1923-05-28

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Has Fred T. Congdon been appointed by the present government a royal commissioner to inquire into and report on the question of gratuities voted by former directors of Grand Trunk Railway to themselves and others shortly before the road was taken over by the government.
2.	Was the said Fred T. Congdon formerly a member of parliament for Yukon territory?
3.	Was the said Fred T. Congdon public administrator for Yukon territory and for what period?
4.	Were charges of mismanagement and improper conduct in the administration of the Wiley estate in Yukon made against the said Fred T. Congdon as public administrator?
5.	Was the late Augustus Power, K.C., legal officer of the Department of Justice, appointed a commis^ sioner to inquire into and report on said charges?
6.	Did the said commissioner report that said Mrs. Wiley and her infant daughter suffered loss, injustice and hardship due to manner of the administration of said estate by said F. T. Congdon?
7.	Did the government of Canada subsequently recommend to parliament the grant of a sum of money to said widow and her infant daughter or either of them on compassionate grounds?
8.	Was a grant of money made by parliament to the said widow and her infant daughter or to either of them?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Yes, appointed but resigned owing to ill-health.
2.	Yes.
3.	Yes, from the 13th March to 30th September, 1901, and from 20th May, 1905, to 2nd April, 1907.
4.	Yes.
5.	Yes.
6.	The report of the commissioner is included among the papers of which a return has been ordered by the House of Commons. The report speaks for itself.
7.	Yes.
8.	Grant of $10,000 made by Vote 574 of the Supplementary Estimates 1912-13 to Charlotte Wiley, in full satisfaction of claim for loss of mining claims, the property of her father on the date of his decease.



GOVERNMENT PRINTING OUTSIDE BUREAU

Mr. JACOBS:: 1.	What was the total sum paid by the government for printing, outside the printing bureau each year for the past five years?
2.	What was the cost to the government of printing the Labour Gazette outside the printing bureau each year for the past five years?


Hon. Mr. MURDOCK:: Answer of the Department of Labour:
1.	Nil.
2.	Answered by answer of King's Printer, dated May 3, to same question.
Answer in so far as respects the Department of Public Printing and Stationery:
1.
Printing Halftones,
Binding Lithographing
Fiscal Year	etc.	etc.	Total1918-	1919	$270,780	51	$ 82,559 43	$353,339	941919-	1920	
215,859	81	88,316 14	304,175	951920-	1921	
157,026	74	127,636 22	284,662	961921-	1922	
144,768	99	126,792 46	271,561	451922-	1923	
126,083	00	141,088 18	267,171	18
2.
Fiscal Year-	Total
1918-	1919	
$19,372	961919-	1920	
26,416	621920-	1921	
31,972	541921-	1922	
32,721	101922-	1923	
26,710	71



PORT ARTHUR ELEVATOR

Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	What was the total amount of No. 1 standard screenings at the government elevator at Port Arthur for the years ending August 30th, 1920-21-22?
2.	What was the total amount of revenue received in each of the above years from all screenings?
3.	Were the said No. 1 standard screenings recleaned in the said elevator?
4.	If so, what was the total revenue for each year:- (a) from the rtcleaned screenings, (b) from the refuse screenings?
5.	During the said years, to whom, at what price and what amount did the government sell, (a) No. 1 standard screenings, (b) recleaned screenings, (c) refuse screenings?
6.	Were the said screenings at any time offered to public tender?
Questions

7.	Did the government officials mix the grain extracted from the said screenings with other grain in the elevator?
8.	In accounting to the shipper for screenings, as provided by law, was said accounting and payment for the No. 1 standard screenings before being recleaned or only at the rate allowed for refuse screenings?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: The elevator has no control whatever over any disposition which the shipper may wish to make of such warehouse receipt. The Canadian government elevators do not make any cash returns for screenings.



RETURNED SOLDIERS-DEATHS FROM TUBERCULOSIS

Mr. LADNER:: 1.	What is the number of deaths from tuberculosis in each of the provinces of men who served in the Great War, during each year since the war up to this date, and what number of such men had their domicile in such province before enlistment?
2.	What is the number of new cases of tuberculosis reported each year since the war according to provinces, showing also the number of such men who had their domicile in such provinces before enlistment?
3.	What is the total number of men who served in the Great War now under treatment by the government for tuberculosis according to the last available records?


Hon. Mr. BELAND:: 1.	Statistics, showing the number of deaths by disabilities, by provinces, and the prewar domicile, of pensioners, and patients, are not maintained by the department. The total, by years, of men suffering from tuberculosis who died while on the treatment strength of the deparmtent, or while in receipt of pension for that disability is:
Year	Number
1916		 12
1917		 41
1918		 141
1919		 391
1920		 459
1921		 404
1922		 343
1923	(1st quarter).. ..	70
Total	1,866
2. Statistics in respect to number of primary and re-admissions to treatment for tuberculosis show:
_	Men Cases
Total Primary Admissions
to Dec. 31, 1920	 9,157
Total Re-Admissions to
Dec. 31,	1920	 449
Total Primary Admissions
during 1921	 598
Total Re-Admissions during 1921	 752
Total Primary Admissions
during 1922	 485
Total Re-Admissions during 1922	 1,122
Total Primary Admissions 1-1-23, to 31-3-23...	.	115

Men Cases
Total Re-Admissions, 1-123, to 31-3-23	 289
*Total Primary Admissions
to date, 31-3-23	 10,355
Total Re-Admissions to
date, 31-3-23	 2,612
*Shows the number of men, who on admission for treatment, were suspected to be suffering from tuberculosis, as well as those in whom the existence of the disease was established. In many of the former class, who are admitted primarily for observation, the existence of tuberculosis is not established and the diagnosis is changed accordingly. The number in whom the diagnosis of tuberculosis was subsequently confirmed is therefore less than the total admissions indicate.
3.	On April 21, 1923, the number of men undergoing treatment for tuberculosis as patients of the department was: In Canada, 1,051; in United States, 103; in British Isles, 26; Total, 1,180.
CIVIL SERVICE LIST Mr. BLACK (Yukon):
1.	At what date was the last Civil Service List published?
2.	At what date will another list likely be published?
3.	What is the reason for delay in publishing list?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	The last edition of the Civil Service List was submitted to parliament at the first session of 1919 and contained the records up to the 1st April, 1918. The provision which required the Civil Service Commission to issue the annual Civil Service List was deleted from the Civil Service Act of 1918. Consequently since that date there has been no statutory provision for the publication of an annual list.
The work of reclassification which has been in progress since the fall of 1918 has made it difficult if not impossible to compile a Civil Service List which could have been even approximately accurate by the time it was ready for distribution. The commission has not therefore considered it advisable to submit any recommendation to the government in this matter up to the present time.
2.	Owing to the entire permanent service being now under the Civil Service Commission a complete list to-day would contain at least three times as many names as the 1918 edition and would be correspondingly expensive to produce. The commission would not be prepared to proceed with its preparation save under direct instructions from the government.
3.	Answered by No. 1.

Questions



CORNWALL CANAL-ALLEGED PARTISANSHIP

Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: 1.	Have charges of political partisanship been preferred against Augustus Blackburn, lock tender, James T. Shields, lockmaster, and John Waldrof, lock hand, employed on lock number twenty-one of the Cornwall canal ?
2.	Has any investigation been held?
3.	If so, who was the commissioner who conducted
the same?	.
4.	What was the result of such investigation in each
case?
5.	Have any of the said employees been dismissed?
6.	Is it the intention of the government to dismiss any of said parties?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	Thomas R. Mayberry.
4.	Blackburn admitted the charges; Shields and Waldrof pleaded not guilty and in their cases the evidence was insufficient to establish the charges.
5.	No.
6.	As Blackburn admitted being chairman of the Conservative ward committee, acting as chairman of public meetings in the interests of the Conservative candidate, canvassing and drawing voters to the polls for the same candidate, his services will be dispensed with by the department.
MESSES. BOVILLE, FISET and COULTER


Mr. KELLNER:: 1.	What is the number of years of service in the public service of Mr. T. C. Boviile, ex-Deputy Minister of Finance, Dr. R. M. Coulter, ex-Deputy Minister of Post Office Department, and General Fiset, exDeputy Minister of Militia?
2.	What was the annual salary of each of the above-mentioned, the date of their retirement, and what is the annual pension of each of them?
3.	What leave of absence was allowed to each one of the said gentlemen at the date of his retirement and what salary was paid during that leave?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: Department of Finance T. C. Boviile:
1.	37 years.
2.	Annual salary $6,000; date of retirement April 1st, 1920; retiring allowance, $3,733.33 per annum.
3.	Three months' leave of absence was given from date retirement was authorized for which payment was made at the rate of $6,000 per annum. Mr. Boviile had, however, taken considerable sick leave prior to 1920.
Department of National Defence General Fiset;
1.	Major General Sir Eugene Fiset is an officer of the Permanent Active Militia, who is seconded therefrom for duty with the Civil
Service; his retirement is not as a member of the Civil Service but as a member of the Permanent Active Militia, and has been based on a total service of 30 years and 220 days.
2.	General Fiset's salary as Deputy Minister and Vice-President Defence Council is S10.500 per annum.
The date of General Fiset's retirement on pension, under the Militia Pension Act, will be April 1, 1924. The annual pension payable on his retirement will be $5,686.19 per annum, to be increased after 3 17/365 years by $88.81 when unpaid pension dues for service in South Africa will have been paid, and after 2 179/365 years by $525 when all unpaid pension dues will have been recovered.
3.	Owing to the serious impairment of his health due to overwork during the late war, General Fleet's medical advisers insisted upon an absolute severance from his public duties. He was therefore granted one year's sick leave with pay from .November 1st, 1922, which leave owing to General Fiset's condition at the present time, has been extended to the 31st March, 1924.
Post Office Department
Dr. R. M. Coulter:
1.	25 years, 5 months.
2.	Annual salary, $6,000; date of retirement, 1st January, 1923; retiring allowance, $4,200 per annum.
3.	Nil.



ST. MARGARET'S BAY ROAD, N.S.

Mr. JONES:: 1.	How much, if any, federal money has been paid out of the good roads appropriation towards the St. Margaret's Bay road in Nova Scotia?
2.	Does the amount paid represent forty per cent-of production? If not, what per cent does it represent?
3.	How many miles have been constructed upon which the Dominion payment is applicable?
4.	If nothing has been paid, is it intended that any Dominion money shall be contributed toward this road?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	$131,091.49.
2.	Forty per cent of $340,228.72, as recommended by the Chief Engineer of the Federal Highways branch.
3.	17.5 miles.
4.	Answered by No. 1.



MONTREAL POST OFFICES

Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	How many post offices are there in Montreal?
2.	Where are they located?
Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General.)
1.	117.
Questions

2.	Office-location:
Montreal (Head Office), St. James st.
Postal Station A, 571 St. James st.
Postal Station B, 324 St. Catherine st. W. Postal Station C, 802 St. Catherine st. E. Postal Station D, 317 Centre st.
Postal Station Delorimer, 1128 Mount Royal ave. E.
Postal Station E, 1832 Blv. St. Lawrence. Postal Station F, Notre Dame & Richmond. Postal Station G, Arcade street & Pine ave. Postal Station H, St. Catherine & Bishop. Postal Station M, 116 Letourneux ave.
Postal Station N, 120 St. Catherine st, E. Postal Station Notre Dame de Grace, 5382 Sherbrooke st.
Postal Station 0, de l'Eglise st.
Postal Station Outremont, 1126 Laurier W. Postal Station R, Corn. st. Denis & Beaubien sts.
Postal Station S, 222 Boulevard Monk.
Sub Offices:-	*	.
Ahuntsic, 6441 Lajeunesse st.
Beaudoin st., 2097 N. Dame st. W. Bordeaux, 2202 Boulevard Gouin. Cartierville, 123 Boulevard Gouin.
Cote des Neiges (Ouest), 1869 Cote des Neiges Road.
Cote St. Louis, 1315 St. Denis st.
Cote St. Michel, Cote St. Michel Road.
Cote Visitation, 2132 Blvd. Rosemont. Dominion, 54 3rd ave. Dominion Park Lachine.
Dorval, Lachine.
Greenfield Park, 70 Devonshire Road. Lachine Locks, 212 St. Joseph st., Lachine. Lakeside, Pointe Claire.
Leduc, 1089 St. Catherine st. E.
Long Point, 3973 N. Dame st. E.
Montreal Nord, Blvd. Gouin E.
Montreal South, 25 Victoria ave.
Montreal West, 46 Westminster ave.
Mount Royal, 164 Graham Rd. Corn. Kin-dersley st.
Notre Dame des Victores, 742 Mont Sabre st.
Ontario st., Centre, 441 Ontario st. E. Ontario st., East, 778 Ontario st. E.
Park ave., cor. Prince Arthur st. & Park ave.
Park ave. extension, 271 Beaumont.
Pointe Claire, Montreal.
St. Catherine st., West, 900A St. Catherine st., W.
St. Cunegonde, 94 Vinet st.
St. Denis st., 282 St. Catherine st., E.
St. Jean Baptiste De Montreal, 1324 Bldv. St Lawrence.

Sub Offices.-Continued.
St. Jean de la Croix, 2850 Bldv. St. Lawrence.
St. Lawrence st., Centre, 508 Bldv. St. Lawrence.
St. Louis Square, 544 St. Denis st.
St. Paul, 1649 Church ave.
Sault au Recollet, 898 Bldv. Gouin East. Tetreaultville, 4341 Honfleur st.
Valois, Pointe Claire.
Verdun, 1253 Wellington st.
Victoria ave., 381 Victoria ave.
Villeneuve, cor. Marie-Anne E. & Dela-roche.
Villeray, 3440 St. Hubert st.
Ville St. Pierre, 20 6th ave., Ville st. Pierre. Youville, 3814 Lajeunesse st.
Sub Office No. 15, 1030 Ontario st., E.
Sub Office No. 16, 271 Bldv. St. Lawrence. Sub Office No. 17, 401 St. Denis st.
Sub Office No. 18, 1911 Masson st.
Sub Office No. 19, 320 N. Dame st., W. Sub Office No. 20, 2096 Ontario st., E.
Sub Office No. 21, 2497 Ontario st., E.
Sub Office No. 22, 892 Lacombe ave.
Sub Office No. 23, 1505 Bldv. St. Lawrence.
Sub Office No. 26, 658 St. Antoine st.
Sub Office No. 27, 713 Wellington st. Sub Office No. 31, 486 Roy st., E.
Sub Office No. 33, 449 Rachel st., E.
Sub Office No. 35, 3049 St. Catherine st., E.
Sub Office No. 37, 321B Rachel st., E.
Sub Office No. 38, 1420 Ontario st., E.
Sub Office No. 41, 1241 Van Horne st.
Sub Office No. 42, 2698 Notre Dame st., W. Sub Office No. 43 481 Gilford st.
Sub Office No. 44, 2231 Papineau st.
Sub Office No 46, 345 St. Antoine st.
Sub Office No. 47, 244 Laurier ave.
Sub Office No. 48, 1575 Notre Dame st., W.
Sub Office No. 49, 513 Delorimier ave. Sub Office No. 50, 882 Laurier ave., E.
Sub Office No. 51, 117 Bernard st.
Sub Office No. 56, 301 Colbrooke ave.
Sub Office No. 58, 311 de Fleurimont.
Sub Office No. 65, 225 Amherst st.
Sub Office No. 66, 119 St. Denis st.
Sub Office No. 68, 1345 St. Catherine st., E.
Sub Office No. 69, 2275 Jeanne d'Arc ave. Sub Office No. 72, 433 Amherst st.
Sub Office No. 73, cor. Beaubien and St. Hubert sts.
Sub Office No. 75, 1465A Wellington st. Sub Office No. 77, 437 Mount Royal ave., E.
Sub Office No. 85, 781 Charlevoix st.

Questions
Sub Offices.-Continued.
Sub Office No. 86, 1158 Castelnau st.
Sub Office No. 93, 1185 St. Denis st.
Sub Office No. 95, 447 St. Catherine st., E.
Sub Office No. 101, 37 Hector st.
Sub Office No. 103, 1159 Papineau st.
Sub Office No. 104, 2217 St. James st., cor. Lenoir.
Sub Office No. 105, 597 LaSalle ave.
Sub Office No. 106, 210 St. Viateur st.
Sub Office No. 107, 166 Notre Dame st.,
Lachine.
Sub Office No. 108, 2501 St. Denis st., cor. Belanger.
Sub Office No, 109, 342 Forsythe st., cor. Hogan st.
Sub Office No. 110, 34 Broadway ave.
Sub Office No. Ill, 803 Lasalle Road, Verdun.
Sub Office No. 112, cor. St. Denis st., & Laurier ave.
Sub Office No. 113, 30 Cadillac st., Guy-bourg.	.
Sub Office No. 114, 1194 Rochambeau st.
Sub Office No. 115, 126 Lebrun st.
Sub Office No. 118, 6071 Shergrooke st., W.
Sub Office No. 119,	3201 Christophe-
Colomb st.
Sub Office No. 120, 6235 Sacre Cceur ave.
Sub Office No. 122, 41 McCord st.



IMPERIAL SHIPPING COMMITTEE

Mr. EVANS:: 1.	Is the Imperial Shipping Committee continuing its inquiries as decided at the Conference of Prime Ministers and representatives of the United Kingdom, the Dominions and India in 1921?
2.	Are the reports of the above committee available to members of this House of Commons?
3.	Who is the Canadian representative on that committee?
4.	Why did the Canadian representative oppose the resolution at that conference recommending the constitution under royal charter of a permanent committee to carry out the duties specified in the report of the Imperial Shipping Committee dated June 3rd, 1921?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The reports are printed and published by His Majesty's Stationery Office in London and may be obtained directly from that office' or through an}' bookseller.
3.	Honourable P. C. Larkin was appointed a member of the committee on April 15th, 1922, in the room of Sir George Perley resigned..
4.	The published summary of the proceedings of the conference does not disclose why the representative of Canada did not agree to the resolution recommending the constitution under royal charter of a permanent committee.
S.C.R. EMPLOYEES, VANCOUVER & VICTORIA


Mr. McQUARRIE:: 1.	How many employees of the Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment department are there now in the service of the department in (a) Vancouver; (b) Victoria?
2.	How many have been relieved of their appointments since the 1st of January 1922, in respect of each city?
3.	How many of those relieved were returned soldiers ?


Hon. Mr. BELAND:: 1.	On the 15th of May, 1923, the staff of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-Establishment numbered: (a) in Vancouver, 230, (b) in Victoria, 24.
2.	Since the 1st of January 1922, there have been retired from the employ of the Department: (a) in Vancouver, returned soldiers 64, others 21; total, 85; (b) in Victoria, returned soldiers 9, others 2; total, 11.
3.	Answered by No. 2.



POSTMASTER OF LAROUCHE

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was the postmaster of Larouche, Chicoutimi-Saguenay county, dismissed? If so, for what reason?
2.	Was an inquiry held in these parts on account of this employee? If so, by whom was it made and what did it cost? If not, why?
3.	Is it >true that one named E. Dubois was put in charge of this post office?
4.	Does the government know that this Dubois is a public insolvent, having failed several months ago?
5.	Were petitions addressed to the government recommending the said Dubois to this position? If so, how many electors s'gned them?
6.	Does the government know that it would have been easy to find in Larouche, in the neighbourhood of Dubois, many of its good partisans, responsible from all viewpoints and well qualified to fill this office?
7.	Is it the intention of the government to uphold, notwithstanding, the nomination of Dubois?
8.	What is the total salary connected with the office of postmaster at Larouche?
9.	Who recommended to the government the nomination of the said Dubois?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes. Political partisanship.
2.	No. Dismissed on statement of membei of parliament that to his personal knowledge postmaster was guilty of acts of partisanship (See Hansard 15th February, 1923, page 286).
3.	J. E. Dubois was placed in charge.
4.	No.
5.	No.
6.	No information.
7.	No complaints have been received against the public service rendered by Mr. Dubois.
8.	S60 per annum (minimum remuneration).
9.	Dr. Savard, M.P. Office in question removed from operation of the Civil Service Act by order in council 1053 of the 29th June, 1922. '
.138
Questions



POSTMASTERS DISMISSED IN CHICOUTIMI-SAGUENAY

Mr. HANSON:: 1. How many postmasters in the county of Chicoutimi-Saguenay were dismissed since the 1st January, 1922?
2.	For what reasons were these dismissals made?
3.	Were inquiries made in the localities where the dismissals were effected, in each case? If so, by whom?
4.	If inquiries were held what amount was paid to the investigator as salary and daily expense?
5.	Are these inquiries over? If not, how many are still to be made?
6.	Were complaints made to the government against dismissed postmasters for bad management of their offices, or improper execution of their duties? If so, in what cases?
7.	Is it true that certain changes were made temporarily? If so, is it the intention of the government to make the present office holders permanent?
8.	Is it true that in the county of Chicoutimi-Saguenay, between the years 1897 and 1921 inclusive, no dismissal was made for the reason of partisan politics, and that the only changes effected were made only for bad service or by voluntary resignation?
9.	Have instructions been issued for the holding of other inquiries against further postmasters in the district of Chicoutimi? If so, against whom?
10.	Are there inquiries which have not yet been completed? If so, in what cases?
11.	Will these inquiries be continued? If so, when?
12.	Have inquiries been held that will not result in the dismissal of employees? If so, in what cases?
13.	Is it the intention of the government to continue this policy of dismissals under the cover of inquiries which are but excuses in the eyes of the public?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General):: 1.	Eleven.
2.	Eight, Political partisanship; Two, removal of post offices to more suitable locations; One, mismanagement.
3.	Partisanship: Four cases investigated by commissioner appointed for that purpose, (Order in Council 2172 of the 16th October, 1922); Four dismissals made on personal statement of member (See Hansard, 15th February, 1923, page 286).
Change of site and mismanagement: Investigated by District Superintendent of Postal Service, Quebec.
4.	Partisanship commissioner, $374.48, total expenses.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes. Port Alfred; Canton Tache.
7.	Temporary arrangements were made to continue public service pending permanent appointment by the Civil Service Commission. The permanent appointee will be nominated by the Civil Service Commission according to the established procedure.
8.	Yes.
9.	Yes. Against the postmaster at St. Gedeon Station and Jonquere.
10.	Yes. See 9.

11.	Cases still under review by commissioner appointed to investigate charges of political partisanship.
12.	Decisions in outstanding cases will depend on finding of commissioner.
13.	The procedure followed is identical with that put into effect by the Conservative government after the elections of 1911, except that in a similar period following the election of 1911, the Conservative government dismissed over 800 postmasters for political partisanship, the majority without public investigation, as against 62 by the present government, the majority after public investigation had been held.



POSTMASTER AT LABARRE

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was the postmaster at Labarre, Cliicoutimi-Saguenay county, dismissed? If so, why?
2.	Was an investigation held in that county in regard to this postmaster? If so, by whom, and what did it cost ?
3.	Is it true that a person named Thomas Debiens, of St. Bruno, "was charged with the changing of this post office? If so, what amount was he paid?
4.	Who was nominated in the place of the former postmaster ?
5.	Who recommended to the minister the nomination of the new office-holder?
6.	If there was no investigation held how was the government notified ?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General):: 1.	Yes. Political partisanship.
2.	No.
3.	No.
4.	D. Lapointe.
5.	On recommendation of Dr. Savard, M.P. The office in question was removed from the operation of the Civil Service Act by order in council 1053 of the 29th of June, 1922.
6.	Dr. Savard, M.P., made a statement that to his personal knowledge the postmaster was an active partisan during the federal elections. (See Hansard, 15th February, 1923, page 286).



STB. ANNE-ST. CHARLES TELEGRAPH

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	What were the revenues from the telegraph line between Ste. Anne and St. Charles, in the county of Chicoutimi, during the past five years?
2.	What were the revenues of the same line between St. Charles and Peribonka during the same period of time?
3.	What were the expenses for the maintenance and salaries on each of these sections during the same years ?
4.	Does the government know that the length of this line there is a telephone system which serves all the parishes and which is in direct communication with all telegraph offices of the district, and that consequently the existence of this telegraph line has become absolutely useless from all standpoints'

Questions
5.	Is it the intention of the government in these circumstances to discontinue immediately the maintenance of these two sections of telegraph, which have no reason for existing from the standpoint of public interest and economy ?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	$323.47.
2.	$23.13.
3.	Ste. Anne-St. Charles, $1,201.90; St. Charles-Peribonka, $4,774.85.
4 and 5. Yes, and as the telephone system supplies all accommodation required in the district, negotiations are in progress with the view of disposing of this branch line at an early date.



MR. EUGENE CARON

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was Eugene Caron postmaster at Tadoussac, in the county of Chicoutimi-Saguenay ? If so, during how many years ?
2.	When did he cease acting as postmaster?
3.	If he gave in his resignation, why did he do so?
4.	Is it true that it was proven to the Postmaster General that the said Eugene Caron, who was at the same time land agent of the provincial government of Quebec, and had considerable correspondence, profited of his position as postmaster to stamp his letters with used stamps which had been officially cancelled, and that it was for this reason that he was forced to give in his resignation immediately into the hands of the inspector who found him in fault?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes, from 1st March, 1888, to 15th April, 1911.
2.	15th April, 1911.
3.	Postmaster was dismissed.
4.	According to departmental records the postmaster was dismissed for having affixed obliterated postage stamps to mail matter despatched from his office.



POSTMASTER AT HERBERTVILLE

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was the postmaster at Herbertville station, county of Chicoutimi, dismissed? If so, why?
. 2. Was an inquiry held in these parts on account of this employee? If so, by whom and what did it
cost?
3.	In his report did the investigator recommend the dismissal of the postmaster?
4.	Is it true that petitions signed by the majority of the interested parties were addressed to the government recommending the retention of the old postmaster?
5.	Is it true that the post office was temporarily confided to one Raoul Desbiens? If so, is it the intention of the government to leave him in that capacity permanently ?
6.	Did the government receive favourable petitions on the nomination of the said Desbiens? If so, what was the number of signatories?
7.	Who persuaded the minister to make Desbien's nomination ?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes. Political partisanship.
2.	Yes. Oscar Drouin, L.L.L., barrister, Quebec. Appointed commissioner to investigate charges of partisanship by order in council 2172, 16th October, 1922. Cost $128.75.
3.	Commissioner Drouin found Mr. Asselin guilty of political partisanship.
4.	Petition received bearing 123 signatures in favour of the retention of Mr. Asselin.
5.	Yes. Permanent appointment is being made by Civil Service Commission.
6.	No.
7.	Mr. Raoul Desbiens placed in temporary charge on the recommendation of Dr. Savard, M.P., pending permanent appointment by the Civil Service Commission.



POSTMASTER AT ANGOULEME

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was the postmaster at Angouleme, Chicoutimi-Saguenay county, Mr. J. A. Menard, dismissed? If so, why?
2.	Was an inquiry held on the premises against Mr. Menard? If so, by whom, and what did it cost?
3.	Is it true that one named L. Laroche was nominated in place of Mr. Menard?
4.	Did the government receive petitions asking the nomination of Laroche? If so, how many interested persons signed them ?
5.	Is it true that the Postmaster General had his secretary write Mr. Menard asking him if he received the Conservative paper "L'Homme Libre" of Quebec, as a regular subscriber or gratuitously? If so, what was the intention of the minister in having this letter written ?
6.	On whose recommendation did the minister make Laroche's appointment?


Hod. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1 Yes. Political partisanship.
2.	No. Postmaster dismissed on statement of member of parliament that he was guilty of acts of partisanship. (See Hansard, 15th February, 1923, page 286).
3.	Yes.
4.	No.
5.	No. But Mr. Menard may have received " card of inquiry " sent out by the secretary, Post Office Department, to persons whose names appeared on subscription list of L'homme Libre with a view to establishing "bora fides of subscription list," before granting statutory postal privileges. This is a routine departmental procedure and no specific record of the names of persons to which cards are sent is kept.
6.	On recommendation of Dr. Savard, M.P., office in question was removed from the operation of the Civil Service Act by order in council 1053 of the 29th of June, 1922.
Questions



MR. GEDEON VERRAULT

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	(a) Was Mr. Gedeon Verrault dismissed as telegraph repairer on the section comprised between St. Charles and Peribonka in Chicoutmi-Saguenay county?
(b)	If so, why?
2.	Was an inquiry held in these parts in connection with this employee? If so, by whom, and how much did it cost?
3.	Is it true that a person named Rousseau of Rober-val, was nominated in place of Mr. Verrault?
4.	Were petitions transmitted to the government recommending the nomination of the said Rousseau? If so, how many electors signed them, and in what parishes?
5.	Did the government receive other petitions recommending other persons than Rousseau for the same position? If so, who was recommended?
6.	Who advised the government to nominate Rousseau?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	(a) Yes; (b) For political partisanship.
2.	(a) Yes; (b) By Mr. Oscar Drouin;
(c)	No cost to the Department of Public Works.
3.	Yes.
4.	No.
5.	No.
6.	Dr. E. Savard, M.P.



POSTMASTER AT ST. JOSEPH D'ALMA

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was the postmaster at St. Joseph d'Alma, Chi-coutimi-Saguenay county, dismissed? If so, why?
2.	Was an inauiiy held in these parts on this employee's account? If so, by whom, and what did it cost?
3.	Is it true that this post office was given to one Marc Aurele Michaud, brought from Montreal specially for this position, and this temporarily?
4.	Does the government know that the said M. A. Michaud was employed in recruiting soldiers in the county of Chicoutimi in 1915 and 1916, and that he disappeared from the county for being mixed in large embezzlements after an inquiry held by the Militia department ?
5.	Is it true that the government received a position largely signed by the citizens of St. Joseph d'Alma recommending the keeping of Mr. Verrault, the former postmaster?
6.	Did the government receive petitions signed by cit:zens of St. Joseph d'Alma recommending the nomination of Michaud? If so, what was the number of those signing?
7.	Did the government receive petitions or requests on the subject of this position recommending others than Michaud? If so. who were those recommended, who recommended them, or who asked for the position themselves?
8.	If an inquiry was held, did the investigator recommend the dismissal of Mr. Verrault?
9.	Who finally succeeded in having the nomination made of Michaud by the Postmaster General?
10.	Is it' the intention of the government to appoint Michaud permanently to this position?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes. Political partisanship.

2.	Yes. Oscar Drouin, L.L.L., barrister, Quebec. Appointed commissioner to investigate charges of partisanship by order in council 2172, of the 16th October, 1922. Cost S77.76.
3.	Marc Aurele Michaud, returned soldier, placed in temporary charge on the 16th January, 1923. Appointed permanently by the Civil Service Commission on April 19, 1923. In so far as department is aware Mr. Michaud is a resident of St. Joseph d'Alma.
4.	No.	.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes, fifteen signatures.
7.	No.
8.	Commissioner Drouin found Mr. Verrault guilty of political partisanship.
9.	Mr. Michaud applied for permanent position in response to usual advertisement.
10.	Mr. Michaud was permanently appointed by Civil Service Commission.



POSTMASTER AT ST. BRUNO

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was' the postmbaster at St. Bruno, Chicoutimi-Saguenay county, dismissed for partisan politics only?
2.	Was an inquiry made on the premises on this employee's account? If so, by whom, and what did
it cost?
3.	Did the investigator in his report recommend the dismissal of this employee?
4.	Is it true that this post office was entrusted to one named Plamondon, who is a school inspector for the provincial government of Quebec, which position nets him a good salary?
5.	Does the government know that this Plamondon, a civil employee, did not hesitate to take part in the federal as well as in the provincial elections?
6.	Did the government receive petitions signed by citizens of St. Bruno recommending the nomination of Plamondon? If so, what was the number of those signing?
7.	Did the government receive other petitions, or other signed requests, signed by citizens of St. Bruno, recommending other persons than Plamondon? If so, who were the persons recommended or who made these requests ?
8.	Who recommended to the Postmaster General the nomination of Plamondon?
9.	Is his nomination a recompense for his partisan politics?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes. Oscar Drouin, L.L.L., barrister, Quebec, appointed commissioner to investigate charges of partisanship by order in council 2172 of the 16th October, 1922. Cost $84.76.
3.	Commissioner Drouin found Mr. Nap. Cote guilty of political partisanship.
4.	Mr. Plamondon was the person selected by the Civil Service Commission after the vacancy had been regularly advertised. Department has no record -of the salary re-

Questions
ceived by Mr. Plamondon for other than post office work.
5.	Department has no such information.
6.	No.
7.	Petition received in favour of D. Harvey bearing 129 signatures and recommended by Dr. Savard, M.P.
8.	Answered by No. 4.
9.	Selection made by Civil Service Commission.



MR. JOS. BURNE

Mr. LAVIGUEUR:: 1.	Has. Jos. Burne, an employee of the Immigration department, been transferred to Quebec?
2.	If so, what are his duties?
3.	(a) What country is he from, and (b) how long has he been in Canada?
4.	Who recommended him and what salary is attached to, the position he occupies?
5.	Does said Mr. Jos. Burne speak French fluently?
6.	Is Mr. Jos. Burne the same person who had charge of the Immigration department canteen at St. John, New Brunswick, or elsewhere?
7.	Has he always given satisfaction to the department ?
8.	Was there ever any report made against said Mr. Jos. Burne?
9.	Were his accounts always kept and rendered in a satisfactory manner?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	Yes.
2.	In charge of catering Savard Park Hospital and supervising catering service Immigration building under jurisdiction of Agent.
3.	(a) Ireland, since January, 1912.
4.	No recommendation. Transferred by instructions. Salary $1,320.
5.	No.
6.	Yes.
7.	Yes.
8.	No.
9.	Mr. Burne does not handle accounts.



CONSEIL NATIONAL DES METIERS

Mr. LAVIGUEUR:: 1.	Has the Immigration department received a resolution from the "Conseil National des Metiers" of the district of Quebec, protesting against the transfer to Quebec of a certain member of the St. John, New Brunswick, Immigration department staff and from elsewhere?
2.	Does the department intend to replace these persons transferred to Quebec with citizens of the city of Quebec ?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	No.
2.	In the event of any vacancies occurring the same will be filled in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Service Act.



CATTLE QUARANTINED AT LEVIS

Mr. BOURASSA:: 1.	What quantity of hay, straw, and grain was purchased by the government for the cattle placed in
quarantine at Levis, Quebec, during the years 1919 to 1922, inclusive?
2.	What are the names and business addresses of merchants from whom these purchases were made?
3.	What amounts were paid to said merchants for each of the above years?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1,	2 and 3. Nil. The government does not purchase hay, straw, grain or other feed for animals placed in quarantine at the quarantine station, Levis, Quebec. The owners of the animals purchase the feed themselves.



PURE-BRED SHEEP IN ONTARIO

Mr. SENN:: 1.	Did the Department of Agriculture receive a request from the Ontario government or any breeders' association to participate in a scheme for the importation of pure-bred sheep to be distributed at cost in the province of Ontario?
2.	If so, did the department agree to accept any responsibility in the matter?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	Yes, a request was received from the sheep breeders' associations in various provinces that some assistance be provided to pure-bred breeders in enabling them to import pure-bred rams for breeding purposes.
2.	Yes, the department has accepted responsibility as follows: The Dominion and Provincial Departments of Agriculture are co-operating equally in defraying transportation and purchasing expenses on specially selected rams imported this year.



WAREHOUSING OF GRAIN

Mr. COOTE:: 1.	Do the same laws governing the warehousing of grain as specified in the Canada Grain Act apply to dockage over 3 per cent which is not the property of the terminals?
2.	Where are dockages set on cars of grain which are consigned to Fort William and Port Arthur?
3.	Does the purchaser or holder of a warehouse receipt receive the quality and quantity of dockage taken from the car as specified by the tariff?
4.	Is the quality of this dockage established at the time the grain is graded? If not, why?
5.	Where and how is the quality of this dockage determined, and is all grain cleaned to grade to assure the dockages being taken out before setting a standard for quality ?
6.	Is binning supervision of dockages exercised by the Inspection department as prescribed for by the Canada Grain Act, section 94-95?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	All dockage regardless of ownership is binned together and is delivered upon the surrender of documents within 3 days; otherwise such dockage may be disposed of as provided for in the tariff governing the operation of public terminal elevators.
2.	At the point of inspection, usually Winnipeg.



Questions
3.	The holder of documents representing dockage receives the general average of quality of screenings as received by the public terminal elevator.
4.	No, because it is not practical to bin separately the actual dockage from each individual car.
5.	(a) Samples of dockage are being taken by officers of the Inspection department at each public terminal elevator while cleaning machinery is in operation, and the average quality of such dockage is determined from the samples so taken.
(b) Yes.
6.	No provision is made in the Canada Grain Act covering the binning supervision of dockage by the Inspection department.



CANADA STEAMSHIPS-WAR CLAIMS

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: 1.	What are the names of the eleven ships for which Canada Steamships, Limited, have recently claimed the sum of $3,651,639.38 under War Claims?
2.	When were these built?
3.	When were these lost?
4.	From whom were these eleven ships purchased by the Canada Steamships line, and at what price each ?
5.	What was the amount of war risk insurance paid on each ship ?
6.	What was the actual value of the ships?
7.	By whom was the premium on war risk insurance paid ?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	SS. Midland Queen, SS. Empress of Fort William, SS. Empress of Midland, SS. Dundee, SS. Strathcona, SS. Neepawah, SS. C. A. Jaques, SS. D. A. Gordon, SS. Armonia, SS. Tagona, SS. Acadian.
2.	The claimant's affidavit does not disclose this.
3.	SS. Midland Queen, 4th August, 1915; SS. Empress of Fort William, 27th February, 1916; SS. Empress of Midland, 27th March, 1916; SS. Dundee, 31st January, 1917; SS. Strathcona, 13th April, 1917; SS. Neepawah, 22nd April, 1917; SS. C. A. Jaques, 1st May, 1917; SS. D. A. Gordon, 13th December, 1917; SS. Armonia, 15th March, 1918; SS. Tagona, 16th May, 1918; SS. Acadian, 16th September, 1918.
4.	The claimant's affidavit does not disclose this.
5.	The claimant's affidavit discloses that the following hull insurance was collected: SS. Midland Queen, 8162,546; SS. Empress of Fort William, 8194,666.65; SS. Empress of Midland, 8194,666.65; SS. Dundee, $305,955.57; SS. Strathcona, $294,433.33; SS. Neepawah, $321,200; SS. C. A. Jaques, $364,999.99; SS. D. A. Gordon, $255,350.50; SS. Armonia, $1,010,681.33; SS. Tagona, $485,900; SS. Acadian, $388,960; total, $3,979,360.02.
6.	Value of vessels: SS. Midland Queen, $560,000; SS. Empress of Fort William, $760,000; SS. Empress of Midland, $760,000; SS. Dundee, $580,000; SS. Strathcona, 540,000; SS. Neepawah, $432,000; SS. C.' A. Jaques, $630,000; SS. D. A. Gordon, 660,000; SS. Armonia, $1,490,000; SS. Tagona, $550,000; SS. Acadian, $669,000; total, $7,631,000.
7.	The claimant's affidavit does not disclose.



PRICES CHARGED TO INDIANS

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: What prices were charged the Indians by the agency or the department during the years 191323 for a wagon, a saddle, working harness, blankets, fencing wire, implements (various), threshing outfits?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: Prices Charged Blackfoot Indians' Fund Trust Account
Wagons	
Saddle	
Work harness
Blankets	
Wire (fencing)..
Threshing outfits.
Implements Binders	
Disc Drills	
Sulky plows	
Mowers	
Rakes	
Plows	
1913	1914	1915	1916	1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923$ cts. 89 00	S cts. 80 20	$ cts.	$ cts	$ cts. 118 60	$ cts. 146 00	$ cts. 138 50	$ cts. 166 35	$ cts. 100 00 128 33	$ cts. 100 00 134 50	$ cts. 46 53
58 00 42 93									
38 45				57 00	59 00		55 08	57 77 40 00	57 50 35 00 30 00 3	00 4	90	25 00
										
										
								3 00 6 25		
3 25 1,408 00 149 00	2 Q1 1,399 20 133 50	3 20	4 69	4 68	5 83	5 82	6 90 2,450 25			
										
								249 50 175 00 150 00	125 00	
										
125 00 50 75 62 00 38 00	77 50	84 25 56 36	105 00 53 90			190 95	79 88		125 00 92 40	80 00
										
							100 00			
										
				118 60				102 12	133 80	
										

Questions



COST OF CARRYING MAILS

Mr. LEADER:: 1.	What was the total amount paid by the Dominion government to the railway companies for carrying His Majesty's mail in Canada for the last fiscal year ?
2.	What was the amount paid to the Canadian Pacific Railway?
3.	What was the total amount paid to the Canadian National Railways, including the Grand Trunk and the Grand Trunk Pacific?
4.	Is it the policy of the government to grant mail contracts to the Canadian National Railways, whenever possible?


George Perry Graham: It is not possible to give the exact figures in answer to the above questions as the railway accounts for March quarter have not all been adjusted yet. It can be stated, however, that the expenditure on railways will be approximately as follows:
1.	$7,453,000.
2.	$3,671,000.
3.	$3,187,000.
4.	Yes.



YUKON MINERALS EXHIBIT

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: Will the govenment cause to be prepared an exhibit of ore and minerals from Yukon territory with data and facts informing the public of the wonderful mineral resources of that territory, the same to be placed with the Canadian Exhibit at British Empire Exhibition in England ?


Charles A. Stewart: An exhibit of this nature is at present in process of preparation.



DAYLIGHT SAVING

Mr. ROBITAILLE:: x. What are the instructions of the Post Office Department in its supplement of the Official Guide of the Canadian Postal Service of May, 1923, in regard to summer time?
2.	Have these instructions been revised or cancelled?
3. Has the municipality of the city of Montreal adopted daylight saving?
4.	Have the time tables of railways which carry the mail to or from Montreal, been changed so as to agree with the daylight saving time?
5. Has the hour at the Montreal Post Office been changed and have the clocks been put an hour ahead since April the 30th last?
6.	If so, by what authority has this change been made?
7.	How was the change ordered?
8.	Is it not a fact, although employees arrive at the Post Office at 7 a.m., daylight saving time, they have hardly anything to do up to the arrival of mails at 8.30 a.m., daylight saving time?
9.	Can these mails be distributed by the first delivery?
10.	Does the minister intend to re-establish the normal hour?
201 h


George Perry Graham: .
1.	"Local Daylight Saving. It is necessary in all cases that arrangements shall be made to despatch and receive mails in accordance with the railway time tables; but in the matter of the time of the opening and closing post offices the postmaster may be guided by the action of the municipal authorities that is, in any place where the local authorities decide to adopt daylight saving time, the postmaster may do likewise."
2.	Only where tl?e exigencies of the public service necessitate a departure from the advice contained in May, 1923, supplement to the Postal Guide.
3.	No.
4.	No.
5.	Yes.
6.	By the Post Office Department through the intermediary of the Division Superintendent of Postal Service Montreal. '
7.	Answered by No. 6.
8.	No.
9.	No.
10.	The department is prepared to adopt whichever time is most conducive to the rendering of an efficient and satisfactory public service.



C.P.R. MAIL SERVICE

Mr. CAMPBELL:: 1.	What is the total amount paid to the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1922 for mail service?
2.	What is the total amount, paid for mail service, to the various lines under government control?
3.	What is the toal amount paid to the Canadian Pacific Railway for carrying overseas mail from the various seaports inland, and what are the details for the contracts covering this work?
4.	What is the total amount paid to the various government lines for services specified in the above question, and what are the details of contracts covering the work?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Calendar year, 1922, $3,749,288.14.
2.	Intercolonial,, $1,042,404.49; Canadian Northern, $680,253.09; Grand Trunk Pacific, $338,673.83; Prince Edward Island, $20,745.29; Grand Trunk Railway, $1,194,517.40; total, $3,256,594.10.
3.	It is not possible to give any figures in answer to this question as such mails are carried with other Canadian mails and transportation is paid for at a car mile rate. There are no contracts for railway mail service. The rates of payment are fixed by the government.
4.	Answered by No. 3.
Unopposed Motions



MR. W. R. LITTLE

Mr. LAVIGUEUR:: 1.	How long has Mr. W. R. Little been in the employ of the Immigration department?
2.	What are his duties?
3.	What is his salary?
4.	Where does he come from and by whom was he recommended to the position he now occupies?
5.	Does he understand and speak French fluently?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	Continuous employment Interior and Immigration departments 22 years, 9 months.
2.	Commissioner of Immigration.
3.	$4,020 per annum.
4.	Scotland; by the Deputy Head of the Department of Immigration and Colonization on the 9th December, 1918.
5.	Not fluently.
MOOSE RANGE DRAINAGE Mr. KNOX:
1.	What was the total cost to the Dominion government in connection with the Moose Range drainage project previous to 1919?
2.	What was the cost to the government in 1919, 1920 and 1921?
3.	What compensation did the Dominion government receive for the land turned over to the provincial government ?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	No expenditure previous to 1919.
2.	1919, $1,600; 1920, $21,438.12; 1921, nil.
3.	No land has yet been turned over to the provincial government.



UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS. ALBERTA DRAINAGE COMPANY

Mr. KELLNER:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams, [DOT]orders in council and other documents, regarding the sale of a parcel of land, under Order in Council No. 811, dated April 26th, 1922, to the Alberta Drainage Company, Edmonton, Alberta, containing by admeasurement 12,800 acres more or less.
BONDED OR EXPORT LIQUOR WAREHOUSES Hon. Mr. STEVENS:
For a return showing a list of all licenses for bonded or export liquor warehouses granted in British Columbia since January 31st, 1921, together with the names of parties to whom granted, date of issue, and the name of the provincial authority endorsing the same, including a copy of said applications and letters of endorsation from provincial authorities also any transfers from one bonded premises or district to another district, together with copy of all endorsa-tions, etc.



GOVERNMENT PRINTING-WINNIPEG

Mr. McMURRAY:: For a return showing, (a) Amount paid for printing by the Dominion government in the cits' of Winnipeg from January 1st, 1911, to December 31st, 1921; (b) All contracts entered into by the government with printing firms in the city of Winnipeg, and money 
paid to said firms from January 1st, 1922, to date; and (c) All printing contracts, and correspondence in connection therewith, made by the Canadian National Railways in connection with various publications and other printed matter.
MAIL CARRIERS AND CONTRACTORS Mr. W. C. GOOD (Brant) moved:
For a return showing the names and addresses, by provinces, of the rural mail carriers.
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Acting Postmaster General): Mr. Speaker, taking this and the following motion together, I would ask the hon. gentlemen in whose names they stand not to press them. These returns mean the compilation of about thirteen thousand names, which would take weeks of time and cost a lot of money, and unless the information is of some special use to members of parliament, I would ask that the department be not put to this trouble and expense. I may add that these lists are sought after a good deal by various departmental stores, patent medicine firms, and so on, and the department has always taken the position that if any private concern wants these lists the country should not be put to the expense oi compiling them; the firm itself should pay for the lists.


Mr. GOOD:: My information is that there are only about three thousand of these names.


George Perry Graham: I am taking the two motions together; these include about thirteen thousand names. If you grant one motion, you must of necessity, on principle, grant the other. If any private individual wants this information he should pay the expense of getting it.
' Mr. SPEAKER: Shall I say dropped?


William Charles Good: Let it stand for the present. Mr. SPEAKER: Stands.


Mr. WILLIAM IRVINE (Calgary East) moved:: For a return showing by provinces the names of all the rural mail contractors and the contractors operating between the post offices and railway stations in Canada.


George Perry Graham: This motion includes mail contractors operating between railway stations and post offices maybe half a mile or three-quarters of a mile apart. There are about nine thousand of these men.


William Irvine: As the government, no doubt, has to send out pay cheques to these men every month or so, I wonder if it would be a difficult matter to compile the names from these cheques as they are being sent out.

Saar Valley


George Perry Graham: It would mean the compilation of thirteen thousand names with their addresses-quite a big job in itself. I may repeat what I stated in regard to the preceding motion that the department has always taken the stand that they do not give out this information unless it is for some special purpose. Before I became a member of this House I endeavoured to get these lists myself and was absolutely turned down by the department.


William Irvine: In that case Mr. Speaker, the hon. member will not object to my pressing the motion now?


Mr. SPEAKER:: Stands?


William Irvine: No.


Hewitt Bostock: Dropped?


William Irvine: No.


Hewitt Bostock: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Hewitt Bostock: Lost on division.



ST. JOHN AND QUEBEC RAILWAY

[Stage Direction]
Hon. G. P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House tomorrow go into committee of the whole to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that the provisions of chapter 12 of the statutes of 1921, be amended by extending the time for the completion of the Saint John and Quebec Railway between Centreville, in the county of Carleton, and Andover, in the county of Victoria, New Brunswick, from the 31st day of December, 1923, to the 31st day of December, 1925.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been apprised of the subject matter of th6 resolution, has given his consent thereto and commends it to the consideration of the House.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Centre Winnipeg) :: Mr. Speaker, what is the attitude of the government in regard to the action of the Canadian representative on the Saar Valley Commission, Mr. R. D. Waugh, ex-Mayor of Winnipeg? He was reported by the press a little time ago to be offering his resignation because of the action of the majority of his fellow-commissioners. The latest English newspapers to come to hand-the Manchester Guardian, the London Nation and others- are very strong in their condemnation of the action of the majority of the members of the commission. I wonder if our Canadian
government have any part in this matter and if so, what action they are taking to support the Canadian representative.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: The government has no intimation on the subject other than has appeared in the press. I understand that the gentleman referred to is an appointee of the League of Nations; he is not an appointee of the Dominion government.



ALLEGED SECESSION POSSIBILITY

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Irvine: I wish to inquire if the attention of the government has been drawn to a statement made by Hon. W. F. Roberts, Minister of Public Health in the province of New Brunswick, which appears in this morning's press, to the effect that the secession of the Mari-times and the formation of a Maritime dominion is an imminent possibility unless a truly Canadian national policy is outlined and adhered to. If the attention of the government has been drawn to this I would like also to know if in their opinion, this is not more disrupting to the Dominion than, say, a strike of miners in Nova Scotia, and if they found it necessary to send militia to combat the strikers-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


William Irvine: There is the question, Mr. Speaker.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The attention of the government has not been drawn to the matter my hon. friend mentions.



BONUS TO TRIPLETS

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. J. L. BROWN (Lisgar):: I have here a communication from one of my constituents requesting me to ask a question of the government. As the communication is very brief I will just read it; it is a matter in which the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) will be particularly interested:
We are told here that the government pays a bonus in the case of triplets who live. The - family have triplets, and if it is true that there is a bonus coming, will you please advise us what proceedings should be taken to obtain this bonus, either in the way of land or money. We will thank you for looking into this matter for us.
I wish to ask whether the present government has, or the former government had, any general policy in this respect. If not, I suggest the propriety of such a policy.

Canada Shipping-Pilotage


George Perry Graham: Who says the West is not progressive?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think my hon. friend is right in suggesting that the Minister of the Interior is in a better position to answer that question than I am.


Charles A. Stewart: I will bring the matter to the attention of the government.



ISENBERG AND HOPPE LEASES

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Edward Joseph Garland: I
wish to ask the government if the statement appearing in this morning's Citizen is correct, contained in a letter from Mr. W. Murdock to the effect that the leases known as the Isenberg and Hoppe leases in Alberta have never been cancelled.


Charles A. Stewart: Decidedly, no. They have been cancelled.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: I would ask whether there is no system of registration so that the public may know of the issue of fiats for the reconsideration of such cases. Instances of this kind arise and the first intimation the public gets is that the case is under way. Is there no means of making the public aware of these matters?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The question is one which the hon. Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) would be in the best position to answer. I will direct his attention to the question.



CANADA SHIPPING ACT-PILOTAGE

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved the second reading of Bill No. 166, to amend The Canada Shipping Act.
Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: Will the minister explain this bill?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: I explained the proposed legislation fully when the resolution was before the committee and my hon. friend was present; I can only repeat what I then said. The law as it is does not allow any discretion to the pilotage authority, in ports other than Quebec, Montreal, Halifax, and St. John, to refuse a certificate to the master or the mate of a vessel who may apply for it. The object of the bill is to replace the word "shall" by the word "may" and add the words "if his application be approved by the pilotage authority." At present the pilot-

age authorities, after the ordinary examinations and upon payment of the dues, are compelled to deliver a certificate to the master or mate making the application. The necessity for the change has been forcibly brought to the attention of the department through a special case which arose this season in the pilotage district of Miramichi. The channel there is very narrow, and capable men have to be employed as pilots. We cannot expect pilots to spend all their time there if their services are not always required; under these conditions they have no option but to seek other means of livelihood, thus leaving the port without competent pilots. The bill is necessitated by an opinion of the Department of Justice that under the law as it stands the pilotage authorities have to grant the certificate. Under the amendment the master or mate is allowed to pass an examination, and be granted the certificate only when the pilotage authorities approve.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
On section 1-Master or mate, if application approved, may be examined, and, if passed, may receive pilotage certificate.
Henry Lumley Drayton: As I understand the minister's explanation, he wants in the first place an enabling clause, and in the next place a clause to prevent, if necessary, action being taken. On looking at the act I suppose the real change is this, that you can use substituted pilots with the assent of the pilotage districts of Quebec, Montreal, Halifax or St. John, but that others could not give that assent. Am I correct in that?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: And the next
change is the substitution of "may" for "shall" in the sixteenth line?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes, and the addition
of the words "if his application be approved by the pilotage authority."


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to. Bill reported, and read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 180, to amend the Civil Service Supermnnua-tion and Retirement Act.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the minister would tell us what is being repealed by this section.

Insurance Act, 1917


Mr. FIELDING:: It is the clause which
authorizes the Treasury Board to grant an extra term of years. That is the whole object.


Henry Lumley Drayton: 1 remember
that.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time,
considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 184, to amend the Insurance Act, 1917.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
On section 1-Returns of British or foreign
unlicensed insurance.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Will the minister explain?


William Stevens Fielding: This is to avoid the
sending in of a duplicate return. There are several places where returns are required, and the object of this is to provide that where one return has been received in proper form, a duplicate shall not be required. That is the whole purpose of the first section.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I have not the act before me, but my recollection is that there was a change, not very much change in substance perhaps, but a change in the form for the definite purpose for which the return was required. Is the minister quite sure that if he waives these returns he will leave the company in the same position, having regard to the section requiring the return, that they would be in if they put in a false return, for instance?


William Stevens Fielding: I do not think it touches that at all. The Superintendent of Insurance has prepared the bill and lhe assures me it is to avoid unnecessary duplication.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If my hon.
friend is satisfied, I am not objecting.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-French version amended.
Henry Lumley Drayton: That seems to be different.


William Stevens Fielding: That is an error in the translation, that is all.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 3-Conditions of license for automobile insurancek
William Stevens Fielding: This creates standard conditions of policies for automobile business, that is all.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we approved of that a couple of years ago, but it was not gone on with.


William Stevens Fielding: I presume not.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think it went through the committee.


William Stevens Fielding: I understand that the various interests concerned have been consulted in the matter and that the bill is not objected to.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps we had better get a little idea from looking over the marginal notes as to what this means.


William Stevens Fielding: I should be very glad to let the matter stand.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Oh, it would not take five minutes.


William Stevens Fielding: The automobile insurance business is comparatively new. This is simply to create standard conditions of insurance in this business as has been done in other lines.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps we
might take it up section by section.


Mr. BOYS:: Is this bill the result of suggestions made by companies interested in such insurance, or by whom? The minister is introducing it, but these things occasionally have some other origin.


William Stevens Fielding: This is the work of the Superintendent of Insurance and he informs me that he has been in communication with the various interests concerned, and that this bill is merely to meet a new condition that has arisen. It is not objected to so far as I know, but if any hon. gentleman desires me to hold it over I have no objection.


Henry Lumley Drayton: In connection with paragraph (c) I would ask the minister whether that follows the usual clause as to mis-descriptions, mistakes in applications and so forth. It seems rather broad.


William Stevens Fielding: I think it follows the custom as respects other branches of the insurance business.


Henry Lumley Drayton: This reads:
If any person applying for insurance falsely describes the property to the prejudice of the company or knowingly misrepresents or conceals or omits to [DOT]ommunicate any circumstance which is required by th* terms of the written application-
Insurance Act, 1917

I note that written application is required. That would be in the form, I assume, that the department will select, so it would not be open to the companies to enlarge that application. In other words, that form of application would be the form approved of by the department, and the companies could not use other forms?


William Stevens Fielding: Yes, I would so understand it.


William Alves Boys: I have not had time as yet to go through all these clauses, but I see that it is necessary under one of them to have a copy of the application in the policy. From my own experience in business it seems to me it would be a very good idea if the agents of companies, or the companies themselves, were compelled to deliver to the insured a copy of the application at the time it is taken. I have, as a matter of fact, a case pending now, and there are many such cases where these policies are filled in, as a matter of convenience, by the agent of the company. I am not finding fault with that, but apparently the agent sometimes takes certain things for granted and inserts them himself, and then later on they turn out to be incorrect not having been read over at the time by the	insured-trouble	results.
I do not think it would be a hardship on the companies if their agents were compelled when taking an application for insurance to deliver a copy of that application then and there. In my experience I do not think I have ever run across a man who was able to show me the form of application that he had signed, and if there is any .sign of trouble it is difficult to get these copies from insurance companies. The insured, having signed the application, when he returns to his home in the evening will look over his copy. If he does not do it then he will not do it at all. If he looks it over he may find things in the application which should not be there.


William Stevens Fielding: I shall be pleased to leave the bill in committee and discuss the matter suggested by my hon. friend with the Superintendent of Insurance.


Mr. MANION:: May I ask a question' I notice in glancing through the notes of the bill-I confess I have not read it over carefully-that the measure seems entirely for the purpose of protecting the insurance company, and I was wondering if the draftsman- I am not referring to the minister himself but to the official who drew up the bill- in any way took into account the very large number of owners of automobiles in the coun-

try, and if he did not draw the bill wholly with the object of protecting the company. In other words has the matter been gone into sufficiently fully by the draftsman to ensure that the companies are not making the regulations so strict as to vitiate, in certain cases, or do away with, the insurance. I hope that the interests of the owner of the automobile are being looked after. I know that the minister would not ignore that point, but I have seen bills put through the House on some matters in which the effect of all the provisions had not been thoroughly looked into. Now the owners of automobiles in the country would not become thoroughly familiar with a policy of this kind whereas the company would be looking entirely to its own interest. I simply point out that phase of the question to the minister.


William Stevens Fielding: I shall draw my hon. friend's remarks to the attention of the Superintendent of Insurance. I am perfectly sure that the superintendent, in preparing this bill, has had regard to the automobile owner as well as to the company. However, any suggestion on that line will be worthy of consideration, and before the bill is put through committee I will be happy to have the Superintendent of Insurance consulted in the matter.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is just one thing, going rather to the principle of this matter, that I would like to draw to my hon. friend's attention. On glancing over the act now I see that exceptions to insurability are made by the act itself. The usual principle as to insurance is that the insurance, when made^ is an absolute contract unless exceptions are stipulated, and for the purpose of helping the public the law provides that these notices shall be printed very distinctly. In some instances, I think-I am speaking from recollection-red ink or larger type has to be used if the company desires to contract itself outside of the ordinary liability of an insurer. In other words, the exceptions have to be brought to the attention of the insured. Now, I point out to my hon. friend that this bill changes the rule altogether. This bill says that unless otherwise specifically stated in the policy of insurance, the company shall not be liable in a whole list of cases; for example if the interest of the insured in the automobile is not that of sole ownership, and so on. A man might very well desire to insure a partial but real interest which he had in an automobile just as much as if he owned it wholly himself, and I really think it should be pointed

Narcotic Drugs
out to him in black and white in his policy that that partial interest is not insurable. Then again, a man may well insure his automobile and have to raise a little money on it; that will not be looked upon as a very heinous thing to do. But under this bill if a man insures his automobile and happens to have or subsequently gives a mortgage, or a lien, against it the policy is void, though there is nothing in the policy to show that such is the case. I would suggest to the minister that he should look into the effect of this bill and see whether we really ought to depart from a pretty well settled principle in connection with insurance, namely, that if the insurer desires to make exceptions to his general liability the exceptions must be clearly shown on the face of the policy.


William Stevens Fielding: I move that the committee rise and report progress and ask leave to sit again. Before the bill is again taken up I will call the attention of the Superintendent of Insurance to the various points brought forward.


William Alves Boys: Would the minister allow me to make another suggestion or two which might be considered by the superintendent when he is speaking to him. I would like to suggest that a copy of an application should always be given to the assured. Supposing, as often happens, loss is sustained and some question arises. The solicitor wants to see the application that his client has signed, but he has not got it. There is nothing which compels an insurance company to provide it, and while most of them do some are unwilling. I think there should be a clause in the bill which would compel an insurance company to provide a copy of the application upon the request of the assured or his solicitor. Then I would like this further suggestion to be considered: There should be a clause that the assured or his authorized agent should be permitted at any time to inspect the original application in the possession of the company. My reason for suggesting that is this. As I said before, very often answers are filled in by the agent and you cannot find that out by a typewritten copy. But if the opportunity was afforded of seeing the original application you could tell whose handwriting it is in, and get at what you want that way. I would like such a clause as that to be included if possible.
Pi ogress reported.



OPIUM AND NARCOTIC DRUGS BILL


[Stage Direction]
Hon. H. S. BELAND (Minister of Health) moved the second reading of and concurrence in the amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 72, to prohibit the improper use of opium and other drugs.
Henry Lumley Drayton: I would ask the minister to explain the effect of the amendments, as to whether the policy adopted by the Commons is or is not changed by them.


Mr. BELAND:: Five amendments have
been made by the Senate to this bill. Two of them are of minor importance, and were made at the instance of the department.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I take it that those are the first two.


Henri Sévérin Béland: The first two involve only the addition of one word to the interpretation clause. The other amendments are more important but as far as we are concerned we have no objection at all to them. They make the intention of the bill clear. I refer to the amendment to clause 4 of the bill, which is the penalty clause. It has been divided in two, one having reference to indictment and the other to summary conviction, a penalty being provided in each case. The fourth amendment refers to section 14, on which there was some discussion in this House, and it has reference to the onus of proof. The amendment reads:
Where any person is charged with an offence under paragraph (a), (d) or (e) of section 4 of this act, it shall not be necessary for the prosecuting authority to establish that the accused had not a license from the minister, or was not otherwise authorized to commit the act complained of, and if the accused pleads or alleges that he has such license or other authority, the burden of proof thereof shall be upon the person so charged.
It makes it a little milder, and I think more acceptable. The last amendment provides for the insertion of the words "and for the revocation of licenses" after the word
"purposes."
Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.



DOMINION LANDS ACT AMENDMENT-COAL

[Stage Direction]
Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Argenteuil) (Minister of the Interior) moved the second reading of Bill 159, to amend the Dominion Lands Act respecting the sale or other disposal of coal lands and coal mining rights.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Explain.


Charles A. Stewart: I think hon. members of the House will remember that the
Dominion Lands-Coal

present bill was submitted as an amendment to the Cancellation Act introduced by myself, to validate cancellation of leases. At that time I opposed this amendment, pointing out that the leases in question, were placed under the control of the Governor in Council and were not in the hands of the minister for disposal. Since that time, I presume, hon. members will have noticed that this has been the matter of a rather lengthy controversy in the Senate, both as to the question of the leases and as to the question of the issuing of the fiat in connection with those leases. Hon. members will remember that the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) introduced legislation on Friday evening for the purpose of the withdrawal of the fiat, and again the Senate has passed this amendment, and I am prepared to accept it, and will ask the House to accept it. It will place these lands under the control of parliament rather than under the control of the minister or the government.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I did not notice that there had been any great conflict in the Senate. It seemed to me that the government representatives in the Senate realized that a great mistake had been made last year, and that the government members in the Senate promoted this legislation; furthermore, that the government members in the Senate, upon looking into the question of the fiat, came to the conclusion that a very great error had been made in issuing that fiat. A bill has now been brought over from the Senate, which
4 p.m. will enable the government to recede from a position which was entirely antagonistic to the real interests of the people. That is quite clear. I merely rise to point out that I do not think there was a fight in the Senate. I think they recognized unanimously that the present procedure was absolutely right, and I rise to congratulate my hon. friend on doing the right thing now, although he insisted on doing the wrong thing last year.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, considered in committee, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of and concurrence in the amendment made in the Senate to Bill No. 10, to amend and consolidate the acts respecting live stock.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Will the minister tell us what the amendments are and whether they affect the policy laid down by the House?
[Mr. C. A. Stewart.


William Richard Motherwell: The amendment
made by the Senate reads:
There may be appointed from time to time by the Oivil Service Commission, with the approval of the Governor in Council, such inspectors as may be necessary for carrying out the provisions of this act.
These are the conditions that prevail with respect to the act at present, so that the amendment does not make any difference in the administration of the act.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It makes it quite sure.


William Richard Motherwell: It makes assurance doubly sure.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Does the minister think it goes far enough to indicate to him, as a matter of principle, that Duncan Marshall should now be recalled?


William Richard Motherwell: Duncan Marshall
was appointed under the provisions of the Civil Service Act.
Motion agreed to; amendment read the second time and concurred in.



SALE AND INSPECTION OF FRUIT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of and concurrence in the amendment made by the Senate to Bill No. 11, to regulate the sale and inspection of fruit and fruit containers.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Explain.


William Richard Motherwell: This is the same
amendment as that which I read a minute ago, except that it is worded a little differently. It reads:
There may be appointed from time to time in accordance with the Civil Service Act, 1918, and any amendments thereof, such inspectors as are necessary for the purpose of this act.
This condition obtains now, and therefore the amendment, like a chip in the porridge, does neither good nor harm.
Motion agreed to; amendment read the second time and concurred in.



THE DAIRY INDUSTRY ACT, 1914, AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend the Dairy Industry Act, 1914, and to provide regulations regarding butter substitute and the re-manufacture of butter, the character and weight of butter, the keeping of records by manufacturers or dealers in

Dairy Industry Act
butter and cheese, and the examination of such records by inspectors, methods of establishing the guilt of persons charged with violation of the Act, and the procedure to be followed in all such cases.
Motion agreed to and House went into committee, Mr. Marcil (Bonaventure) in the chair.
William Richard Motherwell: This resolution precedes a bill, which, I think, has not yet been distributed. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Dairy Industry Act, such amendments are being made as time and the changed conditions of the industry have proved to be necessary. Certain changes are provided for in the interpretation clauses with respect to the terms "inspector" and "analyst." The terms "milk" and "butter fat" have also been defined in the bill. I do not think the term "substitute for butter" is to be found in the bill, but I believe it is in the margin; it refers to the percentage of milk or butter fat that must be contained in butter, and the stipulation is made that this shall be 80 per cent and shall conform to the requirements of the Food and Drug Act.


Mr. TOLMIE:: That does not refer to oleomargarine?


William Richard Motherwell: No; possibly that may come up at a later stage, but I cannot say with any certainty now whether it will or not. The bill also deals with re-manufactured butter. The term "manufactured" has hitherto been misunderstood. Sometimes it is used in reference to the original source of the manufactured article, but occasionally butter is re-made or re-churned, and there is a provision with respect to that practice. Possibly the section that is of most interest is that which deals with the weight of butter. In connection with charges that have been made in the past in relation to underweight in butter packages, there has been experienced a great deal of difficulty in proving that there has actually been such underweight. This difficulty has been inevitable under the terms of the act as it stands at present, because it is provided that the weight shall be so much at the time that the prints or the bricks were moulded or cut. When a pound print or brick goes to the retailer and is sold over the counter it is seldom the same weight as it was orginally, so that it is obviously exceedingly difficult to obtain a conviction for the selling of a package that is underweight when you have to prove the weight of the butter at the time it was moulded or cut. This term, "moulded or cut" is therefore being eliminated; the weight must be one hundred per cent at the time the butter is offered for sale.


William Alves Boys: That applies to the retailer


William Richard Motherwell: Yes. We shall discuss this point later on. There are difficulties in any case, but thi3 is considered to present the minimum difficulty and is most satisfactory inasmuch as it assures the consumer of full weight. As I have said, it is next to impossible to secure any conviction when you have to prove what the weight of the butter was a month or two previously. There are also some other changes with respect to minor matters: certain books must be kept to conform with the new grading system, and provisions are being made with respect to prosecutions and so forth. But these are matters of detail.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What is the meaning of the term "renovated butter"? Does this refer to butter made from renovated cream?


William Richard Motherwell: The provision in the bill with regard to renovated butter is intended simply to continue the prohibition.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Does "renovated butter" mean butter made from renovated cream?


William Richard Motherwell: No; this provision simply prohibits the manufacture of renovated butter by the process which is practised in the United States.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: That is, re-chuming.


William Richard Motherwell: No, it does not prohibit re-chuming. There is a process of renovation in the United States by which the butter is electrified, and that is the practice that we are prohibiting.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The word "renovating"
here does not interfere with the liming of cream?


William Richard Motherwell: No; when the bill is under consideration I shall explain that feature of it. A big evil is creeping in in connection with the treatment of cream that has reached too high a state of fermentation when it reaches the creamery. There is no doubt that the inferior quality of a good deal of the butter that is turned out is due to this evil. The bill does not deal with this situation, however, which is one that, I think, calls for consideration. I had thought of raistug the question before the special committee on Agricultural Conditions.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Does the minister think that we could make butter fit for oompeti-tion with European manufacturers competing in the British market, if we used cream of that kind?


William Richard Motherwell: No.
Dairy Industry Act


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Can the minister give us any information about the manufacture of what is known as "manna" in the province of Quebec?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not think it falls from heaven, and certainly we have had several prosecutions this year in connection with this product. Certain butters of not very superior quality are mixed with vegetable oils and sometimes there is as much as fifty or sixty per cent of butter fat in the compound, the rest being vegetable material. This is considered to be an attempt to circumvent the oleomargarine law. I do not know whether or not that is the intention, but certainly it would be pretty expensive oleomargarine that would contain fifty or sixty per cent of butter fat, which is the nature of "manna." It is obvious, of course, that the butter must have been of a distinctly inferior quality in the first instance, or it would not have been mixed with vegetable oils in this proportion. The same vegetable oil is used in the manufacture of oleomargarine, and I do not think there is any actual law that prescribes the amount of vegetable oils that must be incorporated in the compound to constitute oleomargarine. It is rather a confusing question.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Under the law to-day the manufacture of oleomargarine is permitted only in certain establishments that are licensed for the purpose.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, and it transpired that these' places were apparently licensed. I do not know whether the intention was to get by with it as butter, or whether it was produced as oleomargarine. This is a sort of compromise compound containing butter and vegetable fats.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: You did not let it slip past you, anyway.


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What results did you have in the prosecutions?


William Richard Motherwell: I think we got convictions, but it is some months now since I was inquiring into the matter. I will get details for my hon. friend.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Does this act prevent the manufacture of what is called "filled milk"? And what are the actual ingredients of filled milk?


William Richard Motherwell: That is a local term.
The "manna" that we have just been speaking about may be termed "filled butter"; it is 
filled with other ingredients. In making filled milk the butter fat is extracted from the whole milk and replaced by foreign fats of a similar nature, such as cocoanut oil and peanut oil. The practice is not very general in Canada, but it is quite common in the United States and is prohibited in some nine or ten states. The standards for milk and butter are fixed by order in council under the Food and Drugs Act. In the bill itself there is rather a technical expression which, I think, with the carrying out of the tests embodied in section 1 of the bill stipulating that there shall be 3-5 of butter fat in milk, will have the same effect as prohibiting filled milk, for the simple reason that with this percentage of butter fat in milk there will be no object in adding any other ingredients. Of course, a lot of tests run a good deal higher than 3-5 per cent, which is somewhat low, but it is quite obvious that while the milk contains this percentage it is not simply whole milk with the butter fat extracted.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: In view of the fact that a bill is to be brought down after this resolution is passed, would it not be well to have this particular point covered in the bill?


William Richard Motherwell: We have not used the term "filled milk" any more than we have that of "filled butter". We simply stipulate that butter shall consist of 80 per cent butter fat, which conforms to the Food and Drugs Act. We have a double standard, which will make it impossible for butter to be filled and sold as "manna". The requirement of 3-5 per cent of butter fat in milk will prevent any attempt at filling. However, if it is advisable to make it clear by elaborating the word "filled" we can discuss it in the committee on Agriculture.
.Mr. MILLAR: Are there any substitutes for butter, other than oleo, that are forbidden by law? Also, what constitutes a violation of such a law? I noticed in the city a short time ago something that was labelled and looked very much like butter, but when I asked the retail merchant he said it was the best quality oleo. In the labelling there was nothing to indicate that the compound was oleo, and I was only told its true character when I asked about it. Would the labelling of oleo or any other substitute as butter constitute a violation of the law?


William Richard Motherwell: During recent years the ingenuity of man has been exercised in seeing how many compounds could be put on the market to imitate butter. My hon. friend might very easily find in stores a com-

Dairy Industry Act
pound labelled "country roll", and he would have to turn it upside down to find the word "oleo". Sometimes the word is very indistinct, but usually it will be found on the bottom of the roll. Many people take that country roll to be butter. We all know what the country roll our mothers made was like, but this compound never saw the country in Canada; at the same time it is suggestive of butter. When it leaves the wholesaler the wrapper usually is on it, but when it is displayed for sale by the retailer frequently the wrapper is off and nowhere can the word "oleo" be found except on the bottom of the package. In reply to my hon. friend's question, whether there is any other compound besides oleo that can be sold legally, I think there are others, and it is scarcely possible to determine whether they are meant for butter or something else. But I think the proposed bill will prevent these imitations because they would not contain the required percentage of butter fat.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: Mr. Chairman, there is no questioning the minister's diligence in providing regulations governing the quality of milk, butter and cheese; these dairy products are surrounded with regulations so strict that it is practically impossible for any adulteration to escape detection. The dairymen are not finding fault with such regulations. But I think there is good cause for complaint on their part that such regulations do not apply to those who add base ingredients to dairy products in order to take advantage of the latters' merits. This is a very common practice in this country to-day and it is so general in the United States that, as the minister has pointed out, a number of state legislatures have provided regulations against such adulteration. Reference has been made to "manna", which is, I believe, an endeavour to replace butter fat with a baser ingredient so that the compound may be disposed of at a greater profit. It is surprising how ingenious people are in their attempts to. take advantage of something which has merit.
With regard to oleomargarine, which has been mentioned by the hon. member for Victoria City (Mr. Tolmie), I would point out that there is absolutely no fixed standard for this commodity. The packers have the absolute right and privilege to take dairy products into their packing houses, mix base ingredients with them, and sell the compound at an enhanced profit to themselves. Do the committee think it fair to enact regulations so strict with regard to the production of a food that is absolutely essential to the
health of growing children, and at the same time allow the packing houses to adulterate this commodity and dispose of it to the public as a substitute for butter? I think our regulations have been altogether too lax in this respect, and I am surprised that the minister is not taking steps in this bill to provide against these encroachments. You may surround those who are producing dairy products with all these regulations, but you cannot compel them to continue their production unless they find it profitable to do so. During this parliament and in preceding parliaments, advice has been handed out by agricultural experts, as well as by those who are not agricultural experts, as to what should be done to make agriculture a success. It has been suggested that the farmers, particularly those in the West, should go into the live stock business; many who do not know the conditions in that part of the country have held that this is the only hope of salvation for the farmer. At the same time the manufacture of a commodity such as butter, on which there is the lowest duty that applies to any commodity that comes into this country, is surrounded with regulations so strict that they are becoming a nuisance. And the minister gets up to-day and states that extra safeguards are to be provided respecting the butter-fat content of milk and dairy products, but no provision is being made in regard to the encroachment on this commodity oi butter-substitutes which are left free from such regulations as apply to dairy products. Skilled chemists take advantage of the high quality of butter-fat by so treating it, through the substitution or inclusion of cheaper ingredients, as to enable them to impose it on the public-not to supply a reasonable demand, but solely to make a profit out of a product that is not their own and that has real merit. We collect no tariff whatever on the commodities which are being brought into this country and mixed with our dairy products-or if we do, ninety-nine per cent is refunded. We have heard a good deal during the last few weeks about the standing of the two old-line parties in this country on the tariff. It has been stated that stability has been given to the tariff and that both the old parties are protectionist; yet this is the kind of protection that is meted out to those engaged in agriculture. It is not to the credit of the two old parties that this has been allowed. Is there a country under the sun for which nature has done more than it has for Canada from an agricultural standpoint?- an ideal country, outside of the long winters we have, and even these are beneficial in
Dairy Industry Act

many respects. Yet the condition of affairs to which I refer is allowed to continue; even this session stricter regulations have been enacted regarding agricultural products than those applying to any other commodities. I protest, therefore, against the adoption of any further restrictions on the farmers unless you apply similar restrictions to those not engaged in agriculture, those not producing the basic commodities which are essential in connection with our most important foodstuffs and which are natural to our country.


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know
what my hon. friend is talking about. I think he scents oleo in the air. If he does, all I can say is that last year he and I were on the same platform in that respect, and unless he has changed his view we are still on the same platform. Hence, I take it that he refers not to milk or cream, but to butter or to "manna." Is that what my hon. friend refers to?


Donald Sutherland: Or to the butterfat content of milk.


William Richard Motherwell: We have that covered. The bill is not yet distributed, but I will read a paragraph from it; perhaps it will explain the point better. In fact, these details should not be gone into until the House has the bill before it. The bill says:
Section 6 of the said act is repealed, and the following is substituted therefor:-
"No person shall manufacture any butter containing over 16 per centum of water, or less than 80 per centum of milk fat."
If you get 80 per cent of milk fat into butter and 16 per cent of water, you have not much room for anything else. That conforms exactly to the stipulation provided by the Food and Drugs Act, applied, of course, to the content of butter. I was hopeful of getting the benefit of the views of our analyst on this subject before the committee on Agriculture. I do not pretend to know the terms, but I will read what section 1 of the bill says respecting milk fat or butter fat:
"Milk fat" or "butter fat" is the fat of milk and has a Reichert Meissal number not less than twenty-four and a specific gravity not less than 0.905 at forty degrees centigrade and a Polenski number not to exceed 3.5.
I am not in a position to enlighten anybody with regard to these chemical tests, but I will at least have Dr. Shutt before the Agriculture committee to go into the matter in detail, and if these strange names do not do the trick, we will employ more under-

standable terms. I am quite with my hon. friend in all he says, and if this does not meet his wishes, he is a member of the Agriculture committee and he will find that we stand together on the requisites of this bill.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Motherwell thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 186, to amend the Dairy Industry Act, 1914.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Donald Sutherland: Before the bill is
read the second time I suggest that it be printed, as its merits can only be discussed on the second reading. The explanation given by the minister hardly conveys the meaning of the bill.



PATENTS OF INVENTION


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Trade and
Commerce) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 20, to amend and consolidate the act relating to patents of invention.
Mr. CALDWELL:: What is the effect of the amendments?


Mr. ROBB:: They are only of a minor character. One is to correct a clerical error that was made by inserting a phrase in the eighteenth line that should have been inserted in the seventeenth line. Another relates to renumbering the sections. There are other slight amendments in no way materially affecting the bill.
Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.



COPYRIGHT ACT


[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 24, to amend the Copyright Act, 1921.
Robert James Manion: I understand from the press that these amendments make a complete change in the bill as presented before the Senate. Is that correct?


James Alexander Robb: No. The Senate, I understand, did make some changes in committee which were afterwards referred back, and finally the Senate approved the bill as it left this chamber, with the exception of changing the date on which the act was to come into force. The

Copyright Act
original bill provided that it should come into force on the first day of July, 1923. The Senate amended that to the first day of January, 1924, unless sooner proclaimed by proclamation of the Governor in Council. That is the only change that was made.


George Black: Although the Senate amendment, postponing the date of the coming into force of the act until the first day of January, 1924, may be somewhat of an improvement on the clause which would have brought it into force on the first day of July,
1923,	the change might just as well not have been made because there is no possibility of Canada adopting the provisions of the latest Berne Convention by the amended date. A much later date should have been placed in the bill, and in this connection I should like to read a memorandum prepared by counsel on behalf of the authors:
I observe that the Senate fixes the first of January,
1924, as the date on which the act is to come into force. They might just as well have left the date the first of July, because there is no probability that an arrangement can be arrived at with the United States by the first of January next.
As you know, Congress does not . assemble until December, and it has before it matters of so much greater concern that the Cabinet will not deal with such a comparatively unimportant thing as copyright relations with Canada until more pressing affairs are out of the way.
If our act comes into force on the 1st of January without a new treaty with the United States, the result will be that works published in the United States after that date will not be protected in Canada.
After having enjoyed this copyright protection in Canada for thirty years, the United States government will undoubtedly consider it an affront that its citizens have been made copyright outlaws in Canada, and it is not likely that the United States will continue the reciprocal protection to Canadian authors which they now enjoy.
In consequence, Canadian authors will lose protection in a county they are chiefly concerned in, and as United States publications will be without protection in Canada, and with the Canadian market flooded with cheap piratical-^ reproductions, Canadian authors will lose the benefit -of Canadian copyright as well.
These results will certainly follow if the Copyright Act comes into force before a new treaty is negotiated with the United States.
In my opinion the new act should not come into force until the first of July, 1924, unless sooner proclaimed. This will give parliament at the next session an opportunity to consider the situation should difficulties develop with the United States in negotiating a copyright treaty. If the government is in earnest in improving the copyright law, it must make 6ure that all our existing international rights are preserved before changing the law.
I would like to know whether the minister has taken that phase into consideration because if, as pointed out by counsel, these are to be the results, we had better bring the act into force late enough so that we shall be absolutely safe.


James Alexander Robb: The government are quite aware that there has been a difference of opinion as between the authors,- the song writers, musical writers and the printing trade regarding copyright, but this measure was considered carefully in the House, sent over to the Senate and considered carefully there, and the judgment of the Senate was that the date of coming into effect of the act should be extended until January 1st, 1924. The government concurred in and are willing to accept that amendment. I cannot agree with my hon. friend that anything would be gained by extending the date still further. It seems to me that it would be in the interest of all those concerned in Canada that the Copyright Act should become law. If it is found necessary at the next session to make further amendments the government will not be debarred from proposing them by any legislation that we may pass now.


Mr. HOEY:: The minister is doubtless, by this time, aware that this legislation in its present form is very objectionable to the Authors' Association of Canada. When the bill was before the House and the amendment was introduced by the minister I supported it. I had been suddenly called into the House and laboured under the delusion that that amendment was submitted at the request of the Authors' Association. Since then I have learned that the authors are very much opposed to that amendment, and opposed to the present legislation because of its protectionist features. I think it is very regrettable that we should allow legislation of this kind to pass through the House. I cannot persuade myself that it was carefully considered. I think the majority of us did not understand the significance of the amendment at all. I rise on this occasion to voice my protest against it on these grounds.
Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.



SUPPLY-U.S. LABOUR DELEGATES DETAINED CASE OE ALEXANDER HOWAT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) moved that the House go into Committee of Supply.
['In that case we will have to move that the House do now adjourn.\nOn motion of Mr. Fielding the House adjourned at 11:20 p.m.\nTuesday, May 29, 1923']
James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Speaker, I should like to take
advantage of this, the first opportunity for several weeks, to bring to the attention of the House the case of Alexander Howat, about whom I asked some questions but whose appeal has been dismissed by the Actol.Mj

Labour Delegates Detained
ing Minister of Immigration and Colonization. I do this not merely because of some degree of interest in the case of Howat himself, but on account of the serious precedent involved. The case first came to my notice through a telegram from the secretary of the Miners' Association at Glace Bay, Cape Breton, which reads as follows:
Howat ex-president Kansas Miners and Thomas Myerscough have been detained by immigration authorities McAdam Junction. Howat on his way here to address coal miners meeting soliciting their support for reinstatement of Kansas miners who have been expelled from the U.M.W. of A. Take up matter at once with Immigration authorities whom I am now wiling.
I took the matter up and immediately asked questions concerning the case on the floor of the House. The department finally gave a decision, which decision was appealed against by Mr. Howat. However, the minister finally decided the case against Howat. Now I understand from the American press that Mr. Howat is appealing to the Secretary of State of the United States in regard to the matter. The feeling of the miners themselves, not merely in Glace Bay but in other parts of the country, may be judged from a telegram I shall read, and I may say that I have received some half dozen similar messages from eastern and western Canada in regard to this case. This particular telegram comes from New Glasgow, Nova Scotia, and is signed by a committee of the miners. It reads as follows:
At a mass meeting held at Stellarfcon, N.S. representing two thousand working men of Pictou county the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
Whereas district twenty-six U.M.W. of A. held and celebrated May first as a May Day holiday each district celebrating in its own way, and
Whereas the members located at Glace Bay, Cape Breton, and vicinity, in combination with the Sydney steel workers invited Alexander Howat the deposed president of district fourteen, Kansas, to address mass meetings to be held at Glace Bay and at central points in the other sub-districts, and
Whereas said Alexander Howat was refused admission at the border line into Canada as being a dangerous alien character and one Van Bitner; representing John L. Lewis admitted who is also an alien;
Be it resolved that in the opinion of this meeting we consider this act of the Immigration department is not in accord with democratic principle of free liberty loving citizens of Canada but rather in keeping with despotic Russia under the Czar regime.
Be it further resolved that we forward a copy of this resolution to J. S. WoodswortJh appealing for him to take the matter up with the Progressives and bring before the House for redress.
Now, as I understand the matter, the case of Howat is this: Several years ago a law was passed in the state of Kansas making a strike a crime. That would undermine the very foundation of trades unionism, and of the

right of organized labour to conduct its own affairs. Howat happened at that time to be president of his union, and on account of his position was asked to go ahead and call a strike. He thereby came in conflict with the law of the state of Kansas, and as the trial went forward became in that respect a criminal. Let me call attention to the fact that Howat was exercising his responsibility as the president of the union when he proceeded to call the strike, and had the greater part of the union behind him at that time. Later on there was trouble between different sections of the United Mine Workers in the state of Kansas, and Howat was deposed from his position as president. According to my information he has been carrying on a campaign in different parts of the States and in Canada-the	Canadian Workers being
united, through the International Federation of Labour, with the American workers-in order to have his position made clear, possibly in order to secure reinstatement.
Now let me consider the grounds upon which Howat was refused admission to Canada. According to the press of that date he was denied admission on the ground that he would become a public charge. I interviewed the Acting Minister of Immigration with regard to this, and he told me that the news item was correct. Now according to the Immigration Act:
No immigrant, passenger or other person unless he is a Canadian citizen, or has Canadian domicile, shall be permitted to enter or land in Canada, or in case of having landed in or entered Canada shall be permitted to remain therein, who belongs to any of the following classes, hereinafter called "prohibited classes"-
From the sub-sections enumerating the classes in question I quote the following:
(j) Persons who in the opinion of the Board of Inquiry or the officer in charge at $ny port of entry are likely to become a public chargfe;
The Acting Minister of Immigration and Colonization informs me that Howat's appeal was dismissed on the ground that he was likely to become a public charge. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that there was no reasonable probability that Howat was likely to become a public charge in Canada. He was coming, on the invitation of the miners of Nova Scotia, to fill a lecture engagement, and there was no probability that he would be left without funds or become stranded in this country and be a charge on the resources of the Dominion. As a matter of fact, the Minister of Immigration and Colonization had no hesitation whatever in telling me that this was only a technical ground. The min-

Labour Delegates Detained
ister informs me that instructions have been issued that any man from another country, including Great Britain, seeking entry to Canada who has a prison record shall be excluded. That means that in this case the real reason for excluding Howat was not that he was liable to become a public charge, but tht he had served a prison sentence on account of his having come into conflict with the laws of the state of Kansas.
There are several points I should like to bring briefly before the House. In the first place, I would charge the minister with not acting in this case in accordance with the law. The Liberals accused the late government of legislating by order, in council. Apparently the present government does not even trouble to go the length of passing an order in council, but the minister himself undertakes to legislate as in this matter. I should like the minister to point out the clause in the act which permits him to exclude Alexander Howat. He has a right to exclude a man who is liable to become a public charge. He has the right to exclude other classes or persons expressly specified in the act, but he has no right to exclude a man simply on the ground that he has had a prison record. He has no right to issue instructions to that effect to his officers throughout this country. If the minister can thus disregard the law, I wonder how he expects other people to observe it.
The minister has, by his action in this case, created a new crime in the case of those seeking admission to Canada, that of a prison sentence. I would suggest that a great many of the men who are honoured in British history are men who, at one time or another, because they have advocated measures of reform were sentenced and had a prison record. In my early days I was brought up to read very carefully Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, and I was taught even, in those days that Bunyan had written his Pilgrim's Progress while he was a prisoner. John Bunyan would be excluded according to the ruling of the acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart). In discussing the matter with the minister I pointed out that there were some gentlemen to-day sitting in the British House of Commons who, during the war, for various reasons, had served prison sentences, among others Mr. E. D. Morel, one of the men who defeated Winston Churchill, and the Acting Minister of Immigration told me that if Mr. E. D. Morel, M.P. attempted to come to Canada he would be stopped at the border. I think that is an intolerable situation. My point is that the minister has no right to make



[Stage Direction]
regulations which would have that effect. In my own city of Winnipeg there are several men who have served prison sentences, William Ivens and John Queen, both members of the provincial legislature. If the American government should take similar action, these men who have been elected and re-elected by the votes of the people of their province, would be excluded from the United States. I take it that, under these circumstances, the Canadian government would have a good right to see to it that Canadian citizens occupying honourable positions in the legislatures of this country would have extended to them the right of entrance into the United States. I shall be very much disappointed indeed if Mr. Howat does not succeed in carrying his case further, and asking whether the Canadian government should exclude a citizen of the United States.
Mr. CABROLL:: To what tribunal would
Mr. Howat carry his appeal?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I presume it is a
matter of international comity.


Mr. MARTELL:: Where is international
comity decided?


James Shaver Woodsworth: It should be
decided in such a place as this. That is why I am bringing it up in this House. I think it is a question for this House to deal with.


Lewis Herbert Martell: Does the hon. member
think the parliament of Canada can determine the rights of all internationals? I always thought parliament only had jurisdiction over its own subjects.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Quite so, but we
have no right to exclude people from the country, except on definite grounds, which are stated in this act, and we have excluded this man on grounds other than those stated in the act. According to the best British practice it has rather been the boast through many years, particularly shall I say the boast of the Liberal statesmen of Great Britain, that a great many of the Italian and Hungarian patriots have been enabled to come to Great Britain to place their case before the English people, and because of that they have to no small extent carried on that propaganda which has brought a larger measure of liberty in Italy, Hungary
5 p.m. and other countries of Europe. Are we in Canada going to go back on these principles of British liberty? An editorial appeared in our local Journal on May 16, which was a splendid appeal for British liberty. One paragraph of this article reads:


EDITION
[Stage Direction]
Labour Delegates Detained
Britain and Liberty
Because Home Secretary Bridgeman deported certain English-born Irishmen from England to Ireland, a powerful British government is confronted with a crisis. Not only has the Englishman's passion for the liberty of the subject compelled return of the deported men and women; there is actual possibility that those responsible for deportations shall be prosecuted and that the ministry shall be censured in the House.
In what other country could such a thing take place? The men and women were of humble, lowly origin; without political influence; antagonistic to the interests of the Crown; and a generally dangerous nuisance. No matter. Their deportation was viewed as an invasion of the liberty of the subject, as an encroachment upon human rights: and immediately the voice of England rose up in compelling protest.
Of this is the greatness, the genius and the glory of the British race.
I should like to appeal to Britishers in this country that we in Canada maintain the best British traditions in dealing with matters of this character. Fundamentally such a decision as this is an attack upon freedom of speech. Only a few weeks ago the Acting Minister of Immigration rejected at the border James Larkin who was coming here to fill a lecture engagement in the city of Montreal. James Larkin afterwards returned to Great Britain. The question of his entry was taken up on the floor of the British House of Commons, and the Home Secretary took the ground that James Larkin could not be prevented from entering England because he was a British subject. Here again we have the same question arising. British subjects have certain rights the world over; they should have those rights in Canada as well as in other parts of the British dominions. It is only a few weeks since the distinguished French publicist Jean Longuet, a personal friend of Ramsay Macdonald, who has lectured throughout the length and breadth of Great Britain, and in the United States was asked to come to this country to fulfil certain lecture engagements in the cities of Montreal and Toronto. He was stopped at the border, but finally, as a special concession, he was allowed to come across into Canada, to fill two engagements, on condition that he would return immediately to the United States. Again let me say that that procedure, which is being carried out apparently as a set policy by the present administration, is not in keeping with the best British traditions.
It has been said, of course, that this man Howat was coming over here to raise some disturbance, and after his detention for several days, after the May Day celebration, it was pointed out that there had been very strange things said on May Day. As a matter of fact, it has been definitely denied that these extreme statements were ever uttered, either

in the eastern part of the country, in Cape Breton, or in the western part of the country at Calgary. Apparently the speeches on that occasion were manufactured by the press, and not made by the men themselves.
Consider the situation. On a general international holiday, May Day, the workers, who form a very considerable portion of the population of this country, desire to celebrate in their own way. In so doing they are simply carrying out the request of the International Federation of Trade Unions. I have here a manifesto issued by that body in Europe, signed by J. H. Thomas, M.P., who cannot be accused of being one of the most radical of the labour members of the British House of Commons. It urges that all over the world the workers will celebrate their international holiday. Howat attempts to come over here to join in these celebrations and he is stopped. As far as the working class is concerned, I would say, in the first instance, that they regard this as an unwarrantable interference with Labour's own private affairs. I am not here to defend Howat, or any one section of the United Mine Workers of America. But, irrespective of its sectional prejudices, Labour contends that labour organizations ought to be able to bring over to this country whatever speakers they wish to select. One man representing one section of the United Mine Workers of America was allowed to come through and address a meeting; another man was stopped at the border. Is it for this government to decide which of the representatives of the unions will be allowed to come to Canada and address meetings? If it is, then it is time that we understood that very clearly. But I suggest that the government is going to undertake a pretty big programme if it is to decide just exactly what kind of policies are to be permitted to be advocated in Canada. Further, we regard this as discriminatory class legislation. I know of no occasion when an international bankers' conference has been prevented from meeting in this country. It is fairly well known to certain members of the committee on Banking and Commerce at the present time that some of the policies of our bankers in this country are actually outlined by bankers on the other side of the border; but we do not have any general objection raised to that, nor does the Minister of Immigration send any instructions to his officials on the border that bankers across the line are to be forbidden admittance to this country because their policies may not be in harmony with the policies of certain people in Canada. Imperialists from Great Britain can without

Labour Delegates Detained
hindrance tour this country and address Canadian clubs from coast to coast on certain public policies; yet the Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) actually tells us that other members of the British House of Commons shall not be allowed to enter Canada for the reason that their policies are not consistent with the policies of those who at present sit on the government benches in this Chamber.
I appeal to the House once more, as I have done before, on behalf of these miners of Nova Scotia. I wish the House could understand a little bit more clearly how those men feel in this matter. They charge that in the past their constituencies have been so gerrymandered that it has been extremely difficult for them to elect representatives to the House of Commons. I am not undertaking to argue the case; I know that this is very freely stated in the eastern part of the country. They charge, further, that there have been unfair election tactics. Again, I refrain from arguing the point; I simply state as a fact that the allegation is freely made among the miners. They say that again and again they have sent deputations to the government asking for the most reasonable things, and these have been denied them. Last year they sent a deputation requesting that a royal commission be appointed to go into the whole question of the production of coal in Cape Breton. That commission was refused. This year they sent another deputation praying that the present government carry out its pledges and provide, for the old people among them, some system of pensions. Again their deputation was sent back empty handed. Under these circumstances, is it very much wonder that these men feel resentful. On their invitation, one of their fellow members comes to talk to them on a holiday, and they find that even the fundamental rights of British subjects are denied them, that they are not allowed to discuss these questions, and their guests are turned, back?
I submit that if in reality we are seeking to avoid very serious industrial unrest in this country, if we are really sincere in the desire to bring about reconstruction through constitutional means, then this is the time when we ought to act in the proper spirit. There is no use talking to these men and advising them to use parliamentary methods, while again and again you make it impossible for them so to act. Then when on top of all that they find that they cannot enjoy the fundamental British rights of freedom of discussion, of organization, and so forth, I do not much wonder that there is the very deepest resent-
202i
ment, which sooner or later will manifest itself in ways that may cause apprehension throughout the country. Finally, I would appeal to a government that calls itself Liberal, that the old principles of Liberalism be not trampled under foot. I have no doubt the Acting Minister of Immigration himself thinks that he is acting in the best interests of the country. He says he does not want to stir up trouble; he wants to safeguard the miners from these dangerous demagogues from the United States. I have no doubt he is sincere; but I believe he is mistaken in his policy. I would again submit that he has gone altogether beyond both the letter and the spirit of the law which he is supposed to administer.
Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Acting Minister of Immigration):: No doubt my hon. friend (Mr. Woodsworth) would object to admittance being refused anyone who happened to come within the purview of the law; but surely the people of Canada have a right to say whom they will admit to their midst. The argument my hon. friend uses is, however, directly in contradiction to that principle; apparently, he suggests that no offence which any human being might commit should constitute a ground for refusing to admit him into the country. Further, the hon. gentleman goes on to quote, as a case in point, the matter of the Irish agitators who were sent back from England. The situation is vastly different; Irish agitators are not aliens, they belong to the Empire, and necessarily are treated from a different point of view entirely. But people entering from the United States or any other foreign country are not in that category; and the gentleman in question, Mr. Howatt, spent fifteen months in gaol for an offence, in reference to the justice or injustice of which it is not my business to inquire. In addition to that he is one, so the information goes, who has been denied the privileges of his own organization, and is still denied them. I have no objection to his making application to the Secretary of State and bringing the matter up in due course, and I believe, from the press despatches, it was stated that he intended doing so. So far I have not been informed, either by the Secretary of State of the United States or through our own Department of State, that he has taken any such action; and personally I have no objection to lectures being delivered on behalf of the United Mine Workers of America, or the Bankers' Association, or the Manufacturers' Association, or the Farmers' Association, or any other organization. And that is not the ground on which this individual

Labour Delegates Detained
was refused admittance to Canada; he was not admitted simply for the reason that it was feared he might become a public charge in Canada as he was in Kansas.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Does the minister say that he was a public charge in Kansas?


Charles A. Stewart: Undoubtedly, he was a public charge; he spent fifteen months in gaol.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Does the minister suggest that that is the meaning of the phrase "a public charge"?


Charles A. Stewart: If my hon. friend is of the opinion that a prisoner is not a public charge on the community, I should like him to explain just what the status of such a person is.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The phrase "a public charge" has a well-recognized meaning; it implies that a man has become dependent on the public for his upkeep. It is only, indeed, in a very extended sense of the expression, that one would suggest that a person who is in gaol is a public charge. The expression has an altogether different meaning from that which the minister ascribes to it.


Charles A. Stewart: That is the advice I get from the officers who are paid to advise the members of the government on such questions. However, I do not intend to discuss the point further. I think that in all fairness it is reasonable to assume that anyone who commits an offence and is incarcerated in any public gaol in this country is a public charge on the Canadian people. I do not think there can be any question about that. But, further, I have a copy of the Chronicle in which I see a report that the gentleman has been refused the privilege of speaking in his own country. I am not keeping him out on that ground, though, for I am thoroughly in accord with my hon. friend that there should be freedom of speech. That is not at all the ground on which he was refused admittance. His partner came into the country because there was no similar reason for refusing to admit him; and he made his speech. But I have to be guided by the circumstances as I find them, in the case of Larkin, in the case of Howat, and in the case of a prisoner who comes to my mind at the moment, who is in a gaol in Montana. I have had half-a-dozen cases of this character since I became minister. I am perfectly willing to go into the merits of each case, but in a general way where people have served prison sentences I take it that it is not the business of the immigration officers

to make an investigation as to why such sentences were imposed, and I do not intend, Mr. Speaker, to change that regulation in any particular. If later on it is proven that these men are entitled to come into the country, I have the privilege of admitting them.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the House went into Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Ocean and river service-maintenance and repairs to Dominion steamers and icebreakers, $1,500,000.
Ernest Lapointe: There is a decrease of $100,000 in this item due to the lesser cost of fuel and provisions.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the position of the John D. Hazen at the present time?


Ernest Lapointe: This ice breaker is doing work in the gulf of St. Lawrence just now.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: How many icebreakers have we in active operation at the present time?


Ernest Lapointe: We have the Mikula- lhat is the Russian name of the John D. Hazen; I do not know whether we ought not [DOT]to give this icebreaker back its good Canadian name-the Lady Grey and the Montcalm.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Investigation into wrecks, $12,300.
Mr. SPENCER:: How much of this amount was used last year?


Ernest Lapointe: I will get the information for my hon. friend.


Mr. NEILL:: I wish under this heading to make some remarks to the House in connection with the wreck of the Alaskan which took place on the British Columbia coast last winter, and also in connection with the investigation into that wreck. I also wish to hang on to that so to speak, under circumstances which I will narrate, a plea for some further measure of protection in the way of life-saving on the coast of British Columbia. It will take some time for me to outline the case thoroughly, but I will be as brief as possible, and perhaps the fact that I did not waste the time of the House in discussing the budget may incline the committee to be indulgent on this occasion.
I am taking the wreck of the Alaskan as a typical case, although this is one of four wrecks that occurred last winter on this coast within a very limited area. There was loss of life in connection with some of the other wrecks, but there was a total loss of life in

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
the case of the Alaskan. This coast line along which all these wrecks occur lies entirely within my district. It is called the ' Graveyard of the Pacific," and it is not a mere euphonious expression for magazine articles; it has behind it a very dread reality I remember the first occasion when I walked along this coast. Every mile or two, sometimes every quarter of a mile, I would come on the remains of a wreck. If it was a sandy stretch the wreck was still there and I have a distinct recollection of a 200-ton boat lying battered among trees on the edge of the sandy beach and far above ordinary high water. The rocky points had also taken toll; every place had a name, such as Michigan point and so on, all due to the fact that boats had gone ashore at these points within the memory of men then living, and in every case with loss of life, in many cases with a total loss of life.
The Alaskan was lost on the 2nd January of this year. The boat belonged to a little company of men living in Victoria or Vancouver. She was bought in the preceding November. Her owners ran her on one trip from Victoria to Barkley sound, which is on the west coast of Vancouver island. On the second trip she was lost with all hands. This boat was built thirty-seven years ago in the United States. I may say that even now-at that time still more so-the standards of shipbuilding in the United States are much less exacting than our Canadian standards. Consequently hon. members can judge of the character of a boat built thirty-seven years ago in the United States. It was constructed either of Douglas fir, known to be a soft wood, or else of Oregon pine, a still softer wood. I am qupting now, with one small exception, entirely from the evidence taken at the investigation'. I have also used the coroner's inquest held on one of the bodies that came ashore and my personal knowledge of the local geography. This investigation was held under government auspices a few months ago. The Alaskan was a steamer of 13 horse power, and had what is known as a water-tube boiler. Her tonnage was not ISO tons but a few hundred pounds under. They build them like that in order to escape the regulation, because any boat of 150 tons or over has to be inspected annually by the government inspectors as regards her hull. Her machinery must be inspected anyhow. So the hull of this thirty-seven year old boat which was going out into the open Pacific in winter time had never been inspected by any government inspector from the time she was
launched. She was bought at the time I am alluding to for 86,000. She was insured for S9,000 forthwith.
On account of the total loss of life I advised the government to have an investigation into the wreck, and this was ordered. Hon. members will recall that I have from time to time asked the government when the report was coming down. The answer given me first was that the report was delayed by the sickness of the stenographer who had taken the evidence, and later on by the sickness of the commissioner. I am not a bit surprised that they were sick. I have read the evidence and the report and their perusal and a comparison of them filled me with nausea. Therefore, I repeat, I am not surprised that anyone would feel inclined to be sick who had any responsibility whatever in the preparation of the report. For the result was a gigantic whitewash. It whitewashed everybody connected with the wreck. The only person not whitewashed was the Almighty, on whom blame was put for sending the storm, although it was a comparatively minor storm because the meteorological report says the morning of the day on which the Alaskan was lost there was only a fresh gale blowing and at night it was nothing more than a strong gale. In their desire to whitewash everybody in sight they even whitewashed a government official who was discharged by the department for neglect of duty in connection with the wreck. He too was covered with this universal coat of whitewash. But while very abundant it was from its very nature extremely thin, and certain very salient and prominent facts stick out which I purpose to bring to the notice of the House.
In the first place I am putting some responsibility on the government-though not by way of blaming the present government or the last government, or even, necessarily, a department; it is probably a condition of affairs that has grown Up; the conditions have changed and the regulations have not. I am not blaming anyone in connection with the government, but the government of the day, as regards the future at least, have a certain responsibility.
Now, it arose in this way: The government appointed, I do not know how many years ago, a wreck commissioner to deal with these investigations of wrecks on the Pacific coast. It is an extremely important work, because the decisions sometimes involve hundreds of thousands of dollars in connection with wrecks or collisions. Well, they allotted to this

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
official $1,500 or $1,600, a year I am not sure which, and in case this might not be enough for a really competent man, whose duties would be very little inferior to those of a judge, they said: "If $1,600 is not sufficient, you are at liberty to indulge in private work." The wreck commissioner is necessarily a seafaring man, and a seafaring man is not very likely to be readily capable of adapting himself to some other occupation such as that of a stockbroker or a druggist. His only natural occupation must be in connection with seafaring matters, such as surveying, the testing of compasses, and so on. I am not saying that this man did such work, because I do not know, and I am going to be very conservative in my statements. But I do know that the regulations of the department under which he was employed permit him, if he so wishes, to engage in private work. Now, that is worse than if a judge were given a beggarly salary and told that he might go out and engage in legal work on the side, because a judge might do a great deal of legal work and yet never come in contact with his clients in the court over which he presided. Moreover, if there were any likelihood of that happening, he could get a brother judge to take his case. But this man is sole judge of these cases on the Pacific coast, and more than that, his clientele, if I may use the word, is limited. The number of men engaged in seafaring pursuits on the Pacific coast of British Columbia, that is, those who own boats there, is extremely limited, and if this man is to get employment, as he is invited to do by the government regulations, he must seek it from among the very men on whom he may sit to-morrow in judgment in connection with very important matters indeed. He must be familiar with all these men; he must be on friendly terms with them if he wants to get employment from them, yet he is put in the position of working for them one day and sitting in judgment on them the next. I do not say he ever did any such private work, because, as I have said, I do not know; but I submit that it is an undesirable position for the government regulations to create.
The government will say, no doubt, and say very truly, that the work offering on that coast in this connection is not large enough to justify the payment of a proper salary to a man who should devote his whole attention to it. Well, in that case it would be far better to close the office and either send a man from this coast to deal with the specific cases, or else put them in the hands of the judge in admiralty. There is a Supreme Court judge there who has made a lifelong study of admiralty matters; he sits as admiralty judge when occa-

sion demands, and he has the advantage of being able to judge evidence properly, which no man not of the legal profession has the ability to do; moreover, he would be absolutely independent. Take whichever position you like, whether you send a man from here or whether you put the cases in the hands of the admiralty court there, it is highly desirable that the man who sits in judgment on these cases, who sits alone and has to deal with matters veiy technical and difficult in their character, should not have affiliations of a business or social or personal character with the men on whom he sits in judgment or the interests involved in the cases which come before him. I think that is absolutely incontrovertible, and so far as the government's responsibility goes, I suggest that they look into that aspect of it.
I do not suggest that this wreck commissioner was corrupt, nor do I intend, having safeguarded myself, so to speak, by that statement, to go on and by hint or innuendo suggest that he was corrupt, because I do not think so; if I did I would say so. But I do suggest that this evidence shows that he was very careless or very incompetent, or both. My opinion is that he was both. The evidence shows-and I am prepared to give the book and page for every one of these statements, but I will not detain the House; I will simply make the statements-that almost from the beginning of the case he was prejudiced in favour of the decision which he ultimately gave. He was partial in the bringing out of the evidence; he did not give the evidence its proper value, and he did not obtain evidence that was very material; evidence that was most vital was practically omitted. I wish to state again that I do not know any of the parties to the dispute. The only person I know in connection with it was a constable who was only a minor witness. I know none of these men personally or by repute other than as recorded in the pages of the sworn evidence taken in the course of the investigation. I will give you a short history of the case and later on I will refer to the lack of material evidence, and I think it will be admitted that what I say in this respect is correct.
I will give you a short history of the first trip, and I will give it to you from the evidence of men who were there, disinterested men who made the trip in their capacities as engineer or fireman, men who were not interested in the company and who had nothing to gain by telling the truth or otherwise. I cannot give you the history of the second trip, except as to its initial stages, because everybody was lost. One of the principal

Sup-ply-Marine-The Alaskan
witnesses was a Mr. Wilson, and the commissioner himself comments on the fair and frank way he gave his evidence. Wilson was an engineer; he had a first class Board of Trade certificate from the Old Country, and those of us who are familiar with the Board of Trade regulations in the Old Country know that that means he was a thoroughly competent engineer. He had had thirty years' experience ; which shows that he was a thoroughly experienced man. He got a position as engineer to make his first trip from Victoria to Barkley sound. He went down and took a glimpse at the boiler. He asked the captain if the boiler had been inspected, and was answered in the negative, whereupon he said, "I am not going to sea until that boiler is inspected." The captain said, "Well, now, do not make any trouble; we have our charter and we want to go out. The boat is all right; the engine is all right; let us go out." The engineer said, however, "I am not going until I have inspected this boiler," and when he put it like that, they said, "All right; go and look at the boiler." So he took the top off it, or proceeded by whatever method is followed in such cases, and he found that there were four tubes missing, and four plugged-it was a water tube boiler-and that seven more were leaking. They were leaking with a pressure of cold water on the Victoria water system, which means about 80 or 90 pounds pressure. Of course, you need a higher pressure than that to run an engine, but with that pressure he found seven tubes leaking as well as eight that were out of business. He also found that several of the pumps were in bad shape, valves missing and packing gone, and that there were no wrenches with which to fix the pumps; it is recorded here that he had to send up town to buy some wrenches for the purpose. Mind you, this was a boat going out on the open Pacific in mid-winter, yet they had not enough wrenches with which to fix the pumps, and if he had not insisted on this investigation before they started they would have gone out with the pumps not working and with no tools available to make the necessary adjustments or repairs. After they had fixed the boat up-and he tells us they spent three days tinkering on it; they had no machine shop available-as he himself said, "We decided to make the trip." They started out, I understand, about one-thirty in the afternoon, and they bad not gone very far "when we found the bilges flooding, and the pumps were choked; so we put into Beachy bay," which is fourteen miles from Victoria. Now these pumps had been tinkered with before they started, and they had proceeded only
fourteen miles when this trouble occurred. Fortunately, they found a place where they could put in-it is not generally the case on the west coast that such a place can conveniently or readily be found. They put in at Beachy bay and spent all night fixing up the pumps.
Apparently they were satisfied then, and they started out again the next morning. They had not gone very far, I suppose about forty miles further, when they found there was no water in the boiler, and as you know, you need water to make steam, and if you have no water you cannot go very far. They were liable to drift on the rocks around Pachena Point, and the engineer in his log says that he had to use salt water for keeping up steam, which has about the same effect as if you used salt water for oiling a car in order to get a mile or two more out of her and reach safety. "I am afraid the old kettle won't stand it," the engineer says in his log. They altered their course; instead of going to Kildonan they went to Bamfield, which was the nearest place where they could get water and a sheltered place. The salt water which the engineer had used did enable them to get to Bamfield. They got water there and started off to their destination, which was about ten miles distant. They got there under these conditions, and incidentally I may say they struck the wharf going in and damaged it. "Not enough power" was the reason given. When they raised steam again the engineer had to take the top off the boiler and cut six more tubes out on account of the damage done by the salt water, making ten short out of about fifty. This all took time and in the meantime the boat was being towed around by some local boat so that they could get their cargo of fish on board. After some days they started out with a load and the first thing that happened was that the boat was on fire. The owners at the investigation described it casually as "a little scorching" but the engineer said in his evidence that it was enough to break the glass in the pilot house. That is where you stand to steer; it is the only place where you can steer from, and if the fire was bad enough to break the glass in the pilot house it would not have needed to get a great deal worse before it would have been impossible for them to steer the boat at all. On that occasion it was due to the shifting of the baffle-plates-I do not want to be too technical, but I cannot but be technical just here. I gather from the evidence that these baffle-plates are put on top of the tubes to prevent the heat rushing out too violently into the

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
funnel, something like a damper on a stove. These baffle-plates had got loose and the funnel got so hot that it set fire to the woodwork of the pilot house in the vicinity. They got the fire put out and fixed up the baffle-plates as well as they could. They did not stop to do that, but did it as they went along.
Next they had such a big load on, not only in the interior but also on the deck, that they noticed the deck buckled a bit and the doors jammed. The owner of the boat denied that, but he was not there, and this man who was there says he saw the deck buckled. They went on again and presently they found there was no water in the boiler, and the engineer said in his evidence "I was scared to take a chance by putting more salt water in. I was afraid she would burst or scald someone." So the weather being fine-it was smooth water and a very fine day for the time of year-she drifted around in the straits from eight in the morning till two in the afternoon. Less than half of that time would have sufficed to send her ashore and wreck her if the weather had been at all stormy, but fortunately the weather was smooth. Then a United States cruiser came along and gave her water. Then she started out again between two and three and by four o'clock they were out of water again. They drifted around in the dark until nine o'clock when the C.P.R. steamer the Tees came along and offered her a tow. They hitched on to the bitts, which is an iron frame fastened to the decks and is generally used to fasten the rope to when the boat is moored alongside the wharf. They hitched on to one of the bitts and in ten minutes had pulled it out. Then they pulled out the other one, and as the engineer said "The wood looked to be pretty rotten where it came out." The Tees came back again for another trial and hitched on to the mast. That stood, and finally they reached Victoria with water on the engine room floor. They managed to get to Victoria, which was not their destination, but Vancouver. There they overhauled the pumps. Three had no packing, and then they discovered why they had no water. There was a leaking pipe between the water cistern and the boiler, so they put a new cistern on the deck and that enabled them to get to Vancouver, their destination. They then put her into a repair place for repairs, and they took up this pipe and found that it was a two-inch galvanized iron pipe, and in the language of the engineer "it was pretty well rotten." They had to move the floor to get at this pipe; otherwise it could not be seen. This boat was supposed to be in first-class shape

when she left, but this pipe had neither been tested nor examined. The owner gave as a reason in his evidence that he thought some time it must have been frozen, and then of course that would make a leak, and rust would follow after that. But the boat was supposed to be in first class condition and you could not look at this pipe without tearing up a little bit of the deck. This boat went to sea in a condition which I think I can show ultimately resulted in its loss.
The engineer then recommended a new boiler or re-tubing the old one, but his recommendation w^s not accepted. Then he said, "I am not going back to sea in that boat unless she is re-tubed or a new boiler put in." He was getting good pay and times were bad, but he told one of the assessors at this examination that he would not be a bit surprised considering the condition of the boiler to hear that something had gone wrong in rough weather. He was pressed to say what he thought caused the loss, and he replied that it must either have shipped a sea into the engine room or else a tube burst in the boiler. The sea could only come into the engine room through the doors and shutters, and there were the usual doors to prevent that. So it is more logical to take his other reason as being the correct one, that the tubes had burst.


Lewis Herbert Martell: Were there no port holes in the engine room?


Alan Webster Neill: Port holes?


Lewis Herbert Martell: My hon. friend said that a sea could only come in through the doors. My hon. friend knows that there are port holes in every engine room, and the sea could get in through them.


Alan Webster Neill: The port holes are very small and are made of very thick glass, and there would not be much danger of a sea breaking them. We are dealing with probabilities, not theories.


Lewis Herbert Martell: That is a probability.


Alan Webster Neill: When the engineer was pressed to say why he thought that a burst tube would be dangerous he gave this explanation. He said, "There were too many tubes out already. If there were any more it would overrun the margin of safety. A few more would be dangerous." He was further pressed and he gave this explanation: If a tube leaks from old age, so to speak, it is only a very small pin-hole leak. It leaks gradually and it will be days or weeks before it becomes dangerous, but on account of salt water being used

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
in the boiler, patches of it would crust small pieces the size, say, of a five-cent piece at certain corners and elbows, and that would prevent water getting at the tube, and then the piece would burn out and the tube would burst and the water in all the tubes would run into the fire box and put out the fire. It was more dangerous on account of having used the salt water. The engineer was pressed to say that things were not as bad as he had said. He was asked, "After these repairs, don't you think she was all right?" The engineer replied, "After the repairs I would not have gone myself," and he did not go. He quit his job rather than go. That completes the history of the first voyage. I might mention that in leaving that wharf she knocked down six more piles. The reason was that she had too much power. On her way to Victoria she went on fire again, but that is part of the second trip. It sounds like a jest, does it not, but it is the solemn truth as revealed by sworn evidence.
That is the history of the first trip of that boat on the strength of statements made by reliable witnesses, the engineer and his assistant, dependable men who had certificates which they were liable to lose if they made a false statement. This testimony is better, in my opinion, than the interested statements of the owners, who sat back in their offices in Victoria and Vancouver and "thought and believed and supposed" for that is the tenor of most of their evidence if you subject it to a close scrutiny. Whatever evidence they had to support them was either from employees or firms that they had business contracts with as I will explain later on. Now, the distance from Victoria to Kildonan is roughly 130 miles so we have this situation: Here is a boat in a first class condition-or supposed to be. After having been further overhauled by her engineer and his assistant, she does not get 14 miles before she has to lie up all night to make repairs on her pumps. The next day she had to use salt water; she struck a wharf; she was towed around while being repaired. She starts out with so heavy a deck load that the deck buckles. Then she went on fire enough to break the glass in the pilot house. She breaks down and drifts in the open strait. She starts off again and again breaks down and drifts for five hours in the dark. She is picked up again and the tow tears out both bitts because the wood is pretty rotten, and at last crawls into Victoria with water on the engine room floor. And this was all in a trip of 130 miles, less than 300 miles on the round trip and most of it in sheltered water. What would have happened,
I wonder, if she had gone down as far as Seattle or San Francisco where she would have been exposed during the whole trip to the buffeting of the Pacific ocean? I would like to quote here the view the commissioner takes of the incidents that I have described without a word of exaggeration. Here is how he dismisses all that. Addressing one of the principal owners he says:
There is no doubt you had completed one voyage and, apart from little accidents it was completed successfully. A. Yes, sir.
Apart from "little accidents," Mr. Chairman, it was completed successfully! If it was not such a dreadful tragedy it would be too comical. It reminds one of the Apostle Paul and the boasting he did in his elderly garrulity, that he had been so many times beaten and put in gaol, that he had been stoned, that he had been shipwrecked three times, and had been in the deep for a day and a half. That, however, was the record of a life time of adventure. This happened in a week onlv!
Now to go on to the next trip. Unfortunately it was lamentably short because the vessel and crew were lost very soon after they started out. They started out from Vancouver and, as I say, knocked out six piles of the wharf. Seemingly the vessel had too much power. She went on fire on her way to Victoria and her baffle plates again shifted. Now the journey from Victoria to Vancouver is in inside waters therefore the vessel did not encounter any heavy seas calculated to bring about a shaking which would have caused these baffle plates to shift. The plates were fixed in Victoria and the vessel started out at eight p.m., but returned again at two a.m.-"too hot." Finally a man was got from Vancouver to fix the baffle plates. Presumably they were fixed properly because we heard no more about it. The vessel loaded a cargo of box lumber and started off again in absolutely calm weather; the meteorological conditions show that. She was next seen off Pachena Point thirty hours after she had left Victoria. Now Pachena is about seventy miles from Victoria and the vessel was able to do six or seven knots an hour. So that in ordinary fair weather she should have made that distance in about eleven hours. Instead of that she occupied thirty hours. Where was she during the nineteen hours which intervened? We have no record to show that, no one can tell. She must have spent those nineteen hours somewhere between Victoria and Pachena Point. We have no way of knowing what happened. Did she go into Beach bay to fix up her baffle plates, or did more tubes burst and were

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
efforts made to carry out repairs? No one can tell. What we do know is that she delayed somewhere for nineteen hours before she was seen off Pachena Point. The vessel was next seen at 3.30 p.m., by the lighthouse keeper, passed Pachena Point and heading towards cape Beale which was 6 or 7 miles distant and had she rounded that point she would have been in sheltered water. If there was a very strong wind and a heavy sea running from the start of the trip one could understand what had happened. But the meteorological report shows that the wind during the time was only moderate. It was not until afterwards that what might be described as a strong gale sprang up. So that during the nineteen hours referred to the vessel could and should have reached a place of safety long before the wind increased in violence. Anyhow the centre of the gale was some 200 miles north so that she would not have experienced the worst end of it. When first sighted by the lighthouse keeper the vessel was going very slowly but was too close in; she was either steaming or drifting towards shore. Now, if either a steamship or a sailing boat is near the shore in a heavy wind the first precaution to be observed is to get off that shore. It is therefore reasonable to assume that if this vessel was capable of steaming she would have changed her course, she would have steamed away from that shore and reached a place of safety because there was a harbour of refuge only a few miles away. But as the lighthouse keeper says she kept steaming or drifting to the shore.
Now, I think here is one of the most significant facts as to what really caused the loss of this boat. She was watched closely by the lighthouse keeper, or his wife, and during all that time, between then and dark, they saw no sign of steaming; no sign of smoke coming out of the funnel. The vessel was only a mile and a half away. In British Columbia they use bituminous coal and what is called "run of the mine" for steamships. This contains a great deal of slack and I can certify myself that it makes a very strong, black smoke. You can easily see it for quite a distance; I am well within the mark when I say that it is readily discernible at a distance of ten miles. This vessel was only a mile and a half away. It was being watched by somebody whose attention was called to the danger the boat was in and he swears that he saw no sign of smoke coming out of the funnel. Had that boat been in a condition to steam the onlooker would certainly have seen smoke belching out of her funnel. Every-

body on board having been lost it is impossible that we shall ever ascertain the facts; but I suggest it is probable that a tube burst in her boiler and the vessel drifted around while her crew were trying to get it fixed up. At any rate with this vessel not steaming within a mile and a half of the rocks and a strong wind blowing towards the shore we can know exactly what was going to happen-If that was not the cause what did happen? There is no other suggestion that is tenable.
I may mention that the practice when a vessel becomes disabled at sea is to send up a flare or other signal of distress. The watcher in the lighthouse continued to observe the motions of the boat until after it became dark and observed the crew put up several flares. It shows that the vessel was not abandoned-although someone suggested that she had been-that there were men on board and that they were not able to leave.
Now we have had the evidence before the Commission of Inquiry of some of the government inspectors who I think, came out very well, in regard to their actions in connection with the matter. Inspector Stevens, of Vancouver, speaks as follows and this is a vital point. He was asked if, when this boat was repaired, he should not have been informed of the fact and he said "absolutely." The examination continues:
Q. They should have notified you.-A. Yes. The act
says so. I think it is section 591 or 624 where it says that the owners, masters or engineers should report to the steamboat inspector.
Q. They did not comply with that law?-A. If there was any damage to the boiler they should have notified us.
Q. Supposing the ship had been repaired?-A. If she had been repaired, there must have been some damage.
Q. And they should have notified you?-A. Absolutely.
And then he quotes the section of the act.
If that notification had been given and if the inspector had come down and glanced over the condition of that boiler, I am safe in saying that the boat would never have gone out till her tubes had been repaired, and the salt water conditions made right. He did not know of her condition and was not supposed to know. The boat had suffered damage and it was their duty to report. I have looked up the act and I know the provisions in regard to it, and I say it was the duty of the owners to give notice. It was not so much because of what had been done in the way -of repairs, but it was the safeguard; the inspector would have gone down and examined the boiler and said "That boat must never leave port till it is properly repaired." That was the only safeguard the crew had, and it

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
is for that reason I hold the owners responsible. I think there were four owners and one of them said he was an engineer. Therefore, he should have known what the law was. He said all the necessary things were done. He said in his evidence that the boat had been inspected and overhauled, but it is a fact that this inspector was not notified of these repairs.
Then again Inspector Cullam of Victoria happened to be coming along the street and saw the boat preparing to go out without any lifeboat. He rang up the owners and said "You cannot go out without a lifeboat." The owner approached the captain and tried to excuse it, and said "Do not make a fuss about it, it will be all right next trip, we have a nice little boat; come down and look at it, it will be all right." But Mr. Cullam, with admirable determination said "It is not all right; you do not go out with that dinky little boat, you must get a proper lifeboat." So alert was he that he telephoned the collector of customs and said "Do not let that boat go out until you get a permit from me." He thought they would try to go out in spite of his instructions, but he adhered to his determination and they had to get a proper lifeboat on that occasion.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Mr. NEILL; Earlier in my remarks, Mr. Chairman, I said that among the faults I found with the investigation which we are considering was the fact that, as I believe, material evidence had not been adduced that could have been procured. I want to deal with that matter for a moment. The man from whose evidence I have been principally quoting, Wilson, was on the first trip of the boat, but he did not go out on the second. There were also a number of other men who, warned by the experiences which I narrated this afternoon, decided as well to quit the boat. None of these men were called; but there was one man in particular who undoubtedly should have been called, and that was Brock. He was the captain on the first trip; in fact, he owned the boat, having bought it under option from the vendors. He had bought it from them and had endeavoured to sell shares in it to various friends of his, among whom was a practical engineer named Redding. Redding canned the idea promptly, having given one look at the engines; but
Brock went on the first trip of the boat, and on his return, Mr. Redding, who gave evidence at the investigation, meeting him, congratulated him on having escaped with his' life; and Brock replied: "Yes, I saw the rats leaving the ship in Victoria and thought it was time to quit." Now, that statement might be taken in its literal sense, that Brock actually saw rats leaving the ship; but I take it that what he really meant was that, in view of the condition of the ship and the engines, he 'bought it was time to leave it, and that was why he did not go on the second trip. But, [DOT]Sir, I wanted to submit, Redding's evidence for this reason: he was asked several questions about the man Brock, who did not appear to be on the horizon at all. Amongst other questions, this one was put to him by one of the assessors:
My question is, can he-
That is, Redding.
-say whether Brock is out for the time being while the investigation is on?
That is to say, in other words, was he hiding or keeping out of the way? The answer made by the witness was:
It is a question I would sooner leave unanswered. That answer, I think, would naturally suggest to any of us the idea that it was highly desirable to procure the evidence of a man of whom it was at least implied that he might be keeping out of the way until the investigation was over. And the commissioner himself said: "We ought to have Mr. Brock's evidence." But what means did he employ to get Brock? He asked Mr. Wright, one of the owners of the boat, to get him; and if there is any truth in the suggestion that Brock was keeping, or was being kept, out of the way on purpose, Wright was the very man who was interested in seeing that he did not come to court. The commissioner entrusted to him the duty, or rather the business-because it was not his duty-to procure Brock in order that he might give evidence possibly against his interests; and the consequence, which I think was not unnatural, was that Brock did not appear. Nothing appears in the evidence to show why he was not procured, but I am told by a man who was present that the question was brought up on the last day of the investigation. The question was asked where Brock was, or why he did not come to give evidence, and the reply was made that he was at Powell river and had no money to come in. I do not know what the mileage would be, but at any rate it would not cost more than five or six

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
dollars for boat fare from Powell river to Vancouver; and the assertion that Brook had no money to come down from Powell river, and that therefore on that account his evidence was not available, was not, in my opinion, by any means satisfactory. I submit that that fact alone betrays the very strongest, I will not say suspicion-yes, I will say that; "suspicion" is the right word-suspicion of the competency of the court as conducted. It is absolutely inexcusable that the man who was the captain of the boat on the previous trip, in regard to whom the suggestion was made that he was keeping out of the way on purpose, and who was ordered to be brought forward for examination, should fail to appear, solely for the trumpery reason that he had no money to pay his fare. It was not the business of those in charge of the investigation to be satisfied with that bald statement, for the money could have been easily procured to bring him into court; and failure to procure him is unjustifiable and inexcusable from any point of view that can be taken.
There is another point which I would submit to the committee. One of the witnesses swore in the presence of the owner of the boat, or at least one of the owners of the boat, that it was so heavily laden that it buckled with the weight. The owner of the boat denied that, but still the assertion was mad'e. On her first trip from Barkley sound to Vancouver she had a cargo of fish in boxes, no doubt consigned to various people in Vancouver. It would have been easy to ascertain the weight of that cargo, the invoices would have shown the number of boxes and their weight, and from this data they would have had a good idea whether she was overloaded to the extent of buckling her deck. Then again, no attempt was made to follow up that line of inquiry. On her second trip she was loaded with what are called box shooks, that is, fish boxes knocked down, four feet long one foot wide and one inch deep. They were piled up on deck, and the evidence showed there had not been the slightest attempt made to fasten the deck load by any means whatever. Thus you had this boat going out into the heavy sea with a lot of loose lumber on her deck, and every wave that broke overboard would lift two or three of the top shooks and wash them overboard with any member of the crew who might be standing on them. It would have been easy to ascertain from the stevedoring company how she was loaded- whether this cargo was thrown on like a heap 
of firewood, or whether any attempt was made to secure the deck load from being washed overboard. Even a vessel going out with a deck load of heavy timbers has these properly secured so that they will not be affected by heavy seas. But there was no attempt made to find out how the Alaskan was loaded, whether she was properly loaded or whether she was overloaded-information which could have been easily ascertained from the stevedoring company who loaded her in Victoria.
There is another serious failure on the part of the wreck commissioners; they did not visit the scene of the wreck. Suppose this House burned down to-morrow, and we had two commissioners engaged from Toronto to make an investigation, what would we think of them if, instead of visiting Ottawa and inspecting the scene of the fire, they proceeded to Winnipeg and held their inquiry there? The reason given by the commissioner was that the scene of the wreck was remote and difficult to get at. In reply to this, I may say that there is a well-equipped Canadian Pacific passenger boat which goes three times a month within eleven miles of the spot, and from there to the wreck is a comparatively easy walk over a trail. It would have been a rough walk and in wet weather rather unpleasant, but a woman made the trip the day after the wreck, and there was nothing to prevent any able-bodied men visiting the scene of the wreck, where they would have learned a good deal of very great value in the investigation. I may say that the coroner's inquest which sat upon one of the men's bodies that drifted ashore had no difficulty whatever in visiting the place. If the commissioners had visited the wreck perhaps we would have found in the annex to their report a definite statement as to whether the wreck was that of the Alaskan or not. Doubt is expressed as to whether the wreckage found belonged to the Alaskan or not, but there were reasons for that expression of doubt, as I shall show. But had they visited the scene of the wreck it would have been impossible for them to express any such doubt. The evidence showed there had been no wreck for ten years within ten miles of either side of the wreck found there. We have the small shallow bay there practically covered with this shook lumber-the cargo of the Alaskan-drifting all around; we have a lifeboat found there with the name "Vancouver" and corresponding with the boat purchased by the owners for the Alaskan; we have a number of life belts washed ashore with the name of the Alaskan on them; we have the body of a man, identified as one of the crew, cast ashore

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
at this place. Yet this commission that sat one hundred and fifty miles away found it impossible to say whether or not that was the wreck of the Alaskan. There was also a piece of wreckage thirty feet long and, I think, ten or twelve feet across-I forget the exact measurement-and its condition was such that it was highly desirable not to connect it up with the Alaskan, which perhaps was the reason that this dubiety was expressed. A piece produced by one of the witnesses-a constable, totally disinterested, having no connection with any of the parties-was so rotten that he said he had kicked it off the main piece of the wreck. Those interested tried to make out that it was not part of the wrecked Alaskan, but I think there can be no doubt it was. The coroner's inquest at least had no trouble in finding that this was the wreck. Their verdict in part reads as follows:
That the wreckage of the ss. Alaskan, as examined by them, was very old and rotten.
They had no doubt, having seen the wreckage, whether it was part of the Alaskan or not, and had this commission, as they could easily have done, visited the place they would not have had any doubts either.
There is another matter. A chain was discovered at the wreck about thirty or forty feet long. An attempt was made by the owners of the boat to suggest that it was a piece of old chain that had been lying on the boat deck for casual purposes; but that suggestion was destroyed by the evidence of one of the witnesses who swore it was attached to this piece of wreckage thirty feet long by twelve feet wide found at the spot. Next an attempt was made to suggest that it was a stay chain used for staying the mast, but further investigation proved that a stay chain in that particular place for that particular purpose would not exceed six feet in length. But it was imperative to prove that this chain had nothing to do with the Alaskan, and they next brought somebody into court who swore positively that the chain was not on the boat. On cross-examination, however, it developed that he had not seen the boat for three years, so that weakened his assertion very much. Now, I have here a small piece of that chain, and I will send it over to the members of the government so they can see how worn and weak it is. One end is broken off altogether, and some of the links are about the thickness of a sheet of paper. The constable said that this short piece was a fair sample of the thirty or forty- [DOT] foot length. Some of the evidence went to suggest that the chain was the steering gear of
the boat; but that is not so. From other evidence it appears that this was the limber chain. I am not going into a technical explanation. I need only say that such a chain is used in keeping the openings clear for the water to reach the pump, and if the chain breaks the water is very liable to fill up in the bilges and flood the boat. Whatever purpose this chain was used for, it is a sample of what was considered sufficient for the equipment of that boat. There is a saying that you can judge the unknown by the known. Well, there is something we can look at, at any rate, and so get an idea of the rest of the equipment. There is no question whatever that that was part of the equipment of the Alaskan.
Now, I want to quote briefly a few remarks by the lawyer who represented the relatives of one of the drowned men, the captain of the boat. Here are some of his remarks:
Mr. MacTaggart: I think it is quite clear from the evidence that if there had been any survivors the owners would have been called upon to answer in another court. The evidence shows that.
Further on he says:
In my opinion this investigation should have taken place at Pachena-
That is where the wreck occurred.
-and it could have been ascertained in ten minutes how she broke up and possibly how she was wrecked. If you believe the evidence of the men from the west coast that the large piece they found was a part of the Alaskan and that a piece was kicked off it by their feet, it show's what the condition of this vessel was. Mr. Gordon tells you that there was no other wreckage there and that, therefore, this must have been a part of the wreck of the Alaskan. Unless it is thought that these men came here to perjure themselves, their evidence must be accepted. It is a matter for your consideration. I maintain that that (indicating) is a representative piece of the hull of the Alaskan and, if that is so, it is quite time that there was inspection of the hull for vessels of 150 tons or less.
I quite agree with his remarks in regard to that. I want to quote for a moment the annex to the report. There was a short report saying the wreck was due to a gale, and then the annex goes into more detail. In the annex the question appears:
Was this boat when she left Victoria in good seaworthy condition?	.
And the answer given is as follows:
From the evidence of reputable persons in the employ of her former owners, the Pacific Salvage Company Limited, of Victoria, of responsible employees of Messrs. Yarrows Limited, shipbuilders, etc., of Esquimalt, B.C., as also other witnesses, the vessel when she left Victoria, B.C. on the 1st January, 1923, was * as regards her hull and equipment seaworthy, etc.
You will note the expression: "From the evidence of reputable persons." No doubt

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
they were reputable-I do not suggest these men meant to perjure themselves at all-but who were they? Every man jack of them was interested. They were either the owners of the vessel, or they were the late owners who were in a sense interested, because it was asserted that they had O.K.'d her staunchness to the new purchasers. And the other people, the Yarrows and so on, they were shipbuilders, people who had contracts for the repair of this and similar boats, and who hoped to get more contracts in the future. As I say, they did not go there to perjure themselves, but they certainly went there to give as favourable evidence as possible for the owners. There is keen competition among shipbuilders, and naturally they are not going to injure their clients if they can help it, that is, if they can put things in as favourable a light as possible consistent with truth. You can make truth look a good deal nicer if you want to than if you do not; there is no question about that. The head manager of this salvage company, the late owners, who was trying to do the best he could for his friends, admitted on cross-examination that in all the six or seven years that they had the boat they had never let her go outside-"outside" means into outside waters. They had kept her inside, in smooth waters; that was his experience of the best way to handle that boat. We must compare the evidence of these interested people with the evidence of this engineer, who had no axe to grind; with the evidence of government officials, who were equally trustworthy; and I think I am right in saying that the evidence of these disinterested parties should have been accepted or should at least have been given more weight than the evidence of those who were clearly interested, directly or indirectly.
Then, I refer again to their report, from where I was reading before. It says:
They found that the whole equipment was seaworthy but manifestly was unsafe to venture on such a voyage in such conditions of weather as existed at the time of her loss.
Now, the dictionary meaning of "seaworthy" is "fit or safe to go to sea;" so it would appear that this boat was fit and safe to go to sea but manifestly was unsafe to go if it went outside the harbour. Well, if a boat is fit to go to sea one must assume that it will be fit to encounter a reasonable degree of weather; I think there is no question about that. But they go on record as saying that the boat was seaworthy but manifestly unsafe to go to sea- there is the plain English of it-unsafe to go away from the inside harbour.
I am well aware that the loss of ships at sea is due either to foundering as the result of

a heavy gale-swamping, in fact-or to a breakdown which puts the ship at the mercy of the sea and causes it very soon to go to pieces. This boat did not founder at sea, because she was seen drifting on to the rocks; therefore she met with some mishap; she became disabled. That disablement could not have been connected with her sailing abilities, because she had none; it must therefore, have been connected with her steaming abilities. I suggest that the reason was that her engines became disabled through the fact that one of these tubes to which I have alluded burst and had put out the fire, and there was no more steam available.
Turning again to the report, we find it stated that the condition of the machinery was "very good"-and that in the face of the facts that I have mentioned-and that "the boiler, however, would probably have had to have considerable attention paid to it at her next annual inspection." In the face of all the facts I have laid before the House-that this man gave up a job worth $200 a month rather than risk his life on the boat again; that he warned them that the boiler ought to be retubed; that they had given orders to the marine repair shops to be ready for them on a future ocasion; that a man named McGrath heard the captain say to one of the owners that "she ought to have been fixed up before, but we had not enough money and she will have to run a trip or two more before we can afford to do it"-notwithstanding all these facts, which are in the evidence, you have it solemnly stated that the boat was "very good," but she would probably have to have some overhauling in the near future.
To sum up the situation, we find this little bunch of would-be quick millionaires buying this boat on a shoe-string at $6,000-and insuring her immediately for 50 per cent more; we find them buying this rotten old hull that had not been inspected by the government for thirty-six years. We have them making this trip with all the accidents that the commissioner refers to as "little accidents,'' but which, perhaps, have a greater significance in view of what took place on tho next trip. We find them cautioned and advised by their engineer, who said he would not go to sea; that he would quit rather than take the risk on it again, and also that there was an utter disregard of the regulations, which provided that in a case of that kind they should report these repairs to the inspector of boilers. We find them trying to .go out of Victoria harbour without a lifeboat, and when called to question we find them offering an excuse and saying they would put

Supply-Marine-The Alaskan
one on on t)he next trip. We find that one of the principal owners was an engineer, who knew or should have known what the regulations were. But they went out without reporting these repairs; they tried to go out without a lifeboat-in other words, they took a gamble, not with their own money and then own lives, but with the lives of the crew; for that was the stake, that was the issue. Unfortunately the boat was lost; they lost their bet-and who paid for it? Not the men who should have paid, not the men who would have got the benefit if they had won their bet, not the men who would have reaped the profits, but the unfortunate crew. It was they who paid for it; and their widows and children-one of them left six small children-will be paying for it for ten yearn to come in a life of poverty and, no doubt, insufficient educational facilities. But the owners of the boat-they do not have to pay for it; they will get their $9,000 of insurance where they paid only $6,000 for the boat. They will get their insurance money, which, I think, would be well described as blood money, for that is practically what it comes to. And I note that the price of blood has increased of late years. Judas Iscariot got thirty pieces of silver for betraying innocent blood, but my friends here were going to get, over and above the cost of the boat, three thousand pieces of silver for betraying the lives of eleven men. I notice that Judas Iscariot at least became repentant and tried to undo what he had done by giving back his blood money, but I do not see any sign of that in this case. I do not hear any word of this $3,000 of profit, profit by mens' lives, being handed over to the widows and children. No; they will collect their money and look for another boat to finance on a shoe-string as before, no doubt.
I am not talking simply for the sake of informing the House; I have one or two definite suggestions to make. These men are liable to a heavy fine under the act-I need not quote it; section 591, I think it is-for not reporting these repairs. I maintain that had these repairs been reported the engineer would never in God's world have let that boat go out in the condition she was in. The trivial repairs they did make-the tinkering- had they been reported according to law, these men would have been alive to-day. I suggest to the government, therefore, that in the ordinary course of business they should have these men prosecuted, not in any spirit of revenge-that would be a poor solace to the widows and children-but merely to impress upon them and to impress upon other ship
owners inclined to do the like that they muse not evade these regulations; that the regulations, apparently trivial, are intended for the preservation of life; that they are very important, and that they must be adhered to. The only way you can impress that on some people is by making them pay out of their own pockets. I suggest it is thoroughly proper and	fitting	that	these	men, if	they	havetransgressed	in	that	regard	should	forthe	sake	of	example be	prosecutedand	fined	to	the	limit of the	law.Now these men have been sacrificed. I perhaps was wrong in comparing the shipowners to Judas Iscariot because after all, his action was wilful and these men were not guilty of deliberately sending these men to their deaths. If they had known, I suppose they would not have done it, but they were guilty of this:	They were guilty of risking these
men's lives for selfish greed. Put it on the highest plane it was careless, selfish greed. They were willing to take a risk with somebody else's life. These men are gone. I do not want to go into any heroics about that, because nothing would be more out of keeping, but it is our duty if we can, to so consider the matter that these men shall not have lost their lives in vain. It might be some consolation to their widows if they knew that the loss of their husbands had drawn the attention of the government to the importance of having boats under 150 tons in burden inspected, and the men who work on this class of boats protected. Mj' suggestion is that the limit under which inspection should not be enforced should be reduced from 150. to say 75 or 50 tons. I want to be moderate in order to get the government to accept the situation. That would mean instead of a crew of eleven men, there would only be perhaps four or five endangering their lives in boats of this age and under these circumstances.
The Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Lapointe) when he was announcing in the House the other day the policy, and it was a very liberal policy I am glad to say, which he intended to inaugurate in connection with life-saving appliances on the west coast, when he came to this feature of reducing the inspection limit, hesitated and said that the matter was under the consideration of the government. It is for that reason I am bringing the matter up to-night so that the influence of these circumstances may induce the government to decide definitely that they will introduce legislation of that kind. It could be very easily done.


George Perry Graham: The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is unavoidably absent to-night and I would therefore suggest that this item stand. All of us will then have an opportunity of reading what my hon. friend has said before the item is taken up again.
Item stands.


DEPARTMENT OF RAILWAYS AND CANALS
[Stage Direction]
Railways and Canals-Canada Highways Commission: To provide for the organization and payment of staff of the Canada Highways Commission, including A. W. Campbell, C.E., Chief Commissioner of Highways, at $5,000 per annum, and W. R. Symthe, Commissioner of Highways, at $4,000 per annum, $70,000.
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals): When this item was up before it was threshed out pretty well, but the hon. member for West York (Sir Henry Drayton) and the hon. member for South Simcoe (Mr. Boys) asked for certain information. I have statements here which give that information pretty fully.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-H ighways
William Alves Boys: I remember asking the minister for some information and he was kind enough to let me have it in the form of a document. I would like, if possible, to get some of that information upon Hansard. One of the questions I asked was, as to the various kinds of road construction which were in use in the province of Ontario.


George Perry Graham: You have the information now. I gave you the only copy I had. Put it on Hansard.


William Alves Boys: I thought it was for my personal use.


George Perry Graham: Put it on Hansard. I do not happen to have another copy.


William Alves Boys: Perhaps the minister did not understand me. Earlier in the day I wrote a note asking if I could retain this statement for my personal use. I thought I could do so but I will be pleased to send it over to the minister. I did not understand it was the only copy he had.


George Perry Graham: You can put it on Hansard and then retain it.


William Alves Boys: Personally I would be very pleased indeed to do anything I could to save the minister the trouble of reading it. If the committee would consent to its being placed upon Hansard that would give us the information. The statement the minister gave me consists of three pages.


George Perry Graham: I have no objection to that being done if the committee will consent. I may say, Mr. Chairman, this is some information asked for at the last sitting when this subject was under consideration. The Commissioner of Highways has prepared it
and it is rather voluminous. I think it would save time if the committee would consent to allow it to go on Hansard.


The CHAIRMAN:: Has the minister the unanimous consent of the committee to place on Hansard the statement admitted?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


William Alves Boys: Another thing I would like to know is the cost of the various highways in the province of Ontario by counties, the statement being brought down to date. That :nformation was given some time ago but it would be of greater value if it were brought down to date.


George Perry Graham: I have statements here which constitute a veritable library on the subject. I think they will be found to contain all that information. The committee will have to remain pretty late if I commence to read it. Therefore, if it will not be regarded as an imposition I would ask to have these statements also put on Hansard.


William Alves Boys: Do these statements give the cost of highways by counties up to date?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Each road?


George Perry Graham: I think it contains almost everything imaginable, including even the cost by townships.


William Alves Boys: That will be better still.


George Newcombe Gordon: Has the minister the unanimous consent to place on Hansard this information also?


Some Hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
The statements referred to by the Minister are as follows:
CANADA HIGHWAYS COMMISSION Ttpes or Road
*	May 22, 1923.
There are six general types of road being constructed under federal aid judged from a "surface" stand point.
_ 1st. Cement Concrete Pavement.-Consists of a slab of Portland cement concrete from 6 inches to 8 j inches thick and having a crown of about 1 inch in ten feet. Transverse expansion joints one half inch wide are placed every 50 feet. The only base necessary for this type of pavement is a wall consolidated subgrade. Average cost per mile for this pavement 20 feet wide is $35,300.
2nd. Bituminous Concrete Pavement.-Consists of an intimate mixture of crushed stone, sand and bitumen laid 2 to 3 inches thick on a prepared base of cement concrete, waterbound macadam or well consolidated gravel. The aggregate is mixed at a high temperature in a special mixer and distributed and rolled while hot. Average costs per mile for this pavement 20 feet wide and 3 inches thick are as follows:-
On 5-inch waterbound macadam base	:	 $33,400
On 7-inch waterbound macadam base	 38,300
On 4-inch cement concrete base	 43,500
On 6-inch cement concrete base	 52,900

Supply-Highways
Types of Road-Concluded
3rd. Bituminous Macadam Penetration.-Consists of crushed stone spread on the road to a depth of 3 or 4 inches, lightly rolled then sprayed with hot bituminous binder, which flows into and penetrates the layer of stone. The whole surface is then sprinkled with small stone and consolidated by rolling, so that the binder fills the interstices between the stones. This pavement is usually laid on a waterbound macadam base. Average costs for 20 feet wide and 4 inches thick are as follows:-
On 5-inch waterbound macadam base	 $22,000
On 7-inch waterbound macadam base	 26,900
On 8-inch waterbound macadam base	 28,200
4th. Waterbound Macadam.-Consists of crushed stone spread on the roadway, filled with crusher screenings and consolidated by watering and rolling. It is usually laid in two courses (except when used as a base for hard top) and varies in total depth from 7 inches to 10 inches according to traffic requirements and condition of subgrade. This type of roadway is frequently finished with a top dressing of road oil and sand or oil and limestone chips, which preserves the surface, prevents ravelling and keeps down dust Average costs per mile are as follows,-
20 ft. x 7"	 $14,800
20 ft. x .8"	 16,100
20 ft. x 9"	 17,400
Oil treatment costs from $800 to $1,300 per mile in addition.
5th. Gravel Roadway.-Consists of a layer of gravel spread over the roadbed and consolidated by traffic or by rolling. It varies in thickness from 6 to 18 inches, depending on the character of the subgrade and the density of traffic. If the required thickness of gravel is greater than 6 inches it is usually laid in layers of 3 or 4 inches, each layer being consolidated before the next is applied.	_	_
The average cost of laying a gravel surface 20 ft. wide and 8 inches thick, based on a 2\ mile haul, is $4,700 per mile.
6th. Improved Earth.-This type of highway is formed by digging side ditches, throwing the material (such as it is) excavated therefrom onto the travelled way and grading it to a proper crown to shed water. Properly speaking the operation is one of grading and not of surfacing and usually provides a road which is good only in dry weather. If the material excavated from the side ditches happens to be gravel the road is a gravel road.
The cost varies with the size of ditch necessary to provide drainage and the range is from $1,000 to $4,000 per mile.	#
The above descriptions and costs apply only to the surfacing of roads. The construction of a highway involves other important and often costly operations, which may be described briefly as follows:-
1st. Clearing.-In constructing a new road through wooded country the first operation is that of cutting down and disposing of the trees and underbrush to the limits of the right of way and grubbing out roots where shallow cuts and fills are to be made.
Clearing costs from $200 to $4,000 per mile, depending on the size and density of the timber.
2nd. Grading.-This operation consists of forming the roadbed, which is to carry the finished surface. It involves the excavation of cuts and the filling of embankments, the protection of earth work from the action of rivers or lakes, the underdraining of wet places and the digging of ditches. The cost varies with the nature of the country, the nature of the material encountered, the allowable grade and the width of the roadbed to be constructed. The range is from $500 to $30,000 per mile.
3rd. Bridges.-This item covers the construction of all structures over 20 feet in clear span. The cost of such bridges may be anything from $500 to $500,000. Federal aid does not apply to such costs.
4th. Culverts.-The construction of all structures having a clear span of 20 feet or less, also pipes to carry streams across the roadway and under side entrance roads. Costs vary with the nature of the country, the number and size of streams and the type of culvert adopted. The range is from $500 to $10,000 per mile.
5th. Fencing.-Enclosing the right of way where necessary by fencing costs from $500 to $1,500 per mile.
6th. Tree Planting.-The growing shade of trees along the edge of the right of way protects the surface of the road from the extreme heat of the sun's rays in summer. This costs about $250 per mile.
7th. Miscellaneous.-The erection of crossing, danger and direction signs, guard rails, snow fences, etc Such items cost from nothing to $200 per mile.
203 J
Supply-Highways

Cost Per Mile
The average cost per mile of the Ottawa-Prescott Highway to date is $24,196. The average costs per mile of the roads constructed in Wentworth County are,-
Proj. Township	Sect. Length	Total cost	Per MileBarton	ir	413	$ 298,516 00	$ 72,2802\	8 Saltfleet	i	5-17	103,630 00	20,00001/	11-55	586,324 00	50,800An caster	i{	1	313	98,127 94	31,400G lanford	HI	0-80	30,423 61	38,100Ham il ton-Chats worth	18 E.& W. Flam boro.	01	3-07	116,831 01	38,100B1	2-80	151,502 95	54.000Beverly	D1	1-93	82,426 99	42,600Dundas-Street	25 E. Flamboro	5	3-90	137,641 94	35,30036-48	$ 1,605,424 44	44,008
Average cost for the County, $44,008 per mile
The average costs per mile between Toronto and Barrie are,-
T ownship	Mileage	Cost	Per Mile4-4	$ 110,889 41,052 35,447 231,012 136,222 2,625 9-153	$ 25,2028-2	5,006 3,771 46,202 20,6399-4	5-0	6-6	1-2	2,1871-6	5,72010-0	103,777	10,378Orillia	9-0	157,786	17-532
55-4		
The most expensive bit of highway in the Province of Ontario, of which we have a record is between Hamilton and Binkleys Corners, a distance of 9,100 feet, paved 30 feet wide, with warrenite bitulithic concrete. This work cost $129,907.70.

Supply-H ighways


PROVINCE OF ONTARIO
[Stage Direction]
Statement of Roads Being Built undeb the Canada Highways Act
Name of Road	Mileage	Expenditure to Dec. 31, 1922	Expenditure per mile	Type of ConstructionYork Co.-Whitby- Subsection A1-Pickering Twp....	3-54	$ cts. 233,200 00	$ cts. 65,875 70	* Asphaltic Concrete 20'Whitby-Belleville	75-90	820,655 43	10,812 32	/W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Belleville-Kingston	46-35	982,549 93	21,198 48	t Gravel 30,x20'x9'' [DOT]Oiled Macadam 30'x20' Gravel and Oiled MacadamKingston-Brockville	45-23	1,311,904 55	29,005 18	Macadam 30'x20'xlff'Brock ville-Prescott	[DOT].	11-2	168,161 73	15,014 44	[DOT]Macadam surface treated withOttawa-Prescott	58-3	1,420,312 87	24,362 14	tar 20' Gravel 30'x20' *W.B. Macadam with bituminous surface 20' Gravel with bituminous sur-Hamilton-Queenston	36-33	940,516 41	25,888 15	face 20'x9" Asphaltic concrete 20' Cement concrete 20' ^ W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Hamilton-Brantford	19-18	768,000 00	40,041 71	[DOT]Bit. Macadam 30'x20' [DOT]Bitulithic 30'x30' W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Brantford-Woodstock	24-35	395,407 28	16,238 50	Cement concrete 30'x30' /Gravel 30'x20'xS'Woodstoclc-Ingersoll	7-16	72,876 02	10,178 00	(Macadam 30'x20'xl0" Gravel Macadam 30'x20'x9'r withIngersoll-London	15-57	207,025 90	13,296 46	bit. surfacing 20' [[DOT]Gravel with bit. surface 20'x9Windsor-St. Thomas- Section S-Aldborough Township	10-77	123,271 69	11,445 84	(Asphaltic Gravel 20'x9r [Gravel 30'x20/x9*'Subsec. B1-Twp. of Sandwich W.	2-0	68,428 89	34,214 44	*Cement Concrete 18'Section C-Twp. Sandwich W. and So	
Subsec. D1-Sandwich South Twp	| 6-7	232,263 92	34,666 26	u u * « «London-St. Thomas- Section A-London City and Westminster Township	| 5-8	269,755 35	24,748 19	Cement Concrete 20'Subsec. B1-Twp. of Westminster Subsec. B2-Twp. of Westminster	j 5-1 5-2	184,210 24	35,425 04	* u uSubsec. Cl-Twp. of South wold..	3-9	149,525 66	38,339 91	Lambeth-Maidstone- Subsec. K1-From Chatham City to Centre of Lot 7	2-0	84,092 62	42,046 31	Cement Concrete 18'Subsec. A1-Twp. of Westminster	0-19	7,218 05	37,989 74	Cement Concrete 20'Subsec. Ml-Twp. of Raleigh	2-70	89,152 05	33,019 28	Cement Concrete 18'St. Thomas-Niagara- Subsec. U1-North Cayuga Twp.	7-25	209,705 29	28,924 87	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Section V-Canboro Twp	8-8	270,749 57	30,767 00	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Subsec. BB1-Westerly side Stamford Twp. to Welland Canal	2-0	36,575 71	18,287 85	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0*'Subsec. CC-From westerly city Its. City of Niagara westerly to west side Stamford Twp	4-11	50,763 26	12,351 16	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0*Subsec. Y1-From Crowdand/ Wain fleet Line westerly to road between Lots 19 and 20 Wain-fleet Township	5-36	94,453 89	17,622 00	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0"Section Z-Westerly limit City of Welland westerly to the Crow-land/Wainfleet Line	1-74	9,057 67	5,205 56	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Jarvis-Hamilton- Section H-Glanford Township- from (Subsec. 1) Cons. 1-2 northerly to north boundary	0-8	30,423 61	38,029 48	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0'Section I-Barton Township	3-13	98,127 94	31,350 78	W.B. Macadam 30'x20'xl0"
The standard width of grade in the Province of Ontario is 30'. The depth of bituminous'macadam 4" on 6" macadam base; the depth of waterbound macadam 4" surface on 6' base; the depth of gravel is'-9"; the depth of cement concrete is 6' to 8"; and the depth of asphaltic concrete is 3 to 4' on 6' macadam base.
Supply-Highways
[Stage Direction]
PROVINCE OF ONTARIO-Continued
Statement of Roads Being Built under the Canada Highways Act-Continued
Name of Road	Mileage	Expenditure to Dec. 31, 1922	Expenditure per mile	Type of ConstructionClappison's Corner-Chatsworth- Subsec. LI-From City of Guelph	1-0	8 cts. 61,894 58	$ cts. 61,894 58	[DOT]Cement Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. N1-From N. Boundary south of Lot line 6 and 7, Con. 8, Twp. of Puslinch	1-5	67,921 99	45,281 33	[DOT]Cement Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. N2-Puslinch Township..	10	50,871 37	50,871 37	*Cement Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. Q1-Township of Flam-boro 	3-10	116,831 01	37,687 42	[DOT]Bit. Macadam 30'x20'Elginfield-Sarnia- Subsec. Bl-Easterly from City of Sarnia, Twp. of Sarnia	2-4	89,556 25	37,315 10	[DOT] *Cement Concrete 20'Hamilton-Kitchener- Subsec. Bl-West Flamboro-top of escarpment westerly to west side of Township	2-8	151,502 95	54,108 20	[DOT]Asph. Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. D1-Beverly Twp.- across Lots 31-36	1 -93	82,426 99	42,708 29	*Asph. Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. FI-From westerly Its	' 1-05	31,558 04	f*Asph. Concrete 30'x20'Galt City westerly to west side N. Dumfries Twp	
Section H-Adjoining FI extending westerly to easterly Its. Town of Preston	
London-Goderich	34-62	27,777 53 207,193 79	56,510 07 5,984 80	[DOT]Asph. Concrete 30'x20' Gravel 30'x20'x9*Stratford-Goderich- Section B-Downie and Ellice Twp. From Stratford westerly to Lot Line 15 and 16 Ellice Twp	2-6	139,487 14	53,648 90	[DOT]Asph. Concrete 30'x20'Subsec. Cl-f rom Lot Line 15 and 16 Ellice Twp. westerly to Lot Line 20 and 21 Ellice Twp..	1-26	75,706 65	60,084 64	*Asph. Concrete 30'x20'Toronto-Hamilton (Dundas Street).	30-57	1,009,324 19	33,016 82	[[DOT]Bituminous Macadam 30'x 20'.Toronto-Bradford	27-03	418,100 00	15,468 00	j Asphaltic Concrete on Cement { Concrete-20'* Bit. Macadam 30' x 20'Bradford-Severn- Section B-Twp of Gwillimbury West	6-6	136,222 46	20,639 76	Macadam 30' x 20' ^Section E-Barrie Town easterly.	1-2	2,624 87	21,187 39	Gravel 30' x 20' x 9Section F-From Section E to Ora Bdy	1-6	9,153 30	5,720 81	Gravel 30' x 20' x 9'Subsec. G1-From Vespra/Oro line easterly to Con. 4 and 5....	3-6	45,071 08	12,519 74	Gravel 30' x 20' x 9'Subsec. G2-From Con. 9 and 10 east to east Bdy. Ora Twp....	6-4	58,706 12	9,172 83	Gravel 30' x 20' x 9'Subsec. 11-From W. Bdy. Orillia Twp. northerly to Orillia Twp	4-2	61,390 82	14,616 86	Gravel 30' x 20' x 9'Subsec. 12-Orillia Town northerly to Con. 8 and 9, Orillia North	4-8	96,396 37	20,082 57	Macadam 30' x 20' x 10*Port Hope-Peterboro- Section J-Twp. of North Mono-ghan	5-57	103,475 55	19,199 21	[DOT]Oiled Macadam 30' x 20'Section K-Twp. of North Mono* ghan-Peterboro	
Ottawa-Point Fortune	0-08 69-19	{ 983,349 93	14,212 31	[DOT]Oiled Macadam 30' x 20' (*Asph. Concrete 30' x 20'St. David's-Niagara Falls	4-26	192,901 73	45,282 09	j*Bit. Macadam 30' x 20' [DOT]Gravel 30'x20'x9' /[DOT]Bit. Macadam 30' x 20'Port Credit-Cooksville	2-45	47,544 07	19,405 75	\*Cement Concrete 30' x 20' W.B. Macadam 30' x 20' x I0rBelleville-Foxboro- Subsec. A1-Belleville northerly.	2-0	46,102 73	23,051 36	W.B. Macadam 30' x 20' x 10*
The standard width of grade in the Province of Ontario is 30'. The depth of bituminous macadam 4' on 6" base; the depth of waterbound macadam 4" surface on 6" base; the depth of gravel is 9"; the depth of cement concrete is 6' to 8-J"; and the depth of asphaltic concrete is 3 to 4" on 6" macadam base.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-High ways
Hamilton-Brantford Highway-Project No. 9, Ontario- Length-
Sections-No. 1, Township of Ancaster	
2, Township of Brantford	
Total length	
11'4 miles 7-78 "
19-18 "
Character of Construction in First Project Statement-
Waterbound macadam, base throughout, cement concrete pavement for distance of 2-8 miles east from Brantford, and bithulithic pavement westerly from Hamilton, 1-7 mile.
Cost of Work under Agreement Approved by Engineer, 8768,000.00, or $40,041.71 per mile.
Federal Aid to End of 1921, $238,492.00, Balance Due, $68,708.
Description of the Work Done under Agreement-	.	.	,	[DOT]
This project is built to the standard widths of 30-foot grade and 20-foot pavement, except the portion of the road westerly from Hamilton 1 * 7 mile, being the junction to the Hamilton-Kitchener road where the pavement was constructed at a width of thirty feet, and except 2-8 miles east from Brantford where the pavement was constructed to a width of 30 feet. However, in this case, all work over and above the standard 20-foot width was paid for jointly by the City of Brantford and the County of Brant.
Supplementary Surfacing Project (Not under agreement)
Character of Surfacings-[DOT]	,	, , ,
Asphaltic concrete on macadam base, easterly part, 9-7 miles, and cement concrete pavement, westerly
^The^wholeof the road is now completed, the surfacing being asphaltic concrete on macadam base from Hamilton westerly to the boundary between Ancaster and Brantford Townships, 11-4 miles; cement concrete from Ancaster-Brantford Township boundary to the City of Brantford, 7*78 miles.	.
The estimate of the cost not under agreement as given by the Provinces in its supplementary application for agreement is $723,701.41; this added to the cost of the work under agreement gives a total of $1,382,608.46,
' Owing to the fact that this pavement must sustain a traffic equivalent to that found on the principal streets of a modern city, as it is located between two leading industrial cities, it was thought advisable to build the highway in the most substantial manner. The highway is located in undulating territory and, in order to reduce its grades to five per cent, it was necessary to do a great deal of heavy grading, especially over what is known as the Ancaster Mountain. This work is necessarily costly. Then a subway was required under the Toronto-Hamilton-Brantford railway at Station 91 to Station 105.
Memorandum Re:-
Length-36-33 miles.
Hamilton to Queenston Road
Character of Construction in Approved Project Statement:-
Width of grade-30'throughout.	TT	..
Cement concrete pavement 20' wide, 8^" thick in centre and 6 at side, from Hamilton easterly 4To miles. Bituminous macadam-20* wide, 10* thick 2 miles, Clinton Township.
Waterbound macadam on balance of road.
Cost of Work under Agreement Approved by Engineer: $940,516.41*= $25,888.15 per mile.
Federal Aid Earned:-
$376,206.56, being 40% of approved cost.
Federal Aid Paid: (On account)
[Stage Direction]
Character of Surfacing Laid under Supplementary Project for which there is no Agreement under the Canada Highways Act:-
Bituminous macadam Township of Niagara	3 miles
Bituminous macadam Township of Grantham	2*5
Bituminous macadam Township of Louth	5-4
Bituminous macadam Township of Clinton	4-1
Bituminous macadam Township of North Grimsby.4-3
Bituminous macadam Township of Salt fleet	1-1
Asphaltic concrete Township of North Grimsby....1*3
Asphaltic concrete Township of Saltfleet	5-0
Cement concrete Township of Grantham	1-25
(between City of St. Catharines and new Welland Canal)
Oiled macadam Township of Niagara	2-8 miles
Cost of Additional Surfacing under Supplementary Project Statement-(Not under Agreement) $909,535.22
Combined Cost of Work under Original and Supplementary Projects:-
$1,850,051.63, or an average cost of $50,923.75 per mile.
Supply-Highways

[Stage Direction]
Statement of Condition of Federal Aid Work to December 31,1922
Project No.	Section	Sub- section	Length
			Miles
1-A	M	1	Q	1	1-253A	2	3-09c	1	2-59D	1	0-82E	1	2-07E	2	2-48H	1	2 31G	4-511Q	3	1-765s	1-743u	1-01V	1-83w	2-06X	5-47Y	3-24A	1	2-659A	3	4-473B	1-202C	2	3-50F	4-25H	2	7-584I	0,452M	2	0-797N	1-12P	1-003	D	3	1-148B	1 &2	1-951C	1 & 2	0-893L	1 & 3	3-59ww	2-813TT	1	1-032TT	2	0-611TT	3	1-041I	1-78FF	1-861NN	10-204HH	2-755II	3-250KK	2-043DD	Part	0-81II	Part	1-00KK	Part	0-26QQ	Part	1-08JJ	Part	0-40R	Part	0-41u	Part	0-13A	D	1	2-317J	0-531A	2	1-20B	1	1-138B	2	3-129C	2	2-65c	3	1-121E	1 &3	1-051E	2 & 4	3-39J	2-40JA	0-60K	5-77L	1 &3	0-722N	2-5 & 7	2-589P	1-2-4	2-3486-8	P	3-5 & 7	2-39Q	1-3-5-7	2-93Q	2-4-6	2,386R	1 &3	0-945R	2	0-29T	2-3-4	6-704V	0-32B	I.	L	7-60N	1	3-56N	1	3-56o	3-10C	0-39
Surface
Kind
Gravel	
W. B. M. Tar. B.
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Cone	
Cone	
As. Concrete....
As. Concrete....
As. Concrete....
As. Concrete....
As. Concrete....
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Cone	
Cone	
Con. & Bt. Mac..
Concrete	
Concrete	
Concrete	
Con. & Bt. Mac.,
Concrete	
Bit. Mac	
Bit. ]$ac	
Bit. Macadam...
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Bit. Mac	
Gravel	
Concrete	
Concrete	
Bit. Mac	
Bit. Mac	
VV. B. Mac & oil..
Gravel., Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel.. Gravel..

Gravel		22
Gravel		22
Gravel		24
Gravel		24
Gravel		22
Gravel		22
Gravel		24
Gravel		22
Gravel		24
Concrete		21, 26
Gravel		24
Gravel		24
Gravel		24
Gravel		24
Gravel		22
Gravel		22
Width
Ft.
16
22
22
22
15
16 16 16 16 16 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
16 16 16 14 16 16 16 16 16 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 14 22 16 16
16
22
22
22
24
24
Location of Section or Subsection
St. Cesaire	
Rou ville	
Orford Township	
Magog Township	
Magog Town	
Bolton East Twp	
Bolton East Twp	
Shefford Twp	
S. Stukelye Twp	
St. Marie de Monnoir. N.D. de Bonsecours... Chambly Canton V...
Chambly Bassin V____
St. Jos. Chambly....
St. Hubert Par	
St. Ant. Longueuil__
Orford Twp	
Rock Forest	
Petit L. Magog Vil__
Magog Twp	
Eastman Village	
Shefford Twp	
Waterloo Town	
St. Cesaire Par	
St. Cesaire Vi 11...
Rougemont Village....
St. Romuald	
St. David	
St. Telesphore	
St. J. Deschaillons..
Longueuil Parish___
Boucherville	
Boucher ville	
Boucherville	
Lotbiniere Vill....
St. Pierre de Soreil..
Contrecoeur	
Ste, Victoire	
St. Ours	
St. Roch	
Yamaska Village...
St. Ours Parish....
St. Roch Parish____
Varennes Vill	
St. Ours Town	
Laval Village	
Nicolet Town	
Caughnawaga Reserve.
Ste. Martino	
Huntingdon Vill	
L'Enfant Jesus....
St. Frederic	
St. Frederic	
S. C. de Jesus....
S. C. de Jesus....
S. C. de Marie....
S. C. de Marie....
Black Iiake Town. Ireland Township.. St. J os. Coleraine..
D 'Israeli	
Garth by	
Weedon	
Weedon	
Lac Weedon Vill...
Lac Weedon Vill...
Weedon Centre	
Weedon Centre	
Duds well	
Westbury Township..
Bienville	
Winslow North.. Bury Township.. Eaton Township. Eaton Township.,
Cost
Approximately
$ cts.
71.100	00
14.000	00
48.200	00
35.400	00
2,200 00
41.000	00
41.300	00
35.700	00
82.500	00
43.300	00
42.500	00
18.700	00
39.200	00
49.000	00
120.700	00
66.700	00
25.200	00
54.400	00 16,600 00
39.500	00
65.400	00 88.600 00
7.200	00
11.700	00
27.300	00
27.700	00
37.400	00
35.900	00
11.000	00
149.700	00
99.400	00
66,000 00
16.400	00
27.800	00
60.500	00
24.200	00
195.000	00
37.500	00
45.300	00
27.400	00
11.200	00
18,600 00
6.100	00
9,000 00
6.200	00
9.900	00
4.800	00
131.600	00
83.000	00
2.700	00
53,890 00
48.600	00
6,100 00 11,200 00
13.000	00
12,200 00
16.000	00
10,000 00
31.900	00
15.400	00
14.900	00
22.900	00
8.500	00 6,600 00
15,000 00
10.400	00 600 00
19.400	00
8.600	00
16,800 00
53.600	00 87,200 00
|70,200 00
49.700	00
11.600	00
Per Mile
[Stage Direction]
21,513
11,173
15.599 13,668
2,683
19,807
16,653
14,455
18,289
24,533
24,383
18,515
21,421
23,786
22.066
20.586
9,477
12,162
13,810
11,285
15,388
11,682
15,929
14,680
24,375
27,700
32,578
18,401
12,318
41,699
35,336
63,953
26,841
26,705
33,989
13.004 19,110 13,612 13,938 13,412 13,827
18.600 23,462
8,334
15,500
24,146
36,923
37,600
20,623
5,085
44,908
11,390
2,302
9,991
12.369 3,599 6,667
16,667
5,529
21,330
5.755
9.755
3,556
2,253
6,287
11.005 2,069 2,894
26,875
65.370
10,763
11,474
6,654
16,032
29,744

Supply-Highways
PROVINCE OF QUEBEC-Continued
Statement of Condition of Federal Aid Work to December 31, 1922-Continued
Project No.	Section	Sub- section	Length	Surface	
				Kind	Width
			Miles		Ft.
8 .	A	0-25	B.W. M.&Oil	141-18	V. B. M. & Oil	16B	2-89	VV. B. M. & Oil	16F	Pt.	2-56	W. B. Macadam	12H	Pt.	2-66	travel	20, 22J	pt.	2-76	J ravel	181-48	W.B. Macadam &	Oil	14N	pt.	1-18	Gravel	22p	2-50	22Q	Pt.	0-92	Gravel	18R	Pt.	0-43	Gravel	20, 24T	Pt.	2-28	Gravel	22Y	Pt.	0-22	Gravel	20H	Pt.	106	W. B. Macadam &	Oil	160-17	20I	Pt.	0-17	Gravel	20J	Pt.	2-32	Gravel	20c	2	1-52	c	3	1-14	W. B. Macadam &	Oil	16D	2	0-27	W. B. Macadam &	Oil	16N	1	3-878	22o	4,858	22P	2	0-636	Concrete	16R	2,384	22T	1	3,748	Gravel	22T	2	4,180	Gravel	22CC	2-55	22BB	Pt.	1-42	Gravel	22U	Pt.	2-32	Gravel	22V	Pt.	3,60	Gravel	2211	C	4-19	16E	1-3-5	0-76	Gravel	20E	2-4-6	2-144	Gravel	24F	0-132	G	1	0-638	Gravel	24G	3	0-047	Gravel	24G	4	0-378	Gravel	24G	5	0-39	Gravel	24G	7	6-175	Gravel	24K	2-6	1812 .	c	2-707	22B	1	5-22	W. B. M	1617	B	4-30	1818 .	I	13-41	18A	Pt.	2-30	16B	4,709	W.B. M.&Oil....	16F	2-09	16G	1*12	W. B. M	1623	A	Pt.	0-85	W.B. M.&Oil....	16B	5-59	W. B. M. & Oil....	16C	Pt.	2-30	W.B. M.&Oil....	16W N B & Oil	16pt!	2-26	W. B. M	12K	pt.	0-54	W. B. M	12L	pt.	0-12	W. B. M	14B	Pt.	0-284	Gravel	20D	Pt.	0-425	20B	1-185	Gravel	20E	4,081	20
Location of Section or Subsection
Abord A. PloufFe.... St. Martin Parish... St. Eustache Parish, St. Scholastique
[Stage Direction]
St. Jerusalem	
Calumet Village	
N. D. du Bonsecours-
Montebello Vill	
Papineauville Vil	
Coeur Trds pur de la B.
Vierge Marie de P...
Masson Village	
St. Scholastique P....
St. Hermas Par	
St. Jerusalem Par	
Laprairie Parish	
Laprairie Parish	
Laprairie Town	
Stanfold	
St. Victoire	
Victoriaville Tn	
St. Christophe	
Warwick	
Warwick	
Orford Township	
Brompton Township....
Kingsey Falls P	
Shipton Township	
St. Therese	
St. Janvier	
St. Janvier	
St. Monique	
St. Jerome	
St. Jerome	
St. Jerome	
St. Jerome	
St. Jerome	
St. J. de Mt. Rolland..
St. Michel	
St. Luc Parish	
South Hull Twp	
St. Rose du Degele...
Cap de la Madeleine...
St. Louis de France..
Maple Grove Town	
Beauharnois Town	
Levis City	
St. Ls. Pintendre....
St. Henri Par	
St. Henri Vil	
St. Jeanne de Chantel
lie Perrot	
St. Michel de Vaudreuil.
St. Jos. de Soulange..
St. Christophe Par....
St. Simon de Ramsay...
Ste. Victoire Par	
Ste. Eulalie Par	
Cost
Approximately
Per Mile
$ cts. S
16,100 00 27,200 00 16,900 00 60,300 00
11,259
9,411
6,602
22,669
40,700 00 11,000 00 28,400 00 3,900 00 6,800 00
9,599
9,322
11,360
4,239
15,814
28,700 00	12,588
2,100 00	9,545
22,500 00
18,293
2,400 00 6,800 00 43,500 00
14,118
2,931
28,618
19,400 00
13,759
45.100	00 38,000 00
13.100	00 14,300 00 19,600 00
21.100	00
20.400	00 8,300 00
14,200 00
36.400	00
11,630
7,822
20,599
5,998
5,229
5,047
8,000
5,845
6,121
10,111
31,900 00
3.500	00
35.600	00 5,600 00
10,000 00
800 00
21.600	00 7,100 00
124,500 00
53.000	00 14,200 00 74,300 00 52,800 00
56.400	00
67.400	00
78.000	00
29.500	00 28,700 00 14,513 81 79,196 86 47,148 21
8,243 14
7,613
4,605
16,604
42,424
15,674
17,021
57,143
18,205
20,162
20,385
5,246
14,234
12,279
4,206
29,304
16,564
14,115
26,625
17,075
14,167
20,499
21,692
20,500 00
4.200	00 2,300 00 2,000 00 3,000 00
13.200	00 14,400 00
9,071
7,778
19,167
7,042
7,059
11,139
3,529
Montreal-Longueuil-Sherbrooke, Length 85-25 miles. Quebec-Montreal, Length 159 miles.
Levis-St. Lambert, 177 miles.
Caughnawaga-Malone, 45-38 miles.
Beauce Jet.-Sherbrooke, Length 95-581 miles
The standard width of grade in the Province of Quebec is 24 feet. The width of pavement as above.
The depth of cement concrete is 7* to 8' at centre on broken stone and gravel base. The depth of asphaltic concrete m the Province of Quebec is 2' on 14' broken stone base. The depth of bituminous macadam is 3 to 4 on broken stone base 8 . i be depth of waterbound macadam is 15* loose or about 111' consolidated. The average depth of gravel is 10 .
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Highways
Province of New Brunswick- Statement Showing Cost of Completed Roads
Pro- ject No.	Location	Length T ype of surface	Width	Total cost	Cost per mile
		miles			
1	M atapedia-B athtj rst-				
	Sec. H-Belledune Stn.-Green Pt.	3 0 Gravel		18'	13,300 00	4,433 33
3	N EWCASTI e-M oncton-				
	Sec. A-Newcastle-Chatham		4 0 Bit.Macadam...	16'	129,000 00	32,250 00
7	Moncton-St. John-				
	Sec. I-Apohaqui-Norton			IS'		
	N-Rothesay-St. John		8-6 Bit. macadam..	16'	83,200 00	9,674 42
S	St. John-St. Stephen-				
Sec. N-Musquash-Ludgate Lake...	4 0 Gravel	18'	35,300 00	8,825 00O-Ludgate Lake-Spruce Lake	30 " 	18'	30,000 00	10,000 00P-Spruce Lake-St. John	5-5 "	18'	31,300 00	5,690 9110	St. John-Frederjcton-	Sec. A-St. John-Westfield	Corner	11-3 "	18'	108,200 00	9,575 2211	F R ED E RICTON-W OOD STOC K-	Sec. A-Fredericton-Indian	18'	118,700 00	12,763 44B-Indian Village-Lake	George Rd	10-9 "	18'	83,900 00	7,697 25C-Lake George Rd.-	151 "	18'	145,000 00	9,602 65D-Pokiok-Shogomoc	70 "	18'	76,800 00	10,971 43F-Eel River Br.-Wood-	11-7 «	18'	94,500 00	8,076 9213	Perth-Grand Falls-	Sec. A-Andover-Aroostook...	6 0 Gravel	18'	21,800 00	3,633 34C-South End Long	Swamj>North End	Swamp	3-6 "	18'	44,300 00	12,305 5614	Grand Falls-Qcebec Boundary-	Sec. G-Edmundston-St.	18'	24,400 00	5,191 4916	WESTFIELD-0 ROMOCTO-	Sec. C-Queenstown-Otnabog...	4-5 Gravel	18'	34,900 00	7,755 56
Note. Width of grade-24 ft.-'Width of surfacing as shown above. Depth of bituminous macadam. 3} on 4 broken stone base. Gravel-8".
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Highways

[Stage Direction]
Statement Showing Cost of Completed Roads
Project
No.
2
4
6
8
10
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
30
32
38
Location
Length
Halifax-Bedford	
Halifax-Indian River..
Mt. Uniacke-Lakelands...
Pt. Joli-Sable River...
Aylesford-Middleton
[Stage Direction]
Elmsdale-Shubenacadie...
Li verpool-Caledonia...
Sydney-Glace Bay	
Windsor-Hantsport	
Weymouth-Meteghan	
Bedford-Elmsdale
[Stage Direction]
Elmsdale-Shubenacadie... Shubenacadie-Stewiacke..
Truro-Glenholme	
Amherst-N.B. Boundary.
Truro-New Glasgow	
New Glasgow-Antigonish. Antigonish-Mulgrave	
Tracadie-Canso	
Woods Harbour-Shag Hbr	
Halifax-Hants Co. Line-Mt.
Uniacke Station	
Hawkesbury-St. Peters	
St. Peters-Sydney Road	
Sy dney-Baddeck	
Woods Hbr.-Co. Lines Yarmouth-Shelbume	
Parrsboro-Am herst	
Sackville Riv. Br.-Lucasville
Road	_	
Lucasville Rd.-Halifax Hants
Co. Line	
Sable River-Lockeport	
1 mile east Victoria Br. to 2* miles west of same	
6-	3 17-5
7-	6
6-	3 12-1
7-	1 6-0
8-	2 6-5
21-3
2-46
1-0
28-07
34-91
3-9
30-39
6-0
5-	15
6-	65 8-04
Type
Bit. Macadam....
4-5 M. Gravel...
13-0 M.W.B. Mac.
V.B. Macadam
[Stage Direction]
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Slag Macadam....
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel	
9-	17 M. Gravel...
10-	53 M.W.B. Mac.
Gravel..
Gravel.
W.B. Macadam.
Gravel	
Gravel	
Gravel.,
Gravel.. Gravel..
Crushed Rock.,
Crushed Rock. Gravel	
Gravel.
Width	Total	Cost per mile
	$ cts.	$ cts.
16'	243,397 28	18,634 4814'	340,228 72	19,441 65 j14'	99,357 45	13,073 3414'	123,759 28	9,644 3316'	118,542 50	9,796 9014'	95,707 80	13,479 9214'	49,239 80	8,206 6312'	135,184 49	16,485 9114'	69,061 91	10,624 9116'	55,297 22	5,529 7214'	130,277 37	6,116 3014'	30,266 28	8,697 2014'	17,308 18	7,035 8414'	85,407 86	7,046 8516'	38,261 37	38,261 3714'	93,512 30	5,224 1514'	148,310 77	5,283 6014'	210,360 87	10,678 2110'	12'-14'	159,351 49	4,564 6414'	41,890 18	8,040 3414'	42,884 09	10,995 9214'	84,439 60	4,221 9812'-14'	151,330 95	4,979 6212'	69,682 92	3,871 2714'	27,187 58	4,531 2614'	96,889 49	5,142 7014'	40,410 27	7,846 6514'	56,869 59	8,551 8114'	33,590 11	4,177 8716'	17,262 56	4,426 30
Av. for both surf, combined.
Remarks
Diversion to eliminate 2 rly. X-ings.
Av. for both surf, combined.
$ M. Slag. Mach, included.
Average cost per mile all types (8,192.62.
Width of grade-24 Ft.
Depth of surfacing as shown above.
Depth of bituminous macadam-3' on 6" broken stone base. Depth of waterbound macadam-10r.
Gravel-8' in depth.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Highways
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND Statement Showing Cost of Completed Roads
Project
No.
Location
Length
Type
2
4
6
8 12
14
15 10 18
20 21
23
10 Mile House-County Line	
New Haven-Queen's Arms	
Kensington-Bryenton's Corner	
O'Leary Rd.-Mt. Pleasant	
McMahon's Bridge-Elmira Road....
Dundas-Rollo Bay	
Bovyer's Brook Webster's Corner...
Montague-Cardigan Road	
Murray River-Montague	
Cardigan-St. Peters	
St. Peters-Charlottetown	
Union Road-Scotchfort	
Mater Works Hill-Hunter River....
Bryenton's Cor.-Irishtown-French
River	
Summerside-Borden	
Mt. Pleasant-Misr-ouche	
O'Leary-Bloomfield	
Cliarlottetown-Queen's Arms	
Charlottetown-Union Road	
80	Improved Earth..
8-0	Improved Earth..
3-5	Improved Earth..
12-0	Improved Earth..
8-5	Improved Earth..
8-5	Improved Earth..
9-0	Improved Earth..
5-5	Improved Earth..
100	Improved Earth..
13-0	Improved Earth..
8-5	Improved Earth..
11-5	Improved Earth..
11-5	Improved Earth..
6-5	Improved Earth..
15-5	Improved Earth..
14-5	Improved Earth..
6-0	Improved Earth..
3-00	Improved Earth..
2-75	Improved Earth..
165-75	
Width Total
Generally $ cts.
18'
18'
18'
18'
18'
18'
18'
18'
18'
[Stage Direction]
18'
18'
[Stage Direction]
19,485 37 12,327 58 7,252 07 40,847 17 16,056 51 14,171 58 11,263 65 14,835 47 19,290 01 25,094 52 15,822 45 21,754 86 34,045 47
18'	14,041	7118'	30,950	3218'	44,605	0918'	22,624	62IS'	10,701	65IS'	9,025	35
Cost per mile
8 cts. 2,435 6S 1,540 95 2,072 02 3,903 93 1,889 00 1,667 24 1,251 52 2,697 35
1.929	00
1.930	35 1,861 45 1,891 72 2,900 47
2,160 26 1,996 79 3,076 28 3,770 77 3,567 22 3,500 13
Average cost of all roads $2,357.75.
PROVINCE OF MANITOBA Statement Showing Cost of Completed Sections of Roads
Project No.	Location	Length (Miles)	Type of Surface	Width of Grade	Total Cost	Cost per Mile7	W innipeg-Portage-	oi 60	8 cts.Sec. O.-Poplar Point-Portage la	Prairie	18-7	18'	39,695 34	8	Winnipeg-Boundary (Centre Route)-	z, i«>u uuSec. A-Winnipeg to Trehern Road	52-8	22'	130,702 08	9	Winnipeg-Boundary (South Route)-	Sec. A-Through MacDonald Mu-	nicipality	28-0	20-24'	77,004 54	3,020 00Sec. B-Through Morris & Duf-	11	ferin Municipality	
Winnipeg-Riverton-	19-7	Earth	20'-18'	47,427 25	2,400 00Sec. A-West Kildonan-St. Pauls.	6-5	Gravel	20'	9,126 35	1,410 00
Note.-Extract from the Engineer's Report to December 31, 1922 on Manitoba.
facing^$At5 00p'ermlfe™84 °f ^ 344 mUeS completed and the 142 miles 75% completed exclusive of sur-
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Highways
PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN Statement Showing Cost of Completed Sections of Roads
Project No.	Location	Length	Type of Surface	Width of Grade	Total Cost	Cost per Mile1	Cadillac-Battleford-	Miles	Ft,.	$ cts.	$ cts.2	Sec. G-Battleford-N. Battleford. Assiniboia-Prince Albert-	2-30	Gravel	20	16,309 05	7,080 00Sec. B-Crestwynd-Moose Jaw. ..	25-90	Earth	20	90.033 34	3,480 009-30	20	36,607 34	3,840 004	Sec. G-Dana-Colonsay	
Fleming-Walsh-	23-80	Earth	20	88,891 68	3,740 0032-30	20	73,050 30	2.2G0 005	Sec. E-Mcl.ean-Regina	
Togo-Lloydminster-	25-80	Earth	20	52,177 14	2,030 CO7	Sec. N-Maidstone-Waseca	
Saskatoon-Alsask-	10-20	Earth	20	18,028 16	1.7S0 001	Sec. C-Harris-Rosetown	
Cadillac-Battleford-	27-60	Earth	20	63,963 27	2,320 00Sec. D-Clrose- Rose town	24-30	Grading for gravel surface	20	76,578 29	3,150 00Note.-Extract from Engineer's Report to December 31, 1922 on Saskatchewan.	.	."The actual average cost of the 615 miles of grading completed and the 160 miles which is 80% completed is $2,300 per mile.	.	.
The average cost of the 18 miles of one coat gravel surfacing is $1,800 per mile, making a total of $4,100 per mile for a one coat gravel surface.
The average cost of the 39 miles of clay surfacing is S3,100 per mile, making the average cost of a clay surfaced road $5,400.50 per mile."

Province ok British Columbia-Statement Showing Cost of Completed Roads
Project No.	Location	Length	Type of surface	Width	Total	Cost per per mile	Remarks	Name of contractor1	Alberni-Victoria-	$ cts.	$ cts.	Sec. A-Craigflower Br.-Parsons	Br	2-046	Cement concrete.	IS'	76,617 61 44,373 40	37,447 51 32,869 IS	Palmer Bros. Hodgson, King & Marble. M. P. Cotton Co.B-C ol wood-Langford	1-35	16'	2-42	Asphaltic concrete.	16'	94,949 86	39,235 48	4	Vancou ver-Ladner-	Sec. A-No. 3 Road. Lulu Island.	2-65	Bituminous concrete	IS'	55,417 05	20,912 09	B-No. 5 & 9, Lulu Island....	1-89	Cement bituminous	16'	64,780 42	34,275 35	1 Harrison & Lamond, | Lithia pav., Con-l c.rete pav. Columbia Bith. Co.C-No. 3 & 9, Lulu Island	2-03	Asphaltic concrete..	18'	49,962 75	24,612 19	I 1 b	5	Ladner-New Westminster-	Sec. A-Semiamo Road Delta....	2-97	Bitulithic	16'	[171,128 65 i 82.S48 63	28-664 771	fPalmer Bros., Colum-\ bia Bithulithic Co.,c-	3-00	((	16'	40,892 71'	B-	2-026	Cement concrete....	16'	D- "	0-49	Bitulithic	14'	6,526 22	13,318 82	Columbia Bithulithic Co.6	Caulfield-Roche Point-	Sec. A-North Vancouver	1-00	Bitulithic	15'	20,952 20	20,952 20	Columbia Bithulithic Co.9	Vancouver-Hope-	Sec. A-New Westminster Br.	south	3-27	Cement concrete..	18'	175,455 23	53,656 03	B-Continuation to Johnson Rd	2-30	18'	119,911 48	52,135 43	1-401	Gravel and crushed	24'	75,185 98	53,665 94	Heavy grading and	D-Cloverdale	1 [DOT] 629	Cement concrete.... Bithulithic	18' 16'	59,291 03 44,135 16 107,516 76	36,397 19 14,376 27 37,074_74	embankment	Palmer Bros. Concrete.G-Chilliwack East	3-07	Columbia Bithulithic Co. M. P. Cotton Co.H-Johnson Road East	2-90	Cement concrete...	18'	I-Langley Paririe-Murray-	ville	1-90	16'	63,390 24	33,363 28	13	Spence's Bridge-Princeton-	Sec. A-Aspen Grove South	25-0	Grading and recon-	Kamloops-Osoyoos-	struction	40,783 71	1,871 35	15	Sec. B-Demonstration Farm-	McIntyre Creek	8-82	Grading	16'	47,161 64	5,345 98	Robertson & Partners, Ltd.
g
[Stage Direction]


Supply-Highways
Province or British Columbia- Continued.
22
Ashcroft-Summit Lake-
Sec. D-Dog Prairie-Quesnel. (Mile 214-219) Vernon- Rev elstoke-
See. A-Revelstoke West....
B-	"	....
C-Mara Lake	
D-Three Valley-Taft.... Osoyoos-Gbows Nest Pass-
See. A-Near Kitchener	
B-Thrums-Brilliant....
C-Osoyoos-Nine Mile___
D-Rossland West	
E-Kushanook-C'reston. F-Cascade Easterly...
G-Cascade-Rossland	
K-	"		
H-Near Moyie Lake	
J- Near Creston	
Nelson-New Denver -
Sec. A-Kaslo-Ainsworth	
B-New Denver-Three Forks.
SO	Gravel	10'	23,590 10	4,718 023-3	Grading	14'	197,647 86	17,742 187-84	"	14'	3-22	<1	16'	50,937 05	15,818 931007	"	153,182 33	15,211 751-28	12-18'	6,321 51	4,938 684-0	Grading	16'	31,218 58	7,804 6513-07	Impr. earth and	gravel	10-16'	'30,791 16	10,006 976-75	Impr. earth	16'	115,065 95	17,046 815-66	Mat'l. in situ	14'	22,070 11	3,899 3115 0	Impr. earth and	gravel	16'	229,007 20	15,327 1513-25 5-75	Grading	jll3,763 17	5,987 38J6-62	n	39,403 87	5.952 2430	22,217 67	7,405 894-2	Impr. earth	12'	23,207 77	5,525 425-17	u	10'	19,531 57	3,777 87
gravel and § earth
10-7 earth, 4-3 gravel	
Provincial Forces.
(Angus McDonnell.
Clayton Bros. & Angelu3 Angus McDonnell.
A. W. Davis.
W. P. Tierney Co. W. P. T ierney Co. Provincial Forces.
g
The following projects are under construction and the following amounts are the amounts expended to end of 1922.
18
Ashcroft-Summit Lake-
Sec. A-Fort George-Nixon's Creek B-Nixon's Creek-Quesnel- Fort George-Hazelton-
Sec. F-Endako-Burns Lake	
G-Burns Lake-Rose Lake...
I-N. Bulkley-Houston	
Burns Lake-Francois Lake	
Clearing and grading Clearing and grading
Grading.
Grading.
jl14,026 60
65,232 71
19,956 85
1,500 35^ 1,164 87
1,330 45
Bowles & Pickard and Caine & Brown.
Provincial Forces. Provincial Forces.
Note.-Width of grade, 22 feet. Width of surfacing as shown above. Depth of asphaltic concrete or bithulithie, 2" on 12' broken stone base. Cement concrete 7' centre, 6" at side on 6" broken stone base. Depth of gravel, 9".
co
t-'
Supply-Highways
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Railway Commission
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What is the purport of the immense document? Cannot you give us a brief explanation of it?


George Perry Graham: These documents really give the cost of highways by counties, in some instances by townships, in order to afford a comparison of what highways cost throughout the whole province of Ontario.


William Alves Boys: One other thing. I remember the minister on a previous occasion informed the committee that the cost of planting trees, the cost of acquiring right of way, and I think he said the cost of fencing, do not form any part of the outlay to which his department contributes. I would like to ask him now if his department contributes to anything ex, cept the actual road construction?


George Perry Graham: Nothing except the actual road construction. Anything that is on the road bed, I believe, is part of the road bed construction.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada- maintenance and operation of, $228,969.
Mr. BAXTER:: What I was going to ask I fear has not very much relation to this item. When the railway estimates were up before I asked the minister a question about what we might expect with regard to the place which used to be occupied by the train shed at St. John. Can the minister hold out any hope of the speedy restoration of the train shed or the construction of the union station?


George Perry Graham: I had intended getting some information about that for my railway estimates proper. I have no information concerning that at hand. This merely covers the Board of Railway Commissioners.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: The minister will get it
later?


George Perry Graham: Yes.


Mr. COOTE:: A year ago when this estimate was before the House I brought to the attention of the minister the statement which was reported to have been made by the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) regarding the Chairman of the Railway Commission. At that time the Minister of Agriculture said that he would read a statement in regard to this matter, but, acting, I have no doubt, on the suggestion of his superior officer, the Prime Minister when the House had re-assembled after dinner he declined to read the statement, and took refuge under the ruling given by the Chairman, I think, that matters that were being discussed before a standing committee should

not be discussed in the House till after the committee had reported. That committee has reported, and I think the country would be very glad if the minister would now read that statement to the House. I think we are quite justified in asking the minister to make the statement now, because we had the statement of the Prime Minister himself that the matter of removing Mr. Carvell from the Board of Railway Commissioners, was under consideration by the government. On the 24th June, the right hon. leader of the Opposition, (Mr. Meighen) said:
On the 10th day of June, attention being called by the member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) to certain commitments of the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) as regards the removal of the Chairman of the Railway Commission, the Prime Minister stated, as reported on page 2872 of Unrevised Hansard, that the Minister of Agriculture had made certain representations to the government as regards such removal; that the same had been considered, but that no definite conclusion had been reached. May I ask if a definite decision has been reached, and if so, what is it?
Mr. Mackenzie King: No conclusion has been reached The mattter is still being considered.
I see that the Minister of Agriculture has left the House but I should like to know whether that matter is still under consideration and, if so, what decision has
9 p.m. been arrived at. It seems to me the people of this country are entitled to an answer.


George Perry Graham: The act which provided for the appointment of the Board of Railway Commissioners also provided that the chairman could not be removed except by parliament. This government has not the power to remove the chairman if it wished. As far as I am concerned it 'does not wish. H my hon. friend wishes to move in any direction concerning the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners, it is his duty to do so, as much as it is the duty of any other member of this House, and it cannot be done except by parliament. The Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners is in the same position as the Auditor General.


George Gibson Coote: I think the minister is evading the question. If he wants to evade it, he should say so. The Prime Minister stated quite frankly to the House that the matter was under consideration by the cabinet, and I think before this item passes we should have some definite answer from the government. The Minister of Agriculture certainly has pledged himself very strongly, and the Prime Minister certainly stated that the matter was being considered by the cabinet. Surely we are entitled to an answer as to what decision the cabinet has arrived at in this matter, if they

Supply-Railway Commission
have arrived at any. If not, the minister should state frankly that they have not arrived at a decision.


Lewis Herbert Martell: The minister stated that he was perfectly satisfied with the Chairman of the Railway Commission and that he could only be removed by parliament, and if the hon. member for Macleod wants to have him removed, let him make a motion to that effect, and he will find how far he will get.


George Gibson Coote: I would like to remind the member that the Minister of Agriculture, whom he greatly admires, pledged himself publicly that if he were elected one of the first things he would do would be to put a resolution on the order paper to have the Chairman of the Railway Commission removed, and the Prime Minister came to the support of the Minister of Agriculture last year and said that the minister had made representatiocs to the government and the government were considering them. When he was questioned by the hon. leader of the Opposition he said the matter was still under consideration. That is the last statement the government has made in this House about the matter, and I think I am not asking anything unreasonable when I ask, what is the decision of the government in this matter?
Mr, MARTELL: Let me ask the hon. member whether or not he thinks the Minister of Agriculture, when he made that pledge, did not take too much upon himself? A pledge made in an election is not a pledge for the government. The hon. Minister of Railways and Canals says he is satisfied with the Chairman of the Railway Commission, and most of us on this side are satisfied. If my hon. friend wants to remove him, let him make a motion in that regard.


George Gibson Coote: I did not hear distinctly the hon. member's question; but I would like to ask the member, is political honour absolutely extinct in his party?


Lewis Herbert Martell: According to whom it comes from-like the hon. members opposite.


George Gibson Coote: I think the people of this country expect something better from the hon. member for Hants than the statement he has just made. I also desire to point out that the Minister of Agriculture, when he made this statement, had the idea in the back of his head no doubt that if the party which he supported were returned to power he would be made Minister of Agriculture. There was no reservation when he made that statement, and I think if the minister has any sense of political honour he should stand by the declaration he made. But I want to come back to this question, and I ask the minister once more, if he will be good enough to tell us, if he knows, whether the government has come to any final decision in regard to this matter or not.


George Perry Graham: As far as the government is concerned I happen for the time being to be at the head of that department and I may say the government has come to no decision to ask or to suggest the retirement of the chairman of that commission.


Lewis Herbert Martell: Satisfied with him?


George Perry Graham: I am.


George Gibson Coote: Might I ask the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals if he has perused carefully the letter which was received by the Prime Minister from the Vancouver Board of Trade in connection with this matter and given it the consideration which a letter coming from that important body should deserve?


George Perry Graham: I must plead guilty to not having perused the correspondence of the Prime Minister. Now, my hon. friend should not evade the responsibility that is his in this matter. If he wants to move that the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners be removed, if he is of the opinion that this should be done, then do not let him ask anyone else to assume any responsibility in the matter. It is the duty of parliament and not of the government to take action; and as an hon. member of this House he can move that such action be taken. He has a right to move that the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners be removed.


George Gibson Coote: I can see that the government is anxious to shift the responsibility on to other shoulders. One of its own ministers made a certain statement in public and he has not yet gone back on it. I am sorry that the hon. gentleman cannot answer more definitely for his government.


George Perry Graham: I do not know how much more definite you would like me to be.


George Gibson Coote: I am glad it is still under consideration, at any rate.


George Perry Graham: The minister did not say so.


George Gibson Coote: No, the minister did not say so; nor did he say that it was not under consideration.



Supply-Railway Commission


Lewis Herbert Martell: It has been put up to you.


George Gibson Coote: I have no doubt the Minister of Agriculture would be glad to pass the buck to someone else, but he is the responsible person. Have we responsible government in this country? Does a man renounce his election pledges in as few months as that, and still claim to have political honour? It is time that we had some plain speaking in this country with regard to the Railway Commission. The Minister of Agriculture made that statement in Regina, and it appealed very much to his hearers not only in that city but also in western Canada. I do not know how many people in eastern Canada it appealed to; but I was told by a prominent resident of the Maritime provinces a year ago, when talking about this particular question, that the present Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners should be hanged from a gallows as high as Haman's.


George Perry Graham: That is plagiarism.


George Gibson Coote: He may have put it a little strong, but at any rate that is what he said. Now, I want to point out very briefly one or two reasons why the government should give very careful consideration to the repre-sentatations made to them by the Minister of Agriculture. The Hon. Mr. Langley, when he appeared before the special Railway Transportation Cost committee a year ago, made this statement:
The impression is abroad among our farmers that the Board of Railway Commissioners has ceased to be a board of railway commissioners and has become a board of railway company commissioners.
That is a very serious statement, but I do not think it is at all too strong. I want to bring to the attention of the committee a few of the reasons why the people of western Canada feel just as Mr. Langley stated. On August 10, 1920, the Railway Commission commenced a hearing in Ottawa of an application of the railways for an increase in freight rates. That hearing was completed on August 21, and on September 9 there was put into effect the largest increase in rates that has ever been made in Canada,-an increase in the west of 35 per cent and in the east of 40 per cent. Now that was very quick work. There was no dissenting voice on the board, and certainly there was no delay. The increase was timed to catch the 1920 grain crop, and I believe that from my own station there were only seven carloads of grain shipped at the old rate. In my own particular town that increase took, I believe, out of the shippers of that one place a toll to the amount of $35,000. I would ask the

government to compare the ,speedy methods adopted in connection with this increase with the methods in regard to the decrease which was supposed to follow when circumstances would warrant. The officials of the United Farmers of Alberta went to the commission at Calgary on April 18, 1921, and asked permission to place before them their case for a reduction of rates, and at Regina on April 22, the Hon. George Langley and others appeared before the commission as representing the farmers of Saskatchewan. Representatives were also heard at Brandon, and, I think, at Winnipeg. During the summer of 1921 the United States railways cut the wages of their employees 12J per cent; and the Railway Commission of Canada of their own accord held an investigation to decide whether they could not now reduce these rates again. This investigation was carried on, I think, for a month and a half; but although the wages were reduced as I have said, some time previously,-in July, I think,-it was not until September 13 that Mr. Carvell issued a statement to the effect that all freight rates other than those on which reductions had already been made, should be decreased by 10 per cent from the increases given in 1920. This judgment was concurred in by Commissioner Nantel. Three of the commissioners dissented from the judgment because of the fact that the men had applied for a board of conciliation. I will not detain the House by reading anything in reference to this matter, but the fact remains that because these men had applied for a board three commissioners would not agree to the recommendation for a decrease in the rates which had been brought down by the Hon. Mr. Carvell on September 13. An agreement was arrived at between the Canadian Pacific Railway and their employees on October 8, by which the employees accepted a reduction. But these other gentlemen of the Railway Commission were so busy that they could not come to a decision in the matter at that time, and the reduction of this 10 per cent in the rates was not granted until November 23. Now, it does seem to the farmers of western Canada that the Railway Commission does not show any great desire to deal as quickly with an application for the lowering of rates as it does with any application for an increase. By November 23 the bulk of the grain had probably left the farmers' hands and the railways had got the increased rate.
One other thing I want to refer to, to show why the people of western Canada have lost all faith in the Board of Railway Commissioners as a fair judicial body. I might quote briefly from a report that appeared in the Calgary Herald of an address of the Hon. Mr

Supply-Railway Commission
Carvell before the Canadian Club. Referring to the increase which had been granted in the railway rates Mr. Carvell is reported as follows:
Mr. Carvell said that the railways had made representations to the Board of Railway Commissioners asking for an increase in rates and he said that it meant that $22,000,000 was required to pay the retroactive wages. The railways were hard put to it to pay this big increase. Three presidents of the railway companies came before the board and stated that if the money was not forthcoming there would be serious consequences and they were asked what they meant, and their reply was, it would mean a general strike of railway workers in Canada if the award was not agreed to.
In the same address Mr. Carvell stated that the demands in many cases were unreasonable. But he gives this threat of a strike as sufficient justification for raising the railway rates. He also stated that the farmer could sell his product in any market while the railway company could do business only on its rails and could not charge one cent more than the board allowed. If the Canadian Pacific Railway could not earn dividends no one would buy its shares, and as far as the McAdoo award was concerned, in four years this would have eaten up all the reserves of the company. He went on to dwell on the fact that the Canadian Pacific railway must have sufficient rates to earn their usual dividends.
At a hearing in Calgary on the following day, Mr. J. E. Brownlee, appearing for the United Farmers of Alberta, stated the farmers' case. He said that the farmers were forced to pay war prices for their needs but received only pre-war prices for their products, and this being the case they would probably cut down production to a considerable extent, and in that event any curtailment of transportation facilities would eventually work a hardship on the railway companies. Chief Commissioner Carvell scoffed at Mr. Brownlee's prediction. He is reported as having said:
Do not worry about the future, he said. I do not believe the farmers' organizations in the West are such half-dead, half-alive affairs as you hint. I do not believe there will be any lessening in production. Have a little more faith.
I should like the members of the government to compare the attitude exhibited by the Chairman of the Commission towards what we call "capital" and his attitude towards the common people, the producers of the country. He says that capital must have its 7 per cent or we cannot get it to build railways. And he holds out the threat of a strike on the part of the employees as justification for an increase in rates. Then when
204J
the farmers threaten to curtail production, which is simply their method of striking, he says: "Have a little more faith; do not worry about the future".
Now, we have had a great deal of discussion in this House this session about emigration from this country, and we have been considering the problem of securing immigrants to take the places of those who leave. Well, I want to point out that just so long as we have men occupying high offices in this country-and I think that the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners holds one of the most important posts in the gift of the government-so long, I say, as there are in these high and important positions men who place more value on the dollar than they do on human life, we shall have before us an exceedingly difficult problem to keep people in this country to produce the material for the railways to haul; and it certainly is high time that there was a showdown as to who are to be given the primary consideration in Canada,-the people of the country or the people who are designated in the term "capital". I have no objection to the Canadian Pacific Railway getting dividends, but I do object that the Board of Railway Commissioners should act in a manner so manifestly unfair to one section of this country as the present board is doing. I want to quote from the words of the Chairman of the Board of Railway Commissioners himself in a judgment given by him on September 15, 1920:
Allowing for the undoubted fact that a very large proportion of the traffic moved east and west is on a commodity basis, I am still forced to the conclusion that the rates in western Canada average considerably greater than in the East, possibly around 15 per cent to 18 per cent.
In the face of this remark from the chairman himself, I do not see why the people of western Canada cannot be granted an equalization of rates with the East. I think that the present chairman of the commission, in his refusal to grant such equalization, or at least to grant some redress to the people of the West is condemned by the words from his own mouth. I contend that there is nothing in the Railway Act by which it is intended that the Board of Railway Commissioners should maintain in western Canada rates 15 to 18 per cent higher than those that obtain in eastern Canada. If the Railway Commission want to maintain rates so that the Canadian Pacific Railway Company can continue to pay dividends in the future as they have in the past, their duty is to raise the rates in eastern Canada or lower them in

Supply-Railway Commission
western Canada until both eastern and western rates are on a parity. The people of the West are going to be satisfied with nothing less. The present Chairman of the Railway Commission may be very efficient but unless he can show better judgment in the future than he has done in the past, he cannot convince even honest people in eastern Canada of the fairness of the present condition of affairs.
Before I sit down I want to ask the minister one other question:	Does the government
think it is fair, although the major part of the Canadian Pacific Railway dividends are earned in western Canada, and rates are from 15 to 18 per cent higher there than in the East, that on a board composed of six commissioners there should not be one representative of western Canada? I hope that when the government give due consideration to the representations of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) and possibly decide that the prseent chairman should be removed, they will give to western Canada one representative. I ask the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) will he be willing to go that far?


George Perry Graham: As I understand, Dr.
Rutherford was appointed as a western man to succeed a western man, and he is still a member of the Railway Board. I am not going to discuss the question of rates, it is too intricate, and, besides, I had something to do with perfecting the act under which the Board of Railway Commissioners was created. While this board may have made some mistakes at times-and I suppose even our judges are not entirely free from error-yet on the whole the work of the board has been excellent. Now, my hon. friend has mentioned the difference between eastern and western rates. I do not wish to make any comparisons in that way. It is the duty of the Board of Railway Commissioners to administer the Railway Act for the benefit of the whole Dominion, and I believe they are discharging this duty in a very able manner. Complaints regarding railway rates are not confined to the West; the people in the East complain that the rates from the Maritime provinces are very high and burdensome, and only to-day a question was brought up in the House as to a suggestion, I think, by some member of the government in New Brunswick, that the rates should be substantially reduced, and that unless something was done along this line the situation would be very serious indeed. The freight rate question is one of the disagreeable results of the war. No person can ever expect railway operation to be as cheap as it

was before the war. There is a new condition, and rightly so, among the working men of the Dominion, and, indeed, among the working men of the world; consequently, the wages of railway men will never revert to what they were before the war, and I do not think we want them to. The process of getting back to as near normal as possible will be comparatively slow. My hon. friend has said something about capital. Does he realize that he himself is one of the capitalists? The people of Canada own the biggest railway system in the world, every dollar of deficit on which has to be met out of the pockets of the taxpayers. The subject should always be approached with that in view. I appreciate the situation as to the freight rates, and I have sympathy not for the West any more than for the East, because all Canada is paying a very high freight rate and a very high passenger rate. But it will take some time for these rates to get down to normal. The only way we can get them to normal is to get a greater volume of traffic, and the only way to get a greater volume of traffic is to have more people to produce. It ought to be the object of us all to make Canada so far as population is concerned a bigger country, and to induce men to come here-notwithstanding all that has been said-to make for themselves and their families a future. I believe that in the proper solution of that one problem of immigration lies the remedy for most of our difficulties. As I say, I have great sympathy for my hon. friend and for both East and West in this matter. I am strongly in favour of reducing the rates as rapidly as possible so that the people who produce on the land and elsewhere will have a chance to get a greater return for their labours.


George Gibson Coote: The minister says that Dr. Rutherford has been a representative of western Canada. I think it would have been more proper to say that Dr. Rutherford is a representative of the Canadian Pacific Railway, not of western Canada.


George Perry Graham: If my hon. friend thinks that, he ought to move to have him put off.


George Gibson Coote: At the time of his appointment he was in the employ of the Canadian Pacific Railway.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: Supply-Railway Commission
of that the judgment has added weight in my mind. I know that he came from the Canadian Pacific Railway. Other men have been there who came from other occupations, but once they divest themselves of their previous occupations and associations they become judges and sworn to do right as between all parties in this Dominion. I know of no man who is more likely at every moment of his life to have regard to his public obligations than Mr. Rutherford. And what 1 say of him I have no reason to deny of any member of that board, though the others I do not pretend to know so well.
It may not be popular to stand for a board which has felt it its duty to raise rates and has been unable to bring rates down to the point they formerly were. Perhaps it would be more of a vote catching scheme -I do not for a minute ascribe this intention to others-it might mean more votes to attack the commission, but if the habit of attacking the commission for their acts day by day is to grow in this House, then the usefulness of that commission is gone. I know the minister agrees. I absolve him from the slightest participation in the campaign that was carried on. I know he had no part in it. I do not believe he had the least sympathy with it, but there are other hon. gentlemen who had part in it, and those who helped to elect this government had a very great part in it, and they have done more to destroy the usefulness of that commission than had been done in the previous eighteen years of its existence.
It is true we have high rates. We have vates out of all proportion to the value of rfarm products. Of that there is no question at all, and how it is to be cured is a very difficult problem indeed. But while we admit that such is the case it is still more the case aright across the border to the south. Right [DOT]across the border the rates were higher before the war, higher during the war, and they are higher to-day on farm products, and very substantially higher. They are much higher in proportion to the value of farm products than are their farm products higher than ours. Of those facts there can be no dispute. That, of course, does not remove the truth that farming cannot pay as it did, farming cannot be made even a substantial success, until the carriage of goods gets to be on a basis of price closer in accord with the value of the goods themselves. It is very easy to believe that that can be done merely by a stroke of the pen upon the part of those in authority. I venture to say this, that if the stroke of the pen had come, as my hon.

friend from Macleod thinks it should have come at the time he complains of, the loss to this country in what would have been precipitated by it would have been far greater, I almost said unspeakably greater than the loss we have had to bear. There are times, there are circumstances when you can effect things, and times when you cannot. I am not here to discuss just how we are going to bring about a lowering of railway rates to the level of the products the railways carry. I am inclined to the view that considerable time is going to elapse before that better time will come, but in the meantime do not let us destroy the good work of years, do not let us bring down the standing of a judicial tribunal until it becomes a mere football between the parties in the House of Commons; do not let us have members of parliament running on platforms to remove this man and that man from the Bench or any judicial position. If they do, let us have a government and a prime minister who will not take them into cabinets thereby placing the seal of the government and of the prime minister upon the commitments of the candidate.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: I do not want to get into a discussion on the immigration question because once that starts we do not know when it will end, but before this item passes I should like to say that before we start growing more grain we must have a reduction in the rates on grain or an increase in the price. Those of us who are farming in the West to-day know that it is an absurdity to think of growing more grain unless there is an improvement in conditions in some way or other. I do not like to discuss this rate problem from a western standpoint or an eastern standpoint, but from the Canadian standpoint. I have as much sympathy with the people of the Maritime provinces in their desire for a reduction of rates as I have with my own people in the West. I know conditions in that part of the country, and I know the people there have suffered a great deal. I am told on very good authority that last season no less than a million bushels of potatoes were spoiled in Prince Edward Island largely because there was not a sufficiently low rate to ship them out.
I think when we are discussing the responsibilities of the Railway Commission one of the troubles at least is that the commission has no control over a reduction of rates. I was reading a few days ago a pamphlet published, I think, by Mr. S. J. McLean, one of the Railway Commissioners, in which he stated he was surprised in looking over a

Supply-Railway Commission
number of tariffs to find that at least fifty per cent were apparently reductions in rates. That seems to tell us a good deal. We are demanding reductions on certain basic commodities-lumber, potatoes, grain, cattle and various other things-and yet all the time there are voluntary reductions taking place over which the commission has no control. That I say tells us a good deal. It seems to me there is a good deal of favouritism, that certain interests are getting special privileges in regard to freight rates, and the commission have no control over that whatever. Let me refer to just one product. Bar iron from Sydney. Nova Scotia, goes clean across the continent to Vancouver for sixty cents a hundred. I think that there is no hon. gentleman in this House who will say that the railway can carry that at a profit. It is patent that it must be carried at a distinct loss. That means that a railway company engaged in carrying that product for less than it costs must a short time afterwards come to the Railway Commission and ask for an increase in rates on something else, and that is precisely what is happening to-day.
I cannot agree with any suggestion of doing away with the Railway Commision or crippling its powers. I would rather be inclined to increase its powers. I think that the Commission should have control over the downward revision of rates. Why should a railway have authority to carry some product for less than it costs for some privileged interest, probably with some of its large shareholders interested in the railway, for that is practically what it is? J have been going over a lot of these figures, and I have found some of them illuminating. I have found some things that cannot possibly be justified.
Let me give another commodity. Rice from Vancouver is handled at seventy-five *cents a hundred to Calgary, yet that same rice is carried twenty-four hundred miles from there to Montreal for the same price; that means it is carried twenty-four hundred miles free. Now if the railway company is carrying rice for a distributor in Montreal twenty-four hundred miles for nothing it means that our potatoes, our cattle, our grain, and everything else must pay more in order to make up for that loss. That is really one of the problems we are facing to-day, and action is required along that line.
The Railway Commission has a great deal of responsibility, and I am not one of those who would try to increase their difficulties in any way, but I think some of these things should be looked into very carefully. As far as the East and West are concerned we know that the western rates are higher. The Railway Commission admits they are higher, and justifies the increased rate on account of the water competition in the East. That is one of the things that we hope one day will be wiped out. But I think these other discriminations in giving favoured rates to certain industries is one of the first things we should look into.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil government-Railways and Canals-salaries, including the Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals and Government Director of Canadian National Railways at $10,000, $208,970; contingencies, $38,000.
George Perry Graham: The increase in this department is practically due to the increase in the amount paid to the deputy minister. The deputy minister receives $6,000 in that capacity and $2,000 as a director of the Canadian National Railways. I am asking the House to make his salary $10,000 which will include everything. He will not receive any remuneration as a director after this increase becomes effective.


William Charles Good: How does the minister justify the increase of $2,000?


George Perry Graham: It is easily justified. The deputy minister is remaining in the department when he could go to a position at nearly double the salary he now receives. He has been in the public service for a great many years. I have induced him to remain in the department because I have to confess to the committee, and to the country as well, that Major Bell's services in the department under present conditions are absolutely indispensable. We have no other man who has such a knowledge as he has of the intricate operations of the different railways composing the National system, or who is so extremely well qualified to act in the dual capacity of deputy minister of the department and director of the National Railways. Frankly I do not know how I could replace Major Bell.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Arbitration and awards and costs of litigation, $2,000.
George Perry Graham: This is an item which is voted every year. Sometimes we use it and sometimes we do not.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To supplement pension allowances payable under the provisions of the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Railway Employees' Provident Fund Act so as to make the minimum payment, during the current fiscal year, the sum of $30 per month instead of $20 as fixed by the said act, $50,000.
George Perry Graham: If any explanation is required, I would like to say the provision made
Supply-Railways-C.N.R.

for the men in the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Provident Fund was $20 per month. It has been raised to $30 per month which requires the government to make a little larger contribution than it did before.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What pension is granted to men that are retired from the service?


George Perry Graham: This is a fund created under an Act. To this fund the men contribute themselves and the government has always subscribed a certain amount. In this way provision is made for the retirement of the men; it is a regular pension fund.


Milton Neil Campbell: May I ask the minister if any request has been received for pensions in connection with two Prince Edward Island men who were killed on the Prince Edward Island railway last winter? While snow shovelling these men were caught in a very awkward position in a tunnel and both were killed. They left families who were dependent on them, and I understood some recommendations had been made to the department for the granting of pensions to those dependents. I should like to ask the minister if he knows anything about the matter?


George Perry Graham: I think no such recommendation has been made up to the present time. Any recommendations or suggestions of this kind would go to the Canadian National Railway Board. They may be in the hands of the board at the present time, but have not reached the department so far as I have been able to learn.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Such recommendations would have to be dealt with by the department would they not? The directors of the National Railways would not have the power to pension these families would they, the recommendation would have to come to parliament?


George Perry Graham: I imagine it would at the present time, but we are endeavouring to get a pensions system that will cover all the railways. The Canadian Northern, for example, has no pension system for its men. As to this particular case I will make inquiries. Does my hon. friend know the names of the men?


Milton Neil Campbell: Yes.


George Perry Graham: I should like my hon.
friend to send them to me.


William Findlay Maclean: What progress is being made in the unification of the several systems that comprise the National Railways? To-night I received the railway report and there seems to be still a division of our rail-

ways into several systems. What headway is really being made in the direction of the unification of all these systems into one-a unification of classification the according of the same treatment to the employees in the matter of retiring allowances and other matters? There are many other things in respect of which there should be unification. You still see the names of the old companies on the railways. I made the suggestion some time ago that the government send out without delay a corps of painters to paint out the names "Grand Trunk," "Canadian Northern," and "Intercolonial". Let the government get to work and unify these systems, and make them national railways in the real sense of the term. I know that cannot be done in a day and I observe that some progress has been made, but has there been sufficient progress, and when will there be a real unification? For instance in reading the report to which I refer I see that more than one firm of auditors is engaged in the work of checking the accounts. Surely such a condition as that ought to be remedied. It has taken a long while to get the annual statement of the Canadian Pacific Railway into the shape in which it is to-day. However, the company have got it in excellent shape now and I think the government ought to try and follow a model of that kind in presenting the railway statement to the people of Canada who are, as the minister said a few' moments ago, the shareholders and the only shareholders in this National system. Let us see if we cannot at the next meeting have one report. In the report to which I have already referred, and which was put into the post office to-night for the use of members, there is still a reference to the Grand Trunk as if it were a separate railway. I repeat my question: Will the minister tell us what progress has been made in the work of unification, in the systematizing of the accounting and bookkeeping-in a word the unification of all the factors that go into the making up of the entire system?


George Perry Graham: The report to which my hon. friend refers is for the year ending December 31, 1922. The Grand Trunk only became part of the National Railway system in October of that year so it is impossible to have a consolidation of the accounting of the different lines for the year 1922. The Grand Trunk was run under a separate board altogether. We hope by next year to report on the accounting of the entire system as one body. I may point out to my hon. friend that for certain reasons we will have to be able to tell always how much, for example,

Supply-Mines
the Grand Trunk proper earned as it previously existed. There are financial reasons for that, and I think the same thing applies to the other systems. They will all have to be able to tell what they did as separate entities although the report itself will deal with the system as one. In its consolidated form I think that report when presented will be satisfactory to my hon. friend.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I do not know whether I am in error or not but I was under the impression that all the lines under the control of the government amounted, speaking roughly, to about 22,000 miles.


George Perry Graham: The number is 22,600.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: This pamphlet to which the hon. minister referred shows something over 17,000 miles. What is the explanation? Is it that the mileage in the United States is not included? What causes the discrepancy?


George Perry Graham: I think the hon. member will find that the Grand Trunk is not included in that.


William Findlay Maclean: Where is the account, so far as the annual statement made to parliament is concerned, in connection with lines in the United States owned by the Grand Trunk? This is rather a significant question for us, very far reaching legislation is probably under way and the question of the ownership of certain lines in that country by the people of Canada may come up.


George Newcombe Gordon: This item is for the Intercolonial and Prince Edward Island Railway Employees' Provident Fund.


William Findlay Maclean: When will the minister answer the question regarding Grand Trunk lines in the United States?


George Perry Graham: The account of the Grand Trunk lines in the United States is all in the Grand Trunk report. It will come up next year. I gave the figures for every line in the United States in the statement I made to the House a few weeks ago.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Printing and stationery outside service, $7,000.
Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is this printing done by the Printing bureau?


George Perry Graham: Yes.


Mr. SALES:: Where is this service carried on? I want some particulars about it. A few weeks ago I happened to be travelling west on the Canadian Pacific Railway, and I found gentlemen travelling across the continent who did not know that the Canadian National Railway existed. They were from England and they never heard of the Canadian National Railway. I want to know what kind of service we have in the Old Country when it is possible for well-to-do individuals, travelling across this continent on business and pleasure, to know nothing whatever of the Canadian National Railway.


George Perry Graham: This item is for printing of forms, and the like of that, for our canals and outside service. It has nothing to do with the railways. I think my hon. friend will not have reason to complain of the Canadian National not being known on the continent of Europe, at least, in a few months.


Milton Neil Campbell: I think we will hear
something about it very soon. I notice by to-day's paper that the Canadian National has opened very extensive and ex-10 p.m. pensive quarters in Paris, and spent over $1,000,000, for business. Does the minister know anything about that? Does he think such an expenditure would be justified?


George Perry Graham: The hon. member has not read the item aright. It has nothing to do with the matters to which he refers. It is not for our railways.


Milton Neil Campbell: I am quite aware of
that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mines and Geological Survey-Mines Branch- for investigation of mineral resources or deposits, of the mining and metallurgical industries, and of mineral technology; wages, expenses of testing and research laboratories. Investigations by, including salaries and all other expenses of, Dominion Fuel Board. $200,000 For publications; English and French. Purchase of books, [DOT] laboratory supplies, in-truments, miscellaneous assistance and contingencies	 40,000
Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
reason for the increase in that?


Charles A. Stewart: This is an increase of
$55,500 over the vote of 1922-23, accounted for by the item to cover the expenditure of the Dominion Fuel Board and the additional amounts required by the Fuel Testing and Ore Dressing divisions. I will give the items, if it is considered desirable. I may say for the information of the committee, that we had inaugurated a fuel board consisting of representatives from the Department of Mines
Supply-Mines

and the Interior Department, purely for investigational purposes, not to interfere with the Federal Advisory Fuel Committee appointed for the purpose of securing a fuel supply. A proportion of the increase is for the purpose of carrying on this work. The following are some of the items:
I. Division of mineral resources $35,000 made up
as follows:
a.	Investigation and estimation of bituminous
sands of Alberta	 $ 9,000
b.	Investigation and estimation of saline lake
deposits of Western Canada	 13,000
*c. Investigations in mineral technology and obtaining information with respect to the mineral resources and the mining industry	 13,000
II. Division of Fuel Testing including expenses of Dominion Fuel Board $100,000 made up as follows:-
a.	Salaries and wages	
$23,500b.	Additional labour when required	
1,000c.	Chemical laboratory supplies	
5,000d.	Machine shop supplies	
2,500e.	New Apparatus	
9,000f.	Investigations	
6,000g.	General investigations including expensesof Dominion Fuel Board	
53,000
I have a rather lengthy explanation that I was prepared to place upon Hansard, in order that we might have it upon record, and save reading it to the committee.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we
should know what is being done with this.


Mr. McBRIDE:: Could the minister state
whether he will be able to investigate the coal possibilities up around Hudson's Hope? There has been a good deal of talk about that country. I was up there in September last, but not having the time to stay there as long as I should have liked, I was able to see only the outskirts. I think it is important that the minister should make a thorough investigation into the possibilities of coal in that district as I intend to ask the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) to look into the question of running a railway line in there. I think it would help him quite a bit if he knew exactly what coal did .exist in that locality.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: Under this item there is *an amount for the Dominion Fuel Board. I think the committee would be very much interested to know whether the minister has anything to report in regard to the coal situation throughout Canada generally. I am aware, of course, that a committee of the Upper House and a committee of this House as well are both dealing with this question; but we have also a Dominion Fuel Board in connection with which we vote a considerable sum of money annually; and if the minister could give any report from that board as to 
the prospect of fuel and an adequate coal supply for Canada for the next winter, I think it would be of considerable interest to the people of the central portions of the Dominion. It is stated that the coal situation is much better at the present moment than it was this time last year, and the prospect of strikes or difficulties in the coal areas in the United States is more than it was then. If the minister has anything in the way of information that would prove reassuring to the people, I am sure that the committee and the country would be glad to hear it.


Charles A. Stewart: There is in sight no shortage of coal in Quebec or Ontario at the moment.


William Findlay Maclean: But at what
price?


Charles A. Stewart: It is very doubtful whether the Dominion government, or any government for that matter, can control prices. That is a question of supply.


William Findlay Maclean: But that is the vital question.


Charles A. Stewart: I hope my hon. friends are not expecting the Dominion government to do impossible things.


William Findlay Maclean: They are.


Charles A. Stewart: Well, if
they are-


William Findlay Maclean: At least, the op portunity is open to the government to dc something.


Charles A. Stewart: If hon.
gentlemen are expecting the government to control prices they are expecting the impossible. I do not think that even my hon. friend (Mr. Maclean) expects that. The question of supply has a certain bearing on prices,
1 think he will admit. As I pointed out a moment ago to the ex-Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton), the department is not endeavouring to provide a supply; it simply undertakes to investigate possible sources of supply in the treatment of fuels. An investigation has been carried on having in mind the conditions to be met, because they are most acute. It does seem probable that the supply of anthracite coal will in the future be cut off from Canada, although this is not an immediate possibility. But there is a very considerable supply of bituminous coal to be had from Nova Scotia, and its treatment ought to be encouraged so that the coke may be utilized for domestic and commercial purposes in the province of Quebec. There has been a considerable agitation for the bringing of fuel from Alberta. After a

Supply-Mines
fairly thorough investigation I may say, Mr. Chairman, that that has resolved itself into a question of transportation. If rates can be cut down to the point where the fuel can be delivered in eastern Canada at a reasonable price to meet competition from the other side of the line, it has been established beyond doubt that Alberta coal will meet all demands that may be made upon it. In the meantime the work of the Dominion Fuel Board will be in the direction of research. The work planned includes:
(1)	Investigation of the coking of coal for domestic use. Several plants have been erected in the United States for the purpose of coking bituminous coals in by-product recovery coke ovens with a main objective of manufacturing a domestic fuel and a gas suitable for domestic purposes.. Valuable byproducts other than gas are recovered in the coking of bituminous coal according to this process namely, ammonia or ammonium sulphate and tar oils. By-product oven coke has met with such success in those cities where householders have been instructed how to burn it, that the Fuel Board considers that this class of fuel may be introduced into Ontario and Quebec as a substitute for anthracite coal (Pennsylvania).
(2)	Central heating plants.
The Dominion Fuel Board is concerned not only with the finding of a substitute for anthracite coal but with such economies as can be effected in the use of coals for heating purposes. It appears to the board that the introduction of central heating plants in highly populated centres will result in considerable economies in the use of fuel through the use of lower grade, and hence cheaper, fuel, and through the elimination of the cost3 entailed in delivering coal to private dwellings and the removal of the ashes from these dwellings. In a central heating plant, the delivery of coal may be made at one point, and all the ashes will be removed from this point. Certain municipalities in the United States and in Europe are heated by central heating plants.
(3)	The adaptation of present domestic heaters to other fuels.
In order to solve satisfactorily the problem of the fuel supply of the acute fuel area (the provinces of Ontario and Quebec) it is necessary that householders be assured not only of the required supply of coal, but that they may obtain this coal at the lowest possible cost. It is necessary that an investigation be undertaken with the objective of determining what alterations should or can be made in existing heaters to adapt them for burning bituminous and other coals.
Those are the three principal matters to be investigated. Then the programme provides for an investigation pertaining to the use of pulverized fuel and proceeds:
(4)	The burning of pulverized fuels for generating steam for power, heating and other purposes has met with such signal success both in the United States and in Europe that it is necessary that an investigation be undertaken to ascertain whether Canadian fuels can be advantageously used in the pulverized form. The burning of fuels in the pulverized form permits of the use of the lower grade, hence cheaper, coals, and it is probable that an investigation may reveal that the low grade western lignites may be successfully used, for various purposes when pulverized, without heat or other treatment.
Then, the question of freight rates is discussed, but this I will not take up the time of the committee to read. I have already discussed the question briefly. The programme continues:
(6)	An investigation on the limitation in Nova Scotia coal resources and the maximum possible annual output.
The possibility of introducing Nova Scotia coals into the provinces of Quebec and Ontario to reduce the imports of domestic and industrial coals from the United States is of such great importance to the solution of the fuel problem existing in the acute fuel area, that it is essential that a detailed investigation be undertaken to determine the available coal resources of Nova Scotia and the maximum possible annual output which can be economically maintained in order that the extent to which Nova Scotia coals can be depended upon to help out the fuel supply of the provinces of Quebec and Ontario may be known.
(7)	An investigation of the possibility of securing and using Welsh anthracite for portions of eastern Canada.
Welsh anthracite has been prominently mentioned as a substitute for a portion of the anthracite annually imported into the provinces of Quebec and Ontario. In order to determine to what extent Welsh coal can be depended upon for this purpose it is necessary to investigate the conditions governing the mining of Welsh anthracite, the freight rates from the Welsh coal mines to Canadian ports and the cost of distributing from ports to places of consumption. This investigation will also inquire into the preparation which the Welsh coals should undergo in order to suit them to Canadian conditions, also the probable markets throughout the provinces of Quebec and Ontario for this fuel.
(8)	Continuation of the investigation of the possibility of utilizing peat as a partial substitute for coal.
In view of the successful results of the investigation concerning the manufacture of peat fuel which has just been completed by the Peat Committee, appointed jointly by the federal government and the government of the province of Ontario, and the fact that the peat resources of Quebec and Ontario are of large extent and that the bogs which have been examined in detail contain sufficient peat to permit of a large annual production for many years in those two provinces, it is of great importance that this investigation be continued in order to determine logical sites-


William Findlay Maclean: After twenty
years experimenting we have no tangible results yet. When will the people of Ontario get cheap peat?


Charles A. Stewart: The investigation carried on by the two governments at the Alfred bog has resulted in the perfecting of a machine that will successfully manufacture peat. Some time ago the Ontario government expressed a desire not to continue the experiments any further, as it was now a problem for commercial enterprise.


William Alves Boys: When the minister says peat has been manufactured, does he mean it can be manufactured to sell at a price which will enable it to compete with coal?


Charles A. Stewart: The cost delivered on board car is estimated at $3.50 per ton.
Supply-Mines


William Alves Boys: Was the drying process by nature or artificial?


Charles A. Stewart: By nature.


William Alves Boys: Early in my life I lost all the money I ever had by investing it in a peat industry, so I know something about the subject. I wonder whether any invention has been perfected to dry peat successfully, because that was the trouble in the early days.


Charles A. Stewart: Climatic conditions will play a very important part in the tonnage; that is, if we have a very wet summer the drying process will be very slow. We have an engineer in this city who thinks he can perfect a compression process, but his view does not seem to be shared by the engineers of the various countries with whom we have exchanged reports.


William Alves Boys: What is the nature of the manufactured article which the department is now putting out? Is it to be sold as dried by the sun, or as manufactured under pressure?


Charles A. Stewart: No, it is spread on the ground and allowed to remain until it is thoroughly dry, and then it is picked up and shipped ready for use.


William Findlay Maclean: I would suggest to the minister that the practical solution of this fuel problem is by the application of the principle of public ownership, but it must be applied in a big way, just as the power problem was solved in Ontario. For ten or fifteen years now a system has been perfected of erecting batteries of coking ovens in large centres of population and treating coal in such a way that not only the gas but certain valuable by-products are produced. The city of Toronto ought to give leadership in this respect, either in conjunction with the Consumers' Gas Company or by buying out that company and establishing a big coking plant. It has been proved beyond doubt that the most economical and effective method of heating cities like Montreal and Toronto is by means of these big coking plants. The real solution of cheap heating in our larger cities is for the government to give some kind of leadership, or, failing the federal government, for the government of Ontario or the municipal authorities of Toronto to approach this question right here and now and see what can be done. When I went along the Toronto esplanade last week the outstanding feature along that four miles of waterfront was a continuous line of great steel cars carrying from fifty to seventy tons of anthracite coal. This coal was being put into sacks, transferred 
to big motor trucks and delivered to private houses. I imagine people are paying anything from $15 to $20 a ton for this anthracite, but everybody who has money is getting it, for he fears the government will do nothing, and no one wants to go through the experience endured last winter. I regret to say that the minister in bringing forward his estimates has only promises to make that further investigations will be conducted into the fuel problem. I approve of all he is doing, but he is not doing it quick enough or in a large enough way. Somebody outside ought to get busy. The province of Ontario ought to have another Beck to deal with the coal problem as the power problem was dealt with and solved years ago, that is, by co-operation and the elimination of shareholders' profits, the sole aim of the enterprise being public service. In England many large cities are being heated by central plants where the coal is coked and many valuable by-products are recovered. What can be done in the way of a solution? Investigations and reports are all right in their way, but we want action. How are the people of the cities of Canada to secure a supply of coal for the coming winter at a reasonable price and so avoid the experience of former years, but especially of last year? If the minister has some plan of that kind let him give it to us, so that progress will be made in the direction of relief.


Mr. CHURCH:: I do not desire to oppose this vote. I have no doubt the increase is necessary. The people are not worrying about the tesources of this country; the resources are there, in any event. The Department of Mines has done very good work in this connection, and the money has been well expended. But what the people of Canada are worrying about is where the next winter's supply of coal is to come from. There has been a great deal of discussion on this subject in both Houses of parliament; two committees have met and considered it, but we seem to be going round in a circle; we are just where we were twelve months ago. It is not a matter of research at all; the deposits are there; the question is how to get the coal out; it is a transportation question solely. I am sorry that the Railway Commission has not stepped in and taken hold of the matter. The rate on Alberta coal to central Ontario has been quoted at $9 per ton in train lots, but there has been no actual demonstration of the feasibility of bringing the coal here in train lots; the only demonstration has been in connection with the carrying of grain to the head of the lakes. It would appear that

Supply-M ines
the head of the National Railways would rather quote a prohibitive figure of $9 and get no business than quote a price of $5 or $6 and get the cream of the business.


Mr. CARROLL:: I do not think it is altogether fair for my hon. friend to discuss this matter, in view of the fact that the committee, of which my hon. friend himself is a very active member, will be bringing in a report on this subject in a few days' time.


Thomas Langton Church: I am not criticizing the committee; they have done a lot of good work and have procured a great deal of valuable information. I appreciate the fact that the government has done a great deal to try and reach a solution of the problem. That cannot be done in twenty-four hours, in six months or a year; it is a matter to be worked out in the days that are to come. But the average man is much disappointed, in view of the vast expenditure on the railways and canals of this country, in the failure to arrive at an arrangement which would enable these resources of western Canada and of the Maritime provinces to be brought to Ontario and Quebec. Where is the Railway Commission ' in this connection? They have not laid down a tariff for the carrying of coal to central Canada from east and west, although the commission was set up for the very purpose of regulating and fixing prices for transportation, especially of our basic products. I am sorry to see our merchant marine being sold, because I believe some of the smaller ships could bring coal from the Maritime provinces right up to the central provinces. In the early days the Canadian Pacific Railway had to carry many basic products at a loss; they did so with recurring deficits, and they struggled in those years until they made the business pay and had a surplus. I suggest that if nothing else can be done some bonus system should be worked out. The bonus system is not new in Canada; the railways were largely subsidized by bonuses. The railways to-day are carrying certain basic products to the head of the lakes at a cut rate and in my opinion they should do so with coal. Something should be done to get the coal out, because according to the coal commissioners of the province the same condition will exist next year and we will be as we were last year-people struggling round the coal offices trying to get half a ton of coal. If we bonused the transportation of this product for one winter or two or three winters we might find it to be best in the long run. The other day the Dominion Coal Company in Nova Scotia sent 30,000 tons of
coal over to Holland; that coal was badly needed in central Canada. Let the coal be carried at $5 or $6 a ton and if necessary put an amount in the estimates to cover the difference. Let us have a fair trial of this thing; if there is a deficit one year I venture to say that in two or three years there would be a surplus in the transportation of that basic product, and we would be giving employment to our own workmen and doing something to solve the transportation problem. The government, the Railway Commission-all these different bodies should get together and see whether a price cannot be fixed, even if only as an emergency measure. The Interstate Commerce Commission of the United States had to take action along similar lines. The privately-owned railways over these were quoting prohibitive prices for the transport of coal, and people in places like Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Erie, Pennsylvania, places quite near the coal mines, were paying high rates of transportation. The Interstate Commerce Commission had the various bodies before them and they fixed a rate. That is what the Railway Commission here should do. Formerly 55 per cent of the coal shipments were earned by boat to lake Erie and lake Ontario ports; to-day not three per cent of it is conveyed by water-and why? I do not say there is an arrangement in restraint of trade, but there is a business arrangement under which the rates are fixed and it is decided how the coal shall be carried from the mines in Pennsylvania and elsewhere to lake Erie and lake Ontario ports and solely by rail. It is arranged that all the coal must go through the Niagara district by train to the cities, towns and villages of western Ontario. I say there is no product that is more deserving of bonus than coal is, because it is an actual necessity the same as food. This is the most important problem that the people of Canada have before them at the present time, and I hope that the government will find it possible to take some action in the matter that will afford the necessary relief.


William Richard Motherwell: It is very gratifying indeed to note that our friends from Toronto are beginning to realize what it means to pay the high freight rates from Alberta down to Ontario. I would remind them that some of us up there have been paying those rates for nearly forty years. Nobody ever suggested that we should get a bonus. As a matter of fact, last year when we were wanting to get what was coming to us under the Crowsnest pass agreement and seeking to have it restored, our friends from Toronto though that a heinous proposition. Coal for the province of Ontario
Supply-Mines

is dependent upon what the people there are prepared to pay for Alberta coal. If they are prepared to pay the freight rate, plus the cost of mining, there is an abundance of coal there for all kinds of time. Our friends are suggesting a freight rate, and I understand the railways have offered a minimum freight rate, the lowest rate they can make without losing money. There is no need of anybody freezing to death next winter if they are prepared to buy this coal from Alberta or any other part of the West, and there is all kinds of it. Do they expect the government to fill all their cellars with coal? For ten years I had in a small way the supervision of the forwarding of coal during the congestion periods in Saskatchewan when the grain rush was on, and I know something of the difficulties associated with the movement of coal by railways during the grain congestion period. There is a certain amount of assistance a government can give in the way of investigational work, but to undertake to supply the domestic requirements of coal for a people, when all they have to do is to make provision for themselves, that is out of the question. There is1 coal and an abundance of it if they are prepared to pay the price. So far as a bonus is concerned, if our friends down here require a bonus to haul their coal from Alberta, I do not know that I will object to it so much; I sympathize with them on this long haul, but when discussing freight rates again, and the whole Crowsnest agreement is not restored yet-we are paying for these long hauls and have been doing it for forty years, some of us-I would like to see the sympathy reciprocated a little more in the future than it has been in the past.


Thomas George McBride: I want to say a word in connection with the peat proposition. Before I came to Canada I had a good deal of experience in connection with peat, and any peat I have seen in Canada I would consider only third-rate quality. Two tons of dried peat are equal to about one ton of coal. I do not say I have seen the best of the peat in Canada but I would think that one ton of coal would equal three tons of it, and unless you can contrive some system of pressing it and making it different to anything I have ever seen the sooner you forget about it the better it will be for all concerned.
It has been said that the ships of the merchant marine could be used for bringing coal up the St. Lawrence river and up into the lakes. It would be small boats that would be used for that purpose, any of them that would be used, and those boats cannot be used successfully for that purpose. They are built 
for ocean-going purposes, not for canal work, and if you load those boats down they have too great a draft of water.
The question I rose to ask the minister, and I think he was going to answer when the hon. member for South York rose was this: Does he intend to make any investigation this year into the coal deposits at Hudson's Hope? I have been told by men who know a good deal about mining that the best prospects of anthracite coal in Canada are in that district.


William Findlay Maclean: In what
province?


Thomas George McBride: In British Columbia at
Hudson's Hope, in the Peace River country. According to reports that have been made it is the best anthracite coal in the world outside of Welsh coal. I do not say that is so but I would like to know whether it is or not and I would like the minister to say whether he can investigate that coal area this summer.


Charles A. Stewart: I personally was interested in the reports as to the quality of the coal my hon. friend speaks of. That country is away to the westward of the Grand Prairie country in the Rocky mountains. As * my hon. friend knows, there is an arrangement between this government and the government of British Columbia for geological work, and usually the request as to areas to be investigated comes from the provincial government. Investigation has not been thorough in that area chiefly because it is so far removed from transportation facilities. I know that suggestions have been made for boring and tests of the coal he speaks of, but that would have to be undertaken by the British Columbia government, which owns the natural resources. Our work is simply investigational. We do not pursue our investigations to the point of making tests of the finds. I do not think we have a party in that area this year. I have not a list of the areas to be investigated in British Columbia before me, but I think I am safe in saying that no party will go into that area this year for investigational work. There has been a provincial party in there investigating for oil, and a Dominion party has been engaged the last year making a thorough investigation of the coal deposits.


William Alves Boys: I note that there is an increase of $55,000 in this item over last year. What portion if any of this vote is set apart in connection with coal or a coal supply?


Charles A. Stewart: As I tried to point out in the beginning of the discussion,

Supply-Mines
we do not consider it our duty to provide the supply. What we are endeavouring to do is to investigate the possibilities of using the lower grade bituminous coals that can be procured from Canada and the United States and treating them so that they will take the place of anthracite. Then there is the other vital question, that of freight rates. So far as the Alberta product is concerned that does not need investigation so far as the Mines department is concerned. It is a question of transportation pure and simple. There is no treatment of the Alberta product required. That has been demonstrated both in Toronto and this city so that the problem of using Alberta coal is simply one of transportation, and if the rate oan be reduced to a level that will make it possible to bring that coal down here, that problem will be solved.
There seems to be on the part of the committee an intimation that the government should do something to secure a supply of coal. We have a committee, headed by Mr. Magrath, which has been working more or less on the question of distribution. We have not interfered in that field at all, but there is a bituminous field in the United States close to the city of Toronto that we are investigating. Perhaps that coal could be used in central heating plants or be coked, using the by-products, turning the gas, for instance, into the gas mains and utilizing it for heat and light if necessary. The other by-products would also find a ready market in Toronto. I am told that that coal can be delivered in Toronto for around 87 a ton to-day even at the high rates of transportation prevailing, and that it could be made into a product that could be sold reasonably at ten or eleven dollars a ton, and that it would be equal to anthracite. That is a problem of investigation that we are now working on. If the municipality of Toronto or the provincial government desires to undertake distribution or even to set up a coking plant, there is nothing in the world to prevent them.


William Findlay Maclean: That is practical politics.


Charles A. Stewart: We are making that investigation, and we shall put that information in their hands. But to say that we should assure the people of Toronto of a supply of fuel next winter, that is scarcely the business of the government. 1 want to make that very clear. There is just one other problem. The Water Powers branch are working in connection with the Fuel Board as Mr. Challies, *who is director of
the Water Powers branch, is also a member of the Fuel Board.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Have you finished reading the memorandum? We shall not know all about it until it is finished.


Charles A. Stewart: (9)	Canada possesses large undeveloped water powers and these have come to be considered by many people as a possible source of electric energy that might be used for heating houses and buildings. It is important that the physical and economic limitations of the use of electric energy for house heating purposes should be thoroughly investigated. The Dominion Fuel Board includes as one of its members the Director of the Water Powers branch, Department of the Interior, and can appropriately undertake a study of the subject.
And then there is (10) the question of house construction in order that better insulation be developed. That, of course, does not apply to buildings already constructed. That is the programme that the fuel committee have laid out for investigation and for which we are asking the sum of $53,000.


William Findlay Maclean: Is there any other survey of the water powers going on now independently of that conducted by the Mines department?


Charles A. Stewart: The Water Powers branch are making all the investigations as regards water powers generally in Canada.


William Findlay Maclean: Would that include the requirements of the National Railways? For instance I am told they are taking into consideration very seriously the development of electrical energy for traction purposes along the Transcontinental railway, and that they are actually negotiating with the provincial governments concerned for some kind of an arrangement as to the utilization of these water powers. Does that come under the Department of the Interior?


Charles A. Stewart: The Water Powers branch gathers available data of the possibilities of water powers generally throughout Canada. That work is not confined to any particular province but is carried on in all the provinces of Canada, so that it is possible to furnish data regarding the power to be developed at any given point where development could take place. That is the work of the W'ater Powers branch.


William F. Carroll: I do not think it hurts the various departments of the government to be criticized occasionally by the very faithful followers of the administration. Objection may not, perhaps, be raised to the passage of
Supply-Mines

this vote for ascertaining whether or not we may be able to treat American bituminous coal in the various cities of Ontario in order to get a supply of fuel from this source. I should rather think, however, that the Mines department of this country should exercise its intellect, and employ its knowledge in showing parliament and the country whether or not it is possible to bring the bituminous coal of eastern Canada and the bituminous coal of western Canada into the central cities of the provinces of Quebec and Ontario, there to be manufactured into coke and so take the place of the anthracite which we have been importing from the United States.


Charles A. Stewart: May I interrupt the hon. gentleman to say that is exactly what we propose to do. The same treatment will be applied to the bituminous coal of the Maritime provinces as to the bituminous coal of the West. Let me say to my hon. friend that I have no desire to encourage the use of United States fuel at the expense of the Canadian fuel.


William F. Carroll: Then I misunderstood
the minister. I should rather think the first thing this government, or any Canadian government, would do would be to investigate the possibilities of a Canadian supply. If, as the result of future investigations, they find that they are unable to obtain a supply of fuel in this country, then they might turn their thoughts to the United States. When I spoke as I did a few minutes ago of my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Church) who has been a live wire in our committee and who has taken more interest in the committee on Mines and Minerals-which is now holding sittings for the first time I think in twenty years-than any other member I can now point my finger at, I thought perhaps we had better leave the discussion of this question until the report of that committee was brought down. However, the minister has brought in an estimate with respect to fuel which affords us an opportunity of discussing this question. I still think I must have misunderstood the minister, or he did not make the matter quite plain to me. In his answer to my hon. friend from North Toronto (Mr. Church) I understood him to say that this $53,000 was for the purpose of treating United States coal in order to obtain a supply of fuel for Canada. Now, this whole matter has been fully investigated by both the Senate committee and the House of Commons committee. I am not suggesting that the minister hold this vote over, but I would ask him to consider very 
seriously the spending of any money in an investigation looking to the United States for a supply of coal. The very purpose of the inquiry of both committees has been, as I understand it, to ascertain whether or not Canada is to-day in a position to supply the fuel demands of this country. I for one would rather object to spending our money for any other purpose than to ascertain whether we may entertain the hope in the near future of being able to supply the national demands from domestic sources. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that this is a most serious question. I agree with my hon. friend, the member for North Toronto, that it is the most serious question that has arisen in Canada for some time. If we had a thousand war ships on the Great Lakes in the event of a war with the United States-which God forbid may ever become a fact-that would avail us nothing under present conditions in Canada, because the United States could cut off our fuel supply in twenty-four hours. In that short period of time we would have to capitulate to every demand that might be made upon us to the great republic to the south. Therefore in that respect the fuel question is of national importance and demands the serious consideration of parliament and the country.
The Minister of Agriculture said a moment ago that we have been labouring under the difficulty of freight rates for years. I would like to show him a few telegrams which were sent a few days ago to our committee by the coal operators of the West. Perhaps the minister has seen those telegrams. When Sir Henry Thornton made his railway rate of $9 a ton for the transportation of fuel from the coal fields of Alberta to the various centres in the East, he suggested that the coal operators, and others interested, might join in cutting down their profits.


William Richard Motherwell: Hear, hear.


William F. Carroll: I want to tell the Minister of Agriculture that we got very little encouragement from the coal operators of the West in that respect. They simply said that it was impossible for them to get coal into Ontario at a freight rate of $9 a ton, but they made no comment as to whether or not they would contribute in reducing the cost in order that coal might be brought to the people who needed it. That is one of the things, I think, Sir Henry Thornton intended to bring very forcibly to the coal operators of this country. Therefore, when you talk

Supply-Mines
about freight and lake rates, and similar charges, do not lay the whole blame for existing conditions on the railroads of Canada. If this is becoming a national question, as it undoubtedly is, I think a conference should be held in the immediate future between representatives of the Dominion government. and the various local governments so that the whole matter may be gone into in a very searching manner. No company in this country owns the coal deposits. In the prairie provinces I presume they are owned by the Dominion government. In the Maritime and older provinces they are owned by the local governments, and while I do not wish to make any accusations against operators or persons who are carrying coal, I would say the time has come, Mr. Chairman, when the cards of the various provinces should be laid on the table, and when there should be an open conference with the coal operators of the country, and they should be brought to a realization of the fact that the coal industry of Canada is a national asset, not owned by any company, not owned by any man, but owned by the people at large. I am in hopes that will be one of the things our committee will recommend to the members of this House. I do not wish to criticize the item, but I say, in view of the treatment which has been accorded to Canada, in the last year, that I, as a humble member and faithful follower of this government, would suggest that they should go slowly in spending any part of this $53,000 towards advertising American wares in the shape of coal shipped into this country. Perhaps I misunderstood the minister. I know he is just as true a Canadian as I am, and perhaps better, but, in view of all the circumstances, I would think the energies of his department should be directed more closely towards a very sincere investigation of the possibilities of a home supply for Canada than the probabilities of our demand being satisfied from a foreign country.


Mr. MILLAR:: I wish to press a certain matter on the minister briefly. I had a conversation with a mining engineer a week ago, and I had intended to get my information in better shape before the item came up; still I think I can give him the kernel of the conversation. This conversation showed the necessity of getting accurate reports in regard to our natural resources. This gentleman did not mention this matter by way of criticism of the department, and yet the conversation developed a weak spot. He stated that on one occasion the engineer representing the department brought in some samples from mines located away out in the extreme north that tested out very good indeed. He and some friends had some interests near at hand, and sent out representatives to get samples of ore, and found the samples tested very poorly. They wondered that there was such a discrepancy and where the fault lay. They sent out a second group of prospectors, with the same result. His explanation was that the samples that had been taken by the representative of the department had been salted, if hon. members are familiar with that term, and he remarked that if one were going to be entirely accurate it was necessary almost to lock up his samples after he had taken them, lest some sharper might drop something into them in order to give an entirely false report. He and his friends had been put to the expense of some thousands of dollars just because the report was not accurate. This shows the necessity of obtaining accurate information.
In regard to coal, it strikes me it would be most difficult-and I would be glad to think it would be possible-to bring Alberta coal to Ontario and sell it for ten or eleven dollars per ton. Some hon. members do not seem to wish to continue this
11 p.m. discussion, but I have not taken very much time and I did not introduce it. The question has been introduced and discussed at considerable length. Some people have thought that the coal we ha're been discussing is not going to give satisfaction, and that it will slack. I have used this coal entirely for two years. I have found no difficulty with the coal slacking. Sometimes I have had tons left over in the spring of the year, and have used them in the fall and found no difficulty from slacking. It is simply a question of freight rates, as to whether it is going to be possible to bring coal from Alberta to Toronto and sell it for $9 or $10 a ton. I and others in my town paid last winter $13 a ton on the car. Either it is a case of paying very exorbitant freight rates, or else it will be impossible to bring it to Ontario and sell it in Toronto for $10 or $11 a ton. I would be glad to think it rould be done, and that we could save the $60,000,000 that goes to the United States annually for coal. I can see one of our difficulties that has not yet been touched on in the debate. Perhaps some hon. gentlemen who have a lot of labour people in their constituencies are a little reluctant about touching on it. One of the great difficulties is the problem presented by labour. I believe a great many in the ranks of labour are not

Supply-Mines

receiving too much. A great many who are serving on railways are not receiving too much, but I am convinced there are a goodly number receiving far too much. Here is the way it works out. I had a talk with a friend last fall who stated he had stayed over in the north country with a repairer of engines who, in the course of conversation had said, "I have been able to count 25 hours a day for the last three months". "Well" my friend "when do you sleep?" "Oh" he said, "you doubt it. I will show you by my book. If I work half an hour I am paid for half a day, and if I work after hours I am paid time and a half." And he went on to say further that the engineer helped him out some. He said, "If an engineer comes in at five in the afternoon the engine is not reported till after six. In that way I get paid time and a half for repairing, but if an engine arrives in the morning, say at five o'clock, that engine is reported at once. It may be too warm so that I cannot repair it at once, but it is reported, and being reported at once I get paid time and a half fob repairing it." You may say this is just hearsay but it did not pass through very many mouths- just one-before it reached me. From other sources, from men in the offices, I have gathered the same information. In that way some men are able to draw far more pay than they have a right to.


Mr CARROLL:: Do you get your information from railway employees who are drawing the overtime?


John Millar: Yes.


William F. Carroll: Then, it is perfectly
correct?


John Millar: A conference was mentioned a few moments ago by the member who has asked me the question. It seems to me something might be done by a conference between labour, capital and representatives of the government. In many cases unemployed workmen are not only anxious but willing to work for a fair wage but they are unable to secure employment because others in the ranks of labour are demanding more than they are entitled to, and are thereby stiffing industry. There would be a great deal more employment if these high wages were not demanded. The railways would be able to carry freight for much less and that would give an impetus to mining and make it possible to bring coal from Alberta to Ontario and sell it at a reasonable ' price. That is one way in which a conference could accomplish a great deal of good. I do not wish to prolong the discussion, but I [Mr. Millar. J
would offer the same suggestion put forward by an hon. gentleman from Toronto; I should be sorry to see the ships belonging to the Merchant Marine sold. I think they should be kept, in view of the combine which we have seen on the lakes. I think it might be well to keep them in use.


Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: The minister gave some fragmentary information with respect to the experiments in connection with peat. I did not gather how much it was proposed to expend during the coming year or whether in the minister's opinion the very large amount spent in the past along this line with the comparatively meagre results obtained justifies any further experiments.


Charles A. Stewart: I thought I had made it clear that it was the opinion of both governments, who were joint participants in the experiment, that the machinery had been developed up to that point where they could say that the experiment was completed. They were not in the business of manufacturing any large amount of fuel but were simply developing the machinery up to the point where it could be established that it could produce fuel economically. There is no expenditure in connection with that work for the coming year.


Mr. GOULD:: We are trying to believe that it is the policy of the government to economise this year, and in this regard I must call the attention of the minister to the fact that he is commencing with Assiniboia. Last year we had a vote for the briquetting plant at Bien-fait, which is in the electoral district of Assiniboia; that vote is absent this year. Can the minister give us any information concerning the condition of affairs in that locality to-day?


Charles A. Stewart: The briquetting plant at Bienfait has been carried on under the supervision of a Separate board and not under the department at all. The endeavour to carbonize coal, I may say, has not been successful. A great deal of money has been spent on the experiment, which I think has proved a failure, that is to say, in the direction in which it has been carried on. We did investigate last winter the use of a carbonizer which was developed at an American university by the American Bureau of Mines, and, to test that carbonizer, they are now building a unit at an expense of $1,600. That is all we propose to do in this direction.


Oliver Robert Gould: I understand that the appropriation last year was not all expended and that the minister is now going to use the

Supply-Mines
balance of it. I do not wish unduly to delay the passing of the item, but I did think that this was an opportune time to secure some information concerning the plant at Bienfait. I have been receiving reports all along giving much the same information that the minister has submitted to the committee. It seems to me that when we are expending so much money for laboratory and other investigational work, something should be done to see whether the vast deposits of lignite in that district might not be rendered of some use to the people, to provide either energy of some nature or an auxiliary heating power. Has this question been given any consideration at all?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines-salaries and contingencies, $539,890.
Arthur Meighen: Like other items, this shows a large increase. How is the minister expecting to pay off the national debt this way?


Charles A. Stewart: The statutory increases amount to $14,755. The new positions are three; there were 228 last year as against 231 this year. These three new positions are to be filled by officers who will be in the Fuel Testing division, engaged in the very work we have been discussing; that is to say, an engineer grade No. 3, at $2,700, an assistant chemist at $2,100, and a junior chemist at $1,680, making a total of . $6,480. Reclassification accounts for $3,792.50. These, together with the statutory increases of $14,755, make up the total increase of $25,027.50.


Arthur Meighen: You can always make up an increase if you employ a sufficient number of new men and do not get any extra services from the men you already have, while their salaries are moving up. The increase of salaries implies that extra services are being obtained for it. Every few days we get an advertisement from the Civil Service Commission wanting to appoint this, that, and the other man at large or comparatively large salaries, for some new positions that are created. If this goes on, where are we going to land? If we look for reductions we find them only in connection with help given by the Dominion to provinces or municipalities, thereby saving the taxpayers' money paid to those authorities. The increases come in the civil government estimates in the various departments one after the other; they are going on apparently recklessly. This relatively is an enormous in-
205 i
crease-$25,000. At this rate of increase per year the department is going to reach the dimensions of the Interior department. Why all these "chemists? I was only in charge of the Mines department a very short time, and the department ended with fewer chemists while I was there.


Charles A. Stewart: I am advised that during the period of the war the department was almost denuded of chemists, they being attracted from the service by various commercial enterprises. The same applies to the engineers in this particular department. If there is an excuse for an expenditure in any department of government, I do think it is in the Mines department in which an attempt is made to ascertain the amount of our natural resources and their utilization, and of course chemists play a very important part in any development of this character. The three additional chemists that I am asking for this year will be utilized, as I pointed out a few minutes ago, in carrying on the fuel investigation.


Arthur Meighen: There was some reduction all right, and there was a very considerable censure upon us for not reducing the staff still more; but the process is now in operation. It is true we need chemists, but I do think if you have a limited number of good, faithful men, and they are made to understand that they must concentrate their work upon purely practical ends, we will get as good results at far less eost to the countiy. The temptation of the permanent heads to enlarge the operations under them is very great, and the pressure from those heads is always upon the minister to accede to their demands, but I would warn the minister not to be too easily impressed even by the best of deputies-and I think he has one of the best in that department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion of Canada Assay Office-for maintenance of assay office, Vancouver, B.C., $26,000.
Arthur Meighen: Is this for the assaying of minerals?


Charles A. Stewart: The assay office was created to provide a place where Canadian producers might dispose of their gold.


Arthur Meighen: They took the whole amount voted last year?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: Any Governor General's
warrants besides?
C.N.R.-Paris Offices


Charles A. Stewart: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.	.
William Stevens Fielding: Number 27.


Arthur Meighen: Does the minister intend to go on with more business to-night? What has become of the new clock reforms of the government? We are now twenty minutes after eleven. A lot of business has been put through without any delay except on the part of the faithful supporters of the government behind him.


William Stevens Fielding: I am not complaining at all. I think we have had a very pleasant evening, but it is so pleasant I thought the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) might be permitted to finish up his Bankruptcy Bill to-night.


Arthur Meighen: There is no chance of that to-night.


William Stevens Fielding: In that case we will have to move that the House do now adjourn.
On motion of Mr. Fielding the House adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
Tuesday, May 29, 1923