1918-05-03

SENATE BILL.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 71, to amend the Criminal Code so as to provide for the revision of excessive or inadequate punishments.-Mr. Middle-bro.


Sir ROBERT BORDEN (Prime Minister) moved:: That on and after Monday the 6th day of May next, until the end of the present session, the House shall meet at eleven o'clock in the morning of each day except Sundays, and that in addition to the usual intermission at six o'clock, p.m., there shall be also an intermission every day from one to three o'clock, p.m., and that on . .and after Saturday, the eleventh day of May next, and on eaclh Saturday thereafter until the end of the present session the House shall meet on (Saturdays and that the order of business shall be the same as on Fridays.
It has also been suggested. to me that' the following should be added, to which I at once assent if it meets with the view of the House:
-and that the various 'Committees of the House be at liberty to sit during the sessions of the House.

As far as the business to he proposed by the Government is concerned, it will all 'be on the Order Paper on Monday or in the Votes and Proceedings of that day.
I do not think that anything which has yet to he brought down can he regarded as other than of a minor character, and I do not think it will be controversial. There are certain reasons which make it highly desirable that ministers should be relieved from their duties in Parliament at no very distant date, and we have our choice between two alternatives: One is to ' work a little harder and get through within the next ten days or so, and the other is to have an adjournment and for the House to meet again during the summer. I am convinced that the vast majority of the members of the House would greatly prefer the first alternative, and personally I certainly should prefer that.


Sir WILFRID LAURIER:: The Prime Minister may rest assured that we on this side of the House have no objection to prorogation in time to allow the ministers to attend to the business that may call them elsewhere. I would observe, however, that there are a great many items which might be cut out of the sessional programme. We are engaged at the moment on the Budget debate; which is always important, and especially so on this occasion, in view of the circumstances with which we are confronted. The debate which has proceeded now for three days has been very interesting, and not a minute I think has been lost. The whole debate has been conducive to the public interests. There is also on the programme to-day the Inspection and Sale Act, which is important on account of the information it elicits; I suppose that Bill cannot be left over, but if we go on with it, it will take some time, though perhaps not very long. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has another Bill on the Order Paper for controlling exports and imports. I do not know exactly what it is, but it may lead to a very important discussion. Then there is the Civil Service Bill, which is largely technical, and will take one or two sittings to dispose of. The Consolidation of the Railway Act is also a very important and voluminous Bill, and if it is gone on with this session it will take a very long time. Perhaps the Government would let that stand over for another session. Then there is the Canadian Northern Railway Bill. I do not know exactly what it is, but it is important and will require a full explanation and a good deal of consideration. Then there are the 
main estimates which, however, are largely advanced, and the supplementaries. So, on the whole, there is still a pretty big programme. I understand, however, why the Government wish to press for an early close of the session, and I can assure them that we on this side of the House shall do nothing except to facilitate business as much as we can.
The only suggestion I would make to the Prime Minister with reference to his motion is that he amend it so that we would commence morning sittings on Tuesday, the seventh o'f May, instead of on Monday. The reason T ask this, is that many members are absent and could not be notified in time for Monday morning's sitting.


Robert Laird Borden: I shall certainly assent to that at once. With regard to the programme on the Order Paper, I shall go over it carefully to see what might be omitted. I hope we shall be able to pass the Railway Bill. It went through this House last session, but did not pass the Senate. This year it has passed the Senate, and if it should fail to pass this House, I am afraid the people of the country might reach the conclusion that we were only humbugging with it.


Mr. LEMTEUX:: It is a new House this session, and many of the new members would like to study this legislation-


Robert Laird Borden: They would
have to studiy it, of course, but it was very carefully considered by a special committee of this House last session, and the Bill which has come down to us from the Senate is practically the same as when it left this House, with one or two exceptions. One of those exceptions, I think is rfi -sunre ';:>ipor:anc-e.


Mr. MURPHY:: The Bill lias been
amended in the Senate.


Robert Laird Borden: There is one
amendment of considerable importance, but I do not think the others are of first-rate importance. I hope very much that we shall be able to pass the Bill this session. The Civil Service Bill is founded very much on the present Act, except for the addition of necessary provisions to bring the Outside Service under the rules which have heretofore prevailed with regard to the Inside Service. I hope it will not he controversial .and that it will not occupy a very long time. With respect to the Inspection and Sale Act I shall confer with the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I am informed from my hon. friend, the

Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) that the resolution, item, 23 on the Order Paper, is of importance and he would like very much to have it advanced a stage to-day if that should be possible. There is nothing more to say at the moment about the other items. I therefore beg to move the motion as amended making the first morning sitting of the Houise on Tuesday next, instead of on Monday.
Motion as amended agreed to.



MILITARY SERVICE ACT.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. LAPOINTE (Kamouraska):: Mr. Speaker, I ask the hon, the Minister of Militia and Defence (Major-General Mew-burn) if the Order in Council affecting all unmarried men who- were twenty, twenty-one or twenty-two years of age at the time of their registration last fall applies equally to those who have since married after having obtained their exemption. The Order in Council refers to unmarried men without mentioning whether it applies only to those iwho' were actually unmarried or also to those who were unmarried on the 6th of July, 1917.
Major-General MEWBURN:	The Military Service Act provides that every man who was married after the 6th of July, 1917, will 'be considered asi unmarried, and I think that still holds good in regard to this.



INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENT.

[Stage Direction]
On the order for the House to again go into Committee on Bill No. 62, to amend the Insurance Act, 1917:
Hon. A. K. MACLEAN (Acting Minister of Finance) moved:: [DOT]
That order No. 13 be discharged and that Bill No. 62 to amend the Insurance Act, 1917, be referred to the committee on Banking and Commerce.
He said: It is desirable that this Bill be referred to the committee on Banking and Commerce, and I hope the House will accept this motion.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the motion of the Hon. A. K. Maclean (Acting Minister of Finance) the House went into Committee on the following proposed resolution, Mr. Boivin in the chair:
Resolved, That it is expedient to provide that as five-sixths of the six hundred thousand
shares of tlhe capital stock of the Canadian Northern Railway Company have been transferred to the Minister of Finance as required by chapter 24 of the statutes of 1917, the Governor in Council may assist the Canadian Northern Railway Company, or any company included in the Canadian Northern Railway System, in renewing or postponing the payment of any indebtedness of any such company, on s-uch terms as may be agreed on, by guaranteeing in whole or in part tihe payment thereof, with interest, or the notes or obligations given for such renewal or postponement: Provided1 that the amount of principal to be so guaranteed shall not exceed the amount of the indebtedness the payment of which is renewed or postponed; and, further, that the guarantee shall be in such form and signed by such person as the Governor in Council may approve, and shall enure for the benefit and security of the holder for the time being of the indebtedness or the notes or other obligations representing the same; and that any payments which may 'be required to be made pursuant to any such guarantee shall be made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada, and the Order in Council authorizing such guarantee shall be conclusive evidence for such holder that the terms and conditions of this resolution have been complied! with and that such guarantee iS' legal and binding.
Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I would remind the committee that last year a statute was passed enabling the Government to assist the 'Canadian Northern Railway Company, so soon as the Government had obtained a transfer to it of five-sixths of the capital shares of the company. This proportion of the total share capital of the company has been secured since the closing of the last Session of Parliament. Section 3 of Chapter 24 of the Statutes of last year provides as follows:
So soon as the said1 five-sixths of the said shares have been transferred as aforesaid, the Governor in Council may assist the Canadian Northern Railway Company, or any Company included in the Canadian Northern Railway System, in paying 'and settling any indebtedness of such 'Company or postponing the pay' ment 'thereof on such terms as may be agreed upon, and for such purposes may make advances out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
This section limited advances under the Act to $25,000,000, and that amount was actually expended in caring for the maturities and obligations of the Canadian Northern Railway -Cbmpany last year. A statement covering such payments was laid upon the table of the House early in the session as required by statute. The hon. gentleman will observe however that this section only empowered the Government to assist the company by way of advances to retire maturities or to assist in renewing maturities by a payment of money. The Canadian Northern Railway Company have a number of short term loans or notes which are maturing this year and which are at the present time secured by deben-

tures, or bonds, of the railway guaranteed by the Government, or secured by securities of the Canadian Northern Railway Company which were issued prior to the Government guarantee. Therefore, we are in fact liable for the maturing note. The larger part of the collateral security of these loans) bears a low rate of interest. Owing to the high rates of interest prevailing to-day, it is difficult to secure the renewal of these loans without increasing the rate of interest and perhaps increasing the collateral.
The section of last year's statute which I read does not empower the Government to guarantee payment of the short-term obligations of the Canadian Northern which have matured and are maturing this year, and we ask under this resolution that power be granted to the Government to guarantee when necessary the payment of such obligations or renewals of the same. Our total obligation is not to be increased under the terms of the resolution. The resolution provides, and the Bill will as well, that the Government can incur no greater obligation than now exists. In Great Britain and the United States during the balance of this year Canadian Northern shortterm notes to a very substantial sum will mature. Naturally, we desire to renew them, if possible, in order to avoid at the present time the entire payment of such maturities. We wiish% therefore, under the resolution to procure power enabling us to renew or extend, as circumstances will permit, these notes, and we ask power to guarantee the payment of any of such renewals, when necessary. I think it is a fair request to make, and I hope it will be readily granted. It is in the interest of the Canadian Northern railway, and it is particularly desirable, from the standpoint of, national finance during the present year. I hope that any renewals which shall be made this year shall be for a period of .at least three years, which will carry us over,
I trust, the war period.


Mr. R. L. RICHARDSON:: Can the Acting Minister of Finance state, approximately what liabilities will mature this year?


Mr. CURRIE:: I will supplement that question by asking the minister to read the list of securities that are coming due, the amounts, and what the guarantees are. I think he should take the House into his confidence with regard to this matter.


Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The names of the holders should also be given.


John Allister Currie: The names of the holders cannot be given, but the minister might state the amounts that are coming due. He has a list of them under his hand and might read it to the House.


Robert Lorne Richardson: I would like to have the names of the 'holders also.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Certainly. Perhaps the minister should have the list printed and distributed before the Bill comes before the House.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: If it is agreeable to the committee I should like to have the resolution passed, and when I move the second reading of the Bill founded upon it, I will give the information desired. In the meantime, however, I will give a list of the maturities.	[DOT]


Rodolphe Lemieux: And the holders of the securities?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I can only give the information asked for partially.


Robert Lorne Richardson: Give us what you can.	,


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I shall give a list of the securities which have matured since March 31ist of the present year and one maturing in June next. The London maturities are:
On March 31st, 1918	 $ 929,533
April 9th, 1918	 1,472,167
April 15th, 1918	 2,919,062
April 15th, 1918	 5,201,407
June 9th, 1918	 486,667
These obligations matured and are maturing in London, and I think are held chiefly by the brokerage firm of Lessard Freres, London, and their clients.


John Allister Currie: Are they notes or bonds?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: These are notes.


John Allister Currie: Bonds of the railway?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I think in most instances they are the notes of the company secured by bonds of the Canadian Northern railway guaranteed by the Dominion Government or by some of the provincial governments.


John Allister Currie: What we want to know is whether we are releasing any of the terms or not.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I cannot undertake to give the exact information which my hon. friend requires, but I promise to do so on the second reading of the Bill. The maturities in New York are:

July 10, 1918	$ 2,700,000
July 10, 1918	 3,000,000
-September 1, 1918	 10,000,000
January 10, 1919	 1,250,000'
June 12, 1919	 2,190,000
The New York maturities were sold by the brokerage firm of William A. Keed, New York. On August 12, there is maturing in London notes of the Canadian Northern railway to the amount of $9,733,333, secured by .collateral. In respect of the London maturities I think they can be renewed at full, providing a higher rate of interest is paid. I am hopeful that the maturities in New York may be renewed by a very small principal payment.


Robert Lorne Richardson: To whom are the
liabilities due?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I am sorry that I cannot give that information now, but I shall have it for my hon. friend when I move the second reading of the Bill.


Wilfrid Laurier: I would have supposed that the Government had the power under the Act of last session to do the very thing that the Acting Minister of Finance wants to do under this resolution. If he thinks differently I will not press the point; it is just as well we should know exactly what the Government's powers are. I think, however, that the hon. gentleman should state not only the amount of the liabilities that he undertakes to redeem or renew, but should give us a full and accurate statement of the liabilities that we have assumed.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Under this Bill?


Wilfrid Laurier: Yes. Up to the present time we have not had a full statement of such liabilities. A statement was presented to Parliament last year, but it was understood then that it was not quite accurate, and that there were many subsidiary companies whose liabilities we are assuming. Up to date, therefore, we have not had that absolute and positive statement to which the House is entitled. We must therefore have an absolute and full statement of every liability that we have undertaken to provide for under the -Act of last session. We are entitled not only to have the information which my hon. friend has just given us, but he should tell us who contracted those obligations. He should state not only the parent company, but the long progeny of subsidiary companies whose liabilities we have undertaken to deal with. We have no intention to delay proceedings at this stage, but when the Bill comes before the House we shall expect to have a
full statement upon the points which I have mentioned. J


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I understand my hon. friend wants the fullest information possible as to all matters that would properly fall within the scope of the proposed Bill?


Wilfrid Laurier: What we want is a list of all the liabilities which we have undertaken by the Act of last session. We had a statement last year with respect to that, but it was admitted to be only a partial statement; the Government were not able to give us a statement as to the full extent of the liabilities which we are assuming. That is what we want to have now.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: My purpose in making the statement which I did a moment ago was this: My colleague, the Minister of Railways, proposes some day -shortly to make a very full statement upon this subject, and I did not 'think it was necessary that I should now present a statement covering the whole scope of our financial liability in Tespect of the Canadian Northern railway. I am perfectly willing to give all possible information relating to the subject matter of the resolution and the Bill to be founded upon it. I merely want an understanding about the matter. I am willing to do what my right hon. friend desires, but I think it would be better to leave the complete statement as to our-
Sir WILFRID LAURIER!- The Minister of Railways will doubtless submit a mass of detail when he makes his statement, but the information which we desire is absolutely germane to the Bill which we are now, asked to pass. That is to say, we should have a full statement of the liabilities which we have incurred by the Act of last session.


Mr. CAHILL:: When this legislation went through last year, a statement was made by the Prime Minister that this whole question should properly be taken up by the first Parliament. We are in the position that we are passing legislation here day after day connected with the Canadian Northern railway. When the Minister of Railways and Canals takes up his estimates, he has only .a simple amount of $25,000,000 to be voted as a loan to the Canadian Northern system. We are passing $50,000,000 and $78,000,000, and various other amounts. By the time he comes to his estimates the remaining Canadian Northern legislation will be all through and we have not yet had any

statement as to who is managing this Tailway. We are told by the Minister of Railways and Canals and the Acting Minister of Finance that the people of Canada own the Canadian Northern Tailway. What I ask is: Who own the people of Canada? Mackenzie and Mann still seem to be running the Canadian Northern system. We are taking this road away from them by arbitration. They either have no interest in it or they have. If they have no interest in it, what is the object in allowing them to run it still? If we are taking over the liabilities, we should be in a position to manage the road. The legislation of last year authorized the naming of a commission to manage this road, not when we paid for it, but when we secured the stock. The Acting Minister of Finance says we have secured the stock. Then, why does he not put his own people in control of this system instead of leaving Mackenzie and Mann in charge of it. I have been trying to get that information from the Minister of Railways and Canals and the Acting Minister of Finance, but, so far, have been unable to get it. In his Budget speech, the Acting Minister of Finance did not mention anything about the liabilities of the Canadian Northern. We either own the stock or we do not. If we own the road, we should certainly have an interest in its management.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We are not proposing to make any fresh advance to this railway company. Parliament was given exact details last session of the obligations which the country was assuming in acquiring the Canadian Northern system. I assume my hon. friend can very easily get it now, but if he-


Frank S. Cahill: Has the hon. Acting Minister got it?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I should be pleased to have it sent to him before to-morrow. We are not incurring any further obligations by asking Parliament to pass this resolution, and the Bill to be founded upon it. We are simply asking power to assist in the renewal of certain obligations of the Canadian Northern railway for a few years, at least until the war is over.


Frank S. Cahill: At the last session of Parliament the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) made the statement that in talcing over these short-time liabilities of about $98,000,000, he did not expect to have to provide further financial' aid in connection with the obligations of the road, that the Canadian Northern would renew, them.

During that debate the Prime Minister said more than once that it was not the intention that this Government should run the railway, that there would be a commission appointed, and he also said that the question would be taken up at this Parliament. It has not been taken up, and we are now told that we must rush this measure through Parliament, although the matter referred to by the Prime Minister has not yet come up. We do not know what the liabilities of the Canadian Northern system are. There are fresh liabilities coming in every day to the Arbitration Board sitting in Toronto. Is it not a fact that the province of British Columbia is making a demand on them, and are not others doing the same? We do not know what the liabilities of this road are, and nothing concerning them was mentioned in the Budget speech, or we were not told how it was proposed to meet these liabilities. I think we should know about these matters before passing any more legislation.


Robert Laird Borden: The hon. member is not accurate in his quotation of what I said last session. I did not say it would be managed by a commission, but I stated it would devolve upon Parliament, I hoped at this session, to decide the method by which public ownership could be carried out so as to prevent that political interference and influence which would be absolutely detrimental to public ownership and operation. The liabilities of the Canadian Northern railway, according to my recollection, were very fully set out in statements which were presented to this House at the last session of Parliament. There is not the slightest reason why they should not be presented again. But every hon. member must understand that all those liabilities have to be taken into account by the Board of Arbitration which is determining the question as to whether or not the people of this country have to pay anything for the stock. Whatever the" liabilities are they are to be taken into consideration by the arbitrators who are considering that question how. The purpose of this resolution is to enable the Government to have the right to carry on this business without interruption. By reason of financial difficulties the road has been unable to finance for long periods; and it was necessary to make these short term loans. During this year and next year many of them will become due. It is not desirable that the country at this time should be called upon to make provision for paying them

in cash. Therefore, the Acting .Minister of Finance comes to Parliament and asks for authority which will enalble the Government to extend them by guaranteeing them. It is perfectly true that they are secured by bonds or debentures guaranteed by the Dominion or by the provinces, at least in most instances. But it is equally true that the short term loans so secured are not themselves guaranteed by the Government. It is considered a desirable thing that the Government acquire the whole of the stock so as to vest the beneficial interest of the road in the people of Canada, and that it should be enabled to extend these loans by giving a proper guarantee, which would obviate the necessity of raising the money at the present time *for the purpose of paying them off. That is the sole purpose.


Wilfrid Laurier: The present
resolution is simply a corollary of the action taken by the Government last year. We all understand that. It is also true that there was presented to us a list of the liabilities of Mackenzie and Mann and their different enterprises. But it is also true, and this must not be forgotten, that the Government could not tell us what the total liabilities of Mackenzie and Mann were. The Government did not know whether. they were included, in the blue- [DOT] book presented to Parliament. What we desire to know at this stage is, whether or not all the liabilities are shown in that blue-book, or whether others are coming in as well. We should know exactly the amount of liabilities which we have undertaken under the Act passed last session.


Robert Laird Borden: The information can be given, but, of course, the Government could not then pledge itself that the liabilities stated to the House last session comprised everything the company might owe. As a matter of fact, we have taken precautions, if I am not mistaken, either in the legislation or the agreement, that if any additional liabilities should be discovered, provision shall be made in the award to see that they are paid by the persons responsible for paying them.; in other words, that they must be taken into account in the final payment made by the people of this ..country 'for the stock, whenever it may be acquired.


Frank S. Cahill: Before we give any further money to the Canadian Northern, I think it is a proper question to ask whether the Mackenzie and Mann interests are still
operating that road. Are they still in charge as they were a year ago.?


Robert Laird Borden: The Government is represented by a certain number of directors on the board. It was not thought desirable to interfere with the present arrangements until the award is made, and the stock has been actually acquired through payment. As soon as that is done, it will of .course, he necessary that the country shall have complete control of the operations thereafter.


Frank S. Cahill: Is the country not entitled to know who. the directors of the Canadian Northern system are?


Robert Laird Borden: The country
does know.


Frank S. Cahill: I do not know it.


Robert Laird Borden: My hon. friend is the exception.


Frank S. Cahill: Would the right hon. gentleman mind telling us?


Robert Laird Borden: I cannot name them off by rote.
' Mr. CURRIE: When the Canadian Northern matter was Ibefore the House on a previous occasion, some hon. gentlemen suggested the advisability of foreclosing and taking the road over as .a Government measure. Against that it was urged by the Minister of Finance that the road would have to do a .great deal of financing on short term notes and that these, if they had to he guaranteed 'by the Government, would become a security of the- Government in the market against other federal securities which might be on the market at the same time. Do I understand that the assurance given to the House that the road would stand on its. own feet and do its own financing without any guarantee by the Government is now to he violated, .and that the Government will now have to guarantee these short term notes and make them obligations and securities of the country on the United States., and other markets5


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Our liability is not increased. These short term notes are secured by debenture stocks of the company guaranteed by the Government.


John Allister Currie: I understand that, but
these bonds guaranteed by the Government have not been sold. A numbeT of these bonds that were guaranteed by the Dominion Government and by the provinces have been put into the banks as. collateral security for money borrowed on the

short term notes that now are being renewed, instead of being distributed among purchasers so that they would become an obligation thirty or forty years from now.


Sir SAM HUGHES:: What was the rate of discount?


John Allister Currie: Twenty-five or thirty per *cent, if the truth were told. The Minister of Finance gave as a reason for not foreclosing, the fact that the identity of the road should remain as it is so that when short term notes of this kind, or equipment notes became due, the railroad, company itself would renew them without the Government guaranteeing the notes. I understand not only that the Government are guaranteeing the bonds now in the vaults of the bankers, bnt that every one of these short term notes will be guaranteed and also become a Government obligation. We are duplicating the security. Is that true?


Robert Laird Borden: If the Government acquire the assets of the Canadian Northern railway they cannot well disclaim responsibility for its liabilities. It would be a highly satisfactory bargain for the country if we could acquire the assets of the Canadian Northern Railway system and not become responsible for any of its liabilities; but that is absolutely out of the question. Therefore, acquiring the assets of the road by acquisition of the stock, it is necessary that the Government, if the road is not to become bankrupt or be put in liquidation, should see that the road shall not default in the payment of its liabilities from time to time. There are two ways of doing that. One is to raise *money,, in cash and pay the liabilities off as they become due, looking to some opportunity in the future, when the securities which would be freed by that payment could be marketed in New York, London or elsewhere. The alternative is that this Parliament confer on the Government power to give such a guarantee as will extend these short term loans for a certain period, and it is hoped that after the conclusion of the war financial matters will become nearer to normal when it will be possible to deal in a permanent v'ay with these obligations more satisfactorily than is possible at present. That is the meaning of this resolution upon which the Acting Minister of Finance proposes to found a Bill. When the second reading of the Bill is taken up in committer! the Acting Minister of Finance will be prepared 
to furnish such further information as may be necessary to make the proposals of the Government absolutely plain.


Rodolphe Lemieux: Would it not be wise to postpone this legislation until we receive the report of the commission appointed to determine the value of Canadian Northern stock? The many raids of Mackenzie and Mann on the treasury are alarming the people. When the poor man is being asked to pay a tax of ten cents a pound on his tea and coffee, it is not good policy to again bring Mackenzie and Mann near the treasury.


Robert Laird Borden: No one is bringing Mackenzie and Mann near the treasury. Nothing in this proposal has the slightest relation to any such thing. The Government is acquiring the stock, of a great railway system which is passing into the ownership of the people. As a part of this proposal, it is necessary to make provision for the payment of short term loans, (with which Mackenzie and Mann have absolutely nothing to do) after the stock has once been acquired and paid for by the Government.


Frank S. Cahill: Has the stock not already been acquired?


Robert Lorne Richardson: The road will not be taken over by the Government and operated by a commission as proposed in the Drayton-Acworth report until the report of the arbitration now sitting in Toronto is made. That report will probably be strenuously resisted by this Parliament-most assuredly it will by the people of Canada -and the taking over of the enterprise may be postponed for a considerable period. The transportation problem is a most serious one, and is knocking persistently at the doors of Parliament. The people are very uneasy about this matter, it means so much to the country. If we leave it in the air, we may not be able to take possession of this road for one or perhaps two years, and that will postpone the solution of the whole question. The commitments and liabilities of Mackenzie and Mann grow more appalling as the days go by. While the Government acted, perhaps, according to its best judgment in deciding to acquire the road, it has always been my view-and I believe this is the view of a great many of the people-tnat it would have been infinitely better to let this road pass into'the hands of a receiver and let the provinces that made such vast guarantees pay the.price.

If British Columbia, which guaranteed an amount of $79,000,000, chooses to ruin itself, that should be no concern of the Federal Parliament. Let the people of British Columbia, if they choose to elect a Government that is willing to ruin itself at the behest of Mackenzie and Mann, take the consequences. Equally so with all other provinces-


Rodolphe Lemieux: Not all the provinces; there is one province which is not enmeshed in the net of Mackenzie and Mann.


Robert Lorne Richardson: I refer to all the provinces that guaranteed bonds to an enormous amount. This great question will not stand the postponement which may be necessary if the view of the Prime Minister is carried out. I do not wish, at the present time, to press for information beyond what the Acting Minister of Finance is able to give. The Minister of Railways (Mr. J. D. Reid) has promised to make a complete statement when he brings down his estimates, and I thought perhaps that would be the time for this Parliament to consider the whole question carefully. Let us have a showdown on the railway question; let us know where we are at with the Grand Trunk Pacific, the Grand Trunk, and the Transcontinental, and let us reach a solution in the interest of the country, so as to allay public feeling which is daily growing stronger.


Frank S. Cahill: The Prime Minister stated just now that when we acquired the stock of the Canadian Northern Railway system, we would appoint our own directors and take charge of the management of the system. We have been repeatedly told in this House by members of the Government that we had acquired the stock, and I think 'before, we vote this money we are entitled to know whether or not we have acquired the stock, who are our directors on the Canadian Northern Railway Board, and in what position Mackenzie and Mann are.


Robert Laird Borden: We shall give my hon. friend all the information on that on the second reading of the Bill to be founded on this resolution.


Mr. JOSEPH READ :: There are two things that I wish to know before I can listen intelligently to the discussion. Who disposed of the five-sixths of the stock to the Government, and what is the Government going to do in regard to the remaining one-sixth of the stock?


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: On moving the second reading of the Bill to be founded on the resolution, I shall be pleased to give the hon. member the information he desires. The greater portion of the five-sixths of the capital issue of the Canadian Northern Railway Company now held by the Government, Was obtained from Mackenzie, Mann and Company, Limited. I think we have to-day $92,600,000 of the total par value issue of $100,000,000. The arbitrators now sitting at Toronto are endeavouring to ascertain the value of the equity in six hundred thousand shares as provided by chapter 24 of the statutes of 1917. I hope I shall be able to give my hon. friend all the information for which he asks.


John Allister Currie: How many shares does the Government now hold of the total issue? There seems to be some confusion in regard to the matter. I should judge the Government holds nearly all of the shares.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: It was necessary, inasmuch as the resolution was, in its nature, supplementary to the Bill of last session, to use the words "five-sixths" in phrasing the resolution. As a matter of fact, the Government of Canada have $92,600,000 par valpe of the total issue of the Canadian Northern Railway Company's shares. I cannot, at the moment, say what is the par value of the shares.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I am glad my hon. friend (Mr. Richardson) added a rider to his statement that all the provinces were more or less caught in the net of Mackenzie and Mann. I am bound to protest. While it may be true that the province of British Columbia is committed to the extent of $79,000,000, I may say to my hon. friend that the province of Quebec is not caught in the net of Mackenzie and Mann for a ten-cent piece. That explains why we are not so anxious to become drawers of water and hewers of wood like the other provinces.


Robert Lorne Richardson: You are going to pay your fair share just the same.


Rodolphe Lemieux: I thought we had done away with these raids on the public treasury by Mackenzie and Mann. When the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) have to maintain at Washington a permanent residence from which they may go hat in hand to the United States Treasury to get aid for the Canadian treasury, when our people are being bled white and are bravely paying tavee to carry on this war, we should stand for no more demands from Mackenzie and Mann. Last

year we decided to take over the liabilities of Mackenzie and Mann under the express condition that we would take over the road. We have not got the road. The same management is in charge. It is still Mackenzie and Mann.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: We have the road.


Rodolphe Lemieux: The day after the Canadian Northern legislation was passed last year, Sir William Mackenzie stated in a public interview that after the investigation was finished he would get a hundred cents on the dollar for his stock. Have you, Sir, ever dreamed of such brazen audacity? The country is committed to the extent of nearly $600,000,000 for Mackenzie and Mann, and Mackenzie and Mann coolly, quietly appear before a commission appointed by the Government and claim value for a stock which has been declared valueless by another commission appointed by the Government. It is a scandal to see those men around Parliament again, in these days of strain and stress trying to bleed white the people of 'Canada. Aie we going to carry out the legislation of last session, legislation which was passed under compulsion much against the protests of His Majesty's loyal Opposition and of certain of the most able members of the Conservative party? I need not refer to Mr. R. B. Bennett, the former
4 p.m. member for Calgary, and my hon. friend, the present member for Kingston (Mr. Nickle) but I may say that, in Montreal, the gentlemen who constituted the backbone of the old Conservative party, protested most vehemently against that legislation. Be that as it may, that legislation has been passed. We have to assume the liabilities of the Canadian Northern- Railway system; but in the name of decency and common sense, we should not allow Mackenzie and Mann to exact from this country the millions of dollars, which they claim for a stock which has been declared valueless. Before we pass this legislation the Acting Minister ci Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) will be kind enough to give to the House and the country a list of those liabilities and the names of the holders of those liabilities, because many names are being paraded before the public as being the names of gentlemen who were very active in the conspiracy which took place last year and which gave birth to the Union Government. It is unfortunate that many of the provinces were caught in the net of Mackenzie and Mann, and I am -glad and proud that the so-called backward province

of Quebec is free from that net. It is even stated that, when the provincial statesmen arrived in a great hurry at the capital city of Ottawa during the meetings which took place preceding the formation of the Union Government, they were welcomed at the station-by whom? Not by the right hon. gentleman, but by Sir William Mackenzie himself. I say this Parliament of Canada should not be under the control of any railway magnate who pulls the strings from behind the scenes. For mjr part, I shall be very exacting on the second reading of the Bill. I want a list from the Acting Minister of Finance of all the liabilities and the names of the holders, whether corporations or individuals, so that I can scrutinize every item. The country is in no mood to-day, when we have just committed ourselves to an expenditure of five hundred million dollars to carry on the war, to stand for any more raids on the treasury by Mackenzie and Mann.


Joseph Read: The province of Prince Edward Island, unfortunately, is in the same position as the province of Quebec with relation to this iniquitous agreement- I think I may use that word now-with Mackenzie and Mann. Our people have no interest whatever in the Mackenzie and Mann outfit. Their railway system may be of some benefit to the rest of Canada, but it is certainly of no benefit to the province of Prince Edward Island. When you realize that the purchase of this railroad is putting a debt of one hundred dollars on every child that is born in Prince Edward Island to-night, you can readily understand how our people feel about the action of the Government in drawing chestnuts out of the fire for these people and for the provinces that- were foolish enough to guarantee their bonds. The Acting Minister of Finance should give us the names of the people from whom the Government purchased five-sixths of the stock. He has told us that Mackenzie and Mann held most of it, but we want to know who held the balance, and also who holds the one-sixth of the stock now outstanding. Then we also want information as to the accrued interest. I' understand that the bonds are regarded as collateral security for the notes and, according to the Acting Minister of Finance, the interest is going to be increased on the renewals provided for by the proposed Act asked for. Will that increased interest be taken into consideration by the

arbitration now sitting in Toronto, as a set-off against the watered stock that we are asked to take over?


Mr. PAPINBAU:: On what date was the stock acquired?


Mr. J. D. REID:: I accepted it about the first day of last October.


John Allister Currie: When was the annual meeting of the 'Canadian Northern railway held when the new directors were elected? Was it after October? .


John Dowsley Reid: There has not been any annual meeting since October.
Resolution reported and read the first time.
On the motion for the second reading of thg resolution:


Wilfrid Laurier: That can be taken to-morrow. I think we should have the information that has been, asked for first.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I hope my right
hon. friend will not press his objection, as I desire to have the Bill printed.


Wilfrid Laurier: There is
nothing to prevent my hon. friend from having it printed now.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: That may be quite true, but I do not see what advantage can be gained by postponing the introduction and first reading of the Bill.


Wilfrid Laurier: The only objection I have is that we want to have the information that has been asked for, in advance of the second reading of the Bill.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: I have told my right hon. friend I propose doing that, but it is not likely that there can be very much further information to give, because I imagine that practically every bit of information available was given to Parliament about a year ago.


Wilfrid Laurier: If my hon. friend will say that he will give us all the information some day in advance of the second reading, I have no objection to his motion. Otherwise I shall raise my point of order.


Robert Laird Borden: What is the point of order?


Wilfrid Laurier: -The point of
order is that this is a 'money resolution and cannot be read a second time on the same day it is taken up by the House.


Robert Laird Borden: On what rule does the right hon. gentleman rely?


Wilfrid Laurier: I have not Bourinot here, and I will not press the point. All I want is this, that we have this information a day or two in advance of the second reading of the Bill, that we may have time to consider it.


Robert Laird Borden: There is no objection to that.
Resolution read a first time.



THE BUDGET.

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed the debate on the motion of Hon. A. K. Maclean (Acting Minister of Finance) that Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair for the House to go into Committee of Ways and Means (resumed from May 2).
Mr. LOUIS JOSEPH GAUTHIER (St. Hyacinthe-Rouville):: The Acting Minister of Finance, in introducing the Budget, said that we must provide (Hansard, page 1304):
For Civil Budget.. $230,000,000 For War Expenditure	 425,000,000
For advances to the Imperial Government for financing in part our export trade with Great Britain.. 325,000,000
In all..$980,000,000	$980,000,000
To discharge this there will be:
Revenue.$270,000,000
Advances by Great Britain to pay for maintenance of Canadian, troops overseas,	about	..	300,000,000Unexpended balance of Victory Loan, as of March	31,	1918	130,000,000$700,000,000	$7001000,000
Leaving a probable balance for
1918-19 of	 280,000,000
That balance, our Internal Minister of Finance said, has to be made up by the people of this country. The Department of Finance iis in the same position as the Department of Militia and Defence. We have an internal Minister of Militia in Ottawa and an external one in London. We have an internal Minister of Finance in Ottawa and an external one in the United States. The Acting Minister of Finance has told us that the money market in London is absolutely closed to us during war time *and that the New York market is practically closed, so that, to get the $280,000,000 which

we require, we will have to appeal to the citizens of this country to absorb the victory bonds that will be floated when the money is needed. I claim, Sir, that the Government must secure from the country its entire confidence and that the Government must answer for and explain every act of legislation, or of administration, so that there. shall be nothing concealed. In order that Canada shall be able to make her full contribution to the war, we must have peace and harmony in this country.
I protest very strongly against the restriction of discussion in this House. I see by the Order Paper that there is a notice of motion providing for the censoring of speeches of members of this House. Before you, Mr. Speaker, are permitted to make speeches for me, I intend to make a speech of my 'own because there are certain facts and arguments that I wish to insert in Hansard and which should not go unanswered.
In the Budget speech the acting Minister of Finance announced that there is going to be a war excise tax collected upon-
-all automobiles and jewellery imported into Canada for sale or manufactured in Canada on or before the 30th day of April, 1918, and which on that day have not .been sold to bona fide users of ten per oentum of the amount of the duty paid value when imported and Oif ten per centum of the price when they have been manufactured and sold in Canada.
It is by legislation of that kind that you *disturb trade in Canada. I believe it is my duty to state to the House that, in so far as the motor car trade is concerned, this legislation should not have been enacted and the tax should not have been imposed in the way it is intended to impose it. Here are my reasons for making that statement. I understand that the Government needs revenue and that the trade of the country must supply a part of that revenue, but if the Government disturb the trade of the country, traders will not be able to pay the income tax that they should pay, or to absorb the victory loan bonds that are going to be floated in the future. Take, for instance, the motor car trade. To secure an agency in that line of business, you must sign a contract in the month of December to distribute the quota in the territory in which you want to do business. The distributors of motor cars secured their *agencies and brought in the cars they are going to sell before the new models come upon the market in July. They have been *stocked up since last December with the cars they are going to sell up to the 15th June. They have been compelled to carry

the transportation charges, the duties paid to the customs house, the warehousing charges, they are losing the interest on their money and just at the time when they are going to reap a profit, and be in a position to honour their signatures, the Government comes .in and puts an excise tax on cars that are kept in stock to supply the regular trade. It is not fair to the trade, and I am afraid that the motor car ddsf-tributors who have 'been loaded up since December or January with cars will not, on account of this legislation, be able to dispose of their cars. The result will be that the Government will have practically no revenue. The collection of this tax imposes an Additional duty on the Department of Inland Revenue. More than that, this law does not distinguish between new cars and second-hand or used cars; and in second-hand or used cars, the Department of Inland Revenue will be entitled to collect this tax of ten per cent. Such a tax should not be imposed. I have no objection to those who are using motor cars contributing their fair share to the revenues of the country, but in order not to disturb trade this legislation should not be put into force before the 1st July, at which date the distributors will commit themselves for the balance of the year and the prices will be fixed by the "manufacturers. The Govern-[DOT] ment will lose nothing because it is the manufacturing concerns that will pay, and at no cost whatever the Government will be bound to collect the whole of the amount of the duty imposed upon that trade.
I now come, Sir, to the question of Military Service in this country. When the Bill which preceded the inauguration ol compulsory military service was presented, there was a statement made that created quite a flurry in -this Chamber and out of it. It was stated that the law would be defeated by the law itself. What has been the result? The result has been such as to indicate that the law ought to be amended because you cannot have conscription with a law providing for exemption. In times of stress like those in which we are living every individual in the land must abide by the dictates of the State. The law, as it stood, compelled every citizen who was of military age to appear before the tribunals appointed by this Government. The spirit of the law was that everybody was conscripted except those who were exempted. To ascertain if he was to be conscripted or exempted, a man had to present himself before a tribunal and hear from the officials appointed by this "Gov-

eminent if lie was to remain in this country for the ibenefit of the country, or if his utility would 'be greater on the 'battlefield.
I cannot but regret, Sir, that the law was such that we have 'heard hon. gentlemen, holding positions of responsibility in this House make the statement that there had been wholesale exemptions.
It could not be otherwise, Mr. Speaker, because I claim nobody had a right to enlist unless the tribunals appointed to decide in each case had rendered their judgment, and in order to do that the case had to be heard and tried. But what has been the result? The law provided for exemption but it was interpreted as meaning conscription, and there should not be any reproach to those who have simply followed the law. The law Was unable to supply the one hundred thousand men asked for, and it was amended, and what has been the result? That every young boy in this country is flying to defend the flag and is putting himself at the disposal of the Government. Why? Because the amendments [DOT] made to the law are not amendments for the purposes of exemption, they are amendments intended to facilitate conscription.
There is a fact to which I wish to call the attention of the Government. We are asked to bear a heavy burden of taxation. Nobody complains. Everybody admits that we are in this war to the bitter end. We are willing to be in it, we are willing to buy Victory Bonds and to pay the amount of taxation that is demanded; but I claim, Sir, that when the Government is asking for money for war purposes, it is nothing but justice that certain acts which have taken place in the province of Quebec should be ventilated in the House so that the ministers will have an opportunity to give an answer, and allay public opinion which, as a result of certain proceedings is visibly uneasy.
Now I wish to refer to the Desjardins case. Here is a man who was an employee of the Government and whose depositions I have before me. I can give you his very words-they are to be found in Ris depositions of March 21, 1918-to prove my statements. It has been established by Desjardins himself that he was an employee of the Government, and there is something further: The Government hired two attorneys to defend Desjardins. What had Desjardins done? Knowing that a conspiracy was going on in the city of Montreal, having been told by Giroux, the inspector of the federal police, that there was an association in Montreal known, or to be known,
as the "Knights of Death," he went and met those young men, among whom there were two bandits, two ex-convicts, two desperadoes just released from the penitentiary under ticket-of-leave, who were running this association. Desjardins pays $23 to become a member of the organization. He gives $1.50 to one to go to Beloeil and steal dynamite. He gives a revolver to another man named Paquin in order that the heads of the Government and other leading men should be removed-meaning the right hon. the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Militia, the General Officer Commanding the District of Montreal, Lord Atholstan, and others. Well, Desjardins, the employee of the Government, becomes an associate of these desperadoes, and in furtherance of his designs pays out to them Government money. That, Sir, is bad enough, but there is something worse. I admit that before the trial of these men took place the Government might have been under the impression that Desjardins had done nothing but his duty, but they subsequently took public money for the purpose of bailing Desjardins out. I have here a copy of the cheque issued by the Government with that object in view.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the amount?


Mr. GAUTHIEB:: 

1917-1918.
Department of Justice, Canada (4i2).
No. 1114.
Ottawa, Jan. 4, 1918-$10,000 00. To the Bank of Montreal, Ottawa:-
Pay to the order of A. E. Corriveau, Clerk of the Crown, 'Montreal, Ten Thousand Dollars.
Bail-Desjardins case.



E. B. NBWCOMBE,

[Stage Direction]
Deputy of the Minister of Justice.
J. E. Narraway,
Accountant.
Here was the case of a man accused of conspiracy against the peace of citizens of this country. The King issues a warrant, under his own name and seal, to have this conspirator apprehended and put in jail, yet the Minister of Justice of Canada takes out of the public chest the sum of $10,000 to bail this, conspirator out- The representative of the King in this Chamber desires to stop the King himself from exercising his functions in the. judicial district of Montreal.
Wilfrid Laurier: Hear, hear.


Louis Joseph Gauthier: He wants to stop the judicial authorities from dealing with this

man Desjardins. As I have already said, it was quite possible that up to this time the Government might well have been under the impression that Desjardins had only done his duty; but when all the facts had been brought out at the trial do you not think, Sir, that it would have been better in the interest of appeasing public opinion that the Government should have stopped there. They dddl not stop, but after all the facts had been brought before the court, they gave a cheque for $10,000 to bail this man Desjardins out. So far no explanation whatever has been given. We have tried by every means in our power to bring this matter to the attention of the House, but at every attempt made there was always a reason assigned foir postponing it. I want to be very clear on this point. I was a candidate in the last general election, but I knew that my party would not win. We have been beaten and I admit the defeat. I went to the table to play the game knowing that the dice were loaded against us. I do not complain of the result, but I say to the Government:	If you have been
elected by the will of the majority of the people of this country to administer the business of Canada, do not commit acts of that stamp unless you can explain them. The allegations in this matter should not be allowed to remain unanswered, and I hope that before the present debate is completed we shall have on this question a reply from the Minister of Justice who i,s in charge of the department which handled this matter. We want to know, Sir, why the public money was used to hire two attorneys to defend a conspirator like Desjardins, and why the public money has been used to bail out this man who was a friend and the associate of the conspirators banded together under the title of " the Knights of Death." In this discussion, I do not want to bring in any political bias. Everybody knows that I am a partisan, and I am not ashamed of it. But, Sir, if I was as partisan as some hon. gentlemen may think, I can tell you that the head of the conspiracy was a man named Elie Lalumiere. That name must sound familiar to those who sat in the last Parliament. This man, Laiumiere, was the tool employed to secure the return of a minister of the Crown. He has been charged in this chamber with having committed a crime against the electoral law of this country. He had the help of an inspector of the federal police, and a private employee of the Department of Justice. I believe, Sir, that a charge like this ,
deserves more than a postponement. We must have an answer to this charge, and the sooner we have it, the better for ail parties concerned.
I now pass to the Department of Railways. The president of the Canadian Pacific railway in his address on May 1, this year, stated:
In view of the abnormal and constantly increasing cost of railway operation, the Board of Railway Commissioners, after due deliberation, authorized an increase of ten to fifteen ' per cent, in specified zones in the tariff of charges for the carriage of passengers and freight.
We are suffering in this country from the same disease that is prevalent in the United States. Railway employees claim that the railway magnates, in order to comply with the demands of the employee, have increased the haulage capacity of their motive power, and have made their employees work like slaves. To secure an increase in rates for freight and passengers, they have left their rolling stock without being overhauled. That is the charge which is publicly made. I drew the attention of the Minister of Railways to that matter, and he told me that when his estimates came up he would give me the explanation. I intend to discuss this increase of rates, and to supply him with certain information, so that he may be in a better position to answer me. There has been in the United States a wage commission investigating wages of railwaymen, and I have here a statement made by Mr. Warren Stone, grand chief of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. I quote from the April issue of the Locomotive Engineers1 Journal:
The conditions confronting us at the beginning of winter couldi not have been much worse. Any practical railroad man could1 have foretold what was going to happen. Never before had the railroads made as little preparation of any kind for winter, and never before had we gone into a winter with our power in such rotten condition. On many railroads no effort was made to get power in condition. It looked to the men, at least the rank and file of these great lajbour organizations, as if the railroads were trying their best to make all conditions as hard for the employees as possible, and charge it all to application of the eight hour law, for the purpose of making a showing to support their claims to the higher traffic rates they were asking from the Government.
Mr. Stone was cross-examined by Mr. Lehmann, who asked him:
You spoke of long hours of service, some cases twenty, thirty, forty and fifty hours. Do you mean that during that time the men were actually confined to their positions on the train, and they had no opportunity to leave and get rest and' sleep?

[Mr. Stone:	No, sir. You hare to jteep
your engine ready for service. You do not know what moment you will he ordered to move. The sleep they get if any is not much, folded up like a jackknife on a seat hox in the cab of the modern locomotive.
(Mr. Lehmann: How about the conditions of comfort and safety?
Mr. iStone: There is no comfort on the modern locomotive at al'l; it was not built for that; but to pull tonnage.
Further on, 'Mr. Lehmann says:
You said there was no shortage of engineers, Mr. Stone. Is there a shortage of engines?
Mr. Stone:	There would1 be no shortage of
engines if they had gotten their power in any kind of shape.
I am receiving every week complaints from railway employees to the effect that the same state of affairs exists in this country as Mr. Stone describes. Yet what do we see? This Government aslcs Parliament to grant it power to borrow on the credit of the country $50,000,000 a year this year, and until one year after the war, to purchase railway equipment for railroads which have done their worst to have their hauling power put of order. Is that fair? I say, no, and the people of this country should know the Teal reasons. The Government desires to take $50,000,000 out of the public treasury to purchase equipment for railroads who have not been able to take care of the property they have now, and who have been compelled to come to the Government to secure an increase in freight and passenger charges of ten to fifteen per cent. This should be explained in such a manner that the employees of the railroads and the public will know that the Government has reasons of its own for proceeding with this policy. Our Government will go down in history, I suppose, as a Government of imitators. They have been trying to imitate our neighbours. I do not complain about that, but I would like them to imitate more consistently, not merely the bad features, but imitate everything, the good as well as the bad.
_ When the eastern part of the United States last winter had no fuel, the United States fuel controller ordered a heatless day. In Eastern Canada, when we had all the coal we wanted, the Canadian fuel controller ordered a heatless day. In December last the United States Government decided that no State Government should issue bonds without permission of the federal authority -and that was according to their constitution. In Canada this procedure has been imitated, notwithstanding the fact that we have not the same constitution as they have
on the other side of the border. One is amazed at the explanations given of this action on the part of the Government. The Government want to stop the issue of bonds by provinces or by corporations holding charters from provincial governments; they want to regulate the issue of bonds so that they shall be in a position to secure the best part of the money of the people.
I desire to call the attention of the Government, especially of those ministers who are supposed to look after the interests of the agricultural classes, to what has 'been done in the United States for agriculture. They have established a Federal Farm Loan Bureau; they have opened banks to help the farmers; they have done all they can to keep farmers on the farms and to bring from the congested cities all those who can engage in farm work. I commend to members of the Government an article which appears in the Literary Digest of April 6, 1918, with regard to what the United States has accomplished along this line. Permit me to quote the following:
The practical operation of the Federal Farm Loan1 Bureau has been almost co-incident with the first year of the war. While the members of the Farm Loan Board took the oath of office on August 7, 1916, they were occupied from that date until February, 1917, in the preliminary task of determining the boundaries of the twelve districts established by the Farm Loan Act, the location of the bank in each district, and the selection of the officers and directors of those banks. The first bank was chartered March 1, 1917, and the first Farm Loan Association March 27. The first loan was closed in April, 1917. Up to January 1, 1918, there had1 been 2,40'7 Farm Loan Associations chartered. In the month of February, 2i7'4 additional associations1 were incorporated, and the number in March will1 probably be about 250, so that the total number of associations chartered in the first twelve months will be about 2,931. These associations average about twenty members each, and their loans aggregate about $40,000 each, so that the 2,931 associations will represent a total membership of about 58,62% and a total of about $117,240,000 loans.
Up to January 31, 1918, there had been 112,146 applications for loans aggregating $260,556,981. Of these applications 71,035 had been approved to the amount of $139,050,471, while 24,020 had1 been closed, amounting to $50,782,432. A considerable proportion of the applications for loans have been either rejected, reduced, or withdrawn. The loans closed in the month of February amounted to a little over $11,000,000, and for the month of March they will probably approximate $15,0'00,000, making the total of the loans closed for the first year something in excess of $75,000,000.
Loans have been made in every State of the Union in amounts ranging from $100 to $10,0010'. These loans have all been made to owners cultivating their own lands, and for one or more of the purposes specified in the



Act, viz., the payment of existing indebtedness the purchase of land, 'the making of improvements, or the purchase of fertilizers, live stock, or farm equipment. Where they have been made for the payment of existing indebtednes, they have relieved the farmer of doubt as to his ability to meet the maturing principal of his mortgage, by enabling him to substitute an amortized mortgage, upon which he makes annual payments of a constant amount until! the principal is liquidated.
What has been the result of this policy of helping the farmers? According to the census of 1909, the total agricultural products of the United States were valued at $5,486,615,000 in that year. In 1915 the amount had increased to $6,768,598,000. Last year, on account of protection granted to the farmers, the estimated value of all crops in the United States jumped to the enormous figure of $13,580,768,000. I commend these figures, as well as the legislation described in the article which I have read, to members of the Government in the hope that instead of taking away the farmer's hoys they will leave them here to engage in the work of production. Nobody believes that you can increase production by having college boys and women replace farmers' sons. Instead of pursuing that course, the Government ought to increase their protection of the farming community. Let the Government cease for a while their -protection of the .railway magnates and come back to the farmers. You are appealing to them to increase their production, and at the same time you are taking away from the farmers the very men who are able to increase production and thus benefit this country and the Allies.
I said in opening my remarks that it was necessary to the welfare of the country that trade should not toe disturbed and that peace and harmony should be restored. Some people contend that this country is threatened with a yellow menace which is coming from the Asiatic continent. I believe that there is a yellow menace, but it is not coming from Asia; it is coming from Ontario. It springs from Orange lodges, and it sows hatred in order to reap votes at the polls. We have had enough of that campaign. I appeal to the Government to stop that campaign of arraying province against province, race against race and creed against creed. I do not boast of my religion, tout I claim I have a right to belong to the Roman Church. If I have a right to belong to the Roman Church, I admit that another man may foe directed 'by an Orange lodge. I do not complain of that; hut if my own church intrudes on my political liberty, I resent
[Mr Gauthier.]
it, and if another sect intrudes on the political liberties of the rest of this country, I resent it too. So far as I aim concerned, a man may go to any church he wishes to attend; according to my feeling he may if he so chooses go to no oburcb at all. But he should not try, through religious influences, to have la political preponderance in this country, because if this condition of things is not stopped, we shall have to take action in some way or another to have it stopped. We want harmony and peace in this country. We do not want to dominate any province or any race, hut we do not want to toe dominated by any other province or any race. The only thing we ask is to be allowed to do our duty as we know it. In Germany there are to-day two battle cries'-one of hatred and one of admiration. The (battle cry of hatred is "Got strafe England." The Prussians realize that Great Britain is the greatest cheek to' German "kultur," and they want Great Britan to be badly beaten. Great Britain, paying no heed to the "Hyimn of Hate," goes on fighting the battles of liberty and civilization. But there is another cry, the cry of admiration. This is "Hoch the Kaiser, hoch the superman." We have in this country the same two battle cries, and they are coming from the yellow men. The battle cry of hatred is "Got strafe Quebec." Have you, Sir, not read in the papers of this country, when the disaster occurred at Halifax, the statement that an injustice had been committed; that this disaster should have been the lot of Quebec, not the lot of Halifax. But there is another cry, the cry of admiration. In Germany the cry is "Hoch der Kaiser." In this country it is "Hocken the Sentinel." We are unmoved by the "Hymn of Hate" and by the hymn singers; hut we want to have our: share of liberty, and we are willing to assume our share of duty. But if we have to do our share of duty, we are entitled to our share of liberty, and the sooner this is realized, the better it will be for all parties in this country.


Mr. EDMUND BRISTOL (Toronto Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to congratulate the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) on the very able presentation he has made of the condition of the financial affairsi of this country. I also desire, if I may, to congratulate hon. members on the splendid patriotic tone and character of the speeches which have been delivered1 in this House during the Budget debate. I can ias3uxe my hon. friend from St- Hyacinthe (Mr. Gauthier)

that we are only too anxious to see the people of his race have all the freedom and justice to which they .are entitled. All we in this country ask is that as far as possible there should he peace and harmony, equality of service of sacrifice and of obligation.
1 listened yesterday with a good deal of attention to the speech delivered by my hon. Mend from North Cape Breton (Mr. McKenzie). His speech sounded to me like one of the old time political speeches of pre-war days, particularly that portion in which he referred to Sir Joseph Flavelle and the Davies company and took the Government of the day to task, because, as far as I understood him, they had not in some way criminally prosecuted Sir Joseph Flavelle, or in other ways put the processes of the criminal law in motion. Sir Joseph Flavelle happens to be one of my constituents, and I think perhaps it is fair, and I am going to give the hon. member for North Cape Breton the benefit of the doubt, that in suggesting yesterday that Sir Joseph Flavelle was a criminal and had been robbing the people of this country, he really spoke in good faith. There are three matters to which he called attention. One was the cold storage destruction of poultry in Winnipeg. I do not suppose it needs any argument with him or any other hon. member to say that cold storage companies are necessary in this country. If there were more of them, and if they were under Government control, that would be very much in the public interest- The idea of a cold storage company is, as everybody knows, to take in the particular products of the season of the year when they are plentiful and keep them for use by the public in seasons of the year when they would otherwise be unobtainable. I do not believe my hon. friend suspects the Davies company of desiring to have spoiled in cold storage in Winnipeg a very large number of tons of chicken. When I tell rhy hon. friend that the canse of the spoiling of the chicken was due to the sinking of one of the walls and, in that way the putting out of order of the refrigerating surface of the plant, he probably will understand that the company was not desirous of having this happen, and that if it .had not happened, the chickens and other products in this particular cold storage plant could have been soldi for the benefit of the company and of the public. People, I suppose, in their own houses, have things spoil even when they exercise every possible care, and il aan sure my hon. friend, who is an 9H
excellent laywer, would not say that anybody should be criminally indicted for an unfortunate accident of that character.


Mr. McKENZIE:: I am sorry that the commission which inquired into the matter makes no reference to that as being the cause of the disaster to the goods.


Edmund James Bristol: I have not, perhaps, read the report as carefully as lhas my hon. friend, but I am quite satisfied that my facts are Tight, and that is why I am stating them.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I have a complete copy of the report, and I shall be very glad to give it to the hon. member. There is in it no mention of that cause.


Edmund James Bristol: My hon. friend was very much concerned about the British Munitions Company, the whole of the stock of which was owned by the Imperial Munitions Board. It is quite obvious 5 p.m. that if the whole of the stock of the British Munitions Company was owned by the Imperial Munitions Board, and if the British Munitions Company was making any profits out of 'the transaction, the Imperial Munitions Board would eventually get it. I do- not think my hon. friend intended to suggest that Sir Charles Gordon, or -Sir Joseph Flavelle, or pny of the other directors are drawing a dollar from the treasury of either of these companies, which are the property of Great Britain. It is well known that such is not -the case. One thing my hon. friend seemed concerned about was an agreement for a five per cent commission between, -as I understood him, the Northern Electric Company -and the British Munitions Company, Limited, which was payable by the latter company to the former, and which he suggested Sir Joseph Flavelle -and his friends participated in. This is absolutely incorrect. -The object, as I understood it, of the formation of the British Munitions Company, Limited, was the making of fus-es in this country.
One of the most vital parts of the shell is the time fuse, which has to be accurately constructed to go off at a given moment, or otherwise it would kill our own people. The time fuse problem has caused a great deal of difficulty in England, in the United States and in Canada. When the British Government first gave contracts for shells in this country many of the constituent parts were made in different parts of the United States and Canada, but eventually

the whole shell was made in this country. What caused the greatest possible difficulty with the time fuse, and resulted in the British Government being charged what they considered a high price for the shells, was that its manufacture called for a high degree of technical skill. There were very few men who could do the work, and they were hard to get. The Northern Electric Company, which I understand to be a subsidiary of the Bell Telephone Company, was the only company in Canada that possessed a technical staff capable of doing the work, and they furnished this highly trained and highly paid staff of technical experts on a basis of five per cent. That this operating charge was reasonable is shown by the fact that as a result, not merely has the whole cost of the plant of the British Munitions Company been written off, but the company has to-day, I understand, a surplus of over $400,000, based on the manufacture of time fuses in this country at the same price they were being manufactured for in the United States. So Great Britain has saved practically the cost of her factory, and has four hundred thousand dollars to the good, and has also, located and operating in Canada, the best time fuse factory on this continent, and to Sir Joseph Flavelle and his associates belongs the credit of this achievement.
Coming to the Davies Company, there is no question that the company made a profit of eighty per cent during a certain period of time, but the gravamen of my hon. friend's charge was that the Canadian people were being robbed in some fashion. The Davies Company has been in existence, to my knowledge, a generation or more, and has been doing business for fifty years in the English market. During the first two years of the war, if I am correctly informed, this company sold its entire product to the British Government at the market price such product was bringing in London at the time of its arrival there, and it was sold in competition with similar products from the Swift and Armour Companies and the other big packing plants of the United States. In other words, the Davies Company or any other of these packing houses had no more to do with the fixing of the price than had hon. gentlemen opposite. The price was fixed by the British Government on the arrival of the product in London. Subsequently, the British Government, on account of transportation reasons, changed their policy, and the product was sold at the price it would bring f.o.b. port of shipment in United States or
[Mr. Bristol. J
Canada. So throughout all their transactions, the price the Willian Davies Company received for the 'bacon my hon. friend was speaking about, was fixed by the British Government and by no one else. I have been told that as a result of'the prices ranging over a certain period of time the profit derived by this company from the ;sale of its bacon was two-fifths of a cent [DOT]a pound-and I believe those figures to be correct,-on an article costing, I think, 32 cents, but varying of course in price. What I want my hon. friend to understand, and what I think it is only fair the. Canadian people should understand, is that the William Davies Company had no monopoly. They bought their hogs in the open market in the United States against American competition, and in Canada, and they sold them at the market price that they and every other company had to take from the British Government, when that Government took over the product. And the best proof that the price was not exorbitant is that from the time these transactions started until now there has not been one word of complaint from the British Government against the Davies Company as to any price asked or received by them in the London ,market on the product they sold to that Government. I know from other sources that no company in Canada stands as high to-day with the British Government as does this same William Davies Company. There have been abnormal prices in this country for products of various kinds, and particularly for bacon. Every one knows that on account of the millions of men who have been taken out of production to engage in war, the price of wheat and other farm products has of necessity gone up, and, in addition to that, the soldiers in the camps are consuming enormous quantities of meat- ' far more than they consumed in peace time. With the gradual depletion of the world's stocks, prices have naturally gone up. I want to say to my hon. friend from Cape Breton that if this profit was made, it was not made by an exaction of high prices, but by reason of the fact that this Canadian company was able to do business better and cheaper than its American competitors in the open markets of the world, and with an enormous turn over they made a large amount of money on a small capital. Furthermore, forty per cent of the hogs that were made into the bacon in question, were bought in the United States in. competition with Swifts and Armours and other packing houses there, were brought into this country and manufactured into bacon, and so were

a benefit to Canadian labour. The bacon was then shipped to the English market and, being lower in price and 'better in quality, it beat the American product. In my humble judgment that was a credit to the company and a credit to Canadian enterprise.
So far as Sir Joseph Flavelle is concerned, I have personally no brief for him, and no interests directly or indirectly with him, but I have known him for a number of years and I do not believe that a more honourable and straightforward business man exists in this country. I say that the fact that the British Government have maintained him in the position he occupies in this country through all these years, and are continuing to deal with the William Davies company is proof that the charge that this company has made an enormous pro-fit is absolutely untrue. As soon as the word profit appears we hear about profiteer, pirate, robber, and so on. These statements carry no weight with the British Government. The facts have not been given to the 'Canadian public in such a fashion that they could form an unprejudiced judgment of what the transactions actually were.
My hon. friend has suggested that the Government of Canada should in some way supervise the enormous expenditure of the Imperial Munitions Board in this country, because he says it is the money of the Government of Canada that is being spent. It is true that the 'Government of Canada has loaned money to the British Government in this country in order that she may buy through the Munitions Board Canadian farm products and Canadian manufactured products for the use of Great Britain in this war. It is true that Great Britain is paying out millions from day to day and week to week for the maintenance of our soldiers overseas. It is true that there is a balance in our favour for one hundred million dollars. But my hon. friend is too good a business man and too good a lawyer to suggest that because Great Britain has a credit with us we have a right to dictate how she shall spend her money, and who shall handle her finances in this country. The fact remains that the British people, and particularly the British Government, which il suppose comprises as able a body of business men as are to be found in the world to-day, continue to employ Sir Joseph Flavelle in the distinguished position he occupies, and until my hon. friend can show something more than he has done it is 'high time we left Sir Joseph Flavelle alone and let these
baseless charges shrink into the oblivion they deserve.
What has been the position of our farming friends throughout these transactions? No Canadian can but desire that the farming community in this country should prosper; but we need not bother ourselves about that.
The farming community was never so prosperous. As a matter of fact, referring to the particular product that I was mentioning, while the farmers before the war, or about the time the war broke out, were getting from $6 to $9 per hundred for pork, since the war they have.been getting from $13 to $20. So it is with practically all the products that the farmer has to sell. There was a long period in the history of this country when the farming community undoubtedly suffered and endured great hardships. I heard a friend of mine the other day saying that thirty years ago down in Nova Scotia he had started life as a boy working on the farm. He said that he was about fifteen years of age, that he got up at five o'clock in the morning, worked all day and in order that he might spend his evenings profitably he was allowed to string apples until three o'clock in the morning. He said that after three months of this work he gave up, ran away and left a note behind his stating to the farmer who hired him that he had broken his contract because the farmer, when he entered his employ, had promised him steady work whereas during two hours of the night he was allowed to sleep. Although that may have been the position <$f the farmer thirty years ago, the position of our western farmer, to-day is a very different matter. Our western farmer, although he had probably twenty years of struggle	before the war, has now reached the point where he is in a more prosperous condition than any farmer in the world and I congratulate him. Manual labour for him is largely a thing of tne past. He does his work by machinery. He no longer gets up early in the morning to milk the cows; he does not need to, because he uses condensed milk. He does not require horses because his farm machinery is driven by motor power or steam. He goes to town in his automobile and he spends his winters in Los Angeles. I have been told by one man who was out west that their condition was getting so bad, as regards exercise, that some of them were erecting gymnasiums in their barns, or Whitely exercise in their houses, because manual labour had become a thing of the past. The suggestion

that the farmer is the sufferer at the present time is one with which I am afraid a great many people in this country, like Government employees and those who are living on fixed salaries, will not feel any special sympathy. I think that the farmer, the same as every other person, should bear his fair share of the taxes inasmuch as he has received his full proportion of the wonderful prosperity of the country so that I cannot. at present sympathize with the claim for free agricultural implements.
I want to deal with one particular tariff matter and that is the business profits war tax. If there is one thing that we have tried to do in Canada, it is to attract capital and men to this country.
We have tried to make this a splendid country for people to come and settle in We have tried to make our farming communities prosperous, and we have tried to give people who come here and invest capital a reasonable opportunity for success. That has been the policy of every Government since 'Confederation. It is perfectly obvious that if we are to continue the wonderful prosperity which this country is enjoying, and has been enjoying for a long time past, we must make it equally as attractive as our great neighbour to the south for business and settlement. What happens? When the business war tax of 25 per cent was first enacted it was accepted cheerfully by the Canadian community, as will be any tax, because there is not a man who is not anxious, in my humble judgment, to do his full duty to the state in whatever capacity he may be able to serve it. I am not calling this matter to the attention of the Acting Minister of Finance from the point of view that somebody may wish to escape the tax, but I do urge that we must make this country as attractive as possible to foreign capital in order that it may be induced to invest and assist in the development of our resources. We must make it as inviting as any other country, such as the United 'States. We have alongside of us the United States, a country which for three years had immunity from the war. It is of necessity in a highly prosperous state. Most of its industries are not in need of any financial .assistance from the banks to carry on their work now or for the purposes of extension after the war. We have imposed an excess profits war tax in this country, which works out on the average fifty per
[
cent higher than the like tax in the United States. If a Canadian had a profit of $75,000 on a business having an invested capital of $300,000 he would pay about $12,500 more in taxes 'than he would pay if he were in the United States. I submit that it is not in 'the interest of the people in this country to put the business people of Canada in a worse position than aTe our friends to the south of us. It is unquestioned that capital will ,go where it is treated best. There is nothing in the financial statement which we had presented to us that indicates that the finances of this country are not in such shape that we should not carefully consider in any taxation measure we may enact whether we are doing anything that will drive capital out or thwart any existing industry in the country. The matteT is so important that I want to put a couple of examples on Hansard. The Canadian business profits war tax was enacted on the 8th June, 1917, and the following rates were imposed:
Profits.	Tax.
7% to 15%	25%
15% " 20%	50%
20% and over	75%
In the United States the deductions include (a) $3,000 allowance, and (b) the profits up to an amount equal to a percentage based on pre-war period earnings. These may be 7 per cent, 8 per cent, or 9 per cent. The United States War Profits Tax was enacted on the 3rd October, 1917. That is about four months later than we enacted ours, and it was deliberately put lower than the Canadian tax. The rates are as follows:
7%, 8% or 9%	to	15%	20%15%	"	20%	25%20%	"	25%	35%25%	"	33%	45%
30% and over, maximum 00%
I will give a couple of examples showing how these two systems of taxation work out: Examples showing how ithe Canadian Business War Tax Act compares with the American War Excess Profits Tax.
Example A.
A firm having a capital of $300,000 makes $75,000 or 25% on a year's business.
If in Canada that firm will pay a tax
of	$ 24,750
If in the United States it will pay a tax
of	r	 12,150
Under the Canadian Act it works out thus:-
Invested capital	 $300,000
On which 25% is	made or	 75,000

Up to 7% or on	$21,000
From 7% to 15% or on	 24,000
From 15% to 20% or on	 15,000
In excess of 20%	 15,000
Total Tax	
Under the American Act it works out thus:
Invested capital, $300,000.
On which 25 per cent profits are made, $75,000.
Presuming that in the pre-war period this company had been earning 8 per cent, it would be granted exemption to that amount. .
Profits up to 8 per cent or $24,000 exempt.
Addition allowance, $3,000.
Total amount exempt from tax, $27,000.
Amount remaining that is taxable, $48,000.
Taxable Profits.
Tax.
Prom	8% to 15% oron	$21,000 at 20%	$4,200"	15% "20%	"	15,000 " 25%	3,750"	20% "25%	"	12,000 " 35%	4,200Total Tax	
$12,150
Thus where the Canadian firm pays $24,750 the American firm similarly situated will pay $12,150 or less than one-half. Example B.
A company with $100,000 capital makes 33% profits or $33,000.
If In Canada it will be taxed.
Exempt to 7%	$7,000
7% to 15% or $ 8,000 at 25% $ 2,000 15% to 20% or 5,000 at 50%	2,500
20% to 33% or 13,000at75%	9,750
Total Tax	$14,250
or 40% of earnings.
If in the United States will be Taxed. Exempt	to 8% $8,000	and $3,000	allowance	11,0008% to	15%	or	on	$ 7,000	at	20%	Tax	1,40015% to	20%	or	on	5,000	at	25%	Tax	1,25020% to	33%	or	on	10,000	at	35%	Tax	3,500Total Tax	$6,150
or under 17% of earnings.
In the case of example " A Supposing the company pays out 10 per cent to its shareholders, the Canadian company, after paying the tax out of profits can carry forward $20,250. The American firm doing the same thing would have $32,850 to carry forward.
In a three year period the American firm could bring its capital to slightly lees than $400,000, while the capital of the Canadian firm would be $360,750.
Example C.
A Montreal with a capital an 1914 of $250,000
Made a loss in 1915 of	 85,000
Made a loss in 1916 of	 59,000
And a profit in 1917 of	 130,000
Tax.
these profits are exempt	 000
Tax 25%	 6,000
" 50%	 7,500
" 75%	 11,250
	 $24,750
The company's resources were impaired by tbe end of 1916 to the extent of $144,000, the combined losses of the two yearn, and were really down to $106,000. In 1917 the profits amounted to $130,000 and with this the directors had hoped to make up the impairment of capital. Their Excess Profits War Tax took $71,000, leaving them as the result of three years business $85,000 poorer than in 1914.
The American firms also have this further advantage.
The Exchss Profits Tax in the United States only became effective on January 1, 1917. While the Canadian Excess Profits Tax has already been in force for three years.
Many American firms were allowed to accumulate large profits during the first, second and third years of war, during all of which time the Canadian firms were paying heavy taxes.
Now, Mr. Speaker, it is within the knowledge of many of ue that there is always mOTe or less capital seeking investment in Canada, and to-day that capital is south of the line. The position of England renders the investment of English, capital in Canada for some time to come a very remote possibility. And unless, as I say, we treat Canadian companies and Canadian citizens as well as the United States treat companies similarly situated, we cannot expect to attract that new capital, by way of investment, to this country. Not only so, but the situation works out this way: If between the Business Profits Tax and the Income Tax you take from the Canadian companies a sum so much in excess of what the American companies pay, then after the war is over and it becomes a question of taking the industries in this country and putting them, into a shape to carry on new industries or such new lines of manufacturing as they will have to have recourse to, they will be practically beieft of capital, and in the financial conditions that confront the country it is- a very doubtful question where they will be able to get a new supply, or whether they will be able to get it at all. I would, therefore, aisk the Minister of Finance to give this question the consideration which I feel, in the interest of the business communities and the prosperity of the country, it de-

serves. What is asked for is equal treatment for the great business interests of the country with our friends to the south, and at the same time to make this country so attractive that a very large amount of capital will he drawn here from time to time which will permit taxation to have a much larger spread, and enable Canada to meet more easily the obligations of the future.
There is another matter, Mr. Speaker, that so far as the cities are concerned, and particularly Toronto, has excited a good deal of comment, and it is the question of alien labour. There is a strong feeling in certain sections of tne community that for alien labour to be receiving eight to ten dollars a day, whereas our Canadian soldier is. only in receipt of $1.10 per diem, is hardly a fair situation for the fighting men of Canada to be placed in. I understand that the Government have given a great deal of consideration to this question, and, so far as the labouring people are concerned, I can only say this: When they see the wife and daughter of the alien enemy walking down our streets attired in silk dresses, and so forth, and the alien enemy himself getting such high wages and taking the job of the son or brother or husband at the front, it certainly fills them with feelings of a very unpleasant character; and if the Government could take any action in that regard I am sure it would be welcomed by a very large section of the community.
There is a further matter which in Toronto has been attracting a good deal of attention, and that is the number of fires that have taken place in munition factories or other factories utilized for w.ar purposes, resulting in the feeling that more stringent action should be adopted in reference to the internment of alien enemies or at all events the more careful watching of them. I understand that any communications sent to the Minister of Justice by any responsible citizen in regard to a matter of this kind will receive the most careful attention; and possibly it would be in the interest of Canada if different public bodies in this country would do as they have done in the United States, who of their own motion volunteer to give information to the Justice Department, and in that way practically attaching themselves and forming part of the secret service department, so that all loyal citizens might to a certain extent aid the Government in possibly finding out if there are alien enemies of the country

who are doing the harm, or who should be interned in the public interest.
I am glad to see the tone which has characterized this debate and to find that, while we may differ, perhaps, on tariff questions, on one matter the members of the House are absolutely united. With no single exception every member has shown the strongest possible desire to help this country win the war. That is really what this Parliament was constituted for, and I "am sure that there is no citizen in the country, man or woman, who is not most anxious to do his or her part in this great struggle, to the very best that in them lies. So, Mr. Speaker, I appeal to my friend's, whether from Quebec or Ontario, from the Atlantic to the Pacific- no matter from what part of Canada they may come-with all the force I can to aid us in becoming a united and harmonious people. Let us endeavour with all the strength we can to show that we are worthy of those splendid Canadians who have won undying fame for Canada at the front, so that when these gallant men return to us victorious we in Canada will not be ashamed of the part that we have taken, and so that we may be able to say hereafter that the finest page in the history of this war was the part our country played.


Mr. J. E. FONTAINE (translation):: Mr. Speaker, I was very much interested in listening to the financial statement delivered by the hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Maclean), the acting Minister of Finance-. It was so much more attractive owing to the fact that the hon. member is the same gentleman who, year after year, since the people of this country have committed the serious error of overthrowing the Government of Sir Wilfrid ILaurier, was always the first to rise on behalf of the Liberal party and criticise the incautious and often unfair methods of taxation of Sir Robert Borden's administration. We, on this side of the House, were anxious to hear him, to find out which otf the two groups that compose the Union Government would gain the upper hand. Would it be the Tories or the Protectionists? Would it be the Free Trade Liberals? The Right Honourable Prime Minister, when the cabinet was formed, stated that both political parties would be equally represented, on the basis of fifty-fifty, to use his own expression. If it is equally divided from a numerical standpoint, I believe I can say without- fear of denial that those of our friends who left the cold regions of the Opposition to sit on the Treasury benches have endorsed the

old protectionist Tory policy, which has never served to protect the people and the consumer, but has always assisted the manufacturers and the millionaires.
When I carefully look into the estimates submitted to our consideration, it appears to me that the Government is_not over-solicitous of the lot which falls to the people; that is the workingman, the toiler; I even believe that they have more compassion for the Mann and Mackenzie Company. Why cannot the Government find some means of reducing the cost of living through a more equitable distribution of the taxes, in such a way as to lay the burden upon those who are better able to bear it? As you must know, Mr. Speaker, those foodstuffs which are absolutely essential to subsistence, have reached such heights in price that the workingman is forced to undergo the most cruel privations; still, this is the class which bears the brunt of the war. Shoes, clothing, in short, everything, is selling at exorbitant prices, while there has been scarcely any increase in wages. The manufacturer is allowed to double his wealth, while the workingman is put on short allowance, compelled to eat brown bread and to go without meat. Besides, Mr.''Speaker, does not the Government itself set the example 'of extravagance? If we compare to-day's ordinary expenditure with that of the Laurier Administration, we find that it has more than doubled. Take, for instance, the number of Cabinet members: under the Laurier Government, we had fourteen ministers, and today, we find twenty-five of them; we even have two ministers of Militia and two ministers of Finance. I think that, in these times of war, several ministers have a good deal of spare time and that they could have taken over the management of two departments. But I readily understand that this would not have answered the purpose of the Government's friends.	.
Now, what about commissions? As soon as any question arises that might prove somewhat embarrassing to the Government, presto! a commission is appointed, in the belietf that all responsibility ends there. And these commissioners, creatures of the Government, draw salaries of five, six and even seven thousand dollars per annum. The number of the Civil Service employees has also been increased twofold without any necessity whatsoever; so true is this, that the hon. Minister of Public Works, himself, stated in this House, that there were far too many employees in his own department. Now, Mr. Speaker, what shall we say of the Militia Department's expenditure? That I may not be taxed with disloyalty, I wish to state my position clearly:
I am in favour of 'Canada's participation in this war, I want the Allies to win; I realize that it is a struggle of Democracy against Autocracy. We are fighting for Belgium, we are fighting for the smaller nations. However, we, French Canadians, the minority in this country, would carry on our part in this war with far greater enthusiasm, if the majority did not treat us in the same fashion as the Germans' treat the lesser nations of Europe ; if certain people stoipped slandering, calling us pro-Germans and slackers, because we believe with Lord Bhondda, with Herbert iC. Hoover and others, that the best way to help England is through an increased cultivation of our land, a more intense production to supply food to the Allies; for, after all, though we do need soldiers, if we are unable to feed them, they will not be fighting very long. I know the feelings of my compatriots,
I know they all desire the ultimate victory of England. Is not our past a pledge of our loyalty? Was it net the French Canadians who, upon two memorable occasions, saved Canada for the British Crown? Every one still recalls the battle of Chateaugury; i"74 and 1812 are two dates which remain indelible in the history of Canada, and fanaticism, whencesoever it may come, shall never he able to efface their memory. And did not the Government themselves admit the justice of our claim when they adopted an Order in Council to the effect that farmers and farmers' sons should be exempted from conscription; but, at that time, w.3 were on the eve of the elections, and in electoral matters as in many other cases, the fear of the voters is the beginning of wisdom.
'Crushed under their taxes, direct and indirect, alike, our people are going through a crisis unprecedented in this country which one was pleased to call in former times a privileged land. What will be the outcome of it all? Let us hope that the people will willingly hear the new burdens imposed upon them. Our country is evidently passing through a novel experience. However painful, it must nevertheless he accepted, though not perhaps without recrimination. But once the war is over, the Government will have to face the harsh day of reckon-ning to the voters of this country.
If, owing to their heavy taxes, our private citizens are forced to economize, the Government must find it necessary to do likewise, and the least that can be expected of them, is to exercise the greatest care in the expenditure of public funds. To be extravagant

This Act, with impudent cruelty, disfranchised thousands of British citizens. Canada had pledged her word to all those whom she accepted as her citizens that they would enjoy the same rights as other British subjects. This pledge is found in Chapter 13, Section 17 of the Canada Statutes, 1881. The section reads as follows:
An alien to whom a certificate of naturalization is granted shall, within Canada, be entitled to all political and other rights, powers and privileges, and be subject to all obligations to which a natural-born British subject is entitled or subject within Canada.
This guarantee to aliens who became British subjects was afterwards approved oy the Acts which the Canadian Parliament passed in 1886, 1906 and 1914.
The War-time Elections Act disfranchised hundreds of thousands of the naturalized British subj ects to whom the Government had promised equal rights with other Canadians. Yes, but we don't see the Government exempting these disfranchised subjects from paying taxes, especially the income tax which the present Government is demanding from them to-day.
In return, through this same damnable enactment, the Government granted the franchise to 800,000 women, whom they themselves selected in such a way as to make sure of a favourable plurality; moreover, they gave the ballot to thousands of alien soldiers who knew nothing of our country, its history, its geography, its politics and its interests.
Finally, with conscription, the Borden Government destroyed for many years to come the union which we so sorely needed in this country. This question inflamed the four corners of Canada. Rather than be content with volunteer recruiting, as in Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, the Transvaal, Newfoundland; rather than submit the Conscription Bill to a referendum, as was done in Australia, the Government throttled the will of the nation and imposed compulsory military service. This was fatally destined to accentuate the cleavage amongst the people. We will listen to the words of one of the former ministers in the Borden Cabinet, who resigned his post rather than be responsible for the conscriptionist policy of the Government.
In his letter of resignation, the Hon. Mr. Patenaude, amongst other things, said what follows:
Dear Sir Robert,
On the 18th of May last when you acquainted the House with your intention of presenting a Bill providing for compulsory service during the present war.
Prom the moment you submitted your intention to the Council, I drew your attention 
to its extreme gravity and to the consequences which, to my mind, would follow.
I have, however, thought it my duty in these critical times, to abstain from any hasty decision, as long as I could entertain the hope that these considerations, as well as the very serious events which were meanwhile developing, would induce you to modify, if not to completely change your decision.
I cannot now expect that my hope will be realized; you have in fact decided to introduce, without further delay, your proposed Bill, and have it passed during this session.
Therefore, I feel bound to sever my connection with the Cabinet on this question.
I have always thought, and do yet think, that the best interests of Canada make it a duty for this country to give to the cause of the allies its most generous support. But to do this, I cannot concur in any measure which in my estimation imperils national unity. The proposed law, I have every reason to fear, threatens to destroy this unity, and to give rise throughout the country to deep internal divisions of long duration, and even detrimental to the needs of the present moment. Indeed it is better to keep the country united in the present effort then to attempt a mightier one at the cost of national disruption.
If only conscription had become necessary through	the failure of volunteer recruiting. But that excuse does not hold water. The Primq' Minister himself, in January 1917, in this House during the debate on the Speech from the Throne, used these words:
Recruiting has gone well in every province of Canada. The call: to arms has been admirably answered. In the Maritime Provinces and in the province of Quebec, the movement was, perhaps, a little slow in getting under way, but I know from information received lately that everything is going along now as well as we could hope and that the call is being answered in splendid fashion.
And the Prime Minister was right. I find in Hansard for July 19, 1917, some very interesting figures. At the time when the Government was deciding to impose conscription on the country, of the 500,000 Canadians of military age, 550,000 had enlisted as volunteers. Twenty-five per cent had been refused as physically unfit, and 400,000 had joined the colours. Moreover Canada had, at that moment, according to the Prime Minister himself, 304,000 men in the munition factories. Besides, our railway transportation-and Canada has the highest railway mileage, per capita of population, of any country in the world-and other public utilities which contribute to war-work employed perhaps 200,000 men.
Now, in Europe, all munition workers, all transportation employees are considered as being on active service.
If this be so, then Canada had mobilized for war purposes, altogether 900,000 men; that is one-eighth of our population. While

France had mobilized one in every six, England one in ten, Italy one in eleven and Kussia one in twenty.
In order to appreciate Canada's splendid military effort, let us compare it with the United States. If Canada mobilized 400,000 men with a population of 7,500,000, the United States, with their population of 112,000,000 would have to recruit 5,600,000 men to equal Canada's proportion. Which fact prompted exlPresident Roosevelt to say: " iSo long as the United1 'States have not sent 5,000,000 men to the front we have not the right to place ourselves on the same footing as Canada in the great struggle which is now being waged for Democracy."
Furthermore I claim that conscription drags Canada into an unreasonable and unreasoning participation in the war;- it throws us into an undertaking which is beyond our financial resources, it causes a continuous mobilization of our best men which is out of all proportion, and deprives us of the labour which is absolutely necessary to us if we are to play the economic role which belongs to this country.
More and moTe the war is becoming an economic problem rather than a struggle exclusively military. This war, which has lasted nearly four years and which threatens to. continue just as long, is a war of endurance. More than ever do the words of Lloyd 'George ring true: "Victory will belong to the last golden sovereign, to the last stack of wheat."
Let us act in such a way as to be really useful to the Allies, and for that purpose, let us strive to maintain our national prosperity which is as important to them as to ourselves. Let us make sure' of increased agricultural production. Let us enable ourselves to fulfil our role-a decidedly important one-in the economic effort of the nations leagued against Germany.
In a moment I shall speak of the labour shortage here in Canada. For the present I wish to say a word concerning our financial positibn.
Canada, as a country, is in the millionaire class, as far as wealth and natural resources are concerned, but she is comparatively money poor. iSir 'George Paish, reputed the highest authority within the British Empire on matters of political economy, placed the total indebtedness of Canada, just before the war, at $3,000,000,000, or over $400 per capita of population. Of this amount, $300,000,000 represent the increase in the debt during the 50 years preceding. Now, in three and a half years the war has added one billion dollars to our debt, which is
three times more than Canada spent during 50 years for public works.
According to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, Canada's war expenditure has reached $875,000,000, and this amount does not include the 'Outlay for pensions and for the interest on the war debt.
At present we pay $78,000,000 interest every year. This is equivalent to more than one half our customs revenue, with the war tax added.
Let us compare once more with the United States: if we presume that the total wealth of the United is 74 times as great as that of Canada, we find that our war expenditure represents an outlay of 80 billion dollars on the part of the United States.
Our railroads, with one exception, are bankrupt.
The Government is forced to impose an income tax, thus establishing direct taxes, a thing hitherto unknown,in this country.
And we are forever borrowing. We must find 980 millions to meet our budget requirements for the present year.
Whither are we bound? What sort of future is in store for us, thanks to ourselves?
The war requires sacrifices, very well; but it does not require national suicide. If, in striving to avoid defeat, we ruin the -country what will it profit us? Wouldn't it be acting like the man who jumped into the water so he wouldn't get wet in the rain?
'Our extravagance is bound to bring reaction. This reaction will come about as surely as it did come in the past. We shd1 witness the same things over again: the ultra-imperialists of the present day become separatists. When all is said, it was a question of finance which, in -1774, -separated the United States from England. And in Canada, after the business crisis which occurred here around 1848 and 1849, there arose an annexationist movement which had as its followers or rather, I should say, its leaders, the English inhabitants, men like Molson, Bleury, 'Holmes, Be Witt, Holton, Abbott.
Amongst those who are eager to send our last man to the firing-line how many are not anxious to survive this last man? Amongst those who are eager to contribute our last cent how many would be willing to sacrifice their parliamentary indemnity to war needs?
They will answer that one must live. Well, the same is true of the nation. Only recently the Montreal 'Star declared that Canada should throw herself into the war "to the utmost of her strength, both physical and

financial." This limit has been reached. It is anti-Canadian and anti-Ally to empty the country and to expend millions in the process. The Prime Minister's own words are an acknowledgment that up to the 4th of April, 4018, conscription had cost the country i$l,424,785. It has brought us 30,000 soldiers and 200,000 exemptions as iwas stated by the Hon. Mr. Carvell. And the Manchester Guardian was justified in its statement of September 8, 1917, that conscription in Canada would not be worth what it would cost.
Bet us observe that, due to the cost of clothing, of pay and of transportation charges, 400,000 soldiers cost Canada as much as 2,000,000 soldiers do England or France.
I say that we are making a military and financial effort which is beyond our strength, which is out of all proportion to our wealth and our population; moreover, it is a serious menace to the economic role which is ours by right in this -war.
It is evident to every serious-minded and well-informed observer that the organization of our agricultural production is more important, more necessary, more urgent than conscription for the army. What the Allies are shouting for is food. Their cries of distress reach us every day, more and more insistent. At the beginning of March last the Food Controller of Great Britain sent a' cable to our own Food Controller, saying that England was sorely in need of all the wheat, all the flour and all the meat that Canada could spare.
This cable announced the establishing of food-rations in England and explained the food situation in the Allied countries. We read in it that: " On March 1, London and its suburbs were put on rations. More than 14,000,000 adults are limited to, one and a quarter pounds of meat, four ounces of butter ot margarine and one-half pound of sugar per week. After March 25, this ration will be imposed on the entire country."
We all know that a few months back Lord Rhondda, the British Food Controller, made this statement:
" We are doing our very utmost to increase our own production and to reduce consumption, but the first solution of this grave problem is with our American Allies, and with Canada. I feel sure that they will not abandon us."
And elsewhere, the same Lord Rhondda, who seems to know what he is talking about, says:

"My experience of America, both before and sincp the war, has given the opportunity of appreciating how tremendous are her resources. If they are organized to their full capacity I am confident that the German hope of starving out the Allies or of depressing the people through food shortage and high prices must of necessity be abandoned."
You cannot get away from Lord Rhondda's conclusion:	"The most perfect system of distribution and the most equitable regulation of prices would be merely a waste of time and effort unless the necessary steps are taken to maintain the Allies' supplies at a constant level. And that depends, to a vital degree, on the United States and on Canada."
At the very start of the war, the dictator of the British Empire, Mr. Lloyd George, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, sounded to the people of England this salutary warning >1 quoted a while back: " Victory will belong to the last golden sovereign, to the last stack of wheat."
I happened to read a circular sent out by the Ontario " Organization of Resources Committee ". This committee is presided over by .Sir John Hendrie, Lieutenant-Governor of Ontario; its vice-presidents are the Prime Minister of the province, Sir W. Hearst, and the former leader olf the Opposition, Mr. Row'ell, at present a minister in the Borden Cabinet. Amongst the members of this committee we find the names of several of Ontario's most prominent citizens.
In this circular, which is headlined \ " A Crisis Famine is at our Door, " we find, amongst other things :
"Since February 4, 1917, more than a million tons of foodstuffs have been destroyed through the torpedoing of numerous vessels. Mr. David Lubin, the United States delegate to the International Institute of Agriculture has just made his official report to Washington in which he states that on the 31st of March last there was a shortage of 150,000,000 bushels of grain for the needs of the world until August, 4917."
" On the 10th of April the president of Armour & Company declared that the United States were well on the way towards a catastrophe if the government did1 not take immediate steps for the conservation of foodstuffs. Famine, continues the circular "is spreading more and more throughout the vdiole world. In Ontario, 365,000 acres less were cultivated than in 1915 and the harvest of grain of all kinds fell 27,141,615 bushels, while

the vegetable crops gave 21,458,902 bushels less. This food shortage which is being felt the world over is such that there is grave danger of Canada being left without sufficient supply, and even if our production toofk a dtecided bound it is out of the question to hope for any improvement in the situation. Even if peace were to come within the year we can still see no bettering of food conditions, since we shall still have to send enormous quantities of food to Europe."
Before the war, France, England and Italy alone, imported each year more than one-half billion bushels of cereals. Next fail they will have to import nearly one billion bushels, according to the War Lecture Bureau, the official bulletin of the Director of Public Information at Ottawa.
The hon. Everett Colby, an assistant of the American Food Administrator, in the course of a speech delivered in Ottawa, a few days ago, said:
" Nine months from now we shall hear the cries of distress coming from the children of France and of Belgium; nine months from now famine will devastate these two countries."
This indicates an extremely serious situation; a situation for which the authorities should prepare.
Almost at the same time Mr. Crerar, the Minister of Agriculture emphasized the seriousness of the situation when he wrote in the Standard: " All the labour .available in the country parts is being employed; our extra production must rely chiefly on the labour furnished by the cities."
The Prime Minister himself, 'Sir Robert Borden, in a recent message published in the bulletin of the Canada Food Board at Ottawa, speaks of how extremely urgent it is for America to feed Europe. Our First Minister declares that the production of foodstuffs in the country must be as great as possible during the present months, or else we will be confronted with a "serious" crisis which threatens us to-day " and the extent of which cannot be overestimated."
Dr. D. W. Robertson of Ottawa, lectured in Montreal, a few weeks ago, on the seriousness of the food crisis, and on the means we should adopt to increase farm production in Canada, both for the feeding of our own population and for the relief of our Allies. Dr. Robertson insisted on the fact that the success of the Allied arms is dependent in great measure on the agricultural production of Canada and the United States, and that the chief cause of the decrease in our
agricultural production during the last three years has been the withdrawing of so many workers from the farms, whence they have gone either into the army or into the munition shops. The lecturer showed that, in 1917, France produced only 47 per cent of her normal crops of wheat and potatoes; both she and Italy are suffering from a shortage of wheat, flour and fats. England is no better off, for if she does- receive more ood than they, she must divide it with them; England's supply is only 55 per cent of what it was before the war. Even if they limit their imports to what is strictly necessary, the Allies will have to import this year over two million tons, or 40 per cent more than before the war, although the total tonnage of ocean-going vessels has been very much curtailed. Therefore America, this year, must produce more cereals of every description, than she has ever produced before, since the Allies' expect to receive from this continent 360,000,000 bushels of cereals over and above the amount of their total yearly imports before the war.
The President olf the 'Council, the Hon. Mr. Rowell, thought he had discovered the solution of our farm labour problem when he said, in the eloqueut speech which he delivered in this House, a few days back, that during the war the women of Canada, could and should do what the women of Great Britain and France are doing.
We know of the heroic task accomplished by women on the soil of France; but we know too, that, despite their efforts the agricultural production of France has suffered considerably during the war. The Hon. Mr. Rowell omitted to say so.
An article from the pen of a well-informed writer, published recently in the " New Republic ", shows that the total seed acreage in France was only 8,970,820 hectars, whereas in 1913 it had been 12,580,465; that her crops which amounted, in 1913, to 163,-
388,000	cwt., reached only 90,174,140 last year.
. These figures mean that, notwithstanding the admirable work of the women, children and old men, the soil of France yielded only 55 per cent of its total harvest of 1913.
Here in Canada, harvesting is far more difficult tor women than is the case in France, because of the tremendous acreage of our farms and also on account of the climate. In 'Canada, more than anywhere else, farming is a man's work.
Let us observe also that our country is one of the Allies' chietf providers of cereals and foodstuffs. The Allies rely on us to

make up what they lack. We must give it ' to them and at the same time insure the feeding of our own population.
And it is in the face of these crying needs of the Allies and of Canada that the Government brings on its Bill for compulsory military service, which is intended to deprive our country of 100,000 men or more. Still, there is a shortage of (farm labour in our country which makes it impossible for us to keep up our agricultural production, while we really have need to double it. In The Agricultural 'Gazette of 'Canada, published by the Dominion Department of Agriculture, issue of May, 1917, I find some very important expressions of opinion on the 'question of farm labour in our country. The Departments of Agriculture in all the' different provinces speak of their anxiety anent the shortage of labour on our 'farms.
Mr. Arthur S. Barnstead, Secretary of the Department of Industries and Immigration, in Nova Scotia, says:
The farm labour problem will assuredly be acute in Nova Scotia this year. Hitherto we have depended largely for extra farm help upon the immigration of .agricultural newcomers from Great Britain. The supply of these is of course cut off, and, moreover, thousands of our young farmers are now engaged in military service overseas. Again, the services of many young men 'which would formerly have been available are now fully engaged In our munition factories and steel works. Thus the present outlook for securing, during the rush seasons, any extra help for our farmers from the usual sources is not encouraging.	6
Mr. W. A. Riddell, 'Superintendent of the Trades and Labour Branch, Department of Public Works, Ontario, has this to say:
The need for farm labour in Ontario is quite as acute as it is in any of the provinces. Evidences of this may be seen by such facts as the following::
We can use 5 O'O' farm labourers in our municipality," writes.one reeve. The same mail Drought an application for a boy in jvhich it was stated: "We could use a carload of boys
in this neighbourhood"	With regard
to the Americans, there are five men working in the United States at the present time urging men to come to Canada. In some cases their
fare is advanced	 So far the attempt
to get men m this way has not been successful, nor the men obtained very satisfactory. The class of men that can be drawn from the United States at the present time for farm labour is rather poor."
Now we come to Mr. E, H. Auld, Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Mr. iThos. M. Molloy, Secretary of the Bureau of Labour, Saskatchewan:
Bealizing that a limiting factor in our crop production this year is the shortage of labour a special effort is being made to recruit all available former farmers and farm workers to
assist in putting in the crop	 Then

special farm labour agents from this province are in the United States.
Mr. H. A. Craig, Deputy Minister of Agriculture in Alberta uses these words:
During the past winter those who were interested in increased agricultural production have been anxious about the evident scarcity of farm labour. Owing to the fact that so many young men from Alberta have enlisted for overseas service, the available supply is much less than the requirements.
It was, Mr. Marshall, Minister of Agriculture in Alberta who, at a reunion of all the Dominion's Ministers of Agriculture, at Ottawa, last fall, spoke thus to the Federal authorities:
You cannot satisfy the needs of both militarism and production at one and the same time; you must choose between the two. If what you need is increased agricultural production, then you should leave on the farms those who are already there and further you should attract to the land all those who could be of help in farm work. If, on the other hand, recruiting is the more necessary of the two, then we should enlist in a body and let agriculture go to the dogs. But for the love of God, let their be a choice made right now between these two alternatives and let the Government tell us what they want.
Then we have Mr. William GE. Scott, Deputy Minister of Agriculture in British Columbia, telling us that:
The labour question, however, is the great difficulty, and the debarring factor at the present time to increased production. The farmer realizes that it is his patriotic duty to do all he can to increase the supplies of foodstuffs, and would do so, could he secure the necessary labour. It is a very acute question 'in British Columbia just now, and what is the best solution it is difficult to say	 They are
facing the same situation in the United States, and labour for the farm is also scarce there.
It is not only the farmer who is suffering from scarcity of labour. Our mines, logging camps, mills and industrial works are all complaining that they cannot get the labour that they want fqr carrying on their work to the fullest extent. It must be remembered that approximately 35,000 men have left this province for overseas service since the war began.
As regards the province of Quebec, I received a short time ago a copy of ia resolution adopted by the production engineers and other official agricultural experts, at a convention held recently in Quebec. Here is the purport of this resolution:
Whereas the scarcity of farm labour is becoming more and more acute at the very time when increased production of foodstuffs is most imperative ; and
Whereas the Federal Government, through the Canada Food Board, has requested the province of Quebec to increase by 600,000 acres the land already under culture; and
Whereas the military conscription law deprives us every day of a large number of young farmers and of young city men who are able to give effective help to our farmers;

It is hereby moved by Mr. R. A. Rousseau, B.A.S., official agricultural engineer,
Seconded by Mr. Georges Bouchard, professor at the School of Agriculture, Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere,
And it is unanimously resolved:
That the official agricultural experts, the agricultural representatives of the district, the professors of the agricultural colleges and the travelling agricultural instructors, assembled in convention for the campaign in favour of increased production, this 26th day of March, 1918, urge upon the higher authorities of this country, to enact clearly and effectively, the exemption from military service of every farm worker duly engaged to labour on a farm during the present year.
While lecturing on the labour question, in Saskatchewan, the'26th of February, last year, Mr. R. B. Bennett, then Director of National Service, said what follows:
In all likelihood the scarcity of foodstuffs will be felt more acutely than at present before the next harvest, in Great Britain, in France and in Italy, and as Canada is, of all the Dominions, the least remote from the countries, they naturally turn to us ; they see in us their
first source of supply	 The labour
shortage is the main obstacle to the accomplishment of these ends, and we intend doing all in our power to improve this situation.
In the presence of this scarcity of farm labour, which is making itself felt everywhere, it is small wonder that the number of acres sown in western Canada, showed, in the four years from 1912 to 1916 an increase of only 1,500,000, while in a. single year, from 1910 to 1911, the increase has been 3,500,000.
Every province in the country is crying out for men for the next planting season, and especially for the next harvest. A carefully prepared estimate tells us that the farms need 83,000 men to carry on thetr . ordinary work.
Alberta is asking for 6.000 men for seeding, and 7,000 for the harvest; Saskatchewan, 10,000 for seeding, and 15,000 for harvest; Manitoba, 7,000 for seeding, and 10,000 for harvest; Ontario, 7,500 for seeding, amd 12,500 for haying and for getting in the crops, besides 15,000 boys and 5,000 women; Quebec needs several thousand men; New Brunswick, about 2,000; Nova Scotia, 2,500; Prince Edward Island and BritishColumbia, although suffering less than the other provinces, nevertheless require further hands.
We are shouting famine into the ears of our neighbours in the United States who sent us thousands of men last year. They cannot repeat the effort this year. In this connection let me quote you the important declaration of President Wilson, shortly after the great Republic had declared war on Oermanv. The first and the most urgent appeal of this statesman was towards the
92	I I 'Wl
development of industry and agriculture. In a manifesto addressed to his fellow-citizens, Woodrow Wilson said:
Thousands of men, or rather hundreds of thousands, although fit for military service, will, owing to the needs of industry, be rightfully exempted from that service and sent to perform essential and productive work in the fields, the factories and the mines, and they will belong none the less, for all that, to the patriotic forces of the nation, just as much as do our men at the front.
The man who spoke these words is at the head of a nation of 112 million inhabitante; and we, a people of 7 millions, who have already seen 530,000 of our citizens leave our shores; we who are an agricultural people, whose country is rightfully styled the granary of the Empire, we would give no proof of the same prudence, the same foresight.
When we witness the unthinking policy of the Government which persists in mobilizing for the needs of the army the- most healthy and most vigourous element o.f our country we do not wonder that public opinion is beginning to rouse itself all over Canada. We lately saw rEvenement, a Government organ, reproaching the Government with not exempting young farmers. The English provinces are becoming alarmed over the question of farm labour. Telegrams from New Brunswick and from Ontario speak of meetings of farmers calling upon the Government to considers the necessity of keeping in Canada all young men adapted to work on the land. Toronto informs us that a delegation of 2,500 Ontario farmers is getting ready to come to Ottawa and demand the exemption of all farm workers, from 20 to 23 years of age, who have been called to the colours. I wish to point out that the last delegation of agriculturists which came to Ottawa was from the English farm owners and Anglo-Canadian agricultural experts from the Montreal district. iThe Toronto Star, ia Unionist paper, in its edition of last Saturday, published tire following report:
The farmers all through Ontario are taking definite means to force a reconsideration of the recent Order in Council which calls to the colours all the farmers, both freeholders and tenants, or farmers' sons who have never done anything else but cultivate the land. Bast night farmers' meetings were held throughout the province and vigorous resolutions were adopted setting forth that the crops and food production in general would suffer if the farmers were forced to rely solely on the help from inexperienced city hands. The principal meetings were held at Brantford, Woodstock, Goderich and Ayr.
The same newspaper .informs us that the United Farmers of Ontario intemj sending a



delegation to Ottawa. -So that the policy and the maladministration of this Government have divided the Canadian nation instead of uniting it, as the Unionist Government boasts of having done. The grievous blunders committed by the Government were not resented in Quebec alone, as some people axe pleased to claim in certain quarters. The other day, the hon. member for Russell eloquently vindicated Quebec of the attacks that have been made against her; he made triumphant reply to all these criticisms born of the frenzy of unseeing fanatics. Allow me to add just this: The province of Quebec was not the only one to disapprove of the Government's policy; she is not isolated in her opposition to the so-called Unionist Government which has sown the seed of discord in our ranks. An analysis of the vote recorded in the last election will bear this out.
According to the official figures, the Unionist Government holds a majority of 71 seats in this House; since the government has 153 representatives and the Opposition 82. Taking the vote as a whole, province by province, as also the distribution of the ballots cast throughout the whole of Canada, the exorbitant majority of the Unionist Government in this House is not justified. The total vote, both civil and military, was 1,057,793 for the Government, and 763,371 for the Opposition. But these figures do not take into account the election by acclamation (17 in the province of Quebec alone). Taking the number of votes cast for The Opposition in the 48 constituencies of Quebec province where contests were held, and where the Opposition was victorious, in order to establish an .average, we find that we must add nearly 70,000 votes to the total of the Opposition if we wish to establish the true relation between the two parties throughout the Dominion.
In this way the total division would be
800,000	votes for - the Opposition against 1,000,000 for the Government. This statement is important for the purpose of demonstrating that the Opposition, in Parliament, is not limited to the group - from Quebec. It is a fact that, out of a total of 82 members on the Opposition side, Quebec elected 62, which leaves only 20 members from outside our province, but an analysis of the vote throughout the entire country ishows that the Liberal group represents a very large number indeed of the voters of this country: outside of the province of Quebec there were 519,940 citizens who voted against the Government.

Bor instance, in Ontario: the Opposition holds only 8 seats with a vote of 369,093; while the Government, with 515,140 votes, has 74i seats.
That is to say that with a vote considerably less than double the vote accorded the Opposition, the Government is represented in this House in the proportion of 9 to 1. The true proportion of the votes obtained by the Opposition in Ontario is 34 per cent of the total vote cast in that province which, normally, should1 give us 28 seats while all we have is 8.
In the Western Provinces the total Government vote was 346,935, and the Opposition vote, 153,568. iSo that the proportion of the Opposition vote in the four western provinces and the Yukon is 31 per cent of the total vote cast; still, out of the 57 representatives that these provinces, send to Parliament the Opposition has only 2, while the exact ratio, based on the number of votes obtained, should give us 17 seats.
In Nova iSteotia the contradiction is-still more evident. 'The Government obtained 41,684 votes -there -and the Opposition, 41,305. But the -Government holds 12 -seats against the -Liberals 4. The Liberals obtained merely 370 votes less than the -Conservatives, and still they have only 4 seats, while the Conservatives hold 12. In Saskatchewan, where not one solitary Liberal candidate was elected, the -Liberal candidate's polled 33,500 votes, ox nearly one-third of the total; the Conservatives garnered 81,420.
The province of Alberta elected only one Liberal. At the same time, the Liberal candidates polled 49,920 votes, while the Government candidates got 74,974.
In British Columbia one-half the total vote was cast in favour of 'Liberal candidates, and- still, not a single one of them was elected.
We must deduce from this that, not only is our method of representation altogether unfair, -but also-which is most d-ecidely important at the present time-that very, very false are the claims of those who are waging a campaign of ignominy and of slander against the province of Quebec, seeking to make people believe that the opposition to the Unionist -Government comes from Quebec alone.
The -Government majority in this House i-s abnormal and nowise represents the real difference of opinion in this country.
I repeat that [the province of Quebec is not isolated. The Opposition group in this House, though most of its members come from Quebec province, represents the wishes, reflects the opinion, of 800,000 Canadian

voters, of whom 519,940 are from outside Quebec. Now this figure of 519,940 votes, is equal to one-half the total vote cast throughout the Dominion in favour of this Government.
Putting Ontario and Quebec to one side, we find that the voting in the rest of the Dominion resulted as follows: for the Government, 466,639; for the Opposition, 250,847; so that the proportionate percentage of the Opposition vote ie 40 per cent of the total.
Now let us glance at the civil vote throughout Canada. On the total of this vote, taken altogether, the Government's plurality is only 97,095 which figure does not take account of the 70,000 votes represented by the 17 acclamations in Quebec.
In a word, out of a total of 1,586,793 votes cast the Opposition polled 744,849, or 47 per cent of the total vote.
Therefore the Opposition group may, and must, stand their ground solidly in this House; the province of Quebec is not isolated1 from the rest of Canada. The province of Quebec reflects the true Canadian opinion which the Unionists tried to gag and which they succeeded in stifling through that most perfidious enactment, the War-time Elections Act.
Neither is the province of Quebec isolated in its share in the war; and the French-Canadians especially have contributed most generously.
I cannot go into details and give statistics which would carry me too far afield, but I d'o ihtend to say that it has been proven, figures in hand, other things being equal, as many soldiers were recruited from the province of Quebec*as from any other province. It lias been proved that if we compare the Canadian-born enlistments, that is if we take away the British-born from the number of recruits in 'Ontario and the other provinces, the enlistments in the province of Quebec were proportionate to the enlistments in the province of Ontario and the other provinces.
The " Citizen " of Ottawa, day before yesterday, asks if the opinion of the Englishspeaking people of the country will not have to be altered with respect to enlistment in Quebec, when they have been informed of the figures recently brought down in the House of Commons concerning the volunteer recruiting of Canadian-born citizens. Out oif a total of 197,473 all-Canadian recruits, the province of Quebec made the important contribution of 50,000.
In 1917 Ontario numbered 164,000 recruits, including 118,000 immigrants, which leaves
92i
a purely native-born enlistment of 46,000. The province of Quebec numbered 42,000 which figure included 25,000 French Canadians.
It would appear that Ontario with 46,000 native recruits takee precedence over Quebec by 50 per cent; but when we remember:
1.	That Ontario has 265,176 males over 21 years of age, which is 114,138 more than Quebec, with only 151,038;
2.	That, in the cities of Quebec province there are only 135,000 males between the ages of 17 and 45, whilst among the native-born population of Ontario, there are 395,050, or 260,000 more;
3.	That in Ontario the males outnumber the females by 75,000, while in Quebec the difference is only 20,000;
4.	That, according to the recent census (page 68, volume III) Ontario has 170,789 workingmen who earned, in 1911, less than $500 per annum, and Quebec (page 76) only 111,852; which leaves in Ontario a majority of 34 per cent among those men of the working class who would feel the spur of poverty and would be led to hope that by enlisting they would better the lot of their families; we realize that, as regards the facilities of volunteer recruiting the equation between 46,000 Ontario citizens and 25,000 French-Canadians is perfect. No native citizen, no matter from what province he has sprung, is entitled to criticize the province of Quebec or to claim that we have not enlisted in just as large proportion as any other group of Canadian-born.
The soil of Flanders and of northern France is saturated with the blood of French-Canadians who have offered their lives on the altar of the Allied cause. At this very moment our compatriots are fighting, and dying, always for the same cause.
Sorrow, mourning and anguish stalk in many of our homes. We should not be insulted, to boot, by hearing that the French-Canadians have not done their duty. They have done their duty generously, heroically, and with more credit than a great many others.
All the others are fighting for their own country, their homes, their families, their interests, their fatherland. The French-Canadians alone are fighting for an idea devoid of all personal interest.
They have no country but Canada, and still, they are fighting and dying three thousand miles away from their own land.
Let us reflect and remember that where a nation takes root is in its burying-ground; it is there, in the cemeteries, that you will find the palpitating heart of a people faithful to the cult of ancestry. It is here that

our fathers were bom and were buried: they are sleeping their last sleep beneath this Canadian soil where our ancestors have been laid away for the last four hundred years. What other race in this country can say as much?
But while defending the French-Canadians from the unjust attacks which have been launched against them I do not intend to preach a French Canadian doctrine. No, the political doctrine which must guide our country and towards which all our manifestations of national life should converge, should be, first of all, the Canadian doctrine.
We are proud of being British subjects, but we place still higher out title of Canadian citizens.
To give the last man and the last cent to this war is not a Canadian doctrine; it is an imperialist doctrine, an anti-Canadian doctrine.
Sir Wilfrid Laurier, a loyal subject of the British Crown, if ever there were one, and who in the turmoil of the difficult times through which we are passing, represents the true Canadian idea which will survive the present crisis; this statesman whom recent events have placed in history not only as the leader of a party, but the real leader of the Canadian nation; this patriot who is outside of unionism because he is above it, and dominates it, spoke thus in this House on the 24th of July, 1917:
I would be delighted if we could -send more soldiers to General Currie. I wish that our population and our resources would allow of our sending not only half a million but a million men. But the question is how many men can we take from the life of the nation at the present time without imperilling the public services which are essential to this country, and essential to carrying on our share of the war. This is a subject which, in my humble opinion, has not been sufficiently considered by the Government. They went into this war without any previous calculation whatever, without taking any census of our resources in men and in other respects. They asked for 100,000 men,
200.000	men, 30-0,00-0 men, 400,000 men, and, at last, for 5 00,00-0 men. When they reached the
500.000	figure they were told by several people that they could not get the men. One of the most important captains of industry in this country, Lord Shaughnessy, expressed his opinion in no uncertain terms, that the men could not be got without injury to the public services. But the Government paid no heed to that. They paid no heed to the other consideration, that it is not only men the Allies require at the present time, but food. They paid no heed to the question whether the men could not be better employed in producing food in Canada than in fighting at the front.
It is late, but not too late for the Government to look to itself and moderate recruiting until it has been clearly established, as

I said to my constituents. "That after the tremendous effort which we have already accomplished, this recruiting may go on without harm to Canada, or to the Allies, and this can be demonstrated only afteT a very careful inventory o,f our local meeds,, the economic needs of our country, particularly with respect to farm labour, to the interests of industry, the needs of our transportation system, the operating of our mines and other natural resources which will insure our national prosperity."
I believe that I follow the true, the only real Canadian tradition; I believe I am moved by the real national spirit which must reign in this country and unite all our hearts.
To those imperialists who, wittingly or unwittingly, seek to betray the interests of our 'Canadian land for the interest of the Empire or the Allies, I will always oppose a heart that is adamant, a heart inflamed with one passion, and one only, the passion for Canada.
Glory to our dead who have offered their youth to the sacred cause which we all hold dear: Yes, by all means.
But glory as well to our own dead1, at rest amongst us, to the fathers of our Canadian fatherland, to those who have discovered, colonized, developed this country, to those who have won us our liberty, our political autonomy and we have bequeathed to us a constitution, a deed of Canadian nationality which we should strengthen and not endanger.
Leaving to Germany her materialistic and ambitious aims, we have, ourselves, with the Allies, adopted an ideal goal; World Freedom and the Triumph of Bight. This war is not between England, France and Germany, it is a war between might- and right-, between the pride of conquest and the lofty ideal of the equality of nations, between the hidebound spirit of caste; militarism; and the spirit of liberty, democracy.
Let us not fall victims to the evils we are striving to fight and conquer.
Let- us first- and always, safeguard the interests of Canada. We must not allow outside interests to dominate the politics of our country.
In all patriotism there is a legitimate part of selfishness. Is Canada's patriotism -alone to have no "right to live" ? We are perfectly willing to help others -avoid death, but, before all, we must live ourselves.
In 1774 and in 1812 the French-Canadians took up arms in defence of Canada; they acted on those occasions as true Canadian

patriots. They wish to follow the same rule of conduct in 1918, that is, to show themselves "Canadians, first of all."
Our country, I repeat, is Canada. Our patriotism which most decidedly takes cognizance of those -great humanitarian principles which exist in the higher realms of all races, all creeds and all lands, our patriotism is first of all Canadian. We desire to do our share in defending liberty and civilization, and we are doing it; hut we owe ourselves, before all else, to the defence of our own land first conquered by our fathers, to the defence of the soil which, they have bequeathed to us, where they are at rest, and where we ourselves desire to live and die.
Like all people who do honour patriotism, we are bound first and foremost to our awn fatherland. It is in that land, and for that land, that we are all willing to perish, if need be, to protect our homes and defend the nation.
Were the enemy ever to invade our territory and try to deprive us of the heritage bequeathed us by our ancestors, like the patriots of all times, just as the people, of Carthage, in their supreme struggle gave their gold, made ships from the wood of their houses and rigging from the tresses of their women, we will give all for love of our country and, this time, it will he a siacred duty for us to contribute our last man and our last cent, since we will be act;ng in defence of our native soil, the land of our forefathers.
I would advise those who consider my words too Canadian and not sufficiently imperialistic to turn their gaze upon the escutcheon of the British Crown which has used French speech, for centuries and which is entitled to exclaim with the authority of ages:	" Honi soit qui mal y pense.
Dieu et mon Droit."
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess.
The House resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS.


[Stage Direction]
On the motion for third reading of Bill No. 37, respecting the Toronto, Niagara and Western Railway Company.-Mr. Morphy.
Rodolphe Lemieux: Stand.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Is there any
question about this Bill?


Rodolphe Lemieux: I understand that some documents were to be supplied.


John Allister Currie: The Minister of Railways and I had a talk about it this afternoon, and he has not yet received the information that is needed.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Stand.



THE CANADIAN NIAGARA BRIDGE COMPANY.

[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill No. 43, to incorporate the Canadian Niagara Bridge Company-Mr. Stewart-Mr. .Currie in the Chair. '
On section 10-consent of Municipalities.
John Allister Currie: An
amendment has been added to this section as follows:
(2.) The Company shall not construct or operate any of the works mentioned in Section 8 of this Act upon or over the boulevard of the Queen Victoria Niagara Falls Park Commission without first obtaining the consent in writing of the Commissioners of the Queen Victoria Niagara Falls Park upon terms to he agreed upon with the said Commissioners, and failing such consent then upon such terms as are fixed by the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada.
That was agreed to by all parties concerned.	.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 17-amalgamated Company may borrow money and mortgage property.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. 'Currie):: There is an amendment to this clause, to the effect that the borrowing powers are not to exceed eight million dollars.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Before you report the
Bill, I note it contains a provision that the undertaking is " for the general advantage of Canada." I am not familiar with the terms of the Bill. Perhaps the *promoter will explain.


Mr. STEWART:: It is the usual clause which appears in all Bills of this nature. This is a bridge across the Niagara river, accommodating the United States as well as Canada, and in addition to the Tailway a -roadway is provided for passengers and vehicles.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Did I understand the hon. gentleman to say that is an international bridge?


John Alexander Stewart: Yes.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: If it is, that is quite satisfactory to me.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



THE DYNAMIC BALANCING MACHINE COMPANY.

[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill No. 58, respecting certain patents of The Dynamic Balancing Machine Company.-Mr. Fripp. On Section 2-Certain rights saved.
John Allister Currie: This
clause is struck out.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



GOSPEL WORKERS CHURCH IN CANADA.

[Stage Direction]
House in committee on Bill No. 59, to incorporate the Gospel Workers Church in Canada.-Mr. Middlebro.
On section 4-First General Conference.
John Allister Currie: A subclause has been added providing that the head offices shall be at Thornbury, Ontario.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On Section 5-Power to acquire property:
Rodolphe Lemieux: I suppose these are the usual powers?


John Allister Currie: The section has been amended.


Rodolphe Lemieux: What is the amendment?


John Allister Currie: The proviso that "the annual value of real estate 'which the Church may possess in .any one municipality shall not exceed the sum of twenty thousand dollars " has been amended as follows:
Provided that the value of real estate which the Church may possess in any one municipality shall not exceed the sum of two hundred thousand dollars.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



FRASER LUMBER COMPANY, LIMITED.

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Mr. Elkin, the amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. 9, respecting Fraser Lumber Company, Limited, and Fraser Companies, Limited, was read the first and second times and concurred in.

[Stage Direction]
The debate on the Budget was resumed.
Mr. JOHN A. MAHARG (Maple Creek): Mr. Speaker, before commencing to discuss

the Budget, I should like to refer to the few remarks that the hon. member for Toronto Centre (Mr. Bristol) directed at the farmers of Western . Canada in particular. I am sorry the hon. gentleman is not in his seat, I would have been better pleased if he had been. I am at a loss to understand why hon. members, particularly those from the cities, have to be continuously referring to the position of the farmers. I have not heard the farmers or their representatives speaking in a similar fashion in regard to them. This reference to the farmers seems to come particularly from those who have a protectionist argument to advance. They seem to use the assumed prosperity of the -western farmers as an argument why they should not be asking for more tariff reductions. If the farmers or their representatives so desired, they could use the very same argument in regard to those gentlemen. We could find it easy to do as they have done, to refer to automobiles, men of means and leisure and so forth, and we could go further; we could speak of limousines. There are many other things that we might use for our argument. But if you, Sir, will permit me to use the expression, that is not our style, we do not resort to that kind of argument to bolster up anything we wish to say; if we cannot tackle a question fairly and squarely from an economic standpoint and make our case good, then we are prepared to leave it absolutely alone. The hon. member said that the farmers should be prepared to pay a fair share of the tax. The farmers are prepared to pay their fair share of the tax. The farmers were the first class of people in Canada to ask that the income tax, which is now being so heavily imposed, should be levied. That request is and has been for a number of years a plank in their platform. What they, however, do object to paying, is a tax where for every dollar that goes into the public treasury, anywhere from two dollars to four dollars go into the pockets of private individuals or private interests. We do object to paying a tax in that way.
The hon. gentleman referred to the Saskatchewan farmers as men of leisure. He said: They keep no stock; they buy condensed milk. He made a number of equally absurd statements. I. would advise the hon. gentleman, before he attempts to make another display of his supposed knowledge, to take the statistics of the western provinces, compare them with similar statistics of the eastern provinces, and I think he will not make as big a blunder and exhibit such a lack of knowledge of conditions outside

of Ilia own little sphere as he did in this House to-day. It is said that the smallest place in which a man can possibly live is within himself, and I am afraid that the hon. member for Toronto Centre is a very close inhabitant of that particular place.
He referred to the western farmers as all having automobiles. There are between
130,000	and 140,000 farmers in the province of Saskatchewan alone. ' The number of automobile licenses taken out last year in that province was a trifle over 30,000, nearly 20,000 of which, or possibly just a little more, were owned an the cities and towns. Consequently 10,000, out of 140,000 or so of western farmers, possessed automobiles. The hon. member anight have looked ujp the statistics a'ong that line. He also referred to the farmers as having to build gymnasiums on theur farms so that they might take exercise. The waistline is a very good indication of the amount of exercise that a man takes, and il think if the hon. gentleman will go to the trouble of sizing up a few of the western farmers represented here to-night, he will find out that he is mistaken. I myself am probably about as corpulent as any of them, but up to the present I have found no difficulty in seeing my toes, neither have the rest of our friends.	_
The western farmers do not provide as much merriment for the boys when they come into the cities. The boys do not go up to the -western farmer and ask him to gelt out and not be hiding behind that barrel as they do with some of our city friends. It is a common expression of the boys at least in some of the cities I have visited, when they see some of those gentlemen coming along the street, to ask them: " Why are you always hiding behind that baTrel? I am free to admit that the farmers of western Canada are in a better position now than they were a few years ago and if that were not the case, very few of them would remain on the farm. If they are prosperous, it cannot be said of them- as was said by a Toronto editor of the manufacturers of eastern Canada, that their prosperity is ninety-five per cent due to protection and five per cent due to brains. For the farmers have had no protection whatever; they do not want it; they absolutely refused it when it was offered them. They were offered protection on their products going into the markets of the Old- Country but they said:	No,
we will have nothing whatever to do with protection, we are prepared to isell our products in the open markets of the world, and if we cannot meet the competition there we will switch to another product on which we can compete in those markets ; we will not ask for protection to enable us to live on the labour of others. There are, in my judgment, only two ways of securing wealth; either produce it yourself, or take it from, the fellow who has produced it, and we believe in producing it ourselves.
I must congratulate the Acting Minister of Finance on the fearlessness he displayed in his Budget. I may criticise him a little, but it will be for sins of omission rather than for sins of commission. II also wish to congratulate the hon. member for East lOalgary (Mr. Redman) on his remarks the other evening. I might be tempted to say he stole my thunder, but I will not.
I am very pleased indeed to know that the young men of Canada, partieularlyy of western Canada, aTe alive to the situation that confronts us at the present time as it is only by facing it squarely that we shall 'be able so to guide the destinies of this country as to escape the dangerous shoals. The only criticism I have to make of his remarks is that he -might have gone a little further, and so should the Acting Minister of Finance. I do not see why the Income Tax -should not be applied to smaller incomes than $1,000. There are thousands of young men in Canada, at all events in western Canada, who are earning higher wages to-day [DOT] than they ever did before; -thousands of them are working on the farm for from $600 to $800 a year, and found. That leaves a farm labourer with a nice sum at the end- of the year, and I can see no reason why -the tax should not be applied to such an income.
I would not suggest that the same rate of taxation be applied, but a moderate tax. The minister has seen fi-t to tax the necessities of life of every one of us, so why should he not apply the Income Tax to all incomes, putting a moderate tax on the moderate income?
The Acting Minister of Finance referred to the taxes on household articles as a tax on luxuries, but I cannot -quite agree that tea, coffee, and tobacco, if you will-I never use it myself-can be tdrmed luxuries. But if they are luxuries, what shall we _say about silks and satins and fine furs and other expensive articles of clothing? Surely these must -be luxuries- too.	_
I was disappointed at not finding in the Budget any provision for giving assistance or encouragement in any way to agricultural production. We had thought the minister
[Stage Direction]
would have seen his way clear to give us at least a little encouragement along that line, hut the Budget proposals will have the very opposite effect. That may seem a little strange, hut it is nevertheless true. Automobiles, for instance, are considered luxuries by the Acting Minister of Finance and- are taxed. Now there are certain types of automobile that can be called luxuries, but there is another type the lower-priced car, which, so far as Western Canada is concerned, when we take into consideration the shortage of labour, the great distance some of the farmers live from town and a number of other considerations, are almost a necessity on the farm. Very many of our farmers in order to reach town have to travel from thirty to sixty miles, yet- labour being very scarce they have to put in every possible hour they can on the farm. I have in mind one particular district where there is a settlement of six or seven, thousand farmers who are an average of thirty-seven and a half miles from market. Now if any class of our population requires assistance surely it is those people. But the minister in his wisdom, or otherwise, has seen fit to* tax every class of automobile. I have no objection whatever to the tax on the higher-priced cars which can properly be considered luxuries, but I repeat, the lower-priced car running from $600 to $800 is almost a necessity on the farm; and when we take into consideration the price of harness, vehicles, horses and of hay and grain for feed, it is almost an economy to purchase an automobile, altogether apart from the great saving in time. 'These farmers who have to drive anywhere from twenty-five to sixty miles, take two to three days to make the journey with a horse without any load at all, and from two fo four days with a load. The district I have in mind was settled six to ten years ago. A number of the settlers have been in there ten -years, they went in expecting a railroad would be built. A line was projected, and the assurance given that it would be built, but up to the present time they have no railway and they are almost isolated. These people have done everything in their power to have a railway built. They have gone to the extent of getting a competent engineer and surveying the road at great expense. They put their case before the powers that be. But there was nothing doing. They went back again to their people, organized themselves from one end of the country to the other and then came hack with another proposition that 
they were prepared to build the entire grade of tihe line absolutely free of cost. Up to the present time that offer has not been accepted. They came back still again and said that they would furnish the labour to lay the steel if the railway company would build the line. But they have not received much encouragement yet.
Where people have been so liberal in their offers of free labour, it seems a pity that the Government cannot devise some means of assisting them in the matter of transportation. They are living in as fine a strip of country as you can find anywhere. They are producing very little, simply for the reason that they cannot do it. The distances are too great for them to haul their grain in the winter time; consequently, when they are drawing their grain in the summer, the land is left and the result is that production in that part of the country does not amount to very much. I'f the Government in their greater production campaign could see their way clear to give these people that necessary assistance, it would increase production there to a degree that cannot be duplicated in any other part of Canada.
Then, speaking of the automobile in another direction, I would like to ask the minister why he is going to penalize the man who has yet to purchase a car and apply no tax whatever to those who have already secured their cars? Why would it not be far more equitable, if you are going to charge a man who has yet to purchase his car, anywhere from $75 to $300, to require those who already have their cars to pay an annual tax into the Dominion treasury? They are paying now into the provincial treasury. I cannot say whether this is feasible or not, hut if at is I would have no hesitation in recommending that steps be taken along that line. Personally, it would affect me just about as much as any other citizen, as being la farmer, I have two cars, one for trucking produce and the other a family car. Therefore, I would at least be taxed as much as the average person.
But there is yet another use for the lower-priced car to which I would ask the minister's attention. They are being largely used in Western Canada as tractors for doing farm labour. We have an attachment now in the West for use on the lighter-powered cars, and they are working out a process of putting them on the higher-powered cars as well. For about $240 you can secure an attachment by which, in

about twenty minutes, you can transfer your touring car into a tractor. It has been demonstrated time and again-I have seen it myselfthat it will do as much work and pull as great a load as is claimed for the much-talked of Ford tractor that they are introducing into this country now. The minister said the other day that this tax did not apply to truck or delivery cars. There are thousands of those lighter cars in western Canada that are changed into trucks of one kind or another; they are bought as cars but are changed later. Most of the trucks that are turned out from the factories are more useful for town delivery and such work, hut the car that is largely used for working in the country is the runabout that has been purchased and afterwards changed by the person who has purchased it. We have hundreds of those cars working in Saskatchewan now, and I expect there will be several hundred more of them in operation before this season is over.
I think the minister might make an allowance in the tax that would be paid on these cars, depending upon the classification which might be put upon them, distinguishing between utility oars and cars of a more luxurious class. The utility or working car is an absolute necessity as far as Western Canada is concerned, but I would not say that the other was. We could get along without the higher-priced car, and those who are able to purchase it, I think, might well make up the difference in the amount that would be lost in the levy by permitting the lower-priced car to go free of any duty or excise tax.
The hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Blake) made a reference or two to the farmers. He seemed to have an idea that the income tax was not going to affect the farmer the same as other people, and he was of the opinion that the farmer could get along with much less income (than could other people. There may be something in his argument. I agree entirely with his suggestion that the minister levy a straight tax on land values. We have been advocating that in western Canada for years and we have practiced what we have been preaching. We have had a straight land tax in the rural districts for the last twenty-three or twenty-four years and we have seen no reason for changing it yet. But the hon. member for North Winnipeg makes no suggestion whatever that would affect those who have an income of less than $2,001 and who have no land to apply this land tax to. His constituents largely, or probably almost entirely, are city dwellers.
We are quite used, of course, to that. All kinds of suggestions are being made by the city residents and representatives as to ways and means of taxing the1 agriculturists. Just the moment that he begins to get his head a little above water there is some one in close proximity with a club ready to drive him under again. That is the reason, iMr. Speaker, why the farmers have decided that they will have at least a few representatives of their own in Parliament to state their case on the floor of tire House. We have a few of them from western Canada. From the province that I represent, out of .sixteen members, there are thirteen or fourteen that are actual farmers-not bucklboard farmers at all, but actual farmers living on the soil and carrying blisters on their hands. If you do not believe me come to rooms 116 and 117 some day .and I will demonstrate to you that they are the homy-handed, sunburned sons 'of toil.
An hon. MEMBER:: Room 216.
Mr. MAlHAEiG:	Did I say 116?	^ am
sorry; it should he rooms 216 and 21/. I do not want to get into room 117. I would not want to make any predictions as to what would be found there, but as to the occupants of the other two rooms I am well posted-.
For the benefit of those who are championing the cause of the eastern manufacturers, I may say that we are not quarreling with them at the present time. We have not asked for tariff reductions, as such, since we came here. Any of us who have spoken on that subject have spoken of it as a war measure, a temporary means for the increase of production. If, after the war is over, the Government considers that a reduction of ,the tariff is not warranted, well and good; hut our argument is that nothing 'Should be left undone that can be done at the present time to encourage production in all lines. There are many things' that can he done, hut for the benefit of the member for North Winnipeg I made a suggestion a little while ago. I referred in particular to. the farm labourer, but I think it would apply equally to the labourer in the city. In case the hon. gentleman was not in the Chamber at the time, I would say for his information that I would propose a lowering of the minimum amount of the income to which the tax should apply. Probably it might he made $300 lower, I do not think any serious' hardship would result. The hon. gentleman referred to farmers as not being bookkeepers. How

many of them, he asked, keep books? For his information I would say that there is not the incentive to the farmer to keep books that there is for those engaged in other occupations, because he is not one who furnishes credit. If there is any credit insofar as the farmer is concerned it works the other way; he is generally the debtor and not the creditor, consequently he has not the necessity for keeping books, and he has not the other incentive that some other business concerns have for keeping books either; he has nothing to gain by cooking accounts, by watering stock, or doing any of those things that are so skilfully manipulated by bookkeeping. He has nothing to gain by that even if he wanted to; so his books are 'honestly kept. But for the hon. gentleman's information I would say that there are thousands of our farmers who do keep books, and I venture to state they keep them as systematically probably as the men in his own profession. We have farmers who are quite capable of doing that. I keep a slight record myself, and I know just about where I stand. I never had any university education or academic training, but I know that two and'two make four, and it is a matter of addition, multiplication, subtraction and division; that is all there is to it. If you do your book-keeping honestly, there is no scheming or hidden secrets whatever in connection with it.
The hon. gentleman also referred to the prices that the farmers are getting for their grain; $2.21 for wheat, $20 to $21 or something like that for pork, eggs, butter and other products in the same proportion. The hon. gentleman has quoted those prices correctly, but they are for a No. 1 article. You have gpt to produce the goods, Mr. Speaker, before you get those prices. I venture to say that if there were fixed prices for the services performed by the members of some of the other professions, and they had to produce a !No. 1 .article, or give a No. 1 result, possibly they might see where the farmer comes off sometimes when a hail storm strikes him, or frost or rust blights his crop. Then probably they would have a better idea of what it means to produce No. 1 articles. Possibly, also, it might have some effect on their income, just as it has on the income of the farmers, and that in a great many cases their incomes might probably come within the category of those that escape taxation.
The hon. gentleman also said that the farmers are making money faster than they ever did before, and in the very next breath 
he said there are very few of them that are making $2,000 right now, that is, who have got incomes of $2,000 a year. Now if they are keeping their families on $2,000 a year, and if they are making money faster than they ever did before, I would ask the hon. gentleman what must the position have been of those people a few years ago. As I stated a minute ago, the farmers have a good representation in this House now, a quite sufficient representation to be very effective along any particular lines that they wish to pursue. But, Mr. Speaker, this Government was elected to win the " ar- That was the chief purpose for which they were returned to power, and in so far as the farmers of western Canada are concerned they are prepared to assist the Government in every way to win the war. It has been said that there was an agreement between the two parties, before the Union Government was formed, that the tariff would be left in abeyance during the duration of the war. It is hard for me to believe that any group of men would enter into an arrangement whereby the fiscal policy of the country would be left in abeyance for an indefinite period of time. Personally,
I cannot conceive of such a thing. Such an arrangement may have been entered into, but I am very doubtful of it. To go further: Some of the eastern papers, I think certainly some of the Toronto papers, have said that the western members were pledged to support the Government through thick and thin. Well, I cannot speak for all the western members but I think I can speak for some of them and I can speak for myself, and, so far as I am concerned personally, there is no arrangement, no agreement, no understanding, either written, spoken, or implied, of that nature. And I know of a number of other western members who are in exactly the same position. They may speak for themselves a little later on. Nevertheless we are prepared to give this Government every assistance, and just as loyal assistance as though we were pledged.
But there are differences of opinion as tq what should be done. I may think that it would be essential to deal with the tariff to assist in winning this war. A number of us are of that opinion. But we have been told recently that it is not 'a question of food production, but a question of men. Well, time will tell. We had the figures given us, and it looked as though thar was the situation. Every person seems to be of that opinion. But it is difficult to under-

stand why conditions should change so rapidly. We suppose that those in charge of our affairs nationally and internationally have a fair perspective of what may be expected at least a few months ahead, and it is only a few short months since we were told that production was paramount. Now, production apparently is being left in the background, and the cry is for men. As I said, time will tell. We from western Canada will give this Union Government every opportunity to make good, if you will pardon the use of Jthat term. We will give them every opportunity .and assistance, but we are not prepared to take their say-so for everything for an indefinite length of time. We will use our own common, horse sense acquired during the years we have followed rural occupations, and there may come a time when we will ask the members of the Government at least for a little more information than we have so far asked for. It will not be more than a year, probably six or eight months, until there will be another session of Parliament. In the meantime we will keep our ears close to the ground, and will use what little intelligence we have, and when we come back here we may have something to say. That is the western viewpoint and it may be stated a little plainer, than it has yet been stated this session.
.As I .said, the western people were prepared to give this Government every assistance. We buried our economic views entirely last December. We have not changed our views at all-not at all. Our economic views have not been changed, at least in one direction, in fact, war conditions have intensified them, and We are more convinced now that the views held by western Canada for the last few years have been economically sound. They are being gradually adopted toy this Parliament, one after another; and if this keeps on it will only be a matter of a few years until Parliament will have swallowed holus-bolus that platform propounded in 1910.
The people of our country are probably just a little different from those of eastern Canada; .they may see things from a different viewpoint. This was fairly well demonstrated during the visit of the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to western 'Canada last December. A demonstration was .given then as to the spirit and feeling of the western people. I do not think any politician or statesman or any other man ever had a .greater reception in western Canada than did the right hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier. In all the cities
the people who went to hear him could not be accommodated. 'The churches and halls in which the meetings were held were crowded, and overflow meetings had to be arranged. To the eastern mind, and possibly to the leader himself, things looked very hopeful for a Liberal victory in western Canada. But we who were on the ground knew differently.


Rodolphe Lemieux: If I may be permitted,
I may tell the hon. gentleman 10 p.m. that the leader of the Opposition acknowledged -that thg receptions were most cordial and enthusiastic, but he never entertained the illusion, in view of the War-time Elections Act, that he could rally the West for his party.


Mr. MAHARG:: Since the hon. gentleman has mentioned the War-time Elections Act,
I might say that, so far as the results in western Canada are concerned, that Act cut a very, very small figure. Hon. members from western Canada know that, and I will make bold to say that had the Wartime Elections Act never been placed on the statute books the result in western Canada would have been very similar to what it is at the present time. I venture to say that that Act drove probably as many votes away from the Unionist candidates as the Act itself drove away by disfranchisement. I know whereof I speak. The Wartime Elections Act gained no sympathy in western Canada, not a bit. I have no sympathy with it, and never had. It never was necessary in so far as western -Canada is concerned. She has shown her patriotism; she has -been loyal. The protectionists of the East charged us a few years ago with being annexationists and traitors. If that was so, the West has redeemed herself- she never needed to redeem herself, for she has shown continuously that there is no more loyal part of Canada than the western plains. And in so far as the West is concerned, you can take your Wartime Elections Act off the books any time you like. If it is necessary to rally in order to win this war, western Canada will be'found there every time "with the goods," as the saying is, and as she always has been. Take her patriotic efforts, if you like: We have a very large foreign population, particularly in the province of Saskatchewan, hut take that foreign population out of Saskatchewan, and there is not a province in Canada which has contributed as much per capita as Saskatchewan has, and I think the other prairie provinces have done about as well. It used to rile us somewhat some years ago when they commenced talking about our un-

patriotic attitude; tout practically all the things we have advocated have been done. We have our free wheat, and a lot of other things, and there is not a word about it.
But, Mr. Speaker, I must not depart from the Budget too far, although it seems to be quite the order of the day to go anywhere you like, and not even to mention the Budget at all. I do not want to get too far away. Coming back to what I was saying when the hon. member for Maison-neuve (Mr. Lemieux) interposed, I was referring to the reception given to Sir Wilfrid Laurier as illustrating the spirit of our people. They talked about us a few years ago as toeing a bunch of Grits; everybody was a Grit out there. For the information of this House, I want to say that we have no Grits now, or very few of them, and no Conservatives, or, if any, very few. We do not recognize the old terms " Grit " and " Tory." We regard, the issue before the people, and act accordingly; we do not care what it is. That is why I say that western Canada in the meantime will be keeping her ear close, to the ground to hear what is going on. If anything requires mentioning, she will not toe backward in making herself heard when the proper time comes.
This Budget is designed to take care of our. delbt. During this war we have been piling up a national debt the extent of which is indeed becoming alarming. Several changes will have to .be made in our policies if we are to meet, the commitments that rwe have undertaken during the last few years. It is simply a question, of development. In every province we have the natural resources), tout the difficulty is that they have been largely dissipated.; they have fallen into the hands, of private ownership, and we are, not receiving the benefit from them that we should. I am glad that the minister has taken steps to take into the Treasury at least a portion, of the profits made toy some of these industries; I wish him Godspeed, and suggest that he go a little further. In western Canada you can apply -income tax -as severely as you like, so long as it is fairly and equitably administered. We stand, for that, and have always stood for it. We stand for the direct land tax, have always stood, for it, and are prepared to bear our share of it at any time.
As I say, in order to meet our commitments we should see to -the development of onr natural resources. The western plains are possibly a field easier of development than any which may he found in the other provinces. We have there very large areas
['Mr. Ma;harg.]
of uncultivated land which is owned or held in trust toy the Government. The prosperity of our country for some time to come will depend largely on the production of the western plains. True, we have other resources, tout it takes time to- develop mineral or timber resources. On the plains it is different; the resources of that part of the country can in twelve months, Jbe converted into productive activities, and the Government should look around and see whether something cannot toe done in that respect. Millions of acres of land out there, held by private corporations.-railway companies and land companies-have been lying idle for years, do not produce anything, and are a detriment to the country because they retard development and education. The Government could do nothing better than devise some rnean-s whereby this land could be brought under cultivation; that is the quickest way of producing revenue. The people of the western country have initiative; they are prepared to go ahead. If you take our labourers from us, we will simply increase our man-power, as we have been doing for the last ten or twelve years. Most of the people who went to western Canada were accustomed to driving one, two or three horses* we see it done often down here yet. But they have gradually developed until in the West to-day it is not uncommon to see a man driving eight horses on an ordinary farm implement-and they will continue increasing their man-pbwer indefinitely by the addition of more up-to-date machinery, and the like. The western plains, .therefore, offer a field which, for immediate results, cannot be duplicated in any other place.
In western, Canada large acreages of wihat are known as school lands are, held by the Dominion Government in trust, as it were, for the assistance of education in the provinces. A great demand for that land exists all over the country; people are anxious to cultivate it; they are prepared, to take the chance, expensive as it is, of bringing that land under cultivation if the Government would only .make it available to them. I have done all I can to persuade the Government to thitow that land open for cultivation. Large acreages are being put up for sale, but hundreds of thousands of acres are not being sold, notwithstanding the demand that is being made for them. I have had numerous inquiries in this respect from people in my constituency. I have had inquiries from men who are prepared to break

son). With your permission, Sir, I should like, before sitting down, to offer a further contribution in the hope that when Hansard is completed we may be able to select from it a volume which even the most fastidious collector would desire to have on his bookshelves. In order to make the matter intelligent, so that hon. members will understand it, I think I had better quote the poetry from the beginning. By the way, I was just going to say that apparently some of the legislation that the Union Government has been passing is at least very productive of some things, possibly the season of the year may have something to do with the case-we usually have in the spring a number of budding poets. The hon. member for Brome started out something like this:
The clock we have pushed forward For gardening after tea;
But as for farming implements-[DOT]
We can't admit THEM free.
Then the hon. member for Springfield added this contribution:
In his celebrated platform Of eighteen ninety-three,
Upon which he was returned to power, Farm implements were free.
But when, later on, the tariff Was brought down by Lauri-ee,
The combine was on top again And the farmer up a tree!
I have a little further contribution that was handed to me by another spring poet.
I wish the hon. member for Brantford (Mr. Cockshutt) were here so that he would have the benefit of listening to the poetry being spoken instead of having to read it in Hansard. My contribution runs in this fashion:
We are told that the farmer is now up a tree In regard to ihis implements coming in free; But that tree is now pulpwood, and1 between you and me,
The High Priests of Protection will soon be at sea.


Mr. H. A. FORTIER (Labelle):: to which the Government is giving its attention. Second, if you want to make a success of those industries you must not count upon immigration hut you must retain in this1 country our farm helpers and labourers. Let us stop at once the emigration of our workers by the suspension of the Military Service Act of 1917 and employ immediately on the farms, and in the industries the thirty thousand soldiers who have been raised but have not yet left the country.
Why should we not discuss tills matter ' now before it is too late? The Government of Great Britain discussed the other day the question of getting back from the front twenty thousand soldiers in order to meet the requirements of labour, and nobody as a result has been taxed with disloyalty. During a discussion in the House of Commons of submarine losses and shipbuilding enterprises in Great Britain Mr. Asquith said:
In the next place you must exert every possible effort to draw more skilled labour into the shipyards. I know the difficulties perfectly well. We were at this task of trying to get men from the army, and I know the difficulties *and the objections the military authorities raise, in perfectly good faith, and it is nothing but the strong iand direct exercise of cabinet authority that oan really bring from the front the men who are needed for this purpose; but that they can be brought is proved by the fact that they are being brought though not in the numbers or at the rate we should desire.
During the same sitting of the House, the Prime Minister, Mr. Lloyd George, said:
That has got to be done with very great care. Twenty thousand is the figure wanted; it is the figure we shall work up to.
In Great Britain they have discussed this question of getting the necessary skilled labour for the shipyards, and if they do not find it in Great Britain they go as far as the army, even to the front, and they contemplate bringing twenty thousand back in order to work in the industries of England. As a citizen of the Empire, with equal rights before the King, I ask the same privileges as those enjoyed by the c.tizens of the United Kingdom. I stand m this Bouse as a free man and I say: Stop at once the emigration of our boys; they are needed at home for the sake of the Empire.
Have not the Government abused their power? They have been, elected on their programme of selective conscription with the understanding that farmers would be left to pursue their occupation. It is true that this election which took place in vir-

tue of the War-time Elections Act was nothing else than a camouflage, because the will of citizens of this country as expressed at the polls, lias not prevailed. At the first opportunity, the Government, contrary to the wishes of the people and in defiance of the constitutional rights of Parliament, hurriedly adopted an Order in Council abolishing selective conscription and enacting the most rigid form of conscription under which it is proposed to send farmers to the front. The Government have introduced regulations, under the Military Service Act contrary to the rules of civilized countries, by virtue of which they are conscripting for overseas service the only living son of a widowed mother supporting a fam'ly.
We must realize unfortunately that the party in power and their majentv ha we denied the privileges, responsibilities and sanctity of fatherhood. Only one man can know, and he will never disregard, the sacred words which fell from the lips of his dying father addressed to him as the eldest son: "You will now take my place and take care o'f your mother and your little brothers and sisters," There is no sane man who will dare to deny that that son is the head of the family and that he fills the place of the departed father. In conscripting that son the Government have deliberately violated the last will and testament of the father. I accuse the Government of deliberately depriving widows and orphans of their only support, of throwing them into the street and making them beggars.


Edgar Nelson Rhodes: I regret very much to have to call the hon. gentleman to order, but he is calling in question an Order in Council which has been passed by this House. It is the law and it is not open for him to call it in question.


Hyacinthe-Adélard Fortier: I was only referring to the Military Service Act, 1917, which does not provide fox the exemption of the son of a widowed mother or the only son of a family. I say that in every civilized country of the world there is no one who would take the only son of a widow, when that widow has a small family to support and when that young son is -working to provide the livelihood of mother and orphans. There is no power on earth that should take that son _ and send him away, and allow that widow and her orphans to become a charge on the public.
In the presence of this great conflict, in which for the last four years the British

and the French have been fighting under their respective flags for the eternal principles of civilization, Canadians are confronted with the two-fold duty of facing the enemy and if necessary dying at the front, and of saving their own country and their, homes. But the province of Quebec is opposed to conscription. Not only is that the attitude of the people in general, but the educated men of that province have favoured voluntary enlistment rather than conscription in this young Dominion. Is it not a regrettable fact that nearsighted politicians by the policy which they have adopted have thrown this country into its present unhappy state? The attitude which the French Canadians have taken on the question of conscription is, in my opinion, honourable and patriotic. That French Canadians are lacking neither in patriotism' nor bravery is attested by the record of their compatriots who have been honoured at the front as well as by the conduct of those French Canadians who in earlier days defended Canada against the incursion of military [DOT]forces from the country to the south. The French Canadian is opposed to conscription because he loves his country and his family above everything else in the world. How is it possible that the supreme authority of the Dominion can condemn such sentiments as these in any man? Is it not the supreme duty of the Government, not only to save our country and preserve our homes, but to procure for the Allies what they apparently are most in need of, supplies of food on which to subsist and to enable them to conquer and throw back the invader? Under the circumstances it seems to me that, confronted as we are by such a situation, the Government should not persist in the policy of conscription which seems likely to prove so ruinous to our fair country.


Mr. THOMAS EDWARD SIMPSON (Al-goma, W.):: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention to detain the House very long at this hour of the night. I did not intend to take part in the debate until I heard my hon. friend from Fort William (Mr. Manion) address the -House a day or two ago, when he introduced the very important subject of the development of our natural resources, particularly the iron ore industry. I then felt that it was my duty to make a few observations in connection with this particular subject.
The development of our iron and steel industry, to my mind, is of paramount importance to Canada and should receive the



REVISED

[Stage Direction]
sympathetic and favourable consideration of this House. Our national debt is increasing very rapidly, and it is bound to go on increasing so long as we continue to bear our just share in the defence of the Empire. It necessarily follows that ever increasing amounts will toe required from, year to year in order to pay the interest and sinking fund charges on that national detot. Is it not fair then to expect that our national resources of forest, of field and mine might be utilized to the fullest extent in liquidating these obligations? The hon. member for Fort William has submitted figures to show -that there are vast deposits of iron ore in Canada awaiting development. In New Brunswick they have approximately 20,000,000 tons of magnetic ore, with a concentrating plant capable of handling about 1,000 tons of ore per day. In Nova Scotia the iron mines are said to have about 4,000,000 tons of ore proven, and one company has a plant capable of treating over 200,000 tons annually. In British Columbia experts estimate that the iron ore deposits already discovered contain over 35,000,000 tons of ore, and in Ontario we have the Atikokan range with
10.000.	000 tons of ore proven up, and the company there 'has a blast furnace and roasting plant at Port Arthur. Large deposits of 'magnetite ore have been discovered near Kakabeka falls, and promising deposits of hematite ore have recently (been located east of lake Nipigon, and also near I.oon lake. These deposits are quite close
the Canadian Northern railway. The Moose Mountain Company have developed their mines, proving the existence of atoout
100.000.	000 ton® of magnetic ore. They have installed a mining plant, and erected a Grondel concentrating plant capable of producing some 250 tons- per day of concentrated ore, assaying 63 per cent iron content. There are the Balmont, Willbur, Far-num, and many other magnetic properties in eastern Ontario. Then we have the Lake Superior Corporation and the Algomfa Steel Corporation, of Sault St-e. Marie. They have shipped from the Helen mine at Michipi-coten over 2,263,000 tons- of hemafitic iron ore; on the same range about 10 miles north of the Helen, the Josephine iron- .mine has been proven up toy diamond drilling, and it contains about 1,400,000 tons of hematite ore; and tooth of these properties have vast deposits of siderite ore. The Magpie mine also contains- large deposits of siderite ore, carrying about 36 per cent iron, tout when roasted it carries about 52 per -cent iron of excellent quality, and supplies about one-sixth of the ore used- in the Algoma Steel Company's furnaces- at Sa-ult Ste. Marie.

[Stage Direction]
Canada apparently has- hundreds of millions of tons of iron ore scattered from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and on the extreme East and West we have abundant sources of fuel and flux. We have some eighteen blast furnaces, and several extensive steel plant®, costing approximately $100,000,000, and producing about 1,500,000 tons of finished product per annum, worth about $75,000,000. Notwithstanding the immense deposits of iron ore we have in this country, we find that over 90 per cent of the iron ore used in these furnaces is imported largely from the United States.
Why is this being done? Because most of our iron ore is of a lower quality, containing a smaller percentage of iron content and a greater percentage of sulphur than the American ore from the lake Superior mines, and in order to bring it up to a value equal to the American ore and to make it suitable for use in the manufacture of steel, it is necssary to have the ore roasted to eliminate the sulphur and other injurious contents. This necessitates the erection of expensive roasting or concentrating plants to treat the raw ore. This treatment, we are told, costs from 35 cents to $1.25 per ton, with the result that American ore can be laid down at the blast, furnaces in our own, country for less money than ore from our own mines. In addition there is the problem of raising the large sums of money necessary to provide the concentrating and roasting plants. I submit that at a time like the present, when the Government is endeavouring in every legitimate way to reduce the trade balance standing against us with the United States, they would toe well advised to consider favourably the suggestion of any hon. friend from Fort William (Mr. IManion) and to allow a bounty, of say fifty cents a ton, on the iron ore mined and smelted in Canadian smelters. I feel sure that this would result in increased activity in the mining industry, and would also remove to a very large extent 'the reason the steel manufacturers have to-day for importing from the United States and other countries.
I would like to read a few lines from the first annual report of the Commission of Conservation in Canada/ It says:
Only a few years a,go the ironmasters of this continent would- hardly look at an iron ore if it contained less than sixty-two per cent of metallic content. Now ore of fifty per cent is gladly received. We are, and will continue to be, industrially handicajpped until our iron industry is developed' sufficiently to meet the demands of our country and- render us Independent of outside sources for the all-im-
[Mr. Simpson.!
portant metal. What we need is not conservation of iron ore resources, but vigorous development of our iron industry.
I	have no doubt the Commission had in mind the very large amount of steel products imported from the United States every year when they made this report. We find that, in 1913, over $146,000,000 worth of steel products were imported into Canada from the United States, and about $156,000,000 in 1917. Could we not reasonably assume that, with the necessary assistance given to our iron ore mining industry in due time all of these steel products could be made in Canadian rolling mills from Canadian ore and the money circulated among Canadian workmen? Our steel plants are all working at the present time to their full capacity; they are turning out shell steel of the finest quality for our own use and that of our Allies. I am convinced that
after the war is over the demand
II	p.m. for steel products for the railroads and building trades of this and other countries will be great, and if we get our iron and steel industry on a sound basis now, utilizing our Canadian ore, it will prove to be one of the bulwarks on which we can depend while passing through the period of reconstruction.
Now a word with reference to the newsprint industry, which was introduced into the discussion here the other evening. It is a well known fact that the press, and particularly the large dailies, have been carrying on a persistent campaign against the manufacturers of newsprint paper in an attempt to show that the manufacturers were charging exorbitant prices and making abnormal profits on their output. The hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Richardson) took occasion to dwell at some length on the iniquities of the manufacturers, and quoted from a very cleverly prepared brief to show the excessive dividends they were receiving on their common stock. And some of these manufacturing companies, he said, had common stock which represented no actual cash investment. He also told the House that some seven officials representing the manufacturers in Canada and the United States, were convicted and fined in New York for conspiring to increase prices, and that the publishers had requested the Government to investigate conditions existing in Canada. Right here I want to say that I compliment the Government on the immediate action taken to investigate this matter when it was brought to their attention. I want to say further that the members in this House will stand

solidly behind the Government in checking every attempt that may be made in this country to form combines. A commissioner was appointed to investigate thoroughly the cost of the manufacture of newsprint in Canada, and while his final report has not yet been made known, an interim report was submitted, in which we are told that the commissioner suggested that the fixed price of $50 per ton previously paid to the manufacturers of newsprint be increased to $57 per ton. I presume, in fact I have no doubt, that the commissioner had authority to summon the manufacturers and their agents before him to be examined under oath, and that they had to present their books of account showing the cost of manufacture. And after these had been presented and had been examined by the commissioner, to a certain extent at any rate, he was apparently convinced that the price paid the newsprint manufacturers was not sufficient, and suggested that it be increased from $50 to $57 per ton. In the face of that fact, I think the arguments advanced by the horn, member for Springfield against the newsprint manufacturers falls to the ground. I hold no brief for ithe newsprint manufacturers. The reason for the attack on the newsprint manufacturers is quite obvious. It is a well known fact that the publishers of the large daily newspapers in this country for some time have cut the subscription price of their paper to the ground for the purpose of increasing circulation and thereby commanding a larger advertising patronage at remunerative rates, and now they expect the newsprint manufacturer to pay the shot. Manufacturers are asking that the price of newsprint be fixed at $60 a ton, which is an advance of less than fifty per cent over the price that they were charging prior to the outbreak of war. When we consider that the price of pulp-wood, which was $6 a cord before the war, has increased to $10, and in some instances $12, and when we consider that wages have increased at least seventy-five per cent, we must come to the conclusion that the price asked by the newsprint manufacturers is not exorbitant.
While our national debt has increased very largely since the outbreak of war, it is encouraging to note that the greater portion of it is held by the Canadian people themselves. This shows conclusively that people who cannot take part in the conflict on the field of battle are loyally carrying out the pledge given to the first contingent when they went away and repeated many
93*
times since, that we are prepared to stand behind them to the last dollar. The methods proposed for the increasing of our revenue will, I believe, meet with the approval of the people. The increased business and income taxes will place the burden on, .the shoulders of those best able to bear it, and the taxing of automobiles, player pianos, phonographs, talking machines, and even tobacco and tea, will meet with the hearty popular approval.
Just a word with regard to taxing the alien enemy. I hesitate to introduce this subject, because it has to be treated with the greatest care. Anything we may do in the way of taxing or conscripting the alien enemy in Canada may be communicated to the enemy country and meet with reprisals there on our own prisoners; consequently, we have to be careful in whatever method we may adopt. Nevertheless, we have alien enemies in our midst. They came here before war was declared, and they came largely at our invitation. They were satisfied to accept whatever wages were prevailing at that time, and, to my mind, they should be satisfied to take to-day the wages that were prevailing at that time for the class of work they are doing, and the difference between the wages prevailing at that time fox the class of work they were prepared to do and those prevailing to-day for the work they are doing should be turned over to the public treasury to help carry on the war. This increase in wage is due entirely to war conditions. I believe that the plan can be worked out by insisting that every manufacturer and employer of alien labour report to the Government once a month, showing the number of alien enemies on his pay roll, and stating the standard wage paid for that class of work prior to the war and the standard wage paid for it to-day. Let the employer of labour pay the alien enemy according to the standard before the war, and remit the difference to the Minister of Finance for war purposes.
Edgar Nelson Rhodes: Order. I regret to have to call the hon. member to order. I had hoped that his remarks were merely by way of reference to the subject of alien enemies, but as that subject has already been debated and disposed of by the House, it is not in order for him to deal with it further.


Thomas Edward Simpson: I regret that I exceeded the limit of the rules, but as the matter has direct reference to methods of taxation,

I thought that I was in order. However, I congratulate the Acting Minister of Finance on the splendid Budget that he has presented to the House. I think that the methods of taxation proposed will meet with the hearty approval of the people.


Mr. WILLIAM DUFF (Lunenburg):: Mr. Speaker, I have much pleasure in tendering my congratulations to the Acting Minister of Finance (Hon. A. K. Maclean) on his able performance of an unpleasant duty, a duty thrust upon him by the exigencies of present conditions. When I think of the past and my pleasant relations with the Acting Minister of Finance, my memory takes me back to the years from 1896 to 1911, when he appeared on various platforms in the good old county of Lunenburg and advocated the Liberal policies of lower tariffs, of thrift and of economy; and my heart was filled with sadness as on Tuesday I heard him assume the burdens laid upon him on account of the absence of the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White) and make the statement of the present financial condition of the country.
While we rejoice that the Finance Minister (Sir Thomas White) has recovered his health, we cannot look with equanimity upon his resuming his duties as Finance Minister of this country. The financial affairs of Canada would be safer in the hands of the Acting Minister of Finance. Owing to the crying need for reform, economy and efficiency in the administration of our finances, I suggest that a commission composed of three practical business men, men of large affairs and successful in various fields of activity, be appointed to guide and advise the Finance Department and the Government regarding the financial affairs of the country. This is only a suggestion which, as a new member, I submit in all humility, but I feel strongly that some action is necessary to protect the citizens of Canada.
Before I take up a discussion of the Budget I wish to refer to a statement made this afternoon by the hon. member for Toronto Centre (Mr. Bristol), who came to the rescue of his friend, Sir Joseph Flavelle, Baronet, and made certain statements which the facts will not sustain. He said that Sir Joseph Flavelle was on the same footing as other buyers and sellers of bacon to the British Government. Such was not the case. Sir Joseph Flavelle had a contract with the British Government under which his bacon was taken off his hands at his buying price, plus a certain profit, plus whatever advance the market

price might make. This advantage no other company had. He also had the privilege of sending all his bacon in British transports free of freight, as he was permitted to deliver at Montreal instead of London, which no other company could do. As to his standing, the moment the O'Connor and the Henderson reports were published, the British Government cancelled their special contract with him, refused to do any further business with his agent at London, and are now doing all their buying direct, and not through the agency of Sir Joseph Flavelle.
The Acting Finance Minister informed us that the expenditure was $173,000,000 on current account, which included the interest on the war debt, $45,000,000, and $7,000,000 for pensions. If you deduct these two latter amounts and add $12,000,000 interest on debt before the war, that leaves an expenditure of $133,000,000, which is excessive, and my memory harks back to the night when I listened to the Prime Minister in the town of Lunenburg in 1911, telling the citizens of that town that it was a criminal waste of public money to spend $70,000,000, and that if he were elected to power, he would reduce it by $10,000,000. He also on that occasion promised free medicine to the shore fishermen, but that promise has not been kept, nor do the fishermen want free medicine. With regard to the $7,000,000 for pensions, I wish to say that every right-thinking man in Canada is willing and anxious to make life easy for those who have fought for our country, and every effort should be made to do the Tight thing by them. But if we are to judge from the two returns brought down in the House a few days ago, the administration of the pensions is not built on a sound foundation. I need not elaborate on any of those returns, but there was a case where a colonel who had seen the sun shine over France for only fourteen days who is now back in this country and I am told he is receiving a pension of about $780, and he has also been promoted to a seat in the Senate and will draw a salary of $2,500 a year for the rest of his life. Does the Government intend to appoint any private or corporal or sergeant to the Senate of Canada? Why should they not be appointed just as much as a colonel who was over in France for only fourteen days? Why should those gentlemen draw these large amounts whereas the ordinary private soldier receives only from $2.50 to $48 per month? tit is necessary for the Government immediately tto organize this department properly, and to place at the

head of it not a fourth-rate politician, not a ward heeler, not a political major, but the best business man obtainable and a man with a strong personality. If this is not done, we shall find ourselve in the position of the United iStates after the Civil War with regard to pensions.
We are told that the war expenditure in 1917-18 was $345,000,000, and that altogether, since the war started, the large sum of $878,000,000 has been expended. The motto of the Liberal party, Mr. Speaker, is every dollar necessary for war, hut not a dollar for graft. There is no doubt about it that the expenditure on war account has not been satisfactory to the general public. Case after case might be cited where expenditures were abnormal and excessive, but I will only refer the Minister of IMilitia and. Defence to an article published last year in one of the Government organs, the Halifax Chronicle, which dealt with conditions at Halifax in the Militia Department. Conditions have not improved since then. Practically every doctor in the city, with a few notable exceptions, has donned the khaki, and they are still attending to their private practice. The same thing applies to some of 'the gentlemen of the cloth, and others too numerous to mention. A similar state of affairs exists in the Naval Department at Halifax, though not as glaring. There is need for economy there. We have a cruiser which is known as HJM.C.S. Niobe. Perhaps this ship of war is better known to the general public as one of the " Laurier tin-pot navy," as our Conservative friends were in the habit of calling it in the election of 1911. This cruiser served a very good purpose last year, after the late minister of elections, Hon. Eobert Eogers, came back from the Old Country and hatched the goose egg known as the Conscription Act on the way over. A number of young men from the province of Nova Scotia who, for reasons .sufficiently known to themiselves did not want to volunteer and join the army or come under the new Act felt that perhaps a position on board the Niobe would suit them better than anything else. The result was that the wires were kept hot between Nova Scotia and Ottawa, and through the influence of some of the members for Nova Scotia, these young men, not sons of Liberals, not sons of Quebecers, but sons of good Tory fathers, got jobs aboard the Niobe as oilers and wipers and so forth. To-day those young men are still aboard the Niobe. They remind me of a story I read in the Good Book which I hope we .all read, but perhaps not as often as
we should do. That story is to be found in the 19th chapter of Deuteronomy. In the olden times, the chosen people founded a nation, and they set apart three cities for a certain purpo.se. If any one got into .trouble or committed1 some misdemeanour, he could flee to one of those cities and find refuge there. It seems to me that we should change the name of H.M.C.S. Niobe. She has been an ever present help in time of need and a shelter in time of storm for the sons of some of our Conservative friends in Nova Scotia, and I think that the Admiral of the Fleet, or the Minister of Naval Affairs (Mr. Ballantyne)-I am sorry he is not here-should change the name of H.M.C.'S. Niobe to H.M.C..S. City of Be.fuge.
The people of this country, Mr. Speaker, will demand that proper safeguards be taken by the Government to see that for every dollar spent value is given. With regard to the general expenditure, I would like to speak of one item in which extravagance is apparent. I refer to the matter of advertising by the various departments of the Government. When the Liberals were in power from 1896 to 1911, a large amount of money was spent in advertising various matters in newspapers. The method of that party was to send copy to Liberal newspapers, and only Liberal newspapers *were paid for such work. The same system applied during the regime of the Conservative party from 1911-17, except perhaps that the Tories went one better than the Grits, and now and again you would see advertisements entirely relating to a matter in the Northwest provinces or British Columbia published in a two-by-four Conservative paper in some small town on the Atlantic coast. But what a change has taken place since the present Government came into power. Of course, I understand that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and the work done by the newspapers of this country in boosting so-called Union Government, deserved financial recognition, in addition to the large amount received by them for advertising the Victory Loan. But there is absolutely no justification for the present state of affairs. Nearly every newspaper in Canada is to-day receiving patronage from the Government in the shape of advertising, and in a great many eases the large amount expended is unnecessary, and not justifiable, and I strongly protest in the name of the Canadian people against such a waste, of public money.
I was wondering whether this synchronized -to use a word used some time ago by the Minister of Finance (Sir Thomas White)-

with the sudden high regard of the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Richardson) for the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Sir George Foster). The Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. A. K. Maclean) admits that we have practically no immigration at the present time, but he holds out the hope that after the war the tide of immigration will flow to our shores. My humble opinion is that the European nations will not allow their depleted populations to leave those countries, and I have no such fond hopes as have the Acting Minister of Finance and the Minister of Immigration. Whether such will be the case or not, I have no hesitation in saying that in the meantime such an aggressive member of the Government as the Minister of Immigration is reported to ibe should devote his energy and ability to another department instead of the Government making new appointments at great cost to the country.
When the Acting Minister of Finance referred to the exchange rates between the United States and Canada, my mind was carried back to the 1911 election when that gentleman, in eloquent terms, advocated reciprocity with our great neighbour to the south, and had the views of the acting minister and the Liberal party been upheld at that time, such an impetus would have been given to our export business to that country that no such conditions as exist to-day would have to be dealt with by the Government and the business men of Canada. Give us free food as advocated by the hon. member for Prince (Mr. Joseph Read), and soon the balance of trade will be equalized in a great measure.
The Acting Minister of Finance spoke of the Victory Loan. As he truly said, the people of Canada are to be congratulated on the spontaneous response which came from every province in the Dominion. Money poured into the public treasury, proving conclusively that the people of Canada realized the responsibilities and were determined to provide sufficient funds to carry the war to a successful conclusion. The only criticism I have to make is that owing to the fact that the affairs of the country were not carried on in an economical manner by the late Government, and because our credit was so impaired, it was necessary for them to pay 5J per cent interest for the money, they borrowed at a time when other nations were borrowing at 4 and 4i per cent. It goes to show that something was rotten in Denmark when the Government had to pay such a large interest for that loan. Other

amounts were borrowed previously by the Government, and where did they find the money? From no less a nation than the United States, a nation about which we were told in 1911 that the Jews should have no dealings \tith the Samaritans, or, to quote the battle cry of the opponents of reciprocity, " We want no truck or trade with the Yankees." And we witnessed the humiliating spectacle of the Finance Minister, that member of the noble hand of eighteen going with his hat in his hand to the financiers of the United States begging for funds to carry on the business of the country. And did they pass him by on the other side ? Nay, they bound up his wounds, and sent him on his way rejoicing.
The Acting Minister of Finance has told us that other great loans will be required in the near future, and that they will have to be' raised iin this country. He informed us that to do this we must produce wealth, and more wealth, and produce in greater quantities than ever before. This is not the age of miracles. To produce, we need producers, and the people of this country expect a lead from the Government. But no such lead has been forthcoming, and no stable policy has been enunciated by the leaders of the party in power. Some people are even unkind enough to say that, far from encouraging business, they are actually hindering it.
I read a few days ago in a great family journal, one of the organs of this Government in the city of Halifax, the following:
In an interview yesterday a local fish dealer summed! up the situation as follows:	Fish
merchants In Halifax in the course of their legitimate business are having the hardest time in their history. All kinds of vexatious technicalities in the first place are put up to them by the Government. The Food Control authorities seem to delight in asking for statistics hard to prepare and so intricate as to require an experienced bookkeeper to tabulate, and when the schedule is complete no living man has any specific information of any value to himself or any person else.
It might he well to change the name of the food controller by altering just one letter. One month the Government tell the people they must produce; they tell them they must build ships, and the people make their plans to help this country by carrying out their wishes and invest millions of dollars in farm implements to produce greater crops, and in building ships with which to catch fish, and in purchasing fishing gear to carry on that great industry. The Government even go farther and exempt the farmer and the fishermen from military service and convey, if not in the spoken

word, by their actions, that the producers shall not be called upon for military service. Then suddenly, as a bolt from the blue, in a " moment o.f weakness " that order is countermanded, and a few days ago the fiat went forth in the shape of one of the famous .Orders in Council taking practically every farmer and fisherman of a certain age. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not want the Tory organs in the country to understand that I am not in favour of producers doing their bit in this great struggle. They have been doing their bit, they are doing their bit, and they will continue so to do. But it will be said the demand for additional troops is paramount. What a time to wake up to that fact.!
We are all anxious and willing, Mr. Speaker, to do everything in our power to help the Allied nations win this war. We mean to win the war, whether it is by providing men, ships or food supplies, and we are willing and anxious to strain every nerve to do everything possible to bring to a successful conclusion a fight which we ail believe is in the interests of democracy, truth and righteousness. But I hold that that Order in Council is ill advised and will be ruinous to certain industries. If these men were to ,be enlisted, they should have been taken before they had made all arrangements to carry on their business for this season. I am not a farmer, and others have dealt with this phase of the question. The Minister of Militia evidently realized that the Order in Council had gone too far because a few days ago he found it necessary to make a further explanation with reference to the farming interests, but lie did not make any reference to the great fishing industry of this country, and I am rather surprised that two members of the Cabinet, the right hon. Prime Minister and the Acting Finance Minister, coming as they do from Maritime constituencies, did not realize the gravity of the situation.
Let us for a moment see what would happen to the great. fishing industry if that Order in Council is enforced,-but first it might be well to give the House a few figures on the value of that industry. The total number of vessels engaged last year in the fisheries of Canada was 1,965, and their value $5,267,724. The number of boats was 40,105, and their value $4,829,793. The value of nets and seines was $4,485,269, and the value of other fishing material $14,146,176. The total capital invested in Canada in the fishing industry last year was $28,728,962. The total number of persons employed in canneries and fish houses was
25,680; the number of men in vessels 9,192; the number of men in boats 60,432; the total numbSr of fishermen 69,624, and the total number of persons engaged in the fishing industry 95,304. The total value of the fisheries for Canada last year was $29,208,378.
I would point out it is not the large corporations that are engaged in this industry of so much value to the country, but the fishermen themselves own their vessels and boats and fishing gear, and it seems to me the Government should carefully consider before taking any drastic measures that would interfere with an industry of so much importance to the country, and in which so much money has been invested.
The number and value of fishing vessels, boats, nets, etc., in the province of Prince Edward Island for the year 1916-17 was as follows:
Number. Value.
Sailing and gasolene vessels	21	$	14,800Boats (sail)	445	13,195Boats (gasolene)	1,688	285,050Carrying smacks	
Gill-nets, seines, trap and'	11	2,300smelt nets, etc	5,649	45,728Trawls	972	10,475Hand lines	1,993	1,753Lobster traps	354,667	369,560Lobster canneries	198	182,300Clam canneries	8	1,000Freezers and ice-houses. . . .	6	2,400Smoke and fish-houses.. . .	368	23,637Fishing piers and wharves..	40	225,950 $1,178,148	Number of men employed	on vessels.	. 77" "	boats	. 3,370"	"	carryingsmacks	
18Number of persons employed in fishhouses, freezers, canneries, etc	
2,770
6,235
- The figures for the province of New Brunswick are as follows:
Number. Value.
Steam fishing vessels (tonnage 16)	
1	J 2,500Sailing and gasolene vessels	398	356,700Boats (sail and row)	
7,157	239,575" (gasolene)	
2,002	561,850Carrying smacks	
80	64,100
Gill-nets, seines, trap and
smelt-nets, etc	
60,915	655,545Weirs	
518	517,400Trawls	
859	17,339Hand lines	
10,119	7,680Eel traps	Rods and lines	Lobster traps	
236,506	297,204" canneries	
161	141,950Sardine canneries	
7	399,000Clam canneries	
7	24,900Freezers and ice-houses.. ..	223	319,550Smoke and fish-houses.. ..	1,357	486,710
Number. Value. Fishing piers and wharves..	428 $241,200
Pile-drivers and scows. . . .	617	53,010
Lodges used by fishermen	
Toals	 $4,376,213
Number of	men	employed	on	vessels.. 1,495"	"	boats . . 12,730"	"	carryingsmacks	169Number of persons employed in fishhouses, freezers, canneries,	etc.. ..	Totals	. . 20,5.21Now I come to my own province	of NovaScotia, which is very largely engaged in this great industry:	Steam fishing- vessels (ton-	Number.	Value.nage 528) 	12	$ 167,950Sailing and gasolene vessels	58-5	2,250,283Boats (sail) 	8,02i8	269,090" (gasolene) 	5,075	1,207,687Carrying smacks 	
Gil nets, seines, trap and;	220	115,425smelt nets, etc 	68,673	779,576Weirs 	207	42,570Trawls 	17,913	201,510Hand lines 	32,592	28,831Lobster traps 	822,672	854,538" canneries 	216	278,300Clam " 	4	1,24)0Freezers and ice-houses ....	384	697,193Smoke and fish-houses	5,2'9 2	611,638Pishing piers and wharves. .	1,837	1,155,852Totals	$S,661,643
Number of men employed on vessels.. 4,678 Number of men employed on boats.... 17,042 Number of men employed carrying
smacks	 406
Number of persons employed in fishhouses, freezers, canneries, etc	 6,556
Total	 28,682
In my own county, and I am perhaps more particularly interested in that than in any other part of the province, the fishing industry will be seriously affected by the last Order in Council, as indeed it will be throughout the whole province. The fishing industry is a peculiar one. It differs perhaps from any other industry by reason of the fact that the fishermen have to commence so early to get ready for the fishing operations of the coming season. Vessel fishermen have to make arrangements as early as December of the previous year, or perhaps in January of this year, to engage their nets or trawls and to build or repair their vessels and boats. These men, depending on the legislation passed last year, and, having been exempted by the tribunals, made arrangements in December and January to carry on the industry this year. The consequence is that at the present time millions of dollars

owned by these fishermen, and not by large corporations or the big interests, have been placed in jeopardy. The money was expended by the fishermen themselves upon boats, rope, twine and other gear. They have spent millions of dollars in order to enable them to prosecute the fishing industry this season. In Lunenburg alone there are about 150 fishing vessels. Early in March the fishermen started to get ready. They bought their new cables-and I would like to mention here that since this Government came into office rope for cables 'has increased from fifteen to thirty-nine and a half cents per pound. It is necessary for the fishermen to buy three hundred and ten fathoms for each vessel, and the cable weighs sixteen pounds to the fathom. The acting Minister of Finance can figure out what it will cost to buy a cable for a fishing vessel this season. Then, the fishermen have bought their salt and provisions, have hired their men and have gone fishing. If this Order in Council is enforced, these men who had been exempted, can be taken from the vessels. What will happen? You cannot fish with these vessels on the deep sea with old men. It is a young man's business. Young men ranging from sixteen to twenty-five are mostly engaged on these vessels fishing in the North bay and on the Grand banks. If the young men are taken off these vessels, it will mean ruination to the fishermen whose money is invested in this industry. The same thing applies to the boat fisherman. As this branch of the industry is carried on around the coast of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec, you will usually find that there are three men fishing in a boat. One of them is an old man, the father of a family, one a boy of perhaps twelve or fourteen years of age, whilst the third is a young man, practically the only one who can handle the boat. The Conscription Act will take that young man away and leave the old man and the boy, and that will be the end of the fishing industry. The right hon. the Prime Minister (Sir Robert Borden) and the Acting Minister of Finance, men who come from Nova Scotia and who should know something about the fishing industry, before bringing in that Order in Council, should at least have consulted the business men of that province.
We are * told to build ships. How can we build ships if you take away the men? And' how can you transport supplies, without ships? You cannot build ships with old men. It is quite true that you can use a few old men in the shipyards, but you cannot use old men to lift the heavy pieces

of timber and put them in place -when they are building ships. One of the most urgent requirements in Canada to-day is increased food production and greater shipbuilding activity. A large amount of money has been invested in the establishment of new shipyards and in the building of ships. I would like to read what the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries has to say on this subject. He is a gentleman of intelligence who understands this question, and I think that what he says should have a great deal of weight with this House and with the country. He says:
In last year's report the question of shipbuilding in general in relation to tlhe war was taken uip, tables were furnished1 of the number, tonnage, and speed of the ocean freight carriers of the principal maritime nations, and an account given of methods adopted in a number of foreign countries to stimulate and aid shipbuilding by means of bounties, subsidies, or the free entry of shipbuilding materials.
As the war has progressed, and an ever-increasing amount of the ocean tonnage of the allied1 nations (now including the United States) and of the neutral nations has been sunk since Germany's declaration of unrestricted submarine warfare, the need of shipbuilding activity throughout the world to supply the wastage has become of paramount importance.
This has been thoroughly realized, I think, in Canada. A little further on he says:
In Canada, since the beginning of the war, the number of privately owned shipyards has been about doubled, a description of some of these yards was given in last year's report; and later, in the present one, will he found an account of the new yards established', and also one of the enlargements and improvements made to existing yards, with a view to meeting the demands for increased tonnage.
Apart from the introduction of the larger yards, there has been in the Maritime Provinces generally, and in Nova Scotia in^ particular, a revival of the wooden shipbuilding trade, particularly In the form of small schooners with or without auxiliary power; these are quickly and cheaply built, and at anything approaching the present abnormally high freight rates should, pay handsomely.
He states also:
It would be difficult to exaggerate the importance of shipbuilding as a national undertaking to a country that has, like Canada, an extensive coast line both east and [west, superb inland communication by lakes and rivers, and whose export trade is chiefly overseas.
I notice, Mr. Speaker, that last year there were Ibuilt the following steel vessels; On the Atlantic coast, 'ten steamers with a gross tonnage of 20,560 tone; on the Great Lakes, eleven steamers with a gross tonnage of 31,936 tons; and on the Pacific
coast, nine steamers with a gross tonnage of 42,000 tons-. The number and tonnage of wooden vessels- were: On the Atlantic Coast, five with a gross tonnage of 3,540 tons; on the Great Lakes, one with a gross tonnage of 40 tons; and on the Pacific coast, sixteen with a gross tonnage of 19,729 tons. In addition, there were in co-UTse of construction on March- 31, 1917, fifty-three schooners of a gross tonnage of 17,496 tons. These are wooden vessels averaging aJbout 300 tons net, and most of them are being built in different parts, of Nova Scotia. Now, Mr. Speaker, the people of Nova Scotia, having taken this Government and the Government of the Old Country at their word, how are they going to man these ships and sail them? Ho<w are they going to carry food to foreign countries-, if the only men who can be used as sailors- are -conscripted under the Order in Council -recently passed by this Government. It has- been, flung in our teeth by some of- the .press-notably toy a paper published in the city of Halifax, one of the Government organs-that the fishermen and sailors- of Lunenburg county were slackers and cowards. I want to state here th-at the fishermen and sailors of that county are nothing of the kind, I think the members of this House will agree with me that men who leave their homes on the 15th of March, when the ice is on the coast, and the March winds and -gales are blowing, and go out and anchor one hundred and fifty miles from land-, qnd every morning at daylight start off in the dories and haul their trawls, and continue that occupation for perhaps a month before they see land again-men who pursue that occupation all through the summer fogs and during the August and September gales, before returning home, cannot be called -slackers ot cowards.
And after these men return from the fishing grounds rwhat do we find them doing? They go freighting in their vessels; and for a period of nearly four years, since this war started, there have been about five hundred fishermen from Lunenburg county going down to the sea in ships; taking fish to Portugal, Spain, Italy, the West Indies and Brazil, carrying food to the Allied nations and thus helping to win the war. Do yon mean to say, Mr. Speaker, that a man who faces the deadly submarine at sea in a small vessel of one hundred tons is either a coward or a slacker? I say no, I say he is discharging, when engaged in that hazardous occupation his full duty to his country.

In the remarks made by the Acting Minister of Finance with respect to taxation, he deplored the fact that $15,000,000 of revenue would be lost by the enactment of prohibition during the war. You will notice, Mr. Speaker, the expression " during the war." Let us hope that the Government will take steps in the near future to amend the prohibition law so that prohibition will remain for ever and ever, amen. I am not a so-called temperance crank, nor am I a teetotaller, but I believe that permanent prohibition would ibe a good stroke of 'business. I cannot agree with the Acting Finance Minister in his statement that the $15,000,000 would be lost to the country. On the contrary the large amount of money heretofore expended upon spirituous liquors will, under prohibition, be expended upon various commodities dutiable at about 30 per cent, or will go into the savings bank accounts and the health and prosperity of the people will be greatly improved by the abolition of this traffic.
I also take issue with the Acting Finance Minister with regard to the tax on the business community. I do not think that the business of this country should be overtaxed. Whilst I feel that the tax imposed on war profits should be much larger I do not think it is wise to unduly tax business concerns that are engaged in the development of the industries of the country. If you do you will kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Business men will tighten their purse strings and will curtail their industrial activities, and will invest their money in Government bonds or other securities instead of taking the risk which attends investment in ordinary commercial enterprises. It will be noticed by reference to Hansard of last year that the Finance Minister said these taxes would not be imposed in the future, but I take it that announcement was only a "scrap of paper."
I have carefully studied the income tax proposals, Mr. Speaker, as brought down, and I have no hesitation in saying that the man of small salary is required to contribute more in proportion than the man of large means or the millionaire. To my mind those proposals bear too heavily on the man of moderate means. Has my hon. friend, who in days of yore advocated the cause of the common people so eloquently, fallen from grace? Has he partaken of the forbidden fruit, or is he only submitting a schedule made up by one of the eighteen wise men of 1911? " The voice is Jacob's voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau."

I was more than surprised when the Acting Finance Minister submitted extra taxation on the poor man's necessities, tea, coffee, and tobacco. In this time of stress and strain when the labouring men of the country are keyed up to the highest pitch, when they are doing their bit in increasing production, when they have their noses to the grindstone and are compelled to economize and save owing to the excessive prices which the big interests compel them to pay for everything they use, eat and wear, at a time when they are giving their sons for the cause of the Empire and Canada, I say that the Government is not protecting the common people as they should, and the time is not far distant when the voice of the people will be heard in protest with no uncertain sound.
We were told, Mr. Speaker, that no changes would be made in the tariff. In fact, the member for Springfield (Mr. Richardson) informs us that a pact was made by the Union members not to advocate any changes in the tariff. Is not this a combine? I would suggest that the Minister of Labour be called in to smash this combine along the lines of success he achieved in smashing the combine of the three cobblers in a certain city in Ontario. But you will notice by the schedules submitted by the Acting Finance Minister that he has changed the tariff in some commodities. Why not reduce the tariff on farming implements, which are so necessary for greater production?
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, let me say that whilst I criticized the Government on their Budget, and their shortcomings, we will back them up in every honest effort to carry on the present great struggle in which we are all interested, and will do everything possible to help bring the war to a successful conclusion. Let us all work together fo'r the common good. Let us have a united country, a country free from bickering and petty strife, a country united in a common cause, but free to exercise our right of free speech and with liberty to worship at whatever altar our consciences and our early training dictate. Let us say as Ruth said to Naomi,
" Whither thou goest I will go, your people shall be my people, and thy God my God." On the motion of Mr. M. Steele (South Perth) the debate was adjourned.
On the motion of Hon. A. K. Maclean the House adjourned at 11.55 p.m.

Monday, May 6, 1918.