1923-03-14

NEW MEMBER

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the House that the Clerk of the House has received from the Chief Electoral officer certificate of the election and return of Albert Frederick Healy, Esquire, member for the Electoral District of North Essex.



NEW MEMBER INTRODUCED

[Stage Direction]
Albert Frederick Healy, Esquire, member for the Electoral District of North Essex, introduced by the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King and Hon. George P. Graham.
Questions


[Stage Direction]
Mr. JAMES MALCOLM (North Bruce) presented the first report of the special committee appointed for the purpose of inquiring into chapter 12, 8-9 George V., an act respecting the Civil Service of Canada as follows:
Your committee recommends that its order of reference be so enlarged as to empower it to make recommendations looking toward the betterment of aforesaid act and the Civil Service in general, and also that the committee be empowered to sit while the House is in session.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. ANDREW McMASTER (Brome) presented the third report of the committee appointed to inquire into agricultural conditions, as follows:
The committee appointed to inquire into agricultural conditions beg leave to present the following resolution which was unanimously adopted.
That in the opinion of the committee it is advisable and in the interest of agriculture in this country that a full and searching inquiry should be made into all aspects of the grain trade in Canada and that for this purpose a Royal Commission should be appointed, clothed with full powers not only from the Dominion government, but from all provinces, desiring to cooperate in such inquiry.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. H. S. BELAND (Minister of Health) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 72 to amend the Narcotic Drugs Act.
He said: The purpose of this bill is principally to consolidate previous legislation for the suppression of the traffic in narcotic drugs. Legislation was first enacted in 1908, and subsequent legislation was enacted in 1911, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922. At present the legislation is somewhat confusing, and the purpose of this legislation is to make the interpretation of these different statutes clearer and easier for those charged with the administration of this law. There are a few minor changes. One change relates to the right of appeal which in some cases is limited to a point of law. There is another minor change, as I take it, providing for the ^identification by the finger prints of criminals convicted under the act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 55 (from the Senate), for the relief of Margaret Elizabeth Moran.-Mr. Church.

Bill No. 56 (from the Senate), for the relief of Ethel Lillian Duncan.-Mr. Macdonald (Pictou).
Bill No. 57 (from the Senate), for the relief of Florence Mary Ramsden.-Mr. Macdonald (Pictou).
Bill No. 58 (from the Senate), for the relief of Ross John Craig.- Mr. Macdonald (Pictou).
Bill No. 59. (from the Senate), for the relief of Florence Dodds.-Mr. Hocken.
Bill No. 60 (from the Senate), for the relief of Blanche Hilton.-Mr. Harris.
Bill No. 61 (from the Senate), for the relief of May Woodbridge.-Mr. Harris.
Bill No. 62 (from the Senate), for the relief of Alice May Smith.-Mr. White.
Bill No. 63 (from the Senate), for the relief of Albert Ernest Mould.-Sir Henry Drayton.
Bill No. 64 (from the Senate), for the relief of Winifred Rose Foster.-Mr. German.
Bill No. 65 (from the Senate), for the relief of Emily May Small.-Mr. Garland (Car-leton).
Bill No. 66 (from the Senate), for the relief of Irene Herdsman.-Mr. Garland (Carleton).
Bill No. 67 (from the Senate), for the relief John Frederick King Hall.-Mr. McMaster.
Bill No. 68 (from the Senate), for the relief of Herbert Martin.-Mr. Shaw.
Bill No. 69 (from the Senate), for the relief of Frederick John Saunders.-Mr. Sharv.
Bill No. 70 (from the Senate), for the relief of Robert Archibald Logan.-Mr. Garland (Carleton).
Bill No. 71 (from the Senate), for the relief of Violet Marie Finn.-Mr. Sheard.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions ansv'ered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. HOCKEN:: 1.	What are the names of the Harbour Commissioners for Quebee?
2.	What salary is paid each commissioner?
3.	Are any of the commissioners employed in any other capacity by the board?
4.	If so, what are the names of those so otherwise employed, and amounts paid each, or any of them for such other services?
5.	What is the total amount paid each commissioner for salary and other services or commissions during year ending December 31, 1921?
6.	What dismissals or changes have been made by the present government in the personnel of the commission?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: '
1.	President, Mr. W. Gerard Power; Commissioners: Brig.-General T. L. Tremblay and Jules Gauvin.	.

Questions
2.	President, $6,000 per annum; $4,000 per annum to each of the other commissioners. These salaries are paid out of the revenues of the harbour.
3.	Yes.
4.	Brigadier-General Tremblay, Chief Engineer to the board since 1st July, 1922; salary, $4,000 per annum.
5.	Annual salary only: Major-General Sir D. Watson, $6,000; A. S. Gravel, $4,000; Brig.-General T. L. Tremblay, $4,000.
6.	The former three commissioners tendered their resignations to be effective from the 1st March, 1922. The commissioners named in answer to question 1 above, were appointed in their place.


MONTREAL HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS
Mr. HOCKEN:: 1.	Wliat are the names of the Harbour Commissioners for Montreal?
2.	What salary is paid each commissioner?
3.	Are any of the commissioners employed in any other capacity by the board?
4.	If so, what are the names of those so otherwise employed, and amounts paid each, or any of them for such other services?
5.	WThat is the total amount paid each commissioner for salary and other services or commissions during year ending December 31, 1921?
6.	What dismissals or changes have been made by the present government in the personnel of the commission?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Commissioners:	Dr.	Wilfrid	LaurieiMcDougald (president);	Dr.	Milton L.
Hersey, B.Sc., LL.D.; Mr. Emilien Daoust.
2.	President, $7,000. $5,000 to each of the other two commissioners. These salaries are paid out of the revenues of the harbour.
3.	No.
4.	None.
5.	Annual salary	only.	Mr.	W.	G. Ross,
$6,261.10; General A. E. Labelle, $5,000; Mr. F. Robertson, $5,000.
6.	In November,	1921,	Mr.	W.	G. Ross,
former president, resigned his position to contest St. Antoine division, Montreal, and the other two former commissioners, Mr. Farquahar Robertson and Brig-General, A. E. Labelle resigned as members of the commission in December, 1921. The commissioners named in the answer to question 1, above, were appointed in February, 1922.


CREOSOTED PILING
Mr. CLARK:: ,
1.	What quantity of creosoted piling has been used on government wharves in the province of British Columbia during the years 1920, 1921, 1922?
2.	What firms supplied the piling aforesaid?
3.	What amounts were paid to the said firms?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: .
1.	Purchased and used by the Department of Public Works: 1920, 29,534 feet; 1921, 37,979 feet; 1922, 19,527 feet.
2.	The Colman Company of Seattle, and the Vancouver Creosoting Company to the department creosoted piling was bought and paid for by the following contractors who had lump sum contracts for the following works: 1920, Half Moon Bay, Fraser River Piledriving Co.; Lang Bay, McDonald, Watson & Withers; Shoal Bay, McDonald, Watson & Withers; Squamish, McDonald, Watson & Withers.
1921,	Granthams Landing, W. Greenlees; Gibsons, W. Greenlees; Hopkins, Fraser River Piledriving Co.; Port Moody, Vancouver Piledriving Co.; Savary Island, R. Bumstead; Hollybum, W. Greenlees.
1922,	Lang Bay, R. Bumstead; Powell River, W. Greenlees; Quathiaski Cove, McDonald, Watson & Withers; Hornby Island, McDonald, Watson & Withers; Mansons Landing, W. Greenlees; loco, R. Bumstead had a unit price contract at 90 cents a foot for 3,628 feet.
3.	Paid by this department: 1920, Colman Company of Seattle, $11,292.27; Vancouver Creosoting Company, $6,278.75.
1921, Colman Company, $3,234.90; Vancouver Creosoting Company, $16,265.62.
1922, Colman Company, $2,062.15; Vancouver Creosoting Company, $4,209.57.


CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
Mr. LOVETT:: 1.	What has been the total cost to the government of Canada for the Civil Service Commission from 1917 to 1922 both years inclusive?
2.	What was the total cost respectively of the Young and Griffenhagen commissions for services in connection with the Civil Service?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.
Contin-
Date	Salaries gencies Bonus Total
1917-	18. ..$ 30,372 65 $ 13,552 79	$	43,925 441918-	19.	.. 42,002	84	66,473	26	$ 3,579	55	112,055	651919-	20.	.. 60,578	82	119,489	78	22,624	35	202,692	951920-	21.	..103,540	33	176,037	51	39,307	96	318,885	801920- 21. .. 14,661 99	
14,661 99t1921-	22.	..178,264	61	123,657	09	35,553	08	337,474	781921-22. ..	5,007 54	
5,007 54t
1-4-22 to
31-12-22 ..146,830 01	52,946 78		 199,776 79
581,258 79 552,157 21 101,064 94 1,234,480 94
Note.-The amounts marked t are arrears of salary.
In 1918-19 a preliminary investigation into the affairs of the Printing Bureau by Messrs. Lewis, Tarte and Slack cost $2,648.55.
Questions

2.	1918-19, A. Young & Company, $34,695.76;
1919-	20, A. Young & Company, $95,306.81;
1920-	21, A. Young & Company, $28,452.33; Total, $158,454.90.
In addition to the above the Auditor General's report shows an expenditure of $162,475.26, charged to the Civil Service Commission. This amount was voted to cover the cost of the reorganization of the Bureau of Public Printing and Stationery. It includes the cost of new machinery, the labour of installing the same, etc., this being by far the greater portion of the total.



PACIFIC COAST SHIPBUILDING CONTRACT

Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton):: 1.	What is the name of the bond company pledged for the amount of $321,000 in connection with the contract to build the two ships on the Pacific coast, referred to on page 3515, Hansard, 1922?
2.	Has the full guarantee or any portion thereof now been paid by the bond company?
3.	If not, what efforts have been made by the govem-mnt to collect this guarantee?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	The London Guarantee & Accident Co., head office in Toronto.
2.	No portion of the guarantee has been paid by the bonding company.
3.	Suit was begun some time ago by the Department of Justice on behalf of the Department of Marine and Fisheries to recover the full amount of the guarantee. The pleadings have been made and the case is awaiting trial.



HOUSE OF COMMONS-FURNITURE

Mr. HODGINS:: 1.	By whom is the furniture ordered for the House of Commons ?
2.	Are the orders approved by the Department of Public Works before being forwarded?
3.	From whom is that furniture bought?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1 and 3. Tenders for 128 members' back row desks were called on December 12, 1919, and contract awarded on December 22, 1919; for 28 membeVs' front row desks, tenders were called March 9,1920, and the contract awarded on April 15, 1920. These desks were supplied by the Valley City Seating Co., of Dundas, and by Geo. Roberts & Sons of Montreal. Tenders were called for 312 members' chairs on March 9, 1920, and contract awarded on April 15, 1920, to Castle & Son, of Montreal. Tenders were called for tables and chairs for Clerks, Sergeant-at-Arms and Hansard staff on June 23, 1920, and the contract was awarded on July 6, 1920, to Henry Morgan & Co., of Montreal.

2. No, after tenders had been received by the architect for the Parliament Buildings and approved by the Joint Parliamentary Committee, the furniture was ordered by the architect.



CANADIAN GOVERNMENT MERCHANT MARINE -SCRAP METAL AND MATERIAL

Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: 1.	What has been done with scrap metal and material coming from the fleet and elsewhere belonging to the Canadian Government Merchant Marine in 1921?
2.	Was this metal sold by tender or disposed of otherwise?
3.	If so, on whose authority was this scrap metal and material sold, and at what price?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	All scrap was sold.
2.	By tender.
3.	By Purchasing department. Price realized scrap rope, June, 3 cents per lb; September, 3J cents per lb; December, 4J- cents per lb; Cast scrap, September, $18, gross ton. Grate bars, September, $9, gross ton; December, $10, gross ton. Twisted band iron, $6.50, gross ton. Empty paint barrels, $1 each. Scrap dunnage, $2 a load. Column casting, $15, gross ton. Pipe and retarder, $6, gross ton. Scrap grain bags (by auction) H cents each.
Mr. H. MILBURN


Mf. BENOIT:: 1.	Have complaints been made against one H. Mil-burn, assistant to the manager of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine in Montreal?
2.	Have those complaints been investigated?
3.	If so, who investigated same?
4.	What was the result of the investigation?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: [DOT]
1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	H. J. Page, chief of the investigation department.
4.	Complete exoneration of Mr. Milbum.



MONTREAL POST OFFICE

Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: 1.	What is the name of the clerk at the Montreal post office, who is in charge of accounts and collection of postage on all newspapers published in Montreal, and is in charge of the paid in cash postage system?
2.	How long has this employee been in the service of the Post Office department?
3.	What is his salary and classification?
4.	Who is the clerk in charge of the same service at Toronto?
5.	How long has he been in that post?
6.	What is his salary and classification?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM (for the Postmaster General):: 1.	Camille Bolte.
2.	14 years, 6 months.
3.	$1,500 a year. Postal clerk.

Questions
4.	The organizations of the Toronto and Montreal post offices do not coincide. Duties similar in character to those performed by Mr. Bolte are performed in Toronto by Mr. W. W. Gibson in conjunction with more highly classified work.
5.	Sixteen years, 9 months, employed in the service and has been performing his present duties since 1915.
6.	$1,800 a year. Senior postal clerk.



ONTARIO PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY

Mr. CHAPLIN:: 1.	Have the plans for the Ontario provincial highway between Canboro via Dunville and Welland to Allan -burg been filed with the department in Ottawa?
2. What is the estimated cost of this section?
3. Has any federal grant been paid in respect to it? If so, how much?
4.	Was there any alternative route mentioned from Canboro village direct east down the Canboro road to Allanburg?
5.	Have any representations or objections been sent to the department at Ottawa claiming that the route by way of Dunville and Welland is about 12 miles longer, and pointing out that the cost will be many thousands of dollars more than the direct route?
6.	Does the department intend to pay any portion of this increased cost?


George Perry Graham: .
1.	Yes.
2.	Estimated cost of portion of highway within the township of Canboro, 8.8 miles, $263,280. Estimated cost of portion extending from the westerly limit of the city of Welland westerly to the west side of lot 19, Wain-fleet township 7.1 miles long, $136,745. No other sections of this highway between Canboro and Allanburg are under agreement with the federal government.
3.	Yes; $87,955.20 in respect of that portion lying within the township of Canboro.
4.	No such alternative route was submitted.
5.	Yes, but it was explained that road was located through Dunnville and Welland in accordance with policy of provincial government of improving roads leading to county seats and larger centres of each county, and with the object of connecting in the future with an extension of the provincial system on the old Garrison road through townships of Bertie, Humberstone and Wainfleet to Fort Erie.
6.	The department will pay 40 per cent of the actual, necessary and reasonable cost of such sections of this road as are under agreement.



DRESSED TURKEYS

Mr. COOTE:: 1.	During the calendar year 1922, what was the total quantity of dressed turkeys imported into Canada?
2.	From what countries were they imported?
3.	What was the quantity and value of the importations from each country?	/


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: Imports of dressed
turkeys are classified under the heading of "Poultry and game, n.o.p.," and the department has no record of the separate imports of different kinds of poultry included in this item, nor do the entries and invoices always show the different varieties.



QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN


Mr. EVANS:: 1.	How much grain has been grown on the Indian reserves in the three prairie provinces during the last five years ?
2.	What proportion of this was grown by individual Indians ?
3.	What proportion by white lessees?
4.	What proportion by the greater production operations ?
5.	How much grain was grown on these same reserves during the five years previous to this period?
6.	What area has been summer-fallowed and broken by Indians during the last five years?
7.	What area during the previous five years?
8.	What amount of rentals has been collected during the last five years?
9.	What amount during the previous five years?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: Stands as an Order for Return.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: As regards this question
which has been asked to stand as an order for return, I think this is an abuse of the rule. Of all the nine questions there-I went over the list just now-there is not one the answer to which would be. one line in length.


Jacques Bureau: It is the time it takes to find out the information.


Arthur Meighen: That does not matter.


Jacques Bureau: It does.


Hewitt Bostock: Of course, the rule of
the House does not leave much discretion to the Speaker. Paragraph (4) of section 37 states:
If a question is of such a nature that in the k opinion of the minister who is to furnish the reply, such reply should be in the form of a return.
There is no discretion left to the Chair. ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE



PROPOSED REORGANIZATION

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Centre Winnipeg) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, it is in the public interest that the present Royal Canadian Mounted Police force be disbanded, and that there be organized (a) a federal police force for the protection of government buildings and other federal property, (b) a northwest mounted police force whose activities would be confined to unorganized territories.

Mounted Police

He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this resolution is the same as that which I introduced on this subject last year. The resolution has been modified in form to meet an objection offered by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) that, in the event of its being carried as it was presented last year, it might leave public buildings without guards. The object is essentially to have that force which was formerly known as the Royal Northwest Mounted Police restored to the status it once held. I had hoped that this reorganization would have taken place without the introduction of this resolution this year. In a speech delivered in Toronto on August 30th, the Prime Minister intimated that there would be a change in the control of the Mounted Police. Let me read from the report that appeared in the Citizen of August 31st:
That there will shortly be a radical change in the organization and jurisdiction of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police was intimated by Premier King in the course of his speech at a banquet in his honour here to-night. The Premier advanced as one of the "Striking evidences of the centralizating tendencies" of the recent Union government the change made in the Northwest Mounted Police, whose headquarters were transferred from the northwest to Ottawa, and its character changed from that of a "police for unorganized territories" to a "federal and practically military force." Already, said the Premier, the Liberal government had discharged a large body of the new force, and he hoped that the time would soon arrive when the headquarters of the force would no longer be in Ottawa.
That announcement of the Prime Minister was received with favour in many sections of this country and I should like to quote one of the press comments upon it. In the Montreal Star there appears an editorial from which I extract the following paragraph:
The Northwest Mounted Police are part and parcel of the history of this country. Their fame is worldwide. Their work has won for them recognition in every land where law is the basis of civilization, and their achievements have formed the basis for many a' thrilling novel over a long course of years. To take them from their old home in the West and make them an appanage of the formalities and red tape of the capital was at best a mistake. The Premier is courageous enough to undertake the remedy and does not hesitate about making his views known. It is clear that the headquarters are to be re-established in the West, and that in size and duties the force will be remodelled on the old and tried lines.
Now, there is an impression in some quarters that a resolution of this kind is a reflection upon the work of the force. Rather it is,
I take it, a plain practical proposition as to how we can more efficiently and economically administer the affairs of this department of the public service. Further I think I am speaking on behalf of a very considerable section of the old force when I say that they would welcome a change along the lines con-
]Mr. Woodsworth.]
templated by this resolution. I notice in the March number of a little publication entitled the Maple Leaf, the organ of the Canadian Club of New York, aruarticle by F. J. E. Fitzpatrick, an ex-sergeant of the Mounted Police, in which he speaks of the exploits of the old force in bygone days. May I quote a paragraph as bearing on this point?
I use here the appellation "Northwest" advisedly, as you are aware that within recent date, that term has been eliminated owing to the fact that the romantic and famous corps has been amalgamated with the Dominion Police Force, an entirely different institution and of a very different composite.
Members of the Northwest force have for a great many years been of the adventurous young element, while that of the Dominion force, of men of more mature and sedate habits, satisfied perhaps with a more humdrum life. I believe it was a mistake to merge the two. The attraction of the western prairie life appealed at all times to the spirit of youth with red blood. The duties in the new force, with the prospects of a station at some coal mine in Nova Scotia or some such prosaic duty, will likely eliminate all enthusiasm in the new recruit.
No. Better unscramble the sad mixture. Let romance return to its lair for future additional glory to attach to the name-The Royal Northwest Mounted Police of Canada.
The original force is the one with which we were familiar in the earlier days in the West and the activities of which were confined to the Northwest Territories, where we know it performed a very valuable service in protecting the pioneer settlers and in dealing with the Indians and cattle thieves on the western ranches. But in February, 1919, the activities of that force were extended so that it operated from Fort William to the coast; and on June 7, 1920, it was organized on an altogether new basis. From that time the cost has been tremendous, ranging from $3,000,000 to $5,000,000 a year. This year we have in the estimates an amount of $2,587,999.11 to which must be added the expenses connected with civil government, salaries and contingencies, bringing the total up to $2,634,224.11. We note an addition this year of a sum of no less than $100,000 to assist in the enforcement of federal statutes. We were told by the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) that this was not a new item; but it does not appear that any of the other departments have cut down their estimates proportionately. It would seem therefore that this $100,000 is really an additional expenditure. As a matter of faet, some, of the departments have rather extended their provisions for the enforcing of federal statutes. For example, I notice an item in connection with the appointment of Walter Duncan at a salary of $2,550 per annum as a special investigating officer under the direction of the Department of Finance, with further contingent expenses

Mounted Police
in connection with this service amounting to $2,500, or a total of $5,050 for this particular work of investigation. If the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are doing the work of investigation for all departments of the government, and are doing it efficiently, why should we have additional items of this character in connection with the various departments?
There is a motion on the order paper looking to the reduction of the sessional indemnities of members, and which may come up today. Without anticipating that debate to any extent, might I point out that the amount spent this year on this force alone would pay the sessional indemnities of all the members almost three times over. It seems to me that we may very well hesitate to pay out such an enormous sum for this particular force unless a great deal more is being done by it than is apparent from the reports.
The report shows a force now of some 1,200 officers and men. I think the figure given us by the Minister of Justice the other day was in the vicinity of 1,100. But I wonder whether he was correctly informed when in answer to a question he stated that 118 men were located in the city of Ottawa? My information with regard to the local force-and if this is not correct I shall be glad to be put right- is as follows: At headquarters, one assistant commissioner; two superintendents, one surgeon, three inspectors, one sergeant-major, eight staff sergeants, eleven sergeants, four corporals, twenty-three constables, and three lady stenographers-a total of fifty-seven. In A division, one superintendent, two inspectors, one sergeant-major, one staff sergeant, fourteen sergeants, one hundred and fifty-two constables and two lady stenographers-a total of one hundred and seventy-three. In N division, one superintendent, one inspector, three sergeants, two corporals and twenty constables -a total of twenty-seven. If these figures are correct we have a staff of two hundred .and fifty-seven for Ottawa alone. According to the report I notice the force has been reduced during the past year from 1,680 to 1,227 men- a reduction of 453, or 27 per cent. But the officers have only been reduced from 70 to 64 -merely a reduction of 6 or, say, 10 per cent. I think we might say of this force as one of the members across the floor said recently with regard to the permanent force, that we have generals where we might have colonels, colonels where we might have majors, and so on all down the line. There does seem to be a very, very large number of officials in proportion to the men.
Now, what is this large force doing? Originally it was confined to the vast teritories in
73 i
the West. I note from the report that out of the 1,100 or 1,200 men there are only 78 stationed in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. If we had to' provide only for this small force the expense would be very considerably cut down, and the duties which were originally intended to be discharged by the Royal Northwest Mounted Police could be attended to. Of course, there is the other part of the work to which reference was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) last year-the guarding of our public buildings. I have often wondered, Mr. Speaker, as I have gone in and out of the public buildings here whether we need quite so many guards in them, and especially whether we need as guards men who are presumably trained to do work on our frontiers. As we go into our library I notice there stands on guard at the door a man in the uniform of the Mounted Police. I have no doubt he does very efficient work, but I do not know that he is more efficient than the other guards who are stationed in other parts of the building. I am told that he was placed there at the time of the fire. I presume no one has told him to go away since that time, so he is still there and likely to continue for some years to come unless some action is taken by this House. A few weeks ago I paid a visit to the art gallery, and found there guards in the uniform of the Canadian Mounted Police. They were very estimable men, and I found one had developed into quite a connoisseur and he showed to me and explained the pictures. I was very grateful to him for so doing, but I still wonder whether we need a mounted policeman to do that kind of work. I have noted that in the art galleries of the Old Land aged pensioners are employed for this work and they do it very efficiently. Of course, if we possessed such a great work of art as a Mona Lisa, and an attempt were made to carry it off, I have no doubt that these gallant men might stage a spectacular rescue and we would have it pictured in the movies. I am not sure if something of this sort is anticipated. But to guard pictures in our art galleries, however valuable those pictures may be, it does not seem to me necessary to employ members of the Mounted Police.


Mr. RINFRET:: What about suffragettes?


James Shaver Woodsworth: We do not have any since we have a lady member of the House. Undoubtedly during the war and post-war periods there may have been certain duties for these men to discharge, but that part of their work has largely ceased. I am glad to think that it is not the policy of the present government to use this force for the
Mounted Police

settlement of industrial disputes. During the past year on two occasions the permanent force has been called out, or at least was asked for, in Edmonton and Cape Breton. The Mounted Police were not requisitioned, so it would seem as if here again one of the tasks for which this force was organized in its present form no longer requires their attention.


Mr. CARROLL:: Does the hon. gentleman know of any industrial strike in this country where the Mounted Police were called out?


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes. There was an industrial strike in Winnipeg in 1919, there was also some trouble at Thorold in the Niagara peninsula, and at Drumheller.


William F. Carroll: Does he know as a matter of fact whether or not the Mounted Police were called or sent to Glace Bay in 1922?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I cannot give any information in regard to that. Then there is the enforcement of federal statutes. Just how far men trained to do frontier work are capable of discharging this duty I do not know. It seems rather strange that when the Postmaster General wished to discover the criminal responsible for the theft of $50,000 from the Edmonton post office he had apparently to go outside the Mounted Police for assistance. I am not quite sure how effectively the Narcotic Drug Act has been enforced by the Mounted Police. I should like this House to be informed as to how many non-commissioned officers and men have been dismissed during the past two years for dishonesty in connection with this work. The very nature of enforcing this act in Montreal and in Vancouver would apparently leave the way open for considerable connivance by the men with the very criminals whom they are supposed to suppress, and I think during the course of this debate the House might very well be informed as to how many men of the force have been dismissed for complicity with these criminals.
Another serious question involved in this matter is that of the enforcement of the Criminal Code. We have before us-at least, I hope it will come before us at this session- a bill to amend the Criminal Code. Very few of the citizens of Canada realize the great powers that under the existing Criminal Code are vested in the Mounted Police. Let me read one subsection of the code as assented to July 7, 1919:
Any property, real or personal, belonging or suspected to belong to an unlawful association, or held or suspected to be held by any person for or on behalf thereof may, without warrant, be seized or taken pos-
]Mr. Woodsworth.J
session of by any person thereimto authorized by the chief commissioner of Dominion Police or by the commissioner of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police, and may thereupon be forfeited to His Majesty.
It is not necessary, according to this clause, that a man should be a member of an unlawful association; if he is suspected of belonging to an unlawful association the officer may without warrant seize his property, which shall be forfeited to His Majesty. I know of cases where several years ago mounted police entered the homes of reputable citizens and seized books-in one case a library brought years ago from Great Britain, which was confiscated. To this day the gentleman I have in mind, who is an alderman, by the way, of one of our western cities, has been unable to obtain redress, and under this act I do not see how he can. Arbitrary authority is in this instance vested in the Mounted Police. At the time that certain books were banned during the war, mounted police entered the library of the city of Regina and took from the shelves of that institution a book called Myer's History of Canadian Wealth. It is quite true that that book, which was written from material in the Archives here in Ottawa, is no longer on the banned list, but it is quite possible under this statute that similar proceeding might be taken in regard to any other literature or any other property.
Let me put a purely suppositious case. Some of the members of the Progressive party are anxious to have radical changes made in the Bank Act. Suppose it should be considered that they were going to do that by unlawful means and were accordingly suspected of belonging to an unlawful association. There is no reason why, under the Criminal Code as it stands, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police might not seize any property belonging to the Grain Growers' Association or the Progressive party.


An hon. MEMBER:: They have nothing
to seize.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Perhaps not. The fact is-this is no supposititious case-that under the guise of ferreting out sedition there has been established a system of espionage that is most objectionable, at least to the labour unions of the country. This was brought to the attention of many of us several years ago. On the witness stand one of the corporals of the Canadian Mounted Police confessed that he had wormed his way into the unions, that he had secured the confidence of the members and had actually tried to get people to purchase books which he knew at that time to be banned, and thus, if possible, to persuade them to commit crime. So far as

Mounted Police
I am able to learn, that particular corporal is still in the employ of the Canadian Mounted Police and still carrying on that kind of work. He has been transferred from Calgary to Montreal.


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: We will send him back.


James Shaver Woodsworth: He was introduced to some labour people of Montreal by a man who is generally known in labour circles as being a "red." The labour people do not understand why the government has not arrested this man, who all along has been supposed to be a great agitator. It is passing strange that he should be the very man who introduced this corporal of the Canadian Mounted Police to the unsuspecting workers of Montreal. One thing I should like this House to know is that in the free and easy meetings often held by the labour people in their halls, when almost any man is free to get up and say what he thinks, if someone urges violence the word is immediately passed around that group, "Be careful of that man; he is a government agent." Is it a desirable condition, Mr. Speaker, that it should be said or suspected that when a man urged violence in this country he was a government agent, trying to get a certain number of people into trouble? But this is said and said freely, and we have good reason to believe that it is true. I do not know that the officers in charge know of what is being done in this respect by their subordinates and by the detectives who are subject to their direction. I do not suppose they do. But one man put it this way: "I have to keep my job. To do so I must make many reports. But it is not necessary to tell all the truth, because who is to check me up?" There is no reason why labour people should be spied on in this way, nor is there any reason why public funds should be diverted to the maintenance of a certain number of individuals whose business it is to go in and out of meetings of labour people to try to find out what is going on. If this is to be done, I submit it might be of more advantage to the people of Canada if some of these men were detailed to visit boards of directors of some of our big corporations. If the board of directors of the Merchants' Bank, for instance, had been watched in this way, a good many dollar might have been saved to certain people of this country. Essentially the trouble, it seems to me, is this: that we have half a dozen entirely different classes of work placed under the supervision of one particular group of people. It would clarify the situation a great deal if we had an entire reorganization of the force. I think I am not making an unreasonable request.
I wish to close by quoting the remarks of eminent gentlemen who have given considerable attention to this matter. Perhaps Mr. Speaker will pardon rhe if I quote from Hansard some words of his, spoken as far back as June 7, 1920. He said:
Whenever I meet those fine young fellows walking with a jaunty air on the streets of Ottawa, I ask myself why they have been taken from the plains of the West where they represented law and order and sent to Ontario where we have a strong body of provincial police, in addition to having a strong body of provincial police in Quebec, and similar bodies in the other eastern provinces.
During the period of war, when the government had some drastic action to carry out in connection with military service and such business, I could understand that the government should strengthen the arm of the law for the carrying out of such policies, and I did not begrudge the help that might under such circumstances be given by the Northwest Mounted Police to the Federal authorities, but now that war is over and all such troubles are past, I do not see why we maintain at such a high cost this body of fine young fellows at Ottawa. Their place is in the vast solitudes of the West, of the prairies, where they can maintain, as they have done heretofore, British law and order.
If I need even a more conservative authority, one wh-9se opinion for many years has. received respect, I would quote that of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) who according to Hansard said on that occasion:
Yet with the creation of the provinces and the development of municipal and provincial governments who have all the resources of civilization at their command, there is no longer any need for the Mounted Police. The Yukon might need it perhaps, but there is hardly room for a very large force out there, and in the Northwest Territories I suppose there is not enough population to require very much attention along that line. I wish that we could find some useful service for the Mounted Police.
I think I have nothing to add to that, Mr. Speaker. It seems to me that we are talking economy and efficiency in all these different departments and here is one place where we can practise economy and where by a reorganization of the service we can secure a great deal more efficiency.


Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):: I have listened with considerable interest to the remarks made by the mover of this resolution (Mr. Woodsworth), expecting to hear some more logical and more sound economic reasons given to back up this resolution than we heard at the last session of parliament when a similar resolution was before the House. I expected to hear to-day some valid or reasonably sound economic reasons given for disbanding the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
The resolution states that it is in the public interest to disband the force. I do not think the words "public interest" can be used there in the ordinary sense, that is, meaning for the good of, or for the benefit of the public. On
Mounted Police

the contrary, I think that the interests that would be served by the disbanding of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are interests which are entirely inimical to the public interest of Canada. The mover of the resolution is apparently willing to have a smaller police force in the unorganized territories, though I am afraid he has failed to make clear to the House what he means by unorganized territories. I heard the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories mentioned, but I would hardly say that either of these are unorganized territories. The mover of the resolution, however, is taking the proper stand in not desiring to move the Mounted Police from the Yukon territory. Such a move would be most unwelcome out there.
As the mover of the resolution has failed to take the House into his confidence as to the real reasons behind this desire
4 p.m. to disband the Mounted Police we must draw our own conclusions why anyone would want such an admirable body, and one which has rendered and is rendering to-day such a splendid service, disbanded. The Mounted Police have been efficient in the West, and they are efficient to-day in other parts of Canada, and to my mind, to use a slang expression, that is just where the shoe pinches. They were never popular with law breakers in the West nor with outlaws in the West, and they are apparently not popular to-day with the same class of people elsewhere in Canada. Why should anybody want to see them disbanded? Not in the interests of economy, although that plea has been advanced, for I think that for the amount of work they do it is one of the most economical services we have in Canada. That may not be saying very much, for I do not know that we are much given to economy in any of our services. But in value received I think we get as good service from the Mounted Police as from any other branch of the service, and more.
The suggestion was made that if the Mounted Police were disbanded, and two or three million dollars saved thereby, there would be no necessity for further advancing the resolution on the order paper to cut down the indemnity of members and senators. Surely the members of this House are not to be appealed to in that way. Even at the loss of a portion of their indemnity they would not cut out a public service such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In that I think the hon. member is underestimating the calibre of the members of this House.
The mover of the resolution has carefully refrained from giving the House any information as to the wonderful amount of work done
fMr. George Black.]
bv this magnificent force. All told the Royal Canadian Mounted Police number only 1,227 officers, non-commissioned officers and men, and their activities extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific and from the Arctic to the southern boundary of Canada. As was pointed out, which must have been good news to the people who wish to see it disbanded, the force has been reduced by 27 per cent within the past year, but the work accomplished even by. that reduced police force probably does not make such enjoyable reading to its detractors. Last year the Mounted Police made 12,600 investigations. This year with the reduced force they have made 14,000 investigations. Under the federal statutes they have made 5,235 investigations; under the Criminal Code 470; under provincial statutes and park regulations, 219; and investigations for other departments of the government totalling no less than 8,108. That information is obtainable in the annual report issued by the Mounted Police department. The report is a colourless affair, a cold, matter-of-fact statement, not seeking in any way to add lustre to the splendid reputation of the force or its accomplishments. It is on an examination of the report that one realizes the importance of the services so efficiently rendered.
Of the 5,235 investigations and prosecutions under federal statutes we find that there were 73 under the Chinese Immigration Act; 84 under the Customs Act; 107 under the Explosives Act; 119 under the Fisheries Act; 622 under the Indian Act; Inland Revenue, 1,606; Immigration, 219; Opium and Drug Act, 1,694, and under the Railway Act, 166. Now somebody had to make these investigations for the various departments enumerated; if not the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, then some other police force, because it is inconceivab'e that these departments could each employ a secret service corps, for that is what it would amount to. The investigations for other departments were no less than 8,108, and included investigations for almost every department of government in the Dominion of Canada. We find them all enumerated at page 11 of the annual	report-Finance	department,
Soldier Settlement Board, Customs department, Immigration, and in fact practically all the departments of government of the Dominion of Canada. There were no less than 8,108 investigations held and in many cases prosecutions carried through. Under the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act alone there were 1,694 investigations, and I say that if the Royal Canadian Mounted Police did nothing but the work they performed in enforcing the Opium and Narcotic Drugs

Mounted Police
Act the country has been well repaid. I will read shortly a very interesting extract from the acting commissioner's report in regard to narcotic drugs. This report says:
An important and arduous task is the support of the Department of Public Health in enforcing the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act. Reference was made in the last annual report to the calamitous nature of this traffic; I regret to be obliged to state that the evil persists, and I fear has grown in some parts of the country. To check it will require the united efforts of this force and the provincial and municipal authorities, and also drastic punishment of the agents, such as the peddlers who deliberately create addicts.
The figures already given- show that we have been active, having arrested and prosecuted over one thousand persons, and having secured 800 convictions, with nearly 350 prison terms and over $60,000 in fines. The quantity of cocaine, morphine and heroin seized in the year is nearly 1,250 ounces. This amounts to about 600,000 grains and as a "deck," the cant name for a dose, usually is five grains or less, it will be seen that we have intercepted fully 120,000 doses. These "decks" are sold to addicts at from one to five dollars each, according to circumstances; so that this quantity represents from one-third to half a million dollars which would have come fioin the pockets of the wretched customers of these harpies.
A recent change of the act provides for the deportation of aliens convicted under its provisions. With regard to orientals, when such convictions are obtained we turn the particulars over to the Chief Commissioner of Chinese Immigration, and I understand that about one hundred offenders are awaiting removal from the country. It has been observed that Chinese addicts to this vice continue to be devoted to opium, and to be little inclined to the use of the other drugs; but further that cocaine and the other noxious drugs usually are to be obtained in the Chinese opium dens, so that white addicts repair to these plague-spots.
The difficulties of repression are exceedingly great, for several reasons. One is the ease with which these drugs, which are small in bulk, can be imported; numerous and very cunning devices are resorted to for the purpose of smuggling them, instances being known of their being most artfully concealed in shipments by apparently reputable firms from abroad. An effective international governmental control of the manufacture and trade in these drugs seems the only real preventive of this illicit form of international commerce. Another difficulty is that the traffic is so remunerative that those who take part in it have abundance of money at their command and use it to counter our measures, and to fight cases stubbornly in the courts. Yet another obstacle is the repulsive nature of the work of repression, entailing as it does contact with peculiarly loathsome dregs of humanity; our men greatly dislike it, and it is undertaken only in accordance with duty, and because of the knowledge that while unpleasant it is a service to humanity.
I can only repeat that if the Royal Canadian Mounted Police did nothing except what they did under that act, their services are well worth the money we pay for them. Then further, if the Royal Canadian Mounted Police did not perform those services, who would perform them? You answer:	the
provincial and municipal police. Well, municipal and provincial police are all very well in their way, but they do not commence to compare, as a police force, with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. The provincial
and municipal forces are all subject to local influence and pressure. It may be imperceptible and we may regret to have to say it, but the pressure is there just the same. Anyone who has had anything to do with the practice of law in the various parts of our country knows that that is so. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are above that sort of thing. They cannot be bribed, and they cannot be bluffed or intimidated. They are not now in politics and never have been, so far as I know. I remember on one occasion a Tammany politician in the north tried to get them in politics. He succeeded, but very much to his discomfort, and it was never tried again. That was the only time in my experience tfcat political influence has been applied to the Mounted Police and that effort was promptly resisted and properly resented.
In the matter of morale, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are comparable to the Canadian corps overseas. They have their traditions and are proud of them. They are proud of the record of the force and they do not want it lowered. Every man is seized with the idea that it is up to him to do his duty under all circumstances, and there is no task too arduous' or hazardous, and on the other hand no task too monotonous, for the Mounted Police, if it is their duty to perform it. In that northern country, where there was at one time, as the hon. mover of the resolution (Mr. Woodsworth) says, a certain amount of lawlessness, I have seen a stripling of a boy, in the Northwest Mounted Police uniform, walk into a bar-room where a dangerous row was going on, and where armed and enraged men were fighting. The men were arrested and disarmed by him without protest. He came in there with as much authority as the British fleet would have in sailing the seas. The row stopped at once, the men were taken to the lock-up, and no one had the slightest idea of resisting this officer. When he came in the row was over. It was not because of any superhuman power, on his part, but because public opinion of the Dominion of Canada was behind him. That public opinion being behind him, the whole force and all the resources of the Dominion were behind him, and the law breakers knew this force would be exercised and that this man would be backed up to the limit in the performance of his duty.
As I say, by comparison, there is no police force like it in the world. During the great gold rush to the north, the bulk of the men went up through Alaskan territory. They landed at the American town of Skagway,
Mounted Police

where they had marshalls and special police without numbers. Well, they were entirely useless. They had no real authority. Nominally they had the authority of law, but they were not backed up and they could not enforce the law. It was every man for himself in that town, and holdups and murders were of daily and nightly occurrence. The rush moved up the trail some 40 miles across the boundary, and came under the Union Jack and the Northwest Mounted Police. Then the guns simply had to be put away while on the American side you had to have them to protect yourself. If a man was seen carrying a weapon of any kind, he was politely tapped on the shoulder by a Mounted Police officer and told that he did not need it, that he would have to put it away 'else someone might be hurt by it. He certainly did not need it, because life and property were fully protected by the Mounted Police in that Canadian territory.
There is no demand from the public for the action contemplated by the resolution. If there were we would hear about it. We have never heard of it anywhere, except in the House last session, from the same honourable member who moves the resolution to-day. If there were any proportion of the population dissatisfied with the Eoyal Canadian Mounted Police we would hear of it through other channels, as well as the channel through which we have heard it to-day. As I said last session, when the question was discussed, I do not think this is a matter on which any private member is qualified to advise the government. It is a matter for the government of the day, and for the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin). If the Minister of Justice and the other government departments are getting satisfaction and receiving value from the services performed by the Mounted Police, the minister will continue them. If he is not getting satisfaction, I am sure this parliament would back him up in disbanding, or reducing the force, or creating some other force. But, with, the past record of the Mounted Police, which cannot be gainsaid, and its record of work being done to-day, as disclosed by the official report and by our own observations as Canadians, I say the matter is one to be left for the government and for the Minister of Justice to decide, and that the resolution should not receive the support of this House.


Mr. JAMES STEEDSMAN (Souris):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to discuss this resolution, I find myself in agreement with certain portions of it only, although I wish to say as well that I cannot endorse all the reasons offered with regard to the resolution by the hon. member (Mr. Woodsworth) who introduc-

ed it. The chief reason that I will give at the present time for supporting the resolution is my great regard and admiration for that old force known as the Royal Northwest Mounted Police. I was very sorry when the Royal Northwest Mounted Police were amalgamated with the Dominion Police. At that time we had two forces. To-day we have one. All that has been said by my hon. friend (Mr. Black) to my right with regard to the force, has been said with regard, not to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but to the Royal Northwest Mounted Police. As we in the West, particularly those of us who are old-timers, know, the mounted policeman is not fitted by disposition, temperament, nor training, for police duty in industrial centres. His place is out on the frontier, and that is where the Mounted Police have made their record. I am seized of the fact that the West is not yet in a position to do without a mounted police force. Not only in the unorganized territory, but in the very provinces we still require the services of a mounted police force.
I should like to recall an incident that took place a short time ago, in fact in the early days of the war, when the producers of the West were being urged on every hand to increase production and they were doing it to the limit, at a time when our country was supposed to be flooded with spies, and at a time before the United States had gone into the war. We knew then that those western states were full of enemy supporters, at any rate, and during the harvest of 1916, I think, speaking from memory, a rumour spread throughout that country to the effect that a large portion of the ripened crop was about to be destroyed by fire by alien enemies. Whether that rumour was. correct or not is neither here nor there. It existed, and you can readily understand the feelings of the people at' that time. What happened? An appeal was made for a guard of Mounted Police and they were sent in there. The feelings of relief and protection that came to the people of that district when they saw that thin red line spread out towards the boundary, there to be broken up into small groups and spread along the boundary forming a complete patrol of the southern portion of the constituency from which I come, must be experienced to be realized.
I want to draw the attention of the House to a condition that existed last year in that same part of the country. A band or bands of robbers invaded that district and bank robberies took place there, not only in one town but in many. The people again were ter-

Mounted Police
rorised. I shall mention just one case in particular, that of the robbery of the Dominion bank at Melita, Manitoba, where, together with many thousands of dollars, the property of the bank, over $100,000 worth of Victory bonds, the property of the people of that community, were stolen. Not only that, but a very intimate friend of mine was shot and very severely wounded in an effort to arouse the citizens of that town. I am aware that a certain number of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were sent in there at a late date; but I am forced to the conclusion that either they were not there in sufficient numbers or their organization was not complete enough-there was some reason at any rate- they did not succeed in rounding up any of that band of robbers. That band is still in existence; those robbers are still free, and we have every reason to believe that when spring opens up and the roads get into condition to suit them, they will be upon us again. What is to be done about the matter? There is only one course to follow, and that is to have the Royal Northwest Mounted Police fully equipped and organized so that they can take control of the situation and stamp out and bring to justice that band of bandits who are terrorising those people.
I should like to point out that the prairie provinces are not yet in possession of their natural resources, and again, speaking for Manitoba, the province from which I come, I think the House is already very familiar with the development that has taken place in the northern part of that province. It is entirely unfair and unjust to expect that Manitoba should bear the cost of preserving law and order in that territory. There is no force equal to a force of mounted police to take charge of the work in that country. Therefore, I contend that the time has not yet come when the western provinces can do without a mounted police force. That is my answer to the last part of the hon. gentleman's resolution, that we are not ready to have the Mounted Police .pushed out into the unorganized territory; that we still need them in the provinces, especially the prairie provinces, for these and other reasons, I would urge upon the government to disband . the present force, to establish or reorganize the old Royal Northwest Mounted Police Force, and to let that force be continued as long as there is need for a mounted police force in Canada. When the time comes that there is no longer any necessity for them, let them go down in history and in the hearts of the people of Canada with all the honour and the glory of their traditions to which they are entitled.


Hon.   S@: The hon. member for Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) wishes this House to declare that it is in the public interest that the present Royal Canadian Mounted Police force be disbanded and that there should be organised:
(a) a Federal Police force for the protection of government buildings and other federal property, (b) a North West Mounted Police force whose activities would be confined to unorganised territories.
In other words, the resolution proposes that we should revert to the old system under which we maintained two forces of federal police. In order that I may make my statement as clear as possible, I would ask the permission of the House briefly to outline the history of the legislation which has constituted the present status of our federal police. In 1868 the Dominion Police, as that force was called, was organised for the purpose of enforcing the criminal and other laws of the Dominion only. In 1873, the Royal Northwest Mounted Police was organised to repress crime and maintain peace and order in the western territories. In 1919, it was provided by statutes 9 and 10, George V, Chap. 69, that the Royal Northwest Mounted Police might be employed to maintain peace and order throughout Canada; and in the same year, by another statute passed at the second session of parliament, the name of the force was changed to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In 1920 the powers of the Commissioner of Dominion Police were transferred to the Commissioner of the Royal Can-, adian Mounted Police.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the result of that amalgamation, as I find it after an experience of one year of administration of our federal police, has been to bring more uniformity and efficiency to bear upon the performance of the duties of our police throughout Canada. We now have one bureau, and there is no more uncertainty as to the duties to be performed by our police both inside and outside of the Dominion. There is no more overlapping between two forces as we had in the past; and we no longer require the employment of private agents. The duties of our police are to act, under the instructions of the minister in charge of that branch of our administration, for all departments of the government. The Dominion Police, or rather the Royal Canadian Mounted Police-the name is hardly of such great importance-is charged with the maintenance of peace and order in the unorganised territories and the Arctic region; and that same body has to enforce, among other federal statutes, the Inland Revenue Act, that is to say, they must see to the suppression of illicit stills, and
Mounted Police

the Opium apd Narcotic Drugs Act, the Indian Act and the matter of the protection of reserves. The number of reserves, as hon. members know, is considerable. We have in Canada about 1,200 Indian reserves in Alberta, Saskatchewan, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories. And in Ontario there are 70 Indian reserves which are under the administration and control of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Our federal police force is also charged with the carrying out of the following acts: The Radio Telegraph Act, the Immigration Act, the Fisheries Act, the Chinese Immigration Act, the Explosives Act and the Post Office Act. Practically all of these acts were enforced in the past, before the amalgamation of 1920, partly by the Dominion Police; but many of the departments employed private agents to do that kind of work. Since the amalgamation, however, there is no longer any necessity for going outside to have that work performed. So that the result of the amalgamation has been, as I will show, a reduction in the number of men employed, with the consequent dispensing of private agents, which means a great economy in the cost of administration.
The hon. member for Winnipeg, in support of his proposition, contends that if we were to disband our Mounted Police, as it is today organised, and create a special force for the unorganised territories and a special police for the protection of buildings belonging to the federal government, we should save money. Well, I am in a position to show that since the amalgamation we have considerably reduced the strength of our force and considerably reduced the expenditures. In 1920-21 we had a force of 2,605 men and the estimates totalled $4,674,066. For the year 1923-24, the estimates are only $2,587,999. We have reduced the number of men by about 1,500, and as will be seen from the figures I have quoted we have cut down the expenditures by over $1,000,000. The men are now distributed as follows: In the Maritime provinces 32; Quebec district 32; eastern Ontario 312; western Ontario 34; Manitoba, 97- as a matter of fact, it is only 71-*.; southern Saskatchewan 196; northern Saskatchewan 55; southern Alberta 114; northern Alberta 90; British Columbia 152; and the Yukon territory 49.


Arthur Meighen: Before the minister proceeds, will he give us the estimates for 1921-22?


Sir LOMER GOUIN:: The 1921-22 estimates were $3,527,670. We had then 1,726 men. The number of men and the expenditure have decreased, while the work has been increasing 
every year. It will be found on reference to the last report of the department that in 1920-21 we had 10,888 investigations, which in 1921-22 had increased to 14,032. In regard to the enforcement of federal statutes, in 1920-21 we had 2,068 cases, while in 1921-22 they had risen to 5,235-an increase of nearly 150 per cent. At page 11 of the same report it will be found that we have made over 8,000 investigations for the various departments. This work has to be performed. In the past, as I have already said, it was done by our Dominion and our Mounted Police. The duties now performed in the unorganized territories are the same as those which have been performed since 1873; our men now known as members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are doing exactly what their predecessors, the members of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police, did for so many years. They are engaged in investigating work for the various departments of the government. If we take, for instance, the province of Manitoba, we shall find at page 54 of the report that our federal police investigated 601 cases, and at page 55 the figures are 1,302.
The hon. member for Winnipeg, referring to an answer that I gave him when I brought down my estimates, said that I was in error in telling him that we had in Ottawa 118 men. What I said then was that we had 118 men in charge of our public buildings. I never said that this was the total force in Ottawa. We have a special corps here to prepare our men, and, as detailed by him, we have a local force of about 212.
The hon. member seems to object to our employing members of the Mounted Police as guardians of this and other buldings in Ottawa. He even objects to their uniform. Well they may be called members of the Dominion Police or members of the Mounted Police, but I do not see what difference this could make. We have to have such policemen all over the Dominion. Too many people are under the erroneous impression that the federal government has nothing to do with the police work of this country, and are under the impression that because the provinces are charged with the administration of our criminal laws they should do all the police work for the federal government. But there is nothing in our constitutional law which imposes such work on the provinces, perhaps we may have the right and power to transfer this administration to the provinces, but unless we legislate to that effect the provinces are not concerned. The Fathers of Confederation understood our constitution in that sense, because immediately after confederation, in 1868, they passed the statute to which I have referred constituting

Mounted Police
the Dominion Police, a statute which is still in force.
The hon. member for Winnipeg complains that we have increased the estimates by $100 -000 for special police work to be performed for the various departments. He regards it as an increase because he finds no corresponding reduction in any of the other departments. As I had the honour of explaining to the committee when my estimates were under consideration, reductions were made, not by the other departments, but by the Department of Justice itself. Formerly the expenditures for investigations which we made for the various departments appeared under different headings, those departments reimbursing the Department of Justice. We have changed the system, we do not now ask any of the other departments to pay for any work performed for them by the Mounted Police, and it is for that reason that we have this apparent increase of $100,000.
The hon. member for Winnipeg has brought before the House certain cases, which he mentioned last year when he discussed a similar resolution, to show that the Mounted Police had been unfair to certain citizens in the West and had acted in a way that could not be approved by this House. I cannot contest any of the allegations made by the hon. member, but supposing they are perfectly true-and I have no doubt that they are-this affords no reason for changing the system. If some of our men have abused their power they should be reprimanded or even dismissed, but to say that their action should be sufficient reason to discard our Mounted Police system is a proposition which I cannot accept.
There is one interesting fact in connection with the Mounted Police that I would like to mention. The hon member for Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) complains that there are too many men in the force. We had a post at Brandon in his province and one at Portage la Prairie. We decided to close both these stations, but immediately after acting upon that decision we received protests from the municipal authorities and from practically the whole population of the districts concerned, who urged that we should send back the men we had there before. I do not know of any province where the people are complaining of there being too many men in the Mounted Police. In the Maritime provinces there are 32 men in the force, and I have not yet heard any citizen of any of those provinces ask that a single one of these men be withdrawn. We have 32 in Montreal, and they are doing good work. Hon. members know what the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are doing in Ontario. I have come to the conclusion, after an experience of one year in the administration of the Mounted Police, that the system we now have is a good one and that we are saving money by having only one police force. If there is objection to the name; if the majority of hon. members are of the opinion that we should not call the force the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, that is a matter of detail. But to say it is in the interests of this country that we should reduce the force very considerably is to make a proposal the soundness of which I cannot admit. If our officers are not diligent; if they are not performing their duties as they should, that is another matter. I must declare that I have found those officers most diligent, intelligent, and honest. But I say that if it can be established to my satisfaction that any one of them should be removed, I am prepared to do it. If any one of our constables is not an honest man, honestly doing his duty. I am prepared to dismiss him. But I must say in all sincerity, with no other interest in the matter than a desire to promote the welfare of our country, that in my opinion we cannot have a better system for our police than the one we now have.


Arthur Meighen: Before the hon. gentleman concludes, would he not admit that the increased numbers of the force following the war was due to the returned men who went from the force and who on coming back were entitled to reinstatement, they being reinstated before others who had been enlisted had served their whole term of enlistment? As those who enlisted in the force during the war have completed their terms of enlistment, it has of course been possible to make the reductions that have been made ever since.


Lomer Gouin: That is quite possible.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May I ask a question of the hon. Minister of Justice? Did I understand him to say that there was at present no more employment of private agents? If I remember rightly, the public accounts last year showed considerable sums paid out to various detective agencies. Am I right in understanding that no private agents at all are employed?


Lomer Gouin: Some private agents may have been employed, but in very few instances. 1 say that in the past it was the rule to employ private agents; now it is only occasionally that we do it.


Arthur Meighen: Mr. Speaker, I have not been able to follow this debate, but I have
Mounted Police

heard the address, or most of it, of the hon. Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin). I wish to express my commendation of the courage he has shown in standing by his guns in relation to this resolution. I wish the example he has displayed were more generally followed by his colleagues in other matters connected with the administration.
I only wish to comment on three phases of the minister's address. He commends the action of the government in 1920 in amalgamating the Dominion Police and the Royal Northwest Mounted Police. I think the commendation is well placed, because that action made possible reductions that have since actually taken effect. He also states that it is essential to maintain in Montreal, in the Maritime provinces, in Quebec and Ontario, certain units of the Mounted Police. That I wish especially to draw attention to, and I do so because my memory still ia green of attacks on that very policy, attacks on claims that we made when in office that units of the police were essential in those eastern cities and those eastern districts; attacks which the minister now, after experience in the department, finds to have been utterly unfounded and uncalled for. My reference, though, particularly is this: I understood the minister to admit the truth of certain allegations made by the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) that there had been misbehaviour on the part of the Mounted Police in the past or that improper means had been adopted by them. I did not hear the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg, but my recollection of his address a year ago would lead me to believe that his reference was to the conduct of the Mounted Police in connection with the strike situation in Winnipeg in May, 1919. If that is the case, I do not think the Minister of Justice was justified in stating not only that he would not contest the allegation, but, as he said in the following sentence, that he would admit the truth of it.


Lomer Gouin: I did not have the Winnipeg strike in mind at all.


Arthur Meighen: Well, I do not know what the reference, then, was. I am sure the House will receive with pleasure the minister's assurance that he did not wish to cast a reflection on the conduct of the police on that occasion. That was an occasion of real difficulty such as had not arisen before, I think, in the history of confederation. It was a difficulty that could not be handled by those quiet, unobtrusive measures that

may be satisfactory in normal and gentle times; a difficulty that had to be met in a spirit of determination and of courage-and I think it is correct to say that it was surmounted with surpassing success. H it is stated that there was another occasion when the members of the Mounted Police did not behave according to their tradition and their duty, and the minister feally is of opinion that that is true, then it seems to me he owes it to the service to make such facts known to the public, to bring home guilt, and at the same time to administer correction by dismissal.


Lomer Gouin: If my right hon. friend will allow me, I simply said this: that the allegations made by the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) might be true; that I supposed they were true, since he was making them. But I do not know anything about such allegations.


Arthur Meighen: I am very much relieved to hear the minister put it that way. I would suggest that in future his suppositions be not so easily arrived at. In fact, the supposition does not follow. I would be very much surprised myself if the allegations were found to be correct after full and fair investigation.


Mr. ROBERT FORKE (Brandon):: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to take any part in this debate other than to point out to the minister that the Brandon city council suffered an injustice when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were removed from that city. The city had gone to a large expense in providing equipment, stabling, sewerage and other conveniences for the maintenance of the force, and then the force was suddenly removed and all that equipment and the improvements that had been made were entirely lost. I think the city has really a claim for some recompense for the expenses that were incurred in that connection.
In regard to the vote that was taken last year, I must say that I cannot see my way to following the same course this year. During last year there was considerable outlawry and, as one hon. member has said, banks were being broken into. I know that I appealed to the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin), myself for some help to the local police, in the province of Manitoba and he very courteously replied that every assistance would be given by the force that was stationed in the province at that particular time. Taking all these facts into consideration, I cannot see my way to supporting this resolution

Mounted Police


Mr. D. W. WARNER (Strathcona):: I do not care to enter into this discussion at any length, but I should like to say a few words as we have a station of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police where I live. Last year we had considerable difficulty during a strike by the coal miners, when men who were citizens of Canada and who wanted to work were prevented from working. There was a police force there engaged to see that these people could exercise their right of going to work when they wanted to work. I am not going to enter into a discussion of the difficulties in that case, but I should like to point out this to the House: The people in my community showed a lack of confidence in the provincial police when they pressed for the services of the Dominion Mounted Police to take charge and see that law and order were enforced. I do not know why that force was not permitted to be made use of on that occasion. I have no knowledge of the reasons why that was not done, but I know that I attended several meetings where I was pressed to see that the Dominion Mounted Police were put in charge to look after the difficulties at that place. I should like to ask the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) now why the Dominion Mounted Police were not used on that occasion after they had been asked for by the people of Edmonton.


Lomer Gouin: The reason why we did not intervene was because we considered the municipal police could maintain peace and order in Edmonton.


Daniel Webster Warner: I am glad to hear the explanation. As I said before, I wanted to point out to this House the confidence that our people have in the Dominion Mounted Police. We used to call them the Northwest Mounted Police. I know when I went into that country in 1898 we had no fear from any source so long as we felt that the Mounted Police were in charge. They commanded the respect of the people, and still command their respect. I should like to see it made possible for the Dominion Mounted Police force to co-operate with-the provincial force when that should be necessary. Our people thought it was necessary at that time. I feel that there is perhaps more or less overlapping between the two police forces, the city police and the provincial. The city police on that occasion had charge of part of the work which was inside the corporation, and the provincial police was supposed to keep order outside, but order was not very well kept. Now if the Dominion police had taken part, I believe that order could have been kept, and that we would have
had order at once. That is my opinion from my understanding of the situation. I would like to see it arranged, that the Dominion Mounted Police could co-operate with the other two police forces whenever need should arise.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I think I have nothing to add to my statement of the case. I would call attention to' the fact that the protest of the citizens of Brandon against the taking away of the Mounted Police from that city was, so far as the public is concerned, based very frankly on the fact that they missed a very large pay roll in that particular town. It did not concern itself primarily with the necessity of maintaining the old policy.
If I understood the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) aright, he said that in the western provinces the Mounted
5 p. m. Police were now doing the same work as the old Northwest Mounted Police. Of course so far as Manitoba or British Columbia are concerned, we did not have any Mounted Police in the old days. The kind of work to which most of us have objected is not that taking place in the outlying districts, but rather it is that connected with the industrial communities. I might say that whilst this term "unorganized territories" may be somewhat indefinite, it is the very self-same term that the Prime Minister himself used when intimating that the force was to be reorganized. I used it because I did not want to limit exactly the position which the force was to occupy, whether it was to be entirely outside of provincial boundaries or outside of the municipalities where there was an adequate municipal police force. Purposely I left it general in that way.
In closing I should like to call the attention of the House to the fact that the Minister of Justice accepted my statements, as I think he is bound to do, with regard to certain arbitrary actions of the police several years ago in certain districts of the West. I think the House will recognize that my statements on the floor of this House must stand, and it seems to me, that the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) came very nearly calling them in question. I am quite sure he could not have intended to do it. He confessed that he was not present when the statements were being made. I think I have the right to have my statements of fact go unquestioned when made on the floor of the House.
It seems to me there has been a little bit of tendency on the part of hon. members in this House to rather disparage or ridicule measures
Mounted Police

submitted by the labour representatives, some hon. members suggesting even to-day that these measures would be welcomed by those who wish to perpetuate lawlessness. It seems to me that the time has come when that kind of thing should cease on the floor of this House. We had industrial and political troubles in 1919. I did not intend, nor do I intend now, to go into that matter here. We had trouble when certain fundamental rights of British subjects were taken away from them by the late government. So far as the city of Winnipeg is concerned, the citizens expressed themselves at the last general election in no uncertain terms. I claim that on the floor of this House we should discuss particular measures on their merits and not enter into controversies as to whether or not somebody has some ulterior motive in proposing them.
With regard to this matter, I have been perfectly frank in suggesting the various economies which I think might well be effected by the proposed change, and also in -bringing forward a situation which has been brought to my attention again and again by large numbers of labour people in all sections of this country. I state frankly that the labour people resent the espionage system which has been foisted upon this country. I am glad to think that, to a certain extent, under the present administration the evils of that system are being lessened., I should like to have the assurance of the minister that that kind of thing would entirely cease, because we cannot have industrial goodwill in this country as long as we have a system by which one particular section of the community is under surveillance.
In order that I should conceal nothing I mentioned that among other reasons why I would like to see the activities of the Mounted Police confined to unorganized territories was the abolition of the use of secret service agents in our industrial sections. Many of these men are not of a high character. I know whereof I speak, and if occasion arises I can bring evidence to prove that they are not of a high character. The matter was before the courts several years ago, when it was clearly shown that there was serious interference with a number of citizens of this country. It is for that, among other reasons, that I have proposed this resolution, and I submit that it would be in the interests of the country at large that a reorganization of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police should take place.
Let me remind the House that several of the gentlemen whom I have quoted, who cannot be accused of having any particular sym-

pathy with the lawless elements of this country, very urgently pressed this course upon the country.
The House divided on the motion of Mr	
Woodsworth which lowing division:	was negatived on the foi-
 YEAS Messrs.
Bancroft,	Kennedy (Port Arthur &
Bird,	Kenora),
d'Anjou,	Lanctot,
Davies,	Leader,
Drummond,	Macphail,
Evans,	McDonald (Timiskaming).
Findlay,	Neill,
Garland (Bow River),	Shaw,
Gould,	Spencer,
Humphrey,	Thurston,
Irvine,	Ward,
Kennedy (Edmonton),	Woodsworth-23.
 NAYS Messrs.
Anderson,	Fortier,
Arthu.-s,	Garland (Carleton),
Baldwin,	Gauvreau,
Baxter,	Gendron,
Beaubien,	Good,
Behind,	Gouin (Sir Lomer),
Benoit,	Graham,
Binette,	Grimmer,
Black (Huron),	Halbert,
Black (Yukon),	Harris,
Boivin,	T Hatfield,
Boucher,	Healey,
Bourassa,	Hod gins,
Bowen,	Hoey,
Boys,	Hubbs,
Bret hen,	Hughes,
Brown,	Jacobs,
Bureau,	Johnston (Last Mountain),
Cannon,	Jones,
Cardin,	Kay,
Carmichael,	Kellner,
Carruthers,	Kennedy (Glengarry &
Casgrain,	Stormont),
Chaplin,	King (Huron),
Charters,	King (Kootenay),
Chevrier,	Kyte,
Chisholm,	Ladner,
Church,	Lapierre,
Clark,	Lapointe,
Clifford,	Lavigueur,
Copp,	Leger,
D6chene,	Lewis,
Delisle,	Lovett,
Denis (Joliette),	Lovie,
Denis (St. Denis),	Lucas,
Desaulniers,	Macdonald (Pictou),
T.Vslauriors,	MacKelvie,
Desrochers,	Mackinnon,
Dickie,	MacLaren,
Drayton (Sir Henry),	Maclean (Halifax),
Duff,	McBride,
Duncan,	Mclsaac,
Elliott (Dundas),	McKay,
Euler,	McKenzie, ,
Fafard,	McKillop,
Fansher,	McQuarrie,
Fielding,	McTaggart,
Finn,	Malcolm,
Fontaine,	Manion,
Forke,	Marcil (Bonaventure),
Forrester*	Marcile (Bagot),

Members' Indemnities
Marler,	Savard,
Martell,	Seguin,
Maybee,	Senn,
Meighen,	Sexsmith,
Mercier,	Sheard,
Michaud,	Simpson.
Millar,	Sinclair (Oxford),
Mitchell,	Sinclair (Queens, P.E.I.),
Morrison,	Speakman,
Morrissey,	Spence,
Motherwell,	Stansell,
Munro,	Stevens,
Murdock,	Stewart (Argenteuil),
Papineau,	Stewart (Hamilton),
Parent,	Stewart (Leeds),
Porter,	Sutherland,
Prevost,	Thompson,
Rankin,	Tobin,
Raymond,	Tolmie,
Reed,	Trahan, [DOT]
Robb,	Vien,
Roberge,	Wallace,
Robichaud,	Walsh,
Robinson,	Warner,
Ross (Kingston)i	White,
Ross (Simcoe),	Wilson,
Ryckman, St. Pere,	Woods-156.
MINISTERS' SALARIES AND MEMBERS' INDEMNITIES


Mr. HARRY LEADER (Portage la Prairie) moved:: That, in view of the rigid necessity for economy in all walks of public and private life, it is incumbent upon this parliament to give the country a lead in this matter, and therefore, in the opinion of this House the government should take steps to reduce the indemnities and salaries paid to ministers of the Crown, the leader of the Opposition, members of the Senate and members of the House of Commons by 12j per cent of the present indemnities and salaries.
He said: I had no intention of letting this resolution drop, but it is perfectly obvious that under the present circumstances, in view of the lateness of the hour, it will not come to a vote this afternoon. I understand that according to the rules of the House if the resolution is not voted on by six o'clock it automatically falls to the last place among the motions, and that might involve the danger of its not being taken up again this year. I certainly do not wish to withdraw the resolution, but I fear this danger; and at this stage, although the subject is one of the greatest importance, I will cut my remarks short if the House is willing to let the matter come to a vote.


An hon. MEMBER:: Explain.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Harry Leader: I am sure that hon. members wish to give me a fair show. I know that this resolution is out of the ordinary. A motion of this complexion is not usual in the House; resolutions of this kind usually ask for an increase in indemnities. That is what we have been used to.


An hon. MEMBER:: Oh, no.


Harry Leader: Back on the farm I always thought it was hardly a square deal when I read of resolutions being introduced into parliament asking for increases in indemnities of $200 or $300. When I hire a man for $50 I do not expect him to ask for $75, after he has agreed to the wage I offer. In proposing this resolution, Mr. Speaker, I hope I have the goodwill of hon. members.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear. [DOT]


Harry Leader: I expected that. But if some gentlemen choose to disagree with me I trust that my honesty of purpose will not be questioned and that it will be taken for granted that I am actuated by a desire faithfully to serve those whom I represent.
The necessity for economy and retrenchment is apparent to all hon. members. I believe the government are fairly well seized of the necessity of rigid economy in administration and are working with that end in view. To some extent, however, as I see it, they are handicapped by the taunt, and rightly so, that while they are willing to economize on the other fellow, they still cling to the higher indemnities voted to members and ministers in 1920. Economy is the crying need of the hour. While there are men who by the advantage of birth or sheer ability are not forced by circumstances to curtail their expenditure, the fact remains that the great body of the people are forced to economize.
The Speech from the Throne declared the need for economy. The amendment and the subamendment thereto stressed this need. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I believe that in adopting this resolution we would give a practical demonstration of sincerity in our demand for economy. In my opinion this is the final test. The amount that we would save is perhaps not very large, in fact it is a mere bagatelle as we count'money here in Ottawa, but I think the people would rather have a small surplus than a huge deficit.
Briefly, what this resolution means is to cut $500 off the indemnity of each member of this House, $500 off the indemnity of each member of the Senate, and $1,750 off the salary of each minister of the Crown, thereby saving approximately $200,000 a year. But the monetary saving is of the least importance. I maintain that the principle is a veiy large one and places the government and members in an unassailable position from which to effect economies of a like nature. The burden of salary reductions generally falls upon those who are least able to bear it. Let me illustrate. I remember reading about two years
Members' Indemnities

ago an award respecting the wages of men engaged in the packing plants in Chicago. By that award the first class men, those getting the highest wages, were to receive a reduction of 2i cents an hour; the second class men, those getting lower wages, were to receive a reduction of 5 cents per hour; and the third class men, those in every instance least able to bear the decrease, were to receive a reduction of 7i cents per hour. I repeat, the burden of reduced wages generally falls upon those least able to bear it.
I would not for a moment reduce the salaries of those who are only receiving sufficient for a decent livelihood, but I would urge upon the government to go after the higher paid officials, for instance, the higher paid judiciary. We all admire and respect very much our Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin), and it is not in a spirit of antipathy towards him that I make these remarks. But I feel that along this line we might perhaps save considerable expenditure. I have extracted some figures from the speech made last session by the hon. member for Laprairie and Napierville (Mr. Lanctot), and I would ask his pardon if I have encroached on his rights; I think not, however. These figures are in reference to a judge who was a Minister of the Crown, and I quote them to show what he received from the public treasury. He received as salary, 878,147.50-


Louis Édouard Fernand Rinfret: In how many years?


Harry Leader: As a state pensioner-I shall have something to say about pensions- he received $70,893.33. I think there must be added to that two or three years' pension at ' $4,606.66 per year.


Mr. LANCTOT:: He is still living.


Harry Leader: And drawing a pension. He received travelling expenses as a judge to the amount of $282.90. While a member of parliament he received in indemnities $40,555. As Minister of Justice he received $76,636.20. For travelling expenses as a Minister of the Crown he received $3,196.25. For trips to Europe during the war he received $9,000. When he came back he was offered a job-that is the way I would put it-as counsel of the Labrador commission and was paid in advance $5,000. I do not know whether he ever started work on this job, but that is the sum he was paid in advance.	.


Mr. CANNON:: Would the hon. member go on the Labrador coast for so small a salary?


Hewitt Bostock: Order.


Harry Leader: 
Lucien Cannon: How could he get wealthy if he was not paid?


Harry Leader: Mr. Speaker, conditions in Canada to-day, while not as bad as in soma other countries, are bad enough. We have in western Canada public schools closed for want of funds. Premier Bracken, according to a newspaper report, is authority for the statement that there are $14,000,000 of unpaid taxes in my province of Manitoba. Now a new method is being adopted there to collect taxes. Hitherto the authorities

Members' Indemnities
were satisfied to take a man's land or house and sell it for taxes. Now they are going to garnishee the wages of the defaulter. I feel, Mr. Speaker, that. owing to these conditions, we should share a little of this burden.
The question arises, then: Is there room for economy in our administration? In that connection let me read an article published in the London Free Press-and this will be my only quotation. I am not fully conversant with the conditions in eastern Canada with which this newspaper comment deals, but they are no doubt similar to those in the West. It says:
Aie we over-governed in Canada? We have only eight to nine million people and yet we have a federal parliament and 9 legislatures. The total population of the Maritime provinces is slightly over a million people and yet they have 3 legislative assemblies, 3 lieutenant-governors, 3 speakers and in all three provinces the paraphernalia of the mother of parliaments. Nova Scotia, in addition to a. legislative assembly of 43 members, also has the luxury of an Upper House with 21 members. Prince Edward Island, with a population less than Middlesex county, has all the fuss and feathers of a real parliament. It has a legislature of 30 members, with a sessional indemnity of $500 each, and a cabinet of 8 although only 4 are paid. New Brunswick has a house of 48 members, drawing an indemnity of $1,000 per session, and a premier and 6 cabinet ministers.


Mr. MARTELL:: Will the hon. member
permit a question?


Harry Leader: Yes.


Lewis Herbert Martell: The other night the hon. member raised a question as to who was the representative of Portage la Prairie. Why not divide the indemnity between the two members concerned?


Harry Leader: I may tell the hon. gentleman that I have no doubt as to who represents Portage la Prairie, although some may have. It is evident from the article I have read, therefore, that the impression is abroad that we are over-governed in Canada.


Sir HENRY DRAATON:: If the hon. gentleman will permit me a question, I wonder if before he leaves his interesting financial details he would give us the expenditure of the Ontario government in law fees during the last few years. My recollection is that it runs to $600,000.


Harry Leader: I regret that I cannot
answer the hon. gentleman's question. I believe there is extravagance in administration and that we could avoid some of that extravagance. I would like just for a moment to make a comparison of the cabinet of the United States with that of Canada. The United States cabinet comprises ten ministers, each with a salary of $12,000 per year, so that it costs the United States $120,000 for their 74
cabinet. In Canada we have seventeen ministers with salaries of $14,000 a year each, the total cost being $238,000, or almost double what it costs the United States with twelve times as many people.


Lucien Cannon: Is not the difference in
number between the United States and Canadian cabinets explained by differences in constitutional status?


Harry Leader: That may be, but if the
Canadian ministers could show us the surplus that the United States ministers are showing we would be willing to pay them the bigger salary. I am quite sure that the members of the United States cabinet are carrying on their work to the satisfaction of the American people, at the salaries they are receiving.


Lewis Herbert Martell: Would my hon. friend


Hewitt Bostock: I would ask hon. members to be fair toward the hon. member who has the floor.


Harry Leader: Now, let us compare our
representation with that of the United States. As I have pointed out, the United States has twelve times as many people as we have. Canada will have 245 representatives in the House of Commons after the next election; the United States has 435 members in its House of Representatives. It is true that the United States indemnity per representative is $7,500 while that of the Canadian representative is only $4,000. But the unit of representation in the United States is 210.000 while in Canada it is a little over 36,000. You can therefore see that we have at least six representatives where the United States has one, and that where it costs us $24,000. at $4,000 per year, the cost to the United States is only $7,500. A comparison could also be made with Australia, where there are 75 representatives with a population 35 per cent less than that of Canada. We might also make a comparison with England, where the unit of representation is 70,000. I think, therefore, it is fairly established that our administration is extravagant. The United States Senate has 96 members, or one senator for every 1,000,000 inhabitants, while the Canadian Senate has about 10 senators for every 1,000,000 people. In Australia I believe they have about half as many senators as representatives, so the comparison with Australia is very striking indeed.
Our administration is too costly; there should be a reduction, and I believe the people generally are waking up to that fact. Nova Scotia last year reduced the sessional indemnity from $1,500 to $1,000. Alberta is also effecting a reduction in indemnity thi*



Members' Indemnities
year; I forget the exact figures, but I believe the reduction is from $2,000 to $1,800. A bill has passed the Manitoba legislature this session reducing the sessional indemnity of members of the legislature from $1,800 to $1,500 per annum. It is evident therefore, that the people are realizing that something must be done along this line, and the purpose of this resolution is to draw the attention of hon. members to the fact that it is our move.
If we accept this cut in our indemnity, we can more than compensate for the loss in money by economy in time. I have been here only a short time, but in my judgment the sessions could be shortened very materially by the co-operation of all groups in expediting the work of parliament. I have no ground for complaint this year; we are moving along much faster than last. For instance, while it took fifteen days to dispose of the Address in reply to the Speech from the Throne last year, the time occupied this year was only nine days, and no one doubts that the work was just as effectively done. Moreover, the speeches are much shorter and a great deal better. Another reason why I believe we can save time is found in the fact that the hon. member for St. John city (Mr. Baxter), speaking for his party, I presume, declared a willingness to co-operate with the government in an endeavour to save the time of the House. I believe this can be done, and speaking as a farmer I know it would mean a great deal to western members if we could get through our work in time to superintend our seeding operations at home. I would not for a moment suggest a shirking of our responsibility as representatives of the people; I rather suggest that we concentrate on our duties and perform them with the utmost despatch.
I think that the House should accept this resolution. In effecting a reduction of $500 in the sessional indemnity the amputation might be somewhat painful, but we would all feel much better after the operation. I would point out also that it is not money alone that induces men to go into public life; in fact, we get quite the contrary impression as we listen to the speeches of members when they learn that they have been elected to represent the people in parliament. I question if there is an hon. member in this House who did not on the night of his election say something to this effect: "Ladies and gentlemen, from the bottom of my heart I thank you for the honour you have done me." I remember the right hon. member for Grenville (Mr. Meighen), who was the member for Portage la Prairie, when he was assured of his election for the first time, saying to us: "Ladies and gentlemen, this is the proudest moment

of my life thus far." It Was such a catchy phrase that I used it myself when the occasion arose. I intended to make some further remarks, but I see it is almost six o'clock. I earnestly commend this resolution to the attention of the House and I hope that hon. members will see their way clear to voting for it.
On motion of Miss Agnes Macphail, the debate was adjourned.
At six o'clock the House adjourned without question being put, pursuant to rule.
Thursday, March 15, 1923