1917-04-23

THE ROSS RIFLE FACTORY.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day :
Mr. G. W. KYTE:: Would the Minister of Militia and Defence kindly inform the House when the papers relative to the taking over of the Ross rifle factory will be brought down, and whether a statement will shortly be made by the Government with reference to the manufacture of rifles in Canada?


Sir EDWARD KEMP:: The Order in Council providing for the taking over of the Ross rifle factory will be brought down to-morrow.


George William Kyte: Will the Government be in a position to make a statement with regard to the manufacture of rifles in this country at an early date?


Albert Edward Kemp: Appraisers are now taking an inventory of the Ross rifle factory. The Government is using the greatest possible dispatch in having the necessary specifications and patterns prepared for the making of a new rifle.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: Is the factory at present closed?


Albert Edward Kemp: A certain number of men are employed in the taking of the inventory, but there is no manufacturing going on at the present time.



THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. GRAHAM:: May I ask the leader of the House when the Public Accounts Committee will be called again?


Sir THOMAS WHITE:: I will inform my hon. friend to-morrow.



ENLISTED CIVIL SERVANTS.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Would the Minister of Militia and Defence kindly inform us what the policy of the Government is with regard to the salaries of inside civil servants who have enlisted? It will be remembered that when these civil servants were invited to offer themselves for overseas service they were given the assurance that their salaries would not be lower than what they were receiving in the service, and I understand that the military pay has been supplemented

in certain cases in accordance with that assurance. Those civil servants who enlisted two years ago would now be getting, if they had remained in the service, their regular statutory increase, and I wish to know whether allowance is made for that when they are given their military pay.


Albert Edward Kemp: The question which my hon. friend raises was brought to my attention this morning,. My own view is that these civil servants should get the regular statutory increase, and the matter is being looked into with a view to ascertaining the exact position.


William Pugsley: I should like to ask a question with regard to separation allowances. in the case of civil servants who have enlisted. A return was laid upon the Table the other day giving the names of a number of members of this House who had been appointed to different positions in the Militia, some of them occupying the position of colonel, and who were receiving their sessional indemnity, the salary attached to their military position, and separation allowance as well. I am told that in the case of at least some civil servants who have enlisted the separation allowance has been refused. I would ask whether that is the case, and if so, why a distinction is made to the prejudice of the members of the Civil Service.


Albert Edward Kemp: I have not heard that there has been any discrimination against either members of Parliament or civil servants in respect of enlistment in the overseas forces.


William Pugsley: There is a case within my own personal knowledge of the wife of a civil servant who was refused a separation allowance. She was informed by the Department of Militia and Defence that no separation allowance was granted in the case of a civil servant. We also know from the return that was laid on the Table the other day that separation allowances have been granted to the wives of members of Parliament, who were receiving both military pay and their sessional indemnities.


Albert Edward Kemp: I should be glad if my hon. friend would give me the name of the person he has in mind, so that we may look into the case, and I shall then be able to answer intelligently the question which my hon. friend raises. Personally I do not see why any civil servant in the overseas forces should not be entitled to a separation allowance for his wife.


William Pugsley: It might be a little objectionable to give the name, because sometimes when a civil servant complains he does not possibly receive the treatment from the officials which he otherwise would receive. But if my hon. friend will make inquiry in the department he will find the statement which I have made to be correct, and if he does not find it to be correct, I shall gladly furnish him with the name.


Albert Edward Kemp: I will make inquiry, but I can assure my hon. friend that no soldier will be discriminated against for advancing his claim.



GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS-PURCHASE OF COAL.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. M. MACDONALD (Pictou):: I should like to direct the attention of the Minister of Railways to the following despatch from Stellairtion, which appears in the Halifax HeraJld1:
Stellarton, April 20.-There is much excitement in this town as to future work in the Acadia Coal company's mines. This seems a peculiar statement when anything black is saleable as fuel. The company have now about 20,000 tons in bank. Cars are not obtainable, it is claimed, to ship this to customers. It is rumored that there is serious trouble between the company and the management of the Intercolonial.
This company, being on the line to Sydney, supplies the larger share of the tonnage on the eastern division. Report says that the Canadian Pacific pays over $5 a ton to this company and to the Greenwood company, and that they guarantee cars to take their tonnage. The Canadian government import coal at a cost of $7 per ton at least. The company says its wages to the men are dependent on the price it gets from the I. C. R., who take one-third of its product.
Further rumour says that Scotia is having a price 50 cents in excess of that offered and that they have limited the quantity that it will require from that company. All the miners want is no discrimination against this company and the going price, so that thereby they can secure the going wage.
I am advised that the Minister of Railways has offered this company $4.25 a ton for coal, while the Canadian Pacific Railway is paying this and other companies $5.25 a ton, and I am also informed that the minister paid $9.25 for coal purchased in the United States and delivered at Halifax. What is the position of my hon. friend with regard to this matter?


Hon. FRANK COCHRANE (Minister of Railways):: We have made no contract yet with this company, but we have offered them the same price at which we are buying

from other companies. I have not heard anything with reference to a shortage of cars, but I will take the matter up, and if the coal is shipped there will certainly be ears to ship it in.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I was not referring to the non-shipment of coal, although it is well known in Nova Scotia that there are 20,000 tons of coal banked up at the Acadia mines through the failure of the Intercolonial to supply cans. What I wanted to know is why the Minister of Railways was haggling with this company and offering them $4.25 a ton for coal when the Canadian Pacific Railway was paying for the same quality $5.25 'a ton, and when my hon. friend had paid $9.25 a ton for American coal delivered at Halifax.


Francis Cochrane: We neveT paid $9.25 a ton for coal delivered at Halifax.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: It was so stated by my hon. friend himself in this House in February last.


Francis Cochrane: But we offered this company and other companies more money than their contract called for, and they did not fill their contract.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What are you going to do about it?


Francis Cochrane: That is a matter for us to settle, not you.


Air.   AIACDONALD@: It is not altogether a matter for my hon. friend to settle, but for the people of this country. The Minister of Railways does not own the country yet as he will find out.



FARA1 LABOURERS FROA1 THE UNITED STATES.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I should like to call the attention of the Minister of the Interior to a statement in the Montreal Gazette, to the effect that some of his officials in the United States, in their advertisements for farm labourers for Western Canada, had stated that there would be no ~ conscription here, and that the men would be exempt from all military service. The Gazette states, also, that these advertisements have been withdrawn. Will the hon. gentleman bring down the advertisements in question, n together with any instructions that have been issued in the matter?


Mr. ROCHE:: Yes.



COAL PRICES AND SHIPBUILDING.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Pugsley: As the subject of coal has
been mentioned, I desire to call the attention of the Government to the fact that during the past winter, and even up to the present time, in the city of St. John where a great deal of anthracite coal is burned which can only be obtained from the United States, people have been obliged to pay an enormous price for that article, as much,
I am informed, as $13.75 a ton. We are told that the reason for -these high prices is that coal has to be brought to St. John by vessel and that there is a great scarcity in tonnage, and therefore freights are very high. I do not dispute that; my object in rising is to call the attention of the Government to the fact, which I have brought before this House on many occasions, that there is a great scarcity of tonnage for carrying the water-borne freight of Canada. The matter is a very serious one indeed for those who have to use American coal transported by water. I would ask the Government if any steps have been taken by them to encourage the building of ships, more especially wooden ships, not merely to- engage in ocean transportation but for coast transportation, which is vital to the people of oui country. I was glad to notice the other day that the authority in the United States charged with these matters had decided to give an order for one thousand wooden vessels.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I would remind my
hon. friend (Mr. Pugsley) that he is not in order in entering upon a discussion at this -stage. And, may I say, there is "a growing tendency, I fear, to rather enlarge upon the privilege afforded private members on the Orders of the Day of asking questions upon matters of importance. This, if allowed to grow, will result in inconvenience. Of -course, a certain latitude for the asking, of questions upon -the Orders of the Day has always been granted, but I hope that hon. members will guard themselves against the tendency to dilate upon questions which may involve the necessity of lengthy replies by members of the Government.


William Pugsley: I agree, Mr. Speaker,
-that it is necessary- to avoid as far as possible such discussion. But the conditions of the moment are unusual. These are times that are trying the souls of our people. In the city from which I come the cost of living-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I would remind the hon. member that there is no subject before the Chair. I wish he would submit his question.


William Pugsley: Having made my preliminary observations. I desire to ask if any steps have been taken by the Government for the building of vessels in Canada.


William Thomas White: Orders have been placed by the Imperial Government with Canadian shipyards for some twenty-two vessels. I understand that further orders _ for eight vessels are under consideration. This will involve a tonnage of 175,000 tons. The effect is that all the shipbuilding plants of Canada have sufficient orders to carry them well into the middle of 1918. We have given attention to the question of shipbuilding, because, as the hon. gentleman says, it is vital at this time. The more ships we can build, the more the existing shipping of the world will be available for the transportation to our Allies of commodities of all kinds. Some time ago I took up this question with the Imperial Munitions Board acting for the Imperial Government here, as to what is to be done towards building wooden ships for the purpose of transporting the products of Canada to Great Britain in order to assist in the situation which has become so acute by reason of the submarine menace. The representative of the Minister of Shipping, Mr. Perry, has been looking into the question, both on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of Canada. Recently I offered, on behalf of the Government, to find money on this side of the ocean, to the amount of $10,000,000, to place the Imperial Government in funds for the construction and purchase of wooden ships in Canada. The matter is now under consideration, and I am of the opirtion that orders for a considerable tonnage of wooden ships will be placed in Canada through the Imperial Munitions Board. These, of course,' will be of service to transport our products to the United Kingdom, and will also ease the general shipping situation to which the hon. gentleman has referred.


Hon. T. W. CROTHERS (Minister of Labour):: Perhaps I should add a word in answer to my hon. friend (Mr. Pugsley) on the subject of coal. He will be aware that an order in Council was passed last November, concerning the prices of fuel, clothing, and food. Under that order we have sent out questionaires to all the known coal dealers in Canada, and to these

we have received answers under oath. I have not the figures before me, but, speaking from memory, I think there is no return showing any such price as my hon. friend has stated. Speaking further from memory, I think the order contains a provision compelling dealers to sell any of the products referred to at a reasonable and just price; so that, if any one in the city of St. John feels aggrieved at the price charged for coal, with the consent, of the Attorney General of the province he can prosecute the dealer for demanding a higher price than is reasonable and just.


William Pugsley: I disclaim having suggested that the coal dealers of St. John were asking more than a fair price. What I said was that the excessive freight which they were compelled to pay for water transportation is alleged to be the cause of the very high price. I am sorry to learn from the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) that the Government itself has taken no steps to build ships in Canada but is relying upon the Imperial Government.



CANADIAN PRISONERS OF WAR.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I wish to ask the Minister of Militia and Defence (Sir Edward Kemp) a question in regard to the position of Canadian Prisoners of War in Germany. I have a letter from one of these prisoners who states that after these men were detained there was some difficulty about their pay being made available through governmental sources for the purpose of enabling them to get food, and that as a consequence the parents and friends of the prisoners contributed, as we all know they did, to send food to them. It was stated in the press not long ago that some restriction was imposed on the rights of the relatives and friends of prisoners to send them clothing or food and the matter upon which I want information is: What is the Government doing now? Is it possible for the Government to utilize the pay of these men, which is running on, I presume, although they are prisoners, for the purpose of enabling them to get food through governmental sources, or what provision is being made now for them in view of the fact that private parties are prevented from sending them sustenance?


Albert Edward Kemp: The question
which my hon. friend (Mr. Macdonald) raises, I think, has reference to the Red

Cross Society's shipments to Great Britain. I am not prepared to make a statement at the moment but I shall endeavour to do so to-morrow and in the meantime I shall make further inquiry.



INTERCOLONIAL RAILWAY-COAL CONTRACTS.

Edward Mortimer Macdonald: On Thursday last the Minister of Customs (Mr. Reid) promised to bring down a statement in regard to coal contracts which I asked the minister about a short time ago and he has not done , so.


Mr. REID:: I promised to draw the attention of my hon. friend the Minister of Railways and Canals to the hon. gentleman's request. I mentioned it to my hon. friend, and he is here now.


Francis Cochrane: 

PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 26, respecting the Calgary and Femie Railway Company.-Mr. Turriff.
Rill No. 27, to amend an Act to incorporate the Canadian General Council of the Boy Scouts Association.-Mr. R. B. Bennett.	[DOT]
Bill No. 28 respecting the Canadian Northern Quebec Railway Company. Mr. Rain-ville.
Bill No. 29, to .amend the Aot incorporating the Canadian Surety Company. Mr. Maodonel'l.
Bill No. 30, respecting the Canadian Western Railway Company.-Mr. Turriff.
Bill No. 32, to inco.rpor.ata the Cascade Scenic Railway Company.-Mr. Morphy.
Bill No. 34, respecting the Interprovincial and James Bay Railway Company - Mr. Northrup.
Bill No. 35, respecting the Kaslo and glocan Railway Company.-Mr. Green.
Bill No. 36, respecting La Compagnie du Chamin de Fer de Colonization d:u Nord.- Mr. Northrup.
* Bill No. 38, respecting certain patents of George 0. BTeidert and Burton W. Mudge. -Mr. Macdbnell.
Bill No. 39, respecting the Toronto, Hamilton and Buffalo Railway Company.-Mr. T. J. Stewart.

[Stage Direction]
On motion for the second reading, of Bill No. 33 respecting the Grand Trunk Pacific Branch Lines Company.-Mr. Currie.
Mr. MORPHY moved that the Bill be withdrawn.
George Perry Graham: Why? The hon. -member for Skncoe (Mr. Currie) is not here.


Mr. MORPHY:: I understand the intention is to introduce a new Bill in place of this.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Mr. Rainville for the second reading of Bill No. 37, respecting the Mount Royal Tunnel and Terminal Company Limited.
Mr. LEMIEUX:: Would the mover explain the object of the present Bill? I understand there was an inauguration of the tunnel yesterday, and that a train ran through. Is the purpose of this Bill to extend the time for completion?


Mr. RAINVILLE:: I think it is, but I am not sure.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Carried.


George Perry Graham: The explanation is satisfactory.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. EDWARDS:: 1.	How many National Service Cards were sent out to each province.
2.	How many of such cards were filled in and returned from each province.


William Thomas White: 1. No exact record of the distribution of blank national service form by provinces is available.
1.	Work not yet completed. So far the record for each province is as follows: Nova Scotia, 92,767; New Brunswick, 70,927; Prince Edward Island, 21,479; Quebec,

290,866; Ontario, 627,152; Manitoba, 131,265; Saskatchewan, 149,649; Alberta, 88,278; British Columbia, 76,977.


MAIL REGISTRATION.
Mr. LEMIEUX:: 1.	Has the Post Office Department authorized any private company to guarantee the safe delivery of parcel post or of any mail matter registered or unregistered?
2.	If so, what is the name of said company or companies?
3.	Under what arrangement has said privilege been granted by the Post Office Department?
4.	Have any annual statements been made to the department as regards the volume ofl business done by said company or companies?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: 1.	The Post Office Department has not authorized any private company to guarantee the safe delivery of parcel post or of any mail registered or unregistered.
2.	Answered by No. 1.	3. Answered by
No. 1.	4. Answered by No. 1.


ASHCROFT FORT GEORGE MAILS.
Mr. TURRIFF:: 1.	Has contract been .let to J. C. Shields and others or to the Inland Express Company for carrying mail from Ashcroft to Fort George, B.C.?
2.	If so, when was the contract let?
3.	Were tenders called for this contract?
4.	Was a lower tender than one accepted put in by Charles Miller of Toronto?
5.	What price is the department paying for carrying this mail at the present time?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: 1.	Yes, to J. C. Shields.
2.	24th June, 1916.
3.	No.
4.	A lower offer was received from the B. C. Express Company on the 27th June, 1916, but arrangements with Mr. Shields had already been completed.
5.	$90,000 per annum.


THREE RIVERS PUBLIC BUILDINGS.
Mr. BUREAU:: 1.	Have any payments been made to McLeod, Ferron & Co., for the construction of the public building at Three Rivers?
2.	If so, what amounts have been paid on account of the contract and for extras, respectively?
3.	Have any payments been made to Charles Lafond in relation to the construction of said building? If ^o, how much?
4.	Has wonc on said building been interrupted? If so, for what reason and for how long?
5.	What was the date and amount of the last payment made to the contractors?
6.	What was the date and amount of the last payment made to the architect, Mr. Lafond?


John Dowsley Reid: 1 and 2. Yes, on contract, $96,462.05; on extras, $13,501; $109,963.05.
3TYes, $3,057.67, including disbursements of $77.25.
4.	On May 7, 1914, work of construction was stopped on order of Mr. C. A. Lafond, Supervising Architect, owing to some question being raised by the corporation of Three Rivers regarding a portion of the site. Work was resumed some time in September, 1914, and was continued until September, 1915, when -the contractors expressed a wish to give up the work. Practically no work has been done since that time until March, 1917, when a new contract to complete the building was made with Mr. J. Bourque, and work has been resumed.
5.	March 30, 1917, $2,663.05.
6.	September 10, 1915, $325.63.


RENTALS AT CALGARY.
Mr. TURRIFF:: How much rent was paid to Dr. Blow for the offices of the Irrigation Branch and the Dominion Lands Office in Calgary for the years ending March 31, 1916, and March 31, 1917, respectively?


William Roche: 1915-16. Irrigation Branch, $5,872.20; Dominion Lands Office, nil. 191617, Irrigation Branch, $5,769.05; Dominion Lands Office, $4,924.77.
QUEBEC & SAGUENAY RAILWAY.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	How much has been expended by the Department of Railways and Canals during the year 1916 on the railway known as the Quebec and Saguenay Railway?
2.	What expenditure will it require to complete this railway ?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1.	No money was paid by the Department of Railways and Canals in connection with the Quebec and Saguenay Railway during the year 1916, but work to the value of about $180,000 was performed on this line.
2.	About $1,000,000.


THE DREDGE CAPE BRETON.
Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	Has an investigation been made as to the cause of the wreck of the dredge, Cape Breton? If so, by whom?
2 (a). Has any report been submitted in this matter? (b) If so, when will it be available for Members of the House?
3.	Has any allowance been made by the Government to compensate the families of the men that were lost in that disaster?


Mr. REID:: 1.	Yes, toy Messrs. F. N. Malcolm, Wreck Commissioner, with J. F. Chapman and W. C. Smith, Nautical Assessors.
2.	(a) Yes; (to) Report can toe laid on the Table at any time.
3.	The granting of gratuities is under consideration.


RAILWAY DEPARTMENT STEAMERS.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	What steamers have heen lately purchased by the Railway Department?
2.	From whom were these vessels purchased?
3.	What price was paid for them?
4.	For what purposes are they to be used?


Mr. COCHRANE:: 1.	Authority has been granted toy Order in Council, dated April 17, 1917, for the purchase of two vessels, viz., the A. J. McKee and the T. J. Drummond.
2.	The A. J. McKee was purchased from the Algonquin Central Railway, and the T. J. Drummond from the Great Lakes Transportation Company, Limited, of Midland, Ont.
3.	The purchase price of the A. J. McKee is $500,000, and the T. J. Drummond $515,000.
4.	For the purpose of carrying coal from Sydney to River St. Lawrence ports.


POSTMASTER AT STELLARTON.
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Who is the present postmaster at Stallerton Pictou County?


Mr. PATENAUDE:: Mr. W. G. Miller.


INVITATION TO ANGLO-FRENCH DELEGATES.
Rodolphe Lemieux: Is it the intention of the Government to officially invite the Anglo-French delegates, to the Washington Conference, to visit Canada?


William Thomas White: It has been
arranged that the Acting Prime Minister (Sir George Foster) will extend an official invitation to the Anglo-French delegation to the Washington Conference to visit Canada.


FRANCO-CANADIAN TREATY.
George Perry Graham: Has the Government received intimation of France's intention to denounce the Franco-Canadian Treaty?


William Thomas White: The Government has received no such information.


QUEBEC AND SAGUENAY RAILWAY BONDHOLDERS.
George Perry Graham: Who are the Canadian bondholders on the Quebec and Saguenay Railway, and what amount does each hold?


William Thomas White: The Government has no information as to who are the Canadian bondholders of the railway in question.


DR. BRUCE'S REPLY TO BAPTIE REPORT.
Mr. MACDONALD:: 1.	Has the Department or Minister of Militia received a reply or report from Doctor Bruce to or upon the Baptie Report?
2.	If so, will the minister bring down copies
of said reply or report?	'


Albert Edward Kemp: On the 14th instant, Dr. Bruce informed me that he had forwarded a copy of his reply to the Baptie report to the department, tout the report has not yet been received. I shall bring down a copy of the reply when it is received.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS.

Mr. SINCLAIR:: 1.	What were the names, former post office addresses, occupations and salaries paid to the censors and decoders in the employ of the Government at Hazel Hill and Canso during the year 1916?
2.	How much has been expended in connection with this service at Canso and Hazel Hill since the first of August, 1914, up to the present date?
3.	How much has been expended in connection with the said service in embracing all the stations in the province of Nova Scotia from August 1, 1914, up to the present date?
1.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were in the employ of the Post Office Department on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
2.	How many temporary civil servants and employees of all kinds were in the employ of said department on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
3.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were appointed by said department since the 1st of August, 1914?
4.	How many temporary civil servants and employees were employed by said department since August 1, 1914?
6.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses to both permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1911?
6. What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses of all permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917?


Mr. MACDONALD:: 1. How many permanent civil servants or officials were in the employ of the Department

of Militia and Defence on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
2.	How many temporary civil servants and employees of all kinds were in the employ of the said department on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
3.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were appointed by said department since the 1st of August, 1914?
4.	How many temporary civil servants and employees were employed by said department since August 1, 1914?
5.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses to both permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1914?
6.	What was the gross amount paid by said
department for salaries and expenses of all permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917?	.
7.	How many civil servants were appointed
by said department since October 10,	1911,
under the provision of section 21 of the Civil Service Act?	.


Mr. PARDEE:: 1.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were in the employ of the Public Works Department on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
2.	How many temporary * civil servants and employees of all kinds were in the employ of the said department on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
3.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were appointed by said department since the 1st of August, 1914?
4.	How many temporary civil servants and employees were employed by said department since August 1, 1914?
5.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses to both permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1914?
6.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses of all permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917?
7.	How many civil servants were appointed by said department since October 10, 1911, under the provisions of section 21 of the Civil Service Act?


Mr. J. J. HUGHES:: *1. How many permanent civil servants or officials were in the employ of the Department of Agriculture on the 10th day of October, 1911, and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
2.	How many temporary civil servants and employees of all kinds were in the employ of the said department on the 10th day of October, 1911, -and how many on the 31st of March, 1917?
3.	How many permanent civil servants or officials were appointed by said department since the 1st of August, 1914?
4.	How many temporary civil servants and employees were employed by said department since August 1, 1914?
5.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses to both permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1914?

6.	What was the gross amount paid by said department for salaries and expenses of all permanent and temporary civil servants and employees for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1917?
7.	How many civil servants were appointed by said department since October 10, 1911, under the provisions of section 21 of the Civil Service Act?



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN:: For a copy of all petitions, Orders in Council, letters, telegrams, etc., in connection with the last appointment of a postmaster at Wentworth Centre, Cumberland County, N.S.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: For a copy of all correspondence, memoranda, Orders in Council, etc., in reference to the dismissal of Moses H. Nickerson, as Inspector of Life Saving Stations in Nova Scotia.


Rodolphe Lemieux: For a copy of all proceedings in the Exchequer Court of Canada, and judgment of Mr. Justice Cassells concerning the reference of the Quebec and Saguenay Railway, the Quebec and Montmorency Railway and the LotbiniSre and Megantic Railway.


Mr. NORTHRUP:: For a copy of all contracts and agreements between Sir Charles Ross, his successors or assigns and His Majesty the King represented by the Minister of Militia and Defence since and including the agreement between them dated the 27th day of March, A.D., 1902.


Mr. CARVELL:: For a copy of all papers, documents, petitions, memoranda, correspondence, etc., with reference to the Government of the Dominion of Canada building competing telephone lines in British Columbia paralleling lines already in operation of the Okanagan Telephone Company, Limited.


James Joseph Hughes: For a copy of all papers, documents, petitions, memoranda, correspondence, etc., in connection with, the building of a wharf during the last five years at White Rock, B.C., and any extensions of said wharf, giving the name of the contractor and the name of the Superintendent of Works.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: For a copy of all papers, documents, petitions, memoranda, correspondence, etc., with the Government of British Columbia or any member thereof with the Fishery Officers of the Marine and Fisheries Department resident in said Province, and with any company, person or persons relating to prohibition of the export of British Columbia salmon since January 20, 1913.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: For a copy of all papers, documents, petitions, memoranda, correspondence, etc., in connection with the letting of the contract to construct Section No. 2 of the Jetty over Hayseed Channel, South Arm of Fraser River, Contract No. 10710, with a copy of the plans and specifications, prices or schedule of rates and any and all extension^ of said contract or any new contracts.


Mr. BOIVIN:: For a copy of all papers, documents, petitions, memoranda, correspondence, etc., with reference to the leasing of Poplar Island Indian Regnve, City of New Westmii sler, Noith Arm of Fraser River, showing terms and conditions upon which said lease was granted.


George William Kyte: -
For a copy of the contract for dredging in False Creek in the City of Vancouver, entered into either by the Government or the Board of Harbour Commissioners with the Pacific Coast Dredging Company, showing the quantity of material removed', the amount paid each month respectively to the said company for said dredging since the beginning of the work, showing any changes in or supplementary contracts in regard to dredging at Vancouver made by the Government or Harbour Commissioners with the saidi company, and the total amount expended at False Creek since the inception of the work.


John Howard Sinclair: For a copy of all statements, reports, evidence, letters and other papers and documents in the possession of the Department of Railways and Canals relating to a claim for a horse belonging to one Dan McParlane, injured at Brinley Brook, N.S., by the Canadian Government Railway.


Mr. BURNHAM:: For a copy of all papers, documents, instruments, letters of the Minister of Militia and' all correspondence, etc., relating to the purchase or arrangements for purchase of the property of Albert Carpenter, for the purposes of the Peterborough Rifle Range.


Rodolphe Lemieux: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, petitions and other papers concerning the substitution of the name of LueeVllle given to the post office of Sainte Luce, County of Rimouski, Quebec.


John Gillanders Turriff: For a copy of the Order in Council and all other papers in connection with the awarding of the contract to J. C. Shields and others or to the Inland Express Company for carrying the mails from Ashcroft to Fort George, B.C.



THE DUTY ON SEED BEANS.

Mr. A. B. McCOIG (West Kent) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, on account of the great shortage in the bean crop in Canada during 1916, and the urgent need in this country for this article, in the interest of the consumer and producer, beans for seed purposes should be allowed to come into Canada duty free.
He said: Mr. Speaker, my chief reason for moving this resolution is the great shortage in the bean crop in the southwestern part of Ontario. We have been unfortunate in our attempts to get seed for the different crops which the farmers are desirous of putting in. This is particularly true of the bean crop, which last season was a complete failure in the counties of Essex, Kent and Lambton, and
in parts of Elgin county. We have had to get the seed from the United States. The seed which was brought in last year from the United States matured about two weeks earlier than the home-grown seed, and the farmers who were fortunate enough to get seed from the United States had a great advantage over those who used home-grown seed. They are anxious, therefore, to get as much of the seed this year from the state of Michigan as they possibly can. A request to this effect has been made in a petition which, I understand, has been forwarded to the Government, and the demand has been voiced also by farmers' associations in the county of Kent. In view of the high price of seed at the present time, a greatly increased production during this year will result if the Government can see its way clear to allow the farmers to have their bean seed brought in free of duty and free of war tax. The Prime Minister and the other members of the Government, as well as the citizens of Canada, are particularly anxious that every farmer shall produce as much as he possibly can, and if satisfactory results in this respect are to be obtained, it will be absolutely necessary to get the seed to which I have referred. If this House is in sympathy with the proposals to this effect which have been advanced from time to time by different boards of trade and by different municipal councils throughout the country, I feel satisfied that the request will be granted and this motion allowed to go into effect.


William Thomas White: The matter of production is, of course, a very important one, and within the next few days I shall be glad to look into the subject of my hon. friend's motion and see what, if anything, can be done. I spoke to my hon. friend the other day, and I understood that it was not his intention to bring this resolution up until after the Budget. I do not understand that he is pressing the motion to-day, and if he is content to withdraw it, having brought it to the attention of the Government, I shall be very glad to look into the matter.


Archibald Blake McCoig: I have no desire to press the matter against the wishes of the Minister of Finance, but if it is some time before the Budget is brought down and the people do not know what course the Government purposes adopting, the result may be detrimental to the best interests of this year's crop. It will be satisfactory, however, if the farmers have the seed before May 24 or June 1. Undoubtedly they are anxious to know whether the Government will grant

this request, for if the duty he removed many farmers will put in seed who otherwise would, perhaps, be unable to secure the necessary seed or who would not be anxious _to pay the price which they have to pay under existing, circumstances.


William Pugsley: As I should like to say a few words on this resolution, I would move that the debate be now adjourned.


William Thomas White: I agree to that.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Mr. Pugsley:
That, whereas, in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, the provincial franchise has been granted to women, by legislative enactment, and in British Columbia the electors have voted in favour of similar legislation ;
Whereas it is proposed in the Dominion elections Act that persons entitled to vote for members of a Provincial Legislature shall also be entitled to vote for members of Parliament, but in respect to Alberta and Saskatchewan- alone of all the provinces of Canada-it is provided that only males shall be entitled to vote for members of the Federal Parliament, thus creating an anomalous situation as between the provinces, which should be removed :
Whereas during the present Empire struggle the women of Canada have shown a most intelligent and patriotic interest in, and an unselfish devotion ,to, the welfare of the state; - And, whereas it seems but just and right that they should be given a voice in the direction of its affairs :
In the opinion of this House it is desirable that provision be made either to grant to women who are qualified to vote for members of a. Provincial Legislature, the right also to vote for members of the Dominion Parliament, or to grant to women throughout the Dominion the right to vote for members of Parliament, subject to such provisions and limitations as may seem reasonable to Parliament.
Mr. PUGSLEY': I had intended to press this resolution to a vote this afternoon; but some arrangements were made by other gentlemen in regard to motions further down the list, and for reasons which have been presented to me by my hon. friend the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White), and which seem to be very well founded, I would ask that this motion stand.
Motion stands.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Rouville) moved for:
A copy of the Order in Council increasing the toll rates on Victoria Bridge, Montreal, and also a copy of all petitions, telegrams, letters and other documents referring to said increase.
[Mr. McCoig.j
He said: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to speak at any length. .1 wish only to draw the attention of the Government to the very serious state of affairs which exists in connection with the toll rates on Victoria bridge, Montreal, which is the only connecting link across the river St. Lawrence between the great commercial metropolis of Canada and the south shore. A few weeks ago the people were startled to learn that the toll rates were increased. I do not know the reason for the change, but I wish to inform my hon. friend, the Minister of Railways and Canals, that some relief should certainly be afforded to. the farmers of the counties on the south shore. I have not the present tariff before me, but I know the rates are simply prohibitive for the farmers of the counties of Laprairie, Rouville, Chambly and Vercheres, not to mention others, and I sincerely hope that the representatives of the pi ovince of Quebec in the Government will do something to remove that disability which is fastened upon the farmers of the south shore. The increase, I am sure, has passed unnoticed when my hon. friends were absent from Council, but it seems to me that to call their attention to this real grievance will be sufficient to effect a cure.
I think the time has come when the Grand Trunk Railway Company should give us free ingress and free egress across the Victoria bridge. This bridge has been very heavily subsidized, first for the original construction and later on for its reconstruction, so that it seems to me that the people in that section of the country should receive ample justice on the part of that company. I quite understand that, like all other transportation companies, the Grand Trunk Railway has passed through hard times; but when one considers that such a large population has to make use of that connecting link between the two shores of the St. Lawrence river, one feels that the Government should make it a point, if not to make the bridge free for the farmers and the community at large, at least to have the old toll rates restored. I make a special appeal to the hon. Secretary of State, (Mr. Paten-aude), who represents one of the large constituencies of the city of Montreal, and also to the Deputy Speaker of the House (Mr. Rainville) who represents the counties of Chambly and Vercheres.
Esioff-Léon Patenaude: My hon. friend must be mistaken, because there has been no change in the rates so far as the farmers are concerned; the change is only as re-

gards motor trucks, and I presume the Minister of Railways will have an explanation for that. *


John Dowsley Reid: Perhaps I should reply to
the hon. member, as this matter was brought before me when I was acting for the Minister of Railways in his absence. The matter is one of routine. After having heard the case as represented by the Grand Trunk Railway Company, [DOT] I went into it thoroughly with the deputy minister and other officials, and found that the tolls had not been revised for many years. The deputy minister, after investigating the matter very carefully, recommended that the changes were fair and just, and I therefore recommended the changes to Council and they were approved. The changes, however, were not so drastic as the hon. member has stated. At the time care was taken to protect the farmers and the increase was more in regard to motor trucks. After the Order in Council was passed, I noticed that there were some complaints, but I understand they were taken up with the officials of the Grand Trunk Railway Company and that the grievances complained of were removed. At all events I gave notice to the effect that if there were any grievances,
4 p.m. these toll rates could be revised from time to time, and I was willing at any time to hear complaints which, if well founded, would result in a revision of the rates. From that day, however, -to the time that I ceased administering the department, no complaint was registered. I have- not asked the minister if any complaints have been received since then, but I have been advised by the Grand Trunk officials themselves and others that there are no grievances now, or that if there are any, they are so small that no one cares to take any further interest in them. As my hon. friend knows, the matter can be brought before the Minister of Railways at any time, and I am quite satisfied that he will do his best to remedy any grievance that is shown to exist. The rates are not permanent; they can be revised at any time.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am very glad to hear that the rates can be revised when a grievance is shown to exist. In the present case the grievance is certainly felt by the farmers, and also by the business men of Montreal. My hon. friend, (Mr. Patenaude) stated that the farmers were not hit by this new regulation. Well, I can say this:
I represent the constituency of Rouville,
which, as my hon. friend knows, is a farming community, and when I was there ten or twelve days ago I met several farmers both of St. Hyacinthe and Rouville, and the whole talk was of the rates on the Victoria Bridge. My hon. friend must not forget that motor trucks are used very extensively in that very progressive district, in the Counties of Laprarie, Rouville, and Chambly-Vercheres. I need not say that it is the most progressive district in my province. I have also heard some very bitter complaints from the merchants of Montreal. I am sure my hon. friend will bear me out when I say that there is a large local trade between Montreal and the south sllhore. The wholesale grocers of Montreal send motor trucks over the Victoria Bridge, simply loaded with merchandise to be delivered at Laprairie, St. Lambert, Chambly, Longueuil, Marieville, and other smaller towns and villages. I have heard some members of the Montreal Board of Trade complain very bitterly about these high rates, and I might mention many who do an extensive business on the south shore. They stated that the rates were almost prohibitive. I am glad to have had this ppportunity of bringing the matter before the House, and to have the promise of the acting minister that a remedy 'will be found for this evil.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. RODOLPHE LEMIEUX (Rouville) moved for:
A copy of all letters, telegrams, petitions and all other papers concerning- the substitution of the name of Luceville given to the Intercolonial Railway station of Sainte Luce, County of Rimousld, Quebec.
He said: This motion will be more interesting to those members of the House who are familiar with the French language. Sainte Luce, the old name of the village is a much better name than Luceville. It was an old French name and was euphonious. Sombody, possibly a busybody in the village, undertook to get the name of the post office and station changed, and against the will of the parish priest and of the community generally, and in spite of shoals of protesting letters and telegrams, the name was changed to Luceville. This is really a grievance for that constituency, not only to those who appreciate euphony and like to stick to old names with a romance about them, but from a business point of view as well. I sincerely hope that my hon. friend the Secretary of State, who attends to our
[Stage Direction]


affairs in the province of Quebec, will see to it that the old name of Sainte Luce is restored. Some people in the Province of Quebec have a very officious way of getting old names with a flavour of romance about them changed for new names which have no meaning at all. What meaning has Luceville? It is ugly, it is not euphonious, and there is no romance about it; whereas the old name of Sainte Luce has a pleasant ring about it. I sincerely trust that my hon. friend will see that the name of the station and of the post office is restored.
Esioff-Léon Patenaude: I shall be glad to bring down the documents in connection with this matter and if there is anything that can be done in the premises, I shall do it with pleasure.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Archibald Blake McCoig: That, in the opinion of this House, on account of the urgent need of greater production of foodstuffs and the admitted shortage of farm labour, tractor engines suitable for all kinds of farm work, which will be of great assistance to producers, should be admitted into Canada free of duty.
He said: I feel satisfied that every member of the House will agree with me that it is of supreme importance that this resolution should be passed. We have it on the highest authority that there is great food shortage at this time. The Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) and the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) have urged our farmers to produce as much as possible. But, with the great shortage of labour, especially in the province of Ontario, it is out of the question for our farmers, under present conditions, to get in the crops that our people are anxious they should get in. I was talking to Mr. Foulds, manager of the Thames Valley Land Company, which has large holdings in the township of Tilbury, in the county of Kent, and he informed me that fields aggregating no less than four hundred acres in the most fertile portion of their lands would be left uncultivated this year owing to the shortage of labour and the lateness of the season. I asked him whether, if he had a light tractor engine, he would be able to handle the entire farm, and his answer was that he believed he could. He said he had been communicating with the''provincial authorities with a view to getting one of the ten tractors purchased by the Government of the province. But it is likely he would be unsuccessful because of the great demand 	-
that has arisen for these tractors. It goes to show how urgently the tractors are needed when Ithe provincial Government purchases ten of them and brings them from the other side of the line, where they are manufactured. We learn, also, that the -enterprising members of the Board of Trade of Toronto are drawing upon their private bank accounts to purchase five tractors with a view to distributing them where they can do the best work. With such evidences of an urgent demand for these machines on the part of our own people, it would seem only fair that this Parliament should take action at least to the extent of allowing these tractors to be brought in without an additional fine. I believe that if the duty were removed many farmers would be able to purchase these tractors privately, and if the duty were removed the cost to the purchasers would be greatly reduced. The tariff formerly was 20 per cent and now there is an additional 7i per cent. That is to say, if this duty were taken off we should be able to purchase five tractors for the present cost of four. I believe I am within the mark when I say that at present one thousand of these tractors could be used in Ontario. If the duty were removed these machines would be of some assistance in getting in -the spring crop, and our farmers would be in a much better position to put in an additional wheat crop this fall, and in the meantime there would be the summer fallowing and preparation for that crop. I understand from newspaper reports that other countries have placed orders for no fewer than 50,000 farm tractors.
' This is an indication of how widely useful these machines can be made in assisting greater agricultural production, and makes all the stronger the case in favour of this resolution. ' Should the Government object to allowing the free entry of the larger tractors, I would be prepared to amend this resolution by confining it to tractors of 8-16 horse-power, or possibly 10-20 horsepower. That, I understand to mean, a tractor that will pull 8 or 10 horse-power and will develop power on the belt of 16 or 20 horse-power. These tractors will be sufficiently large for our immediate purposes, and their importation will not interfere with any manufacture in Canada. I believe that the Massey-Harris Company are getting out a small tractor, but it is practically still in the experimental stage. We see by the press this morning that in all churches throughout the Dominion preachers have been urging greater production. And we

are warned by those who are in a better position to judge than most of the members of this House can possibly be that there is danger in the Old .World, and even here, of actual famine. This being so, it is clearly the duty of Parliament to give farmers every possible assistance. With the use of these tractors our farmers will be able to produce more, and thus Canada, besides sending her men to the front, will be able to give assistance in providing supplies for the troops and the people generally without which we cannot succeed in winning the war.
Sir THOMAS WHITE (Minister of Finance! : I am not clear as to what item in the Tariff the hon. member refers to. The resolution speaks of "tractor engines suitable for all kinds of farm work." These engines to-day are manufactured in Canada, by one or more concerns. Some time ago we placed ditching machines on the free list, but that was partly on the ground that they were not manufactured in Canada. As I have pointed out in the House before, one item in the Tariff depends upon another. If we take away the duty on tractor engines, then, as tractor engines are manufactured in Canada, we should have to take away the duties on the raw materials which enter into their manufacture, on the coal used in their production, and even on the building material used in the construction of the buildings in which they are produced.


John Gillanders Turriff: Will the minister please say where these tractor engines are manufactured in Canadia?


William Thomas White: Assuming that I understand the -article to which he refers, I am informed that they are manufactured in Hamilton, Brantford, and possibly some other places.


Archibald Blake McCoig: I may inform -the minister that the 8-10, and 10-20 tractors are not manufactured in Canada, though I understand that the Massey-Harris people are experimenting with them.


William Thomas White: The hon. gentleman's resolution refers to "tractor engines suitable for all kinds of farm work." The description is about as wide ias he can make it. The questions we must consider are, first, are these manufactured in Canada? and second, can they toe manufactured in Canada? If they 'are manufactured in Canada, our farmers .can buy them; if they
43}
are not now manufactured here tout can he, [DOT]then it is important that Canadians should make them.


Archibald Blake McCoig: But the nation wilfstarve in the meantime.


William Thomas White: I do nob agree
that these machines cannot be made in Canada. My information is that they are actually manufactured here and can be bought. It is the policy of the Government to encourage the manufacture of all articles that can he produced in Canada. It is in the national interest now more *than ever that if an article can toe bought in Canada it should be bought here rather than abroad, for it is necessary above all in time ,of war that we should conserve our resources. Speaking also from the standpoint of revenue, there never was a time when this Dominion needed revenue more than it does at present.


John Gillanders Turriff: Import the goods.


William Thomas White: There never was a time when this Dominion needed revenue more than it does at present. Our war expenditures are at the rate of $1,000,000 a day.
Mr. PUG8LEY: Some time ago I eaw in the newspapers that the British Government had bought, for -the use of its farmers, 2,000 of these tractor ploughs. I suppose that is what my hon. friend (Mr. McCoig) means. Were any of these purchased in Canada or were they not all purchased in the United States?


William Thomas White: I have no information as ta that point, but I-am perfectly [DOT]satisfied that if the Dominion Government desired to buy 2,000 ploughs it would be very much better that they should place the order for them in the Dominion of Canada than in the United States.


William Pugsley: If you could get them.


William Thomas White: But the point is that while we might get these tractors in the United States, they are manufactured, or can he manufactured, in Canada and in ordinary times it is desirable that our Canadian manufacturers should build them.


Mr. PARDEE:: Does the hon. gentleman say they can be bought in Canada? I understand the Ontario Government are bringing them in from the United States. Why are they doing that if they can buy them here?


William Thomas White: I am not able to say whether the Ontario Government are buying them in the United States or not, but I am referring to traction engines. Traction engines are manufactured in Canada.


John Gillanders Turriff: I think it will clear matters up a little bit if we get an idea Of the kind of engine that is meant. You can get a traction engine to run a threshing'machine in Canada; they are made at half a dozen or a dozen places. But, the tractor engines that are now being used by the western farmers for drawing a double mould board, or a two or four furrow plough, are not made in Canada except experimentally. We cannot get them in quantity; we have to buy them in the United States.


William Thomas White: My hon. friend
will observe the wording of the resolution. It refers to "tractor engines suitable for all kinds of farm work."


Archibald Blake McCoig: I suggested when I was
making my remarks that I would be willing to so amend my resolution as to confine it to the 8-16 and 10-20 tractors which are suitable for farm purposes. The large tractor-s, the 20-30 and 20-40, are too heavy for farm work and are almost impracticable' because they pack the ground too much.


William Thomas White: It is not possible for me to agree to the amendment of this motion unless my hon. friend desires to give notice of it. I can only speak of the resolution as it. stands on the Order Paper, and as it stands on the Order Paper it should be voted down for the reason which I have given; that is, that -the tractor engines can be manufactured in Canada, and it is against the national interest that they should be imported from the United States. I was developing my argument as to the need that Canada has for additional revenue. Then, beyond the desirability of manufacturing these goods in Canada, if there ever was a time in the history of the Dominion when we need revenue it is the present. We have an expenditure in connection with this war at the rate of $1,000,000 a day. In so far as I know, all classes in the community are doing well. I do not think that the farmers have ever done as well in the history of the Dominion as they are doing at the present time. I do not believe that as high prices have ever been obtained for farm produce as are being obtained at present. I do not believe that general business in the Dominion was ever better or as good as it is at the present time. That being so, there would seem to be no tMr. Pardee.]
reason why the' duty should be taken off these articles any more than off a further range of articles that my hon. friend might mention. The present is not a time to reduce or remove duties which give us our revenue. So that, on two grounds, first, on the ground of revenue, second, on the ground that these articles are being, or can be, manufactured in Canada, I think my hon. gentleman's motion should be negatived. If he desires to withdraw this motion and substitute a motion which covers a certain line of traction engines which he mentioned, but which I cannot identify and about which I have no information at the present time, I would be willing that that should be done, but, as it stands, the resolution should be negatived.


Mr. WILCOX:: Mr. Speaker, I want, in the first place, to associate myself with those who are in favour of any measure that will benefit the agricultural classes of this country at this time. I am rather inclined to the view, however, that the suggestion which has been made by my hon. friend from West Kent (Mr. McCoig) this afternoon, if carried into effect, would not be the benefit to the farmers that he anticipates, but would, on the other hand, work a great injury. We have in the little town of Essex, six miles from where I live, a splendid industry which is branching out into the manufacture of farm tractors. They are putting up at the present time, I understand, seven of these tractors for the express purpose of assisting in all light farm work. If my hon. friend the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) were to act upon the suggestion of my hon. friend from West Kent, I think it would have the effect of wiping out of existence that infant industry, which, I do believe, is [DOT] contrary to the policy of both political parties. As I understand the principle upon which both political parties stand in regard to this matter, it is that the infant industry shall have a reasonable protection until such time as it is enabled to compete against the industries of the outside world. My hon. friend (Mr. McCoig) says that is false. There may be some question about that point, but I know that up our way in the splendid city of Windsor, where we are hoping to build up a great industrial centre, the Liberals have very little to say about free trade.


George Perry Graham: The hon. gentleman did not say what you intimated at all.


Archibald Blake McCoig: I did, not address any
remarks to the hon. gentleman whatever.

I did not refer in any way whatever to anything that the hon. gentleman said. That is all imaginary on the part of the hon. gentleman.


Oliver James Wilcox: I heard a breath floating from the other side that sounded like that. I may be pardoned for referring to the question of traction ditchers which has been dealt with. I think the Minister of Finance will agree when I state that I was the first member of this House who suggested to him that, as this machine was not manufactured in Canada and was only manufactured in the United States, it might be placed on the free list. I have watched this very closely because the question of tile draining in the county of Essex and in western Ontario, where it is a flat, level, but very rich and fertile country, is a live issue and we have dozens of these machines in our neighborhood. There is one working on my own farm, or on my father's farm, and we know, what we had to pay when these machines had a duty imposed upon them. We had to pay twenty-five cents a rod for the digging of the*trench and the placing of the tile. .The duty was taken off. A few more- machines were brought in and the men who brought the machines in joined together and raised the cost of laying the tile to twenty-eight cents a rod. That is what we are paying to-day. So that the elimination of the duty on the tile ditching machines did not reduce the price to the farmer of the laying of the tile, but, in my opinion, it did have the effect for all time to come, while the tariff remains as it is, of preventing all possibility of any tile ditching machines being constructed in the Dominion of Canada. So it seems to me that when our policy is based upon that principle of a reasonable protection for an infant industry, when we are commencing to build up that industry, I believe, as the ' farmers of this country have been loyal and patriotic in their adherence to that principle in our national policy in the past, they will stand by it in the future in the same way. I also believe that the benefit which my hon. friend anticipates would flow from the reduction of duty would not be secured. Therefore, I think the tariff should remain as it is.


Mr. NESBITT:: What firm in Essex are making' these machines?


Oliver James Wilcox: The firm there is making a farm tractor with a capacity of drawing two or three plows. They have purchased a machine shop and commenced operations
about two months ago. I am quite confident that if my hon. friend will sendN a telegram this afternoon, that company will be able to fill right away all the orders that he can take in the county of Kent.


Archibald Blake McCoig: Last fall-I did not want to bring any personal matter into this debate-I waited on Mr. McGregor, head of the Ford factory in Ford, and asked when I could get a tractor for my own farm, as at the request of this Government I wanted one to get in all the wheat possible. Mr. McGregor told me that he could not guarantee me a tractor within two years; and the whole nation would starve before these tractors would be ready to cultivate land to produce wheat.


Mr. LALOR:: If the hon. member will
wire to the Canadian Engine Company at Dunnville, Ontario, he can get a tractor because we manufacture them.


Archibald Blake McCoig: What horse-power?


Francis Ramsey Lalor: I do not know exactly the horse-power, but large enough to do ploughing.	.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: That is the trouble, they are too large.


Archibald Blake McCoig: These are kerosene burning engines and they afford a great saving in cost over the gasolene engines to which my hon. friend (Mr. Lalor) referred.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Are the McGregor people at Ford the same as the firm at Essex?
Mr. tyiLCOX: No, they are not the same people. The Ford people have not commenced to construct tractors. I understand they have not commenced even in Detroit, and I know they have not in Walkerville. The firm I have reference to is starting a factory in the town of Essex.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: What is the name of the firm?


Oliver James Wilcox: I think it is The Essex County Tractor Company, but I would not be positive as to the name.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: Have they produced these tractors yet?


Oliver James Wilcox: I shall send a telegram this afternoon and get that information. I am sure they are now manufacturing tractors and putting them on the market. They had one on exhibition at the fall fair last year.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: The reason I ask these questions is that I wish to be absolutely

fair in these things. So far as the Ford people are concerned, I know that what the hon. member for Kent (Mr. McCoig) says is correct, because I wrote them myself and they are not in a position to produce any tractors yet. As to the factory in Essex, I never heard of it before. That of course, does not say, that it does not exist. I wish them success. But in the meantime I want to impress on the Minister of Finance that this year in Ontario we are suffering very materially from the lack of farm labour. There is a great deal in the newspapers about the city people sending students into the country and going themselves, and all that sort of thing; but as a matter of fact the ordinary farmer does not pay much attention to that because he knows as well as I do that a man cannot [DOT] come from the city, unaccustomed to heavy manual labour, and be much use on the farm.


Oliver James Wilcox: Men from the city have proved to be good fighters and I do not know why they should not be good farmers if they apply themselves.


Edward Walter Nesbitt: They would undoubtedly become good farmers if they had the time and experience, as good as anybody else. But at the same time no man can successfully do a kind of work to which he is not accustomed until he has had training and experience. The tractors of which the hon. member for Kent (Mr. McCoig) speaks were exhibited last year at all the ploughing matches in the country. They were all of American manufacture. The tariff at the present time as against American machines is 20 per cent and 71 per .cent, or-27i per cent. The machines that [DOT] were exhibited and were .put into use last fall, -these American machines, were very light and capable, with engines able to draw two or three ploughs. I saw them working in two or three instances and know that they did excellent work and could be used on the ordinary farm at least in central and western Ontario. I think it would be a material advantage to the people of Ontario, and, perhaps, to other parts of the country if this change in the tariff were made. I leave my hon. friends to speak for the West, but it would certainly be of material advantage to us if the duty were taken off. A duty of 271 per cent is very high; if is altogether unnecessarily high. I do not know of any manufacture that requires a duty of 271 per cent to do business in this country. The minister is quite right in saying that if an article is manufactured in Canada
[iMr. Nesbitt.]
and the duty is taken off the finished article the duty should also he removed from the raw material entering into its production. But for the benefit of the farmer and of the community at large, it would be wise for the minister to remove the duty from light tractors used for ploughing purposes, and I hope he will give this matter serious consideration. I am sure that the hon. member for Kent (Mr. McCoig) will be willing to -amend his resolution to conform to that suggestion.


John Gillanders Turriff: It seems to me that when so -much -has been said by the Government in connection with greater production, this matter deserves serious consideration. A campaign is being carried on all over Canada to-day, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, calling on the farmers to produce more foodstuffs, and there is absolutely no question that the world's supply of food is now at a lower ebb than it has been for many, many years. It was stated last week by an authority engaged in compiling figures relating to this matter that during the present year the amount of wheat produced will be 310,000,000 bushels less than the different countries that use wheat as a food have been in the habit of importing yearly. In view of this shortage and of the necessity for all the production possible, it would seem to be a matter of common sense on the part of the Finance Minister and of the Government to help along production by granting the request made by the member for Kent. There is no use preaching production to a farmer if the conditions are not such that he can produce with advantage to himself. If you want to secure the greatest possible amount of production, the proper course is to make the way easy for the man who produces.
I am quite sure -that the tractors that the member for Kent wishes to have put on the free list are quite different from the ones that -the Minister of Finance spoke about. The traction engines that we have seen in the West by the hundreds are engines that can be used for a number of purposes, chiefly for running separators; they move from field to field by their own power and draw the separator and a wagon or two along with them. That is not the sort of engine that the member for Kent wants to have put on the free list. The engine to which he refers takes the place of six or eight horses. Hundreds of them are being used in the provinces of Mani-

toba, Saskatchewan and Alberta; they will do as much breaking as eight or nine horses. I know- one firm in Winnipeg which has made a contract with a Minneapolis manufacturer for the purchase of several hundred of these tractors; they are being bought throughout the whole country. They retail at a rather high price, something like $1,650; but in the West they find that a tractor of that kind, notwithstanding the high cost of fuel oil, does the work cheaper and more quickly than it can be done by using horses, especially in breaking up the land. A number of these tractors, all from the United States, were exhibited at exhibitions last summer. I think I can reasonably assure the Finance Minister that the tractor engine referred to by the member for Kent is not manufactured for practical puposes in Canada. I believe, however that the manufacturers are taking the matter up, and it is probable that in a year or two they will Have an engine on the market that will be all right. If these tractors were being manufactured in Canada, I feel certain that the Government of Ontario would have purchased them from Canadian manufacturers instead of going to the United States for them. The fact that they bought them in the United States is conclusive proof that they could not secure them in the province of Ontario.
If the duty upon these tractors were removed, one result would be. a very much increased crop during the year 1918. I dp not know that the removal of the duty would make much difference so far as the present year's crop is concerned. In another month the sowing season will be over, and those who have not obtained tractors would haTdly be able to secure them in time to use them advantageously between now and the end of the seeding. We have no certainty that the war will 'be over a year from now, but we do know that food is becoming very much scarcer in Britain. I see that the British Government have arranged with Mr. Henry Ford, the maker of the Ford automobile, to send specifications of his tractor engine to Britain. The British Government will then have these tractors manufactured in Great Britain -and used to plough up the parks and vacant lots throughout the British Isles in order to secure the cultivation of a largely increased acreage. If it is necessary for the British Government to take such drastic steps as these in order to increase their own food supply, it seems to
me that it would be wise for this Parliament to do everything in its power to increase the supply of wheat, not only this year, but during next year as well. From all the information I have been able to get in the West, I understand that the acreage in wheat this year will be less than last year, on account of last fall being a bad season. Only a small amount of land was got ready for this spring, and while the total acreage in crop this year w-ill not be less than last year, the acreage in wheat will be considerably less, that of flax, barley and oats being, perhaps, somewhat larger. We have to take it for granted that there will be a big demand for food next year, and it is not wise to wait until next year to prepare for the sowing of the 1918 crop. We have to begin to prepare now, and we can do no better than adopt the resolution of the member for Kent and have these tractors put on the free list. The wording of the resolution is, perhaps a little wide; it might be better to narrow it down and state more definitely just what kind of tractor is meant. If my hon. friend the member fox Kent and the Minister pf Finance get together, they can very soon arrange that.
I s-ay again that if the Government wish to carry out the policy of more production they ought to adopt the suggestion made by the member for Kent and put these tractors on the free list. It would be a big help to the farmers not only of Ontario, but of the three prairie provinces a-s well, and the result would be a largely increased acreage during the season of 1018.


Mr. BLAIN:: Will the member for Kent state the selling price of the tractor to which he refers?


Archibald Blake McCoig: Four pf these tractors
were brought into Chatham the otheT day, and the price of each, in Tound figures, was $1,150. That includes a plough which will turn three furrows.


Richard Blain: Where is it manufactured?
Mr. MeOOIG: In Chicago, by the International Harvester Company. It bums kerosene instead of gasolene.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Is that laid down price including duty?
Mr. MeOOIG:	Yes, that includes the
duty and the freight.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: What is the horse-power?


Archibald Blake McCoig: For that size, eight and sixteen: that is, eight on the draw and six-

teen on the "belt. It is a tractor that is used for ploughing, discing and cultivating, and the farmers also use it for grinding, or filling the silos in other seasons of the year.


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: 
Frederick Forsyth Pardee: How many tractors do
those companies produce in a year?


Mr. STEWART:: I do not think the Sawyer-Massey would produce more than 32 or 35 altogether in a year. The market in this country is very limited for those engines; perhaps fifty or sixty are sold in the United States for one here,


Frederick Forsyth Pardee: Why does the Ontario
Government go to the States?


Thomas Joseph Stewart: Nobody knows that. I know from the cost of the tractor engines manufactured in the United States that no Canadian firm is able to manufacture in competition with the United States manufacturers considering the large markets the latter have and the larger production com-
6S1

pared with the production in Canada. If the duty is taken off, those Canadian manufacturers who have been in business for so many years, and who are able to produce sufficient to cope with the demand, will be crippled, so that I think the Government would toe very foolish to take off the duty for the benefit of a few farmers when it would ruin the manufacturers who have built up a good trade.


Archibald Blake McCoig: 
Archibald Blake McCoig: and many an acre of land will go into fall wheat this year if the Government will grant this request, and the machines will come in in greater numbers than carloads of four. Many of our farmers would buy the machines and do not only their own work, but their neighbours' as well, the neighbours possibly threshing for the man who is operating the tractor. If the Government will give the farmers this assistance our crop of wheat next fall will be doubled, instead of falling off 180,000,000 bushels, as it did in 1916. That is-what we are all out for. We are not here for political capital all the time, and certainly not on this question. We ask the Government to grant this request because we believe it will assist in carrying out the demand that this Government is making upon our farmers from time to time. There are many other arguments which I could advance, but I will content myself with this quotation:-


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Unless the hon. member rises to a point of order it is not proper for him to discuss the motion at this stage, because the debate has been closed by the member who moved the resolution.


Thomas Joseph Stewart: I do not know whether you call it a point of order or not, but he made a statement about myself that is not
correct, and I wish to contradict him.


George Perry Graham: The minister wants a
day or two to consider this resolution, I understand.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I have no doubt in my mind that it is not competent for the hon. member to amend his resolution except by the unanimous consent of the House.


George Perry Graham: We understand that. I just wanted the leader of the Government and myself to understand each other.
Allies require food above all from America.
The Allies' greatest problem-and the one which you can best aid our allied cause by helping to solve-is that of food, which involves that of shipping.
Please remember that there is no British food problem, no French food problem, nor Italian, nor Russian food problem. It is all one great question. At a recent allied1 conference the Allied Governments agreed to pool their food supplies.
While England is not short of food, andJ probably could get along if she had only herself to consider, all Is not well with France and Italy. Their food shortage is acute. It is growing more so.
Those are the words of the Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour. Surely when he comes from the old land with a message like that we should not hesitate a moment to f>ass this resolution, so that we may get the tractors in time for the spring seeding. If we delay for two or three weeks longer the machines will be of no use this season. I am pleased to 'amend the resolution at the request of the Finance Minister so that all tractors over 8, 16, 10, 20 horsepower he excluded.


William Thomas White: The resolution as it stands includes tractor engines suitable for all kinds of farm work. If my hon. friend desires to narrow his resolution I should like him to give notice, so that I may look into it.


Thomas Joseph Stewart: Mr. Speaker


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Do I understand that the hon. member rises to discuss the question before the House?


Thomas Joseph Stewart: I wish to answer a statement made 'by the hon. member in reference to myself.
[Mr. McCoig.l


William Thomas White: The resolution as it stands on the order paper is wider than is now proposed, and it would be negatived as far as the Government is concerned. If my hon. friend desires to put another resolution on the order paper covering his amended motion, it is open to him to do so.


George Perry Graham: I see the point raised by the leader of the House. I have not consulted my hon. friend, but would the leader of the House assure us that within a reasonable time we shall have an opportunity to discuss the amended resolution?


William Thomas White: My hon. friend can discuss this and any other cognate question upon the Budget; the place where these questions should be discussed.
The House divided on the motion of Mr. McCoig.

Messieurs:
Bourassa,
Bureau,
Cash,
Clark (Red Deer), Douglas,
Fortier,
Gauthier
(St. Hyacinthe), Gauvreau,
Graham,
Hughes
(Kings, P.E.I.), Kyte,
Lapointe,
(Kamouraska ), Lemieux,
McCoig,
McCraney,
McKenzie,
Marcile (Bagot), Michaud,
Nesbitt,
Oliver,
Papineau,
Pardee,
Proulx,
Ross,
Sinclair,
Truax,
Turgeon,
Turriff.-28.


, Messieurs:
Armstrong (Lambton), Armstrong (York, O.), Ball,
Barnard,
Bennett (Simcoe), Blain,
Boulay,
Boys,
Bradbury,
Burnham,
Burrell,
Clark (Bruce), Cochrane,
Crothers,
Donaldson,
Elliot,
Fisher,
Fripp,
Green,
Hanna,
Henderson,
Lalor,
Lewis,
Macdonel],
Maclean (York, O.),
McLean
(Queens, P.E.I.), Marshall,
Meighen,
Morphy,
Morris,
Nicholson,
Northrup,
Paquet,
Patenaude,
Rainville,
Reid,
Roche,
Schaffner,
Sexsmith,
Shepherd,
Steele,
Stevens,
Stewart (Hamilton), Stewart (Lunenburg), Wallace,
White (Sir Thomas), Wilcox,
Wright.-48.
Pairs
Messieurs:
Kemp (Sir Edward), Robb,
Wilson (Wentworth), Wilson (Laval), Stanfield,	Macdonald.
Motion negatived.
MV. PUGSLEY:	I am paired with the
Minister of Marne and Fisheries (Mr. ITazen) Had I voted, I would have voted in favour of the motion.


Mr. MARCIL:: I am paired with the Minister of Justice (Mr. Doherty). Had I voted, I isihoiuEid have voted in favour of the motion.


Mr. CROMWELL:: I am paired with the hon. member for Richmond and Wolfe (Mr. Tobin). Had I voted, I should have voted against the motion.


George Perry Graham: As the matter might
otherwise be overlooked, may I be allowed at this stage to notify the Government that, the proposal to amend Mr. McCoig's motion having been declined, on some future occasion when motion is made for the House to go into Committee of Supply, a motion covering the ground which would have been covered by Mr. McCoig's motion as proposed to be amended will probably be brought forward.



RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. G. E. McCRANEY (Saskatoon) moved the second reading of Bill No. 18, to amend the Railway Act.
He said: As the Railway Act is under revision by a Special Committee of the House, this appears an opportune time to bring to the consideration of the House and of this committee the amendment proposed by this Bill. The purpose is to give to the members of the local Legislatures similar pass privileges to those enjoyed by members of this Parliament. It is not proposed to add any new burden to the railway companies, for it is the practice of railway companies to give passes to the members of the provincial legislatures. It may be of interest to the House to know under what circumstances section 343 of the Railway Act, which it is here proposed to amend, was passed. I am informed that in 1903' the late Senator Davis of Prince Albert, being then a member of this House, made some criticism of one of the railway companies, from which company he held a pass. The criticism was objectionable to the company, and they promptly withdrew the pass and so notified Mr. Davis. He spoke to the late Mr. Blair, who was then Minister of Railways, telling him of the circumstance. As the Railway Act was then under the consideration of Parliament, this section was put in so as to avoid the recurrence of such instances and to place members of Parliament on an independent footing with reference to the railways. This subject of passes has been and is a matter of discussion on public platforms. The fact that a member of the legislature holds a pass from a railway company beoomes the subject of remark. To my mind, members of provincial legislatures are entitled to the same protection for their personal honour that members of this House are entitled to. The legislature of Nova Scotia lias, endeavoured to deal with the matter. In the Statutes of Nova Scotia, 1906, Chapter 25, section 3, the following is enacted:
234a. Every railway company shall furnish free transportation upon any of its trains for members of the Legislative Council and House of Assembly of Nova Scotia, with their baggage, and also for such officers and servants as may be employed by the Governor in Council in business or work connected with the railways of the province, or any of them, with their baggage or equipment, and shall also when required haul free of charge any car provided for the Governor-in-Council.
Whether the legislature of the province of Nova Scotia has the power to pass such an Act affecting railways under the control of this Parliament is a matter I am not going to discuss. But I understand that the practice of the railways .is to conform to
[Stage Direction]
this section and to issue passes to members of the legislature. The legislature has done all it could, at any rate, to put its members in a Tight light before the country. I am informed by leaders of the Opposition in two of the provinces that the passes which are issued to them by the railway companies cover transportation, not only within the province in which they reside, but also over the whole of their system. Perhaps when the matter is under consideration, it may be desirable to give them the same privileges which it is proposed by this Bill to give to members of Provincial Cabinets. The Bill, as it is presented, limits the passes of members of the' legislature to transportation within the province in which they reside, while providing for passes to be given to members of Provincial Cabinets good throughout the whole of Canada.
Francis Cochrane: I cannot altogether agree with this Bill, and I would suggest that it be referred to the Committee on Railways without giving it the second reading. I think it is going rather further than we should go to compel railways to give transportation to all members of provincial legislatures. I understood the hon. member (Mr. McCraney) to say that the railways gave to members of the Nova Scotia legislature passes that are good over their entire systems. That is not the case so far as the. Government railways are concerned. I think that on company railways also such passes are confined to the limits of the province except in the case of the ministers of the Crown.


Mr. McCRANEY:: The minister is correct-members of the legislature are given transportation within the province in which they reside, hut ministers of the Grown have passes good throughout the whole system. That is what-this Bill provides.


William Pugsley: 
Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Solicitor General):: I was endeavouring to get the
full import of the views exx ressed by my bon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley). I think I succeeded to the extent of learning the principle upon which he understands the present enactment was inserted in the Railway Act, namely, that if being in the public interest- that members of thife House should be enabled to ascertain to *the very best advantage the conditions. in all parts of -Canada, it was well that they should be free at all times to travel in the different parts of the country and that they 'should be free to do so * under -such legislation as would make it their right and not make it an obligation on their part to the railway companies. I do not purpose to argue it now. It might be that the logical extension of that principle would be to enable members o-f the provincial legislatures to travel within the borders of their provinces. But I cannot for the life of me understand how, by -any extension of the principle we adopted in this House -some years ago, it could be argued that that right should be extended to members of provincial legislatures to travel throughout

the length and breadth of Canada. Whether, if this Act go no further than to enable members of the provincial legislatures to travel within the borders of their own province, it would then be acceptable, I would not care to say.


William Pugsley: That is as far as it
does go.


Arthur Meighen: It appears to me that as a general principle the shorter our steps, and the less distance we go in that direction the better. Every one knows the abuses to which these rights, or alleged rights, are always put. But, at all events, the proposal, in its present form, does not appear to be one which should be adopted in principle, if the passage of the second reading would mean adoption in principle, because it goes further in my judgment than we can justify ourselves in going.


William Pugsley: As I read the Bill it is limited to the provinces. It says:
and to members of the Executive Councils of the provinces of Canada, and within the provinces in which they reside, to members of the Legislative Councils and Legislative Assemblies of the provinces of Canada.
Except as to members of the Government, it is limited to the province; as to members of the Government it is broader.


Arthur Meighen: I do not see the signifi canee of the conjunction in that event or even that it meets the objection that could be raised to the principle. At all events, I should not care to concede or extend the right further without the fullest consideration. I would suggest that, without adopting the principle of the Bill, it be referred to the committee to which all 1 railway amendments are now referred.


William Pugsley: That means, as I understand, the -second reading without affirming the principle?


Arthur Meighen: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Alotion agreed to, Bill read the second time, and referred to the Committee on Railways.
William Pugsley: I rather thought the Solicitor General meant-and I think that is what the Minister of Railways would do-to refer this to the special committee.


Air. UOCHRANE:: No, to the Railway Committee of the House.


George Ewan McCraney: I understand from the Solicitor General that it was a special com-

mittee to which he thought this Bill should be referred and not to the general Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines. I moved the motion on the understanding that all amendments are being considered-now by this special committee on railway matters, and I see by the public press that the Minister of Railways is inviting suggestions by letter and otherwise. That is the committee which should consider this Bill.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The motion was submitted by me in plain terms to the House and announced carried, and it is, therefore too late to discuss it.	-



SOLDIER SETTLEMENT BOARD.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Hon. W. J. Roche, that the House do tomorrow resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider the following proposed Resolution:-
Resolved,-That it is expedient to establish a board, to be called "The Soldier Settlement Board," consisting of three commissioners, and to provide for salaries and expenses in connection therewith, and tb empower the Minister of the Interior, at the request of the board, to reserve such Dominion lands as may be required, and upon the recommendation of the board, to grant a free entry for not more than one hundred and sixty acres of such reserved lands to any person W'ho has served in the naval or military expeditionary forces of the United Kingdom or of any of the self-governing British Dominions or Colonies, and who has left the forces with an honourable record or who has been honourably discharged, and the widow of any such person who died on active service, subject to such conditions as in the opinion of the Governor in Council are necessary to secure the use of the land for the purposes for which it is granted; and further to provide that the board may loan, upon such terms and conditions as may be prescribed, to any such settler an amount not exceeding two thousand dollars for acquiring land for agricultural purposes, payment of encumb: ances on lands used for agricultural purposes, improvement of agricultural lands, erection of farm buildings and purchase of stock, machinery and equipment, the money to be expended under the supervision of the board, and all expenditure made under the terms of this resolution to be paid out of such moneys as Parliament may appropriate for the purpose.
Rodolphe Lemieux: Is distribution of the
land to returned soldiers to be limited to those of Canadian origin?


William Roche: Oh no.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It will include those
from all parts of the Empire?


William Roche: Yes.


Rodolphe Lemieux: It is unlimited?


William Roche: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
The House went into Committee of Supply, Mr. Rainville in the Chair
Civil Government-Department of Labour,
salaries, etc., $54,137.50.
["But they are fraught with great significance. I should not like to have to reply to the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) to-night, for instance. I would suggest that we pass item 265 and adjourn. We have worked pretty hard.\nProgress reported.\n>\nOn motion of Sir Thomas White the House adjourned at 11 o'clock p.m.\nMonday, April 24, 1917."]
Rodolphe Lemieux: Are there any new
officers in the department?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: There appears to be
one more. The number last year was 39; this year it is 40. There are 5 instead of 4 officials in subdivision A of the third division this year. I understand that one of these positions is vacant. The amount of this vote last year was $54,012; this year it is $54,137.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Have any returned soldiers been taken into the department?
' Mr. CROTHERS: One at least.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Have all employees been appointed under the Civil Service Act?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think not; we have some temporary employees.


Mr. VERVILLE:: It was reported in the press some time ago that Mr. Brown, Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour had been suspended or dismissed from the department. I should like to ask the minister whether he is still in the employ of the department, and why he was suspended?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The office of Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour has been abolished.


John Gillanders Turriff: On what date?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Just a day or two ago.


George Perry Graham: That is since Mr. Brbwn was abolished.
Mr. CROTHERS; Since he was suspended.
. Mr. VERVILLLE:	It is quite a while
since I saw that report in the press.


George Perry Graham: The minister took him
from the office, not the office from him.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The office was abol

ished and his services are to be discontinued from June 1


George Perry Graham: Do I understand that his services are to be discontinued from the 1st of June and that the office was abolished a couple of days ago?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It is all in the same Order in Council.


George Perry Graham: Will the minister tell us why this was done?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have no objection to telling you why, bub in the absence of the person who 'is directly interested, I am reluctant to say anything concerning this matter. I do not like to speak disparagingly of one who has no opportunity of saying anything by way of explanation, or defen-ce, or mitigation. I suppose it is so in all cases where the person concerned is not a member of this House; whatever you have to say touching a matter of this kind has to be said in his absence, and he, therefore, has no opportunity of saying anything by way of explanation. Speaking sincerely, I would prefer not to say anything about it; but my hon. friends are, of course, entitled to ask the reason and to get it.


Alphonse Verville: I would like to know why.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The immediate cause of his suspension arose in this way: on a Saturday evening in the latter part of February he applied to the deputy minister for leave of absence for a few days. As the matter of his absence had been up at least on one occasion before, the deputy referred him to me. Mr. Brown telephoned me to say his wife was leaving the city on Monday and that he would like to have three or four days off. I said, "all right; take three or four days." Well, he took all that week and three days of the next week, and when he returned he did not say anything about it, make any explanation, apology, or anything else. I, therefore, gave him notice of suspension. The facts are that for a long time he had not been satisfactorily discharging the duties of his office. He appeared to be obsessed with a grossly exaggerated conception of the importance of a civil servant in the first division. He used to do things without saying anything about them, a thing which I think a man in his position should not have done. He used to do things that he was distinctly told not to do, and he would criticise the way in which the Department of Labour was administered.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: He was justified in that.	-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The department may
not be managed properly; it may be very inefficiently administered; but it appeared to me it was no part of the duty of an assistant deputy minister to criticise the way in which the department was administered. I do not think he was competent to discharge the duties of his office; I think he was incompetent; I think he was insubordinate, and he was disloyal.


Rodolphe Lemieux: In what sense was he disloyal?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: In the sense that he was not loyal to the head of the department.


Alphonse Verville: I suppose the same
thing will apply in any of the other departments, that if an employee asks leave of absence for a certain length of time, and stays away three or four or five times longer than he is permitted, he will be suspended?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not know what
action the other ministers would take in a case of that kind.


Alphonse Verville: I am not asking the
minister to tell me whether that course of action will apply or not; but I say for the benefit of the other ministers that there are men employed in the other departments who have asked for leave of absence for a very short space of time who have travelled all through the West for four or five months.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have not had very much experience in any other department; but I have acted in a few of the other departments in the absence of the ministers, and I remember distinctly deputies coming in and apologizing for being away half a day, and giving reasons for their absence; such as sickness in the family or something of that sort, and, of course,, nothing more was said about the matter. In this case, however, no effort at all was made to explain or apologize.


Alphonse Verville: It was not a question of apology; it was a question of whether or not he was competent to fill the position.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I gave incompetency as one reason; there are several others.


John Gillanders Turriff: Apparently the reason given is that this official took two or three days longer leave of absence than he had asked for, and because on his return he did not come to the minister and apologize, the minister first suspended him and then fired him, and now the minister brings in

a further excuse that the official was not competent anyway. If the assistant deputy minister was not competent, it has taken the minister five years to find that out. He was not suspended or dismissed for incompetency; but simply because he did not apologize to the minister for being two or three days over his leave he was fired.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not know whether my hon. friend knows better than I why he was fired. I have told the committee why his services were dispensed with. My hon. friend is probably right, that his services should have been dispensed with five years ago; 1 know that I spoke about it several years ago. I may add that he has not received any statutory increase of salary for three or four years because he had pot, in my judgment, efficiently discharged the duties of his .office.


Alphonse Verville: Will the minister give us a little explanation about this item of $15,000 for -sundries? I am not saving it should not be inserted in the Estimates, but I would like some explanation.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: This item comprises three items: extra clerical and other assistance, $1,000; printing and stationery, $7,000; sundries, $7,000. This includes stationery and printing other than the Labour Gazette, travelling expenses for officers resident at Ottawa, postage, clerical assistance, clerical help, etc.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Has the minister given all the reasons that prompted him to dispense with the services of Mr. Brown?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think those I gave would cover them. I have not gone into all the details.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Either they do cover them, or they do not.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I think they cover them.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The minister should tell us in what respect Mr. Brown was incompetent and also in what particular respect he was disloyal. I know nothing about Mr. Brown except that he was always regarded by the public as an efficient officer; but if a man is said by a minister of the Crown to be incompetent and disloyal, those general words ought to be particularized, and definite instances given in which the incompetency has arisen and the disloyalty become apparent. It is very easy to use those words in a general sense and

they carry meanings which are very broad. Mr. Brown is a journalist; I remember when he was in the press gallery here, and while he was in the department, as far as competency is concerned, his intelligence and capacity ought to have made him competent for the office. Therefore, if the minister says he is incompetent, I ask: Wherein is he incompetent? The same applies to the question of his disloyalty. It is only fair that we should know these things.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: As my hon. friend from Pictou has said, when Mr. Brown was appointed to a position in the Department of Labour, he had been a newspaper reporter of some experience, but no distinction. He was appointed to the position without any examination whatever, under the provisions of section 21 of the Civil Service Amendment Act, the Civil Service Commission after profound deliberation for three months gravely certified that the duties of this office called for qualifications of a professional and technical character. As hon. gentlemen will remember, under section 21 of the Civil Service Amendment Act, a man may be appointed without any examination whatever when it is certified by the Civil Service Commission that the duties of the office call for qualifications of a professional, technical or otherwise peculiar character, and in this case such a certificate was given. If a university graduate were to apply for a position carrying a salary of $500 a year, he or she would have to pass an examination; but under this certificate, issued by the Civil Service Commission in this case, this man was ap- , pointed at a salary of $2,800 a year to ad- ' vance to $4,000 by annual increments of $100. That- is a little device that is sometimes adopted to foist into the service one who cannot get in by the regular route.


George Perry Graham: I think the present Government knows more about that than anybody else.
Mr.^ CROTHERS: I do not think you will find any men of that kind in the Labour Department.
' Mr. GRAHAM: I guess the other ministers are pretty bad, then.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: In answer to my hon. friend from Pictou, I would say that I have had many complaints both from employers and employees of the manner in which Mr. Brown discharged the duties of his office.
I remember on one occasion he went down

to New York at the public expense without saying a word to me that he was going, and he did not even condescend to make any report when he came back as to the reason for his visit. I could also give instances where he has criticised the management -of the department behind my back. There * have been occasions when I have told him that we did not require certain things, and months afterwards I have found out that he had got them. I have on other occasions distinctly told him to do certain, things which he did not do. I have no desire to go into these details, but hon. gentlemen have a right to ask for them, and I have a right to give them. It is not a pleasant thing to dismiss a man. from office if he is discharging his duties fairly and efficiently, but, as I said before, Mr. Brown seemed to foe obsessed by a grossly exaggerated conception of the responsibilities and importance of a civil servant in the first division.
Mr. -VERVILLE: I should have thought that the Minister of Labour would have acquired a sufficient amount of . knowledge in the last five years to know the kind of man , he needs in the department. The minister has been speaking of technical men. I think in a department like his it would be better if there was less technicality and more common sense. I am not referring to this Government particularly, for that is what I have always said. Until you get practical men in the Department of Labour you will never make it a success.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: We have them there now.


Alphonse Verville: In inferior positions,
carrying parcels and such like. That is the only kind of practical men you have in the department. The minister might say that the fair wages officers are practical men. Why, it is only two years ago that he appointed one in Winnipeg who did not know who was the head of the labour movement there; he was not a practical man. The only men who should be appointed as fair wage officers are men of practical experi-' ence who have come in contact with the different labour elements throughout the country. # Surely there are men in this country with common sense enough and practical experience to fill the position that has been made vacant by Mr. Brownes dismissal. I am sorry to hear the minister say that he is going to abolish this position. With all due respect for the minister and the deputy minister, I say there is a practical side to the department that nobody seems to know anything about.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Which side is that?


George Perry Graham: The inside.


Alphonse Verville: Everything pertaining to the department. It would not be fair to expect the minister or his deputy to have all the practical knowledge that is necessary. A professional man cannot have that knowledge. But my point is that if practical labour men were appointed to high positions in the department, they would be able to render a great service to the minister and the country.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: When I took charge of the Labour Department, the two fair wage officers were Mr. McNiven and Mr. Du-breuil. Mr. McNiven was transferred within a few months to Vancouver. He is a man with a great deal of experience and strong common sense, and has discharged the duties of his office for the past five years with perfect satisfaction to me. Speaking from memory, I do not think I have ever had a complaint against him or his work. He has settled scores of disputes which would have ripened into serious trouble but for his presence on the ground at Vancouver. I have unbounded confidence in him. Not long after I was placed in charge of the department, I recommended that he be given an increase in salary, because I thought he was worth more than he was getting. Mr. Dubreuil was also a first class man, who looked after the Province of Quebec and the Maritime Provinces. He spoke both English and French fluently and did his work well and I increased his salary because I did not think I could get another man to do the work as well as he, and we were likely to lose him if he did not get an increase. I was very sorry, indeed, when he was taken away. The gentleman at Winnipeg that my hon. friend has referred to served us faithfully there for about three years, and did a great deal of extra work in connection with the Hudson Bay Railway, over which he went two or three times to see that the men constructing the road were being treated properly. He looked after his territory to the satisfaction of every one, and I never had a complaint against him. LTnfortunately, his health failed him about a year ago, and he was obliged to resign his position. I have two or three other men who have not had as much experience as Mr. McNiven or Mr. Dubreuil, but who are discharging their duties efficiently. The only complaint I remember in connection with a fair wage officer was that a man whom I had appointed myself had



not fixed the wage schedule fairly on some public work. I sent another man to the works and he came to the conclusion that the first man had not put ,the wages as high as they should have been, and the schedule was changed accordingly. That, is the only complaint I can remember that has been made against any fair wage officer in the last five years. My hon. friend wants us to have practical men. I think we already have practical men in the department.


Alphonse Verville: In the inside service?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Yes.


Alphonse Verville: Name them. .


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have now in the department one of the officers who was there when I took charge.


Alphonse Verville: There were two.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: None have been dismissed. Not a single Liberal has been dismissed from my department since I was placed in charge of it. And when I took charge there was only one Liberal-Conservative in the department, and he had been appointed prior to 1896 and has since been superannuated.


An hon. MEMBER:: That applies to the Inside Service?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Inside Service and Outside Service. I know the matter to which the hon. gentleman refers-the correspondents of the Labour Gazette. I have explained that to the House before, but perhaps it will bear repeating. When I was placed in charge of the department I asked for a list of all employees with particulars in each case showing name, age, salary, when appointed, the duties assigned, and how those duties were being discharged. This list was made up by one of the officers of the department, one who had always been a Liberal. Out of the seventy or so correspondents of the Labour Gazette throughout the whole country from Vancouver to Halifax, there were about five or six who were reported as not discharging their duties even fairly well. 1 gave word to have them dismissed. I did not know whether they were Liberals or Conservatives, and I don't know yet; nor do I care. Others were appointed in their places.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The minister will pardon me, I hope, if I return to the case of Mr. Brown. I hold no brief for Mr. Brown, but I think -I was responsible for his appoint-

ment when Minister of Labour, and at that time I felt, and the Government felt, that a good appointment had been made. Mr. Brown had been for several years a journalist in Ottawa, the representative in the Press Gallery of the Montreal Witness, and he had taken a very promment position with relation to the Salvation Army in Ottawa. By all the people of Ottawa he was considered a very upright gentleman and quite capable of filling any position in the Civil Service. Now, the word "disloyal" which the minister has used carries with it an imputation of meanness which I cannot believe to be attachable to Mr. Brown; he is the very opposite of a disloyal officer, in my judgment. The minister says that Mr. Brown had, perhaps, too high a conception of his position and his duties. That is quite a human failing, and perhaps Mr. Brown may have it. He may have throught that at times things were not done according to the ethics of the department. But let the minister put himself in Mr. Brown's position. If he -were assistant deputy minister of the department and should differ with his minister on some matters * of official duty, would he consider that a sufficient reason for the minister to dismiss him? Unless he can show that Mr. Brown was disloyal in having divulged the affairs of the department in a mean way, or in not fulfilling the duties of his office, surely he will not say that Mr. Brown should be put on the street. Mr. Brown occupied what I consider a very responsible position and was a respected member of the Civil Service. Surely, though he may have differed in opinion with the minister, or with the deputy minister, that is not a good reason for such action as the minister has taken. We are passing through a crisis which affects civil servants perhaps more than any other members of the community, and yet for petty reasons the hon. minister dismisses such a member of the Civil Service as Mr. Brown. I can assure the minister that Mr. Brown enjoys a very high reputation, arid his dismissal will create in the minds of the people the belief that the minister had other reasons for this dismissal than those which he has stated this evening. I fiave had experience as a member of the Government, and I know that an officer may be fussy, capricious, or annoying to his fellow employees. But the man who holds the position of minister must be human and must be Christian. Surely, the fact that an officer differs with his superiors on unimportant questions is no reason for throwing that officer on the

street. I appeal to the better instincts of the hon. minister and would ask him to reconsider his decision.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend does
not attach the same meaning to the word "disloyalty" that I do. In using the word I did not refer to differences of opinion on questions of the policy or action of the department. Disloyalty includes such an act as going to others with criticisms of the department, or finding fault with the minister behind his back. It was such things I had in mind when I used the word. A "difference of opinion is all right. My deputy may have a suggestion to make, and we talk it over. Perhaps his suggestion is adopted, or perhaps my view is adopted, but in making such a suggestion, the deputy minister is not only not disloyal, but he is performing his duty.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I fail^to understand in what this alleged disloyalty consists, Can my hon friend establish that Mr. Brown gave away the secrets of the department, or struck his minister from behind, or wrote to the press against his minister? Such things, of course, I agree would be disloyal. But even to criticise the minister in his presence-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, not in my presence.


Rodolphe Lemieux: or with his fellow officers of the department as to a certain line of policy-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, outside of the
department.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The duty of a minister
of the Crown is not to accept only the advice of those who are always ready to abide by his decision, but to listen also to adverse criticisms. I remember that when I was appointed Postmaster General, I warned the deputy minister to speak boldly if he should differ with me on an appointment or on the policy of the department. The minister is not omniscient; he must take the advice, and believe in the common sense and loyalty, of those who surround him; and the best protection he has is sometimes the adverse criticism he receives from his officers. When I was in the Post Office Department there were scores of employees who had been there since Confederation and who consequently were not in sympathy with the head of the department. They were the very best of officers and I never had, during the six years I was there, occasion to dismiss one of these men. I would not have dismissed one of them for
differing with me. I would be only too glad to accept their criticism in good spirit and to listen to their views whether I was prepared to accept their decision or not. Really, I do not think my hon. friend is doing justice to Mr. Brown. Mr. Brown enjoys a higher reputation than that given to him this evening by my hon. friend.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend will persist in talking about a set of circumstances that do not exist. He is too clear-headed a man to misunderstand what I said. When I speak of disloyalty,-and the sense in which I use the word is the proper sense in which to use it-he gets up and proceeds to lecture me as if I had refused to discuss matters with this officer and had therefore dismissed him because he disagreed with me. That is not the question at all and I think my hon. friend knows that it is not the question. He followed me when I spoke about criticising the department behind my back and outside of the department. That is what I call disloyalty and that is one of the things for which this officer was dismissed. Yet. my hon. friend presumes to discuss the matter as if I had dismissed him because he did not agree with me on everything. That is not the point at all and I think my hon. friend knows it' is not the point.


John Hampden Burnham: If, as a man in a way representing the taxpayers of this country, I may be allowed to make an observation, it is that the criticism of the hon. member from Rouville (Mr. Lemieux) would certainly be justified if one of the major officers of the department could go off to New York at the public expense, stay there as long as he pleased and come back without reporting. If that is the way the taxpayers' money of this country is to be expended, the Department of Labour had better be abolished. I cannot see any justification, for such conduct.


George William Kyte: May I ask the Minister of Labour when he first made up his mind to abolish the office? He has intimated that he has abolished the office. I would like to know when he abolished that office.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not believe I could tell my hon. friend the exact day or week. I do not think an assistant deputy minister is necessary or desirable in that department. There never was an assistant deputy minister until this man was appointed^


George William Kyte: 
Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, I do not say that. I may recommend some one else but he will not be under the name or style of Assistant Deputy Minister of Labour.


George William Kyte: So that the minister is abolishing the office for the purpose of making it easier to abolish Mr. Brown?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Oh, no.


George William Kyte: Changing the name only. He admits that another appointment is to be made but he says that the officer will not be known as assistant deputy minister.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I did not say that it would be made; I say it might be made.


George William Kyte: Will this new man who may be appointed have the same salary that Mr. Brown enjbyed?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not know.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Was there any investigation before the dismissal of Mr. Brown? I ask this because I happen to know Mr. Brown; he was in a very high position and surely this cannot pass unnoticed. Was there an investigation as to the facts which gave rise to his dismissal?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Does my hon. friend mean an investigation by any outside party or outside source?


Rodolphe Lemieux: Yes.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, it was not necessary; I knew the facts myself.


Mr. L. A. LAPOINTE:: The minister
talks about the facts; I would like to know what the facts are.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: This is war time, and economy is necessary; at all events the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) told us this afternoon that the Cabinet needed money, and as, according to the minister, an assistant deputy minister is not necessary, I suppose the minister will move to reduce the vote by the amount intended for that officer and dispense with the services of anybody for that purpose this year?


Alphonse Verville: I do not quite agree with the suggestion of my hon. friend. This department has not any too much money to its credit so far. If the minister is going to appoint anybody else to do some of the work in the Labour Department. I
[Mr. Crothers.l
would not ask the minister to drop the provision for that man this year, but I would ask him tc^pick out of the 7,000,000 people in the nine provinces, and God knows how many cities, a good, competent, practical labour man, and I do not care what his politics are. Politics makes no difference at all. Let that man try to help him in carrying on the work of his department.


George Perry Graham: The vote is for the assistant deputy minister. The minister may not use it for anything else; so that he might as well drop it. If it is a vote for something else he had better put it under that designation. He cannot take a vot" for one officer and give it to another.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: We do not put it under the name of the assistant deputy minister.


George Perry Graham: I have not the vote
before me.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: There is a practice
that obtains in the department, and has for many years-I do not know whether it will strike hon. members as being a reasonable one or not-but it is this: If a man is promoted from one position to another, the sum of money that he received in the lower position is voted next year and may be voted for ten years one after another although the position is not filled. The vote is taken every year and if it is thought wise at any time to appoint a man to the vacancy he is appointed and the money is there to pay him. Take the $3,000 item there, for jnstance; that was voted for Mr. Coats, ^who was then editor of the Labour Gazette. He was transferred to the Department of Trade and Commerce about two and a half years ago. The vote appeared there every year. It was there last year and was there this year, but it was not used. It may be. thought necessary this year to appoint a man to the position covered toy this vote, to do. certain work in the Department. There are .several vacancies, as I have explained. If a man is promoted or dies, the vote for his former position is carried on and there is a vacancy which may not be filled for two or three years. I do not know whether it is a good practice, but I found it and it has been continued, not only in my Department but in other departments.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You are no+ economizing at all


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It does not follow that this will be expended



Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why put the vote
in if you are not going to expend it?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: We may want it.


John Gillanders Turriff: The minister has explained that in his judgment the position of assistant deputy minister in the Labour Department is not necessary. Therefore it seems to me reasonable to say that the work that the assistant deputy minister is accomplishing could have been done in the department without having an assistant deputy.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not think that
follows at all.


John Gillanders Turriff: Now my hon. friend
dismisses the assistant deputy and says that the position does not need to be filled and is abolished, that it is not necessary or advisable; and he proposes to put somebody in the assistant deputy minister's place, perhaps not under the same title but under another title. I suppose the assistant deputy minister was not appointed as assistant deputy, at least his name' does not appear under that title, but simply as a clerk in the First Division.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: He was appointed as
assistant deputy.


John Gillanders Turriff: Therefore my hon. friend intends to replaeevMr. Brown, though not calling the new official by the same name. He dismisses Mr. Brown, he abolishes the office; then, as he says, he proposes to appoint somebody else to the position.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I did not say that.


John Gillanders Turriff: My hon. friend says practically that.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I said I might.


John Gillanders Turriff: We know what that means under this Government, which is not noted for its economy. We know that when my hon. friend gets that vote through and says he may appoint some one to take that position, there will be enough hangers-on looking for jobs, and especially jobs at that salary, to make it certain that before very long my hon. friend will fill that position. Is it his intention to give Mr. Brown, employment in any other capacity?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It is not my intention at present.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend has criticised the late Government for the appointment of Mr. Brown under sec-9 p.m. tion 21 of the Civil Service Act.
It would take all night to discuss appointments under section 21 in the
t>93
last three or four years. If he appoints another gentleman to do Mr. Brown's work, will it be under section 21 or through the Civil Service Commission direct by examination?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am not able to tell
my hon. friend that. When the time comes and it is thought necessary to put an additional man in the office, I will consider all these questions. We are not in a position now to say what we will do.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend admits
that he will do j*ust what he criticises the other Government for doing, and he will not commit himself to doing anything else.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend did not catch the point of my criticism. My .point was that a certificate was given to the effect that the duties of this office required professional and technical knowledge. It is perfectly right, if you want a skilled engineer, to appoint him under section 21 as a ' technical officer, without examination.


George Perry Graham: They never would allow me to do. it in the Railway Department.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: But why it should be said that the duties of this particular office require qualifications of a professional or technical character is beyond my comprehension.


George Perry Graham: Then we may take it for granted that the minister's conclusion is that he would not appoint a new man under section 21, because, according to his interpretation of the Act, the qualifications for this office, as outlined by him, are not such as would make the person to be appointed eligible under section 21. Then it will be under the ordinary Civil Service system. I might say to the minister that he is wrong about engineers. Under the former Administration, When the Railway Department wanted an engineer I was not allowed to select a man, no matter what his technical knowledge was. We had to accept the man given to us by the Civil Service Commission after passing his examination, and the commission gave us good men; I am not objecting at all to the appointments. But the minister is. wrong in thinking that the other departments by which he is surrounded-unless the Civil Service Commission has changed-are allowed to take even these technical men, unless under some very exceptional circumstances, without the ordinary Civil Service examination.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend is not familiar with section 21.


George Perry Graham: Oh, yes he is, but he has not used it as much as the Minister of Labour has.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have not used it at all.


George Perry Graham: I mean the Government.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: You cannot make an appointment under section 21 without a certificate from the Civil Service Commission.


George Perry Graham: Surely; I know that.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The deputy head of a department, with the approval of the head, may notify the commission that they require a civil servant with certain qualifications, and such an appointment may be made without any examination, because the section so provides. The Civil Service Commission determine whether or not the candidate has the qualifications. For instance, you ask for a graduate in a certain line, perhaps economies. The Civil Service Commission ascertain whether the applicant is a graduate of ,a recognised university. Then the candidate does not have to pass any examination. The matter has to go through the hands of the Civil Service Commission to that extent, but- it is up to the commission to say whether the duties of the position call for qualifications of 'a professional and technical character.


Mr. GAUVREAU:: I think I could make a fair proposition to the minister. If he can promise this committee that he will keep the place and the salary attached to it for a good returned soldier from the trenches, I think the committee will vote heartily the amount.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I might say, \oi the information of my hon. friend, that an Order in Council was passed some time ago providing that all these positions should be filled by returned soldiers, if suitable men could be got; and I know I have followed that myself and I think all other departments are following it as closely as possible. Sometimes you cannot find a returned soldier to fill a certain position. But I have refused this last two weeks dozens of applicants for positions by telling them that an Order in Council requires that positions be filled by returned soldiers and that if we cannot find one now for any position we must leave the position open until we do find one. That is the policy of the Government under that order.


George Perry Graham: The minister has read, I suppose, of a gentleman in Toronto who claims that, althought a returned soldier,

he was sent to the patronage committee of the Conservative party in Toronto to get their recommendation.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not "live in Toronto.


George Perry Graham: That occurred, all the same.


Mr. McKENZIE:: Is it the custom of the department to fill all positions of this kind by promotion in the department? That would be a sound policy and one which the minister would find to produce efficiency in his department. Even if a returned soldier should be available, it might be that he would perhaps fit in lower down, and that promotions might be made within the department to fill positions requiring considerable training. I would think that if positions of that kind could be filled by promotion from among the men in this own department it would tend to efficiency and be an encouragement to better work within the department.
One of the criticisms of this Government has been that in, several of the departments employees have not been promoted as rapidly as they should. As to the Department of Railways, almost disastrous results occurred in the province of Nova Scotia by reason of the fact that promotions were not made within the ranks of the officials of the department. I hope that the Minister of Labour will take a hint from the fact that the Minister of Railways was chastised and brought to his milk, as the saying goes, by some of the criticisms which were made in the province of Nova Scotia, and, if he has suitable men in his own department made the necessary promotion from among them.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: For the benefit
of the hon. gentleman who has just sat down, I may tell him that by several years we have anticipated his contention. In our department we have been doing the very things that he says we ought to do, that is, promoting men to higher positions as vacancies occur. Take the case of Mr. Coats, who was mentioned a moment ago. When he has transferred to the Department of Trade and [DOT]Commerce, another young man in the service was put in his place to do the work he had been doing, but at a very much smaller salary.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What was the name
of the officer?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Mr. Stewart. Weekly
or monthly we are promoting men from the

lower positions to higher ones as vacancies occur. We always do that in our department.


Hugh Boulton Morphy: In one respect I am
forced to disagree with both the minister and the hon. member for North Cape Breton. When we are thinking about the returned soldier we ought to think along lines that will be conducive to his wellfare. If a man standing next for promotion in the Civil Service was within military age, physically fit and did not go to the front for his country, it would be monstrous to promote him, no matter what the length of his service might foe, and thereby refrain from giving the position to a returned soldier who had done'his bit and who was fit for the job.


George Perry Graham: How many correspondents are there?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: About 70.


George Perry Graham: It is not easy to get
good ones, is it?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, we do-not pay
enough.
Conciliation and Labour Act, including publication, printing, binding and1 distribution of the Labour Gazette, and allowance to correspondents, and for clerical assistance in preparing tables of statistics, $35,000.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What practical -steps has the minister taken ito deal with the problem of the high cost of living in Canada? I am aware that an Order in Council was passed in regard to the matter, and that Mr. O'Qonnor has been employed in that connection, but so far I have been unable to observe that in any part of Canada the Government have taken hold of this problem with any strength or vigour or in such way as to produce results. In Australia, where they have a War Measures Act similar to ours, the Government have taken vast powers and have regulated the cost of staple products which enter into the daily, life of the citizens of the country. We have had nothing of that kind here, and I think the minister ought to tell us what he has tried t<? do, even though he has not succeeded in doing very much, to meet the paramount necessity which exists all over Canada, particularly among the labouring people, of dealing with the exorbitant cost of all the necessaries of life.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have a Teport in
process of preparation, which will be ready in a few days, and which will go into particulars concerning the matter to which
my hon. friend directs attention. However, I do not mind telling him, in a general way, what we have done. The Order in Council, a copy of which I have not at hand, is aimed at preventing restriction of trade, exorbitant prices, combines, and so on. For instance, it makes it obligatory for one who is in possession of articles of food, clothing or fuel-the Order in Council is confined to these three classes of goods-in amounts more than ordinarily necessary for his own use or for carrying on his business, to sell these goods at a fair and reasonable price. We took up the question of coal. We sent to every known coal dealer in Canada a number of questions which were very full and very searching. He was required to say where he bought the coal in the first place, what he paid for it at point of shipment, what the freight cost him, the cost of unloading and selling, and the amount of his overhead expenses. Satisfactory sworn, returns were obtained town nearly all the coal dealers in Canada. It was necessary in some cases to communicate with the firms more than once, hut in the end I think we got answers to all the questions which were asked. With one or two exceptions we were satisfied that no unreasonable profits were made foy the retail dealers in coal. We got statements of prices, and .so on, not only from them, but from other sources as well, and were enabled to compare the two, and with the exception of one place, I do not remember that any complaints were made that the people were being overcharged for their coal. Then we took up the price of sugar. We found that an agreement existed between the manufacturers and wholesale and retail men with regard to prices.	.
After some correspondence, some of these men came to see us, and in many cases, if not in all of them, the practice which we thought objectionable was discontinued. I know one refinery, for instance, that controlled the sale of sugar in two provinces, and only fifty-two men in the two provinces could buy sugar from that refinery, no one being able to purchase sugar from it unless he belonged to the association or complied with the conditions necessary to become a member of the association. We took the matter up; the attorneys general of the provinces consented that a prosecution should be taken against those men, the result being that they came down from their perch and discontinued this objectionable practice. We have investigated the cold

storage business throughout the country; we have examined into the way in which collieries are conducted as to prices and all that sort of thing, and in a few days I will have ready a full report which I expect to placed upon the Table and which will set forth the details of what we have done in these various lines. Of course, the great majority of the people of this country understand the main factors in the rise of prices, although they are confidently told by those who have an object in view that there are other causes. It is probably safe to say that thirty million men, if not a good many more, have been withdrawn from productive work to engage in destructive work. It is said that those men consume at least fifty per cent more than they would if they were civilians. That gives us the equivalent of 45,000,000 men consuming foodstuffs and producing nothing, withdrawn from productive labour and engaged in destructive labour. Before the war broke out, there was just about enough food grown to cover the world's consumption; we had not to throw any surplus food into the ocean. Take 45,000,000 men from producing; set them to destroy life and property; take that, in connection with the fact that last year, with slight exceptions in certain places, crops were short the world over, and with all this destruction and waste going on lessening production, and you have the main factors causing the advance in prices. Some people tell us that the rise in prices is due to cold storage and combinations. I admit that in some cases those things have had a slight influence on prices, but the main factors are those I have stated. We are endeavouring under that Order in Council to offset so far as we can those influences that, to a slight extent, may affect prices, but on the whole the others are the.' main factors.	,


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: My hon. friend has in the course of his few remarks admitted that, although a condition has existed, he has done nothing to remedy it.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: He has not admitted anything of the kind.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Will my hon. friend kindly restate what he has done?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I thought I made myself perfectly clear. My hon. friend was not in the House at the time, I am told.


Mr PUGSLEY:: The minister appointed [DOT]some committees.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I was in the House.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I did not think my hon. friend was here all the time.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: My hon. friend made an argument that because he made certain inquiries he had performed his duty.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I said, if my hon. friend, was here or if he was out ,of the House, that we had sent questionaires to all the coal dealers in Canada and that from reports which we had received under oath and from other information, we were satisfied that the coal dealers were not making any undue profits and that there were no combinations as to coal except in one or two places.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I heard all that.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Then why does my hon friend say that I have done nothing? We have done the same thi,,g in regard to sugar, cold storage, etc.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What my hon. friend has said means that he considers there is no duty thrown upon Kim or upon the Government to deal with the whole question of the food supply of this country in some drastic and imperative manner. Why did my hon. friend proceed under the War Measures Act and have an Order in. Council passed giving him plenary powers, if the powers he was going to take simply consisted in the power to investigate matters by asking certain people certain questions? Does my hon. friend mean to say that this Government could not have taken, under the War Measures Act, powers of such a nature that they would be enabled to deal with problems of this kind and fix the cost of staple articles at figures within the reach of the ordinary individual? In this country dve produce approximately 200,000,000 bushels of grain, whereas Canada consumes only 50,000,000 at the most. Does my hon. friend mean to say that there are no means that he or his associates in the Government could have devised by which the people of this country could have received the bread they require at some figure within reason, considering that we produce in this country four times what we consume and that we have such a huge surplus for export abroad?


John Hampden Burnham: Free wheat will haw
that effect.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I do not intend to
pay any attention to my hon. friend, who dreams about things. The situation shows that in regard to this matter the minister apparently thought his duty was ended

when he asked certain questions of certain people. He asked one sugar man as to whether he had a combination with any other brother sugar man in regard to the prices they were to charge, and he found there was a combination, but he said that it faded away. Then he spid that the retail coal dealers were not asking exorbitant prices for their coal. Did it never occur to my hon. friend that it was his duty and that of his colleagues in the Government much earlier in this war to allocate to their respective duties in this country those people who were engaged in performing definite services for the country? So far as coal is concerned, my hon. friend and his colleagues permitted recruiting sergeants to proceed into all of the coal mining districts of this country and take away from those coal mines the expert operators and the men who were able to produce that necessary and essential article which enters into the household life of every one in this northern country. They allowed recruiting to go on without paying any attention to the proper distribution of labour or the necessity of utilizing for the defence of the country those people who should go to the front. My hon. friend was a member of the Government which allowed 50,000 men to go to England who ought never to have gone there because they were medically unfit to fight, whereas had the Government paid any attention to looking after the national duty that each citizen of this country should havie discharged, those men could have remained in peaceful occupation and assisted in the production of those articles that are essential to the well-being of the people. When my hon. friend tells the people that he has performed his duty by asking certain questions of certain people, and stopping there, his answer is not an efficient one and will not be so regarded. My hon. friend thinks his task is all performed; that there is nothing left for him to do. That is my hon. friend's position in regard to the matter. My hon. friend had an Order in Council passed. Occasionally we see these Orders in Council that are passed; there is a regular bureau of a political nature run toy this Government under which announcements are made to the country through the Conservative press, but the last institution that this Government seems to think it leceseary to consult respecting the interest of this country is this Parliament. We come down hbTe after Parliament has sat for two or three months and have to request the Government to bring down and place upon the Table
important Orders in Council which they ought to bring down of their own volition. My hon. friend has thrown upon the municipalities the task of enforcing this Order in Council, which they have passed under the War Measures Act, an Act which gave the Government wider powers than have been taken by any other Government engaged in the war. Suppose my hon. friend saw fit to pass an Order in Council dealing with the question of recruiting, would not the whole country stand aghast if he left its enforcement to the municipal authorities? And yet that is what he did in regard . to this question of the high cost of living, which, next to the task of winning the war, is daily becoming the most vital problem we have to solve. But my hon. friend thinks that he and his Government have performed their full duty when they have asked certain questions, and put np to a municipal 'body the responsibility of enforcing these provisions. I had expected that my hon. friend would tell the House that he had at least attempted to grapple with this question, but all he tells ns is that he has satisfied himself that the retail coal dealers are not asking too much for coal; that the sugar combine faded away when he peered into it, -and that he talked to some tannery about the cost of making leather. If my hon. friend thinks that that is doing his full duty to the people of this country under war conditions, I must tell him that he occupies a very ridiculous position'before the people.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am afraid my hon. friend has never read the Order in Council. I will send him a copy of it to-morrow. My hon. friend is confusing matters. He started by accusing the Labour Department of not having done anything under this Order in Council, and he wound up toy blaming the department for some recruiting that was done at the mines.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I blame the whole Government for that. This question is too serious to quibble over. I pointed out that the whole trouble arose from the fact that the Government had not systematically allocated to the citizens of this country the various duties they should perform with a view to the winning of the war, that whilst it was desirable men should be recruited it was also necessary tha* work like coat mining should be carried on, that the Government had had no plan at all, and that hundreds of men had been allowed to go to the front who ought never to have left this country. In England, coal miners are

exempt from military service; in fact, thousands were brought back from the front to work in the mines in England. Through the lack of system on the part of this Government the price of coal has gone up, owing to the scarcity of labour to work the mines. My hon. friend and this Government should have done what the Government of England did; told the men who were supplying the fuel of the people that they were performing a national service. The Government ought to have known that when they permitted recruiting officers to go amongst these hardy and adventurous men, inducing them to enlist, they were creating a situation under which the price of coal was bound to go up and contribute to the high cost of living in this country.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The remarks of my hon. friend show that he does not know what was done with regard to. recruiting, either. He is talking without knowledge.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: That statement is absolutely untrue.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It just shows that my hon. friend does not know .what he is talking about. Let us confine ourselves for a moment to this Order in Council; we will come to the other matter later. My hon. friend says that we have left the enforcement of this law to' the various municipalities. There is no truth in that so far as I know. I don't think he has read the Order in Council, and I wild send him a copy tomorrow. When he reads it, he will see that the matter is not left to the municipalities altogether.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What is left to them?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It is left to them to
ask such questions as the Minister of Labour might ask touching matters within their own municipality, and if they find out that anything is being done in their municipality in contravention of the law they can proceed to prosecute.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Is not that leaving it to them?
Mr. CROTHERS [DOT] Would you have this Government inquiring into the cost of milk in Nanaimo, for instance, or on Vancouver Island?


George William Kyte: They do it in Australia.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: They do many things in Australia that we do not do here.


William Pugsley: They do many things
there that we ought to do here-build ships for instance.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend talks
a great deal about shipbuilding and Australia is often mentioned. I do not want to say anything derogatory of Australia, but just take this point. It is said that Australia manages labour unions and strikes a great deal better than we do in Canada. Well last year, with their population-of 5,000,000 they had 300 strikes, and with our population of 8,000,000 we had only 75, so Australia has got ahead of us in that regard. The government thought it right to empower the municipalities to inquire into conditions in their own municipality, and if the questions asked are not answered according to the Order in Council the municipal authorities may proceed against a delinquent, with the consent of the attorney general of the province. My hon. friend must remember that the Labour Department has to do not only with conditions in one municipality but with matters that effect the country as a whole.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What have you done5


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Does my hon. friend
want me to tell him three or four times?


William Pugsley: < I think the Minister could more easily tell us what he has not done.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Yes, because it is so little. What have we done in regard to sugar and coal? We have sent out ques-tionaire3 to all the coal dealers in Canada and have received replies under oath, and have checked them up to see whether they were correct.


George William Kyte: Has that reduced the cost of these commodities? "


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I am told that it has, in some places. The prices are not so high here as elsewhere. We have also sent out questionaires to the sugar dealers all over the country, and have received replies under oath. Some of them were not satisfactory, and we repeated our questions. We have also investigated the question of bread.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You did not say that before.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I mention it now, as bread is very important. As I was saying, the Order in Council provides that no prosecution shall be held without the consent of the attorney general of the province.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Why do you put that in?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: For the same reason that you put it in the Lord's Day Act.


William Pugsley: What was the reason?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: When you were passing the Lord's Day Act you left it to the discretion of the attorney general of the province whether there should be any prosecution. We thought that principle a very good one, and applied it in this case.


William Pugsley: In order to prevent prosecutions.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: If the replies to the questions indicate that there has been a contravention of the law, we send the evidence to the attorney general of the province, pointing out that we think there has been a contravention of the Order in Council, and it is then up to him to prosecute if he thinks fit.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Does my hon. friend think that in passing an Order in Council under the War Measures Act, one of the most plenary Acts ever put on the Statute Book, the Government has fulfilled its duty when it turns over the responsibility of enforcing the law to the provincial and municipal authorities?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: My hon. friend is wandering again. If my hon. friend thinks that anything wrong has been done under this Order in Council, it is his privilege and right to criticise it in this House, but it is not proper for him to say to me, in discussing this Order in Council, that I should have seen that no recruiting was allowed at a certain mine. That has nothing to do with this Order in Council. But I may tell my hon. friend for his information-for he does not appear to know it-that long, long ago instructions were given to the recruiting officers not to recruit men in the^e mines, on the ground that these men were needed for carrying on mining,. And the recruiting ceased. So, it will be seen, we have anticipated some of these things.


George William Kyte: How long ago?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not remember.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Now that my hon. friend has delivered himself of his wonderful knowledge, I desire to pay a tribute of admiration to the gigantic brain that has been working so ponderously on this question of the cost of living. The hon. gentleman said I was incorrect in saying that
he had cast the responsibility of this matter upon the municipalities, and then he went on to prove very completely that what I had said was true. He told us the powers given to the municipalities, and declared his opinion that the Government had fulfilled its duty by declaring that the responsibility of carrying out this order under the War Measures Act should rest upon the Attorneys General of the provinces. If that is the way this Government has taken of exercising the powers given it by this Parliament under the War Measures Act at the inception of the war, it is time this Parliament reviewed the War Measures Act and the provisions made under it. As to the constitutional point involved in this reference to the municipalities, there is not a man sitting behind the hon. minister who is acquainted with legal or constitutional matters who will say that this Government is justified under the provisions of the War Measures Act in getting rid of its responsibility for the enforcement of any part of this law by attempting to throw that responsibility upon some other body. As to this question of recruiting coal miners, the hon. minister's know-pledge is singularly limited. He has told us that in November last orders were given that there should be no more recruiting in the coal mines. That is to say, two years and three months after the war began, for the first time the Government interfered-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, long before that.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Let me tell the hon. gentleman for his information-and I come from a coal-mining country and know whereof I speak-that the recruiting officers of this Government have been active right along, and are active at this moment, in the coal mines of Nova Scotia, recruiting men for the war. Shall we say that they are ignoring the instructions that were given them? That is only another way of saying that the Government have never dealt practically with the question of arranging to have proper National Service, for the organizing of bodies of men to work as well as bodies of men to fight. The responsibility for the increased cost of living, which is already severely felt by the people of this country, will be placed upon the shoulders of the hon. minister and his associates because of their absolute failure to deal with the question.


John Hampden Burnham: One statement was made by the hon. metaber for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald), which, as it appears in cold type, will look very badly and will give a

wrong impression. He said that fifty thousand men had been sent overseas who were returned and should never have been sent.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I said that according to the evidence submitted to members of this House, fifty thousand men, medically unfit, had been recruited and sent across.


John Hampden Burnham: That gives a wrong impression. The hon. gentleman must know that the Army Act and the K.R. & 0. allow men to misstate their ages. A man, on his attestation, may make a solemn declaration that he is forty-four years of age, when in fact he is fifty-four, without incurring any penalty. A great many men, in mistaken zeal, thought they could get away with that, and stated that they were forty-four, and so came within the required age, and so got across. But when they were pressed for an accurate statement, they had to admit that they were of a greater age, and so they had to be returned to,this country. This accounts for a large number of the fifty thousand. And they were admitted by reason of a flaw in the Army Act, and no power in the world, no minister of any nation could possibly have prevented it, because it is in all of the Army Acts. And why it is there, I do not know. Now, a word as to another point suggested by the hon. member. The Minister of Labour has been reproached with having allowed food prices to go up without taking proper steps to prevent it. The hon. gentleman is one of those who have been pressing for free wheat on the ground that this change would send up the prices. At one moment the hon. gentleman is for limiting the prices that have gone up, and at another he is for taking steps to cause prices to go up. Which is it to be? We do not wish to go to the people with two horns of the dilemma-one is surely bad enough. Let us know which it is to be.


George William Kyte: I am sure that those who read the statements of the Minister of Labour here to-night will be disappointed to find that, when he was requested to give full explanation of the results of the operations of his department with regard to the cost of living, no results were forthcoming. He did state that questions were sent out as to the cost of certain commodities, but he was unable to point out that his activity resulted in reducing the cost of living by one iota. We had a complaint in Montreal a few months ago because potatoes were selling in that city at $3.50 a bag. The
[Mi-. Burnham.]	/
Minister of Labour made some inquiry and ascertained, that, whereas the dealers in Montreal alleged that there was a great shortage of potatoes in Canada and that this was the reason why prices had gone up, the fact was that, over and above all the requirements for consumption and for seed for the forthcoming season, there was a surplus of two million bushels of potatoes in the Dominion. But the hon. minister did nothing, and potatoes are selling at $3.50 a bag, if not $4.00, in Montreal at this time. As to the price of flour, the hon. gentleman stated that the result of his inquiry was to show that no undue profits were being charged by those engaged in the production of this article.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I did not say that. .


George William Kyte: The hon. gentleman was speaking generally of articles of consumption, and stated that there was no evidence of undue profits being paid.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No.


George William Kyte: Does the hon. gentleman think that when milling companies which were content to earn six or seven per cent before the war are now dividing profits among their shareholders at the rate of twenty-four per cent, that is not an undue profit for war times? The minister stated also that the high cost of these articles of food was due to the large number of men who were taken from the ranks of the producers and became consumers. But how is that to be reconciled with the statement made in the press the other day, that, as to the wheat in this country, over and above all that was needed for consumption and as seed for the coming season, there was not less than 116,000,000 bushels in the Dominion at this time? Besides that, the wheat now held l.y the millers, and for the flour produced from which they are charging enormous prices, was purchased by them from the farmers at from $1.20-to $1.40 a bushel? The farmers received no benefit, the speculators got it all, and they have been dividing enormous profits at the very time when the minister tells us that no undue prices were being charged. Read the trade journals from day to day and you will find that companies engaged in the manufacture of food products are dividing among their shareholders much larger profits than those they made before the war. -Companies that were content with five, six, or seven per cent before the war,

are almost invariably paying dividends of from fifteen to thirty per cent. Yet the Minister of Labour says there is no undue profit enjoyed by those engaged in the production of these particular commodities. How is the consumer affected? To-day flour is quoted at $12.70 'by the car load. The hon. member for Peterborough (Mr. Burnham) had something to say about putting wheat on the free list. At the time that the agitation for putting wheat on the free list was most acute the farmer might very well have looked for increased prices for the wheat which he had raised and it was a time when the consumer could afford to pay a little more for his supply. But they dawdled along for five years, until the price of flour got beyond the reach of the average consumer in Canada, and then they took the duty off to enable the speculator to create a panic and put $1.20 on the price of flour. That is the result of the hon. gentleman's activity on behalf of the consumer. There is not a commodity that enters into general consumption that has not been enhanced beyond all proportion to the exigencies of the times unless you take into account the greed of those engaged in the manufacture of these products. The minister had an opportunity to-night to state wherein his activities had resulted in reducing the cost of living with regard to one commodity to the consumers of this country, but he has failed to do so. He has said that these commodities are dearer elsewhere than here. It is quite true that in Germany, and in Berlin they are, but with that exception food prices in Canada are dearer than they 'are in any part of the civilized world.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The prices in Canada have gone up less rapidly than in any other belligerent country in the world, with the single exception of New Zealand.


George William Kyte: Australia?
. /


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Yes, Australia. They are about the same in New Zealand as in Canada. Prices have gone up less rapidly than in any other belligerent country, New Zealand only excepted, and they are -about the same as in Canada'. My hon. friend has grown very eloquent over prices -and found fault with my department for not keeping down the prices of everything. I remember him making a very eloquent speech not very long ago, but when he got down to facts there did not seem to be very much in it. We have endeavoured to carry out our part in enforcing that Order in Council. The right was given to the municipalities
to investigate within their own limits and to enforce the Order in Council. We thought it better to leave it to the attorney generals of the different provinces Tather than to undertake to prosecute ourselves, just as hon. gentlemen did when they were in power in regard to the Lord's Day Act. Another instance was when they passed the Alien Labour Act. They started in by attempting to enforce it from Ottawa. They had not gone very far 'before they got tired of it, and they amended the Act so that they would not have to enforce it. They never attempted to enforce it afterwards, and I can fairly say that we never attempted to do so either. We left it to those who felt that they were aggrieved, .just as in this instance we leave it to those municipalities who feel that they are agarieved.
(Mr. VERVILLE:	Who asked for the
change in the Alien Labour Act?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not know; I was not in the House at the time. As a matter of -fact, it was changed and no attempt was made by the late Government to enforce it. I am not blaming them for that but I am giving that as another illustration of why this Government had kept away from enforcing a statute passed by this Parliament. It is the duty of the province to enforce the criminal law, or -quasi criminal law, and this Government does not undertake to enforce any Act, of this character, speaking generally although there "are one oi two exceptions. That is what we have done with regard to that Order in Council. No prosecution may be had under it without the consent of the attorney general of the province in which it is said the offence is committed. We believe that the attorney general of the province is in the best position to say whether a prosecution should be instituted or not. If the facts do not warrant a prosecution he does not order one. But, we have carried out the law. We have sent out these questions and wherever doubt arose we have -sent out a man to examine witnesses under oath and have corbpelled people to show us their books; we have investigated cold storage and all that sort of thing. We are preparing a full and detailed statement of what we have done and the results and these reports respecting coal, sugar, bread, and cold storage


An hon. MEMBER:: Anthracite coal?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The report as to
anthracite coal will be laid on the table a few days and every hon. member will

have an opportunity of reading the reports in detail.


George William Kyte: 
Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, I said the prico had gone up lees rapidly in Canada than in any other country.


George William Kyte: I take issue with the minister. I cite the case of Australia,-while in January flour was selling at $5.80 in Australia, it was $9.50 in Montreal; butter was selling on the 15th of January in Australia at 28 cents a pound and in the city of Montreal at 40 cente and the same applies to eggs, bacon and all other commodities that enter into the daily consumption of the home. I would suggest to the Minister of Labour to inform himself a little more on these particular subjects before he undertakes to discuss them here.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I would like to say
to the hon. gentleman that his giving to us the prices of these things in Australia does not prove or disprove what I said. That is not the, question; the question is the advance since the war. If the hon. gentleman takes prices at the commencement of the war and compares them with what they are now he will see how rapidly they have gone [DOT] up. I did not say that prices here were as low, as in any other country. What I said was that prices had not gone up as rapidly in Canada as in any other belligerent country with the exception of New Zealand.


George William Kyte: Which shows that the minister does not face the question hut is quibbling in order to get around it. We are discussing the question of the cost of these commodities. 'Compare the cost of commodities in this country with prices in England. I suppose the Minister of Labour gets some consolation from the circumstance 'that the cost of these commodities is greater in England than in Canada. But we overlook the fact that England is an importing country whereas Canada is an exporting country and the cost of these commodities imported into England depends entirely on

the uncertainty of transportation conditions.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: What about prices in
the United States? My hon. friend and others are claiming the right to send stuff over there 'because prices there are higher than here, and they have not had any war there.


George William Kyte: The United States up to a
few weeks ago was not a belligerent country. The United States was making more money out of the war than any other country. They did not knpw what to do with the m.oney they were making,- therefore they were not as much concerned about the cost of living as about the money they were making. The Government of that ' country were under no patriotic duty at that particular time to see that the cost ,of living was not unduly enhanced. But the moment waT was declared by the United States they took the matter up and they have done more after three weeks to prevent the rise of the price of food products in -the United States than this Government has done in three years.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: What has been the
result?


William Pugsley: I wish to say a word on this subject of ships. The Minister pf Labour is rather disposed to ridicule any suggestion with regard to this Government improving the means . of -transportation. Some gentlemen rather intimate -that the reason for the farmers of the West desiring to secure a market for wheat in the United States is -that they wish tp 'be able to get increased prices. I do not think that that at all follows as the reason. If a farmer has a larger and wider market, a market to which he can continually send all that he produces, he may well be content to receive the same price which he has been receiving for the smaller product
at home. If the farmer can find -a market %
for ten thousand bushels, of grain he may make m.ore money at the same price than he would make if he was selling only some five thousand bushels. 'This larger market will induce the farmers of the West, and indeed of the East as well, to increase their production, because they know that they will always have a steady market for what they produce. I know that 'if we in New Brunswick had free access to the American market for our potatoes, which this Government can secure at once by placing on the statute-book a law admitting potatoes

from the United States into Canada free of duty, the result would be that farmers would double and treble and quadruple their production in the province of New Brunswick because when potatoes are worth $3 or $4 per barrel in the United States the price in New Brunswick is less than that by the amount of the American duty.
Mr. CR0TH3RS:	He w much a barrel
were they this winter?


William Pugsley: My hon'. friend knows they are getting a high price.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: How much? $8.50 a barrel.


William Pugsley: But that has'not always been so. Two years ago the farmers were glad to sell potatoes in New Brunswick at 40 cents a bushel, But if they had a larger market they would be in the same position as the producer of wheat with a larger market. It would encourage increased production and add enormously to the prosperity of the farmers, even although the price of the product should not be materially increased.
With regard to ships, I say that this Government, so far as the question of transportation is concerned, have absolutely fallen down in the discharge of their 10 p.m. duty. This war has been in progress since August, 1914, well on to three years. Surely this Government ought to have recognized that the result of the great European war would be a greater demand for vessels. They ought to have realized that there would be-the submarine warfare, that the shipping of Great Britain and her Allies would be imperilled and that there would so be a greater demand for new shipping. In Canada we have magnificent opportunities for shipbuilding. I remember, when I was a comparatively young man, when in the province of New Brunswick there were dozens of shipyards turning out magnificent wooden ships which sailed upon every sea and carried the fame and reputation of our province to all parts of the world. There are splendid opportunities for shipbuilding. But this Government took no steps to encourage the building of ships. Over and over again I and other members of this House have appealed to the Government to do something, to give bonuses, or to themselves engage in shipbuilding,. for the people of this country.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Did your Government do anything for shipbuilding along these lines?


William Pugsley: 
Mr. W. H. BENNETT:: Was it not prior to 1896 that the Act was passed which granted subsidies to dry docks and under which the Collingwood dock was placed on a footing to do business?


William Pugsley: I think not.


William Humphrey Bennett: That Act was in force prior to 1896; anybody could have taken advantage of it.


William Pugsley: But the Act was amended. Under the Act as originally passed no dry docks at all-<at all events, not m.ore than one two-were built. When the Liberal Government came into power they amended the Dry Dock Act, and I think that if my hon. friend will look into the statutes and look up the date when the dry dock at Collingwood was built, he will find that it was under the amended Act which was passed after the Liberal Government came into power. I want to call attention to the fact that this Government, so far from doing

anything to encourage shipbuilding and Canadian transportation, actually permitted the British Government to commandeer a number of large vessels which were engaged in the transport of coal between the mines in Nova Scotia and the city of Montreal. This greatly hampered the .business of the coal companies, and allowed a very important step to be taken towards increasing the cost of coal in the city of Montreal. With regard to our coast trade, our shipping has decreased most materially. It is an extraordinary fact that the cost of bringing coal	by water from the coal
mines of Pennsylvania is to-day 100 per cent greater than the cost of bringing coal by rail from Pennsylvania to the cities of Montreal and Ottawa, This surprising fact resulted, as I have said, from the great scarcity of shipping. At the very commencement of this war the Government ought to have anticipated the coming scarcity of shipping and to have taken steps to encourage shipbuilding in Canada, We had hoped that a great shipbuilding yard would 1 have been established in the Maritime Provinces, because when the late Government -went out of office there was in the Department of Marine and Fisheries a tender from one of the greatest shipbuilding firms in the world for the building of cruisers and destroyers. If that tender had been accepted, long before this the contract would have been completed and the company engaged in building commercial vessels, probably employing 5,000 or 6,000 men. When this Government came into office, however, they cancelled that contract and returned the amount of deposit, and from that day to this nothing whatever has been done in the way of establishing a shipbuilding plant. Go to the ports u<pon the Atlantic coast; go to the ports upon the St. Lawrence; go to the Great Lakes or west to British Columbia, and you will be able to find hardly anything of a practical character that has been done by this Government to encourage shipbuilding. The Minister of Finance made the statement today that the Imperial Munitions Board are thinking of engaging in the manufacture of wooden ships in Canada and that he, on behalf of the Government has made an offer to lend to the Imperial Munitions Board the sum of 510,000,000. I assume that that amount will carry interest, and that the rate will be at least as high as J.he rate the United States is going to charge the Allies": 3i per cent. But, Sir, that does not fill the Bill. These ships will be under the control of the British Government; they will be used for transportation in the in-

7U8
terests of the British Government. That will not at all improve the conditions affecting the inland coastal transportation of Canada, water transportation between one part	of Canada and another
the point of production and the point of consumption. It will not in any way relieve the difficult situation in which we find ourselves to-day. I agree with what the member for Richmond (Mr. Kyte) has said, that the Minister of Labour has given no satisfactory explanation as to the high cost of living. It is not enough for this Government simply to say they have appointed commissions. It is true that some three years ago they appointed a commission which investigated the high cost of living, which commission found, I believe, that if the people of Canada would eat more fish and potatoes and less meat and flour, they would be able to get along more cheaply- a most valuable report, I suppose, in the opinion of the Minister of Labour. Afterwards it was announced by the newspapers that a committee of the Government, of which the hon. Robert Rogers was the head, had been appointed to take up this question immediately and arrive at a solution. A deputation waited upon him and he gave them the greatest possible encouragement as to what this active sub-committee was to do with a view to reducing the cost of living. Well, we have had no report as to what they have accomplished but we know what they said they could accomplish. It remains for the Minister of Labour to say to-night that he has sent out hundreds of questions to the people engaged in the coal business and in the sugar business, and that if he finds that the answers which he has received show an unsatisfactory state of affairs, he will forward them to the municipal authorities and expect them to take action.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, to the Attorney-General of the province.


William Pugsley: My hon. friend has taken a splendid means of shirking the responsibility which rests upon this Government.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Just as you did on the Sunday question.


William Pugsley: That is a terrible confession for my hon. friend to make. He implies that the late Government, in regard to the Sunday question, referred the matter to the Attorney General of each of the pro-vinees, and he says that this Government did the same thing in the case of the high cost of living and for the same reason. In 45
other words, he wants us to understand that it was done in order to shirk responsibility.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I was reminding you of what you did, that is all.


William Pugsley: If my hon. friend is satisfied with that explanation, of course, I have nothing further to say. It does seem to one that this Government ought to have grappled with this question long ago. The B/itish Government is commandeering every flour mill in Great Britain for the purpose of controlling the cost of flour. Why did not this Government adopt a similar course in Canada? The cost of flour regulates very largely the cost of other food products. Why did they not take charge of the mills of Canada when they saw that millions upon millions of dollars worth of stock, absolutely watered, not representing a single dollar of investment on the part of the capitalists, was earning 10, 15 and 20 per cent, the money coming out of the pockets of the Canadian consumer? Why did the Government not intervene and take charge of the flour mills, thus keeping down the price of flour and the cost of bread? When they saw that the cost of transporting coal between the mines of Nova Scotia and the cities upon the St. Lawrence was increasing because of the scarcity of shipping, why did they, not take steps early in this war to acquire ships for the purpose of transporting coal from the mines to the places of consumption, in order to make the price of coal as low as possible to the thousands of poor people who were compelled to use it? When they saw, as they ought to have seen two years ago, that the cost of transportation between the anthracite mines of Pennsylvania and the ports of the Maritime Provinces was increasing so as to cause great hardship to the people, why did they not take some steps to engage in the building of ships and go into the transportation business in order to keep down the cost of fuel? My hon. friend must not treat the matter lightly; and while he may agree with the Minister of Finance that there is a condition of prosperity in this country, in the part of the Dominion from which I come there are thousands of people with a limited and a fixed income who are placed in a deplorable condition by reason of the high cost of flour, butter, meat, eggs, poultry and fuel. People who were ordinarily in comfortable circumstances are placed almost



in a condition of distress. The matter is not one to be dealt with lightly and it is one which reflects upon this Government that while this condition of affairs exists, and while there are thousands of people in this country who are growing poorer and poorer as a result of this war, the Government does nothing. Do I say the Government does nothing? Not exactly that-it does nothing but appoint commissions and have its members interviewed by the news papers, telling the people what the Government is doing in order to ascertain whether or not the cost cf living is too great. Let me, even now, implore the Government to take effective measures, to take control of the flour mills of the country, to take control of the transportation business cf the country.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Would it do for us
to fix the price of wheat to the farmers?


William Pugsley: I have no objection to that whate/er.


Mr MEDERIC MARTIN:: There is no necessity for that in Montreal or in the Cther cities of Canada. If you do that you will enrich the farmer to the detriment of the rest of the people. You are looking for votes. .


William Pugsley: I think there would be no objection for the Government to take control of the price of wheat provided they do as Lloyd George's Government has done, namely, guarantee to the farmers a minimum price for their wheat because thereby the production would be increased. But what is the use to-day of the western farmer increasing his production when up to a few days ago when this Order in Council was passed granting free wheat, the farmer has not been able to get his produce out to market, because it is a fact that to-day every elevator in the Canadian West is filled with grain? It is an open secret that millions of bushels are still in the hands of the farmers as they are not able to get their grain to market. I was told the other day of a man who had ten thousand bushels of grain in one of the districts of western Canada which he is not able to dispose of because he cannot get cars to take it to the market, and that is the case with thousands of farmers in the West.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Would my hon. friend suggest that we should fix the price of potatoes for the farmers of New Brunswick?


William Pugsley: I have no objection
whatever. '


Thomas Wilson Crothers: We want the farmers of New Brunswick to hear that.


William Pugsley: 
Mr. EDWARDS:: Where did the farmers formerly get that potash from?


William Pugsley: From Germany, but there are other fertilizers which should be secured.


Francis Ramsey Lalor: Is this Government to blame for the German potash not coming here?


William Pugsley: This Government is to blame for not getting other fertilizer into this country to take its place.


Mr. STEELE:: Does my hon. friend say that there is no potash purchaseable in Canada?


William Pugsley: Practically none.


Michael Steele: I think I can give him the names of firms that can supply all the potash he wants.


William Pugsley: If he will send it down to New Brunswick he will find a market .at a good price for every pound of it. Contrast the conduct of this Government with regard to farm tractors with the conduct of the British Government. The British Government wants to increase production just as this Government professes to do. The British Government, however, is in earnest. It is a working Government. Within the last two months the British Government has given an order -to American manufacturers for two thousand tractors to be sent to England for the purpose of assisting the farmers in increasing production. This Government, instead of doing that, says to-day, through the Minister of Finance, the farmer is doing mighty well in this country, and here is a chance to take 27J per cent out of their pockets, and while we cry with one voice: produce, produce, produce, with another voice we say: put your hands in your pockets if you want the farm tractors and pay into the treasury of this country all we demand for the purpose of revenue. Let me ask the Minister of Labour really to do something; let me ask his colleagues really to do something. We have in this Government the most splendid set of talkers that one could gather together. They go to New York and with their eloquence thrill the audiences which gather to meet them. We next hear of them at Boston, where they thrill the people with a beautiful story of Canada, its splendid present and its glorious future, and they hold a high reputation for oratory in that city. They are the greatest aggregation of talkers that one could gather together, but 451
I doubt if one could scrape together a bunch of gentlemen with less desire than the present Government for real solid productive work.


John Howard Sinclair: What strikes me in connection with this Order in Council is the roundabout method of prosecution. I do not wish to deal with this matter as a party question, because the constituents of hon. gentlemen opposite as well as of hon. gentlemen on this side are both confronted with the high cost of living. I think it was Charles Dickens who exposed the circumlocution office in London some years ago, but to my mind the circumlocution office is not to be compared with the Department of Labour in its methods of prosecutions under this Act. I read a description of the method in a speech by the Hon. Mr. Lucas in the Legislature of Ontario some time ago. One of the members had asked him how offenders would be proceeded against and, if I remember correctly, this was the method: If a citizen of my constituency wishes to complain about the price he has to pay for flour, sugar, or any other commodity, he complains to the municipal council of his county, and here I might say that the municipal council in my county meets only twice a year, and their next meeting will not be till January, 1918.


Mr. SCHAFFNER:: Is that place on the
map?
Mr.- SINCLAIR: So if a citizen in my county wishes to complain he will have to wait till early next year. The complaint comes up before the municipal council, and they appoint a commission to investigate; evidence is taken, and they have a case, we will suppose. But they cannot prosecute; my hon. friend from Pictou was mistaken about that; they have no power to prosecute under these regulations. What they do is to refer the matter back to the Minister of Labour. Then he looks at the papers that have been sent on from the municipal council, and makes up his mind whether the case shall go any further. If he thinks he has a good case he appoints another commission to go over the very same matter, call the very same witnesses, and hear the very same evidence. When the commission make out their report to the minister, even then he does not prosecute, but turns the matter over to the Attorney General of the province in which the offence took" place, and the Attorney General decides whether there shall be a prosecution or

not. That is the roundabout method the minister has adopted. Suppose that any other ,of the laws of this country were attempted to be enforced in that way! Would not every one think it ridiculous? If a man were guilty of smuggling, for instance, and some person had to complain to the municipal council in the first place, -and then six months afterwards the council investigate and send ,on the papers to the Minister of Labour; the Minister of Labour investigates, and turns the case over to the Attorney General of the province -in which the offence was committed. Would not every body laugh if such a method were adopted in this Dominion in regard to smuggling? And is -the high cost of living any less important to -the people of this Dominion than the law relating to -smuggling? I cannot help thinking- it strikes me most forcibly-that the Minister of Labpur is not sincere. If he had been he would never have adopted such a roundabout method of prosecuting. I should like him to explain to the House why he did not pass a regulation empowering himself to take proceedings against an offender, instead of having the matter dealt with in such a roundabout way.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It is clear that the
hem. member for Guysborough has not read this Order in Council. There is no necessity for such a circuitous method as he has described. The municipality, or the member for Guysborough himself, -may, with the consent of the Attorney general of the province, prosecute any body without any reference to the Minister of Labour whatever, and the fact that he can do that, taken in conjunction with the speech we have just heard, shows that the hon. member for Guysborough has not read the Order in Council at all. I must also send him a copy to-morrow.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: What was the
trouble that my hon. friend the Mayor of Montreal had in regard to prosecutions?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The Mayor of Montreal is quite able to speak for himself.


Mr. MEDERIC MARTIN:: Of course he is. I -hope my hon. friend will not mind my .speaking in French.
(Continuing in French) (Translation): Mr. Speaker, the newspapers reported yesterday an interview given lately by the honourable the Minister of Labour, stating that the Mayor of the city of Montreal had

not done his duty by the citizens of that city.
The increase in the cost of living is not a question of recent date; yet the minister has been pleased to do what he has always done since he has the honour of sitting on the Treasury benches: he springs up at the last minute and tries to get -the people of this country to believe that he is ever intent on securing their welfare. But we know otherwise, as I shall endeavour to prove.
First the coal question. Some time last March, I received a telegram from the minister, about eleven o'clock at night, and the next day I got in touch with the Board of Control to have an investigation made into the causes of the increase in the price of that commodity. The next day, I gave instructions to the superintendent of Municipal Charities to go around-the coalyards in the city and secure prices. It was found that the abnormal rise in the price of coal was not due to the retailers, but was a result of the importers or wholesale dealers, refusing to -supply the retailers unless the latter agreed to let them fix the price beforehand.
Regarding the high cost of living, the matter had been foreseen by u-s last fall. The Montreal Board of Control and Council had passed resolutions requesting the Government to lay an embargo on some necessaries of life, and it should have been done for instance on potatoes, wheat, flour and some other farm produce, as was just now pointed out by the hon. member for St. John, N. B.' (Mr. Pugsley). We were of opinion that the transport and sale of commodities should be under the control of the Government, who would see that enough remained in the country to feed the population. In this case as in all others, the Government has pursued its usual policy of inaction, with a vi w to getting votes, especially the farmers' votes, at the next elections. But our farmers are wise enough to understand that present prices for farm products are abnormal. I say further that the greater part of such abnormal increase in the price of commodities does not go to the farmer, but to the monopolists and speculators. This year had the Government been in earnest, a commission would have been appointed by the Minister of Labour in all the large centres, to inquire into the quantities of produce held in the cold storage plants, such as poultry, mutton-I know that some has been stored up for as long as 36 months, beef, butter and cheese. The quantities of wheat and flour

in warehouses and elevators might also have been investigated.
The Government should have held back what was required of those staple commodities for the people, set a price on them, and allow the rest to be exported to our allies. What is the present situation regarding potatoes? They are selling to-day in Montreal at $4.00 a bag, and of this the farmer gets only $1.75 to $2.00. I myself bought them in the country at $2.00 a bag when they fetched $4.00 in the city.
At the beginning of the war, especially last year, it was the Government's duty, as they saw prices soaring all the time, to at once lay an embargo on those commodities, and to withold from exportation a sufficient quantity to meet the needs of the community. The farmers are not the only ones to be considered; but one must also take into account the workingman, the under-paid or small earner, who do not hope to see their salaries keep pace with the ever-increasing cost of living. You failed to do so; the city of Montreal entreated the Government to commandeer these commodities, and the Government had not the pluck to do so. As to the coal situation, again I say that the minister wired me at the last minute, stating that coal was selling in Ottawa at $8 a ton and asking whether it was true that $14 to $15 was asked for them in Montreal, and if so, to let him know immediately. I replied to the Minister; I did every thing possible under the circumstances and I find it strange that the minister should now see fit to cast any blame on iis.
There is another point I should like to deal with before I take my seat. The Government has lately passed an Order in Council providing for the free entry of wheat. In 1911, I was in favour of reciprocity, but it seems to me that to-day is not the time to apply it without at least taking steps to keep enough wheat in the country to feed our families and ensure cheap bread instead of helping to increase the price. It is a move merely to catch the western farmer's vote, as can be seen by the statement in the Order in Council to the effect that the measure is intended to secure a better price for Canadian wheat. Here again, I claim, it is not the farmer who will reap the greatest share, but, as was said a moment ago by the hon. member for St. John, N.B., the speculator who has stored the grain of the western prairies in order to enhance the price through exportation into the United States. I say that here again a state of things is created which tends to raise the
price of commodities; and so much is that the case, that since the Order in Council has been passed, the price of a certain quality of bread in Montreal has been raised from one to two cents since yesterday.
The Government has always been keen on unloading its blunders not only on the corporation of Montreal, but in all important centres it has been anxious to shift responsibility for its action on the shoulders of the provincial governments, as was instanced by the speech of the Minister of Labour this evening. As a parting word, let me tell him that he has not worked in the interest of the people at large, or of the city and towns in particular, but has always favoured the trusts, of which he is the protector and friend.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I regret that I did not follow very closely what the hon. member (Mr. Martin) said, but I assume that he was discussing the cost of living. I had the honour and pleasure of spending a day in .Montreal some months ago, and the hon. gentleman, as mayor, treated me like a prince. He spent nearly the whole day with me, and there was nothing in Montreal too good for me. And all the time I was with him he did not say anything about the high cost of anything we ate or drank.


Médéric Martin: Did the hon. gentleman say it was a few weeks ago?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: About a year ago.


Médéric Martin: On Labour Day?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Yes.


Médéric Martin: That was not the time. The \tar-[DOT]


Thomas Wilson Crothers: We had had war for a couple of years then, and the hon. gentleman did not say a word. We noticed in the press a few months ago that coal was selling in Montreal at very high prices- $15 a ton in the centre of the city, and $20 a ton in the suburbs. I did not wait to write to the mayor, but sent him a telegram, asking as to the facts. And, if I remember well, the hon. gentleman (Mr. Martin) wrote back stating that it was true. So, 1 wrote that the best thing he could do was to send a solicitor to represent the city corporation, and we would help him to deal with the matter. But the mayor did not send anybody, he did not give us a chance to help him, and I took the matter up without hearing from Montreal.


Médéric Martin: But I sent some one to make inquiries, to secure bills for coal and these were sent to the hon. minister. At least, if they were not sent, my instructions were not obeyed. What would the minister have us do? The mere fact that a sale has been made at a higher than reasonable price is not an offence? We have to prove that he has coal in his yard which he refuses to sell. That is what our attorney-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Why did you not send a man up to consult?


Médéric Martin: Because it was not necessary. I spoke to Mr. Lamarche, formerly a member of this House, and to Mr. Laur-andeau, and they told us that what we must do is to make an inquiry and send the facts to the minister. We sent bills for coal that had been received. And the commission is going yet.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: It was not necessary to send anything of that kind to us. If the hon. gentleman found that any man was selling coal at prices that were unreasonable or unjust, he could take action against him.


Médéric Martin: That is not what Mr. Laurandeau tells us, and he is -an ex-judge. The minister may say that Mr. Laurandeau did not understand it. In that case I am ready to believe that nobody could understand it.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: If my hon. friend had sent his solicitor as we requested we would have pointed out to him what should be done.


Médéric Martin: The Government should have entered upon an inquiry last tftll, to find out just what supplies were available. Then they should have put on an embargo wherever it was necessary, in order to keep food for the family-the family of Canada, whose interest the Government has in charge. They should have provided that what food was necessary should be kept at home and the -rest sent to the Allies.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: And what was the hon. gentleman's duty as mayor of Montreal?


Médéric Martin: To work for the people, as I did. And next election will prove that they think I did well.


Alphonse Verville: Has anybody been
prosecuted under this Order in Council?


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No, we have no power to prosecute.


Alphonse Verville: I believe the time has come-in fact, came some time ago-when the Government should try to control the prices of foodstuffs. In dealing with the case of the miners of the West the minister stated that the Government had paid $92,000 on account, as I understood him, of the increased cost of living, -that increase for the time covered having been $1.75 a week. But if the ministtr does not proceed to the regulation of food supplies in four or five months from now, perhaps, the cost of living will have gone up another $1.75 a week. Will he then take another $92,000' to make that up? Anybody who knows the conditions here -and on the other side of the line knows that the profits paid in Canada in some cases are quite unreasonable. The minister spoke of the increase in the cost of living in the United States, but he forgets that the wages there are higher than in Canada.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: No.


Alphonse Verville: Then, they must have changed very -lately, for about the first of the month I was in Detroit, Chicago, Indianapolis and Cleveland, and in those cities wages were higher than in Canada. And the minister knows it. We cannot compare the cost of living on this side and on the other side unless we take wages into account. The hon. gentleman knows that as soon as war was declared between the United States and Germany the heads of the labour people in the United States were called into consultation by the Government upon the cost of living. There is an example which the minister might well follow'. If my hon. friend has not done it so far, why does he not do it now? It is better now than never. Why does he not consult the best labour men in the country and ask them to help him to solve the problem of the high cost of living? I do not say that m>
hon. friend can do it alone but if he would gather together a number of men, the same as they have done in the United States, he would do something towards finding a solution for this difficulty. The resolution which No. 149, International Ass >-ciation, signed-


Thomas Wilson Crothers: Have they reduced the price of anything yet?	.


Alphonse Verville: They have not reduced the price but they are going to control prices. It is only three weeks since war was declared.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: But before war was
declared they had street riots over there

concerning the prices of food and we have not had any here yet.


Alphonse Verville: Certainly, but here, the increased cost of living goes on and I believe that in September we will have two labour days; on the first of September they will parade the streets and next day they will supply themselves in the cold storages, and I would be the very first man to tell them to do so if things keep on as they are. I am supposed to keep the peace, but there is a limit to everything and my hon. friend knows that the people of the country will not stand for much more and that they are calling upon him to take this matter up with the best elements to be found in the country, to settle this question and to endeavour to prevent what will be a great calamity. He may not be able to prevent it. My hon. friend said a moment ago that the Order in Council was put on the same basis as the Lord's Day Act. But, the Lord's Day Act was a matter of conscience; this is a matter of hunger and there is a great difference between your stomach and your conscience. The people make this appeal to the minister and he can himself see what the condition is in any part of the country that he may care to go to. You must regulate the food of the people. Seven-eighths of the people of Canada are just on the verge of revolution because they are short of food supplies and they will not stand it all the time. My hon. friend knows the conditions under which the people are living and he has been told it by a great many of his friends. My hon. friend's own officers must ha^e kept him informed as to the conditions and he cannot ignore the facts that are existing in different parts of the country. The fact that he stated that there was an increase of $1.75 per week in the cost of living in connection with mining in the West shows that he realizes that the cost of living has gone up. If the cost of living has increased in the West it has also increased in the East and that is the danger. If you cannot lower the cost of living at the present you can regulate it. You can regulate the profits that some of those large interests are making. I am willing to give them a living profit but to take a profit over and above that is wrong. If my hon. friend does not know what is going on in this country amongst the rank and file of the people, then he hf.s net received reports from his officers, but I believe that he does know. That is why I am appealing to the minister to immediately get the be3t elements from among the labour movement and the business men, if you like, and try to find a solution of the cost of living problem because it is getting very dangerous.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: The hon. member for Maisonneuve is a leader amongst the working people of this country, and he has told us a good deal, but he has not told us what he has done towards paying the advance in the cost of foodstuffs. Under this order he could take action against any man in the city of Montreal whom he thought was overcharging, and prosecute him with the assent of the Attorney General. I do not apprehend that it would be a very easy matter. What is it that controls the price of most of these things? Take cheese; there is a very great demand for cheese to be sent across the ocean to the army. What would my hon. friend do there-fix the price at which the maker of cheese should sell the cheese for at the factory and bring it down below what he could get for it for export? Would he adopt the same method with regard to butter, flour or anything of that kind? When you get down to the actual work you will find it very difficult to fix the price of any of these things. I would suggest to my hon. friend that he would probably learn something of a very practical nature if he would take this order, and finding some one on the corner in Montreal whom he thought was charging too much for his butter or bacon, he would ask the Attorney General to authorise a prosecution, lay an information, bring the dealer before the police magistrate and have him convicted and fined $5,000. If he did that it would be a lesson to him and an example to every other man who was overcharging. It is an easy matter for him to get up and say that you should do so and so, and the Government should do so and so, but what is he doing for the working man?


Alphonse Verville: If I were Minister of Labour I would do more than he has done. I would have a change in the whole situation or I would not stay in the Cabinet. 1 would be man enough to get out of it.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: You are representing the people in this House. Why do you not get out because you cannot do anything?


Alphonse Verville: I have not the responsibility nor the power to do that; the minister has that in his hands.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I have just the power you have under this order.


Alphonse Verville: Yes, but I have only the power of an individual while the Gov-

ernment are absolutely powerful in the country. Perhaps the Minister of Labour inside the Council room was in favour of regulating the prices of food and his colleagues did not look at it in the same light. If that were so I would get out of the Cabinet. I would do something for those I represent or get out.


William Cameron Edwards: There is no doubt the price of foodstuffs has risen considerably since the beginning of the war, especially during the last twelve months. We have had two solutions proposed this evening. The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) suggests in all seriousness that the Government should fix the price of potatoes, wheat, flour and so on. He does not say what that price would be but he proposes to make the price arbitrary and force the farmer to take whatever the Government says he should take for the article that he produces. I do not think that would meet the situation, because if the member of St. John was a member of the Government and was looking for votes, he would fix the price according to the number of votes that he could get by fixing the price. If he thought he could get more votes by fixing the price in the interest of the man who was producing the foodstuffs then his bowels of compassion would be all dried up in regard to the man who was consuming the foodstuffs. But that does not meet the situation. Then the hon. member for Maison-neuve (Mr. Verville) has a plan for meeting the situation and meeting it most certainly. He stands up in this House, professing to represent the labour interests of this country and he says that if something is not done to reduce the price of these foodstuffs he will encourage the mob in Montreal or anywhere to break into the storehouses and help themselves. In the time I have had a seat in this House I have never heard a responsible member of Parliament give expression to anything approaching the statement made by the hon. member for Maisonneuve, and I say it is very little credit to him to make such a statement. It is one which he should not have made as a responsible member of Parliament, because in that position more importance is attached to his utterances than perhaps should attach to them.
I remember in years gone by, when the farmers of this country were not making one-half of one per cent on their investments during the regime of the Liberal Government, one of the responsible members of the Laurier Government offered a solution to the farmers of the country who were

making nothing. His suggestion was that they should work harder and eat less. That was the Liberal solution of the difficulty so far as the farmers of Canada were concerned during the fifteen years they were in power-work harder and eat less. In all the discussion we have heard this evening in regard to the high cost of living and foodstuffs, not one gentleman has attempted to get at the real reason for these high prices. Why is cheese the price it is to-day? Would any hon. member opposite say that the Government should step in and tell the farmers that they must take fifteen cents or eighteen cents or twenty cents a pound for cheese instead of the price they are getting, which is fixed by the demand across the water? Will any member opposite, as a member of the Liberal party advocate that ? The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) said that he would fix the prices. He did not say at what figure he would fix them. In regard to the price of butter and nearly all of these articles, if you look into the facts you will find that there is a reasonable cause at least for the great part of the increase in price. Take grain for instance. What about the grain crop of the United States for last year? The com crop there was about 400,000,000 bushels short. The wheat crop was hundreds of millions of bushels short. The oat crop was short. Look into the number of head of cattle, sheep and swine in the United States, and you will find an enormous decrease; not only last year but for several years. The *same holds good in this country and has held good for many years back in the countries of Europe. These are natural causes for a part, at least, of the hugh cost of foodstuffs. You have also to take into consideration, when you are considering the price of butter and eggs and things like that, the produce of the farm, the difficulty that the -farmer has in securing labour for the production of these articles. Not one hon. gentleman who has spoken with regard to the matter has touched on that phase of the question. And yet that is something which every farmer in the country is thoroughly aware of. He is up against the difficulty of getting labour and has to pay many times what he paid a few years ago.
The hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) said that the Government should have foreseen all these things, the need of ships, and what was about to happen in this war. When the members on this side of the House sounded a note of warning in regard to the war which is now on, every

hon. member opposite, including the member 'or St. John, ridiculed the suggestion. We were talking utter nonsense when we spoke of the war cloud hovering over Europe. They ridiculed the idea of war coming and did not want us to make any preparation for the effective carrying on of our part in this great struggle. It is true that the price of food products is high, but I will venture the statement that during the winter which has just closed, taking into consideration the wages paid, the demand for labour in almost every walk that you could speak of, at high prices, and the cost of foodstuffs, there has been less actual distress in the centres of population in the Dominion of Canada than there has been during any winter in the last ten or fifteen years. And if you are considering the question of the high cost of living and foodstuffs and all that sort of thing, it is only fair to consider the ability of the population to pay the prices which are being demanded at the present time,, as well as to inquire into the real causes for the prices being high. But I believe that during the last winter and at the present time there has been, as I have said, less distress throughout the Dominion of Canada because of the high cost of living than there has been in this country in the last fifteen or twenty years.


William Thomas White: It is now eleven o'clock. We have had a very interesting discussion and perhaps we might pass an item and adjourn.


Thomas Wilson Crothers: I do not know whether hon. gentlemen opposite desire to discuss the other three items? There are only three others.


George Perry Graham: But they are fraught with great significance. I should not like to have to reply to the hon. member for Frontenac (Mr. Edwards) to-night, for instance. I would suggest that we pass item 265 and adjourn. We have worked pretty hard.
Progress reported.
>
On motion of Sir Thomas White the House adjourned at 11 o'clock p.m.
Monday, April 24, 1917.