1922-04-03

MR. SPEAKER'S BEREAVEMENT

Mr. SPEAKER:: Before resuming my
duties in this Chair, I feel bound to express my deep appreciation of, and thanks for, the kind sympathy which you have so generously extended to me in my recent bereavement.



LIMITATION OF ARMAMENTS

Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) :: I beg to lay on the Table of the House the report of the Canadian delegate to the Conference on the Limitation of Armaments, held at Washington, November 12, 1921, to February 6, 1922, including the treaties and resolutions.
I move, seconded by Mr. Fielding:
That 2,000 copies in English and 1,000 in French of the report of the Canadian delegate to the Conference on the Limitation of Armaments, held at Washington, November 12, 1921, to February 6, 1922, including treaties and resolutions, laid upon the Table of the House on the 3rd of April, 1922, be printed forthwith: and that rule 74 be suspended in relation thereto.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Hon. H. S. BELAND (Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment) moved:: That the name of Mr. Pelletier be substituted for that of Mr. Savard on the Special Committee on Pensions, .Soldiers' Insurance, and Civil Re-Establishment.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. J. F. JOHNSTON (Last Mountain) moved:: That the name of Mr. Shaw be substituted for that of Mr. Hudson on the Select Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Hon. S. F. TOLMIE (Victoria City):: Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would like to direct the attention of the leader of the Government to an article appearing in the press this morning to the effect that work on the Esquimalt dry dock has been ordered stopped. In that connection I would like to read a wire from

Nova Scotia Miners
the Associated Boards of Trade of British Columbia, dated Victoria, March 31. It reads
Whereas it has been brought to our notice that the Federal Government has ordered the suspension of work on the building of the Government dry dock at Esquimau; also we understand that the work on the floating dry dock at the Wallace shipyards, North Vancouver, has been discontinued by order of the Government; and exceedingly regretting that the Government has seen fit to stop both of these important works especially seeing that at Esquimau they have already expended approximately one and one half millions of dollars ; therefore be it resolved that this meeting of the Associated Boards of Trade of British Columbia in session at Victoria request the Government to immediately reconsider their decision in order that these important and necessary works for the development of the ports of Victoria and Vancouver be proceeded with as rapidly as possible.
This telegram clearly indicates that the matter is one of great importance not only to the ports mentioned, but also to the great shipping interests of the Pacific coast. I should be very glad indeed, therefore, to receive from the leader of the Government some statement as to what the Government intends to do in this connection.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I saw in this morning's paper the despatch to which my hon. friend has referred. I also noticed a communication which was reported to be a telegram from myself to the secretary of some organization in Victoria with regard to this matter. I should like to make it plain that I have not sent any communications at all; possibly the message referred to was sent by one of my colleagues and the press has got the Kings mixed. But the substance of this telegram attributed to me, indicated that the matter was receiving the attention of the Government. We have thought it advisable to have a report on the situation as it affects the dry docks of Victoria and Vancouver before proceeding further with the work. The matter fs under consideration.



NOVA SCOTIA MINERS

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition) :: Mr. Speaker, before the Orders of the Day are called I wish to put a question to the Government with regard to the positon of the present or apprehended strike in Nova Scotia. In this morning's press there is an announcement which purports to come from the Minister of Labour (Mr. Murdock). The substance of it is in five or six lines, which I will read:
I have not reconstituted the Gillen Board, and I shall not do so unless the "strike on the job" policy is abandoned and repudiated. It that policy is repudiated I shall be very glad to do anything in my power to bring about a settlement of the trouble.
Contrast that with the statement of the Government as embodied in the speech of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), which may be compressed also into a very few words. After suggesting that th< Gillen Board should be reconstituted, and being asked by myself whether that intention on the part of the Government was to be carried out wholly irrespective of the order issued by Mr. McLachlan or conditional on that order being revoked, he said:
I made no condition about Mr. McLachlan at all, in fact I had not given that phase of the question much thought, but I think if we have legal power-and the Minister of Labour holds that we have-to revive the commission-I do not like the term "revive" ; I think the commission is still alive-they should be asked to resume the inquiry, go to Cape Breton and acquaint themselves sympathetically with conditions on the ground. I have every hope that if that is done you will have. a satisfactory conclusion of the difficulty.
That attitude I think was pretty generally accepted by the House as meaning that action on the part of the Department of Labour was not to abide the day of repentance on the part of McLachlan. May I ask, does the statement purporting to come from the Minister of Labour (Mr. Murdock) or the statement of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) of Thursday last represent the position of the Government to-day, or does neither?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: With regard to my right hon.
friend's first query respecting the statement of my colleague the Minister of Labour (Mr. Murdock), I understand that statement has reference to a telegram the minister received from Mr. Baxter, the president of the miners, asking whether the board would be reconvened under certain conditions, and the reply of the minister had reference to the request as he received it from Mr. Baxter.
The position which the Government has taken was exactly as stated the other evening. The Government is quite prepared to reconvene the board, and the Minister of Labour has already in the last couple of days been in communication with Mr. Gillen the president of the board, obtaining his consent to act on the board the minute it is reconvened. The Government had expected to receive an intimation from either
Interim Supply

one of the interested parties or from one of the members of the board asking for its reconvening. We thought that that request would be forthcoming. If it is much longer delayed, the Government will proceed with the establishment of the board without waiting for the request, but we thought it might facilitate the working of the board later on if one of the parties was sufficiently interested to request that it be reconvened.


Arthur Meighen: Anyway, I understand that the reconvening of the board is wholly irrespective of the repudiation of Mr. McLachlan's stand.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We think the reconvening of the board should in the public interest be unconditionally.


Arthur Meighen: Unconditionally?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes, certainly.



SUPPLY-INTERIM VOTE

[Stage Direction]
On motion of Hon. W. S. Fielding (Minister of Finance) the House proceeded to Government orders, and went into Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved:: Resolved, That a sum not exceeding $79,109,751.00 being one-fourth of the amount of each of the several Items not yet voted as set forth in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1923, laid before the House of Commons at the present session of Parliament, be granted to His Majesty for the year ending March 31, 1923.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON (West York) :: I have had the opportunity since this matter was last discussed of further considering the plight in which we find ourselves and of what ought to be done in the circumstances, and I am confirmed in my opinion previously expressed, that the practice in the past was the only practice which could have been adopted, and that the change that was foreshadowed by last year's opposition was not seriously proposed-it was merely advanced for the purpose of delaying, obstructing and embarrassing the government. Under those circumstances, I have no desire to follow such a course of action. I think, however, we ought to follow as nearly as possible the practice in the past, which was to vote simply one-sixth, and not ond-fourth, as this resolution proposes. The only reason for taking an interim vote in advance of the consideration of the Estimates in detail is that of neces-

sity. The Estimates ought to be considered as individual estimates without any doubt, and the usual conditions under which an interim supply vote is granted-I have no doubt my hon. friend the Minister of Finance will agree with me-are: First, that the Opposition are not in the slightest degree prejudiced in considering the Estimates or in Objecting to any individual item; and, second-with which condition also I think the Minister of Finance will agree, that this interim supply cannot be made use of for the purpose of undertaking any new work which has not yet been passed upon by the House.
Now, as to the amount. The only excuse for a vote of this kind is necessity. The usual vote has been one-sixth. That will carry the Government down to the 15th of June, and between now and the 15th of June all these Estimates ought to have been properly and regularly considered in detail, and I have no doubt they will have been. Therefore, I am perfectly willing to consent so far as I am concerned and so far as this Opposition is concerned to the usual interim vote of one-sixth.


William Stevens Fielding: The mental processes by which my hon. friend has reached his conclusion do not disturb me very much. I am more interested in getting the vote through. I regret my hon. friend did not mention sooner that he preferred one-sixth, because at the first stage of the discussion I stated1 that, while it miight be a convenience to have one-fourth voted, if he preferred one-sixth I would be happy to change the motion accordingly, but if we are to change the motion now, it will have to be postponed so that new calculations can be made. We will have to adjourn the committee and have the clerks make the new calculation.
As to the conditions laid down I quite agree with my hon. friend that no action of this kind prejudices the right of the Opposition or of any member of this House to the fullest and freest discussion of every item in the Estimates. As to the second point mentioned, that this interim supply cannot be made applicable to works not yet authorized, of course, at the most, it could only be applied to things expressed in the Estimates; anything not authorized and passed by the House of Commons cannot be undertaken. However, I do not anticipate any difficulty in that direction. The main purpose of the vote is to meet the requirements of the Civil Service. If on reflection my hon. friend would prefer to make it

Questions
one-sixth, I have no objection, although it is taking two bites of a cherry-this House will be in session for several months, under the best conditions. But I have no objection to making it one-sixth. It will delay the proceedings a little while, that is all.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am very sorry this misunderstanding has occurred. I had intended to make myself clear on the previous occasion, that I would consent to one-sixth. So far as making the change in the figure is concerned! the calculation could be made in a few moments by the clerk. It is merely a matter of dividing the vote by six instead of by four. Or, the figure could be inserted afterwards, and the motion read simply one-sixth without stating the figure.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend and I will agree that we will make the motion one-sixth, and leave the clerks to work it out. I move now to amend the motion by making it one-sixth instead of one-fourth, and the clerks will fill in the precise amount at a later stage. That will also be necessary with regard to the bill which I shall have occasion to move in a few moments.
I do not know whether there has been any collusion between my hon. friend and the clerks at -the table, but I find they have already the motion prepared for one-sixth, with the amount filled in accordingly. The figure will be $53,901,669.17.
Motion as amended -agreed to.
Resolution reported, read a first and second time, and concurred in.



WAYS AND MEANS


[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. Gordon in the Chair.
William Stevens Fielding: Resolved that towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the -Public -Service for the financial year ending March 31, 192-3, the sum of $53,901,669.17 he granted out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. FIELDING thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 26, for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the Public Service for the financial year ending March 31, 1923.
Motion agreed to, Bill read the first and second time, considered in Committee, reported, read the third time and passed.
Mr. FIELDING moved that the House do now revert to the Orders of the Day.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 20, respecting the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec.-Mr. Charters.
Bill No. 21, to incorporate Buffalo and Fort Erie Public Bridge Company.-Mr. German.
Bill No. 22, respecting Montreal, Joliette and Transcontinental Junction Railway Company.-Mr. Gervais.
Bill No. 23, respecting Prudential Trust Company, Limited..-Mr. Mitchell.
Bill No. 24, the Quebec Railway light and Power Company.-Mr. Mitchell.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. DUFF:: What was the total cost for the year 1921, of all flags used on every public building in all parts of Canada?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: Department of Health-William Head Quarantine Station, $24.59; Grosse Isle Quarantine Station, $25.50; St. John Quarantine Station, $12; Marine Hospital, Lunenburg, N.S., $5.34; total, $67.43. Department of Militia and Defence-The cost of flags issued during 1921 was $2,027.30. Department of Public Works-The cost of flags issued during 1921 was $3,660.49.


MISS NORA GRAHAM
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Is Miss Nora Graham, of Windsor, Hants county, Nova Scotia, employed at the House of Commons or by any department of the Civil Service at Ottawa?
2.	If so, in what capacity and by whom was she recommended?
3.	What salary does she receive and by whom is it paid?
4.	Has she passed a Civil Service examination and the qualifications required by the Civil Service Commission for a government position?
5.	If so, when and for what position?
6.	Was she in receipt of pay from the Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment or any other department of the Federal Government previous to March 1, 1922?
7.	If so, where and in what capacity?
8.	Was free transportation furnished to her from Nova Scotia to Montreal or Ottawa by the Department of Railways and Canals or the management of the Canadian National Railways, or by any one in a public capacity?
Questions

9.	If so, by whom, at whose request and upon what grounds?
10.	Is her appointment temporary or permanent?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	Yes, on the me'mbers' stenographers ' staff of the House of Commons.
2.	As a stenographer, and was recommended by Mr. L. H. Martell, M.P.
3.	Pour dollars per day, which is paid by the House of Commons.
4.	No record.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	No record.
7.	Answered by No. 6.
8.	No.
9.	Answered by No. 8.
10.	Temporary.


MONTREAL HARBOUR COMMISSION-TUGS
Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	How many tug-boats were used in the Montreal harbour, under the control of the Board of Harbour Commissioners from 1917 until the closing of navigation in 1921, and what were the names of the said boats?
2.	What coal supply was carried by each of the said boats?
3.	What quantity of coal was used by each of these boats?
4.	What officers were in charge of these tugs during the above-mentioned period?
5.	Who was in charge of the coal supplied to the said boats?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: The Montreal Harbour Commission has furnished the following information:
Questions 1, 2, 3:



NAMES OF TUGS-COAL SUPPLY AND COAL USED

[Stage Direction]
Number of Tugs used during year, names mentioned below:-	1917 9	1918 9	1919 8	1920 3	1921 2Name of Tug	Coal Supply Carried	Quantity of Coal used	1917	1918	1919	1920	1921Tug "Sir Hugh Allan''	
Tug "John Young"	
Tug "Alphonse Racine"	
Tug "Robert Mackay"	
Tug "Aberdeen"	
Tug "St. Peter"	
Tug "Beaver"	
Tug "Passepartout"	
Tug "David Seath"	
Total Tons each year	Tons 56 30 25 25 25 8 , 7 21 25	Tons 1,004 715 226 872 992 681 352 76 613	Tons 1,424 689 476 840 539 654 136 72 610	Tons 965 765 Sold in 1919 759 848 612 315 97 583	Tons 1,112 Not in co 836 570 On ways Not in co u	Tons 1,329 m mission. 972 9* 981 mmission. 1C5,461	5,440	4,944	2,518	2,408
'Heating in Spring. fTemporary Service.
Question 4:
STATEMENT SHOWING NAMES OF OFFICERS IN CHARGE OF HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS _______TUGS, DURING SEASON OF NAVIGATION 1917 TO 1921 INCLUSIVE
Name of Tug
Year Capacity
Day Shift
Name of Officers Night Shift
"Sir Hugh Allan"
1917 Captain 1st Eng. 2nd "
F. X. Laviolette,
L. Crouteau	
F. Mailhot	
Changes during Season
1918 Captain, 1st Eng. 2nd "
F. X. Laviolette
L. Croteau	
F. Mailhot	
2nd Eng. C. Jacques.
1919 Captain, 1st Eng. 2nd "
F. X. Laviolette
L. Croteau	
C. Jacques	
1920 Captain, 1st Eng. 2nd "
F. X. Laviolette,
L. Croteau	
C. Jacques	
1921 Captain, 1st Eng. 2nd "
F. X. Laviolette
L. Croteau	
C. Jacques	
[Stage Direction]
Questions
STATEMENT SHOWING NAMES OF OFFICERS IN CHARGE OF HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS TUGS, DURING SEASON OF NAVIGATION 1917 TO 1921 INCLUSIVE-CWuded
Name of Tug	Year Capacity	Day Shift	Name of Officers Night Shift	Changes during Season
				
				
				
				
				
	Engr				
"Alphonse Racine"					
				
				
	Engr		J. McArthur			
"Robert Mackay''					
	Engr				
	1918 Captain				
	Engr				Engr. W. S. Parker.
				
				
				
	Engr				Engr. W. Parker.
	1921 Captain				
	Engr				
"Aberdeen"					
	Engr				
	1918 Captain				
	Engr		J. B. Marchand		R. Cossetti		
	1919 Captain				Captain P. Croteau.
	Engr				
				
	Engr				
				
	Engr				
				
				
				
	Engr		A. Perron		A. Clement		
				
	Engr		T. Mongrain			Captain P. McLean
				
				
				
	Engr				
"Passepartout"					
	Engr				
				
				
				
				noyer.
"David Seath"					
				
				
				
				Captain P. Chatard
	Engr		P. Lange			
Questions
[Stage Direction]
5.	Captain J. Smith, in charge of coal barge, under direction of Mr. George Gen-dron, mechanical superintendent.

Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	Who purchased the paint used by the Montreal Harbour Commission during the years 1917 to 1921 inclusive?
2.	What are the names of t'he persons who received the said paint?
3.	What are the names of the foremen who distributed this material?
4.	From whom was the said paint purchased and what was the total amount paid for same?


Ernest Lapointe: The Montreal Harbour Commission has furnished the following information:-
1.	Purchasing agent, L. H. A. Archam-bault, under approval of Board of Harbour Commissioners.
2.


STATEMENT No. 1-A.
[Stage Direction]
Harbour Commissioners of Montreal
Names of the persons who received the paint purchased and used by the Harbour Commissioners during the years 1917 to 1921 inclusive
Year
Department
Name of Storekeepers and Assistants
Machine Shop and Harbour Yard
Machine Shop	
Harbour Yard	
Traffic Dept	
Elevators and Sheds
U	it
Electrical Dept	
G. B. Hearle, W. D. Aird,
R. Meunier,
F. Scott,
A. Gagnon,
A. Beauregard, W. C. Clifton, T. Bourgoyne,
General Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Machine Shop and Harbour Yard
Machine Shop	
Harbour Yard	
Traffic Department.. Elevators and Sheds,
Electrical Dept	
G. B. Hearle, W. D. Aird,
A. Cassavant, F. Scott,
A. Gagnon,
A. Beauregard, W. C. Clifton, T. Bourgoyne,
General Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Machine Shop and Harbour Yard
Machine Shop	
Harbour Yard	
Traffic Dept	
Elevators and Sheds	
Electrical Dept
G. B. Hearle, W. D. Aird,
A. Cassavant, F. Scott,
A. Gagnon,
A. Beauregard, W. C. Clifton, T. Bourgoyne,
General Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
<«
[Stage Direction]
Machine Shop and Harbour Yard
Machine Shop	
Harbour Yard	
[Stage Direction]
Traffic Dept	
Elevators and Sheds	
«
Electrical Dept	
Warehouse Construction	
G. B. Hearle, W. D. Aird,
A. Cassavant, F. Scott,
A. Gagnon,
A. Beauregard, W. C. Clifton, T. Bourgoyne, A. Beauregard,
General Storekeeper.
Assistant Storeman.
<<	«
U	u
tt	it
Storekeeper. Assistant Storeman.
Storekeeper.
Machine Shop	
Harbour Yard and Traffic	
Elevators and Sheds	
<1	ii
Electrical Dept	
Warehouse Construction	
G. B. Hearle,
P. J. Cullen,
J. Emblem,
F. Scott,
J. L. E. Drapeau, W. C. Clifton,
W. D. Aird,
T. Bourgoyne,
A. Beauregard,
Storekeeper.
Assistant Storekeeper. Storekeeper.
Assistant Storeman. Storekeeper.
Assistant Storeman. Storekeeper.
Assistant Storeman. Storekeeper.	.
The above storekeepers act under direction from Mr. Geo. Smart, Comptroller, who is responsible for safety of all stores.
3.	All paints taken into stock by above quisitions authorized by superintendents storekeepers and distributed by them on re- and foremen.
[Stage Direction]
Questions
4.

[Stage Direction]
Harbour Commissioners of Montreal
Statement showing names of firms from whom Paint was purchased for use by the Harbour Commissioners during the years 1917 to 1921 inclusive and the total amount paid to each firm for same
Where delivered
Shop	Yard	Sheds	Elec.Dpt	Traffic	Sundry	Total214 60 1,032 20 23 76 217 86	$	$	3	3	3	$ 214 60 1,266 37 23 76 377 65 240 00 2 64 295 57 .. 5 64155 17	44 25	19 10	15 65	
109 79			46 75	3 25	
				240 00				
							.. 2 64	
		295 57						
5	64 148 05 6	65	518 70 1,161 60	111 48 56 83 9 20	7 67	72 70 38 00 1 80	858 60 5,669 61 28 80 44 004,406 53 17 80 44 00	
Wall Bros								
								
		$ 3,464,29	$ 442 47	4,752 58	$ 7 67	$ 226 19	$ 134 04	$ 9,027 24
								
Year 1918	Where Delivered							
Elev. 2	Shop	Yard	Sheds	Elec. Dpt.	Traffic	Sundry	Total$	s	$	3	3	$ 6 50	3	$ 6 50 383 10 153 06 6 00 362 00 296 06 161 66 178 29 1,099 06 7,456 41 3,241 00383 10	142 96	10 10 6 00 16 50 91 35	
309 25 108 96 123 49 157 29	36 25 85 70					
					10 05			
				38 17				
			21 00					
							1 75	
		855 52 62 01	123 35		45 43	74 76 11 35		
				7,383 05 1,487 50				
	1,753 50							
Total value 1918									
	$ 1,753 50	1,759,48	266 30	9,291 82	55 48	216 56	1 75	13,344 89
Year 1919		Where Delivered						
Shop	Yard	Sheds	Elec. Dpt.	Traffic	Sundry	Total$	$	$	$	$ 6 50 15 50	3	$ 506 344 33 338 39 1,775 41 372 35 984 42 111 60 1,288 29 34 50 672 75 77 40 173 40261 31 334 64 1,268 14 245 20 470 13 111 60 338 14	67 52	75	3 00	42 63 105 20 242 87	464 64	1 45 71 35	20 50 147 65	52 42	
32 70	892 75		24 70 34 50		
								
				672 75 24 00				
Wall Bros							53 40	
		173 40						
								
		3,202 56	490 92	2,054 14	73 55	249 35	108 82	6,179 34
								
Year 1920	Where Delivered							
W. House	Shop	Yard	Sheds	Elec. Dpt.	Traffic	Sundry	Totals	s	$	3	3	$ 4 50	3	$ 4	50 993 4 3,401 81 359 09 280 00 369 21 7,714 47 41 15 227 50 5	20 111 1599 34	3,401 81	236 39	104 20	18 50	280 00	60 43 92 46	137 74 192 50	23 30 28 40	147 14 28 10	60	7,373 01	41 15	227 50 5 20	
111 15							
								
	111 15	488 62	434 44	11,287 52	70 20	179 74	41 75	12,613 42
								
Questions
[Stage Direction]
STATEMENT No. 2A-Concluded.
Year 1921
Where Delivered
W. House	Shop	Yard	Sheds	Elec. Dpt.	Traffic	Sundry	TotalBarrett Co	*	$	$ 6 71 4 82 87 93	t	t	$	;	$ 6 71 247 72 30	47 25 75 321 67 339 55 2,659 96 60 40 188 00 547 11 17 77 561 55 31	15Brandram-Henderson	172 74 1 29	12 49 78 14	99 94 30 39 30 47	16 24 49 97	2 78	Canada Paint Co	Canada Asbestos Co	Dom. Paint Co	25 75 27 34	Jameison Co., J. W	294 33 71 82 64 52	Jamieson & Co., R. C	183 97 2 63	20 60 2,580 43 52 90	63 16	12 38	Reed & Co., Geo. W	7 50	Sharpe Ltd., C. A	139 44 131 97	48 56 129 78	Sherwin-Williams	252 21	33 15	Standard Paint Co	17 77	Thompson, B. & S. H	561 55	Walker Hardware Co., J	24 50	6 65	Total value 1921	1,048 38	792 71	464 40	2,872 38	147 14	21 81	5,346 82
Recapitulation
Name of Firm	Year	Total value 1917 to 19211917	1918	1919	1920	1921	t	$ 6 50	$ 6 50 338 39	$ 4 50 99 34	$ 671 309 01	$ 24	21 961 34 383 10 3,401 81 2,370 57 30 47 6 00 25	75 280 00 23 76 2,459 00 1,754 82 240 00 164 30 473 86 1 75 5 64 13,316 51 60 40 299 60 15,002 57 17 77 262 00 4,475 30 142 55 217 40 111 15214 60	Berevidge Paper Co	383 10	Buckley Co	3,401 81 359 09	1,266 37	153 06	344 33	247 72 30 47	Can. Asbestos Co	Canuck Supply Co	6 00	Dom. Paint Co	25 75	Eclipse Paint Co	280 00	Gravel, Ludger	23 76	Jamieson & Co., J. W	1,775 41 372 35	321 67 339 55	Jamieson & Co., R. C	377 65 240 00 2 64 295 57	296 06	369 21	Lemesurier, C	McArthur Irwin Co	161 66 178 29 1 75	Martin Semour Co	Merchants Awning Co	Patterson Manfg. Co	5 64 858 60	Ramsay & Son, A	1,099 06	984 42	7,714 47	2,659 96 60 40 188 00 547 11 17 77	Reed & Co., Geo. W	Sharpe Ltd., C. A	111 60 1,288 29	Sherwin Williams	5,669 61	7,456 51	41 15	Standard Paint'Co	Sterling Products	34 50 672 75 77 40 173 40	227 50	Thompson & Co., B. & S. H	2,341 00	561 55 31 15	28 80 44 00	5 20	Wall Bros	Webster & Sons	111 15	
9,027 24	13,334 89	6,179 34	12,613 42	5,346 82	46.511 71

Mr. GOULD:: 1.	What was the initial estimated cost to the Dominion Government for the construction of the Briquetting plant at Bienfait, Saskatchewan?
2.	Who made the estimate?
3.	Was there any collapse of buildings during
the construction?	[DOT]
4.	What is the total cost of the plant to the Government to date?
5.	Is the plant now closed?
6.	If so, why?
7.	What salary was paid to the superintendent, Mr. Roche?
8.	Was there an explosion in the said plant?
9.	If so, when?
10.	What was the immediate monetary loss as a result of this explosion?
11.	Was the explosion due to neglect on the part of the operators?
rMr. Lapointe.]
12.	If not, what was the cause?
13.	Was a Government inquiry made into this explosion?
14.	When will the product of the said plant be available commercially ?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	The total estimated cost was $400,000 of which the Dominion Government was to bear one-half and the Governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan one-quarter each.
2.	The Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research.
3.	No. (A small concrete roof of one bin did fall but this was replaced by the contractor at his expense).

Questions
4.	The total cost of the plant to date is $570,871.15 of which sum $210,831.32 was spent on buildings and the balance of $360,039.83 on equipment.
5.	Yes, as far as actual operations are concerned.
6.	On account of exhaustion of funds voted by the Governments interested.
7.	Three hundred dollars ($300) per month.
8.	The Board has no record of any explosion of consequence.
9.	Answered by No. 8.
10.	None.
11.	12.	13. Answered by No. 8.
14. The Lignite Utilization Board hopes, subject to the successful operation of the carbonizers after changes now being made are completed, to have briquettes available commercially in from 6 to 8 months.


NOVA SCOTIA MINERS
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: 1.	What steps, if any, are being taken to secure for the Nova Scotia miners a fair day's pay for a fair day's work?
2.	In view of the high cost of living, has the Government used its influence with the operators of industrial companies to prevent any curtailment of production?
3.	What action, If any, does the Government propose to take to prevent the British Empire Steel Corporataion in the minister's own words, from undertaking to dictate Government policy?


Hon. Mr. MURDOCK:: 1.	The differences between the coal operators and the coal miners of Nova Scotia were referred to a Board of Conciliation and Investigation established by the Minister of Labour under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, and the findings of the board were made public early in February.
2.	Advantage is taken of every suitable opportunity to urge on employers of labour the advisability of maintaining production to the largest possible limit, and where there has been a reduction in output, to make the utmost effort to return to normal production.
3.	If any action is necessary such action will be taken and information given to the public in due course.


SORED SHIPYARDS
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Have any persons been dismissed from the Sorel shipyards since the 29th day of December, 1921?
2.	If so, what are the names of the said persons, and what were the respective causes for dismissal?
3.	Have any persons been taken on the staff at the Sorel shipyards since the 29th day of December, 1921?
4.	If so, what are the names of the said persons and the reasons for their employment?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	There have been no actual dismissals of employees at the Sorel shipyard since the 29th December, 1921. The services of a number of employees were discontinued temporarily since that date.
2.	The names of the persons whose services have been so discontinued are as per list attached.
3.	A number of persons have been taken on as employees at the Sorel shipyard since the 29th December, 1921.
4.	The names of those who have been so taken on are as per list attached. The reasons for the discontinuance of the services of some and the employment of others are stated by the superintendent of the shipyard as follows:-"Due to the scarcity of work in Sorel and the great number of unemployed persons, and by reason of the fact that the Sorel shipyard could not employ more men than a limited number for the work we had, and also in view of giving relief to the suffering families, every fortnight a certain number of men were suspended and a new gang of men given employment. In order to obtain the relieving result, I took my information from the secretary of the St. Vincent de Paul Society, the clergymen of Sorel and St. Joseph de Sorel and the General Hospital of Sorel, who were in a good position of knowing the families in distress."
(The list of names accompanying this answer has been filed in the office of the Clerk of the House).


CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE-INSURANCE
Mr. MARLER:: 1.	What amount of insurance is carried on the ships owned by the Canadian Government, known as the Canadian Merchant Marine?
2.	When was this insurance placed?
3.	What are the names of the companies carrying such insurance and the amount in each?
4.	Who were the brokers through whom this insurance was placed?
5.	What was the amount of the premiums?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	$41,310,720.00.
2.	January 1, 1922.
3.	Thirty English companies of good repute, and four American companies as
under:
Questions


CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE-OUTSTANDING CLAIMS
Hon. Mr. MANION:: 1.	Are there any claims outstanding against two Canadian Government Merchant Marine ships constructed at Prince Rupert? If so, what is the total amount of said claims?
2.	Has the Attorney General of British Columbia, Mr. Manson, requested settlement on behalf of the creditors?
3.	If so, is he acting for the Government of the province of British Columbia?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	No claims are outstanding against the vessels of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine constructed at Prince Rupert. There are, however, claims by outside creditors outstanding against the Prince Rupert Dry Dock and Shipbuilding Company, the contractors for the construction of the vessels. The Department of Marine is not definitely advised as to the exact amount of these claims. They are represented as amounting to between $430,000.00 and $450,000.00.
2.	The Attorney General of British Columbia has requested settlement on behalf of the community and in the hope that satisfactory arrangements for continuing the enterprise at Prince Rupert might be made possible.
3.	No.


FUEL FOR LIGHT BOATS
Mr. GAUVREAU:: 1.	What was the cost of the fuel used by the light boats Tile Blanche, Princess Shoal and l'Ue Rouge, du-ing the last season of navigation?
2.	How many cords of wood were bought for each of the said boats?
3.	What price was paid per cord for said wood?
4.	When did they commence using coal on the said boats?
5.	How many tons of coal were purchased for the said boats, and what price was paid per ton?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	$2,005.
2.	1 cord of kindling wood for Red Island lightship.
3.	$10.00.
4.	In 1918.
5.	210 tons at $9.50.


GRAND TRUNK COAL
Mr. MACDONALD (Pictou) :: 1.	What quantity of coal was imported into Canada during the calendar year 1924, for and on account of the Grand Trunk railway?
2.	What was the value of said importations?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	1,823,000 net tons.
2.	Cost at the mines, $4,725,000; delivered in Canada, with duty and charges, $11,250,000. Of this total, $963,000 was for duty.


CIVIL SERVICE BONUS
Mr. GARLAND (Carleton):: Wrhat method is used by the Government in establishing the amount of bonus to be paid to a civil servant?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil) :: The distribution of the sum granted as a bonus to civil servants is governed by an Order in Council of April 21, 1921, which divides the service into groups and sets forth the amount to be paid to each person.


CANADA-MEXICO TRADE
Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	Has the Government in its possession any recent reports of the trade possibilities between Canada and Mexico?
2.	Has Canada any Trade Commissioners in Mexico ?
3.	If so, how many and where are they located?
4.	If not, does the Government contemplate the early appointment of experienced Trade Commissioners there?
5.	Have any steps been taken to promote trade between Canada and Mexico?
6.	Have any steps been taken to inaugurate steamship service from Canada to Mexico, both on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	The Government has this matter under consideration.
5.	Yes.
6.	This is also under consideration.


MR. ALEX CAMERON
Mr. HALBERT:: 1.	Was Mr. Aiex Cameron, of Beaverton, Ontario, employed on the Trent Valley Canal system?
2.	If so, on what date was he first employed, what were his duties and salary?
3.	Is he still employed on the said works?


Hon. Mr. KENNEDY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	First employed August 26, 1913, as Foreman, at $4 per day, which wage was reduced to $3.50 per day, August, 1914.
3.	No.

Questions


MACKENZIE-MANN SUBSIDY
Mr. IRVINE:: What is the date on which the Dominion Government paid the first cash subsidy in connection with the Mackenzie-Mann interests?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: The date on which the first cash subsidy was paid to the Canadian Northern Railway by the Dominion Government was September 7, 1900.


William Irvine: What was the total amount received by the Mackenzie-Mann interests from the Government up to the time when they surrendered control?


George Perry Graham: The total amount
of cash subsidies paid the Canadian Northern Railway by the Government was $31,870,016.56.


CANADIAN GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS- DEFICITS
William Irvine: What is the total amount of deficits paid to date, by the Government, for the operation of the Canadian Government Railways?


George Perry Graham: Total amount of
deficits paid by Government for operation of Canadian Government Railways to December 31, 1921, $46,097,072.56.


LIVE STOCK BRANCH-CALGARY
Mr. IRVINE:: 1.	What is the cost of the Dominion Livestock Branch office at Calgary, apart from free freight outlays?
2.	What is the free freight outlay out of Calgary under the carload lot?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	Salaries, office rent, etc., for the fiscal year 1921-22, $6,061.70.
2.	From April 1, 1921, to February 28, 1922, the sum of $12,516.80 was paid by
the Federal Department of Agriculture in connection with shipments under its free policy out of Calgary.


INCOME TAX, MONTREAL OFFICE
Mr. DEMERS:: How many persons are employed In the income tax office at Montreal, and what are their names?


William Stevens Fielding: The number is
209. If the honourable gentleman will move for a return the names will be promptly brought down.


RIORDON COMPANY TAXES
Mr. HALBERT:: 1.	Was a note accepted from the Riordon Pulp and Paper Company in payment for income
tax?
2.	If so, on what date was this note accepted?
3.	What was the amount of said note?
4.	Has any payment been made on the said note?
5.	If so, what amount?


Hon. Mr. FIELDING:: 1.	A note was received from Riordon Company, Limited, on account of income tax.
2.	Note was dated 30th April, 1921.
3.	The amount of said note was $51,103.09.
4.	No.
5.	Answered by No. 4.


CUSTOMS AND EXCISE
Mr. MICHAUD:: What amount has been received each year from customs and excise collections, during the last fifteen years, in the several ports and sub-ports in the county of Madawaska, New Brunswick?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: CUSTOM'S REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1906-7 TO 1921-22, INCLUSIVE, FOR THE ____________FOLLOWING PLACES IN THE COUNTY OF MADAWASKA, N.B.
Fiscal Year
1906-	07	
1907-	08	
1908-	09	
1909-	10	
1910-	11	
1911-	12....
1912-	13	
1913-	14	
1914-	16	
1915-	16....
1916-	17	
1917-	18....
1918-	19	
1919-	20	
1920-	21	
1921-	22....
(11 months).
Grand Falls	Edmund- ston	St. Leonards	Green River	Clair	Connors	St, Hilaire521 68	2,303 49	681 27	104 60	13,936 70	833 43	5,121 79	1,435 32	612 95	18,850 54	6,805 93	16,429 92	1,084 01	320 07	21,519 01	3,167 10	29,714 97	793 11	254 03	22,241 07	11,561 92	26,288 15	3,979 48	376 78	22,675 43	3,004 84	25,206 37	7,120 55	750 20	18,268 50	5,080 65	27,607 66	12,972 37	1,891 26	13,465 02	3 766,908 53	38,974 15	35,455 68	4,628 42	14,948 54	30 925,937 89	25,841 28	34,301 47	694 67	10,813 03	180 524,204 97	24,124 72	22,417 74	340 00	5,729 95	4 45	578 384,075 49	32,426 99	16,523 08	496 87	2,159 37	1,123 512,790 97	71,990 71	11,388 08	525 40	2,436 81	320 92	168 263,561 78	88,295 93	3,927 83	225 21	1,157 36	980 67	578 573,171 59	25,283 19	3,259 75	289 66	1,828 40	3,166 15	101 271,843 53	57,754 12	3,494 19	415 65	1,139 72	811 53	336 063,839 84	97,993 48	8,887 67	181 46	6,140 31	1,080 24	276 15
Questions

Excise collections are included in the amounts shown for 1921-22, as the Customs Service and Excise Service have been amalgamated since 1st April, 1921.
It is not possible to give the information as requested regarding excise collections prior to April 1, 1921, for the reason that the Inland Revenue records did not show amounts collected for smaller places but included them in the total collections for the division in which the county of Mada-waska is situated.


EDMUNDSTON POST OFFICE
Pius Michaud: How much revenue was received from the Post Office at Edmundston, New Brunswick, during the past fifteen years?


Hon. Mr. MURPHY:: 1906		
1907		
1908		
1909		
1910		
1911		
1912		
1913		
1914		
1915		
1916		
1917		
1918		
1919		
1920	
1921	
Total.. .


$ 1,677 88 1,340 29 2,192 80 2,287 77 2,393 07 2,370 72 2,475 12 2,689 30 2,638 28 2,702 68 3,578 01 3,871 57 6,007 41 7,483 36 9,273 56 11,389 94 $64,371 76 SOLDIER SETTLEMENT
Mr. SPEAKMAN:: 1.	How many returned soldiers have been established on farms in each province by the Soldier Settlement Board?
2.	What number of said settlers, if any, in each province, through failure, have had their land, stock and equipment resold?
3.	What loss, if any, has been sustained by the Crown, in each province, in such cases of resale?
4.	(a) How many officials and employees are employed by the said Soldier Settlement Board, and (b) what is the total expenditure for salaries and expenses of said Board.


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil) :: 1.	As at January 31, 1922:
British Columbia	3,252
Alberta	8,674
Saskatchewan	7,722
Manitoba	4,439
Ontario	1,595
Quebec	 415
New Brunswick	 583
Nova Scotia	 402
Prince Edward Island	 334
27,416
2. As at January 31, 1922:
-	Land, Stock and Equipment Completely Sold	Land Sold -Stock and Equipment Not Sold	Stock and Equipment Sold- Land Not Sold	Neither Land nor Stock and Equipment SoldBritish Columbia	127	5	193	60Alberta	124	5	426	143Saskatchewan	69	15	184	124Manitoba	59	6	273	83Ontario	57	8	76	34Quebec	49	3	57	13New Brunswick..	35	7	7	21Nova Scotia	16	4	4	19Prince Edward Island	31	5	4	6567	58	1,224	503Total	2,352	3.	In 419 cases in which complete returns have been received from district offices the following gains and losses are shown:
Gain Loss
British Columbia... $ 7,660 57		
Alberta	 24,848 07		
Saskatchewan	 22,585 14		
Manitoba	 1,047 33		
Ontario	 5,999 83		
Quebec	 $9,737 46
New Brunswick.. ..	6,514 88		
Nova Scotia	 2,632 81		
Prince Edward
Island	 10,188 63

Net Gain, $71,739.80.
4.	(a) Number of officials and employees as at December 31 in each fiscal year:
1917-18, 2; 1918-19, 216; 1919-20, 1,500; 1920-21, 1,046; 1921-22, 761. Peak of staff, June, 1920, 1,579.
(b) Total expenditures for salaries and expenses:
Salaries-
1917- 18	$	1,720 401918-	19	
102,291	721919-	20	
1,269,459	841920-	21	
1,929,035	971921 to Feb. 28, 1922.. .. 1,261,548	09
Expenses of Board-
1917- 18	$	1,514 911918-	19	
105,261	221919-	20	
1,303,964	051920-	21	
1,290,646	391921 to Feb. 28, 1922..	597,826 84


SASKATCHEWAN INDIAN RESERVES
Mr. CAMPBELL:: 1. What parcels of land did the Indians of the Kee-See-Koose Indian reserve, in the Province of Saskatchewan, surrender to the Department

Questions
of Indian Affairs, in or about the years of 1909 and 1910, and what is the legal description of each of such parcels?
2.	What parcels, if any, have since been disposed of by the Department (a) by auction, and (to) otherwise?
3.	What is the legal description of each of such parcels so disposed of, name of the purchaser and the amount of the purchase price?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 
COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. STANSELL:: 1.	Has the position of Commissioner of Agriculture been filled?
2.	If so, by whom, and what is his remuneration?
3.	Who was the last commissioner under the Agricultural Instruction Act, what was his remuneration and when did he resign?
4.	Who has been doing this work during the years 1920 and 1921?
5.	What are the qualifications necessary for the position required under the Civil Service classification list, and how are the qualifications therein designated and described?
6.	Was the present appointment made by the Civil Service Commission? If not, how was it made and by what authority?
7.	Was the position advertised? If not, why?
8.	Is the new appointee a technically trained man, and of what technical institution of agriculture is he a graduate?
9.	Was promotion within the department considered when the appointment was made?
10.	Were returned soldiers with required technical training and with practical experience given an opportunity to apply for the position?
11.	Was the present incumbent a defeated candidate in support of the party of the present Government during the last election?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Mr. W. J. Black. He resigned 29th November, 1918. He was then receiving a salary of $4,000 per annum.
4.	The Deputy Minister of Agriculture.
5.	Commissioner of Agricultural Instruction.
Qualifications: Graduate in agriculture from a college of recognized standing; experience as Supervisor of Agricultural Instruction or in work of equivalent character and standard; a high degree of organizing ability; knowledge of pathological methods; familiarity with the agricultural conditions and problems of the Dominion; tact, good address, and ability in public speaking.
6.	7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. Answered by No. 1.


ELEVATOR OVERAGES
Mr. LUCAS:: 1.	What was the total amount of overages received by the Government from terminal elevators during the year 1921?
2.	What was the total value of the same and what became of the proceeds?

Questions


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	During the crop year 1920-21, the total amount of overages to be delivered to the Government was 98,455 bushels, and 671,078 pounds of mixed grain.
2.	$130,524.06. Accounts have been rendered for this amount, but no payments have yet been made.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS- INSURANCE
Mr. MACDONALD (Pictou):: 1.	What is the amount of annual premium payable on the $112,590,338 insurance carried on the property of the Canadian Northern Railway Company, referred to in the answer to question number twenty on March 29, 1922?
2.	What is the amount of annual premium payable on the insurance carried on the property of the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	$506,656.52.
2.	$362,098.65.


BEEP IMPORTS
Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What quantity of beef, fresh, cured, canned and frozen, was imported into Canada, and from what countries during each of the years ending March 31, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the beef so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount of duty was collected on these imports during each of the said years?


Jacques Bureau: 


STATEMENT OF IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION OF &quot;BEEF, FRESH AND PICKLED, AND CANNED MEATS&quot; SHOWING THE QUANTITY, VALUE AND DUTY COLLECTED, BY COUNTRIES, FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1920 AND 1921, AND 1922 TO DATE.
[Stage Direction]
1920	1921	1922, to date	Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	DutyBeef, Fresh, Chilled or Frozen:-	$	$ cts.	5	$ cts.	704	$ 34	$ cts. 21 129i,43i 1,541,431	9,417 290,125	1,828 62 46,242 93	United States	
Total	
Beef, Pickled, in Barrels:	1,811,609	230,240	54,348 27	70,671	19,619	2,120 131,811,609	230,340	54,348 27	1,632,862	299,542	48,071 55	71,375	19,653	2,141 25400 420	50 53	6 00 8 40Newfoundland	920	206	18 40	1,230 99 1,257,389	222 15 138,071	24 60 1 98 25,147 78	United States	
Total	
Canned Meats:- United Kingdom	
Australia	
Br. Sts. Settlements.... Hong Kong	
Newfoundland	
New Zealand	467,014	70,650	9,340 28	642,921	46,555	12,858 42467,934	70,856	9,358 68	1,258,718	138,308	25,174 36	643,741	46,658	12,872 82240,819 14,928 18 67,436 42 8,064	91,824 4,655 19 42,534 25 1,681	23,121 98 1,197 67 5	22 11,696 85 6	87 294 17	1,130,112 18,099	304,180 2,862	82,631 26 729 42	768,446 1,116	181,624 433	45,128 38 108 2512,086 1,152 162,578 196,862	6,828 214 22,976 56,415	1,876 45 58 85 4,142 56 14,291 25	1,954 2,001 262,214 573,588 15	601 551 37,565 102,212 22	165 28 151 52 7,203 09 25,553 00 6 051,344	673	185 07	1,375 11,062 10 2,638 110 450,719 39,282	750 14,233 8 959 36 134,857 13,493	206 25 3,801 85 2 20 245 25 9 90 37,085 67 3,710 57	France	132	52	13 00	68,184	29,346	7,419 17Japan	
Miquelon and St. Pierre United States	
Uruguay	
Total	13,935	3,217	835 35	132	31	8 03585,280 85,873	162,972 24,075	44,817 81 6,620 52	450,810 85,500	110,874 19,987	30,490 35 5,496 421,017,871	331,727	88,794 51	2,026,085	557,811	148,791 48	2,213,960	483,246	121,729 54
NOTE:-"Canned Beef" and "Canned Mutton" are not shown separately in the Classification of Imports, but are included in the statement oi "Canned Meats".

Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What quantity of mutton and lamb, fresh, cured and canned, was imported into Canada, and from what countries, during each of the years ending March 31, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the mutton and lamb so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount was collected as duty on the imports referred to during each of the years 1920, 1921 and 1922?


Jacques Bureau: Questions


STATEMENT OF IMPORTS ENTERED FOR CONSUMPTION OF &quot;MUTTON AND LAMB, FRESH, CHILLED OR FROZEN,&quot; SHOWING THE QUANTITY, VALUE AND DUTY COLLECTED, BY COUNTRIES, FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1920 AND 1921, AND 1922 TO DATE
[Stage Direction]
Mutton and Lamb, Fresh Chilled, or Frozen,	1920	1921	Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	Duty$	%	68,080 4,868,884 2,910,737	*9,183 700,176 562,806	$ 2,042 40 112,026 77 87,322 11New Zealand	
United States	
Total	2,477,799 2,365,105	313,592 490,182	49,585 98 70,953 15	4,842,904	803,774	120,539 13	7,847,701	1,272,165	201,391 28Mutton and Lamb, Fresh, Chilled, or Frozen	1922, to Date	Lbs.	Value	DutyAustralia	104,313 605,364 7,618,387	S 7,804 94,894 417,971	$ 3,129 39 12,343 73 78,551 61United States	
Total	8,328,064	520,669	94,024 73
Note.-"Canned Mutton" is not shown separately in the classification of imports, but is included in the statement "Canned Meats."

Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What quantity of pork or pork products, such as bacon, hams, fresh, salted or otherwise cured, have been imported into Canada and from what countries, during each of the years ending the 31st March 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the pork and pork products so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount was collected as duty on the said pork imports during the said years?


Jacques Bureau: 


STATEMENT OF IMPORTS ENTEREDTOR CONSUMPTION OF &quot;PORK AND PORK PRODUCTS&quot; SHOWING THE QUANTITY, VALUE AND DUTY COLLECTED, BY COUNTRIES, FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1920 AND 1921, AND 1922, TO DATE 1921
[Stage Direction]
Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	DutyPork: Fresh, Chilled or frozen-	$	$	$	s	3,585	$ 611	% 72 30Australia	12,097	2,190	362 91	1,360 28,467,150	1QQ 4,419,634	27 20 854,014 5046,293,256	i4,405,277	1,388,79768	22,402,444	3,862,311	672,073 32	
46,305,353	14,407,467	1,389,16059	22,402,444	3,862,311	672,073 32	28,472,095	4,420,444	854,114 00
Bacon and Hams: Shoulders and Sides, Cured									
	20	12	0 30	303	111	6 06	1,400 2 20	525 2 6	23 70 0 04 0 40
									
	4,337 58	1,527 17	86 74 1 16	5,145	2,462	102 90			
Newfoundland										
				66 550 6,817,359	2i 110 1,545,380	1 32 11 00 136,347 18			
									
	4,973,539	1,384,409	99,470 78				6,849,036	1,233,802	136,980 72
									
	4,977,954	1,385,965	99,558 98	6,823,423	1,548,084	136,468 46	6,850,458	1,234,335	137,004 86
Pork: Barreled in Brine									
400 1,945 8,142,820	75 360 808,976	6 00 38 90 162,856 403,225 9,131,568	824 2,089,028	64 50 182,631 36	2,930 10,846,702	754 1,734,370	58 60 216,934 04	
9,134,793	2,089,852	182,695 86	10,849,632	1,735,124	216,992 64	8,145,165	809,411	162,901 30
Pork: Dry Salted- Hong Kong										
4,693 4,171,647	2,320 1,061,487	93 86 83,432 94	768 2,061,447	330 438,345	15 36 41,228 94	1,113,801	152,283	22,276 02
4,176,340	1,063,807	83,526 80	2,062,215	438,675	41,244 30	1,113,801	152,283	22,276 02
									
1922, to Date
39i
Questions

Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What quantity of green apples, in boxes or barrels, have been imported into Canada, and from what countries, during each of the years ending March 31, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the apples so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount was collected as duty on the apples so imported?


Jacques Bureau: Statement of the total imports entered for consumption of " green apples " showing quantity, value and duty collected for the fiscal years 1920, 1921 and 1922, to date:
Fiscal Year 1922
Quantity
Country	Brls.	Value	Duty
United
States. 145,088 $1,053,744 $130,579 20
Fiscal Year 1921
United
States. 273,319	$1,528,606	$245,987 10
Eleven Months Fiscal Year, 1922 United
States. 105,828 $ 648,293 $ 95,245 20 EGG IMPORTS Mr. SUTHERLAND:
1.	What quantity of eggs have been imported into Canada, and from what countries, during each of the years ending March 31, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the eggs so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount of duty was collected as duty on the eggs so imported?


Jacques Bureau: 


STATEMENT OF IMPORTS ENTERED FOR CONSUMPTION OF &quot;EGGS&quot;, SHOWING THE QUANTITY, VALUE AND DUTY COLLECTED, BY COUNTRIES, FOR THE FISCAL YEARS 1920, 1921 AND 1922, TO DATE
[Stage Direction]
Country	1920	1921	Doz.	Value	Duty	Doz.	Value	DutyUnited Kingdom	
Australia	
Hong Kong	
Newfoundland	
New Zealand	
China	
Japan	
United States	
Total	3 1,800 65,616 2 5,158 3,422 1,200 5,900,279	$ 30 806 18,069 1 2,470 1,077 505 2,814,484	$ 0 06 * 54 00 1,968 48 0 06 154 74 102 66 36 00 177,008 37	i 8,915 71,959 [DOT] 3 11,250 46,134 2,257 5,201,417	$ 15 5,851 22,215 1 2 6,844 15,637 821 2,292,912	* 0 02 267 45 2,158 77 0 09 225 00 1,384 02 67 71 156,042 515,977,480	2,837,442	179,324 37	5,341,936	2,344,297	160,145 57Country	1922, to Date	Doz.	Value	DutyUnited Kingdom	6 30,434 78,428	$ 39 13,917 20,923	$ 12 913 02 2,352 84Australia	Hong Kong	Newfoundland	New Zealand	149,783	42,205	4,493 49
United States					9,223,475	3,122,929	276,704 25
						
				9,482,126	3,200,013	284,463 72
						
[Stage Direction]
Questions
BUTTER IMPORTS Mr. SUTHERLAND:
1.	What quantity of butter was imported into Canada, and from what countries, during each of the years ending March 31st, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
STATEMENT OF IMPORTS ENTERED FOR CONSUMPTION OF "BUTTER" SHOWING THE QUANTITY, VALUE, AND DUTY COLLECTED, BY COUNTRIES, tFORiTHE*FISCAL YEARS 1920, 1921, AND 1922, TO DATE.
Country	1920	1921	Lbs.	Value	Duty	Lbs.	Value	DutyUnited Kingdom	$	$.	112	$ 49	$ 4 48Australia	59,080 24	21,369 24	2,363 20 96	Br. Sts. Settlements	Hong Kong	Newfoundland	
Newl Zealand	
Holland	1,340 149,240	503 59,000	53 60 4,478 32	1,049 1,533,280 110	461 918,589 55	41 96 48,119 68 4 40Syria	United States	
Total	188,271	96,098	7,530 84	2,207,077	886,555	88,283 08397,955	$ 176,994	S 14,426 92	3,741,628	$ 1,805,709	$ 136,453 60Country	1922, To Date	Lbs.	Value	DutyUnited Kingdom	2,036,471 287,724	$ 586,381 84,738	$ 62,671 09 11,508 96Australia	Br. Sts. Settlements	Hong Kong	20 170 2,148,752	26 49 681,685	80 6 80 68,804 00Newfoundland	New Zealand	Holland	75 1,332,210	46 448,342	. 3 00 53,288 40United States	Total	5,805,422	$ 1,801,267	$ 196,283 05
2.	What was the value of the butter so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount of duty was collected during each of the said years on the butter so imported?
Jacques Bureau: 


OLEOMARGINE IMPORTS
Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	What quantity of oleomargarine has been imported into Canada, and from what countries, during the years ending March 31st, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the value of the oleomargarine so imported during each of the said years?
3.	What amount of duty was collected on such imports during each of the said years?


Jacques Bureau: Statement of the imports entered for consumption of Oleomargarine, showing the quantity, value and duty collected during the fiscal years 1920, 1921 and 1922, to date, by countries.
Fiscal Year 1920 Quantity
Country United	Lbs.	Value	DutyKingdom	$	FreeUnited	States..	... 6,497,031	1,872,104	FreeUnited	Fiscal Year	1921	Kingdom	$..	FreeUnited	States	
4,630,747 1,206,351 Fiscal Year 1922 to date United	FreeKingdom United	... 6,000	$ 1,399	FreeStates..	... 1,330,634	254,329	FreeTotal	
1,336,634 $ 255,728 Free
Questions

CUSTOMS REVENUE Mr. SUTHERLAND:
What amount of Customs duty was collected in each province of the Dominion during the
years ending March 31, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922?


Jacques Bureau: 


STATEMENT OF CUSTOMS DUTIES COLLECTED IN THE FOLLOWING PROVINCES DURING THE FISCAL YEARS 1917-18 TO 1921-22 (11 MONTHS)
[Stage Direction]
Province	1917-18	1918-19	1919-20	1920-21	1921-22 (11 months)Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Yukon	$ 4,378,192 64 129,560 16 4,294,106 43 42,980,392 76 79,969,478 45 11,674,421 58 3,805,981 02 4,011,683 03 10,226,151 09 118,012 25	8 4,157,240 67 126,954 13 4,342,127 66 43,581,440 16 77,334,332 91 10,664,827 55 2,858,349 00 3,428,534 45 11,476,645 72 74,004 24	$ 4,943,802 65 150,259 92 6,165,461 73 55,609,453 18 90,565,833 12 12,153,306 80 2,697,031 09 3,633,501 63 11,543,104 35 58,881 02	S 4,373,168 91 198,202 74 5,377,429 02 56,182,275 37 82,532,697 29 11,395,327 45 3,478,836 35 4,146,991 16 11,941,003 80 59,927 19	$ 2,360,816 35 315,052 32 5,585,704 28 31,562,828 16 47,396,065 65 6,009,616 71 1,474,671 89 2,082,710 72 10,871,208 20 38,144 76

Mr. FAFARD:: 1.	How many pounds of butter were imported from New Zealand during the year 1921?
2.	During what months of the said year were these importations made?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1.	1,080,912 pounds.
2.	January, 1921, 235,424 lb; February, 258,664 lb; March, 417,816 lb; April, 90,776 lb; May, 73,472 lb; June, 1,960 lb; July, none; August, none; September, none; October, 2,800 lb; November, none; December, none; total, 1,080,912 lbs.


STEAMSHIP SUBSIDIES
Mr. EVANS:: 1.	What steamship companies operating on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans are subsidized by the Canadian Government?
2.	What is the extent and purpose of such subsidies?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	The following companies performing ocean services were subsidized during 192122, and the votes are repeated in the Estimates for 1922-23.
Atlantic Ocean:-Reid-Newfoundland Co., St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada and Newfoundland Service; annual subsidy $35,000.
Royal Mail Steam Packet Co., London, Canada, British West Indies and Demerara service; annual subsidy $340,666.66.
Elder, Dempster and Co., Ltd., London, England, Canada and South Africa service; annual subsidy $146,000.
Pacific Ocean:-Union Steamship Co., of New Zealand, Ltd., Dunedin, New Zealand, and Canada-New Zealand (Pacific) service; annual subsidy $130,509.
[Mr. Bureau.!
Pacific Steamship Co.-Victoria and San Francisco; annual subsidy $3,000.
2.	The extent of these subsidies is indicated in the answer to No. 1. Their purpose is to assist the development of trade between Canada and the countries named, and also in some cases to provide for the transportation of mails to and from Canada.


Mr. JACOBS:: 1.	What sums are paid annually to steamship companies as subsidies by the Canadian Government?
2.	What are the countries to which such vessels sail?
3.	How much has so far been paid on account of such subsidies?
4.	Do any vessels under the control of the Canadian Mercantile Marine sail to countries and ports to which vessels subsidized by the Government also sail?
5.	If so does the Government Intend to take action to discontinue subsidies to steamship companies competing with the steamers belonging to the Canadian Government?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	The estimated expenditure for the fiscal year 1922-23 under the head of Mail Subsidies and Steamship Subventions is $1,100,775.66. Of this amount $655,175.66 is for ocean services, and the balance, amounting to $445,600, is for coasting services in Canadian waters.
2.	Vessels running on the ocean services referred to above sail to Newfoundland, the British West Indies, Demerara, South Africa, New Zealand, and the United States.
3.	This question is too indefinite to enable a reply to be made.
4.	Yes.
5.	Canadian Merchant Marine vessels, when properly equipped to meet requirements of service should be entitled to preference.

Questions


TURTLE MOUNTAIN FOREST RESERVE
Mr. STEEDSMAN:: 1.	How many men were employed In the care and management of the Turtle Mountain Forest Reserve during the year 1921?
2.	What were their duties and what salary or rvage was paid to each of them?
3.	How many head of livestock were pastured there during 1921, and what revenue was derived from same?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	Five.
Salary Bonus
2.	1 Senior Forest Ranger $1605 $263.25 1 Asst. Forest Ranger $1020 $163.00 1 Asst. Forest Ranger $1020 $172.82 1 Herder, April to November $690.29 1 Teamster, May to November $517.48
3.	1822 head, $3,652.90.


NOVA SCOTIA PENSIONERS
Mr. DUFF:: 1.	What are the names and post office addresses of all persons receiving pensions, in the Province of Nova Scotia, in virtue of service, and what are the respective amounts of said pensions?
2.	What are the names and post office addresses of all persons in said province, receiving pensions by virtue of being dependents of soldiers, and what are the respective amounts received yearly by each said dependent?


Henri Sévérin Béland: This question could, of course, be readily answered; but there exists in Canada a great divergence of opinion as to the advisability of rendering public the names of all pensioners in this country. Therefore, I would ask the hon. member to put on the Order Paper a Notice of Motion, with a view of ascertaining the sentiment of the House in regard to rendering public the names of pensioners. I am in the hands of the House. The moment the sentiment of the House is expressed, if it be decided that the names shall be made public of all pensioners, dependent or disabled, the question will be answered. In the meantime, if the hon. gentleman is agreeable, 1 would ask that the question be dropped.
Question dropped.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS

Mr. DUFF:: 1.	What was the total expenditure for the year 1921 of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Ke-establishment ?
2.	How was the total expenditure of the Department divided with respect to- (a) Pensions; (b) Treatment; (c) Vocational Training; (d) Land Settlement; and (e) Relief of the unemployed?
3.	What was the total expenditure of this Department for the year 1921 for-(a) Administration of Pensions; (b) Administration and costs of treatment; (c) Pay and allowances of those on treatment; (d) Administration and costs of Vocational training; (e) Pay and allowances of those on vocational training; (f) Land Settlement Loans; (g) Administration costs of land settlement; (h) Unemployment relief; and (i) Administration costs of unemployment relief?
4.	What was the total expenditure for the year 1921 for the staff salaries, and maintenance costs of each hospital?
5.	What number of persons, full and part time, were on each hospital staff, and what was the average number of patients on the strength of each hospital?
6.	What was the total expenditure for the year 1921 for travelling expenses of the Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment officials, patients not included?
7.	What were the travelling expenses of each
Commissioner of the Pensions Board for the year 1921?	.


Mr. LUCAS:: 1.	How many buildings or parts of buildings are rented by the Government in the city of Ottawa for office purposes?
2.	What rental is paid in each case?


Mr. KENNEDY (Glengarry):: 1.	What were the total payments made in each year by the Government from 1914 to date, (a) to or for the Canadian Northern System, (b) to or for the Grand Trunk System,
(c)	to or for the Grand Trunk Pacific System,
(d)	to or for the National Transcontinental, and (e) for the Intercolonial, distinguishing in each year the amounts loaned by the Crown, and in the case of the Intercolonial Railway, distinguishing between expenditure charged to revenue and expenditure charged to capital?
2.	What were the several amounts in each year that were guaranteed for the said railways during the said periods, and the amount not borrowed of any amount guaranteed?
3.	What portions of those amounts so paid or guaranteed (other than with respect to the Intercolonial) were for capital expenditure and what sums were to meet deficits?
4.	What amount of each loan guaranteed was for refunding purposes?


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	What amount of money has already been advanced the Quebec Harbour Commissioners by the Government of Canada, and what are the dates of such advances?
2.	What are the present terminal or wharf facilities at the harbour of Quebec?
3.	Are the said terminal and wharf facilities being: fully utilized?
4.	If not, to what extent?
5.	What is the daily capacity of the said facilities, both for incoming and outgoing freight?
6.	What has been the daily average use of such capacity during the season of navigation?
7.	Are such advances subject to interest?
8.	If so, has such interest been paid in full?
9.	If not in full, what amount, if any, has been paid?
10.	What are the total arrears of interest?
11.	What additional facilities, if any, are now proposed to be installed?
Quebec Fisheries

UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS Mr. BLACK (Yukon) :
For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, reports, and other documents exchanged between the Department of the Interior, or any of its officers or employees, and the Gold Commissioner of the Yukon Territory, or any other person, during the years 1919, 1920 and 1921, concerning the imposition of a royalty tax or Government charge upon the output of minerals, other than gold, from the Yukon Territory. Also a copy of the Order In Council in this connection.


Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams, reports and other documents exchanged between the Department of the Interior or any of its officers or employees, and the Gold Commissioner of Yukon Territory, or any other person or official, concerning the application to Yukon Territory of the Order in Council which provides that the mining recorders shall not receive for record, transfers of interest in mineral claims, when such interests are less than one-quarter interest. Also a copy of the said Order in Council.


Mr. WHITE:: For a copy of all correspondence passed during the year 1921, between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Prime Minister of Ontario, relating to the activities of Honourable Manning Doherty in England on the subject of the cattle embargo.


Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda and other documents passed between the Minister of Labour and Mr. J. B. McLachlan.


Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure):: For a copy of the petition presented by Mr. A. Wick and others, asking for improved methods in the Quebec fisheries, together with all correspondence and other documents relating thereto.


Mr. CALDWELL:: For a copy of the contract entered into by the Government with the Dominion Iron and Steel Corporation for a supply of steel plates, along with a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the Government and the said company relating to the above mentioned contract.


Mr. STEVENS:: For a copy of all documents, correspondence, letters and telegrams passed between the Minister of Immigration or any of his officials, and persons, companies, organizations, since January 1, 1922, regarding the placing of immigrants upon land in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan or Alberta.



QUEBEC FISHERIES

Charles Marcil: For a copy of the correspondence and all other documents, regarding the transfer of fisheries to the Province of Quebec.

He said: The question of jurisdiction in the matter of fisheries is not a new one, at least in this particular case. For many years past there has been a divided jurisdiction between the Dominion Government and the governments of several provinces. I am reminded, Mr. Speaker, that twenty-five years ago this very month, in 1897, on your invitation and the invitation of the Liberals of the county of Gaspe I became a candidate to represent that county in the legislature. I contested the election against the then premier of the province, the Hon. E. J. Flynn, who in the course of his campaign announced that the province of Quebec had secured a victory before the Privy Council in England by obtaining a decision which meant that from then on the provincial government would issue licenses to the fishermen in the tidal waters of Quebec. And so it happened that from 3 397 until last year, without interruption, the government of Quebec controlled the issuing of licenses to the fishermen in the counties of Bonaventure, Gaspe, along the river St. Lawrence, and in the tidal waters generally of the province. In the month of November, 1920, following a reference to the Privy Council of the question of disputed jurisdiction between the Dominion and some of the provincial governments, and in the light of the decision rendered in the case of British Columbia, a new policy was adopted by the federal government then in office. Last session, wishing to know exactly what the policy of the Dominion government was, I placed on the Order Paper a question which was answered by Hon. Mr. Ballantyne, then Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I give the question and the answer:



QUEBEC SALMON NET LICENSES

Mr. MARCIL (Bonaventure) :: 1.	Has any understanding been arrived at between the Government of Canada and that of the Province of Quebec regarding the granting of licenses for salmon nets in the tidal waters of said province consequent upon the recent judgment of the Privy Council?
2.	Is the Government aware that the Province of Quebec has granted licenses for the present year?
3.	What action If any does the Government intend to take in this matter in the public interest and that of the fishermen concerned?
4.	Is it a fact that the Province of Quebec contends that it is the sole authority having power to grant licenses in such tidal waters because of its jurisdiction over the bed of rivers and bays and the shores generally of that Province?
5.	If so, will the Government of Canada recognise the licenses granted this year by the Government of Quebec?

Quebec Fisheries


Hon. Mr. BALLANTYNE :: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The decision of the Judical Committee of the Privy Council of November 30 last in the Quebec Fisheries Reference decided that the administration of the fisheries in the navigable waters if the province that 'are accessible by way of navigation from the sea comes within the purview of the Federal Government. The Government of the Province of Quebec has been informed that the Department of Marine and Fisheries will undertake the administration of the fisheries In such waters from May 1 proximo. Any licenses issued by the provincial authorities will not be accepted as conferring authority to fish. No one will be permitted to fish in the said waters except under license from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries.
The House will realize the position in which the fishermen found themselves. They had paid for and been granted licenses in the usual course, as they had done for the last twenty-five years, and they were suddenly informed by the Dominion authorities that thereafter those licenses were worthless and that they would have to secure permits from the Dominion fishery officer. Of course, the fishermen had to accept the situation, and the electors in my constituency, in yours, Mr. Speaker, and throughout the province, were called upon to pay additional sums of $20, $25, $30 and $40 before they were in a position to fish. This anomalous condition of affairs then presented itself: Men who had fished for twenty-five years on a provincial license were told that they could not fish unless they secured a license from the Dominion authorities, while other men who had the Dominion license found it worthless unless they could show a provincial permit as well. The man who had the provincial license could fish along the shore belonging to the province, but he had to have a Dominion license if he fished in the waters that came within the purview of the federal government. Naturally, the fishermen asked that some remedy should be found for this state of affairs; and about a month ago we learned that negotiations had been entered into between the Department of Marine, under the control of my hon. friend (Mr. Lapointe), and the government of Quebec, as a result of which a satisfactory solution had been arrived at. The fisheries have been transferred to the province of Quebec, so far as such a transference lies within the power of the Dominion government, who retain the control that is required by the British North America Act. I have been receiving letters from my constituents, who fish the magnificent Gaspe 4 p.m. salmon, which is known the world over and is the glory and joy of men from all parts of America
who love fishing, and they ask that the license fees paid to the Dominion government last year be refunded. I have submitted the matter to the minister, who informs me that he has it under consideration, although his first answer was not favourable. As an instance of what actually happened, I should like to read to the House a brief statement given to me by a gentleman who was at Port Daniel, one of the fishing villages in my constituency, last year, at the time of the conference between the Dominion and the provincial governments. This statement is as follows: Statement of Louis Simpson re Complaints of Certain Salmon Fishermen of Port Daniel and District.
Last summer these salmon fishermen were called upon to pay for two several licenses to permit them to follow their occupation of fishing salmon. One license fee was paid to the Dominion Government, whilst another license fee had to be paid to the Government of the province of Quebec.
The official responsible to the Dominion Government collected the several fees and in return granted licenses, but after so doing did not notify the fishermen that it was the intention of the Dominion Government to alter the arrangement, which for years past had been permitted by the representatives of the Government of the province of Quebec (which Government until last year had administered the fisheries). One of these arrangements, was that, notwithstanding, the printed regulations, the fishermen fishing in the harbours open to the winds blowing from the gulf (such as Port Daniel and the other ports to the northeast) should not be required to tie up their nets on Sunday. It was recognized by the government official that nets, so tied, were liable, should a storm arise, blowing from the east to be destroyed. Moreover, at Port Daniel where the rivers emptying into the Baracbois are allowed to be poached, there was nothing to be gained by a strict adherence to these regulations.
The officials of the Dominion Government, without giving the fishermen any- notice of their intention of withdrawing such permission or of their intention to make a custom, legalized by many years permission, which certainly can be claimed to have established, until withdrawn by notice, a legal right, raided the fishermen's nets, seized and sold the salmon found therein, and summoned the licensees to the county town of New Carlisle to appear before a judge.
The fishermen, against my advice, were induced to plead guilty of a technical infraction of the regulations and were each fined by the judge, two dollars and costs.
The loss to the fishermen was as follows:-
The value of the nets taken.
One day's work at the most important time of the year.
Expenses to New Carlisle and back.
Fine and expenses.
The fines, loss of time and expense will have exceeded ten dollars per man, while some of the salmon taken was allowed to go back and the balance was eventually sold at less than the market price for fresh caught fish.
The actual sum realized by the department from the sale of the fish is not known to me,
Quebec Fisheries


Mr. W. G. McQUARRIE (New Westminster) :: In British Columbia dual licenses
are exacted; that is to say, the fishermen have to take licenses from the Dominion as well as from the province. Would the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) be good enough to explain why this arrangement should be made with respect to the province of Quebec if a similar arrangement is not made with respect to British Columbia ?


Charles Marcil: I have
exhausted my right to speak, but the reason is this: for the last twenty-five years Quebec has administered its fisheries, and it is advisable in the interests of those fisheries that that system should continue.


William Garland McQuarrie: As I understand it,
British Columbia exercises control over the fisheries of that province, and has done so for years. I would suggest that the hon. minister give some consideration also to conditions respecting the fisheries in British Columbia.


Ernest Lapointe: Mr. Speaker, the
House will be indebted to the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil)-at least, I am-for having brought this subject to its attention, especially in view of the misapprehensions that seem to exist in some quarters as to what has taken place in regard to these fisheries. There has been no transfer, much less an abandonment, of any right belonging to the federal government. An irritating question has been settled, in the interests, I believe, of all concerned.
Under the British North America Act, "sea coast and inland fisheries" are, by inclusion in article 12, placed under the legislative power of the federal government. The interpretation of this article has been the subject of many litigations, and I think a short history of the case will help to bring about an understanding of the situation.
There was no difficulty in connection with the fisheries until about 1882, when the federal government undertook to lease salmon angling privileges in non-tidal rivers in New Brunswick. In this connection the case of Robertson vs the Queen was submitted to the Exchequer Court of Canada and subsequently, on appeal, to the Supreme Court of Canada. The federal government had leased salmon angling privileges on the Miramichi river. The adjacent property was owned by a private company which permitted private citizens to fish in that river. Mr. Robertson took proceedings against these fishermen, and the latter were successful. Robertson then instituted an action for damages against the Dominion government in the Exchequer Court and later before the Supreme Court of Canada. The decision was that under the British North America Act the fisheries did not pass to the federal government, but remained the property of the riparian owners. As in all the provinces the Crown, in the right of the province was owner of the properties adjacent to the rivers. From the time of that decision until to-day the provinces have themselves administered those fisheries and leased the salmon and other angling privileges.
Following this decision the provinces claimed that they had jurisdiction in tidal waters as well, and it was finally decided to submit the case for a decision to the Supreme Court of Canada and to the Privy Council. This submission to the Supreme Court was in 1894, and the decision of the Privy Council was given in 1898. It was, in substance, that the exclusive power of regulating the fisheries, no matter where they were situated, was vested in the federal government under the British North America Act, but that any rights which the provinces had prior to Confederation were still kept by them. But the decision did not define what were those property rights of the provinces.
In Ontario all the fisheries are non-tidal, so the administration of all the fisheries in Ontario passed to the Ontario government, and has always been in its hands. Of course, this does not take away the power of regulation by the federal government, which applies to all the fisheries, inland as well as sea coast. Immediately

Quebec Fisheries
after that decision, the sea-washed provinces claimed the administration of all their fisheries. They took the ground that prior to Confederation they owned the fisheries not only in the non-tidal rivers but in the territorial waters as well. They did not go to the courts immediately, but after many conferences between the Dominion government and the provincial governments they came to an agreement under which the federal government continued to administer the fisheries pending a decision on the question of rights. This applied to all the provinces except Quebec. Quebec insisted on its interpretation of the clause of the decision, but finally there was also a modus vivendi between this government and the province of Quebec, under which Quebec kept the control and the administration of all the fisheries on the north shore of the river St. Lawrence and the gulf of St. Lawrence, on the north shore as far as a place called Pointe des Monts, and also of the rivers and their estuaries from Pointe des Monts as far as the boundary Blanc Sablon. It was found impossible to reach an amicable settlement as to the question of rights, and then it was decided to submit the difficulty to the courts again. This was done in 1912 or 1913. The province of British Columbia was the party to the litigation against the Dominion government, but all the other interested provinces joined in the case and were represented before the courts. The decision was given in 1913, and was, in brief, that since Magna Charta there has been under British law a public right of fishing in all tidal waters, and that the administration of this right passed to the federal government under the British North America Act. This decision settled the matter everywhere except in Quebec. Immediately after the decision was rendered, the government of Canada published in the official Canada Gazette a notice stating that on 1st January, 1915, it would assume control of the fisheries in the tidal waters of the province of Quebec hitherto administered by the federal government, and at the same time on the 25th of January the government of the province of Quebec published in the Quebec Official Gazette a notice that the decision of the British Columbia reference did not apply to the province of Quebec, and that therefore any person wishing to fish in the river and gulf of St. Lawrence and any tidal waters should make application to the Department of Colonization, Mines and Fisheries for the necessary permit.

The province of Quebec contended that as the decision of the Privy Council was based on Magna Charta, and as Magna Charta did not apply to Quebec the decision did not affect that province;-it is well to remember that in civil matters the French law has always been kept in Quebec, though the country passed to the British Crown. It was consequently necessary to have a further reference to the court as far as that province was concerned. In the meantime the same modus vivendi applied and Quebec continued to administer her fisheries within the geographical limits I have described. The reference was arranged for in 1914, and the decision of the Privy Council was given in 1920. This decision was, in substance, that while Magna Charta did not apply to Quebec, there is a public right of fishing in all the waters that are navigable from the sea, but that there is no public right in the soil under the water, and that where the province or any private person owned the soil it could not be used for fishing without the consent of the owner. I think it would be well for me to read a sentence of the decision of the Privy Council:
To the first question, neither the Government of Quebec, nor any member of the executive council, has the power to grant the exclusive right of fishing in the tidal waters so far as navigable of the rivers, streams, gulfs, bays, straits or arms Of the sea of the province and of the high seas washing its coasts. In so far as the soil is vested in the Crown in right of the province, the Government of the province has exclusive power to grant the right to affix engines to the solum, so far as such engines and the affixing of them do not interfere with the right of the public to fish, or prevent the regulation of the right of fishing by private persons without the aid of such engines.
Now, it happens not only in the SL Lawrence river but on the coast of the gulf of St. Lawrence, on both the north and the south shores, that owing to conditions along the coast all the fisheries there are carried on by fishing engines attached to the soil. The water is very shallow along the whole coast, and in very many cases these fishing nets are out of the water at low tide; so that there really is a conflict of jurisdiction in the administration of these fisheries along the whole coast. The decision, of course- and this has never been denied-gives the exclusive power of regulating the fisheries to the federal government. In the province of Quebec the ownership of the soil is still vested in those who own that soil, either private citizens or the Crown-mostly the Crown in right of the province. So whatever rights of fishing the

Quebec Fisheries
public may have in those waters cannot be exercised there, on account of the conditions along the coast, without attaching engines to the soil, and this cannot be done without the consent of the owner, in other words, the province of Quebec. Last year, which was the first year after the decision of the Privy Council no settlement could be made; and the federal government undertook to enforce its rights in all the waters of the province that are navigable from the sea. To administer those fisheries and to issue licenses, which they had never done before, the federal government had to employ overseers. We appointed nine overseers, with an inspector over them, and we had to use a suitable boat for the purpose of supervising those fisheries. The cost of this service was about $85,000, and the total revenue from this portion of the district this year has been $12,573.39, and as the fees for salmon fishing licenses have been reduced the revenue from that source will be even lower in future.


Mr. MACLEAN (York) :: Has the federal government applied to the British Parliament to have this dispute straightened out by legislative action? Would that cure the difficulty?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not think it is at all necessary.


William Findlay Maclean: It is a very expensive business.


Ernest Lapointe: It has been very expensive so far, but that will not be the case in future now that an agreement has been reached. I may point out that under the agreement the provincial government will continue what they were doing last year and furthermore will issue licenses. Great friction and conflict resulted from the divided authority last year as my hon. friend from Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) has stated. The fishermen in his district, and in other districts of the province, had to pay a double license at high cost. For instance, on one side of the Baie des Cha-leurs, in my hon. friend's constituency, the fishermen had to pay twice the amount which was exacted from the fishermen of New Brunswick, on the other side, for the same right and the same privilege. There has also been litigation, as between the fishermen and the provincial government and the federal government, and it was a very unfortunate state of affairs. After all. under the present arrangement we have
practically only repealed the Order in Council which had been passed last year after the decision of the Privy Council, which Order in Council provided that licenses should be required from all the fishermen along the coasts of the gulf of St. Lawrence and the river St. Lawrence. We have repealed that Order in Council, but we are maintaining our right of regulating the fisheries there, and we will always ha*ve the right to intervene if these regulations are not observed.


Arthur Meighen: Who will report to the Government as to whether the regulations are observed or not?


Ernest Lapointe: I would say the fishermen themselves, and those who are interested in the fisheries there; there are many interested parties.


Arthur Meighen: You will have no officer to report to you whether your regulations are lived up to or not?


Ernest Lapointe: There is no obstacle to the appointment of some man to see that the regulations are fully observed.


William Garland McQuarrie: Is it the intention of the federal government to transfer to the province of British Columbia the administration of the fisheries on the Pacific coast? Has the government of that province requested such transfer, and has the federal government reached an adverse decision in the matter? If so, on what ground was that decision based?


Ernest Lapointe: The government of British Columbia has not requested any such transfer. Furthermore, I may tell my hon. friend that the legal and other conditions are not at all the same in British Columbia as in the province of Quebec. I do not know whether what is suggested could be done. My hon. friend the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) shakes his head, but if the government of British Columbia applies for a transfer of the administration of fisheries the application will certainly be considered. However, I do not think such a request will be made, because the administration of those fisheries costs this Government about $400,000 a year, and I think the provincial government would hesitate very much before assuming such a large expenditure as that.


William Garland McQuarrie: Has not the minister seen the despatches in the press to the effect that the government of British Columbia was making such a request?
Quebec Fisheries


Ernest Lapointe: No such request has reached me, but my hon. friend may rest assured it will be fully considered if, and when, it does come.


William Garland McQuarrie: Can the minister state the amount of revenue received from the Pacific coast fisheries?


Ernest Lapointe: I cannot give my hon. friend that information offhand, but I have been informed by the officials of the department that the administration of these fisheries involves a cost to the Dominion treasury of about $400,000 a year.
With respect to the Quebec fisheries, as I have said there has been no giving away of any right. We have kept the power of regulation, we have not given anything which we should not have given; and the whole matter resolves itself into the settlement of a cause of conflict and difficulty. In view of the Confederation pact, which was the result of any agreement between various provinces by virtue of which they relinquished some of their rights and retained others for the purposes of administration and control, it is very important that any cause of conflict should be avoided. Any encroachment on the rights of the provinces-even the mere appearance of an encroachment-is dangerous to the peace and good order of this country. I think, therefore, it is a good thing that this question, which was certainly an irritating one, should have been settled in a way that will result in economy on the part of this Government at this time. I repeat that no right has been given away by the federal government, and this settlement should enlist the support of all good-minded people in the Dominion.


Mr. LADNER:: Does the federal government draw any revenue from the fisheries as a result of this arrangement with the province of Quebec?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not see how any revenue could be enjoyed in view of the fact that we expended $88,000 last year and the receipts were only $12,000. So the Quebec fisheries will be a charge on the provincial government.


Arthur Meighen: If my hon. friend has no officers to see that his regulations are carried out this year, he will not have any revenue-he will only have the advantage of the expenditure.


Ernest Lapointe: The difference between the revenue and the expenditure was $76,-
000.	I can give a pledge to my hon. friend

that no officers will be paid any such sum as that to carry out the work of supervision.


Arthur Meighen: One officer would not
be able to accomplish anything. This is merely a motion for the production of papers, and it is not wholly unobjectionable in itself, but is a motion which, in my judgment, should pass. Of course it is a motion on which hon. gentlemen have a right to speak, and the mover has taken advantage of it to congratulate the Government on its course, and the Government has also taken advantage of it to congratulate itself. I have listened with interest to what has fallen from the lips of both these hon. gentlemen, and I may say that their comment on the conduct of the Government has been helpful. The minister's remarks have been of value as interpreting the judgments delivered since 1882 by the Privy Council. I may go further and say that they are illuminating on every question except those questions which may possibly come in controversy and be of moment in connection with the conduct of administration, that is to say, on the question of the right of the Government of Canada to abdicate to any other government a function placed in it by the constitution, the right of the government of Canada by Order in Council to amend the British North America Act. At the present time I do not wish to enter into a controversy for the reason that on the motion that is before the House, for the production of papers, the judgment of the House could not possibly be obtained. I merely make this comment for the purpose of preserving the right, although I do not think it needs any preserving, of bringing the subject up on a later occasion should I be so advised.


William Findlay Maclean: I should like to say in connection with this discussion, that I do not blame the lawyers at all, but the question at issue to my mind is in regard to the powers under the British North America Act, and the distribution of rights as between the provinces and the federal government. I think all these troubles could be remedied by legislation rather than by appeals to the court. But we do not happen to have in this country the right to amend our own constitution. They have that right in Australia, and now that we are a nation, and so described by everybody in this country-and especially so descrihed in his reference to the free

Gaspe Railways
state of Ireland the other day, by the Prime Minister of Great Britain-I think it is pretty nearly time that the Parliament of Canada had the power to straighten out this question of jurisdiction as between the provinces and the Dominion. If we had that power these questions would not be coming up. In other words these questions could be settled by conference between the provinces and the federal power, and the settlement embodied in a short act of parliament. Matters are coming up year after year, and we have conferences and litigation between the Dominion and the provinces, and it is an expensive business. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on it, when it could all be straightened out by legislation, rather than by litigation. Again I say, after hearing discussions for many years, and seeing the progress that has been made in curing these things by legislation, rather than by negotiation or by incessant appeals to the court, that a short way to cure the trouble would easily be reached, if the Parliament of Canada, perhaps in eonjuction with the provinces, had the right to amend the constitution, so that it could be adapted to the requirements of the day.


William Garland McQuarrie: As to the question which I asked a few moments ago, I do not wish it to be understood that I was urging upon the hon. minister that he should transfer the fisheries of British Columbia to that province, but having seen in the press despatches a statement to the effect that British Columbia had asked that to be done, I wish to clear up the matter. I think, as a matter of fact, there might be more reason for turning over to the province of British Columbia the fisheries than there would be in respect to the fisheries of any other province, because we are very far away from the seat of administration, and it takes us a long time to get a decision on matters which come up from time to time. The minister may remember that it was urged upon the previous government that a commission should be appointed or that an advisory board should be appointed in British Columbia to take charge of the administration of fisheries there, or, if that were going too far, to advise the minister from time to time as to the various questions which come up in respect of the fisheries on the Pacific coast. The minister will remember that that request was made by all those interested in the British Columbia fisheries, by the canners, by the fishermen, merchants,
the boards of trade, and so on, by the returned soldiers, and by all others interested in fisheries in British Columbia. That request was refused by the previous minister, and I would like to take this opportunity of pressing that same request upon the present minister. I think something of that kind should be done, because Ottawa is too far away to look after all the matters which pertain to the fisheries away out on the Pacific coast, and we should have some board out there to assist the minister and the department.
Motion (Mr. Marcil, Bonaventure) agreed to.



QUEBEC, ORIENTAL AND ATLANTIC, AND QUEBEC AND WESTERN RAILWAYS

Charles Marcil: For a cony of the correspondence with the proprietors of the Quebec Oriental and Atlantic and the Quebec and Western railways or other persons on their behalf, concerning the operation or merging of these two roads with the Canadian National system.
He said: the older members of this House will remember that this question was discussed by yourself, Mr. Speaker, and by myself as representing respectively the counties of Gaspe and Bonaventure. To enlighten the new members of the House, I would like to preface my remarks by a reference to the proceedings in Parliament of the 9th April, 1884, nearly 40 years ago. Parliament voted $300,000 to build a branch of the Intercolonial from the lower end of the Matapedia valley along down to Gaspe bay. That vote was brought about by the request of Sir Charles Tupper, then Minister of Railways, and supported by Sir Hector LangeVin, representing the province of Quebec. Unfortunately, the construction of the Intercolonial had been completed but a few years before, and, like most railways in those days, it cost much more than it should. A company organized under the name Baie des Chaleurs company induced the government in the following year to reverse its policy, and instead of building this railway as a branch of the Intercolonial to serve Bonaventure and Gaspe, handed over the subsidy and the undertaking to a private company called the Baie des Chaleurs Company. They secured the usual double subsidies from Quebec and Ottawa, and land subsidies in addition, the subsidies amounting to probably a million and a half dollars. They went through a chequered career for ten or fifteen years,
Gaspe Railways

and finally the road was brought down to Paspebiac, a hundred miles from the starting point.
Things were in that stage when you, Mr. Speaker, were elected to the House, and in the same stage when I was elected to the House nearly twenty-three years ago. When we asked the then government to take over these railways as branches of the Intercolonial railway, because they were intended, at their very inception, to be branches or feeders of the Intercolonial, the government of the day told us that it would be advisable first to complete the undertaking and then the whole system would be merged into the Intercolonial railway. You, Sir, succeeded in encouraging and inducing a company of British capitalists to extend the railway from Paspebiac down to Gaspe Basin, where it has remained for almost the last ten years, and where it connects with deep waters in one of the finest inland ports in North America. This railway is owned by a British company who are holding the property merely for the purpose of getting rid of it. They are operating a train twice a day. They have very little rolling stock; they have very poor cars, and their locomotives are antiquated. The local rates paid on this railway by the people are deemed to be exorbitant and matters are at a standstill. I am treating now not of the case of the company; I know that at the present time the railway problem in Canada is the greatest of all our problems. Our railways are the backbone of the country; and remembering what was said last year by the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen), and what no doubt the present Minister of Railways (Mr. Kennedy) will say. I realize that this is a very poor time to advocate the taking over of any railway. I am not here to advocate the taking over or purchasing of these railways; I am here to advocate the cause of the inhabitants of the north shore of the Baie des Chaleurs.
We have in these two counties of Bona-venture and Gaspe a miniature of Canada. We have the old Acadian settlement, the original settlers from Grand Pre, who came through the wilderness of New Brunswick and started the Acadian settlement. We have the United Empire Loyalists who, in 1812, were settled in our townships by the government of the day, and the Jersey fishers, who came over from the Island of Jersey and who exploited the fisheries of the Baie des Chaleurs, which, for 150 years, has been one of the most prolific fisheries in Canada. We have in Paspebiac the

mother-house of the establishment now converted into a maritime provincial concern, of Robins, Jones & Whitman, which has been doing a steady business in the same place for 170 years and which has twenty-two establishments scattered along the coast of the Baie des Chaleurs and the gulf of St. Lawrence. We have, in connection with this mixed population, a most admirable soil, productive to a marked degree. We have resources unknown at the present time. The Gaspe peninsula, as you yourself, Mr. Speaker, said in your speech last year and as you have said on previous occasions, measures, roughly, 11,000 square miles, the size of two ordinary kingdoms of Europe. We have there on the south shore of the gulf and along the Baie des Chaleurs, which enters into this case, a population of only about 60,000 or 70,000 people and only a strip about three or four miles wide along the shore is inhabited at the present time; the remainder is a terra incognita. We have there pulp wood to supply the continent of America for I do not know how long. The builder of this Parliament building, Mr. Lyall, organized a company in Montreal some three or four years ago, and started looking for lead and zinc in Lemieux township, partly in Gaspe and adjoining Bonaventure. He has taken out of the earth there 400,000 tons of mineral ore for the reduction of zinc and lead, and according to the reports which he has. the probabilities are that lead ore can be found there in hundreds of thousands of tons. Our fisheries as I have said have been exploited for 175 years. Our forests are magnificent; the pulp-wood is unlimited. The fisheries are splendid; the soil is fertile, and we have a hardy, law-abiding population. These two counties sent 1,000 men to the front during the Great War, and memorials to commemorate their deeds are now being erected along the coast of the two counties. The inhabitants live in happiness together. These people inhabit the oldest established part of the province of Quebec, because Jacques Cartier entered the bay of Gaspe and planted the cross there before he reached Quebec. These people, have, through their representatives, been voting steadily for the construction of railways throughout Canada so as to open up the great Canadian West and every other part of this country. You, Mr. Speaker, and I, myself, have, in their names, voted railway subsidies by the million, by the hundreds of millions. We have assisted in the establishment of new pro-

Gaspe Railways
vinces, in opening up new harbours, in developing everything that Canada now possesses; but these old counties in Quebec seem to have been overlooked. The families of these people are very large, as is usual in Quebec; they have eight, ten, fifteen children. The young men have to leave the country; the young girls have to do likewise, and you will find them today, after the instruction which they have received at the different colleges in Quebec, scattered throughout the continent of America. Thus, these are all good, hardy settlers who have been lost to Canada. They are the descendants of the pioneers; as woodsmen they are unsurpassed in Canada. Put them in the hardest and roughest part of this country and they will make good. Some of them are engaged now in developing a part of the Abitibi country; they are developing that part of the country between Moncton and Levis over the great Transcontinental railway. These people made good fighters during the war, and one of the Victoria Crosses granted to the province of Quebec was granted to a boy who came from the Matapedia valley.
I am pleading in their names; I am asking this new Government; the new Minister of Railways to consider the position of these two counties and to see if he cannot bring about a state of affairs by which they will be given an opportunity of earning their living properly, of developing the country, and of bringing business to the Canadian National railways, because this is the only way in which the deficit of the country can be met. Two years ago, a million and a half dollars worth of business was handed over to the Canadian National by these two small railways, and if they had had the ordinary facilities, this could have been doubled. They have very little rolling stock; their locomotives are antiquated; their passenger service is not a credit to the country. The man in charge of the organization is putting up a big fight to carry on, but the people are not getting the service they should have. Running a railway skirting the shore of the Baie des Chaleurs is a difficult undertaking in the winter time, and in some seasons the railway service has been interrupted. This year fortunately, the winter has been exceptionally mild in Quebec, and trains have been running with the loss of scarcely a day. The Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) received a number of petitions which I handed him in your name, Sir, from the 40
county of Gaspe, and I myself handed him petitions from my people of Bonaventure county asking that something should be done. If it is impossible at the present time to take over these railways in any shape or form, I should like that they be considered as forming part of the Canadian National railway system for purposes of transportation.


William Findlay Maclean: Why could they not form part of the Intercolonial?


Charles Marcil: Perhaps some arrangement could be made by which they could be treated as forming part of the Intercolonial. At present goods are shipped by the branch lines as far as Matapedia where these railways connect with the Intercolonial. There another freight charge is made, and I am informed that shippers suffer a handicap of $4 per thousand feet on lumber shipped through these counties.


William Findlay Maclean: Has the Intercolonial railway a lower freight rate than any other road in Canada?


Charles Marcil: I will leave that question to the Minister of Railways (Mr. Kennedy). I do know that goods shipped from any of the parishes in these counties are waybilled to Matapedia and then put on the Intercolonial railway. At Bonaventure there is a magnificent timber limit known as the Robitaille limit. It is a magnificent bit of forest, and was once owned by Mr. Robitaille, who was at one time Receiver-General of Canada, having sat for many years in the House of Commons. Some years ago this limit was acquired by Senator Edwards and is now owned by Mr. Angus McLean, of Bathurst, New Brunswick. Mr. McLean, and others operated a mill in this district, and they declare that it is impossible for them to ship lumber profitably over these railways. They have therefore closed down the mill, throwing hundreds of men out of employment. The logs are cut in this area and rafted across the Baie des Chaleurs to Bathurst, a distance of twenty-five miles, where they are sawn and manufactured. The same thing occurs in the Nouvelle river district, where the timber is cut and rafted across the Baie to Dalhousie to be manufactured at Dal-housie. This is a great injustice, and it recalls the fact that Sir Oliver Mowat at one time started a campaign in Ontario to stop the export of timber from Ontario to Michigan, and the present Minister of Justice stopped the shipping of pulp-wood

Gaspe Railways

cut in Crown Lands to the United States. It is unfair to these people that they should be deprived of their resources and their only means of livilihood, because the Government of Canada has not seen fit to give them proper railway communication. I have given these two instances to show what might be done, and I hope that the present Minister of Railways will take the matter seriously into consideration. The first important step is to see that these people are put on the same footing as if they were on the south shore of the Baie des Chaleurs and on the main line of the Intercolonial railway.


William Findlay Maclean: Is it a fact
that the Intercolonial railway has a lower freight rate than other railways?


Charles Marcil: I am un able to answer that question. Now, apart from the traffic arrangements, I would remind the House that last year the advertising department of the railways made a great feature of summering in the Baie des Chaleurs district. Those hon. members who have not visited that country in summer time have not seen one of the most enchanting places of Canada. The scene from Campbellton to Gaspe is unparalleled for beauty. Every year thousands of tourists go down the Baie des Chaleurs. Once they reach Matapedia they have to take other cars in order to get to their vari-
5 p.m. ous destinations. If a Pullman car left Montreal three times a week for Gaspe I feel sure it would be full during the months of June and July. At present there is a Pullman running to Campbellton, but it is practically worthless, because passengers leave it at Matapedia and take the local railway going down the Baie, and the Pullman runs empty to Campbellton. The passenger service undoubtedly needs improvement. I have it on good authority that the Canadian National system could easily put on, at a nominal cost, a Pullman car for the service of these people; and also locomotives and cars to assist in local transportation.
I have so far spoken principally in regard to the part of the railway that extends through my country, but as Mr. Speaker is unable to take part in this debate we unfortunately cannot have his views on the subject so far as his own constituency is concerned. A couple of days ago I received a visit from Mr. Dubuc, who is well known in Quebec, and is a considerable promoter of the pulp industry. He gave me certain facts and figures. The pulp mills with

which he is concerned at Chandler have been closed for the last six or seven months, but they were opened up again last week, and they give employment at present to about 300 hands. This gentleman tells me that his idea is to use the port of Gaspe where the Dominion government at considerable cost, provided excellent accommodation. We have also a splendid railway to New Carlisle; and if this part of the road on the Atlantic, Quebec and Western railway were provided with the necessary service, it would expedite the whole business through the port of Gaspe, and utilize the wharf, which is now practically idle. With adequate facilities he could handle
40,000	tons of pulp. 6,000 tons of sulphur, and 6,000 tons of coal per year, and he suggests that the Minister of Railways might easily overcome the deficit, so far as that portion of these railways is concerned, and at the same time develop business in that district, by providing at a nominal cost 50 dumping, coal, platform and box cars. This would secure some return for the money that has been invested in these railways, and it would give the people the service they should have.
I do not intend to go further into this question, but I think I have put the matter in a nutshell, as the Speaker of this House did last year when he spoke on the same subject. The Chairman of the Railway Commission reports, as a result of the investigation held at New Carlisle, that there is no branch connecting with the Intercolonial anywhere that could compare with these two branch railways from the standpoint of the importance of their traffic. I direct the attention of the minister to the fact that by chapter 16 of the Statutes of 1915 it was enacted by this Parliament that any branch lines not exceeding 200 miles i length could be either purchased or leased without agreement to purchase, and brought under the Government railway system. The following roads have been taken over under that legislation:
New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island
Tailway	 36.05
International Railway of New Brunswick	 111.3
St. Martins railway	 28.73
Salisbury and Albert	 44.77
York and Carle ton railway	 5.46
Moncton and Buctouche railway	 29.93
Elgin and Havelock railway	 26.11
Lotbiniere and Megantic railway	 29.59
Cape Breton railway	 30.64
Caraquet and Gulf Shore railway	 80.01
I would ask the minister as a favour, before he reaches a conclusion in this matter and admits the reasonableness of my

C.N.R.-Electrification
claim, to compare the value of the business carried on by the railways mentioned in this list with that of the two roads to which I have referred. I suggest also that he compare the total earnings, tonnage carried, and business generally of the two Gaspe railways with others in the province of Quebec, such as the Roherval and Saguenay, the Temiscouata, and the Quebec, Montreal and Southern. He will realize at once that the two Gaspe railways are among the best feeders that the Intercolonial have.
The people have waited patiently for many years for the taking of some action in this matter. They were told in the old days that these railways would form an important part of the Intercolonial. Mr. Robitaille, who represented the county in the early days, advocated the construction of this railway.- I may say in passing that the grain grown by him on his farm at New Carlisle, Bonaventure county, took the gold medal for Canadian wheat at the Paris Universal Exposition of 1867. The possibilities therefore of the soil of that district, are immense. We have a hardworking population; we have men of business calibre; we have large resources of sea and land, forest and mines. I leave the matter in the hands of the Minister of Railways, and sincerely hope that he will see his way clear to put these roads on a proper footing, thus increasing the business of the Government railways and assisting in the development of that section of the country.


Hon. W. C. KENNEDY (Essex, Minister of Railways and Canals) :: Mr. Speaker, the notice of motion of the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) is for a copy of the correspondence with the proprietors of the Quebec Oriental and Atlantic and the Quebec and Western railways or other persons on their behalf. I find that two returns have already been brought down with regard to this matter, the first on May 16, 1913, and the second on May 27, 1919. Since the last-mentioned date there has been considerable correspondence with the owner of the lines referred to, Mr. Read, of London, with a view to purchase, but the government of the day did not see fit to conclude an agreement with him. As I understand it, these roads are not to-day paying carrying charges, and if they are included in the national system the rates applying to their tariff will be the through rates rather than the local rates, and their deficits will be increased.


William Findlay Maclean: Is Mr. Read getting any subsidies on these roads?


Mr. KENNEDY (Essex):: I do not
know, though I understand from what was said by the hon. member for Bonaventure that he received two subsidies, one from the Dominion and one from the provincial government. However, that is not the point. The hon. member for Bonaventure has stated the needs of the people living along the line of the roads mentioned, and it is the duty of this Parliament to assist them in every possible way. The hon. member contends that considerable development in traffic, both as to freight and passengers may be anticipated. The Dominion government have had this matter before them in the past. There is on file in the department a report of the Chief Railway Commissioner with regard to it, and a very favourable report it is. Representations have also been made by residents of the district, and I assure the hon. member for Bonaventure that when the time is opportune we will give the matter every consideration. I need hardly tell him, of course, that Bonaventure is not the only part of the country which is demanding increased railway facilities.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. gentleman
says that he will " give the matter every consideration." May I ask him what he means? I did not understand the hon. member for Bonaventure to ask for the absorption of these lines by the national railways.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I understood him to say that one of three courses might be adopted: absorption by the national railways, loan of equipment, or lease. When I said that the matter would be given consideration, I meant that we would go into it very carefully and if it were found possible to relieve the disabilities which are stated to exist there, we would be glad to do what we could. In the meantime, the Government will have much pleasure in producing the papers required by my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. DESLAURIERS (Sainte-Marie.) (Translation) :: Moved:
That in the opinion of this House, it is advisable that the Government substitute electric power to that of coal over its railways, in such centres where this natural supply abounds.
C.N.R.-Electrification

He said: Mr. Speaker, it is not my intention in this present discussion to point out to this House all the localities in the Dominion where electric power might possibly replace steam for traction purposes, the subject would be too vast; I shall content myself with showing the possibility of its profitable use in my province, where this natural resource has been distributed profusely by Providence. The idea of utilizing electric power for the railways is not a new one. It is a daily topic in almost every European country; and in many of which, trials have proved sufficiently satisfactory so as to permit me now to state, that nowhere has it been deemed advisable to return to the old steam power method, especially when the direct current system has been utilized: as for instance in Switzerland, on the St. Gothard road; in France on the Paris-Lyon-Medi-terrane and Orleans-Midi systems; in Italy on two railway sections of 62 miles in length where the triphase current system was tried out with very good results. Finally in Germany, England, Australia, Africa, and in Spain, it is the question of the day; however the country in which electric power has been applied on a larger scale as a propelling force, is certainly that of our neighbour the United States. In fact, the electrification of the New York Central, the New York-New Haven and Hartford, the Butte-Anaconda railway, then, and more particularly, the electrification on a gigantic scale of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul railways are experiments of the highest importance, since they were crowned with success. Seeing that all the countries are adopting this system, why does not Canada immediately follow in their footsteps? When we are confronted, in our yearly Budget, with an enormous deficit amounting to one hundred million dollars and we hear it said in this House that this deficit will continue for a whole decade; when we know that we import from our neighbours all the anthracite which is consumed in Canada; when we are forced to submit to their unreasonable demands, to undergo the hardships and after-effects of their strikes, to put up with the fluctuations of their market; when we realize that in the central part of Canada we have not a trace of any coal deposit and that according to geological data, we shall never possess any, am I not free to cast my eyes towards this taiagnificent chain of mountains, the Laurentides, where I see these 
thousand and one streams silent at times and at others tumbling about them, as they proceed, precipitating their waters in the mighty St. Lawrence, itself uncontrolled and unharnessed, I wonder why we should not call upon this element to help solve, if not to entirely solve, our railway problem, at least to ameliorate our situation with regard to railways. Doubtless, the economic side of the question was given full consideration in Europe as well as in the United States, with regard to the electrification of railways. I might consider the merit of the question with special reference to humanity for large centers such as Montreal, Toronto, etc,-and it is on this high ground according to me that we should look to the discussion of this problem. This country possesses vast forest reserves, but we should not be led to expect and believe that they are inexhaustible. The late Senator W. C. Edwards, an authority on forestry, in a report to the Commission on Conservation, did not hesitate to declare that as things were going, timber industry in a few years, would be very insignificant in the Eastern parts of Canada. If we look up the report of the Forest Department for the Province of Quebec, we find a statement of Mr. Piche, forestry expert, declaring that the loss each year through the destruction of wood, both manufactured and unmanufactured and buildings, amounts to the enormous sum of $10,000,000 or $15,000,000, losses which for the greater part are attributed to sparks emitted from steam locomotives. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that this enormous loss is well worth while that the Government should find means to eradicate this form of conflagration. In large centers, such as Montreal, Toronto and others, the requirements of cleanliness, health, quiet and rest for the population have for ever so long tended toward the discarding of the steam locomotive. I would ask you, Sir, to follow me, for a few moments, in the great metropolis, to pass through the counties of Saint Henri, Hoche-laga and Sainte Marie and there to stop and to look at these windows besmeared with soot and gases, closed the year around, these walls equally blackened and I would moreover invite you to enter with me into the workman's abode who, owing to the scarcity of lodgings, is forced to seek shelter in the vicinity of stations and railway yards, there you will find, as if imprisoned, his wife surrounded with a large family, washing the clothes and beginning over again each day the same work. Snow

C.N.R.-Electrification
itself reaches the ground in a filthy state. Hark! the locomotive all night long fills the air with its hooting and deafening noise, thus depriving the sick child, the worn out spouse and the husband exhausted by his daily toils, from their legitimate and beneficial sleep. And we, the representatives of the Metropolis, would be deprived of the privilege to harness this powerful agent, the St. Lawrence river, so as to furnish us the necessary power to electrify all the railway systems which are in operation on the Montreal island. I feel certain that if such an advantage were offered to New York, Paris or London, this change would have long ago taken place. The first condition required for the carrying out of such an undertaking, is to ascertain if we have in this country water power in sufficient quantity and capable of being utilized. This is perhaps the point in my argument which is the most easily demonstrated. If we examine the report of the Commission on Waterways for the Province of Quebec we notice that the north shore of the St. Lawrence is specially endowed with water powers. But first of all we have the St. Lawrence which has a potential energy estimated at 2,500,000 horsepower. On the south shore, there is the Richelieu river, a tributary whose rapids at St. John, Chambly and Saint Ours can develop 40,000 horsepower. Plowing past Hull to the city of Montreal we find the Ottawa river with its tributaries, the Quinze river, the Gatineau, the Lievre, the Little Nation, the North, the Red and the Kipawa rivers whose united waterpower is calculated to be 481,000 horsepower. From Montreal down on the north shore to the St. Maurice river are to be found the tributaries of l'Achigan, l'As-somption, the river du Loup, the Maski-nonge and the Ouareau whose total waterpower amounts to 20,500 horse-power. The Saint Maurice river itself which supplies at present 365,000 horse-power can be regulated so as to develop 800,000 horse-power. Following the north shore down from the St. Maurice river to the Saguenay river, are the tributaries of the Batiscan, Sainte Anne de la Perade, Jacques Cartier, Montmorency and Saint Anne de Beaupre which altogether can develop 30,000 horse-power. The Saguenay basin alone with its gigantic tributaries, the Grande Decharge, the Peri-bonka, the Mistassini rivers, mentioning but the most important ones, can develop
800,000	horse-power. Continuing along the north shore of the St. Lawrence from the Saguenay to the Hamilton river are the
Sainte Marguerite, the riviere aux Outar-des, the Escoumains whose united courses can be made to yield 550,000 horse-power.
The Hamilton river alone can develop
506.000	horse-power; we could also add to it two other water-powers in its vicinity, which are capable of developing 50,000 horse-power. On the watershed of James bay, we come across the Harricana, Notta-way, Bell and Rupert rivers whose combined water-powers can develop 753,700 horse-power. Now, Mr. Speaker, there can be no doubt that this part of my argument has been clearly proved. There exists in Canada, on the St. Lawrence river and along the north shore, within the province of Quebec, an abundance of waterpower well capable of being developed.
Let us compare the water powers of which I have just given the potential energy, with the hydraulic forces utilized by the United States for the electrification of their magnificent Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul system; this railway has a total energy of 200,000 horse-power supplied by various separate plants some of which have no more than 4,000 horsepower, others varying as follows: 10,000 horse-power, 15,000 horse-power, 30,000 horse-power, and 80,000 horse-power. Therefore with 200,000 horsepower the Americans have found it possible to electrify the whole of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway system, 440 miles in length, and to maintain a voltage of
100.000	volts on the main line with substations which step down the voltage to
3.000	volts so as to distribute it to the transmission lines supplying the trains on their run.
It might perhaps seem venturesome for a young country like ours, almost ruined through its unlimited participation in the last war, to be the first to undertake this experiment, but when we behold France, which alone bore up with the greatest share of the burden of the war, and whose financial state is probably as bad as ours, undertaking the electrification of its vast Paris - Lyon - Mediterranee, Orleans - Midi systems, when we see the United States obtaining the most practical results by the electrification of their magnificent Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul system, first of all on a 440 miles run, but which has since been extended to 655 miles, when we have under our eyes the report of the Butte, Anaconda Pacific Railway which, for one year's operation, all expenses included, on a capital of $1,200,000 effects a saving of
C.N.R.-Electrification

$242,300, I say, Mr. Speaker, that what can be accomplished in the United States, the good results thus obtained by our neighbours can well he duplicated over here and that we should have no fear of ridicule in tackling the problem.
For us, representatives of the people in Parliament, our first duty calls forth the development and conservation of our natural resources for the welfare of Canada. According to an American engineer, Mr. Spencer, there exists between lake St. Francis and the foot of the Lachine canal about 2,000,000 horse-power undeveloped. It takes, approximately, two pounds of coal to produce one horse-power per hour, we are therefore losing each day 30,000 tons of coal. Let us suppose that it is bituminous coal, and the cost agrees with the price laid down in the railway statistics for the year ending on the 31st December, 1920, namely $6.47 per ton, we are consequently daily losing, owing to the fact that these 2,000,000 horse-power are undeveloped, the sum of $194,700, in other words, $50,565,500 per year.
I am aware that the operating of our railways by electricity, would not be very practical were we left to operate them solely from their earnings, having due regard to the smallness of our population and to the undeveloped state of our trade activities for the time being; however, seeing we have the option to utilize the direct current system with central power-houses and substations, allowing the withdrawal at each substation of a sufficient amount of current for lighting purposes, heating and for the needs of industry, I believe, we have in this a very useful complement to the electrification of our railways. Take for example the yearly cost of heating, in Montreal. On an average, six or seven tons of anthracite are consumed yearly in each home, which amounts up to 700,000 tons of coal per year. I suppose that the consumer pays $16 per ton, this gives us, for the 700,000 tons, a total of $11,200,000 per year, simply for the heating. I therefore contend that if it were possible to develop electricity at a low cost, all the oil lamps would vanish from every home, all would cancel their American coal orders and adopt this system absolutely hygienic and far more effective-the electric system -and moreover in large centres such as Montreal and others, it would allow the public to do away with gas-meters which are as detrimental to their purse as to their health.
I. Mr. Deslauriers.]
In order to ensure the success of the plan it is evident that both private interests and companies should not be considered. My past experience with them, forces me to make this statement; at present the companies, in Montreal, which supply electricity for the purposes of lighting and heating, sell the kilowatt-hour at one and a half cent, this means that they charge $128 for what actually cost them $15 or one-fifth of a cent per kilowatt-hour. As an explanation of these business methods, I might point out that in their reports there are to be found numerous misleading entries included in their outlays, and much overhead expenditure in connection with the improvement and harnessing of water courses. I wish to say that if the Government utilized all of the 2,000,000 h.p. on the St. Lawrence river, it could sell electricity at such a low price that the whole public would benefit by it; what we, at present, pay $128 for, we could buy for $50 and we would only be paying a fraction of a cent per kilowatt-hour; this would permit us to make use freely of electricity. The main point in an electrification system is the high cost of the initial outlay which includes the dams, causeways, electrical appliances, transmission lines, the construction of central power plants, sub-stations, etc. Take for instance the Loutre dam, the largest dam in the world today, larger than that of the Nile and Panama, having a capacity of sixty billion cubic feet of water at the disposal of the industries which are established below the dam. These industries pay the interest, plus a certain sum to the sinking fund, on the capital invested and held by the province of Quebec, they moreover, pay a thirty-five cent tax per horse-power, I therefore state that if we followed this example, given the same conditions, we would also have a large number of industries establishing themselves below these dams, in our own country, thus bringing in revenues to the province and conserving our natural resources. I believe we should without any hesitation follow the advice of Mr. Mauduit, a French engineer, who having had some experience in the operations of these systems, knows what type of electric locomotive has given the best results in the United States; and is also in a position to know what system has proved the best, and this, through his serious study of the management and operation of the Chicago-Milwaukee and St. Paul system.

C.N.B.-E lectrification
He states that this system is the most practical, safe and economical. If the cost of equipping the central power houses and the sub-stations is very high, the operating of the large railways by the direct current system is so economic, that we have in it, I believe, a reasonable compensation. The electric locomotive, in fact, gives such effective results that it is out of the question to compare it with the efficiency of a steam locomotive. Moreover, it is lighter and starts with no wheel slippage, has a more effective brakeage, a greater steadiness of pull easily regulated, and highly thought of for hilly and mountainous grades. While the steam locomotive has on the average a normal pull of 31,112 pounds, the electric locomotive has a normal pull of 65,000 pounds and more, which is steady on grades of 2 per cent, a feat which cannot be accomplished by the steam locomotive. Our neighbours have further established the proof of the efficiency of the electric locomotive when, on their great Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul system they have replaced 112 steam locomotives by 45 electric locomotives. The decrease in the number of locomotives brings up the question of salaries and hands. A trainman, I believe, receives $10.85 per day. Therefore, the fact of decreasing the number of locomotives entails also a reduction in our expenses in reference to salaries.
Comparing the electric locomotive with that of the steam locomotive of equal horsepower, the former weighs thirty to thirty-five per cent less and its weight is distributed on a number of driving axles distant from one another by seven or eight feet, while the steam locomotive carries its weight in one place; this means that in the construction of roads and bridges, the electric locomotive, owing to the distribution of its weight, enjoys an economic advantage denied to the steam locomotive. The strength in construction of the electric locomotive allows it to run a long time without having to be cleaned, inspected or repaired. This is not the case of the steam locomotive, for after having run one hundred or one hundred and fifty miles we have to see to the cleaning, inspection and most of the time to fairly costly repairs. This necessitates an outlay for equipment, inspection and repair shops, all of which are a cause of considerable expense, while we do not need any of these with the electric locomotive.
As we are obliged to import coal for the steam locomotives, the question of returns
which are 6 per cent, and at the most 8 per cent, according to the Canadian Pacific, is worthy of consideration. This great waste is due to steam under pressure, to stoppages, either for traffic, coal or water, or again for the meeting of trains; whilst the electric locomotive gives a maximum yield, particularly when its source of energy is drawn from the water powers along the line, as would be the case in the province of Quebec.
The ordinary price of an electric locomotive varies to-day from $130,000 to $140,000. Formerly, it was $60,000. But, as I said previously, the electric locomotive being worth two or three steam locomotives, it is more economical to purchase an electric locomotive. The Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul railway, has invested a capital of $12,750,000 for the electrification of its 440-mile system, which compares with the distance from Ottawa to St. John, or Ottawa to New York, but, so as to have the actual cost, it is in order to deduct therefrom the actual value of the 112 steam locomotives which have been replaced by electric locomotives and which are laid down at a price much below their value, though they are still in use in other parts of the United States.
Mr. Speaker, when I think that our coal resources, at the extremities of the Dominion, are fast being exhausted, because the more we utilize them, the less there is left of them; when I think that these coal resources which we so badly need for our metallurgic industry are getting exhausted; while the more we utilize our water powers, the smaller the waste; when I know that the United States, at each Congress, at each conference, and in both their houses, recommend that their natural resources be used economically; when I know that the Canadian Pacific, almost concluded a contract with the Shawinigan Power, a couple of years ago, for the electrification of its Montreal-Quebec system, then I think that, under the circumstances, this debate is not ill-timed.
Knowing, as we do, that the electric locomotive can overcome all obstacles and even take advantage of them, can ascend the mountain grades, as well as descend them; knowing, as we do, that the electric locomotive may reach points which until now it has been impossible to utilize for the starting and developing of new industries; knowing, as we do, that the electric locomotive makes it possible to operate a railway system in a rolling, mountainous country, at very low cost, on account of the
C.N.R.-Electrification

steadiness of its pull; knowing, as we do, that this locomotive can face a storm, can brave the severest cold weather without itself being affected; knowing, as we do, that it can easily haul heavy trains up steep grades; knowing, as we do, that, in the Rocky mountains, Americans are using the electric locomotive to pull their steam locomotives out of the snow banks; knowing all this, I do not think it reasonable to compare it to the dirty locomotive which besmears everything in its way, which is powerless in difficult roads, is helpless against a storm, is stifling in a subway, and at times even incendiary.
When we know that the difference in cost, for electric power, for the same distance, the same work, during the same time, is in proportion of 88 to 200 in favour of the electric locomotive, that the cost of repairs is 8 to 18 in favour of the electric locomotive, I wonder why the St. Maurice Valley railway which has 800,000 horsepower at its disposal, is not electrified. I wonder why all the railway systems which run on the island of Montreal are not electrified by this time; I wonder why the Government railway systems, from Montreal to Ottawa, are not electrified; I wonder why an electric railway should not be built to the Gaspe peninsula, in that mountainous district where an electric locomotive would be so useful and so advantageous in the development of our mining resources; I wonder why an electric railway should not be built to the coast of Labrador thus providing an outlet for the beautiful and immense forest resources we own there.
In concluding, I feel confident that the present Government will always, in directing its future policy, bear in mind a truly national and patriotic spirit, and that it will avoid, contrary to what has been done in the past, conceding water-powers like those of the " Cedres " to the Aluminium Electric company of Massena, New York, which disregards each year the clauses of its contract, pays nothing to the province and withdraws yearly from the St. Lawrence 65,000 horse-power. I hope that this Government and the provinces will have sufficient national pride so as not to advertise themselves in the future as pawn-shops in order to dispose of our national resources in the interest of private companies and strangers. I have confidence that the Government will always remain national so as not to forget this ever-living motto of our regretted grand

leader, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Canada first, second and last.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


William Findlay Maclean: Mr. Speaker, for a moment I want to refer to a matter that concerns the whole House. I am speaking to-night, as I did the other day, from this centre line as between the Progressives and the official Opposition, so that I may be heard all over the Chamber, and I would make this suggestion to the House, and especially to the leader of the House whom I see in his place, that henceforth any one who wishes to address the House and to be heard all over should have the privilege of coming to the centre-


Mr. McMASTER:: That does not fill the bill.


William Findlay Maclean: -and that ministers, when their estimates are up, should always occupy the centre seats in the front row opposite. In that way everybody could hear, and it would improve the debate. I am throwing out that suggestion to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the leader of the House, so that after this we can try and get those who wish to be heard-and I wish to be heard to-night; I have no trouble in maying myself heard-to come to the centre. The electrician also has toild me that with very little trouble he could attach a light to the two centre desks. I think if my suggestion were adopted the debates would be improved.


Hewitt Bostock: Without wishing to interrupt the hon. member I might say that although the rule is that an hon. member when speaking should address the House from his own seat, yet in view of the poor acoustics of the Chamber I shall not, if such is the judgment of the whole House, apply that rule against any hon. member who would like to speak from the centre of the Chamber in order to be heard.


William Findlay Maclean: I am very
glad to hear you say that, Mr. Speaker. I would expect that from you, having regard to your knowledge of the House. I also speak from my knowledge of the House. Only to-night one of the members of the Hansard staff approached me and said, "Mr. Maclean, would you mind speaking from the

C.N.R.-Electrification
centre of the House so that we can hear you better?"	I said, "Yes, I have been considering that."	I hope that some arrangement will be made so that the two seats here and on the other side can be used by hon. gentlemen and by ministers when their estimates are going through. Everyone in the Chamber would then be able to hear, and the debates would be improved.
For a few moments I want to refer to the motion that has been introduced by the hon. member for St. Mary (Mr. Deslaur-iers) in favour of the electrification of the railways of Canada. When he raised that question this afternoon he raised the most important question in connection with transportation that has ever come up in this country, and I am especially pleased to see the Minister of Railways (Mr. Kennedy) here to-night. I hope that he will not only listen to the discussion, but take part in the debate.
I have been an advocate of the public ownership of railways, for years and years, and the basis of public ownership of our railways is their electrification. Now that the electrification of the railways is coming, I hope that the State will have control over it. Not only is that the view here in Canada, but the President of the United States, amid all his duties and responsibilities, and especially the responsibility that was his when the new treaty was made between the powers in the direction of disarmament, took occasion to make a very important deliverance to the people of the United States in regard to transportation. He spoke in favour of the electrification of the railways, and he based his deliverance on the report of the International Joint Commission that was appointed by the United States and by Canada to deal with this very question and other similar ones. The International Joint Commission made a special report to Congress and to this Parliament, and in that report, which is now in the hands of hon. members, they come out unitedly in favour of the development of the St. Lawrence waterways, and in connection with that development, the development of waterpower for transportation, a subject in which hon. gentlemen to my left are especially interested. The President of the United States within the last three months has practically said that there is no solution of the transportation problem as far as he could see except in two directions, and his proposal was that we must develop the waterways of the St. Lawrence, and develop them not only as waterways so
as to allow ocean steamships to get right up to lake Superior, but develop them also for water-power, for the electrification of the railways.
The hon. member for St. Mary spoke in support of his resolution in French this afternoon, and although I did not get all of what he said, I think I understand fairly well what his argument was. He said that the province of Quebec has probably the greatest store of water-powers in her rivers of any portion of Canada. I could not quite make out though whether the hon. member was making the argument I am making to-night, that these powers should be developed by the State for the use of our own railways; and when I speak of the railway question I have only to repeat what I said in this House two weeks ago on that question, that the corporation-owned railways of the United States have absolutely failed in their mission. They have broken down; they are practically all hamstrung to-day, and in bad financial condition. Their champions, and they have several, have said in the prominent American newspapers and magazines in the last few weeks that the only salvation for the American railroads lies in their electrification, and, that before that can be done the two hundred company-owned lines in the United States must be consolidated into ten or twelve systems. If that is done, and the railways are electrified, there may be some hope for the American roads, and still more hope if the magnificent waterways we have in connection with the St. Lawrence are developed for the transportation of steamships and for the generation of power.
There is one man in Canada who, like Joseph in Egypt, saw what was coming. Joseph had divine inspiration behind him, but there is a man in Canada to-day who had the foresight of Joseph, and who saw that the development of electrical energy was to be his main mission in life, and Sir Adam Beck to-day has this to his credit: He is the one man who foresaw what was coming, and he had the hardihood-and it is said to be a crime that he is guilty of- to see that the great development of waterpower energy by the public would go a long way toward the settlement of the transportation problem. And Adam Beck has this further achievement to his credit, that he has the greatest public development of water-power in the world at Chippawa and Niagara. He has only two of his units working to-day, but each is producing 55,000 horse-power.
C.N.R.-Electrification

The two generators were run the other day up to 120,000 horse-power. Not only has he these generators but he has eight others ready to install when the proposed development is completed. The progressive section of the people of Ontario, who represent the municipalities there, are lining up behind this movement. They are even putting mortgages on their property to promote these great developments of horsepower for the purpose of improving transportation. As I said earlier, before the year is over Sir Adam Beck will have developed 600,000 horse-power; and I believe that ultimately he will even have a million horse-power. And yet at the inception of the Chippawa plant Sir Adam was told that he was a crazy man. Why there will ultimately be an income of $10,000,000 from the horse-power generated on the Niagara and Chippawa rivers. The other day Sir Adam asked the Progressive party in this House to go up some Saturday and see the plant at Chippawa and Niagara, and inspect what is being done there in the way of developing electric energy for the railroads of Canada. I want to tell the Prime Minister now that if he wishes to be up-to-date he must have in his Government in the future a Minister of Power. I do not say go to Adam Beck and secure him for that office; although he may be looking for a position before long if we are to judge what is going on in the legislature of Ontario. In Sir Adam Beck we have a man like Joseph of Egypt; he had the force and capacity to go and induce the municipalities to stand behind him and to give him the credit in order to generate this power. It is this very power, in connection with which my hon. friend (Mr. Deslauriers) moved his resolution this afternoon, that will be the salvation of the country as far as transportation is concerned. I hope the leader of the Government will pay some attention to what I am saying. I repeat that the first man he ought to get is a man like Sir Adam Beck in connection with the administration of our national railways.


Jacques Bureau: Do you want to kill us?


William Findlay Maclean: I certainly do not want to kill you. Here are our members from Quebec speaking. Our friends there are afraid-


Jacques Bureau: Not a Frenchman but the French member for Three Rivers.


William Findlay Maclean: My friend has a splendid electrical development in
[Mr. W. F. Maclean.1
his constituency at Three Rivers, but the people do not own it.


Jacques Bureau: No, but they are making money through it.


William Findlay Maclean: In that case you ought to be proud of it. Unfortunately our friends in Quebec do not want to hear what Ontario is doing although the latter is carrying out this development in the public interest. In the province of Quebec they think that work can only be done by private companies. If I understood the argument of my hon. friend (Mr. Deslauriers) this afternoon, he sees what is coming; he hears the sound of the "going in the mulberry trees," and that these private companies are getting ready to sell out and turn their enterprises over to the Government. My suggestion to the Prime Minister is that he Should get as soon as he can a good man to act as chairman of the National Railways.


Jacques Bureau: Yes, Sir Joseph Flavelle.


William Findlay Maclean: Sir Joseph
Flavelle is acting in that capacity at the present time, but I understand the position may be vacated soon. The Government must get a man as chairman of the national railways who possesses the capacity not only to bring about the generation of power but to go ahead and buy out these companies. Perhaps he can buy out the Montreal power companies and then it will be possible to proceed with the electrification of the railroads of Canada. If President Harding's scheme is carried out in connection with the waterways in the St. Lawrence and the generation of the electrical energy there; if Adam Beck is able to develop his million horse-power, as I think he will, at Niagara; if some of the available water-power is developed on the Ottawa here; if water-power is developed by Adam Beck also on lake Superior and on the Abitibi-taking all these developments together, and including in them the energy to be derived from the Montreal power scheme, there will be enough power available to drive every train that is run on the Canadian railroads from the city of Quebec right up to lake Superior and along the front of our country to Windsor. That power is the cheapest in the world; it will solve the question of cheap motive power for our railways. Not only that, but it will render us independent of the coal owners of the United States upon whom we are now dependent for our coal and

C.N.R.-Electrification
lor the fuel for our railways. Why we are sending millions of dollars every year to the United States for the purchase of coal to supply motive power for our Canadian railways. The province of Ontario has started in the right direction by making this a question of public ownership. The right solution of the transportation problem in America is going to result from this power development. I am not giving my own view but am simply citing the opinion of men who have studied this question-from the President of the United States down to even the champions of private ownership-when I say that there is no solution of the problem of transportation except through the electrification of the railroads.
The hon. member who brought up this resolution this afternoon has done a public service in directing our attention to it, but he did not handle the question in the way in which I would have handled it because I maintain that this power must be owned by the people. We are saying the same thing in Ontario to-day and we have made a great success of power development. And it is because of that success that we hear so much opposition to it in Montreal. I have nothing to say against our friends in Montreal; but for some reason or other all, or at least the main part, of the opposition to what has been done in Ontario comes from outside that province. A great deal of it emanates from the power trust -I will not call them the power ring- that is centered in Montreal. My hon. friend (Mr. Bureau) is a member of the Government. If the only view he has about the public ownership of power development is that it is a dangerous thing in connection with transportation in this country he cannot very well say that he is a Liberal or even a Progressive: he is an old-timer, he is a " die-hard," he has joined the party of the " die-hards."


Jacques Bureau: May I ask my hon. friend what party he has joined?


William Findlay Maclean: I have not joined the "die hards" but the public ownership party. I think my hon. friend is with the "die hards."


Jacques Bureau: My hon. friend's companions are far worse than	the	"die
hards."


William Findlay Maclean: Well,	our
friends the farmers have grasped that solution of the transportation problem to which I have alluded. At the same time
I give the province of Quebec credit for what it has done. Down at Three Rivers and on the lower St. Lawrence there has been some fine water-power development. Let me remind hon. members-I think I referred to it the other day in connection with this water-power question-that some years ago a very innocent bill was introduced into this House and into the Railway Committee and very nearly got through. That innocent bill went in this direction: That all the water-ipower developed at Cornwall and on the Long Sault, on the St. Lawrence river, was to be given to the greatest metal trust in the United States, the Aluminum Trust. They very nearly got all those water-powers that President Harding now says ought to be used for the electrification of their railroads over there. However, the plan did not succeed because some of us members in the House stopped it. So there is a free field open now for water-power development. The example has been set by the province of Ontario; and soon I hope there will be one million horse-power available for motive power for our railways and for the benefit of the people of the province.
As I said when the railway question was under discussion the other night, I think I know what the C.P.R. desire more than anything else. While they have denounced, or somebody has denounced, Adam Beck and his radials in Ontario, nobody would be so glad to get the Sir Adam Beck radials and water powers as the Canadian Pacific railway. I give them credit for that. We are going to keep that water power for the Canadian Pacific Railway, if they come to us as a customer, but we do not want them to get control of those powers. Just wait and see how soon some big trust will reach out, on the lines of the suggestion of the hon. member for St. Mary's (Mr. Des-lauriers), and endeavour to grab the water powers now centered in the power companies in Monteral. Perhaps the Canadian Pacific Railway would administer them as well as they could administer many other things, and I give them credit for that. But the Canadian Pacific Railway is strong enough as a transportation company in this country, and I should not like to see it get this water power. I think the Government should get those powers, and have for a minister a man with foresight to handle the proposition. All the Dominion has to do is to get into the province of Quebec. There are many rivers there that have not been taken over, and if they can get two or three of those rivers, such as

C.N.R.-Electrification
the hon. gentleman spoke of this afternoon, they can show how cheaply water power can be developed as a public proposition, and they will be able to generate all the power required down there at a fair price. I do not want to see the investors lose a cent, and I do not want to see them use the energy they have to put up the transportable charges.
When I spoke of transportation in connection with waterways, I told the story of the barrel of herring that was obtained by a United States merchant in the Alaska fisheries. When these herring came to be sold in the eastern States the charge was $5 a barrel, while the products of the fisheries of Scotland were brought by some steamship to New York for 50 cents a barrel. That is the difference between transportation by rail and transportation by water, and when they have reduced the cost of the development of water power there will be almost a like reduction in freight charges. I want to tell my Progressive friends that they are improving transportation, that there will be a great improvement in the future and that they are entitled to the benefit of it. A man cannot succeed in farming under the present rates unless the transportation charges are reduced. Electrification of the energy for the railways, and waterways as competitors of the railways, will do a lot, and the way to get the full benefit of electrical energy for transportation in this country will be by the state owning the water powers. Especially will it be the duty of the Minister of Railways, in his reconstruction of the National Railways, to select a chairman who will make it his main business to study the water power question, and see where he can get his power for the lowering of transportation charges.
In Ontario the development of our electrical energies for transportation and for industrial purposes, and most of all for improving life on the farm, would be of immense benefit. The Hydro-Electric of Ontario is distributing electrical energy for all purposes through the farms. They have broadened their policy, they are going to reduce prices and subsidize the lines which will distribute the electrical energy. It will be a great source' of wealth and strength to the people of Ontario to have that development, and we are going on with it. We start in the right way when we take it up as a public ownership proposition. Transportation must be a public ownership proposition. Everybody sees that it has to come, and I hope the Minister

of Railways will announce that he is going ahead with a system of consolidation, so as to put the railways in a position to use this electrical energy. When we get that announcement we will know that the country is prepared to move ahead.
While I was glad to hear the hon. gentleman speak this afternoon, and beg to express my appreciation of his effort in drawing public attention to the question, I want to see that effort, as far as this House is concerned, realized on the lines of public ownership, particularly in the way of getting a chairman of the National Railways who will have two main duties. His first duty will be to assist in the real consolidation of our railways and provide electrical energy, so that we will be independent of our neighbours in the United States. They have been good friends to us. but they cut us off from our supplies from time to time. The President of the United States has said that he is for the development of waterways in order to lower freight rates. We have done the same thing, and made a success of it, and I hope there will be no more talk in this Parliament or in the legislature except on the lines of public ownership.
I want to speak of the West. I have been reading for a great many years about the West, and the information I have- and I think the members from the West will confirm it-is that there is enough power in the Saskatchewan river, the Red river, the Assiniboine and other rivers, to run every train, and to move every bushel of wheat, even when there will be five times the number of farmers they have on the prairies, by electrical energy instead of coal. Of course they have coal mines in the West, but that coal is dear, and then there is a better way to use the coal at all seasons of the year than by the present method.
The coal can be burned at the mine and they can generate electrical energy, and instead of shovelling coal and loading it up, they can. burn it right down in the mine, as they say, and convert it into electrical energy. That energy has the one supreme quality that nothing else in the world has; it transports itself along the wire, travels itself and delivers itself, wherever it is wanted. There is no trouble about that. I forget how much of the energy of our railways is devoted to carrying their own coal, but it is a large proportion. The electrical energy has this marvellous quality. It travels along the wire and delivers itself wherever it is

C.N.R.-Electrification
wanted, right into the engine, or it can deliver itself into an individual motor in a car. I was glad to hear the hon. member speak this afternoon in favour of development of electrical energy as a motive power in this country. He is a supporter of the Government, and after he has made that statement, I think the Government will listen to the suggestion I have made, that is to put a chairman at the head of the National Railways who will make it his business to develop two or three water-powers at cost price, and see at what price he can buy water-powers from the companies already possessed of them.
When the Minister of Railways commences his consolidation of the railways- and I hope he will begin in Ontario and make a demonstration there-I trust he will be ready to take all the power that the Hydro Electric system of Ontario will be prepared to deliver in almost a few days. To show how successful Adam Beck's system is, let me state that three of the power systems that have been taken from private companies are comparatively so inferior to the modern development that Sir Adam Beck has at Chippawa, that he will scrap those three great plants at Niagara Falls. That shows what progress is being made along that line. The Toronto Power Company, the Ontario Electrical Development Company, the big company that was bought over from the private interests in Buffalo, that owned it, and the other power company at Hamilton, which is ready to sell and which has fixed its price, will all have to be scrapped because the development of electrical power by the Ontario Hydro Electric Commission has been so successful.
This commission has made a great success of the development of electrical energy in the interest of Ontario; it has made a success of the Toronto Street Railway. I wish hon. gentlemen who criticise street railway systems would visit Toronto and see the system of street railways owned by that city. If the city authorities are charging the people six cents for transportation, it must be remembered that they are spending a great deal of money on the equipment. It is a fine example of a publicly-owned transportation system operated by electrical energy, owned by the people, and a system the purpose of which is not primarily to make profits, but to give service.
Who has brought that about? It is not
private companies that have made this great demonstration to the world. The municipalities of Ontario have given this example, and up to date they have not lost a dollar in this connection. People say: "Adam Beck has made this and that mistake; he has exceeded his estimate," and his great critic is the Drury government. But when a government begins to criticise another organization for extravagance or carelessness, let me ask how their estimates compare with those of Sir Adam Beck? He has kept well within his estimates and he has made good. The people who are behind him have not lost a cent, and there has not been any graft in connection with the development of this power. The power is there; the exhibition of it is there, and you can see it every day now. Let the new Minister of Railways start to electrify the railways at once with all the power that he can get from the Ontario system, and let him begin to move cars from Niagara to the Detroit river, and from Niagara through Toronto where most of the traffic is. We have there two great National roads, the Grand Trunk and the Canadian Northern. We can also sell some electrical power to the Canadian Pacific if they want it. I believe the Canadian Pacific are willing to buy power; they are simply waiting to buy power for the electrification of their railways. They hope to buy it from companies in Montreal, and I should like to see them get it there; but no matter who gets the power, the Government must take control of the electrification of railways and must fix the price.
I have almost finished my remarks, but I come back to the same statement I made the other day in regard to transportation. I have been in this House long enough to see freight rates reduced time after time by the Railway Commission that we established in this country, and every time a dollar was taken off railway freight rates in the moving of our crops, that dollar was put on by the steamship ring that controls transportation on the Atlantic. That cannot be done when the people own the transportation facilities, and therein lies the protection of the public. When the government of the United States-and this is what private transportation companies are afraid of-join, as I hope they will gladly join, with the present Government in developing electrical energy on the St. Lawrence river right in front of us and in two or three other places where power can be generated, we shall have the railway companies of the United States and of Canada in the hands of the people. This will give

Electrification

us a better lever for controlling freight rates than any commission or anything of the kind. We will furnish power to move your trains, provided you make the freight rates reasonable. There is the real problem of transportation in this country, and the hon. member for St. Mary (Mr. Deslau-riers) pointed it out to-night. I have studied this problem, and I hope we shall hear more to-night in favour of electrification of the railways of Canada, based on public control, and best of all, if it can be effected, based on public ownership of the sources of electrical energy. If we have that, we shall make real progress towards lower freight charges in this country.


Mr. PAUL MERCIER (Westmount-St. Henri) :: Mr. Speaker, I feel it my duty to speak to the resolution moved by the hon. member for St. Mary (Mr. Deslauriers). This question may be viewed from many angles. I think the whole House has been well informed about the matter from a technical point of view; but the question may be looked at from the point of view of 'local interests. For instance, every hon. member knows my constituency, Westmount-St. Henri, which is divided into two big portions, one on the upper level, namely, Westmount, and the other on the plains, the two wards of St. Henri and St. Cune-gonde. Hon. members who have travelled through the province of Quebec via the Grand Trunk, the Canadian Northern, or the Central Vermont, have passed through those centres, and they know how the population is suffering as a result of that traffic, and from the smoke which spoils everything, and is even injurious to human life.
This resolution must also be considered from a general point of view as far as public health and civic progress are concerned. In Montreal, there are electrical locomotives leaving the Canadian National railway station, and in all parts of the United States electrical locomotives are being used with great success. No doubt, the problem can be easily solved by the electrification of locomotives; the population, especially in urban centres, will not be inconvenienced by the dense smoke, and great benefit will ensue in connection with public health and child welfare if this resolution is adopted by the House.
I understand that the Government is obliged to say that it is shouldering very large expenses; but if this discussion has the result of inducing the Government to do its utmost to remedy the situation, the

populations of the large urban centres will benefit thereby. I remember reading that Max Hopkins used to say, when he was looking at a locomotive, "I take off my hat to it." If fuel locomotives are replaced by electrical locomotives when trains are passing through cities, the people will continue to practise that maxim by raising their hats to this new electrification of progress.


William Costello Kennedy: The thanks of the House are due to the member for St. Mary (Mr. Deslauriers) ler bringing this resolution to its attention. He has displayed a keen interest in the question of the electrification of our railroads, which is one of great moment to the people of the country. The member for South York (Mr. Maclean) also made an interesting contribution to the debate, although, perhaps, he discussed the matter from a different angle from that of my hon. friend from Montreal. Those of us who come from Ontario, however, and who know that the hon. member for South York was one of the pioneers in the advocacy of the electrical development of our railways, and all that goes to make for the successful development of eletrical energy in our province, feel sure that those who have the matter in charge will give the hon. member's views every consideration. I have taken this matter up with the Board of Directors and the Board of Management of the Railways, who are keenly alive to the situation and know what is being done not only in this country but also on the other side. They are aware that the New York Central, the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway, and many other roads on the other side, use electrical energy, but they feel that in Canada the change at present would entail a very large expenditure, which the result of investigations that have been made is hardly conclusive enough to warrant. It is considered, therefore, that it would be better, for the present at any rate, ro defer action in the matter. Probably all that my hon. friend from St. Mary had in mind was just to bring the matter to the attention of Parliament, and I know that he will feel satisfied when I tell him that everything in connection with the development of electrical energy is being closely watched by the Board of Management of the Railways. They are not only interested in the question, but are also sympathetic, and when the right time comes they will do their part. In the meantime I would suggest to my hon. friend, if it meets with his approval, now that we have

Military Service Act
had a discussion of the subject, that he withdraw his resolution.


Hewitt Bostock: Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. member have leave to withdraw the resolution?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Hewitt Bostock: I might direct the attention of the House to the fact that, at first sight, the resolution does not seem to be in order. It reads:
That, in the opinion of this House, the Government should take steps to electrify the Canadian Government railways on all lines where electric power is available.
Reading it a second time, however, I find that it contains only a pious wish, on the part of the hon. member who moves it, that the Government should take certain action in respect to the matter he brings before the House. The hon. member invites the Government to make an investigation; that, undoubtedly, is what is meant by "taking steps." Section 54 of the British North America Act reads:
It shall not be lawful for the House of Commons to adopt or pass any Vote, Resolution, Address, or Bill, for the Appropriation of any part of the public revenue, or of any Tax or Impost, to any Purpose that has not been first recommended to that House by Message of the Governor General in the session in which such Vote, Resolution, Address, or Bill is proposed.
I must remind hon. members on both sides of the House that when a resolution is adopted it is binding on the Government; and any resolution that calls for the expenditure of public moneys must originate with the Government. In the present instance, the resolution is simply a request that the Government should investigate the matter in question. For that reason I have allowed the discussion, which otherwise would not have been in order.
Motion withdrawn.



TERMINAL FACILITIES AT ST. JOHN, N.B. RESOLUTION NOT IN ORDER

[Stage Direction]
On the Order:
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: That in the opinion of this House, terminal facilities should be provided by the Government of Canada at the port of St. John, New Brunswick, in the shape of a frost proof warehouse, to enable Canadian grown potatoes to be shipped during the entire year from a Canadian port.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Stand.


Hewitt Bostock: Since the hon. member does not propose to proceed with his resolution, I would ask that he amend it in conformity with the section of the British North America Act which I have just read. If the resolution were adopted as it stands, it would be binding on the Government, as it calls for the expenditure of public money. The hon. member may bring it forward at another sitting of the House in an amended form.



MILITARY SERVICE ACT, 1917 AMENDMENT BILL

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JAMES S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg Centre) moved the second reading of Bill No. 18, to repeal the Military Service Act, 1917. He said:
I shall not say much on this motion. I take it that the Military Service Act was very fully discussed on almost every political platform in the country. I understand that it is a matter of legal dispute as to * whether or not the act is still operative or whether it became void automatically with the cessation of the war. If it is dead, it seems to me that the least we can do is to give it decent burial. The war has ended, and we are glad to think that the circumstances which may or may not have made necessary the passing of the Military Service Act no longer exist. I therefore ask that that act be repealed.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: If the Military Service Act were still in operation the Government would be only too glad to accept the hon. member's suggestion and repeal it. But the act has ceased for some time past to be operative, and there is therefore, in the opinion of the Government, no need for the proposed legislation. My hon. friend has said that it is a matter of legal dispute whether or not the act is still in force. I can, I think, give my hon. friend assurance on that point which will be satisfactory to him and to the House. I have the opinion of the Deputy Minister of Justice, agreed to by the Parliamentary Counsel, Mr. Gisborne. There is no doubt whatever in the minds of authorities who advise the Government on legal matters, as to the exact position of this legislation. The opinion of the Deputy Minister of Justice is as follows:
The Military Service Act, Chapter 19 of 1917, was passed, as the recitals show, for the single purpose of enabling the Government to embody, by selective draft, re-inforcements. not exceeding 100,000 men (section 13, subsection 4) "to maintain and support the Canadian Expeditionary Force now engaged in active service overseas". By section 4, sub-section 1, the Governor General in Council was authorized

Military Service Act
to call out by proclamation any of the classes of men described by the Act for service "for the duration of the present war and of demobilization thereafter." The Act plainly had its application only to the circumstances then existing, and in relation to the war then in progress. The Act is now exhausted and spent and could not be invoked for another emergency. Therefore it is not necessary to repeal it.
If the statutes were being revised, Mr. Speaker, the commissioners would simply drop this act altogether. For us to proceed any further would he to take action which is wholly unnecessary.


Arthur Meighen: Of the correctness of the position taken by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) there is no doubt whatever. The act has no present force and effect; there is no room for legal dispute of any kind on that point. The act plainly applied to the then war, and to no other; it could not by any government be applied to any other emergency, contingency, or war whatsoever. Consequently, on the termination of that war, the act became obliterated so far as actual operation at any time is concerned. However, the fact that it applied to the one state of hostilities and to that alone did not prevent a very prolonged and bitter assault being made upon it in the late campaign, and I have no doubt many hon. members of this House count it among their pledges that they would repeal this law,-a law which already was repealed; a law which, if you can speak of it in that way, was functus offiicio-absolutely without power of operation. That was the plan adopted of attacking the method of selective conscription which that law embodied.
If, however, it is the purpose of the hon. member or of any other hon. member or of the Government to wipe conscription from our statute book, there is yet much to be done. The Militia Act contains a provision for conscription, for compulsory military service-not through selection by tribunals; not by selection of any kind, but merely by the casting of lots,-by chance. The Governor in Council is empowered under the Militia Act, as it is to-day and has been on our statutes for decades, to compel military service in this country or out of this country for the defence of Canada at any time the Governor in Council or Parliament deems such a course necessary. Consequently, the principle of compulsory military service is as much embedded in our law as the principle of compulsory financial service by way of taxation. If, therefore,

there are those pledged against it who desire to redeem their pledge-which, of course. I have grave reason to doubt, on this or any other subject-the course to be pursued would be to attack the Militia Act of this country. I for one will await with much interest, though with little apprehension, any attack that may be made upon it.


Ernest Lapointe: Mr. Speaker, I desire only to correct a misapprehension on the part of the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen). He seems to be unaware of the campaign that was carried on in my province with regard to the Military Service Act at the last election. My right hon. friend says that there are men in this House who sit here, probably, because they took a pledge to have that act repealed. I wish to tell him that those who took that pledge were defeated at the last election, and they were the friends of my right hon. friend. We were opposed by the friends of the right hon. leader of the Opposition, mind you, because we were supposed to have supported conscription. We, they said, were those who had been in favour of conscription; and they attacked us because we did not ask the repeal of that act after the war was over. The position I took then, the position we on this side of the House took, was the position that has just been taken by my right hon. friend: that the Military Service Act is no longer in force and that these gentlemen, supporters of my right hon. friend were absolutely mistaken.
I will give my right hon. friend some further information. His colleagues, the new ministers who were appointed to represent the province of Quebec,-Dr. Normand, fellow citizen of my hon. friend to my right (Mr. Bureau); Mr. Monty, and the others-came down to the province of Quebec and said in their speeches that we were responsible for conscription; that if they had been in the House at the time they would have opposed it; that we were the conscriptionists and that the colleagues of my right hon. friend were those opposed to it. That was the campaign in the province of Quebec at the last election, and my right hon. friend is mistaken when he states otherwise.


Arthur Meighen: Will my hon. friend permit me to ask again a favour I so often ask,-that is, that he support his assertions as to other people by quotation?

Military Service Act


Ernest Lapointe: Everyone knows that in my province; no one would deny it. All those who read newspapers, whether they live in the province of Quebec or elsewhere, know that what I say is correct.


Arthur Meighen: I will support mine.


Jacques Bureau: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend
(Mr. Lapointe) does not, perhaps, know of the service rendered to me in Three Rivers at the last election by the leader of the official Opposition (Mr. Meighen). It was my privilege to have as my opponent the then President of the Privy Council. This gentleman came on the stump and asserted- and a list of the members in question was published in one of the papers supported by the friends of my right hon. friend- that those who voted for and supported conscription were the Liberals in Opposition in 1917. But I was saved in this way: My right hon. friend came to Three Rivers and said in the course of a speech there: "I am the father of conscription". I called a meeting and I asked the President of the Privy Council, who was right, he or his leader; and when he was caught between the two he did not answer. Thus the situation was saved.
Now, my right hon. friend wants quotations. If he will have patience and wait until to-morrow I will send him the newspapers of Three Rivers from which he will see that prior to his visit to that city there was not a speech made by the President of his Privy Council-and we had three or four meetings every evening in those days; it was a great fight-in which it was not stated that Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the then Opposition, naming your humble servant as one of the members of it, were the fathers and promoters of conscription. But after my right hon. friend came to Three Rivers, they changed their tune. They said: "Well, conscription was not invented in 1917; it was instituted at the time of Confederation. Sir George Etienne Cartier was the father of conscription. Subsequently Sir Frederick Borden changed the act; it was he who imposed conscription upon the people; therefore, the law of 1917 was nothing new; we simply took your act and put it into force." Then we put the question, "Why did you change it if you already had authority to raise armies for overseas? Why didn't you use that law? Why did you pass a new one?" "Oh," they said, "the war was a new thing; the conditions were entirely new; everything was new." I make the
statement here that in the province of Quebec the fight was made, whether it was inspired by the leader of the Opposition or not, on the charge that the Opposition of that day, in 1917, were the people that brought about conscription. But when my right hon. friend went through the province saying that he was the father of conscription these people changed their minds and said, "So it dates from the consolidation of the Militia Act," and they were opposed to it and said: "The Militia Act will be wiped off the statute book. We as a self-respecting nation do not want that." My right hon. friend does not need to ask for quotations, because I could load him up with so many that it would take him the balance of the session to read them. So I will ask him to "dispense"; it will save him work and the country will be as well informed.


Mr. GEORGE PARENT (Quebec West) :: I should like to gratify the request of the leader of the Opposition for a quotation. I happen to have one in my pocket at the moment. During the recent campaign Mr. Belley the ex-Postmaster General, was the candidate of my right hon. friend in the county of Charlevoix-Mont-morency and I can quote from a speech he made as reported in the Quebec Chronicle, the owner of which was the late Sir David Watson, a well known friend of the Tory government and of the government that has just passed away. This is what that newspaper report says:
With documentary evidence in hand Mr. Belley proved that the Conscription Act was contained in the Laurier law,-


Arthur Meighen: Hear, hear.


Georges Parent: -as it appears in the Revised Statutes of Canada of 1906. The Borden Act did not change this Act, but simply changed the mode of raising troops. By the Laurier Act the troops were raised by lottery while the Borden Act provided for selection by exemption tribunals.


Arthur Meighen: AM true.


Georges Parent: By the lottery system enacted in the Laurier Act hundreds of young men would have gone to war, hut under the Borden exemption system not a single young man of Charlevoix county went to the war. But the point which impressed the audience most was the voting of five hundred million dollars which Mr. Borden had obtained in the session of 1918. He explained that the Borden Act was passed before the elections of 1917, the elections having been held in December that year. At the beginning of the session of 1918 Mr. Borden presented a hill bearing No. 38, by which he asked Parliament for a sum of five hundred million dollars which

Military Service Act

was required, amongst other things, for^ the enforcing of the Conscription Act. Not a single member had voted against the granting of this money, not even the Liberal members, who had taken pledges only a few months before that they would ask for the repeal of the Military Service Act.
Several members then sought Mr. Belley's permission to ask him a few questions, and he readily consented and answered all questions decisively.
I hope that quotation will satisfy my right hon. friend.


Arthur Meighen: If I may be permitted a remark, I am thankful to my hon. friend for confirming precisely what I stated was the case.


Mr. P. F. CASGRAIN (Charlevoix-Montmorency) :: My hon. friend from Quebec West (Mr. Parent) has just given the House a quotation from the Quebec Chronicle with reference to the campaign of the ex-Postmaster General (Mr. Belley) in the county of Charlevoix-Montmorency. I happen to have been the fortunate candidate in that election. I succeeded in beating one of the ministers who had (enjoyed office for a few days under my right hon. friend who now leads the Opposition. Every word that has been quoted by my hon. friend from Quebec West is absolutely true. I could also quote to the House, if I wished to detain it, many more statements circulated in the county of Charlevoix-Montmorency at the expense of the people of this country to show that conscription was the work of the Liberal party. I answered each and every one of these statements on the platform, and with the aid of some of my friends, especially the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Lapointe), I succeeded in obtaining the victory over one of the ministers of my right hon. friend opposite. The first statement which was published referred to the voting of $500*000,000; which !was required among other things for the enforcing of the Conscription Act. I answered that which was not absolutely correct, and several other statements that were made about conscription at that time. We did not raise the issue. It was the hon. gentlemen now sitting angularly opposite who raised it, although they accuse us of having raised the issue to get us back into power. I want to say publicly here in the House that if the election in the province of Quebec was carried on the conscription issue, it was not carried by the Liberal party, but by hon. gentlemen sitting angularly opposite from me here. I shall vote with pleasure for the repeal of this law.


Mr. JOSEPH ARCHAMBAULT (Cham-bly and Vercheres) :: Mr. Speaker, in my humble opinion this bill is useless. I agree with my hon. friend the Prime Minister that the law is not now in operation, and I only rise to answer in two words the right hon. ex-member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Meighen) who now sits angularly opposite by the grace, generosity, and skilful tactics of the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Crerar). I happen to have with me a few quotations that he challenged my hon. friend from Quebec East to produce T have a quotation, for instance, from a speech made by the ex-Seeretary of State, Mr. Monty, on conscription, as reported in La Minerve, a Montreal paper carrying on its front page the photograph of the leader of the official Opposition. I will translate from La Minerve of November 5th, 1921 as follows:
The Hon. Mr. Monty in Beauharnois
The Hon. Mr. Monty spoke afterwards on conscription. He declared that in 1917 he was opposed to that law. No one could doubt it. He had defended hundreds and hundreds of conscripts. He had adopted and he was still willing to defend the principle of Sir John A. Macdonald that Canada should have an army only for the defence of Canadian territory. He openly declared that if ever in future the same question came up he would oppose conscription and defend his anti-conscription principles. "You can say," repeated the Secretary of State ''that I was against conscription, that I am still against conscription, that I will be against conscription on the 6 th of December, that I always will be against conscription."
If this quotation is not sufficient I can read further extracts from a newspaper that was published in the constituency of Three Rivers, the St. Lawrence Valley Chronicle, quoting speeches delivered by the Hon. Dr. Normand. That gentleman, who was president of the Privy Council is reported as saying the following:
Conscription is not a matter of principle but simply a matter of contribution, and I said it and I repeat it again, and I always said during conscription time, that I was opposed to conscription, and I am still opposed to conscription. I thought it was a bad system of administration. I was also opposed to it because I considered it the wrong way and I am still opposed to it. In the present election there are Nationalists who state that we should never participate in the wars of the Empire. I am with those, I am somewhat of a Nationalist myself.
Dr. Normand also said that he had always opposed conscription which he condemned vigorously saying that on that question he agreed with the Nationalist idea on the subject. Now I will not further occupy the time of the House in reading these newspapers. I have probably

Military Service Act
ten or fifteen numbers of the paper La Minerve showing the whole fight in the province of Quebec carried on by the ex-ministers-the ministers pro tern as I might call them-was on this question. The Liberals did not bring on this issue in the province of Quebec. It was the friends of the leader of the Opposition.


Arthur Meighen: Oh, no.


Jacques Bureau: Hear, hear.


Joseph Archambault: I can quote
from another copy of La Minerve a list conspicuously printed on the first page of Liberal members of the province of Quebec who were accused of having voted for the principle of conscription.


Ernest Lapointe: And I was one of
them.


Joseph Archambault: The list sets forth the names of Messrs. Bureau, Brou-illard, Bickerdike, Boivin, Bourassa, Boyer, Cardin, Deslisle, Demers, Devlin, Ethier, Fortier and so on. That was the fight that was waged by friends of hon. gentlemen opposite in the province of Quebec in the last election. How different from the fight conducted in 1917 when the Liberals were accused of being friends of the Kaiser and not willing to do their duty in the war. I will not say anything further, but I am sure my hon. friend the leader of the Opposition will not insist upon any more quotations, and will be a little more chary about issuing challenges in future.


Arthur Meighen: I have never contended, and have never even said, that the ministers who came into the Government had been or were in favour of conscription.


William Duff: But you took them into the Cabinet.


Joseph Archambault: Was the question of the attitude of the ministers on conscription never discussed before their entrance into the Cabinet?


Mr. N. K. LAFLAMME (Drummond-Arthabasba) :: The bill proposes to repeal a statute which is no longer in effect, because it is exhausted. The Government takes that view and so does the leader of the Opposition. That is also the opinion of the law officers. Surely the war was concluded by the ratification of the three Treaties, Versailles, St. Germain and Sevres. There is nothing for us to discuss here, so why bring such a question before the House. The discussion will not advance the business of the House one iota. Its only effect is to transfer to this Chamber-for a motive I am unable to appreciate-a debate which will have not the slightest effect upon the members of this House, whatever influence it might have if conducted from the hustings.
Mr. HENRI E. LAVIGUEUR (Quebec County): When conducting the fight in my constituency at the last election I had to face opponents who demanded of me that I should ask Parliament, if circumstances permit, to repeal the Conscription Act. At that time I happened to have as my opponent Mr., Armand Lavergne, the chief of the Nationalist party in the district of Quebec. That gentleman opposed me on the ground that I had not asked Parliament to repeal the act of 1917. Mr. Lavergne was supported in that fight by chiefs of the Conservative party, some of whom were the intimate friends of the leader of the Opposition. I told the electors at the time exactly what the hon. member who has just taken his seat has stated to the House 

that the Conscription Act was dead and that there was no need to repeal a dead law. Now I am happy to have the statement I made at that time confirmed in this House by no less a person than the leader of the Opposition himself.
Mr. H. A. FORTIER (Labelle), (Translation) : Mr. Speaker, I have but a few remarks to add with reference to the proposed legislation which is before this House. I do not wish to recall the unpleasant reminiscences of the last general election. The electors of the county of Labelle returned me with such a large majority that I can afford, in this instance, to be magnanimous and not take any notice of the declarations made by my opponents. I then declared in the presence of my electors that there was no necessity of a special bill for the repeal of the Military Service Act as the latter did not exist. These declarations, I believe, are absolutely identical to those made in this House by the hon. leader of the Government (Mr. Mackenzie King), and moreover by the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen). I still hold to this opinion as I contended before my electors, that no necessity exists to bring in a special bill for the repeal of the Conscription Act. However, seeing that the Prime Minister has given us communication of a letter of the legal adviser to the Justice Department, leading to the belief
National Defence

that perhaps in certain parts of the country, there seems to exist doubts on the advisability of such a bill, I emphatically declare that I am in favour of this bill, if its mover persists in submitting it to the consideration of this House. I have always been opposed to conscription, and if the measure is necessary, I shall gladly give my support to a bill which would repeal the Military Service Act of 1917.


Hewitt Bostock: In my judgment this-discussion is out of order. Any resolution presented in the House must have something positive as to its effect. If a motion is made or a bill introduced with a view to repeal legislation, that legislation must be in existence. From the opinions of the Law Officers of the House of Commons and of the Deputy Minister of Justice, and, after the opinion expressed by some of the leaders on both sides, I come to the conclusion that the Military Service Act, 1917, cannot be repealed, because it has exhausted itself, and is considered as non-existent at present in the statutes. Therefore I give it as my opinion that this bill should be dropped and that the discussion should not proceed and I so rule.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Militia and Defence) moved that the House to-morrow go into Committee of the Whole on the following proposed resolution:
Resolved-1. That it is expedient to bring in a measure to create a department of the Government of Canada to be called the Department of National Defence, over which a Minister of the Crown shall preside who shall be the Minister of National Defence.
2.	That the Minister shall be charged with all matters relating to Defence, including the Militia, the Military, Naval, Air and Police Services of Canada.
3.	That there shall be a Deputy Minister of National Defence who shall be appointed by the Governor in Council, and hold office during pleasure, and such officers may be appointed as are necessary for the carrying on of the business of the department.
4.	That the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Minister may appoint an officer who shall, in relation to the Naval Service exercise all the powers and duties vested in the Deputy Minister of the Naval Service by or under The Naval Service Act, and who shall have the rank and salary of a Deputy Head of a department, and shall be a member of the Defence Council.
5.	That the Governor in Council on the recommendation of the Minister may appoint an officer to be known as Comptroller, who under the Deputy Minister of National Defence, shall be charged with all financial matters pertaining to the Department of National Defence.
TMr. Fortier ]
6.	That any person whose position is abolished on the coming into force of the Act to be based upon these Resolutions may, on the recommendation of the Minister, be appointed by the Governor in Council to such position in the Department and with such rank, title and salary as shall be prescribed.
7.	That if any person is removed from office or an appointment in consequence of the abolition of his office or his appointment by the Act based upon these Resolutions or by any order or regulation thereunder, or is retired within two years after the coming into force of the said Act, the Governor in Council may grant him a gratuity, retiring or superannuation allowance, or pension not exceeding such as he would have been entitled or eligible to receive if he had been retired under the provisions of any Act applicable to him, after adding from one to three years, as the Governor in Council may deem advisable, to his actual term of service.
8.	That provision be made to vest the powers, duties and functions vested in the Ministers and Deputy Ministers under the various Acts relating to the Naval Service, the Militia, Militia Pensions, the Royal Military College, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Dominion Police, in the Minister of National Defence and the Deputy Minister of National Defence respectively :-Provided that the powers vested in the Deputy Minister of the Naval Service under the Naval Service Act shall be exercised by the officer appointed for that purpose as aforesaid.
9.	That provision be made to constitute a Defence Council to advise the Minister on all matters of Defence, including or relating to the Militia, the Military, Naval, Air and Police Services of Canada, and on all matters referred to it by the Minister, and to perform such other duties as may be prescribed by the Governor in Council.
He said: I beg to inform the House that His Excellency the Governor General having been apprised of the subject matter of the resolution commends it to the consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the Chair.
Department of Agriculture :-
Salaries	? 640,717 50
Contingencies	 135,000 00
Mr. SPENCER:: On page 87 there is an item, "Chief, sheep and goat division, $3,210." Will the minister tell me what the duties of this gentleman are?


Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) :: That gentleman has
charge of the marketing of these animals and the development of new strains or breeds. It may seem strange to my hon. friend that we should be raising goats in our country, but we are. They are in use, sometimes for milk purposes, as well as for their meat.

Supply-A grieu Iture


Arthur Meighen: I think it would be opportune now if the Minister of Agriculture would give us an explanation of an appointment which has been made in his department to a post that it had not been considered necessary to fill for some time, and the making of which, so far as any information I have goes, was wholly against the provision, the spirit, if not, indeed, the letter of the Civil Service Act. I refer to the appointment of Mr. Duncan Marshall to the position of Commissioner of Agriculture. The Civil Service Commission classified this position and1 fixed the maximum salary, I think, at $4,200. Even with the classification there, owing to the fact that the Agricultural Instruction Act had got wholly under way, there was no very great difficulty to Ibe encountered in the completion of the grants to be -made under that act. It was not considered necessary to fill the position and incur that expenditure, because the officers of the department felt themselves wholly capable of taking care of all the work that had been done previously by the commissioner. Notwithstanding this the present Government has appointed a Commissioner of Agriculture, and as the reports state-and I do not think it is disputed-has repealed the Civil1 Service recommendation as to salary, and gone beyond the maximum by about $1,800 to commence with, giving Mr. Marshall $6,000 a year at the public expense. I believe that in relation to certain subjects in his department we have had the spectacle lately of the deputy minister- who by the way draws only $6,000 himself- having an officer under him drawing the same salary. I do not know whether the minister counts the Commissioner of Agriculture under the deputy minister or not. Possibly there are two executive heads in his department. We have had the spectacle of these two officers giving diametrically opposite statements as to matters affecting the department in relation to the embargo. I think the House is entitled to an explanation as to why they saw fit to fasten this charge on the public, and whether or not it was on the recommendation of the Deputy Minister of Agriculture, a most efficient officer.


William Richard Motherwell: This is a matter that does not come under the head of civil government as Mr. Mashall's salary is dealt with in the estimate for the administration of the Agricultural Instruction Act. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, however, I wall be very pleased to give the explanation.


Arthur Meighen: How does the minister justify taking an officer's salary, which is a civil government matter, out of civil government, and putting it under the other estimate?


William Richard Motherwell: Mr. Duncan
Marshall has not been appointed Commissioner of Agriculture at all.


Arthur Meighen: What position has he been appointed to?


William Richard Motherwell: If I have the permission of the Chair, I will read the Order in Council, and probably that will speak for itself. I may say that I think answers to questions in regard to this matter were tabled to-day: This is the Order in Council:
The Committee of the Privy Council have had before them a report, dated 1st February, 1922, from the Minister of Agriculture, submitting that the Agricultural Instruction Act under which the suih of $1,100,000 annually has been granted to the Provincial Departments of Agriculture for the purpose of aiding agricultural instruction in the provinces expires March 31st, 1923.
The minister states that in view of the extraordinary and exceptional conditions in the agricultural world it is highly desirable that an investigation be made into the advisability of the continuation, discontinuation or emendation of the provisions of this Act; the amounts to be paid, and the methods of calculating such amounts in the event of its. extension; and the scope of the work of the provinces to be undertaken- with the assistance of funds provided thereunder.
It is considered advisable that a commissioner be appointed under section 38c of the Civil Service Act as amended by chapter 22 of the Statutes of 1921, to conduct the investigation indicated above, and to inquire into such other agricultural problems as may be desirable and necessary.
The minister, therefore recommends that Mr. Duncan Marshall, of Olds, Alberta, be appointed as a commissioner for the above purpose, and to perform such other duties of a cognate nature as may be delegated to him.
The minister further recommends that Mr. Marshall be paid a salary at the rate of $6,000 per annum, said salary to be paid from the appropriation provided for the administration of the Agricultural Instruction Act and that this appointment date from January 15, 1922.
The committee concur in the foregoing recommendations and submit the same for approval.
I will read simply that part of section 38a:, beginning within five lines of the bottom, which has to do more particularly with the subject under consideration:
Nothing in this Act shall affect the powers of the Governor in Council with respeot to the appointment of any commissioner or other member of any Hoyal or other commission or board, or any deputy head.
Supply-A griculture

The appointment was made under that section, not as Commissioner of Agriculture, but as a commissioner to make certain investigations with respect to the continuance, or non-continuance or amendment of the Agricultural Instruction Act. That is what he is engaged in doing now, and I hope we shall have his report in time to determine what will be the character of the legislation. The hon. member for Centre Vancouver (Mr. Stevens), in his speech on the Address, referred to the absence of any reference to this. We are contemplating bringing down legislation; but before doing so, we shall have the special report stating how this legislation can be improved or extended, or whether it should be left just the way it is.


Mr. CRERAR:: Am I to gather from my hon. friend's remarks that this question is not a permanent one?


William Richard Motherwell: It is a temporary appointment.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: How long is it expected to last?


William Richard Motherwell: About six months, probably. .


Arthur Meighen: The minister of course, could not help noticing, as he read the Order in Council, that the duties assigned to Mr. Marshall are just the duties that would be performed by the Commissioner of the Agricultural Education Branch, were he appointed to fill that office for which the Civil Service Commission fixes a salary of 54,200 a year only. Did Mr. Marshall, as part of his duties in this office, make a trip to Mexico recently?


William Richard Motherwell: He has not been here for two or three weeks.


Arthur Meighen: Was the trip to Mexico a part of the investigation into the Agricultural Education Branch?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Arthur Meighen: Was it a trip at the
public expense?


William Richard Motherwell: So far as I know, he did not go to Mexico.


Arthur Meighen: Was it Florida? Was his trip there part of his duties under the Order in Council?


William Richard Motherwell: That was not
amongst his duties enumerated in the Order in Council.


Arthur Meighen: Did he take that trip
as a public official, or was it a private job?


William Richard Motherwell: When the right
hon. gentleman has finished, I will endeavour to answer his question.


Arthur Meighen: That is the first question. The next is this. Surely the minister does not contend that that section of the Civil Service Act can be utilized merely by giving a man another name as an excuse for giving him another salary.


William Richard Motherwell: With respect to
Mr. Marshall's duties, apart from the investigation into the working of the Agricultural Instruction Act, I may say that he is conducting an investigation with respect to the exhibition grant throughout Canada. As my right hon. friend knows, in the past about $180,000 have been paid by the Dominion Department of Agriculture by way of exhibition grants. That seems a large sum of money, and he is conducting a special inquiry as to how much those grants can be reduced without materially affecting the success of those exhibitions. Another matter is the question of the working out of the "accredited herd" policy of the present Government. This work is being taken up with great vigour; the amount of money set aside in the past for it has not been sufficient to meet the situation, and certain amendments are under consideration. I might point out that no herds under twelve in number have been inspected, and the result has been that complaints have been made about discrimination in favour of the man with the big herd, inasmuch as the man with the small herd does not come within the scope of the act. When Mr. Marshall comes back and completes his report with respect to these matters, as I hope he will be able to do in the course of two or three weeks, we have under consideration sending him to some South American countries, either Argentine, or Brazil, or Chili, or probably them all, this matter depending on the information which we get from the Department of Trade and Commerce as to which of these countries will prove, at the present time, the best market for our pure-bred herds that just now have difficulty in finding a market. As my right hon. friend and the committee know, the foot-and-mouth disease, that is so prevalent in the old country at this time, makes it impossible for any of these countries to get their breeding animals from the usual source in the United Kingdom. It was, therefore, thought that this would be a good time to set up a market for our pure-bred animals in these countries, and that we might possibly be able to continue it. Their business relations with Canada

Supply-Agriculture
are good at the present time, and as they are not able to get pure-bred animals from the United Kingdom, we thought it would be a fortunate time to send one or two representatives of this department to these South American countries with the object that I have stated in view. Mr. Duncan Marshall, when he returns, with probably another gentleman, Mr. Dryden, will be delegated, if the information we get from the Department of Trade and Commerce justifies us in sending them, to these South American countries to open up a market more particularly for pure-bred animals.


Arthur Meighen: What was his last
trip in connection with?


William Richard Motherwell: With regard to
Florida, the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) and I sometimes exchange the work of our men. If the right hon. gentleman had been in the Chamber on Friday evening, he would have heard how we lent some of our entomologists to the Interior Department. Some of them went out in scouting parties and in aeroplanes to guide the lumbermen in directing their operations and in taking care of their lumber areas that are menaced by the spruce bud worm. There was a large exhibition in Florida, where the Department of the Interior was represented by Mr. Marshall, who did some work in connection with immigration.


Arthur Meighen: I should like the minister to take a note and, when he hears of any immigrant coming from that district, let me know. Evidently Mr. Marshall is in for a good time. I believe Chili comes next, then the Bermudas, and so on. Will that expedition to Chili be for immigration, or in the interests of pure bred stock?


William Richard Motherwell: I thought I made that plain.


Arthur Meighen: The South American trips would be in the interest of the Department of Agriculture. I am afraifl that six months will go by without much study into the question of the continuance of agricultural grants.


William Richard Motherwell: I am sorry if my right hon. friend has never heard of the prospects of the live stock markets in the Argentine, in Chili or in Patagonia. There is an exceedingly good prospect there for pure bred animals, especially as they are not available in Great Britain, where they were formerly got.


Arthur Meighen: Is not that the work of the trade commissioners? If the trade
commissioners are not good enough, would it not be better to have Mr. Marshall appointed under the Department of Trade and Commerce and be paid a salary for this sort of work?


William Richard Motherwell: You could do it that way, but inasmuch as Messrs. Marshall and Dryden are both practical, first class live stock men, it was thought that they would be as successful as anyone else.


Arthur Meighen: The salary limit was pretty low under the Civil Service Commission. That question came up too, I suppose.


Mr. BRETHEN:: I think it is quite well understood that some of the countries that have been mentioned-the Argentine and Chili-are already in the market for Canadian pure bred stock. They have already purchased our stock. Why have the Commissioner of Agriculture and Mr. Dryden been selected to form the committee? It is well known that both of these gentlemen are competent and are zealous in looking after the interests of beef breeds of cattle; but why have not the dairy interests 'been considered? It is dairy cattle that have been going to Chili and to the Argentine, and I cannot see why there should not be some one to represent the dairy breeds, which, I think we all agree, are quite as important in Canada as the beef breeds.


William Richard Motherwell: Neither Mr. Marshall nor Mr. Dryden is unfamiliar with the dairy interests. It is true that they have paid more attention to 'beef cattle, but in regard to any one whom we might appoint the question might be asked: Why not appoint some one else? Judging from the nature of questions on the Order Paper, one might be inclined to think that it was something different that some hon. members had in view. The question is asked, for instance: Was one of these gentlemen a defeated candidate? I do not see that that has anything to do with this subject. If any hon. gentleman thinks it has, let him ask the question.


Mr. HANSON:: Is not Mr. Duncan Marshall himself a large grower of beef cattle, and will he be prohibited from doing business on his own acount while travelling as a representative of the Goverment. He might have an eye for the main chance, and the minister might say whether there will be an express prohibition against his doing business in his own behalf.
Supply-A griculture


William Richard Motherwell: I understand from the newspaper reports that Mr. Marshall has sold out his 'live stock and has rented his place. He is therefore completely at liberty to represent the Government. I do not know what his future plans may he, but I learn from the newspapers that he has disposed of his stock.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I endorse what my hon. friend (Mr. Brethen) has said with regard to the necessity for including an expert dairyman in the delegation which is going to South America to secure more trade for Canadian 'breeders of cattle. While both the gentlemen mentioned are well known and of great ability, we must remember that they have both specialised of late years in the beef cattle industry. It is well known that our dairy herds have been developed to a very high point indeed. In fact, we are producing certain specimens of dairy breeds that are among the very best in the world. We also know that there is a tremendous development of the dairy industry in South America, particularly in the Argentine. That country has been making very rapid strides of late years in the production of dairy breeds, and their products are shipped to Great Britain in competition with our own. I think therefore that the minister would be well advised if, in that delegation, he included an expert dairyman to explain to the people of the Argentine the benefits to be derived from the importation of Canadian dairy breeds. I am greatly interested in what the minister has to say with regard to the accredited herd system. This system is costing a great deal of money, but I think that it is accomplishing considerable good in Canada in eradicating tuberculosis from our herds. As we all know, tuberculosis has been making alarming progress, affecting not only cattle but hogs, and this is shown in our abattoir inspections. In the past the accredited herd system has been conducted largely through the minister, the deputy minister and the veterinary director general. I do not quite appreciate the reason for appointing a man, who is not a veterinarian, for the purpose of reporting upon this kind of work. I used to think that the old combination worked well indeed, and if there was any fault to be found with it, it was the barrier that we encountered when we went to the Minister of Finance for further assistance. The old combination worked well enough, and I do not think it is necessary to make any change now. Is 
it the intention to renew the fund, under the Agricultural Instruction Act, which will run out at an early date; and, will approximately the same sum of money be appropriated for the purpose for which that fund was provided? Does the Government intend to disburse that money in the way it has been spent during the past ten years, namely, by the provinces with a slight control exercised by the federal authorities? I should like to know also if the expenditure for agricultural grants for fairs has been cut down this year. These grants have done a great deal of good in developing exhibitions throughout the country, and I do not think that there is any particular agency that has rendered a greater service to the pure bred live stock business *of Canada and the cattle industry generally than the encouragement of these exhibitions. The reduction in grants will not .be felt to any great extent by the larger exhibitions, but the smaller and medium *sized fairs that obtain grants from the department will suffer considerably as a .result of a cut, I understand, of 50 per cent now under contemplation. On behalf of the exhibitions throughout the country *from coast to coast, I would ask the .minister to consider this point carefully *and try to make the reduction less in the case of the smaller exhibitions than in the ,ease of the larger ones that will not feel the reduction to the same extent. By following such a course he would let down the smaller exhibitions gently, so to speak, and would not interfere unduly with the work that they have carried on. The plans for these exhibitions are prepared in most cases, about a year in advance, and if a severe cut in their grant is made without warning, they may be involved in serious difficulties, particularly if bad weather is encountered and the gate receipts are much smaller than in former years.


Mr. WARNER:: Was it through Mr. Marshall's recommendation that the reduction in these grants was made?


William Richard Motherwell: Should Mr. Marshall's report indicate that injustice is being done to these exhibitions, the matter may be considered as reopened. I understood when we decided on the reduction of these grants that all the exhibition managers had been notified of the intended reductions from six months to a year ago. There is some doubt, however, about the accuracy of my information in that respect, and should Mr. Marshall's report indicate that hardship would follow as a

Supply-A grim Iture
result of these cuts, there will be an opportunity of reconsidering the matter when we come to the vote in the Supplementary Estimates. In the Finance Minister's absence, of course, I do not want to say anything about the Supplementary Estimates that will startle him, but at least the matter can be considered. The member for Victoria (Mr. Tolmie) knows as well as I do that large sums of money have been handed out to exhibitions all over Canada during the last three or four years. There is no use in talking economy about a $2,000 civil servant, and then handing out $180,000 to these big exhibitions. There is no sense in that sort of thing. We have a certain amount for agriculture; what is the best way to spend it? Do we get as much value out of this expenditure as we would get out of $180,000 spent for other purposes. That is what we have to determine. In my opinion we get less value from the money granted to these exhibitions than we do from any other expenditure that is made in the Department of Agriculture. If we made the grant the same as before, I am sure my secretaries and stenographers would be saved a good deal of trouble in answering telegrams and inquiries of all kinds; but in my judgment a substantial reduction is justified. As I have intimated, however, if it is found that the exhibition- managers did not get proper notice, as I understod they did a year ago, the matter will be looked into, and possibly we might make the reduction only twenty per cent this year, with a further cut next year.
Another very proper question was put to me by the hon. gentleman who was my very capable predecessor-and I want to pay tribute to him; I found the department particularly the live stock branch, in excellent shape when I took office, and consider myself fortunate in being able to step into it. Now the hon. gentleman asked why Mr. Marshall interfered-I am not sure that is the word he used-with the accredited herds. That is a matter which has been left largely to the veterinarians. Only those who have had their animals tested and found to their dismay that they were affected with tuberculosis and had to be destroyed, know what it feels like. There is a good deal of feeling throughout the country that the tuberculin test is not the last word with respect to the diagnosis and treatment of this disease, and the view prevails that there ought to be some representation of the
man whose herds are proposed to be slaughtered. Both Duncan Marshall and myself know what it is, experimentally, to have one's herds slaughtered on account of tuberculosis, and there is no doubt that' those who own the cattle should be represented in such an important matter,

not merely the veterinarians, much as I may think of them. I may say in this connection that investigations are being made in Europe with a view to discovering some serum or vaccine or antitoxin that will take care of this disease by immunizing the animals when they are young, just as is done in the case of blackleg. If you could not treat blackleg when the animals are young, the mortality would be much greater than it is. Some progress has been made in that investigation. It is not one of the matters that I intended to have Duncan Marshall deal with, but what I do want him to get at is the viewpoint of the man who owns the herds. There is another point in this connection: the man who has only three or four head of cattle who is exempted from the operations of the accredited herd regulations wants to know why the big man should have access to this accredited herd money while he has not. These are some of the reasons why we want this matter inquired into, and I do not know any better man to do it than Duncan Marshall. He is himself a stock raiser; he has had his herds infected by tuberculosis, and has been co-operating with the federal Department of Agriculture in the administration of the Agricultural Instruction Act.


Mr. MANION:: What exhibitions are
qualified to receive the federal grant, and on what grounds are they so qualified?


William Richard Motherwell: I cannot have my whole staff here to deal with these various matters; this is the result of our getting away from the civil government estimates and into the matter of exhibitions. However, I can tell my hon. friend offhand that in Saskatchewan seven cities and towns receive grants from the federal treasury, amounting to almost a fabulous sum. As to Ontario, the city of Ottawa, for instance, gets a grant. I read in one of the morning papers the other day that the Ottawa fair had a surplus of $10,000 as a result of last year's operations, and that another exhibition had a surplus of $14,000. In the West, large salaries are being paid to the managers of exhibitions, in some cases as much as $10,000 a year, where large grants are given by the Do-

Supply-A griculture
minion as well as by the province. These $10,000 salaries are somewhat large compared with Mr. Marshall's modest $6,000, and in view of the surpluses which these ' exhibitions have in many cases it seems to me that with the exchequer in its present condition, a continuance of the usual large grants would be a little too prodigal.


Robert James Manion: Can my hon. friend give me the qualifications which entitle these exhibitions to grants?


Mr. CHAPLIN:: If this matter comes up under another item, why should we discuss it under the civil government?


William Richard Motherwell: I have here the
statement of conditions under which grants were made to summer and fall exhibitions for the year 1922. There would be very little change this year. I might quote a few paragraphs:
Exhibition Associations whose shows are open In all live stock classes to the whole of the Dominion of Canada, will receive grants under the following conditions on the basis of the expenditure in prize money in the utility classes of live stock and poultry at their last exhibition :-
1.	Fairs, which have expended at their last preceding exhibition a minimum of $4,000.00 and up to $16,000.00 of a maximum of their own money for prizes in these classes and which have not received a grant from the Dominion Department of Agriculture for the show at which this expenditure was made, shall receive the minimum grant of $1,250.00.
2.	Such fairs as have not received a grant for their previous exhibition shall be entitled, in addition to the minimum grant as stated above, to a grant of 50 per cent of the expenditure over $4,000.00. The maximum grant, in no case, shall exceed $2,500.00.
3.	Fairs, which shall have expended at their last preceding show a minimum of $4,000.00 and up to $16,000.00 of a maximum of their own money for prizes in these classes plus the amount of the grant received from the Department for their preceding show, shall be entitled to the minimum grant of $1,250.00.
I take the ground that we should not let them down too suddenly. They went up gradually, and we should try and arrange it so as to give the least jolt to those concerned. The matter will undoubtedly be reconsidered later on when the report of Duncan Marshall comes in, as well as that of Dr. Grisdale, who has just returned from the West.


Mr. GOULD:: I have complete faith in
the Minister of Agriculture spending the moneys that are voted in a proper manner. I see that the staff contains from forty-eight to fifty new members, but hon. members will remember that in the discussions concerning agriculture in this House I have

always expressed the belief that the Department of Agriculture was nearer the paint of starvation than any other department of the Government.
With regard to this vaccine or antitoxin, I am sure that we should approve of the expenditure. A good many members of this House will recall along with myself that there was a time in the West when our stock was not inspected, and the thought came to me as the minister was speaking of a visit he himself had from an inspector who destroyed a certain portion of his herd on the ground that they were infected with tuberculosis. I remember once an inspector came on my farm and shot horses that were supposed to be suffering from glanders. He was receiving five dollars per head for every horse that he found infected with the disease, so naturally enough he was successful in finding a goodly number roundabout that were infected. I mention this in order to emphasize that the Department of Agriculture should be provided with sufficient money to provide for proper officers, so that we shall not be subjected in the future to enormities such as those I have described. I do not think the House is really opposed to voting this money. In past years, owners have suffered materially in Canada because of the ravages of various diseases among their stock, and those diseases are becoming even more prevalent in the herds of Canada to-day.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Speaking of the grants
for these agricultural exhibitions, while some of them may have reached a point where they are beyond the need of assistance, it must be remembered that though we have in western Canada five or six of the best fairs on this continent, they had to be built up by assistance from both federal and provincial governments, and without that assistance they would not have been the excellent shows they are to-day.
As far as the salaries are concerned, that is a matter for arrangement by the management of each exhibition. These exhibitions do not consist altogether of agriculture; manufacturers and many other lines are represented, although the grant is made on the ground that a certain sum of money has been paid for live stock at the exhibition of the previous year, so the ten thousand dollar salary paid to the manager of one of these western exhibitions is not only for his services as manager of the live stock, but for managing the whole show.
I was interested in what the minister had to say with regard to the accredited

Supply-Agriculture
herd system. He said that tuberculin, which is being used for the purpose of testing these cattle in the accredited herds, was not the last word in diagnosing tuberculosis. I claim that it is, so far as we know, and while we do not recognize tuberculin as an infallible agent, it is the very best we have including three tests for diagnosing tuberculosis. When we take into consideration our great loss from this disease, particularly in our abattoirs and in swine from dairy districts, I think the Government has been quite justified in the past in using the very best methods at hand for the eradication of this disease. There is a great deal to do in that direction in the future.
Wtih regard to the use of serums for immunizing, and so on- that has nothing whatever to do with the accredited herd system, but a system of experiment should be carried on along these lines whenever any agency is found that gives promise of combatting this great disease. But that has nothing to do with tuberculin as a diagnostic agent.


Daniel Webster Warner: I would point out that it is not possible for the fairs in the West to get the attendance or the admission fees possible in the East with its heavier settlement, and consequently it is more necessary to give assistance to the western fairs. I have had experience enough to know that if these fairs are not given the grant this year, probably many of them will be spoilt. I think they should have, at the worst, at least one year's warning before the grant is withdrawn, because they have made their arrangements on the basis of receiving the grant. They could not possibly carry on with any fair amount of success with a very much lower grant from the Dominion Government.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River) :: There is a question I would like to ask the minister in connection with this vote and it is this: Considerable anxiety was expressed at one of our recent sittings by reason of the fact that insufficient encouragement is given to those who are deserving of promotion in the Civil Service. That being the case does the Minister of Agriculture consider it a desirable thing to give to an outsider like Mr. Duncan Marshall what the public would consider a plum in the Civil Service? Is this an encouragement to those who have worked so long and faithfully in the Civil Service?


William Richard Motherwell: My hon. friend has raised a very good point and it is one
I considered very carefully before I made my decision. The present Government, it must be remembered, has only been in power about three months. Now it was only at the beginning of the new year, or very shortly afterwards, that it was made apparent to me that the Agricultural Instruction Act would have to be dealt with at this session of Parliament. That information came to me quite unexpectedly and quite suddenly. My staff at that time were all busily engaged; there was a convention in progress at one end of Canada with regard to a particular topic, and another convention dealing with something else at the other end of the Dominion at which our officers were in attendance. Even at the present time a number of the staff are just returning from a live stock convention at Saskatoon; and we had not at the time I refer to a single man available to take up that particular line of investigation work. My hon. friend from Victoria (Mr. Tolmie) can testify if he likes that when he presided over this department the staff were all busy. They are always busy and particularly in the early months of the year. Here was the session coming on, and we wanted to deal with this question in a thorough and intelligent way; we wanted to ascertain just what the facts were. Very well, how are you going to get facts unless you send out a representative to procure them? Take my position to-night. I am without proper assistance owing to the absence of the deputy minister. It is quite true that on the civil government estimates the official who is here advising me is as good an authority as I could get; but in the matter of experimental farms and exhibitions Dr. Grisdale is the best authority available because he has been so closely identified with them. Now then, so far as the qualifications of Mr. Duncan Marshall are concerned he has been, as my hon. friend knows, a provincial Minister of Agriculture, and has worked in connection with the federal Minister of Agriculture under a signed contract each year on the administration of his quota of the moneys to be expended under the Agricultural Instruction Act, and amounting probably in the case of his province to $75,000 per annum. Mr. Marshall knows, as few other men could possibly know, the weaknesses of that act. In this connection I think there is one very pronounced weak point in the statute and it is this: Although the statute is called the Agricultural Instruction Act and under its provisions
Supply-Agriculture

something' like a total of $10,000,000 is distributed, the distribution does not take into consideration the rural population at all but is made on the straight basis of population. That is one of the weak points emphasized by Mr. Duncan Marshall. I would therefore ask who should be better qualified to investigate the conditions of an act than the one who represents a province that has suffered under the past system of distribution. I am now opening up what may be a controversial question and I do not want to continue on that line-I would rather go ahead with my estimates. However I simply wished to demonstrate the facts and establish why we selected Duncan Marshall for this particular work.


Edward Joseph Garland: I was
very much pleased to hear the minister state that Mr. Marshall's appointment was due to the fact that owing to pressure of public business at that time no men in the Civil Service were available. I am sure the minister will therefore be quite willing to give the committee the assurance that the appointment of Mr. Marshall to the position of Commissioner is merely temporary, and that as soon as possible one of the deserving members of the Civil Service will be promoted to fill it. If for no other reason than a desire to improve the morale of the service and to encourage the civil servants who are to work in conjunction and co-operation with him, he should now give us a guarantee that one of them will be appointed to the office as soon as possible.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: If I can get the attention of the minister away from the subject of exhibitions I would ask him if it is the intention of his department to put into operation this season the Dairy Grading Act which was passed during the last session of Parliament.


William Richard Motherwell: I think my hon. friend refers to the Dairy Produce Act.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Will the minister please answer my question?


William Richard Motherwell: We were hoping to put the act into force the first of May so that by the time the rush of the season came on there would be as little disturbance as possible, but if so, matters will have to be greatly accelerated. The Civil Service Commission makes the necessar ' appointments and it may take them three or four months to do so-in fact I may not get the act into force at all for some time. Sometimes nearly a year elapses be-

fore they make appointments, so that when I speak of the date at which the act is likely to come into force I do so with that reservation in mind.


James Dew Chaplin: I see from the estimates that a new officer is being appointed as a " Canning Specialist." I would like to know what the duties of this new officer are?


William Richard Motherwell: That is an appointment made at the Experimental Farm. The position is vacant now but I understand it is to be occupied by a lady who will deal with the canning of fruits and vegetables and demonstrate the various processes.


James Dew Chaplin: I would like to know how many of the officers of the department are connected with the Experimental Farm in Ottawa?


William Richard Motherwell: Do you want a list of the employees at the Experimental Farm?
!Mr. CHAPLIN: I assume the minister is not going to get through with his estimates this evening, I would therefore like him to provide a list of the officers who are connected with the Central Experimental Farm. I think that is a question that relates to the civil list and I would like to discuss it. In my opinion that is one of the sources of great extravagance in Ottawa and if you want to put in the plug in the interests of economy that is a place where it ought to be done.


William Richard Motherwell: At the Experimental Farm?


James Dew Chaplin: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: It would only lead the discussion very much afield if I went into that.


James Dew Chaplin: I asked the question.


William Richard Motherwell: There is the specific vote.


James Dew Chaplin: Can the hon. gentleman answer the question?


William Richard Motherwell: It would take a long time.


The CHAIRMAN:: Item 41 deals with the Experimental Farm, and will be found on page 92. It will come up later.


James Dew Chaplin: If this list goes
through, I will not get the information I want when I come to the Experimental Farms.

Supply-A griculture


William Richard Motherwell: I have the list
here. It will be rather slow if I pick them out. They are initialled on the left-hand margin.


James Dew Chaplin: I do not want the minister to take up time now. He can give me information another time.


William Richard Motherwell: If my hon.
friend would ask for a return, I think it would be the simplest way.


James Dew Chaplin: That would be all
right.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The list should be prepared and brought down in its entirety.


William Richard Motherwell: It is all here, if the committee desires it, but it would be a laborious task to pick out the information.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister says he
borrowed some of his help from the Minister of the Interior. Did he ever borrow any of the astronomers from the Minister of the Interior? I inquired of that minister about his astronomers, but he never . gave me the information. Has the hon. Minister of Agriculture ever borrowed any astronomers from the Minister of the Interior?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Edward Joseph Garland: Could
the hon. minister tell me if the position held by Mr. Marshall is permanent or temporary?


William Richard Motherwell: Temporary. He
has not been appointed Commissioner of Agriculture. He has been appointed a commissioner to make a certain investigation and most assuredly it must be temporary. I should like to answer one question, asked by the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Tolmie) which the hon. gentleman from East Peterborough (Mr. Bre-then) referred to, namely, why both these representatives are required. These representatives were appointed to investigate markets in 'South America. Whether they will do this work or not will depend on whether they are available, or whether they have other work that is pressing. We have that work in mind, if we can carry it out. However, I will consider the appointment of a dairy representative to take the place of one of these gentlemen. We would like to keep down the expense as much as possible. The point is well taken, and I will be pleased to consider the
advisability of having a representative of the dairy interests take the place of one of these gentlemen, inasmuch as both of these positions are tentative.


George Arthur Brethen: Coming back to the
position of the deputy minister, I desire to ask a question, but I do not know that we can hold the minister responsible, because it will probably work back to the Civil Service Commission. I should like to know why, in a department of the importance of the Department of Agriculture, the deputy minister gets $5,500, while in some of these small departments, and all the other departments, excepting one where the deputy minister gets $10,000, the salary is $6,000.	,


William Richard Motherwell: I may assure the hon. gentleman at the outset, that I am not going to deny responsibility in any matter. The principle of ministerial responsibility is part of our constitution, and I would like to say that a ministerial responsibility should carry the power to act. Dr. Grisdale gets a house in addition to his salary. It is not usual to put that item in the estimates. His salary is reduced in the estimates from $6,000 to $5,500, the $500 being represented by the house. He was a director of the Experimental Farm before he took this position, and one of the conditions of his taking the present position was that he would remain on the Experimental Farm.


George Arthur Brethen: That answers my
question.


William Richard Motherwell: Had it been as
my hon. friend suggests, there would have been just ground for complaint. I hope I will have my hon. friend's assistance in making bona fide corrections in these matters. The salaries attached to these positions are so unattractive that we cannot get them filled. A process has been under way to try and get more money in order that we may get men fitted for the work.


Mr. THOMPSON:: As to the grading of the dairy produce, have the regulations been drafted yet,'and if so, what are they?


William Richard Motherwell: No, there was a conference in Ottawa about two weeks ago of the dairy representatives from all parts of Canada,-cheese, butter, and wholesale interests-and they proposed regulations that they thought would work out. All the parties interested were there, including the middlemen. These regulations

Supply-Agriculture
have not been approved either by myself or by Council. We have not yet dealt with them, but we hope to within a very short time. Possibly the cheese will be assembled at some convenient place for grading.
If it is a convenient railway centre and a large number of small factories around, we would assemble it for grading. If it was a large factory with a large output we would grade it right in the factory. The regulations will come to me when they are licked into shape, I will go over them, and they will be finally approved. If my hon. friend has any representations to make in regard to this matter, I will be glad to have them. We have had before us representatives of the dairy interests of Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific, including the wholesale dealers.


Leon Johnson Ladner: I notice by the Canadian Grocer that an official announcement has been made that the importation of oleomargarine is to be prohibited after the expiration of the present act in July next. I should like to know from the minister whether other hon. gentlemen are receiving communications of the kind or not. I know I have received communications from urban centres in western Canada where oleomargarine is used, and I would like to know whether it is the intention of the Government to continue the act by which the importation and manufacture of oleo-jmargarine under regulations may be carried on.


William Richard Motherwell: I think permission to import and manufacture expires on the first of September. SSo far as I am concerned, it can expire forever.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Undoubtedly the minister has given some consideration to the matter. It is a very important one for the people, both consumers and producers. Do I understand you to say it is the policy of the Government not to allow importation when the act expires.


William Richard Motherwell: I thought I made it quite plain that the Government had not dealt with the matter. It is a few months ahead, and we are so pressed with our daily duties that we meet questions when we come to them. We do not cross the bridge until we come to it. I have not discussed it, even with my colleagues. I could not give an official reply, inasmuch as it must be the policy of the Government. I have given my personal views, and I do not think it necessary to elaborate them at this time.


William Foster Garland: I understood the minister to say that the grant for exhibitions would be cut down, and in his statement he said something about associations making large surpluses and the managers claiming large salaries. I might say, with regard to the fair at Ottawa, that the grant from the federal government was $5,000 and, according to newspaper reports, it is to be cut by $2,000. The outcome of that will be that the prizes that the live stock men receive will be cut down by just that much, and they are the ones who are getting the big benefit of this federal grant. For instance, according to our fair in Ottawa last year, if a man showing horses paid a dollar for entry money, he got eight dollars out in prize money; if a man showing cattle paid a dollar for entry money, he got seven dollars out in prize money; if a man showing sheep paid a dollar for entry money, he got five dollars out in prize money; if a man showing poultry paid a dollar for entry money, he got three dollars out in prize money. The outcome of this policy will be that this prize money will be reduced proportionately by $2,000, and that will be a hardship, not so much on the fair board as on men who are exhibiting stock.


Mr. MILNE:: I notice in this estimate that we have fourteen statisticians. If we do not already have enough statisticians to cari'y out the work of the department, we soon should have. I notice we have five animal pathologists and two plant pathologists. Where are their laboratories, and do - they co-operate with gentlemen who are doing the same work in the provinces?


William Richard Motherwell: With regard to the animal pathologists, we have laboratories at Ottawa. Dr. Watson has charge of the whole of this work, and a large number of serums and antitoxins are made in the laboratories. Some of the provinces have laboratories, but they find it more economical to import serums and antitoxins or to ship them in from large centres. I had the pleasure of meeting some of the gentlemen engaged in this work. As a matter of fact, I do not know where one-half of the buildings are that contain the staff of my department. There are eleven buildings, I think, and when I get time, I shall avail myself of the opportunity of, at least, finding out where they are. The statisticians are engaged in compiling statistics for filing purposes, for library purposes and, more particularly, for market purposes. I can assure the committee that,

Supply->1 griculture
so far as I know, there are no drones around the department, and I have the department just as it was handed over to me. As regards the Experimental farm, I visited the poultry plant, but I did not go all over it to see whether the staff were all on the job or loafing. I know Mr. Archibald, however, and I do not believe he is a man who would permit loafing, so that I do not think the remarks along that line were warranted. But there is nothing so good that it cannot be improved, and we have had some valuable contributions and good suggestions this evening. I like the suggestion that was made about a dairy representative going down to explore the possibilities of South America in connection with the dairy breed of cattle. No branch of agriculture is getting so hard hit to-day as dairying.


Robert Milne: I do not believe the minister quite understood my question. Do these investigators under the federal department co-operate with investigators under the provincial departments, or, when they are investigating, do they simply walk indiscriminately all over the field?


William Richard Motherwell: There is co-operation and there should be a good deal more, but it is not an easy task to undertake. The hon. member for Victoria city (Mr. Tol-mie) and the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Crerar) were not long at their Work until they realised the necessity of more co-operation between provincial and federal departments. I thank my hon. friend, because that is one of the works of my special messenger in the person of Mr. Duncan Marshall, namely, to see if we cannot cut out some of the overlapping, particularly in the live stock branch. It is not easy to do so, but I think it can be done. A resolution was passed last session in the Saskatchewan legislature recommending just such a policy, and it was proposed to extend it to the administration of experimental farms in that province. That opens up a big field of research, and I think a great deal can be done especially in the live stock branch where the provincial government has a live stock policy and the federal government has almost a corresponding one, with the necessary paraphernalia connected with both. Some co-operation has been effected and I hope more will be.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: What is the last item in this appropriation, $4,000, for new positions and promotions?


William Richard Motherwell: I explained that the other night, and that is the saving feature of all these items. New positions may be found necessary between now and next year, and if it is found that some of these salaries are not sufficiently attractive to secure applicants, we shall have to ask the Civil Service Commission to regrade these positions at higher-salaries. If that is done, some source will have to be provided from which to get the additional money, and that is what this sum of $4,000 is for. It is quite necessary, and a safeguard in the whole business.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Did I understand1 the minister to say that his policy is to cut off grants for agricultural exhibitions?


William Richard Motherwell: No, my first proposal was to reduce them, on the ground that I understood the associations had all been notified a year ago that these grants had been so generous during the war that they ran up in the aggregate to $180,000, and they would be cut down. I am not criticising the grants adversely. During the war, when there were so many calls on individuals for various purposes, it was found advisable by the then government to give substantial additional grants for these shows. I understood from my officials that the associations have been notified that the grants would be cut down, and the proposition was to cut them in two with due notice. I find they all claim now that they were not notified, and it is quite possible that we may be able to modify our proposal when we come to the Supplementary Estimates. If subsequent reports indicate that there is going to be a severe strain on these fairs as a result of cutting the grants in two, at the beginning we may start with a cut of 20 per cent, and gradually make further reductions, but we can consider the matter further when we come to the Supplementary Estimates. I cannot, give any assurance that this will be done; I shall have to wait and ascertain what the reports are. If my hon. friend ever tried to reduce the grants to agricultural societies he would find it a difficuut job. Someone has to stand up and advocate it. At the same time I do not want to be harsh or unjust to the institutions that have their programmes prepared for the coming summer.


Thomas Henry Thompson: Will the regulations with regard to the grading of dairy products be considered by this House before they are finally adopted? If not, I want
Supply-A griculture

to express the views of my constituency, which is the second largest cheese producing county in the Dominion. The people I represent are absolutely opposed to the grading of cheese being done in Montreal, as proposed by the minister. For years we have had a system whereby the cheese is inspected at cheese factories, which are large and commodious; and the work of inspection has been carried on satisfactorily and with the best results. I was present at meetings held at Peterborough, Camp-bellford, Stirling, Picton, Belleville and Madoc, and while I am not speaking for any place outside of my own constituency, I can say that resolutions have been passed at all of these cheese boards absolutely opposing the grading in Montreal. Copies of these resolutions have been sent to the minister asking that the grading be done in the cheese factories. The people believe that this system which has worked satisfactorily in the past, is very much better than the one now proposed. The man buys his cheese and inspects it at the factory, and there is a proviso in the regulations that if there is any dispute between buyer and seller, the instructor of the district, who is a disinterested party, shall act as sole arbitrator, his decision being final. This system has given every satisfaction and the people are therefore unanimously opposed to the proposal to send the cheese to Montreal for inspection and grading. If the Government wishes to carry on grading they do not offer any objection, although they do not see the need for it; but they do certainly oppose strenuously the attempt to change the system and send fhe cheese to Montreal. Besides the convenience there is in inspecting the cheese at the factory, there is this fact, which is of considerable importance, that when the inspection is done under the eyes of the cheese maker, defects can be pointed out to him and he can readily remedy them.


William Richard Motherwell: If the hon. member has recommendations to make in regard to the regulations I shall be glad to receive them, but I think that the inspection in the past was done principally by those interested in buying the cheese. In regard to grain, for instance, the grading is done by the buyer, where the grain is sold locally. What we want is to have a government grading of cheese. We have received some objections, but they were from the buyers of cheese. Sometimes we have had a few objections from farmers who have not understood the matter; but as a matter of

fact no change is ever introduced without some objections. The grading of butter has been practised in the West for years, with entire satisfaction, and I have no doubt that when we establish the system with regard to cheese it will be found to work satisfactorily. We have to do it whether we like it or not.


Thomas Henry Thompson: The delegates from Peterborough, Campbellford, Stirling, Picton, Belleville and Madoc cheese boards, who attended the meetings which the hon. minister refers to, opposed the grading in Montreal. They represent about $10,000,000 worth of cheese exported, and their views should be considered. Whatever may have been done with regard to butter in the West is no reason for enforcing on cheese makers regulations which they do not agree with.


William Richard Motherwell: On page 22, item
45 we have cold storage warehouses and dairy, and we should discuss this matter under that item.


William Foster Garland: Under what item does poultry inspection, in regard to record performance, appear?


William Richard Motherwell: On page 87. This comes under "Chief, Poultry Division." In some cases we have two sets of what appear to be the same officials, one for the Experimental Farm here, and another for outside work at some 'other experimental farm.


William Foster Garland: The inspectors to which I have reference are not in connection with any experimental farm, either in Ottawa or anywhere else. They go to the individual farms that participate in the contest. Last year there were some 11,000 birds entered.


William Richard Motherwell: The inspectors
of poultry are paid out of the live stock vote on page 22. These are civil government estimates.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: While I heartily sympathise with the minister in his desire to increase salaries-because I know very well that some of the experts are not as well paid as they should be-still I note in the last item on page 89 the sum of $4,000 for new positions and promotions. Is this in accordance with the Civil Service Act, and did the minister consult the Department of Justice before including this item in the Estimates?


William Richard Motherwell: I hope to be able to prevail on the Civi4 Service Commission

National Defence
to increase salaries to get the right men. The Plant Pathologist whom we hope to get I do not believe will be attracted by the salary offered. We shall go to the commission and make out a case for better salaries.


Mr. COOTE:: There is an increase in travelling expenses from $75,000 to $85,000. Does the minister really think that his department is justified in asking for an increase of $10,000, particularly when we expect railway rates to come down? If any part of this $10,000 is to be incurred on trips to the Argentine or Chili, I think he should ask the Department of Trade and Commerce to reimburse him to that extent. I believe that we have trade commissioners in South America, and if the Department of Agriculture sends specialists there, it is only fair for the minister of that department to ask the Department of Trade and Commerce to shoulder that expense.


William Richard Motherwell: I have explained
that; possibly the hon. member was not in the Chamber at the time. Almost every year representatives of the department have to attend meetings or conferences overseas. The Agricultural Institute meets at Rome this year; it has to do with the compilation of farm statistics from all over the world. That accounts for a considerable amount of the $10,000 for this year. In addition, the travelling expenses of a number of officers in the administrative branches have been transferred to this vote, augmenting the amount to that extent.


James Dew Chaplin: In respect to the item of $4,000 for new positions and promotions, I notice on page 88 that increases of salary are provided for thirty-six positions, while five or six remain at the same amount. Why, then, should there he provision for this $4,000 also?


William Richard Motherwell: If my hon. friend refers to some getting increases and others not, I may point out that it depends upon what stage of the salary range they have reached. If at the top, they stay there until put into a higher grade by the Civil Service Commission; if at the bottom or somewhere between the bottom and the top, they go up according to the classification.


James Dew Chaplin: Why is it necessary to
provide for $4,000 for possible further increases?


William Richard Motherwell: Because these
salaries may not attract the men we want. As a matter of fact, some of them will not.


Leon Johnson Ladner: What new positions are contemplated in this vote of $4,000?


William Richard Motherwell: These figures, ol course, are estimates; the amount is an approximation. There may be some outbreak which the Entomological branch will have to deal with; if the season is hot and dry, invasions of insects are possible and may come overnight. I do not anticipate that there will be many new positions, and I hope there will be sufficient extensions of salaries to get the positions all filled. If the money is not required it will not be spent.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Henry Herbert Stevens: I think we have done
pretty well; we might adjourn.


William Stevens Fielding: Very well.
On the motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the House adjourned at 11 p.m.
Tuesday, April 4, 1922