1923-04-16

PRIVATE BILLS FIRST READINGS

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 106 (from the Senate), to extend the Right of Appeal from Convictions for Indictable Offences.-Mr. Sheard-for Mr. McQuarrie.
Bill No. 107 (from the Senate), to incorporate Montreal Finance Trust. Mr. Papi-neau.
Bill No. 108 (from the Senate), for the relief of Violet Gardiner.-Mr. Sheard.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).
drawback on materials imported
['I will not make a definite promise, but I think I can secure a copy of the letter, and if so I will have it placed on the Table with the other communication referred to.\nSales Tax']
Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1 and 2. Information not available.
3.	$9,405,949.57.
4 and 5. Information not available.
6.	$1,481,793.07.
INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE at NIAGARA



Mr. FAFARD:: 1.	What amount of money has the Topographical Survey expended in the Dominion during the years 1900 to 1922?
2.	What amount of such money was expended, each year, in each province ?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.
1900- 01	$ 269,929.49
1901-	02	
371,529.771902-	03	
449,999.291903-	04	
749,930.511904-	05	
794,409.831905-	06	
599,780.011906-	07	
526,582.611907-	08	
768,243.941908-	09	
797,746.741909-	10	
754,437.851910-	11	
976,024.941911-	12	
958,329.561912-	13	
964,890.111913-	14	
1,051,685.781914-	15	
1,046,909.881915-	16	
1,043,158.571916-	17	
774,396.191917- 18	i	579,870.451918-	19	
405,171.741919-	20	
558,080.311920-	21	
685,013.001921- 22	591,400.54

Year	Manitoba	Saskat- chewan	Alberta	British Columbia	Yukon	N. W. T erri-tories	Ottawa salaries of office staff	Office expenses$	$	$	$	s	8	$	$1900-1901	37,890	42,037	55,657	19,813	39,708	13,143	47,182	14,4991901-	1902	
1902-	1903	41,906 56,149 16,827 80,026 37,442 125,206	46,113 109,596 322,614 180,048 92,674 71,194	122,793 101,591 210,311 337,088 255,710 164.392	18,377 39,019 29,568 34,186 48 165	65,339 57,277 44,948 35,467 33,055 10,848	1,632	49,823 63,995 83,338 87,879 104,433 86,364	25,547 22,372 42,325 39,716 28,301 41,7861903-1904	1904-1905	190.5-1906	1906-1907	26,793	1907-1908	120,947	171,739	238,498	39,815	19,231	135,182	42,8311908-1909	114,721	138,868	333,223	63,122	22,157	68,869	56,7871909-1910	92,474	225,744 235,620	288,689 470,419	68,880 117,950	18,685 11,715	12,655 10,951	47,311 64,0861910-1911	64,807	477	1911-1912	84,167	265,609	418,295	94,222	30,094	11,693	54,2491912-1913	177,445	234,763	348,444	89,663	25,424	3,506	10,770	74,8761913-	1914	
1914-	1915	171,786 188,457	185,786 117,620 123,747 181,890	444,246 543,313 489,572 283,791 171,127 120,955 160,462 251,793 115,012	110,084 91,478 174,661 96,873 97,050 43,224 54,975 38,433 60,348	19,154 23,605 16,653 12,489 8,601 4,569 2,499	17,134	11,677 25,472 30,116 32,225 31,806 32,103 46,824 50,174 51,945	91,818 56,965 63,118 89,955 57,341 38,330 31,695 42,512 62,3531915-1916	145,292	1916-17	77,173	1917-18	75,773	138,172	1918-19	40,983	125,008	1919-20	78,838	182,787	1920-21	159,242	142,859	1921-22	102,422	122,207	77,114	T otal....	2,089,973	3,456,695	5,925,381	1,456,699	501,518	113,006	1,085,476	1,088,773 15,717,521
Questions


SURVEYS IN PRAIRIE PROVINCES
Mr. FAFARD:: What amount of money was expended in the provinces of Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba for surveys of base lines, township lines and subdivision lines; also for surveys of lakes and rivers, during the years 1882 to 1922?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: Base-lines, Township,
Meridians,	Outlines,	Lakes,and Block	Subdivision	Rivers,Province	Outlines & Resurveys Etc.Manitoba	$ 468,438 $1,442,231 $ 83,739Saskatchewan. ..	550,912	2,869,330	328,270Alberta	
1,167,514	4,448,362	195,481Total	$2,186,864 $8,759,923 $607,490
Department of Public Works-
Saskatchewan and Alberta	$54,498 53
Manitoba	 40,647 21

Expended on surveys of lakes and rivers.


COMPLAINTS AGAINST BREWERIES
Mr. BROWN:: 1.	Have any complaints been received by the government from any of the provinces during the calendar year in regard to breweries using the privileges granted 
them by license, to violate the liquor laws of the province?
2.	If so, in regard to what breweries?
3.	Is it the policy of the government to continue licensing the breweries so complained of?
4. What action is being taken in regard to the breweries complained against?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1.	Copies of convictions for infractions of provincial laws have been received.
2.	Not deemed advisable to disclose the names.
3.	Under consideration.
4.	Answered by Number 3.


LIQUOR WAREHOUSE LICENSES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. CLARK:: 1.	How many excise bonded warehouse licenses for the keeping of intoxicating liquors in the province of British Columbia have been issued since the beginning of the year 1920?
2.	Who are the licensees and what are the dates of issue of such licenses, including any renewals thereof?
3.	In what cities or towns respectively were the warehouses situated in respect of which such licenses were issued ?
4.	Is it the policy of the government in dealing with applications for such licenses to require the approval of the attorney general, or the provincial government, or a member thereof, before issuing such license?
5.	Are such licenses renewable annually? If so, is similar approval of the attorney general or other provincial authorities required for such renewal?
6.	Was such approval given in the cases of the granting or renewal of such licenses? If so, by whom?

Questions


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1.	Four.
2.	& 3. (1) Liquor Control Board of British Columbia, Vancouver-Date of Issue September 19, 1921,-renewed April 1, 1922; (2) Canadian Pacific Ocean Service Ltd., Vancouver-Date of issue February 27, 1919, April, 1920, April 1, 1921, April 1, 1922; (3) Calgary Export Co., Vancouver-Date of issue January 22, 1921-renewed April 1, 1922; (4) Liquor Control Board of British Columbia, Victoria-Date of Issue July 8, 1921-renewed April 1, 1922.
4.	Yes.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes-Attorney General of the province and Chairman of British Columbia Liquor Board.


LUMBER IMPORTATIONS FOR WELLAND CANAL
Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: 1.	Did the Montreal harbour board order 5,000,000 feet of lumber from the United States during 1922 for use on construction work in connection with the Welland canal?
2.	If so, why was not this lumber ordered from British Columbia?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	No.
2.	See answer to No. 1.


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	No lumber for use on construction work in connection with the Welland canal was purchased by the Montreal harbour board.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


GRAIN ELEVATOR COMMISSION
Mr. COOTE:: 1.	Was there a grain elevator commission appointed by the government in the spring of 1922? If so, what was the purpose in view?
2.	What were the names, addresses and occupations of the members of this commission?
3.	Have they made a report to the government?
4.	If so, has the report been published?
5.	If no report has been made, when does the government expect to receive a report from the commission?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
4.	Answered by No. 1.
5.	Answered by No. 1.


MONTREAL HARBOUR MASTERS
Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	Are the Montreal harbour masters, appointed by the Montreal Board of Trade, paid by the government?
2.	If so, what are their respective salaries?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1 & 2. The harbour masters for the harbour of Montreal are not appointed by the Board of Trad? -or paid by the government.


PARK AND DAVIS COMPANY &quot;METAGEN&quot;
Mr. DESLAURIERS:: 1.	Does the product known by the name of "Metagen" put up by the Park and Davis Company contain
vitamines as advertised?
2.	If not, will the use of this product be prohibited by the government?
Hon. Mr. BELAND.
1.	Biological tests have shown that "Metagen" contains vitamines.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


CLOSURE RULES
*Mr. MEIGHEN:: Is it the intention of the government to recommend to Parliament repeal of the closure rules adopted in 1913?


Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: I may answer this question orally by saying no.


WHEAT SHIPMENTS TO GREAT BRITAIN
Hon. Mr. MANION:: 1.	How many bushels of wheat were shipped from Canada to Great Britain in the years 1912, 1913, 1919, 1929, 1921, 1922?
2.	How many bushels of wheat were shipped from Canada to the United States, to France, to Italy, to Germany, to Belgium, and to Holland, in the same years ?


Jacques Bureau: 1 and 2:
Exports of Canadian Wheat to Countries Specified, during the Fiscal Years ended March 31 1912
1913, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922	'
Country	1912	1913	1919	1920	1921	1922Bushels	Bushels	Bushels	Bushels	Bushels	BushelsUnited Kingdom	
United States	60,343,037 997,662	77,722,465 9,834,530 45,469	37,317,648 1,992,409 1,235,509 1,039,273	51,426,131 6,661,588 5,045,000 2,757,174	29,294,612 42,324,894 5,051,461 21,048,458 1,832,739 14,069,843 6,976,125	92,498,351 16,592,797 1,111,752 10,298,424 1,219,257 4,069,245 2,585,885
890,003 1,696,953 429,485	777,614 3,072,736 1,162,636				
Belgium					4,198,288		
						
Questions


JAMES RUSSEL
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Was James Russel, of Newcastle, New Brunswick, employed at any time by the Fisheries branch as warden on the River Miramichi?
2.	If so, when was he discharged from the service, for what reason, and was any official investigation held in connection with his removal from the service?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	He was employed as a temporary fishery guardian.
2.	February 21st, 1923, as work on which he was employed was then finished. There was no investigation nor was there any reason for one.


SMELT FISHING REGULATIONS
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Is it the intention of the Fisheries branch to revise the regulations regarding the taking of smelt from Canadian waters?
2.	If so, what changes are contemplated?


Ernest Lapointe: 1 and 2. No changes are at present under consideration.


CONTRACTS AWARDED TO DEMERS, OF QUEBEC
Mr. PARENT:: 1.	Have contracts been awarded one Demers, of the city of Quebec, by the Post Office Department?
2.	If so, on what date and for what service have said contracts been given ?
3.	Were tenders received for the said work? If so, from whom?
4.	How many days, if any, elapsed between the receipt of tenders and the notification to the successful tenderer ?
5.	Who were present when the tenders were opened?
6.	At what price were the contracts given?
7.	Has a person by the name of Nolin put in a tender?
[DOT] 8. If so, what price did the said Nolin quote for the said service, and on what date was his tender received ?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for Postmaster General) :: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) 29th April, 1921, Quebec post office to railway stations and wharves; (b) 29th April, 1921, Quebec street letter boxes; (c) 29th April, 1921, Quebec parcel post delivery.
3.	Yes. (a) Amedee Demers, (b) Amedee Demers; (c) Amedee Demers and James M. Norton.
4.	Tenders for all three services were due at Post Office Department on 29th April, 1921, and instructions awarding the contracts to the lowest tenderers were issued the same day.
5.	Two responsible officers of the department.
6.	(a) $13,000 per annum; (b) $16,000 per annum; (c) 60 cents per hour.
7.	Yes.

8.	(a) $7,800 per annum; (b) $16,500 per annum; (c) 75 cents per hour.
These tenders were irregular and furthermore were not received at department until 30th April, 1921.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. IRVINE:: For a copjr of all correspondence, documents, letters, telegrams passing between the postmaster of Calgary post office and the Postmaster General's department, in connection with Mr. John Hayes.


NATIONAL RAILWAYS-LIQUOR TRANSPORTATION
Mr. STEVENS:: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, telegrams and other documents passing between the Right Honourable the Prime Minister, the Honourable Minister of Railways, and H. R. Grant of Sydney Mines, Nova Scotia, or other persons, having reference to the transportation of liquor, over Canadian National Railways or other lines under the control of the Canadian National Railways, into the province of Nova Scotia.


CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE
Henry Herbert Stevens: For a return showing the earnings and expenditures of the following vessels on the trips set forth below:-
1.	Canadian Winner, leaving Vancouver August 8, 1922, for the Orient, returning October 12, 1922;
2.	Canadian Inventor, leaving Vancouver September 28, 1922, for the Orient, returning November 20, 1922;
3. Canadian Britisher, leaving Vancouver May 13, 1922, for Australia, returning October 4, 1922;
4. Canadian Traveller, leaving Vancouver July 13, 1922, for Australia, returning December 1, 1922;
5.	Canadian Farmer, leaving Vancouver July 18, 1922, for California points, returning August 12, 1922; also from Vancouver, August 14, for California points, returning September 13, 1922.
6.	Canadian Observer, leaving Vancouver July 7. 1922. for California, returning August 23, 1922; also August 8, 1922, for California points, returning September 24, 1922.


MR. W. H. TRUEMAN APPOINTMENT TO THE BENCH
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. HANSON:: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) I would ask the Prime Minister whether the report published in the press to the effect that Mr. W. H. Trueman, K.C., of Winnipeg has been appointed a judge of the Court of Appeal of Manitoba is true?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The report is correct.


CATTLE SHIPMENTS
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
' Mr. FORKE: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) the following question: I notice an in-

Cattle Shipments
terview in Saturday's Manitoba Free Press given by W. H. Forster of England, who came to Canada from England to purchase cattle. He intended purchasing about 2,000 head; he found when he came that all available space for ocean shipments had been contracted for.
It had been broadcast in England that Canada would have for sale this spring about twenty-five or thirty thousand head of cattle suitable for the British trade, and that the ocean freight would be about S15 per head. Now when a purchaser comes here, he finds all, or nearly all, space contracted for, and the ocean rate is $22.50 or $25 per head.
In view of the fact that the department has been urging farmers during the winter to have cattle ready for the market, had the department any knowledge that a condition such as exists might occur?
Mr. MOTHERWELL:: Mr. Speaker, it is difficult offhand to answer all these questions.


Mr. FORKE:: It is just one question.


William Richard Motherwell: But the answer to the one question does not do justice to the subject generally. My deputy is preparing a statement for the press that covers the whole question; it gives the sailings of all the steamers for the next four weeks from Montreal and St. John and shows that there will be a shortage of space for the first two weeks in May, that on the third week space will be equal to the demand, and that on the fourth week it will be greater than the demand. At the present time the space available is less than the demand. In a general way we had some information with regard to the number of cattle that would be shipped, but it was very difficult to get any exact figures. With the information furnished to us we have kept the shippers in Montreal acquainted with the requirements of this movement. That is all I can say in a verbal statement.


Robert Forke: Is the minister aware of the fact that by the end of May the proper time for the shipment of this class of cattle is nearly past and space will be of little benefit to the shippers after that date?


William Richard Motherwell: Does my hon. friend think we should carry shipping space in our vest pocket ready for immediate requirements? There were two schools of thought apparent in Canada in connection with cattle shipments to Great Britain after the removal of the embargo: One was to deprecate the removal and to point out that there would be nothing much going over anyhow; the other was to exaggerate the movement. Between the two it was pretty difficult for us
to size up the situation. We kept the cattlemen fully supplied with information we gathered in regard to the situation. You cannot restore a trade that has been suspended for thirty years and expect to find everything ready for it3 resumption without some disturbance. Therefore it is quite natural that there should be a shortage of space for a brief period, but, as I have already indicated, in a few weeks there will be more than sufficient accommodation to meet the demand.


THE BUDGET
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: I rise to ask my hon. friend, the Minister of Finance, whether, he is going to fix this coming week for the introduction of the budget?


Mr. FIELDING:: It would be a great joy to me if I could fix the date for this week, but I am afraid it will have to be postponed. I hope it may be during the coming week, but I do not desire to be too definite. I am almost as anxious as my hon. friend to have it off my mind.
Hon. F. B. CARVELL
On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. COOTE:: Mr. Speaker, I would draw the attention of the Prime Minister to a despatch in the local papers from Vancouver dated April 10th, stating that a letter of protest has been sent to the Prime Minister by the Vancouver Board of Trade in which it characterizes recent statements of Hon. F. B. Carvell, Chief Commissioner of Railways, regarding the attitude of the province of British Columbia toward the freight rate question as showing disregard for the ethics of his position. Has the Prime Minister received this letter? If so, will he be good enough to lay it on the table of the House for the information of members?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, I have received the letter to which my hon. friend refers and shall have pleasure in laying it on the Table before the House rises.


George Gibson Coote: Will the Prime Minister also be good enough to secure a copy of the letter sent by Mr. Carvell to the associated boards of trade in British Columbia, which is referred to by the Vancouver Board of Trade?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I will not make a definite promise, but I think I can secure a copy of the letter, and if so I will have it placed on the Table with the other communication referred to.
Sales Tax



SUPPLY-SALES TAX

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Hon. W. S. Fielding (Minister of Finance) for Committee of Supply:
Mr. JOS. T. SHAW (Calgary West): 1 want to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, of bringing to the attention of the House the application of the existing sales tax in so far as it affects public libraries. I am impelled to take this action at this particular time because I read in the public press that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) is not averse to receiving suggestions from outside deputations with regard to the approaching budget, and it occurred to me that perhaps he might not be unwilling to view with favour suggestions made by members of this House.
Under the operation of the existing sales tax public libraries are subjected to a 6 per cent tax on books imported from foreign countries. And may I say at the outset that the majority of our books are imported? If these books are not imported directly they may be purchased, as they often are, from Canadian wholesalers, in which event a sales tax is charged the library of some 2i per cent; but in the price charged by the wholesaler is included the price which he must pay by way of sales tax, totalling 3| per cent. Therefore, in any event the library must pay a sales tax of 6 per cent on its purchases.
Another factor that is of great importance to public libraries is the matter of bindings, which they use very considerably. Bindings are subject to a sales tax of 4J per cent. Now, it is rather a strange coincidence that while libraries have been exempted so far as their purchases are concerned from the operation of the customs tariff, they have not been exempted from the sales tax in their purchases of books and bindings. The operation of this sales tax, as I have indicated, constitutes a very grievious burden to public libraries. There is, as must be matter of common knowledge, an increasing demand on public libraries to-day, and it is also a fact that these institutions are receiving decreased appropriations. In the city from which I come we have a very efficient tax-supported public library officered by a very capable official indeed, a library which serves not only our city but a very large surrounding country. In the city of Calgary alone the operation of the sales tax during the present fiscal year will mean the payment by that library of about $1,000. During the year also there has been a decrease in the appropriations for this library totalling $2,000, In the western provinces the operation of the sales tax will mean
approximately $10,000 to public libraries, of which amount $7,000 represents the tax on the purchase of books alone.
I hold in my hand a letter from the Inspector of Libraries for the province of Ontario, and I should like to indicate his views in connection with this matter. Referring to the libraries in Ontario, he says:
Our libraries expended in that year $164,185.
That is, the year 1921. Continuing, he
says:
The sales tax is a heavy burden on our libraries. The prices of books have increased tremendously since before the war, and the libraries' incomes are decidedly limited. The Dominion government has always recognized the general public service of public libraries by permitting imported books to come to the public libraries free of duty. Surely the sales tax should be removed when it is in the general public's good that it should be removed. The Ontario legislature bases its grants largely on book purchases, and we find that our grants are not as effective by reason of the tax that is imposed ?
It is apparent, therefore, to anyone who ponders the situation for a moment that the tax-supported public libraries find themselves ground between the millstones of heavy federal taxation on the one hand and a decreasing appropriation on the other, the latter due primarily to the financial stringency. While the tax does bear very seriously upon the individual library, I think it can fairly be said that the aggregate amount received by the government, so far as the application of the tax to libraries is concerned, is very insignificant indeed.
The special objection which I have to the particular tax that I am referring to is that it constitutes a tax upon taxation. This is a case of double taxation, and falling as it does upon a tax supported institution, it bears very heavily indeed. Strange to relate, when the statute was drawn the provincial libraries were specially exempted, but other public libraries, equally tax-supported, were not favoured with exemption. Under these circumstances I am asking the House in the form of a resolution to indicate that this tax should be removed, in its application to public libraries in so far as it affects the purchase of books and of binding supplies.
I know that I shall be met with one or two arguments. It will be suggested. I doubt not, that the matter should first be taken up with the Finance Minister (Mr. Fielding) or the Minister of Customs and Excise (Mr. Bureau). But the library officials last year did take the matter up not only with the Minister of Finance but with the Minister of Customs and Excise, and they did not accomplish their desire. It will be urged, also, I assume, that to move an amendment when going into Coni-

Sales Tax
mittee of Supply constitutes a vote of want of confidence in the government. I have not any desire by this vote to indicate any such want of confidence so far as this particular item is concerned. I do want to suggest however, that there has not been any other opportunity to bring this matter to the attention of the House. Had I brought it up by way of private member's resolution I should have been met with the suggestion that it constituted in effect a subtraction of the public revenue and consequently would not be legal under that head. Bringing it up at this time, I may be met with the suggestion, as I have said, that it is a vote of want of confidence. Well, it is about time that hoary tradition was dispensed with; and I notice that in the Mother of Parliaments itself, the most transparent technicality has lately been taken advantage of in order to obviate the application of that rule. Then again, it may be urged, "Why not bring it up in the budget debate?" But if ever there was a time for pious platitudes, surely it is when the budget is under consideration, I do suggest to the government that this is the time and this is the place to bring to the attention of parliament a matter which to my mind is of vital significance to our public libraries and also to the reading public.
But I may be met further with the argument: "Why pick out this particular item? Why single out the sales tax in its application to public libraries? Why not deal with a dozen other things?" Well, I want to say at the outset that the tax in its effect upon libraries is particularly vicious, particularly harmful. It is, as I have pointed out, a tax upon taxation; it is in a category by itself so far as sales tax is concerned. And not only that: while I have very serious objection to the sales tax in many directions, I sometimes think it is much more desirable to attack the enemy in detail rather than by making a' frontal attack. I feel, that it is going to be a great many years before we shall have in vogue in ' this country a proper, scientific system of taxation. No effort has yet been made to delimit, if you like, the various fields of taxation-Dominion, provincial, and municipal. Consequently I must take this opportunity of presenting to the House a resolution dealing with this particular matter. I move in amendment:
That all the words in the resolution after the word "that" be struck out and the following substituted therefor:
Whereas public libraries are necessary and valuable educational institutions not existing for profit and supported by public taxation,
And whereas, on account of the increasing demand for library facilities and the difficult economic conditions prevailing, public libraries in Canada are experiencing the greatest difficulty in financing their reasonable requirements,
And whereas the application of the sales tax on the purchases of books and book-binding by public libraries constitutes a heavy financial burden, limiting the usefulness and impairing the efficiency of such public libraries,
Therefore be it resolved that this House deems it advisable that public libraries in Canada, supported by public taxation, be exempted from the operation of the sales tax in so far as the same affects the purchases of books and book-binding by such public libraries.
The amendment is seconded by the hon. member for McLeod (Mr. Coote).
William Stevens Fielding: Mr. Speaker, on the question of nonconfidence to which the hon. gentleman has referred I am reminded of the old lines, "It was all very well to dissemble your love, but why did you kick me downstairs?" I do not want to dwell on the question of non-confidence. I think I have a better reason for asking my hon. friend not to press his motion, or if he is to press it, for asking the House not to accept it.
With what he has said as to the importance of public libraries, the desirability of encouraging them and the hard times they are perhaps having, I am sure I can heartily sympathize, as I am sure most members of the House will, but that is by no means a conclusive reason why we should adopt this motion. I am not at the moment expressing any opinion whether it is or is not desirable that we should exempt public libraries from the sales tax. This is but one of twenty questions which are being presented to the government by hon. members on both sides of the House. I am sure I am probably within my facts when I say that I see before me on the two portions of the opposite benches at least a score of gentlemen who have done me the honour of calling upon me to impress upon me some particular thing in which they would like some reduction of taxation or some exemption from the operation of this or that tax. One gentleman here on this side of the House makes a habit of urging the exemption from the income tax where there are a certain number of children. Another hon. member brings forward some particular thing in which he is sincerely desirous of having a change, and no doubt they could all make a measure of popularity if they would get up in this House and become the champion -of this or that particular thing. But why should we select among these fifty or more things-perhaps I had
Sales Tax

better be moderate and say among the twenty or more changes proposed:-why pick out of the basket this particular thing and ask the judgment of the House upon it this afternoon? I fail to see the reason. I had a large deputation the other day urging very strongly that in the matter of income tax any man who contributes to charity or religion or any of the various noble causes which we are all asked to help should not be taxed on what he contributes for that purpose. That is perhaps as strong a case as my hon. friend from Calgary (Mr. Shaw) brings forward, but all who have these things in mind have been content to make their case and await the moving of the waters. I know of no reason why this particular case or fad, if I may dare call it that, and not offensively, for fads are good things at times, should be selected for us to vote upon to-day. If it is good policy to do that, then hon. gentlemen opposite-I am not designating any member-who have come before me and asked that a particular tax be abolished ought to get up and move in the same way and somebody else move for income tax exemption where there are children. Each of these things may be important in itself, but I submit to the House there is no good reason why we should pick out this particular thing and ask the House to pass judgment upon it this afternoon.
The sales tax is not a particular baby of my own. It was a system, and probably a necessary system, established by the forme.-government. I have had the unpleasant duty of increasing the amount of it. That is my crime in the matter. When the late government devised the tax I know that they made many exemptions; some people think too many; I know there is something to be said against exemptions. But the late government did make a very liberal list of exemptions. They considered public libraries I have no doubt, and no doubt thought that taken all in all libraries could stand the tax as well as many other things. I am not declaring against the judgment of the hon. member for Calgary. I am asking him to consider whether it is wise to ask the House to select this particular one out of the many questions, anticipate the budget, and ask for a vote upon it now. I do not think that is fair. I do not think either party in the House should accept the motion.
Amendment negatived.



SUPPLY-SPECIAL DELIVERY LETTER POSTAGE

['Before the House adjourns I will lay on the Table some papers I promised this afternoon relating to a communication from the Vancouver Board of Trade.\nOn motion of Mr. Mackenzie King, the House adjourned at 10.55 p.m.\nTuesday, April 17, 1923']
Hon. CHARLES MARCIL (Bonaventure):: Before you leave the chair, Mr. Speaker, I 
would like to call the attention of the Acting Postmaster General (Mr. Graham) to a matter concerning which I should have spoken when the House was in supply, but being occupied in a committee of the House I was unable to do so. It is regarding the special delivery of letters, on which a stamp of twenty cents has now to be placed. Many complaints have reached me from Montreal on this subject, and I would like to call the attention of the acting minister to the matter so that he may investigate it.
When the special delivery was originally devised, the postage was fixed at ten cents; it is now twenty cents, in addition to the three cents ordinary postage. That makes twenty-three cents for a special delivery letter. Last Thursday I had occasion to send a special delivery letter to Montreal,. placing twenty cents postage on it. The letter was wrongly delivered, but I am not complaining of that, as the address might not have been as perfect as it should have been.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I would ask hon. gentlemen to kindly refrain from conversation while the hon. member is addressing the House.


Charles Marcil: Montreal is now a very large city and it includes many outlying municipalities. When a special delivery letter, bearing a twenty-cent stamp in addition to the usual postage stamp, is brought into the post office it is handed over to a boy who is paid eight cents to deliver the letter in any part of the city which is served by the Montreal general post office. The government has received twenty-three cents from this letter and pays only eight cents to the messenger for its delivery. By common knowledge in the Montreal post office these messenger boys are the worst paid in the service, and I would ask the minister even if he cannot reduce the taxation on letters to at least give some encouragement to these messengers and grant them a better remuneration than they are receiving at the present time. Because these boys may have to go, in the course of their journeys, to almost the extreme end of the island of Montreal to deliver one of these letters for eight cents; they spend practically the best part of the forenoon and afternoon and are even employed late in the evening, at this work. If the ordinary postage rate is going to be reduced, at any time, from three to two cents, I would ask the government to consider whether it would not be possible to revert to the old rate of ten cents for special delivery letters from the present rate of twenty cents, and thereby increase the use of this facility which is not as well resorted to at the present time as it used to be in the old days. I hope the minister will give his atten-

Supply-I mmigration
tion to these matters and see if something cannot be done along the lines indicated to improve the service.


Mr. GRAHAM:: I will bring the facts stated by my hon. friend, as well as his request, to the notice of the department so that they may receive full consideration.
Motion agreed to and the House went into Committee of Supply, Air. Gordon in the chair.



[Stage Direction]
Immigration contingencies and general expenses, including grants to immigration and colonization societies, or associations, as may be authorized by the Governor General in Council, $1,850,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: I understand the minister has some information to give the House after long and deliberate reconsideration of his rather precipitate action in the first place. I heard with a good deal of satisfaction that he had indeed made some modification, some change, in his intention. Without going further into any criticism I would like to hear what the minister has to offer on the subject.


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Argenteuil) (Acting Minister of Immigration):: Mr. Chairman, there are two items still to be passed in the estimates for immigration, one dealing with immigration contingencies. I take it that my hon. friend does not desire that we should cover any old ground in connection with the matter but that the information should deal with this item.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I was hoping and expecting for some decidedly new ground.


Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: I do not know how' I could introduce any new ground. The estimates themselves are before the committee, and I shall give explanations as to this particular item. I may say that in the matter of publicity in Great Britain we have increased our expenditure from $77,000 to $303,000, and in the United States from $245,000 to $372,000. I propose to give an explanation of these items. For newspaper advertising in Great Britain we expended in the ten months of last year for which we have returns the sum of $5,302.62. We propose to spend this year $60,000. On pamphlets, booklets, maps, etc., we spent $58,000 for the ten months, and we propose spending $172,000 this year. We are increasing our expenditure for lectures and attendance at shows from $8,000 to $50,000, and our expenditure on exhibition motor cars from $4,000 to $15,000. The department has had one motor car going about with exhibits of Canadian products from town to town, accompanied by lecturers. The
results that we have received from this form of advertising have been so good that we intend to equip and put another car on this work.


Mr. TOLMIE:: How much of the appropriation is for the British Empire Exhibition?


Charles A. Stewart: No part of this appropriation is for the British Empire Exhibition.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: There will be a special vote for that?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, a special vote. The remuneration to journalists and special writers last year was $1,281. The expenditure proposed for the same purpose this year will be $6,000, making a total expenditure for these various purposes of $303,000.
We spent on newspaper advertising in the United States in eleven months of last year the sqm of $125,447. We propose to spend $200,000 this year. On advertising pamphlets and booklets we spent $100,000 in eleven months of last year; this year we intend to spend $155,000. The expenditure on publicity bureau and special writers in eleven months of last year was $19,124. We intend to spend $17,000 for the same purpose making a total of $372,000 for these different purposes in the United States. For the getting out of sundry publications, to be mailed out of Canada but to be printed in this country, we spent in eleven months of last year $3,000; we intend to spend $10,000 this year. For the preparation of motion pictures and photographs for publicity purposes we spent $2,000 in eleven months of last year; we will spend $20,000 for that purpose this year. Office and travelling expenses at Ottawa and Winnipeg for the ten months of last year involved an expenditure of $3,926.89. We have appropriated $7,500 for that purpose this year. Special writers, for eleven months, $1,470; we propose to spend $4,000 this year. Newspaper advertising in Canada, required $374 last year; this year we will spend $5,000. On foreign and continental work we will spend $35,000. This is practically all new work; we had no vote for that purpose last year. This year we propose to spend $20,000 on pamphlets and booklets, and for publicity purposes in northern Europe, other than literature, $15,000. For newspaper subscriptions-these are newspapers sent out to our immigration agents-we propose to spend $3,000, and incidentals unforeseen $3,500, making a total publicity expenditure of $760,000 all told.
There is an item of $25,000 for general printing done by the King's Printer for the service outside of Ottawa. This is to provide for the
Supply-Immigration

printing of books, manifests, cards, indexes, forms, letterheads and questionnaires for the use of the various immigration agencies and detention hospitals, immigration halls and boundary inspection halls at points all over Canada. The expenditure in 1921-22, was $21,600, and for the eleven months ending February 26, 1923, $9,860.
Then there are some customs inspectors who are paid out of this vote who perform in-spectional duties at the boundary. They are paid by the Immigration department, and the payments range from $50 to $300 per annum. These inspectors are at various places along the northern boundary where there is very little traffic over the line, and consequently receive a small remuneration from the Immigration department. Others are at points where there is heavier traffic, and receive a better salary. There are only two men on the paylist receiving $300 per annum. The majority receive $100, and quite a few $200 per annum. I have a list of the names of the custom house officers who perform these services. For general stationery supplied by the King's Printer for the service outside of Ottawa there is an item of $10,000. This item is to provide for the general stationery and supplies required at the various agencies, seaport offices, detention halls and boundary inspection offices, supplies consisting of typewriting machines, writing paper, envelopes, pens, pencils, fasteners, ink, travelling bags, etc. The item of contingencies and miscellaneous expenses in Canada, including salaries of temporary employees, amounts to $140,000. The largest portion of this item is to provide for the salaries of temporary clerks at Ottawa, stenographers, inspectors, guards, matrons, labourers and charwomen, at our various agencies, offices and boundary inspection points outside of Ottawa. For the salaries of the 110 customs officers I have mentioned and
4 pirn, immigration inspectors along the line between Canada and the United States we paid from $50 to $300 per annum for extra service. I am reading the same item as I read a moment ago in respect to the customs officers. My memorandum with regard to this item reads:
It provides also for the travelling expenses of investigating officers, for legal expenses in connection with the rejection of immigrants and other miscellaneous and incidental expenses, not chargeable to any specific service.
We spent on this service $125,000, and we are asking for an increase of $15,000 making $140,000.
Postage, telegrams, cablegrams, telephone express and freight charges in Canada, $25,000. This is to meet the cost of postage on parcels and letters addressed to
[Mr. C. A. Stewart.
points outside of Canada; for cablegrams, telegrams, long distance telephone tolls, freight and express charges on books, manifests, forms, stationery supplies, immigration literature and maps, etc., shipped to points in Canada and outside of Canada.
Inspection of British immigrant children, $15,000.
This is to provide for the cost of inspection of children emigrating to Canada under the auspices of the various homes and societies in the British Isles, these children being placed in Canadian farmers' homes. The cost of the first inspection is borne by the Canadian government and the cost of all recurrent inspections until the child has attained the age of 16 is recovered by the department from the British government.
There is a little change in this connection this year inasmuch as we are voting a sum of $200,000 which will be a grant for the purpose of paying the passages of these children. Formerly the British government contributed to some extent towards the cost of this expenditure, but their contribution will now cease, and we will have to bear the expenditure ourselves.


Mr. MANION:: What arrangements are made for the children on this side of the water?


Charles A. Stewart: So far we are utilizing the various organizations that have been engaged in this work. I gave a list of them when the vote was going through. In most cases though not in all, they have foster homes already located for those children. We are making inquiry as best we can, and as soon as possible after the child is settled we will make an inspection to ascertain the desirability of the home and what success is being made with the settlement of the child in the particular home.


Robert James Manion: You continue making inspection from time to time in this connection?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, if possible, twice a year.


Mr. GOULD:: The minister spoke of
special writers. What jurisdiction or supervision does the department exercise over these special writers?


Charles A. Stewart: They are people who write special articles for advertising purposes which must pass the officer of the department who is in charge of publicity, Mr. Stead. They are all scrutinized before being sent out. We pay for those articles because they are written attractively, with a view of bringing settlement to the country.


Oliver Robert Gould: The reason I asked the question is that I would suppose that the articles are based on facts and figures supplied by the Department of Agriculture. Is that the basis upon which the articles are written?

Supply-Immigration


Charles A. Stewart: The articles may be the	experience of the writer
himself	not	of necessity	based on
facts furnished by the department, because very frequently these articles are made very attractive for the purpose of publicity. Hon. members will notice that this amount was included in the publicity vote. The next item is:
Seaport agencies and detention hospitals and halls expenses, $85,000. This is to cover the cost of administration and maintenance of agencies and offices at the various seaports: St. John, Halifax, Quebec, Montreal, Vancouver, Victoria, New York, Boston. It also provides for the equipment, administration and maintenance of immigration detention hospitals and halls at St. John, Halifax,. Quebec, Montreal, Vancouver and Victoria. The above expenses consist of cost of uniforms, telegrams, cablegrams, telephones, freight and express charges, wages of cleaners; travelling expenses of officers attached to these agencies; laundry, charwomen for the cost of board of immigrants temporarily detained for medical observation on account of minor contagious diseases, etc.
So far as detention while under medical inspection is concerned most of these charges are recovered, because in nine cases out of ten it is the fault of the medical officer on board the ship that proper inspection had not taken place prior to embarkation, and in every case in which that occurs the steamship companies are required to pay the cost while the patients are detained for medical attention in those hospitals, or until such time as they return to the country from which they came. This amount is about the same as we have had in former years. The memorandum continues:
In land agencies and maintenance of immigration halls in the West, $20,000.
This item is to provide for the expenses of our various inland agencies throughout Canada, and for the maintenance of immigration halls at certain points in the. West, and especially at our agency at Winnipeg. These expenses consist of cost of uniform, telegrams, telephones, freight and express charges, wages of cleaners, food for deports and immigrants temporarily detained in the immigration buildings, laundry, pillows, blankets, and other expenses necessary for general upkeep and maintenance.
The expenditure for 1921-22 was $12,696 and for the
eleven months ending February 28, 1923, $12,485.
Deportation expenses amount to $50,000. This is to cover the travelling expenses of the deportation officers, the cost of uniforms, and meals for deports on train, rail and steamship fares, in cases where the railroad and steamship companies are not liable for free transportation. The increase is due to the fact that by agreement with the Department of Health aliens convicted under the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act and ordered to be deported have to be handled by this department under the provisions of the Immigration Act. Up to last year it was not the duty of the Immigration department to do this work but now
all persons convicted under the Narcotic Drug Act and who are to be deported are handed over to the officers of this department. Frankly, I sometimes think that this is rather the duty of the Dominion police than of the Immigration department. However, for the time being we are performing this service.
The next item is $50,000 for boundary inspection expenses. It is to provide for the cost of uniforms of boundary inspection officers- as well as to pay for meals, lodging and travelling expenses, for relieving inspectors and for overtime on Sundays and statutory holidays. It also provides for the incidental upkeep of offices on the boundary line between. the United States and Canada. In 1921-22, we spent $42,785.06 and for the eleven months ending February 28, 1923, we expended $51,955.62. We therefore expect to get along with a little less this year than we did last year.
For contingencies and general expenses ir the United States the vote is $180,000. This item is to provide for the expenses of nineteen agencies maintained and operated in the United States. These expenses consist of rent of offices, furniture, typewriting machines, postage, telegrams, telephone messages, freight, express charges, light and fuel, stationery supplies, printing envelopes, cards and letterheads, and temporary assistance, and to provide for the salaries of fifteen new field men. The expenses in connection with this field work are estimated to be in the neighbourhood of $50,000 for the year. I have some doubt as to two items here, this and the next one. When the items were inserted I did not know what difficulties would be encountered in the appointment of these agencies. What I intended to do was to revive the old system of getting farmers who had been successful in Canada to go to the United States and Great Britain and lecture during the winter months, but our Civil Service Act makes it somewhat difficult to carry out appointments of this kind. They would not be permanent, and you could scarcely call them temporary. So that there is considerable difficulty in making such appointments, and I intend to cut down the amount in connection with this work so that we shall need only three or four lecturers to go to the Old Country; and I shall abandon my intention of sending any to the United States.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Would it not be difficult to get farmers who are successful to go abroad?


Charles A. Stewart: Not at all, any number of them. We are asking for

Supply-Immigration

$50,000 for field work in the United States, and $75,000 for Great Britain.
Then there is an item for contingencies and general expenses on the continent. This is to provide for expenses to be incurred in connection with equipment and maintenance of seven or eight officers in Europe to vise passports and see to the inspection of immigrants coming to Canada. The expenses will include rent, furniture, fuel, light, taxes, uniforms, inspection, freight and ^express charges, postage, telegrams, cablegrams, telephone service, salaries of temporary employees, typewriting .machines, stationery and supplies, books, letterheads, travelling expenses, etc. I might say that this is entirely a new service which is being carried on on the continent of Europe. We have offices located at Antwerp and Warsaw, and we hope to be established in Prague. Our officers will travel to three or four other points to make inspections of people embarking on steamships and to advise them as to whether or not they are likely to be accepted in Canada on inspection. We do not, of course, guarantee that they shall be permitted to land, but we see to it that they shall have a fair idea ns to whether or not they will be admitted. We are rapidly getting past the point where we find it necessary to reject people on account of the occupational test. Indeed, that difficulty no longer exists in regard to the northern countries of Europe, and not at -all so far as Great Britain and the United States are concerned. This work is intended to apply only to people on the continent of Europe outside of the territory I have mentioned. We shall admit from the continent only domestic servants, farm labourers and those who can engage in farming; in other words, those who can buy farm lands. Our object is to obviate what has occurred in the past and has caused a great deal of hardship to people who upon landing at St. John, Quebec, or any of the other ports of Canada, find that they are not permitted to enter the country. I am told that on one occasion there were as many as 2,000 persons kept in detention and sent back to the country of their origin because they could not be permitted to land under the regulations. Last year, on the other hand, we never had at any one time more than five, and I hope that that condition will continue. This vote of $100,000 is an entirely new one and is experimental; and if we find that it is not warranted, then, of course, we shall withdraw the officers. I do think, however, that it will be of great advantage in preventing people from coming to Canada who have

no chance of getting in. Such people might otherwise be unable to obtain adequate information regarding the conditions and the regulations, and we shall at least see that they do not make an unnecessary trip across the ocean.
The next vote is also a new one. It is one which I dealt with when speaking to the House on a previous occasion. It is to provide for the work of repatriating Canadians who left eastern Canada particularly. We have not been active in the eastern field, having had agencies only at BostQn and Manchester. We are asking for a vote of $20,000 for the purpose of repatriating those Canadians who have left eastern Canada, as we think a useful work could be done in endeavouring to bring these people back into this country. This is to provide for the salaries and travelling expenses of colonization agents and to meet the necessary expenditures involved in connection with the work of bringing back into Canada those people who have gone abroad, especially French-Canadians. The expenses consist chiefly in travelling and living expenses of those engaged in this undertaking, and also provides for halls for lecture purposes, etc. It is intended to make a special effort in this field during the year 1923-24. The next item relates to the Women's Immigration Division. We are asking for $15,000 to provide for the expenses of conductresses on trains of parties of girls coming to Canada to engage in domestic service, and also to pay for salaries and uniforms for these women officers and to provide grants for women's hostels maintained in the principal cities in Canada, for temporary assistance and welfare of immigrant women, and for a per diem allowance of $1.50 to these free hostels for accommodation accorded by them to women immigrants coming into Canada to engage in domestic service, such free accommodation not to extend in any case over more than forty-eight hours; also for travelling expenses of women officers and of ladies attending the annual reunion or convention of the Canadian Council of Immigration. Then we have grants to immigration or colonization societies. We propose to increase the grant to the Salvation Army by $10,000, as they intend extending their work very materially in connection with domestic servants. To the Scottish Aid Society we are maldng a grant of $5,000. This is a new organization working in the north of Scotland, headed by the Reverend Father Macdonald, and supported by such prominent men as Mr. Burns and Mr. McBrien. Father Macdonald has been actively engaged in this work for a

Supply-Immigration
number of years. To the Union Nationale Franeais we are continuing the grant of $1,000. Therefore I am asking for $4,000 in this connection that is not allocated and for $100,000 for the Canada Colonization Association.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister be good enough to let us have any more information than he may have on that particular subject?


Charles A. Stewart: I think I gave the committee when the matter was under discussion before the names of those connected with the organization. Lest I forget, before leaving the matter of publicity, there is one very important feature that I must mention. We have an arrangement both in Canada and in Great Britain under which the transportation companies and the government have formed a publicity committee. This committee is for the purpose of preventing overlapping and getting full value for the expenditure on publicity, and to this end various fields of advertising are allocated to particular parties. This committee will co-ordinate our whole publicity campaign. In Canada the committee is headed by Mr. Stead, who is our chief publicity officer, and in Great Britain by Mr. Obed Smith, our superintendent of immigration for Canada in London.
. I think I covered most of the field the other day in connection with the Canada Colonization Association. One of the features my hon. friend objected to was the commissions that were to be taken by the association. I may say that 5 per cent goes to the local agent in the United States, who is'paid no other salary ; and 2J per cent goes to the local agent in Canada who secures the listing and the necessary information surrounding it. So that in all only 2| per cent of this commission will go to the association. I told the committee that Mr. Everett, the manager of the organization, will confine the association's efforts almost entirely to the United States. I am advised that they have collected in all from their subscribers $160,000. They assure me that their subscriptions will still continue. They have a budget of some $15,000 per month, which includes the following salaries: vice-president, $500; secretary-treasurer, $500; general manager, $1,000; secretary to the general manager, $175; office manager, $250; sales manager, $416; manager of listing bureau, $291; four stenographers, $371; office boy, $60; office rent, $311; attorney's fees, $200; stationery and printing, $1,000; office supplies, $83; descriptive literature, $416; general advertising, $500; one field man, $275, his travelling expenses, $833; filing clerk, $100; postage and express, $416. Those expenses are for the
119 J
Winnipeg office. For the St. Paul office the expenses per month are: superintendent of agencies, $500; office manager, $416; two stenographers, $225; one book-keeper, $125; office boy, $60; rentals, $100; office supplies and blank forms, $250; newspapers and magazines, $500; descriptive Canadian literature, $833;, salaries of five field men, $1,375; travelling expenses, $1,458; railway fares and concessions, $1,200; postage and express, $250.


Mr. MILLAR:: Who is to appraise the value of the land to be occupied by these settlers?


Charles A. Stewart: I will give the information shortly. In order that we may have an understanding of the matter 1 will read the following list of tentative proposals made at the time:
1.	The association agreed to continue to list and offer for sale lands along existing railway lines on their thirty-two year payment plan at 6 per cent interest.
2.	Lands and location to be subject to inspection to determine suitability and fix maximum prices-this to be undertaken either by the provincial or Dominion government.
In answer to my hon. friend I may say that the Manitoba government have expressed their willingness to undertake this work. This is not true of the other two prairie provinces and it would have to be undertaken by a representative of the Soldiers' Settlement Board. In 50 per cent of the cases this board already have the values fixed upon lands adjacent to the railways, because I do not think it would be good business to permit the sale of lands at any distance from the railways, particularly where we are giving government assistance in the way of helping any organization to perform this service.


John Millar: Who fixes,the value of the 50 per cent, the Canada Colonization Association?


Charles A. Stewart: I fear I did not make myself clear to my hon. friend. At the moment almost 50 per cent of these lands within ten or twelve miles of the railways are already listed by the Soldiers' Settlement Board. If they have not been inspected by the officials of the board, they at least have a fair idea of their values and they could readily fix the maximum values. But in the case of Manitoba, if the provincial government assume that duty it will not be performed by the Soldiers' Settlement Board. But the point is that the company are willing to submit their listings to the' government officials for the purposes of inspection as to maximum value and adaptability for settlement. This is important, because lands which are some dis-
Supply-Immigration

tance from the railway could be sold more cheaply than those in its immediate vicinity. Then, we have large areas of free lands that would appeal to some people, lands which are a long distance from the railways. But the idea is to get settlers on lands that are contiguous to the railways, and also to prevent the foisting of poor lands upon people who have not had very much experience in that connection.


Oliver Robert Gould: This is a hypothetical case: suppose an individual in one of our villages in the West wished to go on the land; would the same conditions apply as to the Canada Colonization Association, percentages and so on?


Charles A. Stewart: I do not know that I can answer my hon. friend in that respect, because the service is an outside service rather than one for' people, living in villages in this country who might be desirous of going on the land. But I can quite see the desirability of their securing a contract of this kind, at 6 per cent.


Oliver Robert Gould: Five.	[DOT]


Charles A. Stewart: The provision is for 6; it is doubtful whether that figure could be reduced. But I do not think the association should be entitled to receive the same remuneration from the individual who is in the country and who walks into their office as they receive in the case of those whom they have to bring into the country.


Oliver Robert Gould: The reason I ask the question is because I believe that the department should place restrictions in this respect in the agreement with the Canada Colonization Association. If no such restrictions are provided, I believe they should be.


Charles A. Stewart: That is a perfectly reasonable suggestion-that a Canadian citizen in a town or city who desires to go upon the land and take advantage of this long term payment plan should be able to do so at reasonable cost.


Mr. THURSTON:: Why confine it to cities? It might be a farmer from an eastern province who wished to take up the land.


Charles A. Stewart: Suppose we say Canadian citizen.


Mr. GARDINER:: When were the values of these lands determined by the Soldier Settlement Board?


Charles A. Stewart: They have been operating now for over three years, and
TMr. C. A. Stewart.]
they have been placing these values right along ever since. If any information is found not to be authentic a reinspection would have to be made.


Robert Gardiner: This is an important point. A valuation placed on a piece of land some three or four years ago by the Soldier Settlement Board might not be a real indication of the value of that land to-day.


Charles A. Stewart: Not if it was made three years ago-I agree with my hon. friend, because land was then selling at a higher rate than we do now. But no matter how much we may disagree about the Soldier Settlement Board or about its success, we know that after they became familiar with the valuation of land they valued it pretty closely. There has, of course, been a considerable drop in the price of land during the last three years. The memorandum continues:
3.	The association agrees that all moneys received from subscribers, commissions on sales of land, or government grants, will be utilized to carry on settlement work.
4.	The association agrees to furnish to the Department of Immigration monthly reports of their activities and a list of all lands sold and where located.
5.	The association agrees to continue to employ a firm of chartered accountants, subject to the approval of the Minister of Immigration, to make monthly audits to accompany reports from the association, and that the books and financial statements will at all times be open for government inspection.
6.	The Minister of Immigration to be satisfied from monthly reports that satisfactory progress in settlement is being made, and that the continuance of financial support by the subscribers will be maintained; and these reports shall be the basis upon which he shall authorize payments of the proposed grant of $10,000 each month. *
That is, briefly, the plan adopted by the government in connection with the grant to the Canada Colonization Association.


Mr. BOYS:: Would the minister inform the committee what he was reading from just now? Is that a written proposition that the association makes to the department, or what is the idea?


Charles A. Stewart: It is the
proposition that was discussed tentatively with the association when the grant was requested, though not so fully in detail. The arrangement made at that time was that the government should be assured that the association was being supported by its subscribers. There was no question in my mind at least as to the advantages of the scheme of settlement proposed by the association, but it was desired that there should be an assurance that the association was being supported by private individuals who went into this scheme for the patriotic purpose of settling lands in the vicinity of the railways. Every hon. member will

Supply*-Immigration
admit that the question of dealing with privately-owned lands so far as settlement is concerned is a difficult one for any government. However, the idea that was had in mind when this matter was discussed was as I have stated it; it was desired that the government or the department should be safeguarded by the provisions contained in this memorandum.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Is there any written contract or agreement between the department and the association?


Charles A. Stewart: No. We have no contract with the Salvation Army. Indeed, I do not know that the government would be wise in entering into such a contract with any organization. I make this statement to the committee in order to assure it that on the fulfilment of these provisions I shall be authorized to pay out the money and not otherwise. If patriotic citizens put up their money for the purpose of doing this work, it seems to me that they should be treated the same as any organization to which we give grants. As I have stated, upon these suggestions which I have read I shall be guided in the payment of any funds to this organization.


Mr. MacLAREN:: I have a communication from one who is familiar with t*he organization of the immigration officers of the Dominion in Great Britain. He states:
There are now thirteen offices of the department over here, including the London office, with nine officers in charge, and four new ones to be appointed. With two exceptions I understand all are western men, while one other has no Canadian residence.
I wish to ask the minister if that is a correct representation.


Charles A. Stewart: He states
that the offices are manned by western men?


Murray MacLaren: That is not the statement. He says:
There are thirteen offices of the department over here, including the London office, with nine officers in charge, and four new ones to be appointed. With two exceptions I understand all are western men, while one other has no Canadian residence.
I take it that his meaning is that all are western men with one exception.


Charles A. Stewart: I could not give the particular province from which our agents in Great Britain come, but I do know this, that one of the most recent appointments was from Nova Scotia, that of Mr. Murphy who is working in Aberdeen. Mr. Obed Smith, I presume, was an eastern man, although when he went over he went from Winnipeg, I believe. My hon. friend will also recollect that
we have one new man who has come from New Brunswick just recently. He was working for the New Brunswick government and has now been taken into our service in Great Britain. There are two new appointments pending and one of the men, I understand, though I have not been informed definitely, comes from Vancouver. They are coming before the Civil Service Commission for final examination within a few days. They are both returned men, majors, I think; so they will both be Canadians, but I suppose we shall be guilty of appointing a westerner again inasmuch as one of these men comes from Van-i couver.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Scandalous!


Charles A. Stewart: These are
the only two vacancies.


Murray MacLaren: I quite understand that the minister is favourable to appointing these officers so that the various portions of Canada shall be represented, but I believe that at the present time a very large number of the offices in Great Britain are filled by officers who come from the West. This letter is dated the 3rd of April, and I would be glad to hand it to the minister at any time if he cares to see it. At that date my informant was in a most favourable position for knowing the conditions. There is one other part of this letter I should like to read, because he. is thoroughly conversant with the subject of immigration, especially as it affects the East, but before quoting further I should like to refer to the minister's observation that one of the new appointees came from New. Brunswick. I think if the minister will recall what has taken place, the facts are, and the discussion in the House will show it, that the official to whom the minister referred has not been appointed, or rather he was not appointed at the time of the discussion in the House, and I have not heard of his appointment subsequent to that time; but rather he was there appointed for two periods of sixty days. There was some technicality -in the act which prevented his appointment, and I believe still prevents it. At the present moment I am unaware of any official in Great Britain who is familiar with New Brunswick. I may be in error, but I think that is correct. The other portion of his letter which I wish to quote reads:
I feel convinced that many of those who go West, especially married men with a young family, and who do not find conditions to their lilting would settle down and make good in one or other of the Maritime provinces, but if you do not have anyone over here from these provinces to place before these people information concerning the East, I do not see how we can expect to obtain our share of settlers.
Supply-Immigration

I do not think that what he states is anything different from the views we hold ourselves, but it is satisfactory to know that one on the ground and familiar with the subject of immigration takes exactly the same views as we have already had the opportunity of placing before the House and before the minister.	>


Mr. McMURRAY:: In rising to discuss the issue to-day I prefer to deal more with the general question of immigration rather than with any particular item. I had the misfortune of being indisposed during the major portion of this debate, but I have read with care the contributions to the debate by the various members taking part in it. I have no apology to offer to the House for discussing at some little length, although it may be tedious, this question of immigration into Canada. It is undoubtedly the paramount question, of transcendent importance to this country, Considering the economic circumstances and financial conditions in which Canada stands to-day this is a very, very important question going really to the root of our economic existence, being second only in importance to that of confederation itself. Therefore the subject is worthy of long and careful debate. I spoke on this question last year at some length, and I propose to speak on it at some length again to-day.
What are the problems that are facing this government? When the government came into power the question of constitutional liberty was at stake. That was disposed of by the accession of this government to office, but on coming into office the government was faced with outstanding problems of an economic nature. This government has a business proposition to meet. There is a tremendous indebtedness hanging over the heads of the people of Canada to-day, amounting in the total to something like four billions of dollars That includes the national debt, provincial and municipal indebtedness. It does not touch the individual indebtedness, the money owed h}' the various citizens of the country.
The second great economic problem facing us is the railroad problem. Last year we went back some seventy-two or seventy-three million dollars on that account. This year in spite of a wonderful harvest in western Canada that probably saved the railroads, we went back some sixty million dollars.
The third great problem, which is subsidiary to the other two, is to alleviate the burden of taxation on the shoulders of our citizens and to give to this present generation in Canada a fair and moderate means of living. There is no question that the whole world

to-day, the citizens of every country are groaning under a heavy burden of taxation. We in this country must expect no odds. Whatever advantage we may take of the circumstances, we shall still have to bear a very-heavy load. The cost of the war must be paid and we in this generation must pay our share of it. This country faces a tremendous problem, as great a problem as Canadians ever faced.
The building of the Canadian Pacific railway in Canada was something that tested the metal of our people. To-day Canadians have a real and genuine test to undergo. I do not know how this burden of taxation can be relieved-how our people can be relieved from the heavy burdens that rest upon them, how industry can be relieved from heavy taxation-unless, by some means or other, there is created in this country a large amount of wealth that can be taxed. You can pass acts of parliament but parliamentary enactments will not create wealth; wealth can only be created by the application of labour to our natural resources. That must be done if we of this generation are to escape the tremendous burden that rests upon us. Supposing there had been a crop failure in western Canada last year-western Canada that has contributed six or seven hundred millions of dollars to the general body of wealth in this country? Had there been a crop failure last year our position would have been immeasurably worse than it is to-day. That may come, probably will come-we cannot expect a bountiful harvest all the time-and if it should come our position would be bad. The only way that we can possibly meet the situation is by creating wealth in this country.
The natural resources of Canada are great. It is almost tautological to repeat of what these resources really consist. ' There is land in this country of great fertility; there are some two hundred million acres suitable for agriculture that are as yet untilled. We have vast forests, which are yielding us to-day some $200,000,000 per annum. As to mines we are, as yet, only on the fringe of their development. The stage is set in Canada to-day to take care of a population of thirty millions. We have the railroads, we have the telephones, we have the telegraphs, we have the shipping lines, we have the canals, we have the elevators built far beyond the needs of our present population. Why? Because we are a widely scattered people. This National railway of ours, which showed a deficit this year of $60,000,000, has contiguous to it a great area of fertile country. It runs, probably, through the best area of fertile country served

Supply-Immigration
by any transcontinental railroad on the American continent. Between the city of Winnipeg and the city of Edmonton, within a distance of ten miles on each side of the railroad, there is asserted by competent authorities to be some ten or twelve million acres of untilled arable land.


Oliver Robert Gould: Will the hon. gentleman elucidate a little further his point as to the elevators being beyond the needs of the country at the present time?


Edward James McMurray: I will come to that later on. In northern Ontario there is asserted to be in the clay belt some twenty-five million acres of arable land. Those who have not seen that district would be well repaid by travelling over the railway which passes through it. Last year I went up into that country at the close of the session, and I saw white clover covering the hills down to the railroad track for miles. Where that clover flourishes agriculture will also thrive. The Canadian Pacific railway, which has grown to greatness on account of the land immediately adjacent to it and by reason of the development of the west, runs through a country which is comparatively poor compared with that-which is traversed by the Transcontinental railway. The clay belt through which the latter railway runs will, in years to come, prove to be agricultural land of fine quality. North of lake Superior the Canadian Pacific passes through a rocky country. In the far West the land through which that railway runs is more or less drought stricken. On the other ltand, the Transcontinental and Grand Trunk Pacific run through a country which is well wooded and well watered.
Where is the solution of the problem which confronts us to be found? If we have these resources, and no one can deny that they exist, what is it that we lack? We are simply short of man power to create that wealth of which I have spoken. Have we come to such a position in Canada to-day that we cannot bring together the two forces that are necessary to create that wealth? We have great natural resources, with all the appliances necessary for their development, and the man power can be got from the teeming populations of Europe. Can we get that man power that we need so much? Undoubtedly we can. The United States has had to close her doors against immigration-immigration that built up Canada in the past. In the last analysis Canada was built up by immigrants; we are all immigrants or the descendants of immigrants. In the cities of Canada to-day there are hundreds, yes thousands, of
men versed in agricultural pursuits who could go on the land and work it if a proper policy were inaugurated to enable them to do so. Shortly before I came away I addressed an audience in my own constituency and spoke upon the question of immigration, a question of deep interest to those people, and a man rose in the meeting and said "There are two or three hundred of us here." Those people were Germans of the very sturdiest and finest stock of agriculturists that Canada ever had. He went on to say "If we were given that chance we would go out and we could make a success of farming. One thing we are short of is capital." I think you could go through the cities of Canada and gather together men and women who to-day are merely existing, who are agriculturists by profession but are to-day competing with labour in these urban centres, who would be glad to go on the land where they could produce wealth to the advantage of themselves and to the advantage of Canada as a whole. As a result of the Great War and the dislocation of economic and industrial affairs in Europe I believe there are to be found there to-day men and women of good calibre, the very best types that the countries of Europe have, agriculturists by profession, who have been broken, probably ruined, as a result of the great conflict. If these were brought to Canada they would be a great acquisition to the country.
What may we expect immigration to do for Canada? What did immigration do fbr Canada in the past? In the early years of the history of Ontario immigration, in the course of fifty or one hundred years, turned a wooded wilderness into a wonderful land. Many of the early settlers who came to the province of Ontario were disbanded soldiers of the agricultural immigrant type. Irish and Scotch soldiers who formed a large percentage of the British army. They came from peasant stock, they cleared the land; they remained where they settled; they never talked of leaving Canada; they built up a great province. The same is true of the provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. Whenever we brought the real agricultural immigrant to this country he stayed. The settlers who have -not remained in this country, in my opinion, were not of the real agricultural type.
What did immigration do for western Canada? When Clifford Sifton became Minister of the Interior and took charge of immigration in this country it was as if a wizard had waved its wand over the land. In western Canada everything was in a state of stagnation. In the eastern parts of Canada, including cities, a similar condition prevailed. In a few years
Supply-Immigration

immigration began to pour into this country. The country seemed to spring to life. The prairie that was untilled and uncultivated began to turn'into fields of grain. The cities of Canada began to grow and I tell you, Mr. Chairman, it was as a result of that policy and that policy alone, that the cities of western Canada were built up, and that the great grain industry of western Canada was developed, the growth of which is one of the marvels of the world. When Clifford Sifton commenced his immigration policy the province of Saskatchewan was producing some
5.000.	000 bushels of wheat; to-day she is producing nearly 300,000,000 bushels-a marvellous thing-and based solely upon the immigration policy. The harbour of Montreal was choked with grain vessels last year solely because of that immigration policy. There is a real connection between that immigration policy and the growth of the great manufacturing cities of Ontario and Quebec. We need an immigration policy to-day far more than in the days of Clifford Sifton. At that time we could pick and choose. We were not burdened with debt. We were not under financial difficulties. We had a great country. We merely needed it opened up for the creation of wealth. But to-day we need more than that. We stand in such economic peril that an immigration policy is an economic necessity, and we are not in a position to-day to say that we will pick and choose. What we want to-day is a man who can make his way in the country. His passport must be his capacity to get through. As James Fitzjames% said when challenged by the Highland chief:
My pass in danger tried
Hangs in its sheath and by my side.
The qualification of the immigrant into this country is his capacity to earn an honest living and to wrest it from the soil by toil and labour What has been happening in regard to immigration in this country in the last few years? To-day I am expressing my own ideas. I am not speaking in condemnation of the government, but I must say immigration has fallen away and fallen away badly. At the outbreak of the war there was an immigration of some 380,000 a year. In the year ended March, 1921, there was immigration of
148.000,	and in the year ended March last the figure was 89,000.
Now, what is the policy of other nations situated as we are? New Zealand, Cape Colony and Australia have adopted a genuine policy of going to Great Britain and Europe, securing immigrants and settling up and developing their country. To-day the immigration of Australia is its biggest feature. There
fMr. McMurray.]
is a national spirit behind it, and it is backed with the national wealth. I think that should be the policy of this country. That is the policy that has the good will of the
5 p.m. Canadian people behind it, and that is the policy into which we should put our. money.
If I were passing any criticism on the particular items under consideration. I would say they are too small. They should be multiplied by ten, and that the great desideratum for the consideration of this government, should be the creation of wealth in this country that will protect us and our children from the hardships under which we and they must exist. To the men of eastern Canada, of Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton, London, I would say that their manufacturing and commercial existence are at stake if wealth is not created in their great markets of western Canada. Anything that is injurious to that great market of eastern Canada, the great market being western Canada, reacts directly and instantly upon the manufacturing and commercial centres of eastern Canada, and it should be the policy of eastern Canada to do everything in its power to make conditions so that wealth can be produced readily and easily on the plains of the West. I would say to the people of western Canada, and to their representatives in this House, that unless you bring more people into this country to create a larger body of wealth to help to bear your burden, you cannot expect to get a reduction in tariff. How can you expect to get a reduction in railroad rates? This indebtedness of Canada must be met. It cannot be repudiated. If you do not create that body of wealth, if you do not bring more shoulders to bear the burden, then you yourselves must bear it. It is in vain to think you can throw it down and repudiate it. If you want lower taxes, then there is only one solution-bring in the thousands of immigrants that can be added to the population of western Canada. Let them till your fertile land, let them help to bear your burdens. We are not bringing these people here as servants or slaves. We are bringing them to a country where the national burden individually per capita is probably much lower than in any other country in the world, the United States being the only country I can think of where the national burden per capita is lower than in Canada. The majority of these immigrants are coming from a place of dire distress to a country not where money can be conjured up or created, but where honest, hard toil is rewarded fairly well, where they and their countrymen and countrywomen before them have done

Supply-Immigration
well and where they can do well, and can create a competency to provide for their ultimate comfort, well being and happiness.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: How does the hon.
member propose to settle all the thousands of people on the land unless they have the money to buy it? When the hon. member speaks of the power behind the immigration policy, the national wealth, does he suggest the financing of these people in the purchasing of the land?


Edward James McMurray: If the hon. member will be patient I will try to come to that in due course of time and will illustrate what I think could be done. Probably the hon. member will not agree with me, and probably few in the House will agree with me, but I am taking the opportunity of putting my ideas forward on a question that I think is of paramount importance to the whole of Canada and- of transcendent importance in western Canada.
Who should these immigrants be? In my opinion the immigrants that should be brought to this country ought to be in the first instance agriculturists? I would not close the door to any immigrant who has the hardihood and the courage to cross the ocean to come to this country, but I would make a strong bid for men and women who can develop the resources of the country. And who are they? They are the sort of people who in the past made a success in Canada; they are the people who bettered their own conditions and therefore proved valuable and useful settlers in Canada. I am going to deal largely with western Canada, because it is of western Canada that I know most, having lived some twenty-six years on its plains. In the early days I drove over most of it on horseback and buckboard and I knew its people of the old time. I know the old time rancher and the large'grain grower, and I know the people who have lived in the cities of that part. of the country as well as the men on the frontiers. It is therefore of the development of that West, which I have seen unrolled like a panorama before me during some twenty-six years, that I wish to speak to-day.
I will deal, if I may, with the question of the financial conditions existing in western Canada as set forth at considerable length by some of my Progressive friends in this House. The hon. member for Yale (Mr. Mac-Kelvie), speaking in this House the other day, suggested our keeping away from the people of central and southern Europe. The majority of us who have lived in western Canada, and I believe the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Forke) particularly will join me in an encomium of those people of southern and
central Europe for the contribution that they have made in labour and toil to the development of that part of our Dominion. The policy of Sir Clifford Sifton brought to western Canada the Ukrainians, many of whom came in their sheepskin coats and in their quaint European dress; and to-day in the University of Manitoba .20 per cent of the students are the descendants of those people of central Europe. The same is true in regard to the Agricultural College in Winnipeg, and I believe the same truth holds in Saskatchewan. I had the pleasure of travelling on the train with a leading educationist of Saskatchewan and he told me of two boys whom he had taught in a small schoolhouse near the town of Yorkton and both of whom are Ukrainians and to-day, university men. AVe have numbers of lawyers among these people, and the professions are filling up with them. They make good Canadians; they are the very best citizens; and I have never known in the hard two or three years that we have passed through in recent times of any of these people asking charity from municipality, provincial government or Dominion government.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Has the member for North Winnipeg consulted the statistics of the Social Bureau of Winnipeg?


Edward James McMurray: I have looked over those statistics, and the men we call "foreigners" were largely conspicuous by their absence.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I agree with the hon. gentleman in a general way, but a certain percentage of them undoubtedly sought relief.


Edward James McMurray: What I said was that I had not known of any of them who had done so. These people were settled in western Canada in some of the very poorest parts of the country, as iny hon. friend for Springfield (Mr. Hoey) can bear me out. In his constituency they were settled in low swampy land out around Beausejour. The land was drained, the trees cut and the place was developed. Crops were produced and that section of the country was turned practically into an agricultural garden. This year I was near the town of Neepawa and along the mountain the grain was turning golden for miles and miles, so that one beheld a beautiful agricultural scene. That land was owned by Ukrainians who came to the country practically without a dollar; but by patient and diligent toil they built up a paying industry for themselves. A collector for a large machine company told me that he was able to collect far more money from these Ukrainian people than he could from the English,

Supply-Immigration
Canadian and American settlers. He could get ten times as much from these people, and apparently they were prosperous. They live simply, they are close to the soil, and so they create wealth. That is the story of the Ukrainian. You can find them between the lakes and north of Winnipeg where they were put into a country of wilderness, of swamp and poplar and stony ridge, a country in which I do not believe any people, even the sturdy French-Qanadian frontiersmen could have lived under the circumstances. But these people have lived there, and it was a great mistake, in my opinion, that they were ever compelled to settle in that part of the country. It was a loss to Canada, and a waste of energy and time to put them in a country that should have been kept as a national preserve for wild animals instead of for these poor people to labour- in. But they have made good, and men in this House can bear me out when I say that wherever these people have gone they have proved successful as settlers. Near Edmonton there are great settlements of them, and they are doing well. I have met many of them, and I want to deal later on with the case of one or two of them by way of illustration. Take also the Germans. I remember Germans north of Indian Head, away across the Qu'Appelle valley, bringing down loads of wood on their sleighs over a haul of thirty or forty miles, and selling it for a few dollars, and hauling their grain over the same distance. Nothing but hardihood and courage and strength of physique could have accomplished this. They made good, however, and to-day are prosperous. I refer to Lemburg and the surrounding districts. Take also the case of the Mennonites. These people have made a garden out of southern Manitoba, and it is a crying shame that a policy of bigotry should have driven from this country some of the best agricultural settlers Canada has ever had.


Mr. BROWN:: They are going to stay there.


Edward James McMurray: I sincerely hope so.


Mr. LEWIS:: Where, in Mexico?


John Livingstone Brown: No, in Manitoba; only a few of them are going.


Edward James McMurray: These people came to Canada away back in 1872, and undoubtedly they had an assurance that they would be protected so far as certain of their tenets were concerned. That pledge, I believe, was absolutely and foully violated, and these people out of their strength of conscience and

high resolve, which qualities, whether we agree with their tenets or not, we must admire, felt themselves obliged to leave. They had the courage to leave the land which they had converted into a garden, rather than break faith with those things which they valued more than wealth itself.


Arthur John Lewis: Does the hon. member think it bigotry on the part of our government to insist that immigrants shall conform to our educational laws? And does he think it a wise policy to bring people here who will not conform to such laws?


Edward James McMurray: I believe it is the bounden duty of our government to keep its compact. I think that duty is higher than any other.


Arthur Meighen: What compact was violated?


Edward James McMurray: The compact violated was this: Our government sent representatives to these Mennonite people in Russia to induce them to come to Canada. One colony came here, and another went to Kansas. Those who went to the United States settled there on the understanding that they would have to conform to the school laws of the country. The colony that came to western Canada settled there under this compact-that they were not to be called upon for military service, that their religion should be preserved to them, and that they were to be at liberty to educate their children iu their own way, Undoubtedly that compact with the Mennonites was made by the Canadian government. A policy of education in western Canada, dominated very largely by one man, forced a large section of those people either to educate their children in the public schools or to lea#ve Canada. I may say that one-half of the Mennonite colony had pretty well dropped their own school system and were quite willing to adopt the Canadian system, in fact ten or fifteen years would have settled the whole trouble. But some men are impatient, they seem to think that a nation can be made in a day, and that immigrants can be persuaded to surrender their Old Country ideals in favour of Canadian ideals within a very short period of settling here. Well, rather than have our public school system forced on them these people left Canada.


Arthur John Lewis: Did the supposed agreement entered into by the government with these Mennonites apply to all of them or only to a certain section that came in a good many years ago? Moreover, has this government

Supply-Immigration
any right to interfere with provincial jurisdiction over education?


Edward James McMurray: My hon. friend is
diverting me from the thread of my argument. I am not here to discuss whether the provincial government acted rightly or wrongly. I may tell him, however, that education is in the jurisdiction of the provinces.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. gentleman made a serious assertion: he said that a solemn compact had been foully violated. I know what the compact was, if you may call 'it that, having read it, and although the alleged interference with it was at the hands of governments that certainly were not Conservative-they were Liberal-I think his language is wholly too strong. Undoubtedly there was no violation of this .so-called compact, by the government of Canada.


Edward James McMurray: Under a Liberal government I can hardly understand there being a violation of any compact. But that is as I understand it. My right hon. friend is entitled to his opinion, but until I am shown something to the contrary I shall adhere to what I have said. A prominent educationalist of Saskatchewan told me recently that night schools are being attended by these men up to thirtj' years of age. I know in the city of Winnipeg these foreign people eagerly seek these educational opportunities. In my constituency I was simply astonished when I became acquainted with these people to find all sorts of halls of learning among them

musical institutions, debating clubs, cultural clubs, surpassing anything that we have among the native bom in the city of Winnipeg. In that city-and the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) no doubt will bear me out-the Ukrainians have a labour hall that cost them some $50,000. Other Ukrainians have built two large educational insitutions to educate, not their boys and girls, but their grown-up people. They also publish newspapers. As a result of this educational work these people readily become Canadians and are proud of the name. So I would say to the government: Make your immigration policy a wide one, make it an energetic one, throw open your gates and let those who have the hardihood to come to our shores enter and help, and those I have mentioned have helped in the building up of this country.
My hon. friend for St. Lawrenee-St. George (Mr. Marler) spoke of the growth of the United States immediately after the Civil War by reason of their immigration policy. To-day we need such an immigration policy
in a much more marked degree than did the United States at that time. Our people are demanding immigrants. For the last two years I have talked with representative men whenever I had the opportunity upon the question of immigration, and invariably I found they were keen in demanding an energetic immigration policy. I think that is true of our business men, true of a large portion of our agriculturists, and true of many of our Labour leaders-of whom I have the highest possible regard and with whose aims and aspirations I sympathize-many of these leaders to-day are strongly in favour of a proper immigration policy. I think the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Forke) is in favour of an immigration policy, in fact I heard him state so in this House, and I wish he had been more emphatic, but still I think he appreciates that our economic salvation can come only through bringing to this country strong, willing and intelligent workers to develop our resources. By that way, and that way alone, we will get lower taxes and lower freight rates and ultimately lower prices for the commodities that we must consume.
During the course of this debate several members of the Progressive group have apparently taken the position that because of the high prices of the commodities they must use and of the low prices of the products of their labour our farmers ip western Canada cannot secure a return sufficient to maintain them. I am glad that that assertion has been made by only a limited number of Progressive members. I am glad that certain members of that party differed, and differed widely, with what I consider were extreme, exaggerated and fantastic reports of farming conditions in western Canada. I appreciate particularly the remarks of the hon. member for Swift Current (Mr. Lewis) in his very able speech the other day upon this question. I know the district in which he lives; it is a district that for some years has been stricken hardly by climatic conditions. I know the type of people who hav6 lived there-sturdy and energetic and intelligent. In spite of the conditions prevailing there, he was one of those whose mathematics did not lead him to believe that the less was greater than the whole; he saw western Canada as a whole and he gave a fair and faithful report of the conditions existing there. The hon. member for Strathcona (Mr. Warner) and the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Hoey) bore witness to the conditions prevailing in that part of the country; they did not back up or approve the extraordinary assertions made by some other hon. members in that respect.
Supply-Immigration

Now, what is the actual condition in western Canada? Is it a fact that the sturdy, hardy, intelligent agriculturist cannot live there? I went to western Canada twenty-six years ago and into the vicinity of Regina. Times were as hard there as they possibly could be. There was no market for what the farmer produced. I myself have grown and sold the finest of stock there at 2J- cents a pound. Wheat at that time was selling at 54 cents a bushel. In the period from 1890 up to 1911, only, in one year, 1904, was the price of wheat in western Canada ever a dollar a bushel.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What did the hon. member have to pay for binders at that time?


Edward James McMurray: We will come to that. We will deal with the wheat first; that is what we pay for the binder with. I give the prices of wheat per bushel in western Canada consecutively for the years from 1890 onwards: 90, 94, 74, 69, 54, 61, 68, 85, 69, 70, 884 674 68, 81.


Mr. DAVIES:: Are these the prices at
Fort William, or the prices obtained by the farmer in the country?


Edward James McMurray: These are the prices at Winnipeg-the price per bushel on the opening day of the market each month.


Claudius Charles Davies: It would be safe to deduct 15 cents a bushel in order to arrive, at the price actually received by the farmer. In fact, it is necessary to do that in order to be fair.


Edward James McMurray: Do that if you like; I am talking about what the West was built on before. Perhaps my hon. friend does not get the gist of my remarks on that point. The figures continue: 1904, $1,014 and for the succeeding years: 76, 75, $1.03, 97j, 96, 98, and for 1913, 78.


Oliver Robert Gould: Are these the prices of No. 1 Northern wheat?


Edward James McMurray: Yes. These were the prices that prevailed; these were the prices that the men got who went there in those days who were successful and who have grown wealthy. The same figures hold in respect to oats, and in respect to cattle; I have the figures all before me, but it would be a waste of time for me to take them up.


Oliver Robert Gould: I suggest that my hon. friend might now make a comparison of the prices that these people paid for their binders or for their labour.


Edward James McMurray: I suggest that I make my speech in my own way; I will come to that in time. The hon. member will make his speech and I will make mine. These were the prices that prevailed in western Canada when there went into that country young men of Ontario, Quebec and the Maritime provinces-bright, intelligent men. They toiled there and in the course of time they became prosperous. They own sections, three-quarter sections, half sections, good buildings; they have been successful because they have been thrifty. The prices of the goods they had to purchase were high; freight rates were high-higher than they are to-day, but up to 1913 these men were prosperous. I have been down in California at a picnic and have seen two or three thousand of them-farmers of western Canada, wintering in California.


Robert Forke: Do not overdo it.


Edward James McMurray: I heard it was five thousand, but I will leave it at two.


John Jabez Thurston: Were there any other Canadians there but farmers?


Edward James McMurray: Oh, yes. These are the facts. Up to 1913 the West was prosperous, the West did well. It might surprise my friends if I told them that the per capita wealth of the men on the western prairies today is nearly twice that of any other part of this country.


John Livingstone Brown: Do you take off the mortgage indebtedness?


Edward James McMurray: I take off all the mortgage indebtedness. In dealing with this question I speak with deepest sympathy for the people of western Canada-and I consider myself one of them. I have seen them go through their struggles. I have seen them as pioneers develop a wilderness into one of the most remarkable agricultural countries on earth. It is a truism that the character of a people is affected by their environment and by their occupation, that it is developed and moulded, as individuals and as groups, by the country in which they are located and by the labour that they must perform. The pioneer is always a sturdy and a courageous man and the western pioneer, going to that land with its wide open spaces, took on something of the bigness of the country. The copper did not exist in the West until the days of Timothy Eaton, and the drinks were three for two bits. Everything was done in a large way. Having taken a quarter section of land, the settler wanted more; he got a half section, and his very virtues of enterprise, ambition and bignes* ultimately became his ruin.

Supply-Immigration
What has produced the conditions that prevail in western Canada to-day? Is it the high prices that the farmer pays for the goods he buys? Is it the low prices of the commodities he sells? Is it the tariff? Is it freight rates r My Progressive friends know that last year freight rates was the paramount question with them. I recognized, sitting in the committee that was inquiring into the matter, that freight rates meant more to western Canada than any question of tariff or the high cost of goods. But is that the cause of present conditions in that part of the country? Or must you go back to that man whom I described and loved, the western farmer himself? I think you will. What happens? Remember up to 1913 he was prosperous.
Mr. FORIvE: This is getting embarrassing.


Edward James McMurray: I intend to make it more so before I am done.	*


Robert Forke: It is this love stuff I object to.


Edward James McMurray: You must have got over it. You were not always that way.
Then immigration came. The settlers came in and the western man got more land. He bought and he sold, and he sold and he bought. He became a speculator, and we know that the western man assumed a load of debt without any thought of the consequence, just as lightly as a darky would throw a turkey over his shoulder and start off home on Christmas night. The western man contracted liabilities in a free and easy manner without regard for the consequences, like the Irishman who gave a promissory note and said, "Thank God, there is another debt paid." WThat has been the trouble? Speculation, too much credit. My hon. friends over there are .'backing a system whereby the farmer of western Canada can get more credit. I put it to them as individuals, and as a group, is it not a fact that too much credit has been the curse of western Canada? It has been the curse of the city man, I know. Has it not also been the curse of the agriculturist?
Then the war came, with high prices. The farmer of the West flourished, or should have flourished. It is true he paid high wages, but when you consider the price he got for his grain he never paid as low wages as he did then. What was the result? Further speculation. Let me give an instance, and this is a typical instance, not an extraordinary one. Each and all of us in the West can call a case to mind. Down near the town of Morris, some forty miles from the city of Winnipeg in a good section of the country a prosperous Canadian had 960 acres of land. He had it
partially paid for. He had earned it himself from nothing. He decided, good soul, that he would rest, and he bought a house for some four or five thousand dollars in the adjoining town. He sold his farm to some American at a high price, sixty some odd dollars an acre, the farmer receiving a small payment down on it. His brother, who farmed a half section of land some five miles from the town, persuaded the farmer to buy his land. He did so, putting the money he got from his own farm into this house and buying 1,100 acres from his brother from the proceeds of the sale of his farm. Speculating in land, the whole three of them. The war ended, the prices fell. The farmer gets back his farm at Morris. The 960 acres, which were in good condition before the war, come back to him in a dirty and filthy condition. He is not in a position to work the half section he bought from his brother and work the farm too. He has his money in that house and his brother, of course, has lost on the 1,100 acres. There is an instance of two farmers in a 'prosperous condition wiped out by speculation.


Oliver Robert Gould: Immigration?


Edward James McMurray: The next thing I believe that would be the salvation of the western farmer and of western Canada is not the reduction of tariffs, but a personal economic salvation. It has got to go right back to the farmer himself.


Mr. LUCAS:: Would not that apply to every class of citizen in Canada just as well?


Edward James McMurray: Absolutely. We have all got to get back to that. Is there bad farming in western Canada? About the worst, I think, in the world. I remember twenty-six years ago, and my hon. friend for Brandon and the hon. member for Lisgar and older members among the Progressives will remember too, how when the soil of western Canada was first farmed there grew up no noxious weeds-nothing but the rose bush came through. But to-day go from the city of Winnipeg down to Emerson on the east side of the river and you will pass through a sea, yellow and golden, not with the grain, but with the sow thistle. Weeds of every kind you will find in that district. There is land that will produce eight or nine bushels of wheat to the acre. Is there any tariff policy, is there any government that can save men from themselves who farm under such conditions?


Mr. JOHNSTON:: I know that the hon. member does not want to give a wrong impression. From his statement it might be taken that the weed menace was wholly due
188S
Supply-Immigration

to bad farming. I do not think the hon. gentleman wants to convey that idea, that the weed menace is wholly due to poor farming methods.


Edward James McMurray: I would ask my hon. friend in reply, to what is it due?


Robert Forke: One crop methods.


Edward James McMurray: That is bad farming.


John Livingstone Brown: If the hon. member has any method in his mind that will effectually combat sow thistle, I think it is a shame that he should keep it to himself.


Edward James McMurray: I will try and help my hon. friend out as I go along.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Was not some of that prosperity of the earlier days due probably to the mining of the soil, taking off the cream of it at that time?


Edward James McMurray: I am coming to that. The hon. member for Centre Winnipeg is very suspicious as to the real cause, and I am glad that he caught my point and bears me out that the farmer's condition in western Canada is due to farm mining. [DOT] These weeds are a terrific menace to the country. There is no denying that a system of farming must be followed that will do away with them. So long as the farmer of western Canada grows crop after crop and summer fallows year after year, so long will that land be dirty and so long is he going to seek in vain for an economic return from his ill-guided labours. There is a depletion of that soil. In the spring of the year you have only to go out through the country, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and you will see the air for a hundred feet-this may be an exaggerated case-simply filled with flying soil. You will find in places right even down there on the Mennonite reserve the soil piled up against the fences. In 1920 the Canadian Pacific Railway made a careful agricultural survey of western Canada, and estimated that the loss to the agriculturists of Canada that year by reason of weeds and soil thinning amounted to the stupendous sum of $200,000,000. There has been an agricultural survey made by the province of Manitoba which shows that a large portion of southern Manitoba and of southern Saskatchewan-from which my hon. friend for Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) comes-has been depleted by improper farming methods. The land has been robbed of its fertility .


Oliver Robert Gould: My hon. friend will not go into that district and say so.


Edward James McMurray: I had some trouble with coal miners out there some years ago; I do not know how I should find the farmers. Here is another thing: Can you farm for five or six months and rest the balance of the year ? The farmer says that he is the only working man in the country; but those who grow grain very largely rest from the month of November until about the middle of April in the following year. What is there for them to do? On many of these grain farms a cow is a rarity, or at least two or three of them. That condition has got to change. Until that condition does, change the cry that has gone up in this House-the wail from my hon. friend for Bow River like the wail of Riz-pah; the lament of Rachel crying for her children and who would not be comforted-* will continue.
Then there has been some extravagance- the rankest extravagance-on the part of the people of western Canada; and I do not differentiate for one moment between the farmer on the farm and the man living in the city. We have not yet had the iron driven so deeply into us that we have learned to forget the extravagance that existed before the war. There has been personal extravagance, there is municipal extravagance, and there is provincial extravagance. Take Alberta with an estimated expenditure this year of some fourteen millions; Saskatchewan about the same; and Manitoba even greater. I put it to my hon. friends opposite that the heaviest burden the farmer of western Canada bears today is the municipal taxation upon his land.


Robert Forke: For value received?


Edward James McMurray: For value received? But it is there. I know a little of what I am talking about. I farmed land in western Canada.


Robert Forke: You are more of a lawyer though.


Edward James McMurray: I farmed over one thousand acres. I farmed out there for some fifteen years. I was born on the land, I worked upon the land, and I know something about farming conditions out there.


An hon. MEMBER:: You did not stay there? .


Edward James McMurray: I' did not stay there. But I am going to deal with the emigration of the Canadian from Canada and I will explain why I did not stay on the farm when I come to that branch of my subject. I repeat, the heaviest burden is the burden of extravagance-personal, municipal and provincial.

Supply-Immigration
Now then as to the conditions that prevail in western Canada. My hon. friend for Bow River (Mr. Garland) and my hon. friend for Swift Current (Mr. Lewis) touched upon the conditions that prevail in certain localities. Undoubtedly there are places in western Canada where drouth has been a serious menace, where sturdy, sterling working people could not make it go, where even the sturdy European with his reduced system of living would be handicapped and possibly could not succeed. But the story that my hon. friend for Bow River has told of his locality does not apply to western Canada at all. It is an isolated instance and as the member for Springfield (Mr. Hoey) says "If you apply it to the whole of western Canada it is outlandish extravagance." I wish-in order that the members of this House may be truly and fairly informed upon conditions there, in the interest of those Progressive members themselves who have been fair in this matter, and above all in the interest of western Canada-to put the matter fairly and clearly before the public. There has been a decrying of one of the most fertile portions of this earth of ours; there has been a defaming of the sturdy men and women who have made western Canada and who are unequalled, or at least unsurpassed, by any other Canadians. It does greatly affect us in the West-the western men, big of heart and big of hand, sturdy and ambitious-to be represented in this House by men who wail and wail. The continual howling that has been indulged in has been overdone altogether. It is detrimental to Canada; it is detrimental to the people of western Canada; it is unfair and improper. I believe this thing started as a political cry. The people of western Canada protested against the tariff. That was all right but as a political cry it has been carried beyond the bounds of reason. It has become an obsession purely and simply with certain people; they remind me of what old Dodds said of his dog-he yelped when he tied him up and howled when he let him loose. To have to listen to this continual wailing in the House and in committee, I fear would have the effect of causing my hon. friend for George Etienne Cartier (Mr. Jacobs) to imagine he was listening to the wailing of his people when they were compelled by the Egyptians to make bricks without straw. There are many contented people in western Canada; many prosperous and well-to-do farmers. The West is not ruined or broken financially; the picture which has been drawn of it is totally unfair. I would
like to give some figures concerning western Canada in order to show the general condition which very largely prevails there. When we hear such a loud cry of poverty, want and ruin from the West let me say that there are more telephones per capita in the province of Saskatchewan than in any other country of the world except Sweden. In the ownership of automobiles the province of Saskatchewan excels any other country with the exception of the United States, which it equals. My hon. friend for Bow River said they were closing up schools in the province of Alberta. Well, I want to tell him that in that province in 1921 they opened eighty-six new schools. In the province of Saskatchewan there were 61,000 automobiles. _ In the province of Manitoba there were 39,200 automobiles, 12,000 of which were owned in the city of Winnipeg, a wealthy city, and 27,000 owned by the farmers outside of Winnipeg, which, taking in the small towns gives a proportion of 1 to 18; in the prac-' tically purely agricultural province of Saskatchewan the ratio wras as 1 to 12. The industries in western Canada grew from 1881 in 1915 to 4,535 in ' 1919, a remarkable growth in the space of four years. The employees in those industries increased in number from 29,000 to 49,000, -and the product of those factories in the year 1919 was 8307,000,000, or three times what it was in 1915. The per capita, or individual, wealth in the prairie provinces is 82,123, and in the East., from which we have heard no complaint or no prolonged cry, the wealth is 11,238, or pretty nearly one-half of what it is in western Canada. The field crops last year in the four western provinces amounted to 767,000,000 bushels valued at $455,000,000, and I defy any man in this House to show me a greater per capita production among any people on the face of God's green earth.


An hon. MEMBER:: Who got the money?


Edward James McMurray: I will tell you who got the money. The farmers of western Canada paid a larger income tax than all the farmers of the rest of Canada, and the income tax of the farmers of western Canada in 1921-22 doubled the tax of the year before.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Edward James McMurray: When the House rose I was discussing the causes of the depression in western Canada at the present time. I
Supply-Immigration

argued, rightly or wrongly, that the major cause was the personal action of the farmers of western Canada, and in that regard I drew no distinction between the agricultural people of western Canada and the people of the cities. We were a free western people lining in large open spaces and very readily took the opportunity of investment and speculation that presented itself to us there; and I allege that the cause of the condition in which many of the farmers of western Canada find themselves to-day is first and foremost bad farming, and secondly, personal extravagance, municipal extravagance and provincial extravagance. If you, Mr. Chairman, ever came to visit our western country you would be astonished at the magnificence of the public buildings there. In the city of Winnipeg we have public buildings far beyond anything that is fit and proper for a young and comparatively undeveloped country like Manitoba. We. have a parliament building which, if it does not excel this magnificent structure in which we are seated this evening, is at least a very fair rival of it. It is splendidly furnished, and is of the very finest architecture. We have a court house which I am told is superior to anything in the British Empire. We have an agricultural college which, according to the information I have, and judging from the cost of it, has not its equal on the continent. We have also a deaf and dumb institute that is costly and marvellous and is beyond the capacity of the people of Manitoba to keep up. That story, Sir, as regards Manitoba applies to Saskatchewan and Alberta as well. We have gone into extravagance there, personally and publicly. I understand that farmers out in the West drive automobiles although they are unable to pay their taxes and supply the gasolene. Lastly, we went into speculation, and that has caught most of the farmers in the West. As a lawyer practising in the city I have drawn many deedg and agreements for city lots for farmers scattered far and wide over the prairies.
Now, as the cause is a personal one I do not despair at all and I think the people of western Canada do not despair either, because the solution is a story of their own personal economic salvation. This is a temporary thing in a way. After the Crimean war in old Cam ada and in the old province of Ontario many of the farmers found themselves stranded and in very difficult financial circumstances. Grain was high, as were all other prices, just as was the case during the late war. Farmers bought land for their sons,. and they bought more land; and- the result was that when the war was over they were stranded. The resulting condition w-as a temporary one that gradually

righted itself, and from that time on the province of Ontario has flourished steadily.
The same thing I contend holds in the West. We are to-day in a period of transition in agricultural matters in western Canada. Some ten or twelve years ago the large ranch with its thousands of cattle disappeared. It was unprofitable, uneconomical, and it had to go. The large grain farms of western Canada are also going; there is a transition in process there. There is going to be no more grain mining, no more gambling in grain. The farmer now is not going to work five months in the year; he will be obliged to farm twelve months; he must get acquainted and shake hands twice a day with the homely old milk pail, and he must learn to hear the music of the friendly pig around the place; in other words, he has got to get right down to real genuine farming, and he must get a smaller farm. Does it not appeal to you as ridiculous that the farmer of Ontario, of Quebec, or of Nova Scotia, on a clay land farm not equally as fertile as the wonderful land of western Canada, farms fifty or one hundred acres, while the man in western Canada in order to make a living from a more fertile land must farm a half section, two or three sections and even as high as the American farmer who with his tractor machinery, and so forth, handles eight or ten thousand acres? Such a farm will speedily go to weeds and depletion; and these are farmers that cannot meet the situation in western Canada and who must therefore change their methods.
What is the immediate cause of the financial distress in the West? My Progressive friends from western Canada who sit opposite me heard repeatedly last year that, "The present crop is a debt-paying -crop." It is not that you cannot farm to-day in western Canada. The difficulty in western Canada lies in the heritage of the past three or four years, and the money that should have been going to pay for the present year's operations is being extracted from the land to pay the debts accumulated in the period of extravagant expenditure and easy credits of three or four years before, and that in spite of the fact that the year before the province of Saskatchewan gave $403,000,000 worth of products and the other provinces equally proportionate amounts.


William Irvine: Does the hon. gentleman
mean to say that the conditions in the West to-day are the result of lack of business ability on the part of the farmers there? Is he making a sweeping charge in regard to the three provinces?

Suppl y~Immigra tion


Edward James McMurray: I am afraid I shall have to go to the trouble of making my speech over again for my hon. friend's benefit. Had he thought it worth while listening to me I think that he would have gathered this and the other points as I went along. Now, I want to talk to my western friends through the mouths of western farmers themselves, and the hon. member (Mr. Irvine) can draw his conclusions from what I say. The first man I would quote is a prominent member of the grain growers' organization of Saskatchewan He gratuitously sent to me a communication which I presume my hon. friends across the way have also received. This man I remember came to the vicinity of Indian Head sixteen or seventeen years ago as a poor boy and worked on a farm there for his daily pay. To-day he owns three thousand acres of land, 1,800 acres of it under cultivation as agricultural land, and 1,200 acres of grass land for his cattle. Reciting the conditions in the West he says:
What are the remedies? (1) Reduction of size of farms, even if we have to sell them at a loss; (2) better live stock; 85 per cent of the cattle in Saskatchewan are scrubs; (3) cheaper supplies; (4) more immigration.


William Irvine: Does he say lower tariffs?


Edward James McMurray: No, cheaper supplies.
4.	More immigration: let us get thousands of those good agricultural people from central Europe out here on the land. They have proved among our best settlers to-day in western Canada. There are fewer of them in financial trouble than there are Canadians or English speaking people, because they are more careful and do not buy so extravagantly, do not go into debt.
5.	It doesn't seem good argument to say we should bring in more settlers when those already here are not too prosperous, but it is good argument. More settlers, different methods and systems of farming will increase our production, reduce our debts and taxes, help to pay for our railways and war debts.
The second western authority I shall quote is a member of parliament in the Saskatchewan legislature.


Mr. GOOD:: Would the hon. member give the name of the authority he has just quoted?


Edward James McMurray: I shall be glad to give it to my hon, friend privately. This member of the Saskatchewan legislature is Mr. George Spence and he sits for Noteku. I think that is somewhere in the constitutency of the hon. member for Swift Current (Mr. Lewis). Writing in the Regina Leader he says:
A man in the southwest to-day who is building for the future wisely and well is a real "homemaker" and not a "fortune seeker."
I may remark in passing that the southwest is a district periodically troubled with drouth, and it is, questionable if it should ever have
been turned to agricultural purposes, for it is naturally a ranching country.
This type of man is bound to win out because he is of the hardy pioneer stock that believes in individual -effort and work. He knows that success or failure is an individual responsibility; that there is no "easy money"; that acts of parliament will not do for him what only he can do for himself. He is long on selfreliance and short on substitutes for that quality. We should be careful in our desire to help this type of man not to undermine this spirit of self-reliance. There is no substitute for it, whatever. The most effective and acceptable assistance that can be offered him is that which touches actual conditions and helps him to help himself.
The statement can safely be made that large-scale farming and ranching have failed. They are both things of yesterday. The superiority of intensive over extensive farming has been definitely established. The big cow ranch is doomed to disappear and give place to the small stock-farm, as exclusive ranching is as lopsided a business as exclusive grain growing. To cheapen production, which is our only salvation in this crisis of low prices, we must have the greatest efficiency in feeding and caring for our animals. The brood sow and milk cow are foundation stock. The bacon hog and the stall-fed steer are great sources of exportable wealth.
The next step in intensified agricultural development is an intelligent survey and classification of lands, showing which are and which are not suited to cultivation ; and larger tracts of open range made available to communities of small farmers for summer pasture. As more and more com is grown, stall-feeding to finish will become the practice as there will always be a shortage of summer grass.
Grain growing alone is a soil-robbing proposition, a seasonal occupation, and an intensifier of our farm help problem."
I commend that to the committee as being pretty sound advice. Now, this continued defaming-I was going to say slandering-by, I am pleased to say, a very limited number of the representatives of the West has not been received with any great cordiality in the prairie provinces. The depicting of our sturdy and courageous western men and women agriculturists as quitters and squealers has not met with much response, and I doubt very iPuch if those who have given voice to such statements in this 11 ou.se will receive any very great welcome from their constituents.
The press of western Canada have taken the matter , up and I have before me a list of replies received from substantial and responsible farmers in the West and published in the Winnipeg Evening Tribune of 10th, 12th and 13th April. As they are typical I will read two or three of these communications. The first comes from J. N. Christison, who farms eight miles from Morris, Manitoba. He writes:
I have no serious fault to find with the present system of carrying on farming as any other business in this country. I came from Scotland and it seems to me that people here want to get rich too quick. They want to pay for a half section in five or six years. They ought to be willing to work half a lifetime to do this as they would have to do in most countries.



Supply-Immigration
. I don't think a Western Canadian wheat board would be of any practical benefit to the farmer. Great Britain will not pay $1.50 a bushel for our wheat if Argentina will sell for 85 cents. The law of supply and demand must rule in the world's markets.
Everything costs more now than before the war and the rule should be economy until prices come down. The trouble with a lot of farmers is that they went in too far when wheat was $2 a bushel. They bought more land and now they are deeply in debt. The pay-as-you-go principle is the one to follow in farming and would save a lot of trouble.
The troubles of most farmers are largely of their own making. If they have not got too far into the hole chey can pull out through practising rigid economy.
That is from a western farmer, not from a theorist. Here is another story which is really typical of many of our early fanners in the West. It is from Peter Goosen, a Mennonite, one of the class I referred to a short time ago. He lives nine miles from Morris. He says:
I began farming at Morris 30 years ago with 3500 as my capital. Now I have eight and one-half quarter sections, 1,640 acres of land. I have my own threshing outfit and about $10,000 out at interest. My first wife died and I was left with nine children, the oldest 14 years. I was a widower for fourteen years and it was pretty hard raising all those children.
I don't work much now, but I supervise. Last year we made a profit. We make a profit every year. Just in March I sold a carload of wheat which netted me $1 a bushel and which showed a fair profit.
The greatest difficulty facing the farmer is the high cost of supplies and equipment.
Binders which used to be $150 are now more than $300. Seed drills have gone up 100 per cent. Oil and gasoline are much higher than they used to be. Labour is twice as high as it was before the war. Twine, which is essential, is much more costly than it used to be.
Careful economy until prices come down is the only thing for the farmer.
I don't think a wheat board will be of much benefit to the fanner. I ship my grain in carload lots and have no serious complaint to make. A man must handle his money for a good crop carefully. Some men think when they get a good crop that it will be the same every year. They spend money like water and buy more land. In the boom time during the war I bought only 80 acres of land.
If I were a young man I could start again with $500 in some new district and make just as good a success as I have made in Morris district,
I have a dozen such letters taken from the Tribune, but I will not weary the House by reading them all. These letters show the true conditions existing throughout western Canada, and this false election cry-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Edward James McMurray: -has been carried too far and has done more to break the morale of our farmers in the West than anything that has occurred there in a long, long time. As an instance of what can be done by settlers in the West I may refer to the Icelanders. They came from a poor land and settled as a rule in rather indifferent agricultural country between the two lakes. They raised sheep
[Mr. McMurray.l
and carried on mixed farming; to-day they are prosperous.
Now, some of my hon. friends have referred to emigration from Canada. That apparently has always been going on. But who are the people that are leaving Canada? They are people of our own stock, Canadian and Old Country, and those of American stock. Very, very few of our agriculturists of foreign origin are leaving Canada. The trouble is that our present system of education educates our young people away from the farm-not the children of poor people but those of the well-to-do. A well-to-do farmer gives his boys and girls a good education, and they go to the cities. Our cities have grown in advance of the country, there is no occupation for these well educated young people in these cities and naturally they drift across the line into the United States and are lost to us forever. The same holds true of the skilled English mechanic. While our cities were expanding there was a place for him; when this expansion ceased or slackened he found himself without work and was attracted to the large centres across the line. The hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) spoke of our American settlers returning to the States. Probably the first and hardest hit in western Canada by the depression was the large farmer from the neighbouring republic. He came to western Canada with his tractors and other equipment, he was of a speculative type, and as soon as the depression came he was one of the first to leave. The people we are going to keep in this country, Mr. Chairman, are those of the real, genuine agricultural type. In this connection I would submit to the government the advisability of bringing here settlers of German stock, the Reusch Deutscher, the peasants of Germany and Austria. They have always made good in western Canada. They go on the land and stay there
What ought immigration to do for this country? It ought to lessen the cost of production, to stabilize our industries, to improve our social conditions, to bind Canadians closer together. I was particularly struck by the remarks of the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Manion). He appealed for immigrants to develop Northern Ontario. It is a very fine country with a harvest growing right there that any man with an axe and hardy enough can cut down. It is destined to become a very flourishing district and will yet supply much needed freight to the railroads which are our common property.
Probably the principal opposition to a vigorous policy will come from organized labour. Well, in the days of Canada's greatest immigration activity, when settlers were coming

Supply-Immigration
to us by their thousands, labour never enjoyed better pay, longer hours and more work.


An hon. MEMBER:: Longer hours?


Edward James McMurray: Yes. You' will have longer hours on the farm because you have to work all winter to make farming pay. If we bring to this country a sufficient number of settlers and place them on the land in western Canada the manufacturers of eastern Canada must immediately begin manufacturing to supply their wants; and the increased products that come from the West will flow down through our channels of trade to enliven and create greater industry here.
The government is endeavouring to bring in more immigrants, and I am now about to express my own idea of what I conceive to be a sound immigration policy. When I am told by a limited number of my Progressive friends-because I am glad to say that many of their colleagues have taken the opposite stand

when I am told that the immigrant cannot live and flourish in western Canada I refuse to credit the statement. When I think of the great fertility of that country, when I think of the thousands of immigrants that have settled there, when I think of the thousands of trainloads of grain that are yearly sent out of that country, when I think of over 150,000,000 acres of arable land in the West, a great deal of which is close to the railroads, I am convinced that the statement is not correct. I am confident that the hardy immigrant will prosper there in the future just as his countrymen did before him. These immigrants can be had in the shape of agriculturists from Great Britain, from the continent of Europe, and from the United States, and even from our own cities. But before any immigrant can be successful I think he ought to receive a reasonable degree of help, advice and instruction. If the Minister of Immigration were a clergyman he might very well take as his text-and I say it with all reverence

, "I go to prepare a place for you; that where I am ye may be also."


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Edward James McMurray: We have a preacher on our side too. As to our railroads, when Jim Hill was building the Great Northern railroad in the United States he found it necessary to give to the settlers along the line cattle, pigs and sheep. Surely we with a greater railroad system and with a finer country should not hesitate for one minute to fill it with sturdy, hardy people who will develop the land and help make our railroads a success.
I would suggest to the government that it woidd be good policy to buy one or two
120J
million acres of land immediately adjacent to the railroads for a settlement scheme similar to that which proved so successful for our returned soldiers. There is nothing to hinder us taking, as an experiment, 1,600,000 acres of land and settling 10,000 families on it. This would probably cost the government $24,000,000. Supposing twenty acres were broken on each farm, at five dollars per acre this would cost a million dollars more. Then supposing the government erected houses on these holdings at a further cost of $10,000,000 or $15,000,000. As a result the settlers would have every prospect of success. I do not know whether the government is prepared to embark upon such a policy, but the land is there and will produce the wealth, now lying latent, if we bring settlers to it, for our earlier settlers in the West have proved that they can turn our prairies into highly productive land. This is no new experiment; it has been tried with the returned soldiers and has proved a success.
We have a great economic problem on our hands, Mr. Chairman, a problem greater than has ever faced us before probably. This problem has to be met in a businesslike way, and immigration is the only solution that I see. By a well-conceived immigration policy much of our western land can be made productive and so save the Dominion from severe economic stringency, if not disaster. This is not a governmental question, it is really a national question that affects each and all of us, and I submit that the government should not recklessly nor carelessly be condemned in its immigration policy for the sake of mere party advantage. Immigration vitally affects western Canada, and the government is entitled to the support of the West in its endeavour to evolve a satisfactory policy.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. McMur-ray) has made a number of statements to which no doubt exception will be taken in some quarters, and I have no doubt that hon. gentlemen to my left are eager to get a chance to reply. There is one statement to which I would like to draw his attention in [DOT] which he went further I think than we might have expected him to go in view of a previous statement made by him. He said, if my notes are correct, that he would not close the door to any immigrant who had the courage to cross the seas and come to Canada. I take it that my hon. friend really would not go so far as to make a statement of that kind after considering exactly what it means. I think that he would modify that statement to say that he would include only immigrants
Supply-Immigration

of the white race. The hon. gentleman says yes; I thought that would be his reply.
I am afraid it will be necessary for me to make a further statement on the question of oriental immigration. I have apparently, quite unintentionally, incurred the displeasure of the Japanese Consul General at Ottawa. Possibly it would be well for me to read the correspondence that has passed between us. The first is a letter dated the 24th of March, 1923, addressed to myself and signed by Hon. T. Ohta, Consul General of Japan:
The attention of this office has been drawn to Hansard of March 23rd in which the following remarks made by yourself are quoted:
Page 1507: Mr. McQuarrie: The Japanese Consul General was kind enough to send me a memorandum of the Japanese views, and I suppose copies have been sent to other members of the House. In that memorandum the details of this alleged gentleman's agreement are set out. It is stated in the memorandum that the arrangement was to the effect that no more than four hundred Japanese labourers should be admitted in any one year____
Page 1508: Mr. McQuarrie: ....I am opposed in the first place, to the agreement itself, and I am opposed also 4,0 any secrecy regarding it. There should not be any secrecy about it. We have received the memorandum from the Japanese Consul General as to what the arrangement is with Japan_____
As the matter is of much importance in connection with the duties of this consulate, I would be much obliged if you would be good enough to advise me to what Japanese Consul General you refer to as having sent you the memorandum mentioned, and if possible let me have a copy of same.
For your information I am sending, under separate cover, a copy of a pamphlet issued by this consulate last year.
Thanking you in anticipation,
Your sincerely,
I replied as follows:
Ottawa, March 28th, 1923.
The Hon. T. Ohta,
Consul General of Japan,
Plaza Building,
Ottawa.
Dear Sir,-I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 24th instant referring to certain remarks made by me on the 23rd instant in the House of Commons and reported on pages 1507 and 1508 of Hansard.
I might explain that on the occasion in question, I spoke unexpectedly and without having my notes before me. Upon going through my files, I find that among others I have two pamphlets; one entitled "Facts About Japanese in Canada and Other Miscellaneous Information-1922" and purporting to be issued by the Consulate-General of Japan, Ottawa, and another one entitled "A short Statement of the Position and Facts Regarding the Japanese in Canada" which purports to be issued by The Canadian Japanese Association, 329 Gore Avenue, Vancouver, B.C., dated June 1st, 1921.
I find that, inadvertently, I attributed to the first mentioned pamphlet or memorandum a statement which is contained in the latter. The memo issued by the Canadian Japanese Association contains the following paragraph:
"Since Japan entered into a "Gentleman's Agreement" with Canada, restricting immigration from Japan to the number of 400 labourers per annum. Japan has not fully availed herself of this privilege, and for the fiscal year 1919-20 she has only sent 201. Not
[Mr. McQuarrie.}
only that, but the Japanese government has exercised great care and vigilance in selecting the labourers allowed to proceed to Canada. These men have fair educational (qualifications and are of good moral character, as is evidenced by their conduct in the country of their adoption."
This is the statement to which I referred. I am sorry that I mentioned the information as having been received from the Consul General of Japan.
I shall take the first favourable opportunity, when the oriental immigration question is under discussion again, to make the necessary correction in the House.
I trust this will clear the matter up to your entire satisfaction.
Yours very sincerely,
Then follows a letter dated April 3, 1923, addressed to myself from the Consul General pf Japan:
Dear Sir,-I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated the 28th of March, admitting your fault in connection with the statement made by yourself on March 23rd in the House with regard to the disclosure of details of the Lemieux agreement, and giving a promise that you will make the necessary correction at the first favourable opportunity.
While appreciating the circumstances under which you made the mistake in question, I would say that the circumstance itself has nothing to do with the fact that my reputation has sustained considerable injury by your statement. Under no circumstances are you entitled to any action which not only reflects on my integrity but constitutes itself a serious charge against my official duties as Consul General. I was quite surprised by this deplorable occurrence, as it was entirely beyond imagination that a matter which has grave con-# cern with the integrity and honour of a representative of a friendly nation should be treated in such an irresponsible manner by a member of Parliament of any country.
I will, however, refrain from going any further in this matter as you say you are sorry, and I will accept your letter as a genuine expression of regret and hope that you will make the promised retraction in order to clear up the matter.
Yours sincerely,
I must say that when I wrote the letter of March 28th I did not do so because I feared any dire consequences which might have happened as outlined in the last letter from the Consul General, but did so in order to clear up a mistake which I myself had made. I do not know exactly what would have happened if I had not said I was sorry, but, of course, having made the mistake I was only too glad . to admit my fault and to state that I was sorry. In this connection, and as an extenuating circumstance, I would like to draw attention to the similarity between the two pamphlets. I am not suggesting that there is any connection between the two; that is to say, I am not contending that the authors were the same, or even that the Consul General of Japan knew anything about the statements of the Canadian-Japanese Association, but it does seem to me that such a pamphlet would not have been issued by the Canadian-Japanese Association without the knowledge of the Japanese representatives in this country. The momorandum issued by the

Supply-Immigration
Consul General of Japan deals with a number of subjects. It takes up: The number of Japanese in Canada; the number of naturalized Japanese in Canada; acreage possessed by Japanese in Canada; Japanese passengers sailed to Canada since 1908; the classification of Japanese labour; summary of trade of Canada with Japan; Canadian commodities exported to Japan; Japanese commodities imported into Canada; the number of Japanese in the Canadian Expeditionary Force; also -and I would call particular attention to this -the amount subscribed by Japanese in British Columbia to victory loans.
There are other extracts in the same connection: An extract from the Vancouver Province of November 6, 1919, and then a passage from the Tokio Asahi of April 14, 1922, which refers to the reception given by the Prince of Wales to a Japanese-Canadian soldier who happened to be in Japan at the time. Then we also have "Japanese needed to work in Fish Canneries of B.C.," and certain excerpts from the House of Commons debates. I might mention that the pamphlet I have just been referring to is entitled Facts about Japanese in Canada and other miscellaneous information. The pamphlet issued by the Canadian-Japanese Association is headed A short statement of the position and facts regarding the Japanese in Canada. It goes on to give some statistics, and to refer to the part taken by Japan in the great war and it deals quite extensively with that. Then it takes up the question "Can the Japanese be assimilated?" and gives, as I said before, certain statistics as to the number of Japanese in Canada, the number of Japanese owning land, and so forth. I would like to question the propriety of propaganda of this kind being issued by the consular representative of a foreign nation, whether friendly or otherwise. I am forced to the conclusion that this pamphlet issued by the Japanese Consul General is nothing more than propaganda intended to influence the members of this House and the people of this country. If we examine the publication we find that no arguments are advanced, but that certain alleged facts are stated, and the conclusion to be drawn is that the Japanese in Canada are so few in numbers that they do not constitute a menace to this country in any sense of the word. On page 7 the number of Japanese in Canada are given in comparison with Canadian population as follows:
Canada, population, 7,206,643. Japanese, including those naturalized, etc., 17,691, or 24 in 10,000.
British Columbia, population, 392,480. Japanese, 16.867, or 420 in 10,000.
Alberta, population, 374.663. Japanese, 375, or 1 in 10.000.
Saskatchewan, population, 492.432. Japanese, 147, or 3 in 10,000.
Manitoba and Yukon, population, 464,126. Japanese, 86, or 2 in 10,000.
Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick, population 4,878,495. Japanese, 216, or .04 in 10,000.


Mr. BALDWIN:: When was that pamphlet issued?


William Garland McQuarrie: It bears the date of 1922. Now, as to the number of Japanese passengers that sailed for Canada since 1908- the details are given here on page 9, but I will not read them-the total is stated to be 17,570. Then on page 12 the number pi Japanese passengers that returned from Canada from 1908 to 1921 is given as 17,683. These tables will show that more Japanese have returned from Canada than came to the Dominion during the same years. In that connection we all know that there has been an increase, quite a marked increase in the Japanese population of Canada, and particularly in British Columbia in that period. In the same pamphlet we find an extract from the House of Commons debate of May 8, 1922, purporting to be a statement by the Prime Minister. I think it is unfair to publish a portion of the speech of any hon. gentleman in this way so as to indicate to the public that he-in this case the Prime Minister-was favourable to Japanese immigration whereas, as a matter of fact the Prime Minister in the speech which he gave on that occasion stated emphatically that he was very much opposed to oriental immigration, and, that the government proposed to take effective measures to prevent it. An extract is also given from the speech delivered by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Dickie.) That also is misleading and again I say that it is unfair to quote any member of this House in that way. The same thing was done in the case of the hon. member for Nanaimo as in the case of the Prime Minister and I submit that such a procedure is not justified. If the Japanese are going to quote a member of this House at all they should either give his entire speech or such parts of it as fairly represent what he actually said. There are other features of this pamphlet to which reference may be made. It purports to set out what the rights of foreigners in Japan are. From this pamphlet it would appear that foreigners are welcome in Japan and are given very extensive privileges. My information-and I may say that I obtained it from people who have been in Japan-is that that representation is rather misleading; that the foreigner is not welcome in Japan, that he is not given a chance in any line of business, and that he is discouraged in
Supply-Immigration

every possible way. So much for the statement of the Consul General of Japan.
I also have to take exception to propaganda which is being carried on by the Consul General for China, Mr. Chilien Tsur. In this connection I would like to read a short extract from an editorial which appeared in the Ottawa Citizen of March 24, of this year. It says:
Hon. Chilien Tsur, Consul General for China, in his address to the Ottawa Canadian Women's Club, deprecated the tone and character of some of the remarks made in parliament by honourable members regarding the question of Chinese immigration. "Is that the Christian way of expressing cordiality and peace?" he is reported to have said.
Then there was a statement made by the same gentleman in Victoria as to the segregation of school children there; another statement made by him in reference to the immigration sheds in Vancouver; and a statement in regard to the head tax. The gentleman has been going from one end of Canada to the other criticizing the government and the people of this country in regard to the laws which are in effect here. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that that kind of thing contravenes all the ethics of international usage. I do not think it is right or proper for this gentleman to issue propaganda of this kind, but I must say that it appears that that kind of thing is pretty general throughout this country, I should say throughout the North American continent, and that there is a very strong concerted movement going on at the present time to put before the people of this country the right of the Japanese, particularly, to equality of treatment. I have certain extracts here from San Francisco papers which I should like to read in this connection. It seems they are going to have very shortly a convention composed of representatives of the various Japanese associations of America, including the Japanese Association of Canada, the object of which is to enforce race equality on the people of this country. I will read from the Sacramento Bee of March 19th, 1923, the following:
The New Anti-American Agitation in Japan To Force Race Equality Through Treaty Revision Is the Japanese government quietly encouraging a popular outbreak of anti-American feeling preparatory to diplomatic demands on the immigration question? We know that the Japanese associations in this country are under the direct control of the government. These organizations are now making plans for a large scale agitation in Japan for "race equality" (in America only-not in Japan and her territories). A powerful "Society to enforce Race Equality" was organized in Tokio last January. Among its promoters are many influential merchants, members of parliament, preachers, and other leading, men who have lived in America and are co-operating with the Japanese associations. This agitation menaces the peace of America
(Mr. McQuarrie.)
and Japan. Its object is to "Enforce race equality." Race equality with the Japanese means wresting from America something which the people of the Pacific coast will not concede. The Japanese are raising an issue which would mean war. Tokyo knows this. Tokyo controls the Japanese associations in this country and can control agitation in Japan. Why is this rising tide of mischief-making not controlled at the start? In my last report I dealt with the American influence and significance.
The following editorial refers to the Tokyo end:
(Translation, Japanese American News, March 16, Editorial)
Necessity of Understanding with Tokyo Confreres Treaty Revision and the American Brotherhood
Never before has there been such sharp debate on the Japan-American question as in the Japanese parliament this year. There have been discussions before but they never rose to the proportions of the debate this year. And this vigorous debate was mainly the result of dissatisfaction over the discriminatory treatment of Japanese in America and the desire to correct it. The government's replies were mostly irrelevant but nevertheless they showed a hesitating desire to comply with this demand. The interpellations and answers were necessarily formal but the debate was wholly different from the usual noisy wrangling of the opposition. For this reason this debate will have a certain degree of influence and significance.
Not that we think that this debate in parliament will produce immediate results. It goes without saying that the Japanese-American question will not be settled in this way, but there is not the slightest doubt that parliamentary discussion will have an influence on the government, on the people,, and on one element of the international situation. For this reason we have taken much interest in the parliament this year-and we think we have much to be thankful for.
We think also that one reason for this happy phenomenon in parliament was the opportune effort to arouse public sentiment by the "American Brotherhood" now called the "Society to enforce Race Equal-ityf" organized by men who rose to prominence in America or have interests in America. The personnel of the organization of the Society to Enforce Race Equality and they main features of its work have been reported already in numerous telegrams and other communications. Probably most of the people in Japan who are deeply sympathetic with the Japanese in America in their present situation are connected with this society.	.
We may presume that these persons organized the society and undertook to arouse public sentiment, not merely out of sympathy for the Japanese in America, but from the broad standpoint of the Japanese nation and Japan-American relations, recopizing its necessity for our nation and race. But in its work and effects thereof, in its motto-Equal treatment for the Japanese in America-it is absolutely at one with the earnest desires of the Japanese in America. Therefore we tender to the Society for the Enforcement of Race Equality our deep respect and gratitude.
The 100,000 and more Japanese in America to-day are at the parting of the ways. In the midst of terrible anxiety they are seeking a way out of darkness into light. To put it concretely, they earnestly hope that when the treaty is revised the discriminatory treatment they now suffer in immigration, in the land question, and other matters, will be abolished. And in order to attain this hope we must start a nation-wide popular movement, organizing public opinion for stimulating the government, helping and compelling it to act. And in this popular movement our first reliance for sympathy and help is the American Brotherhood. It is no simple matter to start a nation-wide movement

Supply-Immigration
We cannot do it by sending hundreds of telegrams. There must be an organized body of confreres in Japan. The debates in parliament have prepared the people by giving preliminary information. The Japan-American question has blossomed out in this parliament. We truly rejoice in this. But we must add to this preliminary knowledge by giving more detailed and reliable information on the Japan-American immigration question, showing how equal treatment for Japanese overseas is necessaiy for the honour and interests of the national people. If we do not arouse public sentiment to this extent we can not escape from our present sad plight.
I have also another quotation from the same paper of date March 17th, 1923, which reads:
A Trouble-Making Body of Immigrants Japanese Determined to Override Wishes of Western America
Scheme to Compel Government to Demand "Equal Treatment"
No other immigrant group in this country has ever undertaken so persistently to evade the laws of the land and override the will of the American people as do the Japanese. At this moment they are forming plans for a combined movement for the avowed purpose of forcing the Japanese government to take a stand which would mean war or the over-riding of the will of the people of at least nine western states. This movement has already begun in Tokyo and the American end is being organized by these peculiar agencies of the Tokyo government, the Japanese associations. For the first time in the history of the Japanese colony, if the scheme carries, the entire group will be organized for joint action. What they propose to do is brought out in the following translations from a local Japanese paper. The Japanese-American News of March 15, 1923, in its Los Angeles column under the date of March 13, has the following:
Japanese All-American Conference
We have already reported that at the meeting of the managing staff and the standing committees of the Central Japanese Association (Los Angeles) day before yesterday, it was decided that a proposal be made that this year's regular meeting of the affiliated Japanese associations of the coast be deferred and a general conference of all the Japanese associations in America be held in Seattle after the decision of the AntiJapanese land cases, set for hearing April 16 in the U.S.A. Supreme Court, has been rendered.
Yesterday the following letter, accompanying the resolution, was sent to the Japanese Association of America; the Japanese Association of the Northwest, Seattle; the Oregon Japanese Association, Portland; the Japanese Association of Canada; the Japanese Association of New York; the Japanese Association of Chicago; the Japanese Association of Hawaii; requesting approval of the proposition.
Greetings:
At a joint meeting of the managing staff and standing committee of this association on the 12th instant the following resolution was adopted and we respectfully ask your prompt consideration and approval of the same.
Japanese Association of Southern California. Ginnosuke Yuass,
President.
March, 1923.
Proposal of an All-American Conference of Japanese Residents
Said conference to be held after the decision has been rendered in the land law appeal cases set for hearing April 16th in the Supreme Court. In addition to the delegates of the affiliated Japanese
associations of the coast, delegates to be invited from all Hawaii and from the New York and Chicago regions. The conference to discuss preliminary investigations regarding the revision of the Japan-Ameri-an treaty and the effect of the Supreme Court's decision.
The calling of the conference is to be left to the Japanese Association of the Northwest, Seattle.
Following up the matter editorially the Japanese American News (March 15) says:
ALL-AMERICAN CONFERENCE OF JAPANESE RESIDENTS Extremely Proper -
The Central Japanese Association of Southern California has proposed an All-American conference of Japanese residents. The plan is to hold a convention after the decision of the land law cases which are to come up for hearing in the Supreme Court April 16th, the convention to be made up of representatives of the Central Japanese associations of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Vancouver, B.C., New York, Chicago and Hawaii, for the purpose of considering
1.	Preliminary investigation regarding the revision of the Japan-American treaty, and
2.	Effects of the Supreme Court's decision.
The motto of the association is "Abolish discriminatory treatment". There follows this paragraph to which I would call the attention of the committee:
If our government is not firmly resolved-
By "our government", they mean the Japanese government-
If our government is not firmly resolved on revision every means should be employed to make them so. We cannot easily do this by ordinary methods. We Japanese in America to whom it is a question of life and death should determine to accomplish our object at any sacrifice.
It appears that something is being done to endeavour tON arouse public opinion. I am not prepared to say that the pamphlet issued by the Japanese Consul General was part of that general movement, but I do say that its tenor is the same; and if that pamphlet had never been forwarded to me the Japanese Consul General would never have had occasion to take exception to my remarks in tjie House of Commons, because there would have been no opportunity for me to confuse pamphlets issued by him with those issued by Japanese associations. The situation in California is very serious; but considering the population of the United States as compared with that of Canada, the number of Japanese in Canada is much larger proportionately than the number of Japanese in the United States. It has been pointed out on many occasions by interested persons that the number of orientals in this country is very small. But the same thing applies to the United States. The trouble is the same here as it is in the United States, and that is that the oriental population is
Supply-Immigration

not properly distributed. We have them on the Pacific coast while there are very few in other parts of Canada. In British Columbia as well as in California there is a very significant feature of this question which has many times been referred to. I refer to the birth rate of the Japanese. I have here a pamphlet, a short extract from which I should like to read; it deals with and possibly explains this question. I am reading now from a pamphlet issued by the North American Commission of the American Legion. This pamphlet is entitled The Oriental Question Report presented by the National Oriental Committee of the National Convention of 1922, which report was unanimously adopted. At page 30 there appears the following :
In order that the seriousness of the Japanese question may be understood it is necessary to obtain the Japanese point of view, which can be had in no way better than from the statements of prominent Japanese and the editorial comment in Japanese newspapers. One of the most instructive of such editorials, appearing in the "Shin Sekni" or "New World" of San Francisco, in October, 1919, said:
"We should advance and not recede. To stop is to retreat. While we push forward boldly the enemy has no chance to form plans.
"What can Phelan do? What can Inman do? When we of the Yamato race arise with a mighty resolve their opposition will be as futile as an attempt to sweep the sea with a broom.
"Even if photograph marriages should be prohibited, we cannot be stopped from leaving our descendants on this American continent. Even if not a single Japanese woman comes it is not possible to prevent the seed of our great Yamato race from being sown on the American continent by marriages with Americans, with French, with Indians and with negroes, especially since there are already 100,000 Japanese here and 5,000 are born annually.
"Supposing that we Japanese were prohibited from owning or cultivating the land. Even the laws of California are not forever unchangeable.
"The day will come when the real strength of the Japanese will make a clean sweep of all laws."
"The far-seeing nature of the Japanese designs is attested by their not infrequent allusion to the plan of one hundred years. An album of scenes depicting the Japanese farming activities whiclj was published in Sacramento in 1915 contained a preface which said that it would serve not only as a souvenir but for the larger purpose of- contributing to the formation of the great colony scheme of 100 years". An article in the Sacramento "Daily News", a Japanese newspaper, discussing the then pending alien land bill, said:
"It is impossible to escape anxiety because of the many serious matters which arise, one after the other, in connection with our plans oi resistance in the present crisis and their relation to our compatriots' plan of a hundred years."
The importance of propagating the Japanese race in furtherance of this plan of one hundred years is emphasized in the following article which appeared in the "Nichi-Bei" of San Francisco, in October, 1919:
" The Americans wish to kick Japan down to international isolation and confine development of her people to one small island country. Truly it is a laughable and villainous plot. Awake! Even if we Mr rMcQuarrie.]
cannot expand our country's borders let us expand with all speed the Yamato race of which we are justly proud. Beget! Beget! Beget!. It is only by the propagation of our Yamato race by every good Japanese that we can solve the anti-Japanese, nay, the American-Japanese problem. For the next ten, twenty, fifty or one hundred years, beget! beget! Children, boys and girls, will be treasures more valuable to your countrymen than hundreds of millions of gold. And at the same time they are the supreme treasures for the development of our race ".
A quotation from a Japanese language newspaper, identity not given, read into the record of the Congressional investigation of 1920 says:
" We must send for wives. We must raise as many children in America as possible, so that we shall acquire a stability and strength which no amount of anti-Japanese agitation can shake. Land can be had by legal invasion of the spirit of the laws. But without children to inherit, what hope for the future of Yamato-America? Land, broad acres settled thick with Mikado's subjects, children to inherit the land, mothers to bring forth the children."
Protesting against the suppression of photograph marriages the Osaka Mainichi Shimbun quoted in the San Francisco Nichi-Bei of January 17, 1920, says:
" The annual migration of women to America by photograph marriages numbers more than 1,000. At the present time the single prefecture of Hiroshima has 44,155 of its people residing in America. Of these 15,592, not more than one-third, are women. Yet our government, ignoring or glossing over these facts, dares to suppress photograph marriages in a cowardly truckling to America, injuring the national dignity, and adopting an expedient of suicidal repression of our overseas development."
The use which the Japanese hope to make of the voting power vested in the thousands of American-, bom children of their race who are now rapidly approaching twenty-one years of age is a matter of grave concern. Before quoting the Japanese on this point a short extract will be given from a letter to the Portland, Oregon, Northman by Miss Francis Hewitt, recently returned from Japan, where she had spent six years teaching English to Japanese school children. Referring to the misinformation relative to the Japanese purposes conveyed by the missionaries who dare not write anything displeasing to the Japanese censors of their letters, and by tourists and notables who go to Japan on trade or other commissions and are so entertained "that they seem to lose all sense of sane observation." Miss Hewitt says:
" They do not learn that every girl is thoroughly drilled in the doctrine that should she become a " picture bride " in America or an immigrant to other lands her loyal duty to her emperor is to have as many children as possible, so that the foreigners' land may in time become a possession of Japan through the expressed will of the people ".
The Nichi-Bei of San Francisco, in an editorial translated in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer of July 4, 1922, comments enthusiastically upon the voting power of the 40,000 American-bom Japanese in California, not to mention that of the 49,000 in Hawaii and the other thousands scattered along the Pacific coast, and still other thousands who are being bom each year. This editorial indicates the means whereby the Japanese, as stated in the editorial herein quoted from the Shin Sekai, expect that the " real strength of the Japanese will make a clean sweep of all laws." It argues:
" If the Japanese now here settle down where they are, and the number of American-bom Japanese grows gradually, it may be presumed that in the next ten or twenty years the number of second generation Japanese in this state, who will have the right to vote, will reach a large figure. Then will the political influence of the native-born Japanese be recognized;

Supply-Immigration
then will probably come the time when the attitude of the American-born Japanese will decide the course of an election. Even 5,000 voters among the Japanese five years hence will be able to accomplish a great deal. But with twenty or thirty thousand of them- then a great change will have come in the situation of the California Japanese. At any rate, no person with political aspirations will be able to ignore the voters of Japanese descent."
Anticipating the possibility of the denial of suffrage to American-born Japanese whose births have been registered in Japan as required of Japanese subjects, the Japanese Sacramento Daily News suggests the discontinuance of the practice of sending such birth notices to Japan, saying:
" Hereafter the omission of the notice to Japan is just the way for Japanese subjects, by securing American citizenship, to lay the foundation of a great development. And another day, when the opportunity comes for them to reinforce the Japanese residents in America who have no citizenship rights, they must, on behalf of His Majesty, the Emperor of Japan, become the. loyal protectors of the race. Even though they are not registered in Japan, if they return to Japan and have documentary evidence that their parents are Japanese they can register at any time."
I would like also to refer to an editorial published in the Vancouver Daily World of recent date, under the caption, "An Ungrateful Guest." It says:
After spending three years in Ottawa as a guest of Canada, Mr. Kosaku Mizusawa, late of the Japanese Consulate general, has gone to the United States and there delivered an attack upon this country, its people and its laws. Such a gross breach of hospitality and of etiquette deserves notice.
Mr. Mizusawa is described in the Japanese language paper which prints his interview as being an "Eleve Consul." The admixture of French and English is apparently intended to convey the idea of a student-consul or consul in training. As a student-consul Mr. Mizusawa has at least one thing to learn and it is to be hoped his official superiors will promptly teach him the importance of keeping a still tongue in his head. Such an official, breathing such sentiments under such circumstances, is a danger to international good-will. The circumstance that the interview was printed in Japanese in a Japanese language paper circulating up and down the Pacific Coast aggravates rather than mitigates the offence.
The charge made by Mr. Mizusawa that "Canadian anti-Japanism is far more cruel than the California anti-Japanese laws" is based on a recent immigration measure offered at Ottawa by Mr. Neill of Comox-Albemi, which never reached second reading, a land bill said to be offered by Mr. H. H. Stevens, which had a similar painless death, and the refusal by the Dominion authorities to add to the large number of Japanese now controlling the fishing industry of this coast.
Then there is a part here that I cannot make out-something about an actual grievance. Then it goes on:
It is true that the officials of the Fisheries department are, on instructions from Ottawa, refusing to grant more licenses to Japanese fishermen than were held in the season of 1920-21. That number comprises roughly two-thirds of all the licenses issued on the B. C. coast.
Says Mr. Mizusawa:	"The Japanese engaged in
that industry in that country are largely naturalized citizens of England. It is difficult to understand how any law can be passed to stop them from fishing. But
they are doing it by administrative process in connection with the issuance of licenses. The Canadian anti-Japanism is far more cruel, in my opinion, than the California anti-Japanese laws."
Mr. Mizusawa has, during his three years' stay in Canada, become so accustomed to seeing his countrymen displace Canadians and British in the industries of British Columbia he cannot comprehend that a halt has been called in the work of Orientalising the coast fisheries. That new Japanese who have never fished before cannot be admitted to the fisheries fills him with a sense of outrage. He finds it difficult to understand how any law can be passed that can stop his countrymen from fishing here. In this disability, his countrymen are at worst only sharing the fate of white fishermen who cannot get permission to fish or operate canneries, of white citizens who own hotel bars and cannot operate them, of white trappers and loggers and manufacturers and a host of other people who at some stage or other find their activities curtailed through the paramount right of the state.
I suppose this gentleman will be even more pained to hear that a cut of 40 per cent has been made in the number of Japanese licenses issued this year.
Now, the claim is made that these Japanese are naturalized British subjects and as such are entitled to all the rights and privileges of British subjects. I had occasion to point out a few days ago the case of a Japanese who was naturalized when he was very young. I have under my hand the evidence which was given before the British Columbia Fisheries Commission in this connection. Hozumi Yonemura, who was assistant secretary of the Japanese Association, District No. 2, was examined and presented a memorandum which is included in the evidence. During the course of his examination the following questions were asked:
Q. Were you born in this country?-A. No, sir.
Q. When did you come to the country?-A. 1911.
. Q. You were naturalized then?-A. The same year, I think it was.
Q. How old are you now?-A. 21.
Q. You were naturalized in 1911; you would only be ten years old then. It seems you have to be 21 to be naturalized.-A. I have been told by my father.
Q. Was your father a citizen of this country then?- A. No.
Q. Is he here now?-A. Yes.
Q. When did he come to the country?-A. About 18 or 19 years ago.
Q. He came here and then he sent for you?-A. Yes.
Q. Is your father naturalized?-A. No, I don't think he is.
Q. What is your father's name?-A. Koshiro Yoma-mura.
Q. Where does he live?-A. New Westminster.
Q. What business is he in?-A. Contractor.
Q. Have you ever become expatriated from Japan?- A. No.
Q. You never made any application for expatriation? -A. I did, but I could not succeed. That expatriation is in question now in the House of Commons in Japan.
Q. So that you still are a citizen of Japan according to the Japanese law?-A. Yes.
Q. And the same thing applies to all the Japanese in this country?-A. Not those who were born in this country.
Suppl y-Immigration

Q. All the naturalized Japanese in this country are still citizens of Japan according to the law bf Japan? -A. Yes.
Q. You had to make an affidavit saying you were in the country three years before you could be naturalized, and you had to swear an affidavit of allegiance to the British Crown which you did not understand. What I am asking you is this, were there many Japanese who were in the same position?-A. There must be many others.
Now, in this same connection I also have the evidence of P. E. Kuwabara, who said he was secretary of the Steveston Fishermen's Benevolent Society. He was examined before the commission at Vancouver. The following is part of the evidence:
Q. Now, when we were up at Essington we were told by a Japanese there-he was secretary of the Japanese union for No. 2 District

that he came to this country in 1911 and that he was naturalized the same year. At the present time he is only 21 years of age and consequently he was naturalized when he was 10 years old. He said he had been told by his father that this was quite the proper thing and he said there were a great many other Japanese who were in the same position, who had been similarly naturalized in an illegal manner. Now, would you contradict that gentleman ?-A. That is correct.
Q. Therefore there are a great many Japanese whom you refer to in your document who have not been naturalized at all? '
Mr. Martell: There are also a great many Japanese not expatriated by the Japanese government.
A. That is correct. I can say so.
If these statements are true; if these witnesses knew what they were talking about, then we have a peculiar situation in British Columbia in that a great many of these Japanese were naturalized in an illegal manner, and if these naturalizations were questioned they would have to be revoked.


Mr. CARROLL:: Is the hon. member
criticising now the judges who have recommended naturalization, or the minister who has charge of that kind of thing?


William Garland McQuarrie: What was recommended in the report of the British Columbia Fisheries Commission, of which I happened to be a member, was that all these naturalization certificates should be called in and that only those should be issued in cases where the applicants were bona fide entitled to certificates. I am not criticizing anybody.


William F. Carroll: Does my hon. friend
mean to say that the judges of the various courts of British Columbia have granted certificates or recommended the granting of certificates to the Secretary of State which are wrong?


William Garland McQuarrie: These certificates were issued some years ago, and I must say, from information that I have, that naturalization certificates were granted in a somewhat loose manner.


William F. Carroll: The hon. member must
then be criticizing the judges of the British Columbia courts.


William Garland McQuarrie: I am criticizing no
one; the hon. member is trying to put words in my mouth. I am simply stating the facts, nothing more.
Now, as I have stated previously, it is suggested by the propaganda to which I have referred that there is really no oriental menace in British Columbia; that the members from that province have been making a great fuss about nothing; that there is no danger there at all, nothing we should get excited about, nothing in respect to which we should take action. Well, in that connection I would say, as I have said previously, that this is not a political question or rather it is not a party question. I suppose it is a political question, and for that reason I resent interference by the representatives of foreign nations. But it is not a party question; and I am going to quote from statements made not by members of my own party, but by ministers of the Crown in British Columbia who, of course, are Liberals. The first is a statement made by Hon. E. D. Barrow, Minister of Agriculture in British Columbia. I read from a despatch published in the Vancouver Province of November 23, 1922, dated at Victoria. It says:
Figures showing the extent of the penetration of Japanese and Chinese into the fruit, vegetable and general market gardening industry in British Columbia were given the legislature yesterday by Hon. E. D. Barrow, Minister of Agriculture, in the debate on Mr. Ian Mackenzie's resolution calling for amendment to the B.N.A. Act to give the province power to control oriental ownership of lands or other natural resources and employment in industries connected with them.
Ninety per cent, of the local produce furnished in the city of Vancouver supplied by orientals and 55 per cent, of the potatoes of the province are produced by orientals, Mr. Barrow said.
To present the seriousness of the menace, Mr. Barrow quoted figures which he said were collected two years ago by the department of agriculture in its survey of the yellow peril. This survey showed that there were 14,050 acres of agricultural land owned by Japanese and Chinese and 12,000 acres leased by them.
"That was the condition two years ago and we are satisfied that the acreage held by orientals has been increased since that time," Mr. Barrow said.
At the time of the survey, out of the 4,500 acres in the province devoted to small fruits, the Japanese hold 2.341 acres, or more than 50 per cent. He declared that this added to the problem of the berrygrowers in connection with economical marketing on the prairies.
For truck farming the Chinese own 1,632 acres and lease 8,184 acres, the Japanese own 281 acres and lease 560 acres, a total of 10,097 acres, Mr. Barrow said.
"This is the time to take a definite stand to prevent orientals from acquiring any more of our farm lands," Mr. Barrow went on. "It is now practically impossible to buy any produce not grown by orientals. If the oriental were not producing our vegetables the white

Supply-Immigration
man would be. The same method is to enact legislation to prevent them from acquiring more than they have." Mr. Barrow pointed out that the greater proportion of the hothouses near Victoria were owned or run by orientals and they are aggressive on the north side of the Fraser in the berry districts. There was concern that some of them would indirectly get some of the rich Sumas lands being developed by the government.
There are no orientals coming into Chilliwack, however. Mr. Barrow said, as in that district the community spirit is too strong against them. There is no real estate firm in the district that would dare to sell land to orientals. But there is fear that some of the fertile alluvial lands nearby, which are held in big blocks, might pass into the hands of Orientals.
Here is a statement by the Attorney General of British Columbia, the Hon. A. M. Manson, and this I take from the Vancouver World which is the Liberal organ in the city of Vancouver:
That in the shingle mill industry in British Columbia the oriental had already secured the balance of power and that to-day 54 per cent of the shingle mills in this province were controlled by Asiatics, was stated to the House yesterday by Hon. A. M. Manson in seconding the motion of Hon. William Sloan, calling upon the federal government for total exclusion of Asiatics from Canada.
"And that is not all," he said. "It may be interesting to this House to know that 7A per cent of the industrial workers in the logging industry are Asiatics: that 41 per cent in the lumber dealing industry belong to the same race; that 16 per cent in the baking industry; 39 per cent in the fish canning industry; 39 per cent in the vegetable canning business; 15 per cent in the coal mining industry: 37 per cent in the pulp and paper industry and 39 per cent in the saw milling industry are also Asiatics."
The attorney general did not mince words in dealing [DOT]with the problem. "The story of the oriental in British Columbia has been the story of a progressive menace," he said. "He came to us first as a hand laundry man. Then he became a factor in the fishing industry. Next in the logging and lumbering industry. Then he invaded mining and farming and now he is a menace in the wholesale and retail merchant business."
While seconding the motion for exclusion of entrance into Canada he stated that he thought we should go still further and adopt a policy that would compel the oriental already here to leave Canada.
I have here a statemettit by the Hon. William Sloan, Minister of Mines in British Columbia. This is taken from the Vancouver World of November 11, 1921:
In the face of all the facts that I have been able to assemble it must be clear to us that the industrial and economic life of British Columbia is already endangered by Asiatic competition and that the white people cannot compete with this foreign population for the chief reason that orientals are. as has been repeatedly emphasized, accustomed to and contented with a much lower standard of living. In the final analysis it must be admitted that while a single state may continue to contain two races, it cannot long continue to contain two conflicting and distinct civilizations.
Mr. Sloan goes on to give a statement which is very interesting. He says:
I wish to submit some very interesting figures which have been compiled with regard to the Activity of orientals within our province and which indicate serious inroad in our industries of fishing, agriculture, lumbering, mining and also in respect to business and trade.
In 1920, 2,227 gill net licenses and 519 trolling licenses a total of 2,746 licenses were issued, to Japanese by the Department of Marine and Fisheries.
It may safely be said that there were 5,492 Japanese fishermen at work in British Columbia in 1920, which number certainly has not decreased in recent years.
The Asiatic Exclusion League of Canada points out that the total number of births in British Columbia in 1920 was 11,192, that the Japanese births aggregated 657, making the proportion of Japanese to whites one in seventeen.
Statistics also have been compiled which indicate that the proportion in 1921 was about one in 13.
Out of 438 grocery licenses issued in Vancouver in 1920 over 171 were granted to orientals. There were 80 oriental laundries. In restaurants 713 orientals were employed and 50 per cent of said restaurants were owned and operated by orientals. There are 62 oriental barber shops in Vancouver.
Sixty per cent of the merchant tailors in Vancouver are orientals. In the present year these numbers have grown alarmingly. Japanese and Chinese merchants now hold 1,656 trade licences in the city of Vancouver.
In my own constituency in Nanaimo, an industrial district, it is noteworthy that orientals also have been obtaining a footing, as is indicated by the following facts: In that city there are three Chinese laundries, two Chinese barbers, five oriental merchant tailors, three Chinese fruit, and vegetable merchants peddling from door to door, and at least 75 per cent of the truck farming of the district is controlled by orientals.
He goes on to show how the orientals are also invading the coal mining industry. I have also some information contained in a memorandum of the Steveston Fishermen's Benevolent Society, a Japanese organization, which was presented to the British Columbia Fisheries Commission, and which deals particularly, of course, with my own district.
I would like to draw attention to the condition which exists in the town of Steveston, which is at the mouth of the Fraser river. A few years ago this town had a population of some three thousand, the majority of whom were white. Now it has a population of about the same number or a little larger, but practically all of them are orientals. I will give you the Japanese gentleman's own figures. There are about 600 married couples living in Steveston and its vicinity with approximately 1,200 children, together with about 700 single fishermen, all engaged "in fisjiing and the subsequent industries on the Fraser." That would make an oriental population of some 3,100. Then he goes on to say that these fishermen have invested in their business a large sum which is stated to be $1,694,900 and is made up as follows:
870 gas-engined fishing boats (under 10 B.	.
H.P.), valued $1,000.00 per boat, and $500.00 fishing nets and other gears .. .. $1,305,000 50 fish-carrying boats (from 10-20 B.H.P.),
valued at $3,252.00 per boat	 133,900
38 fish-carrying boats (over 20	B.H.P.),
valued at $6,500.00 per boat	 256,000
Total	 $1,694,900
Supply-Immigration

Then, in the same document, we are toid about the trolling and other operations, which give employment to a great many more Japanese. There is one statement here, and I would like to call attention to it because it seems to convey the idea that these men think they are really hfelping the country by engaging in the fishing. It says:
We are all working to promote the production of one of our national products, namely, fish.
They think they are really helping us by doing this fishing. I take it that they are not doing anything to help the country but are rather taking advantage of our natural resources in a way that should not be permitted and in a way that would not be permitted to us in Japan. There is another peculiar thing about this statement and that is, it is contended that by catching fish on the west coast of "Vancouver Island they are doing a patriotic work inasmuch as they are catching the fish which otherwise would go to the Americans. It says here:
If this observation is correct, which we presume it is as far as the present stage of biological observations are concerned, we are not killing any Canadian fish, but are killing our competitors' fish for the benefit of the nation. We are not very familiar with the political aspects of fisheries in connection with United States, but we presume we are doing a very beneficial and rather patriotic work for our adopted country, especially when fisheries authorities in the state of Washington are apparently taking an attitude that they are very little interested with the question of the conservation of salmon, but only concerned to put up as many cases of canned salmon as they possibly can by almost any destructive means of fishing.
Now, I think, we are telling these Japanese that we do not need them in our fisheries.
I would like if I may be permitted to do so to read another editorial from the Vancouver World.


The CHAIRMAN:: I am afraid that the hon. member in his elaboration of citations is getting beyond the provisions of the rule which declares that speeches in Committee of the Whole must be strictly relevant to the clause or item under discussion, which in this case is immigration. I am drawing my hon. friend's attention to the rule so that he may be guided by it.


William Garland McQuarrie: I think the editorial 1 am about to quote is really relevant to the subject under discussion. It summarizes very well the conditions that we are faced with in the city of Vancouver to-day and is entirely relevant, particularly in view of the fact that the government proposes to admit merchants to Canada although other immigration is to be excluded. Now, this editorial from the Vancouver World which, of course, is a government organ, is to the following effect:

The Army of Asiatic Retailers
The figures, printed elsewhere in this paper, showing the extent of the Chinese and Japanese competition in the retail merchandizing and general occupational businesses of this city, will come as a startling revelation to many people.
Within the past year a general branching out of Chinese and Japanese stores has taken place all over the city. There is hardly a business block, either in the down-town section or in the outer districts where the local tradesman is not suffering from the effects of Asiatic competition. But until The World secured the returns from the City Hall records, who for one moment imagined that 1,658 Chinese and Japanese were holding trade licenses within the city limits?
Nor has the worst been reached, by a long way. Six months ago The World pointed out the menace which Would come within a few years from the admissior of last year's army of 1,445 qualified Chinese merchants through the port of Vancouver. Not many of the 1921 class are yet in business. They came armed with the necessary capital to secure entry, but they are still busy learning English, studying Canadian business methods and preparing with patience for the time when they will be able to take their line in the ranks of the commercial contenders for Vancouver's retail trade.
Many of the Chinese retailers are doing business under assumed names. Possibly out of admiration for one of the leaders of the Vancouver bar one Chinese tailor has taken the name of " Charles Wilson." His explanation is that this is his real name " in English." Another. a grocer, has paid a delicate compliment to the Scotch by taking the name of " MacLean." Others are content to take mere company names which sound like the names of Anglo-Saxon concerns, such as " The Royal " and the " North American," etc. But it would surely make the Bard of Avon turn in his grave to see who runs The Stratford Gent's Tailoring Club, or the Stratford gentlemen who patronize it.
To-day the Victoria Chinese are using the strike, picketing and intimidation to prevent the principle of separate schools for Asiatics being introduced there. They and their mouthpieces are demanding that the Asiatic school populace shall be educated on terms of intimacy with the children of white people. Un* doubtedly the equipping of their children with the fullest measure of intimacy with their white competitors in the business affairs of life is the governing factor in the refusal of the Chinese to attend the schools set apart for themselves.
A study of the article referred to will show that there is no line of industry which the evergrowing tide of Asiatic invasion is not prepared to contest with the Anglo-Saxon in this province. The time, has come for some enlightened self-sacrifice on the part of buyers as well as for the utmost efficiency on the part of the tradesmen to meet the situation which is probably destined to reach much more aggravated proportions before relief comes.
The statement referred to in the editorial is as follows:
Over 1,600 Oriental Shopmen Stores of Asiatics Occupy 100 Blocks
How many Chinese and Japanese are there in business in the city of Vancouver?
The full total is impossible to state without a complete census, if such a thing were possible, but the records of Trades License Inspector Jones' office at the City Hall show that no fewer than 1,658 Chinese and Japanese have been licensed to carry on merchandizing businesses within the city limits.
This does not include men who work for wages, and there are many such, but only those who are in business for themselves. As there are 18 stores with 25

Supply-/ mmigration
feet frontages in an ordinary Granville street block, it would take nearly one hundred city blocks to house all the businesses run by Asiatics in this city, if each of them occupied 25 feet of space and all were hived together instead of being spread over the city.
All of them, however, do not occupy business premises. There are 152 Chinese hawkers and peddlers, who do business from carts and autos. In a few instances there is a duplication of names where a man may have separate licenses for selling stationery or confectionery and tobacco under the same roof.
The business of hawking and peddling is almost entirely monopolized by the Chinese with their 152 peddlers. Only two Japanese are as yet in that business. So, too, in regard to laundries. Out of the 55 laundries in the city 41 are run by Chinese.
Once Favoured by Widows
Candy, ice cream, fruit and tobacco-the typical small business which used to be the mecca of the retired workman or the widow with small means-is the chief business that has been attacked by the Asiatic in point of numbers. Of licenses in these lines, no fewer than 137 are held by Chinese and 197 by Japanese. The Greeks have made the candy, fruit and tobacco business their chief object of attack, but they hold only 103 licenses as compared with the 334 held by the two Asiatic races.
There are 97 Chinese grocers and 79 Japanese grocers in the list; 62 restaurants run by Chinese and 27 run by Japanese.
The Japanese have entered strongly into the rooming-house business, there being 69 lodging-houses run by Japanese as compared with 14 run by Chinese.
No fewer than 45 barber shops are now run by Japanese and 20 by Chinese. The jewellery business and the drug store business, both reputedly lucrative businesses, have attracted the Asiatic merchants, there being 22 Chinese jewellers and eight Japanese jewellers m business here and 27 Chinese drug stores and four Japanese drug stores.
Asiatic Penetration
The full extent of the penetration of the Asiatic mer

 chants into various lines of retail business is shown by the following list: Autos for hire, 14; auto drivers, 15; garage and supply houses, 5: apartment houses 13-billiard and pool rooms, 10; bootblacks, 1; butchers', 40; barbers, 65; brokers, 8; boot and shoe dealers! 27; boot and shoe repairers, 23; bath parlours, 12-candy, ice cream and fruit, 133; confectionery, 11 \ cleaners and dyers, 55; druggists. 33; dry goods, 38; dressmakers, 4; express and draying, 38; flour and feed', 8; fish dealers 20; grocers, 172; greengrocers, 57; gents' clothiers, 63; hawkers and peddlers, 154; hardware, 9-jewellers, 30; lodging-houses, 83; laundries, 43- milliners 3; miscellaneous, 52: printers and publishers, 5-poulterers, 17; photographers and photo supplies, ' 12 [DOT]' restaurants, 89; secondhand dealers. 14; stationery' and books, 54; tobacconists, 201; wholesale dealers 29 The above makes a grand total of 1,658.
I think I have shown that there is something of a real menace facing us, particularly in British Columbia, and I submit that immigration of this class should be excluded from Canada. I was very glad indeed to know that the hon. member who preceded me (Mr. McMurray) agreed with me in this particular. He said that we should encourage to come to Canada those immigrants who have the coinage to work and face hardships, but he would not include in that class the oriental immigrant. Since this matter was before the House last year the agitation for the exclusion
of orientals has been continued in British Columbia. I have before me a number of resolutions which have been passed by organizations at different times since I had the honour to place before this House last session the resolution calling for exclusion. I will not take the time to read these resolutions, but I would say that, irrespective of party, the demand from all classes that these orientals should be excluded from Canada is as strong as ever, and I hope that the Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) will endeavour this year to do something to meet the situation.


Robert Gardiner: I listened with a good deal of amusement and not a little amazement to the address of the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. McMurray) this afternoon and evening, but I believe the most amazed member in this House was the hon. Acting Minister of Immigration (Mr. Stewart) himself. I will take up a little later some of the points the hon. member for North Winnipeg dealt with. But at the present time I would like to say a few words with regard to Canada as a country to live in. I believe that it is generally a well-accepted fact that, in so far as Canada is concerned, we have, perhaps, one of the best countries that can be found on the face of the globe. We have a country of large dimensions, and of very extensive natural resources. Those natural resources are so extensive that even the people who are living in Canada to-day do not know a tithe of their extent. Under these circumstances it would be quite natural, of course, for us to expect that immigration to Canada! would be almost spontaneous. But I find myself in a somewhat peculiar position, and that position is simply this, that, so far as the people of Canada are concerned, we must take the condition to-day and discuss it as it exists.
I regret that I had not the opportunity of listening to very much of this debate. I have been engaged in the special
10 p.m. committee on Agriculture looking into agricultural conditions and consequently I may perhaps repeat some of the arguments that have been used and if so, I will have to ask the pardon of the House! It is proposed by the Acting Minister of Immigration on behalf of the government to increase the immigration grant in the effort to induce people to come to Canada, and I understand the bulk of the money is going to be spent in an endeavour to bring to this country farmers, agricultural labourers and domestic servants. In so far as the two latter classes are concerned, I believe the country can well afford to accept quite a few immigrants who
Supply-Immigration

come as farm help, that we can also afford to accept a number of domestics but I find my* self in somewhat of a disagreement with those who propose to bring in people who will immediately go on the land. First of all let me say that I am not very well acquainted with conditions in the East, and consequently I must speak of that part of the country which I know best-western Canada.
We have heard many speeches in this House with regard to conditions in the West. We have heard some addresses which to all intents and purposes intimated to members of this House that conditions in western Canada were not nearly as bad as they were painted, but I may say that I listened to the address of the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) some few days ago and I noticed that the press of this country got after him very severely because he chose to tell the truth as he knew it in this House. I am fairly well acquainted with the conditions in the district in which that hon. member lives, and if I can add anything to what he has stated, I would say that the hon. member told a part of the truth and not all of it. If he had told the conditions as they really exist in that part ' of the country, I believe the members of this House would be still more amazed than they were at what he said- I believe it is generally understood, so far as Canada is concerned, that we have in our cities, towns and villages, a greater population than conditions at the present time could justify. I noticed in one of the Ottawa papers the other day a statement by Mayor Plant that 20 per cent of the citizens of Ottawa have received some assistance during this last winter. That condition is more or less prevalent throughout the whole of Canada, and, it consequently is convincing evidence of the inadvisability of bringing in more people who would settle in the cities, towns and villages, and of the wisdom of bringing people who would settle on the land and become farm labourers or domestic servants.
We heard a good deal about agriculture during the war. Hon. members of this House will remember how the government of the day did everything in their power to induce the farmers throughout the length and breadth of Canada to produce and produce some more, and no doubt the farmers of Canada did all in their power to produce all they possibly could. As a matter of fact, some of the farmers in Canada got into financial difficulties because they undertook to produce more than their capital would allow them to produce efficiently. But the point I want to bring before the House is this: Hon. members will remember that during the war the people of

Canada recognized the fact-and I believe it was stated on more than one occasion on the floor of this House-that agriculture was the backbone of Canada. I have here a summary of Canadian trade for the eleven months ending February 28, 1923, and I wish to call the attention of the committee to some of the items contained therein. If we look down the export column for that period we shall find that Canada exported altogether $854,893,844 worth of goods. The amount of agricultural products exported included the following items: First, we have agricultural and vegetable products, mainly foods, totalling $363,615,713; next, agricultural and vegetable products other than foods, $21,479,441; and there is another item, animals and animal products, amounting to $126,922,203.
Now, Mr. Chairman, all these products spring first of all from the farm. True, there are included in some of the items agricultural products which are partly manufactured, such as flour, and other articles which undergo some finishing process, such as bacon, etc. But the point I want to drive home is this, that agriculture as the basic industry of the country provided exports during that eleven months amounting to a total of $512,017,357, leaving for all exports of all other classes of commodities produced in Canada only $342,876,487. There is something else I would bring closely to the attention of the committee. Let us take fibres, textiles and textile products. During the eleven months I have mentioned Canada has exported $6,946,047 worth of these products. I hope that the House will bear these figures in mind, because they are important. Obviously therefore there seems to be no question about the fact that agriculture is the backbone of Canada; but, if I might say so, I think that Canada's backbone is broken and broken badly.
I have some information here which I might give to the committee relating to the economic conditions of western Canada, and I speak of a part of the country that I know very well. While it is admitted that during the past years we have had a dry area in western Canada, yet in the greater portion of the West we have had fairly good crops; and I do know from actual experience, in discussing various matters with farmers qf western Canada, that even in those parts of the country where the people enjoyed good crops they seem to be as badly in debt as are the people where there were practically no crops at all. I do not know what the idea of the minister or the government can be in bringing more people into the country to go on the land. I cannot comprehend the reason at all. I do not know whether it is for the

S upply-Immigration
purpose of increasing the population or in order to increase production. No doubt the object is mainly to increase production, and if that is the case I desire to submit to the committee some evidence that has been given before the special committee on Agriculture, so that we may see whether we can afford to produce much more agricultural commodities than we are doing now.
The special committee, of which I happen to be a member, has taken a good deal of evidence and it appears, practically from every witness that has come before the committee, that the conditions in regard to agriculture are deplorable not only in the West but in the East as well; and even in Quebec the conditions appear to be as bad as they are in western Canada. The other day we had a witness from Montreal who stated that the farmers of Quebec are up in arms because they receive so little for their produce notwithstanding that they have to pay high prices for the things which they must have in order to produce farm products.
The committee will remember that at the last session of parliament we passed an act for the purpose of grading hogs, and the reason given by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) for the passing of that act was its necessity in order that we might get a class of hog grown in Canada from which we could produce what he called "Wiltshire sides" that could be sold to advantage in Great Britain. I do not know for what reason, but I am told that that act has never been enforced in eastern Canada; it has been applied only in the West. Now, I do not know that the Minister of Agriculture under the act was allowed to discriminate as between the East and the West in its application, and whatever reason he may have had for hot putting it into force in eastern Canada is totally unknown to me. Perhaps the Mininster of Agriculture may some time in the future explain this discrimination. The fact remains, however, that the real idea behind that act was for us to produce such a class of bacon hog in Canada as would enable us to compete with other bacon-producing countries in the world for the market in Great Britain. We were told that that was practically the only market available for bacon products, and consequently we must produce that kind of bacon which was desired there. I believe that the members of the committee will admit with me that we have produced what is termed "select bacon hogs." We have produced the best hog it is possible to produce in this or any other country. But what is the situation? We find that when the packing houses have taken the
select hogs from our farmers and have properly graded them, when they have cured them and cut them up into Wiltshire sides, they sell that bacon in Great Britain at a loss. Mr. McLean, the Secretary-Treasurer of the Harris Abattoir in Toronto, appeared before the committee the other day and he was asked at what price they were selling this Wiltshire bacon in Great Britain. I quote from the evidence:
By the Chairman:
Q. Just let me ask you this question. What are you selling bacon for in England at the present time?-A. I should say that the average price of Canadian bacon sold in England last week was about 80 shillings per 112 pounds.
If we figure this out in Canadian money we find that the price is about 18 cents per pound for the best bacon Canada can produce. I might explain to the committee that this bacon is merely cured; it is not smoked. When it gets into Great Britain the people who get it smoke it and place it on the market. But the most amazing part of Mr. McLean's statement was that it cost the Harris Abattoir 96 shillings to produce that bacon which was sold for 80 shillings in Great Britain, or in other words, a loss of 16 shillings on every 112 pounds sold on the British market. The question is, how long can we continue to feed Great Britain at a loss with our best farm products? How long can that continue; and in view of that, would it be advisable to ask the people of Great Britain or the United States to come to Canada and Btart farming? Could we ask them to come here and farm in order to produce the best class of bacon so that it. might be sold in the British market at a lower price than it is sold for in Canada?
Two or three ciays after Mr. McLean had given his evidence I looked up one of the Calgary newspapers. As hon. members know, we have a big packing plant in Calgary, which is one of the best in the country. I noticed that they were advertising the best bacon at 45 cents and best hams at 33 cents per pound. At the same time they were selling bacon in Great Britain at 18 cents a pound. I maintain that such a condition of affairs should not be allowed to continue any longer than can possibly be prevented, and until it is eliminated it seems to me to be futile to ask people to come to this country to engage in farming. I would suggest to the Acting Minister of Immigration that he might better spend some of this money which he is asking for immigration in advertising in the Old Country papers something along these lines:
If you purpose coming to Canada to farm, don't; stay in Great Britain, because we will feed you cheaper there than here in Canada.
Supvly-Immigration

That is not the only farm product, Mr. Chairman, that we are selling in Great Britain at a loss. Here is another very substantial item. We had before that special committee the secretary-treasurer of the Millers' Association of Canada, comprising the millers of Ontario and Quebec. This gentleman stated that wheat ground in Canada and shipped as flour to Great Britain was being charged from 2 to 5 cents per 100 pounds more in freight than the flour of wheat ground in United States mills. It seemed that it made no difference whether the boats were of British or Canadian registry, providing they sailed from a United States port they carried flour ground in United States mills that much cheaper than they would carry Canadian-ground flour. But the most amazing statement he made was when he was asked whether the mills that he represented were selling flour in Great Britain at a lower price than in Canada. He answered, "Absolutely, relatively we are selling flour in Great Britain at a lower price than we are selling it in Canada." And he had a most ingenious excuse to offer by way of explanation. He said, "If we were supplying the Canadian market alone we could only run our mills about 50 per cent of the time; by running our mills full time, even if we have to sell our flour at a lower price in Great Britain than we receive in Canada, this lower price provides a little profit towards meeting our overhead expenses. Consequently we do sell flour in Great Britain at a lower price than here." Now, it seems to me there is something radically wrong with any system that will permit the products of the Canadian farm and the Canadian mill being sold abroad at a lower price than what they can be obtained for at home, and I trust, Mr. Chairman, that the special committee will have some substantial recommendations to make to this House, and I hope that if those recommendations have any virtue they will be incorporated in legislation.
The hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. McMurray) dealt quite lavishly with conditions in western Canada, and told us that it was possible to get all the immigrants we require from continental Europe, and that they would naturally make the very best settlers. As far as I am concerned, I should like to say that if those people care to come here on their own initiative I would not wish to keep them out, but I do say that we farmers of western Canada-and I believe I may speak for the farmers of the East as well- have no desire to compete against this class of farm labour. We do not wish to have to accept their standard of living, and consequently we are opposed to any great influx of such immi-

grants. This very important fact must be remembered, that to-day we find a very much higher standard of living in our urban centres than in our rural, and this is really the reason why so many of our young people, and even of our older people, are being attracted to our cities, towns and villages. If we are going to keep our people on the land the living conditions in rural Canada should be made just as good as they are in the urban centres.
With regard to wheat production, the hon. member for North Winnipeg seemed to think that all we had to do in western Canada was to produce as much as we possibly could and we were bound to be successful. But there is such a thing, Mr. Chairman, as cost of production. If we take into consideration our cost of production we find that invariably there is quite a discrepancy between this cost and the price we receive for our products. We had before the agricultural committee a young man-


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Casgrain):: I would remind the hon. member of rule 57, headed "Reports from Committees." It provides that:
Reports from standing and special committees may be made by members standing in their places, and without proceeding to the bar of the House. Until the report and evidence have been laid upon the table, it is irregular to refer to them in debate or to put questions in reference to the proceedings of the committee.
I would therefore ask the hon. member to refrain from quoting from the report of a committee which is at present sitting.


Robert Gardiner: I will not quote the figures, then, Mr. Chairman, but I think I shall be quite within the rules if I give a summary of the results. This young man made a study of agricultural conditions in Manitoba. He took three specific points and got the farmers to keep exact cost accounts. After these accounts had been finally analyzed it was found that the cost of producing wheat at those three points was more, and in some cases very much more, than the farmers received for the product. In other words, the wheat was produced at a loss. Later in the session the House may have an opportunity of getting the actual figures, and it will then be found that my summary is borne out by the evidence. If we farmers in western Canada are producing our wheat and other products at a loss, what is the sense of bringing other people here to produce still more products to be sold at a still greater loss? Of course, it is well understood that so far as the price of our wheat is concerned it is set by the Liverpool market. Therefore our only remedy is to reduce the cost of production.

Supply-Immigration
190?
That is where the salvation of the Canadian farmers seems to lie in my judgment.
For the last forty or fifty years we have had a fiscal policy which seems to be based upon the principle that those industries which may be termed secondary must receive extra consideration. That is to say, these industries which are based on our primary industries receive protection, but our primary industries receive no protection whatsoever. Consequently we have to meet the competition of the world, and this coupled with the fact that our home manufacturers are enabled to set the price of their products means that what we must buy is at a price out of proportion to what we receive for that which we have to sell. The policy of the government seems to be to adopt immigration as a cure for the depression that we have in Canada at present. I remember that -when I was a young boy I used to go to fairs, and there we would see gentlemen who were selling salves and lotions which they -claimed were a cure for all diseases. It is possible that these remedies did do some good; but while they might heal a running sore for the time being it was invariably the case that the disease would break out in some other part of the body, so that the patient would have to consult a physician or surgeon before actual relief was obtained. No doubt the skilled surgeon, instead of using salves and lotions, would use the knife and with a few deft strokes cut out the offending part and afford real and lasting relief to the patient. We used to call the gentlemen who sold these salves and pills, "quack doctors"; and it seems to me that the remedy the government proposes for the present depression- immigration-is a quack remedy that will not satisfy the people of Canada any more than the remedies advocated by the quack doctors relieved their physical ills. I do not know whether the minister would give a name to the remedy which he proposes; he might call it "immigration lotion," to be well rubbed in -something of that description. I am satisfied, however, that it will not be a cure for the economic disease from which we are suffering at the present; some more specific remedy will have to be applied.
I would like to make a few suggestions for the consideration of the government as to what I believe would be advisable in the interests of Canada as a whole, and more particularly in the interests of the farmers. The first thing I regard as necessary is a reduction in the cost of living, that is, a lowering of the cost of the things we must have in order to exist. The prices of agricultural products have come down very substantially; as a matter of fact many of our products are down to the basis of pre-war figures, but we find on looking over the list of other things that we must buy, such as boots, shoes, clothing of all descriptions, furniture, etc., that the prices of these articles are high in comparison with the prices of agricultural products. I believe, therefore, that the House would be well advised to consider seriously ways and means whereby the cost of these commodities may be greatly reduced.
Our greatest disability in western Canada at the present time is lack of proper line of credit. I have nothing to say against the banks so far as the amount of credit they are giving is concerned, but hon. members will realize that the banks are not in the business of giving long-term loans; they are organized only for the purpose of giving short-term loans. While bank loans or bank credits, therefore, may be fairly satisfactory for seasonable loans they are not at all satisfactory for long-term loans. Our present long-term loan system is very expensive. We can get loans from the mortgage companies for a term of five years-sometimes we can get ten years -at a rate of interest of about 8 or 9 per cent. In the first place, agriculture cannot pay as high a rate of interest as 8 or 9 per cent, so that some means will have to be found whereby we can get cheaper money for long-term loans. When a farmer gets a loan of $1,000 on his quarter-section of land from a mortgage company, he finds that when he goes to the bank to get the proceeds there is coming ' to him only $940 or $950 instead of $1,000. In other words, it has cost anywhere from $40 to $60 to have that loan put through; the amount which he actually receives is reduced by that sum, and on the top of that he pays 8 or 9 per cent interest. But that is not all. If at the end of the five years he is incapable of paying off the loan, he has to incur practically the same expense that he incurred originally, in order to have it renewed. It seems to me that in any country which claims to be an agricultural country the first thing to do is to provide what we would call long term rural credits at reasonable rates of interest. I say that one of our greatest disabilities at present is our high interest rates. I trust, therefore, that before the session is concluded the House will see its way clear to make some provision along these lines.
I have said that we are paying too much for the things we must have in order to produce. I would like to see, when the budget comes down, a [DOT] substantial reduction in the tariff duties. We are not asking the House or the government to take off the duties entirely. but a substantial all-round reduction

Supply-Immigration

would, I believe, be one of the best things that could happen to Canada. If there was a little more competition from outside sources we could realize the possibility of getting at a lower price the commodities that we must have in order to live.
A good deal has been said about the conditions in Quebec, which has been held up as a province where everybody is prosperous, particularly the farmer. When the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) came before the House with his estimates, he gave us a brief outline of his travels during last summer and he held up the province of Quebec, so far as agriculture was concerned, as the banner province of Canada. But we have had quite a number of witnesses from that province who seem to think that agriculture in Quebec is just about as badly off as it is in any other province, and that there is just as much dissatisfaction among the farmers . there as there is among the farmers of the West.
We have in the past been spending millions of money to bring people to this country. We have held out-to them the possibility of making a livelihood here, but circumstances and conditions which now prevail have placed them in a very precarious financial position. In view of the fact that these people have come here at the invitation of the Canadian government on behalf of the Canadian people, it seems to me that our first duty is to look after those who are already here. When we have made conditions livable for those who are now in Canada, that will be time enough to launch out upon a substantial immigration policy. Let me repeat, the duty of this House and the duty of Canada is to the people who are now here. I am convinced, of course, of the fact that immigration eventually will have to increase before Canada can ever enjoy that measure of prosperity that she should have, but our first duty, it seems to me, is to take cognizance of the conditions that confront us now and find a remedy, if possible, for those conditions. When we have found the proper remedies for the unfortunate condition that we have at the present time, there is no doubt in my mind that Canada will not have to spend very much money to induce people to come to this country. The moment people throughout the world realize that Canada is enjoying a substantial measure of prosperity we shall get all the immigrants we require without spending very much money.


Mr. MURDOCK:: I beg to move that
vote No. 53 for Immigration and Colonization be reduced by the sum of $50,000.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think perhaps we had better hear the reason for this amendment, and why it is only 10 per cent or less. How do we arrive at the $50,000?


Charles A. Stewart: I made the explanation this afternoon, but perhaps the hon. gentleman was not in the House. The explanation is that we voted a sum to send lecturers to the United States and Great Britain, which was the system pursued in the old days. Now under present conditions there is a very great difficulty in getting these appointments made, and I am therefore asking that the item be struck out.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Item as amended agreed to.
St. John Immigration buildings, $23,000.
Charles A. Stewart: This is the item on which my hon. friend (Sir Henry Drayton) wanted some details.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How much was capital, and how much maintenance?


Charles A. Stewart: In 1920-1921 the principal paid was $17,609.66, and interest $4,842.65; in 1921-1922 we paid in principal $22,888.65, and interest $7,359.32; for 19221923 we are asking for $15,846.74 principal, and interest $6,488.30. Those are the three payments that have been made in connection with the St. John building. The total of principal is $56,345.05, and of interest $18,690.28. In 1921-1922 for repairs and extras, which included some extra stressing of the roof, we paid $6,946.09. For 1922-1923 we are asking for $275.61, making a total in all for repairs and extras of $7,221.70.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My recollection was that there were other operating costs included in the same account. I think the interest item possibly includes caretaking, does it not?


Charles A. Stewart: No. I think this is where the difficulty arises. There was an item in the estimates for 1921-1922 of $43,000, and the question arises as to what proportion of that had been paid in that particular year. The vote in 1922-1923 is $25,000; is 1921-1922 $43,000, and in 1920-1921 $9,000. My hon. friend will notice that while there was only $9,000 voted in that year there was paid out $22,452.31, so that there was paid out of contingencies for that year the sum of $13,647.49.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Where is the caretaking, for example, carried?

Supply-Immigration


Charles A. Stewart: In another item altogether.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What item?


Charles A. Stewart: The item for contingencies.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is where the trouble was. Last time we were told it was in this item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Interior-salaries, $1,502,982; contingencies, $115,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: I notice there are some rearrangements. Perhaps the minister could tell us what changes have been made. For example, he has a financial controller this year that he did not have before, and some other positions are apparently done away with


Charles A. Stewart: This item was not the one I wanted called.
Item stands.
Immigration and Colonization-salaries, $272,325; contingencies, $60,000; total, $332,325.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Will the minister give us the details of the changes in this vote?


Charles A. Stewart: I may say
that there is provision here for sixteen new appointments. Ten of them have not been made and, probably, unless heavy immigration takes place we will not need to make them.


Henry Lumley Drayton: We had that
information before.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, the
following items are of interest: statutory increases 86,445; transferred from immigration to outside service salaries vote, $6,760; provision for promotions and increases due to reclassification $2,565; transferred from immigration outside service to the inside service $16,125, the total amounts to $32,160. There are a number of vacancies due to resignation or transfer, and the net increase is $28,790.


Henry Lumley Drayton: You spoke of transfers from the outside to the inside service How many employees were there?


Charles A. Stewart: Sixteen employees altogether. The positions filled are- Miss M. Purdy, Sr. clerk-stenographer, $1,320; Miss L. M. O'Connor, Sr. clerk-stenographer, $1,320; P. A. Casey, clerk, $1,005; Miss M. G. McFarlane, file clerk, $960; Miss J. Byers, file clerk, $960 Miss E. Morgan, Jr., clerkstenographer, $600. The positions unfilled include, Inspector of British Immigrant children (female), $1,320; Inspector of British Immigrant children (male), $1,320. The rest are clerk-stenographers.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What was the
cost of the service last year?


Charles A. Stewart: The amount voted last year was $243,535 and the actual expenditure $206,282.08.


Henry Lumley Drayton: So that the
minister is asking this year for an increase over his actual cost last year of some $65,000. I suppose that has been done on the supposition that his department is going to do a little functioning this year.


Charles A. Stewart: It will be noticed that out of the sixteen positions six have been filled. If the others are not required, they will not be filled.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is quite obvious that my hon. friend has a list there but it does not mean that the people referred to were employed or that the money for their salaries was paid. I make it out that my hon. friend is asking for $65,000 over his expenditure of last year. Am I wrong in that supposition? If so I hope my hon. friend will correct me.


Charles A. Stewart: Quite right.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I suppose that is because the minister expects to get going this year.


Charles A. Stewart: If we do employ the number that is set forth here we will require the vote; if we do not need them we will certainly not employ them.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is quite obvious that the number of new appointees is really not illustrative of the situation. The comparatively few employees would never make up that $65,000 increase. I notice there is a new official now, "Director of Publicity"?


Charles A. Stewart: That is Mr. Stead.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What was his former position?


Charles A. Stewart: I understand Mr. Stead was paid from the outside service last year, as well as Mr. James, his assistant.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Stead was in the outside service and is now included under Civil Government?
Supply-Exhibitions


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: And the same with the Assistant Director of Publicity?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then I notice from what the minister said the last time this matter was up that there is still a further discrepancy in the amount, in that he transferred nine out of this total to Chinese Immigration. They would no longer appear in this vote. Is this correct?


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend is not just correct in his statement. They were transferred as well from the outside service into the Chinese service. They were paid while working in the Chinese service from the outside service, so that they were not transferred from this staff. This is the inside service staff.


Henry Lumley Drayton: They were transferred from the outside.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Exhibitions-further	amount	required-(Governor
General's warrant January 30th, 1923), $12,000.
Charles A. Stewart: This is item 400 in the supplementaries. This is a warrant that was taken for the expenses of Colonel Belcher, who travelled from Vancouver to Halifax, speaking in various towns and cities on his way, interesting people in the various provinces in the British Empire Exhibition which will be held in 1924.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is the assistance the government gave to the exhibition.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Advances to soldiers settling upon the land and cost of administering the Soldier Settlement Act, including salaries, $8,400,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: This is an item of considerable importance, and I think the House would like to have full details in connection with the status of the undertaking, how many applications we still have, how many are still open, and generally the position of the undertaking. I expect there will be some discussion on this item. I do not know whether we will advance it much by taking it up at five minutes to eleven.


Charles A. Stewart: I might make the explanation and if there were any questions asked-


Henry Lumley Drayton: The only point about that is that if a statement is made and the matter is not proceeded with, it will all have to be gone over again. I do not think anything will be gained by it. If there are some small non-contentious items they might be put through.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Do you wish to sit any later?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No.
Item stands.	*
Progress reported.


COMMUNICATION FROM VANCOUVER BOARD OF TRADE
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Before the House adjourns I will lay on the Table some papers I promised this afternoon relating to a communication from the Vancouver Board of Trade.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King, the House adjourned at 10.55 p.m.
Tuesday, April 17, 1923