1917-05-18

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Sir ROBERT BORDEN moved:: That on Monday, 21st May, and on subsequent Mondays to the end of the session, Government Notices of Motions and Government Orders shall have precedence after Questions and Notices of Motion for the production of Papers.
He said: I present this motion now, on account of the urgency of public business. I understand that there has been an opportunity for all the items on the Order Paper to be brought forward at least on one occasion.


Hon. CHARLES MURPHY:: With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I desire to call the attention of the Prime Minister to the fact that an arrangement was made with

the acting Prime Minister that one or two motions standing in my name should be put over to a convenient day.


Mr. PUGSLEY:: Among the public Bills and Orders are some which were delayed owing to the absence on account of illness of the Minister Oif Justice (Mr. Doherty). I refer particularly to Bill No. 4, which was to be referred to a special committee, the members of that committee to be chosen by the Minister of Justice. The Minister of Justice is in his place, and I would like very much to have that Bill considered.


Robert Laird Borden: Any special case of that kind shall receive the best consideration possible. Under the circumstances, I would be inclined to alter the motion so as to make the proposed change begin with the Monday after next.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The motion now reads, "On and after Monday, 28th May."


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: I have no objection- to the motion, with the amendment that has been made. But we have a right to expect-and in regard to this I appeal to the Prime Minister's own experience-that -the Government will state whether they have introduced all the legislation they propose to introduce this session, or whether there is more to come. The passing of this motion will mean that, beginning with the week after next, the Government will have all the sitting days for their own business. If the right hon. gentleman is not prepared to give us now the information to which I have referred, we shall expect it at some future day, say next week.


Robert Laird Borden: The request of the right hon. gentleman (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) is a reasonable one. But he will appreciate the fact that I have only just returned, and therefore I am not quite so familiar with Government business as I otherwise should be. I will make it my business to inform him as to the proposals of the Government at the earliest possible moment.


Mr. KNOWLES:: The passing of this motion will leave only next Monday for the second reading of public Bills introduced by private members. I happen to have a couple of Bills standing in my name. I may remark that during the twelve or thirteen sessions I have sat in this House I have not before introduced a public Bill, and I should be sorry to see these that I

have introduced this session fall by the wayside. I think neither of these Bills is contentious, and as to one of them the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) was kind enough to say that I should have an opportunity to deal with it.


Sir THOMAS WHITE:: My recollection is that I agreed that as the hon. member (Mr. Knowles) was absent, the matter should be held over until his return.


William Erskine Knowles: I am afraid there has been an absolute misunderstanding between us. What I understood was that I should have an opportunity to proceed with the matter, and certainly that -is what I intended. However, there will be opportunity to discuss this point elsewhere than on the floor of the House, and, no doubt, to arrange the matter.


Robert Laird Borden: If the hon. member will confer with the Finance Minister I think he will lbe able to make some arrangement.


William Erskine Knowles: Am I right in understanding that there will be no opportunity after next Monday to propose the second reading of public Bills standing in the names of private members?


Robert Laird Borden: Not unless they be called up specially.
Motion as amended agreed to.
CRIMINAL CODE	AMENDMENT-RE



MARRIAGE OF DIVORCED PERSONS.

William Pugsley: I move that the Special Committee to consider Bill No. 4, to amend the Criminal Code, consist of the following members:-
Messrs. Jameson, Middlebro, Nickle, North-rup, E. Lapointe, A. K. Maclean, and Pugsley.


Mr. DOHERTY:: The hon. gentleman submitted these names to me and they are quite satisfactory.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. H. BENNETT moved for leave to introduce Bill to amend the Insurance Act of 1910.
He said: This Bill is in the same terms -as one introduced in this House by the late Mr. Lancaster. It relates to the interests of one or more insurance companies in Ontario, who claim that they are infringed upon by other companies-
Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Will the hon. member please submit his Bill before making his explanation?


Mr. BENNETT:: I have not the Bill before me, but would ask permission-


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: The hon. member is not in order in making his explanation before introducing the Bill.
Order stands.



MR. BRUCE'S REPORT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. OLIVER:: May I ask the hon. the
Minister of Militia and Defence (Sir Edward Kemp) if he has yet received the report of Dr. Bruce which he mentioned having received notification of, although not having received the report itself,, when I brought the matter to his attention a few days ago?


Sir EDWARD KEMP:: The report to
which my hon. friend refers has not yet been received by the Department of Militia and Defence. I have made several inquiries since my hon. frienu, brought the question up.


Frank Oliver: Have inquiries been made of Dr. Bruce as to what has happened to his report of which he notified the minister but which has not yet been received?


Albert Edward Kemp: No1 inquiries have been made of Dr. Bruce. I do not know where Dr. Bruce is; he may be in England or he may be in France.


Robert Laird Borden: In France.


Albert Edward Kemp: It may be that
the report may have gone down with one of the vessels which has been sunk by a submarine. I will, however, make some inquiry along the line which my hon. friend indicates with as little delay as possible.


Frank Oliver: Was the report supposed
to have 'been mailed from this side of the ocean or from the other side?


Albert Edward Kemp: I received a letter from Dr. Bruce, but the letter did not have any date or any place written or stamped upon it which would indicate the point from which it had been written. When the letter came into my possession and I noticed it, I asked if the envelope from which the letter had been taken could foe found. We made search for the envelope, but we were unable to find it, so that I have no means of knowing where the report was sent from.



CANTEENS IN CANADIAN CAMPS IN ENGLAND.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Albert Edward Kemp: My hon. friend from Pic-tou (Mr. Macdonald) has inquired of me on one or two occasions in regard to canteen arrangements in England. I may say that army canteens in Great Britain, both for the British and Canadian armies, are under the control of the Imperial Canteen Committee, upon which Committee Canada has a representative. Ten per cent of the profits on all sales to Canadians goes to the benefit of their regimental fund, and 2i per cent to the Canadian Soldiers' Relief Fund. All final profits on canteens in England over and above the 10 per cent referred to are divided proportionately on the basis of turn-over between the British Soldiers' Relief Fund and the Canadian Soldiers' Relief Fund.



THE PRIME MINISTER'S VISIT TO ENGLAND.


Robert Laird Borden: I would suggest to my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) that we might suspend the rule, so that I might make my statement as to my recent visit to England on the motion to go into Supply. Some discussion of my observations may be desired and I suggest this procedure to give the necessary opportunity for that discussion


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.
Speaking on the motion that the House go into Committee of Supply.


Right Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members of this House are aware, on the 20th December last the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom summoned the Prime Ministers of the Overseas Dominions to meet in London with the members of the British Cabinet in conference. The proposed gathering was designated the Imperial War Conference. The purposes of the Conference, as detailed in the telegram which was received, were to take counsel with each other:
First, as to matters connected with the prosecution of the war;



Second, as to the terms upon which peace might be made;
Third, as to the problems which would arise immediately after the conclusion of peace.
Parliament was summoned at an earlier date than was at first intended in order that the representatives of Canada might arrive in Great Britain at the time designated. It was at that time proposed that the first meeting of the Imperial War Cabinet should be held during the last week of February. We left Ottawa on the 12th day of February and arrived in London on the 23rd day of that month. Unfortunately, through delay in the arrival of the representatives of India and of South Africa, the formal proceedings of the Imperial War Cabinet did not commence until a somewhat later date. We left Canada at a very interesting time. Germany had announced, just two weeks before, the commencement of an unprecedented and ruthless submarine campaign, and we had the experience in crossing the Atlantic of driving through fog at full speed without lights and without the sound of any fog horn, a course which in time of peace, would be regarded as madness itself, if not absolutely criminal. I mention this to indicate to hon. gentlemen in this House the conditions under which ocean travel must now be undertaken, and as an object lesson in the perils to British and Allied shipping through the waging of this campaign of which I shall have something more to say at a subsequent stage of my remarks.
We all greatly regretted the fact that Australia could not be represented in the Imperial War Cabinet or in the Imperial War Conference. For some time after our arrival it was expected that the representatives of Australia would arrive before the proceedings had been concluded, and it was proposed that the consideration of all important matters, in which Australia was es pecially interested, should be delayed until their arrival. However, as it turned out, the representatives of Australia were not able to attend, and under the circumstances the best that could be done was to inform the Australian Ministry from day to day of the proceedings of the Imperial War Cabinet and the Imperial War Conference, and especially with the nature of any resolutions or proposals in which the Commonwealth of Australia might he especially concerned.
Although there was some delay, the Canadian representatives did not find the time

hanging heavily on their hands. There were certain meetings of the British Cabinet which we attended before the formal meetings commenced on .the 20th March; and in the meantime we utilized every opportunity to visit Canadian camps and hospitals, to visit the troops in France, and to take up very many matters of importance, and some of them of urgency, in connection with the prosecution of the war.
The first meeting of the Imperial War Cabinet was held on Tuesday the 20th March and the first meeting of the Imperial War Conference was held on Wednesday the 21st March. Six meetings were held in each week, three of the Imperial War Cabinet and three of the Imperial War Conference, and except for a short recess at Easter, this continued until our visit was concluded. I am not confident that it was originally inten'ded to hold an Imperial War Conference as well as an Imperial War Cabinet; but after the proposal for holding an Imperial War Cabinet had been launched, it became obvious that there weTe certain matters more or less connected with the war which might, with advantage, be thus discussed in conference between the representatives of the United Kingdom and representatives of the overseas Dominions and of India.	_
The genesis of the Imperial War Cabinet is to be found in the events of this waT. Every one has realized the somewhat anomalous position of the self-governing nations of the Empire in respect of questions which concern foreign policy and foreign relations. It is abundantly clear that the self-governing Dominions are vitally interested in those questions which involve the issues of peace and war. In the event of a great war, threatening in any way the existence of our Empire or its status, the self-governing Dominions being at war when the Mother Country is at war must inevitably take their part, and thus they are directly concerned with the causes out of which war may arise. If we take tan example from the events which have been transpiring during the past three years, -we observe that some at least of the causes out of which this war sprang arose before this Dominion had an existence. We observe further that some of the causes for which our Empire took up arms were concerned with treaties and understandings in which the overseas dominions pf this Empire had no voice and no part; but Canada and the other Dominions engaged in this conflict, because they realized that the issues involved transcend

all others within our experience, and concern * the future of every Dominion and of the United Kingdom, the future of the Empire as a whole, and, indeed, the future of the world.
And so, without any hesitation whatever, every self-governing Dominion took up arms, and India as well, and their participation has been whole hearted. Two years ago, in London, I said that the overseas dominions of the Empire had sent to fight Bor the cause of justice and of liberty in this war not less than 250,000 men. I said with equal truth in London not more than a month ago that these Dominions have called to arms in the present struggle not less than 1,000,000 men. So, under those conditions, and having regard to the part which the overseas dominions of the Empire have taken, it was obviously necessary that the pledge given by the British Government in the early months of the war to consult the Dominions as to the terms of peace, must be fulfilled in substantial measure. And, as that question was to come under consideration, so also it was desirable and necessary that questions of co-operation in the prosecution of the war and problems which will arise on its conclusion should also come under consideration by the British Cabinet and the representatives of the dominions assembled in the first Imperial Cabinet ever held. The flexibility of the British constitution permitted this to be done. That constitution is based on usage developed slowly and gradually into convention. The Cabinet is not known to the formal enactments of the law, nor is the office of Prime Minister; and yet all of us realize how important, how supreme a place the Cabinet of Great Britain or of any of the dominions has in the Government of the country. And so with the .office of Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. To it is attached a power and authority which, in events such as those through which we are passing, permit him to exercise that power and influence for great purposes made necessary by great events. And so, the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Ireland called together the Prime Ministers of the overseas dominions to sit in Council with the five members of the British Cabinet. In taking that course he absolutely disregarded precedent. As he himself said most eloquently in his address at the Guildhall: This is not a time in which one could justify too rigid an adherence to precedent, or even to tradition. It is a remarkable fact in our history that constitutional de-97i
velopment has seemed to depend more upon events than upon men. The events of this war made it absolutely essential that the Dominions should have the voice to which I have alluded, and, having that voice, it was natural, and more than that, necessary, that they should be assembled in an Imperial War Cabinet.
It was a remarkable body that was gathered together. First there were the members of the Cabinet of the United Kingdom, the five men who constitute that Cabinet, but who call into counsel with them other members of the British Government whenever necessary. These five men, with representatives of India and of the Dominions, met for the purpose of dealing with matters of common concern. touching the whole Empire. While we were in London and in the very early days of the sessions of the Imperial War Cabinet, a further remarkable development took place. It also arose out of the necessity imposed by events, and I am thoroughly confident that it was not premeditated or designed when the Imperial War Cabinet was first summoned. The Crown acts in the United Kingdom and in all the self-governing Dominions of the Empire; it acts in the United Kingdom upon the advice of the ministers of the United Kingdom; it acts in each of the Dominions upon the advice of the appropriate Ministers;- in federal affairs, upon the advice of federal ministers; in provincial and state affairs, upon the advice of provincial and state ministers. It is the same Crown throughout, acting upon the advice of different ministers. That tie of allegiance to the Crown is the tie which chiefly binds together the Empire to-day so far as constitutional considerations are concerned.
We sat on alternate days in the Imperial War Cabinet and in the Imperial War Conference. On days when the Imperial War Cabinet did not sit the war did not wait; therefore it was necessary that the British Cabinet itself should sit on those days to deal with questions arising out of the war. This result, therefore, very early obtained: that the Imperial War Cabinet was differentiated from the British War'Cabinet; that the Imperial War Cabinet sat for the' purpose of dealing with matters of common concern to the whole Empire, and the British War Cabinet sat for the purpose of dealing with those- matters which chiefly ^concerned the United; Kingdom.
There was for the first time in London an Imperial War Cabinet. But there was

more than that. There were two Cabinets advising the Crown, one an Imperial War Cabinet advising the Crown in respect of matters of common Empire 'concern, and the other a British War Cabinet advising the Crown in respect of matters which chiefly concerned the affairs of the United Kingdom. I do not mean to suggest that this differentiation was absolute; it was carried out as best it could be carried out.
I ventured to bring the subject to the attention of the statesmen of the United Kingdom and the people of the Empire in an address which I delivered in London before the Empire Parliamentary Association in the early weeks of my arrival there. The idea has so impressed itself upon the people of the United Kingdom, and upon Their statesmen, that at the very last meeting of the Imperial War Cabinet a definite offer was made to the overseas Dominions that this experiment should be continued in the future; that it should develop into a usage and into a convention; and that annually at least, and, if necessity should arise, oftener, there should assemble in London an Imperial Cabinet to deal with matters of common concern to the Empire.
It is perfectly obvious that such a proposal cannot include the large cabinet to which Great Britain may revert after this war is over. It is idle to speculate or to conjecture as to whether the present system of a very small number of men in the Cabinet will continue; I think it likely that it will not continue. Therefore the future of this proposal will be a cabinet of governments rather than of ministers; a cabinet in which the Government of the United Kingdom, the Governments of the Dominions, and the Government of India will be represented. Having regard to the declarations of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and his colleagues, the proposal will carry with it much of advantage to the overseas Dominions. I say that for this reason: it is not proposed that the Government of the United Kingdom shall, in foreign affairs, act first and consult us afterwards. The principle has been definitely and finally laid down that in these matters the Dominions shall be consulted before the Empire is committed to any important policy which might involve the issues of peace or war. The language in which the Prime Minister of Great Britain conveyed his proposal to the ministers from the Dominions made that abundantly clear. So, as I understand the proposal-and I think I understand it correctly-the British Cabinet shall continue to discharge its functions 
in respect to all matters relating to the United Kingdom, but there shall be also an Imperial Cabinet, in which not only the United Kingdom, but all the overseas Dominions shall be represented by their Governments
The representatives of the United Kingdom will consist of the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Secretary of State for India, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and very probably the Secretary of State for War, and the First Lord of the Admiralty. The representatives of the overseas Dominions will be their Prime Ministers, and if the Prime Minister is unable to attend some minister of first rank must attend in his place, who, for the time being, shall possess the authority and exercise the functions of the Prime Minister for that purpose. It is idle to have an Imperial Cabinet unless those who assemble around the council board are possessed of the authority for the time being to carry out the proposals which may be agreed to. It may be said, in criticism of this proposal, that what the Prime Minister of one of the Dominions might there agree to, he could not afterwards carry out because the assent of Parliament might be withheld. That criticism, however, is equally applicable to any policy that a government might bring down, and, therefore, it does not seem to constitute a grave objection to the proposal which has been outlined by Mr. Lloyd George.
We all know that the future constitutional relations of the Empire have been a matter of much discussion in parliaments, in the press, and by constitutional writers and others. We also know that men who have given thoughtful and careful study to the subject have been much perplexed as to what those future relations may be. We have, on the one hand, self-government enjoyed by each of the overseas dominions; we have that autonomy of which they are rightly jealous. We have, on the other hand, the necessity of consultation and cooperation; and how to reconcile the aspirations of the overseas dominions on the one side or on the other, to bring about unity and concentration of purpose in great matters of common concern and at the same time to safeguard the rights of self-government which the overseas dominions at present enjoy, has been a matter involved in much difficulty and complexity. It seems to me that many of the difldeulties are likely to be cleared away by the proposal of Mr. Lloyd George. I do not pretend to prophesy that this will be the ultimate form in which

necessary consultation and co-operation will be brought about. It would be idle to pass any conjecture on that subject; so many prophecies have failed of fulfilment that one is naturally unwilling to commit himself to any prophecy on the subject. But this at least may be said of Mr. Lloyd George's proposal: it does not sacrifice in the slightest degree the autonomy or the power of self-government which is possessed by each of the dominions. The ministers from overseas go there as the heads of their governments. They are responsible to their own parliaments; as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom goes there responsible to his parliament.
They go there as the representatives of autonomous governments, each responsible to an independent Parliament. They meet there foT the purpose of consultation, cooperation, and united action, but that action can be taken only with the sanction and authority of the representatives of the various nations of the Empire assembled in their own Parliaments. Therefore, there is no sacrifice of any existing power of self-government. There is, on the other hand, opportunity far consultation, cooperation .and united action, which I venture to think will prove of great advantage to the Empire as a whole.
The deliberations of the Imperial War Cabinet were necessarily secret. They covered almost every conceivable subject connected with the prosecution of the war, the terms of peace, and the problems to arise after the conclusion of the war. I was greatly impressed with the enormous variety and vast complexity of the problems that have to be taken into consideration by the British Government from day to day. I made it my business, when I first went to London, to go to the offices of the British War Cabinet for the purpose of examining the correspondence just for a single day. Before we arrived in London, all precedents had been cast aside in the methods of the British War Cabinet. When, in 1915, I sat for the first time in that Cabinet, it was an unwritten law that no record should he made of its proceedings and that no member of the Cabinet should make any note of the conclusions arrived at. In Great Britain administration is not carried on in the same way as here. Our Cabinet is a committee of the Privy Council. Matters are dealt with in recorded form. We pass Orders in Council, sitting as a Cabinet, sitting as a Committee of the Privy Council. The meetings of the Privy Council in Great Britain are formal affairs, and
the meetings of the Cabinet are absolutely apart and distinct from the formal meetings of the Privy Council in- which no debate takes place and in which the proposals placed before the Privy Council are accepted as a matter of course. The British War Cabinet, as constituted when we arrived in Great Britain, kept a complete record of its proceedings; it had half a dozen secretaries at least, several of whom attended each meeting, resolutions were passed and conclusions were recorded in writing. All precedents of the past had been put to one side, and entirely new methods had been adopted. Voluminous records are kept in the offices of the War Cabinet. The day I examined the correspondence of the War Cabinet, I suppose there were at least 200 telegrams dealing with eveiry conceivable subject, with matters arising in almost every country in the world, neutral, allied, or enemy. There were questions arising in all parts of the world-from every country in the world there pours in from day to day correspondence regarding matters requiring the attention, not only of the Foreign Office, but of almost every department of the British Government. I am bound to confess that my visit to London gave me a wider and clearer view than I could otherwise possibly have obtained of the tremendous duties and responsibilities imposed upon the British Government in this war.
So far as the deliberations of the Imperial W'ar Cabinet are concerned, I can speak of them only generally; they will be alluded to in my subsequent remarks. I might, however, be permitted to read to the House a letter which I addressed to Mr. Lloyd George on the 30th of April, shortly before my departure from England, and the reply which I received from him. My letter reads:
Dear Mr. Lloyd George,-
As we are about returning to Canada I desire to express the thanks of the Canadian ministers for the courtesy and consideration extended to us on all occasions and for the opportunities afforded to make ourselves fully acquainted with the highly important 'subjects which have come under consideration in the Imperial War Cabinet. The deliberations in which we have taken part have made us realize more fully the vastness and complexity of the problems involved in the successful prosecution of the war and in the determination of the conditions on which peace might be made.
While our absence from Canada has been greater than we anticipated or desired, we realize that the purpose for which we crossed the Atlantic could not have been accomplished within a shorter period.

The step which you have taken in summoning the Imperial War Cabinet is a notable advance in the development of constitutional relations, and I am confident that the usage thus initiated will gradually but surely develop into a recognized convention.
I pray that the united effort of our Imperial Commonwealth may speedily be rewarded with such decisive victory as will assure an abiding peace. Believe me,
Yours faithfully,
(Sgd.) R. D. BORDEN.
To which Mr. Lloyd George replied on the 2nd of May:
My dear Sir Robert.-
I am very much obliged to you for your kind letter of April 30.
I should like to say how much we have appreciated the promptitude with which you accepted our invitation to attend the meetings of the Imperial War Cabinet under circumstances which involved a grave measure of risk for yourself and your colleagues, and our request that you should delay your departure until all the important business^ which had to come before us had been concluded. I feel, however, that you will agree with me in thinking that the work which the Imperial War Cabinet has done has amply justified the requests which we have made of you. I cordially agree with what you say about the importance of its meetings. If they have been of value to you, we have found them of not less value to ourselves.
It has been of Immense advantage to bring to' bear upon the vital problems of war and peace, fresh minds and fresh angles of vision from the Overseas Dominions. I believe that this new experiment will prove, as you suggest, a permanent convention of our constitution, for its recent meetings have unquestionably contributed not only to unity of purpose among the peoples of the Empire, but to the vigour with which we hope to prosecute the war and the clear-sightedness with which we shall enter upon the negotiations for peace. Yours sincerely,
(Sgd.) D. Lloyd George.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: I do not understand from my right hon. friend's remarks the duties or the functions of the present British Cabinet. As I understand it, there is an Imperial War Cabinet, a British War Cabinet and a British Cabinet. What are the functions of the British War Cabinet as distinct from those of the British Cabinet, and the Imperial War Cabinet?


Robert Laird Borden: The Imperial War Cabinet advise the Crown in respect to all matters connected with the prosecution of the war. The British War Cabinet advise the Crown more especially in matters concerning the work of the United Kingdom in the war.


Samuel Hughes: That is not the British War Cabinet.


Robert Laird Borden: We call it the British War Cabinet. The "British War Cabinet" and the "British Cabinet" are interchangeable terms. In Great Britain it is called the War Cabinet. I alluded to it as the British War Cabinet for that reason.


Samuel Hughes: I understand thal ministers who are not members of the British War Cabinet are nevertheless members of a general British Cabinet.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend overlooks the fact that in Great Britain all the members of the Government are not members of the cabinet.


Samuel Hughes: I know that.


Robert Laird Borden: The cabinet has been made a very small one of only five members, two of whom have no portfolios.


Samuel Hughes: That is the point I want to make clear.


Robert Laird Borden: The other members of the British Government are not members of the British Cabinet, but they are called into consultation in the British Cabinet whenever matters especially- concerning their departments come up for consideration. In the future, however, when the British Cabinet will probably be larger than it is to-day, the Imperial Cabinet will include, not the whole British Cabinet, but certain selected ministers, that. is to say:	the Prime Minister, the Foreign
Secretary, the Secretary of State for War, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and the Secretary of State for India. They will represent the British Cabinet in the Imperial War Cabinet, and the Dominions will be represented in that cabinet by their prime ministers.	.
As to the Imperial War Conference. Some of its deliberations and resolutions are for the present confidential and will not be published at once, but the greater portion has been made public. A blue book is now in preparation, and as soon as it is received it will of course be placed upon the table of the House and printed for the use of members. The subjects under consideration included the constitution of the Empire, the development .and control of natural resources, Imperial preference, coordination of military equipment and stores, production of naval and military munitions and supplies, naval defence, -care of soldiers' graves, naturalization, representation of India at future Imperial Conferences, the

position of Indians in the self-governing dominions, removal of temptations to which overseas troops are now exposed, the trade commissioners' service, patents and other subjects.
The question of constitutional readjustment naturally came up for consideration. I think it is advisable that I should speak of that in the first instance, although it was not the first resolution passed. I shall not speak in detail of all the
4 p.m. resolutions, but I shall allude to only the more important ones, and if any discussion is required as to the others, it can more conveniently be had after we have the full record of the proceedings of the conference so far as they can be made public. I called into informal consultation the ministers from the other dominions and we discussed the question of constitutional readjustment pretty fully and carefully among ourselves. In the end we found that we were not very far apart in our views, and in the net result I had the honour of moving in the conference, this resolution. I should say at this point that all the proposals which have been put forward by the Prime, Minister of the United Kingdom with regard to an Imperial Cabinet are subject to the conclusions which may eventually be reached by the conference mentioned in this resolution, which is as follows:
' The Imperial War Conference are of opinion that the readjustment of the constitutional relations of the component parts of the Empire is too important and intricate a subject to be dealt with during the war, and that it should form the subject of- a special Imperial Conference to be summoned as soon as possible after the cessation of hostilities. They deem it their duty, however, to place on record their view that any such readjustment, while thoroughly preserving all existing powers of self-government and complete control of domestic affairs, should be based upon a full recognition of the Dominions as autonomous nations of an Imperial Commonwealth, and of India as an important portion of the same, should recognize the right of the Dominions and India to an adequate voice in foreign policy and in foreign relations, and should provide effective arrangements for continuous consultation in all important matters of common Imperial concern, and for such necessary concerted action, founded on consultation, as the several governments may determine.
Now, I am aware that some criticism from a certain standpoint may be made of that proposal, because it may 'be urged that it does not lead to a sufficiently close organization of the Empire. Theie have been proposals put forward for an Imperial Parliament which should have taxing powers for certain purposes over all the Dominions
as well as over the United Kingdom. As far as I am concerned, and I think the other members of the Conference thoroughly concurred in this view, I regard that proposal as neither feasible nor wise.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Robert Laird Borden: I venture to
think that the Dominions have done more for the common cause that we all have at heart in this war than could have been accomplished by any Imperial Parliament possessing the powers to which I have alluded.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Robert Laird Borden: And I think that the best guarantee of what the Dominions are prepared to do for a great common purpose in the future, is the record of what they have done during the past three years. I should say this, however, in justice to those w>ho have been advocating different views with great ability and with great earnestness, that I do think all the parliaments and peoples of the empire are greatly indebted to the groups of young men in the Mother Country and throughout the Empire who have taken up this subject and studied it and issued many able publications with regard to it. Their work has been most earnest, unselfish and devoted, and it has had this good effect; it has concentrated the opinion of the great mass of the people upon these problems of great common concern. So while I am unable to accept some of the conclusions which they have reached, I nevertheless feel that the Empire lies under a debt of gratitude for the work which they have done in that regard.
This resolution was accepted unanimously by the Conference. I am happy to say that from first to last in all the proceedings of the Conference there was not one dissenting voice from any conclusion which the Conference reached. Every conclusion was absolutely unanimous, and I -think this was perhaps due to the fact that certain subjects which did involve difficulty were first taken up informally in private discussion, and a conclusion was thus reached.
I should say this, further: A special Imperial Conference is to be summoned immediately after the war for the purpose of considering constitutional readjustment. I raised the question, and so did others, as to the constitution of that conference. I entertained the view, and I know that it was shared by others, that such a conference
, 1532

should include representatives of the recognized political parties in all the Dominions of the Empire. This is too great a question to he made a matter of party controversy, and if I should have anything to do with the selection of the representatives of Canada at that special conference I desire now to say, without any qualification, that I should ask the leaders of the opposite party to go with me to that conference, so that we might take counsel with each other and with the other members of the conference as to these vital questions.
The next subject to which I shall allude is the development and control of natural resources. This resolution was regarded as of -some importance. I proposed it to the Conference, -and at the request of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom it was brought -into the Imperial War Cabinet and discussed there. It was unanimously adopted both by the Imperial War Cabinet and by the Imperial War Conference. Its terms are -as follows:-
Having regard to the experience obtained in the present war, this Conference records its opinion that the safety of the Empire and the necessary development of its component parts, require prompt and attentive consideration as well as concerted action with regard to the following matters:-
1.	The production of an adequate food supply and arrangements for its transportation when and where required, under any conditions that may reasonably be anticipated.
2.	The control of natural resources available within the Empire, especially those that are of an essential character for necessary national purposes, whether in peace or in war.
3.	The economical utilization of such natural resources through processes of manufacture carried on within the Empire.
The Conference commends to the consideration of the Governments summoned thereto the enactment of such legislation as may assist this purpose.
It is beyond question -that when this war broke out the Germans were utilizing for their own purposes-their own national purposes, the building up of their industries- natural resources from many parts of our Empire, and in some instances natural resources which -could n,ot be obtained in the same abundance and of the- same quality elsewhere. I venture to think, and I have so stated in the United Kingdom, that Germany had a better knowledge and conception of the natural resources of the Dominions of this Empire than was to be found in the United Kingdom itself before the war. I have little doubt of that, and if you had the opportunity of hearing what was recounted to me from other Dominions you would have little doubt. I will give one incident with regard to our own country which was

brought to my attention the day I left Canada. The president of a Canadian company which has vast mineral resources on the island of Newfoundland told me that aJbout two months before the war he was in Germany and had occasion to call upon one of the managers of Krupps-. Reference was made to these mineral resources, and the gentleman to whom I have referred spoke of their development. The manager rang a bell, called in a clerk, -and to the Canadian's great surprise, the -clerk placed before them a plan of th-e workings at Belle Isle, which not only showed those workings as they were when he had left Canada a month or two before, but even showed the developments which had taken- place during his absence. This givies on-e an idea of the thoroughness with which the Germane watch the development of our natural resources, and of their methods. I venture to think that this- resolution, which has commended itself to the Imperial War Cabinet and the Imperial War Conference, will also commend itself to the Parliament and people of Canada. We have resources so varied and abundant within this Empire, that we need not fear any effort -Germany may make to dominate the wor-ld commercially or industrially after the war. But I have absolutely no doubt that such an effort will be made by the -Germans, and, indeed, there is the most reliable information that systematic arrangements for that purpose are being carried on in Germany to-day. If we have anything like the same resourcefulness, the same thoroughness, the same self-confidence, the -sa-me courage as they have put into their efforts in the past an-d will put into their efforts in the future, we have nothing to fear. The resources of this Empire are beyond all comparison greater than -any that Germany can command. She cannot dominate the world commercially or industrially any more than she can dominate it toy her military power.
The next resolution to which I call attention is one concerning Imperial preference. This resolution was -brought forward toy Mr. Massey, in the first instance, at the Imperial War Conference and was afterwards with -some amendments approved by the Imperial War Cabinet.
The time has arrived when all possible encouragement should be given to the development of Imperial resources, and especially to making the Empire independent of other countries in respect of food supplies, raw materials, and essential industries. With these objects in view this Conference expresses itself in favour of:_-
1. The principle that each part of the Empire, having due regard to the interests of our Allies!

shall give specially favourable treatment and facilities to the produce and manufactures of other parts of the Empire.
2. Arrangements by which intending emigrants from the United Kingdom may be induced to settle in countries under the British flag.
I should say at once that this resolution does not necessarily purpose, or even look to, any change in the fiscal arrangements of the United Kingdom. It does not involve taxation of food; it does not involve taxation of anything. As far as the fiscal system of the United Kingdom is concerned, I followed when in England precisely the same course that I have carried out in this Parliament and in this country-I decline to interfere in matters which are of domestic concern and should be the subject of domestic control in the United Kingdom. I declined to invite them to change their fiscal policy. These matters are within their control, as our fiscal policy is within ours. And I would go further and say that the people of Canada would not desire the people of the United Kingdom tdchange their fiscal policy for the purpose alone of giving a preference to the producers of this country, especially if the proposed fiscal changes should involve any supposed injustice, should he regarded as ;unfair or oppressive by a considerable portion of the people of the United Kingdom. But what this proposal looks to, as I understand it, is this

that we can within this Empire establish better and cheaper facilities of communication than we have enjoyed up to the present time. That, I believe, is the line along which the change indicated will proceed. The question of transportation has been a very live one, a very important one, to the producers of this country, especially those of the western provinces. We know that before the commencement of the war the cost of transportation across the Atlantic increased twofold or threefold. There was sometimes a dearth of ships. I hope and believe that there will be concerted action and co-operation between the government of the United Kingdom and the governments of the Dominions, by which speedier, better, and more economical transportation will be provided between the Mother Country and the Dominions, and between the Dominions themselves. So, in this light, I am confident that the resolution passed by the Conference will receive favourable consideration by the people of this country.
The next resolution I will take up deals with the question of naval defence. The resolution unanimously adopted is as follows :
That the Admiralty be requested to work out immediately after the conclusion of the war what they consider the most effective scheme of Naval Defence for the Empire for the consideration of the several Governments summoned to this Conference, with such recommendations as the Admiralty consider necessary in that respect for the Empire's future security.
It would be impossible to do that during the war; the Admiralty frankly told us so. In the first place they are too busy, and, in the second place, they desire to learn thoroughly the lessons of this war before they reach conclusions that they would commend to the overseas governments. The development of submarine warfare during the past three years has been so important and so serious as to cause the authorities of the Admiralty to-reconsider more or less the whole position. But we do believe that after the war is over it will be necessary for the United Kingdom and the Dominions to take up this question in co-operation and with a view to concerted 'action. For that purpose the Admiralty will prepare, with the least possible delay after the war is over, a scheme by which we can act together for this great common purpose.
I do not need, I hope, in the presence of hon. gentlemen in this House, to emphasize the importance and necessity of this. It is obvious that if the communications of this Empire on the ocean are cut, the Empire cannot hold together. That is apparent and clear to all. It is a matter of congratulation to us that although -there is a serious menace in the submarine campaign which Germany has carried on, *this has been met with at least some success up to the present and 1	hope it
will be met with still more success in the future. Outside of the submarine campaign, we all rejoice that the ocean was swept practically clear of the German flag within a few months after war broke out. That is a great achievement. It means as much for us as it does for the people of the United Kingdom. What enables our producers, what has enabled them during the past three years, to send their products at greatly increased prices across the ocean for the sustenance and comfort of the people of the United Kingdom and for the purpose of carrying on this war? It is the organized power of the British Empire in the Navy- that, and that alone. What is it that keeps Quebec, Montreal, Halifax, St. John, Victoria and Vancouver from being raided by enemy cruisers, from seeing women -and children murdered in their streets by German shells and from all the horrors and barbarities that even some of the towns in

*the United Kingdom have suffered? I say again that it is 'the organized power of the Empire in our Navy. Therefore, it is a matter of concern to ns, as to the United Kingdom, that the naval power of this Empire shall be kept up and increased in such measure that the ocean paths shall not be closed to us whether in peace or in war.
The next resolution to which I invite your attention relates to the care of soldiers' graves, a most sacred duty devolving upon the people of the Empire. The resolution which was passed in regard to that is as follows:
The Conference, having considered the minute addressed to the Prime Minister on the 15th March, 1917, hy His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, concurs in the proposals made therein, and humbly prays His Majesty to constitute by Royal Charter an Imperial War Graves Commission for the purposes stated by His Royal Highness, and along the lines therein set forth as embodied in the draft charter submitted to the 'Conference. The Conference places on record its very deep appreciation of the generous action of the French Government in allotting in perpetuity the land in that country where our men are buried, and urges that similar arrangements should be made, if possible, in the terms of peace with all governments-ally, enemy, or neutral-for a similar concession in Gallipoli, Mesopotamia, Africa, and all other "theatres of war. The Conference desires to record its grateful appreciation of the work already done Toy the Prince of Wales and his Committee in caring for the graves of those who have fallen in the common cause of the Empire, and its satisfaction thaft His Royal Highness has consented to become the President of the permanent Commission.
The Commission will be constituted of representatives of the United Kingdom and the overseas Dominions and they will be charged with the care of the soldiers' graves. I should say that France generously offered to undertake the care of the graves of all the soldiers of the Empire who were buried within her territory. With the most grateful appreciation of that fine, that splendid, offer on the part of the French nation, it was thought better that we should ourselves undertake that sacred duty. So it is to be. The Commission will have full power and jurisdiction to deal with all these matters. It is hoped that territory in neutral or in allied countries where our men are buried, may be secured, and it is proposed that whatever expense is necessary for this sacred purpose shall be undertaken by the Mother Country and by the Dominions upon some satisfactory basis. In the early future, the Royal Charter will be issued, the Commission will be constituted and the work, which has already

received care and attention, will be carried out upon the lines indicated.
The next resolution is that relating to the representation of India. I moved this resolution, and I have no doubt that the course which the Conference took was absolutely wise. The resolution is as follows:
That the Imperial War Conference desires to place on record its view that the resolution of the Imperial Conference of 20th April, 1907, should be modified to permit of India being fully represented at all future Imperial Conferences, and that the necessary steps should be taken to secure the assent of the various Governments in order that the next Imperial Conference may be summoned and constituted accordingly.
I should read in connection with that another resolution in regard to India as to which a word might be said. It is this:
That the Imperial War Conference, having examined the memorandum on the position of Indians in the self-governing dominions presented by the Indian representatives to the Conference, accepts the principle of reciprocity of treatment between India and the Dominions and recommends the memorandum to the favourable consideration of the Governments concerned.
As far as the representation of India is concerned, I am absolutely confident that it will be productive of good. I had more than one illustration of that during the Conference itself. The Indian representatives were the Maharaja of Bikaner, one of the native Indian princes and a man of splendid loyalty and devotion who governs his country along progressive lines, and who has contributed in every possible way to the winning of this war. Another Member Designate of the Viceroy's Executive Council of the Governor of Bengal, a man of notable learning, experience and ability and of great fairness and moderation as well. The third was Sir James Meston, Lieutenant Governor of the United Provinces, who has had a distinguished career as a civil servant in India, and who also is a man of commanding ability and wide experience. I found it of very great advantage in discussing matters of common concern to India and ourselves that we had the representatives of India at the Conference. I invited the members of the Conference to meet informally at the hotel at which I 'was staying, and we had a free, full and frank discussion of the whole situation insofar as the Dominions are concerned. India has had matters of difference, matters sometimes of controversy with South Africa, perhaps also with Australia and New Zealand, and on some occasions with Canada. Sir Satyendra Sinha stated the case from the Indian

standpoint with great ability and fairness, conspicuous moderation and very deep feeling. His address to us was not the less impressive because it was so fair and so moderate. On our part, we spoke with equal freedom, equal frankness, and, I hope, with equal moderation. The net result was the resolution at which we arrived, and which I have read. Its basis is the idea that the self-respect of India shall be maintained by an agreement that whatever measures we enforce in regard to the emigration or the visits of Indians to Canada shall also prevail with regard to the emigration or visits of Canadians to India.
I do not think that anyone in this House can dispute the fairness of that proposal. Upon certain other matters which we discussed I need not dwell to-day. I see nothing but good in the presence of India at that Conference, and I believe that there will be no objection in this House or in this country to having that great dependency of the Empire represented at future meetings. India has been splendidly loyal in this war and has contributed of her manhood and of her treasure for the purpose of enabling us to win it. We must take that all into account. Her civilization is different from ours; it is more ancient, in some respects it may be said to be on a higher plane, perhaps-


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Robert Laird Borden: There is more of idealism in their civilization; more perhaps of materialism in ours. I am not disposed to discuss the question as to whether one or the other civilization is superior; but I do say that the Indian civilization is entitled to our respect, and that we must do our part in making the inhabitants of that great dependency of the Empire feel that they are not treated with contumely or injustice by the people of any of the Dominions. I believe that purpose will be carried out; I believe it will be materially assisted by the Conference which we had with the Indian representatives.
The question of double income tax was also taken up. I need not read the resolution, which has been made public. It was very fully and forcibly discussed, and in the end a resolution was adopted which looks to action by the British Government immediately after the conclusion of the war.
We took up also the question of protection to overseas soldiers from certain temptations, and to the lack of adequate action on the part of the home
authorities. If there was one subject on which I did express myself with unusual vigour, it was on that particular subject. I am bound to say that I do not think sufficient care or attention has been given to this subject by the Imperial authorities, and I very frankly told them so. There was an earnest promise of redress in that regard, a promise of more adequate protection, and the removal of temptation; and I venture to hope, with considerable confidence, that the action which we took in the Imperial Conference on that subject will be productive of good results.
In the Imperial War Conference we also took up the cattle embargo, which has been a source of irritation to the people of this country for many years past. I do not hesitate to say, what I said in the Conference and what has been many times said, that if the United Kingdom desire, for the protection of any industry in the United Kingdom, to keep Canadian cattle out of that country, we have not the slightest objection to their doing so. But we want them to do it directly, and not indirectly. We consider that, if the embargo is maintained for any such purpose, as I took the liberty of asserting, it is a great injustice to Canada that it should be maintained, and it ought to be removed. I said to them: If you desire to keep our cattle out pass a law to keep them out; keep your own course with regard to your own fiscal matters, with regard to your industries, with regard to your productions; we do the same with regard to ours, and we are perfectly content that you should do the same with yours; but do not, on the pretense that our cattle are diseased, keep them out for any such purpose. I am not at liberty to make any [DOT] announcement on the subject to-day beyond this, that the representations which we made were received as favourably as we could have expected by the head of the Department of Agriculture, Mr. Prothero. I must allude, in that connection, to the great service which was rendered in this matter by my colleague, Mr. Rogers, who, at my request, took the subject up immediately on his arrival in Great Britain. He was indefatigable in carrying out the purpose that we had at heart; he brought it up in the Conference, argued it with great earnestness and ability, and eventually succeeded in having the Minister of Agriculture come to the Conference for the purpose of a frank discussion of the whole question. After that discussion had taken place we received the very favourable indication to which I have already alluded.

In addition to the Imperial War Cabinet and the Imperial War Conference, we were very actively engaged in many other matters relating to the war. There were all conceivable questions with regard to its prosecution, to which I have already alluded. We had to take up the question of naval protection during the war, we had to take up many questions with regard to the Canadian Expeditionary Force, with regard to the provision of shipping, food supply, the restriction of imports, and a score of other questions which arose from time to time and which kept us most actively engaged. I believe that there was some suspicion in this country that the overseas ministers were occupying their time in enjoying themselves, and were not very actively engaged. I have been accustomed to reasonably hard work all my life, but I venture to say to the members of this House and to the people of this country that I never worked more incessantly or more actively during any like period than I did during the period I was in England. That, I think, is equally true of my colleagues. Mr. Rogers attended the meetings of the Empire Land Settlement Committee, to which not only he, but representatives of all t)he provinces of Canada were appointed while we were in London. He took up also questions relating to the purchase of Canadian wheat and cheese, the provision of dry docks in Canada, and other important subjects, and in connection with many good progress was made.
Mr. Hazen was in continual conference with the Admiralty and the Minister of Shipping with respect to the provision of tonnage, Atlantic coast patrol, restriction of imports from Canada, and the requisitioning of Canadian ships by the Admiralty. He served on a very important committee of the Imperial War Cabinet. Both he and Mr. Rogers interested themselves actively in all matters affecting the welfare of the Canadian forces.
Sir George Perley attended all the meetings of- the War Cabinet and of the War Conference and was of invaluable assistance throughout in all the matters to which I have alluded.
We also were in conference with several departments of the British Government and with General Macdougall, of the Canadian Forestry Corps, as well, respecting the utilizing of certain Canadian products, such as cars, locomotives and lumber. General Macdougall took a very keen interest in all

such matters and credit should be given to him for his zeal and activity in promoting Canadian interests in that way. We also took up the question of exchanging Canadian soldiers and civilians interned or imprisoned in Germany and the amelioration of their lot, and we did everything that seemed possible of accomplishment.
T have spoken of my visit to France. It might interest members of this House if I should say a few words about the Canadian Army Corps and its achievements during the past six months. After our visit to France, all the members of the Conference were invited by the French Government to visit Paris, where they proposed to receive and entertain us; but owing to the necessity of returning to Canada with the least possible delay, we were unable to accept the invitation, and, so far as I know, none of the representatives of the Dominions will be able to accept. I regret, this because I should greatly have liked to take a message from this Parliament and from the people of Canada to the French Government and the French nation, assuring them of our admiration of the splendid courage, patience and fortitude with which they have endured this war and all that it has meant to that nation. No one can realize it who has not been in France and has not seen the devastation that has been wrought there. I was opposite Vimy Ridge early in March with the Canadian Army 'Corps. I went in the first place to visit the Canadian Corps, and afterwards I was at British headquarters and at French headquarters. On a third or fourth day I was on the Somme battlefield -and saw there some of the territory that had been wrested from the Germans by the valour of the Canadian troops. When I was in France in July, 1915, there was one Canadian division at the front. I then had the honour and privilege of seeing the Canadian, troops and of speaking to them at that time near . "Plugstreet," opposite Meseines. When I was in France on this occasion, twenty months afterwards, there- were four Canadian divisions -at the front, a full army corps-up to strength, and then 6,000 over strength. There were 130,000 Canadian troops in France when I was there, if one includes the lines of communication units, the Canadian Railway Corps and the Canadian Forestry Corps. I need not speak to you of their record; the record speaks for itself. I was there during the preparation for the Vi-my fight and I saw the men rehearsing the work which they were to un-
MAY ]?, i!)J7
dertake. It was a splendid compliment to the Canadian troope that they were selected to make that attack upon a ridge which had been assaulted many times, but had never been taken; and it is even a greater tribute to the valour, the discipline and the resourcefulness of those troops that they took Vimy Ridge without being stopped once in their attack. I saw the plan of the operations. We knew that the attack was coming, but we did not know when it was coming. We were full of apprehension, because, as I have said, the ridge had been assaulted many times, but every attack had been repulsed with great loss. It must be said, however, that never was an attack upon Vimy Ridge or upon any other position preceded by such tremendous artillery preparation ae that which preceded the Vimy attack. General Smuts, distinguished both as a soldier and as a statesman, who was in France on the day when the artillery preparation began and during part of the following day, told me that in the history of modern warfare there was nothing approaching the bombardment with which that attack was heralded. He said something further which may be of interest to this House: that he had called for the records showing the amount of munitions on hand after that bombardment had proceeded for 24 hours, and he had been astonished to find the arrangements so excellent that they had more shells on hand than when they commenced the bombardment. Canadians at the front, in the British Islands, and I hope, everywhere, have learned the value of discipline. They have learned that discipline is necessary in an army, and I believe that it was because of their good discipline, as well as of the confidence reposed in them by their officers, that that attack was so successful. The plans which I saw showed the 'German trenches extending very far back, out own line of trenches not extending to anything like the same depth. One plan showed the objectives to be attained. Another showed the arrangements for the barrage, beginning at 5.30 in the morning-zero, they called it- then proceeding at intervals of five minutes until the division on the right was to attain its final objective at half past two. They went on with the barrage in front of them -just as I had seen them rehearsing it; going on behind a line 'of men with rifles at the slope, representing the barrage. They went on, and at 2.26, the division on the Tight, which had the furthest to go in gaining its objective, was able to telephone back
seven miles, over wires laid while the battle was being waged, informing those in charge of the guns that they could lift the barrage, as the troops were all ready to occupy their final Objective at half past two. Behind one of the divisions a number of pioneers were going forward laying their wires. They found a German tunnel. It was safer inside than outside; they went in. While laying their wire in the tunnel they discovered a number of Germans. The pioneers are not supposed to be a combatant force, but they are always ready for a fight; so there was a fight, with the result that the Germans were overpowered. It is recorded that a sergeant of the pioneers marched proudly back with 16 German prisoners and claimed from the enclosure a receipt showing that they had been taken by the pioneers. In the tunnel mines were found ready to be exploded until the pioneers cut the wires.
I may, perhaps, be pardoned if I give to the House a short extract from a document which was placed in my possession by an officer who came over with me on the ship. It is a fairly full report from a German intelligence officer of the 79th German reserve division, and it contains information that the Germans had gathered with regard to this proposed attack. I shall read only one paragraph of it:
Spring Offensive. The spring offensive of the Entente that was to be expected will most probably be staged in this vicinity, perhaps with the intention of turning the Siegfried Line (Drocourt-Queant Line) and thereby defeat its purpose. North of Arras the British will be forced, according to the nature of the ground, to deliver a joint attack on the long narrow Vimy ridge, the possession of which gives them command of the high ground in this vicinity and would also be a safeguard against German attacks on the left British flank near Arras.
Opposed to the Division (79th Reserve) are Canadian troops. The 3rd Canadian Diyision on the right flank of the Division (79th Reserve Division) came into the line about the middle of March. Recent identifications place the 2nd Canadian Division on the left divisional flank. The extreme flanks of the Canadian Corps have closed in towards the centre so that the Canadian Corps now occupies a smaller front than it did a few weeks ago. The corps is now echelonned in depth and this formation points to operations on a large scale. Behind the front line near Mont St. Eloy extensive billets for troops have been erected and this also points to a strong concentration, and! that troops are holding the front in depth. The Canadians are known to be good troops and are, therefore, well suited for assaulting. There are no deserters to be found amongst the Canadians.
I went to see Sir Douglas Haig at headquarters, and I discussed with him matters

of more or less importance relating to the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
When I proposed to return to England the next day, Sir Douglas Haig said to me: " I want you to go and look at the battlefield of the Somme, and I am sure you will come back convinced, as I am, that troops who could capture those positions, can take any position in the world. I want you to go there because some of your own troops have played an important part in that field of operations." I went there. We went through the town of Albert, which has often been spoken of in this House, where the Madonna and Child on the spire still lean over the roof of the ruined church. Among the peasants there is said to be a belief that the war will not end until the statue falls. The Germans deliberately turned their artillery on that church for weeks and finally struck the spire and the church itself is in ruins. We then came to a light railway which was built by the Canadian Railway Construction Corps under the command of General Jack Stewart, and I would like this House and the country to appreciate, more perhaps than they have yet done, the work that has been performed by the Canadian Expeditionary Force. The Canadians have played an important part, not only as combatants at the front, but in every sphere of operations. General Jack Stewart was sent for by the headquarters staff of the Fifth Anny not long ago. It was very important that a certain line of railway should be constructed with the least possible delay. The estimate made by experts as to the time required was that it would take six weeks, and if anything like that time should he necessary, the plan of operations would be absolutely interfered with. General Stewart said that he would examine the ground. He went and looked at it; he came back and- said: " If you will give me two battalions of the Canadian Railway Construction Corps, I will undertake to build it in a week." He went on with the work -and he built that l-ine of railway in four days.
I went forward to the front on a light railway built by the Canadian Railway Construction Corps across land that had been " no man's land," but that is now French land in the possession of the Allies. I have not the power to describe the condition of that country to the House; one must see -it in order to realize it. We left that railway and then on a narrow tramway we entered small ammunition cars just large enough for a man to

stand up in. We went up to the front past Courcellette, past Thiepval to a plateau beyond. To the right beyond Oouroelette was Bapa-uime -and immediately in front of it was the Loupart Wood. To our left was Fries -which had been taken the day before -after ia sharp fight. The guns behind us were bombarding the Loupart wood and it was thought to be almost impregnable, but two days later the Germans scuttled out of it and it was ours. Cour-celette was on our right. We afterwards returned to Thiepval which had been a beautiful French village. I can not describe its present condition better than in these words, that it was simply a mass of churned-up mud. There was no sign of street, or house or habitation, no indication that a human being had ever dwelt there, except that in one or two places in the side of a shell crater one might see part of the foundation of a house. The whole country is like that. General Smuts in describing it to me said that the lip of each shell crater touched the lip of another. I am absolutely unable to understand how the British ever got their big guns over land in such condition or how our own men went forward when they took Vimy Ridge. It must be remembered that these shell craters were full of water and men slipping in stood in danger of losing tneir lives and, I believe, some -of them did lose their lives by drowning. The country defies description; it is churned-up earth and mud with a confusion of all kinds of debris. I saw six abandoned tanks to the left of the plateau beyond Thiepval. In Thiepval itself, there were German helmets lying around here and there and points of shells and every kind of debris, barbed wire and all the objects that are used in warfare under modem conditions. I was particularly proud to have the privilege of seeing Cour-celette, because the Canadians distinguished themselves in its capture, and in that attack and on other battlefields, no regiment bore itself more worthily than the 22nd French-Canadian regiment which did splendid "work in every engagement in which it participated.
The Canadian Railway Construction Corps is performing work of the most vital importance. As far back as 1915 it was, I believe, suggested to the war authorities that railways could be constructed behind the fighting line and utilized to great advantage. The matter w^s not taken up immediately; but it has been taken up since,

and one of the chief requests that we received from the War Office while we were in England was. for additional men for the Canadian Eailway Construction Corps and for the Canadian Forestry Corps. What I have said of the Canadian Railway Construction Corps applies with equal force to the Canadian Forestry Corps. The work of these units is not so impressive, but is almost equally important as that of the combatant forces. It is absolutely necessary, as things are at present, that Great Britain should cut down to the utmost the tonnage for the conveyance of articles other than food supplies, and timber takes up an enormous quantity of tonnage. Therefore, in Great Britain and France forests are being sacrificed to-day on every hand in order that the necessary timber for the prosecution of the war may be provided. It is universally admitted on the other side of the Atlantic that the Canadian Forestry Corps is most highly efficient, and the request to us is that we shall send men in as large numbers as possible to assist in the work which they are carrying on.
In Great Britain I visited eight camps in all: Shorneliffe, Crowborough, Shoreham, Seaford, Witley, Bramshott, Hastings, and in Windsor Great Park, a camp of the Canadian Forestry Corps. I found the men in good spirits, in good physical condition, and undergoing careful and effective training; at least it seemed to me excellent. I visited hospitals in Great Britain and France, and everywhere I found our men receiving, so far as I could see, the best of attention. I did not hear a complaint from any man in hospital, except from one man who complained to me that the Germans were not fighting fairly, because, he said, "when the Canadians climbed the Vimy ridge, the Germans did not stand up to them, but ran away instead of fighting like men." 1 deemed it not only my duty, but my very great honour and privilege, to utilize every spare moment in seeing our men in the hospitals; and I saw only two men from Vimy ridge who did not smile with great satisfaction when I spoke of their having driven the Germans back. Those men could not smile with their lips by reason of their wounds, but they did smile with their eyes. Let me say to the members of this House and to the people of this country that no man wanting inspiration, determination or courage as to his duty in this war could go to any better place than the hospitals in which our Canadian boys
are to be found. Their patience, pluck and cheerfulness are simply wonderful. I saw some of those who are near and dear to members of this House in one of the London hospitals after that fight, the brother of one hon. member and the son of another, and I can tell those members that those young men were in fine form, in splendid spirit, proud and happy to have rendered the great service to their country which they were able to accomplish when the Vimy ridge was captured.
There is another thing that should be mentioned, and that is the very, very great kindness of the British people to all our Canadian troops. I have been among them in camps and hospitals and elsewhere, and there was hardly a place I visited where I did not find visitors at the hospitals giving great care and attention to our wounded. The troops themselves realize with the greatest possible gratitude and appreciation the kindness and attention of all those among whom they are thrown, and I know the people of this country, when they realize it in the same way, will be inspired with the same sense of gratitude.
Certain representations have been made to me and also >to the overseas authorities from time to time that the Canadian troops contract drinking habits while .overseas. I made it my special business to inquire as to that. I inquired of General 5 p.m. Turner, General Steele, and of General Child of the War Office, who has to deal with such matters, and I shall place their reports upon the Table afterwards, I shall not stop to read them now. It is enough to say that these reports indicate that such representations are almost absolutely without foundation. The Canadian troops are not addicted to the habit of drunkenness. It was represented to me by General Steele, in whose word I have absolute confidence, that there is less drinking among the Canadian troops than among any other troops in the United Kingdom, and I thoroughly believe that. Drinking is almost at a minimum. I think General Steele said that three men peT thousand per week in the area under his command had been brought up on such a charge during a particular period, and that was a fair average. General Steele said that he believed it was better to utilize the wet canteen than to permit the men to go to public houses near at hand. When troops go to the canteen they are necessarily under discipline and supervision. If there is no wet canteen, and the men go

out to the public houses-and you cannot very well prevent them-they are not under the same discipline or supervision, and almost all the difficulty has arisen in that way, and not through the wet canteen.
So far as general war conditions are concerned-I am sorry to have had to trespass so long on the attention of the House, but I am dealing with an important subject, and some of these matters that seem trivial may yet be of interest-all realize that there were great developments during our visit to Great Britain. We started almost immediately after the submarine campaign commenced, and while we were there the fortunes of war in many theatres of operations were very largely in favour of the Allied nations. There was a great victory in Mesopotamia. The offensive was assumed with marked success by the British armies in France and substantial advances were made. But I hope that hon. gentlemen in looking at the map will realize that the territory won by the offensive which commenced this spring is only an insignificant part of the Allied territory that is still held by the Germans. The overwhelming power of our artillery impressed me as very much greater in the fighting this spring than it was on the Somme. But a great struggle still lies before us in this war; that is the message I bring back to you from Great Britain and from the front.
A great struggle lies before us, and I cannot put that before you more forcibly than by stating that at the commencement of this spring's campaign Germany put in the field 1,000,000 more men than she put in the field last spring. The organization of the man-power of that nation has been wonderful. Awful as are the barbarities and methods which she has perpetrated and used, one cannot but admit that the organization of the national life of that country throws into the field absolutely the full power of the nation.


Samuel Hughes: Does that 1,000,000 biclude troops of other nations besides Germany, or Germans only?


Robert Laird Borden: It includes Germans only. Germany has managed so to organize her national life that she wias able to put in the field at the commencement of this spring's campaign 1,000,000 moTe men than she put in the field at the commencement of her campaign last spring. That is the information that was given to me, and which I think it is my duty to place before the House, in order that the conditions at the front may be realized and understood.

Now, I desire to speak with discretion and moderation in these matters, hut I cannot too strongly emphasize my belief that a great effort still lies before the Allied nations if we are going to win this war, and it is absolutely inconceivable to me that we should not win this war. The unsettled political conditions in Russia undoubtedly have handicapped the effort on the eastern front, and thus enabled Germany to make a greater effort on the western front.
Against these considerations there is the fact that a great kindred and neighbouring nation has entered into the war on the Allied side, the United States of America. That important event, which took place during our absence, must exercise a tremendous effect not only upon the issue of this war, but upon the future of the world. The fact that citizens of the United States are to fight side by side with the soldiers of our Empire cannot but have a splendid [DOT] influence on the future of the two nations. Although the relations of the two countries have been good for many years, this notable event must do much to wipe out certain memories, and I know that the Canadian forces at the front will be delighted to fight side by side with those from the great republic to the south. There are in the Canadian Expeditionary Force more than 9,000 men who give their next of kin as resident in the United States of America. I do not say that all these men have come directly from the United States; some of them may have emigrated to this country, leaving their relatives, or next of kin, on the other side, of the line; but 9,000 who were undoubtedly born in the allegiance of the United States are now fighting in the Canadian Expeditionary Force.
But although the United States has entered this war, we do not know how long it will be before the tremendous power of that nation can be translated into military effort. It cannot be done in a few weeks; it cannot be done fully in a few months. -We know that from our own experience; the British government know it from their experience, and, therefore, it must not lead to any relaxation of effort on the part of the Empire, or on the part of any of the Allied nations.
I pause to say a few words about the submarine campaign. Perhaps its seriousness may not be realized by those who have not been brought closely in touch with events from week to week, and with confidential information which has been made available to those who have attended the Imperial War Cabinet.

I believe it will be met; I believe there is enough determination, enough resourcefulness, enough self-denial, and enough courage on the part o.f this Empire to meet it and to defeat it. But I would not be doing my duty if I did not emphasize its seriousness. I need not do more, in order to emphasize Germany's confidence in this campaign than to say this-that in order to carry it on she risked war with the United States of America. That indicates her belief that the submarine war would bring the struggle to a conclusion before the United States could throw effectively its power into this contest. That is what she is trying to do now., The losses in ships have been very serious indeed, and some of the losses of late have taken place under conditions which I cannot mention to the House, but which are sufficiently grave. The cry of Lloyd George, when he made his great speech in the Guildhall, was this:	What we need in this war
is ships, and then more ships, and then more ships still. It is the belief of the Germans that they can protract the war on the western front until their submarine campaign has made it necessary for Great Britain to accept terms of peace to which none of us would listen to for a moment at present. As I have said, I do not believe Germany's attempt will succeed,, but it will require courage, resolution, energy, self-denial and resourcefulness on the part of the people of the United Kingdom, and of the Dominions, if that attempt is to end ' in failure.
I have no confident hope that the war will end this year. Any conjecture as to the time when it will end is almost valueless. The effectiveness- of Russia's efforts on the eastern front, and the s-peed with which the power of the United States can be thrown into this struggle, will toe great, if not determining factors.
Now, as to our efforts- in this war-and here I approach a subject of great gravity and seriousness, and, I hope, with a full sense of the responsibility that devolves -upon myself and upon my colleagues, and not only upon us but upon the members of this Parliament -and the people of this country. We have four Canadian divisions at the front. For the immediate future there are sufficient reinforcements. But four divisions cannot toe maintained without thorough provision for future requirements. >If these reinforcements are not supplied, what will be the consequence? The consequence will be that the four divisions will dwindle down to three, the three will dwin-
'die to two, and Canada's efforts, so splendid in this war up to the present, will not be maintained as we desire it to be -maintained. I think that no true Canadian, realizing all that is at stake in this war, can bring himself to consider with toleration or seriousness ^.ny suggestion for the relaxation of our efforts. The months immediately before us may be decisive. They may be decisive even if the war should not end this year. Germany is bringing into play during the present season the last ounce of her manhood. What have we done in this war? We have sent 326,000 men overseas in the Canadian Expeditionary Force. Including reservists in British and Allied armies, and men enlisted for naval defence, 360,000 men at least have left the shores of Canada. It is a great effort, but greater still is needed. Hitherto, we have depended upon voluntary enlistment. I myself stated to Parliament that nothing but voluntary enlistment was proposed by the Government. But I return to Canada impressed at once with the extreme gravity of the situation, and with a -sense of responsibility for our further effort at the most critical period of the war. It is apparent to me that the voluntary system will not yield further substantial results. I hoped that it would. The Government have made every effort within its power, so far as I can judge. If any effective effort to stimulate voluntary recruiting still remains to be made I should like to know what it is. The people have co-operated with the Government in a most splendid manner along the line of voluntary enlistment. Men and women alike have interested -themselves in filling up the ranks of regiments that were organized. Everything possible has been done, it seems to me, in the way of voluntary enlistment.
All citizens aTe liable to military service for the defence of -their country, and I conceive that the battle for Canadian liberty and autonomy is being fought to-day on the plains of France and of Belgium. There are other places besides the soil of a country itself where the battle for its liberties and its institutions can be fought; and I venture to think that, if this war should end in defeat, Canada, in all the years to come, would be under the shadow of German military domination. That is the very lowest at which we can put it. I believe that this fact cannot be gainsaid.
Now, the question prises -as- to what is our duty. I repeat once more, a great responsi-



bility rests upon those who are entrusted with the administration of public affairs. But they are not fit to be trusted* with that transcendent duty if they shrink from any responsibility which the occasion calls for. If the cause for which we fight is what we believe it to be, if the issues involved are those which have been repeatedly declared by all our public men and in all the press of Canada, I believe the time has come when the authority of the state should be invoked to provide reinforcements necessary to sustain the gallant men at the front who have held the line for months, who have proved themselves more than a match for the best troops that the enemy could send against them, and who are fighting in France and Belgium that Canada may live in the future. No one who has not seen the positions which our men have taken, whether at Vimy Ridge, at Courcel-lette, or elsewhere, can realize the magnitude of the task that is before them, or the splendid courage and resourcefulness which its accomplishment demands. Nor can any one realize the conditions under which war is being carried on. I have been somewhat in the midst of things at the front, yet I feel that I cannot realize what the life in the trenches means, though I know that I can realize it better than those who have not been as near to the front as I have been. I bring back to the people of Canada from these men a message that they need our help, that they need to he supported, that they need to be sustained, that reinforcements must be sent to them. Thousands of them have made the supreme sacrifice for our liberty and preservation. Common gratitude, apart from all other considerations, should bring the whole force of this nation behind them. I have promised, in so far as I am concerned, that this help shall be given. I should feel myself unworthy of the responsibility devolving upon me if I did not fulfil that pledge. I bring a message from them, yes, a message also from the men in the hospitals, who have come back from the very valley of the shadow of death, many of them maimed for life. I saw one of them who had lost both legs pretty well up to the hip and he was as bright, as cheerful, as brave, and as confident of the future as 'any one of the members of this House-a splendid, br.ave, boy. But, is there not some otheT message? Is there not a call to us from those who have passed beyond the shadow into the light of perfect day, from those who have fallen in France 
and in Belgium, from those who have died that Canada may live-is there not a call to us that their sacrifice shall not be in vain?	.
"I have had to take all these matters into consideration and I have given them my most earnest attention. I realize that the responsibility is a serious one but I do npt shrink from it. Therefore, it is my duty to announce to the House that early proposals will 'be made on the part of the Government to provide, by compulsory military enlistment on a selective basis, such reinforcements as may be necessary to maintain the Canadian army to-day in the field as one of the finest fighting units of the Empire. The number of men required will not be less than 50,000 and will probably be 100,000. These proposals have been formulated in part and they will be presented to the House with the greatest expedition that circumstances will permit. I hope that when they are submitted all the members pf the House will receive them with a full sense of the greatness of the issue involved in this war, with a deep realization of the sacrifice that we have already made, of the purpose for which it has been made, and with a firm determination on our part that in this great struggle we will do our duty whatever it may be, tp the very end.


Right Hon.   S@: Mr. Speaker, when, in the month of December last, the official news came from the other side that the Government of Canada had been invited to a conference, to take place at an early date in London, upon questions connected with the war, although at that time Parliament had been summoned to meet early in January, we on this side of the House at once decided that we would offer no objection whatever to the absence of the ministers who would go to London. We did not see that there was any special urgency for the conference, such as would interfere with the business of Parliament. Notwithstanding, we determined that we would not offer any objection, but that, on the contrary, we would, in so far as it lay in our power, facilitate the business of the House in order to permit of the absence of the ministers. Although we did not see the immediate object of the conference, although it would have seemed that there was no urgency, we thought that there might be questions of the organization of the armies, of the construction of ships, of the production of foods, of the supplying of munitions, which were of such consequence as to

make it necessary or advisable for the Government of the Mother Country to confer with the Governments of the overseas Dominions. Therefore, we at once assented to the proposal that Parliament should adjourn to enable the Prime Minister and the colleagues by whom he was to be accompanied to attend the conference.
I have first to say to my right hon. friend that if I have any criticism to offer, it is simply this, that he did not exercise the best of judgment in his selection of the colleagues to accompany him. It seems to me absolutely according to the fitness of things that the attendance of two members of the Government would be indispensable for such a conference, and that one should be the Minister of the Naval Service and the other the Minister of Militia and Defence. The Minister of the Naval Service (Mr. Hazen) was selected, and the Minister of Militia and Defence (Sir Edward Kemp) was left behind and was replaced by the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Rogers). Now, the Minister of Public Works may be a warrior bold, but he did not show that he had had any experience in that line. The Minister of Public Works once said on the floor of this House that his specialty was winning elections, which is not at all like winning the war. In my humble judgment the presence of the Minister of Militia was indispensable when the Canadian Government was called upon by the Government of the Mother Country to discuss matters appertaining to the war. It may be said that we have a Minister of Militia in Great Britain. But, Sir, though we have a Minister of Militia in Great Britain, it seems to me all the more reason, since we have two heads of the department, that the Minister of Militia in Canada should have accompanied the Pr^me Minister, in order that the Minister of Militia in. Canada and the Minister of Militia in England, the Canadian head and the English head, might confer together and not come into collision. We had that experience before when there was a collision between the late Minister of Militia and the gentleman who at that time had assumed the powers of the Minister of Militia overseas. That is all the criticism I have to offer as to the action taken by the Prime Minister in that respect.
Now, we have the result of that conference, and my right hon. friend will agree with me, as I am sure that every member of this House will agree, that the result of the conference, in so far as any practical
98*
action that has been taken, amounts to very little. My right hon. friend has told us that the only concrete thing which has come out of this conference is that we are to have an Imperial War Council. That seems to be a very ambitious designation for the assemblage of gentlemen, or the body, which is to be known by the name of the Imperial War Council.
It seems to me to be rather a misnomer, calculated to lead men to indulge in fancies and dreams, rather than to impress itself on the judgment of serious men. You have an Imperial War Cabinet composed of five members of the Imperial Cabinet, of one member of the Cabinet of each of the different overseas Dominions, and of representatives of India. My right hon. friend stated that the duty of the Imperial War Cabinet is to advise the Crown upon all matters of Imperial concern; matters which concern the whole British Empire. This Cabinet is to advise the Crown. What Crown? The Crown in Great Britain, the Crown in Canada, the Crown in Australia, the Crown in New Zealand, the Crown in South Africa, the Crown in Newfoundland and the Crown in India,-because under our present system of Government the Crown is represented by ministers who advise it in all these different countries. The Imperial War Cabinet can conclude nothing. We are familiar with the declaration made some weeks ago by Mr. Bomar Law to the effect that the Imperial Cabinet was at once executive and consultative. With all respect to the opinion of Mr. Bonar Law, this is a statement which cannot be accepted as it was uttered. The Imperial War Cabinet has no executive power; it can report, it can pass judgment, it can. come to conclusions upon any subject; but its conclusions achieve nothing; they are simply reported to the Crown in Parliament in Great Britain; in the different countries overseas, and in India. And when such a report has been made it may be accepted by one Parliament and rejected by the other. We have already had such a case. In 1911, the last Imperial Conference of that year decided to adopt a system of naval zones to be patrolled by the navies of the different Dominions having navies. A navy was ascribed to Canada on the Atlantic coast, and another naval situation was ascribed to Canada and Australia on the Pacific ocean. This plan was adopted by the mother country,but it was rejected by the Canadian Government and by the Canadian people, and therefore this body is nothing more than a consultative body. I

do not object to it as a consultative body. But I object to terms being used which, in their very nature, cannot accord with the rules of parliamentary government as it exists to-day in the British Empire, in the motherland, and in the Dominions overseas. But if I 'am told that there is to be -a body which is to be known by the name of the Imperial Council, I am not disposed to quarrel with the name. I do not object to there being consultations, quite the contrary. My right hon. friend has stated that this body-so named, and misnamed -is to meet once every year. As to this, I have no objection whatever. This body can do nothing except discuss, come to certain conclusions, and report them to the different peoples whom its members represent, by them to be accepted or rejected.	Well, Sir, for my
part, I am very much of the opinion that a great deal of advantage is to be derived by frequent consultations between people and people. Ignorance has been, all through the ages, the cause of many discords, indeed, and very many wars also;-and when peoples are living under the same allegiance and are part of the same Empire, undoubtedly nothing but advantage can come from frequent consultation. To that I have no objection.
My hon. friend has alluded to the fact that there were enthusiasts in Great Britain and in Canada also who had hoped that the British Empire would be reconstituted; in fact, it was stated in the press when the Conference was summoned that its chief object would be to reorganize the British Empire. Well, everybody who has had the slightest experience in public affairs must have known that such a hope was a delusion, that it could not be realized. As it has turned out, all hopes of reorganizing the British Empire have been adjourned to a Conference to be summoned immediately after the war is over. I attach very much importance to the belief, and I agree altogether with the view expressed by my hon. friend a moment ago, that no reorganization of the British Empire can bring about greater or better results than those which have been demonstrated by the present conditions. I cannot imagine that under present circumstances, so long as there is the disparity of population between the United Kingdom and the dependencies, any system can he organized or planned which will work more satisfactorily than the plan which we now have and upon which the Empire has grown up to its present solidity-I use the word " solidity " advisedly.

But still, if there is to be a conference, as it is understood there is to be a conference, one thing at all events has been gained and one thing to which I at once tender my complete adherence; it is -a fact that any conference, any reorganization, which may be contemplated will be based upon the principle of local autonomy and will not involve an impairment of the powers now vested in the Dominions beyond the seas. I understand that in the new constitution whidh is to be discussed when the Conference takes place the principle of monarchy is to be adopted. I have read a statement made by Mr. Long, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in which I find:-
The resolution with regard to the constitution of the Empire was made the occasion for striking expressions by the various speakers of attachment to the monarchical institutions of the Empire, and their value for the preservation of Imperial unity. In the words of one of the speakers, the monarchy is the keystone of the Imperial arch.
It seems to me that these phrases were altogether unnecessary. There 'has been a revolution in Russia. Revolutions have been threatened in many other places; but in the British Empire we are satisfied with monarchical institutions. There may be liberty and freedom under a monarchy, and there may be despotism in a republic. For my part I may say this, and I think that in this opinion everybody will agree, as a matter of abstract opinion it matters not what is the form of government, provided the people are free in their institutions and have the right of representation and petition. Under the British institutions we have been .accustomed-and this is the reason why I read with some surprise such words as these-we have 'been accustomed to look upon, and we do look upon the Crown as a basis of union among the different parts of the British Empire, and as a guarantee of that union I am pretty sure that the British people to-day would not tolerate a monarchy such as existed in England at the end of the eighteenth century or the beginning of the nineteenth century; but so long as the British monarchy is maintained in the traditions which were inaugurated by Queen Victoria every British subject the world over will be quite satisfied to remain under monarchical institutions.
I wish to refer to the next resolution which was adopted by the conference and which has been made public. My right hon. friend had stated that many of the resolutions adopted by the conference have, to remain secret. As to that I have no

fault to find; so long as they remain secret they do neither good nor harm.


Robert Laird Borden: I did not say " many;" I said "some."


Wilfrid Laurier: Whether some or many, they do no good or no harm, it matters not whether they are published or whether they are not published. However, I shall deal only with those which have been published and, taking them in the order in which my right hon. friend presented them, the next to which I wish to refer is that in respect to India's representation at future Imperial Conferences. My hon. friend has read the resolution; I shall read it again.
That the Imperial War Conference desires to place on record its view that the resolution of the Imperial Conference of April 20, 1907, should be modified to permit of India being' fully represented at all future Imperial Conferences.
Under the resolution of 1907, representation at the Imperial Conference was confined to the Government of Great Britain and the governments of the self-governing dominions. Henceforth, India is to take part in the Imperial life of the British Empire. For my part, I say without hesitation not only that I have no fault to find with this proposal, but that I highly commend it. It is not more than twenty years since Rudyard Kipling wrote the following lines:
Oh! East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.
This might have been true as applied to conditions twenty yea'rs ago, but, Sir, in these days events move rapidly. The opinion of a man like Kipling, who knew both West and East fairly well, was that they would never meet; but now they can and do meet. The civilization of the East, which, as my right hon. friend has said, is older than our own civilization, and which is, in some if not in many respects, superior to ours, is being gradually invaded by the civilization of the West. The East and the West, which men at one time thought would never meet, are rapidly drawing closer together. It is now' something like 22 years since Lord Lansdowne, then Foreign Secretary, concluded a treaty with Japan. Japan, emerging from a position of secular lethargy which had endured for ages, had moved up into the path of Western civilization, and it is greatly to the credit of Lord Lansdowne that he had prescience to realize what the approach of Japan towards the civilized life of the West
would mean. We see the result to-day of his prescience in the splendid support which the cause of the Allies has received by the concurrence of Japan in the cause for which we are striving. And who would have thought twenty years ago that the old, antiquated institutions of China would drop almost as if my magic and be replaced by a republican system? But the East is moving towards the West, and in the principle that India ought to be admitted to the councils of the Empire I entirely agree.
Another resolution was passed by the conference which was not as concrete as this last; indeed, it was very vague. I read:
That the Imperial War Conference, having examined1 the memorandum on the position of Indians in the self-governing Dominions presented by the Indian representatives to the Conference, accepts the principle of reciprocity of treatment between India and the Dominions, and recommends the memorandum to the favourable consideration of the governments concerned.
What is the meaning of this? The meaning will be found in the fact that in British Columbia, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and in many other establishments of the British Empire, Asiatics, Indians and Hindus are not permitted to cpme in to work as labourers. It was against this condition that representations were made in the memorial which was presented to the members of the conference by the Indian representatives. I call attention to this because it is one of the important subjects that we have to deal with in order to maintain the unity of the British Empire. If representatives of the people of India shall attend future Imperial Conferences, we must be prepared to give the subjects of India fair and proper treatment when they ask for it. This is a very serious subject, and I do pot see how it can be successfully dealt with unless a very wise and prudent course is adopted. At the bottom of it there is an economic condition which we must not lose sight of. What is the reason why Asiatic and Hindu labourers, our fellow-subjects, h^ve not been admitted into some parts of the British Empire? What is the reason why Sikhs and Gurkhas, who fought in the British Army, were not admitted into some parts of the British Empire, where they were seeking work as labourers? The reason is that they were ac customed to such a low wage and they could live sp cheaply that they could compete with white labour on conditions which no white- man could accept. We should not close our eyes to this situation. I approve the idea that we should endeavour to over-

*come these difficulties, but it is evident that nothing has been done so far at the conference .to overcome them. But if, as I say, the leaders of India be admitted into the consultations of the Governments of the overseas dominions and of the Empire, we must be prepared to take up the other question, which Js perhaps of greater significance, .greater moment and greater difficulty.
The following resolution with regard to naval defence was adopted by the conference :
That the Admiralty be requested to work *out immediately after the conclusion of the war what they consider the most effective scheme of naval defence for the Empire for the consideration of the several governments summoned to this Conference, with such recommendations as the Admiralty consider necessary in that respect for the Empire's future security. '
That the British Admiralty should be invited to consider the question of the most effective scheme of naval defence is quite proper; nobody can object to that. But it must bring up a question which has long been at issue in this Parliament as to whether the object had in view would be more effectively accomplished by local navies, as was advocated by hon. gentlemen on this side when they sat opposite, as well as by h.on. gentlemen opposite when they sat on this side, but which was rejected by hon. gentlemen opposite when they took office. It is not to be forgotten that the last election in the province of Quebec was fought largely on this question. But I shall not re-open old sores; the question will come up again as to which is the best method.
I may be pardoned if I think our plan is the (best, although perhaps the opinion will ibe the reverse on the other side of the House. We shall know afterwards what is [DOT]the plan adopted, and whatever plan is recommended by the Admiralty will, as it ought to be, be subject to discussion by this House.
As to the trade and commerce of the country, the resolution is very mild and no fault can be found with it. On. this side of the House we are certainly in favour of Imperial toade; we are in favour of giving preference to the Mother Country, and when at one time we heard it said on the floor of this House that we should bargain with the Mother Country and ask favour for favour and preference for preference, at least we on this side maintained that we should act of our own accord" without making any quid pro quo, and I

am glad to say that our friends opposite have now taken that view. But if we are in favour of the extension of our trade within the Empire, let it be recorded that we on this side-and, I "hope hon. gentlemen on the other side also-are in favour of international trade, of trading with all the nations of the earth, of trading with every nation that is willing to trade with us, of trading with every nation with which we can have reciprocity, and of trading especially with our neighbours to the south, with whom is to ibe found the best market we have ever had. These are all the important resolutions which have been adopted at the conference.
There is one resolution, however, in regard to which I may say a word. It is the [DOT]last one, and one which must touch the heart of every Canadian; it is that the committee had agreed to ask the King to organize a commission to look after the graves of our soldiers who have fallen in battle in France. My right hon. friend has stated that the French Government hae placed at the disposal of the Imperial military .authorities all the land necessary for these Imperial cemeteries. The idea is a pious and nolble one, and certainly every Canadian will give hearty response to it. We hope the war may mot last much longer, but many men have fallen and we know that before the war comes to an end many more [DOT]must fall. Their remains will lie under the soil of France; but their graves will be kept green in the soil of France as the memory of our fallen brothers in our hearts, and the land will ibe visited by the people of tall those countries who have sent men to France to fight, not only for the integrity of France, but for the civilization, of mankind. We can well believe that the feeling of reverence, respect and affection will so continue amongst all the countries which have sons buried in the soil of France as to make .i't forever impossible that a word of discord 6hall ever be heard amongst those nations, because such would be a new agony to those who remember that lying in the soil of France are men who have given their lives, not only that France should live, but that the civilization of mankind should 'be preserved.
My right hon. friend concluded his observations by stating that we are certainly very far from the end of the struggle, and I am afraid that his words are only too true. Events in Russia have brought into the war a new feature upon which we had not calculated. We had thought that the

new offensive which was to be undertaken by our armies this year, was to have brought our forces to the Rhine, but events in Russia have enabled the German Government to bring to France from the eastern front, perhaps nearly a million men, if not more. Under such circumstances, it goes without saying that the war must last a long time.
As to the methods which Canada must take with regard to the prosecution of the war, I have only this to say: that Canada intends to remain in the war to the end until victory has been won. As to the methods -which we are to adopt in order to send more men to the front and to fulfil to the end the duty that we are all determined to fulfil, a good deal of consideration must be given before the traditional policy followed by this country shall be set aside. I make at present no observation on that. The Government tell us that they have a new policy to offer us and I have only this to say: that whenever that policy is made known to us, we shall receive and consider it in the same spirit that we have determined since the outbreak of the war to assume towards all the proposals of the Government, and that is, to give them due and fair consideration, reserving to ourselves the liberty of free British subjects to discharge our duties in the way we consider they ought to be discharged. I am not going to say we should adopt this or adopt that; that we should reject this or reject that. The only thing I say-and as fo which I pledge the word and judgment of those who sit beside me- is that we have no intention other than to remain in the war to the end, and we are determined that we shall do our duty to the best of our judgment and in such a way as to insure that the best methods are adopted to bring about that victory for which we are all longing and which we all hope will certainly come, whether it comes early or late.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS.

[Stage Direction]
CONSIDERED IN COMMITTEE-THIRD READ i:\GS.
Bill No. 7, respecting the Continental Heat and Light Company-Sir Herbert Ames.
Bill No. 11, respecting The Canadian Order of the Woodmen of the World.-Mr. Glass,
Bill No. 25, to incorporate The Eastern Telegraph and Telephone Company.-Mr. Jameson.	.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee on Private Bills, Mr. Blain in the Chair.
Bill No. 44, to incorporate Alliance National.-Mr. Achim.
On section 17-Investment of funds:
Mr. BOIVIN:: I desire to move a slight amendment to this section. Besides this Bill for the incorporation of La Societe des Artisans Canadiens Frangais, there is to come before the Committee Bill No. 44, to incorporate Alliance Nationale. They were considered together in the Committee on Banking and Commerce and were made as uniform as possible. Several amendments were made in this Bill whidh were afterwards included in Bill No. 44. But one amendment was made in Bill No. 44, which, owing to that Bill having been considered last, was not made in Bill No. 40, and, to make the two Bills uniform, this .amendment is necessary. I present it at the request of the hon. member for Labelle (Mr Achim), in whose name both these Bills stand. The amendment is:-
That the first paragraph of clause 17 be amended by striking out all the words after "Canada" in the sixteenth line, and substituting the following: "or in accordance with the laws of such province, on property situated in such province."
This relates to the investments which may be made by the society.


Mr. ROGERS:: Do I understand that the ' hon. member (Mr. Boivin) makes the motion on behalf of the mover of the Bill?


Georges Henri Boivin: Yes, and at his request.


Mr. HAZEN:: Was this amendment considered in the Committee on Banking and Commerce?


Georges Henri Boivin: Yes. The societies to be incorporated 'by this Bill and Bill No. 44 are absolutely similar, and the Bills were made as uniform as possible. But Bill No. 40 was considered first, and this amendment, which was made in Bill No. 44, was not included in Bill No. 40.


William Thomas White: Would my hon. friend explain briefly the effect of the amendment?


Georges Henri Boivin: The effect is to make the clause more complete.


William Thomas White: What kind of investment does it authorize? What line of the section is it proposed to amend?


Georges Henri Boivin: It is proposed to strike out the following words in the first subsection of section 17:-

on property situated in such province and collectable by the municipalities in which such property is situated.
These are to be replaced with the words I have just read. The Banking and Commerce Committee discussed the matter and made this amendment in Bill 44, and it was thought it would be much better to have it in this Bill also. It is owing to the wish expressed in the Committee that I propose the amendment.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
Bill reported and read the third time.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 48 respecting the British Columbia and White R'iver Railway Company.-Mr. Clements.

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed the discussion consequent on the statement made this afternoon by the Right Hon. Sir Robert Borden (Prime Minister) as to the transactions of the Imperial War Cabinet and of .the Imperial War Conference.
Mr. W. P. MACLEAN (South York):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to say a word or twoi with regard to what took place this afternoon and in regard to the matters which formed the subject of discussion and which are of the greatest importance to Canada and to the Empire. In the first place, I desire *to congratulate the right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) and the Government on coming to the view that conscription must be resorted to in Canada	in order	that	we	may do	ourfull	share in	this	war. While	the
decision is somewhat delayed. I believe the people of Canada will appreciate the final determination at which the Government has arrived. Certainly this policy will he appreciated in my own province and,
I think, all over the Dominion. The position in the country and in this House might he well expressed by a reference to the recent activities of the ginger party

in Great Britain-the party that demanded that more ginger be put into the conduct of the war.
The result of the ginger movement in the Mother Country was a reorganization of the Cabinet, not only once but twice. New men were taken in, with a policy based on conscription and a more vigorous prosecution of the war, and a determination to do everything that possibly could he done by Parliament to bring the war to a successful conclusion. I take it that the announcement made here to-day means a more vigorous prosecution of the war by this Government. I congratulate the Government on what has been decided in regard to conscription.
The vigorous policy which has been foreshadowed in connection with conscription should also be applied to many other questions in connection with the war. I should have liked to have heard that the Government intended not only to take up vigorously the question of conscription, but also to take up what the ginger party brought in Great Britain, food control, the appointment of a food dictator and a very widespread control of all prices, especially those of the needs of life. The speech of the Prime Minister this afternoon also contained an intimation that more gingeT might be put into the transportation policy of this country. The Prime Minister hinted at a policy that would mean the Government and Parliament of this country taking a more pronounced course in regard to transportation in relation both to railway and ocean traffic. The only effective way of improving transportation facilities is to have some kind of Government control of the railways and of the ocean liners. I shall not be surprised to see a transportation policy adopted by the Parliament of Canada that will produce a great shipping industry in this country, even if the Government have to own the ships. I hope for such a policy and through it we can improve the condition of Canada and of the farmers of Canada who are raising reheat for the Mother Country and the Allies. They have long had Government control of railways in Europe, especially in Germany, and I believe that the United States will have it now that they are in the war, that there will be public ownership of railways, as there now is provision for their absolute control. We shall have to do the same thing here and I hope I was not going too far in assuming from the Prime Min-

ister's speech that we shall have more ginger at least in regard to railway transportation in this country; that the farmers of the West especially will be able to market their grain at lower freight rates, and that they will also obtain relief from the exorbitant tolls charged on freight by the ocean lines.
There are one or two other things in which we want a great deal more ginger in the policy of the Government.


William Pugsley: Hear, hear.


William Findlay Maclean: The Prime Minister this afternoon said that he was surprised to learn of the experience of a friend of his who was told in Germany by a business man how much the Germans knew of the stores of iron ore in Belle Isle, off the coast of Newfoundland. The same knowledge that the Germans had of those iron ores in Newfoundland they have always had of the nickle deposits of this country. The time has surely come when we must have a national policy in regard to the control of those great natural resources of Canada and of the Empire. We must have a national policy in regard to our nickle. We must know before this war is over whether it is true that the Krupp Company really controls the nickle deposits of Canada. I believe that information is obtainable in the United States which will verify what has been said, that the nickle deposits of this country, which ought to be consecrated to the Empire and should be controlled by ourselves and used by the Empire, melted and refined in our own country, are controlled by hostile interests. Then we have the greatest asbestos deposits in the world in the province of Quebec. Yet the control of those great deposits is outside of Canada. It is absolutely necessary that we should have control of this product, and we must have some national policy in respect to it. There are two other things, petroleum and gasolene, two absolute necessities of war, two things that can be produced in this country-yet the control of our deposits of these great resources is not in Canada. We have the oil wells in Canada, and we ought not to allow a gallon of gasolene to be consumed in this country which is not refined and distilled within the country. These are things that are essential to war. They are natural products of Canada, and in the case of two or three of them we have a monopoly; yet we have not exercised that monopoly. I say that in this new policy, this progressive policy,
which the Government are announcing to-day, and which tends in a good direction, we must go further and include other lines.
Then, too, we must have a more progressive policy in regard to currency and banking in Canada, a matter to which I have before referred in this House. That is essential in connection with .the war. I hope we shall have an announcement of a more progressive policy in that respect before long. I trust that not only will we have conscription in this country and a far-reaching measure of conscription, but that it will be vigorously presented in this House and vigorously prosecuted and put into force, because the war is not won; it has to ;be won, and everything must be done to win it. There must be absolute c,o-o.peration and unity in this country to win the war, and if a progressive policy is adopted it ought to be supported by a united Parliament, as it will be supported, I believe, by a united people.
'The Prime Minister also dealt with a question about which I have .thought a good deal, that is the rearrangement of the various elements of the Empire and their .standing, one with the other, and how far this war will lead us in the way of com federation or consolidation of our interests. I agree with what the Prime Minister said that he has not very much sympathy with that new school in England called the Bound Table school, who are trying to land the Empire into some system ,of confederation.
I had not a great deal of faith in that. I believe in the principle laid down by Sir John A. Macdonald, and followed by the right hon. Prime Minister this afternoon, that while it is desirable that there should be an alliance and a consultation of governments of the Empire, we must retain our absolute autonomy, our absolute independence, and our right to pass on any question of Imperial policy before we are definitely committed to it. That is an important consideration which should not be discussed at this time but which, when a further conference is held and When the relations of the various parts of the Empire one to the other and to the union are dealt with, will be most carefully considered. I am confident that no step will be taken until each member of the Conference has had an opportunity of discussing it in his own Parliament. I support the Prime Minister in his going to the Conference and taking part in its discussions. His going there had a good effect upon him and he

has come back with what I am quite sure is -a progressive proposition with regard to the conduct of the war.
What I would like the Government to do, now that they have declared for conscription, is to go vigorously into it and do what the United States are doing. Conscription is practically in force there to-day, or will be as soon as the President signs the Bill; they purpose raising a draft of 500,000 men by this method. By employing the same method we can raise 100,000 or 200,000 men, or even more, if we have to-and I beliqye we shall have to. I hope that we shall have the assistance of all our Allies. I hope that Russia will soon come into line, but the burden of this struggle for liberty will fall upon France, upon Great Britain and her daughter States, and upon the United States, and the characteristic policy of these great nations in defending civiliza tion and maintaining liberty is to be based upon conscription. When you have selective conscription, as the minister outlined it to-day, you get rid	of
all recruiting and its inconveniences. Many of the most patriotic men in the country never could quite see the reason why they should go out and tell the young men why they should go to the front. The law of conscription is based on the duty of each man to defend'the country and to protect the rights of his fellowmen, and when you have that law you do not need to exercise persuasion or ask a man to go as a matter of reason. Many a man says: tell me it is my duty by law and 1 will go. That reply has often been met in recruiting campaigns. The Government should do what they have done in England-and it will require a great deal of work on the part of the ginger party to get it through. The United States came to it, not because they were more active than any one else, but because they had the experience of the Mother Country. We have the experience of tooth now, and it is the duty of a united Parliament to pass a law of conscription, selective conscription if you like, but, in any case,* a law that will impose a duty upon the men of Canada. Probably the youngest men, those, say, of 21, could first be told that they must go to the war. The school boys will grow up under a system which tells them that it is the duty of those who are over 20 and 21 to go in the first draft, and that if more are required those who are older will be called upon. I am sure that when they know it is their duty there will be no objection. I do not care in which province they may live.

To my mind the only way to win the war is by adopting a vigorous policy of conscription. I hope that a measure to this end will toe introduced into Parliament right away, and that it will be passed. I believe that the men will go gladly and that there will then be no trouble in filling up the ranks of the battalions we have there now. And we need more; as was pointed out this afternoon, those who are over there are calling to us to give them
assistance,	and	we have to	heed	thatcall.	This	Parliament, then,	will	notbe	doing	its	duty unless	it	enacts	a law of	conscription	and	then
enforces it. The result will be our ability to increase the number of our soldiers overseas by 100,000, or if necessary, 200,000 men and, carried out on the selective principle, the law will result in no man being sent forward who is more useful here in the munitions plants, as a grain grower, as a farmer, as a railroad man or as one who is engaged in anything essential to the ordinary life of the community. We have that principle recognized at last. I do not know what stand hon. gentlemen opposite will take in regard to it. But a good many of their supporters in my province, pronounced Liberals, are declaring every day that they want to see conscription in Canada. We have to have it to win the war. Now that the ball has been set rolling, the ginger policy-


An hon. MEMBER:: What will they say now?


William Findlay Maclean: Thousands of
them are saying that they are in favour of conscription. I do not think all the loyalty is on the side of one party in this country; I would not want to live in Canada if that were the case. Anyway, you want to give every man an opportunity of saying whether he accepts the law-and it is the first law of any community that every citizen ought to be willing to defend its liberties. Some people have left our country because they feared conscription on the other side of the line. But that is one of the accidents of a condition of war; it is a common trait of humanity. I believe that Canadians irrespective of politics will support conscription just as the Britishers in the old land, irrespective of politics, supported it there. Among the most useful things they have in Great Britain in connection with the militia are the courts of tribunals which mobilize the men, size them up and find out those who are fit to

go to the war and those who are necessary in munitions plants, the farming industry or other essential occupations. In that way the air is cleared-and that is the great thing, to clarify the situation with regard to the war. You clarify the situation with regard to the prosecution of the war through the adoption of conscription as you could do in no other way.
Conscription has been found to he absolutely essential in Great Britain and France; the United States have just declared themselves to be in favour of it, and now that we have taken the same attitude, there is a much brighter prospect of winning the war. We are engaged in a struggle against an organization of nations which depend absolutely on conscription for their war efforts. If, as the Prime Minister said this afternoon, Germany has brought into her armies a million men more than she had a year ago, that has been accomplished by reason of the law of conscription in force in that country. In a struggle against conscription as it exists in Germany, you cannot overcome Germany nor defend civilization, nor maintain the liberty of the world unless you fight the devil with fire, if conscription is the fire he uses against you. That view came home long ago to the boys who are giving their services at the front and many of whom have made the supreme sacrifice. It is going to come home to this House and to the people of this country. It is the view taken by the women of this country; it is the view taken by many a Canadian mother whose boy has been killed on the battlefield and who cannot understand why some other mother's boy should not take his place in the field, if the struggle is for the liberties, not only for this country, but of the world. I absolutely agree with what the Prime Minister and the leader of the Opposition have said this afternoon, namely, that this war must be won, and, if it is to be won, it can be won only by the adoption of the principle of conscription. And when we adopt that one principle of the ginger party in Great Britain, we shall have to adopt their principles in relation to other matters I have spoken about this evening. I wish, therefore, to congratulate the Government on at last adopting this policy. The Government have taken a good while to adopt it, and some reconstruction of the Government and more unity in this Parliament may be required to carry it into effect. I am, however, prepared to face any change that will give us a more vigorous policy,
not only in regard to conscription, but in regard to everything necessary to win the war. The other question as to what our relations are to be between the component parts of the Empire need not concern us now; that will take care of itself after the war. The Prime Minister in the British House of Commons said yesterday, and it was 'also told us here this afternoon that the question would be discussed later on; but the question of the rela-9 p.m. tions between the component parts of the Empire is not the question before us to-day. The question at issue is the winning of the war. We may as well recognize the fact that conscription is necessary for the winning of the war; that question faces us now, and I hope that the Government will not delay in bringing down their proposals in regard to conscription and that the House will not delay in carrying them into effect.


William Pugsley: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend made the suggestion that there ought to be more ginger in the Government. This reminds me of the fact that some years ago a horse dealer in St. John had a horse to sell, and he loaded him up with ginger, and as the horse appeared lively and in fine condition he wias able to sell the animal, but after the effects of the ginger wore away the horse was the same old horse.


William Findlay Maclean: Will my hon. friend say that Lloyd George is only a ginger horse?
-Mr. PUGSLEY: This occasion gives me an opportunity of speaking concerning a subject which is very dear to my heart, and which has been suggested by my right hon. friend the leader of the Government. I refer to the subject of shipbuilding in Canada. The Prime Minister stated that the great cry of Lloyd George was for ships, more ships, still more ships. Those in this country who have given the subject any consideration whatever lare not surprised that the demand should have arisen for more ships. That demand has been increasing ever since this war broke out. Any man with any foresight, any man whose duty it has been to look ahead to the interest of this country must have foreseen that the time would come when ships would be imperatively required in order to carry on the transportation business, not only of Canada so far as its coastal transportation is concerned, but between Canada and the Mother Country. Yet, to-day we are in this lamentable position, that-to

post of duty where their presence was required. One very important subject that came up for the consideration of those jingoists in England, who have a certain amount of influence with the present Government, and whose representative is, I think, a former citizen of Canada, Lord Beaver-brook, who himself advocated the scheme, and who, I have no doubt, had a great deal to do with these hon. gentlemen being invited to go to England at this time,, was the reconstruction of the Empire, the question of Imperial federation. We know that there are a good many people in England who have been strongly agitating that question, and have been hoping that the Dominion would be drawn into an arrangement of that kind. But I believe that if that arrangement were consummated it would ' be the first step toward the breaking up of the Empire, instead of a step toward its greater consolidation. The Prime Minister tells us that that question was considered. He expressed his great thanks to the group of young enthusiasts in Great Britain who had been so earnestly agitating Imperial federation. But the Conference passed1 a resolution identical with the position taken by Sir Wilfrid Laurier when he attended the Imperial Conferences. I have here extracts from one of the leading English newspapers making reference to the speech of General Smuts. I think the people have a great deal to thank General Smuts for; I. believe that he, moire than all others, has prevented the idea of Imperial federation going into effect so far as the Conference was concerned. Here is what is reported in the Ottawa Journal of this evening, in a telegram from London.:
London, May 18.-Editorially discussing General Smuts' speech, in which he regarded the British Empire not as a state, but as a system of nations, the Daily Telegraph says it is a difference which goes to the very root of the Imperial fabric. "The oneness of New Zealand or Australia with Great Britain," says the Telegraph, "must he different not merely from that of India, where there is no kinship of blood or community of language and ideas, but also from that of Canada and South Africa, in each of which are two sturdy different stocks which, at the present time, can hardly be said to desire complete fusion, even as an ideal.
'To ignore this great fact because it is an awkward stumbling block to the realization of a cherished political theory is not statesmanship, but the negation of statesmanship.''
Referring to General Smuts' assertion, that the British commonwealth of nations does not stand for standardization or conventionalism, the Telegraph says:	'There is one other
great Imperial statesman who will certainly applaud and endorse that sentiment, namely, Sir Wilfrid Laurier. It is exactly the point

he has always laid stress on when Imperial federationists have seemed to him to press forward at too rapid a pace."
That is a striking tribute to the stand that Sir Wilfrid Laurier took during all the years he was at the head of the Government of Canada. The final action of this War Cabinet is the greatest possible Tebuke to those who have been condemning Sir Wilfrid Laurier because he has always pronounced for the autonomy of Canada and other overseas dominions of the Empire. Then, again, what a striking endorsement it is of the position which the Liberal party has always taken in reference to the British preference. After many days of conference the Imperial War Cabinet came to the conclusion that the British Parliament should not impose any duty on foodstuffs, and that the overseas dominions did not expect Britain to give any preference upon foodstuffs* coming from those dominions. But there was no need to go to London to have that declared. That was declared, so far as Canada was concerned, in 1897, when the British preference was established by the Parliament of Canada, at the instance of the Liberal party led by Sir Wilfrid Laurier. At that time the Liberal Government and the Parliament of Canada said to the British people: We give you a preference in the markets of this country for all the manufactures and other products of Great Britain; we give you that preference freely and voluntarily, exacting nothing in return; we do not ask the Imperial Parliament to tax foodstuffs and to make dearer the food of the British people. It would be interesting for you, Mr. Speaker (Mr. Blain) to look over the pages of Hansard and see how the party led by the present Prime Minister regarded that action of the Liberal party at that time. They condemned that action. They said it was entirely against the interests of Canada to grant any preference in Canada unless the Imperial Parliament also granted a preference to the foodstuffs of Canada in the markets of Great Britain. And, if I am not mistaken, it is on record that the right hon. gentleman (Sir Robert Borden) voted against a resolution in this Parliament approving the action of the Government of that day in granting the British preference. I know his party voted in that way, and i think hi3 name is recorded with the others. There was no occasion for three members of the Government to go to England for the purpose of having that declared a proper policy, which was declared twenty years ago by this Parliament and approved of generally by the people of Britain.

If you eliminate these matters to which I have referred, what else is there of importance that the Imperial War Cabinet considered? They considered the question of the temptations placed in the way of our soldiers at the front. Sir George Per-ley is the acting High Commissioner for Canada, and Overseas Minister, receiving a very handsome salary. One would suppose that he could acquaint this Government with what is going on and that through him any action reasonably possible to take might be taken. This, surely, was not a subject making necessary investigation by these gentlemen for so many weeks, if not months. I can not at the moment think of anything else of urgent importance that was considered. The Prime Minister says that he has noticed in the papers suggestions that he and his colleagues were having a good time in England. We can not be blamed for what the newspapers say, and I am inclined to think that the newspapers can not be blamed for the reports they give. It was open to every one to see, day after day and week after week, what was going on. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Hazen) the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Rogers), we read, dined with His Majesty the King. The newspapers could not blind their eyes to the fact that the Prime Minister received the freedom of several cities in England, and that excellent speeches were made on these occasions. The newspapers must have seen that these gentlemen, during the Easter holidays and at other times, were having a good time-


Mr. JAMESON:: Surely the hon. gentleman does not call that of which he has just been speaking "having a good time"?


William Pugsley: A very excellent and pleasant time. But, as to real work, I would like these gentlemen to tell us what they have done that could not have been done equally well by correspondence or through the Overseas Minister, who is also the acting High Commissioner? When they went to England, I joined heartily with other members on this side of the House in wishing them Godspeed on their journey, and in expressing the hope that they would be able to accomplish something for Canada and for the Empire. They come back empty handed except with this beautiful mace that is now lying on the Table. My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition was happy in the Temarks which he made in reference to that a few days ago. Really that is the only tangible, the only substantial thing that they have brought back.
But just a word in regard to the very important subject which my right hon. friend has referred to and which, of course, has nothing to do with hie visit to the other side of the water. That is the question of conscription. This House, I would suppose, would hardly be called upon to express an opinion on this important question until the particulars have been brought down. The statement has been made that it is to be selective conscription. As to whether the country will be satisfied with the measure of conscription which is proposed will depend very much upon how the selection is to be made. I could understand that in England, where they have a national Government, a Government free from all partisanship, a Government whiifh is absolutely non-partisan ini its character, selective conscription could be worked out to the general satisfaction of the people. But if, in this country, when the war broke out, this Government had created an absolutely national, non-partisan Government, and if the war had been carried on irrespective of party consideration and of party patronage, the Government would be in a very different position to-day to ask the country to trust them with the duty of carrying out selective conscription. We have no intimation from the Prime Minister as to how the duty of carrying out the selection is to be performed. If patronage is to enter into it, if partisanship is to enter into it, as it appears to have entered into everything connected with the war, then it is very doubtful if the people of the country will be satisfied with it. I agree with my right hon. friend the leader of the Oposition that the people are united in their desire to do everything that is possible to win this war. If conscription is necessary in order to have more men available at the front, I think the people will agree to conscription, but I also think, Sir, that the people will demand that there shall be conscription, not merely of man power, but of the accumulated wealth in this country as well. They will demand that. The people, and especially the labouring people, will not be content that the youth of Canada should be conscripted and sent by force to the front while the wealth of this country is allowed to go scot free. It will demand that conscription shall be applied so as to do equal justice to all classes in the community. I shall await

with interest the 'bringing down of the measure providing for conscription before venturing any opinion, as to whether it should be approved of by the House, but I, as one humble member of this House would say that a great deal will depend on the mode in which selective-because that word "selective" is a most important word in connection with it-conscription is to be carried out.


John Douglas Hazen: Mr. Speaker, I think it will be admitted by every member of this House and by every person throughout the country wherever the speech of my right hon. friend is read, that this afternoon, dealing with a question of very great and far-reaching importance, that the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) made a deliverance that can be characterized properly and truthfully as dignified and statesmanlike. I think it may also be .said that my right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfred Laurier), in his-short address, dealt with the matter in a way that was worthy of one occupying the high position he occupies in this House. The hon. member for South York (Sir. Maclean), who also addressed the House, spoke from the standpoint of the public interest, and it remained for my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) to deal with this transcendent Imperial question from the standpoint of petty party politics.	It is to be regretted that
an hon. gentleman possessing the ability and long parliamentary experience of my hon. friend should never be able to get away, in dealing with any question before this House, from a desire to secure party advantage. As a matter of fact, the hon. gentleman of late years has got so that he cannot deal with any question, I think I am within the mark in saying so, from the standpoint of the public interest no matter how important that question may be to the people of the country, but he thinks it necessary, with every question, great or small, to descend into the realm of petty, partisan discussion irrespective of what the public interest may be, his desire being to advance party interests first and the interest of the country afterwards. I think it is related of Queen Mary of England that she said that when she died the word " Calais " would be found engraved upon her heart. I am disposed to think that my hon. friend has taken Courtenay Bay so much to heart that when my hon. friend dies " Courtenay Bay " will be found en-
graved on his heart although, for personal reasons, I hope and trust that his demise may be postponed for a very long period. My hon. friend invariably, since the session of 1912, has repeated his speech on Courtenay Bay six or seven times during every session, and when he makes that speech I am always reminded of the story of the man who, to save time, instead of saying his prayers at night, had his prayer written on a card which he hung on a post at the foot of his bed, and when he got into bed he pointed to the card and said: Lord, those are my sentiments. It would save a great deal of the time of this House if the hon. gentleman would adopt some such course in regard to that speech which, I venture to say, nearly every hon. member of this House has by memory now and could get up and repeat in exactly the same words as my hon. friend has used here tonight and on many previous occasions. I must say, however, that there are some very notable omissions from the speech of my hon. friend. My hon. friend always puts it forward that had the contract been awarded for cruisers and destroyers, for which tenders were asked by the Government of which he was a member, they would have been built at Courtenay Bay in the vicinity of St. John. My hon. friend always forgets to tell this House, what I must remind him. of, how these tenders were received nearly six months before the date of the general election of 1911, and how they were placed in a pigeon hole in one of the departments and never again saw the light of day. If the hon. gentleman had been in earnest, if he had been sincere, if he had ever believed that they were to be built in Courtenay Bay, would he have allowed six months, or practically six months, to pass without any action being taken upon them? When the hon. gentleman went out of power the tenders were resurrected from the pigeon hole to which they had been consigned. My hon. friend says that these vessels would have been built at Courtenay Bay. My hon. friend always forgets to tell this House that his honoured leader told this House that had his Government stayed in power these cruisers and destroyers would have been built at Montreal.
I have previously asked my hon. friend to reconcile the statement he so often makes with the statement of his leader, but that he has not been able to do and cannot do. For six months those tenders weTe pigeonholed and northing was done; but when the elections took place It was held out as a glittering bait to the people of St. John,

the people of Halifax, the people of Montreal, and the people of Sydney that if the Government was returned to power theirs would be the places where those cruisers and destroyers would be built. When I came into office as Minister of the Naval Service I found'-


William Pugsley: I wish to correct my
hon. friend. My hon. friend says that for six months these tenders remained in a pigeon hole. I want to tell (him that these tenders and specifications were taken by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to England for the purpose of consultation with the authorities there, and brought back from England very shortly before the elections took place.


John Douglas Hazen: And that is the explanation my hon. friend made to this House before, an explanation that must be utterly unsatisfactory .to this House and to the people of this country. Why were they taken to England? Why were they not dealt with here? To-night my hon. friend objects because members of the Government went to England at the request of the British Government. Why should this matter, a matter that should have been dealt with by the Government of Canada if they had madte up their minds as to the policy they were to pursue, why, may I ask my hon. friend, who talks so much about Canadian autonomy to-night, should these tenders be taken to England? Parliamentary language might perhaps not permit me to say-


William Pugsley: Does the minister want my answer?


John Douglas Hazen: -that the excuse is a mere excuse and is not a reason.


William Pugsley: Will the minister allow me to answer, or does he desire an answer?


John Douglas Hazen: If the hon. gentleman waits until I have concluded my speech he may answer. The hon. gentleman has a habit of always interrupting when a member is addressing the House-


William Pugsley: You asked me a question


John Douglas Hazen: And while that is the case there is no member so sensitive to interruption or who resents it so much as my hon. friend when he is on his feet. I say that my hon. friend when again addressing the House on this subject would do well to tell the facts of the case. It makes little difference, they have been told over and over
again in this country and are well known to the people. My hon. friend can go on repeating his excuse for many years to come but he will fail to make any impression upon the people of Canada or on the people of the constituency which he especially desires to influence by the statements he is making in regard to this matter.
My hon friend (Mr. Pugsley) has to-night made the claim that this Government has done nothing to advance ship building in Canada. One would think from the statement of my hon. friend that really nothing was being done about the building of ships in this country. Let me point out, what every member knows, that every ship yard in Canada is full to capacity at the present time, building ships for the purposes of the British Government and for purposes of trade between this country and Great Britain. My hon. friend says that the Imperial Munitions Board will not award contracts for ships of less than 2,500 tons. Let us see what has been the connection of the Imperial Munitions Board, a Board responsible to the British Government alone, with this matter. The British Government, after the reconstruction of the Cabinet under the leadership of Mr. Lloyd George, appointed a controller of shipping, and for that position they obtained the services of one of the most experienced shipping men in the world, Sir Joseph MacLay, the head of a great shipping firm in the city of Glasgow, a firm known the world over. Sir Joseph MacLay has been wrestling with this question of acquiring ships since he came into office; it is admitted on all sides in the British Isles that no more capable man could be found for the task. When I was in Great Britain I spent many hours with Sir Joseph MacLay and his officers discussing these matters. I was at his office time after time, discussing with him and members of the Department over which he presides, the shipping situation, pointing out to them the advantages which were offered in Canada for the conetruction. of ships, and I do not think I am speaking in any language of exaggeration when I say that I believe it was in part at least due to the efforts I made that many of those contracts upon which our Canadian ship yards are now working were placed in Canada. These ships are being built for Great Britain and for British trade. They are being built for the purpose of relieving, as far as may be, the serious condition of affairs that exists



to-day, because, in consequence of the operations of the submarines, and of the fact that Great Britain has had to supply shipping not only to meet the requirements and wants of the people of the British Isles, but also the requirements of her Allies, there has not been available as much shipping ias is necessary to carry to Great Britain the commodities required for use there. As a result of that situation, the greatest economy and frugality must be exercised, and that condition will continue to exist between now and the next harvest, in order that the people of the British Isles may have sufficient food for their wants. As a matter of fact, the condition is so serious that for three or four weeks before we left Great Britain no potatoes at all were served at the hotel where we were staying, or at any hotel in the city of London. Sugar was extremely scarce, and flour was scarce and had to be carefully husbanded. At the hotel where we were staying, under the order of the director of food supply, Lord Devonport, only a small portion of bread was .served to the guests at each meal, and we saw no such thing as white bread, because the wheat flour was being mixed with rye and with meal made from barley in order to make the wheat flour go as far as possible. That is the state of affairs, and it has been brought about in consequence of the lack of tonnage to carry foodstuffs in large quantities to feed the people of the British Isles.


William Pugsley: Hear, hear.


John Douglas Hazen: I do not think for a moment that there is going to be starvation in the British Isles. There is lots of food of certain sorts. There seemea to be no lack of meat or fish or other foods of that sort. Still, economy and frugality and prudence will have to be exercised, and Sir Joseph MacLay is doing his utmost, with a large staff of competent shipping men about him, to utilize the shipping facilities of Great Britain, Canada and all other parts of the world. In order to make good as far as possible the ravages , and losses caused by the submarine campaign and by the diver-serion of a large number of ships from commercial traffic in consequence of their being employed in the transport of troops and munitions to distant countries and theatres of war, these steps are necessary.
All these facts are in the mind of the shipping controller, who occupies a most responsible position to-day. In consequence of that, he is making arrangements for the building of ships in Canada, through the
[Mr Hazen.]
instrumentality of the Imperial Munitions Board, which is responsible to the British Government alone, the expenses' being financed I believe, although I am not quite positive, in whole by the Government of Canada, who are making the advances for the purpose of carrying on this work. However, I make this statement subject to correction, because certain arrangements were made when I was away and I have not been able to catch up with my work since my return and get full information on all the subjects with which I should be familiar. As I say, those contracts are being made in Canada, but the shipping controller and his staff have decided that the ships they require are to be of not less than 2,500 tons dead weight capacity.
That is the decision that the British Government has come to through the responsible department of the shipping controller. It is for that reason that the Imperial Munitions Board cannot place contracts for ships that are smaller than 2,500 tons. There is no doubt that in different parts of Canada, along the coast of the Maritime Provinces, in British Columbia, on the St. Lawrence and at other places, many ships can toe built and are being built to-day. In the province of Nova Scotia a large number of ships


William Pugsley: By private parties.


John Douglas Hazen: By private parties, and
these private parties, at the present rate of freight, if they have any luck at all and escape the submarines, will make most handsome dividends and profits. Numbers of ships are being built to-day by private parties. '


William Pugsley: Could the minister tell me the highest tonnage of these ships?


Mr HAZEN:: I am told that the ships
being built in Nova Scotia run from 1,500 tons down to small vessels of say 150 ipns. I believe that a large number of them are under construction in Nova Scotia. When I was in England I pointed out to the Shipping Controller the desirability of utilizing all the wopden shipping possible foT the purpose of carrying foods across the ocean. Since Tet/urning to Canada I have again communicated with Sir Joseph Maclay and Right Hon. Walter Long, impressing the desirability of the matter upon them and asking for further consideration of it.


William Pugsley: Why do they not accept smaller vessels?


John Douglas Hazen: What ground of criticism is there against the Government because the Imperial Munitions Board is not awarding contracts for the construction of ships of less than 2,500 tpns, having regard to the statement of facts that 'I have put before the House to-night? In what way is the Canadian Government responsible or tjo blame for that? After all, if we have shipyards employed to their utmost capacity; if smaller yards are employed by private individuals who aTe enterprising enough to go into business and to build ships in very considerable numbers, in what way does the interest of the country suffer? though at the same time I would hope that the British Government would see its way clear as a matter of policy to decide that ships of less than 2,500 tons should be built for them in Canada under the control and jurisdiction of the Munitions Board. When my hon. friend addressed the House he should have known, if he did not know, that in wliat they were doing the Imperial Munitions Board were following the direction of the Shipping Controller of Great Britain. If he did know that, or if he did not know it-more especially if he did know it-it is evident that my hon. friend was not so desirous of assisting to advance the commercial and shipbuilding interests of Canada as he was to score a point against the Government, basing his argument on premises that were not substantial and on a condition of affairs for which the Government are in no sense responsible. These are the facts, and that is my excuse for replying to what my hon. friend said this afternoon.
Passing from what my hon. friend has said, I would refer for a few moments to the remarks that were made this afternoon by the right hon. gentleman who leads the Opposition, My right hon. friend had very little criticism to make with regard to the statement of the right hon. leader of the House as to what occurred at the meetings of the Imperial War Cabinet and of the Imperial Conference. My hon. friend did indulge in a little criticism of the hon. Prime Minister because the Minister of Public Works wias one of the gentlemen who were asked to accompany him to England. The right hon. leader of the Opposition said that in his opinion the two ministers who should have accompanied him to England were the Minister of Naval Service and the Minister of Militia. The Minister of Militia declined to go to England because he had been in office only a
99 J
few weeks, was overburdened with work, had upon his shoulders the responsibility of what is to-day the most important department of the Government, and had to acquire a knowledge of that department to enable him to administer it with the success with which, I am glad to say, he is administering it. Moreover, there is an Overseas Minister of Militia in the person, of Sir George Perley, a very capable business man who is devoting himeelf entirely to the work of the militia and of the High Commissioner's office in London. Having all these facts in mind, it was considered that it would be possible to allow the Minister of Militia to remain in his office at Ottawa and that the hon. Minister of Public Works might accompany the Prime Minister in his place to the old country. When there we were in constant and daily touch with Sir George Perley; we were in constant and daily touch with the authorities in the War Office, and with the authorities of the Admiralty Department. The right hon. gentleman,, in making this criticism, did not press the point very much and was not himself, I believe, very strongly impressed with the force of the criticism that he was making.
The member for St. John says that the Conference and the War Cabinet were barren of result and he would have the country 'believe that the members of the Government who were over there were not engaged in serious work; that they were, indulging in junketing trips about the country; that they were simply enjoying themselves in a social way and were not properly attending to the business of the country. I eay, Sir, that a meaner insinuation was never made to this Parliament or to the people. In many respects I entertain a feeling of great regard for my hon. friend, but I say that it is not worthy of him to make a charge of that kind against the Prime Minister and two of the members of the Government. Not only is it unworthy of him, but it is another evidence of the fact that he views the questions that come before this House only from the narrow standpoint of petty politics and that he cannot rise to the position of a statesman and discuss big issues in a statesmanlike, dignified and proper manner as is fitting in a great Parliament like this. Let me tell my hon. friend that while I am in Ottawa during the session of the House, every moment of my time is occupied. Any man who has been in a ministerial position, as many of my hon. friends whom I see opposite have been, know that no man can discharge the duties

of a minister of the Crown during a session of Parliament in ordinary times, without devoting his whole thought, time and attention to the duties of that office. But busy as I have been during the past sessions, more especially since the war broke out, and during the time when extraordinary work has been thrown uipon the department of which I am the head, I never did a greater amount of harder and more exacting work during a session of Parliament in Ottawa than I had to perform during the time I was in Great Britain. It was a relief to me when we got on the steamer at Liverpool on our way to Canada to obtain a few days rest after the strenuous work that we had beeen undertaking.
I am sure my hon. friend will realize how unfair it is that the suggestion should go -abroad that men in responsible positions in the Government, when upon a mission which in point of importance was as great -as any that Canadian statesmen ever went [DOT]on, should be idling away their time, indulging in social pleasures and neglecting the business for which they went overseas.
My hon. friend is not satisfied with what the Imperial Conference has done; nor is he satisfied with what the War Cabinet has done. In this respect, my hon. friend differs very much from the gentleman who at the present time, with the general consent of all parties in the state, is Prime Minister of Great Britain. Mr. Lloyd George, in addressing the War Cabinet at its last meeting, gave us .this message. Let me remind the House, however, in the first place, that three days in the week we had meetings of the Imperial Conference and, on the other three days, meetings of the Imperial War Cabinet. Im addition to that there were committees on which we served, and it was my privilege to serve on two or three most important committees, one, regarding tonnage restrictions, on which I served along with members of the British Government and members of the Overseas Governments, another with regard to conditions which might arise when terms of peace were proposed, and on this latter committee there were four members of the British Cabinet and it was presided oveT by Lord Curzon, who himself was one of the five members of the British WaT Cabinet. Mr. Lloyd George, in saying farewell to us, said that the presence of the overseas representatives of the War Cabinet not only was an encouragement and a support to the Government of Great Britain, but had [ 'Mr Hazen.]
proved to them a real .and genuine help. He further said that everything that the British Government knew had been unreservedly placed at the . disposal of the representatives of the overseas Dominions, and that it would be .a great mistake if the experiment that had been made in calling together an Imperial War Cabinet this year was not repeated and incorporated in the very machinery of the Empire. That, he said, was the opinion of every member of the British Government. For that reason Mr. Lloyd George said that in his opinion, war or no war, a session of the Imperial War Cabinet should be convened at least annually, for the purpose of reviewing, apart from the waT, the general foreign, policy of the British Empire. It was inconceivable, he said that after this war, the overseas Dominions should not be, not only fully informed as to .all matters of foreign policy, but consulted before any such policy was agreed upon by the British Government, and he went on then to. say that in his opinion, as the Prime Minister stated this afternjon, the Imperial Cabinet should consist of the Prime Minister of Great Britain and certain other ministers, such as the Colonial Secretary, the Secretary of State for India, the War Minister and the First Lord of the Admiralty, whose duties would naturally bring them more closely in touch with Imperial affairs than others, and the Prime Ministers of the overseas Dominions. He did not refer to the overseas Dominions as dependencies, as I was sorry to hear my hon. friend on the other .side refer to them to-night. The word "dependency" grates harshly on my ear. Mr. Lloyd George said that the Prime Ministers of the overseas Dominions should attend these War Conferences, and if the Prime Minister of any overseas Dominion was for any reason unable to attend, then a minister delegated by him and given extensive powers should attend and also such other ministers from the overseas Dominions as the Prime Minister considered would be of value at the conference, because of any information they might through their departments possess of matters of special import concerning the Dominions overseas and the relations of the Empire abroad. That was the opinion of Mr. Lloyd George, and he said that that was the opinion of every member of the Government. The Government of Great Britain to-day is composed of men of different political faiths. There axe men who are Liberals, men who are Conservatives and men who are special

representatives of the great labour interests of the country. The War Cabinet, for instance, consists of five men: Mr. Lloyd George, a Liberal; Mr. Bonar Law, a Conservative; Lord Milner and Lord Curzon, Conservatives, and Mr. Arthu: Henderson, the representative of the labour interests of the countrv. The Government itself, outside of the War Cabinet, is composed of men of different political par-
10 p.m. ties, and Mr. Lloyd George, speaking for them, referred to the services rendered by the overseas representatives at the War Cabinet in the language which I have used, and which is substantially correct, even, I think in many cases, to the words that he used. That being the case, perhaps those of us who accompanied the Prime Minister overseas and the Prime Minister himself will not feel so badly, as we otherwise might at the fact that the hon. member for St. John (Mr. Pugsley) thinks we are of no service and have accomplished no good.
Something has been said to-night about Imperial federation. I never knew exactly what was meant by Imperial federation, except this: there never was any hard or fast scheme to which any great body of people in this country committed themselves, and my understanding of the phrase Imperial federation did not necessarily imply an Imperial Parliament; it did not necessarily imply the sacrifice of a single iota of our autonomy or independence or liberty. If it did no man in this country would support such an idea for a single moment. What I have always understood by Imperial federation was that there should be a closer drawing together in the bonds of union, friendship, sympathy and common support, and the maintenance of a common Empire of Great Britain and its overseas Dominions and India and all the countries generally that make up the British Empire. Speaking from that standpoint,-I believe that the result flowing from that meeting of the War Cabinet this year, with the declaration that no question of foreign policy will be embarked upon without the overseas Dominions being consulted and without all the information being placed before them, is the greatest advance in the way of linking together more closely for common support and for the objects that are dear to the hearts of the people throughout the Empire that has occurred since the British Empire was first known to exist. To-day we have the fact that on an equal footing, with Great Britain, perhaps, being primus inter pares-the first among equals
-our statesmen, whatever party may be in power, are to meet year by year with the members of the British Cabinet for the purpose of considering and discussing questions that are for the interest and promotion of the cause of Empire the world over. Could there have been taken any more effective step without sacrificing one single jot or iota of our independence, political freedom or political autonomy? I believe, when party passion disappears, and the events of this year are viewed dispassionately, as they will be by the historian of the future, it will be admitted that one of the greatest steps ever taken for the advancement of the cause of this Empire and the uniting together more closely its component parts in bonds of friendship that in no way interfere with the independence of the Empire, was taken during the last few weeks, and it is one that I believe will, in the future, redound to the advancement of every part of this Empire and go a long way towards ensuring the future peace of the world. I did not intend ito speak tonight, and I do not want to trespass much upon the time of the House, because there may be another opportunity for taking up. in detail the questions that have been referred to. The resolutions that were passed at the Conference I do not intend to take up in detail, nor at any great length, but there are a few matters that have been referred to in the course of the debate this afternoon in regard to which I will crave a few moments of the indulgence of the House before I take my seat.
Reference was made in this House and we saw references in the press to the drinking habits of the Canadian soldiers in the different camps in which they were placed in Great Britain. I want to tell this House in regard to that matter a few facts, more in detail than the matter was referred to by the Prime Minister this afternoon. At one of the meetings of the Imperial Conference Sir Edward Henry, Chief of Police of the city of London, appeared before us, and he told us that in what he spoke of as the London area, there were from three to four hundred thousand soldiers every night; that many of them were on leave from the trenches, and many of them were going to or coming from the front. As a result, the streets of London were frequented in large numbers by these men.
Most of them were men without relatives or friends, and many of them naturally sought human society and human comfort, and yet Sir Edward Henry told us that of the 300,000 or 400,000 men who were in the

London area every night, the largest number of soldiers who bad ever been arrested in one night for drunkenness was 16, and the number hardly ever exceeded 10 or 13. I do not think anything could speak more strongly for the sobriety and good-behavior of the soldiers there. The soldiers Sir Henry referred to were not all Canadians; some were from Australia, or New Zealand; many of them were British; and there were others from almost every quarter of the globe. These figures, I repeat, are a splendid tribute to the sobriety of the soldiers who are fighting the battles of the Empire at the present time.
Coming more directly to the Canadian soldier, against whom I understand a charge was made in this House, the day before I left England I received a letter from General Steele, in command of the Canadian troops at Shorncliffe. This letter was not written at any solicitation of mine.


William Pugsley: I wish to correct my hon. friend. He says a charge was made in this House against the Canadian soldier. If he is referring to the matter my hon. friend from Rouville brought before the House, I would point out that what the hon. member for Rouville did was to read a letter from an officer who had been in England, in which a complaint was made against the wet canteen, which the officer said was a temptation to the Canadian soldier.


Mr. CROTHERS:: And a complaint against a dry canteen, too.


John Douglas Hazen: I did not have the pleasure of hearing ithe speech of my hon. friend from Rouville, but I saw in the English press-and it may have been an erroneous impression of what the hon. member said- that the hon. member for Rouville bad criticised the wet canteen and alleged that as a result of it there was a great deal of drunkenness among the Canadian /troops in England. I would not for one moment do the slightest injustice to the hon. member for Rouville, who is a friend of mine, and for whom I entertain feelings of very great regard. I am only stating that as a result of his speech that impression did get abroad, although, of course, the hon. gentleman may not have so intended.


William Pugsley: He read a letter from an officer who had been in England.


John Douglas Hazen: non-combatants in a sense, at the same time the railway construction men are incurring a danger not very much less than that incurred by the men actually fighting in the trenches. One could not helip feeling impressed with the wonderful cheerfulness of the men at the front, their wonderful physique, and the wonderful work they are doing. I never met a man in the trenches who had a complaint to make about anything. They were trying to do their duty for the honour of the Empire and of Canada. And in the different hospitals I visited-and I visited many of them; whenever I had a spare hour or two I went to some of the various hospitals to inquire for our Canadian soldiers, and I think I must have talked to thousands of them -I found the same spirit of cheerfulness prevailing. As far as I could judge from my own observations and from the statements made to me by the men in [DOT]the hospitals, the Canadian hospital service is one that is a credit to the people of this country, and those whb have friends at the front should have the satisfaction of knowing 'that those friends will receive in our different hospitals the very best of treatment. All these hospitals are equipped with operating rooms, X-ray apparatus, and instruments as modern as can be found in the best hospitals in Canada. The best of Canadian surgeons and doctors are there, [DOT]and the best of Canadian nurses. And all over the land in England and France I found the women of Canada in the hospitals ministering to the wants of our soldiers who have unfortunately been wounded.
Let me tell a little story illustrating the (Spirit of the Canadian boys at the front. One night about ten o'clock, after I had returned from a visit to the military camp at Shoreham, I found a cable from a member of this House telling me that he had information that his son had been wounded, and asking me if I could ascertain where he was and what was his condition'. It was just after the battle of Vimy Ridge, and (many wounded were being brought across the Channel. I at once inquired by telephone among the different hospitals, and at length I found this young man was in the First London General Hospital, and the information I was given was that he had received- a flesh wound in 'the leg, that his condition was not serious, and that he was getting along very well. I wired this information to his father, and the next morning, being Sunday, I went to the hispital ito see him. And a 'more cheerful boy I [Mr Hazen.]
pever saw. Lying in the bed next to him was the brother of a member of this House, the hon. member for Centre York (Mr. Wallace), wounded, but I am glad to say, not seriously. And in another near-by bed was the Colonel of the regiment of the young man, the son of the hon. member for (Kingston (Mr. Nickle). He told me the iStory of the fight. Referring to my hon. friend's son, he said that early in the day the young man was wounded in the head' by a piece of shrapnel. The wound bled a good deal, and the young man was ordered back to a dressing station and to fall out. But he would mot do so; he said that he would be disgraced forever if he did; that he was there to help to 'take Yimy Ridge and he wanted to go on. His Colonel allowed him to have his way. Later in the fight, the boy received the wound which 'caused his removal [DOT]to the hospital. This is illustrative' of the courage and spirit that characterizes all our Canadian boys at the front, so far a3 I could see, without one single exception.
Many members of this House have sons in the fighting force. I think that nearly every member who has a son of military age has that son serving at the front. Some have unfortunately lost their eons in. the war The Prime Minister referred to the fact that arrangements had been made that the graveyards in which 'the Canadian soldiers are buried would 'be kept in proper condition in perpetuity at the expense of the British Government and the Governments of the overseas Dominions, through the agency of a commission of which the Prince of Wales is chairman. That, I have no doubt, is gratifying news to all the members of this House as it is gratifying to my-iself. When I was in France I visited a graveyard in which I have a very great personal interest. Lying side by side with ;my own dear boy I saw the names of other Canadians-of General Mercer; of the son of the late General Cotton; and the sons of other prominent Canadians-all sleeping their last sleep.. And extremely gratifying [DOT]it was to me to see the way in which that graveyard was kept and to observe the evidences that the loving hands of companions and comrades of these men who had given up their lives had done everything that could 'be done to brake their last resting place what their relatives and-friends overseas would desire to have it.
All through the Canadian forces, on every side, I found that feeling of comradeship, that feeling of affection one for another, that feeling of sacrifice and I felt, as I

looked over towards Vimy Ridge from Mount St. Eloi and was told that in a short time four Canadian divisions would be hurled against it, it would be little less than a crime if we in Canada did not see that these divisions were replenished, that all wastage was made good and that men would be kept going from Canada to sustain and strengthen the arms of those who had been fighting so valiantly for pur cause over there. Whilst at the outset of the war I thought that the effect of men voluntarily coming forward to serve their King and country without any compulsion at all was a much grander and more inspiring sight than would be that of men being brought forward under compulsion, I also made up my mind that if the voluntary system failed it would be our bounden duty as Canadians to adopt methods similar to those which have been adopted in practically every other country in the world and to see that men went forward from Canada to fill up the ranks of those who bad fallen in the fight and were incapacitated from further service. That is the reason that actuated me in giving my consent to a policy which might be described as compulsory service or conscription, or whatever you may choose to call it, such as was announced by my right hon friend the Prime Minister this afternoon, a policy which this Government intend to stand or fall by in the estimation of the people of this country.
There are many other matters that I might speak about in regard to our visit but I feel that it is unnecessary to do so; in fact at this late hour, time will hardly permit. There will be future opportunities of discussing perhaps more in detail some of the matters of interest to this country that we came in contact with on this trip abroad. Let me say, however, that grievously as we have been stricken by the war, great as is the sacrifice, personally, financially and commercially that the people of Canada have had to make, yet there is some satisfaction in knowing that wherever you go in France or England you find the praise of Canada, and what Canada has done, on the lips of every one. As a result pf what Canada has done, Canada's name to-day looms larger in the opinion of the world than ever it did before and it has taken a war to make the people understand the wonderful resources of Canada and the wonderful vigour of Canadians of the present generation.
Mr. PiTJGSLEY: Will my hon. friend (Mr. Hazen) permit me to say that I am very
glad that I made a reference to him because if I had not done sp it would not have given us the opportunity of listening to the very eloquent, interesting and affecting speech that the hon. gentleman has made. The minister .stated that every shipyard in Canada is occupied to-day. in building ships for the Imperial Munitions Board. I would like the minister to tell me what number of vessels are being built and where they are being built. 'There are a number of shipyards in the Maritime Provinces where wooden vessels were bpilt in the past, but where there are no ships being built now.


John Douglas Hazen: I cannot give the hon. gentleman that information at the moment, but I shall endeavour to get it and give it to him. I will have to go to the Munitions Board. When I say that every shipyard is filled to its capacity I do not refer to shipyards which were shipyards in the past, but where no ship has been built for many years. I refer to shipyards where people have a plant and are ready to receive proposals for the construction of ships. I refer to Mr. Davies at Quebec, the Canadian Vickers Company at Montreal, the shipyards of Collingwood, the Poison Iron Works at Toronto, Couglan & Son on the Pacific coast, and the Wallace shipyards on the Pacific coast. I believe that ships are being built at the present time at New Glasgow by the Nova Scotia Steel Company. These are shipyards I had in my mind. There are places, for instance, along the St. John river, amongst them Oromocto, where I was born, at which ships have been built. At Oromocto there were three shipyards, buit no ship has been built in them for the last forty years. However, I will be very glad to get the information for my hon. friend.


Mr. D. D. McKENZIE (North Cape Breton and Victoria):: Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of interest to the hon. Minister of Marine .and Fisheries (Mr. Hazen), and I suppose it is only fair as a member of this House that I should extend to him my congratulations upon the very excellent presentation of the case which he has placed before the House, and also my sympathy with 'him in the trying ordeal of visiting the ground on which his 'beloved son has shared the fate of many other Canadians who have given up their lives for the sacred cause and for their country. I have listened with a good deal of attention to the whole of my hon. friend's speech, and, going back to the first of it, where he accused my hon. friend from St. John (Mr. Pugsley) of

making the same speech so often, I am not going to join issue upon the fact as to whether the hon. gentleman has made that speech often or not, as I can say to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries that, no matter how many times the hon. gentleman has made that speech, the same reply exactly has been made to it by the Minister of Marine .and Fisheries. If the short prayer " Those are my sentiments," applies to the one, it equally applies to the other. I am sure I do not find fault with the Minister of Marine for saying that the speech of the hon. member for St. John has been repeated quite a few times. It is a good speech; it is full of meat, and it is important to the people of St. John and of Courtenay Bay. He tells us that very likely the hon. member for St. John 'yill find the words "Courtenay Bay ." engraved upon his heart. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries had better take care that he will not find them engraved upon his political tombstone, because this is a very live issue in that part of the country, and the people may take care to point out that this was the finish of a man who had had a very happy career, but who fell at Courtenay Bay because he did not carry out schemes which were of great advantage to the people of the country and here he lies. The Minister of Marine gave us as the reason why they did not go on with shipbuilding in 1911 that the minister of that day thought it proper to consult the Admiralty. I think it was absolutely proper that he should consult the Admiralty in connection with the building of ships, and that the pattern that would be followed by shipbuilders of this cohntry should be as much as possible the same as that followed on the other side.
But I am very glad to be able to quote to the Minister of Marine an authority on that line of action that he will not dispute; that authority will be himself. When he spoke in this House for the first time after the last election, speaking in the same capacity and office in which he is to-day, on the 22nd of November, 1911, he expressed the position in which he and his Government were with regard to consulting the Admiralty. He said: I
I think the people of this country will approve of the action of this Government in hesitating before rushing hastily into a policy which must involve an expenditure of so many million dollars every year. I think they will appreciate the course of this Government in doing what was stated by the Prime Minister in his admirable speech in reply to the right hon. leader of the Opposition, when he said it was the intention of the Government to consider with the English Admiralty this whole

naval question from first to last. When we have done that, I think we will be able to come before this House and this country with a policy that will appeal to all Canadians as a policy that will be the best for the people of Canada and the best in the interest of the empire in which we live.
If it was wrong for the Minister of Pub-Works of the Government of Sir Wilfrid Laurier to propose consulting the Admiralty before launching upon a shipbuilding policy, was it right for the Government of the day? I think that it was quite proper in both Governments, but the hon. gentleman cannot now make any criticism against the former Government because we were consulting the Admiralty on this matter when that was also the policy of himself and of the Prime Minister under whom he holds office. I point this out to the minister in order that he may see that he is making a wrong line of criticism in adverting to the delay necessary to consult the Admiralty in the days of the Laurier Government and saying that'it was time ill spent and that there was no necessity for it. If the Laurier Government had continued in power they would have followed out the policy which they had enunciated and we would have had a navy of our. own; we would have been in the same proud position as Australia in defending not only her own waters but in extending defence to nearly all parts of the world where British interests are concerned. That is the isrtriking difference between the two policies. I would remind the Minister of Marine that the Government has been a long time in getting to work, that from the date of his address, the 22nd of November, 1911, until to-day, they have done nothing, although he then promised that the Government would in a short time bring down a policy that would be absolutely satisfactory to the people of this country, and carry it out.
The minister has been telling us that they worked very hard while they were away. While I was looking at the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and the Minister of Public Works and the Prime Minister yesterday and to-day, and when I heard their remarks about the food that was given to them in England, my mind reverted to the ancient days of the three Hebrew children, Shedrac, Meshac and Abednego, and I am glad indeed that the same result is present in the countenances of our children who went across. Those Hebrew children refused to partake of the fat things from the king's table; they would only take such ordinary food as pulse, etc. They thrived on it and looked fat and wholesome,

and I am glad to see our friends coming back in the same condition. But, after all,
I am disposed to think it was a nice holiday they had away, the long trips in the fresh air and the excellent good time which the Minister of Public Works knows so well how to enjoy and to suggest. I think it was rather that than the conduct of the Hebrew children that has brought them back looking so well; and if they are given to work on the other side of the Atlantic, my advice to the country generally would be to keep them there, because our experience with those three gentlemen, except the Prime Minister, is that they do not break their necks working, and if the Minister of Public Works was put to the task to show the great things that he has done since the war began, I am sure he would find some difficulty in pointing out anything conclusive or effective towards carrying on the war. I am sorry that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries is not here; if he were I would point out to him that all I know that he or his department did since the war began was to carry on reckless, partisan extravagance all along the coast from the western boundary of New Brunswick to the frozen zones of Labrador, in putting every little, miserable craft lying rotting on the shore before the war began into active service, and paying for them at the highest prices. I challenge, the minister or his department to place in the hands of members of the House a list of the boats, ships, scows and old tug boats that he has forced into the service of his department since the war began, and to tell the House and the country the owners of them, what they have cost the country and what they have been doing. If there is one scandalous thing in connection with this partisan war business from start to finish, it is that phase of the conduct of the department of the Minister of Marine. I intended to tell him that I do not blame him for it in any way, as he does not know; but his partisan agencies throughout the Maritime provinces know all about it, and if he will bring down the return I have suggested, the people of this country will know where millions of the money of this country is going. When we know that this is the extreme partisan way in which every phase of the war is carried forward, you will pardon us if we hesitate before we put the lives of our friends, under the rule of conscription, in the hands of hon. gentlemen opposite who have carried forward everything in connection with the
war strictly and absolutely along party lines. If conscription is to come, we trust that it will come in such a way that, we will not have the scandalous condition of things that officers will be sent through this country with the Tory brand, with the Tory heart, and the Tory intent, who will take away Grit boys and pass over the others by influences that certainly should not be brought to bear in this country. But when it is meeting us at every point, every turn of the road, in everything that they have touched in connection with this war, what hope have we that they will become rigliteous and high-minded all at once if this weapon of conscription is put in their hands? We can only judge their future by their past, and their past shows that there is nothing too strong, so far as party lines are concerned, to meet the approval and satisfaction of the members of this present Government.
My particular reason for replying to the Minister of Marine was to point out to him that the criticism he made in respect to shipbuilding and the delays that he alleges were committed and caused by the out-1 going Administration, were justified.
I think I should make one more comment in respect to the information that the minister gives us in connection with the criticism made on the wet canteen on the other side. I want to point out to the House and to you, Sir, when the word drunkenness is used, that is no evidence that there is insobriety. I wonder whether the minister ever heard the real definition of drunkenness. A man is drunk when he holds on to the grass for fear that he may fall backwards from the ground. A story is told of a man who was holding on to a telegraph post on the side of the road. He was asked what he was doing there, and he replied, "I am standing here until my old house comes around again." These are the conditions found in men who are drunk. Another story is told of a group of men who were drunk, one of whom called out to Mrs. Brown, whose head was out of the window: "Come down and pick out Mr. Brown; the rest of us want to go home." They were so drunk that they could not tell Mr. Brown from the rest of the men in the group, and they knew that Mrs. Brown would be able to find him. I am not saying that the boys were drunk, but these illustrations supply an indication of what drunkenness is. I heard the speech of the hon. member for Bouville. He simply


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Green in the Chair.
Progress reported.
On motion of Hon. Mr. Rogers the House adjourned at 10.53 until Monday, May 21.
Monday, May 21, 1917.