil Service Commission relieved members of a great deal of unpleasant work, and it would 'be very much better to put the Outside Service in the same position. You -would certainly get a better class of civil servant, and it would be to the general advantage not only of the -Civil Service, but of the country as well.
-Mr. CURRIE: After all is said and done, the question of putting the Outside Service under a commission wpuld simply mean turning the offices -over to one party. That would hardly be fair because, as matters stand now-I am speaking as a member of this House-the party that left office in 1911 seems to be largely possessed with the -idea of getting office, and every day I am receiving letters from members of that party /who opposed me in the last election asking for offices. If they were disfranchised, I -suppose it would be all right, but the Tories do not get any office, they never get within gunshot of an office with this commission, and the Outside Service is their only chance.
Mr. MARCH.:	Will my hon. friend tell
us how many new appointments this Government made since they came into office?


Mr. BRADBURY:: The commission makes the appointments.
Mr. MICHAUD I read in this resolution that any person may be promoted from the Third Division to the Second Division by the Governor in Council u-pon the recommendation of the head of the department -based upon the report in writing of the deputy head. I remember that when the Civil Service Act was passed in which a deputy minister recommended himself for -an increase of salary of $1,000 and left a poor employee in his department, with a large family, at his former salary. That civil servant has been at the same salary for the last eight or nine years. I believe that in this particular case the deputy minister should not have anything to say, in so far as recpmmend-ation is concerned, because a great many civil servants will suffer by not getting the proper recommendation from the deputy minister.


John Hampden Burnham: I cannot understand
why some members of this House wish to disfranchise the civil servants. To my mind, that indicates very little faith in
humanity. It is -a very retrogressive step. If Parliament is going to endorse such a theory as that, that men accepting trifling positions and doing work commensurate with them, earning their salaries, are to be disfranchised because they are not supposed to have a due and proper interest in the country, then they are like those people who were employed by the Byzantine Empire or ancient Rome, they are practically made eunuchs of, as suspicion is at once cast on them. I think it is most unworthy position for any one to take.


John Gillanders Turriff: I did not propose that.


Charles Murphy: With the view of expjdit-ing the passage of the -hon. minister's resolution and later on of the Bill to be founded upon it, I should like to make a suggestion to him. The suggestion is based upon an occurrence in the House some weeks ago, of which I am certain my hon. friend has a recollection. He will recall that when the estimates were first, under- discussion this year attention was drawn to the fact that certain Orders in Council h-ad been passed, the effect of which was to abrogate certain sections of the Civil Service Act. One Order in Council in particular was mentioned as having been brought to the attention of the Returned Soldiers Committee. That is an Order in Council taking away from the Civil Service Commission the Tight of appointment to this Third Division and placing that right altogether in the hands of the minister of the day. A request was made at that time that a return or statement should be submitted to the House showing how many departments-how many ministers in other words-had availed themselves of this privilege, and to what extent the privilege had been taken advantage of in each department. I submit that that information should be before the House and the committee before we proceed in any event, with the Bill to be founded on this resolution. We ought to be in possession of that data before we discuss the Bill on the second reading.


William Thomas White: I have forgotten the circumstance.


Charles Murphy: I will send Hansard to the minister.


William Thomas White: When the Bill is in the committee, after the second reading, I will endeavour to get the information.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I was called from the
Chamber, and on my return I heard the



hon. member for Peterborough (Mr. Burnham) speaking against the disfranchisement of the civil servants. I want to place myself on record immediately as saying that I think every civil servant who is qualified ought to have the right to vote. The proposal to disfranchise the Civil Service is repugnant to me as taking away from th.e liberty of the citizen. Simply because a man happens to be working for the Government is no reason why he should not have the right to vote. There are two ways, however, of disfranchising civil servants: one by taking away their vote, and the other by muzzling them. A practice was in force-I hope it will not be continued at the next election-of dismissing a man simply because he voted for one party or for another. I have in mind instances of investigation into the conduct of officials, who were suspended or dismissed if their conduct did not tally exactly with the party view. In reading over the report of an investigation which took place in my county-I wish to speak particularly of matters of which I have certain knowledge-I found that a certain gentleman said to a friend whom he had in his drawing-room one evening after a meeting, that after all he thought Laurier was not a bad fellow. That is all he said; that was all that was brought out before the investigating commissioner. Had he said that I was or was not a bad fellow, and that, accordingly, he should or should not vote for me, I would not mind; but it seems absurd that he should lose his position simply because he said that the leader of a party was not a bad fellow. .That is what I call muzzling the civil servant and, therefore, disfranchising him; because if you take away his position by reason of his having voted a certain way, in effect you practically take away his vote. I agree with the member for West Peterborough that every civil servant ought to have the right to vote as he sees fit, I care not what party is in power.


John Allister Currie: Would the hon. gentleman go further and say that the civil servant has the right to go on the public platform and to canvass?


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: In three elections which I have run I have never made a complaint as to how any postmaster or civil servant acted during the campaign. I recognize that he is a citizen with rights similar to those which I enjoy, and that he is entitled to exercise those rights. The practice has prevailed around this part of the country, and I have never once complained of it. I do not see why a civil servant, as well as

any member of this House or any man who does not work for the Government, should not get on a public platform and give expression to his views.


Mr. WRIGHT:: The gentleman who opposed my hon. friend in the last election was the only person who had any reason to make complaint. I do not suppose there was any opposition on the part of civil servants in his riding.


Emmanuel Berchmans Devlin: I said that in the three elections which I ran I had never made any complaint.


Mr. GERMAN:: If civil servants pass the qualifying examination why should it be necessary that they be promoted to the Second Division only on the recommendation of the head of the department? I should think that no such recommendation would be necessary.


William Thomas White: No one is entitled to be passed into the Second Division unless there are vacancies in that division. If there are one or more vacancies in the Second Division the question arises as tc what persons in the Third Division who are-eligible for promotion shall be recommended for the positions. One would think that the best official to recommend them is the deputy minister. The fact, that -a man has qualified for promotion does not mean that he is ipso facto promoted. Promotions, therefore, to vacancies occurring in the Second Division through death or otherwise are made from the lowej; division on the recommendation of the deputy, concurred in by the minister.


William Manley German: I understood that the classification of employees into various divisions was a matter more of salary than of position. A person drawing a salary as clerk in the Third Division cannot draw the salary of a clerk in the Second Division, but I should think that it would not be necessary that there should be a vacancy in the Second Division in order to allow a clerk to draw the salary of the Second Division.


William Thomas White: They can draw only the salary which is within the limits of their class. The salaries of the First Division are higher than those of the second, and the salaries of the Second Division overlap, to a certain extent, those of the third.
Mr. GERMAN [DOT] That is by reason of persons having, by examination, passed from, one division to another?


William Thomas White: By reason of promotion from one division to another.


William Manley German: If a person in the Third Division passed an examination qualifying him for a position in the Second Division, I think that he should automatically get the salary of the Second Division.


William Thomas White: My hon. friend
is entirely mistaken.


John Allister Currie: In the Indian Service and in the British Service, promotion is based upon seniority, not upon the recommendation of a higher official. Has that principle been recommended here, or does the promotion of a civil servant depend entirely upon the deputy minister? Suppose that for one vacancy there are three candidates, one of whom has been in the service a year longer than the other two. Does that man get the position, or does the promotion depend altogether upon the recommendation of the deputy? One of the grievances in the English Service was that higher officials always had the say as to whether promotion should be made or not. In the army, seniority is recognized right through. The senior man always takes the command or the appointment-and that applies from the youngest soldier up.


William Thomas White: What happens
in our Civil Service is this: when vacancies are to be filled, the deputy considers those members of his staff most deserving of the appointment. He then makes a recommendation to the minister, which is passed on to the Council.	*
I do not think those in seniority are necessarily considered as being more eligible for a position than others. A good deal might be said in favour of that, but a man might be in the service for 20 years and be exceedingly incompetent, while a man who had been in the service but two years might be competent for the position. Qualifications being equal, I think the senior man should have the position.


John Allister Currie: In all other services outside this Canadian service there is an absolute rule that in the filling of an appointment the senior man gets it, and I think the minister ought to consider that question seriously because the deputy minister can tyrannize over a man and can keep him back for ten, fifteen or twenty years, even if he is a good employee, simply because the deputy has some grudge against him. The rights of seniority are the only rights of any kind in the service.
128*


Mr. COCHRANE:: What about fitness?


John Allister Currie: Fitness is tested by examination. If a man cannot pass the examination, that settles the question of his fitness. If he has passed the examination, then the question of whether he should receive an appointment or not should depend on the question of seniority. That is the only fair way of dealing with the matter.


William Thomas White: I find I have
available the information asked for by the hon. member for St. John, and I should like now to place it upon Hansard. I find that there are in the messenger grade, 452 employees. I am speaking now of the Inside Service to whom this legislation applies.


Charles Marcil: All in Ottawa?


William Thomas White: In Ottawa. There are 1,778 in the Third Division. There are 2,678 receiving $1,200 or less per annum. There are 1,758 receiving more than $1,200 per annum. The average salary of all permanent employees is $1,398. The total number of employees in the Inside Service including deputies, is 4,473. When the Bill is in committee after the second reading, I shall have an estimate showing the amount of increase in expenditure involved in connection with this legislation.


Charles Marcil: On the lines of what the hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr. Currie) has just said, I have in mind an official who is in subdivision "B" of the Second Division, and who was placed at the maximum of his class when the Civil Service Act was passed; that is, he was then receiving a salary of $1,600 a year. That is a good many years ago, but he has been left at that salary ever since; there has been no promotion for him, and there does not seem to be any promotion in store. A
5 p.m. good many others in the same branch have been promoted, but this man remains where he was. He has not been put into the class above, and I understand, before he can go there, he must be recommended by the chief of the branch, and that recommendation must be concurred in by the deputy minister and the minister. The minister will agree there is a case of hardship there.


William Thomas White: There may or there may not be.


Charles Marcil: This man has been there for nine years; others have received increases of $50 or $100, and others have gone into higher classes, but this man still

remains where he was when the Act was passed. I have personal knowledge of this matter. Does the minister not think that this man, having been placed at the maximum salary of $1,600 for years, and having satisfactorily fulfilled the duties of that *office, and now finding himself without any .advancement, is not being treated fairly?


William Thomas White: I am quite unable vto pronounce upon a ease of an official whom I do not know, and as to whose qualifications I have no information except the statement of my hon. friend. I should imagine, if this officer is a close personal friend of my hon. friend, that he would be intellectually -qualified for an advance. What I think should be done in a case of that kind is for my hon. friend to bring the matter to the attention of the deputy or the minister, and it can then be looked into, and if any injustice has been done, it might be remedied.


Charles Marcil: Apart from any question of favour, I think it is a matter of justice. There must be many in the same position as this man, and that is the reason why I drew the matter to the attention of the minister.
Resolution reported, read the first and second time, and concurred in.
Sir THOMAS WHITE thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 68, to amend the Civil 'Service Act.


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

George Eulas Foster: With the consent of the House I should like to revert to motions. Some time ago the House passed a resolution moved by Mr. Northrup, appointing a committee to take into consideration and report on the cost of parliamentary printing and other matters. That committee met to-day and it was the opinion of both si'des who were there represented that it would be advisable to join with the Senate in that investigation and report. As the Senate is to meet to-night and may adjourn thereafter, I should like, if there is no objection, to get this resolution up to the Senate before they adjourn to-night. I therefore move that we revert to the order for "Motions."


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.	.
Sir GEORGE FOSTER thereupon moved:
IMr. Marcil.]
That a message he sent to the Senate requesting that House to appoint a committee to act with that already chosen by this House to consider and during the present session to report the total cost, including incidental expenses, of each session of Parliament, and the best way, if any, of reducing the same.
John Allister Currie: The joint committee of
the House and the Senate on Printing have had this subject before them for several years. They have been continually endeavouring to reduce the cost of printing and other matters in connection with this Parliament. Recently another committee was appointed by the House to take up this very same .question. I do not think any matters will come before this new committee that could not very well be taken up by the Committee on Printing, unless possibly such questions as the pay of officials of the House and matters of that ki^id. I should like to ask the minister whether he does not think it would be well to let the one committee do the whole work, so that there would be no overlapping.


George Eulas Foster: I think this new committee probably goes further than the old committee. As the committee has already been appointed by the House and is going on with its work, there is something to be gained and nothing to be lost by associating the other House with it.



UNIVERSAL RADIO SYNDICATE, LIMITED.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. J. D. Hazen (Minister of Marine) the House went into Committee to consider the following proposed resolution, Mr. Blain in the chair:-
That it is expedient to repeal the Ocean Telegraph Act, chapter fifty-two of the Statutes of 1913, and to authorize the repayment to the Universal Radio Syndicate of the balance remaining unpaid of any deposit made by the syndicate with His Majesty, after deducting any money due by the syndicate to His Majesty.
William Pugsley: Will the minister kindly explain?


Mr. HAZEN:: 
William Pugsley: The resolution does not seem to be open to very great objection except on this point, that, apparently the ten thousand -pounds-


John Douglas Hazen: Dollars.


William Pugsley: all events, the arrangement is made with the Marconi Company for the performance of the service. This is the first I have heard of the matter, and perhaps my hon. friend will allow the committee to rise now, with a view to sitting again when there is a fuller attendance, as possibly some hon. members may desire to speak on this subject. Meantime the agreement that has been referred to might be brought down.


John Allister Currie: Has this syndicate any
connection with the German Telefunken company which handles wireless?


John Douglas Hazen: I think not.


John Allister Currie: I understood at the time that it was part of that concern. However, I do not see any reason why the resolution should not go through and the agreement be brought down on the second reading of the Bill. That would expedite the matter.


William Pugsley: That might- do.


John Douglas Hazen: The Act to be repealed
was assented to in June, 1913, and the agreement for the radial telegraph communication is embodied in the Act, so that any hon. gentleman who wishes to look at this agreement has only to turn to the statute. Perhaps I did not make it clear that the $25,000 went back to the company because they had fulfilled the bond. They were to have $25,000 returned to them when they had spent $50,000, half of it in Canada, and the money was returned because they had fulfilled the conditions. Then, as they had difficulty in carrying on operations, it was decided to lend them $15,000 which came out of the remaining $25,000. The suggestion that the hpn. gentleman makes is one for consideration. We might pass the resolution with the understanding that when we go into committee on the Bill I shall )be able to say whether I think the course proposed desirable or npt, and it can be discussed.
Resolution reported and agreed to.
Mr. HAZEN moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 69, to repeal the Ocean Telegraph Act.
Motion agreed tp and Bill read the first time.	'



SUPPLY.


[Stage Direction]
On motion of Right Hon. Sir George Foster for Committee of Supply:
[Mr. Pugsley.J
Mr. CLARENCE JAMESON (Digby) moved:: That all the words after "that" he struck out and the following substituted therefor: "In the opinion of this House, in view of the food shortage with which this country is confronted, and for the purpose of materially increasing the resources and food supply of Canada, a Department of Fisheries, under a separate minister, should be forthwith organized.
He said: It is obviously the duty of any member of this House to bring to the attention of the Government and of the country any project the adoption of which he conscientiously believes will add to the resources .or food supply of Canada during the serious years with which we are confronted. This being so, I desire to present to the House very briefly the opinion which I enr tertain regarding the absolutely essential action to be taken by this Government in order to render vastly more productive an important source of food 'supply, namely, the fisheries of this country.
For many years the reports which successive ministers have laid upon the table of this House have reiterated the statement that the fisheries of Canada are the most extensive in the world. So far as possibilities are concerned, that statement is absolutely correct. The geographical position of Canada in that respect is unsurpassed.
The wholesome sea is at her gates,
Her gates both east and west.
But, in so far as results are concerned, the departmental statement is, unfortunately, entirely misleading. If we consider the value of the product of fisheries of certain .other countries, we find the following. I give the results in round numbers, because I am no more fond of statistics than is this House:
United States	$76,000,000
Great Britain (before the war) ..	75,000,000
Norway, in 1915	 50,000,000
Japan	 4-5,000,000
Canada, in 1916	 35,860,000
Looking more closely at the reports of the Canadian fisheries, we find the following results:
Value
of Products.
1896	$20,470,000
1916 	 35,860,000
The increase of 75 per cent on the face of it, might perhaps appeal to the casual reader of the report as being fairly satisfactory. But, it is a fact-I do not know how broadly it is recognized-that within the same twenty years the average market value of Canadian sea foods

has advanced over 67 per cent. Consequently the increase in' the production of sea foods of Canada within that time has ibeen rather less than 8 per cent, which is much more than inade up by the increase in the quantity of salmon taken in the British Columbia fisheries. The capital invested in the fisheries in 1896 was $9,826,000 and in 1916 it was $25,-
855,000,	and the cost of operation has proportionately increased during the same period. In other words, it has been of late years costing us $2.50 to produce the same quantity of sea foods that in 1896 we produced at an expenditure of $1.
It is not a pleasant thing to contemplate, but it is a fact, nevertheless, that in so far as production is concerned, the fisheries of Canada have practically stood still during the past twenty years. This has been due, in the main, to four things-lack of attention, lack of appreciation, lack of vision, and lack of intelligent, progressive policy. Instead of $35,000,000, the fisheries of Canada should to-day be yielding $60,000,000, * and in five years they could 'be made to produce $100,000,000 annually. We all remember, not so very many years ago, when the wheat fields of the West first yielded a $100,000,000 harvest. What a great shout went up from the people of the country, and how the newspapers, East and West, commented on the splendid achievement. But, we had waited 25 years and had expended hundreds of millions of dollars in building railways and elevators to make that result possible. Are -not $100,000,000 drawn from the harvest of the seas of equal economical value to this country? Mr. Speaker, they are not only equal but more so, because the wheat fields of the West require cultivation, while the sea fisheries do not. Why have we not recognized and profited by that obvious fact? The reason is because the fisheries have always been neglected; because they are to-day, and havie been for years, a mere adjunct of the Naval Service Department, which in turn, is an adjunct of the Marine and Fisheries Department under one minister. No man, even though he be a demi-god, could successfully conduct the fisheries of Canada as at present organized. One naturally asks why this is so. Sir, the answer is not far to seek. In the first place, how is the time of a minister of the Crown occupied? Let us take the case of a reasonably industrious minister; one who spends six out of the seven days of the week toiling away in his office in the Capital. One full day at least
of the week is occupied in answering correspondence; one full day in the week is occupied in receiving delegations and callers; two full days in the week are occupied at Council attending to matters pertaining to other departments; one day in the week, perhaps, is devoted to matters of general policy, and, possibly, politics; while if this House is in session, one full day in the week is spent in this Chamber, leaving at .best one full day in the week devoted to attending to the special duties appertaining to his department. I would like to digress just for one moment to point out ' that, aside from agriculture, the chief items of our annual production in raw material in 1915 were:
Lumber	 $61,919,000
Coal	 32,111,000
Nickel	   20,492,000
Gold	 18,977,000
Pulpwood	  15,590,000
Copper	 17,460,000
Silver	 13,228,000
Pig iron from Canadian ore .. ..	1,715,000
Being for the most part under provincial control and under the especial care of many provincial departments of Government, they were in the main very well cared for. The fisheries of Canada yield $35,000,000, according to the departmental blue books, and in what relation do they stand to the Federal Department of Marine and Fisheries? Let us turn to the list of services in that jdepart-ment, and we will find that they number 37, of which the fisheries is one. I think I should read the list:
List of Services Attended to By Marine and Naval Service Departments. Lighthouse Construction and Maintenance, Lighthouse Board,
Dominion Steamers,
Harbour Commissioners,
Harbours and Harbour Masters,
Wreck Statistics and Investigations,
Wreck and Salvage Contracts,
Ice Breaking,
Live Stock, Shipments,
Meteorological Service,
Marine Hospitals, Port Doctors, Sick and Distressed Seamen,
Masters and Mates,
Shipping Masters,
Pilotage,
Navigation Schools,
Removal of Obstructions to Navigation, Registration of Shipping,
Port Wardens,
Licensing of Ships During War,
Requisitioning of Ships During War,
St. Lawrence Ship Channel,
Marine Signal Service,
Sorel Shipyard,
Steamboat Inspection,
Examination of Steamboat Engineers, Wharves and Wharfingers,
Water Lots in Public Harbours,

Inspection of Ship's Tackle,
Safety of Ships and Prevention of Accidents, Naval Service.
Stores,
Survey of Tides and Currents,
Hydrographic Survey,
Radio Telegraphs,
Canadian Arctic Expedition,
Life Saving Service,
Fisheries Protection, and Fisheries.
Which of these 37 services of the department is it that occupies the minister's one available day of the week? The fisheries, as I have pointed out, is the one single productive service in the department. Do you suppose the fisheries get the minister's one available day for the week? If you will excuse me the expression, the fisheries do not get a "look-in." Who looks after the fisheries branch? Not the minister, because the minister has not the time; not the deputy minister, because his 'time is otherwise fully occupied. It is the superintendent of fisheries, a man with little authority, and a man who cannot make any recommendation in the matter of policy, I venture to say, unless specially requested to do so. In any case his time is fully occupied by the thousand and one details of his department which arise daily. Hence the fisheries do not get, and cannot get, fair play in the department, and, in my opinion, they do not get fair play in this House. Few members take any interest in them, while the discussion of any matter pertaining to the fisheries is the signal generally for a thinning out in the attendance of this Chamber. Let me give an illustration. Last year, upon a resolution introduced by myself, a committee was appointed to investigate the spread in price of sea foods in Canada. That committee held twelve sittings. The minister never attended a single session of the committee. I am quite prepared to admit that his time was otherwise fully occupied. The deputy minister never attended a single sitting of the committee, and I am prepared to admit that his time also was fully occupied. The superintendent of fisheries was there and rendered excellent service, but, as I have pointed out, he has no authority. That committee made a report which was presented to this House. That report was to have been discussed on the last day of the session along with the reports of the committees on pensions and public printing. That was the arrangement; I made it myself with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Marine. But it was never carried out, because the first named committee, quite unnecessarily I think, occupied almost every moment of the time.

I repeat, therefore, that the fisheries of Canada, which could be made to produce $100,000,000 per annum, have been neglected and ignored for years; both by the department and this House. Just here I will make the observation, if I may be permitted, that my experience in this House has forced me to the conclusion that economic questions do not invite that consideration to which I think they are entitled. That has probably been due to the fact that our political problems have been vexed and perplexing, and that the natural wealth of the country has been great and its development rapid, if not feverish. But the time is coming, if, indeed, it is not already here, when economic questions will engage the attention of this Parliament, and when mere questions of party and of the respective and relative advantages of the "ins" and the "outs" will be pressed back into second place. There are those in this country who desire to see the Dominion rounded out by bringing Newfoundland into the Confederation family. The ancient colony has not hitherto shown any great anxiety for the union, and I am not certain that she can even be induced to become a war bride.	Many
reasons are given for her indifference in this respect, but I think at the heart of it all is the fact that the great majority of the male population of Newfoundland are engaged in the fisheries, that almost $11,000,000 of her annual export of $14,000,000 is derived from the fisheries. They are opposed to Confederation, I think, because they say Our fisheries have advanced while those of Canada have practically stood still; why should we exchange a policy of progress, development and growth for one which is just the reverse? And why is it that the fisheries of Canada are in that unhappy position? The reason is that they have never had the first care and attention of the head of the department nor, under present conditions, will they ever get it and the two problems of economical production and economical distribution have been unsolved. In this condition of affairs one naturally asks, what is the remedy, what can be done? In my opinion there should be organized a Department of Fisheries with a separate minister responsible to this House and to this country. The fisheries of Canada are surely big enough and exten- >
sive enough and important enough to warrant this. A Minister of Fisheries would find his time fully occupied for several years to come in grappling with and solving of the two great problems of economical production

and economical distribution of sea foods in this country. Such action is furthermore necessary in order to reassure the fishermen and the fishing interests of this country. It is certainly necessary in order to command attention and respect for the fisheries of this country in this House. Above all things it is necessary in order to secure respect for the fisheries and the fishing interests from the transportation companies and concerns operating in Canada. So long as the present system is continued the present conditions will prevail, and this country will fail to reap tens of millions of dollars which might, under proper conditions, be drawn from the har-. vests of the sea. I am not charging this Government with especial negligence in this matter. They are merely following, or I might say perpetuating, the policy which they found upon coming into office, a policy which, indeed, has been pursued by all governments more or less indifferently since Confederation. But, Sir, to-day with the highest authorities gravely assuring us that the world's food supply will be seriously impaired during the years which are even now upon us; with Professor Cudmore of Toronto University pointing to the fact that the world's wheat harvest of last year was about 960,000,000 bushels less than the year before with men of the calibre of Lord Shaughnessy telling us that if we are to survive economically we must get out of the habit of thinking and acting in ruts; with the hon. the Minister of Finance praying for greater economy on the one hand and the hon. the Minister of Trade and Cominerce preaching increased production on the other, I say, with this array of unquestionable testimony before us as to the necessity of the hour, would it not be little short of criminal for us to stand idly by and fail to avail ourselves of the almost unlimited supply of sea foods at our very door? We cannot do it organized as we are; we can do it by proper organization wdthout involving additional expense. Therefore I say to this Government, as to men charged with the gravest responsibilities, organize a Department of Fisheries, place the portfolio in the hands of a man of ability, courage and vision, from within this House or from outside of it, I care not which, nor am I particular as to what his political antecedents may be-and support him in carrying out a policy which is calculated to meet the national requirements.


Mr. H. H. STEVENS (Vancouver):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to second the motion of the hon. member for Digby (Mr. Jameson),
I wish to say a very few words. It is not my intention to quote any statistics or to go into any details in the general argument or suggestions which I purpose making. First, I wish to emphasize and to support the statements of the mover of the resolution as to the food value of fish. I think the food value of fish is now admitted by all, and the only thing that we lack in this country is a due appreciation of the quantity of this food material that lies at our doors,ready for use and proper exploitation. My hon. friend has pointed out that the annual fish production of Canada, which is valued at approximately $35,000,000, can be doubled, and, perhaps, trebled. There is no question that fish is an excellent substitute for meat, the cost of which has so abnormally increased. A movement was recently set on foot in the Motherland to increase the consumption of fish with a view to reducing the consumption of meat and helping to bring about that economy which is so necessary under present conditions. That fish, therefore, is of great value as a food cannot be disputed, and my hon. friend deserves commendation for bringing to the attenion of the House the matter of the exploitation of our fisheries.	'
The administration of the fisheries is practically an appendage of the Marine and Fisheries Department. I would not for a moment reflect upon the Minister of Marine and Fisheries by saying that the Fisheries Branch of his department is not properly administered. Without question, the minister has given his best services to that work, so far as he has 'been able to do so. But many matters of importance come under the jurisdiction of the Marine and Fisheries Department. There is the control and direction <?f navigation in Canada, a matter of very great importance indeed. The matter of pilotage is also an important one, the regulations in connection with which require constant revision and supervision. The administering of the great harbours and their foreshores is also part of the duty of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. These matters, together with the administration of naval affairs, now occupy a very large part of the minister's time. I do not think that the House, or the country, expect one minister to assume a task that is beyond the capabilities of one man. That principle was recognized by the House; it has been recognized since war broke out by the appointment of an assistant to the Minister of Militia and of another, I think, to the Minister of Finance. I am not suggesting that in this case an under-secretary

would fill the hill, (because the administration of the fisheries is sufficient to occupy the full time of a minister appointed for that special purpose.
Another thing which must not be forgotten, is that Great Britain built up her position as a naval power upon the fisher-folk of the British Isles, who form the first line of defence of the United Kingdom, as the fishermen here form our first line of defence in Canada. A few years ago the Maritime Provinces, and particularly the province of Nova Scotia, contributed to the seafaring element of our population the finest class of men produced by any nation. Two or three years ago, sixty-five per cent of the captains sailing in and out of the port of Vancouver came from the province of Nova Scotia. Through the failure of the governments of Canada during the last thirty or forty years to take steps in regard to the matter-I am referring now more particularly to governments preceding this one, though the condition still prevails to some extent-the fisheries of the coast have passed largely into the hands of Japanese or foreigners. Twenty years ago one would see scarcely a single Japanese fishing in northern British Columbia or north of the Fraser river, but to-day a large majority of those fishing on the Pacific coast are Japanese. It is not my desire to reflect on the Japanese, but I contend that it is the duty of Parliament and of the people to conserve Ifor British citizens, native-born if possible, this valuable franchise of the right to fish.


John Douglas Hazen: Are not many of these
Japanese British subjects?


Henry Herbert Stevens: The minister's suggestion is quite right, but the point is that these people have become British subjects simply for the purpose of securing a fishing license. On the Pacific and Atlantic coasts the fisherfolk form, as I have said, our first line of defence, and if you build up a strong, intelligent and prosperous community of fishermen along our coasts, the result will be an immense benefit to the country not only in the way of production, but also in the way of defence in time of war. A commander of one of the British cruisers a few months ago told me that when he was in the service on the Canadian. Atlantic coast there passed through his hands several hundred recruits from the Maritime Provinces and Newfoundland who were as fine a class of men as could foe found. I mention this merely to show the value of these

men to the country. The greatest service is being rendered to the Mother Country to-day by mine sweepers in the seas surrounding Great Britain, manned by the crews of the trawlers of England's great fishing fleet. This will impress the House with the necessity of building up the fishing communities on our sea coast and the undesirability of allowing our fisheries to drift into the control of aliens or of nationalities that are not as sympathetic with us as we should like. I do not wish to criticise the minister of the department, but I do submit that our fisheries are of sufficient importance to justify the establishing of a separate department for their administration, that department to be in charge of a minister of the Crown. Not only would this be a step in the interest of the production and distribution of food, but it would build up among the fisherfolk along our coasts a race that will maintain the traditions of the fisherfolk of our Empire.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


John Douglas Hazen: I stated the other evening that it was my intention when the Fisheries' Estimates came before the House, to make a statement regarding the activities and progress of the department during the past year. It was suggested by my hon. friend from Guysborough (Mr. Sinclair) last year, that I should make such a statement, and I always like to accept a good suggestion no matter where it comes from. In view of the fact that the fisheries .question has been brought before the House this afternoon by my hon. friend from Digby (Mr. Jameson) on the motion to go into Supply, it occurred to me that this might be even a more fitting time to make the statement that when the Fisheries' Estimates come before the House. I think this is especially desirable in view of the fact that the Marine and Fisheries Committee after a number of meetings during last session made a report to the House which contained many valuable suggestions.
I regret to say that I was not able last year to attend the meetings of that committee, for the reason that in addition to the work of my own department which, according to the hon. member for Digby, embraces almost 37 departments, I had thrown upon my shoulders during the session the work of the Department of Agriculture to a con-

siderable extent, as the Minister of Agriculture was suffering from injuries sustained during the burning of the Parliament buildings. In addition to that I was also acting as chairman of the Pensions Committee. With all these duties on my shoulders, I regret to say that I found it impossible to attend the meetings of the Marine and Fisheries Committee last year. As I have said they made a very valuable report to the House, and their suggestions have been given every consideration by the department, and I propose now to let the House know just what action we have taken in regard to them, before discussing more particularly what was said by my hon. friend from Digby and my hon. friend from Vancouver City (Mr. Stevens) this afternoon.
Unfortunately it is still no easy task to afford adequate protection to the fisheries that require it. Hence, a great deal of the department's work is essentially of a negative character. While this work is of the utmost importance, and is exacting on time, the affirmative side,-the doing of things to increase the knowledge of the fishermen in the life history of fish, to enable them to catch more fish, to prevent them losing valuable time, to encourage the better handling of fish, so that the fishermen will get more for their catches and the public a better article of food, to provide better facilities and cheaper rates for the transportation of fish, to bring to the attention of the public the value, cheapness and general excellence of fish as food, and the keeping up and increasing of the supply of certain kinds of fish by artificial hatching-is from year to year receiving more attention.
Last session the Select Standing Committee on Marine and Fisheries made an exhaustive investigation into the spread in price of sea foods. The valuable report and recommendations and evidence procured, which were submitted by the committee to the House, will still be fresh in the minds of the members. The recommendations made have been acted on by the department, and as far as possible they have been effected. It may be best to cite the recommendations and summarize the action taken thereon. The first recommendation was:
1.	That inspection of transportation of sea foods, and organization of the distribution thereof, be undertaken by the Department of Marine and Fisheries, somewhat along the lines already inaugurated by the Department of Agriculture in respect to certain farm products.
A young man, Mr. Leonard, of St. John, who has been brought up in the fish business, and who is consequently familiar with the requirements in transportation, was appointed inspector on the 1st July last, and was continued in such position until the end of September. His headquarters were at Mulgrave, Nova Scotia. The Canadian Government railways did everything they could to facilitate his work, including furnishing him with transportation, good for express or freight trains, so that he was not only in a position to see and direct the handling of shipments of fresh fish at the very important shipping and transhipping point, but was enabled to accompany shipments from place to place and see the conditions at other important shipping points. On the whole he found conditions fairly satisfactory. Following suggestions made by him, the railway arranged to make some improvements for the icing of refrigerator freight cars and the marking of such cars on the outside so as to minimize the danger of their being disconnected from the train at switching points, and so delayed in reaching their destination. It will be remembered that it was regarded by some as necessary that refrigerator express cars should be available for local shipments as well as for through shipments. Experiments made by the inspector proved this not to be so. Fish packed in a liberal supply of ice reached their destination to points in the Maritime Provinces in perfect condition when forwarded in ordinary express cars. It is not considered that it will be necessary to again employ an inspector, at least for the present. The second and third recommendations were:
2.	That the express facilities be so improved as to insure daily transportation of sea foods from the east by means of the chilled car service.
3.	That the refrigerator ear service for the transportation of sea foods be so improved as to render it available on express trains.
In order that the conditions and requirements might be most perfectly understood by both sides, last spring a conference was called by the department of representatives of the, railways, express companies and fish merchants. It was of a highly satis-i factory nature, and resulted in a clear understanding of the difficulties on both sides. The railway undertook to overcome as far as possible, the obstacles to the more general use of the refrigerator fast freight service, and though it has made consistent earnest efforts in that direction, it must not be overlooked that the movement of

troops and war equipment has necessarily seriously handicapped such efforts.
The putting on of a refrigerator express service was subsequently taken up with the manager of the Canadian Government railways. It was found that the existing refrigerator cars are really not safe for use on fast passenger trains, and apart from the undue cost of new cars at the present time, they could not be speedily built. It was arranged, however, that the railway would insulate a portion of one of its large express baggage cars for fish transportation and run a *weekly refrigerator service from Mulgrave to Montreal, shipments from Halifax being consolidated at Truro, and if it transpired that this was used to such an extent as to require additional space, further cars would be so arranged. This service was in operation up to the end of November. While it was the best that could be done at that time, it has not proved fully satisfactory. Apart from the lack of proper rolling stock, the heavy loading of the passenger trains involves serious difficulties. Were the express shipments and mails sufficient to warrant special trains, the difficulty would be minimized. This question is being kept in the forefront by *the department.
The fourth recommendation was:
That the consolidation of shipments for different points in the express refrigerator car, on the basis of carload express rates, to the farthest point, and the opening of car in transit to set down fish at different centres en route, would materially aid prompt and economical distribution of sea foods.
The express companies, after full consideration of this recommendation, intimated that they are unable to comply with it.
The fifth recommendation was:
That a carload lot express rate, substantially lower than the L.C.L. rate, should be fixed on sea foods from the east.
The companies maintain that the existing L.C.L. rate is as low as a C.L. rate should be, and that they therefore cannot reduce it.
The sixth recommendation was:
That the minimum freight carload quantity, on the Government railway be reduced from a new scale of 24,000 pounds to the former scale of 20,000' pounds, in the case of fresh sea foods, and from the new scale of 30,000 pounds to the former scale of 24,000 pounds in the case of cured sea foods.
The railway agreed to do this, and it was put into effect early last summer.
The seventh recommendation was:
That transportation companies should give special attention to the movement of cars con-
	*
taining perishable food commodities, to secure delivery thereof without deterioration.
This matter was taken up with the railways, and, as previously indicated, in fast freight shipments the cars are being specially marked on the outside, and every care is to be taken of express shipments.
The eighth recommendation was:
That an exclusive express service operated by the Government be inaugurated on the Intercolonial Railway and Prince Edward Island sections of the Government railways, as a preliminary to any general scheme for the nationalization of express business In Canada.
As this is a matter for the Railway Department in the first instance, it was referred to the minister of that department, who will no doubt be in a position to state what conclusion has been reached.
The ninth recommendation was:
That the fish diet be made a special feature on the Intercolonial dining cars, the price not to exceed the cost and expense of serving the same, as shown by the evidence.
(Note.) This would be In line with the policy of certain important railways which make a special feature of food products peculiar to the country traversed by such railways, tending to increase the consumption and- advertise the product.
While the Intercolonial Railway has not made a low rate on fish in its dining ears, it is specializing on fish, and calling attention to it by special menu cards.
The tenth recommendation was:
That an active publicity campaign be organized by a competent person to promote an increased demand for sea food in Canada.
In view of the fact that the demand for fish is expanding so rapidly as to make production a real problem, it was considered best to defer action on this matter for the present.
The eleventh recommendation was:
That the department have made, for demonstration purposes:	(a) An inexpensive refrigeration box, suitable for use in retail fish stores, in which fresh fish can he attractively displayed without, risk of deterioration; and (b) a portable refrigerator, suitable for use in the distribution of sea foods in towns and cities; and that plans and specifications thereof, with estimate .of cost, be furnished by the department upon application.
After considerable experimenting the department devised a cheap but attractive and efficient showcase. The names of companies in different parts of the country prepared to manufacture it, and the prices, were procured and pamphlets descriptive of it were prepared and distributed to the trade, and intimating that on

application the names and prices of such companies would be given or, if preferred, working plans and specifications would be furnished free to any one desiring to have a case built locally. The wholesale fish firm of D. Hatton 'Company of Montreal, has recently informed the department that it has 200 of these show, cases built, and that it is distributing them amongst the retail trade.
Up tp the moment no practical appliance of the character suggested, has been devised, and none can he found to be in use anywhere. The twelfth and thirteenth recommendations were:
That the existing scale of Government aid in the transportation of certain sea foods by express be for the present continued under regulations as to methods of shipments, and that the steps already taken to promote the packing of herrings by the Scotch method are approved, and that special attention be given to the development of this branch of the industry.
These have been complied with.
With regard to the improvement of lakes and other waters that have been to some extent depleted I may say that fish breeding is being extended as rapidly as feasible, and is being continuously conducted with greater efficiency. The benefits are so well known as to require no argument. The salmon rivers of the Atlantic coast are steadily improving. The 'Great Lakes were never more productive than at present. Lake Winnipeg, which some years ago was in a serious condition, is quite recovered, and has more fish than for many years past.
The Fisheries Exhibit at the Toronto Exhibition was again given last year, and a restaurant operated in connection with it. I think hon. members whp have seen this exhibit will agree that exhibit has not 'been allowed to suffer by repetition, new features being introduced each year. 'It was again awarded a gold medal. The patronage of the restaurant was limited only foy its capacity. Day after day it was necessary to close the doors 'at times. Over 37,000 meals were served during the twelve days of the fair. In the year before, the number of meals served was about, 25,000. Last year the number was 37,000 as I have stated, and had we had more accommodation, which it was impossible to procure, a still larger numlber would have been served. We believe that these meals of fish, well served in splendid condition, and at moderate prices, will have the effect .of making the value of fish as a food better known in Toronto and .in western Ontario generally. Men engaged in the fish business in Toronto have informed me that, as a consequence of
this exhibit and restaurant, their business has shown a very c.onsiderable increase during the past few years.
While the full information necessary to enalble an analysis of the fisheries for the fiscal year which has just closed is not available, one for the calendar year, which can be made up, so far as the sea fisheries are concerned, from the monthly bulletins published by the department, may be of value and interest. Apart fr.om any difference that may exist from year to year, in the number of men and vessels actually engaged in fishing, there are natural conditions which affect the volume of production and which have to be duly considered when comparing the results of one year with another. For example, our salmon production is affected by the phenomenon of a big run occurring on the Fraser river every fourth year, growing gradually less in the following years till it reaches its poorest stage in the year preceding the next big-run year. Our hook and line fisheries for such fish as cod, haddock, hake, halibut, etc., on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts are dependent on a supply of herring for bait, so that a scarcity or abundance o-f that bait fish immensely affects the output, of the line fishermen.
The dogfish is always with us,-in vaster numbers in some seasons than in others- devouring edible fish and destroying gear to such an extent as to stop operations at times. The somewhat erratic appearances of the mackerel and herring masses and fish of their kind on our coasts produce varying results from year to year. Finally, by limiting the number of fishing days, or permitting operations on the greatest possible number of days in the course pf a season, the weather conditions affect the production of all kinds of fish, perhaps more than any other natural agent.
The season of 1916 was characterized by several adverse conditions. There was a general scarcity of men, particularly on the Pacific coast, owing to enlistments; the poorest salmon year in the cycle of four on the Fraser river occurred; there was an abnormal amount of unfavourable, foggy weather on the Atlantic coast; the spring herring fishery in the Gulf of St. Lawrence was much curtailed owing to ice remaining on the coast till a late date; and the summer and fall herring fishery all over the Atlantic coast was practically a failure. Considering these adverse conditions, it is not surprising to find the production of

some of the chief kinds somewhat below that of the year before. Compared with 1913, .however,-a pre-war year,-the production of cod, haddock, etc., and such fish as remain fairly constant on the grounds, was very much greater during 1916. The marketed value of the product in the year 1915 was the greatest in the history of our Canadian fisheries, reaching a total of $35,860,708, which exceeded the total for the prewar year of 1913, by $2,652,960, notwithstanding the fact that 1913 was a big-run year on the Fraser river. So far as the incomplete figures for the past season permit us to arrive at conclusions, it would appear that the record value of our fisheries in
1915	has been substantially exceeded in 1916.
Looking at the figures for some of the chief kinds, we find that the quantity of lobsters landed ' in 1916 was 2 per cent greater, and the value 21 per cent greater than in 1915. Compared with 1913, the increase in quantity is 10 per cent, and in value 11 per cent, the prices paid by the canneries in 1913 being somewhat higher than those paid in 1916. The quantity of cod, haddock, hake and pollock taken in
1916	was 7 per cent less than in 1915, but the value was 14 per cent greater. The slightly diminished landings of those fish were due partly to the fact that there were not so many Lunenburg vessels engaged in the bank fishery, and partly to a scarcity of bait during the best part of the inshore fishing season. Compared with 1913, however, the catch of 1916 was 24 per cent greater, while the value was greater by 52 per cent.
The quantity of herring and mackerel landed in 1916 was 25 per cent less than in 1915, and 32 per cent less than in 1913. The value, however, did not fall to the same extent, as prices were from 50 per cent to 100 per cent above normal. The total catch of halibut in 1916 fell below that in 1915 by 8 per cent, but there was an increase in value. Compared with 191-3, the catch of 1916 was 13 per cent, and the value 60 per cent greater. In the year 1913, however, American vessels had not begun to land their catches at Prince Rupert.
The sardine fishery resulted in a decrease of 11 per cent in quantity, but an increase of 37 per cent in value when compared with 1915. Comparing the past season's catch with that of 1913, we find an increase of 100 per cent in quantity and 167 per cent in value. The movements of these small fish like the movements of all the herring kind, are uncertain, and as they are captured al-

most entirely by fixed appliances, the fluctuation in the quantity taken from year to year is consequently considerable. The value has increased much in keeping with that of other canned products since the outbreak of war.
The smelt fishery, owing to lack of ice. on the rivers, was not so productive as usual, the falling off in 1916, compared with 1915, was 6 per cent in quantity, but there was an increase of 22 per cent in value. Compared with 1913, the catch of 1916 was 14 per cent less, while the value was 16 per cent greater.
Complete returns of men and material employed in the fisheries during 1916 are not yet at hand, but a comparison of the number of fishing bounty claims paid in the past season with the number paid in the preceding year indicates that fewer vessels, fewer boats and fewer men were engaged in the fisheries of the Atlantic coast. In 1915 bounty was paid on 13,926 boats and to 24,670 boat fishermen. In the past year the numbers were 12,350 boats and 21,700 boat fishermen, with a few late claims likely to come yet. In 1915 bounty was paid to 6,107 vessel fishermen in vessels aggregating 23,638 tons. In the past year there were 5,450 vessel fishermen in vessels aggregating 20,150 tons to whom bounty was paid, with a few late claims also likely to come in.
Our boat fishermen and those who fish in inshore waters now find the motor-boat indispensable to the success of their operations. It gets speedily to and from the fishing grounds quite independently of winds, tides, and, in a great measure, weather conditions. Also, it permits operations over a greater range of fishing grounds than was possible with the old sail boat. We do not know exactly how many motor-boats were used in the fisheries of 1916, but the figures for 1915, and the precedifig four years, are illustrative of the rapid advance made in the use of such craft. In 1911 there were 5,580 motor fishing boats in the whole of Canada; in 1912, 5,911; in 1913, 8,700; in 1914, 9,302, and in 1915, 11,097.
Improvements are constantly taking place in the handling and manufacturing of cured fish of all kinds. The proportion of the inshore catch of cod, hake, etc., that is dried is annually growing less, while that used fresh and cut for the boneless trade is increasing and bringing enhanced values. In the pickled fish trade, through the stimulus of the Fish Inspection Act, increased attention is being given to the production of better packages and to improving the grade and quality of the pack. We are now using

in the salt mackerel trade an iron-hooped hard wood barrel superior to that used in any other country. Manufacturers of the finnan ihaddie, which is the mainstay of the smoked fish business, have within the last four or five years greatly improved its palatableness by realizing that too much salt and smoke applied to a fish that is really intended for almost immediate use are apt to curtail its consumption.
Looking at it all over, the production of our fisheries in 1916 is very gratifying. This gratification is mingled, with regret, however, because of the reported loss of 23 fish-erment while pursuing their calling on various parts of our coasts. In view of the preparations that aTe being made for. the coming season, and of the fact that this is the big run year for salmon on the Fraser river, we may look upon it as quite within the range of the probabilities that the value of the output in 1917 will reach the $40,000,000 mark.


INSPECTION OF FISH.
[Stage Direction]
The past season is the second in which inspection has taken place. There were in all 7,213 barrels of herring, alewives and mackerel presented for the brand. Of that number 2,688 were refused the brand, because of either poor quality of fish, bad grading or inferior barrels. In the previous year, 1,328 barrels were presented for the brand, of which 117 were refused. The number presented for the brand and the number refused the brand by districts were as follows:
In the district of H. H. Mann, Cape Breton Island, 305 barrels were presented, of which 31 were refused owing to poor packages. In the district of R. Gray, Halifax, Guysboro, and Antigonish counties, N.8., 1,493 barrels were presented, of which 575 wore refused, because of too light salting and bad grading. In the district of A. R. Hilts, Lunenburg county westward and round to Kings county, N.S., 1,744 barrels were presented, of which 238 were refused for bad grading. It was ultimately discovered that 400 barrels of this lot had deteriorated in quality and after a re-examination the brand was removed before final shipment. In the district of T. Doyle, Magdalen Islands, Prince Edward Island, and part of the Gulf shore of Nova Scotia, 91 barrels were presented, of which 62 were refused because of poor quality and bad grading. This officer devoted much time at the Magdalen Islands endeavouring by practical demonstration to improve the fishermen's methods of splitting, cleaning and
[Mr. Hazen-J
curing their mackerel, and while improvement undoubtedly resulted, he found that the fish generally were not cured entirely up to the standard required for the brand. In the district of C. Hubbard, Restigouche county to Kent county, N.B., 1,817 barrels were presented and 31 refused, owing to inferior packages, and the poor quality of the fish.
In the district of A .0. H. Wilson, Charlotte, St. John, Albert and Westmorland counties, N.B., 1,763 barrels were presented, of which 1,720 were refused because of leaky barrels and the poor condition of the fish.
Mr. McKENZIE:: How many were presented?	'


John Douglas Hazen: 1,763 in that district and 1,720 were refused.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Only a few were accepted.


John Douglas Hazen: Only a few were accepted. They were in poor barrels. I understand that the difficulty is now being overcome and that next year fishermen will have no trouble, owing to the improved methods of the coopers in getting good barrels so that the fish can be properly preserved and can be branded, and so command higher prices. In the district of A. O. H. Wilson, Charlotte, St. John, Albert and Westmorland counties, N.B., 1,763 barrels were presented, of which 1,720 were refused because of leaky barrels and the poor condition of the fish. The brand was taken advantage of by 73 separate packers against 16 in the preceding year. In the course of the year, 67 merchants and packers, including a number of individual fishermen, applied for and received instruction in herring-curing in the Scotch style.
The summer and fall herring fishing last season was little better than a failure on the Atlantic coast, and as a result not more than 30 packers actually cured herring in the Scotch method. Of these, 22 presented their pack for inspection and the brand. Fifteen cooperages which produce barrels in considerable quantities, applied for and received instruction in Scotch barrel making. These were located as follows:- I in Ontario, 2 in New Brunswick, and 12 in Nova Scotia. A number of scattered individual coopers, who make a few barrels for split herring, were also visited, as they could be located, and instruction given them. Perfection in barrel-making has not yet been reached, but many of the coopers are now turning out a rbally good barrel.
It should be kept in mind that the amount or value of the work performed by the in-

specting officers, cannot be measured by the actual number of barrels presented to them for the brand, because inspection is not obligatory. Hon. gentlemen will remember, when the Bill was passed it was made permissive, it was at the option of those who were doing the packing as to whether they would have inspection or not. As the demand for almost any kind of fish is abnormal at present, it frequently happens that a packer, after benefiting by the visits and instruction of our officers, ships off his fish without waiting for the officer to return and brand them.
In addition to the instructions contained in the Act and its regulations, the department in the beginning of last year issued to the trade pamphlets of special instructions in barrel-making and curing in the Scotch method. Prior to the fishing season and during its progress, each officer visited packers, barrel-makers and dealers within his district and kept before them the merits of the inspection system and endeavoured to persuade packers to cure their fish in accordance with the requirements of the Act. Instructional pamphlets will again be distributed to coopers and packers for their guidance this year, while practical demonstrations in barrel-making and curing will be continued.


HERRING PISHING OPERATIONS.
[Stage Direction]
In the course of the past summer, the department fitted out one of its steamers with herring drift-nets, for the purpose of endeavouring to locate the herring schools off shore in the Atlantic, and to catch them at a time when the fish are in the best condition for curing for the best markets. It is difficult for one boat to accomplish much in the course of one short herring season. A considerable amount of success was met with, however, notwithstanding a general failure in the herring fishery, and much valuable information secured concerning the size and quality of fish on the different grounds worked over. The boat began operations about the middle of May, and continued till the latter part of August. Fishing grounds extending from off Victoria county in Cape Breton to those off Shelburne county in Nova Scotia, were operated on. In all, 388 barrels of herring, and 5,622 barrels of mackerel were secured. June and July were the best months. Herring were scarce in August, and dogfish very plentiful. A detailed report of the quantity and quality of fish taken on the various fishing grounds has been printed and distribut-
 ,
ed to' those in the trade who are concerned in the business.

[Stage Direction]
For the purpose of assisting masters of fishing vessels to locate bait supplies during the cod fishing season, the department operates a system whereby definite information concerning bait along certain stretches of the Atlantic seaboard is collected by the local fishery officers and despatched daily, by telegram, to certain important sea ports, and there posted up. The number of ports selected as receiving stations is necessarily limited, in the interest of economy, but through the courtesy of the Halifax daily papers, in which the telegrams are published each day, the smaller fishing centres also derive the benefit of direct advice as to available supplies of bait. Copies of all telegrams received at the receiving stations are mailed to the department at the end of each week, by which means the work is closely followed and checked. During the spring of the past year, ninety telegrams were sent from the Magdalen islands, Souris, P.E.I., and Queensport, N.S., to Canso, Halifax, Lunenburg and Biverport, N.S. During July and August, 195 telegrams were sent from Little Bras d'Or, L'Ardoise, Canso and Musquodoboit Harbour, N.S., to North Sydney, Canso, Halifax, Lunenburg and Shelburne, N.S.; also from Lockeport, N.S., to Canso and Halifax, N.S.; from Shag Harbour to Halifax, Shelburne and Lockeport, N.S. From the beginning of September to the end of November, 66 telegrams were sent from Campobello, N.B., covering information from the counties of Charlotte and St. John, N.B., to Digby, Yarmouth, Pubnico and Clark's Harbour, N.S. The information contained in the telegrams was of much benefit to line fishermen who were in search of bait, by directing them to where supplies were available, and to net fishermen who had bait to sell by bringing purchasers to them.
As will be seen from the foregoing, considerable is being, done to educate the fishermen and encourage them in the adoption of better methods, but some definite and comprehensive system of technical education all along the lines connected with their work is needed, and the matter is receiving attention, in order that everything may be in readiness to begin work as soon as possible after the return of peaceful days. Fishermen have not had sufficient pride in their calling, and too often their sons have been encouraged to

take up other vocations. There is consequently a shortage of skilled fishermen, and just at a time when they are urgently needed. When the war is over, it would be a good thing if skilled fishermen from desirable European countries wishing to immigrate would come to Canada. They would find splendid opportunities here, and I think it will be admitted that we need them for the proper development of this industry, which offers employment to so many people.	*
This afternoon the hon. member for Digfby (Mr. Jameson), who moved a resolution that it was desirable that the Department of Fisheries should he established under the control pi a separate minister who would devote his entire attention to the encouragement and development of the fisheries alone, said that, in his opinion, the increase in the growth of our fisheries had not been satisfactory. If I recollect correctly, he told the Hpuse that $75,000,000 was the value of the fisheries in the United States, while the value of the fisheries in Canada last year was $35,000,000. I think my hon. friend ought to bear in mind that the conditions in the two countries are not similar. *I do not think that the comparison which my hon. friend makes is one that justifies or bears out his contention. We must remember that the United States to-day is a nation of about 100,000,000 people, that the American fishermen have a market for their fish right at their very doors, that the industry there has been much longer established than in this country, and that there are a great many more men engaged in it than are engaged in fishing in' Canada, If he compares our population of less than
8,000,000 with the American population of nearly 100,000,000, he will see that our production of $35,000,000 worth, which will be increased this year to $40,000,000 worth, is not an unfavourable one for Canada. There is no doubt, as my hon. friend stated, that Canada's fishing grounds are the most extensive in the world. We have on the Atlantic coast about 5,000 miles of sea coast, running from the Ste. Croix river around New Brunswick and Nova Scotia up the gulf of St. Lawrence. We have on the Pacific coast some 7,500 miles of sea coast, not counting indentations and many of the hays, and we have also in Ontario and in the (western provinces, very extensive fresh water lakes in which many fish like white-fish, sturgeon, pickerel and others pf very considerable value are to he found. There is no doubt that as the development 129
of the country proceeds, as the number of our fishermen increases £tnd as a greater market for their product becomes available, there will be a much larger production of fish than there has been in years past. In making that assertion, may I point out that from the year 1886 until a few years ago, little or no progress was made in the Atlantic fisheries. My hon. friend is disposed to attribute this circumstance to lack of proper attention by the department in charge. While it is true- that there was very little progress in the Atlantic fisheries during the time referred to, it is fair to beaT in mind that the conditions prevailing before 1886 were much more favourable to the Atlantic fisheries than the conditions, during many years following that date. From 1854 until a year before Confederation a reciprocity treaty had been effective under which fish and the products of the fisheries were admitted into the United States markets free of duty. In 1872 the Treaty of Washington was entered irto, which again gave the freedom of United States markets to our fishermen. This treaty remained effective until 1885, and its provisions were much more important to our fishermen at that time than they would be now. Again, the mackerel fishery was at its zenith during the years prior to 1886. The quantity of mackerel taken then was nearly three times as much as the. quantity taken now, the value being nearly double. Moreover, the general conditions in the country from 1886 onward for a number of years were not such as to afford much opportunity for the rapid development of out Atlantic fisheries. No doubt the pickled fishing industry could have been greatly developed under proper conditions, but it was a difficult matter to find capital ready for investment in that direction, and the competition of a well-established business from Europe had to be met and overcome. Under the Fish Inspection Act, applied three years ago, and which has been in operation two seasons, the necessary steps to develop this industry are now being taken.
My hon. friend points out that the original department was the Department of Marine and Fisheries. No doubt the work of that department has enormously developed since its inception a year or two after Confederation. A judge of the Supreme Court of Canada who was Minister of Marine and Fisheries from 1896 to 1902 said the other day that the department, from what he saw of it, must ha.ve ten
[Stage Direction]


times as much work to do now as it had during his time. Other work has since been added to the department.. Some years ago the work of the St. Lawrence ship channel was administered by the Department of Public Works, but when Mr. Prefontaine was Minister of Marine and Fisheries that work was transferred to that Department. Then,	it	was provided by	theterms	of	the	Naval Act	that	the
Minister of Marine and Fisheries should be the Minister of Naval Affairs. I assume it was thought at the time that there would not be very much work in the Department of Naval Affairs. That was the case for a time, and that wae the reason why we [DOT]divided the department. When I came into the department I found the Marine and Fisheries Branch very much overburdened with work, while the Naval Service Branch had not nearly so much to do. For the purpose, therefore, of equalizing the work, the administration of matters pertaining to the Fisheries was handed over to the Department of Naval Service. The Fisheries Department administers the Fisheries Protection fleet and the Fisheries Patrol fleet, both of which services logically come under the Department, of Naval Service. There is no. doubt that the work has enormously extended. While that is the case, I think the hon. member for Digby jumped at too hasty a conclusion when he intimated that the work of the Fisheries Department was being neglected and had been neglected ever since the department was formed. He asserts that during all these years, even when the work of the department was not so extensive, proper and adequate attention was not given to the development of our fisheries. I shall not argue that much more cannot be done than has been done, but the fisheries officers of the department-I know them intimately-are very capable men indeed. Mr. Found is wonderfully well informed with regard to fishery matters, is a most energetic official and active in the discharge of the duties of his position. The same may be said of Professor Prince, a scientific man connected with the Fisheries Department, as well as the other fishery officers.
During the past five years great attention has been given to the development of our fisheries with the result that many waters that were being rapidly depleted a few years ago, have been replenished with fish. There has been also an increase in the salmon fisheries of the Atlantic coast, and in many other directions considerable de-
TMr. Hazen.J
velopment has been attained. This is true in respect of all branches of the fisheries, with the exception of the oyster industry, which, unfortunately, for quite a number of years showed a steady diminution. I am glad to say, however, that under arrangements made between the Federal and the Provincial Governments, barren bottoms are being leased for replanting, and the chances are that along the coast of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, as has been the case in United States, a great development of that industry will take place, with great benefit to the oyster fishermen and to those who have been enterprising enough to put their money into the work of development which is now going on.
I am not prepared to discuss whether or not there should be another department to take charge of the fisheries. My hon. friend has suggested that the reason why Newfoundland does not come into the union is because they fear that sufficient attention will not be paid to their fisheries, I thin^ that is the first time that reason has been suggested; I always understood that other reasons induced a great many of the people of Newfoundland not to look favourably upon the idea of a confederation with the other provinces of British North America. I sincerely hope that that idea is disappearing, because I think it would be a splendid thing for Newfoundland, for Canada and for the Empire, if Newfoundland should eventually come into the union, situated as it is at the mouth of the St. Lawrence and at the very entrance to the heart of Canada. I do not tbiink my hon. friend can find the slightest justification for the argument that he has put forward in this respect. It may be that fishery matters in Canada can be treated with greater energy. One of the difficulties encountered at present is that a great, many men have gone away to fight and there are not as many men available to engage in the industry as there were some years ago. At present there is a market for all the Canadian fish that can be produced. The home market is increasing. People at points distant from the sea-board, owing to the campaign of education that has been taking place, are beginning to appreciate in greater degree the value of fish as a food. In view of the high price of meat of all kinds, fish will doubtless be sought more than it has been in the past. Moreover, our fish are being sold in increasing quantities in the American markets, and large quantities of Canadian fish are being sent over to Great Britain not only for our

soldiers, but for the purpose of feeding the civil population as well. The reason for that is that in Great Britain the condition of affairs is such that many of the trawlers in the North sea have been driven off the waters, some having been torpedoed, others havings been taken over by the Admiralty. When I was in Great Britain a few weeks ago, I was talking to a gentleman in Grimsby, one of the largest ' fishing centres in that country, and he told me that from the port where he lived there had usually, in normal times, been 36 trawlers sailing out into the North sea, but that at the present time there were only five trawlers engaged in the fishing business. As a result, there is not the same supply of fish from home -waters or from water contiguous to Great Britain for sale in the different markets, and there is a market there for Canadian fish, for the use not only of our soldiers but of the civil population as well. I asked that gentleman whether it was likely that the trade in frozen fish in Great Britain would be permanent, and his idea was that it would not; that after the war, when the fishing industry in Great Britain again assumed its normal condition, when the trawlers were all in commission again, bringing in fish daily for distribution throughout the country, it would be unnecessary for the British to have frozen fish brought from Canada, as they would have an ample supply for themselves. I think it is perfectly clear that the consumption of fish in Canada must and will develop, and year by year people are realizing, through instrumentalities such as the Toronto Exhibition, the distribution of literature, the discussion of this matter in Parliament, the discussion that goes on in the press from time to time, the value of fish as a food. When conditions again become normal, no doubt there will be an enormous development of our fisheries on our sea coasts and on our lakes. It is most gratifying to know that in lake Winnipeg and in our Ontario lakes where the fish were depleted years ago, the result of the fish breeding hatcheries has been that more fish are to be found in those lakes to-day than during the past generation.
My hon. friend (Mr. Jameson) has done good service in bringing this matter to the attention to the House. As he said, it is not often we have a discussion in this Parliament on an economic question. We can discuss this matter without any prejudice and without any idea of gaining any party
129i
advantage, because we are all only too anxious to develop the great resources of [DOT]the country, to make them as valuable to our people as possible and to preserve them as far as we can for the use of future generations.
After the war there will possibly have to be a very general change in .regard to the departments of Government, and probably this House will have to consider the desirability of having a naval department standing iby itself with a separate minister entirely apart from the minister who administers the Department of Fisheries. -We may find it necessary to do as has been done in Australia, where the system has been adopted of having a defence minister, who administers both the War Department and the Naval Department. To-day my hon. friend from South Renfrew (Mr. Graham) stated that he has received letters suggesting that a separate Department of Mines ought to 'be created under a minister, for the purpose of developing the mining industry of the country. These suggestions are all, of course, subject to consideration, and I for one am not prepared to say that they do not carry weight, but at the same time we must bear in mind that for a country with a population of less than
8,000,000 we have a large Government as it is; we have some 17 or 18 ministers and more than that number of departments because some ministers preside over, more than one department. The whole question is one that cannot be determined simply on a resolution of this character dealing with one department of the Government; it will have to be dealt with from a more general standpoint when the war is over.
So far as my department is concerned, as my hon. friend has pointed out to-day, it is finding a great deal of work to do and has more subjects to deal with than any other department of Government. A great deal of additional work has been thrown on our shoulders, not only in the Naval Department, but in the Department of Marine and Fisheries, as a con-
9 p.m. sequence of conditions that have been created by the war. I would like to pay this tribute to the men and women in my department with whom I am working every day: for I have always found them anxious, ready and willing to undertake that extra work, and cheerfully to do what they can, under the abnormal circumstances that exist, to keep the work of the department up to the mark and, as far as possible, promptly to deal -with all questions that come befbre the
[Stage Direction]
department. As minister of the department, I cannot, as my hon. friend says, give my entire attention to the fisheries or to any one branch of the department. Not only has a minister the duties of his department to attend to, but he has to attend to his work in Parliament; he has the affairs of his constituents to attend to-and that is not a small work when he repre-, sents a large constituency-and he has also to give time to certain political questions that have to be considered from time to time. Canadian ministers do what ministers do in England: The departments have permanent heads who are men of capacity and ability, and the different branches of the departments are presided over by men of ability. The different matters that come up for consideration have to be thought out by the permanent heads of the department, and then those matters are submitted to , the [DOT] minister who has to use his very best judgment in coming to a conclusion according to the facts presented to him. No minister can spend his time in digging up those facts for himself or in classifying them; he has to depend on the judgment of others, and in many cases men in this country and in every other country are called upon to preside over departments concerning the work of which they have had no previous knowledge. That is so in Great Britain. The Earl of Derby is called to be Minister of War; Sir-Edward Carson, a lawyer, is made First Lord of the Admiralty, and Mr. Bonar Law, a man who in his earlier days was engaged in the iron business, becomes Chancellor of the Exchequer. The same thing prevails in this country. You cannot have for Postmaster General a man who has always been a postmaster and who has had a knowledge of postal affairs, and all a minister can do is to do as a judge does, to bring his intelligence to bear upon the different questions with which he has to deal, obtaining from those who are acquainted with the work of the department, the best knowledge they can lay before him and obtaining the best views that he can get, and then to make up his mind. Other men might possibly be able to do more work than I can perform; but there is a limit to what any man can do, and I know that in my department at the present time, so -far as my officials are concerned and so far as I myself am concerned, every minute of our time is occupied. When conditions become more normal, a distribution may be made that will be mqre in the public interim Mr. Hazen.]
est; but T do not wish to admit for one moment that my predecessors in- office neglected the interest of the fisheries, and, so far as I am concerned, I desire to say that every attention that is (possible under existing circumstances has been given to the development of the fisheries, and if I -can rely on the judgment of my fishery officials more work of development has taken place during the past four or five years than in many years previously.
Mr. J. H. SINCLAIR (Guysborough):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the minister on his new departure. I am sure that his address has been listened to with a great deal of interest by members on both sides of the House. It has'often occurred to me that it would be a good thing that when the Minister of Marine and Fisheries asks for his Estimates fpr the year, he should make a statement of the work of the past year and the policy that the department intends to pursue for the year to come. The minister has adopted that suggestion. While we listened with interest, as we always d-o, to his smooth and persuasive speech some of us were not a little disappointed that he has not been able to work out a more progressive policy. I sympathize with the attitude taken by my bon. friend from Digby (Mr. Jameson) that the Department of (Marine andi .Fisheries, and especially the Fisheries Branch has not been conducted vigorously in the past, and has not done the work that the country expected it to do. My hon. friend from Digby intimated that the colony of Newfoundland had kept out of the Union for fear their fisheries would be neglected if they joined this Dominion. I do not know whether that is the case or not, but I cannot help feeling that the fishing interests of the province from which I come would have been in much better shape than they are in to-day if they remained undeT local control. Other industries in the province of Nova Scotia have made splendid progress. We have been able to develop a great coal mining industry, a very important fruit industry, as well as a great agricultural industry. All of these are under the control of a vigorous local Administration. On the other hand the fishing industry, which is really one of the most important in our province, has been marking time for practically half a century. In the last report of the 'Marine and Fisheries Department you will find that there has been no increase during the last 30 years in the value of the fish caught. But that

does not tell the whole story. During that period there was really a decrease in the quantity of fish caught, but on account of the higher price the total value of the catch kept up to the level of thirty years ago. Now that is not a very good Tecord, especially for the provinces of Nova Scotia which is the great fishing province of eastern Canada. Whatever progress has been made has been made largely in the province of British Columbia, where the salmon and halibut industry have been developed. The fact that the total value of the fisheries of Canada show an increase is due to the progress that has been made in British Columbia, and not because of any proigress in the Maritime Provinces or in Quebec. I attribute the development of the industry on the Pacific coast partly to the fact that the railway express companies have dealt with the transportation question in a vigorous manner. There the Dominion Express Company as a means of transportation has been very successful; but our experience has been different in eastern Canada. The remedy that my hon. friend from Digby suggests is to appoint a Minister of Fisheries. I do not know whether that will be of any great value. I think it would be quite suffiicent if a little more life could be infused into the present minister. If he would only show a little more vigour and enthusiasm, introduce necessary reforms in the department, I think we could, get along very well with one minister. But the minister must give his officials a lead. I do not object to the proposal of my hon. friend from Digby, but I do not think it is the best remedy. The situation requires something more, and I think it could be met by the present minister if he would only show more energy and conduct the department on business principles.
My hon. friend has referred to the fact that last year the Marine and Fisheries Committee held a number of meetings and carefully investigated the fisheries of this country, but, as my hon. friend from Digby pointed out, we were not honoured with a visit from the minister during the whole session. The committee in their report made certain recommendations, which the minister has gone over very carefully tonight, indicating to what extent they have been carried out. He failed, however, to show that anything substantial has been done. An attempt was made to do something in the way of inspection. A man was sent to Mulgrave we are told for two or three months to look after shipments
from that point- The minister withdrew the man and never expects to send him back again. That was a very abortive attempt in the direction of inspecting shipments. Everybody knows that fish is the most per- ^ ishable article on the market. No other article begins to decay so quickly, and it is therefore of the utmost importance to have the best transportation facilities. There should be a cold storage at the terminals, and quick transport by refrigerator cars; the fish should be got to the market in good condition and with as little delay as possible. Without these facilities the fishing industry cannot be developed. The minister's attempt at inspection was so ridiculous that nobody will regard it as a final attempt. We shall not be satisfied until something more is done.
I need not point out to the House that the fishing industry is capable of very great development. My hon. friend from Digby pointed out that for the capital invested, no* Canadian industry gives such a large return. The industry has a capital [DOT]invested'.' of about $25,000,000, which includes wharves,, warehouses, and all appliances on land as; well as the boats, vessels, and nets that are used on the sea, and that investment of $25,000,000 brings in a yearly return at present of $35,000,000. I do not think that can be said of any other Canadian industry. There is no reason why that $35,000,000 could not be enormously increased, doubled or trebled, in fact, with proper facilities. We have assisted many other industries in this country by bonuses. We have spent from $16,000,000 to $20,000,000 in bonusing the steel industry, and as a result a great industry has been built up in this country which otherwise we probably should not have had. The fishermen are self reliant and they are not asking for anything of that kind so far as I know. What they are asking for is a chance to carry on their business; they want the facilities for developing the industry, not a cash bonus.
The greatest question of all is transportation. We cannot develop the fishing industry unless we can improve transportation from the place where the fish is caught to the market My own constituency affords a very good illustration of that fact. About twenty years ago the town of Canso in my constituency was carrying on a fishing business in the old-fashioned way. They had no proper means of sending fresh fish to market because at that time there was no daily boat connecting the town of Canso with the Intercolonial at Mulgrave. The;

X would strongly recommend that the incoming Executive Committee spare no effort to secure the improved facilities and proper service from the various transportation companies handling our products, from which they derive large revenues. I suggest that the assistance of the Naval Service Department of our Federal Government he again enlisted with this object in view.
It is, therefore, the opinion of the president of the Fisheries' Association that our methods of transportation between the Maritime Provinces and Montreal are obsolete and as a result we have not been able, with these methods, to build up anything approaching a great fishing industry. Still the minister seems to be quite satisfied with these methods. I do not know whether we can do anything more to convince him or not, but in looking over the list of recommendations made by the special committee of this House on fisheries, I cannot find that very much has been done. The first of the recommendations which was made is one in regard to inspection. An abortive attempt was made at Mulgrave to do something in the way of inspecting shipments, but my hon. friend seems to have abandoned the idea o.f doing anything more. The second is:-
That the express facilities be so improved as to ensure daily transportation of sea foods from the east by means of the chilled car service.
Nothing has been done in the direction of improving the express service from the East.
3.	That the refrigerator car service for the transportation of sea foods be so improved as to render it available on express trains.
That has nqt been done.
4.	That the consolidation of shipments for different points in the express refrigerator car, on the basis of carload express rates, to the farthest point, and the opening of ear in transit to set down fish at different centres en route, would materially aid prompt and economical distribution of sea foods.
I have heard it questioned whether that is a practical proposal or not, hut at all events there has been apparently no investigation and no attempt to carry it out. The next is<-
That a carload lot express rate, substantially lower than the L.C.L. rate should be fixed on sea goods from the east.
That has not been done. Recommendation No. 6 has been carried out, but No. 6 simply recommends that the old quantity be restored. It is:-
That the minimum freight carload quantity, on the Government Railway be reduced from the new scale of 24,000 pounds to the former scale of 20,000 pounds.

That was the proposal and that has been done. I never saw any good reason for increasing the minimum carload quantity and there was so much opposition to the increase that my hon. friend apparently secured the consent of the railway department to the proposed reduction. For this we must give him credit.
8. That an exclusive express service operated by the Government be inaugurated on the Intercolonial Railway and Prince Edtward Island sections of the Government railways, as a preliminary to any general scheme for the nationalization of express business in Canada.
My hon. friend has made no reference at all to any attempt to deal with this important recommendation.
I want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that after this committee had devoted most of a month to investigating this matter to the best of their ability and had brought in their recommendations, they were unanimously adopted iby the House of Commons. My hon. friend the Minister of Marine and Fisheries should have attempted immediately or as soon as possible to carry them out. Most of them are very practical suggestions but no attempt has been made to comply with them and no satisfactory explanation has been given to show why they have not been complied with.
I might refer to the apparent disregard of the department of the interests of fishermen on the question of salt. This question arose during the present season. It became known last winter that the freight rates were so high that it would be difficult for the merchants on the coast to secure salt enough to carry on the fishing trade and as early as February last correspondence was opened with the Department of Trade and Commerce asking the Government to do something in the way of providing tonnage to carry salt across the Atlantic so that the fishing industry could be carried on. The fact is that little has been done, and it transpires now from evidence that has been placed! before the House by the hon. junior member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean) that transport ships have been coming across the Atlantic empty in connection with the work of the Admiralty and that some of these ships have been carrying mud ballast from the other side and that it has been costing $1.25 a ton to discharge this ballast out in Bedford Basin. With proper foresight these ships could have come over with salt instead of mud and there would have been plenty of salt available to carry on the fishing industry.
If the minister had 'been alive to the interests of the fishermen he would not have

allowed a circumstance like that to have taken place but he would have approached the Admiralty and seen that tonnage was secured in order that the fishing industry might have a sufficient supply of salt for the season.
I hope that, even if we do not succeed in getting a Minister of Fisheries alone, we may be able to get some kind of progressive policy from the department as at present organized. The minister could do a great deal that he has not done. He has, I believe, capable and energetic officials, some of whom are as good men as he could find anywhere but these officials want a lead from himself. The minister is the man to whom we have to go with ,dur complaints and criticisms, and he is the man who is responsible for the administration of his department, and not his officials. I trust he will bestir himself and take steps to put into practice the recommendations .of the Fisheries Committee looking towards the development of this important industry. A programme has been outlines by the committee which contains, I think, the principal things that are required at the present time. It is reshits that we want, and want them now; we do not want to wait for them too long. My hon. friend has been in office for six years, and I am sorry to say there is really not very much that he can show of a progressive nature that he has attempted or accomplished. I am not opposed to the proposed addition to the Cabinet but I am not inclined to swap horses now when we are crossing the stream, I would rather have some results from the present minister and I hope that, after the discussion to-night in which it has been again drawn to his attention that the transportation facilities are in such a backward state, he will endeavour to do something to have them improved.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Mr. Speaker, I have been greatly interested in the addresses of the hon. member who introduced this resolution (Mr. Jameson) and the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. The subject has been very fully dealt with by the minister and by the hon. member for 'Guysfoorough. It is not a new subject to this House, and I shall not go over grounds that have been traversed in the years that are gone toy. I wish to say a few words on this great subject of fisheries, and as a preliminary I would say that the fishing industry and the fish products of Nova Scotia have never had a fair show in this country, have
never been fairly brought to the notice of the consuming people of Canada beyond the province itself. There is a large market for fish in the various cities of Quebec and Ontario, but we have not been in a position to put that excellent product in its inviting condition and with its proper tasting qualities before the people, as it has been injured in transit as a rule, and what is a most palatable and , excellent aiticle when it leaves Nova Scotia' becomes stale and distasteful and uninviting before it reaches the table of the consumer in the central provinces. To overcome these difficulties should be our principal object. It is, of course, interesting and encouraging to be able to say that we have the fish in abundance. When people launch upon any enterprise, it is well to be sure that they have in abundance the article with which they propose to deal. Sometimes men launch their capital upon mining speculations only to find after they have spent it that the mineral which they expect to find is not in their property. We are far past that stage, so far as the fisheries of Nova Scotia and all of Canada are concerned. The fish are there in abundance and of the very best quality. It so happens that I represent a section of the province .of Nova Scotia which is the home of fisheries on a very large scale. So in discussing fisheries I might be accused of being local in my observations because I talk of matters in my own constituency; but I do not think that makes it any less important to talk about those things and to present them, because a very large section of the very cream of the fishing grounds of the province of Nova Scotia happens to be along the coast of the island of Cape Breton of which Cape Breton North and Victoria forms a part. As I have said, it is encouraging to be able to tell the minister and the Government that we have the fish. We have it in tons and millions of tons, and anything that we have caught of the fisheries in the province of Nova Scotia is but touching the fringe of an unlimited quantity that is available there. So much then for the quantity that is there. As the minister has pointed out, from the western coast of New Brunswick along the whole coast of that province, the province of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and up to the frozen north is one continuous fishing ground of the richest and best quality. The fish is there, there is no question about that. The next thing, of course, is that the fish must be caught. Let me say to

the minister that it is useless to think of making a development or an advance along these lines without the expenditure of money. We must all take our share of responsibility for putting the money at the disposal of the department in order to find the facilities to catch the fish and place it on the market. I think that all Ministers of Marine and Fisheries in this country since Confederation have been a little too timid about the amounts of money they should have and could have expended in connection with the development of the fishing industry, and I hope that the present minister and future ministers will enlarge their ideas in that respect and spend more money. I may be asked, what are you going to spend the money for, what are you going to do with the money? And I may point out, as has already been pointed out, that while it is certainly not the duty of the Government to send out men in boats to catch the fish, it is the duty of the Government to make the building and harbouring of boats and the going to and from the fishing grounds as safe and convenient ae possible. These are things that must he done by public money, that cannot be done by the enterprise of the fishermen alone. In the county from which I come, along the north coast of Cape Breton, we have very extensive fishing grounds, but they are along a forbidding rugged rocky coast with very few harbours. The money that has been spent in the development of those harbours and in the building of breakwaters has resulted in substantial benefit to the fishing industry. Though there is yet much to be done, we have been able to use larger boats, go further out into the sea and obtain bigger catches. Millions of tons of fish have been carried away from the very doors of our fishermen by American vessels, taken to a foreign country and sold, the profits that should be made by ourselves going to foreigners. The minister must get money from the public coffers for the development of the harbours and the encouragement of our own fishermen as well as of those whom we can induce to come from Newfoundland to develop our fisheries if the conditions are at all favourable.
After the fish is caught, proper facilities must be available for getting it to market as speedily as possible. The centres of trade and of consumption must be put in touch with the places where the fish are to be obtained. The minister need not apologize for spending money for this pur-

pose. The fishing industry can never be developed at Canso, for instance, a great fishing centre, by the use of a single boat running from Canso to the Intercolonial terminus at Mulgrave. The only way of solving the difficulty is by extending the railway to those points. Every inch of the coast line of Cape Breton should have railway accommodation, because the whole coast abounds in fish, and the greatest discouragement to the fishermen is the lack of transportation. The development of the harbours in the northern part of Victoria county has brought about good results. Two large American concerns have been doing business in that part of the country since the opening of the harbour of In-gonish, as a result of the appropriation of moneys voted by the late Administration. In getting these moneys for the development of harbours and breakwaters, I was regarded by many hon. gentlemen as spending money for the purpose of getting votes. I am sorry to say that that is the manner in which many members of this House view the expenditure of moneys for the opening of harbours' and the building of breakwaters to serve the needs of our fishermen. But, as I say, one of the results of the opening of the harbour of Ingonish has been the activity of these great concerns, the Gorten-Pew Company of Boston and the Thompson Company which have amalgamated, and the firm of Collis, Jones and Whitman. They handle hundreds of tons of fish every year, paying for them readily, saving a great deal of labour and enabling the people with whom they deal to obtain the fish in better condition than they could otherwise secure it. The provision of proper facilities for the catching and the marketing of fish cannot be made without an expenditure of money and a more active interest in the matter on the part of the minister. The Railway Depart-men have dealt with the transportation of fish as they would with passengers who had smallpox; the fewer they had and the quicker they got rid of them, the better they liked it. I fear that the minister regards all this discussion and the time which it takes up as a nuisance, and something that he would be glad to be rid of. But the only way to get rid of it is to make proper provision for the development of the fisheries, one of the most magnificent industries of Canada.
Last year and several years before, I asked the minister to make provision for bait along the coast. In the small colony of Newfoundland the Government provide steamboats with cold storage facilities that

carry an ample supply of bait for the use of the fishermen. No doubt, headquarters are provided which supply the steamers with bait from time to time. We have nothing of that kind. Surely we can do what the Government of Newfoundland, a country with a small population, can do. In the county from which I come, at certain seasons of the year when fish are practically running in on the shore in tons, the fishermen have no bait, and they suffer to that extent. Money devoted to development along the lines which I suggest would be well and profitably spent. Places should be established along the coast of Cape Breton and elsewhere in the province of Nova Scotia where bait could be obtained at any time by the fishermen, It is of no use to say that the fishermen themselves should establish these places; they have not done it in the past, and they will not do it now. If the minister, then, will take some steps to make it easy for the fishermen to catch the fish; if he will provide facilities for bringing that fish to market and take such other steps as I have suggested, he will be doing a great service to the people and will justify the expense of the department over which he presides.


Mr. W. S. LOGGIE (Northumberland, N.B.):: I have listened with much interest to the remarks made by the minister with regard to the fisheries of Canada during the last year. I regret that what to my mind was the most important recommendation made by the Committee on Marine and Fisheries last year was passed over by the minister with this remark, that it was found that the recommendation was not required because the fish arrived at destination packed in ice, and in good condition. That remark may' be true in the months of April, May and June, but from my experience I can say that during the hot months of July and August fish do not arrive at destination properly preserved in ice, and that if compartments of the car were set aside and ice chambers used, the fish would arrive in much better condition. But that is really not the important part of the recommendation. It was clearly brought out before that committee that deterioration was very much greater in the winter season than in the summer season, and that matter was entirely passed over by the minister. On a previous occasion I have stated in the House that I can send a carload of fish to London, England, and it will arrive there in good order, whereas if I send a box of fish from my town to the city of Montreal during the winter season, I cannot expect it to arrive at Montreal in good condition. Why? Because frozen fish are placed in heated cars, and when they come into contact with the heat of the car, the frost is drawn from the fish and you can never get them back into proper condition, and unless they are consumed immediately, they deteriorate very quickly. The recommendation to which I have referred is the most important part of the recommendation of the Marine and Fisheries committee; yet the minister tells the House to-night that that recommendation was found not to be required at all. The minister instanced the fact that they put an express car on the route once a week. If I am not corerct, the minister will kindly correct me. I do not remember that he mentioned the day in the week that this car was put on the route, but he said that it started from Mulgrave and picked up the freight from Halifax. I do -not wonder that the car was taken off; I claim it is quite impracticable to put a car on once a week and expect that to satisfy the needs of the trade or to enable the producer to place fish in the market from day to day as is required. The shipment of fresh fish by expressmustnot be provided ononly one given day in the week. It is true, I will admit, that perhaps Tuesday would be the best day of the week for the shipment of fish, but one car a week will not meet the requirements. Nothing else will
10 p.m. meet the requirements except a car north on each of the six days in the week, and that car provided 'with a compartment where ice and 6alt can be put in the chamber so that the car may be kept cool. That is more important in the winter season than in the summer season, and yet the minister never referred to the matfer at all.
Another thing that is most important for our fishing industry is markets, and to-day we have in a foreign market that is friendly to Canada a considerable demand for salted codfish, but the duty on these goods entering that country practically prohibits our using that market. I think therefore that the Department of Marine and Fisheries should suggest to that country that they might reduce the rate of duty or perhaps permit that commodity to enter free. Let me give an instance. At one time codfish went to the markets of France and word came back that those fish were subject to a duty of forty-five francs per hundred kilograms, or about four cents per pound. That is something that the Department of

Marine and Fisheries or the Department of Trade and Commerce might take up in the interest of the fishing community of this country, especially at this time when the fishermen of France are not able to frequent the waters of St. Pierre and Miquelon, and when we would not interfere with the French fishermen if we had access to their market at a reasonable rate. If the Department of Marine and Fisheries would take up that matter, they would be doing something to aid and foster the fishing industry.
The minister informed us that the recommendation regarding the 20,000 pound car was undertaken, but he did not tell us whether the rate per hundred pounds was increased thereby. It is all very well for the railways to reduce the minimum carload from 24,000 pounds to 20,000 pounds and to increase the rate per hundred pounds. The minister did not tell us that the matter worked out in that way.
Let me refer just for a moment to what the hon. member for North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie) referred as something that would encourage the industry perhaps as much as anything the Government could do.
I am glad to see the Minister of Railways in his seat on this occasion, because the re-maiks I have to make apply more particularly to his department. I know of nothing that the Government could do that would assist the fishing industry more than to take over the branch lines that are feeders for the Intercolonial railway and operate them as they should be operated. That would be a great boon to the fishing industry. Let me illustrate what I mean. On, the Caraquet railway lour or five weeks ago some eight or ten boxes of frozen fish were sent by the Dominion Express from Ship-pigan to Montreal. That railway took about four days to carry the fish from Shippigan to Bathurst, a distance of lees than 100 miles. By the time the fish arrived in Montreal they had deteriorated and were practically of no value. The operation of that railway has caused the loss of a considerable amount of fish. Last March several carloads of frozen fish were sold to Montreal, Toronto; and American markets. The railway was blocked with snow at the time, but the shipper hoped that the line would soon be cleared and that he would be able to get a refrigerator car in which to ship the fish. Day after day passed and no oar came. At last the weather commenced to get warm, and then the fish could not foe marketed. The goods are still in the freezer because [Mr. Lo^grie.l
the railway could not place a car at the shipper's disposal. The Government could give no greater encouragement to the fishing industry than by seeing that the feeders to the trunk line are properly managed. I want to congratulate the Minister of Railways for assenting to the proposition that the Government railways should come under the Railway Commission; that would be a boon to the fishing industry. At present the branch lines are constructed undeT provincial charter, but I hope the Minister of Railways will soon announce that he is going to take over and operate the branch lines and feeders in the interests of the fishing industry and of the people in the territory which they serve.


William Pugsley: I think that was promised six years ago.
Mr. LOGGIE; It has been promised for a long time. I said to some of the subordinates of the railway a short time ago that it takes two men to make a bargain and I suppose that one of the reasons why these lines have not been taken over is because they have been unable to come to an agreement as to price. The line is constructed of light rails, and small engines are used. The equipment is not able to cope with the rough weather experienced in the winter season, and it is alleged that the Government would have to rebuild the road. We are talking about spending money in the interests of the fisheries.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Is the whole of that
road in New Brunswick.


William Stewart Loggie: The whole of it is in Gloucester county.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: And the Minister of Marine does not look after it.


William Stewart Loggie: When the warm weather comes we cannot sell frozen fish in any market practically. There are exceptions to that; for example, in the United Kingdom, in the month of August, when their salmon fishing is over, they will use our frozen fish. There is quite a demand for our Atlantic sea salmon in England in the month of August, but, as a rule, you cannot market frozen fish where fresh fish are available, and therefore it Is in the interests of the industry that facilities should be provided for placing the goods on the market at the proper season.
I just wish to say a word or two regarding the lobster fishing industry. The present season is some three weeks late. Weather conditions on the Atlantic coast have been

such that the season that should have opened about the 5th of May did not open until about the 25th of May. The season properly opens on the 25th of April and packers get to work about the 5th of May. On account of the bad weather this season, which delayed them until the 20th of May, they will probably have a very short pack.
I have always been opposed to extending the season, but in the interests of increased production I think the minister might well consider extending the season this year, when the matter is brought before him in the regular way. I have frequently told the minister that after the packing season closes a considerable amount of pilfering goes on. I have pointed out that to him year after year, and he has always replied that his officers say that it is not going on. I want to repeat to-night that it is going on. Within the last few days, when I was home, I was ^old that these men get a few traps and hardly use them at all during the season, but keep them for pilfering after the season has closed, when the lobsters are more plentiful and can be caught at considerably less expense. If the minister cannot stop illegal fishing after the 1st of July then he ought to let everybody fish. Close fishing down for a month and then let everybody have the same chance. It is unfair to allow [DOT] these men to engage in illegal fishing all along the coast, and it seems to be increasing every year. A market is found for the goods if there is any demand for them, although I have no doubt that fnany exporters would prefer to have nothing to do with them. But once the goods are packed they find a market. I am not prepared to say just how that is done, but I told the minister privately last year how I thought, it could be done. If the minister will see that the close season for packing lobsters is observed, I think he may be able to maintain the industry, but if some men are to be allowed to pack while others cannot, I say let him change the season; let us all pack for two or three weeks in the fall. The minister ought to put it on a business basis, and give those who have a large amount of money invested the same chance as those who fish for lobsters out of season.
I do not know that I need take up the time of the House any longer. I have talked along these lines on former occasions, and have perhaps referred to-night to one or two matters that I did not mention before. But the field is a great one. The possibilities of our fisheries are vast, and it behooves us to take care of the industry^ It is true that the deep sea fisheries are
not so much in danger as the coast fisheries. There are now being introduced in the waters of the St. Lawrence steam trawlers. What effect that will have on the fisheries, of coursd, I do not pretend to foretell. We always have felt that it was dangerous to have the trawlers come within a certain distance of our coast. But they do it in the North Sea, and many of these vessels come from Gloucester and Boston on our own coast, and so I suppose it is only fair that the same should be allowed from Canadian ports. I know that the industry in that line has been increased and, I believe, successfully. One argument in favour of the trawling system is that the operator is sure of a catch, whereas if you go put with hand lines or trawling with hooks, there is great risk from the weather. This means that the supply thus secured is uneven; sometimes there is too great a supply of fish, and sometimes none at all. With the trawlers the market can be supplied more regularly. Perhaps it *is not out of place that they should be allowed.
Another industry that, I think, might possibly be developed to some extent, is the herring industry. If the minister would try to facilitate the drifting for herrings at certain. seasons of the year and in certain waters, the results would be beneficial. It is alleged that there is a small herring, fat and suitable for the market in the months of July and August. I am not informed on this subject myself, but I have understood that traps are allowed for herring all the summer season on the Prince Edward Island coast. The traps are put put in the spring and kept out until the fall, a nominal fee of $15 being charged. But in some sections there seems to be objection to these traps. I do not say that they should be allowed in the rivers, -but I do npt see why they should not be allowed in the outside coast. Certainly I cannot understand why there should be objection to them in other places, when they are allowed on the shpres of Prince Edward Island.
I was very glad to hear the minister's address, and I have taken the opportunity to mention a few points in that address to which I take exception. I hope the subject of express facilities will be taken charge of by the minister, and that ho will not say tp the House again that these facilities are not needed. I know from personal experience that the recommendation on this subject is the most important made by the Marine and Fisheries Committee.


Mr. ONESIPHORE TURGEON (Gloucester, N.B.):: I had not intended to take

part in this debate, but some remarks made by the hon. member for Northumberland (Mr. Loggie) force me to say a few words. First, and more particularly, I wish to speak of the lobster fishery. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries no doubt will remember that my hon. friend (Mr. Loggie) and I have not always agreed as to the close season, nor as to the size of fish to be taken. I see that my hon. friend is coming to the ideas I expressed some years ago, and I take advantage of that fact to urge upon the minister still more strongly if possible the importance of the points for which I have contended. I have always objected to the extension of lobster fishing into July, and that for two reasons. In the first place, it tends to prevent the reproduction of the lobsters, and in the second place the fish caught in July are. not of the good quality which Canada is expected to give to the world.


William Pugsley: What about the regulation size?


Onésiphore Turgeon: It is too small. I have always asked that the minimum size be not less than nine and a half or ten inches.


William Stewart Loggie: There is no limit at all in our waters.


William Pugsley: I have understood that in Nova Scotia the limit was three inches. '


John Douglas Hazen: There is no limit, not on the south shore.


Onésiphore Turgeon: J have always contended that the size should not be less than nine and a half or ten inches, the same that is put upon fresh lobsters to reach Boston and New York. On the other side of Nova Scotia, where there is no object in taking fish of a smaller size, because they have to go to that market and will not be received if of less size than the regulation calls for, they get fish of nine and a, half to ten inches, just as we have been getting them of seven inches for the last fifty years.
I believe in limiting the catching of lobsters to the large fish, and I believe that there should be an open season in the fall. This year, the season has been backward for fishing, as for everything else, and so the lobster season in our district will hardly cover more than a month. I admit that my hon. friend (Mr. Loggie) who is one of the largest dealers, perhaps the largest dealer, in the Maritime Provinces, is in danger of having his profits curtailed, nevertheless,
I believe in sticking closely to the fishing season. But I have always advocated, as
TMr. Turgeon.]
he knows, that lobster _ fishing should be permitted in the fall, say from the 15th or 20th of August until the latest date when it can be carried on. I have always said that the reason why the packers were opposed to this was that when they closed down after the spring season they did not want to resume. But I have always maintained that it would be to their advantage to have no extension of the spring season, but to allow fishing in the fall. More fish would probably be taken in the fall season than are secured nqw for the May and June pack. It is said that fishing in the fall would be precarious because of the storms in September and October. But we are more apt to have storms even in June on our shore, and more severe storms, than in the early months in the fall. To allow fishing in September will be a compensation for those packers who may not have been able to secure the quantity they calculated upon, and it would also make it unnecessary in many cases to carry over for another year large quantities of cans and boxes.
I am very glad that hon. members supporting the Minister of Marine and Fisheries have called attention to the needs of the fishing industry. There are many ways in which that industry can be helped. We are not asking for a bonus, b.ut we do ask for shipping facilities, particularly on the railways that carry our fish to the Canadian market, and also in the improvement of harbours, wharves and breakwaters, so that deep-sea fishing may be increased along our shores, especially in these years when our fish are required for Great Britain and the allied nations.


Mr. G. W. KYTE (Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the indulgence of the House for a moment while I offer one or two observations with respect to the subject under discussion. No doubt the hon. member for Digby (Mr. Jameson) presented the amendment which he has made to the motion that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply for the purpose of calling the attention of Parliament to the necessity for some further, and more vigorous action, on the part of the Government towards the development of the fishing industry throughout Canada. The object of his amendment is one that is to be commended and anything that can be done, or any discussion that is called for by such action on his part that will result in more remunerative employment and wider markets for our fishermen ought to be commended and supported by the members on both sides of this House.

We well remember that in 1911 the issue upon which the election was decided was that of^ reciprocity. 'Commissioners representing this country negotiated an agreement with the Government of the United States which resulted in opening to the products of Canadian farmers the large and remunerative markets of the United States. While that agreement was defeated in the election of 1911, it is within the knowledge of this House that quite recently one part of the reciprocity arrangement was put into operation by Order in Council passed by this Government which opened the markets of the United States to the products of the Canadian farmers in the West. But, that market is still closed to the products of the Canadian fisheries. Having regard to the importance of opening the United States market at this particular . time to one great branch of- our industry,
I think it might quite logically follow that the Government should have taken some steps to have opened a free market in the United States for the fisheries as well. The reciprocity agreement provided for the free entry into the United States of the products of the farm and the products of the fisheries and it would thus have conferred a distinct benefit upon the fishermen of the Maritime Provinces.
There is another item which enters into the fishing industry and which also came in for favourable treatment in that agreement. I refer to the article of salt. One of the greatest hindrances to the successful prosecution of the fisheries of the Maritime Provinces during the present season is the difficulty the fishermen have in obtaining an adequate supply of salt. Owing to the want of tonnage it is extremely difficult to obtain salt from the markets which heretofore have supplied it to our fishermen. Under the reciprocity agreement salt was to have been admitted free to the fishermen of the Maritime Provinces but that agreement having been defeated, our fishermen are still under the necessity of paying a duty of 7i cents a hundred pounds upon all salt imported. No greater stimulus could be given our fishermen by the present Government than to take immediate steps to remove the duty on salt. A very serious situation confronts our fishermen. The price of salt has increased fourfold during the last three years and I do know that many fishing communities in Nova Scotia have decided to abandon the salt fishery tnis year owing to the extreme difficulty of obtaining the salt that they require in the prosecution of their industry.
There is another matter that was to have [DOT] been dealt with by the reciprocity agreement and that was the amendment of the regulation known as the. modus vivendi by removing the license fee which heretofore had been imposed upon American fishermen coming into our ports for the purpose of purchasing bait, taking on supplies or shipping their fish to their own markets.
A license fee of $1.50 per ton is exacted upon all American fishing vessels coming into our ports for the purpose which I have mentioned. The reciprocity agreement contained the following clause:
The Government of Canada agree? that, until otherwise determined by them, the licenses hitherto issued to United States fishing vessels under the provisions of Section 3 of Chapter 47 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, granting to such vessels certain privileges on the Atlantic coast of Canada, shall continue to be issued and that the fee to be paid to the Government of Canada for such license by the owner or commander of any such United States vessel shall hereafter be one dollar per annum.
A very large business developed along the coast of Nova Scotia previous to the imposition of this license fee in the supplying of bait to the American, fishing vessels and a large trade also was developed by the merchants along the coast in supplying these vessels and their crews. The imposition of this license fee has resulted in these vessels keeping away from our ports. When their outfit is exhausted, instead of coming to the ports of Nova Scotia to refit, in order to avoid the payment of the license fee, they return to their own ports and this large business which could be built up by our merchants on the shores of Nova Scotia is interfered with.
There is another consideration which is very important in respect to this matter. It is well known that the fishing fleet of the United States is largely commanded and manned by Nova Scotia fishermen. These men are obliged to leave their homes along the shores of Nova Scotia in midwinter or early spring and to go to the United States to take their positions as masters or crews of these fishing vessels. They come to the waters of the Maritime Provinces, particularly those of Nova Scotia to prosecute their industry but they are unable to visit their	homes for the
purpose of transacting any business or of renewing their supplies for the reason that they, are prohibited by this license fee. During recent years a very large proportion of the American fishing fleet is made up of what is known as auxiliary fishing boats. [DOT] This license fee under

the modus vivendi does not apply to fishing vessels of that class so that no share of that part of the fishing business, which has gone to the United States, and which has grown up enormously within the last 15 or 20 years, accrues to the advantage of the people of Nova Scotia.
The object of the resolution which the hon. member for Digby has introduced is to find some means of increasing the pio-duct of the fisheries of Canada. There is no better way in which we can enlarge the output of the fisheries than by seeking freer and larger markets. Whatever may be said to the contrary by hon. gentlemen opposite, the fact remains that to a great extent our best and largest market is that of the United States. The abrogation of the treaty of 1818 has been asked for time and again by hon. members sitting on this side of the House. That is still a very live question and I for my part cannot see how any advantage can possibly accrue to the fishing industry of Canada by preserving the terms of the treaty or by preserving the modification of the treaty as embodied in the terms of the modus vivendi. I stated a moment ago that American vessels are not permitted to enter our ports for the purpose of obtaining supplies or prosecuting the fishery to the advantage of the people of Nova Scotia. But a different condition of affairs exists on the coasts of British Columbia.
At Prince Rupert there is a large fishing industry which has been developed in recent years, and which is carried on largely by fishing vessels that come up from the port of Seattle. These fishermen are allowed to fish off the waters of British Columbia. They can come into Prince Rupert and ship their fish to the United States market without paying the license fee which prevents vessels coming into the ports of Nova Scotia. I cannot understand why that distinction is made, and why privileges are granted to the fishing industry of British Columbia that are denied to us in Nova Scotia. The fishing industry would be very largely increased in Nova Scotia if a change were made in these regulations and the license fee entirely cancelled and the right given to fishing vessels of all nations to come into our ports to buy supplies. There is a very large demand for fish now in the British markets owing to the curtailment of fishing operations in the North sea. I am informed that buyers from the British markets go over to the United States and contract for the purchase of large quantities of fish which are

caught by American vessels and taken to American seaports. We do not find that in the province of Nova Scotia we are sharing the advantage of this large expansion in the British consumption of fish from this side of the ocean as a result of the war. I am informed that the Department of Marine and Fisheries have been considering the question of the removal of this license fee under the modus vivendi with the authorities at Washington. I do not know whether or not that is correct. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries will no doubt be good enough to give any information to the House that he can possibly give at present, but I for one would be very glad to learn, in the interests of the fishing communities of Nova Scotia, that some step was being taken by the Government to abrogate the treaty of 1818, and to remove from the statute books the modus vivendi which prohibits American fishing vessels from coming into the ports of Nova Scotia. A very large trade would be developed in Nova Scotia through our merchants doing business at the seaports if they were permitted to supply freely to these fishermen all goods necessary for them in prosecuting their fishing voyages. Not only are our fishermen prohibited from getting a very large market for fresh fish by supplying these fishermen with 'bait, but our merchants are deprived of the opportunity of furnishing other supplies to vessels, such as rubber boots, clothing, oilskins and underwear. This prohibition results, as I said, in diverting the trade which should belong to the merchants of Nova Scotia to .the supply houses in Massa-chussetts, and at the same time it 'has a very deterrent effect upon the development of our fisheries in the Maritime Provinces.
Mr. ARTHUR B. OOPP (Westmorland): I rise to discuss this question, which is of great importance to the fisheries in my own particular locality. I do not rise for the purpose of supporting the motion of my hon. friend particularly, because I do not want to support it in either of the two cases in which it may have been offered to this House. If it was a new policy that was intended to be adopted by the hon. members opposite with regard to having a new portfolio in the Cabinet we on this side would have little to say in regard to such a policy. But if it is a matter of voting want of confidence in the Minister of Marine and Fisheries I would not want to subscribe to it unless the hon. gentleman coupled the whole Government with the motion. I

would not want him to single out my Mend from New Brunswick in a vote of want of confidence in that hon. gentleman. If it included the whole Government I might be induced, in some manner, to consider the matter at least more carefully.
The hon. member for Digby (Mr. Jameson) has brought to the attention of this House an important matter in regard to the fishing industry of our country. It has been discussed very largely by gentlemen on this side of the House in relation to both the deep sea fisheries and coast fisheries. I was rather surprised during the course of the discussion to-night when I picked up a report recently issued on lobster fishery conservation in Canada by Mr. A. P. Knight. As I am .particularly interested in that branch of the fishing industry, in which .a large number of fishermen are engaged ' on the shores of my constituency and of all New Brunswick as well as Nova Scotia, I was astounded
to	learn	that during'	the	last	nineteen	years	the lobster	fisheries	havedecreased	a little	over	100	per	cent.My	hon.	friends	opposite	speak of	the	increase in	the	value	of	the
fisheries. Is is very easy to have the value increase as the price goes up, but the quantity is decreasing all the time, according t,o this report, and while I realized that there had 'been a decrease in the lobster catch in Canada, I had no idea that it had decreased to such an alarming extent as it has. My hon. friend from Digby, in discussing this matter this evening, made the statement that there was a good deal of dry rot, or that the Government or the department had got into a rut and that it was time it was taken out of this rut and put on a more businesslike basis, and more attention given to the different matters put before the department. I do not know whether that is a correct expression, whether the department is in a rut pr what is the reason, but, during the two or three years that I have had the honour to .have a seat in this House, I have looked into fishery matters to seme extent and Tead the reports that have been made from time to time. I have read the reports made in regard to the fishing industry of this country back for years and years, and the recommendations that have been made. Things of that nature have been brought before the people, but it does seem to me for some reason or other, whoever may be to blame, whether it is the minister over the department or his officials under him or whether it was because there was no one who had the information or 130


REVISED
[Stage Direction]
knowledge, or whether the industry is something in a class by itself calling for nerw scientific research, there surely seems to have been a very great deal of neglect if I may use that term, in regard to the protecting of the lobster industry of this epuntry. I notice that some years ago, twenty years ago for all I know, the lobster hatcheries were established in this country, There had been hatcheries for different kinds of fish all over Canada, and the lobster hatchery was introduced. I know that in my county we looked forward with great anticipation of the lobster hatchery being a good investment, and we hoped that the lobster catch would be very largely increased because of the hatcheries. I see by this very latest report by Mr. Knight, who is apparently an authority on this question, that instead of the lobster hatchery having been a benefit it is a menace to the lobster industry, and he lays down the principle that the lobster hatchery must be done away with and some pther arrangement or scheme entered into. I have not been able to read the whole of this very interesting report and the tables set out in it. He says:
What is to be done? It is useless to look to the hatcheries as a means of replenishing our depleted waters. Rather are they agencies of destruction than of conservation.
That is a statement by one who has made a study of this matter very recently, and if that is so, surely we have lpst 'a great deal of time besides wasting a great deal of money in the effort to replenish our lobster fisheries. According to the report made by Mr. Knight, the lobster catch has been decreasing year by year, and if some steps are not taken tp prevent it, sooner or later the industry will disappear altogether.
John Douglas Hazen: I think the member for
Northumberland could assure my hon. friend that in the straits of Northumberland, in the vicinity of Point Sappin, there was the largest catch of lobsters last year that had been obtained in forty years.


Mr. OOPP:: Would that in any way disprove the statements made in the report of this official appointed by my hon. friend?


John Douglas Hazen: It is a fact that -the catch was so large that they could not handle the fish in the factories.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Is that because of the lobster hatchery?


John Douglas Hazen: I am not saying why; I
am simply stating the facts.


EDITION
Arthur Bliss Copp: I am not speaking in a
critical way; I am simply seeking information. In a report on the subject, the inspector of fisheries in that portion of the province, Mr. Morrison, says that the lobster industry, which had fallen off to an alarming extent during the previous two years, was showing signs of improvement. But while that is true with regard to lobsters ,^st yeaT, there has been, a falling off of $94,469 in the value of the herring catch. There has been a falling off also in the mackerel catch, and the smelt catch has shown a falling off of $122,000. Cod also has shown a decrease.
I wish to, -refer to a matter that is very dear to my heart, and that is the shad
fishery. I	do not think they	havethe shad	fishery	in other parts	ofCanada as	we	have it in	theprovince of	New	[DOT]Brunswick. A	fi Vyears ago	it was a valuable	industry along the St. John, Kennebeeasis, and Petiteodiac rivers, the Bay of Fundy, the Dorchester and Sackville rivers, and, I believe, in your own constituency, Mr. Speaker. These districts were teeming with shad, which could be bought a few years ago at $3.50 a half barrel. Now, however, it is difficult to get shad at all, the cost being as high as $15 a half barrel. It seems to me that this valuable fishery could be saved to the people of that locality. Some floating shad hatcheries havie been established on the St. John river, but something has been left undone that should have been done to keep up the fisheries along our rivers. I sincerely trust that the ministerhaving heard the remarks of the member for Digby, will get out of -the rut and, with his officers, do something to make our supply of fish as plentiful as it was in the past. If he will promise to take action, we will not vote for the motion of want of confidence, in which case he will be allowed a few weeks to try to do something in the interest of the people.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The hon. member for
Digby (Mr. Jameson) has been called from the Chamber, and before leaving he intimated to me his desire to withdraw the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. member have leave to withdraw his amendment?
Amendment (Mr. Jameson) withdrawn.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into Committee of Supply, Mr. Blain in the Chair.
Progress reported.
fMr. Hazen.]
On the motion of Hon. J. D. Hazen the House adjourned at 10.55 pjn.
Wednesday, June 6, 1917.