1923-03-02

[Stage Direction]
Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 44, to amend the Yukon Act.
He said: The object of the proposed amendment is to increase the classes of actions in which litigants may have the right to appeal and may have the right to have issues of fact determined by a juiy. Before the Yukon courts litigants are limited to appealing from final judgments only; there is no right to appeal from interlocutory judgments. Members of the House who are lawyers will realize that is a most unnecessary limitation. The right to appeal in Yukon courts is limited to actions where the amount in controversy is $500 or upwards; where the title to real estate is in question, where the validity of a patent is affected, or the matter in question relates to the taking of an annual rent, a customary or other duty or fee, or a like demand of a public or general nature affecting future rights, or in cases of proceedings for or upon mandamus, prohibition or injunction. Strange to say, cases which most frequently arise there do not come within the list of those in which the right of appeal exists, namely: Actions for the recovery of mining claims, both placer gold claims and quartz claims; actions to establish the title to mining claims and actions to settle boundaries of mining claims. The court has jurisdiction to try actions for divorces and judicial separation, but there is no right of appeal. The same limitations apply to the right to have questions of fact
70S
Supply-Justice
[Stage Direction]
determined by a jury. In that respect actions over mining claims are omitted in the same way. Those for the recovery of mining claims, or to establish boundaries of mining claims, or to establish titles to mining claims do not carry with them the right to trial by jury; nor have litigants the right to have questions of fact in actions for divorce or judicial separation determined by a jury.
I realize that the bill is late in getting on the order paper. I called the attention of the government last year to the necessity for these amendments, and I was hoping that a government bill would be introduced for the purpose this session. However, that has not yet been done and I trust that the government will see its way clear to providing time for putting this measure through. The matter is not contentious, and will take up very little of the time of the House.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. A. STEWART (Acting Minister of Immigration and Colonization) moved to introduce Bill No. 45, respecting Chinese Immigration.
He said: There are several new features in this bill. One is that we are by statute limiting entrance of Chinese to Canada to mem; bers of the diplomatip corps; to children born in Canada but who have left this country for the purpose of being educated; and to merchants . and students.
It is rather a difficult matter to define the word "merchants" and we have not made a very definite description of the individual to be known to a merchant who will be admitted to Canada. Undoubtedly there will be a considerable amount of discussion on this particular section when the bill comes up for consideration. The definition of "students" is restricted to students coming to Canada for the purpose of attending any Canadian university or college authorized by statute or charter to confer degrees. While we have had some difficulty in connection with the definition of "merchants," we have defined students very clearly.
These are the two important clauses of the bill. There are many other regulations to be dealt with, but they will come up for consideration in Committee of the Whole and will be dealt with there.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
The House again in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Penitentiaries, $1,670,500.
Mr. CALDWELL:: I would like to call the attention of the Minister of Justice to some things that have happened during the past year in connection with capital punishment. We have had capital punishment in this country for a long time, and it is possible we shall not abolish it at the present time. We had a case during the last year, in the county in which I live, of a man being executed in such a bungling manner that it was commented on, I think, by all the papers in Canada. I know there is a very strong feeling in my province, and I think in other provinces of Canada, that capital punishment should not be carried out at the county gaols, but that some provision should be made for executing prisoners who are condemned to death in the penitentiaries or at some central place in the province where proper arrangements can be made to carry out the law in that respect. Living in the county in which this bungling occurred last year, I feel that I would be remiss in my duty if I let this opportunity pass without calling the attention of the Minister of Justice to the matter. I have no doubt that he has received communications on the subject, and I should like to know whether it is the intention of his department to make arrangements to have executions caried out in future at the penitentiaries in Canada.


Mr HANSON:: I would like to add a word along the same line as the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton. This matter has been brought very forcibly to the attention of the country by reason of the terrible bungling that took place in an execution in the county of Carleton, New Brunswick. A capital crime of some enormity was committed down there, and the death penalty was imposed upon the accused.	I quite
appreciate the fact that under the constitution the carrying out of the punishment for that offence is imposed upon the provincial authorities, and that in consequence a constitutional question arises in connection with my hon. friend's suggestion. The sheriffs are appointed by the provincial government, and for the most*part they are very fair officials and carry out their duties with a certain degree of exactness; but in the case of capi-

Supply-Justice
tal punishment almost invariably we find that they refuse to perform their duty. I am not casting any reflections upon the sheriff of Carleton county. He probably did what any other sheriff in the country would have done. He endeavoured to get some other person to perform the task that the law had imposed upon him, and so far as he failed to do it himself, he failed to perform his duty. At the same time, he employed a person who was evidently wholly unqualified with the result .that the whole community, the whole country, in fact, was shocked at the manner in which the punishment was inflicted in that case. It is not perhaps any business of the Dominion, strictly from a constitutional point of view, but it does occur to me that a convention or arrangement might be made with the provincial authorities whereby the imposition of capital punishment might very well be carried out by officials of the Dominion in the penitentiaries at the various centres. I hope that the Minister of Justice to whom I have already spoken about this matter will give it his very best consideration. The country will not stand for a repetition of what took place in Carleton, New Brunswick, last year.


Mr. MICHAUD:: I want tb emphasize the remarks made by the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) in connection with a hanging that took place in New Brunswick last summer. What took place on that occasion was very unfortunate; somebody is to blame, and I hope the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin), in the near future, will have the law of our province altered so that a man convicted and sentenced to be hanged will be hanged in the yard of the penitentiary, and not in the yard of the county gaol. Moreover, the sheriff of a county is not a competent man to hang one of his fellowmen. The man who should look after these serious matters ought to be appointed by the government of this country, and he ought to be the only man required to assume this duty.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: In view of the discussion that has taken place regarding where the blame is to be attached for bungling the execution of a man in Carleton county, I should, perhaps, say another word. Our sheriff spared no effort to get a competent hangman and he secured a man recommended to him by the sheriff of Montreal as being competent. On the day before the execution was to take place, the sheriff received a telegram stating that on account of an accident, this man would be unable to attend. Our sheriff would not hang the man, and I
would be very sorry if he had to undertake such a duty. I do not think the sheriff of a county should be compelled to do the hanging for that county. He is an official who must perform his official duties and meet the people of his county in his every day official work.


Mr. BOIVIN:: This is part of his official duties.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Yes; but we should change it so that it should not be part of his official duties. Later on, he had the sentence postponed, because otherwise, under the Criminal Code, should the execution not have taken place on the day appointed, the man would have got off and could not be hanged afterwards. The sheriff came to Montreal and, for fear of a slip-up the next time, employed two men, each recommended to him as being competent to perform the hanging. He took them both down,- and I believe the hanging was carried out in a very efficient manner. The trouble was that the man was cut down before he was entirely dead. An investigation was held and the sheriff was exonerated from all blame in the matter. I think the investigation did not go deep enough; it did not place the blame where possibly it rightly belonged. Several surgeons were present who were testing the man to find out whether he was dead or not; but whether the surgeons pronounced him dead and he was * accordingly cut down, was not made clear. As the sheriff would not perform the hanging and had to employ another man, he must pay that man out of his own pocket. This is not fair. I do not think a sheriff is a competent man to hang a person; he is a man selected to do the duty of sheriff of a county in enforcing the law,' and unfortunately this is, at the present time, part of his duties. If executions were carried out at provincial penitentiaries, it would be well to have an efficient man to officiate for a province, or, possibly, for two provinces. I would not say as to that. You cannot expect every sheriff in every county to be an efficient hangman. Capital punishment is part of the law that I have never approved myself; but as it is on the statute books, if it is to be carried out, it should be carried out in an exemplary manner without a hitch, and this is not always the case at the present time. I hope the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) will see to it that this is arranged.


Hon.   S@: No one regrets more than I do this painful incident which was referred to; but as has been admitted by all



Supply-Justice
hon. members who have spoken, the carrying out of capital punishment is a matter in the jurisdiction of the provinces. We are told that it should not be the duty of a sherriff to carry out capital punishment. That may be so; but that is for the province to decide, and it is for the province to see that the sentence is carried out. A proposition is made that the executions should take place in provincial penitentiaries. First of all, there are no provincial penitentiaries. All our penitentiaries are Dominion. It has been suggested that, if possible, one penitentiary, where executions should take place, should be chosen for each part of the country. This is another matter that must be decided first by the provinces, and if the provinces ask us to lend a penitentiary for such executions, this is a matter which we might discuss and agree upon. I am disposed to do anything possible to prevent a repetition of such an incident. I understand that an investigation has taken place to find out where the responsibility for it rests. I have no comment to make as to the decision which was reached; but it is my intention to communicate with the different provinces and to try to find some way to give satisfaction to the people of Canada on this point.


Mr. COPP:: Can the Minister of Justice give us a short statement with regard to the item under Dorchester penitentiary: "Land, building and equipment, $80,000"? What does that comprise, and what buildings are being erected. Is it a continuation of the same work, or new work?


Sir LOMER GOUIN:: This item covers the cost of continuation of construction and provides for the purchase of necessary land. There is a decrease of $3,000 from last year.


Arthur Bliss Copp: If it is not the same work, what work is being done?


Lomer Gouin: The item covers:
Completion of hospital	 $20,000
Sewage disposal plant	 25,000
Officers' row	 10,000
Water main and sewers	 10,000
Deputy warden's house	 10,000
Equipment of new school and hospital.. 5,000


Arthur Bliss Copp: Is that $10,000 for the purchase of a house for the deputy warden?


Lomer Gouin: The construction of a new house.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: There is apparently no building maintenance work in

Alberta, but there is an amount for the salary of an accountant. What need is there for an accountant?


Lomer Gouin: The accountant has charge of the reserve, looks after different leases, and collects the rents and the royalties from the coal mines.


Edward Joseph Garland: What are the receipts?


Lomer Gouin: We receive on account of royalties about $4,000, $400 for the rent of a farm of two acres, $300 for a piece of agricultural land, and $100 for the rent of a house.


Edward Joseph Garland: Then, for
the administration of $4,800 of receipts, it costs $3,000?


Lomer Gouin: Yes. The books were closed a month ago; and as the hon. member may see, there is a decrease in the estimates of $2,000.


Mr. CARMICHAEL:: In connection with the Saskatchewan estimates, I see that the maintenance of inmates has increased by $5,000, while salaries and retiring allowances have increased $10,500. There seems to be an undue increase in salaries there in relation to the increase of business.


Georges Henri Boivin: "Business" is good.


Lomer Gouin: The increase is made up as follows:	To cover statutory increases of officers: 1st quarter, 14 at $60, 2 at $120; 2nd quarter, 17 at $45; 3rd quarter, 8 at $30; 4th quarter, 2 at $15; and to provide for increase of officers who may be permanently appointed before January, 1923, and salaries of extra officers on account of added population received from Kingston.


Edward Joseph Garland: In connection with the Alberta item, I think the minister might save the country some money if he would secure the services of some local accountant instead of paying the enormous sum of $2,280 for the comparatively small amount of work done.


Lomer Gouin: He is a local gentleman and is not only custodian of the reserve but accountant as well. I do not think it would be possible to make any further reduction in this expenditure.


Mr. KNOX:: After the prisoners were brought to Saskatchewan from Kingston and a number had been transferred from Alberta

Supply-Justice
it was found that the farm was not large enough to provide work for the convicts. Has an3r provision been made for further acreage in connection with the Saskatchewan penitentiary?


Lomer Gouin: An order in council has been passed for the purchase of an additional farm which I have reason to believe will soon be ready for use.


Mr. BANCROFT:: I have visited the Manitoba penitentiary at Stony Mountain and thoroughly inspected it, and it is a pleasure to know that there has been a great improvement in the methods pursued at this institution in the last few years. The people are very much gratified at the fact. The minister might explain the increase in the salaries and retiring allowances in this item.


Lomer Gouin: The increase is statutory. The details are: 1st quarter, 15 officers at $60 and 2 at $120; 2nd quarter, 11 at $45, and 1 at $90; 3rd quarter, 7 at $30 and 1 at $60; 4th quarter, 5 at $15. There is also provision for increase of officers who may be permanently appointed before 1st January.


Leland Payson Bancroft: It is a fact, then, that the increased improvements in the interests of the prisoners have not entailed any increase in the cost of administration.


Lomer Gouin: It has not.


Mr. LEWIS:: The item of maintenance in Saskatchewan shows an increase of $5,000, while in three other items in connection with other penitentiaries there has been a decrease. Has there been an increase in the number of inmates in the Saskatchewan institution and a corresponding decrease in the other penitentiaries? Or has the standard of living been lowered in the other three and not in Saskatchewan?


Lomer Gouin: The other penitentiaries remain about the same. We removed from Kingston to Saskatchewan about 75 inmates.	-


Mr. BROWN:: When a prisoner is discharged from a penitentiary in midwinter, say, is he provided with suitable clothing or anything to keep him going until he gets work?


Lomer Gouin: When convicts are discharged they are furnished with one suit of clothes, one cap, one suit of underclothes, one shirt, one pair of shoes, one pair of socks, one tie, one pair of braces, one handkerchief, one overcoat between October 1 and May 1, and one pair of gloves. They are also paid railway fare to the place of sentence or an equal distance, and given some money besides
49i
to cover their expenses en route. The average cost of equipment, tickets, etc., is $60. During the month of December last 140 inmates were discharged from the penitentiaries, other than Manitoba, from whom no report has yet been received.


Leland Payson Bancroft: The warden of the Manitoba penitentiary told me that he is working in co-operation with different organizations all through the province, and that no inmate leaves the institution until a job has been found for him. In the past year 50 inmates have been discharged of whom only three were re-arrested.


Lomer Gouin: That is right.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is that general scheme being carried out at all the penitentiaries?


Lomer Gouin: Yes.


Mr. WHITE:: What is the number of convicts confined in each of the penitentiaries, and what are the figures for the last two years?


Lomer Gouin: On 1st April, 1921, there were in custody 2,150 inmates; on 1st April, 1922, 2,640.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: How does the minister, account for this alarming increase of convicts in these times?


Lomer Gouin: I can give no reason for the increase.


Mr. FORKE:: Might I suggest that the increase is due to the change of government!


Lomer Gouin: I do not think so.


Mr. STEWART (Humboldt):: I understand that criminologists and social service workers generally recommend a classification of corrigible and incorrigible convicts. Has the Department of Justice under consideration the adoption of such a classification, so that those convicted of first offences may be given a better opportunity to reform?


Lomer Gouin: We have such a proposal under consideration.


Mr. McBRIDE:: In the case of Saskatchewan, does not the minister think that prohibition is responsible for the increase of the number of convicts?


Lomer Gouin: I could not answer my hon. friend's question.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I presume that a prisoner at the present time gets no share of the proceeds of his labour during the time of his incarceration?
Supply-Justice

t tZ


Lomer Gouin: No.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I have always thought that it would be a wise provision, especially in the case of married convicts with dependents, that a portion of their earnings should be set aside for the maintenance of their families. When a man is convicted and imprisoned we often find that his family immediately become a public charge. It is possible that the responsibility falls on the right shoulders now, but I have always thought that a prisoner should be entitled to some share of the proceeds of his labour. When a convict is discharged he is very apt to drift back into criminal ways if he is totally without funds, for he is very much handicapped in getting a job on account of being branded as a gaolbird. I think this might very well engage the attention of the department.


Lomer Gouin: A similar recommendation is before me and I am inclined to favour its adoption.


Mr. SEXSMITH:: In connection with the increase in the salary and retiring allowances of the Kingston penitentiary staff, how is the increase accounted for?


Lomer Gouin: It is mainly the
statutory increase.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Have all our penitentiaries farms? And, if so, what percentage of the inmates find outside employment on them?


Lomer Gouin: Every penitentiary has its farm, and we also work quarries. The proportion of the inmates employed in farming depends, of course, on the size of the farm. As an example I might give the results of last year's farm operations in connection with the Saskatchewan Penitentiary: Oats, 14,000 bushels; barley, 2,000 bushels; wheat, 589 bushels; peas and oats, 201 bushels; hay, 106 loads; hay, cultivated, 175 loads; green feed, 8 loads; cabbages 4,000 heads; potatoes, 7,000 bushels; turnips, 1,000 bushels; carrots, 800 bushels; carrots, white, 70 bushels; beets, 650 bushels; parsnips, 200 bushels; mangolds, 70 bushels; corn, 60 bushels. Green vegetables such as radish, lettuce and onions, were furnished during the entire summer to the prison steward, and he was also supplied with all the pork used during the year.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: Are the proceeds of these farms used in the maintenance of the institution?


Lomer Gouin: For the maintenance of the institution. They are treated as revenue.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: I understand that
modern criminologists are agreed that most crimes are committed either because of certain mental deficiencies, largely inherited, or because of unfavourable social surroundings. If would seem to me, in view of this heavy expenditure if for no other reason, that it would be well worth while to set apart sufficient funds for the study of these cases and the setting at work of forces which would prevent such an increasing afnount of crime. Is anything being done along this line.


Lomer Gouin: Yes, every inmate
is under the care of the warden, the chaplain, the surgeon and the alienist of the penitentiary.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I notice that the
superintendent of penitentiaries in his report
says:
With sufficient government work to keep the inmates continually employed the burden of supporting the penitentiaries would be removed and wages could be paid to inmates as well, thus enabling those with dependents to send money thus earned to needy ones at home while the head or wage-earner of the family is incarcerated.
Is suitable work of this kind contemplated in order that those incarcerated shall be able to support their families and develop their characters? .


Lomer Gouin: Yes. The hon.
member will find in the report that we have increased the revenue from 850,000 to $150,000. As to giving work to the inmates, that recommendation is before me, as I have already stated in answer to another hon. member.


Donald Sutherland: In regard to the
increase of prisoners during the year, what proportion were British-born and what proportion were foreign-bom?


Lomer Gouin: At page 7 of the
report the hon. member will find the answer to his question:
Nationality (Place of Birth)
British-
Canada	 1,605
England and Wales	 182
Ireland	 30
Scotland	 59
Other British countries	 29
1,911
Foreign-
United States	 246
Austria-Hungary	 109
Russia	 108
Italy	 89
Roumania	 28
China	 20
France	 9
Norway and Sweden	 14
Other foreign countries	 106

Supply-Justice


Andrew Knox: I see there is a large increase in the British Columbia item. We have had an explanation as to the increase for Saskatchewan, but when the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride) put the question a moment ago it occurred to me that he might have put it the other way and that an explanation might well come respecting the increase for British Columbia. I would like to know whether the income from the work done on the farms and in the shops of the penitentiaries is credited to this item, and whether the amount voted is the requirement for upkeep over and above the receipts from that work.


Lomer Gouin: The increase is to cover the construction of a boundary wall already commenced, and of a new kitchen and hospital. It is also required to purchase material. It does not cover the cost in connection with work done by the inmates.


Charles Wallace Stewart: What provision is made for the education of convicts who are illiterate?


Lomer Gouin: We have qualified teachers in every penitentiary who are charged with that task.


Mr. SALES:: I do not think the minister has completely answered the question of the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Knox). Does the income derived from what is produced on the farms go into the consolidated revenue fund?


Lomer Gouin: It goes into the consolidated revenue, and what they use in that work is charged to maintenance.


Thomas Sales: So that it really costs more than the amount here stated to keep the farm going?
Sir^LOMER GOUIN: Yes.


Mr. STEWART:: (Humboldt): I know that the inmates of the penitentiaries do certain work for the Post Office department in the way of making and repairing mail bags. For how many departments of government is that kind of work done, and what cost is charged against such work?


Lomer Gouin: Work of tkt kind is done in three institutions, Stony Mountain, Kingston and Dorchester. The Postmaster General provides the material and we charge 50 cents a day for each convict engaged in the work. That is the contract.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Is work of that kind done for any department other than the Post Office Department.


Lomer Gouin: Very little. We do some little work for the Interior department.


Charles Wallace Stewart: It might be well to consider the desirability of having uniforms, for example, such as are used in any of the departments, made in the tailor shops of our penitentiaries.


Lomer Gouin: That is a recommendation that is before me. I am inclined to be in favour of it.


Mr. MILLAR:: I notice that for the year
1921-	22 the estimate for lands, buildings and equipment, British Columbia, was $10,000; in
1922-	23 it was $20,000, and for 1923-24 it is $28,000. There seems to be quite a substantial increase.


Lomer Gouin: Two years ago nothing was done but some small repair work. Last year the construction of the boundary wall was commenced; this year that
4 p.m. work will be finished and a new kitchen and hospital will be built.


Mr. SHAW:: Are convicts in every province entitled by law to the benefit of remission of sentence in lieu of good conduct? If not, what provinces have not yet taken advantage of that provision?


Lomer Gouin: Every inmate is entitled to such remission. It is a Dominion law, applying to all penitentiaries.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: It applies also in some provinces to convicts in provincial gaols. I would like to know if all the provinces have taken advantage of that provision.


Lomer Gouin: We have nothing to do with provincial gaols. I could not give an answer to that question.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Serious charges are made in the report of the Superintendent of Penitentiaries with regard to the conditions in local gaols. He states:
Many of the inmates coming to the institutions are found to be in a most unsatisfactory condition. Numbers of them suffer from various diseases and vermin. Although they are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, they are in many respects worse treated while awaiting trial than after their removal to the penitentiary.
Is anything being done by the Department of Justice to see that men charged with crime are protected from bad surroundings in the local gaols?


Lomer Gouin: That note is put there especially to direct the attention of the provinces to the matter.
Supply-Justice


James Shaver Woodsworth: It also says, " A word to the wise is sufficient,"-or its equivalent. But is it "sufficient" that a note should be made of the matter in this report? It seems to me that if there is a Justice department in Canada it is the duty of that department to see that people charged with a crime should be protected while they are awaiting trial.


Lomer Gouin: If the present means are inadequate we will have to have recourse to other measures; we must make progress.


Charles Wallace Stewart: What reading matter is supplied to the inmates of the penitentiary, and what was the amount expended last year for this purpose? I would further ask, whether the regulations permit the use of tobacco by penitentiary inmates, and whether they are supplied with tobacco.


Lomer Gouin: There was a very large increase in the number of books supplied to the penitentiaries last year. The reading matter is selected by the warden, the chaplain and the school teacher. Magazines to the value of $1,400 were given the inmates. They are entitled to tobacco and are supplied with it weekly.


Edward Joseph Garland: Does the reading matter supplied include daily news. papers?


Lomer Gouin: No.
Mr. GARLAND (Bow River) '* That is good.


Mr. BAXTER:: I would like, by way of a little bit of healthy contrast, to call the attention of the minister to the hundreds of thousands of poor, honest and decent people in Canada who have to buy their own magazines and their own tobacco, and have to ggt along with very little help from the people who are so immensely anxious for the welfare of those who have struck sometimes at the very roots of society and are undergoing a just punishment. I think it is just as well, once in a while, to realize that it is the poor, decent, honest toiler-who sometimes has to live under a leaky roof and sit down to a table not very well furnished-who has to bear his share of keeping up these luxuries because our country, like others, is cursed with too great a sense of uplift. We are getting just a little too finicky in these matters. There is too much of a tendency at the present day on the part of some people to say "Oh, poor fellow, you got into gaol. It is true you only slashed your wife's throat; you tried to kill her, but did not succeed. Let us send
fSir Lomer Gouin.3
some women to read to you and give you magazines. There will be some nice literature for you and plenty of tobacco, and we will try to get your sentence shortened. We hope now that you will be a good fellow." That is all very nice, it is a first-rate thing, but just let us stop once in a while, as men whoj have some common sense, and think of the poor, decent, honest toilers who are keeping this thing up.


Robert Forke: I would like to express
appreciation for the kind advice we have received from the hon. member who has just sat down. I want to say, however, for the information of that hon. gentleman that to my knowledge the people who help the poor, as a rule, are the poor themselves.


Donald Sutherland: Would the minister give us some information as to whether the inmates of these institutions are temperate o; intemperate in their habits?


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: They do not have
bars in the penitentiaries.


Lomer Gouin: According to the
lecord there are 151 abstainers, while 1,401 are classed as temperate and 588 as intemperate.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: Has any record been
kept in order to ascertain whether the present treatment of the inmates of the penitentiaries of Canada is having a good effect?


Lomer Gouin: There is no special
record kept but the "repeaters," who numbered about 20 per cent ten or twelve years ago, have fallen to less than 4 per cent.


James Dew Chaplin: What is the cost of the maintenance of each prisoner in the penitentiary?


Lomer Gouin: Two years ago the cost was $2 a day. Last year it amounted to $1.55. That covers the entire expenditure, including the cost of land, building, heat, lighting and so forth.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police, $2,587,999.
Mr. STEVENS:: I am not quite sure
whether the observations I have to make come properly under this item but I presume they do. I desire to bring to the attention of the minister the question of the inadequacy of the pensions awarded to the veterans of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police, who were retired prior to the advances in pay which have taken place in recent years. In former years the mounted police received a very low rate of pay. When they were discharged

Supply-Justice
they were given, only a small pension and this amount, in view of the increased cost of living nowadays is altogether inadequate. On previous occasions I brought this matter to tne attention of the predecessors of the present minister.
Then there is another grievance-shall Isay? -that the old veterans of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police have, and that is in connection with the veterans who served in the Riel Rebellion. All those of other branches, outside of the Mounted Police, who served in that rebellion received a land grant or scrip, but the officers and men I have referred to were not given any such recognition. This grievance has been brought to the attention of various governments and in calling attention to it now I do not do so in any spirit of criticism. I want the minister to recognize the fact that I am bringing it forward because I consider it to be a just claim. There are not, perhaps, very many of the survivors of that force left, most of them are pretty well advanced in years, but during all the intervening time they have made this claim and, in nearly every case, I think, have appealed to deaf ears. I think that we could well afford to do justice to these old veterans of this splendid police force. I am well aware that there are those in the country to-day who have some criticisms to offer of this force, but with that sentiment I have no sympathy whatever. But in order to meet their possible objection let me remind the committee that in relation to those in whose behalf I am pleading with the minister this afternoon there can be no such sentiment held. They were the pioneers in this great service, the men who, as practically every hon. gentleman from the prairie provinces knows, rode the plains and maintained law and order. In manj'- eases they were government, judiciary, police force, and general help for the settlers all through the West, and in my experience of some thirty years passing backwards and forwards over the prairies, and living also in the extreme West, I have witnessed'the extraordinary influence that these men gained over all classes of the community. Their deeds read like a romance; we all know that, and it is unecessary for me to bring forward any proof of it. I think, however, that the government of Canada should do justice to the remnants of this force, to those veterans who in their old age still feel that they were very unjustly treated.
Let me just bring forward one further argument ; I do not wish to labour the point. One of the reasons, it is alleged-and I have looked over the record pretty carefully,
and while I would not choose to pass a very decided opinion, I am inclined to sympathize wholly with them-one of the reasons alleged why they did not receive this scrip was because there was a little jealousy between the military commanders and the police force. There were strained relations to some extent, and the result was that while the police did perhaps some of the most difficult work in connection with that rebellion they received no recognition in the way of scrip, whereas all other branches of the service did. Years afterwards, it is true, a meagre attempt was made to do justice to them by striking a medal, which they all value very highly, but which certainly did not give them justice. I wish to ask the minister if he will again take their claims into consideration. I believe it is a just claim and one that ought to be granted. I just leave the matter in that way, and ask for his consideration.
Before sitting down I wish to refer to a kindred subject, and that is the meagre pension which is being paid to the widows of those who were in the service for many years. I have in my hand at the moment the case of the widow of a former superintendent, Mrs. Joseph Howe. Her husband was in the force for twenty-three years. He died in 1902. He went through the Riel rebellion and the South African war, and gave magnificent service all through his career in the force. His widow to-day is receiving a pension of $29.16 a month, and that is the widow of a man who attained the rank of superintendent while in the service. It is true that a very slight increase was made to this, perhaps, because of some action that was taken about a/year ago. But I am not basing my claim on this one case, I simply mention this as a typical case. There are widows, not a large number, it is true, who are receiving this meagre pension, which is based upon the very low rate of pay received by the force in those early days. I think the government could very well consider the claims of these persons for an increase in their pensions. The only argument against this claim that is worthy of any consideration at all is that if parliament were to raise the pension in conection with the Northwest Mounted Police force, we would have to raise the pension of all civil servants who are retired. In reply, I would submit to the minister that most of the civil servants who have been retired were retired under a very much higher rate of pay than the Northwest Mounted Police force. What I said two years ago, and also three years ago, when I spoke on this subject was that we should bring up the pensions of the
Supply-Justice

. veterans of the Royal Northwest Mounted Police, and of their dependents who are drawing pensions, to some minimum standard at least, a minimum that would be in advance of what they are getting to-day and in some degree commensurate with the conditions that obtain now as compared with the conditions that obtained at that time. I bring the matter forward at this time for the attention of the minister, and hope that he will give it not only consideration, but, also that action for which he is known. I heard one of his friends describe him the other day as a man of few words but prompt action, and I believe that that virtue might very well be applied in these instances at this time.


Andrew Knox: Before the minister replies, I should like to endorse everything that has been said by my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens). This matter has been before the House on several occasions. I know I have spoken on it once or twice. I happen to know some of the old veterans in my own constituency, and I know that the conditions prevailing there are such that they certainly require a little looking into. I understand that the number of these veterans in the Dominion at the present time is very small. These men gave the best part of their lives in the interests of opening up western Canada, and I think anyone who reads the history of the Northwest Mounted Police will admit that their record is hard to beat in any country. Some way, I think, could be found of getting around the difficulty mentioned by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre, that the pensions of these men might be increased so as to make the evening of their lives a little more comfortable than it appears to be for some of them at present. It is not necessary for me to go into any details as my hon. friend has dealt with the matter fully, but I heartily endorse everything he has said and I trust that the minister will give the matter his very careful consideration.


Lomer Gouin: As the hon. member has said, this is a pretty difficult question. It has been brought to the attention of all the governments we have had for the last twenty years. A few days ago the commissioner in charge of our Mounted Police brought me a memorandum on this very question. There were two propositions: One was to increase the pensions paid to the officers and to their widows by fifty per cent, and the other to pay them a pension based on the pay of to-day. This matter I have now under consideration. I intend to study the record, and if I find that there is an in-

justice, and that it is possible to remedy it, and if the House is of the opinion that something should be done for the officers and their widows I shall be happy to do it.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Might I call the ministers' attention to the fact that I have on the order paper a resolution looking towards the re-organization of the Mounted Police. On several occasions, at the request of the Minister of Justice, I have allowed that resolution to stand. It would seem to be rather unfortunate that these estimates should be brought up before there was a general discussion of the whole question. I simply submit the matter to the Minister of Justice.


Lomer Gouin: I asked the hon member on one occasion to adjourn consideration of his resolution. After I informed him that I was ready, I was expecting that he would proceed with it. I do not see how we could suspend consideration of this item and wait for the consideration of his resolution. The hon. member might very well bring this matter now to the attention of the committee and make any propositions which he may have.	_


Edward Joseph Garland: I think the House is in a better position to consider a serious matter such as reorganization of this force when it is prepared for a resolution and knows that one is going to be brought forward. I wish to support the contention of the hon. member for 'Centre Winnipeg (Mr. Woodsworth) that we might, perhaps, with the permission of the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin), turn to one of the other many items in the Estimates and deal with it. I cannot see the necessity for rushing this item through at this time.


Lomer Gouin: I do not see why we should suspend consideration of this item. The hon. member (Mr. Woodsworth), when his resolution is called, will bring forward his arguments; and if the House were to decide that we should adopt the views that he brings forward and make the amendment that he proposes, we would have to legislate to that effect. The passing of this item to-day would not change matters as regards such an amendment. We need this money for the current year if we continue this system. If we change it by legislation, we shall make the necessary change in the expenditure.


Mr. HOEY:: The minister is doubtless aware that several bank robberies occurred last year in the southern districts of Manitoba and Saskatchewan, bank robberies that led to tremendous losses on the part of men holding

Supply-Justice
victory bonds. These bonds have been lost, and the holders have not been compensated,
I understand, either by the banks or by any other agency. Has the Dominion government any policy as regards the better protection of those districts? That is to say, does the Dominion government act only when requested to do so by the districts concerned? If so, by which government is the expense borne? This is a vital question, because many of these robberies have been perpetrated by men coming from south of the international boundary. Will the minister express an opinion regarding this matter?


Lomer Gouin: As the hon. member knows, the maintenance of peace and the protection of property are under the control of the provinces. Whenever we have been asked to assist in such protection, our men have gone and have done the best they could They propose to do the same in the future.


Robert Alexander Hoey: In that case is the expense borne by the Dominion government?


Lomer Gouin: Ordinary expense is paid by the police and extraordinary expenditure is paid by the province.


James Dew Chaplin: Under the heading of "Pay of Force " the sum of $1,381,532 is given as the estimate for 1922-23. Will the minister explain why this amount is not the same as the amount given in last year's estimate under the same heading?


Lomer Gouin: There is a reduction of $186,028.50.. In 1921-22, we had in the force 1,726 men; in 1922-23, 1,423; in 1923-24, 1,150; or a decrease, of 576 men since 1921-22.


James Dew Chaplin: The question I asked was, how it is that in last year's estimates you asked for an appropriation of $1,456,532, and in this year's estimates, you put the amount of $1,381,532 as being the amount of the estimate of last year. I cannot make those figures jibe.


Lomer Gouin: The estimate of last year was $1,381,532.


James Dew Chaplin: I have before me the estimate of last year as asked for, and the amount is given as $1,456,532.


Lomer Gouin: That amount was reduced during the session, because we decided to reduce the number of men, and we did so.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: The question which the Minister of Justice has just answered covers the first part of what I was going to ask him. Is this reduction in the estimate consequent
upon the provincial police undertaking part of the duties formerly performed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?


Lomer Gouin: We have closed certain posts, and we have decreased the number of men in Ottawa and in other places.


Alfred Speakman: I appreciate tjiat, but my question was whether the minister was able to make the reduction because provincial and other police' were undertaking part of the duties formerly performed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.


Lomer Gouin: No, we do the work with fewer men.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: Would the minister
kindly give the details for the $100,000 item, the last item?


Lomer Gouin: This item, which appears as an increase in the summary of the estimates, cannot truly be classed as such in the accepted sense of an increase. Heretofore, expenses incurred by the force in the enforcement of federal statutes has been repaid to this department by the department concerned. To meet this unforeseen expense, provision had naturally to be made in our estimates; but as it is the intention hereafter to perform these duties without charge to the departments concerned, the money hereby requested for this purpose has been deducted from the sub-heads under which they were formerly voted, such as railway transportation, travelling expenses, hire of conveyances, contingencies, and therefore appear in this estimate as one complete item. In other words, these amounts were taken from their sundry sub-heads and placed, as a whole, under the column of "Decreases". On the item "Maintenance ", the estimate of last year was $815,945, whereas this year we ask for only $673,301.


William Garland McQuarrie: I presume that this item would include charges for legal services in connection with prosecutions?


Lomer Gouin: No.


William Garland McQuarrie: I understand that a legal gentleman, Mr. Donald Downie, of Vancouver, who of course is a very strong Liberal supporter, has lately been appointed legal adviser to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police there. He attends police court prosecutions in that city although there is a city prosecutor who conducts all cases. Mr. Downie does not take any part in the prosecutions at all, blit sends in his bill to the department for attendance in all these cases, and is paid. I understand further that when a case is taken to a
Supply-Jus tice

higher court, whether for speedy trial or otherwise, this same gentleman attends on behalf of the department, although there is a crown prosecutor who is paid by the provincial government to conduct these cases. Mr. Downie does not take part in these trials either; nevertheless he sends in his bill to the department and is paid. I have heard some objection raised to that practice, and it has been suggested that some economy might be effected in this connection. It is contended that there is no necessity for having a representative of the department appear in the police court or any other court when there are officers of the city and of the province present to prosecute. My information may not be correct but I believe it is, and if there is any explanation the committee should have it.


Lomer Gouin: If there is no necessity for our employing Mr. Downie, I am of course disposed to dispense with his services. In any event, however, Mr. Downie could not be employed by the Department of Justice if he acted for the Health department in these cases mentioned by my hon. friend. I will see my colleague about the matter.


William Garland McQuarrie: He acts on behalf of the Mounted Police.


Lomer Gouin: No, the Health department.


William Garland McQuarrie: I understand also that Mr. Downie was appointed contrary to the recommendation of the Vancouver Liberal Committee.


Mr. DUFF:: Too badl


William Garland McQuarrie: And there is some objection to that, too. The minister might inquire into the matter.


The CHAIRMAN:: The hon. member is out of order. The minister has stated that this matter does not come under his department but under the Department of Health, which has nothing to do with this item.


William Garland McQuarrie: The minister said he would look into the matter and I only thought he might wish to make his inquiry com/plete.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: How many men are engaged in guarding the parliamentary and other government buildings in Ottawa?


Lomer Gouin: About 118.


Edward Joseph Garland: Do I understand that the increase of $100,000 in this item is offset by a reduction in some other item?


Lomer Gouin: Yes; it is not properly speaking an increase. We were chaining

different departments with expenditures made by them, and provision is made for that in an item "Maintenance" under which $800,000 was voted last year. This year we are asking for $600,000.


Edward Joseph Garland: What was the amount of refund from each of the departments of government to the Department of Royal Canadian Mounted Police last year?


Lomer Gouin: The amount refunded last year was $93,779.50, contributed to by the Departments of Agriculture, Customs and Excise, Finance, Health, Immigration, Indian Affairs, Interior, Justice, Marine and Fisheries, Militia and Defence, Mines, Post Office, Secretary of State, Soldier Settlement Board, Commissioner of Taxation, Air Board, Trade and Commerce and Public Works.


Edward Joseph Garland: What. was the amount of each department?


Lomer Gouin: The amounts are:
Agriculture	
$15,701	96Customs and Excise	
16,515	56Finance	
8,353	98Health	
17,243	93Immigration and Colonization .. ..	279	09Indian Affairs	
12,066	17Interior	
5,620	59Justice	
1,200	00Marine and Fisheries	
1,526	67Militia and Defence	
91	80Mines	
1,098	11Post Office	
3,000	00Secretary of State	
7,733	83Pensions	
142	98Soldier Settlement Board	
217	65Commissioner of Taxation	
2,809	88Air Board	
53	55Trade and Commerce	
117	75Public Works	
6	00


Edward Joseph Garland: Does the item under Secretary of State include naturalization pf aliens? I understand that a considerable amount of work is done in that connection.


Lomer Gouin: Yes.


Edward Joseph Garland: And the amount is only $7,000 odd.


Lomer Gouin: That is for the extra work done by the Mounted Police for the Department of Secretary of State in connection with naturalization.


Edward Joseph Garland: How many outside investigators are employed by the Secretary of State's department and other departments?


Lomer Gouin: The whole work is done by the Mounted Police. This is an extra charge made to the Department of Secretary of State. In the report will be found

Supply-Justice
the number of investigations made in connection with naturalization.


James Shaver Woodsworth: What are the precise duties of Major Hamilton?


Lomer Gouin: To make a weekly summary of reports from our officers for the use of the commissioner, and to conduct correspondence with police departments all over the world.


James Shaver Woodsworth: On whose initiative are investigations undertaken?-that of the Minister of Justice?


Lomer Gouin: All investigations are made at the request of the various departments. The Minister of Justice has never asked for any investigation.


Mr. SPENCER:: Do the naturalization fees cover the cost of naturalization?


Lomer Gouin: That would be for my colleague the Secretary of State (Mr. Copp) to answer.


Edward Joseph Garland: What is the size of the police force maintained in our larger cities, such as Montreal, Toronto, Fort William?


An hon. MEMBER:: And Hull?


Edward Joseph Garland: Yes, by
all means let us have Hull.


Lomer Gouin: We have no man in Hull. In the provinces of Quebec the total is 41; Ontario, 288; Manitoba, 71; Saskatchewan, 274; Alberta, 173; British Columbia, 175; Yukon Territory, 51; Northwest Territories, 27.


Edward Joseph Garland: It takes only 27 men to police the Northwest Territories, as against over ten times that number to police Toronto with the help of the provincial force.


Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: The O.T.A.


Lomer Gouin: We have only 16 men in Toronto. In Ottawa we have 118 men engaged in the protection of our public buildings, and about 40 instructors. All the men are available for outside duty.


Edward Joseph Garland: How many are stationed in Fort William, arid what are their duties?


Lomer Gouin: We have 28 men there. They are engaged on general investigation work, and are useful as a reserve for service in any part of western Canada.


James Shaver Woodsworth: According to the newspapers the Quebec government is preparing to enforce the Narcotic Drugs Act. Are the Dominion police co-operating with the provincial and municipal police in this connection?


Lomer Gouin: We co-operate as much as we can with the provincial and municipal police; but this is a federal statute, the enforcement of which is in our hands.


Mr. LUCAS:: Where are the Alberta men stationed?


Lomer Gouin: At Edmonton, 22; Peace River, 7; Grouard, 2; Jasper, 1; Atha-baska, 2. In southern Alberta: Lethbridge, 50; Banff, 10; Calgary, 12; Canmore, 2; Coutts, 3. There are also men stationed at various other places such as Drumheller, Fer-nie, Field, Kingsgate, Medicine Hat, Michel, Pincher Creek, and so on.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous

to provide for the revision of the Dominion Statutes, $20,000.
William Garland McQuarrie: When will this revision be available?


Lomer Gouin: We shall try to have it for 1926. We had one in 1886 and one in 1906; that is to say, one every twenty years. Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-expenses of litigated matters, Department of Justice, $33,000.


William Thomas Lucas: What is that item for?


Lomer Gouin: It is to cover the
expense of litigation conducted by the Dominion, not provided for elsewhere. The amount varies greatly from year to year and cannot be accurately foreseen. The expenditure for 1920 was $7,655; for 1920-21, $13,000; for 192122, $37,514. The usual vote is $13,000. The additional sum of $20,000 is asked for this year in order to provide for the expenses of the reference to the Privy Council of the Newfoundland boundarx' question, a case which is now pending.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-expenses under Pecuniary Claims Convention with U.S.A., $10,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Will the minister kindly
explain?


Lomer Gouin: The Pecuniary
Claims Convention between Great Britain and the United States, providing for the settlement by arbitration of pecuniary claims outstanding between the two countries, was signed at Washington on the 18th of August, 1910. The first schedule of claims was prepared and several cases were argued before the tribunal in 1914, and awards were made.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
A second schedule was in course of preparation when the war interrupted the proceedings. The United States national arbitrator is Mr. Chandler Anderson; the Canadian arbitrator, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick; the umpire is Mr. Fromageot, of Paris. The Canadian government is responsible for the payment of half the expenses and remuneration of the two arbitrators and the umpire at $40 per diem during the sittings of the tribunal. As negotiations are pending between Great Britain and the United- States for the preparation of the second schedule of claims, and resumption of the activities of the convention may occur during the year, it becomes necessary to provide for working expenses.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What was spent last year?


Lomer Gouin: The amount was


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-to provide for the administration of the Bankruptcy Act, $4,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Considering the enormous increase in bankruptcies, I would like the minister to explain the reason for the decrease in this item.


Lomer Gouin: This amount covers the cost of sending the statutes and the Canada Gazette to trustees and the registrars of the dili'erent provinces. The number of failures has no bearing on the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil government-Justice-salaries and contingencies, including $2,000 for Solicitor General's Office, $243,270.
Henry Herbert Stevens: May I direct the attention of the minister to the statement made the other day by the Finance Minis p.m. ister (Mr. Fielding), which we took as a promise, namely, that he would extend to the committee the courtesy of providing details of civil government items in the form of preceding years?


Mr. GRAHAM:: I am informed that copies of these details have been put in the boxes of the members.	[DOT]


Henry Herbert Stevens: They certainly were no I-
there at three o'clock; they may have been put there since. However, this item is very small, and I have no objection to its going through.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
TRADE AND COMMERCE Trade and Commerce-bounties on crude petroleum, administration of the act, $3,000.	.
Mr. JELLIFF:: I would like to call attention to what I regard as a very grave injustice in the administration and distribution [Sir Lomer Gouin.)
of bounties. There are three provinces in which we have productive oil wells, Ontario, New Brunswick and Alberta. In Alberta we have five producing oil wells, and there are nine more being drilled at the very extreme southern end of the province, with great prospects of success. New Brunswick has seven yielding oil wells, and Ontario had 3,015 in 1921. Now, let me draw attention to the fact that in the distribution of bounties Ontario received $90,751 in 1921, whilst New Brunswick received $3,926. On the other hand our men, who are operating under especially difficult conditions and are endeavouring to develop the oil resources in the Alberta fields, are receiving absolutely nothing. They have brought this matter to the attention of the department on several occasions in recent years but have received no consideration and no allowance. It seems that under the law a standard is fixed of specific gravity, and if there is any variation from that standard the producer' gets no share in this bounty. This seems to me to be directly contrary to what our policy should be. The drilling of these oil wells and the production of oil is one of the most important enterprises devolving upon this country at the present time.. Last year, for example, we imported over 366,000,000 gallons of crude oil whereas Canada itself produced only between five and six million gallons of oil. The needs of Canada for oil are very great. The country which produces and has an abundance of its own oil in future years is certainly going to take the lead in our civilization. This is a matter which we must not neglect and therefore these bounties should be granted in equal and equitable manner to all the provinces in which efforts are being made to develop this great resource. For the present I shall be satisfied with bringing the matter to the attention of the minister, and urging him to look into it and see that the bounty for the production of oil reaches the Alberta producers to the extent which they merit. When the budget is presented I shall deal with the question at greater length.


Hon. Mr. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Trade and Commerce) :: No later than yesterday my hon. friend brought to my notice, some changes which he thought would encourage the development of oil wells in western Canada. These will be taken into consideration by the government and a statement in that regard made when the budget is presented.
Respecting the matter of the bounty paid in different provinces the, reason for that is this. The bounty is based upon the specific gravity

Sup-ply-Trade and Commerce
of the oil produced, and those districts where the oil is not of such a standard as to entitle them to receive the. bounty, are protected under the tariff. We will take my hon. friend's observations under consideration.


Lincoln Henry Jelliff: I would like to draw the minister's attention to the fact that the crude oils we are producing in Alberta, regardless of the slight difference there might be in specific gravity as compared with other native oils, are available for all our uses in this country. We have our own refinery at Okotoks, and we are getting there the very best grade of gasoline, kerosene and all the various petroleum products. Under the circumstances I do not think we ought to be discriminated against in the manner which now obtains.


James Alexander Robb: The reason which I have assigned explains why no bounty is given. However, we will look into the matter.


Mr. COOTE:: I would urge upon the minister the advisability of changing the specific gravity tests under which the bounty is paid. In Alberta the oil wells are drilled under very great difficulties. They are a long distance from the plants where the machinery and well casing are made, and the expense of putting down some of those wells runs into many thousands of dollars. I am sorry I have not the figures here. The wells are also very deep, in many cases reaching over three thousand feet. I think these facts should be taken into consideration when comparing the Alberta wells with the Ontario wells. I am told that the Ontario wells are comparatively shallow and that the drilling apparatus needed for them is very much cheaper. In Alberta a lot of men have had to give up drilling operations because of the great expense involved. I think the minister should take into consideration these facts, and either change the specific gravity test so that the Alberta oil wells may get the benefit of the bounty, or else do away with the bounty. I was told by*an oil operator that some of these oil wells miss coming under the provisions of the bounty by only a very slight percentage in the specific gravity test, and it seems to me very unfair that the Alberta oil men should be deprived of this assistance bearing in mind the very great disadvantages they are labouring under. In my opinion this is a case where the law needs revising, and if the government wishes to encourage the oil industry in Alberta it should make the change which we are suggesting.


William Garland McQuarrie: While I am in favour of the bonuses provided for under this item,
I think the government might spend some money in another direction, more particularly in endeavouring to curb the operations of bogus oil companies which are selling, or endeavouring to sell, stocks to the people of this country. I know that out in our province we have a great many companies which are reporting in the newspapers from time to time that they are just about to strike oil. However, they have never struck any, yet they keep on taking money out of the pockets of the people. Now I know that there are hon. members who think that the people should be relieved of their money in some way-either by horse-racing, or by stocks, or otherwise- but I think this kind of thing is doing a great deal of harm, and the government should take steps to see that the public are not defrauded in the bare-faced, cold-blooded manner that a great many of these oil companies are guilty -of.


James Alexander Robb: I quite agree with some of the observations of my hon. friend, that there [DOT] is a need for controlling the sale not only of oil stocks but of other wildcat schemes.
Regarding the observations of my hon. friend from Macleod (Mr. Coote), the Department of Trade and Commerce has only the administration of the act, which was passed in 1904; but I can see from what my hon. friend has said that there is reason for looking into the matter. Possibly some revision of the act is required, and we shall give that very careful consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canada Grain Act, administration of, $1,478,839.
Robert Alexander Hoey: Is there any itemized statement with regard to this?


James Alexander Robb: The item is presented in the usual form, but if there is any information my hon. friend desires I shall be glad to answer any questions. The Grain Commission publishes an annual report. The 1922 report j was presented some time ago, and the most recent report is now in the printer's hands.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: What happened to the appeal case which was going to be taken up before j the Supreme Court of Canada in connection | with the validity of the Canada Grain Act? .


James Alexander Robb: It is still in the courts.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Has it been taken up before the Supreme Court yet?


James Alexander Robb: It has gone to the Supreme Court, but it has not yet been called.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Joseph Tweed Shaw: My recollection is that the House was informed last session that an effort would be made to bring on the case at the earliest possible date. Two sessions of the Supreme Court have been held since that time.


Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the reason for the increase in this item?
\ Mr. ROBB: It is. partly due to the statu-i tory increases in the salaries. There is also ! the fact that our experience in other years is that we have not always voted the amount required in the Main Estimates and had : to ask for a further amount in the Supplemen-taries. We expect this amount will cover all the requirements this year. This estimate was prepared by the Board of Grain Commissioners ancl sent down to the department some time ago. It is their estimate of the amount that will be required to administer the act this j'ear.
. Mr. HOEY: With reference to the case in the courts referred to by my hon. friend from Calgary West (Mr. Shaw), are there any firms to-day contributing to the government with regard to overages?


James Alexander Robb: All but one firm in Canada have paid.


Robert Alexander Hoey: In full?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, but one firm contends that it is illegal.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Can the minister answer my question as to the reason for delay in bring-J ing on that case before the Supreme Court?


James Alexander Robb: That, of course, is in the hands of the Justice department and I really could , not give my hon. friend the reason. I re-j member the circumstances he refers to and it | was stated that we would try and rush the | case through, but after the wheat board legis-j lation was put through the necessity for hurrying that case along was not as great and that is perhaps the reason for the delay. On February 16 the Justice department reported that the case was practically ready for trial and it was hoped to have it disposed of some time in the month of March.


George Gibson Coote: I should like to draw the attention of the minister to one phase of the grain trade in western Canada which is very : much to the front in all discussions which are ! taking place there regarding the administra-I tion of the act, and that is with reference to dockage. I think possibly in our province at all events we had more dockage than usual , this year because we had an unusually good crop of weeds. I want to bring to the minister's attention the treatment I personally re-

ceived in regard to dockage of wheat, because it is typical of many cases that have happened this year. I shipped two cars of wheat to Vancouver in September and the dockage on both these cars was four per cent. I thought the dockage was excessive, and I wrote to the company who handled this grain and asked them to secure from the inspectors a statement showing how the dockage was made up.
I was informed in reply that the first car was a little better than two per cent cracked wheat and approximately two per cent seeds, the cracked wheat weighing up a little heavier than the seeds. The inspector's sample of the second car showed more seeds than the sample of the first car. The proportion worked out a little less than three per cent seeds as against a little over one per cent of cracked wheat. According to the statement which was sent me of the proceeds upon this car, we were paid the large sum' of one dollar per ton for these screenings. This wheat was shipped to Vancouver and cleaned there, and I am told there is no better market for chicken feed in Canada than Vancouver. Cracked wheat ought to be good for chicken feed, yet this dockage was sold for only one dollar per ton.
I made a complaint about this, and we afterwards received a money order for $8.50 covering these screenings at the rate of $4 per ton. On the other car, which I mentioned first, where there was something over two per cent of cracked wheat we have not received any- . thing over the one dollar per ton. I certainly think this is a matter demanding very thorough investigation by the department. I am not very well informed as to how this dockage is handled, but I have been told that in some of the government elevators there are two bins into which the dockage is put. In the one bin the dockage belongs to the government, that is, dockage under a certain percentage, which goes to the government elevator to pay for the cleaning. Where the dockage is over that percentage, it goes to the shipper of the grain and he is paid for that dockage according to the price at which it is sold. This goes into a separate bin. If that is the case, it rests with the management of the elevator where these screenings shall be put. I know that the charge is sometimes made that the management of the elevator will take screenings which may belong to some car where the dockage is over the percentage which would entitle them to take the screenings for cleaning charges, and this dockage may consist largely of cracked wheat and wild oats, and put that dockage into their own bin, and switch dockage from some other car which has weed seeds of no value, into the other bin. Possibly the minister would give

Supply-Trade and Commerce
us some information, regarding that. I should also like his promise that he will have a thorough investigation made as to the working of the elevator in Vancouver to see why so many shippers are being paid only one dollar per ton for good screenings.
As regards this question of dockage, I have had resolutions from three different farmers' associations in my constituency asking that it be made compulsory for country elevators to install proper cleaning facilities, so that all the wheat might be cleaned at the country elevator, and the dockage kept there and returned to the farmer. I know there are some objections to that; but I should like the minister to promise us that he will have the Board of Grain Commissioners make a very thorough investigation into this question of dockage and report to the House, at least by next year, whether that would be a good procedure. I saw in the Calgary Herald some time ago that it was estimated that the farmers of western Canada would pay freight, on screenings on 1922 crop, amounting to $5,000,000. Some means should be devised of saving freight on dockage, and I am quite convinced that if grain were cleaned at country elevators, the dockage that would be returned to the farmer would much more than pay for cleaning the grain. In some cases the dockage amounts to seven and, in odd cases, to ten per cent, so that, if the dockage were removed, hon. members can easily realize the saving to the railway companies in the fall in the number of cars required for hauling this grain.
I wish to emphasize again the question of dockage on grain that went to Vancouver this fall. I have had many complaints in my district in regard to it. We had a very dry summer; the wheat was unusually dry and brittle, and I believe it cracked worse than usual. Of course much of the cracked wheat is caused by inefficient threshers. When you have a separator cracking wheat, it is almost impossible to take the weed seeds out, as the cracked wheat will cover up the weed screens. There should be returned to the farmers of Alberta many thousands of dollars, jqst from dockage that was taken out of their grain this fall and for which they were paid, in many cases, as I was in my experience, as low as one dollar per ton. It is nothing less than downright robbery that screenings of the class I have' spoken of should be paid for at the rate of one dollar per ton.


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: I think the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) is very fortunate in getting one dollar per ton for his screenings.
I received only twenty-five cents per ton for mine. I cleaned my wheat in the elevator and shipped it to Fort William after it. was cleaned. On 2,142 bushels of wheat I had a dockage of 86 bushels and 40 pounds, for which I got 56 cents. I asked for a reinspection; but in the location where I live, namely, on the Canadian National going south from Winnipeg to Emerson, a branch goes direct to Port Arthur. My wheat leaves my home town and goes to Emerson and then direct to Port Arthur, and it is almost impossible to get a re-inspection unless wheat passes through Winnipeg. Can the minister state whether or not one can get a re-inspection when wheat does not pass through Winnipeg?


James Alexander Robb: It might be difficult to have an inspection after grain had passed an inspection point; but if the bulk had not been broken and the inspector advised in time, and the car held, I can see no reason why there should not be a re-inspection. The hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) and the hon. member for Provencher (Mr. Beaubien) havte brought up a question of great importance to all Canada. No question causes more trouble in the administration of the Grain Act than this question of screenings. Not only is this question of interest to the people of western Canada, but I call the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) as a witness that it is of interest to the people of eastern Canada, because the good farmers of eastern Canada object very strenuously to having these dirty seeds, mixed or sold straight, and dirtying farms that are fairly well kept. I have considerable sympathy with the idea of having grain cleaned at the original point of shipment; but I am not sure that could be carried out in a new country, nor am I sure that the government would be wise, in the administration of the act, to make it obligatary upon all country elevators. It costs money to put in cleaning machinery, perhaps not so much to put it in as to operate it, and to clean fast enough so that the grain can be taken care of as it comes into the warehouse back in the country. I am told some modern threshing machines are now equipped with cleaning machinery that cleans the grain fairly well. I think I should say to my hon. friend that I have already been discussing this on two different occasions with the Board of Grain Commissioners, and we have tried to work out some plan whereby we might arrange to have grain cleaned economically, leaving the screenings back on the farm where they could be used near the point of produc-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
tion and thus saving the man who owns the grain the cost of freight shipping this to Fort William or to Vancouver where it is cleaned. There is not much sense in paying freight on screenings that are of comparatively small value.
The hon. member for Macleod brought up the question of the returns he had received, and I was astonished that he would only receive one dollar a ton for cracked wheat, because my experience has taught me that feed is worth considerably more than that. I agree with him that there should be some demand on the Pacific coast for, at least, a reasonable amount of chicken feed and a considerable quantity of mill feed. I have had brought to my attention a statement sent to us by the grain commissioners, a statement that was reliable and supported by a telegram from would-be customers. We did for a time find a very good market for these screenings in the United States. It was represented to the commission that the screenings were used largely for feeding sheep. We had men follow the screenings along, in the years past, to their point of destination, and we discovered that Canadian screenings were put into various grades of feed, some of them selling at very high prices under a fancy name. The United States, like Canada, in recent years have passed drastic legislation controlling the product that goes into different feeds, requiring an analysis, and the result of all this has been that they have destroyed the market for that sort of grain, grain which the hon. member for South Oxford called "rubbish." I have in my hand a memorandum from the Board of Grain Commissioners. I think I had better put on record the statement of the grain commissioners on this matter. They point out that the market for screenings is now limited, and I may say that it is not the operator of the elevator but the inspector who determines what dockage there shall be to bring wheat up to standard grade. The grain commissioners make this statement:
To-day the price paid is $1.50 per ton for general run screenings of which the proportion of anything better than refuse runs from 10 to 20 per cent the average percentage based on actual cleaning test being practically 15 per cent. As an example, take today's purchase price of $1.50 per ton, plus $2 per ton, cost of cleaning, equals $3.50; 15 per cent, better than refuse equals 300 lbs. per ton, at a price at which thousands of tons could be obtained, namely $9 per ton, equals $1.35, which shows a cost to the elevator, or an absolute loss of $2.15 per ton, as refuse screenings are offered f.o.b. cars free to any party who will take them away. As a matter of fact an entire boatload was offered recently to the Globe Elevator Company, Duluth, plus 50 cents per ton, providing they would 
take them from the elevator by boat. This company replied under date of October 13th as follows:
"Impossible work screenings to pay cost, evea basis
50 cents per ton credit, so will pass it up."
The actual facts-and I am citing now the conditions on lake Superior at Fort William and Port Arthur-show that the grain commissioners offered a bonus of 50 cents per ton if the screenings were taken away and their offer was refused. This refusal came from a market where heretofore we sold screenings by the boat load. I am therefore entirely in sympathy with the view of my hon. friend that something should be done to have grain cleaned at point of loading near the producer. I thank him for bringing the matter to our attention and I shall submit it again to the grain commissioners to see whether, during the year, we cannot work out some scheme. But it must be an economical scheme so that we shall not close up the elevators and in that way do more harm to the producer.


John Millar: As the minister points out, the question of deciding where the grain should be cleaned is one that is difficult to settle. A good many people will remember that years ago the cleaning was done largely in the country elevators, but the very difficulty the minister has spoken of was experienced there. The grain is usually rushed in at certain hours of the day. There are hours of the day when very few loads arrive, and at other times there is a great rush; and if farmers thresh and haul their grain from the threshing machines to the elevator it is a considerable inconvenience to them to have to wait an hour or two before they can unload. I am not sure that it is practicable to have the cleaning done in the country elevator, although it would be a considerable economy if the freight could be saved and all the trouble referred to avoided. I have in mind two cases, in which I could give the names and addresses, of farmers who made the same complaint that has been raised by the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote). In one case the farmer received 50 cents a ton for cleaned oats taken out of grain grown on new land, and in the other case $1 a ton was paid for cracked grain which was considered quite clean. I believe that what the minister said in regard to prices of screenings generally and the lack of market for them is true. But I think it is simply a case . of screenings and screenings. There are some screenings that are worth very little. By the time they pass through the terminal elevator, where there are facilities for putting them over the screen several times, they are practically nothing but wild oats and dirt and are worth little. A great

Supply-Trade and Commerce
deal of good grain, of course, has been taken out of such screenings. But the complaint is not in regard to that sort of screening, on which no one places very much value. The complaint is in reference to such cases as I have referred to and that mentioned by the hon. member for Macleod, where for cracked wheat and clean oat screenings that are worth $15 a ton 50 cents or $1 is offered. But this is only one of many complaints which I hope will be thoroughly investigated and remedied by the grain inquiry commission which we hope will be appointed later on.


Donald Sutherland: Is it not possible to have machinery in the threshing outfits that would take the great proportion of the small seeds out of the grain and thus solve the difficulty at the very point where it can be done most easily and at least cost?


John Millar: Probably the time will come when that will be done generally, but at present it is not practicable. There are very few threshing machines that are so equipped as properly to clean grain in the field, and I am inclined to think that for a number of years to come the difficulty will be this, that with the screenings a considerable quantity of good grain will be taken out in the field, which could be made use of in the terminal elevators. This grain could be extracted at the elevators but it cannot be separated in the field. These are difficulties for which I do not pretend to offer any solution offhand. I do not know what the solution will be, but it is a matter that calls for a great deal of care and thought because the farmers lose a good deal as things are.


George Gibson Coote: I should be glad if the minister would promise to have the Board of Grain Commissioners make a thorough investigation into this matter of dockage at Vancouver. Many of us would like to get a few dollars out of the dockage which someone out there has kept from us. They have paid $1 a ton where the dockage was something worth while. In the particular car I referred to more than one-half was cracked wheat. The minister might see that the commissioners endeavour to get some justice for the men whiS had dockage that should have been adequately paid for and for which they were given only $1 a ton. When I received my statement I said I would rather they had not. offered me anything, because I considered it an insult to be offered a dollar per ton for screenings of that kind. I want to put on Hansard a statement which I got last year, through the Department of Trade and Commerce, from the Board of Grain Commissioners giving an analysis of the dockage on wheat received at the terminal elevators at Port William and Port Arthur for the crop year 1920-21. I shall read this statement in order to bring to the attention of the House and the people generally the amount of dockage that is being taken to Fort William and which should be left at home.
Analysis of Dockage on wheat received at Public Terminal Elevators, Fort William and Port Arthur
crop year 1920-21
Total Number of cars received	 73,846
Total Gross contents of same	bus. 95,885,152$
Cars having no dockage	 9,735
Cars having dockage of less than 3 per cent	35,603
Cars having dockage of 3 per cent or more	28,508
73,846
Lbs.
Total gross contents of 28,508 cars having
dockage of 3 per cent or more	 2,158,249,IV
$ of 1 per cent of same retained by Elevator Company	 10,791,251
Lbs.
Total dockage on 28,508 cars having dockage of 3 per cent or over	 106,807,620
Less $ of 1 per cent of gross contents retained by Elevator company to cover invisible waste and loss in cleaning.. ..	10,791,250
Balance returnable to shippers.. ..	96,016,370
One other question. A year ago, if I remember correctly, I was told that we could not have our screenings reshipped from Calgary to local points, on account of regulations prohibiting their movement. Are such regulations in effect; and, if so, are they issued from the minister's department?


James Alexander Robb: In answer to the first question, the deputy minister already has a note of my hon. friend's complaint regarding the price ' paid at Vancouver and will to-morrow write the Grain Commission for an explanation. As to the second question, no such regulations have been issued by the Department of Trade and Commerce; but I think the Department of Agriculture issues regulations covering the shipment of noxious weeds.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: During the course of the year I have had several complaints from farmers that they are not able to purchase screenings from the government elevator at Calgary. What disposition is made of these screenings? And why is it that local farmers are unable to purchase them?


James Alexander Robb: I imagine if there is a market for the screenings in Calgary the elevator operators will be glad to sell them to local farmers. I shall draw the attention of the grain commissioners to this matter. Of course, where there is no local demand, screenings are sometimes used for fuel.

7S6

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Lincoln Henry Jelliff: Apropos of what my colleague from Macleod (Mr. Coote) has been saying, I would call the attention of the minister to the value of these screenings in our mixed farming operations. I doubt if their value is sufficiently comprehended. We produced in what we call the Lethbridge freight district 22,000,000 bushels of wheat last year, constituting over one third of the entire wheat product of Alberta, and figuring the screenings at two per cent we would have about 450,000 bushels available if we had a storage elevator at say, Lethbridge, with proper cleaning facilities. I know three or four of our big sheep men have been sending their flocks to Fort William for the past two seasons to fatten them on elevator screenings. They figure that it takes about 250 pounds of screenings to carry a sheep through the hundred feeding days. On the basis of the re-cleaned screenings which we could have at Lethbridge, they figure we could increase our sheep by 76,000. In addition to that great benefit for the people of that part of the country, there would be the additional advantage of their being able to feed more poultry, pigs and other stock. It is costing us about $60,000 in freight to send these screenings to Fort William-an entirely unnecessary expense. I do hope the minister will communicate with the Board of Grain Commissioners and see if some method cannot be devised for cleaning a good deal of this grain nearer to the point of production, so that the mixed farmers and sheep growers of the locality may get the advantage of the by-product for their stock.


James Alexander Robb: I will.


Mr. EVANS:: This cracked wheat business is becoming very acute at times; last autumn the condition was the worst that I had ever known. As the minister is himself a miller, will he tell us if it is detrimental to the quality of flour if cracked wheat is mixed with the whole wheat? .


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend can quite understand, I am sure, that the admixture of cracked wheat makes a dark flour which I doubt very much if he would care to buy for his own family needs. Sometimes wheat is cracked in the thresher by incompetent threshers setting the cylinders too close. The miller will not buy cracked wheat simply because he cannot sell the flour produced from cracked wheat.


John Millar: Would it be practicable to grind the cracked wheat by itself for flour?


Mr ROBB:: There is a world market for flour, if any person thinks there is money [Mr. Robb.3
in dark flour he has every opportunity to try to create a demand for it.


Thomas Sales: 
Mr. MOTHER WELL:: That is the way it works.


Thomas Sales: That is exactly the way it works; I know by practical experience. In many cases it is the man's own fault because he will not be reasonable and have the fair thing done to him by the thresher. So far as the value of screenings is concerned, I would simply confirm what the minister says. At our own terminal at Port Arthur we burnt as much of it as we possibly could; we had more of it than we could use. As the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans) will remember, down at the head of the lakes they had been dumping the screenings around the trestle work supporting the railway approach to the elevator. Well, the water got in there; the material decomposed, and you could not go within a hundred yards of the elevator without holding your nose; it was worse than any rotten brewery or anything a man could imagine. We had to pay to have that stuff taken away and dumped into the lake. So that the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) will see that when he receives a dollar a ton for his screenings, he is probably receiving more than they are worth.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 32, to incorporate The Alert Guarantee Company of Canada.-Mr. Ladner.
Bill No. 33, respecting The Canadian Niagara Bride Company.-Mr. Stewart (Hamilton).
Bill No. 34, respecting the Huron and Erie Mortgage Corporation.

Mr. White.
Bill No. 35, respecting The Ottawa. Northern and Western Railway Company.-Mr. Mc-Giverin.
Bill No. 36, respecting The Quebec Central Railway Company.-Mr. Tobin.
Bill No. 37, to incorporate Buffalo and Fort Erie Bridge Company.-Mr. German.
Bill No. 38, respecting The Essex Terminal Railway Company.-Mr. German.
Bill No. 39, respecting The Rutland and Noyan Railway Company.-Mr. Tobin.
Bill No. 40, respecting a certain patent of Henry Matthew Wells and James .Edward Southcombe.-Mr. Maclean (Halifax).
50 i
[Stage Direction]
The House again in Committee of Supply,. Mr. Gordon in the chair.
George Newcombe Gordon: When the committee
ic.se at six o'clock we were considering item 303 "Administration of Canadian Gram Act." Shall the resolution carry?


Mr. GARDINER:: I believe it is understood, and I think it is provided in the act, that the grain commissioners shall be residents of Fort William or Port Arthur. Does the minister know whether the present commissioners reside in either of these places?


James Alexander Robb: It is quite true that the act
provides that the residence of the grain commissioners shall be in Port Arthur or For: William, but in practice it has been found ot advantage to the producers of grain for one of the commissioners to be moving about ir. different places, and' to spend more or less time at Winnipeg. I understand that they have their official residence at Fort William, just as a member of parliament has his residence at Ottawa while the House is in session, but I cannot tell my hon. friend whether taey spend all their time there. I should hardly think it practicable that they should.


Robert Gardiner: I understand that the commissioners have to devote all their time to the duties prescribed for them under the Grain Act. Can the minister tell us whether they are doing so?


James Alexander Robb: That is my understanding. If anybody knows anything to the contrary, I shall be glad to hear of it.


Archibald M. Carmichael: Does this item provide for the salaries of the commissioners, and if so, what are their salaries?
* Mr. ROBB: Yes, $6,000 to each of the commissioners and $6,500 to the chairman.


Mr. STEVENSON:: What is the reason for the increase of $178,839.


James Alexander Robb: It is partly due to statutory increases and, as I intimated this afternoon, in past years the item in the Main Estimates has usually not been sufficient and we have had to bring down a supplementary estimate. It is hoped that this item will cover the whole expenditure for the year.


John Millar: How much has been received this year from overages at the terminal elevators?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend will remember that during the afternoon there was an intimation made that this matter is in the courts

Supply-Trade and Commerce
and has not yet been determined, so the accounts have not been made up.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion Bureau of Statistics (including sixth census), $300,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: To what extent has the plan progressed for bringing the statistical branches of the various departments under this Bureau of Statistics? I am under the impression that the bureau is doing good work, but this sum is a heavy one. I presume that the statistical work connected with the census is diminishing. Would the minister give us an idea of the requirements making up this large sum?


James Alexander Robb: It has been the policy, which was inaugurated a few years ago, gradually to bring in all the statistical branches under the one head. That is almost completed now. Only last week, I think it was, we took over the statistical branch of the Labour department. There are the usual statutory increases. My hon. friend will note that there is a reduction of $115,000. The work in connection with the census of 1921 is gradually diminishing, but there is still some work to be done. It might interest the House to know that the population of Canada, according to the census of 1921, was 8,786,483.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to Canadian Engineering Standards Association for. the promotion of uniformity of standards in metallic and other products, $10,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: What I have to say on this item might as well apply both to this and the following resolution on the same page with reference to the Honorary Advisory Council of Industrial and Scientific Research. There has been under contemplation for some time the establishment of a Bureau of Standards or a Central Research Institute, and personally I think that is something that we should establish in a very definite manner as early as possible. It would appear from the estimates that we are spending a great deal of money indirectly in this connection, but we might have more efficiency and better results if even a little more money were expended and the bureau or institute established in a definite manner.
With reference to the work of the Research Council, I know of nothing of greater moment to the country at the present time than the fuel question. I listened the other day to a most interesting address by Sir Clifford Sifton and also had an interview with the fuel commissioner of the province of Quebec, Mr. Wanklyn, both of whom have given a great deal of thought' and study to this problem.

The suggestion was made by them:-it is not in any sense original, and I am not advancing it as such-that this body should devote itself during the coming year to research in connection with the fuel problem, and some very practical suggestions were made. For instance, it was pointed out that we were dependent upon anthracite coal from south of the line, and that repeatedly during the last two or three years efforts have been made in Congress and in state legislative bodies to put an embargo upon the exportation of coal to Canada. These are warnings that should not be disregarded. As a matter of fact, the shortage of coal this year has, I -night say, narrowly escaped being a tragedy in some instances. It seems perfectly clear that we cannot, in Canada, hope to depend, for fuel purposes, only on anthracite supplies from the United States. We have an abundance of soft coal, and while it is quite true that soft coal is not as suitable as anthracite for domestic use, it certainly will produce heat and, if properly handled, will serve, perhaps, almost as well as anthracite. On the Pacific coast we use nothing but soft coal; we get along very nicely with it and have no difficulty whatever. On the east coast there is an abundance of soft coal; in Alberta and British Columbia there are unlimited supplies of soft coal; yet in the great central district of Canada, where the industrial concerns are located and where you have congested populations, there is no, coal. The function of government, it seems to me, is to solve a problem of that kind. I do not mean to say that the minister or his department should take that responsibility; but we are spending a large sum of money on this research work, and it seems reasonable to suggest that a problem of that kind should be immediately referred to this body with a definite request that some action should be taken.
I might recite, for a moment, a suggestion made by Sir Clifford Sifton and Mr. Wanklyn. They suggested that there should be established, contiguous to the large centres, such as Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton and so on, coke ovens with the necessary equipment for saving the by-products; that soft coal from the Maritime provinces should be brought to those centres and out of that coal the gas made which, I am assured by some experts, could be supplied very cheaply to those centres for use as fuel; that the coke could also be used for fuel-and coke makes an excellent substitute for hard coal, as it is smokeless and fairly dustless-and in addition to. that, various by-products would be produced which, we all know, are of great

Supply-Trade and Commerce
value. That is a problem which, I suggest with great earnestness to {he minister, might be referred to this body, and if the appropriation proposed is not sufficient, parliament ought to vote a larger sum for that purpose. I look with a great deal of anxiety to the future, if we are to have each year a recurrence of this fuel problem, each year getting more acute and fraught with greater danger to the public, to industry and to the welfare of the community generally. I throw out this suggestion for the consideration of the minister now that we have these two items before us.


John Millar: Would a discussion on standardization of machinery, particularly farm machinery and the parts thereof, properly come under this head?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


John Millar: Then I should like to deal with that matter just for a few minutes. This is a matter of considerable importance, and I should like to see it fully discussed in parliament. In past years, a great deal of difficulty has arisen owing to the fact that even the same kind of implement manufactured by a firm in different years, has parts that are just a little different. For instance, if you break a part of a bindei purchased in 1921, you may find that the part you would buy for 1922 would, perhaps, not just quite fit. If you buy a wagon of a certain make, and a nut or a bolt is lost, you will find that the same part from another wagon will not fit, will not serve as a repair. I have no hesitation in saying that those who manufacture the machinery are not anxious that these parts should fit. We often find ourselves in this position. A part of a binder or a wagon or some other farm implement is missing, or, perhaps, more than one part; we find that those parts are not in the repair shop; we cannot get them, and we are under the obligation of throwing the implement aside altogether, although it may not be nearly worn out, and purchasing a new implement. If something were done to cause the various parts of farm machinery to be standardized, so that nuts and other parts of one implement would readily apply on another as far as practicable - and I think a great deal could be done that is not now being done-much loss and expense would be saved. This is something in which farmers are very much interested. I do not know that I have any positive proof except from conversation with those who should know much more about this matter than I do; but they have told me and given me
sufficient proof that those who are manufacturing those implements are not anxious that the parts should be standardized, and are not likely to standardize them unless they are compelled to do so.


Charles A. Stewart: In reply
to the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens), I might say that in the Mines department, we are taking active steps to test low-grade coals, just by the method as outlined by my hon. friend and as suggested by Sir Clifford Sifton. Early last fall we began to be interested in this question on account of the probability of a fuel shortage in Ontario and Quebec. We have made considerable investigations, and officials of the Mines branch are working on the technical aspects of this problem, in close association with the work of the United States bureau of mines. The problem, as it would appear at the moment, is one of transportation and supply. According to statistics available regarding supplies in eastern Canada -and I speak particularly of the Nova Scotia fields-the probable maximum output of the fields of Nova Scotia would be, if the mines were run at full capacity, about 8,000,000 tons. If a plant were established, say at the city of Montreal, for the conversion of this bituminous coal by the coking process, and the by-products utilized in that city, this would just about supply the necessities of the province of Quebec.	Therefore, the
more pressing problem, that of the fuel supply for Ontario,	will have	to be foundfrom	some	other source,	and wehave	turned	our attention	to those
bituminous fields of the United States that are within three or four hundred miles, say, of the city of Toronto, where a similar plant might be established. Plants might be established also at the other larger centres throughout Ontario.
I should be pleased if it were possible to utilize an all-Canadian supply, but we believe at the moment that that is rather a difficult matter owing to transportation, because the supply would have to be brought from the western coalfields, entailing a haul of over 1,200 or 1,300 miles, if not almost 2,000. The haulage would add so much to the cost that it would render the price practically prohibitive.
The Scientific Research Council has instituted experiments in the briquetting and treating of coal in Manitoba. The Manitoba and Saskatchewan governments, joined by the federal authorities, have for some years been carrying on experiments in the attempt to carbonize and briquette that product. Some-

Supply-Tmdf and Commerce
thing like $800,000 or $900,000 has been expended in this experiment and there is a complete plant established at Bienfait, in Saskatchewan; but so far that experiment has not been successful. Within the last month our attention has been directed to an experiment that has been in progress at the University of Dakota, and we have shipped two carloads of coal from the Bienfait district to that plant. One of our fuel experts witnessed the experiment and reports that they were successful in carbonizing our coal at that particular point. To construct one of these units is not nearly so expensive as the units that have been constructed and which have proved to be a failure at Bienfait. ' About $1,600 will construct one of them. But one of the practical difficulties in the carbonizing process is briquetting, and that problem has not yet been solved. True, in the initial experiments carried on by the Mines branch in a small way on two or three ocassions they were successful in the briquetting process. But so far the development of these experiments has shown that on a large scale these tests are not reliable, and a good deal more remains to be discovered in connection with briquetting.
What my hon. friend suggests has been tried in North Dakota and in the western states, where they have been experimenting with a grate that can be placed in the stoves to burn the carbonized product in its powdered state without briquetting. Of course, they can purchase that product at greatly reduced prices; but after all it is hard to keep for any considerable time. The technical work in connection with these experiments will be carried on. With regard to the problem of coking the bituminous products of Nova Scotia and the area that is contiguous to the central portion of Ontario, that in our opinion at the moment would seem to be the method of solving this somewhat serious problem, so far at any rate as Ontario is concerned.


Donald Sutherland: What success has
been achieved in briquetting peat in Ontario?
I believe that experiments have been conducted for a number of years. Have they been successful to any extent?


Charles A. Stewart: Experiments carried on with respect to the utilization of peat as a fuel are not new from the point of view of the methods employed in the older countries of Europe and in the United States. You do hear from time to time that it is possible to dry peat artificially. I am not prepared to deny that. But I may say that Mr. Camsell has visited Germany this year, has
(Mr. C. A. Stewart.]
examined the operation in England, and has consulted with the Bureau of Mines of the United States, and the advice we have received is that it is a somewhat expensive process. Therefore at Alfred, where experiments have been carried on, attention has been directed to the sun-dried process. That involves the perfecting of machinery to obviate* manual labour as far as possible in order to cheapen production. This year, while they have not such machinery as they would like to see installed, they nevertheless have sufficient knowledge, from the experiments that have been conducted over a period of two or three years, to warrant them in the statement that they can successfully manufacture peat and air-dry it at a cost of about $3.50 per ton delivered at the station. One of the difficulties again is the matter of transportation, because the commodity is bulky; and, quoting from memory, I think the rate from Alfred to Ottawa, a distance of some fifty miles, is about $1.40 per ton. It is evident therefore that it cannot be conveyed over very long distances. As a subsidiary fuel of low grade, however, there is no doubt that it would be of immense value to the province of Ontario where there are so many large peat bogs all within fairly close reach of the larger centres. Experience shows that with the machinery now in existence it Is possible to manufacture peat at the price I have quote'd, namely, $3.50 per ton. Of course, it must be remembered that no very large output can be produced, because the season is short, and as the product must be sun-dried, it must be produced and manufactured during the midsummer months. So that if we happen to have wet weather or dark days the output is accordingly reduced.


Arthur Meighen: I want to take the opportunity of impressing on the government the imperious necessity, not of experimenting with this thing or that, but of making certain that we do not in Canada face another winter in the perilous condition we faced this. It is all right to have a lignite board trying various chemical experiments with briquetting and carbonizing lignite. It is proper also to be testing coke ovens, and we may perhaps expect a little there. We may look, too, with a little hope to our peat bogs. These may be all right. In time possibly, in time almost certainly, one or more, maybe all of these will be of real value. But the chances of any one of them meeting a really acute fuel famine next winter are practically nil. This year we came to the verge of winter, in fact we stumbled through it, merely trusting to luck. There was no provision made. We had no definite, reliable understanding with the United States; and we

Supply-Trade and Commerce
found ourselves in the middle of winter with children dying. Unquestionably many lives were lost this winter among the poorer classes, especially in the larger cities, because of insufficient heat and an utter inability to get the means of supplying it. We found ourselves in that condition this winter, compelled to send our representatives to bend their knees to American fuel controllers and beg of them the favour of a little coal. It will not do for this country to be in that position again.
Now you ask, "What can we do?" There are measures we can take so as to be absolutely sure of having coal. We have the coal ourselves. We not only have bituminous coal, we have anthracite as well. We have coal lor all our industrial purposes undoubtedly, but I mean we have coal for the heating of our homes; for this purpose we have a grade of coal just as good as any we import; we have it in Alberta, we have it in British Columbia. The minister says that the freight is high. So it is. But the mining of the coal is very easy. Our anthracite mines are not yet reached by railway facilities, but it does not take very long to construct a railway from the end of steel to-day to one or more of our anthracite deposits; it would not take a heavy capital investment; and I venture this conjecture, that that anthracite can be mined at more than one point at	a cost very little exceeding a
couple of dollars per ton. At present prices of anthracite coal in Ontario that leaves a pretty big margin for the carrying of that coal into this province even to compete against the Pennsylvania product.
But it is not a matter of competition. It is a matter of getting coal, it is a matter of ensuring this country against a fuel famine,
. and against further humiliation. Let me repeat, it is not something to be overcome by merely relying on the precarious success of this or that experiment and talking vaguely of doing something this way or that. It is necessary to take action to ensure, as we must ensure at whatever cost the insurance may be against the people being confronted with another fuel famine next winter. We were not in this danger in years gone by; this last winter has shown us the very real danger we are in.
I have had estimates given me of the actual cost of bringing coal within at least the radius of Nova Scotia coal distribution, and the figures are not such as to make it prohibitive even in competition with the anthracite product. But again, I repeat, whether the figures go beyond the limit that would bring it within the radius of competition with the anthracite product or not, means must be
found to see that we are on a sound basis so far as our fuel is concerned before another winter is upon us.


Charles A. Stewart: There is
rx anthracite coal within eighty miles of any railway in the province of Alberta.


Arthur Meighen: What is eighty miles?


Charles A. Stewart: It is not
anything. But my hon. friend speaks of the condition last winter. Clearly we could not build a railway eighty miles long during the winter.


Arthur Meighen: I did not say that.


Charles A. Stewart: Well, my
hon. friend intimated that it was a very small matter, but he perhaps does not understand that it will cost $4,000,000 to construct eighty miles of railway to reach anthracite coal deposits west of High River, which is the nearest Albertan point I know of at the present moment. There is no anthracite coal in Nova Scotia. True, you can bring the product of Nova Scotia into the heart of Ontario during the summer season, but it is a low grade coal and cannot be utilized in our domestic furnaces.
What I was speaking of was not the immediate demand for fuel. It it were a burning necessity, coal could be brought from Alberta to Ontario to-day, but it would be at a prohibitive price. The utmost limit of coal haulage is about five hundred miles. Now, should we not be alive to a problem that is bound to become more serious as the years go by? It is not at all improbable that the Americans will prohibit the exportation of anthracite coal within the very near future. Therefore is it not good business to prepare for that day by the utilization of our domestic product? If we had coal deposits within four or five hundred miles of the city of Toronto, then it would be quite reasonable to devote every energy to bringing it to the central portions of Ontario. But within three hundred and fifty miles we have just the same grade in the United States, bituminous coal of the same character as Nova Scotia's, that can be treated as I have outlined. It seems to me that that is the problem we should tackle at once.
I am not unmindful of the fact, and as a resident of Alberta I would be delighted to think, that we could at a reasonable rate, supply the people of Ontario or any other part of Canada with the immense quantities of fuel that we will have for sale in that province for the next three or four decades. But I think the cost of transportation will make it out of the question. With the product that can be

Supply-Trade and Commerce
secured for the province of Quebec from the coal mines of Nova Scotia, although limited, and with the product that can be secured from the United States without fear of having an embargo placed upon it, treated in the central districts as I have outlined, we will, I think, in a much more reasonable way be able to solve this question from the financial standpoint.


John Millar: Would the cost of Alberta coal laid down in Ontario be higher than we in the prairie provinces are paying for Pennsylvania coal at the present time-$28 a ton?


Charles A. Stewart: Oh no, I think you could lay down the Alberta product at about $16.50 per ton. That is based on the rates charged from the mines to Winnipeg a year or two ago.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has furnished the information that exactly completes m.y argument. I want him to understand that I was not objecting to the endeavours being made now in the Mines department and in the Interior department, or to the plans outlined by the minister. How could I? I think I was instrumental in commencing two of them. But the matter has reached such a crucial stage that we cannot rely on such methods. The minister says that we are not in great danger because in a pinch we can bring in Nova Scotia and Alberta coal. But we cannot bring it in in a pinch. That is exactly what I want to drive home to the minister. We cannot bring Alberta coal in here when we get into the depths of next winter at a time when Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta wheat is flowing eastward; we will not have the railway facilities to move coal as well. We can ensure against another fuel famine next winter by getting the coal here ahead of time, and if we can lay it down in Ontario at $16 a ton, that is less than I am paying to-day. If it is possible to burn the bituminous coal of Nova Scotia in our furnaces, well and good, but I do not know. I have heard the present Solicitor General (Mr. McKenzie) display considerable erudition in trying to convince this House that the people of Ontario ought to burn the bituminous coal of his province, and he assured us that they would get far better results at the difference in prices.


Charles A. Stewart: You cannot burn it in grates.


Arthur Meighen: There is a difference in the government on that point; but that is not the only point on which there is a difference among them.


Mr. McKENZIE:: Get another grade.


Arthur Meighen: Let the hon. minister take either horn of the dilemma. If we cannot utilize Nova Scotia bituminous coal we have got to build the eighty miles of railway referred to into the anthracite deposits of Alberta. Let the people be warned in time. Let us arrange to get coal from both ends of the Dominion. Do not let us trust to luck, for if we do we are depending on a very slender reed.


Charles A. Stewart: I have had an experience of sixteen years in connection with the burning of the lignite products of Alberta. I am assuming, of course, that my hon. friend did not say


Arthur Meighen: I do not mean lignite- bituminous products, say.


Charles A. Stewart: Bituminous is not available. This coal is not more than a semi-anthracite; it hardly falls within the class of the anthracite of Pennsylvania. Tests have been made at the university and elsewhere of all these grades of coal. The difficulty with our product is that you cannot utilize it if it is stored in midsummer-at least, not without great waste, and waste is a very potent factor where such a tremendous freight rate has to be paid. So I want my right hon. friend to realize that it is not all as easy as it looks. He suggests storing the product of Nova Scotia, but you could not burn the product of Nova Scotia in your present anthracite grates; you would have to have special grates. True, it has been done by Mr. Gray, one of the officials of the Dominion Steel Company, but when used in his anthracite furnace it was mixed with coke,, with fairly successful results. There is nothing mysterious in connection with this thing.
I do not think we need experiment on it for two or three years; results can be quickly obtained, but we must start upon definite lines in arriving at a solution. It is not my problem to solve the fuel difficulties of this winter; that was left to another board. My task is to endeavour to solve the problem permanently for this central part of Canada.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I think the minister has mistaken the point of my observations of a moment ago. I do not wish in any sense to cast a reflection on the efforts of the Department of Mines. What I want to point out is that under these two votes we are spending a very considerable sum on scientific iesearch.
I believe the government would get results if they instructed a body of scientists such as we have here to solve this problem, and gave them sufficient money to do it. I am aware of the efforts being made by the Mines depart-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
ment in seeking to utilize these lignite deposits of western Canada. Now, that is a problem-


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend is absolutely wrong. The Mines department have nothing to do with that; the Research Council is in charge of it. I hope you will not blame the Mines department for anything in that connection.


Henry Herbert Stevens: My hon. friend will admit that it is under the Interior department that these experiments are proceeding.


Charles A. Stewart: No, it is not.. Mr. MEIGHEN: It was.


Charles A. Stewart: The scientific research body is under the control of the Department of Trade and Commerce. The reports from the Lignite Utilization Board come to the Department of Mines. Within the last year, in order to see that we are getting value for these experiments, we have taken a direct interest in the matter; I have had the deputy minister follow every step of the investigation that has been carried on,


Henry Herbert Stevens: Does that not emphasize the point I am making? My hon. friend gives us quite a lengthy explanation of what is being done to solve the fuel problem; then he says that the experiments are under some other department and that his department is taking an interest in the matter.


Charles A. Stewart: Let me put my hon. friend right-


Henry Herbert Stevens: Let us brush away these trivial points. What I am getting at is that we have a fuel problem, and I suggest that the government should definitely instruct the Advisory Council on Scientific and Industrial Research that that problem needs solution and needs it quickly. Half a dozen solutions have been suggested. One is to use a coke oven for the coal of the Maritime provinces; another is to bring in American bituminous coal; another is to bring coal to this part of Canada all the way from Alberta. I will add two more: you can get Welsh coal from Great Britain at a-very low price; I venture to say it can be landed in Montreal just as cheaply as some of the bituminous coal from the United States. Certainly Pacific coast soft coal could be landed in Montreal or at the head of navigation as cheaply as coal from Alberta. So that there are many suggestions to make, but we seem to be rambling around, one department looking at one side of the question and the Research Council looking at another-no one seems to be responsible.
If this vote is not large enough, let us make it large enough to attack seriously and solve this fuel problem.


Charles A. Stewart: What I
object to is the charge of the hon. member that this is a mix-up affair. I hope I have not misled him to that extent. The experiment at Bienfait was instituted and carried on by the Research Council under the supervision of Mr. Ross, who was chairman of a committee of the council appointed for that purpose. That committee was entirely outside the Mines department or the Department of the Interior or anyone else. The money was voted by Parliament and was expended under the supervision of 9 p.m. that committee until a year ago; in fact, it is still under their supervision.


Arthur Meighen: To what minister do those in charge of that lignite investigation report, and what minister puts in the estimates? I may tell the minister that when I was there they reported to me; they went over all their accounts with me, and it was through me that the recommendations were made to council.


Charles A. Stewart: My right hon. friend is speaking now of the committee?


Arthur Meighen: Of the lignite committee.


Charles A. Stewart: It is true I got reports that were submitted to Sir James Lougheed, and ' it is true also that I had to make a, report on this matter last year. But my right hon. friend will not argue that that committee was under the control of the department or took advice from the department?


Arthur Meighen: Oh yes. It is under the departmental control, just as, for example, the old Conservation Commission was under the control of the Department of Agriculture. Its estimates are subject to the recommendation of the minister. It does not take its direction scientifically from the minister, but it is under the control of the government. It is not a commission that is at large and subject to parliament, like the Civil Service Commission. It is responsible to the department over which my hon. friend has control.


Charles A. Stewart: Did my
right hon. friend have anything to do with the appointment of this committee?


Arthur Meighen: No. It was appointed before I got there; that is why I did not.


Charles A. Stewart: I may be entirely wrong, but that is not the impression

Supply-Trade and Commerce
I got of the matter. That committee was appointed by the Research Council. True, for the purpose of making reports and getting the necessary money, it was placed under one of the departments of government, the Department of Mines. Now, we understand the situation; what I am anxious to point out is that, when I came on the scene no one in. the department that I knew of was willing to take the responsibility for that committee. I do not think that is the best way to spend money, and that is why I have instituted in the Department of Mines this committee of technical men to work on this problem, being under the control of and responsible to the Department of Mines. I have done the best I could to get value for the expenditure made at this plant out west, but in fairness to the Department of Mines I want to' make it very clear that they are not and have not been responsible for these experiments. For the experiments carried on now, however, they will be responsible and the department will be responsible. That is what I have been trying to convey. My hon. friend (Mr. Stevens) says that we are mixed up in this matter. To some extent we are, but I am trying to finish an experiment started by another body. I have not, as yet, suggested that the work be taken away from them; I think they ought to be allowed to finish it. But that is not the case in so far as the coking of the coals of Nova Scotia- which I am proposing to-night for the purpose of solving this problem-is concerned. That is directly under the, control of the Department of Mines, and of the minister.


Mr. HOCKEN:: I want to ask the minister a question that is not so greatly involved as the one we are just discussing. I agree with the necessity of beginning now to provide a supply of fuel for the people of this country, especially those in the central parts of Canada, for next winter, and having regard to the necessities of the province of Ontario, and to the fact that there are large deposits of peat in that province, I would ask what the department are doing to make it possible to use these peat deposits in the neighbourhoods where they are located.


Charles A. Stewart: I do not know that I can speak of the time when the experiments were started. I may say, however, that the expense is borne partly by the government of Ontario and partly by the federal government, and the experiments were' carried on under the direct supervision of the Mines departments of the two governments. The experiments have been conducted at Alfred, a place about fifty miles from this city, 
between here and Montreal, and I have just announced to the committee that a report has been made to the federal and Ontario governments that they have perfected machinery , that can produce sun-dried peat at $3.50 per ton. I may add that I think that after the technical and scientific part of the experiment has been carried out, it is hardly the business of the government to conduct the commercial end of the undertaking.


Robert Forke: I am not very sure that I shall be in order in what I am going to say, but my statement is perhaps very well known to the Minister of the Interior. In regard to Alberta coal I have heard some discussion tonight as to the suitability of grates that have been burning anthracite for the burning of Alberta and softer coals. I do not know that there is any hard coal being burned in the province of Manitoba to-day to any extent outside the city of Winnipeg. A few years ago everyone had to purchase anthracite to burn in his furnace. To-day the people of the province of Manitoba generally speaking, are burning soft coal and experiencing no trouble in the world. I am talking from personal experience. We have had better heating results with coal from the Alberta mines than we ever obtained with anthracite ; that is in the use of coal in the common furnaces.
I have a statement here made by an Alberta miner which may prove of interest. The letter is dated November 24, 1922 and the writer says:
Practically all of the mines in Alberta are closed to-day for want of orders, althongh winter has not commenced yet. There are enough mines in Alberta to practically bury Ontario in coal in six months.
I have no doubt that the present mines, operating full time with their present staff, could ship at least four times the quantity of coal in a year that they are now doing.
The writer figures out-and I have no doubt the minister is familiar with these figures- that coal can be carried from Edmonton to Toronto at $6 per ton. Obtaining coal from this source would provide a tremendous amount of all the year round labour for the Alberta miners. It would also yield a great amount of traffic for the Canadian National railway and, perhaps, would do something towards putting it on a paying basis.
I canot go into the figures to-night, although I have a detailed statment here, as to the rate per ton per mile and the load that a train could carry from Alberta to Toronto.
I am not an expert on the subject but from the figures in my possession I think it is commercially feasible. At any rate it is worth looking into. It seems a strange thing

Supply-Trade and Commerce
that although Alberta has such tremendous resources in coal Ontario to-day should be suffering for the want of that fuel. In the Maritime provinces also there is an abundance of coal. It is just a question of how it can be the most promptly and cheaply transported. The writer of this letter has gone into the matter very accurately, I think, and he makes the statement that the carrying of Alberta coal from Alberta to the western part of Ontario has never been seriously considered by the management of the Canadian National Railways.
I think, perhaps, the greatest trouble with the Alberta coal is the fact of its slacking. Let me say that there are certain of the,mines in Alberta that I know of that keep the coal for months and it remains perfectly whole and perfectly good. In view of the fact that we have the coal and the transportation facilities, is it not worth while looking into the possibilities of carrying that coal over our own National system and perhaps saving to the people of Canada at least $125,000,000 that now goes each year to the United States? By developing our own coal resources, and carrying the fuel to the points where it is reeded, we should provide work for our own people. It is a proposition, in my opinion, that is well rvorth looking into.


Charles A. Stewart: There was
a fuel famine about five years ago, and it took a very considerable amount of money and persuasion on the part of the Alberta government to induce the people of Manitoba to bum the lignite coal. It costs to-day about $4.75 a ton for coal on board the car. That is the rate in Alberta at the moment, and it costs about $4.25 a ton to ship to' Winnipeg. That is about the same rate that is being charged for the transportation of wheat. The qost of | transportation from Winnipeg to Ontario would have to be added to the figure as it applies to coal.


Edward Joseph Garland: Is the hon. gentleman quite sure as to the freight figures to Winnipeg.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.
Mr. FORIvE: I do not think they are right but if the minister is sure we will let it go at that.


Charles A. Stewart: The $4.25?
Unless there has been a reduction in the last year that figure is right.


Robert Forke: Coal is hauled in mixed
trains, and in all shapes. If you loaded a train at Edmonton, one of these big heavy trains, it could be hauled very much cheapen in a continuous journey all the way down than
ic could be hauled into Manitoba in the way in which it is now handled. People are very hard on the miners sometimes, but when the men are only working about half time, they require double the wages to maintain themselves and their families and so it becomes very expensive to mine coal under the present conditions. I think very few people are well acquainted with the conditions under which miners work when they complain about the wages the miners enjoy. When it is realized that they lack' employment sometimes for six months in the year the necessity for the prevailing rate of wages is apparent. Now that we have a new management of the Canadian National Railways I think it would be wise for them to look into the conditions and see whether something along the lines indicated could not be done.


Mr. WARNER:: Are the Fuel Commission or the government seeking further means to promote the transportation of coal from Alberta to Manitoba? We are very much interested in that. I understood when discussing this matter with a member of the Fuel Commission not long ago th$t coal was brought from as far as 2,100 miles and landed at Winnipeg where it was being used instead of our Alberta coal. I do not know the reason for that, but if there is any good reason, I should like to know it. It is possible that conditions were such as to justify bringing coal from that distance from another country when it could have been purchased only six or seven or eight hundred miles away at the most, from Winnipeg. We have had evidence here tonight that they have been using our Alberta coal and find that it answers the purpose very well. I think there are good grounds for investigating this question. We are in a position in Canada where we cannot afford to ignore any means of keeping money in our own country, employing our own labour, and paying the coal miners and the mine operators for getting this wealth out of the ground. I would like to impress upon the government that it would be worth while adopting measures to facilitate such a development. It is really a serious matter. We in Alberta need the money for our coal just as much as the people in Manitoba need our fuel. If that were done, it would relieve the situation more or less, because the coal that comes in from the United States could then be distributed throughout Ontario instead of being taken up to Winnipeg and the west, which our Alberta coal could supply. I should like to know what the government or the fuel commission are doing along this line, if they are doing anything.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


James Alexander Robb: If this debate will awaken the people of Canada to the importance of the coal situation and prevent them from forgetting as soon as hot weather comes in June that there is another winter ahead, it will be time well spent. I am not prepared to agree with my right hon. friend, the leader of the Opposition, that this has been the first year of coal shortage, or the worst year for getting coal in Canada. Periodically a coal shortage develops in this country.


Arthur Meighen: Does the minister say that there has been any year worse than this? Scarcely any one in Canada can get coal.


George Perry Graham: Nonsense.


Arthur Meighen: I wish the hon. gentleman were in my position. I am not a member of the government.


George Perry Graham: But you are not the whole of Canada.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know why it should be more difficult for me to get it than the ordinary man. Besides, we come in contact with many in just the same situation. This is the first really acute year of a coal shortage in Canada.


George Perry Graham: Not at all.


Arthur Meighen: I would like the minister to visit our cities. There has been no suffering at all till this year but this year there has been widespread and acute suffering.


James Alexander Robb: There has been suffering, but I contend that this has not been the first nor the worst year, and I am quoting the statements made by coal dealers who should know something about it.


Arthur Meighen: It is a pretty good year for them.


James Alexander Robb: We will not quarrel over it. I quite agree that we should try to use our own coal, but there is no use boasting that we have a large coal supply in the West and then freezing through the winter. I am not prepared to go as far as some hon. gentlemen and say that there is anthracite in Alberta, but I am told that there is a very good quality of coal there, and if that were developed it would also be an advantage to our National Railways to move that coal east. So much for coal.
The Lignite Utilization Board is the organization that has control over the experiments at Bienfait in Saskatchewan. The committee of the Industrial Research Council in their report say that they turned over entirely to the Lignite Utilization Board the carrying on 
of research work in that connection. And may I remind my right hon. friend that it was he himself who was responsible for creating the Industrial Research Council, and that it was during his period of administration that this experimental work at Bienfait was turned over by the Research Council to the Lignite Utilization Board? This board is financed jointly by the Dominion government, the government of Manitoba and the government of Saskatchewan.
Like my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens), the other evening I listened to the speech of Sir Clifford Sifton, who is a student and goes deeply into these questions, and the thought occurred to me: If this is as good a proposition as Sir Clifford Sifton thinks, it is a great chance for wealthy men to invest their money and go into the business in Montreal. I confess that Sir Clifford Sifton almost convinced me that it would be a paying proposition to float Nova Scotia coal to Montreal, heat that city with the gas derived from that coal, and ship the coke to the country districts, incidentally deriving considerable revenue from dyes and other byproducts. If he was correct, that would be a profitable venture for some business men to go into. I hope hon. gentlemen do not expect the governments of this country, either federal or provincial governments, to put coal into the bins of the people. Surely we have not yet reached that point. The people must do something for themselves, and if miners go out on strike in Pennsylvania and we allow the newspapers to lead us to believe that the strike is going to be settled to-morrow for all summer, and we go on in that expectation, we may find ourselves in the same position next winter as we did this year. I think we should give it out to the people of this country that they must look after themselves a little bit. They cannot always leave it to the government to provide them with coal, and bread and butter. It is a business proposition and the people must look after themselves.
My hon. friend from Qu'Appelle (Mr. Millar) asked a question about the standardization of parts of agricultural implements. It may interest him to know that two or three years ago the then member for Kent, now a member of the Upper Chamber, brought in a resolution for that purpose and the matter was referred to the Agricultural committee. That committee had the manufacturers of agricultural implements before them and went into the matter very thoroughly, and they did arrive at some conclusion regarding the minor parts of agricultural implements, but they did not accomplish all they desired. My hon. friend says that the government should go

Supply-Trade and Commerce
so far as to force the agricultural implement makers to standardize parts. So far as possible it is very desirable that there should be uniformity of parts, that parts of different machines should fit one into another. But is it in the interest of users of agricultural implements that the government introduce such legislation as the hon. member suggests? You cannot compel the manufacturer of an agricultural implement in any country outside of Canada to make the parts uniform. If you force Canadian manufacturers to do that, you are creating a great monopoly and you are giving the people having that monopoly an advantage in our country by destroying competition which you wish from other countries. Therefore, I am not sure that it would be to the advantage of users of agricultural implements to pass legislation compelling manufacturers to make the parts uniform.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: Notwithstanding the fact that the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Robb) has asked that the question of coal be laid to rest and the item pass, the .question of the coal supply is, perhaps, one of the most important questions for residents of Ontario at the present time. IjTo one who lives in cities in western Ontario can deny that there has been a very large amount of suffering during the present winter on account of the coal shortage. We have experienced it; we know it. We have not had the coal, and what coal we have had, we have had to pay a very high price for. We hear from people who seem to know and we read in the newspapers that our experience of this present winter may possibly be repeated next year, or if not next winter, then the following winter. This all depends on whether or not another strike occurs in the United States coal fields.


James Alexander Robb: Or in Canada.


Hugh Guthrie: Or in Canada. An athra-cite coal strike in the United States is a most serious thing for the ordinary householder in Ontario. It may be that another strike will not occur in those coal fields next summer, or next winter, or for a year or two to come; but there is still a possibility that these strikes will occur. During the last five or ten years there have been a large number of such strikes, and in some of those years we have certainly experienced a coal shortage in Ontario. I believe the seriousness of the coal shortage was greater this year than ever before. In the city in which I live I have had more complaints this year than ever before, as to both scarcity and price, and there is a prospect of this problem getting worse rather
than better. It is one of those questions which we must face in Ontario and in the Dominion of Canada.
I do not take the view of the Minister of Trade and Commerce that it is a question with which the government has little or nothing to do. He should realize that in facing a coal shortage in central Canada, we are facing something in the nature of a national calamity. The people have a right to look to the government for direction, assistance and protection in the matter of a national calamity, and they will look to the government and hold the government responsible. The question which interests us most in Ontario is: What is the government doing as regards this question? What steps is it taking, or what does it propose to do? No one on this side of the House or in any part of Canada would, I think, for a moment question the propriety of the government expending money in experimenting along lines such as those described by the minister to-night. That is well and good but it is highly speculative. It may eventually result in some relief in this country; but it is a very indefinite matter, and the relief may be long postponed. The question is: What are we going to do in the meantime?
If I understood the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) aright as he spoke to-night - he has left- the chamber, I am sorry to say- his proposal is simply that this country could take care of the province of Quebec, which has no coal, if Quebec had the use of the whole output of the mines of Nova Scotia, which output he estimates at about 8,000,000 tons. That, he says, would provide reasonably well for Quebec, and then the problem of a supply for Ontario would arise. I understand, in Ontario, we use some ten or twelve million tons, and we have no coal in our province. The minister says that we cannot bring coal from Alberta to Ontario on account of the long haul. Let me tell him that many cities in Ontario this winter have brought coal from Wales, and the people have been using Welsh coal. It is true we have had to pay a high price for it. If we can use Welsh coal, surely we can use Alberta coal. The Minister of the Interior intimated pretty clearly that, on account of the quality of Alberta coal and the long railway haul, the use of it in Ontario at the present time is hardly a practical question.
What does he propose? He says that there are coal fields in the United States within 300 or 350 miles of Ontario, and an abundant supply of bituminous coal can be derived therefrom. That is the point that rather

Supply-Trade and Commerce
puzzles me. I have read in American papers within the past two weeks that if another strike takes place in the anthracite fields, great distress will be caused in the United States, and the result will be that the whole output of soft coal of the United States will be used in the United States and that Canada will get neither anthracite nor bituminous coal from the United States. That is a condition which must be considered. It may not be a probability; but it is a possibility and one which the government should consider. We are faced with a real difficulty and means must be found to avert it. If the condition arises again next winter as it did this winter; if it becomes more grave next winter, as it may possibly become, the government is bound to take care of such a situation. It is bound to protect and to direct and to assist, and the time to lay its plans is now, not later on in the season, not waiting, as the minister will say, until next autumn, until the acute situation actually arises. Let plans be made now. Give the people a lead in the matter. It is all very well for the Minister of Trade and Commerce to say-


Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):: What plans, if any, has the hon. member in mind that should be laid now?


Hugh Guthrie: I do not know that I have a definite plan, and I do not know that I would be called upon to explain it if I had one, although I would be glad to do so. But a government in office for the purpose of governing and taking care of the country should immediately get busy and devise a plan. What ran through my mind was something in the nature of coal depots to be established at various points in Ontario. Whether those depots were to be supplied with Alberta coal, or Nova Scotia coal, or Welsh coal, I could not form a very reasonable conclusion. Then, if the difficulty arises, we shall at least be carried through what may or may not be another hard winter. It is the government's work to look after that, and the people of Ontario feel very much interested in this question. Letters have come, I fancy, from Ontario to every member of this House during the present session. I know I have been interviewed. I have had communications, and the question is: Is the government prepared to direct, to undertake, to help, and if so, will it lay its plans now?


George Perry Graham: I am Sony to detain these estimates, but I imagine we are all speaking at quite a distance from them. I do not rise to discuss this coal question in detail or at 
any length, because at a future time I wish to take it up in connection with the work done by Mr. Magrath and Mr. McCourt during the past year. But I should not like the idea to go out that the United States has not been dealing fairly with Canada in the coal situation this winter or is not dealing fairly now. As a matter of fact northern New York, to put it mildly, has been as hard pressed on account of the lack of fuel as Ontario has been. I know of one instance in which Pennsylvania anthracite was sent from an Ontario town to a town in New York state to help them out. The United States has acted fairly in the matter in every respect, and I have no doubt that hon. members would endorse that statement if they were acquainted with all the facts. It is true that some gentlemen in the United States, I will not call them agitators, did attempt to stop the export of anthracite into Ontario and Quebec. But when it came to a showdown before the authorities they were brushed aside and the export was permitted, Canada receiving, I think, all she had a right to expect under the circumstances.
As to the lack of coal, we all agree that there is a sufficient pupply on the American continent to keep us all warm and provide for all our necessities. But that is not the trouble When the operators and the owners fall out i' makes no difference what supply Providence has deposited in the earth; we do not get it, and that is all there is to it. It does not matter whether the disagreement takes place in Pennsylvania or in Canada, the supply depends on the ability to bring it to the surface and have it transported. And the United States has just as much trouble, notwithstanding its large deposits, as we have in Ontario. Suppose all plans were laid for bringing the coal from Alberta to Ontario; if the same trouble arose in Alberta as in Pennsylvania we should not be able to get coal from that province any more than we could from Pennsylvania, because it would not be mined. I intend to speak at greater length on this subject on a future occasion when I have all the data, but at the moment I want to point out that the root of the trouble does not lie in the fact that there is not a supply of coal close at hand, although it may be in the United States; it lies in the fact that the coal is not produced at the mines. I think we bum about 4,000,000 tons of anthracite in Ontario and Quebec annually, and this year we have had only a percentage of that, so that we have been left in a straitened condition. Some cities, I believe, have suffered considerably, although some parts of the country have suffered to a greater

Supply-Trade and Commerce
extent than others. As a matter of fact the districts I am in touch with suffered less 'this year than two years ago. That, however, is only a matter of comparison. No doubt it does seem queer to people generally that while we in Canada have an immense supply of coal there should be a lack of fuel. My hon. friend spoke about depots. This proposition would be a good one, I think, if the coal to be stored were Pennsylvania anthracite. But some of the coal we have in Canada would not retain its quality when placed in these depots, and that, of course, would make a difference. Some of the coal in Canada does not stand the weather and will not retain its heating and steaming qualities when stored in large piles or exposed to the air for any length of time. And that is one of the difficulties that arise in transporting our coal any very great distance.


Robert Forke: A good many of the coal sheds in Manitoba are filled in the summer and the coal keeps all right until winter. 1 do not think it slacks to such an extent as to present any insuperable difficulty.


George Perry Graham: I did not refer to any
particular coal. I have been discussing the matter with Mr. Magrath a good deal, and expect to have more data. But let me emphasize again that we do not want it to go out from this House that we believe we have been humiliated in the United States or treated unfairly or anything of that kind. Those in the United States in authority over the fuel situation this year treated Canada fairly; indeed, more fairly than many of the people of New York state think she should have been treated. And this fact is due not only to their fairness but to the work done by Mr. Magrath, who has been at the head of the commission assisted by Mr. McCourt and Major Bell.
Now, as to peat. Put not your trust in peat, is my advice. We have large peat bogs in Canada and I have had more or less knowledge of the peat industry for a great many years. While it has been difficult to get moisture out of peat, it has been done, but to such a negligible degree that the quantity produced cannot be depended on to take the place of coal. As an auxiliary, shipped over a few miles, it can be successfully utilized, and it has great heating and steaming qualities. But the quantity produced up to date, under the experiments that have been made, has been comparatively small, and for years to come we shall not be able to depend on it except as an auxiliary. I am in hearty sympathy with the idea that we should work
out some scheme to enable us to use our owe coal, because apart from the possibility of a famine or the difficulty of getting a supply from the United States, Canadians ought to use their own coal so far as they can, simply because it is their own. That is the policy I believe in, and I think that the minister (Mr. Stewart, Argenteuil) has started a useful line of experiments. I have a good deal of faith in the final outcome of these experiments, because if we can utilize Nova Scotia coal or western coal in the form of coke or in any other form in the central sections of Canada, we have not only done something to protect ourselves, but we have accomplished something to the advantage of both East and West and of the whole Dominion. So far as it is possible to do so, my policy, I repeat, is that we in Canada should utilize our own resources.


Mr. GOULD:: Is the $120,000 in this item supposed to be for the purpose of carrying on further work in connection with these experiments this summer?


James Alexander Robb: The $120,000, I understand, does not all go to that work. The work is financed by the Mines branch of the Dominion Department of Interior, as well as by the governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan.


Oliver Robert Gould: Last year there was a total of $250,000 voted for the experimental work at Bienfait.


James Alexander Robb: That matter comes under another department.


Charles A. Stewart: I might answer the question. There was $250,000 voted last year of which $125,000 is still available. Out of that we propose to devote $25,000 to the building of a carbonizer of the same type as that which has just been used in testing two loads of our coal.


Oliver Robert Gould: There has been a good deal said to-night in regard to the shortage of coal throughout Ontario. The part of the country from which I come is much colder than Ontario and we have had a coal shortage there this year. Since I have had the honour of representing my constituency in this House I have repeatedly requested that transfer switches be placed at pivotal points on the railway for the purpose of having coal transported to our people with regularity. It is a fact, as my worthy leader (Mr. Forke) states, that in western Canada the local coal dealers in the towns fill up their sheds with 60 to 80 tons of coal against the approaching winter, and those whose credit is good can go to the coal merchants and get a sufficient

Supply-Trade and Commerce
supply to fill their bins. But there are thousands of people on the prairies who cannot do that, and these are the people the least able to suffer the hardships of a coal shortage. I maintain that the government in looking after the welfare of the people by protecting them against these fuel shortages should see to it that the railways trasport this coal at lower freight rates. At our lignite mines coal costs from 11.50 to S1.80 a ton, yet when it reaches my home, not more than eighty miles away, I am obliged to pay $7 a ton. I give this by way of illustration. The big spread in price is due to a great extent to the long roundabout haul involving an extra hundred miles or so. It will be readily understood that this is a very heavy toll to take from the people who have to bum this low grade lignite coal.
I do hope that the experimental work will be brought to a success and that eventually we will have the briquetting of lignite coal placed on a commercial basis. About two weeks before I came here one hundred pounds of lignite briquettes were sent me from Bienfait by the Utilization Board. I tried them in my furnace and heater with very satisfactory results. They were a little smoky to start with, but they sgon burned brightly and retained their form until reduced to ash. I see no reason why when another carbonizer is inst'alled and the plant completed a great industry should not be developed that will provide for the fuel needs of the people of the west. I would point out to hon. members from Ontario that they still have wooded areas which can be resorted to in case of fuel shortage, but we on the bleak prairies have no substitute to take the place of our coal-when our coal fails we have to suffer all the hardships of our western winters, and we have been in this deplorable condition many times. I myself have seen a carload of thirty or forty tons of common lignite at a siding, with sixty teams waiting for a supply, being doled out in lots of 500 pounds. The people who go out on the plains to build up the country should receive every encouragement from the government, and their hardships should be reduced to a minimum. And certainly the government should take the necessary steps to ensure these settlers against any further fuel shortage.


Alexander Kenneth Maclean: Which government?


Oliver Robert Gould: All governments, whether by co-operation or by individual effort. I am not charging any government with being derelict, but it seems to me the seriousness of the fuel problem in the West has not im-
[Mr. Gould-l	*
pressed itself upon governments to the extent that we consider desirable. We have terminal elevators to store our excess grain until transportation can be provided, and while the hon. minister was speaking it occurred to me that fuel depots throughout the western provinces and Ontario would be a means of solving this problem and would not entail a very heavy expenditure. I would like to see the lignite fields in my district developed. I have been informed that north of the present lignite area there are huge deposits of coal of exceptionally good quality, and I have had many requests from people in that territory for the government to test the extent of these deposits. I think it would be good policy for the Minister of the Interior to give this matter his consideration.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: This is a very familiar question to me and one on which I have been expressing opinions for the last twenty years in and out of this House. For many years I found it difficult to get anyone to appreciate the great importance of the question, because we were not then faced with the prospect of embargoes on our importation of anthracite coal from the United States; we could get it in abundance, and therefore it was difficult to impress on the people of Ontario and Quebec the desirability of our being independent in every respect, particularly in regard to our coal supply.
It is rather disappointing to me to hear the suggestions made that after' helping to develop the hard coal deposits of the United States, and now having reached the stage when we may be denied any further supplies of their anthracite, we should start in to develop their soft coal and continue our dependence for our fuel upon a foreign nation. No doubt they are a very friendly people and quite willing to deal with us while we have the money to pay for the coal they send, us, but the day may come when we will be thrown back on our own fuel resources, and then I am confident we shall regret the extent to which we have neglected to develop our own coal deposits.
Our transportation facilities-our railways and canals-are built with the idea of developing our trade east and west. Now, is it not the sane and proper course for us to utilize these instruments of transportation to meet the necessities of our people, particularly in the matter of fuel supply? I was very much disappointed with the figures given by the hon. Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) in regard to the limited production of coal in Nova Scotia. It will be readily understood that
80 i

Supply-Trade and Commerce
every business man has to limit his production or output to his market. That is the situation in the Nova Scotia coal-fields. We have unlimited quantities of coal under ground, but our market is limited; we can sell only 7,000,000 or 8,000,000 tons a year, and consequently the output is limited. But if we can assure the coal owners of Nova Scotia of a bigger market it will be no trouble for them to double their output. Many of the mines now open are only working single shift. With the demand doubled it will be no trouble for those mines to work double shift and produce double their present output, and if this supply is not sufficient to meet the fuel requirements of Ontario and Quebec, more mines can be opened. So hon. members will see that Nova Scotia can produce as much coal as may be	required to	meet thefuel demands	of Ontario	and Quebec or of any other part of Canada. We have in Nova Scotia limitless quanities of coal at tidewater, capable of being transported to any part of this country. But those who have invested money in that business are looking for a proper return from what they have put into it, and it is up to the business men of Ontario and Quebec, and up to the government, so far as they can help in that direction, to arrive at some method by which this coal can be brought into the central provinces and used to meet the needs of the people in the matter of fuel.
A good deal has been said about briquetting. We have passed the experimental stage of briquetting in Nova Scotia. We have briquetted coal; it is a splendid fuel of which hundreds of thousands of tons can be produced in our province if there is a market for it. I imagine it is just as good a fuel as anthracite, particularly in open fire-places; it makes a more cheerful fire, being more like wood fire than anything you can get by using anthracite. We have also passed the experimental stage so far as coking is concerned; we have coked hundreds of thousands of tons of coal, and the product thus obtained has been used in the different cities of Ontario and Quebec with highly satisfactory results. This question is one of the most important that the House has had to discuss, and being an old coal miner myself, I am glad to have this opportunity of saying something with regard to it, particularly with regard to our coal in Nova Scotia. There is talk of having coal shipped to Montreal, and there converted into coke. What is the matter with converting it into coke at the pit mouth? If there is danger from ignition in the yarding of large quantities of coal, that danger does not exist in con-51
nection with coke. In the process of making coke the sulphur is removed and it can be piled mountains high without any difficulty on that score. We should all stand up, more or less selfishly, for the development to the fullest extent of the resources of our own country, and you will pardon me, I am sure, if I express the ambition we have that our coal should be converted into coke in the part of the country in which it is produced, thus giving our people the advantage of that further development. Coke is much lighter than coal; very much larger quantities of it can be carried by water, and the units of heat in your cargo will be much greater than if coal is carried. I suggest, therefore, that the manufactured article rather than the raw coal, be transported and yarded at different centres. Then you will have a fuel suitable for any use, whether for furnaces or for stoves, for heating or for cooking. I am sorry to appear as if I were delaying the estimates of the minister, but this is a very important subject, and I am glad to have an opportunity to express my views upon it. We cannot too soon be independent of outside countries for such a necessity of life as our fuel supply.


Edward Joseph Garland: I wish to endorse the sentiments expressed in the latter part of the remarks of my hon.
10 p.m. friend (Mr. McKenzie). I wish also to put in a plea for Alberta in this regard, particularly my own district. Out there we have a coal that is, I think, unequalled by coal produced in any other part of the Dominion of Canada. I am told that you can light it simply by applying a match to it, and if you happen to break your looking-glass you can use the glistening surface of the coal as a mirror. It is the most beautiful coal you could see. So far as the shortage in Ontario this year is concerned I must say that I have not seen any very pronounced evidence of it; I did not shiver at all- until I heard the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) speaking. In the West we were not at all alarmed; we did not hear anything about a shortage. However, if a shortage did exist-and it may have; if you have had difficulty in getting coal, it can only be the fault of the people themselves and of this government. We have in Alberta, I say, unlimited quantities of the finest coal in the world, simply awaiting consumers. Are you aware that we are shipping thousands of tons of Drumheller and Taber coal to the United States? If you will only ask us for our coal we shall be glad to send it down to you-if you will pay the freight. The suggestion made by the hon. member for South



Supply-Trade and Commerce
Wellington (Mr. Guthrie) is one that might well occupy the attention of the government. Alberta coal would lend itself to storage in depots; there might be some little slacking, but it would not amount to a great deal. I believe you could get that coal landed in Toronto at around $16 a ton-from $16 to *18, at any rate-and it would compare favourably with the anthracite that is now used in this part of the country. I ask the government, therefore, to consider the possibilities of obtaining for use in central Canada our Alberta coal, particularly coal from Drum-heller. If you will put it up in great storage bins and distribute it as required throughout Ontario, we will supply you with all you need.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: I do not know whether the hon. Solicitor General (Mr. McKenzie) was in the chamber when in answer to queries with regard to the advisability of storing Nova Scotia or western coals, the statement was made that these coals would not compare with anthracite so far as quality was concerned; that they would not store without slacking, and that our grates and furnaces were not suited to their use. I would like to hear what my hon. friend has to say in that regard. He knows the kind of furnaces and grates we have here and the kind of climate which exists; he knows whether the coal from Nova Scotia must be used right away or whether it can be stored. I should like very much to get information as to what really can be done with Nova Scotia coal. There is just one other question I want to put to him and that is this: He tells us that Nova Scotia coal can be, and is being, successfully briquetted. I take it that even the Minister of the Interior would not say that Nova Scotia coal in briquetted form could not be used in our grates as they are now. I want to know whether Nova Scotia coal is really being briquetted and what the cost of that coal is.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: As far as the briquetting of Nova Scotia coal is concerned all I can say is that a Nova Scotia company-not the largest of our companies, but a company known as the Bras d'Or Coal Cmpany, and I may say that Senator Currie is the owner of that coal mine-introduced a briquetting machine and made a success of producing the article. But in those days-it was before the war-American coal came in so cheaply that the people did not care to enter upon the experiment of buying these briquettes and the American anthracite coal put the company out of business. In those days you 
could buy anthracite coal and land it in your cellar in North Sydney for $7 a ton. The cost to-day is two and one-half times that price. Even if the briquetted coal cannot be bought to-day the machine is there; they stopped producing briquetted coal because the people would not buy it when anthracite was so cheap and easy of purchase. But there is no ditiiculty in burning these briquettes. I have burned them in the grate in my house and they make a splendid fire. I have been keeping house in North Sydney for the last thirty years and the dwelling is heated by a hot water furnace. I have never burned anything but Nova Scotia coal and the house is clean and comfortably heated. I do not think there is anything peculiar about the furnace it is an ordinary furnace built by people in North Sydney who make a business of it.
With regard to Nova Scotia coal being unfit for dumping as they call it, for many years we had no trouble at all. I believe that a few smaller mines, on the north side of the harbour as well as on the south side, have been opened, where there is a certain amount of shale but there is no difficulty if that is kept out of the coal. If coal with that shale in it is dumped and left for some months there is danger that it will ignite and burn. However, the coal produced by the old standard mines is not subject to this danger at all. In the matter of heating one's house, if there is proper care and proper selection of the coal there is no difficulty whatever.
Let me say to my hon. friend that no matter how good any article is it may be spoiled and given a bad name by being improperly handled. Even a coal miner may spoil coal by allowing shale and stones to enter it, whereas he should keep these materials out. If our Nova Scotia coal is properly mined and handled there is no better bituminous coal on the continent of North America.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend did not quite catch the point. I did not want his opinion on the subject of ignition; I wanted to see what his view was as to the statement of the Minister of the Interior that the Nova Scotia coal was of such a character, compared with the lignite of the West that it would not stand; not that it would not burn but that it would slack and become dust and greatly deteriorate in value if exposed to the weather.


Daniel Duncan McKenzie: Any bituminous coal will suffer more or less when exposed to rain and

Supply-Trade and Commerce
sun. Much will depend upon how long the coal is left out under the weather. If covered up in some sort of a shed this slacking process will not happen at all. If that process takes place it is due to the influence of rain, frost, hot sun and so forth which disintegrates the coal. But even if Nova Scotia coal slacks it is a good fuel. It is not as nice to handle, but you can get a fierce fire, a good heat, out of slack; it never gets to the stage where it is not heat producing.
Washed coal, for the purpose of making steel is treated in washing plants. That means that the coal is ground into what may be called very poor slack, and then it goes through a washing process. Of course you would not use washed coal for heating your house but it gives the best kind of heat in the making of steel. I have been living in the neighbourhood of coal mines all my life and I never saw any Nova Scotia coal that could not be used for heating purposes if used under anything like favourable conditions.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I do not want to add very much to the length of this debate, but while this particular item may be passed without exhaustive consideration the discussion which has grown out of it has really an importance that just at first, I am sorry to say, perhaps some members of the administration did not care to attach to it. We do not want to launch into schemes that are too paternal but on the other hand I do not want to see the government avoiding such measures as may be necessary in order to grapple with really unfortunate conditions which may confront our country. I think that is what a government is for. I think that in a matter of this kind, instead of expending ourselves in mere criticism, if we are given the opportunity it should be the work of each member of the House to make such suggestions as he can for the improvement of the very lamentable situation which we have had to face during the present winter, and which has had to be faced during some previous years.
I am not going to debate whether this is the worst of all the occasions. Personally I think it has been. I may be wrong about that, but I know that the winter has been more severe than any winter in which we had a fuel shortage previously. But we will not get very far by debating that at length. The real question is, what has been done up to date, and what can be done for the future? I do not think that a House that complacently sits for six or seven hours during the discussion of daylight saving, as we did last year, or of a man's spiritual or moral welfare, as
51i
we have done more recently, ought to deny at least a few hours of consideration for a man's bodily comfort. I am not half so anxious to prepare a man for the next world as I am to keep him tolerably comfortable while he is in this world, and some people not in parliament will do all that is necessary to look after his spiritual welfare. Let us here devise the means for looking after his material welfare. To keep him decently warm is one of the most important things.
How is this coal or fuel of whatever nature it may be, to be got? I will tell you what I have seen in my own province, and I presume the same thing has 'been going on all over Canada. It is not bad so far as it goes, not at all bad, but it has simply been the giving of warnings to the people through the press that they must not expect to get American anthracite. In my province we have been leaning very heavily on American anthracite. It has been tolerably cheap; it is a more comfortable fuel than the native product of Nova' Scotia and to some extent of New Brunswick, and our people have used it very largely. They have got warnings that they cannot count on a continuance of the supply. There is not involved in that the slightest bit of reflection on our neighbours to the south. They are doing the best they can in the face of a very difficult situation, and I agree with hon. members of this House who have acknowledged that the United States has dealt fairly with us. But they may continue to deal fairly and still be unable to deal with us even as well as they dealt this winter. When that day comes, will it be enough to use the printing presses to warn the people of this country, to send out circulars to tell them that in all probability American anthracite cannot be got, and that Welsh coal, Scotch coal, stovoids and several other substitutes may be used which will do pretty nearly as well as anthracite, or literature such as I have seen saying that you can make soft coal do very well by burning buckwheat with it? That does not mean the buckwheat that the farmer grows, but a particular size of coal they use down there.
It is easy to say that you can use these things, but what are you going to do to get them? Can you rely on the coal trade? They cannot manage everything. Their importations of anthracite are shut off, and a man who has been dealing in anthracite all his life is perhaps scarcely in a position to make arrangements with mines. He can buy his product so far as it goes, but would it not be better to have a governmental agency spending perhaps a little less time and a

Supply-Trade and Commerce
little less money on finding out how to make analine dyes just for the present, useful as they may be, and put that energy into coordinating the fuel business of the country, just as you would co-ordinate any other enterprise of the country during war time. For this is a war against one of the worst elements with which man has to contend, a war with cold, and he must have his weapons ready.
Is it asking too much of a government that it should function in a matter of this kind, that it should provide leadership, that instead of merely giving out pamphlets, it should have an organization which would be in touch with the men in the coal business, and that means be taken at least to take a rough census of the necessities of the country? For instance, you go into a city like Ottawa. A very brief census will reveal what I will call the institutions whose heating arrangements are capable of being easily made over so as to use fuel oil, other heating arrangements, that can take some of these made-up forms like briquettes, and others which must have anthracite. Then you ration. But it is not enough to ration until you know you have the substance to deal out. Then co-ordinate with the mines and with the railways and see that the necessary material for that particular community is brought in. Leave it in private hands just so far as you possibly can. Do not interfere with the ordinary business of the country more than you can possibly help; but help the ordinary business of the country, help it to stay on its feet and do the work it has to do. Put the force of the government back of it to the extent at least of obtaining information and give them enough power to see that the coal dealer acts justly. It might be necessary to go further, and it being the case of an emergency I would not revolt against even some paternalism on the part of the government. I would even rather have a little grandmotherism than have no action taken at all. What we want to have is the happy mean. I would therefore suggest that some attention might be paid, and perhaps it is being paid now, to the development of oil shales in New Brunswick. I believe a good supply of oil could be obtained there. It would be worth while to help in some way that industry to be developed rapidly, so that oil fuel would be available wherever oil fuel can be used, and it can be used in a great many cases. It is quite a simple matter, I understand, to adapt furnaces of a certain character to the use of oil. But somebody must do those things.

This is as vital to us as any subject I can possibly think of. It is of immensely more importance than nine-tenths of the subjects we discuss in this House, yet to-night it was rather intimated to us that it would be better to let this stand over till some other time, and that anyway, there was nothing the government could do about it. I do not agree with that. I am not taking this position at all from any standpoint of partisanship. I believe the government can do a very great deal about it. I do not believe it is the office of government as one government said of itself, that it was merely a fly upon the wheel and could not control the motion. It did not control the motion, it was a fly upon the wheel, and as soon as the people got an opportunity they replaced it with a government that did something. I am not issuing an invitation to my hon. friends to take measures to remain in power, but I am quite willing, even if it helps them to stay in power, to give assistance by voice or vote in this House in order that they may get courage enough to grapple with this situation and keep helpless people from being frozen to death, for that is what the thing comes down to.
Now I want to say a word about the remarks of the Solicitor General (Mr. McKenzie). New Brunswick coal is good. That coal stands out. I have seen it standing out all winter at the Canadian Pacific coal dumps in West St. John, and it does not slack too much to be used in the engines. There is no danger there. It can be burnt in practically any furnace. Some slight changes are sometimes necessary, and even if sometimes your grates are burnt out by the use of it, what is the cost of a few grate bars compared with the ruin of the health of a family and the ruin of the building itself through want of heat during our rigorous winters?
That is what we come down to; that is the thing to be faced. I am just going to ask the department to enter upon this thing with a whole heart and a willing mind, and to put into being an organisation that will go a good deal further than the organisation has gone this winter; that will reach higher up, that will bring producers and distributors together, that will make a census of the requirements of Canada, and that will make our supplies go just as far as they possibly can. The department may go even further than that. If there is to be a long railway haul in some instances, let them put the new board of railway experts to work. This will be just one more problem for them. I would suggest that they might even lay off for a time the special trains that will be necessary down in my province to

Supply-Trade and Commerce

conduct the second deportation of Acadians from the Maritime provinces, and they might use those trains to better advantage in hauling coal to warm the Canadians of the upper provinces.


John Millar: I think if we are going to run true to form to-night, we shall have to switch back to standardisation. We carried on the discussion for a while on standardisation; then we went over to coal; then we went back to standardisation, and then over to coal again. I am inclined to think, if we were able to bum within the next ten years all the coal we have been handling since eight o'clock, we would have very warm winters in Canada.
I should like to make a few remarks in reply to the minister before this item passes. The minister referred to a meeting which had been held, to which I understood him to say the agriculturists had been invited, to discuss this question of standardisation. I do not know that my information is correct; but I got the impression from some conversations I had at different times that the way those meetings worked out was this. Manufacturers of farm machinery, not wishing to do certain things, would say that they could not be done, and the agriculturists present, not being practical machinists or engineers, could get no further. Perhaps a different policy on the part of the government, if they wish to progress along this line, would be to have practical men deal with practical men; that is men who are machinists, who know all about the business of making machines, to deal with those who are now engaged in the business of manufacturing machines. The minister took objection to coercive legislation. He doubted whether it would be wise to force those machine companies to take that course. In case an investigation were to prove that the machine companies of Canada, as has been alleged by many, are, for the purpose of making greater gains, multiplying parts unnecessarily, and refusing to standardise those parts when they could very readily be standardised; if that be the case in order that they may sell more machines and reap greater profits, I should like to ask the minister what the remedy is, if it is not coercive measures on the part of the government. It is quite obvious that purchasers of machines could not possibly bring about any remedy by co-operative means or any other, so far as I can see. This would be no departure from what is being done. We have plenty of precedents for coercive measures. I remember some legislation that was passed a short time ago in Saskatchewan in regard to selling machines, and now we
find that a company that sells an engine and guarantees that that engine will develop a certain power, is compelled to live up to its guarantee. Moreover, when they sell machinery, they must use a certain form of contract specified by the legislature. They are also compelled to charge the same rate of interest after maturity as well as before. So in many ways, we have measures that are coercive. Therefore, if it is proved that machine companies are causing a great deal of loss and inconvenience to those who till the soil, and that this is reflected in other lines of business, causing a loss to Canada as a whole, coercive measures will be quite justified.
Since the hour is late, let me close with just one more remark that I was going to make in regard to another matter, perhaps, not quite relevant to the discussion, but a matter of great importance. I refer to the enormous cost of parts. I have heard it said by those who have done some figuring, that a binder that can be bought for about $329 or $330, which, I think, was the price a year or two ago, would, if purchased in parts, cost about $1,500. While I would not say that those figures are exactly correct, I believe they are not far from correct. Those are matters in which tillers of the soil are perfectly helpless. It seems to us that we are in the stranglehold of those who sell us the machinery and provide the parts. It was necessary for the government of Saskatchewan to pass legislation compelling those machine companies to keep the parts, because they practised in the past selling a machine and then within a year or two saying: "We have no parts for that machine; we are not making it any more," and a man with a practically new machine, a machine very little used, was compelled to throw it aside. In order to protect the buyer the government of Saskatchewan was compelled to pass such legislation. This would be going just a little further, and I think it would be quite justifiable. If I thought there was any danger of our switching back to coal, I would talk until eleven o'clock; but as the hour is late, I think we are about ready to pass this item and I will say no more.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: I have a good deal of sympathy with the hon. member for Qu'Ap-pelle (Mr. Millar). I have been interested for many years in this matter of standardization of parts, and I think it is really time that something should be done. Perhaps the hon. member is not aware that last year the Committee on Agriculture appointed a special committee to go into that matter. They picked up the threads that had been dropped

Supply-Trade and Commerce
at some previous session when a special committee had been appointed for that purpose, and they got to the point where they came to a "gentlemen's agreement" with some of the manufacturers. As far as I understand the matter, this was not very much, but just a start that was made. I think three of the companies in Canada agreed to take a certain standard for some bolts and, I believe, knife heads of mowers and certain things like that, and at any time changes were made in the future, they would hold to that standard. That is, perhaps, all right in a way; but the question arises as to other makes coming into the country. The minister mentioned that matter himself. I would suggest that if it were necessary to take any coercive measures, I would take measures which applied not to the manufacture but to the sale. In this way, the measures would apply to implements coming in from the United States as well. The John Deere Plow Company makes a special class of machine for western Canada, a particular kind of plough that, I believe, is not sold in other parts of the country at all. Yet to suit conditions in western Canada, they make a particular class of machine, and any other company will do the same thing. I think the matter is being seriously considered in several states to the south; in fact, I believe in at least four states, there is a law at the present time as regards standardization of sleighs and cutters. The companies are compelled to manufacture and sell only the standard wagon size, I understand, for the convenience of automobiles travelling in the winter time.
One of the secrets of Henry Ford's success is the system of standardization he employs. You will go into one of the Massey-Harris agencies in a small town for some mower sections. They have none in stock and you step across the street to a Deering or a McCormick or a Frost and Wood. You find that they all have these parts, but there is a difference of 1/16- or l/32nd of an inch, just enough to prevent them from working. It seems absurd that such a condition should exist. One particular company makes a practice of changing some of its parts every three or four years and I have been told that this is done with the intention of frustrating the specialty companies who make a business of manufacturing these parts. The only way to get ahead of the specialty companies is to adopt the Ford method, that is, of underselling them. This is a matter that might be referred to the agricultural committee for consideration.
Now, I want to deal for a moment with the coal situation which is after all the im-
[ Mr. Campbell.]
portant question. In the district from which I come we are not particularly concerned with the shortage of fuel. If it is a cold day and there is a lack of fuel all you have to do is to take an axe and go into the bush and bring back some wood with you. There is no trouble in that regard. But I realize the importance of this subject from the national standpoint, and it seems to me that the solution of the whole problem is a matter of transportation. They have an abundance of coal in Nova Scotia, according to the Solicitor General (Mr. McKenzie) as well as in Alberta, and I see no reason whatsoever why it cannot be profitably transported to Ontario and Quebec. I think a good deal of the difficulty could be overcome by making seasonal rates on the railroads. Any practical railway man knows, in fact, one need not be a practical railway man to know, that an engine can haul about twice as much in the summer as in the winter. The time spent-on the road and about terminals is a great deal less in summer than in winter and it can safely be said that you can operate the railways on 35 cents in the dollar during the summer as compared with the winter. One of the problems on the prairies is that as soon as the wheat starts to move the coal begins moving also, and unfortunately in the same direction. When the channels are all clogged with wheat that is the time people find they need coal; and there is no reason why coal cannot be transported in the summer. Mr. Hanna giving evidence before the special rates committee last summer, stated that if the railways had steady business all the year round they could operate with 5,000 box cars less. Now, 5,000 box cars, according to my calculations are worth $25,000,000, and I assume that with engines and other equipment it is necessary for the Canadian National Railways to maintain about $50,000,000 extra equipment. Taking the overhead charges, depreciation in value, interest, etc., I believe I am not far wrong when I say that it will run to $10,000,000 more loss yearly. If that or part of it could be saved by keeping the railways busy all the year round you would accomplish one of the biggest things in the country; you would solve one of the greatest problems that face us to-day. It would also help to a large extent to solve the wage question.
Some hon. gentlemen mentioned conditions with regard to miners. I am more familiar with railway matters than with mining, but I may say that the wage question is also one of the serious problems in connection with the railways. We see a good deal in the news-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
papers about the enormous wages drawn by train and engine men and others employed by the railways. As a matter of fact, however, some of these men very often do not get enough to break even on. They will make a good wage in the fall and winter and most of the summer they are laid off. I know that last summer some men who had been fourteen years in the service of Canadian National Railwaj^s were laid off. That is a serious situation and these men must necessarily ask for high wages if they are to make a living. If you can keep the wheels of transportation moving in the summer-and that I contend can be done by fixing a sliding scale of rates, to go into effect on the 1st of May and be operative until the 1st of August when the grain starts to move-it will give the people in this part of the country an opportunity to secure coal either from Nova Scotia or Alberta, and in many cases some grain cpuld also be carried at lower rates. This would simplify the whole proposition, and I contend that the suggestion ought to be taken into consideration. The transportation of, say, 7,000,000 tons of coal from Alberta would call for about 5,000 trains, and I think the railways are capable of handling it. I would assume from the figures quoted by the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) that Nova Scotia can supply 8,000,000 tons, which would leave 7,000,000 tons to come from Alberta. In the year 1922, we purchased from the United States 15,000,000 tons of coal, for which we paid, I think, between $75,000,000 and $100,000,000 or $125,000,000. It seems to me that there is no reason whatever why we cannot save that money and increase the earnings of the Canadian National Railways.
I think that we have overlooked another important source of supply, however. We have looked to the East and to the West,'but we have not looked to the North. I think most hon. gentlemen here are aware of the fact that in the islands along the northern part of Hudson bay there are immense coal deposits, and I am one of those who predict that as soon as the railway reaches James bay it will be found that that coal can be easily brought into Ontario. Looking over a report the other day of Captain Bernier I saw the statement that he had mined coal on Melville island and found it as good as Sydney coal. And there was an abundance of it too. Mr. Stefansson mentions the same thing. I see no reason therefore why we should be dependent on the United States or any other country for coal. They evidently do not want to give it to us, and so far as I can see we could be independent of them if we adpoted the proposal I make of establishing seasonal rates.


Mr. NEILL:: Some hours ago in the debate, the Minister of the Interior (Mr Stewart) made the remark that having regard to the ever-threatening danger of the United States putting an embargo on coal coming into Canada, it behooved the government, or it was the intention of the government, to seek to develop and enlarge the fuel resources of Canada. He might also have added, to preserve the existing coal resources. I heartily agree with him in that position, and I have been pleased to-night to hear hon. members from Ontario describe the hardships to which they have been subjected through lack of coal in the East, because perhaps they will now pay some attention to the coal situation in British Columbia, which I brought to their attention last year. My plea at that time fell on deaf ears; but when it is a case of "coming home to the hangman" perhaps they will take more interest in the subject.
I want to mention briefly what the situation is, which is more acute than it was last year, in connection with the mines in Vancouver island and in British Columbia generally. In spite of all this coal scarcity in Canada they are going out of business from want of orders -not from any want of market-due to the encroachment of fuel oil imported from the United States with a very small duty. But for fuel oil there would be enough demand to keep the mines working 75 per cent more than they are working at the present time. But the mines in some cases are working only two days a week, while in other cases they are shut down, on account of the competition of imported fuel oil. The miners in these mines, with all the dangers which they have to face-50 having been killed the other day -are paid a very modest wage. So that the trouble is not due to excessive labour cost. The mines are run in a thoroughly modem and efficient manner. In one case there is not a steam boiler in the whole mine; it is all. run by electricity generated by waterpower. But the trouble is that the coal mines cannot compete with the cheap fuel oil 'which is sloughed off on the market from the American producers of gasoline.
Now, what happens to any industry when it gets down to habitually working only two or three days a week? As you can imagine, large capital is tied up, and it means that those interested will quit. That is what ultimately must happen; they will go out of business.
And what happened a few years ago? These are deep mines, and if not worked they soon

Supply-Trade and Commerce
flood. A deep mine when flooded is about as costly to re-open as to develop a new mine. So when these deep, costly, highly equipped mines go out of business they go out of business for all time, once they become flooded. What happened two years ago may happen two years hence. Two years ago, owing to some economic disturbance in the States-no threat of war or anything of the kind-the sellers of fuel oil notified British Columbia consumers that in three months time there would be no more oil exported into British Columbia. What did the railroad and manufacturing people do? They hurriedly converted back their plants to coal burners, and very glad they were to find the coal mines of Vancouver Island waiting patiently and ready and eager to fill their wants. But in a very short time industrial conditions in the States changed and fuel oil was once more available. Immediately the consumers, selfish, as most business interests are, converted back their plants to the somewhat cheaper and more convenient method of using oil.
Let me predict what will happen two years hence after the coal mines have been shut down. Owing again to some economic disturbance, or to a threat of war or to any other reason whatever-no reason was given last time, none may be given in the future-. supposing the United States again put an embargo on fuel oil? A few years ago we would have laughed at an embargo on anthracite coal, would we not? But to-day it is in sight. They may put an embargo on fuel oil, but by then our mines, owing to our selfish neglect, will have gone out of business. Where will our railways, our ships, and manufacturing industries get their supply of fuel then? There will not be any. What will be the position? Suppose war threatens with some nation bordering on the Pacific, what will we do when our oil supply is cut off and we have no coal to resort to?
Last year I pleaded with the House to put a duty of two cents a gallon on fuel oil in order at that time to preserve our coal industry. I thought it worth while not to let one of our Canadian industries go out of business. This year I no longer plead, I threaten and warn this House and the government that in two years or less our railroads, our ships and industries may be desiring coal and will not be able to get it. It will not then be the loss of the industry, it will be the fact that we will be throttled as a nation, for we will not have any fuel supply in British Columbia, and that is of far greater national importance than even the destruc-
Mr. Neill-1
tion of this single industry. Therefore, I suggest and urge upon the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) that he consider once again the national importance of imposing such a duty on fuel oil as will enable these coal mines to' be kept in operation at least to meet our future wants. Otherwise when the day of travail comes upon us and finds us with no fuel, we as a nation will bitterly regret the selfish indifference we have displayed towards the situation out there.


Mr. MILNE:: Mr. Chairman-


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Marcil):: Does the committee realize that considerable latitude of discussion has been allowed by the Deputy Chairman? I do not want to shut off the hon. member, but I would remind him that the item now under discussion is No. 367.


Robert Milne: My intention was to revert for a few moments to the standardization of fuel oil. I believe I am in order.


Charles Marcil: Yes.


Robert Milne: A matter of great importance to the whole Dominion is the standardization of gasoline and fuel oil. It affects not only those who drive motor cars, but those who operate machinery. In making an analysis of a large number of samples of gasoline and kerosene we find that the specific gravity, distillation and other specifications vary to quite a large extent. We find in many cases that when the weather gets cold retailers fill their tanks with a low grade gasoline and sell it at the same price as they charge for the high grade. I think that consumers should be protected from this fraud by making the oil companies declare the specifications of their commodities. I am told that it is very difficult to standardize these products so as to ensure the importation of, say, gasoline of a certain grade on account of conditions obtaining at the oil wells and distilleries; but it seems to me it would be a very simple matter to compel the companies to guarantee their products to be up to a certain standard; that is, if I buy gasoline I should be able to see at the plant or filling station the actual specifications and so know exactly what quality I am being supplied with. I make that suggestion to the government in order to guard our consumers against the gross fraud now being practised on them.
There is room, too, for research work in connection with lubricating oils. I am convinced that more engines are destroyed from the use of poor lubricating oil than from any other cause. While we have specifications for lubricating oil as to its flash test, viscosity,

Supply-Trade and Commerce
and so on, yet there is something in a lubricating oil, a greasy quality, that we have not yet been able to define exactly. Therefore I think the research branch might well direct their attention to the subject. If they could frame a standard specification for lubricating oils a great deal of fraud would be prevented, for we would then know what we were buying. In addition to the regular oil companies handling heavy oils jobbers are springing up here and there and putting on the market oils of very inferior lubricating qualities. We also find that the dealers in many cases carry three different grades of lubricating oil, and if they get out of one grade before your can is filled they will take the rest from some of the cheaper grades, but charge you the higher price just the same. I should like the government to take this matter into consideration and see whether there is not some way of protecting the consumer from these frauds -for I claim they are nothing less than frauds.
I would like to see the government find out something more about lubricating oils-what the quality of the oil is that makes it a lubricant, and so on-so that the consumers may be protected from every point of view.


James Alexander Robb: This matter has already been
under review by the officers of the department, but I will again direct the observations of my hon. friend to the attention of the Research Council with a view to seeing whether we can arrive at a basis for establishing a standard for Canada.


Richard Smeaton White: The discussion seems to
have gone very far afield; in fact, I have had some difficulty in finding out what item we are considering. There was one matter in connection with the discussion on fuel that impressed me as requiring a little more notice. The hon. minister stated that the steel was within 80 miles of the anthracite coal mines in Alberta. If that coal is really anthracite and compares favourably with Pennsylvania coal, it strikes me that 80 miles is a very short distance to bridge in order that the supply may be made available for Ontario. The hon. Secretary of State (Mr. Copp). according to Hansard of February 21, reports that about 2,700,000 tons of anthracite eoa1 were imported into Canada last year; and that was only about 60 per cent of our normal supply. That would, figuring it roughly, amount to a weight of about 100,000,000 bushels of wheat at 60 pounds to the bushel. If all our western railroads had for every 80 miles of track a business of 100,000,000 bushels of wheat, they would be in a much better financial condition than they are today. The government, therefore, might very
well take into consideration the matter of linking up the rail connections so as to provide us with adequate supplies of our own Canadian coal. The question of freight rates might be submitted to the Railway Commission with a view to securing special rates at certain favourable times of the year so that solid through trains of coal might be taken from the coal fields to, say Fort William, at a much reduced CGst for transportation.
Coming back to the item under discussion.
I have had the honour to be appointed a mi mber of the subcommittee of the Committee on Agriculture, dealing with the standardization of parts. There was very little done last year; in fact we met once and had a little discussion, and that was the end of it. The work already done has been a start, but a very small one. Certain agricultural implement makers have Agreed to adopt certain standards of bolts, and so on, but they are the standard bolts already made, so that there is very little advance in that respect. The question of standardization involves many considerations. The matter of patenf rights is involved; the matter of standardization of machines and parts which come from the United States is involved. In order to make some progress in the matter I wrote to the United States Secretary of Commerce, Mr. Hoover, in August last, and was informed bv him that the American manufacturers of farm implements had taken up this matter of standardization. I will quote a section of his letter:
National standardization as a part of the programme of this department is still in the initial stage of its development however, the farm implement manufacturers having recently appointed a committee to carry forward in surveying present conditions and in recommending simplifications.
I fully agree with you that standardizations of Canada and the United States should be in agreement, particularly in such important fields as farming equipment, and I am asking our Division of Simplified Practice to keep you fully informed as this work progresses. Meanwhile, the most accurate statement of present standards can be obtained from Mr. H. J. Sameit, Secretary of the National Association of Farm Equipment Manufacturers, and we are asking him to give you a statement of these practices.
I have several letters on this subject; I quote from one dated December 23rd last:
Our plow and tillage implement department has formulated its recommendations, and when approved by 75 per cent of the membership who manufacture this line, such recommendations will be ready for adoption, after being formally approved by our General Standardization Committee and the General Executive Committee.
We will be pleased to provide you with the recommendations of each department as soon as they have been formally approved by the General Standardization
Committee and our General Executive Committee. If you desire to have the information piecemeal, wre will forward it.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
I understand that this movement in Canada was started by the farmers, but in the United States it was started by the implement men, the object being to reduce the number of implements that were manufactured for certain purposes, in order that fewer lines of machinery would have to be carried, with resulting decrease in the cost of production. I am not just sure that standardization can be carried very far. It can be effected in many respects, but it can be carried so far that it will lead practically to the stifling of inventive genius. It strikes me, therefore, that a government standard machine is a thing which is a long way in the future.


Charles Marcil: I understand we were discussing also the following item, 368.


[Stage Direction]
Items agreed to.
Trade and Commerce-maintenance of terminal elevators, and necessary equipment, $10,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the reason for the change there?


James Alexander Robb: There is a decrease of $85,000, an amount which was last year required to provide some improvements at Vancouver. This year there is an item of $10,000 for the Moose Jaw elevators.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The reduction means that certain work in construction which was done last year will not have to be done this year.


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Trade and Commerce-weaights and measures inspection, $310,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: I understand there is a charge made for the inspection of public scales. Does this charge meet the cost of the work?


James Alexander Robb: For many years this department showed a loss; this year, for the first time since its organization, there will be a small surplus.


Charles Wallace Stewart: I wish to get some information from the minister bearing upon the answer to a question put in the House regarding the Peterborough district. It would appear that this district is practically self-supporting-in fact, more so-but it is possible that the figures do not cover the whole cost. When the question was put as to what percentage of the moneys collected by the inspector was received by the government the answer was given 100 per cent. The sum of $892 was collected and I would ask what was paid out in cartage.


James Alexander Robb: Is that in Peterborough or in the Belleville district?


Charles Wallace Stewart: The question placed on the order paper had reference to the inspector of weights and measures for the Peterborough district, but I believe this is the same district as the Belleville district.


James Alexander Robb: It is the Belleville district.
I have not at the moment the details my hon. friend wants but I will be glad to get that information for him.


Robert Milne: When a gasoline pump is tested by the inspector and the pump is shown to be short, or does not give a gallon, is there a prosecution for short measure? In the gathering of something over thirty samples of gasoline in the province of Manitoba-a gallon being collected at each station-I think there were only two stations in the entire list where there was a clear gallon; the remainder were all short.


James Alexander Robb: The government's responsibility is inspecting the accuracy of the machine; we are not responsible for the operation of the machine. If there is a shortage I submit the question of prosecution is a provincial one.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Is there a standard cartage charge? As I understand, the inspector goes into a town or village and inspects the scales in rotation, and that it is the practice to charge $2.50 for cartage in each case. The complaint has been made that sometimes this charge is excessive; that there is no reason to make a charge of $2.50 for cartage when the inspector simply goes from one door to the next.


James Alexander Robb: The cartage charge would vary somewhat in proportion to the size of the weights that the inspector had to carry about. It might also vary in different localities. My hon. friend will understand that there might be places where the charge for cartage would be less than in other communities. Of course this matter is governed by regulations and my hon. friend will understand that we do not carry those regulations around in the record. However I will get my hon. friend the information he desires.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: With regard to the point raised by the hon. member for Neepawa (Mr. Milne) I have had very grave doubt in my own mind for some time as to the advisability of the department allowing the use of these pumps to measure gasoline or oil. For instance, the inspector may inspect them and they may be perfectly all right, but there is a possibility that the valve of that pump may

Supply-Trade and Commerce
vary the least bit. Gasoline is something that escapes very readily if the valves of the pump are not just as they should be. Then there is a want of suction and you will not get the amount of gasoline you should get. I found on one occasion that the man had put twelve gallons into the ten gallon tank of my car. I told him that I did not mind paying for the gasoline, but I did not want a ten gallon tank stretched by putting twelve gallons into it. How often this thing happens we do not know, and it is worthy of the minister's consideration as to whether the use of these pumps should be continued. They are very convenient, I admit, and one of the things put forward in their favour by salesmen themselves is the fact that they will save their price on the machine in a very short time.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend knows-he is more familiar with the facts than I am-that there are many varieties of this pump on the market. In some cases the department has refused to recognize them. I am not sure, however, whether we should accept the advice of my hon. friend and not inspect them. Perhaps they require inspection oftener. I can quite see that there is a chance for some fraud to be practised.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: How often are they supposed to be inspected?


James Alexander Robb: Once a year, but if there is a complaint they are inspected oftener.


Henry Elvins Spencer: If fault is found, is the license refused until the matter is put right?


James Alexander Robb: They are not allowed to weigh on a scale unless it has been put right.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Would the same rule apply to a pump for oil after it is inspected?


James Alexander Robb: I think so.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I do not think that once a year is often enough to make an inspection. There is another thing. How many drivers of automobiles, for instance, are in a position to know just how much gasoline has been put into their tank? You seldom have your tank empty. Very few people are in a position to gauge accurately what was in their tank when they began to fill it and what it contained when they were done. I know on the occasion I spoke of I said to the fellow: "There must be something wrong with your pump." He took a gallon measure and pumped it out and it was about two-thirds full. Apparently he was astonished himself and said "I will not use that any more."


James Alexander Robb: I will bring this matter to the attention of the department and see if we .cannot adopt a more satisfactory method.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Is any certificate issued to the owner and operator of a pump after it is inspected?


James Alexander Robb: The inspector places a stamp on the machine and it is sealed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Printing of parliamentary and departmental publications, including cost of translation of the Canada 5c ear Book, $150,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Could we not get back to the old figure in connection with this item?


James Alexander Robb: I am afraid we cannot do that in view of the number of census publications that are being issued.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.	*
Canadian Exhibition in France, $50,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: I wonder if the minister would allow that item to stand in connection with the other.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
VIMY RIDGE MONUMENT Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Acting Prime Minister):	Mr. Speaker, with the leave of
the House I desire to move:
That it be resolved that a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint their Honours that this House doth agree to their Address to His Excellency the Governor General, respectfully requesting that His Excellency will be pleased to transmit our joint resolution to the President of the Republic of France approving the government's acceptance of the gift made by the government of France of a tract of land on Vimy Ridge for the erection of a monument commemorating the exploits of Canadian soldiers in the Great War, in such a way as to His Excellency may seem fit; by filling in the blank space therein with the words "and Commons".


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
On motion of Mr. Fielding the House ad-pourned at 11.15 p.m.
Monday, March 5, 1923