1922-04-11

THE GRAIN TRADE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. F. KAY (Missisquoi) presented the fourth report of the Select Standing Committee on Agriculture and Colonization, as follows:
That the question of the constitutionality of the reconstruction of the Wheat Board, with the powers conferred thereon by the orders in council establishing or extending the same he referred to the law officers of the Crown for their reasoned opinion.
On motion of Mr. Kay the report was concurred in.

Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) :: Mr. Speaker, in conformity with
the requirements of the Statute, I beg to lay before the House the following papers:
List of. Shareholders of the Chartered banks of Canada; Statement of unclaimed balances; Statement respecting the Quebec Savings Bank.
In former times these papers were printed for the information of the House, but several years ago the late Government, as evidence of its great economy, decided not to print them. As I do not want to be less economical, I am submitting the papers in this form.



THE GENOA CONFERENCE


Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday my
hon. friend from Marquette (Mr. Crerar) asked me to bring down certain papers relating to the proceedings at the Genoa Conference as outlined originally at Cannes. I therefore beg to present:
1.	Copy of Memorandum on Anglo-French relations and of the draft of the proposed treaty with France presented by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to Mr. Briand at the meeting of the Supreme Council at Cannes, January, 1922.

Genoa Conference

2.	Copy of Resolutions adopted by the Supreme Council at Cannes, January, 1922, as the basis of the Genoa Conference.
My hon. friend asked that these documents should be incorporated in Hansard, so that hon. members might have an opportunity of perusing them during the Easter vacation. With the unanimous consent of the House I move that these documents be so incorporated.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Do I understand that
there is unanimous consent for the motion made by the Prime Minister?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
(The documents referred to are as follows) :

[Stage Direction]
Memorandum by the British Government
The British Government strongly desire that the Cannes Conference shall lead to definite results which will be approved by French and British sentiment and also by the opinion of Europe as a whole. In their judgment the indispensable condition of such success is a close preliminary understanding between the French and British Governments.
Public opinion is undeniably anxious and disturbed both in Great Britain and in France. Questions in which both countries are deeply interested are rightly believed to be at stake. There is a general feeling that some of the fundamental problems of the peace still await solution, and the critical temper of the public in both countries has given rise to public controversy. The suspicion and uncertainty thus produced have been reflected throughout Europe and even beyond Europe with unhappy results.
The failure of the Cannes Conference would therefore re-act with very bad effect on the relations of the two countries. Indeterminate or provisional decisions would be regarded as tantamount to failure, and would inevitably accentuate the divergence between French and British sentiment which has lately made itself felt. Europe would regard any such consequence with dismay, since its peoples realize that a dlose understanding between the British Empire and France is essential to European welfare and the peace of the world. The British Government desire to make it plain at the Cannes Conference that the British Empire and France stand together as firmly in the issues of peace as in the ordeal of war.
In their opinion this is not to be secured by any piecemeal treatment of the questions by which the Conference is faced. On the contrary, they consider it absolutely necessary that the problem should be treated as a whole; and with this object in view, they desire to state the position of both countries, as they see it, at the present time.
In their opinion there are two principal reasons for anxiety in France.
In the first place, French opinion is disquieted on the subject of reparations. France is endeavouring to repair her devastated area, and is obliged to advance great sums, which make a

formidable gap in her budget, for that purpose. This expenditure should and must be met by Germany; but, in spite of settlement after settlement, satisfactory reparation by Germany is always postponed.
In the second place, French opinion is naturally anxious about the future safety of France. She has been invaded four times in a hundred and twenty years, and in spite of the losses of man-power suffered by Germany in the war and under the peace, France has still a population twenty millions less than that of the German Empire. Germany, moreover, possesses five million men trained to arms, and amongst them a very powerful corps of officers and noncommissioned officers. It is true that Germany has been deprived of nearly all her arms and equipment, but France cannot overlook the possibility that this deficiency may, by one means or another, be made good. It is therefore essential to her that the discrepancy between French and German man-power should be made up .in such a way as to guarantee her soil from another devastating war.
In Great Britain there is also grave cause for anxiety and discontent. Britain is a country which lives by Its exports, and its trade has been devastated as terribly as the soil of France. The consequences in human suffering and privation are very serious. Nearly two millions of the British working-class are unemployed, and their maintenance costs the country nearly £2,000,000 a week. This burden falls upon a community more heavily taxed than any other in the world and more hardly hit than France by the economic consequences of the war.
The hard ordeal through which the British people are passing is not, however, peculiar to them. France is in some ways the most fortunately situated of European countries. Owing partly to the large proportion of her population which lives upon the land, partly to the stimulus given to internal production by the needs of her devastated area, and partly also to the fact that the arrested condition of emigration to extra-European countries affects her population much less than those which sent large numbers of emigrants oversea before the war, she is suffering less than others from unemployment and from the collapse of international trade. In Italy and Belgium, however, the unemployment is serious. Belgium is a food-importing country, dependent upon the European markets for 80 per cent of her export trade. Italy is also very dependent upon foreign trade, and has a greater population to employ than before the war.
In Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe the collapse and confusion of the normal processes of economic life are even more marked. Millions are living in conditions of bitter privation and misery. Even where inflation has given employment and good wages to the working-class, the relief is temporary and reaction certain, unless measures are taken in time. The educated and the professional classes are suffering more terrible even than the working-class. The civilization of Europe cannot long survive such conditions. In its present state it is moving fast towards social and economic catastrophe.
Profoundly, therefore, as her own interest is engaged in the economic reconstruction of Europe, Great Britain appeals in no selfish spirit for the co-operation of France in that great human cause. It must be undertaken here and now. There is an awful aggravation of human misery, and in some parts of Europe an in-

Genoa Conference
creasing menace to civilization itself, in every month of delay.
The problem before the countries is how to meet their respective necessities by common action. These must be met as a whole. Complete frankness between th,e statesmen of both countries is essential, if the problem is to be effectively solved. Great Britain fully recognizes France's ground for anxiety, but she cannot agree to postponing the question of the reconstruction of Europe, while meeting France's desires in regard to her reparations and her security. In order to give satisfaction to French needs, the British Government must be able to tell the British people that the two countries are marching together to restore the economic structure of Europe and the general prosperity of the world.
With regard to reparations, His Majesty's Government are prepared to abide, so far as they are concerned, by the arrangement reached in London under which France would reap considerable advantages while Britain would make considerable sacrifices. They believe that this arrangement will meet the essential claims of France until such time as a wider financial settlement can be attained-perhaps in two or three years.
With regard to the safety of France, Great Britain is prepared to give her a guarantee that in the event of unprovoked German aggression against French soil the British Empire will put its forces at her side. There will be double value in this guarantee, since it will not only safeguard France in the event of German attack but will make any such attack extremely improbable. It is not likely that Germany would have attacked in 1914, had she realized the great forces which the British Empire would throw into the war. In 1914 Germany credited Great Britain with only six divisions; she knew little or nothing of the character or the resources of the British Commonwealth. She is wiser now, for she knows that, instead of six divisions only, the British Empire was maintaining 400,000 men in the field in France by the end of the first year of war. These numbers rose rapidly afterwards, and during the last two years the Empire had a strength of 2,000,000 men in France and Flanders despite a heavy drain of casualties. Great Britain called out a total of nearly
7.000.	000 men for military service by land, sea and air. The self-governing Dominions called out more than one million and a half. The Indian Empire called out nearly the same. The total strength thrown by the British Empire into the war, was therefore over 10,000,000 men. The losses in killed, wounded and missing were
3.500.000.
It is inconceivable that Germany should forget these facts or their significance as a guarantee of French soil. What the British Empire did once for civilization, it will, if need be, do again. Germany, it is true, has great reserves of trained officers and men; but those of the British Empire will be available as long as those which Germany preserves from the old military regime. If, therefore, she is certain that the British Empire will stand by France in a future' war, she will not be tempted to keep alive any dreams of revenge. It is of great importance to divert the German mind from any such ambitions as well as to provide for the defeat of those ambitions should they mature. The British Government believe that both objects would be met by a British guarantee to France against invasion of her soil, and that such a guarantee
must ripen and strengthen the friendship of the two nations as years go on.
There are two ways in which the guarantee could be given.
The first is by means of an offensive and defensive alliance. Though such an alliance might seem desirable to France, it would in reality not serve her interests well, because such alliances are contrary to British tradition. The British people understand the claim of France to be guaranteed against invasion of her soil; but they would not willingly be committed to military liabilities for breaches of the peace elsewhere, 'and they would not undertake responsibility of any kind for the defence of countries in Eastern or Central Europe, in which their interest is necessarily small. An alliance involving, or even appearing to involve, any such responsibility would not carry the whole-hearted concurrence of the British people. On the contrary, it would be strongly opposed by large sections of the community in all parties, and would therefore not be as valuable to France as an understanding in another form.
The second alternative is a definite guarantee that the British Empire would stand by her in the event of unprovoked aggression by Germany against French soil. This alternative was discussed at the Imperial Conference last summer, and it is probable that the opinion of the Empire would support that of Great Britain in giving such a guarantee to France. It would therefore have far greater weight, for it would, the British Government believes, carry with it the whole-hearted opinion, not of Great Britain alone, but of the Dominions, which put a million soldiers of first rank into the field during the war. The real danger to France is from German invasion. She cannot be invaded by any other Power. A guarantee against German invasion secures her safety beyond doubt. This, therefore, is the alternative which His Majesty's Government prefer to adopt. They propose the draft Treaty between Great Britain and France attached to this memorandum as the form of engagement best calculated to protect the common interests of both Powers in Western Europe.
In order, however, that effect may be given to it, it is necessary that the guarantee should be accompanied by a complete Entente between the two countries. This was the basis of the agreement of 1904, which gave France the support of Great Britain in the war, and it is equally essential now. For such an Entente to be achieved, three questions must be cleared away. These need only be indicated here.
The first is the settlement of the Eastern question and the attainment of a just peace between Greece and Turkey.
The second is the question of Tangier.
The third is the question of submarines. His Majesty's Government make no condition of this, and they fully understand that the divergencies of French and British views on the subject may be due to different ideas of the uses which submarines can serve. The British opinion, however, based on four years' war experience, is that submarines are effective only against merchant ships and are ineffectual otherwise as instruments either of attack or defence. British opinion would inevitably insist on a heavy programme of anti-submarine craft, if the French submarine programme were carried out, and the two countries would thus be launched in a course of competitive naval construction. The British Government cannot disguise the fact
Genoa Conference
[Stage Direction]
that any such development would react very seriously on British sentiment towards France. Her sea communications are to Britain what her eastern frontier is to France. Naval competition in any form between herself and France would corrode goodwill.
The fourth and last essential to the proposed Entente is that France should co-operate wholeheartedly with Great Britain in the economic and financial reconstruction of Europe. The British Government desire the agreement of France to the immediate summoning of an Economic Conference at which all the Powers of Europe, including Rusia, would be represented. The economic collapse of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe is now the most serious factor in the paralysis of European trade; and it cannot be remedied unless the produce and the markets of Russia are once more made available to the world. The presence of the real leaders of Russia is therefore necessary, in the opinion of the British Government, to the success of such a Conference. No useful object is served by discussing the Russian question with secondary representatives of Russia, or by forwarding conditions in writing to Moscow. It is most important to deal, if possible, with the heads of the Russian Government, and the Oon-' ference should be held as soon as possible at the most suitable centre for that purpose.
In order to trade with Russia, certain assurances and guarantees are essential. Those may be briefly set forth here. The British Government would not propose to present them to the Russian Government in advance of a Conference, but to discuss them at the Conference itself in conjunction with the counter-proposals for recognition which they would undoubtedly call forth.
In summary, they may be stated thus:-
(1)	Nations can claim no right to dictate to each other regarding the principles on which they are to regulate their system of ownership, internal economy and government. It is for every nation to choose for itself the system which it prefers in this respect.
(2)	Before, however, foreign capital can be made available to assist a country, foreign investors must be assured that their property and their rights will be respected, and the fruits of their enterprise secured to them.
(3)	The sense of security cannot be reestablished unless the Governments of countries desiring foreign credit freely undertake:
(a)	That they will recognise all public debts and obligations which have been or may be undertaken or guaranteed by the State, by municipalities or by other public bodies, as well as the obligation to restore or compensate all foreign interests for loss or damage caused to them when property has been confiscated or withheld.
(b)	That they will establish a legal and judicial system which sanctions and enforces commercial and other contracts with impartiality.
(4)	An adequate means of exchange must be available, and, generally, there must be financial and currency conditions which offer sufficient security for trade.
(5)	All nations should undertake to refrain from propaganda subversive of order and the established political system in other countries than their own.
All countries should join in an undertaking to refrain from aggression against their neighbours.
[Mr. Meckenzie King!
These are the four questions of which His Majesty's Government particularly desire a solution in connexion with the Treaty which they propose. They have indicated them because they consider agreement upon them to be indipensable to that complete Entente between Great Britain and France which they desire to maintain. The time has passed when statesmen could pledge their countries to engagements without full regard to the popular sentiment which they represent. In order that the Treaty of Guarantee proposed should be of lasting value to France, it is essential that the democracies of the British Empire and the French Republic should feel assured that they are guided by similar purposes and harmonious ideals. All questions, therefore, should be cleared away which may be capable of dividing the sentiment of the two countries and marring their accord. His Majesty's Government are confident that the four questions which they have indicated here can be solved in a manner satisfactory to both Governments, and that the Treaty of Guarantee between the two nations may thus be sealed and confirmed by a complete and durable Entente.
It is, moreover, their particular desire that this Entente between Great Britain and France, so far from excluding other nations, should form the basis of a larger scheme of international co-operation to ensure the peace and stability of Europe as a whole. The sixth clause of the stipulations put forward for discussion at the Economic Conference which they propose lays down a simple condition of international accord-"that all nations should join in an undertaking to refrain from aggression against their neighbours." Such an. undertaking they are willing to give and to promote by all means in their power. It would lead, as they hope, not only to a temporary improvement of European relations, but also to a universal reduction of armaments and this, in their belief, is the only certain, means of building up that sense of safety amongst nations, great and small, which Europe through the many centuries of its political history has never yet attained.
Cannes.
9th January, 1922.	.
Draft of Treaty between the Governments of the British Empire and the French Republic.
Whereas the soil of France has been twice invaded by Germany within living memory, and is still suffering deeply from the devastation wrought by the enemy; and
Whereas the peoples both of France and of the British Empire have paid heavy toll of their manhood and their wealth in overcoming the German, armies of invasion and
Whereas the welfare of the European peoples and the economic structure of the world have been profoundly disturbed by the protracted ordeal of war through which they have lately passed and
Whereas guarantees of the security of France against any future invasion by Germany are indispensable to the restoration of European stability, the safely of Great Britain, and the peace of the world ; and
Whereas the following safeguards contained in the Treaty of Versailles
" Article 42. Germany is forbidden to maintain or construct any fortifications either on the left bank of the Rhine or on the right

Genoa Conference
bank to the west of a line drawn 50 kilo, to the east of the Rhine.
" Article 43. In the area defined above the maintenance and assembly of armed forces, either permanently or temporarily, and military manoeuvres of any kind, as well as the upkeep of all permanent works for mobilisation are in the same way forbidden.
" Article 44. In case Germany violates in any manner whatever the provisions of Articles 42 and 43, she shall be regarded as committing a hostile act against the Powers signatory of the present Treaty and as calculated to disturb the peace of the world," may not sufficiently provide for the defence of the essential common interests of the High Contracting Parties and the maintenance of peace in Western. Europe:
His Britannic Majesty and the President of the French Republic having etc., etc., etc., have agreed as follows:-
Article I
In the event of direct and unprovoked aggression against the soil of France by Germany, Great Britain will immediately place herself at the side of France with her naval, military and air forces.
Article II
The High Contracting Parties reassert their common interests in Articles 42, 43, and 44 of the Treaty of Versailles, and will consult together, should any breach of them be threatened or any doubt arise as to their interpretation.
Article III
The High Contracting Parties undertake further to concert together in the event of any military, naval or air measures inconsistent with the Treaty of Versailles being taken by Germany.
Article IV
The present Treaty shall impose no obligations upon any of the Dominions of the British Empire unless and until it is approved by the Dominion concerned.
Article V
This Treaty shall remain in force for a period of ten years, and shall, if approved by both parties, be renewable at the end of that period.'
Cannes.
13th January, 1922.	i
Resolutions Adopted by the Supreme Council at Cannes, January, 1922, as the Basis of the Genoa Conference.
I.-Economic and Financial Conference.
(a)	Mr. Lloyd George's Resolution.
The Supreme Council agreed at its meeting, held at 11 a.m. on Friday, the 6th January, 1922, to accept in principle the draft resolution proposed by Mr. Lloyd George in regard to an Economic Conference. The resolution was considered in detail at a further meeting of the Supreme Council held the same day at 3.30 p.m., and was finally approved as follows:- The Allied Powers in conference are unanimously of opinion that an Economic and Financial Conference should be summoned in February or early March, to which all the Powers of Europe, including Germany, Russia, Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria, should be invited to send representatives. They regard such a conference as an urgent and essential step towards
the economic reconstruction of Central and Eastern Europe, and they are strongly of opinion that the Prime Ministers of every nation should, if possible, attend it in person in order that action may be taken as promptly as possible upon its recommendations.
The Allied Powers consider that the resumption of international trade throughout Europe and the development of the resources of all countries are necessary to increase the volume of productive employment and to relieve the widespread suffering of the European peoples. A united effort by the stronger powers is necessary to remedy the paralysis of the European system. This effort must include the removal of all obstacles in the way of trade, the provision of substantial credits for the weaker countries and the co-operation of all nations in the restoration of normal prosperity.
The Allied Powers consider that the fundamental conditions upon which alone this effort can be made with hope of success may be broadly stated as follows:
1.	Nations can claim no right to dictate to each other regarding the principles on which they are to regulate their system of ownership, internal economy and government. It is for every nation to choose for itself the system which it prefers in this respect.
2.	Before, however, foreign capital can be made available to assist a country, foreign investors must be assured that their property and their rights will be respected and the fruits of their enterprise secured to them.
3.	The sense of security cannot be re-established unless the governments of countries desiring foreign credit freely undertake-
(a)	That they will recognize all public debts and obligations which have been or may be undertaken or guaranteed by the state, by municipalities, or by other public bodies, as well as the obligation to restore or compensate all foreign interests for loss or damage caused to them when property has been confiscated or withheld.
(b)	That they will establish a legal and juridical system which sanctions and enforces commercial and other contracts with impartiality.
4.	An adequate means of exchange must be available, and, generally, there must be financial and currency conditions which offer sufficient security for trade.
5.	All nations should undertake to refrain from propaganda subversive of order and the established political system in other countries than their own.
6.	All countries should join in an undertaking to refrain from aggression against their neighbours.
If in order to secure the conditions necessary for the development of trade in Russia the Russian Government demands official recognition, the Allied Powers will be prepared to accord such recognition only if the Russian Government accepts the foregoing stipulations. Ob) Place and Date of Conference.
The Supreme Council agreed at its meeting, held at 11 a.m. on Friday, the 13th January,' 1922, that the Genoa Economic and Financial Conference should assemble on the 8th March 1922, subject to any later adjustment.
(c)	Invitation to Russia.
The Supreme Council at its meeting held at 6.15 p.m. on Tuesday, the 10th January, 1922, agreed that an invitation should be addressed to Russia in the following terms:
Genoa Conference
[Stage Direction]
On behalf of the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers I have the honour to transmit to you a copy of a resolution passed by the Allied Powers in conference at Cannes on the 6th January, 1922.
In accordance with this resolution and with reference to M. Chicherin's telegram, dated the 8th January, 1922, I hereby formally invite delegates from Russia to attend an Economic and Financial Conference to be opened at Genoa early in March, 1922.
I shall be glad if you will inform me of the names of your delegates and their staff, and on receipt of this information and a statement of the route by which your delegates propose to travel I shall communicate with the interested governments and inform you of the arrangements made in order to afford them all necessary facilities and safe conduct.
The Supreme Council, conscious that you recognize the importance which it attaches to the assurances nad guarantees which it has laid down as indispensable to the useful cooperation of the Allied Powers with Russia in the task of the economic and financial reconstruction of Europe, learns with satisfaction that you propose to send representatives with full powers to take decisions.
(d)	Invitation to the United States of America.
At its meeting held at 3.30 p.m. on Friday,
the 6th January, 1922, the Supreme Council agreed that an invitation to be represented at the conference should be addressed to the United States of America.
(e)	Invitations to othe,* Countries.
The following lists show the countries to be invited to the Genoa Conference in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Council taken at its meeting held at 6.15 p.m. on Tuesday, the 10th January, 1922:
I. The following countries to be entitled to appoint delegates without limit:
1.	The Allied Powers represented at the Cannes Conference.
2.	United States of America.
3.	Germany.
4.	Russia.
II.	The following countries to be entitled to appoint two delegates each:
5.	The various dominions of the British Empire.
6.	Spain.
7.	Portugal.
8.	Norway.
9.	Sweden.
10.	Denmark.
11.	Finland.
12.	Switzerland.
13.	Esthonia.
14.	Poland.
15.	Czecho-Slovakia.
16.	Latvia.
17.	Austria.
18.	Hungary.
19.	Roumania.
20.	Jugo-Slavia.
21.	Greece.
22.	Bulgaria.
23.	Holland.
III.	The following country to be entitled to appoint one representative:
24.	Luxemburg.
(f)	Outline Agenda.
The following outline agenda was approved by the Supreme Council:
1. Examination of the methods of putting into practice the principles contained in the

resolution reached at Cannes on the 6th January, 1922.
2.	The establishment of European peace on a firm basis.
3.	Essential conditions for re-establishment of confidence without injury to existing treaties.
4.	Financial subjects.
(a)	Currencies.
(b)	Central banks and banks of issue.
(c)	Public finance in relation to reconstruction.
(d)	Exchanges.
(e)	Organization of public and private credit.
5.	Economic and commercial subjects.
(a)	Facilities and guarantees for the import and export of commercial products.
(b)	Legal guarantees for the re-establishment of commerce.
(c)	Protection of industrial property and copyrights.
(d)	Status of consuls.
(e)	Admission and position of foreigners in regard to the conduct of business.
(f)	Technical assistance to industrial recon struction.
6.	Transport.
(g)	Detailed Agenda and Resolutions.
The .Supreme Council at its meeting held at 11 a.m. on Friday, the 13th January, 1922, appointed the following Committee to prepare the detailed agenda and draft resolutions for the Genoa Conference:-
Belgium, Viscount Davignon.
British Empire, Sir Maurice Hankey.
France, M. Seydoux.
Italy, Signor Jung.
Japan, M. Tokugawa.
(h)	Press Notice.
A Ministerial Committee issued to the press on the 11th January, 1922, a notice explaining the objects and proposed procedure of the Genoa Conference. This press notice is reproduced in the Appendix to this paper.
II.-International Corporation (a) Resolution of the Supreme Council.
The following is the text of a resolution passed by the Supreme Council at its meeting held at 6.15 p.m. on Tuesday, the 10th January, 1922 :-
The Supreme Council approves the establishment of an International Corporation with affiliated National Corporations for the purpose of the economic reconstruction of Europe and the co-operation of aill nations in the restoration of normal prosperity, and agrees that a Committee shall be immediately constituted, composed of two British, two French, two Italian, two Belgian representatives and a Japanese representative, with power to add representatives of other countries :-
(1)	To examine the project in detail;
(2)	To conduct any necessary preliminary investigations ;
(3)	To proceed with the organisation of the proposed Corporation and affiliated Corporations with a view to its beginning operations at the earliest possible moment;
(4)	To report to the Genoa Conference on the progress made;
(5)	To make any recommendations to any of the Governments concerned or to the Genoa Conference which, in their view, are likely to assist the purposes of the Corporation or of the Genoa Conference.
The Governments represented on the Council undertake to provide immediately in equal shares £10,000 for the work of the Organising

Genoa Conference
Committee, and to give all the support and assistance in their power to the Organising Committee and to the Corporation when formed, (b) Preliminary Meeting of the Organising Committee.
The Supreme Council at its meeting held at 11 a.m. on Friday, >the 13th January, 1922, came to the following decision:-
That a preliminary meeting of the Organising Committee of the International Corporation for the re-establishment of better economic conditions in Europe should be held in London in eight or ten days' time, invitations to be issued by the British representatives. The names of the representatives (Belgium, France, Italy and British Empire, two each, and Japan one) to be communicated to the British Secretary 2, Whitehall Gardens, London, S.W.l.

[Stage Direction]
Press Notice regarding the Genoa Conference.
The Supreme Council have to-day agreed upon the subjects to be discussed at the Conference which is to be called at Genoa early in March, in order to facilitate the economic revival of Europe.
General Objects and Conditions
The published resolution of the Council of the 6th January explains the reasons which in the unanimous opinion of all the nations represented on the Council make necessary a united effort by all European countries to restore the economic life of Europe and to remove the obstacles which at present impede it, and the fundamental conditions of such a combined effort. These include the recognition by all countries of their public debts, 'and compensation for loss or damage caused by the action of Governments ; financial and currency conditions which offer reasonable security for trade and peace amongst nations. Among the essential objects of the Conference will be the consideration of the practical measures required to give effect to these principles, and in particular to secure, without injury to the provisions of existing treaties, the essential conditions for the re-establishment of confidence between nations without which international commerce cannot revive.
Peace
The first condition which is of prime importance in the reconstruction of Europe is to establish the relations of all the countries on the basis of a stable and enduring peace.
Financial Subjects
The Conference will also discuss the financial conditions which impede revival and the financial measures which might assist it, in particular the financial situation in the several countries in relation to the task of reconstruction: the rapid variation in the amount and purchasing power of the national currencies; the violent fluctuations in the relative value of the currencies of different countries as reflected in the exchanges, and the bearing upon these problems of the position and status of central banks and banks of issue. The Conference will examine the conditions under which public or private credit can best be made available for the work of reconstruction.
Economic Subjects
The obstacles to revival, however, are economic as well as financial. The Conference will
therefore consider how the existing impediments to the free interchange of the products of different countries can be removed, in particular by the abolition, as rapidly and completely as possible, of such new impediments as have resulted from post-war conditions. The improvement and development of <the transport system will engage special attention ; and among other questions which might be usefully examined are the security afforded by the laws and by the legal systems and commercial documents in the different countries; the provision rof expert and technical assistance by countries specially qualified to give it; the position of consular officers; the protection of copyrights; and the regulations governing the admission of foreigners for the purpose of carrying on business.
January 11, 1922.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: I beg to lay on the table of the House a copy of the report of the Chief Electoral Officer. I move, seconded by Mr. Fielding;
That one thousand copies in English and five hundred, in French of the report of the Chief Electoral Officer, transmitted on March 1st 1922 to the hon. Speaker of the House of Commons, pursuant to Section 74 of the Dominion Elections Act, and laid on the table of this House on March 14th, 1922, be printed forthwith, and that Rule 74 be suspended in relation thereto.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition) moved:: That the name of Mr. Neill be substituted for that of Mr. Hubbs on the Select Standing Committee on Marine and Fisheries, and that the name of Mr. Hubbs be substituted for that of Mr. Neill on the Select Standing Committee on Mines and Minerals:
That the name of Sir Henry Drayton be substituted for that of Mr. Garland (Carleton) on the Select Standing Committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph lines, and that the name of Mr. Garland (Carleton) be substituted for that of Sir Henry Drayton on the Joint Committee of both Houses on the library.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. GEORGE PARENT (Quebec West) :: Before the Orders of the Day are called, Mr. Speaker, I beg to bring the following matter to the attention of the House. I am informed that the Civil Service Commission, after leaving the public under the impression that civil service examinations would be held in the spring, has now decided that no such examinations shall be

C.N.R.-Minuter's Statement
held. I am also informed that many students have prepared themselves for these examinations. In view of these facts, I should like to know if the Government intends to take such steps as may be necessary to force the Commission to hold such examinations.


Hon. A. B. COPP (Secretary of State) :: I have no definite information with regard to the matter, but I will make inquiries and let my hon. friend know what is being done, at the next sitting of the House.



SIR MONTAGU ALLAN

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. 0. R. GOULD (Assiniboia) : Mr. Speaker, I would call the attention of the Government to a press report which states that Sir Montagu Allan is leaving Canada. Now, the affairs of the Merchants Bank have keenly interested the public quite recently, and under the circumstances I ant wondering what right this gentleman has to leave Canada. If he persists in staying away, will extradition proceedings be instituted to bring him back to Canada?
Sir LOMER GOUIN (Minister of Justice) :: I have no information on this question. I will inquire of the attorneys representing the Government and will inform [my hon. friend at the next sitting of the House, or before, what has actually happened.



ORIENTAL IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. W. G. McQUARRIE (New Westminister) :: Before the Orders of the Day
are called, may I ask the Prime Minister if it would be possible to fix a day for the discussion of the resolution dealing with oriental immigration, which stands on the Order Paper in my name, and to give it the right of way? I have been asked by a number of hon. gentlemen when the resolution is to come up, and I think it would be convenient if a day could be fixed. I suggest, if I am in order in doing so, Monday, the twenty-fourth.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, I certainly shall seek to meet the wishes of my hon. friend, but without knowing the order in which the several motions come, it is a little difficult to say offhand what day could be fixed. I will endeavour to arrange the matter with him, however, and in time to give the House due notice of the day on which the resolution may be taken up.



PRIVILEGE-MR. KAY

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. W. F. KAY (Missisquoi) :: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. In the Halifax Herald of last Friday, the 7th of April, I find an article which is malicious false, and untrue. It is headed:
Wheat Board is cause of big political war among Liberals.
I will read the part of this article which refers to myself. Speaking of the Government, it says:
One of its main tactics is to raise the cry that the establishment of a national Wheat Board would be an interference with provincial rights and contrary to the British North America Act. Thus, when the question came up in the Agricultural Committee meeting yesterday, Mr. Kay, a friend of Mr. Robb, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, moved that the question be referred to the Supreme Court for a verdict upon its validity. The idea in Mr. Kay's mind, and in the mind of the Government, is that with the question before the Supreme Court, it would be safely shelved for the present.
It is hardly necessary for me to state, Mr. Speaker, to the House that as Chairman of the Committee on Agriculture I could not make a motion. The facts of the case are that the Committee on Agriculture passed unanimously a motion asking this House to refer the question of the constitutionality of the re-establishment of the Wheat Board to the Supreme Court of Canada. In my capacity as chairman of the committee, I presented that report to this House.
I may say, 'Sir, that my mind is absolutely unbiased as to the pros and cons of this very important question. And may I be allowed to say that the only suggestion which I have received from any member of the Government is that the Committee on Agriculture should be urged to give a free and full hearing to any parties interested in this most important question and to speed up and expedite in every way the report of the committee to the House. There is one word of truth, Sir, in this article,-which article I have declared to be malicious, false and untrue,-and that is that I am a friend of the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Robb). To that allegation I plead guilty.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
The House again in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Civil Government-Railways and Canals- salaries and contingencies, $221,470.
Hon. W. C. KENNEDY (North Essex, Minister of Railways and Canals):: Mr. Chairman, when the estimates of the Department of Railways and Canals were presented to the House on a recent occasion, at the request of the former minister (Mr. J. A. Stewart) and the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) I withdrew them for the moment in order that I might later present the annual statement. I am now in a position to present to the House the annual statement of the Minister of Railways with respect to the operation of the nationally-owned railways of Canada.
The period under review is the twelve months which ended December 31 last, the calendar year now being the fiscal year of all Canadian railways, including the Government lines, whose year formerly ended on March 31. Although a year of depression in trade, with decreased tonnage and less travel, and with reduced rates when contrasted with the previous year, the nationally-owned roads were able, largely owing to drastic curtailment of expenditures, to make an improved showing over 1920.
As the Government-owned railways are still being operated in two groups by two separate boards, though with such co-ordination of operation as has been possible under separate management, it is again necessary to make separate statements concerning the operations of the Canadian National lines, and of the Grand Trunk lines. But before dealing with the separate reports, I would like to say that seemingly the outstanding feature of 1921 operation was the improvement in the position of the Canadian National-Grand Trunk combination. Those roads comprise approximately 52 per cent of the railway mileage of Canada, and in 1920 they did 52.21 per cent of the railway business of the country as reflected in the gross earnings of the transcontinental lines. During 1921, a year of depressed trade and falling railway revenues, the Canadian National-Grand Trunk lines increased their percentage of gross earnings from 52.21 to 54.22 per cent. .Applying these percentages to gross earnings of the transcontinental lines, it means that the nationally-owned lines increased their proportion of the available railway *business and improved their position as carriers during the year to the extent of about eight and a half million dollars.
Canadian National Railways The operated mileage of the Canadian National lines at December 31, 1921, was 17,338. During 1921, 123 miles of new line were turned over to the operating department for permanent operation and, in addition, 65 miles were turned over for operation on behalf of the construction department, a total of 188 miles.
The mileage comprises the following units:-
Canadian Government Railways
Intercolonial Railway	 1,670
Prince Edward Island Railway..	276
Branch Lines, Including the leased
St. John and Quebec Railway 515

 2,461
Transcontinental Railway including
Lake Superior Branch	 2,007
Hudson's Bay Railway	 214

 2,221
4,682
Canadian Northern System	 9,900
Grand Trunk Pacific	 2,756
Canadian National Railways	17,338
The average mileage operated in 1921 was 17,236. The gross earnings amounted to $126,691,455.72, being an increase of $1,049,703.41 over the previous year, notwithstanding decreased traffic to the extent of four million tons of freight and 1,715,625 passengers. The National system is said to be the only transcontinental system in America whose earnings in 1921 from the increased freight and passenger rates established in September, 1920, were not entirely offset by the loss in tonnage and passengers.
Operating expenses amounted to $142,784,357, being a decrease of $19,700,365, leaving loss on operation of the system of $16,092,901 for the year, as compared with $36,842,970 for 1920, or an improvement in the operating result of $20,750,068. It is claimed on behalf of the management that this reduction was not made at the expense of the property, and that deferred maintenance and betterments made during 1919 and 1920 were reflected in 1921 by providing more economical operating conditions, while increased efficiency of the working forces enabled more work to be done by fewer employees.
The year saw a big slump in railway traffic following the decline in trade which set in during the closing months of 1920. There was a decline in the movement of all commodities with the exception of wheat. The grain movement of that season con-


Arthur Meighen: There was a correction made to $69,593,441. I understand that now it is given as only $67,000,000 odd.


Mr. KENNEDY (Essex):: C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
bill was $21,391,215. When operating revenues amount to $126,691,455, and wages and fuel combined require $103,772,812, the balance, roughly, 23 millions, is of course insufficient to meet other operating charges totalling 39 millions. For that reason, the operation ratio in 1921 was 112.70 In other words, it took 112.7 cents to earn a dollar. In 1920, the ratio was 129.32. That year wages took 78.61 cents of every revenue dollar, locomotive fuel 18.79 cents, and other expenses 31.92 cents. In 1921, the distribution was, wages 65.03 cents, locomotive fuel 16.88 cents, and other expenses 30.79 cents.
Out of every dollar spent in 1921, 23.61 cents went into maintenance of way and structures and 22.17 cents into maintenance of equipment. Transportation by rail-superintendence, train movement, station employees, yards terminals, telegraphs, etc.-absorbed 50.15 cents, and transportation by water, .08 cents. The Traffic Department, soliciting, etc., 1.79 cents, general-general officers, law, insurance, etc.-2.15 cents, while transportation for investment, the cost of moving the railway's own materials for betterments, new construction, etc., amounted to 1.39 cents.
Operating costs were high in January and February, due to the higher wage scale which was adopted in September, 1920, retroactive to May 1st, the result of the Chicago Award. When traffic commenced to fall away forces were reduced and by the end of April the staff showed a reduction from 60,500 in 1920 to 51,000 in 1921. This staff reduction was maintained until the end of the year. It ran nearly 10,000 below 1920 through the months of May, June and July, averaged about 6,000 less in August, September and October, and about 5,000 less in the last two months of the year.
The reduction of operating expenses by 20 millions is a welcome change, as in recent years it has been all the other way. Operating expenses of 1920 increased by more than 37 millions over 1919; those of 1919 increased by 27 millions over 1918.
Total Pay-roll, including betterments, was $88,755,060, as against $105,109,808 in 1920, a decrease of $16,354,748. The reductions in number of employees and of the rates of pay from July 16, 1921, is estimated to account for $12,775,000 of this, and the balance would be betterments. It has been customary to quote for comparative purposes the increase in the average railway wage which grew from
TMr. ~W. G. Kennedy.]
$713 in 1915 to $1,633 in 1920. Last year the average wage was $1,471.33, but the comparison is of little use in contrast with full employment years as in 1921 decreased train service caused lessened mileage per man in the running trades, and part-time work in shops with permanent force rather than full time with reduced force materially decreased the average wage of the mechanical staff, while rigid curtailment of overtime was another factor. While this explanation shows the 1921 average wage to he of little use in comparison with other years, the fact remains that on reduced time, the average wage last year was still double what it was in 1915.
In accepting the reductions which the Canadian railways, acting in unison, made effective from July 16th last, the railway brotherhoods recognized the present labour situation and also accepted the principle of following in the deflation stage the United States precedents which built up the war time wage scale. At the present time negotiations are under way looking to a modification of sonne of the working conditions that the railways feel to be difficult of application, resulting in excessive wages in some classes and the placing of expenses on the railways which are claimed to be unduly burdensome. It is recognized that railway wages must provide for a proper standard of living, hut they should have reasonable relation to the importance and value of the work performed, and to wages generally. The management inform me that the labour situation has greatly improved; that the spirit of railway labour is better than it was; that labour has become more efficient and is doing more work and better work. I am glad to give expression to the views of the management in that regard.
A problem which in recent years has confronted railway managements is the question of providing suitable service on branch lines at a cost not out of proportion to the earnings and capable of meeting in many cases motor car competition. For this the self-propelled gasoline car seems to be the most suitable. The Canadian National Railways have been active in obtaining experience with this plan of operation. Much will depend upon the attitude of railway labour towards the self-propelled car, which could take care of branch line services, if expenses of operation are not made too costly in the matter of wages. In this effort to cut excessive costs, and yet pro-

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
vide reasonable service, the co-operation of railway labour is invited. As a matter of fact, these branch lines suffer not only from heavy costs of operation, but from the competition of the motor car and motor truck, a competition which is increasingly felt each year by all railways.
While the trend in prices of materials and supplies is generally downward, the movement is slow, and prices continue greatly in excess of pre-war figures. Of course a drop in prices is not immediately reflected in operating expenses, due to the necessity to keep on hand large stocks of fuel and other supplies, which have to be charged out at purchase price until new stock begins to be used. The management estimates the reduction in tie expenditure last year to have been $1,550,000; reduction on account of materials and supplies generally $1,300,000 and on fuel $2,216,175. Average price of coal, which was $3.65 in 1916, and $7.40 in 1920, was $6.10 last year. Coal purchases during the year amounted to 3,483,085 tons. Of this 2,505,389 tons were Canadian coal, costing on the average $5.71, or $14,320,504.53; and 977,696 American coal, at an average price of $6.47, and totalling $6,324,450.94.
The management state that in 1921 they did not purchase for the Intercolonial railway or ship to the Intercolonial railway east of Montreal any American coal; that on the other hand, they took delivery of coal produced in the maritime provinces in ,1921 to the extent of 1,184,015 tons. In addition to the coal taken by rail in the maritime provinces, they moved 281,959 tons of Nova Scotia coal up to Levis by water. They also took in through the port of Quebec, by water, 90,865 tons of Nova Scotia coal, and railed some of that coal as far west as Cochrane. The coal taken in by water at Levis and Quebec is included in the total of 1,184,015 mentioned. The total quantity of American coal purchased for use at Toronto and east during 1921 was 160,000 tons. Coal consumption on the Intercolonial in 1921 was about 20 per cent less than in 1920. They have now accumulated nearly four months' stock of coal, and eastern officials have been instructed that sufficient reserve has now been secured and the railway is, therefore, no longer in the market except for daily requirements.
After the very heavy purchases of rolling stock and motive power in 1918, 1919 and
1920,	it was not necessary to go into the market for equipment of any kind during
1921.
No work was done on eastern lines in the construction of new branches during 1921. All such work during the year was confined to western lines. A number of branch lines and extensions were under way prior to the war, on which work was suspended, and the Government has since provided the National Railways management with money to go ahead with certain of these lines along which settlers were in bad way for railway facilities. A detailed statement of this construction work will be included with those which will appear as an appendix to these remarks.
The construction and betterment programme for 1922 is necessarily curtailed. There is in the west alone construction projected which would entail an expenditure of $25,000,000 to bring to completion. In view of the financial condition of the country and the impending general re-organization of National Railway direction and management, it is felt to be better to confine construction and betterments for the present to the minimum and leave to the new board to advise as to what is essential or necessary in the matter of extensions. Briefly, this year it is proposed to finish active lines, up to the point to which track has been laid, at an estimated expenditure of $1,286,164, with ballast, fence, telegraph line and buildings, but to make no extensions to any of them beyond the point where track is already laid. Details of this work will be given in connection with the estimates.



GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY SYSTEM

[Stage Direction]
I will now deal with the Grand Trunk Railway System. This system extends from Portland, Maine, to Chicago, with an operated mileage of 4,776, of which 3,612 miles comprise what are known as the Grand Trunk Canadian Lines. The New England lines, as the Eastern United States lines are known, extend' from Portland, Maine, to Norton vMills, Vt., on the International boundary, with an operating mileage of 172, while 992 miles embrace the operated mileage west of the Detroit and St. Clair rivers, in the states of Michigan, Illinois and Indiana, between Port Huron, Detroit and Chicago.
In addition, there is operated under separate management, but controlled by the Grand Trunk Railway Company of Canada, the Central Vermont Railway System, with an operating mileage of 613, extending from New London, Connecticut, to Montreal, of which 463 is operated in the United States.
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Stage Direction]
1921	1920
The Operating Revenues, all Lines (including the Central Vermont)
were	$109,097,557 58 $113,223,934 52
The Operating
Expenses were 104,725,039 93	108,884,828 58
Leaving a net revenue from railway operation of	 4,372,517 65	4,339,105 94
After taking into consideration railway tax accruals, uncollectible railway revenue, hire of equipment, joint facility rents and non-operating income items, the gross income, before deducting fixed charges, was in 1921 $3,573,443.34, as against $7,498,393.30 in 1920. The fixed charges for 1921 were $19,245,583.68 as against $14,025,637.07 in 1920, making a net loss for the year 1921 of $15,672,299.34, as against a net loss for 1920 of $6,527,243.77.
The net deficits for 1921 and 1920 are apportioned as follows:
1921	1920
Canadian lines. ..$7,386,170	97	$3,155,892	06Western lines. . ..	4,797,177	55	1,935,155	94New England lines.	1,881,093	84	990,869	03Central Vermant. .	1,607,856	98	445,326	74$15,672,299 34	$6,527,243 77
The increase in the net income deficit of 1921 over 1920 of $9,145,155.57 is due principally to variation in amount received under the guarantee of the United States government following the return of the American units of the system to corporate control on March 1, 1920, and to an increase of $5,219,946.61 in interest on funded debt. The increase in fixed charges was caused by the inclusion of a full year's interest on the guaranteed stock, which ran from May 21 only in 1920, and increased interest on government loans and new issues.
In addition to the results as shown for the system comprising the Canadian lines, the Western lines, the New England lines and the Central Vermont, there are certain stock controlled subsidiary companies, the net results of whose operations do not wholly enter in the system net income. These companies are:
Chicago, New York & Boston Refrigerator Co.
International Bridge Co.
Montreal Warehousing Co.
Terminal Warehouse Registered.
Oshawa. railway.
Rail & River Coal Co.
Thousand Island railway.
Montreal & Southern Counties railway.
St. Clair Tunnel Co.
Grand Trunk Milwaukee Car Ferry Co.

The net income of all these companies for 1921 was $453,118.68, as compared with $613,639.66 in 1920. The amount taken into the Grand Trunk accounts as dividends from these subsidiary companies was $127,000 in both 1921 and 1920.
The accumulated undistributed surplus of these subsidiaries was $918,986.21 in 1921, as compared with $934,423.49 in 1920.
At December 31, 1921, there was on hand locomotive and car stock, owned by the Grand Trunk Railway system, including the Central Vermont, as follows:
Locomotives of all kinds	 1,503
Passenger service oars of all kinds. . ..	1,210
Freight service cars of all kinds... 47,312
Company's service cars of all kinds ..	2,545
The outstanding obligations as at December 31, 1921 and 1920 respectively, of the Grand Trunk Railway system, including the Central Vermont railway, bearing interest were as follows:
1921	1920
Government
loans	$ 73,702,154 42	$ 21,340,808 62
Other
obligations 354,583,462 32	338,434,369 72
Total	$428,285,616 74	$359,775,178 34
Because of the fact that the operations of the units of the railway system in the United States were subject to a guarantee by the United States government in operating results for eight months in 1920, no proper comparison can be made for the system with the results of the operations for the twelve months of 1921.
Comparisons, however, can fairly be made of the operations of the Canadian lines for the two years. These will be found in detail in the statements which form an accompanying appendix.
Revenue passengers carried on the Canadians lines in 1921 numbered 11,609,762, as compared with 12,206,977 in 1920, or a decrease of 4.89 per cent. Revenue tons of freight handled in 1921 amounted to 21,687,749 compared with 26,322,423 in 1920, a decrease of 17.61 per cent. The loss in tonnage was distributed over all commodities, excepting products of agriculture, but was most noticeable in coal, both anthracite and bituminous, which together constitute between twenty-five and twenty-eight per cent of the total tonnage.
The average number of employees on Canadian lines in 1921 was 29,127, as compared with 32,260 in 1920, and 24,457 in 1917. The average wage in 1921 was $1,574.66, as compared with $1,661.54 in 1920, and $914.80 in 1917. Of the total

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
operating expenses of $71,179,292.80 in 1921, $42,149,952.50, or 59.22 per cent, was the amount of the payroll. The
4 p.m. corresponding figures in 1920 were; operating expenses, $76,213,815.16; payroll, $49,567,436.72; percent of operating expenses, 65.04.
Total hours worked, including betterments, ordinary and joint facility operations, in 1921, was 68,545,640, as compared with 82,178,337 in 1920. At rates in effect prior to the McAdoo award, the employees would have received, in 1921, $23,374,063.24, as compared with $45,865,171.10 actually paid, an increase of 96.2 per cent.
The decision of the United States Labour Board, known as the 12i per cent decrease, which came into effect July 16 last, produced to December 31, 1921, on Grand Trunk Canadian lines a saving of $3,035,112.06. Had the decision been effective throughout the full year, the difference in wage charges would have been $6,306,198.88.
The Grand Trunk Railway system, exclusive of the Central Vermont, contracted for 2,795,000 net tons of coal during the coal year ending March 31, 1922, the aggregate cost, including freight and duty, being $15,288,900, or, $5.50 per ton. Of this amount, 2,675,000 tons had been delivered to March 31. The amount purchased for Canadian lines was 2,030,000 tons at an aggregate cost, including freight and duty, of $11,672,700, or, $5.75 per ton.
During thp year ending December 31, 1921, there was added to the investment account of the Grand Trunk system $26,772,057.15, apportioned as follows:
[Stage Direction]
Canadian Lines	$24,790,901	01Western Lines	
1,550,513	95New England lines. .	..	44,277	94	(Cr)Central Vermont	
474,920	13
Of the above total $20,550,000 was for new equipment; $2,100,000 for improvements to equipment; $1,150,000 for increased weight of rail; $800,000 for sidings, yards and spur tracks $350,000, investment of Grand Trunk and Central Vermont in affiliated companies, and the balance, $1,500,000, in miscellaneous roadway, buildings, structures, etc.
The accounts of the Grand Trunk Railway system for the year ending December 31, 1921, have not been audited by an outside firm of chartered accountants, as is the case with the rest of the roads embraced in the National system. The auditing has been done by the Company's own auditors.

[Stage Direction]
As to the Estimates, it is not necessary to do more at this stage than outline the requirements of the railways so far as the Estimates are concerned, and to leave detailed explanation for the consideration of, the various items in committee.
Briefly, the amount to be voted on account of the railways for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1923, as provided for in the Estimates, is $97,220,000, compared with $179,065,760 last session. This includes both Grand Trunk and Canadian National lines.
For operating deficits $21,123,827 is provided for 1922, as against $23,129,369 for 1921. The actual operating deficit on the Canadian National lines in 1921, as already stated, was $16,092,901.
Interest charges due the public require $33,571,438. Last year this item was $35,871,195.
For betterments the sum of $30,261,286 is provided, as against $60,077,828 last year. Pending the organization of the new board and adoption of its policy as to necessary extensions, and also having in mind the general financial position of the country, the construction and betterments program has been restricted to minimum requirements.
Refunding securities in the hands of the public, for which $39,241,700 was necessary last year, calls for $11,129,910 this year. This refunding does not add to corporate capital indebtedness but changes the form, the usual practice being to retire a maturing issue with a fresh issue bearing the Government's guarantee. Where securities are retired by Government loans, the liability of the railway is transferred from the public to the Government.
It is not necessary this year to provide for refunding securities in the hands of the Government, for which $11,148,533 was included last year.
The actual cash for operating deficits, interest charges to the public, and betterments, which is required to be provided for the current year is $84,956,552, as against $119,078,392 last year.

[Stage Direction]
In the Speech from the Throne it was stated that conferences had been arranged between the railway authorities with respect to the reduction of rates upon basic commodities. A number of these conferences have been held, but, because of the uncertainty of the entire rate situation, the executives of the various railways feel
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
that it is inadvisable, at this time, to reduce rates on basic commodities in view of the fact that the suspension of the Crow's Nest Pass agreement ceases on July 6 next, and the Crow's Nest Pass scale of rates again becomes effective on the commodities named in the Crow's Nest Pass subsidy legislation of 1897; further, general order No. 308, of the Railway Commission, dated September 9, 1920, does not extend beyond July 1.
The Government feels that the matter is of such great moment and of so much importance to the people of the country

who are not only interested in lower freight rates, but concerned as owners of more than 22,000 miles of Canadian railways-that the entire question should be placed before the members in such a way as to enable them to obtain the fullest possible information. With this in view, I propose, at an early date, to ask the House to appoint a special and representative committee to examine into the question of rates, with power to summon the executives of the various railways and others to place before the committee all available information for the consideration of its members. It would then be for the committee and for the House to take such action as, having regard to all the circumstances, shall commend itself to the wisdom and judgment of Parliament.

[Stage Direction]
The first step in the reorganization of the railways will be the establishment of a single representative Board of Directors for the unified control and co-ordinated operation of the government-owned lines, now directed and controlled by two separate boards and two different managements. This board will be thoroughly representative and will include in its number the most competent railway men, men of wide practical experience and training, and possessed of expert knowledge in the various departments of railway activity.
I am aware that there has been criticism of the Government because the new board has not already been appointed. We realize that, for the time being, we might conceivably save some money by the immediate termination of dual control and dual management; on the other hand, we also realize that by unwise or hasty selection of this most important body we might easily, in the long run, lose a great deal more.
It is well to bear in mind that it is intended to turn over to this board proper-

ties in which the public and the Government have invested $1,582,500,000-and this does not take into consideration cash subsidies ^mounting to $41,000,000, nor land grants.
Last year, our railway executives spent $343,458,420, made up as follows:
Grand Trunk (operating) ....$ 104,725,040 Canadian National
(operating)	 142,784,357
Cash voted in Estimates (not
including deficits)	 95,949,023
[Stage Direction]
The total expenditure of the Dominion of Canada on Consolidated Fund account of 1919-1920-fiscal year-was $303,843,930, and in 1920-1921, $362,600,000.
It will be seen that the new Canadian National Railway Board will have the spending of more money than was expended by the Dominion on Consolidated Revenue Fund account in 1920, and almost as much as was spent in the fiscal year ending March 31, 1921. Before turning these properties over, or entrusting any board with an expenditure which equals or may exceed the ordinary expenditures of the Dominion, we are bound to know that the men to whom this vast responsibility is entrusted, and in whom this great confidence is to be reposed, are eminently qualified to successfully discharge such important duties.
I am free to confess that in the short time thus far at our disposal, and with the necessarily limited investigation it has been possible to give the matter, we are not yet in a position to announce who will compose this board. In an undertaking of this magnitude, it is above all essential that we be prudent and careful. When we turn over these valuable railway properties with a view to giving government ownership and operation a fair trial, it is of the utmost importance that w'e place them in capable and honest hands, and in the hands of men who, as regards component parts of the system, will administer them without fear or favour, without thought of politics, and in the general public interest.
For that reason, we prefer to be careful and prudent, adopting good business methods, and, in the final analysis, the country will benefit by it.
We are impressed with the necessity for bringing about the unification of the system as quickly as may be possible with due regard to the public interest. We keenly realize the magnitude of our responsibility.

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
We know what is expected of us, and when we appoint our board we wish it to fulfil on behalf of the Government and the people of Canada those same high expectations.
We propose to appoint this board under provisions of existing legislation to which, up to the present time, no effect has been given. This legislation provides for a single board of directors and for the inclusion of any lines of railway which may from time to time be vested in, or owned, controlled or occupied by His Majesty. When this legislation is brought into effect it automaticaly abolishes the present Canadian Northern Board, and the Canadian Grand Trunk Board, which succeeded the English directors in May last.
The new board will be given the direction and control of the Grand Trunk Railway properties, the Canadian Northern railway, the Grand Trunk Pacific railway, the Transcontinental railway and the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island railway and branch lines. I have mentioned these lines specifically so that there may be no question or misunderstanding as to where any or all of them stand so far as general direction and control is concerned.
The board will be asked to examine fully for itself the existing situation, and after it has done so to make such recommendations as in its opinion will tend to the highest efficiency in the operation of these railways, without respect to political or any considerations other than the best and most approved railway practice. On their advice and recommendation will depend the division of the immense mileage into suitable operating districts or divisions, with regional headquarters which it is hoped will enable local or district matters to receive the consideration of officials most capable of understanding local requirements. Briefly, what will be aimed at will be centralization of general direction and control and decentralization in matters of local detail.
As to this, I have had opportunity to consult the gentlemen who at present are operating and managing the roads, and while there are natural differences of opinion as to how the various lines might best be grouped for economic management and operation they are unanimously of the opinion that a re-grouping and re-arrangement is necessary if improved results are to be obtained. They agree that the large mileage should be divided into units, each with its own headquarters and under the direction of a general manager who, while subject to the lines of policy laid down for his guidance and direction by the board at
general headquarters, should have much wider powers on all matters pertaining to his own particular division or district than has recently been the case so far as the present two divisions of the Canadian National system are concerned. It will be for the new board, however, to advise just what form of administration is most suitable. It is the intention of the Government that the board in the exercise of its several duties and functions shall be free from interference, political or otherwise,
Upon the new board will devolve also the task of selecting and developing an executive composed of the best men in the existing systems, and such others as may be necessary, in order to combine the most suitable talent available for the management of the railways, and in order that economies may be effected which are desirable and necessary in the interests of successful operation and management. It is hoped to build up a distinctly Canadian National personnel and in this the board will receive such co-operation and support from the Government as should secure for it, from the employees, the same loyal and faithful service which generally characterizes the relations of the average railway man with his own particular road. The Government and the board will want the good-will and co-operation of the employees, and we will wish every employee to feel that he will have, under government ownership, the same opportunities of advancement to even greater responsibilities and greater rewards than would have been possible under former restricted conditions. Such of the older officials and employees as have given long service, and who of necessity may have to be retired, will receive the benefit of superannuation.
Just one other point. There has been such criticism of the statements presented by the Management of Canadian National Railways, and also concerning the Grand Trunk, as to impair parliamentary and public confidence in the figures and statements which have been put out from time to time. Naturally, any confirmation or verification of accounts, or investigation or justification of managerial methods and practice is a matter to be dealt with by the incoming board, to whom these properties are being turned over, rather than by the outgoing. The Government is most anxious that as far as the financial affairs of these railways are concerned, not only Parliament, but the general public, may have confidence in any statements which may be issued by the new board. To that end, it
[Stage Direction]


C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
is proposed to supplement the work of coordination by an investigation of the financial affairs and business methods generally of the railways passing under the control of the new board. This is a usual business precaution in the nature of a stocktaking on the occasion of a change of administration.

[Stage Direction]
I expect, Mr. Chairman, after the Easter recess, to be in a position to make a statement to the House concerning the operation of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine during 1921. Heretofore, that has been done by the Minister of Marine, but the late government decided that the responsibility of the department and Minister of Marine should cease with the completion of the construction programme. As the ships are being operated in conjunction with National Railways, and directed by the same board, and to a certain extent by executives common to both railways and Merchant Marine, on the Minister of Railways devolves the task of presenting the report of the operations for last year. I understand that the figures are now complete, and I hope, therefore, to present the report when we take up the Estimates of the Canadian Merchant Marine.
And now, Mr. Chairman, before taking my seat, I would like, following the usual practice, to hand in, for publication in Hansard, copies of the various statements which I have endeavoured to analyze in the course of my remarks. I would request the consent of the committee to have them printed as an appendix to the statement I have just concluded.
The CHAIRMAN:: The Minister of Railways asks the unanimous consent of the committee that certain statements be printed in Hansard. Is it the pleasure of the committee that such consent shall be granted?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
(The statements referred to are as follows) :



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS.

[Stage Direction]
Summary of Statements Referred to by The Honourable The Minister of Railways and Canals in His Statement in The House of Commons in Connection with Operations for The Year 1921.
N.B.-Figures in italics are deficits, decreases or credits.
1.	Mileage Statement.
2.	Comparative Statement of Operating Results, 12 months ending December 31st, 1921 and 1920.
3.	Memorandum showing Operating Results by months for year 1921.
4.	Comparative Statement of Operating Deficits for year 1921 and 1920.
5.	Income and Fixed Charges for years ending December 31, 1921 and 1920.
6.	Comparison of Payroll showing amount of Operating Revenue paid in Labour, and average number of
employees, 1921 and 1920.
7.	Comparative Statement of Traffic 1921 and 1920, exclusive of Electric Lines.
8.	Comparative Statement of Train Mileage, 1921 and 1920.
9.	Statement showing details of equipment on hand December 31st, 1920, deliveries, retirements and
positions at December 31st, 1921.
10.	Summary of betterments carried out in 1921, and some of the larger works it is proposed to carry out
during 1922.
11.	Statement respecting Canadian National Telegraphs.
12.	Summary of Construction carried out in the year 1921.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 1.]


[Stage Direction]
GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC RAILWAY Operated Mileage-December 31, 1921.
Canadian Government Railways.-
Intercolonial Railway (Including International and N.B. and P. E. I.
Railways.)	$	1,670 38
Prince Edward Island Railway	 275 99
Branch Lines in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Quebec	 342 85
2,289 22
Transcontinental Railway (Including the Lake Superior Branch)	 2,006 73
Hudson's Bay Railway	_..	214 00
4,509 95
St. John & Quebec Railway Westfield Beach to Centreville
(Leased)	 158 11
St. John to Westfield Beach (Running Rights)	 13 96
[Stage Direction]
 172 07
[Stage Direction]
	4,682	02
Canadian Northern Railway System	
9,899	90Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	
2,756	38Canadian National Railways	
17,338 30
Average Mileage Operated.
Canadian National Railways
. (including Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.)	 17,064 43
St. John and Quebec Railway	 172 07
17,236 50
56i
884	COMMONS
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 2.]

[Stage Direction]
Comparative Summary of Operating Results-Twelve Months ending December 31, 1921 and 1920.
Excluding St. John and Quebec Railway.
1921.
1920.
Increase.
Decrease.
%
Incr.
%
Deer.
Operating Revenue.
Canadian Northern	
Canadian Government	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Total	
Distribution.
Passenger	
Freight	
Other	
Operating Expenses.
Canadian Northern	
Canadian Government	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Total	
Distribution.
Mtce. of Way and Str	
Mtce. of Equipment	
Traffic	
Transportation-Rail.	..
"	Water	
Miscellaneous	
General	
Transportation for Invest.. .Cr.
Operating Ratios.
Canadian Northern	
Canadian Government	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Total	
Operating Deficit.
Canadian Northern	
Canadian Government	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Total
[Stage Direction]
42,907,217 78 34,834,703 34 2,456,715 09 76,695,606 01 350,135 79 2,564,663 07 3,378,724 34 7OS,Olfi 94
124 38 123 46 170 34 129 32
16,258,579 80 10,449,876 43 10,134,513 94 36,842,970 17
[Stage Direction]
15	01 9 82
46 13
16	62
9,782,668 66 4,862,577 68 6,104,822 07 20,750,068 41
Mileage in Operation.
Canadian Northern-Steam..
Canadian Government	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Total	
Can. Nor. Electric Lines..
System	
Average Mileage Operated.
System	
Revenue Train Miles	
Earnings per R.T M.*	
Expenses "	*	
Net Loss "	*	
9,773-70
4,509-95
2,756-38
9,585-37
4,295-95
2,756-38
214-00
4-98
17,040-03
16,637-70
402-33
17,166-23
17,064-43 $34,701,241 $3 60 4 07 0 47
16,763-90
16,642-66 $37,920,271 $3 27 4 24 0 97
421-77
2-53

[Stage Direction]
'Electric and Water Lines Excluded. 

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

[Stage Direction]
-Concluded.
Comparative Summary of Operating Results-Twelve Months ending December 31, 1921 and 1920
-Concluded.
Excluding St. John and Quebec Railway-Concluded.
1921.
Freight Traffic (Eel. Elec. Lines).
Revenue Tons Carried	
Rev. Tons Carried 1 Mile...
Average Rate per Ton	
Avg. Rate per Ton per Mile... Avg. Distance Hauled Miles..
21,182,466 8,991,467,782 $	4 41
c.	1039
Passenger Traffic (Eel. Elec. Lines).
Rev. Passengers Carried	
Rev. Psgrs. Carried 1 Mile.... Average Rate per Passenger.. $ Avg. Rate per Psgr. per Mile.. c. Avg. Distance Hauled Miles..
11,856,620 711,867,853 1 70 2-826 60-04
1920.	Increase.
25,089,376	
9,221,370,748	
$ 3 61	$ 0 80
c. 0-983	c. 0-056
368	56
13,572,245	
841,636,864	
$ 1 66	$ 0 04
C. 2-684	c. 0-142
62-01	
Decrease.
%
Incr.
3,906,910
229,902,966
1,715,625
129,769,011
22-16
15-22
5-29
2-49
15-42
[Statement No. 3.1

[Stage Direction]
(Including Grand Trunk Pacific Railway). Memorandum Showing Operating Results by Months for Year 1921.
Month.	Earnings.	Operating Expenses.	Result.$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.10,932,081 63	13,808,668 47	2,876,586 81,10,225,436 82	13,203,762 32	S, 978,525 5010,539,862 54	13,061,704 27	2,521,841 78 2,608,818 659,397,525 00	12,005,843 55	8,456,806 61	10,972,049 84	2,515,21,8 288,429,913 92	10,967,695 62	2,687,781 709,306,384 27	10,568,080 40	1,261,696 ISAugust	
September	10,536,461 74 11,500,126 24 12,906,133 97 12,817,198 28	10,489,230 30 10,995,951 37 11,870,003 63 12,083,048 63	47,231 44 504,174 87 1,036,130 34734,149 6511,643,524 70	12,758,319 08	1,114,794 88
126,691,455 72	142,784,357 48	16,092,901 76
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 4.]

[Stage Direction]
(Including Grand Trunk Pacific Railway).
Comparative Statement of Operating Deficits for Years 1921 and 1920.
Year ending December 31st,
Year ending December 31st,
1921.
1920.
Canadian Government Railways	
Divided as follows:-
Intercolonial Railway	
Prince Edward Island Railway	
Transcontinental Railway	
Moncton and Buctouche Railway....
Elgin and Havelock Railway	
St. Martins Railway	
York and Carleton Railway	
Salisbury and Albert Railway	
Lotbiniere and Megantic Railway.... Caraquet and Gulf Shore Railway...
Cape Breton Railway	
Quebec and Saguenay Railway	
Hudson Bay Railway	
Canadian Northern Railway System
$ cts. $ cts. 	 5,587,298 75	$ cts
4,022,053 92 		6,549,629 48
617,158 93 		729,772 16
441,182 99 		2,780,359 46
43,946 17 		43,800 68
39,250 67 		47,518 25
42,068 38 		60,305 39
16,010 95 		21,317 39
55,040 53 		88,033 60
25,773 49 		20,413 49
154,504 52 		29,329 87
24,524 14 		14,621 65
33,862 98 		13,189 84
71,921 08 		51,585 17
6,475,911 14
$ cts. 10,449,876 43
16,258,579 80
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway
4,029,691 87
Total Deficit
16,092,901 76
10,134,513 94 36,842,970 17
[Statement No. 5.]

[Stage Direction]
Income Account for
Years ending December 31st, 1921 and 1920.
-	1921.	1920Gross Operating Revenue.	$ 69,088,474 16 40,964,303 92 16,638,677 64	$ 66,695,398 80 44,537,803 85 14,408,549 66
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway			
Canadian National Railways			
	$ 126,691,455 72	$ 125,641,752 31
Operating Expenses. Canadian Northern Railwav System			
	$ c. 75,564,385 30 46,551,602 67 20,668,369 51	$ c. 82,953,978 60 54,987,680 28 24,543,063 60
Canadian Government Railways			
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway			
Canadian National Railways			
	142,784,357 48	162,484,722 48
Net Deficit from Railway Operations. Canadian Northern Railway System			
	6,475,911 14 5,587,298 75 4,029,691 87	16,258,579 80 10,449,876 43 10,134,513 94
		
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway			
Canadian National Railways			
	16,092,901 76	36,842,970 17
Tax Accruals. Canadian Northern Railway System				
	1,191,890 84 35,743 87 357,394 54	1,185,652 28 60 50 45,409 30
Canadian Government Railways			
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway			
Canadian National Railways			
	1,585,029 25	1,231,122 08
TMr. W. C. Kennedy.]

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-Con. Income Account for
Years ending December 31st, 1921 and 1920.
-	1921.	1920.Total Operating Deficit.	$ c. 7,667,801 98 5,623,042 62 4,387,086 41	$ c. 17,444,232 08 10,449,936 93 10,179,923 24
Canadian National Railways			
	17,677,931 01	38,074,092 25
Non Operating Income.	3,119,349 72 457,352 46 863,185 83	1,845,994 62 1,737,978 51 1,837,442 03
		
		
		
	4,439,888 01	5,421,415 16
Deductions from Gross Income.		
	1 oil, 242 14 '845,065 71 801,667 77	125,637 37 720,096 33 812,404 79
		
		
Canadian National Railways			
	2,657,975 62	1,658,138 49
Total Deficits before Fixed Charges. Canadian Northern Railway System		5,559,694 40 6,010,755 87 4,325,568 35	15,723,874 83 9,432,054 75 9,154,886 00
		
		
	15,896,018 62	34,310,815 58
Fixed Charges. Canadian Northern Railway System-		
	17,595,707 51 13,224,208 27	13,993,695 36 10,326,260 69
		
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway-		
	30,819,915 78	24,319,956 05
	3,977,447 36 1,535,474 22 1,702,886 64 2,742,191 60	4,270,244 38 1,539,224 00 808,351 63 2,256,467 90
		
		
		
Canadian National Railways			
	9,957,999 82	8,874,287 91
	40,777,915 60	33,194,243 96
Total Deficit.	36,379,610 18 6,010,755 87 14,283,568 17	40,043,830 88 9,432,054 75 18,029,173 91
		
		
		
	56,673,934 22	67,505,059 54
		
	316,044 60	346,015 49
		
	56.989.978 82	67,851,075 03
	1	
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 6.]
__	CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS.
Memorandum Showing Amount op Operating Revenue Paid in Labour-Years 1921 and 192 .
Gross Earnings:
Canadian Northern Railway....
Canadian Government Railways. Grand Trunk Pacific	
System	
Operating Labour:
Canadian Northern Railway....
Canadian Government Railways, Grand Trunk Pacific	
System	
Ratio of Labour to Gross Earnings:
Canadian Northern Railway	
Canadian Government Railways
Grand Trunk Pacific	
System	
Comparison of Payroll (Including Betterments): Canadian National Railways	
1921	1920.	Increase or	Inc. or
		Decrease	Dec. %.
$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	69,088,474 16	66,695,398 80	2,393,075 36	3-5940,964,303 92	44,537,803 85	3,573,499 93	8-0216,638,677 64	14,408,549 66	2,230,127 98	15-48126,691,455 72	125,641,752 31	1,049,703 41	0-8442,233,504 97	47,563,113 08	5,329,608 11	11-2028,649,972 81	35,941,959 31	7,291,986 50	20-2811,498,120 09	15,262,647 77	3,764,527 68	24-6682,381,597 87	98,767,720 16	16,386,122 29	16-5961 13	71 31	10 18	14-2769 94	80 70	10 76	13-3369 10	105 92	86 82	34-7665 03	78 61	IS 58	17-2888,755,060 20	105,109,808 29	16,354,748 09	15-56
Average Number of Employees.
* 	1921.	1920.	Decrease	% Deer.Canadian Government Railways	20,658 32,384 7,281 60,323	23,849 33,654 7,821 65,324	3,191 1,270 540 5,001	13-38 3-77 6-	90 7-	66Canadian Northern Railway	Grand Trunk Pacific	Canadian National	
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 7.]

[Stage Direction]
Comparative Statement of Traffic, 1921-20 (Exclusive of Electric Lines).
1.	Passengers Carried-
Canadian Government	
Canadian Northern	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
**Canadian National	
2.	Number Passengers Carried 1 Mile-
Canadian Government	
Canadian Northern	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Canadian National	
3.	Tons of Freight Handled-
Canadian Government	
Canadian Northern	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
**Canadian National	 * **
4.	Tons Freight Moved 1 Mile-
Canadian Government	
Canadian Northern	
Grand Trunk Pacific	
Canadian National	
1921.	1920.	Increase or Decrease.	Per Cent Increase.	Per Cent Decrease.6,235,601	7,344,074	* 1,108,473	15-094,862,887	5,468,352	* 605,465	11-07814,845	824,732	* 9,887	1-2011,856,620	13,572,245	* 1,715,625	12-64298,645,302	361,555,820	* 62,910,518	17-40335,277,128	387,818,185	* 52,541,057	13-5577,945,423	92,262,859	* 14,317,436	15-52711,867,853	841,636,864	*129,769,011	15-428,301,330	12,976,623	* 4,675,293	36-0213,634,537	14,504,411	* 869,874	6-003,674,507	2,853,116	f 821,391	28-79	21,182,466	25,089,376	* 3,906,910	15-572,706,274,266	3,422,139,155	*715,864,889	20-924,711,313,574	4,687,603,090	f 23,710,484	0-51	1,573,879,942	1,111,628,503	f462,251,439	41-58	8,991,467,782	9,221,370,748	*229,902,966	2-49Per Passenger.	Per Ton Freight.	1921.	1920.	1921.	1920.5. Average Haul- Canadian Government	47-89	49-23	326-00	263-72Canadian Northern	68-95	70-92	345-54	323-18Grand Trunk Pacific	95-66	111-87	428-32	389-62"Canadian National	60-04	62-01	424-48	367-54
* Decrease, fin crease.
**Less System Interline.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

[Stage Direction]
Train Mileage.
[Statement No. 8.]
	1921	1920.	Inc. or Dec.	% Inc. or Dec.
Passenger-				
Canadian Government Railways	4,624,183	4,791,387	167, m	3-49Canadian Northern Railway	6,348,272	6,992,016	643,744	9-21Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	1,606,093	1,539,184	66,909	4-35Canadian National Railways	12,578,548	13,322,587	7 44,039	5-58Mixed-	Canadian Government Railways.	1,116,665	1,236,931	120,266	9-72Canadian Northern Railway	1,784,768	1,824,059	39,291	2-15Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	368,075	, 435,975	67,900	15-57Canadian National Railways	3,269,508	3,496,965	227,467	6-50Freight-	Canadian Government Railways	5,297,882	6,611,115	1,313,233	19-86Canadian Northern Railways	10,305,947	11,559,893	1,253,946	10-86Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	3,111,247	2,817,337	293,910	10-43Canadian National Railways	18,715,076	20,988,345	2,273,269	10-83Special-	10,680 28,496 8,782	28,618	17,938	63-68Canadian Northern Railway	82,132 53	53,636 8,729 62,845	65-3047,958	110,803	56-71W ork-	Canadian Government Railways	313,360	622,360	309,000	49-65Canadian Northern Railway	1,124,793	1,712,118	587,325	34-30Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	412,619	732,849	320,230	43-70Canadian National Railways	1,850,772	3,067,327	1,216,555	39-66Total-	Canadian Government Railways	11,362,770	13,290,411	1,927,641	14-50Canadian Northern Railway	19,592,276	22,170,218	2,577,942	11-63Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	5,506,816	5,525,398	18,582	0-34Canadian National Railways	36,461,862	40,986,027	4,524,165	11-04
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 9.]

[Stage Direction]
(Including Grand Trunk Pacific Railway)
Statement showing details or Equipment on Hand December 31st, 1920; Deliveries, Retirements *	and Position at December 31st, 1921.
-	Dec. 31st, 1920.	Retirements during the year.	Delivered during Year	Dec. 31st, 1921.
Locomotives-				
Passenger		1,730	9	12	1,733
				
	226		1	227
	13			13
Total Locomotives		1,969	9	13	1,973
Passenger Equipment-				
First Class Cars	477	14	14	477249	19	230192	3	195348	6	342Dining Cars	62	i	12	73Parlor Cars	67	3	3	67Sleeping Cars	202	1	21	22255	55Baggage and Express	-	509	14	70	565Business and Pay Cars	66	2	2	66Other Cars in Passenger Service	61	4	26	83Total	2,288	64	151	2,375Freight Equipment-	Box Cars	55,824	706	715	55,8339,768	182	9,586Stock Cars	3,494	19	350	3,8258,371	112	8,25978	7	71Refrigerator Cars	1,719	23	104	1,800Other Cars in Freight Service	1,435	29	189	1,595Total	80,689	1,078	1,358	80,969R ork Equipment-	Gravel Cars	271	7	215	479Derrick Cars	181	14	20	187Caboose Cars	1,074	55	30	1,049Other Road Cars	3,497	251	173	3,419Total	5,023	327	438	5,134Total Cars	88,000	1,469	1,947	88,478
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
[Statement No. 10.]
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS INCLUDING* GRAND TRUNK PACIFIC

[Stage Direction]
Annual Report with'Regard to Betterments for Fiscal Year ending December 31,
1921.
The total main track mileage operated by the Canadian National Railways on January 1, 1921 was
17,215-27 miles.
On December 31, 1921 the operated mileage was as follows:-
Canadian Northern Railway Eastern Lines-
Including Halifax and South Western Railway	 2,949*91
Canadian Northern Railway Western Lines-
Including D. W. and P. Railway	 6,823-79
Niagara, St. Catharines and Toronto Railway and Toronto Suburban Railway (Electric Lines)	 126-20
^	  9,899*90
Canadian Government Railways-
Intercolonial (Including Branch Lines)	 2,289 [DOT] 22
National Transcontinental Railway (Including Lake Superior Branch)	 2,006-73
St. John and Quebec Railway	(Leased)	 172-07
Hudson Bay Railway	 214-00
[Stage Direction]
 4,682-02
Grand Trunk Pacific	Railway	 2,756-38
Total M iles Operated	 17,338 [DOT] 30
Lines on which construction was completed and taken over for operation-during the year and included in the above figures
Canadian Northern Railwray, Eastern Lines-
Burrill Deviation 4-0 miles decreased length of main line by 0-40 miles. Washago Connection 0-7 miles made no increase in length of main line.
Sellwood Jet. to Selhvood 0-18 miles decreased length of main track 0-73 miles.
T. and Nor. Ont. Connection North Bay	
Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines-
Preeceville to Lintlaw	
Sangudo to Whitecourt	
Cessford to Steveville	
Lucky Lake to Demaine	
Humbolt to St. Brieux	
Moosejaw to Jet. with Riverhurst Sub. Div	
Union Jet. Edmonton	
Connection Camrose	
Connection Alix	
Connection Barlow	
Miles Added
0-	25
38-80
9-00
1-	33 0-56 0-08
0-	74
1-	30
Total	 124-16
Less reduction in mileage as above	 1-13	Miles
.	_	

 123-03
Net increase in mileage put in operation, 1921.
In addition to the above the following mileage was put into temporary operation and .	is included in the operated mileage of the System-
Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines-
Turtleford to St. Walburg	
Demain to Beechy	'	
Meiford to Ridgedaie	
Lintlaw to Kelvington	
Miles
5-6
13-9
Grand Total Mileage Added	 188-33
The following betterments were made to Roadbed and Track during the year 1921:-
New 85-lb. Rail Laid 1921-	Miles
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	 166-08
Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	 71-26
Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	 37-67
Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	 211-91
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	 24-00
Total
Second Hand Relay Rail Laid 1921-
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	 Nil
Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	 26-87
Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	 38-89
Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	 1*71
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	 Nil
Total	 67-47
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Ties Put in Track for Renewals-
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	 1,193,387
Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	 '147*987
Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines (Including Niagara, St. Catharines and Toronto
Ry.)	 1 002 147
Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines (Including D.W. and P. Ry.)	 2'490*943
Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	 828,756
Total	 5,663,220
Ballasting Chargeable to Capital Account, 1921-	Miles
Canadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	 35-3
Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	^ '	103*3Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	' ' . ' ' ' ''' "	164*0Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	140*3Total	
442*9Water Supplies, 1921-	NumberCanadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	
16Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	'	13Canadian Northern Ra ijway, Eastern Lines	
3Canadian Northern Rail way, Western Lines	
72Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	
23Halifax and South' Western Railway	
3Total	
130Tie Plates, 1921-	NumberCanadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	
NilCanadian Government Railways, Western Lines	62,500Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	
10,000Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	
238* 455Halifax and South Western Railway	
NilGrand Trunk Pacific Railway	
121 083Total	
432,038Rail Anchors, 1921-	NumberCanadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	
6,250Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	
32,500Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	
2^500Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	
104,450Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	
7*000Halifax and South Western Railway	' ' ' NilTotal	
152,700Fencing Wire and Snow-	MilesCanadian Government Railways, Eastern Lines	
15.4Canadian Government Railways, Western Lines	
1-5Canadian Northern Railway, Eastern Lines	
7.5Canadian Northern Railway, Western Lines	
37*2Grand Trunk Pacific Railway	'	28*8Total	
90*4
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
The following new structures were constructed and improvements to existing structures and facilities carried out:
Item.	Canadian Government Railways.	Canadian Northern Railway.	Grand Trunk Pacific Railway.	Total.Eastern Lines.	Western Lines.	Eastern Lines.	Western Lines.	9	i	5	3	182	3	1	61	12	2Bunk Houses, Section Dwellings	13	4	3	31	19	7011	5	9	4	292	4	2	2	10Sidings and Extensions to Sidings	65	6	37	30	6	14417	9	28	9	635	20	8	33Bridges and Trestles filled	14	2	67	39	13	135140	12	149	154	56	511
In addition to the above, considerable *work was undertaken such as the construction of farm and highway crossings, roadways, ashpits, drop-pits, loading platforms, ditching and wells for station water supply, etc., and the installation of track scales, turntables, interlocking plants, machinery in shops and roundhouses a-Sd the heating and lighting of stations, freight sheds, etc.
The following are some of the larger items carried out during the year:-
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS (Eastern Lines)
At Fairview-grading for locomotive terminal started during the previous year was completed.
The replacement of the double track bridge over the Tantramar river, near Sackville, was completed during the year.
At Cape Tormentine, dredging the entrance channel and turning basin, in order to provide a greater depth of water for the ferry steamer s.s. Prince Edward Island, was continued and 65 per cent completed, at the end iof the year.
Between Sackville and Painsec Junction absolute permissive automatic block signals were installed, thereby increasing the capacity and improving operation for traffic over this portion of the line.
At Moncton new terminal facilities, consisting of a 40-stall engine-house, machine-shop, power-house, stores building, turntable, coaling plant, water tank, stand pipes, cinder pits, and the necessary lighting, water and sewer facilities was undertaken and was sufficiently completed to be put into operation by the middle of December. Realignment of the main line and alterations and additions to yard tracks in connection with the new facilities were alsc made.
At Moncton mechanical shops-mechanical stokers were installed and duct for power line constructed.
At Bathurst-terminal facilities to facilitate the operation of the Caraquet and Gulf Shore railway were constructed consisting of a three-stall engine-house, turntable, ashpit and air hoist, together with the necessary trackage.
Grade and alignment revisions between McGivney Junction and Fredericton, which were started during the previous year, were completed.
On branch lines in New Brunswick the replacement of a number of bridges and the strengthening of trestles was carried out.
Between L€vis and Chaudi6re the installation of automatic signals was 50 per cent completed.
At Chaudi£re Junction improvements to terminal facilities consisting of extension to engine-house, new machine shop, coaling plant, ashpit, stand-pipes and yard re-arrangement was 80 per cent completed at the end of the year.
In connection with the co-ordination of the C.G.R. and G.T.R. at St. Rosalie Junction, a six-stall extension to the engine-house and additional yard tracks were provided. The installation of a new water supply at this terminal was 87 per cent completed.
At Hervey Junction the C.N.R. and C.G.R. facilities were co-ordinated, a connection being constructed to enable both lines to use the same station. Additional tracks were provided and a new station built replacing the former station, which was destroyed by fire.
At Parent commencement was made on the construction of staff quarters.
On the Amos subdivision, the replacement of trestle over the Coffee river with permanent structure was 13 per cent completed and the replacement of trestle over the Matagan river 75 per cent completed.
CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY (Eastern Lines)
Between miles 67.6 and 91.6 on the St. Lawrence subdivision a diversion known as the Burrill deviation was constructed reducing the grades and curvature. On the original lines there were two steel viaducts, but on the deviation only one was required, the other being replaced by culvert and fill. This work was 95 per cent completed.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
At Hawkesbury, in order to co-ordinate the G.T.R. and C.N.R. facilities, eliminating one of the stations and an interlocking plant, two main track connections and some additional yard tracks were installed and a three-stall extension to the engine-house built. These works were 70 per cent completed at the end of the year.
At Rockland, a connecting track between the C.N.R. and G.T.R. was constructed, siding tracks provided and one-stall engine-house built. These works were 80 per cent completed at the end of the year, and when fully completed will permit of the consolidation of the stations and the elimination of a diamond crossing and interlocking protection.
At Washago in connection with co-ordination of the C.N.R. and G.T.R., a connection and passing siding were constructed and the C.N.R. station moved to the junction point.
At Hornepayne a new station was erected.
A number of trestles were replaced with concrete culverts and fill or with permanent steel structures and some steel bridges were renewed with heavier spans.
CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY (Western Lines)
New steel bridge over South Saskatchewan river at Saskatoon, replacing Howe truss
spans, was completed.
Work commenced on new steel bridge seven miles east of Brandon, Man.
Crossing at Kaministiqua river, North Lake subdivision. Work started on new steel bridge.
New subway 90 per cent completed at Dauphin, Man., for pedestrian traffic.
Moose Jaw, Sask., new subway at Athabasca street, completed.
On the Boston Bar subdivision, British Columbia, reinforced concrete culverts were installed at various points, and 312 feet of tunnel lining completed.
New water supply at mile 85.2, Gladstone subdivision, has been established.
Work started on new reservoir for water supply at Ethelbert and work progressed far enough to have enough water to carry along.
At Maymont, Sask., a good water supply has been provided, water being taken from Saskatchewan river.
An excellent water supply at Dona, located to serve two subdivisions which cross at this location, has been completed.
A dam has been constructed at Kindersley, Sask., to collect water from spring run-off.
At South Saskatoon (Nutana), a new terminal yard has been completed and facilities provided comprised of new engine-house, coaling plant, machine shop, stores building, ashpits, etc.
New freight tracks have been constructed in Winnipeg terminals and extensions were made to passenger tracks.
The yards at Hanna, Drumheller and Wayne were extended and new passing tracks were installed at various points on the Hanna and Drumheller subdivisions, to facilitate the movement of coal.

[Stage Direction]
At Melville, Sask., a contract was let for construction of dam and reservoir of approximately 250 million (250,000,000) gallons capacity. The reservoir was almost completely filled by rains during months of September and October and an ample supply of good water is now assured. Pipe line and pumping station were constructed in connection with this work.
Water supplies at Hubbard, Archydal and Riverhurst were completed to such an extent as to assure a supply of water at each point during 1922.
A portion of frame trestle at Birdtail creek, mile 190, Miniota subdivision, is being replaced by steel span on concrete piers, the work being 40 per cent completed at the end of the year.
Salmon wharf at Prince Rupert has been practically completed and warehouse is being erected.
New stations are being erected at Prince George and Prince Rupert.
Track diversion at Firdale completed.
Addition to Edson roundhouse completed.
During the present year it is proposed to continue works which were uncompleted at the end of last year and undertake new works of which the larger items are briefly referred to below:-
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS (Eastern Lines)
Continue the -work of dredging at Cape Tormentine, yard improvements at Moncton, installation of automatic signals between L6vis and Chaudi£re, construction of staff quarters at Parent, replacing trestles over the Coffee and Matagan rivers on the Amos subdivision.
Flattening the slope and placing additional rock and large capping stones on the breakwater at Cape Tormentine.
Provide two eighty-ton cranes for Moncton repair shop.
Completion of yard extension and rearrangement of main line at St. John.
Provide telephone train dispatching service between Mont Joli and L6vis.
Extend stores building at St. Malo.
CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY (Eastern Lines)
Complete the work on Burrill deviation and replacement of trestles on various subdivisions.
Extend five stalls of the engine-house and provide additional machinery at Parry Sound.
Ballasting on various subdivisions.
Construct a new station at Napanee.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Provide additional stores accommodation and scrap reclaim building and plant at Leaside.
Pave roadways and provide drainage at Cherry street yard.
Provide additional terminal accommodation and trackage at Quebec.
Construct six-stall extension to engine-house and provide additional yard facilities at Limoilou.
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS (Western Lines)
Erect boarding-house for staff at Sioux Lookout and lengthen fifteen stalls of engine-house.
Fill various trestles.
Provide telephone train dispatching service between Sioux Lookout and Winnipeg.
Install scrap reclamation plant at Transcona.
CANADIAN NORTHERN RAILWAY (Western Lines)
On the D.W. and P. railway it is proposed to construct car repair shops at Virginia and Duluth as required by the Minnesota state laws.
Between Port Arthur and Fort William a second track is proposed to provide for the dense traffic between these points.
A number of wooden trestles are to be replaced with steel bridges on concrete foundations and a number with concrete culverts and earth fills.
Wooden bridges over the Kaministiqua and Assiniboine rivers are to be replaced with steel trusses on concrete substructures.
Ballasting on various subdivisions.	.	.
At Fort Rouge a new trunk sewer and a filtering plant for the water supply are to be constructed to serve the terminal. New water supplies are proposed at Mary field, Rama, Avonlea, Gravelbourg, Delisle, Wiseton, Eston, Lloydminster, Vegreville, Mecheche, and completion of the water supplies at Paskwegin and Kindersley.

[Stage Direction]
Construct additional trackage at Watrous and Rivers terminals and improve the water supply at the latter point.
Provide water supplies at Arrow river, Tate and Bradwell and complete the water supply at Hubbard.
Complete the filling of Battle river trestle.
Improve Mirror terminal by the construction of six additional stalls to roundhouse and additional trackage.
Construct a freight repair shop at North Edmonton, this to form a unit of a complete repair shop at that point.
Construct a diversion of the railway at the Big Eddy crossing at Sundance creek.
Complete the construction of a terminal at Coalspur.
Complete the construction of a station, Salmon dock and warehouse at Prince Rupert.
Complete the filling of the Ky-ax river crossing and erect a steel span to provide permanent waterway at this point.
Ballasting on various subdivisions.
Replace various trestle bridges with steel spans on concrete substructures or with concrete culverts and earth fills.

[Stage Direction]
Connect Transcontinental railway with Canadian Northern at Mokomon, in order to permit abandonment of approximately 28 miles of the Lake Superior branch.
Provide new classification yards west of Fort William.
Consolidation of C.N.R. and G.T.P. yards at Portage la Prairie.
Complete the consolidation of terminal facilities at Regina.
Consolidate the G.T.P. and C.N.R. in one line through Camrose and provide the necessary connections.
Complete connection between the C.N.R. and G.T.P. at East Edmonton.
Consolidate the C.N.R. with the G.T.P. in the vicinity of Entwhistle and construct the necessary connections.
Construct connections between G.T.P. and C.N.R. at Stony Plains and abandon the C.N.R. between Edmonton and Stony Plains.
Consolidate Lucerne and Jasper terminals at one point.
[Statement No. 11.]
CANADIAN NATIONAL TELEGRAPHS Statement of Pole and Wire Mileages
C.N.R. System (Including Transcontinental
and Intercolonial)	
Great North Western System	
Grand Trunk Pacific System	
January 1, 1922	
Poles	Wires
12,150	57,157
8,201	37,925
2,818	14,590
23,169	109,672
January	1, 1921
Poles	Wires
10,424	44,553
8,181	29,401
2,820	14,430
21,425	88,384
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Principal Additional Wires erected in 1921
Number	Kind of Wire	Between	Mileage1	Copper	Winnipeg-Vancouver	1,6452	"	Newcastle-Campbellton	2141	"	Montreal-Quebec	1781	"	Toronto-Niagara Falls	84-	"	Miscellaneous	3181	Iron	Saskatoon-Calgary	3991	"	Edmonton-V ancouver	7792	"	Vancouver Island	1471	"	Warden-Brazeau	173Miscellaneous	3504,287
Memorandum
Poles and wires property of G.N.W. System not on Canadian National Railway Right-of-way have been included in 1922 Statement, also Railway Wires in Western Union Territory East of Moncton. These were not inoluded in 1921 Statement and will explain increased mileages.

[Stage Direction]
[Statement No. 12.]
Statement of Work Done on Construction of New Lines During the Year 1921
Eastern Lines
There was no work done on Eastern lines in the way of constructing new branches all this work during the year being confined to Western lines.
Western Lines
Grading.-During the year there was the equivalent of 67 miles of grading completed. By " equivalent " is meant that in certain places each mile may not have been completely finished so the percentage of this in yards to the whole yardage was taken to get the number of miles done.
Of this 67 miles of grading 65.6 miles were done on prairie lines and 1.4 in British Columbia on the Okanagan branch.
A? appended statement gives in detail the branches on which this grading was accomplished, and is divided by provinces; this shows there was completed in Manitoba, nil; Saskatchewan, 51.2 miles; Alberta, 14.4 miles, and in British Columbia, 1.4 miles.
Trestles.-On new lines in 1921 in the erection of 51 bridges and trestles 4,015,200 feet B.M. of timber, 118,260 lineal feet of piling, and 200,760 pounds of iron were used. Detail of where this work was done is given on an attached statement.
Cowichan river bridges at miles 71.6 and 74.6 and E. and N. crossing at mile 74.4 Vancouver Island line were completed during the year.
TT-, T.he substructure of the bridge over the Red Deer river at mile 59.3 on Hanna-Medicine Hat Ime was also completed during the year.
wlth'lhe erection of some wooden bridges on the Okanagan branch was also proceeded
Tracklaying.-There was laid in 1921, 99.6 miles of track on new lines, 96.5 miles being laid on prairie lines, and 3.1 miles in British Columbia on the Vancouver Island line. Detailed statement attached shows the branches on which this track was laid, and divided into provinces shows there was laid in Manitoba 17.7 miles, in Saskatchewan 66.9 miles in Alberta 11.9 miles, and in British Columbia 3.1 miles.
In connection with tracklaying 74 switches and frogs were placed for sidings and wyes to abovelm6S Th'S USed UP 10 miles of traok in addition to the main line track referred
and Surfac.in,9

In 1921 there were 188.6 miles of new track ballasted; the which thi= h=,TQaSi-°n prairl® llnes- Detailed statement is attached showing the branches on S!t.w.n r t 6oAWaan<i0ne' and dlvlded lnto Provinces shows there was ballasted on r * 90 miles, and on Alberta lines 98.6 miles. There was no ballasting done on new lines in other provinces.	8
Fencing and Telegraph Lines.-264.08 miles of fence, and 163.2 miles of telegraDh line done esr„e5M dunng the year. Detailed statement showing the lines on which this work was done, and given mileages is attached.
Buildings and Structures
Water Tanks.-6 water tanks were completed in the season for new lines and 5 pumphouses, and 2,515 lineal feet of pipe line built to serve them.	y 1
™c„?tatW>n£''T?Duri?f the 7ear one third class and one fourth class stations, 11 freight and passenger shelters, 32 loading platforms, and 12 stock yards, were erected on new lines.
Section Houses. Nine section houses were completed on new lines during 1921 The branches on which these buildings were placed is shown in the attached table.
Miles Put in Operation.-During 1921 on Canadian Northern, Western lines, there were 173.4 miles of new lines turned over to the operating department for permanent operation, and in addition to this 65.3 miles of new lines were turned over to the operating department for operation on behalf of construction department, or a total of 238.7 miles. Attached is detailed statement showing these lines and mileages.
[Stage Direction]


C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

[Stage Direction]
Western Lines.
Statement Showing Fencing and Telegraph Line Erected during 1923.
	Fencing.	Telegraph Line.
Branch.	Fence Miles	Miles.
	68-30	16-0
	20-90	10-5
	42-70	
	2-00	23-0
	44-00 18-33	21-5 7-8
	32-35	9-2
		6-1
		13-5
	35-5	55-6
		
	264-08	163-2
		
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS Western Lines
Statement Showing Grading, Tracklaying and Ballast done during the Year 1921.
Branch.		Grading.	T racklaying	Ballasting.
Manitoba-			17-7	
			17-7	
Saskatchewan-			0-5	
		1-7	13-9	28-0
			23-7	
				33-0
		13-5		
		3-2	15-02	29-0
		4-9	0-17	
		21-4		
		6-5	13-06	
			0-64	
		51-2	66-9	90-0
Alberta-*		12-6		
		1-6		58-6
Onoway Branch	0-2	11-9	40-014-4	11-9	98-6British Columbia-	1-4	3-1	Total for British Columbia....	1-4	3-1	67-0	99-6	188-6Summary-.	17-7	51-2	66-9	90-0Alberta	14-4	11-9	98-665-6	96-5	188-6British Columbia	1-4	3-1	67-0	99-6	188-6
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

[Stage Direction]
Western Lines.
Statement of Miles of New Lines pot into either Permanent or Temporary Operation, 1921.
No.	Branch.	From Mile.	To Mile.	Miles.	Total.
	Turned Over for Permanent Operation.				
	Saskatchewan.				
11	Luck Lake	19*75	28-8 (Demaine)...	9-0	7	Melfort-Humboldt	21*5 (St. Brieux) "A"	Thunderhill	54*1 (Humboldt).	32-6	5	72 [DOT] 6 (Preeceville) "B"	100-3 (Lintlaw)....	27-7	69-3Alberta.	"C"	Drumheller Sub	315*6(West of Drumheller).	18	Hanna-Medicine Hat	322*7 (Just beyond Wayne)	7-1	0*0(Med. Hat.	58*2 (Steveville) "D"	22	0 noway	58-2	33*4 (Kobinsons)..	72*2 (Whitecourt).	104-1 173-4Mileage put in Permanent Operation..	Turned Over for Temporary Operation on Behalf of Construction Dept.	Saskatchewan.	15	Jackfish Lake	55-7 (Turtleford).. 28-8 (Demaine)... 0-0 (Melfort)	77*8 (St. Walburg). 34*4 (Beechy)	
23*7 (Just beyond Ridgedale).	22-1 5-6	11	Luck Lake	6	Melfort, N.E	Thunderhill	23-7	5	100*3 (Lintlaw)....	114*2 (Kelvington).	13-9	Mileage put in Temporary Operation...	65*3

[Stage Direction]
Mileage put in Permanent Operation	 173-4
Mileage put in Temporary Operation	 65-3
Total Mileage put in Operation	 238-7
"A" Previously near Lake Lenore to Humboldt (15 miles) operated on Behalf of Construction Department.
"B" Previously operated on behalf of Construction Department.
"C" Double track.
"D" Included in this figure is 46-4 miles, from Mile 0-0 to Mile 46-4 which was taken over for Permanent Operation prior to 1921, but not reported by this office.
57S
Kennedy.]
CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS. Statement of Work Done by Construction Dept., 1921.
Branch.	Turnouts Placed	Tanks.	Pump Houses.	Pipe Line.	3rd Class Stn.	4th Class Stn.	F.& P. Shelter.	Section Houses.	Loading P.F's.	Stock Yards.	No. of Trestles.	T restles.	Piles Driven.	Iron.Prairie Lines.	Lin. Ft.	M.F.B.M.	Lin. Ft.	Lbs.Acadia Valley	1	7	45,800	1,720	2,290Amaranth Extension	Eston S.E	4	1	1	75	1	1	3	2	2	449,700	18,745	22,4851	3	3	2	Humboldt-Melfort Branch. Jackfish Lake Branch	1	i	400	3	2	2	311,500	7,825	15,5759 11	1	1	2	5	2	2	62,800	2,560	3,1401	3	5	82,500	4,515	4,125Melfort JN.L	
Munson-Wayne Dbl. Track	2	90,700	4,820	4,5359	1 1	i i	240 1,700	2	4	26	2,937,000	76,245	146,850Onoway Branch	1	3	3	3	4	Oliver N.E. Branch	1	6,200	325	310Peebles-Lampman Branch	Line Rev. 333-5	Drumheller Sub	9	4	4	29,000	1,505	1,450Thunderhill ii.xt	1	i	100	[DOT]	3	Total Prairie Lines	74	6	5	2,515	1	1	8	9	32	12	51	4,015,200	118,260	200,760British Columbia.	3	74	6	5	2,515	1	1	11	9	32	12	51	4,015,200	118,260	200,760'
o
o
o
s
[Stage Direction]
o
Ui
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement

[Stage Direction]
Statement No. 1	*
Comparative statement of the results of the operations of the Grand Trunk Railway system, including the Central Vermont, for the years ending December 31, 1920 and 1921.
Statement No. 2
Comparative statement of the principal and interest and the funded debt of the Grand system, including the Central Vermont, for the years ending December 31, 19^0 and 1921, showing the increase in principal and interest charges in 1921 over 1920.
Statement No. S
... Comparative statement of the results of the operations of certain stock controlled sub-
CSnS?am,esLthe net resuIts of whose operations do not wholly enter the net income of the Grand Trunk Railway system.
Statement No. t
Some comparative operating and statistical information in respect of the Grand Trunk Canadian lines for the years ending December 31, 1920 and 1921.
Statement No. 5
Statement showing for the Grand Trunk Railway system, including the Central Vermont the locomotive and car stock ion hand December 31, 1921.
Statement No. 6
Statement for the Grand Trunk Railway system, including the Central ,Vermont, showing the additions to investment during the year ending December 31, 1921.
Statement No. 1.
GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY SYSTEM (INCLUDING CENTRAL VERMONT) Results of Opebations 1921-1920.
	1921.	1920.
Railway Operating Revenues.	$ cts.	$ cts.
Canadian Lines			
Western Lines			
New England Lines			2,910,515 43	2,936,869 55
Central Vermont			
		
	109,097,557 58	113,223,934 52
Railway Operating Expenses.		
Canadian Lines		71,179,292 80	
Western Lines			
New England Lines			
Central Vermont			
		
	104,725,039 93	108,884,828 58
Net Revenue from Railway Operations.		
Canadian Lines			
Western Lines			
New England Lines			
Central Vermont			
		
	4,372,517 65	4,339,105 94
Taxes, Uncollectable Railway Revenues, Hire of Equipment and Joint Facility Rents-Net.		
Canadian Lines			
Western Lines			
New England Lines		673,594 82 Dr.	724,027 95 Dr.
Central Vermont			
		
	3,633,863 95 Dr.	4,786,010 37 Dr.
[Stage Direction]

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement	_____________
Statement No. 1-Con.

[Stage Direction]
Results of Operations 1921-1920.
-	1921.	1920.Net Operating Income or Loss.	$ cts. 6,828,313 93 4,088,646 33 Def. 1,355,085 11 Def. 645,928 79 Def.	$ cts. 5,385,446 17 3,124,454 38 Def. 1,499,703 15 Def. 1,208,193 07 Def.
738,653 70	446,904 43 Def.
		1,185,558 13 2,996,057 06 Cr. 3,124,881 93 Cr. 508,834 12 Cr. 1,315,524 62 Cr.
Other Income-Net.	2,278,129 80 Or. 1,368,567 48 Cr. 526,008 73 Dr. 286,057 91 Dr.	
		
		
		
		
	2,834,630 64 Cr.	7,945,297 73 Cr.
		5,110,667 09 8,381,503 23 427 65 990,869 03 Def. 107,331 55
Net Income Before Fixed, Charges.	9,106,443 73 2,720,078 85 Def. 1,881,093 84 Def. 931,986 70 Def.	
		
		
		
Fixed Charges-Interest on Funded Debt.		
	3,573,284 34 3,107,420 66	7,498,393 30 771,450 67
Payable to others-		
	3,107,420 66	771,450 67
	13,385,194 04 2,077,098 70 675,870 28	10,765,944 62 1,935,583 49 552,658 29
		
		
Net Income or Loss.		
	16,138,163 02 7,386,170 97 Def. 4,797,177 55 Def. 1,881,093 84 Def. 1,607,856 98 Def.	13,254,186 40 3,155,892 06 Def. 1,935,155 94 Def. 990,869 03 Def. 445,326 74 Def.
		
		
		
		
	15,672,229 34 Def.	6,527,243 77 Def.
		9,145,055 57
		
Notes:-1. 1921 figures do not include credits on account of interest on advances to G.T.P. Ry., shown in G.T.P. statement as $2,742,191.60, and do not take into account in statement of interest due Government $1,000,000 payable to Government for loans to G.T.P., $10,000,000 (due 1919) and $15,000,000 (due 1923) guaranteed by G.T.
2. 1920 statement of Operating results shows operations of Lines in U.S., for ten month period only. Corporate income, however, is for 12 months and includes Standard return paid and to be paid by U. S. Railroad Administration.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY SYSTEM Principal and Interest on Funded Debt 1920 and 1921.
Statement No. 2. *
	1920.			1921.		
Principal O/S Dec. 31.	Principal O/S Dec. 31.	Interest.Rate.	Interest.	Rate.	£ .cts.	%	$ cts.	S cts.	%	$ cts.Grand Trunk Railway Company of	Canada.	G.T.R. Perpetual Debenture Stock	20,782,491 67	5	1,039,124 58	20,782,491 67	5	1,039,124 58G.W. " " "	13,252,322 67	5	662,616 12	13,252,322 67	5	662,616 12G.T.R. Consolidated Debenture	Stock	119,839,014 33	4	4,793,560 56	119,839,014 33	4	4,793,560 56Northern Railway Perpetual Stock	1,499,979 67	4	59,999 18	1,499,979 67	4	59,999 18Canada Atlantic 1st Mortgage	Bonds	16,000,092 00	4	640,003 68	16,000,092 00	4	640,003 68Northern Railway 3rd Preference	Bonds	70,566 66	6	4,234 00	70,566 66	6	4,234 00Second Equipment Mortgage	Bonds	719,780 00	6	43,186 80	6	*21 592 40Wellington, Grey and Bruce Bonds	279,346 67	Vs.	28,266 37	268,640 00	Vs.	*28!223 37Guaranteed Stock	60,833,333 33	4	1,482,812 50	60,833,333 33	4	12,433,333 33Equipment Trust Notes "A"	591,000 00	41	39,892 50	197,000 00	ii	*19,207 50" " " "B"	672,000 00	41	41,580 00	336,000 00	a	*23,940 00" " " "C"	672,000 00	4i	37,800 00	448,000 00	4i	*26,040 00Whipple Car Shop Bonds	75,000 00	6	5,250 00	45,000 00	6	*4,350 00Notes Payable Whipple Car Shops	200,000 00	5	12,500 00	100,000 00	5	*5,000 00334,583 33	*3 year 6% Secured Notes Jan. 1921.	4,866,666 67	6	292,000 00	*Equipment Trust Notes "D"	1,750,000 00	5	96,875 00	1,500,000 00	5	*79,166 663 year 6% Secured Notes	14,600,000 00	6	876,000 00	*657,000 0020 year S.F.G. Debenture Bonds .	25,000,000 00	7	218,750 00	24,743,000 00	7	11,741,824 00Equipment Trust Notes U.S.R.A .	898,500 00	6	53,910 00	838,600 00	6	*50,316 00Equipment Trust Certificate "F".	11,586,000 00	61	+702 QQ4 QQ25,000,000 00	6	1391,666 67Dominion Government Loan-	1918	593,733 34	6	35,624 00	25 624 001919	554,800 00	6	1920-21	20,192,275 28	6	735,826 67	25,000,000 00	6	11,481,038 811921-22	48,702,154 42	6	Sundry items	35,000 00	Vs.	3,000 00	*
Total Grand Trunk Railway Co. of						
	303,977,902 29		11,537,395 29	371,042,194 75		116,492,614 70
						
* Decrease, fIncrease.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Ministers Statement
Statement No. 2-Con. *
GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY SYSTEM Principal and Interest on Funded Debt 1920 and 1921.
	1920.			1921.		
	Principal. O/S Dec. 31.	Rate.	Interest.	Principal. O/S Dec. 31.	Rate.	Interest.
						
	$ cts.	%	$ cts.	$ cts.	%	$ cts.
Grand Trunk Western Railway						
Company. 1st Mortgage Bonds	14,990,720 00	4	599,988 80	14,990,720 00	4	599,988 8011,541,000 00	4	461,640 00	11,541,000 00	4	461,640 00G. T. Jet. Mortgage Bonds	3,872,000 00	5	193,600 00	3,872,000 00	5	193,600 003,027,000 00	6	174,052 50	2,891,000 00	6	fl78,203 001,098,700 00	6f & 8	82,174 76	1,098,700 00	6f & 8	82,174 76Indebtedness for Adv	792,701 77	5	39,635 08	1,874,583 60	5	f93,729 181,050 00	*
Total Grand Trunk Western Rail-						
way Co		35,322,121 77		1,552,141 14	36,268,003 60		fl,609,335 74
Detroit, Grand Haven and Mil. Ry.						
Co. Equip. Mortgage Bonds	1,999,000 00	6 & 7	122,612 88	2,000,000 00	7	fl40,000 00Cons. Mortgage Bonds	3,200,000 00	6& 7	195,754 71	3,200,000 00	7	1224,000 00Mowatts Mortgage Bonds	146,000 00	5	7,300 00	146,000 00	5	7,300 0080,000 00	6i	5,200 00	80,000 00	65	5,200 00285,000 00	19,260 30	285,000 00	*16,010 30Indebtedness for Advances	666,289 28	5	33,314 46	1,505,053 39	5	f75,252 66Total Detroit, Grand Haven and	Mil. Ry. Co	6,376,289 28	383,442 35	7,216,053 39	1467,762 96Total Grand Trunk Western Lines.	41,698,411 05	1,935,583 49	43,484,056 99	f2,077,098 70Central Vermont Railway Company.	Refunding Mortgage Gold Bonds..	13,261,000 00	5	516,219 30	13,161,500 00	5	t654,915 62Montreal and Province Line Bonds	200,000 00	4	8,000 00	200,000 00	4	8,000 00Stanstead, SheSord and Chambly	155,865 00	4	6,234 60	155,865 00	4	6, Z'Si 60Equip. Trust Gold Notes "D."...	147,000 00	5	8,983 35	49,000 00	5	*4,083 3365,000 00	6	tl.551 51128,000 00	6	fl,085 22Collateral Trust Bonds	35,000 00	5	1,924 91	* Transferred	to unf	unded debt,Ja	n. 192	1.U.S.R.A. Note March 1 to Nov. 18,	1920	300,000 00	6	14,379 45	* Renewed an	d tran	sferred to un-funded de	bt, N	ov. 1920.4	3,000 00	f Transferred	to "I	ncome fromfun	ded S	ecurities."83 32	t
Total Central Vermont Ry. Co		14,098,865 00		552,658 29	13,759,365 00		f675,870 28
* Decrease, tIncrease.
[Mr. W. C.
Kennedy.]

C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 2-Con.

[Stage Direction]
Increase in Interest Charges Included in Income Statement.
Item.	1921.	1920.	Increase, Decrease,$ 2,433,333 33 1,741,824 00 703,994 99 391,666 67 3,107,420 66 2,077,098 70 675,870 28	$ 1,482,812 50 218,750 00	$ 950,520 83 1,523,074 00 703,994 99 391,666 67 2,335,969 99 141,515 21 123,211 9920 year 7% S.F.G.D. Bonds	Equipment Trust "F"	15 "year 6% S.F.G.D. Bonds	771,450 67 1,935,583 49 552,658 29	
$ 11,131,208 63 8,114,375 05	$ 4,961,254 95 9,064,382 12	$ 6,169,95368 950,007 07
			
			
	$ 19,245,383 68	S 14,025,637 07	S 5,219,94661
			
Statement No. 3.

[Stage Direction]
Separately Operated Cos. net Surplus of which is not taken up in Income Account of G. T. Ry. Co. Results of Operation 1920 and 1921.
Chicago, N. Y. & Boston
Refrigerator Co	
International Bridge Co	
Montreal Warehousing Co	
Terminal Warehouse Reg'd____
Oshawa Railway Co	
Rail. & River Coal Co	
Thousand Islands Ry	
Montreal & Southern Counties
Ry	
St. Clair Tunnel Co	
G. T. Mil. Car Ferry Co	
Total	 *
Net Income.	Dividends paid to G. T. R. Co.	Accumulated Undistributed Surplus.	1921.	1920.	1921.	1920.	Dec. 31, 1921.	Dee. 31, 1920.219,526 48 88,310 09 165,772 42 57,838 03 51,367 29 211,573 84 1,830 26 90,124 23* 106,102 37* 146,873 13*	32,162 98* 174,642 17 109,648 42 75,907 00 94,074 65 443,188 26 6,105 34 120,893 39* 134,952 02 1,917,79*	340,522 42 379,740 40 2,598 05 232,617 91 143,767 61 854,158 83 6,995 05 548,708 86* 390.299 83* 102,405 37*	120,995 94 445,217 44 21,825 63 174,779 88 115,737 20 698,834 62 11,507 29 458,584 63* 278,721 88* 82,832 00120,000 00	120,000 00	
2,800 00	2,800 00		
		4,200 00	4,200 00		
					
					
					
$453,118 68	$613,639 66	$127,000 00	*127,000 00	*918,986 21	*934,423 49
*Deficit.
906	COMMONS
[Stage Direction]
Minister's Statement
Statement No. 4.

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Lines.
CoMPAHATIVE SUMMARY OF OPERATING RESULTS AND DETAILED STATISTICAL INFORMATION, 1921 AND 1920.
1921.	1920.	Increase or Decrease	%$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	15,510,164 08	16,948,180 21	R	1,438,016 13	8-49.54,239,903 65	58,102,053 78	II	3,862,150 13	6-65Other	7,107,964 54	6,392,413 33	715,551 21	11-19Operating Revenue	76,858,032 27	81,442,647 32	R	4,584,615 05	5-63Maintenance Way and Structures	12,862,797 47	12,005,384 17	857,413 30	7-14Maintenance of Equipment	17,809,497 41	21,103,421 77	R	3,293,924 36	15-61Traffic	1,583,830 08	1,304,106 94	279,723 14	21-45T ransportation-Rail	35,574,797 57	38,518,233 35	R	2,943,435 78	7-64462,320 04	501,360 95	R	39,040 91	7-792,904,024 32	2,787,700 26	116,324 06	4-17Transportation Capital Account Material (cr.) ..	17,974 09	R 6,392 28	11,581 81	181-18Operating Expenses	71,179,292 80	76,213,815 16	R	5,034,522 36	6-61Operating Ratio	92-61%	93-58%	R	0 97%	1-04Net Revenue from Ry. Operations	5,678,739 47	5,228,832 16	449,907 31	8-60Railway Tax Accruals	1,325,577 28	1,280,062 62	45,514 66	3-56Uncollectable Railway Revenue	8,908 68	23,004 63	R	14,095 95	61-27Hire of Fquipment (cr.)	1,755,059 13	6°0,172 71	1,064,886 42	154-29Joint Facility Rents (cr.)	729,001 29	769,508 55	R	40,507 26	5-26Net Operating Income	6,828,313 93	5,385,446 17	1,442,867 76	26-7Revenue Tons Carried	21,687,749	26,322,423	R	4,634,674	17-61Revenue Tons Carried 1 Mile	4,052,564,411	5,028,651,524	R	976,087,113	19-41Average Rate Per Ton	82 50	$2 21	29c	13-12Average Rate Per Ton Per Mile	0-0134	0-0116	0-0018	1 -55186-90	191-00	Revenue Passengers Carried	11,609,762	12,206,977	R	597,215	4-89" " 1 Mile	509,330,321	529,809,165	R	20,478,844	3-87Average Rate Per Passenger	$1 33	$1 39	R	0 06	c 4-32" " Per Mile	0-0305	0-0320	R	0-0015	0-4743 -P	43-4	Revenue Train Miles	17,587,275	18,628,310	R	1,041,035	5-59$4 37	$4 37	Expenses Per Revenue Train Mile	4 0?	4 09	R	0 04	0 98Net Earnings Per Revenue Train Mile	0 32	0 28	0 04	14-29Employees and Compensation.	1921.	1920.	1917.	29,127	32.26C	24,457	$1,574 66	*1,661 54	$914 80	$71,179,292 80	$76,213,815 16	42,149,952 50	49,567,436 72	59-22%	65-04%	9,860,454 22	11,785,773 67	13-86%	15-46%	
NOTE-R denotes DECREASF.
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 4.-Con.

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Lines.
Comparative Summary op Operating Results and Detailed Statistical Information, 1921 and 1920. Freight Traffic Movement (Company's Material Excluded.). Year, 1921.
Commodity.	Tons.	Percent.
Products of Agriculture.		
	1,057,362 931,522 480,112 123,135 73,000 18,141 40,210 585,782	4-88
Corn			4-30
		2*21
Barley			0-57
		0-34
Flax			0-08
Other Grain			0-19
Flour			2-70
	297,553 165,510	1 -37
Hay and Straw			0-76
	38,186 56,636	0-18
Apples (fresh)			0-26
Other Fruit (Fresh)	161,582	0-74Potatoes	50,564	0-2365,385 207,011	0-300-95
4,351,691	20 06
		
Products of Animals.		
Horses		19,309 214,553	0 09
Cattle and Calves			0-99
Sheep		25,935 94,455 219,090 31,295	0-12
Hogs			0-44
Dressed Meats (Fresh)			104 014
	116,138 14,889 50,217 91,813 12,869 67,337	0-54
Poultry			0-07
Eggs			0-23
		0-42
Wool			0 06
Hides and Leather			0-31
	43,529	0-20
		
	1,001,429	4-26
		
Products of Mines.		
	3,285,225 2,359,069 7,484 96,350 121,722 96,651 3,968 1,332,213 271,168 30,460 23,692 95,666 61,391	15 15
		10-88
		0-04
		0-44
		0-56
		0-45
Base Bullion and Matte			0-02
		6-14
Slate-Dimension or Block Stone			1-25
		014
		Oil
		0-44
		0-28
		
T otal		7,785,059	35-90
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 4-Con.

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Lines.
Freight Traffic Movement (Company's Material Excluded) Year 1921.
-	Tons.	Percent.Products of Forests.	262,743 .40,816 1,109,606 1,063,404 96,513	1-21 0-19 5-12 4-90 0-45
2,573,082	11-87
Manufacturers and Miscellaneous.		
	389,469 215,489 118,326 54,986 264.068 128,909 379.069 198,360 98,438 43,730 60,175 127,825 18,288 29.861 42.861 83,451 525,780 344,523 24 944 3,535 42,803 1,418,144 1,363,454	1-80 0-99 0-55 0-	25 1-	22 0-	59 1-	75 0-91 0-45 0-20 0-28 0-59 0-08 0-14 0-20 0-	38 2-	42 1-	59 0-11 0-02 0-20 6-54 6-29
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	5,976,488	27-55
		
	21,687,749	100-00
		
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 4-Con.
GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY SYSTEM. Canadian Lines.
Freight Traffic Movement (Company's Material Excluded) Year 1920.
Commodity.	Tons.	Percent.
Products of Agriculture.		
	1 run 979	
		
Oats		448,937 so 177	1-71
Barley			
		
Flax			
Other Grain			
		
Other Mill Products		90S'435	
Hay and Straw		292',699	112
Cotton			
Apples (Fresh)		03'744	
Other Fruit (Fresh)		161'102	0-61
Potatoes	 * .		
Other Vegetables (Fresh)		84'030	
Other Agr. Products		194 937	
Total		3,795,374	14-42
Animal Products.		
		
Cattle and Calves			
		
Hogs			
Dressed Meats (Fresh)		994 793	
Dressed Meats (Cured or Salted)		30,639	0-19
Other Packing House Pds		147,286	
Poultry			
		
Butter and Cheese			
Wool			
Hides and Leather			
Other Animal Products			
Total			
Mine Products.		
Anthracite Coal			
Bituminous Coal			
Lignite Coal			
		
Iron Ore			
Other Ores and Concentrates			
Base Bullion and Matte			
Clay, Gravel, Sand, Stone (Crushed). .	1 009 353	
Slate Dimension or Block Stone			
Crude Petroleum			
Asphaltum				
Salt	 			
Other Mine Products			
Total			
		
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 4-Con.

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Lines.
Freight Traffic Movement (Company's Material Excluded) Year 1920.
Commodity.	Tons.	Percent.Forest Products.	195,454 48,752 951,404 1,254,565 308,456 773,715	0-74 0-	19 3-	61 4-	77 1-	17 2-	94
3,532,346	13-42
Manufacturers and Miscellaneous.		
	243,734 281,033 334,685 122,195 489,105 284,968 305,606 416,520 69,301 25,472 102,908 81,256 27,171 21,354 87,732 113.924 538.925 694,924 24,824 2,676 54,739 1,691,997	0-	93 1-	07 1-27 0-	46 1-	86 1-08 1-16 1-	58 0-26 010 0-39 0-31 010 0-08 0-33 0-43 205 2-	64 010 001 0-21 6-43
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	6,015,049	22-85
		
	1,554,805	5-91
		
	26,322,423	100-00
		
[Stage Direction]
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Statement No. 5.

[Stage Direction]
Statement or Locomotive and Cab Stock on Hand, December 31st, 1921.
-	G. T. Ry. System.	C. V. Ry.	Total.Locomotives-	1,398 6	99	1,497 61,404	99	1,503Passenger Service Cars- First and Second	533	49	582 102 24 32 41 386 43Combination Cars	90	12	23	1	28	4	36 366	5	20	30	13	1,106	104	1,210Freight Service Cars-	30,501 3,505 1,510 6,829 100	1,875 423	32,376 3,928 1,517 7,029 100 1,651 711
7	
		200	
			
	1,638	13	
Caboose Cars		671	40	
			
44,754	2,558	47,312Company's Service- Officers' and Pay Cars	33	1	34 606 42 1,863605	1	40	2	1,721	142	2,399	146	2,54548,259	2,808	51,067
Statement No. 6.

[Stage Direction]
Additions to Investment Year ending Dec. 31, 1921.
Item.	Canadian Lines.	Western Lines.	New England Lines.	Central Vermont.	Total.$ cts. 67,763 48 20,534,246 09 1,979,903 34 770,557 89 253,174 64 1,162,542 49 22,713 08	$ cts. 239,729 73 34,465 26 70,450 88 292,951 57 547,713 66 365,202 85	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts. 307,493 21 20,558,477 11 2,091,975 22 1,144,710 29 803,476 69 1,512,676 52 353,248 11New Equipment	
Improvements to Equipment	
Increased Weight of Rail	
Sidings, Yards and Spur Tracks	* Roadway, Buildings, Structures and Miscellaneous	
Securities and Investment in Affil-	59,572 97 2,588 39 106,439 SO	10,234 24 41,621 00 21,627 86 91,370 48 330,535 03	Total	24,790,901 01	1,550,513 95	44,tm 94	474,920 13	26,772,057 15
C.N.R.-Minister's Statement
Arthur Meighen: I do not intend to make any comments at the moment; I simply wish to ask, I think, three questions of the minister. The first is this: As respects his figure of operating ratio for last year, which he gave as 129 and a fraction, I draw his attention to the fact that it was given in last ' ear's statement as 124 and a fraction. As long as he is certain that his figure is not an error, I am quite prepared to take his statement that it is a correction of last year's figure.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I shall be glad to verify the statement. I gave it in good faith, and assumed it was correct.


Arthur Meighen: I ask the question particularly for this reason : The 'loss last year was given in the same statement as $69,000,000, whereas the minister to-day corrects it and reduces the loss for 1920 to $67,000,000. Consequently, I would think, were he altering the operating ratio, he would alter it by diminishing it; instead of that, it is a very substantial increase.
The next question is this: In referring to the construction programme for this year, the minister stated that nothing would be done save in cases where construction had already proceeded to the point where the track was laid. I would like the minister to explain just what that means: how much of the track; the ballasting, or merely the construction of the grade; or does it include, indeed, the laying of the rails?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: It includes the rails.


Arthur Meighen: Then I would understand that there were no new rails to be laid-not a mile of rails to be laid?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: That is correct.


Arthur Meighen: The next question is this: In stating the invested capital in the railways that will subsequently be included in the entire unified svstem, he fixed the figure at one-and-a-half billions as subscribed by the public. I would understand by that, he means the public of this and other countries, not simply of this Dominion?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Exactly.


Arthur Meighen: The last question is this: The minister referred to an investigation that was to be conducted for some purpose not any too closely defined, but he gave no intimation as to what would be

the character of the commission or committee or individual who is to investigate. Is it under the Inquiries Act, is it to be a committee of this House a royal commission, or what?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: My hon.
friend refers to the investigation of the board?


Arthur Meighen: I really hardly know how to describe it because the minister did not describe it himself. He said there was to be an investigation concurrently with the co-ordination. What it is to investigate I do not know very well-finances, I think, or something like that. Is the investigation to be by a committee of this House, or a commission, or is to be under the Inquiries Act?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: That will be a matter for the new board. If it is thought advisable to have an investigation likewise by a committee of the House constituted for that purpose, very well.


Arthur Meighen: What the minister had in mind, though, was an investigation under the new board after its appointment?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Yes. I
might point out to my right hon. friend that there has been considerable criticism in the press of recent statements issued by the National Railways; they have been analyzed in detail in the press, and the criticism has been made that the statements put out by the railways were incorrect. One of the first things the new board will do will be to verify the figures that have already been given out. The thought I had in mind was that the statements that are given out should be of such a character that the people of this country will rely upon them.


Arthur Meighen: Meaning it will be done by or under the board?


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: Yes.


Hon. J. A. STEWART (Lanark) :: Mr. Speaker, when hon. gentlemen who sit opposite occupied seats on this side of the House, it was customary to delay discussion of the annual report of the Minister of Railways until after it had been printed and distributed and the members had had an opportunity to study the figures contained in the report. I have no intention this afternoon-and I fancy that those who sit in this part of the House will for the most part delay discussion of this report-of following the Minister of Rail-

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
ways through the comprehensive report that he has presented to the House. He has given to us sufficient statistics to justify study by the members, and we will at some time before his Main Estimates are considered make opportunity to discuss such features of his statement today as in the opinion of members in this part of the House should be reviewed.
I would, however, like to say just a few words in passing with reference to certain features of the railway situation, and particularly with reference to the carrying out of the promise of co-ordination as contained in the Speech from the Throne. It is now some five weeks since co-ordination first broke upon the House, and during that time an anxious House and an interested public have looked for a realization of co-ordination by action of the Government. The statement made by the Minister of Railways to-day would appear to work out co-ordination by promising the bringing into force of the Canadian National Railway Act of 1919 at an indefinite time, and the appointment of a committee of the House to consider the question of railway rates. As I understood the minister's statement, those were the two declarations of policy which he made to us this afternoon.
It is very difficult for us on this side of the House to appreciate the necessity for the delay. The minister has stated to us that the matters involved in the appointment of a unified board are so important and so difficult that it is impossible for the Government at this time to appoint its board and to carry on the policy of unification that was contemplated when the Canadian National Railway Act of 1919 was passed. Those who were interested in the campaign last fall and followed the speeches made by hon. gentlemen opposite will be surprised, I am sure, that they do not feel they have yet a sufficient knowledge of the railway situation to carry out even the appointment of a unified board. The policy of the late government was a clean-cut policy so far as the administration of our railways is concerned. In 1917, when the Canadian Northern system was taken over, the Government of Canada assumed a tremendous responsibility, assumed it at a time when in the opinion of the Canadian people and of Parliament there was no policy open to the government except to do as the government did, and when any other policy would have broken down at the most critical time in the history
of Canada the whole transportation system of this Dominion. The difficulty with the Canadian Northern arose at a time when the transportation facilities of Canada were groaning under war traffic, and had the road been permitted to go into liquidation there is no question that it would have not only destroyed the usefulness of the Canadian Northern system itself, but it would also have paralysed the whole transportation system of Canada.
I am not going to discuss whether the arrangement of 1917 was a wise one or not. The fact is that it is the one that was adopted by the Parliament of Canada. The government was face to face with the problem of providing for the management of the railways which were taken over by the Canadian Government at that time. Two plans for the management of its railway property were open to the government of the day. One was to manage the railways under a department of government, to continue the whole, railway system of Canada under the political management under which the Intercolonial had been managed and controlled for forty years prior to that time; the other was to provide for independent control in the management. The policy adopted by the late government was to try out, perhaps for the first time in the history of railway economics, government ownership with independent control in management. The policy adopted at that time provided for the complete removal of the management of the nationally owned railways from political control. That condition prevailed down to 1919 when the arrangements for taking over the Grand Trunk were completed, and in order to continue the policy that had been adopted in 1917 the Canadian National Railway Act of 1919 was passed. That act provided for a new board which would take over the combined systems. It provided for the taking over of both the Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk systems, so that we would have a unified management, under which we could get co-ordination. And perhaps those who have studied the Canadian railway situation will agree that there must be a ruthless co-ordination of these systems if we are to see daylight through our railway problem.
Now, under the original arrangement with the Grand Trunk the Grand Trunk officials were continued in office. They were continued in office for the reason that it was felt that in order to enable them to pre-



C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
perly prepare and conduct their case before the arbitration tribunal they should have access to the books and records of the company and should be in complete touch not only with the records but with the operation of the system. But after there had been default in the completion of the arbitration proceedings at the time specified-a default which in the opinion of the government of the day was a deliberate default on the part of the officials of the Grand Trunk, a deliberate attempt to postpone the arbitration proceedings-and after the government had refused to extend the period for the completion of the arbitration, it was agreed between the Government of Canada and the Grand Trunk itself that the government should be given immediate control of the Board of Management of the system, and this was carried out, and a new board was appointed. The question might further be asked why the government did not at the time provide for the unified management, why at the time it did not provide for a central control? That occurred in the early months of 1921.


William Costello Kennedy: In May.


John Alexander Stewart: And a board was appointed at that time, an independent board, the board as it exists to-day. On that board the Government appointed executive officers of the Grand Trunk, and they appointed as chairman Sir Joseph Fla-velle. The Deputy Minister of Justice was a member of the board, and Mr. Dupuis. The reason why an independent board was appointed was in order that it might be given an opportunity to investigate such details as might be necessary to carry out the amalgamation in management of two great railway systems. It was thought at that time that it would result in a more efficient means for the appointment of a central board and for its control in management if an independent board for the Grand Trunk railway were given an opportunity to study the details of the Grand Trunk system and its requirements, and that then the two boards would be utilized for one purpose of working out a central control. As early as October of last year we had, in the opinion of the government, reached the time when it would have been possible to carry out the provisions of the Canadian National Railway Act of 1919. We had reached the time when the two boards could have been dispensed with and a central board appointed. The question

may fairly be asked why the government did not carry out that policy? The answer consists in the fact that we were in the midst of a federal election, and it was felt that it would have been unwise for the government to have possibly complicated the situation by the appointment of a board pending the result of the poll. Hon. gentlemen opposite will no doubt commend us on our foresight in that connection. The fact is that the new board was not appointed, but early as the month of October the right hon. gentleman who leads the Opposition, in making a statement in the maritime provinces as to his view of how the eastern lines of the government owned railways should be managed, made practically the statement that was made by the Minister of Railways to-day. He stated in the maritime provinces in the early days of the month of October that in his opinion there should be a grand division-a grand division that would manage not only the Intercolonial and National Transcontinental but such of the Grand Trunk lines as might be brought within its jurisdiction. So that as early as the month of October last it was the opinion of the late government that the time had arrived when the provisions of the Act of 1919 might be brought into force.
We commend the Minister of Railways for his policy in reference to the Intercolonial. The hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) put up a very strong argument the other day in support of the return of the Intercolonial to political control. He gave us a very interesting historical account of the conditions under which the maritime provinces entered confederation, and urged that section 145 of the British North America Act made it compulsory for this Government to continue the management of the Intercolonial railway under the system that had obtained from 1878 down to the time it was placed under the management of the Canadian National Railway Board. He at the same time made a further statement with reference to rates-stated it as his opinion that the question of rates upon the Intercolonial was one which should not be determined by commercial considerations at all but should be regulated and controlled by the requirements of trade. I am not so sure that the position taken by the hon. gentleman as to rates can be disputed. I am not so sure that it is not possibly fundamental in the pact of Confederation that there should be interprovincial trade, and inter-

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
provincial trade-it matters not whether it originates in the East or in the West, or whether it originates centrally for the East or for the West-must be on conditions that will permit that trade to be carried on. So I submit that possibly the position taken by the member for Cumberland in reference to rates is one that will commend itself to the House. But what I am glad to note by the statement delivered by the Minister of Railways this afternoon is, that the Intercolonial is to be permitted to function as a part of the great national railway system, and I am sure the fact that the Intercolonial should be treated in this way will commend itself to the House. Unquestionably it will best serve the people whom it was built to serve, and whom it was intended to serve, as a part of the national system rather than by reverting to a position of " splendid isolation."
I am not going to attempt to deal with the financial portion of the statement of the minister except to say this: That the improvement in round figures of $20,000,000 in operating revenue between 1920 and 1921 is a record which brings comfort to those who were chiefly responsible for the system that was adopted in respect of the national railway properties. As I understand it, and as I understood the figures of the minister, on the whole of the government properties, including the Grand Trunk, the operating improvement was $20,000,000 in round figures. The real test of a railway's strength, and the real test of administrative skill, does not occur in periods of prosperity and buoyancy of traffic, it occurs in periods of adversity and depression. And the fact that during a year such as 1921 we were able to show, in connection with the government railways, a result as satisfactory as that reported to the House to-day is very creditable indeed. It is unquestionably a good showing, and that statement will scarcely be disputed. I would like to ask hon. gentlemen who questioned the policy of the late government with reference to the property which came over to the Canadian people if there is amongst them those who still feel that the result for 1921 would have been better had we had private ownership and private control.
I wish to refer in a general way to the attitude of hon. gentlemen opposite with reference to the railway policy in Canada, not so much now as during the later months of last year. It was a popular political pastime for the opponents of the
58i
late government to lay at the feet of that government the blame for all our railway troubles. I am inclined to agree with my hon. friend from Marquette (Mr. Crerar) when he says it matters little which political party was to blame, or whether both were entitled to censure for the conditions that led up to the situation in which we found ourselves in 1917 and again in 1919, and I entirely agree with him when he says that the people of Canada must bear their fair share of the blame. I am sure, as far as the Liberal-Conservative party was concerned, that in 1904, and again in 1908, we did everything we could to convince the Canadian people that the construction of the National Transcontinental and the Grand Trunk Pacific was a mistake. There is no question about our position in that regard. The people decided otherwise in terms that could by no possible means be misunderstood, and for that reason there is no question that they are entitled to some share of the blame, if blame attaches, for the position in which we found ourselves later.
In the confession of political faith of the Liberal faith, and the confession of political faith of hon. gentlemen opposite, contained in the Ottawa platform of 1919, and in the public press, particularly in the press of the latter months of last year, and on the public platform of the same period and since this House opened, hon. gentlemen have charged the late government and the Liberal-Conservative party with the deliberate intention of destroying the Grand Trunk Pacific and the National Transcontinental by encouraging construction of the Canadian Northern system, and charging that the Canadian Northern system was deliberately built into territory which should have been the territory of the Grand Trunk Pacific. Hon. gentlemen who take that position might, with profit, refer to the views held by the late Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier. His views are very clearly set forth in the discussion in 1914 on the question of the advance which was then under consideration to the Canadian Northern railways. It will be found in Hansard 13th May, 1914. In his discussion of the resolution introduced by the Right Hon. Sir Robert Borden providing for a loan to the Canadian Northern in that year, the Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid said in part:
I may confess at once that I have long believed that this country requires three transcontinental railways and although this theory has been sometimes controverted, in this House and out of it, I have never seen any reason to

C. N. B.-Minister's Statement
change my opinion
For my part I can say that I have always favoured the efforts of our two fellow citizens,-
Mackenzie and Mann.
-whose names have been mentioned several times by my right hon. friend, and who have applied themselves for many years to the task of binding the continent with another band of steel. The late Government were not slow to interest themselves in the enterprise and to favour it as much as they could.

Irt 1899, or thereabouts, after we came into office, we asked Parliament to give them assistance to extend the railway system then in existence in Manitoba eastward to the end of Lake Superior. If I remember rightly, we gave them a cash subsidy of $6,400 a mile for that length of railway. Later, in 1903, we induced Parliament to give them a guarantee of $13,000 a mile for a line of railway running through Manitoba to the city of Edmonton. Afterwards, in 1908, we asked Parliament to give them another guarantee of bonds to provide for several branch lines which would be feeders of the line in the Prairie Provinces. In 1911, as has been explained by my right hon. friend, it was considered that the system would not be complete unless it were extended eastward to the St. Lawrence and eventually to the Maritime Provinces, that is to say, unless it were made a transcontinental railway, and in that year we asked Parliament to give to the enterprise from Port Arthur to Montreal a guarantee of bonds to the extent of $25,000 a mile.

We are told that these companies are to be united in a transcontinental system, and with that object I agree.
My right hon. friend said, and I altogether agree with him, that we cannot allow this enterprise to fail. We have too much money in it not only the money of the country, but of the Provinces and of the bond holders themselves. It is therefore, necessary that we should assist this enterprise.
My right hon. friend says that we are to go into partnership with Messrs. Mackenzie and Mann and the Canadian Northern railway. These are the very words of the Prime Minister. That being so, is it unreasonable to ask that in that partnership we should be the leading and not the junior partner? * [DOT] *
I said a moment ago, and I repeat, that this enterprise must go on. It has been conceived for the benefit of the Canadian people. We require this Railway. My right hon. friend said he would not let it go into liquidation. It must not go into liquidation, but we should have the con-tol of it.
<Since we must go into partnership with the Canadian Northern railway let us see that we are the master, and not the servant.
We have helped them in the past, I for my part, have been an admirer of their energy and enterprise.
That was the policy advocated by Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1914. In 1917, when the financial difficulties of the Canadian Northern forced them to come to the Canadian parliament, the policy of the late government was in direct line with that advocated by the right hon. leader of the Liberal party in 1914. I submit to the House that when hon. gentlemen opposite attempt to disassociate themselves from the construction of the Canadian Northern and all that 
led up to its completion, they cannot, in the records of parliament, find anything to support that position. The hon. Prime Minister, the other day, urged that it was under the late government that more than 4,000 miles of the Canadian Northern came into operation. That I am willing to concede. The point I want to make is this, that practically all the main line construction of the Canadian Northern was effected under charters issued by the Liberal government prior to 1911, and the subsidies, with the exception of the subsidy covering the railway from Prince Albert to the British Columbia boundary, were largely, if not exclusively authorized by the former Liberal government.
I stated before and I repeat now that I do not propose to discuss the report further, but I shall have an opportunity of doing so when the general estimates of the Railway Department are considered.


Hon. D. D. McKENZIE (Solicitor General) :: This old and familiar subject of railways is rather tempting to one who has been in this House as long as myself. Let me at once congratulate the Minister of Railways (Mr. Kennedy) upon the very able and excellent presentation which he has made of the case to the committee. I am sure that there is no misunderstanding the real situation as presented by the minister and that, as he continues in the administration of the railway affairs of this country, the people generally and this House will be satisfied that no mistake has been made in putting the hon. gentleman at the head of this very important department.
The history of railways in Canada is rather an old one, and nothing comes closer to the interest of the (people generally than the operation of our railways. Perhaps, this is not the time to go at any length into this question, and if any person of less incisive speech than the hon. member for Lanark (Mr, Stewart) had replied to the Minister of Railways, I am not sure that I would have said anything at all on this subject. Although always opposed to the hon. gentleman politically, I have great admiration for his talent and ability; he has a great knack of making things appear just exactly what they are not. After my hon. friends across the way came into power, there became noticeable amongst them an absolute neglect or forgetfulness of time; they apparently became possessed of one divine attribute in that one day

C. N. B.-Minister's Statement
was to them as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.
The hon. member for Lanark reminded the committee that, in 1919, they passed an act for the purpose of amalgamating the railways. Well, 1919 is a good while ago. I was in the House at that time and I think the hon. member for Lanark was also. If I remember correctly, the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Meighen) who now leads the Opposition, had charge of that bill. If he had not charge of it, he was very industrious, as he always is, in the promotion of it. The bill was introduced in such a hurry that, after it had received its second reading, eleven clauses were added to it.


Arthur Meighen: What bill does the
hon. member refer to?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The bill for the
amalgamation of the railways, chapter 13 of the acts of the first session of 1919. I think my right hon. friend had charge of it. The year 1919 has passed; so have 1920 and 1921, and now we are barely started with 1922. And although lately hon. gentlemen opposite have had no control over these matters, during those years, although there was such feverish haste over introducing the bill that it had to be put before the House and put into committee before it was all properly drafted, nothing was done towards bringing about this amalgamation. To-day, however, I find the hon. member for Lanark metaphorically shaking his fist in the face of the minister and saying:	" Here you have
been in power since the 27th of December last, and nothing has been done in connection with the matter." Is it not a little marvellous what a difference it makes whose ox is being gored?
I notice that hon. gentlemen opposite are highly critical that we are taking so much time in carrying out other matters of this kind, when during ten long years with opportunities which we do not possess even now, they did nothing at all. Will the hon. member for Lanark take these matters into serious consideration and put himself for a moment in the other fellow's place? He himself has been a Minister of Railways, if not for a longer time, at all events, for about as long a time as the present minister, and I find no monuments standing to his memory.


Arthur Meighen: Perhaps the hon. member would agree that the statement just
read by the minister is some monument itself to what was done by the late government.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: All I can say is that for ten years we were hearing statements from ministers of my right hon. friend's party, and in them we found nothing at all of the hopeful note that is contained in the statement made to-day.


Arthur Meighen: It is a monument to what had been done before the present minister came into office.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: As regards the will of the people, and monuments, I say to my right hon. friend that, in 1904, the railway policy of the Liberal party was submitted to the people of Canada, and it received almost unanimous approval from the Atlantic to the Pacific. The great leader of the Liberal party of
5 p.m. those days did not expend one dollar in carrying forward the railway policy of that party until he first made it the main issue in the election of 1904, and having received the mandate of the people of Canada to go on with this work, he went on with it. Therefore, it must be admitted that the policy of the Liberal party was fully and squarely presented to the jury of the electorate of Canada, and that the work was proceeded with only after the electorate had given full consent to the government of the late Sir Wilfrid Laurier to go on with the work. What happened? The government that has just gone out of office and its predecessor in office, the Borden administration, came into charge of this policy before it was completed and brought to its full fruition; they had charge of the business of completing the construction of the railway and managing it for ten years, and the same people who said to Sir Wilfrid Laurier and his government "Build the railway," said to that administration after ten years of management: "You must be kicked out; you are not fit to be relied on."


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: What did Sir
Wilfrid Laurier and his government inform the people this railway would cost them?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Neither Sir Wilfrid
and his government, nor any other government could say how much would be the cost of an enterprise comprising as many miles as this. There has been a great deal of misrepresentation about some statement alleged to have been made by the

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
Minister of Finance of that day. It has been answered and cleared up a hundred times; but hon. gentlemen opposite, wishing to make political capital out of that statement and to put the Liberal party in wrong in connection with it, persist, notwithstanding those various and multitudinous statements, in still standing by the old statement. Sir Wilfrid Laurier himself, as far as I know, never made any definite statement as to what the road was going to cost.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: Will my hon. friend explain now why the statement that the road was going to cost $13,000,000 was made? He says that one hundred and one reasons have been given. What was the reason for that statement?


Mr. McKENZEE:: We were told in an estimate issued by the late government, of which my hon. friend was an ornament, that this magnificent building was going to cost $5,000,000. What is it going to cost now?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I could not tell you.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Perhaps $15,000,000 before we are through with it. Will my hon. friend explain that difficulty and that difference?	*


Henry Lumley Drayton: Very easily, if you desire the explanation now.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: My hon. friend is quite profuse with his language, and somewhat regardless of his figures sometimes, and I am sure he will give an explanation, whether satisfactory or not. When a certain man of old was asked who gave him his sight, he answered: " I know not; but one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see." All I need say to my hon. friend is, that whereas his Government told the people that this building was going to cost $5,000,000, it will cost them $12,000,000 or $15,000,000. That is all the explanation I require from my hon. friend.


An hon. MEMBER:: No such thing.


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, I might point out that what my hon. friend has favoured us with is hardly an answer, and cannot be regarded as one of the hundred and one explanations why $13,000,000 was given as the true cost of the Transcontinental.

Mr, GRAHAM: Which it never was.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I say it never was; and it is no wonder that the people turned my hon. friend out of his high position of Minister of Finance if he could not see the difference himself. Now, we are told that we made a mistake in the building of this road. Let me remind hon. members opposite of the history of their own party and what the first Minister of Finance in the Borden administration, the Right Hon. Sir Thomas White, stated in regard to this matter. If any hon. member cares to turn up the first budget speech of the Right Hon. Sir Thomas White, delivered in February, 1912, he will find that the then Minister of Finance stated that so far as the railways then in operations or in course of construction were concerned, they were a splendid national asset, and would continue to be essential to our full development. That, sir, is the condition in which we handed over the railways to the management of the Borden government, and if they made ducks and drakes of them we cannot help it.


Mr. ARTHURS:: How many railroads
were then in the possession of the Dominion government?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: It is not a question sc much-


James Arthurs: How many railroads were then in the possession of the Dominion government?


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


James Arthurs: Will my hon. friend answer my question?


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: There was never any criticism-


James Arthurs: Answer the question. My hon. friend has not answered the question.


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am not obliged to answer the question at all,


James Arthurs: I asked my hon. friend how many railroads were then in the possession of the Dominion government. He has not yet answered that question.


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: -and if I answer it, I shall answer it in my own way. I am too old a bird to be caught in that way.
91D

C. N. R -Minister's Statement


James Arthurs: I ask the privilege of putting this question to my hon. friend: How many of the present units of the National Railway system were then in the , possession of the Dominion government?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: The Canadian
National Railways were not at all in the possession of the Dominion government in 1912.


James Arthurs: That is not an answer.
I asked: How many-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am not an encyclopedia of railway information. And, further, even if I did know, I would not undertake the enormous task incident to the penetration of the information to my hon. friend's understanding.


James Arthurs: My hon. friend knows very well that there was only one railway then in the possession of the Dominion government. If his intellect does not carry that far-


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: How unkind of my hon. friend from Parrv Sound to try and trap an inexperienced member like myself! He knows all about it. 1 thought he did. That is why I delayed giving him the information. Now he is unkind enough to try and get me "in wrong" with 'the committee by asking me to tell him what he knows perfectly well himself. It is hardly fair, and I would not have expected it of my hon. friend.


James Arthurs: I desire to tell my hon. friend that he is a better authority than I am on the subject.


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I was expecting, Mr. Chairman, that I would be given right of way this afternoon after having kept so very quiet since the beginning of the session; but I observe there is no consideration to be gained from some hon. members by being quiet. My point is that the Canadian people gave their assent to the railway policy of the Laurier government; that it was necessary for the full development of the country to carry that policy into effect; that when the party to which I belong left office in 1911, we passed over the National railway property in its then condition to the incoming administration; and that their financial critic when making his
budget speech in February, 1912, stated that that property was a splendid asset to the country. What he stated then has been often quoted in the House since, and it has never been contradicted because it cannot be.
Now then, the general railway policy of the Laurier administration was endorsed by the people, and we carried the Transcontinental almost to completion. And when we handed it over to the incoming administration, and one of their leading financial men said, "It is all right, it is money well expended, it is a splendid national asset," our responsibility ended. If the new' administration spoiled the road in the building; if they broke the contracts and interfered with the arrangements we had with other companies in regard to it; if they made it impossible to carry out the original arrangement of which the people of Canada approved; if they made a wreck of the whole thing-and it was a wreck when handed over to us the other day-who is responsible? After the Government has been in power for a few weeks, hon. gentlemen, like the priest with the Levite, pass by on the other side; they say they had nothing at all to do with this wreckage. Is that fair? Will the hon. member for Parry Sound go home and pray over that, and then say that his attitude is right? Surely it is not an attitude which should be taken by fair minded men to-day. If the road has not been a success during ten years of administration by hon. gentlemen opposite, that is no fault of ours. If they spoiled the grade in the building of the remainder of the Transcontinental road and brought about a condition under which the contracts with the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Grand Trunk could not be carried out, that is no fault of ours. But the condition faces us, and we must make the most of it. We have promised to give government ownership a square deal and a fair trial, and that we are bound to do; we are bound to give the people an opportunity to see how this thing works out.
I do not wish anybody to have any misapprehensions about my own position in the matter. I happen to be a member of this Government, and I stand by the position the Government has taken in regard to giving this road a square deal and making the most of it. The records of this House will show that ever since there was talk of the Government taking these roads over, as a matter of conscientious belief I was op-
920	COMMONS
C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
posed to that being done. I was not in favour of government ownership, because I have always believed that you cannot get the same results from government ownership and government management that you get under private ownership and private enterprise. But I am anxious and willing that everything shall be done in order to make this road a success, and I hope it will be a success. In that respect the statement made by the minister to-day is encouraging; it shows some signs of an advance in the right direction.
There is one other thing I wish to say about this railway situation. I cannot understand how hon. gentlemen sitting in opposition can talk as they do about Portland and the branch lines of the Grand Trunk in the United States, having regard to the attituude they themselves have taken. Since Parliament opened, several criticisms have been made about the attitude of the present Government with regard to the situation at Portland. We did what we could to prevent the acquisition of the Grand Trunk, particularly that portion of it which is in the United States. We took the ground that hundreds and millions of dollars had been spent in this country to establish railways running from east to west; that millions had been spent in the deepening of the St. Lawrence and the enlarging of canals to make navigation possible, so that we would be an independent nation and capable of carrying on our own affairs. But after all that money had been expended, the Meighen administration went down to Portland and established there, in a foreign country, what is practically a national port of this country. Can anybody stand by a policy of that kind? They bought not only 2,000 miles of road in a foreign country, but they virtually bought a port which must be maintained. Will anybody for one moment say to the Canadian people: "We were advised by the late government to spend millions in buying this road and establishing this terminus in a foreign country, and now we are to .starve it by cutting off every avenue of traffic leading to it "? If hon. gentlemen opposite are consistent, they must be in favour of diverting traffic toward that port, thereby starving such places as Montreal, Quebec, Halifax, Sydney, and St. John.


James Arthurs: Cape Breton.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Cape Breton is so well off and so wealthy that they could not starve

it; if they could, they would have done it long ago. I may tell my hon. friend from Lanark (Mr. Stewart) that I have before me a record of the various resolutions that were proposed while the discussion on the Grand Trunk railway acquisition was proceeding in the House. Resolution after resolution was moved by hon. gentlemen then in opposition, now on the right of the Speaker, asking that delay should take place; that there should be investigation; that the bill should not be read until further information had been obtained. I find on looking at the division lists the illustrious name of my hon. friend from Lanark, indicating, by his vote, his desire to rush pell-mell to Portland and establish there, in a foreign country, the national ierminus of all our railway systems. My good friend from St. John City (Mr. Baxter), who accepted office in the late administration, knowing the history of matters in connection with Portland, knowing that a stage had been reached which made a retracing of steps impossible, now finds fault, because forsooth, we are not cutting off Portland and cutting off all our connections with the United States. It is far from businesslike, far from courageous on the part of my hon. friends to whine about Portland and our connection with the United States when that is a condition which they themselves brought about. Our national status requires that we should have our own ports on the Pacific and on the Atlantic, independent of any foreign country.
I condemn, as I have always done, the idea of linking up our railways with the railway systems of the United States and with United States ports, as was done by the right hon. gentleman who now leads the Opposition and his predecessor as Prime Minister of this country. Those who are old members of the House recall the battles that were fought over this question. They know, and we know in the maritime provinces, particularly in Nova Scotia, that one of our grievances against the outgoing government was their taking over coal [DOT]mines in the United States, the output of which must necessarily compete with ours, thus destroying a part of the market for our coal. It was a near-sighted policy on the part of my right hon. friend and those who sat in council with him, to buy coal mines in the United States capable of producing something like two or three million tons of coal annually and to admit that coal into the markets of this country free of duty. While that coal output was controlled by the Grand Trunk Railway Company,

C. N. It.-Minister's Statement
duty had to be paid upon it when it came into Canada, and that was a matter of business; we could say nothing about it. But we bought the Grand Trunk, with its \arious railway lines, its coal mines, and everything belonging to it, and if the coal now pays duty on coming into Canada, it is simply a case, so far as the Government is concerned, of taking money out of one pocket and putting it into the other.


James Arthurs: Was the hon. gentleman opposed to the acquisition of the Grand Trunk railway, and is he still?


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Always was, am
to-day, and shall continue to be. My hon. friend knows, and my record in this House will show, that I was always opposed to any property being acquired to be run by the Government, particularly the government of that day. I feel rather humiliated that I have never been able to impress upon my hon. friend where I stood on this matter. However, there is hope yet.


James Arthurs: My hon. friend quotes
scripture of.tener than he does politics.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Of some people it
can be said as was said of Ephraim, "Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone." I have always been opposed to this policy of buying railways in the United States because, as every member of this House knows, we have no control, so far as legislation goes, over these properties in a foreign country. We cannot pass one line of legislation regarding them. They come under the legislation of the different states through which they run, and we have no representation in those state legislatures at all. Federal legislation by the United States may also be passed affecting these vast properties, as to which we would have nothing to say. That in itself would be a reason why the people of this country should be careful before they launch into the purchase of vast properties in a foreign country over which we have no control so far as legislation is concerned, and as to the management of, which we have nothing to say. I submit to you, Sir, that the question of owning and operating and competing as a Government with our coal mines in Nova Scotia is a particularly sore spot with the people of that province, who cannot understand how any person or any government will take the responsibility of putting themselves in competition with private enterprises. I hope that as time goes on, now that the management is under
the control of the Liberal government, the railways will show an improvement. Even in the short period towards the end of the year, the change of government has brought its results. The management knew, because they could not help reading the signs of the times, that there was to be a change of administration. Everybody believed that except perhaps the ex-Minister of Finance and his leader, and the management shaped their course to meet coming events; they were more careful, knowing that they would be submitted to the close criticism of a Liberal government and that business-like methods would be expected of them.


Arthur Meighen: Perhaps it was the
anticipation of the coming government that caused the big deficit in the month of December last.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: I am not aware that
there was any such deficit, but I can readily understand that the old government having gone out, if there was any possible way by which they could take anything with them they would do it. However, the inquiry that the minister has promised will see to these things, and I would advise my hon. friends opposite to be careful about anything of. that kind which they might have carried with them. I hope that as the years go on and proper management prevails in connection with these roads better results will be obtained for the good people of this country.


Arthur Meighen: I will not undertake to make any exhaustive analysis of the statement presented by the minister to-day. It is too long and encloses within its compass so many figures, I think I might say, so much information-though I might add, were it appropriate, so little in the way of policy-that more time than a few minutes for reflection would be requisite for that purpose.
It is very rare, however, in the history of this Parliament that a minister of the Crown has presented a statement to the House which was received with a great deal more applause upon the part of the Opposition than upon the part of the Government. That has been reserved for the experience of this afternoon. I listened to the report with interest; I listened to it with some gratification, and I think the same can be said for most of the hon. members of this House. Upon the results of the operation of the national railways,

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
particularly for the year 1921, depended very much as to what would be the attitude of the people of this country toward the continuance of the system of operation then in vogue, indeed, what would be their attitude to the whole immense problem of the management of our railways.
I could not help but come to the conclusion that the Government likely thought it would be wisest that as little serious discussion should take place this afternoon on this statement as could not be avoided, and that as a consequence the Solicitor-General (Mr. McKenzie) was put up with instructions to take just as much time as he could and say as little as possible. The Solicitor-General had the accumulations of humour of all this last winter to retail to Parliament; he has had his opportunity, and that task he has mightily well performed.
The statement presented to-day of the operations in 1921 before the change of Government-and I am not for a minute suggesting that under a change of Government, if they follow the lines intimated by the minister, there will be difference in the future-is such, I am sure, that it will carry encouragement to many throughout this country, and will strengthen the hands of those who have not given up hope, who have consistently believed that we can, if we follow right lines such as have been pursued, make these roads a success.
The hon. minister's statement discloses that in the national railway management, that is to say, within the ambit of the system given to the board, the Intercolonial, the Transcontinental, the Grand Trunk Pacific, the Canadian Northern, in all that vast system, including a mileage of 7,340 miles, there has been an improvement in operating returns in what has been the worst commercial year for many years in this country-an improvement of something over twenty million dollars. From a deficit in 1920 of 36 million odd on all those systems, there has been a reduction to about 16 millions in the year 1921. There has been at the same time, it is true, an increase in the fixed charges. Such is inevitable because the deficits that necessarily accumulated during the time of amalgamation, during the time of the rehabilitation of the road, during the time of the completion of construction and-after construction-during the time when deferred maintenance and deferred betterments had to be made up-when all these had to be overtaken, the deficits that accumulated were necessarily substantial and consequently the fixed charges increased accord-fMr. Meighen.]
ingly. The fixed charge increase this year -which if I gather the figures correctly amounts to $7,000,000, the difference between the $40,000,000 as it stands now and the 33 millions odd as it stood in 1914- will be made up in the main of the interest on last year's deficit and even in greater degree of the interest on the money put into the system in the way of betterments and in the way of increased construction, almost wholly in western Canada. But that increase is much less than the improvement that is shown in operation returns, with the consequence that a deficit of 69 millions odd announced last year is now reduced to 56 millions odd.
The minister gives us the information, which I receive with pleasure, that the deficit announced to Parliament last year of 69 millions as the 1920 deficit turns out to have been too large, and that the real deficit was $67,505,000. The difference is not great but that there is a difference on this side is something significant. It would indicate that the former Minister of Railways in giving the information last year erred on the side adverse to himself, and instead of painting the deficit as smaller than it actually was, he painted it larger. That fact surely has some significance. It stands alongside the other undoubted fact, that from the day the former Minister of Railways made it until this hour he has been condemned through the whole of the Dominion of Canada as having misrepresented the deficit, as having stated it to be far less than it actually was.
Very well, there is this improvement in the returns. It was accompanied by a small reduction of wages, but it shows itself, as disclosed in the statement of the minister as very largely due to the economies resultant upon amalgamation; to the increased traffic; to the perceptibly increased proportion of the traffic of this Dominion, indicating that the National Railway system is gaining on all competitors due to better service. The better service to the better equipment and better system brought about by the expenditures under the late administration. Anyway the corner has been turned. I want to impress again that, so far as I have discussed the subject up to now, my reference has been wholly to the roads under what we know as the National Railway Board, the board of which Mr. Hanna has been the president. That system has been in operation since, I think, the fall of 1917; I think it was put in operation just after the Union government was formed. The

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
whole mileage was not then under the board but one by one different systems have been put under it. First the Canadian Northern; and, I think at the same time, the Transcontinental railway. We did not relieve the Grand Trunk Pacific from operating that line but the Grand Trunk Pacific refused to operate it. The Grand Trunk Pacific had no more competence or power to operate it than any humble penniless individual in this House. It could not begin to operate it because of the position it was in, and absolutely declined to do so. We were powerless to make it do so because it had not the resources with which to operate the road. We had in the system then, first the Transcontinental railway and the Canadian Northern; later was added the Intercolonial. The Canadian National Railway Board was made the manager of the Intercolonial, and later in the spring of 1919 on the seventh day of May, the Grand Trunk Pacific Board having notified the Government that on that date it would cease to operate the Grand Trunk Pacific because it could not even operate that road any longer we took the Grand Trunk Pacific, operated it as receiver, and very shortly afterwards turned it over to the Canadian National lines for operation. That brought all that system under the Canadian National Railway Board. There remains now outside one only of the government-owned lines-the Grand Trunk line, the parent Grand Trunk.
Very well. In so far as this speech discloses the condition of the national railways I venture to submit to the House that it is gratifying to a degree. And more: In comparison with the record of government operation in other countries-yea, in comparison with the record of private operations during the same period in other countries-it establishes the system of management which the late government put in, as the best yet devised for the operation of government lines. For although a deficit appears, although there is a deficit on operation, although there is still a very substantial deficit in operation and fixed charges, a deficit of some 56 millions -though that is the fact, you can put the result, that is the final result, alongside of corresponding results by similar privately-owned systems in other countries, and you will find that result to reflect credit upon the operations here; a favourable result as compared with the results in the United States for the same period.
I observe that the minister has not favoured the House with any figures corresponding with those he gave us as to our own roads taken from the returns of the United States railways in the same time. In the statement given last year those figures appeared and they were illuminating indeed. Other figures appeared as to relative results over in England. They also were of very great service to Parliament. I am sorry the minister did not include these comparisons in the statement he presented this afternoon.
There is one other point I want to emphasize. In the statement made last year by the Minister of Railways estimates were given as to what would be the result for 1921. It was estimated that in 1921 there would be better results in operation, but the utmost the minister of that day expected from the year 1921 was that, in operation and in fixed charges put together we could not expect to get out under less than sixty millions odd of a deficit. The figures given this afternoon show that that has been very much reduced, at least to the extent of some $4,000,000.
Consequently, all in all, the statement this afternoon will bring to the people of Canada the realization of this truth at least-that facing, as we have had to face, the taking over a system which we had to get under and take over or let it fall into liquidation, if not into desuetude and idleness, the best course available was adopted. And, having decided on the best course, the best system of management was devised, and that system of management has been vindicated by the results.
I was not able to follow-because a parallel method was not adopted-the figures given by the Minister of Railways as regards the Grand Trunk railway. I rather came to the conclusion, from the general purport of his remarks, that the results of the 1921 operations of the Grand Trunk are by no means as satisfactory as are the results with the sister system, the Canadian National. Of course, it must be remembered that the 1921 results in the Grand Trunk are results accruing, in so far as the government board is concerned, as only from the month of May,

I will be corrected if I am wrong. I am satisfied that it was towards the end of May when what could be called a government board was put in charge of the Grand Trunk. Hon. gentlemen will remember that until that time the government was

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
not empowered to place directors in charge of the railway, the Grand Trunk directorate managed the system. The Grand Trunk Railway Company insisted, as one of the terms, which, finally, we conceded to them in making the arrangement for arbitration, that until the arbitration was over they be not ousted from control. Finally we yielded to that contention. I am not sorry that we did. If we had not yielded, there would be at least some semblance of justice in the cry that is now all too common in the Old Land that we used harsh methods in connection with the shareholders of that road. If we had ousted them, they would be able to say " Yes, you threw us out of our system, you insisted that we should get out or you would have nothing to do with us, and then, when we were out, unable to get the evidence to go before the arbitration board, you took advantage of the disability there imposed upon us, and you got the best of the arbitration." We yielded to them on that point, and as a consequence they had a right to keep their board in control of the Grand Trunk system until the time expired when the arbitration was to end. When that time expired, however, the government of the day determined, as disclosed in the speech of the former Minister of Railways, the hon. member for Lanark (Mr. J. A. Stewart), that, though the arbitration was not over, it should have been over, and, as the Grand Trunk had not used due expedition to get it over, if they wanted an extension of the time they must, first of all, yield that point, and permit the government to go into control of the road. The government of the day was anxious to hasten that time when we would be able to get, to the full, the advantages of complete amalgamation of the government system. We knew we could not get them in full immediately we put our board in. We knew that some time would be required on the part of the former officers of the Grand Trunk, and on the part of some of the officers of the Canadian National railways, to prepare the way for amalgamation, to prepare the lines immediately to be pursued when the amalgamation would take effect. Consequently, we were anxious that as little delay as possible should intervene between the control of the Grand Trunk Board proper and the advent of the Grand Trunk Board appointed by the Government. The Government appointed its board about the end of May or the 1st of June last year. The 
Government retained, and necessarily retained, on the board, temporarily at least, certain high officials of the Grand Trunk. The reason for that was manifest, and the justice of it no one would dispute. The government board, therefore, only operated with part of the Grand Trunk Board, the Government appointees, from the middle of May last year until the end of the year; consequently the less favourable showing of the Grand Trunk last year, is not attributable to the fact that there was a government board in control as opposed to the old board. I do not think there are many Canadians who would not gladly agree that those gentlemen added to the board by the government were strong, able and competent men, and who would not also be glad to hear the news that men of that character, or the same men, would be accepted by this Government and continued. Very well, that was the position they were in. There has been no opportunity at all as yet to secure the fruits of that unification, which was the policy of the late government, which was embodied in and the reason of the Act of 1919. The Act of 1919 is in itself the machinery by which the whole fruits of amalgamation can be secured. It will be seen that no time whatever was lost on the part of the late administration in reaching for that goal-that goal which we must reach if our national railway management is to be a success. But, unfortunately, there has been delay on the part of this Government. I know of no reason why it should not have been called into effect immediately they came into power. What was there to ascertain? What more was there to be done? I know there was not need for further conferences between the directorates. I am aware myself, and I am sure the minister will not dispute it, that the necessary arrangements had been made, so far as the organizations of the two systems were concerned, that would have enabled the Government to have called the act into effect at once. The minister in his speech does not in any word or sentence indicate that there was any reason on that score for not calling the act into effect. He says "We had to get good men to go on the new board, and three months and a half has not been time enough to enable us to think who the good men are." Is not that the only reason the minister has given? I would venture to suggest, in the light of the results of last year as disclosed in the

C. N. R.-Minister's Statement
statement this afternoon, that the Government would do very well to reflect, in the seriousness of their own cabinet council, whether or not it is probable that there were good men on the board last year. Why, then has the Government delayed? If I have understood properly the full meaning of the statement the minister has made it is this. He says "We are going to carry out the policy of the late government; after tribulations, after doubtings, after twistings and turnings, after fears, inward quarrels, and all sorts of rebellion in the party, we have decided that we are going to pursue the very policy the late government laid down, the policy the late government pursued right up to the time it went out of power. We have decided on all that, and all we have not decided on is just when we will put it into effect." That is one statement of policy as announced by the minister this afternoon. It is not very radical or momentous, but I think on the whole it is fairly wise.
Then on the subject matter of rates, about which we have heard much for many months, I waited with apprehension-not with apprehension but with genuine curiosity-to find what the minister would have to say. I was aware, as every hon. gentleman is aware, that the control of rates on our railways was delegated, by the legislation of 1902 or 1903, to the Railway Commission of this country. I was aware that the Railway Commission was sitting and considering the problem at the present time. I was aware that the Commission had an organization that had command of the facts and the history of the whole question. I was aware that it was composed of men whom, if they were not competent men, or were in any way truant in their duty, there was a proper method of removing. I was aware the Railway Commission had been placed in this position at the hands of hon. gentlemen, many of whom are now members of the present Government; but, of course, I had to remember as well that, notwithstanding, the scale of rates in effect under that commission was laid at the door of the late government by their orators, yea, by themselves, all through this Dominion, and I was wondering what would be the policy of this administration, what line they would devise that would harmonize their own conduct in placing this question under a judicial tribunal, with their professions in declaring that they would decide it themselves. Well, we get the result this
afternoon. The whole of their policy is this: We promised in the Speech from the Throne a "consultation" of the railway heads. We have found that is no good. Here is our policy now: "We will appoint a committee of Parliament to think it over." That is the mouse that has come out of the mountain. There is going to be a committee of this House to decide what to do about railway rates. Will the Railway Commission be called as witnesses before the committee? Will we try all over again what the Railway Commission has been trying for almost a year back, or for twenty years back? If so, when is this session going to end?
I think this committee will clearly understand that the statement of the minister this afternoon disclosing the Government policy on rates is merely an admission of mental and moral bankruptcy on the whole question. There is no way in which they can carry out what they have declared they can carry out. There is no way to harmonize their professions now with their promises. There is no way in the world in which they can make good to the people of this country the promises they have made, without violating the policy of which they themselves are not only the disciples but, twenty years ago, the originators.
That is all I have to say on this question this afternoon. In so far as the facts of management are disclosed with regard to a system where the method of operation, the [DOT] personnel of operation, the system and principles of operation, have been put to the test, the statement is gratifying to me-I do not know whether it is gratifying to the Government or not. I know how far it harmonizes, or rather fails to harmonize with their statements of the position all through last fall; and as I sat here and heard those definitions of future policy-a committee of Parliament to look into the question of rates, a committee or some agent of a new board which is to be put into the National Railways to investigate whether what the National Railway Board gives out as facts are really facts or not-I wondered how far those two anaemic and equivocal definitions of policy would' be accepted by the hon. member for St. Antoine (Mr. Mitchell), as fulfilling his pledges made to the electors of his constituency during the last campaign. He was going to have a commission, a royal commission; he was going to bring over experts from Asia, no, from Europe and from some other continent which he did not name. These experts

C. N. R -Minister's Statement
were going to be brought over to Canada to supplement the brains of hon. gentlemen opposite and to study the alleged railway tangle into which the late government had plunged this country. Where is his pledge now? Can he find any reference to it in the speech of the Minister of Railways? Who is this committee or this individual whom the new board, at some unspecified time in the indefinite and misty future, is going to appoint to see whether the board itself is telling the truth or not? Is that the fulfilment of his pledge to his electors? As we received notice that the late government's plans as to amalgamation were to be followed line by line and letter by letter, I wondered what thoughts were passing through the mind of the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Macdonald), and I wondered what comments he was making to his seat mate beside him, the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan), who, I see, is conferring now with his fellow pledgor, the hon. member for St. Antoine. They, speaking in Nova Scotia, and, as well, the hon. member for Colchester (Mr. Putnam), used this pledge, that the Intercolonial railway was going to be jerked out of the National system when they came to Ottawa; that it was going to be extricated and restored to the Department of Railways and Canals, and run as it was in the years of long ago. I wonder now how they are going to square themselves with the electors of their constituencies. Do not let it be said that I favour the carrying out of what they were pledged to do. I favour now precisely what I said in the last campaign -precisely what the present Government is now undertaking to do at a very indefinite time, precisely what we undertook to do most definitely before the people of this country. I stated plainly in Moncton that, just as soon as we took in the Grand Trunk, as would be done at the earliest possible moment, at that time there would be sufficient eastern mileage to warrant the establishment of, and that there would be established, an Eastern Grand Division, in which there would be that measure of railway home rule that was essential, but in which there .would not be lost at all the advantages of unification. There would be, in a word such decentralisation as the Canadian Pacific has in effect, as all railways of sufficient magnitude have in effect. That was what I stated was the proper policy. That is now what is intimated in the speech of the Minister of Railways. But it is entirely out of accord with 
promises given electors, which promises account for the presence in this House of the hon. member for Cumberland, the hon. member for St. Antoine, the hon. member for Pictou, the hon. member for Colchester, and, I know not how man? more. I am not going to seek to exhaust, for it is six o'clock already, the comparison of the statement of policy on this phase this afternoon, attenuated, vague, timid, as it is, with the various bold commitments of hon. members opposite,-not at all. They were quite loose and reckless in their engagements; anything they thought would suit their constituents-that was the commitment made. One policy came from British Columbia, another policy from the prairies, another from Nova Scotia and another from New Brunswick, all designed to catch the prevailing opinion or cupidity of the district. All these policies are now scrapped, the policy which the former government sturdily pursued is now proclaimed as right and hon. members are asked by the Minister of Railways to go back and make their peace with their deluded electors.
Mr. FIEL.DING:	It was understood
that the House was to adjour* at six o'clock. I therefore, move that the committee rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King, the House adjourned at 6.04 p.m.
Wednesday, April 19, 1922