1923-02-23

[Stage Direction]
Copy of agreement between His Majesty the King and Sir Henry Worth Thornton, K.B.E., to act as directing head of the railways, steamships and other undertakings, comprised in the Canadian National railway system.-Hon. Mr. Graham.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved that the House on Monday next go into committee on the following proposed resolution:

Resolved, that it ia expedient to amend the Canada Shipping Act, chapter one hundred and thirteen of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906, and to provide that the minister may pay, out of moneys applicable to the relief of distressed seamen and appropriated by parliament for that purpose, such sums as are deemed necessary for the relief of shipwrecked or destitute seamen who are not entitled to relief under any of the provisions of the Merchant Shipping Acts; also pay any reasonable expenses incurred in any British possession or any foreign country on account of subsistence or transport of. such seamen who have been domiciled twelve months in Canada; and to provide further that in the case of passenger steamships registered in Canada, the Governor in Council shall have power to authorize the acceptance of passenger steamboat certificates issued by the Imperial government or by the government of a British possession; and further to provide that, in the case of seagoing ships, the Governor in Council shall have power to authorize the acceptance of survey or inspection made by an exclusive surveyor to an approved society or association for the classification and registry of shipping, in lieu of Canadian government inspection.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the favourable consideration of the House.
Mr. CALDWELL:: Does the government propose to take for government business, Monday next, which is Private Members' day?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: This is the usual expression-Monday next. It means Wednesday or Thursday as well.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. D. D. McKENZIE (Solicitor General) moved that the House go into committee on the following proposed resoluton:
Resolved, that it is expedient to amend the Canada Temperance Act, chapter one hundred and fifty-two of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1906, by addition thereto of part V, and to provide for the prohibition of importing, sending, taking or transporting into any province in which the prohibitions hereunder are in force, any intoxicating liquor; to further provide penalties for the violation of this act; and to provide for the revocations when such have been declared revoked by an Order in Council of the Lieutenant-Governor of a province affected.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. R. B. HANSON (York-Sunburv):: I
desire to put a question to the Acting Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) with respect

Supply-Health oj Animals
to a notice which, I am informed, was posted in the office of the Canadian Government Railways at Moncton yesterday in these terms:
To audit office staff. I have been instructed to notify you that the revenue accounts of the entire Canadian National railway system are to be handled at Montreal, commencing May 1st. It is intended that the auditing of the Canadian Government Railways revenue accounts for April will be completed at Moncton and that as soon as practicable after May 1st our staff will be moved to Montreal. Any clerk who does not desire to go to Montreal but prefers to sever his or her connection with railways will please advise the chief clerk accordingly.
W. H. Estano,
Auditor of Traffic.
I am instructed that this affects 180 employees at the very outset, of whom 110 are married men, for the most part owning their homes at Moncton. Is this notification correct?


Hon. G. P. GRAHAM (Acting Minister of Railways and Canals):: The organization and
distribution of the staff is entirely in the hands of the Canadian National Railway Board. I have no knowledge whatever of that notice.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Will the minister find
out and let parliament know? I know how earnest a devotee he is of the principle that parliament should know all the details of operation.


Mr. JACOBS:: I thought we were taking the railways out of politics.


Hon.   S@: At the same time, I would like to ask the minister if he would also advise us whether all the staff which has been looking after the auditing of the Canadian National Railways will be moved from Toronto.


George Perry Graham: The Canadian National Railway Board and its offices are open to my hon. friend just as they are to me. A few days ago he moved for a copy of all letters that had been sent by any member of the government to the Canadian National Railway Board. This would add to that one or two letters, and it might be brought up in the House that we were trying to influence the railway board. The board have a difficult task to perform. Any information that is required, for which hon. gentlemen will ask in the regular way, I will endeavour to get through the board.


Arthur Meighen: This is asked for in the regular way. If the minister takes the ground that he will not disclose such information in parliament, I can understand that position.
If he does take that ground, of course, he will have to reverse himself. We want the information, if he says as he said two years ago that it should be given.


George Perry Graham: I am, of course, out of order just as my right hon. friend was. But I did not take any such ground; I did not hint at any such ground, rather the contrary. I said that the information could be secured from the board by any member; I also informed him that they could communicate with that board. But I added that if it was so desired, I would try to secure the information.


Mr. FIELDING:: Is my right hon. friend not reversing his position when he asks for such information?


Arthur Meighen: I am not at all. If the government say that they do not feel it is in the public interest that these details should be given, I will abide by that decision.


William Stevens Fielding: The government is not supposed to possess such information.


Arthur Meighen: But we are asking them to get it.


William Stevens Fielding: I am not sure that they have the right to get it under the rules.


Arthur Meighen: That is different from the position taken two years ago. If my hon. friend would take the position that was then taken by us we would not complain.


William Stevens Fielding: The right hon. gentleman should stand by his own position.


Arthur Meighen: I do, precisely.



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Agriculture-health of animals, $1,500,000.
Arthur Meighen: Before the minister enters upon his estimates will he be good enough to tell the House whether or not the embargo on Canadian store and breeding cattle entering England has been actually removed?


Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture):: We do not expect that the removal will be actually operative until about the first of April, when the United Kingdom authorities expect to have all the preliminaries ready to allow of the importation of stores under the provisions of the act. The question of breeding animals, however, has not yet been disposed of by the British parliament. I might first of all answer one or two

Supply-Health oj Animals
questions that were raised on the last occasion we were in supply. The hon. member for Qu-Appelle (Mr. Millar) then and on a previous occasion referred to a practice which, it was alleged, was in vogue in the vicinity of Calgary-at all events, the allegation appeared in the Farm and Ranch Review of that city -with respect to the purchasing of reactors and the re-sale of them to owners of herds that supplied milk to the cities. I think that was the purport of the complaint.


Mr. MILLAR:: The article that appeared in the Farm and Ranch Review of Calgary states that some people are making a practice of buying old cows at about $8 a head, the inference being that they are acquired in the belief that they will readily react. Then at the proper time they ask for an inspection, and when the cattle react they receive from the government $40 a head compensation. The article states that this practice prevails to a considerable extent around the stockyards of Winnipeg.


Mr. BROWN:: In the case of animals sold at the stockyards the indemnities would come from the condemnation insurance fund and not under an item of this kind.


William Richard Motherwell: Since this matter was first mooted my deputy took it up with the Veterinary Director General, and I might read a paragraph from a communication of his on the subject:
On January 8th, I wrote to the Editor of the Farm and Ranch Review. As no answer had been received on February 15th, a second letter was sent to him by registered mail. To this letter no reply has yet been received. I enclose copies of both letters.
I think it proper to point out that the dishonest purposes referred to in the newspaper story cannot be achieved as simply as is made to appear possible. Protection to the financial interests of this department is afforded by the fact that no compensation is paid for unimals which reast to the first test in addition to herds under the municipal tuberculosis Order. Dishonesty of the kind is possible only by roundabout methods.
If the animals are purchased in the manner described and, being sold to owners of municipal herds, they react on the first test, then no compensation is given. And this provision is intended to obviate just such a practice as is alleged. With regard to the other suggested practice of buying cattle and holding them until an opportune time for inspection, when they react, I do not see how the owners of such cattle could benefit by this practice if the cattle are grade animals. There is no compensation for grade cattle unless they are tested in conjunction with pure-bred herds. As I have explained, there is no compensation for grade cattle that react on the first test, and it is not likely that people would 
be able, to buy pure-bred animals at $8 or $10 apiece; there are not many people who would sell pure-bred cattle at that low figure. So, I presume that the cows purchased at $8 apiece are grade animals; and if they are it is impossible for the owners to get compensation. If they are acquired in the way described they cannot earn compensation because municipal herds are not eligible for compensation under the first test.	^


John Millar: Would the minister like me to read the article in full? It is already in Hansard.


William Richard Motherwell: I do not think that is necessary. Now, I would refer to one or two other matters while I am about it. It was very gratifying to me to note the objection taken to any reduction in the agricultural estimates, but I endeavoured to make it plain the other day that we hoped to keep up this important service with this reduced amount for the next year. It will be recalled that I spoke of $75,000 or $80,000 being spent in this current year for operating the restricted area in Manitoba. Possibly it would be of interest to the committee to refer to the first report in regard to that restricted area, comprising three municipalities in the neighbourhood of Carman thirty miles from Winnipeg. The Veterinary Director General writes:
A recent telegram from Dr. Hall, who is in charge of the area testing in Manitoba, has reached this office, and it will be interesting to you to hear the progress that has been made. Up to February 21st there have been 255 herds tested, comprising 3.238 cattle, of these 258 reacted, giving a percentage of 7.9.
That is not a large percentage when you take them just as they come, one herd after another.
The staff engaged in this work numbers 12, exclusive of Dr. Hall, who probably is not actually doing any testing himself but supervising and arranging the work of his staff. The area covered comprises a large part of the municipality of Dufferin, and Dr. Hall says that he expects to finish the testing of all the cattle in Dufferin municipality by the 28th instant, and adds that weather conditions have retarded progress.
Because of shortage of funds, for one reason, it is not intended to go ahead next year with any further experiments in this restricted area enterprise. I have explained already that the intention was to gather by an actual try-out, information of what it would cost to clean up a given area. When we had that information we were going to the provinces to see if we could not induce them to co-operate with the federal authorities in tackling this big national work. I might say incidentally that the provincial authorities of British Columbia engaged on the work of compensating for tuberculous animals slaughtered before the Do-

Supply-Health of Animals
minion authorities ever took it up, but it was found to be such an enormous task that the federal government had to come to their assistance and take it in hand . Now the enterprise is so vast and important that all authorities we can get behind it should be induced to co-operate, but we cannot get them to join us until we are in a position to advise them as to the probable cost. We do not contemplate such expenditure next year, and consequently that much can be taken off last year's estimate and still meet the ordinary demands incident to this work. In addition to that, there will be found on the back -of the Votes and Proceedings a resolution indicating the intention of the government to bring in a bill reducing the compensation for pure-bred animals that may be slaughtered on account of being affected with tuberculosis. If that bill passes,-I make that qualification because it did not get through last session; if it had we would not be so short of money this year on this vote; if it passes-it will mean that 8300,000 next year will go as far as $400,000 would this year, or 75 cents next year will go as far in the actual payment of compensation as $1.00 this year.


Mr. GOULD:: In the area referred to in the Carman district of Manitoba does the work embrace grade cattle?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, everything that is bovine in character. Another reason is that I think we will have to get along next year with a smaller staff of inspectors, as the work arising in connection with the removal of the British embargo is likely to draw off thirty or forty of our veterinary staff. I expect to have the embargo staff returned inside a year, but in the meantime, we will have only three-quarters of our veterinary staff available for the accredited herd areas. For that reason we purpose keeping up the second examination of all herds that have been tested this year. It is very important that we should do this if we want to clear up those herds that have already been taken in on the first examination.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Did I understand the minister to say that his department is not taking on any new herds this year under the accredited herd system?


William Richard Motherwell: No. Somebody said that, but I denied it very emphatically. If my hon. friend will subtract $285,000 from the total of $1,500,000 he will find how much money we will have to work with. When we make allowance also for the lesser compensation which I am proposing in my resolution,
and, for the fact that we will not undertake any further restricted area work, it will be seen how it is possible for us to make this reduction in the vote and still keep up the work.


Mr. BRETHEN:: In reference to the $1,-
500,000	for administration and enforcement of Animal Contagious Diseases Act and Meat and Canned Foods Act, how much of that money was spent on the accredited herd system last year?


William Richard Motherwell: I placed that information on the Table two or three days ago, but it may not have come to my hon. friend's attention. Speaking from memory, it was, roughly, $400,000 for pure-bred and $300,000 for grade.


George Arthur Brethen: How much of this money was spent in the restricted area work?


William Richard Motherwell: We have not that work completed yet, and therefore do not know how much it will cost eventually.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Then the minister is taking on new herds under the accredited herd system?


William Richard Motherwell: Oh, yes, we are taking on every herd that is coming along in these three municipalities. We want to get that work done in the winter time as we can do it cheaper then.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: But over Canada, generally?	' 6


William Richard Motherwell: No, not over the rest of Canada; but we are conducting second examinations.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: But you are not taking on any more herds outside of that restricted area?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, that was the
substance of my answer. We are accepting applications, and they will be taken up in older of priority when we get our new vote.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I am very sorry that the minister has seen fit to take this course, because I believe the testing of pure-bred cattle in fact of all cattle, is one of the most important undertakings in Canada to-day, for it affects not only our herds but the lives of our people as well. I am very sorry that the minister has seen fit to restrict the work in this particular.


William Richard Motherwell: I have not.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Had I got this idea the other night I* would certainly have opposed his increase for the experimental farms,-

Supply-Health of Animals

that is, if that increase is at the expense of the necessary funds for the testing of cattle. That is one of the most important works his department is engaged in. As a breeder of pure-bred cattle, I would even be willing to forego compensation altogther if necessary, and I would certainly be willing that the compensation per head should be reduced, if by so doing he could extend the work of testing cattle for tuberculosis. I think the compensation for animals destroyed under this act is a very small factor in the whole proposition-, the more important feature is the health not only of the animals but of the people who use the products manufictured from milk.
I sincerely hope the minister will reconsider his decision to cut down his vote and will not restrict this very important work.


Mr. TOLMIE:: Mr. Chairman, I think we
all agree that the accredited herd system as introduced is perhaps one of the best, if not the only means in fact, that can be employed to encourage the ultimate eradication of tuberculosis. It has been clearly shown that any plan to make a clean sweep of tuberculosis over any extended area, such as a state or province, cannot be carried out, simply on account of the volume of work and expense involved. In Massachusetts, New York, Illinois and one or two other states where this great work was undertaken, it was found to entail so much expenditure and labour that it was finally abandoned. Therefore we have adopted the accredited herd system, hoping thereby to create little centres free from disease and at the same time educate the people up to the time when we will be able to take hold of the eradication of tuberculosis on a much larger and more successful scale.
It is very important that this work should be carried on without restriction. We have got our farmers educated to the point where they are anxious to have their herds cleaned up, as is indicated by the large number of entries in this particular line. We have already made arrangements with the United States for the exchange of our cattle from accredited herds on both sides of the line without the usual inspection at the boundary. We have a large market on the American side, and it would be a great pity if there should be any interference with the very valuable trade with the United States in purebred animals at the present enjoyed by this country. There is another point: can we afford to stop it, or even to ease up? In 1922 we slaughtered 488,000 head of cattle in our inspected abattoirs. In 1910 the percentage of tuberculosis animals among those inspected amounted to 2-96; in 1922 tffe percentage amounted to 5-26, a very marked increase

indeed. A still greater increase is apparent in connection with our hogs. Last year we slaughtered something like 1,700,000 head of hogs in these inspected establishments, and it was clearly shown that the percentage of infected animals had increased from 5-26 in 1910 to 21 86 in 1922. Can we afford to ease up on this work of cleaning up tuberculosis in Canada? An enormous wastage is involved, not only in the compensation paid, which is very small, in the cleaning up of accredited herds, but also in the interference with trade and the severe losses incurred in shipping the animals to the packing houses. When we see this large reduction of $285,000 in the estimates for carrying out the work of the Health of Animals branch, we wonder if the high degree of efficiency maintained in the past can be continued under those conditions.
Canada to-day possesses an enviable reputation so far as the health of animals is concerned. In fact, it was shown before the royal commission sitting in London in 1921 to inquire into the embargo question that Canada was the freest country in the world from contagious diseases among animals-surely a very proud position to hold, a position that has been attained through the excellent work done by the Department of Agriculture, particularly the Health of Animals branch, in years past. This reputation is of the greatest value to us, particularly when we begin to export our animals, either in live or in dressed state, to outside markets. In fact, it is safe to say that the strongest argument we had to present before that commission in 1921 was this statement of Canada's freedom from contagious disease. While other factors undoubtedly had a good deal to do with the removal of the embargo, that in my opinion was the pivot on which the whole thing turned.
I should like respectfully to offer to the minister a suggestion or two in connection with work that perhaps is not receiving as much attention in the department as it might. I understand that the department is expending about $32,000 a year on research work, including that of the pathological division of the Health of Animals branch. The men engaged in this work are experts in their respective lines, and in addition to carrying on actual research work their time is taken up in the manufacture of tuberculin, etc, I understand that they have put up sufficient tuberculin and mallein to more than cover the amount of money expended on that particular division. While the tuberculin test is the best test we know of at present for the diagnosis of tuberculosis where no physical symptoms are shown, still, its efficiency has

Supply-Health of Animals
not reached the point where it can tell us just how badly the animal is affected. That is, it does not pick out the animal that would be likely to recover from the disease from the one that might be what we call an open case or a spreader of the disease. That is the very serious drawback to the use of tuberculin. I feel that there are great possibilities for research in this connection; we would probably find that from fifty to seventy-five per cent of the animals affected with tuberculosis might naturally recover. The question might also be taken up of vaccination and immunization of animals against this disease. Here is a tremendous field for work that ought to produce very excellent results. At present we are testing and actually destroying those affected, but we spend very little money on trying to discover a remedy that would place us in a very much better position and save us millions of dollars.
Fortunately, we have in connection with the pathological laboratory one of the most experienced animal pathologists on the North American continent. I refer to Dr. Watson, Chief Pathologist of the Department of Agriculture, whose ability has been amply demonstrated in the past. A few years ago a disease affecting horses broke out on the prairie, known as dourine. Several hundred animals were affected, and the compensation paid ran into thousands of dollars; in one year I think it reached $43,000. This gentleman first made a careful diagnosis of the disease. He was able to carry put a blood test devised by himself whereby he could diagnose the disease before any physical symptoms were shown, and in five or six years he had completely eradicated the disease from the country -surely a very excellent work. Quite recently he has scored another triumph in the carrying on of experimental work in connection with glanders; he has produced a serum in the laboratory in Hull, that gives great promise as a remedy for this disease. Quite recently a case of glanders broke out on a farm in Manitoba, and both the farmer and the medical man who treated him became infected with the disease. There had been no cure for glanders in the human being, so far as was known; it is a disease that is very prevalent in some countries, particularly in Russia. A serum produced by the Chief Pathologist was sent out to Manitoba and used in both these cases, and the farmer is now back at work and the doctor making rapid progress towards recovery. Certainly that is a very satisfactory result from the efforts of this gentleman.
37i
I feel that the pathological division should receive the strongest possible support. You have a man there whose experience and ability it would be hard to dupliciate and who would be quickly taken hold of by others if his efforts are not fully appreciated and if he does not receive satisfactory assistance in his present capacity. Here is a field that promises very excellent results if a sufficient amount of money and proper encouragement are given to this gentleman. I should be very sorry indeed, Mr. Chairman, to see the vote stand in its present position, with that very large reduction of $285,000. I would respectfully suggest to the hon. misister that if he is unable to change the present vote he at least make a very strong effort to have an amount placed in the supplementary estimates that will give proper aid to this very important branch of the Department of Agriculture.


William Richard Motherwell: Let me right at the outset thank the hon. gentleman for his exceedingly constructive suggestions and criticisms. The fact that we brought down last year $75,000 in the supplementary estimates for this department is an indication that I am not unfamiliar with the fact that what you cannot get by one bite you can sometimes get by two. So it is not too late yet. We shall know inside of three or four weeks, before the supplementary estimates come down, whether the embargo provisions are not bringing about the change that might be expected, and if the worst comes to the worst, why, I am glad the Finance Minister has heard my hon. friend's suggestion; he will know what it means when I recommend to him and my colleagues that we should get a little more, in view of the altered circumstances in connection with the embargo. That was the situation that arose last year; representations were made by the Manitoba authorities after the main estimates came down, and we made provision for a further amount in the supplementaries. That is why the suplementaries are there. So that without making any promises, all I can do is to say that if I find it is required to keep up the work to the full, I will certainly make the same endeavour to meet the situation as I did last year. I am sure that will meet the expectations and hopes of every hon. member in this committee.
With respect to the member of the veterinary staff, Mr. Watson, who has been successful in discovering a serum for the curing of glanders when man is affected by it, I may say that I feel particularly interested in that discovery. Further it seems to me too bad that we have such primitive surroundings for our excellent staff to work in, but I suppose
580	COMMONS
SupplyJ-Health of Animals
we walk before we run, and it seems to me the surroundings we have and the accommodation must answer for the present. We have just moved our biological laboratory from the Experimental Farm to Wellington street, where we have more accommodation, but after all it is not a public building and it is not suitable. It is better than where it was, and the accommodation over in Hull, to which my hon. friend refers, is not what it should be either, but in time, as we find the financial situation eases up a bit, possibly we may be able to spend a little more in the construction of these very necessary buildings. In the meantime, I may say I was almost affected with glanders and I can sympathize too in the full. We have had cases where men have had glanders and have been cured by this newly accepted method worked out by one of the veterinary staff. The men responsible for building up the staff have established it in pretty good shape in the last few years. I do not want to take any credit myself but I am convinced that there is only one policy to adopt, and that is full steam ahead to the capacity of our finances. To show the committee the experience of the United States with respect to this matter, I may say they are also doing the same thing, having only one limitation, and that is money, and I feel that this is a case where many hands make light work. There are other considerations. For instance, having the municipal authorities as well as the provinces interested in it financially, I think, would produce better results in the end, besides being easier on all hands. I have before me a communication from Dr. Torrance to Dr. Grisdale which reads as follows:
Dr. Mohler, the chief of the bureau of animal industry, in his last annual report for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 1922, states that co-operative federal state tuberculosis eradication had given highly encouraging results. Fully accredited herds had increased in the United States during the past year from 8,201 to 16,216.
There are now fully accredited herds in each state with the exception of California and New Mexico and in these states there are 129 herds with 1,370 cattle and 724 herds with 5,573 cattle which have passed one test respectively under this plan.
Dr. Mohler also states that they had on fyle at the time of his report 35,239 applications from owners of herds for accreditation, which they had been unable to handle, and that these herds contained more than one-half million cattle.
I am informed by my staff that while there were a lot of herds on application at the first of this year, we have caught up during the past year on the applications for accreditation. We have not caught up entirely, but [DOT] have caught up pretty well compared with the condition a year ago, so that we are not

even marking time. We think the work is in better shape to-day than it was one year ago. That is, when you take into consideration that we have taken up a new feature of work in the restricted area, and we are following up the second examination. I am sure the hon. member for Victoria and Carle-ton (Mr. Caldwell), whose heart must be in this as an old practitioner, knows the value of it possibly as no other member of this House knows it. I knew the value of it as a sufferer before there was any compensation for slaughtered animals, and I think the committee should be prepared to assist in extending this work and laying the foundation for a new policy in getting the necessary information to enable us to go, I hope, successfully, to the provinces, to start on a plan to take care of the work in a comprehensive way. We will have our limitations however. It is quite possible if we get the municipalities into this matter of accredited herds to co-operate with the provinces and ourselves, we will find more applications than can be taken care of, judging from the experiences of the United States.


Mr. LOVIE:: Can the minister tell us how much it costs for the treatment of glanders in Treesbank, Manitoba, and that district?


William Richard Motherwell: We will take a note of that, or if the question is put on the order paper it will be better.


William James Lovie: The minister has no record of it?


William Richard Motherwell: We have not that information. It is a continuous work. I think we can dig it out of the accounts, but there has to be some limitation in the matter of available documents here. I will be very pleased to answer my hon. friend, if he will put it on the order paper.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The minister says the reason he is cutting down this vote is lack of money, but I think the explanation is hardly fair, in view of the fact that he has increased some of the other items. If he had said he cut this out to switch money to some other purpose, we would be able to prove it by the very estimates themselves, but in view of the fact that the estimates are $14,000 more than last year, and that what I consider the most important item under this head is cut down, I feel it is a mistake to switch off from this work money that should be devoted to it, and add to some other branch of the service. I think this is the most important service under the Department of Agriculture. I sincerely

Supply-Health of Animals
hope, as the minister has suggested, that he may bring down a vote in the Supplementary Estimates and that he will continue this work on at least as large a scale as before.
With regard to the restricted area in Manitoba, it is just possible the atmosphere is so much drier in Manitoba than at Hull, that it would be a good plan to locate the restricted area in eastern Canada. I do not think he should locate it in Hull. It would be better in the Maritime provinces where we have a moist climate, but not similar to Hull, because the moisture comes from the ocean.


William Richard Motherwell: In discussing this with the staff and the gentleman from Manitoba, who probably in a practical way was the first to draw my attention to it, my first thought was to get some portion of Canada that had a distinct boundary line, so that we could operate within certain distinct boundaries, and Prince Edward Island was my first thought and Vancouver Island my second. We had no applications from either of those and no agitation for it, and as one of them does not like innovations very much anyway I was rather disposed to take-[DOT]


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Which one?


William Richard Motherwell: I will leave it to my hon. friend to guess. I thought it was best to take it up with the Manitoba representatives who were ready and anxious to try it out. After all, if you suggest it to somebody else, you would not have them enter the work with the same enthusiasm as the province of Manitoba would, who are already anxious for it, have passed the necessary resolutions and have worked up public sentiment ready to go into it. However, when Canada's ship comes in probably, we will be able to take action elsewhere. I would like to see it tried in either of those places I have named, because then we would have a complete boundary line beyond which no contagion would escape.


Mr. WALLACE:: Has Manitoba contributed anything towards the cleaning up of this area?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: I would like to
know whether the proposition to reduce the maximum compensation paid has had the effect of reducing the number of applications?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Donald Sutherland: Has it had any
effect at all?


William Richard Motherwell: No, I do not think it had a particle of effect.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The minister stated
that the work is being nearly overtaken. Is he counting the applications that have come in that are not being considered to-day?


William Richard Motherwell: I might point out
that there is a certain amount of "hang over" yet that affected the work last year. I had to stop the taking on of new herds for want of necessary funds. We had to do the best we could with less money and endeavour to keep the work going. That is one reason why we are not taking on the Manitoba works further. That can be done cheaper in the winter time. We have just recently assembled our men there at a time when the farmers will be free to give the necessary assistance.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: If the department is
not free to take on any more accredited herds what was the use of issuing the pamphlet a copy of which I hold in my hand?	,


William Richard Motherwell: We are taking them up now.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: But you are not testing the herds, and do not intend to do so.


William Richard Motherwell: I do not think
that is fair.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: .1 do not want to say anything that is unfair, I want to get at the real purpose behind this. For instance here is a pamphlet which has been distributed instructing people how to proceed to get their cattle tested. In this pamphlet this question and answer appear:
Q. But I can get help if I want a test?
A. Certainly.
Then this question and answer appear:
Q. What is the minimum of animals that will be accepted?
A. Ten pure-bred animals, one a pure-bred herd sire.
Now the minister is telling us that he is not taking on any applications with the intention of testing them this year.


William Richard Motherwell: We have got to do one of two things. We were $50,000 short of our expected revenue and, when our expected legislation did not go through last session, that was tantamount to requiring $50,000 more to do a given amount of work. We are taking on the applications as they come to us with the intimation, as I 'have already stated to the House, that our men will devote their time to certain examinations and work in Manitoba for the balance of the fiscal year. Then, as soon as the new vote is available we will go on with our examination of the new accredited herds. That is exactly the same policy that we pursued last year.
Supply-Health of Animals


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: 
Mr. HARRIS:: I am sorry that the minister did not explain this vote a little more fully as to one matter which concerns a big industry in the Dominion of Canada, and that is the raising and feeding of hogs. Last year in discussing this particular estimate we had b.efore us the case of one man upon whom we thought the operation of the act had wrought injustice

a man by the name of Alderson. In discussing that case the minister said in part:
Sometimes justice falls short. We have known innocent men to be hanged, and we may expect a similar fatality to be meted out sometimes to a hog.
Now the minister has had the opportunity of looking into the records of the department and perhaps cin give us some more information in regard to this particular issue. Of course, if he does not, we will all try our level best to remember this little passage and perhaps we can read into it that a similar fate may be meted out to a certain political party. I would like the minister to tell us frankly if he feels that in reviewing any of these issues,

justice has in any way fallen short. At the time referred to there was considerable discussion regarding the feeding of garbage to swine, and the minister had in mind, I think, that perhaps the garbage which was not properly cooked by steam process might be cooked perhaps by direct heat in larger kettles. Those were the words he used as will be found by reference to page 1029 of last year's Hansard. He said, on the occasion referred to:
The only change that has been contemplated at all has been the substitution of larger kettles for cooking garbage, so as to avoid the necessity of procuring more expensive boilers.
I would like, before this vote passes, that this minister would be good enough to give me some information on this matter.


William Richard Motherwell: I feel disposed to keep my eye on the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) when I touch upon this somewhat delicate subject. However, we all appear to be in pretty good humour now, and possibly I can get the desired information to the committee and escape the danger point.
I may say that last year I was impressed with the idea that possibly there had been a miscarriage of justice somewhere

I mean in equity not in law; I think Mr. Alderson got all that was coming to him in law, but, as has been said, that sometimes that falls short of equity. At least I was understood to have said that. After the House prorogued last year I took some steps to investigate the matter further. In the meantime Mr. Alderson took the case to the courts, but not having a case in law he fell down; he did not, as he thought, get justice. My deputy sent to Toronto and got a copy of the evidence that was taken in the proceedings, reviewed it very thoroughly, and tried to get at the bottom of the matter. I had understood that there were certain strictures made by the judge with respect to certain witnesses, but if so they did not appear in the copy of the evidence we got. But I can see where Mr. Alderson fell down. He sought to prove there was no disease in his herds but unquestionably there was disease present; it could not be proven that it was attributable to other causes than uncooked garbage. I received a communication from Mr. Alderson after that asking me if he might have an opportunity of discussing the matter with me, and, as I naturally wished to see the gentleman over whom there had been so much discussion, I immediately made an engagement with him. He came down and we had a long talk, and I was very much impressed with Mr. Alderson's sincerity and
5S3

Su-pply-Health of Animals
truthfulness. I am confident that he felt that he was abused and that he was telling me a true story. So much so that I arranged for a conference in my office between Mr. Alderson,	one , of his	sons,	and aneighbour,	and three or	four	of my
staff, including the deputy, and myself. I suppose we were there for an hour and a half, or possibly two hours, going into this complex question, and endeavouring to secure a solution that would deal with the matter from the standpoint of equity. We thought we had secured a solution. I felt that if such a thing as compassionate compensation-shall I call it?-could be given to Mr. Alderson, that should be done. I felt in my heart that it should be done; but I am not a legal authority, and I was informed by the Auditor General, when this was attempted to be done, that under the law we could not pay compassionate compensation. The law is there for the purpose of compensating the owner of animals that have cholera. On the other hand, it was found that the bulk of the evidence went to show that, while cholera was present to a very restricted extent, a considerable number of animals had been slaughtered that were not diseased at all. That was the situation. Mr. Alderson slaughtered thirty-three head of animals, which under examination proved to be all right and fit for food. In view of that, the evidence seemed to indicate that a considerable number more had been slaughtered that would have proved to be all right if they had been salvaged. I think Mr. Alderson should have been allowed to salvage either the entire bunch or none at all. I was not in charge at the time; I do not know what the regulations were, and I have not gone into them intimately enough to know whether a mistake occurred or not. I think, however, the veterinary inspectors felt they went far enough when they allowed Alderson to salvage thirty-three. But having salvaged thirty-three, Mr. Alderson came to the conclusion that they had not cholera at all and that if the rest had been salvaged, he could have got the value of them on the market. There is, however, no question at all that cholera was present, and, further, Mr. Alderson could not prove that it had been contracted by any other means than by garbage. Therefore, on the cholera-affected animals, he was not entitled to any compensation, and the ruling of the department and the officers of the department is strictly and legally right.
As regards the animals that were slaughtered and salvaged, and that proved to be all right, there is presumptive evidence that if more had been salvaged, they would have proved
to have been fit for human consumption, and that is the place where I feel an injustice was done. Whether that was due to wrong regulations or to regulations not being carried out according to the instructions given, I do not know. All I know is that immediately I became familiar with the facts, instructions were given that, in future, owners of all herds of this nature must be allowed to salvage anything that did not show any clinical signs of disease. Then the post mortem, after the animals were slaughtered, would indicate whether or not they were fit for human food. That is the situation. If my hon. friend has any suggestions to make with regard to the matter, I should be glad to have them; I have made an attempt to meet the situation. The hon. member for South Oxford made such strong representations and came back so frequently in regard to this case, that I came to the conclusion that his action was not to make a noise, not mer^y to play the game or to indicate that he was active on behalf of the interests of his constituents, but because he believed in his heart that justice had fallen short somewhere. I will give the hon. gentleman credit for that, and it was for that reason that I pursued the investigation further. I then ran up against the stone wall of the Auditor General who, in effect, intimated that no such thing as compassionate compensation could be paid under the provisions of the law.


Joseph Henry Harris: Any one who knows anything about the workings of the department and particularly the Health of Animals branch knows that they are doing a great deal of good work. I appreciate the minister's statement that, in future, occurrences of this kind will be prevented. The injustice, however, already done to this particular party, who by the way is no constituent of mine, is not righted by taking care of some case which might happen in the future. At the present time this man is some seventy years of age, and he is destitute through the necessity of the department cleaning out his herd of swine and is not being able to receive compensation to a larger extent than he did to take care of his particular case. I would respectfully ask the minister if it is not possible for him to bring down in his supplementary estimates some measure of relief which will compensate in some small degree this man to whom a gross injustice has been done.


Mr. LEADER:: I cannot help but think the government has adopted a policy of passive defence in regard to this very important work of the eradication of tuberculosis from our cattle. The minister has made it

Supply-Health oj Animals
plain, I think, to everyone present that while the government are willing to accept applications that may be made, they will be unable to act upon them this year at least; in fact, they will not be able to take on new work in Manitoba except in this restricted area.


William Richard Motherwell: That is for this current year.


Harry Leader: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: That will soon be out.


Harry Leader: The fact that the government will not be able to take on any new work is due not to lack of funds, but to the opinion of the minister that this work is not as important as other work. It will be remembered that the other night I protested against the increase of $200,000 in the appropriation for experimental farms, and I think my contention was sound in that regard. To-day I am going to suggest that the minister endeavour, in his fight with the rest of the Cabinet, to get more money for this particular work of the eradication of tuberculosis and to bring such further sum down in the Supplementary Estimates. I am particularly interested in this phase of agriculture; I know something about it. My herd was, perhaps, one of the very first in Canada to be accredited. I am going to be looked after, so I cannot be accused of looking at this matter from a selfish viewpoint. But my neighbour, who has not had the advantage of getting under this system, is going to be out in the cold for this next year at least. I think this work is so important, not only to the farming interests, but to the people who live in our cities, that every endeavour should be made, not just to stand pat, but to carry on an aggressive campaign against this disease. Last year, in speaking about this matter, I mentioned that glanders had been almost entirely eradicated from horses by the action of the government. As has been proved in the United States, if the same aggressive action is displayed as regards tuberculosis, the same results will be achieved. It will, however, never be achieved by the policy of passive defence that is taken at this time. The minister has paid me the compliment of stating that, in a moment of weakness, he agreed to raise the compensation last year. I hope that I have enough influence with him that he will feel obliged to insist in Council on $285,000 for the accredited herd system, the same as was asked for last year. I am going to suggest that he make a fight for that amount.


Donald Sutherland: I should like to refer to the matter that the minister was

dealing with just a few moments ago. I appreciate very much the careful manner in which he has inquired into the case referred to, that of Alderson, who had some 245 hogs slaughtered under the Contagious Diseases Act. This man has received no compensation and as a result he has been practically ruined. He had a large experience in this particular business and it is to be assumed that he knew quite well what the consequence would be if cholera developed in his herd. The minister observed that the case had been taken into the courts and that the man had failed to establish his position. Mr. Alderson endeavoured to show that there was no disease in his herd; he staked everything on that issue. There was the alternative by which, if he could establish that the disease might have been introduced from some other source rather than from garbage feeding, he would have been entitled to compensation. But he said that he was satisfied in his own mind that there was no disease in his herd and that therefore he would undertake to establish his case on those grounds. The judge in his finding points out that the evidence of Mr. Alderson and three or four of his witnesses was absolutely in contradiction to that of the officers of the department; and he adds that he finds it necessary to accept the statements of those who. are experts in the diseases of animals rather than the testimony of the owner of the animals. And the owner not having tried to establish that the disease had been introduced from some other source than garbage feeding, there was no other recourse for the court than to disallow compensation. A post mortem was held on one small pig out of this herd of 245 animals. A few culls from different litters were put into a pen together and it was on one sickly-looking little pig that the post mortem was held. The man pleaded with the officers of the department to allow him to slaughter as many of the animals as he could and dispose of them for food. He was given permission to kill and dress what he could in one day and disposed of 33 of them in this way, every one of which was passed by the inspector. Now, it is remarkable that although the inspectors, on taking the temperature of six or eight of these hogs, declared the animals to be diseased, and to have a high temperature, yet when they were slaughtered no disease was discovered in them. I am not going to argue that there was no disease in the herd. The evidence of the officers has been accepted by the court, and the assumption is reasonable that some of these sickly runts among the culls that were in this pen would be most susceptible to disease if it was introduced

Supply-Health of Animals
from any outside source. And the returns show that some animals that had been taken to the place a few weeks previously for breeding purposes had died, though other animals that had been brought about the same time and taken away had not developed disease. The assumption, therefore, is that the disease might possibly have been introduced from this outside source, although Mr. Alderson might not be aware of its presence. The officers of the department might have found disease in one of these animals and concluded that it was necessary to slaughter the whole herd. The minister stated his conviction that many of these animals were fit for food; and that, Mr. Alderson having suffered a great injustice, he had taken steps to see that the regulations under the act should be amended so that an incident of this kind could not recur in the future. So that now where disease breaks out, if there are any animals that are free from it and are fit for food they will be salvaged and not be a total loss to the owner.
The man concerned happens to be a resident of the constituency that I represent. But I want to say right here that I interested myself in the matter not by reason of any political services he had rendered me, for he had been a staunch Liberal all his life, but because I had known him for many years and was convinced that he was upright and honourable. I am satisfied that when he went into court to endeavour -to prove that there was no disease in his herd he firmly believed that there was not; and I do not think that the officers of the department showed him the consideration to which he was entitled. He declared in evidence, which I think was corroborated by other witnesses, that he was assured by the inspector that he would receive two-thirds compensation for the animals slaughtered, that he would have his premises cleaned up, and that he would be enabled to go into business again. Far from that being the case, he finds himself now in the possession of property of very little value, for he has not since been able to utilise his pens for breeding purposes. In short, he is simply down and out. In view, therefore, of his sincerity and his loss which the minister admits, I think he is entitled to some consideration. And the fact that the minister even went so far as to recommend a compassionate allowance would indicate the justice of his claim. If the law as it stands precludes some compassionate allowance being made for a person injured in this way, I think that some steps should be taken to see that justice is done. We
talk about passing an old age pension law and other measures for the relief of the people, and it does seem very hard indeed that a man who is trying to earn an honest living should, by an incident of this kind, find himself absolutely deprived of his means of livelihood. I hope the minister will bring down something in the Supplementary Estimates to provide some measure of justice to this man. The very fact that every one of the 33 animals that were slaughtered and dressed was found by the department to be absolutely free from disease and fit for food goes to show that the disease was not general in the herd. The minister is convinced that an injustice has been done in the owner not being allowed to salvage the animals that were healthy. The hon. member for Victoria City (Mr. Tolmie) stated that in 1910, 5.26 per cent of the animals inspected were infected with tuberculosis, as against 21.86 last year. It shows an alarming increase of disease in our hogs, and renders imperative that heroic remedies be resorted to for its eradication, otherwise we shall find ourselves without even sufficient hogs for domestic consumption.	.
I am not going to deal with the accredited herd system. I know the minister is anxious that progress should be made in this matter. It is likely, as was indicated in the discussion the other night, that under the present regulations governing compensation some people may have taken advantage of the department. I suppose it is impossible to frame laws that will absolutely prevent all fraud. However, the case to which I have referred happened in the spring of 1920. Since that time the man aggrieved has been living in hopes that some compensation would be paid to him for the loss he sustained. Now, I would ask the minister to give this matter a little further consideration, and although the Audit department may not be prepared to pass any compensation payment under a strict interpretation of the act as it was, I hope that some means can be found to provide a remedy.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would like to know how many accredited herds we have in New Brunswick and who the owners are; and the same information in respect to Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island.


William Richard Motherwell: The total number of fully accredited herds, that is, those which have had two clean tests, is 374 in all the provinces; the number in process of being accredited is 1,069; the number of applications received is 181-or a total of 1,624. Taking each province the figures are: Prince Edward Island, fully accredited, 14; under
Supply-Health oj Animals

process, 29; not tested, 6; total 49. Nova Scotia, fully accredited, 8; under process, 6; not tested, 7; total 21. New Brunswick, fully accredited, none. My hon. friend does not seem to have taken advanatage of this system.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Are Harding Bros, not there?


William Richard Motherwell: No. There are 14 under accreditation, but they have to get two full clean tests before they are recognized as fully accredited. The number not tested and waiting is 3. So my hon. friend has not got any very great grievance after all-only three on the waiting list. There are often more men waiting in a barber shop.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Mr. Chairman, I think
possibly the minister has lost the point that I made a short time ago. While I have often seen more than three men waiting in a barber shop, I do not think such a waiting list applies to the present case. I would call the minister's attention to the fact that we are simply beginning this line of farming in New Brunswick, which accounts for there being 14 herds under process. This indicates that what 1 am saying is absolutely correct. Due to the fact that this pamphlet has only been issued very recently-I did not get my copy until two months ago-very few of our people knew that this system was in operation. A good number of our farmers intend to apply for accreditation of their herds, and they will be very much disappointed when they find that their applications are deferred. Hope deferred maketh the heart sick, as the old saying is. Another point. Here are 14 herds under process of examination, and in due time they will be the only accredited herds for the whole province of New Brunswick. We have quite a large number of other breeders of pure bred cattle who will be absolutely unable to get their herds tested, and consequently they will not. be able to sell their stock, because our beginners are aware of the fact that tested stock is worth far more money than untested. Untested stock may be all right, but you can not sell it. I am raising some pure-bred stock, but I have not got them accredited yet. I was going to make application, but I shall not do so now, for I do not want to be on the waiting list when there is no barber to attend to me.


William Richard Motherwell: The sooner you apply the sooner your turn will come.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The result will be that the 14 breeders who get their herds accredited will corner all the business in New Brunswick,

and no other breeder will be able to sell purebred stock in competition with them. My hon. friend for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Leader) pointed this out, and as his herd is accredited we cannot impute to him any selfish motives. I have not a very big herd, but I know large numbers of breeders who have, and who would like to get their herds accredited. I have been doing some work along this line and I am very sorry, because having told the pure-bred stock breeders in my province that they could get their herds accredited, I now find myself in a false position.


George Arthur Brethen: There seems to be a misunderstanding regarding this matter. I take it that there is no money at present to carry on this work for the current year, that is, until after the 31st March?


William Richard Motherwell: Except in Manitoba.. We are taking on new work there now.


George Arthur Brethen: In the restricted area?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, and the retest, second, third or fourth, as the case may be.	[DOT]


George Arthur Brethen: I quite agree with what the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) has said regarding the value of this work. I believe that this accredited herd system is the first and about the only stimulus to people who own herds of cattle to try and eradicate tuberculosis, and I believe that for every person who was interested in it at first there are at least a hundred now interested as a result of this compensation scheme. I should like to have an assurance from the hon. minister that the vote as it stands at present will look after the applications now on file and new applications to the extent it did last year.


William Richard Motherwell: I think we can do
(hat.


George Arthur Brethen: That is the only thing I
wish cleared up.


Mr. JELLIFF:: Have we any accredited herds in Alberta?


William Richard Motherwell: In Alberta the figures for accredited herds are: Fully accredited, 7; under process, 41; on the waiting list, 6; total, 54. If any hon. gentleman wants to know about any other province I shall be glad to give the information.


Mr. KENNEDY (Glengarry):: Ontario?


William Richard Motherwell: 
Mr. KNOX:: Saskatchewan?


William Richard Motherwell: Fully accredited, 13; in process, 50; on the waiting list, 19; total, 82.


Harry Leader: Quebec?


William Richard Motherwell: Fully accredited, 98; in process, 301; on the waiting list, 52; total, 451. Manitoba, fully accredited, 26; under process, 179; on the waiting list, 9; total, 214. British Columbia, fully accredited, 23; under process, 27; waiting list, 1; total, 51. No report from the Yukon.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Where can we get the names of the men who own these accredited herds?


William Richard Motherwell: I suggest that my hon. friend ask for a return containing that information. We have everything else here, but we shall be glad to supply that.


Oliver Robert Gould: I am sure that enough evidence has been furnished in the remarks of hon. members on this question to prove that it is one of very great importance. I have wondered whether the minister has been deprived of this $285,000 by a process of duress, as the hon. member for Brant (Mr. Good) suggested the other day in regard to another matter. There is no doubt that disease is prevalent not only in pure bred herds but among other cattle as well. Only two days ago I received a letter from my home stating that one of our nearest neighbours had lost twenty-one head out of a herd of twenty-three because of tuberculosis. The disease is prevalent in herds of grade cattle, and the department have not the same opportunity of finding out to what extent it prevails there that they have in the case of the pure bred herds. That is one reason why I urge upon the minister that this item be increased by $285,000. In view of representations that have been so generally made here to-day I have no doubt that if the minister will again go to his colleagues and ask for the amount taken off from last year, he will get it.


William Richard Motherwell: I have stated in answer to another hon. gentleman that it all depends on how things work out. I will have all the information inside of a month, and if this amount will not do the work, I will do my best-as I did last year and succeeded-to get an additional amount in the Supplementary Estimates. I am interested and delighted to know that even what appears to be a reduction, not in efficiency but in the size
of a vote; a better use of money-alarms the members of this committee when it is applied to agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Richard Motherwell: I have been requested to take up item No. 48 for the same reason that I gave in respect to No. 45.
Agriculture-live stock, including grant of $6,000 to Stock Growers' Protective Association, $1,230,000.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: To what branch of live stock does this refer?


William Richard Motherwell: The hon. member
who asks the question drew attention, under the previous item, to the importance of live stock in the Maritime provinces. The same importance is to be attached to live stock all over Canada; I had occasion to draw attention to that in a former debate. This vote applies not only to the beef types of live stock but to our dairy herds. I will give the details; it is largely a speeding up along every line. I may be asked why we increase the appropriation and decrease it somewhere else. Well, our information is not yet complete in regard to the possibilities of the embargo, and that is the reason why we left it to be dealt with in the Supplementaries. But in this case we know only too well that this amount of money will be required-and more if we could get it-to put our live stock in better shape all over the Dominion of Canada. You could take a radius of twenty-five miles right around where we sit and find that in a lamentable number of dairy herds the average production per cow is lower than 3,000 pounds per annum; and we are competing with countries whose average is 6,000, and who are close to a market, at that. So you can see what a tiemendous handicap we s.uffer in competing with other countries which are active in the dahying industry. We must do all we can to remove that disability. It is true that much depends upon the individual but education enters largely into the matter. If we can convince the dairyman that poor, scrub live stock is a money loser, we have done something towards starting him in the right direction; but it is remarkable how much of that educational work seems to be necessary with some people. Some farmers may think that they get along better with poor stock because it will stand more hardship, but they are money losers in these times when nothing but the best can make the grade under the conditions to which I have referred. The details of this vote include:	horse breeding division-federal
assistance to horse breeding; cattle division; distribution of pure-bred bulls; sire purchase policy; scrub bull campaign; boys' breeding
58S
Supply-Live Stock

clubs; free freight policy. The latter is the payment of freight on carload lots of female Stockers which the farmers purchase at the various stock yards for winter feeding or breeding. Sometimes a large number of females will be rushed onto the market, and in order to see that they do not go out of the country the freight is paid on them back into the interior from any recognized stock yard. Then, the amount covers activities of the poultry division, stockyard service, national live stock records, egg and poultry markets intelligence service; egg inspection and grading, record of performance, co-operative marketing, and so on.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: It does not include cow testing for butter fat?	,


William Richard Motherwell: That is under the dairy division not the live stock division.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would like some information about the Stock Growers Protective Association. I always have a suspicion of a "protective" association.


William Richard Motherwell: Southern Alberta at one time was practically all devoted to ranchers. There is a certain residue in the vicinity of Calgary, in the foothills and the Lethbridge country, and adjacent district, who have been devoting their activities almost exclusively to cattle growing,-just as the wheat men devote their time to growing wheat, and the potato and fruit growers devote their time to their own products,-with the result that they have been hit exceedingly hard this year with the deflation in live stock prices. A number of men have organized this association for protective purposes in the securing of markets, in the improvement of their herds, and doing all those things which seem to be requisite for the purpose of tiding them over these very trying times. It was a heroic effort put forth by these ranchers to try and meet the present situation, and we feel that they have done a very large amount of educational or propaganda work. They have had correspondence both with the United Kingdom and the United States and with various parts of Canada, for the purpose of improving their conditions with respect to the markets.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The minister spoke of a grant for fox inspection.


William Richard Motherwell: Fox inspectors, registration and inspection.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: How much money is spent in that branch? I should like to ask the minister if he realizes just what fox farming means?
LMr. Motherwell.]


William Richard Motherwell: I intended seeing it last fall.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I wish the hon. minister had. I am getting on thin ice, because I see the hon. member from Prince Edward Island (Mr. MacLean) looking at me very sharply. To my mind it is a matter of speculation or has been in the past, and I would be sorry to see the Department of Agriculture contribute anything towards speculation. I have no doubt that men who have lost money in fox farming lost largely because it was a great deal like the Vancouver boom in real estate a few years ago-there was nothing behind it -and men who bought foxes at fabulous prices were not able to sell the offspring for anything near what they paid for the breeding stock, and in fact they are killing them now and selling the hides for fur-breeding stock that costs thousands of dollars a head. I would be sorry to see the department restricting important branches and devoting money to fox breeding.


William James Lovie: Under this item I would like to take up the question of federal assistance to horse breeding. It is known that for the past number of years there has been what is known as a federal scheme for the assistance of horse breeding. As the law stands at present, it works out quite an injustice. It is not very fair in its application. I could best illustrate to this committee possibly if I mentioned what took place in my own district. I belong to what is known as the Holland Clydesdale Horse Breeding Association. There are other associations in the same district but this one has been running now for probably about twenty years. We follow one pure-bred draft stallion and keep him some years. We have had high-class stallions, the best we could get, and yet simply because a number of us club together and purchase our own stallions, we get no assistance from the government, whereas if we were going into the hiring of stallions in'that district we would get $8 for every mare in foal per year. That is a handicap and an injustice and there seems to be no way of remedying the injustice. As an association we seem to be penalized simply because we invest good money to get the very best stallions we can procure. We have a stallion called the Chicago Junior Champion and the Brandon Grand Champion, and yet because we own these horses we are penalized. Could any change be made in the law so that this injustice could be wiped out? The law works with our association in such a way that it will put us out of business and members will drop it. It is not conducive to community breeding.

Supply-Live Stock
I would like to know what the minister would have to say about changing the law.


William Richard Motherwell: Let me deal with the question raised by the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) referring to the fox industry. There is no question about the fact that there was an inflation and a deflation in that business, as in many other businesses, but as far as I know, regarding the fox industry of Prince Edward Island particularly, it is in a good healthy condition at present. It is true that it has been hit by the American tariff, but it will surmount that. Foxes are agile creatures and will be able to leap over the Fordney tariff. We are doing certain inspection work. The live stock records take care of the registration, just the same as with the domesticated animals and the department engages in certain inspectorial work. It is partially self-sustaining and will eventually be entirely self-sustaining. I think the time is approaching when nearly all these services being rendered by the federal government will have to be paid for, just the same as in the older countries. At the present time it has not been done except in a few cases, such as the inspection of a carload of wheat, for which they charge 90 cents. The time is coming when the same principle will have to be adopted with regard to other services.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Before the hon. minister leaves that subject, how much money is spent on the fox inspection?


William Richard Motherwell: It was $8,000 last year, and $10,000 is set apart for this year. I have a two-page memorandum in regard to it, if the hon. member for Victoria wishes to read it.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I do not wish to delay the vote, but I call attention to the fact that it is an unwise expenditure of money, in view of the fact that the hon. minister has not money enough to test our cows. He is cutting down important work and branching out into speculation.


William Richard Motherwell: I think we have got to develop our farming. I like the thought of new ventures that will enable farming to become more diversified, even if it is only in the matter of fox breeding. Take such a matter as the growing of hemp, flax, tobacco, or the breeding of foxes, or anything that will appeal to the people and give them a diversion, I think it is sound policy to develop these things. I am not a protectionist and I think this industry has proved that it would be wise to lay the foundation for a line of pure-bred foxes, and their registration certificates are recognized in the short time in which they have been recorded as being valid, and they have a high standard already.
With reference to the question of horse breeding, my hon. friend (Mr. Lovie) wanted to know why groups of men purchasing a horse could not get the same assistance as clubs of men renting a horse. That looks reasonable enough, but it opens up the old question which dates back to the early days of the western provinces, when there was a general campaign from there, what we called syndicating horses. A great many abuses grew up, and I think one of the reasons is that they do not want to encourage the old policy of syndicating, but I think the object is not so much to help the man who has two or three stallions. The purpose of the assistance is to help the individual farmer who has no other way of securing the services of a good animal except through the medium of the group-that is where five, six, eight or ten, whatever number there may be, group together and rent horses under the assistance given by the department. Now, the giving of assistance to the individual who finds it impossible himself to buy an animal, is the primary purpose. That means giving encouragement also to incidentally the man who owns the horse, but the primary object is the individual; the man who owns the stallion benefits in a secondary way.
If we were to encourage the men who owned the horses, I am afraid it would help to restore the old syndicating business that I am sure some of my hon. friends opposite me must have run across in their early experience in Manitoba and elsewhere.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I notice there is an increase of $170,000 in this appropriation, and I would like to know whether any particular expansion of the live stock industry is contemplated under the increased vote?


William Richard Motherwell: We shall devote
ourselves to a general propaganda, carrying the message of better live stock to the people and then following it up by rendering such assistance as we can, and carrying out hog grading also. It is estimated that our expenses in connection with the hog grading alone will amount to about $50,000. At the beginning there has been a little exception taken to our policy, as is always the case in connection with any new policy-but sooner or later it will be generally accepted as right and proper. When the breeds have so improved as to comply with the standard-to the extent, at least, of 50 or 60 per cent in the matter of "selects"-then the time may
Supply-Live Stock

come when something will have to be done by way of fees to take care of the cost of the work.


Mr. GARDINER:: In connection with this item I would like to inquire as to the possibility of finding a market for western raised horses. Doubtless the minister is well aware of the fact that in that country we have a great number of surplus horses, and the department may possibly be able to do something in the direc+ on of finding a market for that surplus. Is the minister contemplating taking any action along this line?


William Richard Motherwell: There is in the
various eastern provinces a very good market for good sized horses, say over 1,350 or 1,400, but I think there is sufficient market in the province of Ontario to take care of all that class of horses offering for sale. That was the information obtained by the Live Stock branch about six weeks ago; and we have a man in the West now helping to develop that business, and indicating the' portions of Ontario where a sale for animals of that description might probably be looked for. But unfortunately the largest number of animals offering there on the western market are animals weighing about ten or eleven hundred pounds, animals running on the prairie, range horses. Some of them, I suppose, will run from ten to twelve hundred, and some under. We have been endeavouring for over a year to find a market in Europe for such animals. We can find the market, but we cannot discover anybody who is prepared to pay for them-that is the difficulty. There is plenty of demand in countries that are unable to pay, and that is the way in which the matter stands.


Robert Gardiner: In connection with this vote I would like to make a remark or two in regard to hog grading. There is a good deal of dissatisfaction amongst the farmers in connection with the present system of hog grading. I believe those who are alive to the situation realize that hog grading in the long run is going to be the best policy, but they point out this important fact, that in so far as the department's officers are concerned they only grade the farmers' hogs when they go into a stock yard. Now, their contention is that the hogs should be graded after having been slaughtered at the plants. The present system, I am afraid, will never be satisfactory to the farmers until the hog grading takes place in the plants as well.
We believe that the packers
5 p.m. are in a position, by judicious selection after the hogs have

passed into the plants and been slaughtered, to get a good deal more number one meat sent out of the plant than they pay for on the open market, and I therefore suggest to the minister that he should look into this question to see whether it is not possible for him to extend the hog grading proposition so as to provide for grading in the plants as well.


Mr. MACLEAN (Prince):: With reference to the market for horses, referred to by my hon. friend opposite (Mr. Gardiner), I may say that there was a carload brought down to the Maritime provinces this year and the farmers there-although a market was found for the animals-were very much disappointed with the character of the stock. It was intimated, in the advertisements of the sales that these animals would be useful * for the purpose of improving our stock, but the Maritime province farmers found that they were just ordinary work horses and not very desirable. However, I believe there is a market in the Maritime provinces for the right kind of horses, that is typical horses, calculated to improve the stock that we have there at the present time.
Some reference was made to the question of fox breeding, and I think that it is only fair to say that possibly from no line of live stock: has the government received such a large amount of money in taxes as it has received through the breeding of foxes. I can name one company in Prince Edward Island that has paid as much as $1,000 a year in income taxes. A very large amount of money has been invested in that industry, but it was only within the last year or two any assistance was given to it. We had loc&l registration in our province which was not recognized in shipping animals across the line into the United States, and it was with a view of facilitating that export that the breeders there asked for live stock records to be started in Ottawa. A small amount has been expended in that way-some $8,000 or $10,000. It is not, however, a free grant to the ranchers, as they consider that the fees that are charged for registration are extremely high. I think it is only fair that it should be made known that the government has received very large amounts in the way of income taxes from the fox breeding industry. The breeders are still paying heavy taxes and suffering from certain handicaps which we feel the government should endeavour to remove. With a view to providing remedies an experimental station has already been started.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would like to inquire of the minister how many breeders there are

Supply-Live Stock
who are paying such immense income taxes. If the enterprise is such a money making business I do not understand why the government should be called upon for assistance to the extent of $8,000 or $10,000 a year. I know of no farmer in New Brunswick who has been doing anything more during the last three years, than merely meeting expenses, let alone pay income taxes. I am more convinced than ever that there should not be any extra appropriation for this industry when it is in the hands of a few breeders and when, as I said, it is a matter of speculation. I hope those engaged in it are making money, but when they are able to pay such large sums in income taxes it is pretty good proof that 1 was right in the contention I advanced.


William Richard Motherwell: The fox industry is not confined to Prince Edward Island at all; it extends throughout Canada, and my prompter tells me that the largest branch is in New Brunswick.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: That does not make the matter any better. That is the reason I know about it.


William Richard Motherwell: These fox ranches developing throughout Canada, and the work that is being done can be done only by the government. The question is only one of doing the work as we are doing it without any cost; or if we start a policy of fees, we shall have to pass the fee system around to many other things than the foxy fox.
Answering the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Gardiner), I am pleased to note that he agrees with the principle of hog grading. Theoretically, and in practice too in small countries, the method of grading is undoubtedly after slaughter. But that does not seem to be practicable in a country like Canada, where animals are shipped long distances and where the owners do not appear on the scene at all after shipment. In a little country like Denmark, a farmer will load his animals on a cart or some other conveyance and take it to the abattoir. He will then go down town, if there is one there, and do a little shopping. Then, on his way back he will get his grade and money and return home, and the transaction is completed. It is not practicable to do that in Canada; but that is the ideal method if conditions would permit. We have a man now investigating the whole question and also getting information that, I think, will lead in a short time to the adoption of a policy of grading the bacon itself. Grading the live hog is only one of the processes that should be checked up and controlled by grading the bacon, especially for export, so that we may
then know just what relationship exists between the select hog and the select bacon. We have made a nice start on the matter, but we are looking forward to the introduction of new features which experience shows to be desirable.


Mr. HALBERT:: How many hog graders have we in Ontario at the present time?


William Richard Motherwell: Twenty-two, all
told, nine of whom I understand, are in Ontario.


Robert Henry Halbert: It would not be possible then for them to grade all the hogs that would go on the market at the present time.


William Richard Motherwell: My hon. friend
means, grade them before slaughter?


Robert Henry Halbert: No, after slaughter.


William Richard Motherwell: They are graded at all the chief abattoirs and stockyards, where-ever they are slaughtered. I may say that we have in mind making provision that, just as a farmer can have his wheat properly graded by the load, a farmer can ask that his hogs be graded at the point of shipment, but for want of time we have not yet succeeded in bringing that about. We are starting at the large centres. My experience has been that, the farmers generally where there are local markets, have not asked the local buyer or drover to grade their animals, but I think a system can be worked out whereby a farmer can demand the right to have his animals graded, and his animals will be tagged, so that the report of the grade can be sent back, and he will know whether the drover has given him the proper grade.


Robert Henry Halbert: Supposing a carload is shipped f.o.b. to the packing house, without going on the market, are such hogs graded?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes. But as a rule, a drover in the country gives simply a flat price for the whole bunch, unless there are some old derelicts.


John Millar: Have the weights fixed by regulations for "Selects" and other classes proved satisfactory? I have heard some complaints in that regard.


William Richard Motherwell: That is quite a problem. It depends upon whom my hon. friend refers to as the one that should be satisfied. We do not pretend to make grades to suit the present bunch of hogs. What we wish to fix is a set of grades that will suit the buying market, and then our desire is to encourage the people to raise hogs that will fit the grade and have a weight that will meet the demand abroad. Mr. Archibald is over-
Supply-Live Stock

seas now, as I told the House the other night, in order to secure a number of breeding hogs; but he is also going over to Denmark to find out what they have adopted as the proper weights of live hogs to make select bacon, and we shall be able to get some information from Denmark. She is supplying the same market, and with the information received from there and our experience here, we shall be able to arrive at just what constitutes a proper size for a select bacon hog. At the abattoirs the weight runs from 160 to 210 pounds, and this means, not always but generally, nearly 220 pounds at point of shipment. If we can raise this without hurting the quality of the Wiltshire side, I would be in favour of raising it; but we must find out exactly what the market wants. It appears to want a bacon side from a hog running from 160 to 210 pounds, but we shall supplement our information with what we can secure from Denmark before we make any change.


John Livingstone Brown: No matter what weight is chosen for the premium hog, it seems to me desirable that the next grade should not have the same maximum weight; it should be higher. On that point, there is more dissatisfaction than on anything else; that is as regards taking hogs out of one grade and putting them into another where the maximum weight for the two grades is the same. The minister, perhaps, has the recommendation of the Council of Agriculture on the matter, and it is worth while considering on that point.
Mr. .MOTHERWELL:	The weight, of
course, does not determine the class of the hog. You can have a chunky hog that will not make good Wiltshire.


John Livingstone Brown: This comes out of my investigation of the Winnipeg stockyards. More dissatisfaction seems to arise from the fact that the maximum for the premium hog is the same as the maximum for the next grade.


William Richard Motherwell: That is probably because a number of people do not understand what we are aiming at.


Mr. WARNER:: Have we really any kind of bacon except the Wiltshire that they are willing to accept in Great Britain? The greatest dissatisfaction in our part of the country over this hog grading is because the farmers who were asked to raise a bacon hog, did not understand that they had to raise a hog that was so hard to raise and to get at as the Wiltshire-side hog. They understood that they were to raise a bacon hog that could be produced out of the breeds that they already

had on hand, and the consequence is that they are so badly discouraged that they are giving up the idea of trying to raise a bacon hog if they have to have the Wiltshire-side hog altogether. It was not understood-and I understand this is the case quite extensively-that they had to qualify for the Wiltshire-side. They claim that the breeds they have will not produce enough of the Wiltshire-side to pay them to undertake raising Wiltshire-side hogs. In many places* about one per cent is as high as they get; in some places, they might get a little more than that; but they claim that it is not worth while to try, and they do not believe they can change the breed of their hogs so as to reach the mark that is set at the present time. But they did hope that they could raise bacon hogs.


William Richard Motherwell: There are three brands of Wiltshire-side, leanest being the highest, lean the second and prime the third. So that there is a reasonable variation. I recollect having read of other recognized brands in the Old Country but I do not remember them. These are the standard brands, however. I can understand the difficulty my hon. friend speaks of. For over a year we have talked about the advantages of grading hogs. The matter was taken up a year ago last November by various organizations, local, provincial and federal, and there was worked out the best system that could be devised with the information available. Of course, there is always room for improvement as we acquire more information. But this is the difficulty: too many people expected to have a grade that would fit their hogs and they went back home disappointed. As I have suggested to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Millar), the idea is to establish a standard to suit the market. This is the day of the buyers' market and not the seller's. During the war everything went in the shape of a hog, because the world was hungry for hogs and everything else eatable. But now the boot is on the other foot and our people are disappointed because they cannot get into the select grade and obtain the 10 per cent extra. They will simply have to try to breed better bacon hogs to meet the export requirements. About 50 per cent of the quality of a bacon hog is due to heredity and 50 per cent is controlled by the feeder. As a rule, unless you have lots of dairy by-products you cannot produce a hog of the best type. You cannot make a Wiltshire-side by turning a hog loose at a self-feeder; especially if it gets the kind of feed the average hog is given. By a properly balanced ration you can produce

Sup-ply-Live Stock
a good bacon hog, using a reasonable amount of dairy by-products in the feed. We have not paid adequate attention to feeding with a view to the production of good bacon hogs. As I say, feeding represents 50 per cent, and breeding the other 50 per cent, of conditions that produce good bacon hogs, and we must endeavour to educate the breeders up to an appreciation of that fact.


Mr. WOODS:: Is there any system of government grading, inspecting and stamping of bacon which is dressed in the abattoirs for export, or is this left entirely to the packing houses?


William Richard Motherwell: For many years there has been in vogue a system of grading by the packers themselves, who follow whatever system they think suits the market. That also formerly applied to live hogs. This system was satisfactory to the packer but not to the buyer, and therefore we are introducing a system of government supervision and standardization. We hope to introduce a system of government inspection of Wiltshire sides, and we shall thus be able to control the quality of export bacon, so that it shall go upon the market in the approved and recognized grades. We have not taken that matter up yet, but we are progressing in that direction.


Donald Sutherland: The minister says that 50 per cent of the success in the raising of good bacon hogs is due to heredity and 50 per cent to feeding. The grading of hogs is a new thing in this country. Prices have kept up fairly well considering the deflation that has occurred in other branches of agriculture, and grading has not been practised long enough to determine whether or not it will be the success it is expected to be. The prices of beef animals have always been fixed according to quality; and the packers have been buying hogs and doing the grading themselves. Now, however, the government intends to fix regulations under which this grading must be done. A minimum weight and a maximum weight are established, and if the animal weighs 3 pounds over 220, it does not receive the premium. If it is underweight, on the other hand, I suppose it is not entitled to the premium either. But you do not follow that up. A packer may take in an overweight animal and if it is of good bacon type he will probably be able to dispose of it at a select price, so that your system is really of no effect. At the Winter Show at Guelph last fall the grading of hogs was a surprise to people who were interested in the business. In many instances animals that did not grade very highly on foot graded 38
well when dressed, and vice versa. And they were examined by men who were experts in the business. I am not finding fault, but it shows how difficult it is to grade animals.
The only true test is that which is made after the animal is dressed and is in the hands of the packer. The packers have graded carcasses for many years, and the government is now stepping in to do something which in any other business is done by one of the two parties to the transaction. I' take it that the government is undertaking this duty on the assumption that the farmer is not in a position to take care of himself. The hon. member for Strathcona (Mr. Warner) said the farmers were somewhat surprised that some animals were not grading. It is quite evident, I think, to anyone who has been engaged in the live stock business for any length of time, that the proper type of bacon hog is one that cannot be economically fed. It is what one might call a long-geared animal, and that type is not regarded highly by the live stock breeders of the country. I venture to say that you will find in the corngrowing districts of western Ontario, when this matter is put to the test, that the farmers will not raise the kind of hog which it is claimed will produce select bacon in the Old Country. This is one of the things that should be demonstrated at the experimental farms, to ascertain the cost of producing bacon under these conditions from the different types of hogs. Many of the breeds that the people are now being advised to try out may cause disappointment and our breeders may quit the business. And of course you cannot grade hogs if none are raised.
Another factor which enters very largely into the successful raising of bacon hogs is pure feed stuffs. In fact in this connection it is of more importance than anything else that may engage our attention this session. The minister admits that 50 per cent of hog disease is due to bad feeding. We have for years permitted the adulteration of feed stuffs, and the disastrous results following their use have driven many hog raisers out of business. In my part of the province it is impossible to purchase hog feed without finding on the bottom of the sack "Screenings not exceeding mill run." It may be said that the law specifies the quality of feed stuffs and prohibits adulteration. But what is the use of such legislation if the millers do not supply feed stuffs of this standard, but, on the contrary, offer us substitutes adulterated with poisonous weed seeds on which we are expected to raise bacon hogs. Hogs of the type described by the hon. mem-

Supply-hive Stock

ber for Strathcon'a (Mr. Warner) might have the capacity to overcome the bad effects of these poisonous weed seeds, but the bacon hog's constitution is too delicate to resist, and thousands of such hogs have died before reaching maturity. I have pointed out the serious damage which is being done to our hogs by the marketing of these adulterated feed stuffs, and on several occasions I have introduced a bill to prohibit adulteration, but without success. However, that matter will come up very shortly when I shall have an opportunity of discussing it at greater length.
I understood the minister to state that this increase of about $50,000 is for propaganda to stimulate the raising of cattle and hogs. We cannot pick up an agricultural paper today without coming to the conclusion that there is propaganda on foot to try to convince our farmers to follow a certain line of production. For months past every agricultural paper in my province has been loaded up with propaganda to persuade farmers to put their money into a business that is not co-operative at all, but is absolutely a joint stock company. After a great deal of effort in this direction we are now informed that nothing further is going to be done along cooperative lines during the present year. I recall another line of propaganda to which the minister has also referred, namely, the grading of cheese. I notice that right here in eastern Ontario our cheese producers have met together and protested most emphatically against this proposal, yet in spite of their protests steps are being taken to compel them to submit to it. It is all very well to pass laws and frame regulations under them to compel people to do certain things, but unless they find it is profitable to do these things all our efforts at compulsion will be fruitless. I very much fear that this propaganda is not good business. The farmer is a fairly intelligent man as a rule, notwithstanding what some people may think about him. He knows when he is engaged in some branch of his business on which he is making a little money or losing, and if he is not making a profit in any particular line we may be certain that he will quickly discontinue it.
This department has now men over in' the Old Country to purchase a certain class of animals which the department desires our farmers to handle. If they are of the type which I have seen very recently, I am afraid that in many instances they will appeal only to those breeders who are anxious to make money out of the introduction of such animals by the department,-in fact in many instances

these men are simply promoters. We heard a year ago about efforts being made to develop markets for our live stock, and a couple of prominent men were sent to South America for that purpose We have not heard very much so far this session about what they accomplished. I asked a question as to whether one of these parties had been appointed Commissioner of Agriculture. In reply, the minister stated that this gentleman was only temporarily engaged, and I believe he referred to him as his "special messenger" in connection with this live stock business, and that he hoped he would be able to go to South America, but sickness had prevented him accompanying the other gentleman. I hope that a lot of this propaganda is not designed for political purposes, but I rather suspect it is. At the close of last session when I arrived home I was surprised to find that this supposed Commissioner of Agriculture was up in my riding addressing a gathering of Liberals. The chairman of the meeting, a member of the executive of the Liberal party for Ontario, was down here in Ottawa at the close of the session; I knew that. Well this "special messenger" of the minister, addressed a meeting of Grits in my constituency. At the commencement of this session I placed a question on the order paper respecting his standing in the service, and to my surprise I find he is still in the employ of the government at a salary of $6,000 a year with several more thousands for expenses. But my inquiries with reference to his activities in my constituency and in other ridings were not answered by the minister. This is the kind of propaganda that is being carried on, and I am afraid that about 50 per cent of it will be found to be political. I am sorry to think that, I am indeed, but my conviction is that in the province of Ontario there is more camouflage along that line at the present time than ever before. Even the president of our Agricultural College at Guelph came into my constituency and addressed a political gathering there.


The CHAIRMAN:: I would draw the attention of the hon. member to the fact that what he is discussing comes under Civil Government. If he seeks to criticize the actions of some of the officers who come under this vote, he will of course be quite in order.


Donald Sutherland: Mr. Chairman, I
would not like to violate the rules of the House. This item being in regard to live stock, and we having been told that the party I have referred to was engaged to develop a live stock market in South America, if I can show that while engaged for that

Supply-Insects and Pests
purpose he was devoting his time to political propaganda, I do not feel that I have transgressed the rules. However, I shall have an opportunity to deal with this subject at a later date.
When the estimates for the experimental farms were going through the minister informed the committee that the system was being changed to meet the changed conditions in the country, and that efforts were being made to develop live stock depots at our various experimental farms for the breeding of animals to supply the adjacent districts. I assume that part of this money will be used to stock up the experimental farms with these animals. The minister shakes his head?


William Richard Motherwell: No; that comes under the experimental farm vote.


Donald Sutherland: I notice that the farmers of western Canada are in a position to avail themselves of the concession granted * to them in respect to what is known as the shipment of carload lots of feeding cattle, whereas the farmers in Ontario are not. Ontario has been the great market for the feeders from western Canada during this past fall, on account of their being practically excluded from the United States and Old Country markets. You can understand, therefore, the unfairness of the present regulation which does not enable the Ontario farmer to have these animals shipped back under as favourable conditions as those available to the western farmer. Another source of injustice to Ontario is that a very small proportion of the male animals distributed for breeding purposes are placed in that province. We have not found any particular fault in that regard, but I have endeavoured to show that so far as experimental farms, live stock and all these things are concerned, practically no encouragement is being given to agriculture in Ontario. The minister will realize that it is not fair or in the interest of those who are shipping their feeding cattle from western Canada to Ontario to find that when they arrive there, very high rates have to be paid on the shipments of the cattle back to the farms. There is another preference given in respect to the shipment of animals for breeding purposes from the live stock markets, but so far as I know that preference has not applied to Ontario. The chief complaint I have, however, with regard to rates is in connection with the carload lots. I hope the minister will look into this matter, if his attention has not already been directed to it, and see that some concession is granted along that line.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mr. BLACK (Huron):: May I ask the minister what amount of money has been expended in the scrub campaign throughout Ontario ,and whether there is co-operation with the provincial government in that resepct?


William Richard Motherwell: I understand that $5,000 has been spent under that head. The provincial departments in the West, and also those in Ontario, are co-operating. The extent of that co-operation is pretty hard to define.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would like to ask the minister a question in regard to the protection of pure bred stock.


George Newcombe Gordon: I have to direct the attention of the hon. member to the fact that that item has been carried, after a great deal of discussion.
Agriculture-administration and enforcement of Destructive Insects and Pests Act, $310,000.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: Will the minister explain the increase of $70,000? Perhaps he will tell the committee also what progress has been made in connection with the campaign against the corn borer in Ontario.


William Richard Motherwell: Nearly all these increases are due to the development of our ordinary activities. In the case of insect pests, there seems to have been increased difficulty during recent years in many parts of Canada. In the East the corn borer has been active, and we have had the grasshopper in the West. The activities under 'this item may be divided into two heads, one botanical and the other entomological. The botanical end of it deals with the following subjects: potato inspection; plant pathological investigation; cereal rust; potato diseases; white pine blister rust; fruit diseases Laboratories are maintained at the following points:	Ottawa, Charlottetown, Kentville, Fredericton, Quebec, St. Catharines, Brandon, Saskatoon, Lethbridge and Summerland. Take the question of cereal rust; we have been looking for the best man we can get to carry on the investigational work in that connection, but the kind of men we need are not available at the prices we offer-prices which, as hon. members know, are not entirely controlled by the department. I suppose that after a while, when we have failed a sufficient number of times to get a proper man as expert on fungus diseases of this nature, we shall be able to get a reclassification that will enable us to offer a salary that will command the best man for the purpose. In the meantime we are doing what we can in this direction with the limited supply of men we have. In the Entomological

Sup-ply-Insects and Pests
branch, activities are carried on in respect to insect pests affecting field, garden and orchard crops, forest and shade trees, and so on. Methods of controlling these pests are studied at the following branch laboratories and field stations, which are maintained out of this appropriation: Annapolis Royal, N.S., Fredericton and Bathurst, N.B.; Hemmingford, Aylmer, and Lake Edward, Que.; Strathroy, Vineland and Port Stanley, Ont.; Treesbank, Man.; Saskatoon, Sask.; Lethbridge and Banff, Alta.; Vernon, Agassiz and Victoria, B.C. The second branch of activity is the inspection and fumigation of nursery stock. In this connection stations are maintained at Montreal, St. John's, Que., St. John, N.B., Montrose, Ont., Toronto, Niagara Falls, Windsor, Winnipeg, North Portal, Vancouver. Then, there is the matter of brown-tail moth control in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Quebec. There is the European com borer quarantine and control work in Ontario. The invasion of this insect pest gave rise to the possibility of a very serious interruption in the development of many of our fodder crops. However, quarantine methods have been employed; the habits of the insect are better understood, and the corn borer menace is not looked upon as being as serious as it was a year ago. We are taking all precautions for the purpose of circumscribing as far as may be the activities of this insect. Then there is the question of apple sucker quarantine in Nova Scotia, and alfalfa weevil quarantine in Alberta.
We have the gypsy moth scouting in Quebec, and the satin moth scouting in British Columbia ; then there is the introduction and distribution of parasites and other useful insects, and the study and control of insect pests by their natural enemies and the distribution of these native enemies. These may look like very strange activities, but when I was at the Agassiz farm I visited the entomological laboratory there and found the men engaged in gathering the cocoons of the natural enemy of the spruce bud worm of the Maritime provinces and eastern Canada. They were catching these little fellows and sending them down here to propagate their species and attack their natural enemies and their natural source of food. That is what keeps the animal world and the plant world properly balanced. When they get too many of one kind something else bobs up and feeds upon it, and thus preserves the equilibrium. We are trying to destroy harmful insects and pests by subjecting them to the attacks of their natural enemies, and we are attempting in this way to take care of these invasions.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What results are you getting in the extermination of the spruce bud worm?


William Richard Motherwell: It takes time. The parasitic insects multiply with amazing rapidity. Nature as a rule takes care of these matters. In reference to the invasion of grasshoppers, I believe nature has done as much to take care of the extraordinary invasion in the West, in the way of providing parasites of the grasshopper as all the other agencies supplied by man. But British Columbia is a long way from the Maritime provinces and nature has to be supplemented by the transfer of parasites from British Columbia to the Maritime provinces. I have had the opportunity of transplanting beaver to Saskatchewan and placing them in some of the forests reserves-taking them from their native haunts and putting them on the forest reserve. You would lose sight of them in the jungle and somebody years afterward would discover a dam across the road and then somebody would find the beaver. This practice will manifest itself, but it will take time. It depends on the condition. Then as to the spruce bud worm,-I have this memorandum.
Investigations in eastern Canada have shown that the Spruce bud worm problem is not a purely entomological one, but that it involves the entire administration and management of timber resources. Only by the adoption of the broadest practices in the administration and management of these forests will it be possible to establish conditions necessary to prevent a repetition of this recent catastrophe. Our investigations have awakened a very great interest in this problem among foresters and lumbermen and have resulted in cooperative studies and experiments by forest entomologists, foresters and forest pathologists, through which we can hope to obtain in the future a bud worm proof forest. The losses to balsam and spruce in eastern Canada have amounted to at least 150,000,000 cords which would have been worth in manufactured value billions of dollars. As an indication of the savings which have already resulted from our study in the province of New Brunswick alone, it has been estimated by the deputy minister of the Crown Lands Department of that province that following our studies the cutting of Balsam fir and the salvaging of bud worm-killed Spruce and Fir have been of benefit to the province in the past two years to the extent of hundreds of thousands of dollars.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is the brown-tailed moth invasion of New Brunswick increasing or decreasing?


William Richard Motherwell: I understand it is decreasing.


Mr. MAYBEE:: Is the grasshopper pest under control?


William Richard Motherwell: It seems to be working westward into Alberta and western Saskatchewan. It is prety well circumscribed in Manitoba and if the hon. member for

Supply-Insects and Pests
Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) were here he would be able to give some particulars, but I have not heard of any serious invasion in Assiniboia where it first asserted itself some four or five years ago. It has been travelling up towards Swift Current, and I think appearing at intervals at various places in Alberta and British Columbia, but the various provincial governments have adopted restricted measures and, assisted by their municipalities, they are on the alert. Forewarned is forearmed. They are in a better position in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta than we were in the early days of the invasion. They are now more or less in a position to meet the situation, although it is not quite under control. I think the danger is almost past.
. Mr. MacKELVIE: Has the codling moth situation been improving or otherwise?


William Richard Motherwell: I have made inquiries and there is a certain amount of this insect pest prevalent and there are fears as to its expansion. Precautionary measures are being taken and fumigating is being done in the cars which have been affected. My hon. friend asked if we contemplated stopping the importation of fruit altogether, in the event of the pest becoming sufficiently serious to warrant it. So far as my investigation has gone, I do not think that point has been reached. I think it is better understood now than previously and the preventive steps have had results. I do not apprehend any serious increase in the danger from this pest. However, everybody seems to be aware of the trouble, and therefore preventive measures are adopted. Taken as a whole, the situation is not any worse.


Mr. STEWART (Humboldt):: To what extent is the aeroplane assisting in the war against insect pests particularly the insects attacking the forest, and in what part of the Dominion has the aeroplane been used for scouting?


William Richard Motherwell: That is the only medium practically to-day for scouting, both in Ontario and Quebec, and the Interior department is doing a great deal of it.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Will this item enable the minister to do any scouting over the forests in Saskatchewan?


William Richard Motherwell: If there is any occasion for it. There is none of this spruce bud worm that I am aware of in northern Saskatchewan. There may be other pests, but they are largely in the Maritime provinces, Quebec and British Columbia. The forest difficulty referred to, however, has not
asserted itself and has not been brought to our attention on the prairies. Wherever the conditions are thoroughly understood the less difficulty there is from any sort of insect pest, but some further remedies will be available when the necessity arises.


Lincoln Henry Jelliff: When this same item was up for consideration last year I drew the minister's attention to a particular species of pest that we have to deal with in our part of the country, and that was the pest to our live stock,-timber wolves. I think the minister will recall that last year I read communications from a number of our stock growers, located along the foot hills of the Rockies, complaining of the depredations and havoc that have been wrought among their herds by these timber wolves, and I specially stressed the matter and asked him that some provision, if possible, be made tending to the rapid extermination of that pest, In addition, I went to the trouble of corresponding with the Department of Agriculture of the United States, and obtained a statement of the methods which they were employing in exterminating the wolves in that country and also data as to the results they had achieved, and I think the minister has that memoranda in his possession. I am not going to hold up his estimates to-day except to avail myself of the opportunity of calling his attention to this matter' anew, and seeing if something cannot be done to track these timber wolves to their regular breeding places in Waterton park, and other reserves, that are under the control of the Department of Interior, and exterminate them. I do not suppose that my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture wants the stock in which he is so particularly interested eaten up by the wolves that belong to the Minister of the Interior, and I would suggest that these two ministers get together and, possibly along the lines of the suggestions contained in the report from the United States, formulate some plan whereby these wolves can be hunted to their breeding places and destroyed. These pests are killing not only the young live stock which our dairymen and stock growers prize so highly in that part of the country, but also the deer and other game in the parts referred to. The ordinary man along the foot hills has no right, under the regulations of the government, to go in there and hunt these animals. Under the United States regulations, however, the government employs expert hunters to trace up these wolves and exterminate them, and the hunter is allowed a regular salary for doing it. In return the pelts go to the government by whom they are sold, the
Supply-Fruit

receipts from this source tending to offset the expenditure involved. Where a farmers' or stock growers' association will undertake the work they pay the hunters, and the pelts are turned over to the association to help repay the cost. Now it seems to me that some plan can be worked out along that line between the two ministers. Our farmers and stock growers are very insistent on this point, and I hardly feel like giving the matter up until I see some aggressive action on the part of the two departments concerned. I hope the minister will look up the correspondence and data in question, and see that some attention is given to the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Fruit, $182,000.
Mr. GUTHRIE:: What is the reason for the increase?


William Richard Motherwell: This increase is about on a par with the other increases that we dealt with this afternoon. All activities in connection with fruit are being speeded up. In addition to that, the act that was passed last year with respect to vegetables including potatoes, is administered under the Fruit branch, 'that involves the expenditure of a small amount of money for potato inspection and such like, this accounting for a part of the additional expense. Other activities are in connection with marketing and grading. This year there is a consolidation of this act, and this will involve a certain amount of additional expenditure.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: In connection with the
' matter of enforcing the grading of potatoes, is it proposed by the government to have inspectors who can settle disputes between shippers and buyers?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know what my hon. friend means by settling disputes; but they will settle what the grade is. For instance, if a buyer and a vendor have a dispute as to the grade, the inspector will decide upon the grade, and then they will have either to abide by that or to go to court. At any rate, that will be the authentic decision of what constitutes the grade.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: How many inspectors has the minister now for this purpose? In this connection, while possibly I am out of order on this, I should like to mention one point
.
in connection with enforcing potato grades, seeing that potatoes come under this item. In the grading act, as passed last year, there was no clause providing that an inspector's report or decision would be final as a settlement of a dispute between parties over grades. J would like to see that amendment made to the act, because unless you have such a clause, the inspector's decision has no authority under the act. I thought of this last year, but it slipped my mind when the matter came up in committee. Under the act you compel the consignor to furnish the grade contracted for. but you do not compel the consignee to accept that.


William Richard Motherwell: I think my hon. friend is right. There should be either a provision of that nature, or a provision for a survey board to pass upon a decision of an ' inspector, in which latter case the decision of the survey board would be final, but I do not think a survey board would be necessary. It is implied, possibly, that the inspector's decision should be final; but if it is not in the act, it might not hold in a legal case.
Mr., CALDWELL: Would the minister be willing to move such an amendment as that?


William Richard Motherwell: If the act is up for consideration, or if my hon. friend thinks the matter is of sufficient importance in itself, we will look into it. Has any difficulty arisen with respect to disputes between buyers and sellers? Such disputes might easily arise.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I do not know that any have arisen, because very few potatoes have been sold in Canada this year under the act. Most of our potatoes are for export. There is a possibility, next year, if the crop should be short in Ontario, that we would be shipping large quantities of potatoes to Ontario as formerly:	In former years, many disputes
arose between shippers and consignees, and they had no way of settling them.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Publications, $28,500.
Robert Henry Halbert: Perhaps, a good deal of waste occurs as regards publications in connection with agriculture, and I would suggest to the minister that such publications be sent out with a note stating that the copy sent is a sample and requesting, if they would like to continue to receive the publication, that they fill in the form enclosed. That would save a great deal of money on publications.


William Richard Motherwell: That is precisely the practice that is being pursued.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Seed Control
International Institute of Agriculture, $15,000.
William Richard Motherwell: This is an institution that has been in existence for approximately ten years, and I think David Lubin was one of the gentlemen responsible for its organisation. It consists of an organisation with headquarters at Rome, Italy, and about sixty-three different countries participate in it and help to finance it. They have a permanent office now in Rome which is maintained throughout the year with a small staff, and an international conference is held once every two years for the exchange of opinions and experiences and the furthering of activities with respect to statistics, largely of an agricultural character. I believe it was through this medium that we first were apprised of the fact that this year we had suddenly jumped to the place of the largest wheat exporting country in the world. I think the institution serves a reasonably useful purpose from a statistical standpoint, although its usefulness is perhaps not quite so extensive as was anticipated by its originators. It was thought at first that by having statistical information of a world wide character flashed before the entire world of purchasers with regard to either overages or shortages of farm produce, there would thereby be provided in some measure a guide to producers which would enable them to produce more heavily in one direction, or to a less extent in another, as the case might be, according to the conditions in the various markets. I do not think that the institute quite does that, but it is a source of reliable information and as such I think it is valuable.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: But as a source of
practical information, the results obtained from it are nil.


William Richard Motherwell: I think so.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I am afraid so myself.


Mr. SPENCER:: Is the United States a member of the institute, and if so what does it pay in proportion to Canada's contribution?


William Richard Motherwell: The United States has three representatives on the international conference and Canada one. We sometimes send more than one, but on important questions on which a division ts taken we have just one voice.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Does the minister think we are getting value for the money we are investing in this institute? I think he is rather of the same opinion on the question as myself.


William Richard Motherwell: To be quite frank,
I do not think we can afford to drop out of it. If we had an abundance of money we could wall afford to stay in it; and even as it is I do not think we should withdraw. At the same time, I have often wondered whether in these days of stress 115,000 might not be expended more usefully.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: For example, in the testing of cattle for tuberculosis.


William Richard Motherwell: However, I would not recommend that we should withdraw from the institute. I admit that I had misgivings once, but I have not as many now, and I should not like to advise our dissociating ourselves from the rest of the world in the compilation of these valuable statistics.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: As a matter of history I think possibly the statistics are of benefit. But is it not a fact that we get the information so long after the occurrence of events that it is ancient history when we do get it?


William Richard Motherwell: We get the information quickly now. We got by cable, early this year, the news that we were in the proud position of the largest exporters of wheat in the world.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: Is the library in the West block carried on under the auspices of this institute?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Alfred Speakman: I went through it the other day, and I think it is exceedingly valuable.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, it is.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Seed, feed and fertilizer control, $295,000.
William Richard Motherwell: The increase is not very large. Last year a new fertilizer act was passed which involves a little more expense; like every other growing activity it calls for additional expenditures from year to year. Possibly in the seed department there will not be quite as large an expense as in former years, but there is a considerable expenditure that is more or less fixed. A very generous contribution is made to seed fairs, which include standing field competitions. These fairs are held throughout the provinces and serve a valuable purpose. The hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) on another vote raised the question of the Seed Purchasing Commission. To allay any anxiety about the matter of feeding stuffs I might say that a representative conference was held last week in Ottawa of producers, users and handlers of
Supply-Seed Control

feeding stuffs with a view of formulating some amendments to the Commercial Feeding Stuffs Act. Since coming here I have been very much struck with the arguments advanced by some, that we have just as much right to expect bran and shorts in their purity as anything else. It is a standard article, even though perhaps not in the same sense as flour; and the farmers take the ground that when they produce grain it has to be sold on a basis of purity. For instance, weed seeds cannot be counted in the gross weight; they must be taken out, and only the net weight is considered. If there is too much moisture in butter, not only is it deducted but you are prosecuted; and it is contended that when a purchaser wants mill stuffs he should be able to get what ought to be standard articles like bran and shorts unmixed with screenings. That question has been raised and a bill is in course of preparation covering it. I have not had an opportunity of referring it to my colleagues, but if it is satisfactory it will be brought down to the House. It makes provision very much along the lines suggested by two or three members either this year or last year.


William James Lovie: Do the millers claim that their bran and shorts are pure when they send them out?


William Richard Motherwell: No, the law permits their mixture now. It allows the mixture of shorts and screenings; if you want to buy it in its purity you must procure it in small packages certified. There is a certain demand in the United States and Canada for bran in small packages for human consumption. It is known as sanitary bran or something like that. It is also produced in large quantities for the American market. When you buy shorts, however, the law permits a certain mixture. For instance, if you have a hundred bushels of wheat from which you get two bushels of screenings, those screenings go into the bran and shorts which are the byproduct of the milling of that wheat. This mixture is allowed by law, and a good many feeders of hogs are very strongly objecting to the adulteration. The bill that we have under contemplation provides for a standard of purity for bran and shorts. I cannot give the hon. gentleman the full provisions of the bill in advance, but that is what we are aiming at.


William James Lovie: I think the sooner those
evils are rectified by the proposed bill the better, because when we sell our wheat we are docked so much for screenings, and the millers have no business to sell those screenings as they do not pay us a cent for them. There

is no evidence so satisfactory as something you see yourself, and I may say that I saw in southern Ontario some time ago shorts with the milling company's brand on the bag, but so much adulterated that young pigs would die before they would touch such feed. This product was simply black seeds ground up and a very small quantity of shorts added. I tasted the mixture; it was quite bitter, and certainly pigs would not eat it. The regulations ought to be made a lot more drastic because the milling companies get these weed seeds for nothing and we pay the freight rate on them to Fort William. Instead of being used for hog feed they should be dumped in the lake.


Mr. MOTHERW ELL:: The practice simply grew up, like Topsy, overnight as it were, until finally it was legalized. Later we began to discover the evils of the practice. As a matter of fact, shorts as we have them now, even without screenings, are not much else than fine bran. Some people like things mixed, but there is no reason why we should not know what we are getting in our by-products from the mill, and they should be standardized like everything else.


Mr. THOMPSON:: How is this fund administered in connection with the field crop competition? Is it paid over to the province or does it go direct to the agricultural societies?


William Richard Motherwell: In the western provinces the money is paid through the medium of the agricultural societies that have the administration of the seed fairs; and I think that is the way it is handled all over Canada.


Thomas Henry Thompson: The minister did not get my question correctly. I asked if this money was paid over to the provincial authorities.


William Richard Motherwell: No, it is paid to the agricultural societies because they administer the seed fairs. That is my understanding.


Milton Edgar Maybee: Is it the policy of the seed department to establish seed cleaning stations; and, if so, has anything been done along that line?	'


William Richard Motherwell: We have in the
western interior elevators very efficient seed cleaning machinery. We have no stations established for the purpose of seed cleaning, but in Alberta they have local seed cleaning stations to accommodate the growers of pedigree seeds. The activity of the Seed branch with respect to the distribution of seed has been confined largely to the West. Even last year

Supply-Seed Control
when they were short of seed oats in eastern Canada the supplies were taken from stocks held in the West.


Alfred Speakman: Does the control of commercial seed houses come under this item; and, if so, is there a standard of purity set for garden and grass seeds supplied by those houses.


William Richard Motherwell: We control them in this way,-we control the quality of their product. I presume we would have authority to enter and examine their seeds. All these matters are being dealt with in the bill now before the Agricultural Committee, in which bill standardization of field and garden seeds is provided for.


Alfred Speakman: I intended to say a few words about garden and grass seeds, but I shall reserve my remarks until that bill comes down.


William Richard Motherwell: I think it will be dealt with next Tuesday.


Robert Gardiner: Is it the intention of the department to continue the Seed Purchasing Commission?


William Richard Motherwell: Does my hon. friend mean that we are to keep the commission going when there is nothing for it to do, or will we re-establish it when there is something to engage its attention?


Robert Gardiner: I understand that ever since the Seed Purchasing Commission was established there has always been something for it to do. I believe there is quite a lot of work for it to attend to this year, and I would suggest to the minister the advisability of continuing the commission in force for at least some time yet. We farmers in western Canada have derived a great deal of benefit from the work accomplished by the commission and would be very loath to lose the services of such a very effective body.


William Richard Motherwell: Last year we had a reasonable staff on that commission and, I have already intimated, a large amount of western seed grain was distributed in the prairie provinces to take care of a shortage there. This year we were prepared to go ahead with the purchase and distribution of seed, but the provincial governments of the western provinces were not ready to play their usual part in guaranteeing payment by the municipalities where the latter were not able to pay cash for the seed distributed. Therefore we could not do business this year.


Robert Gardiner: There is just one other point in connection with that. The Seed Purchasing Commission has always paid its way, it has never cost this country one dollar.
Not only that, but the commission has provided business for the interior elevators amounting to over $600,000. Taking that into consideration and also the fact that this commission has been of great benefit not only to the West but also to the East, I believe it is the duty of the government to continue it in operation. Certainly we in the West would be very loath to lose its services.


William Richard Motherwell: I omitted to sav that we have a small staff of two in the office ready to do business on a moment's notice if required. The Seed Commissioner, Mr. Wilson, is paid on a per diem basis and his services are available at any time. The seed supply of the West is pretty well distributed, and as the provincial governments do not think it is necessary that there should be any intervention at this session, we feel that it is not our business to take any active steps in the matter. There is no necessity of our going into the business unless there is some co-operation on the part of the province in connection with payment for the seed.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What steps have been taken to see that the new Fertilizer Act is being complied with?


William Richard Motherwell: We usually wait un til there are complaints. Our inspectors and analysts however are carrying on their work and taking steps to see that the material is up to the requirements. I do not know of any particular violations of the law this year; if there have been any I should be glad to hear of them. There is no doubt that in some parts of Canada the matter is a very important one; in fact, it is the object of the act to see that consumers are protected.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: the assurance that before the department grants licenses for brand numbers, this requirement of the act shall be complied with. I think also that the department should print bulletins giving all this information to those who ask for it. We feel that we have been defrauded in times past; we have bought fertilizer made of material which, though it would stand the analysis, was not plant food. Two years ago the fertilizer men appeared before our Agricultural Committee here and on that occasion they admitted that materials were used in the manufacture of the product that we at least did not believe were plant food. I refer to such things as ground leather scraps, ground mustard seed, wool, hair, feathers and so on. They say that these tilings can be treated and made available for plant food; I have my doubts myself, and I think even the chemists disagree in that regard. But the department should insist on having a statement of all the material entering into the manufacture of the article when application is made for the registration number of the brand.


William Richard Motherwell: This matter is
being followed up pretty closely, because there has been a disposition to put spurious articles into fertilizer, and even with the most careful supervision they sometimes get past. There may be some manurial properties in feathers, but I should think it would be of very slight value indeed.


Thomas Henry Thompson: I would like to ask
the minister on what basis the grants are made in connection with field crop competitions? Is it on the basis of the amounts contributed by the agricultural societies? I would also ask whether Ontario participates in that grant, and if so to what extent? I have been president of an argricultural society for a good many years, and I never heard of the federal government giving this assistance in respect of field crop competitions.


William Richard Motherwell: It has been going on for ten years.


Joseph Henry Harris: Does the minister think that during the last two or three years the operation of this act has had the effect of improving the quality of feedstuffs. At the same time he might give the committee an idea of what the administration of this act has cost.


William Richard Motherwell: It certainly has
not improved the quality of the feedstuffs. The hon. gentleman was probably not in his seat when I gave g rough outline of how this practice grew up of putting screenings back into the bran and shorts, until finally it was authorized by law. A good deal of 
objection has been taken on the ground that these screenings are deleterious, sometimes actually poisonous in their character, and the public are demanding the by-products in their pure state. It is a practice that grew up; somebody put the stamp of approval on it, and it has gone on. It is difficult to state the cost in the case of any one of these particular items-seed, feed, and fertilizer control-because the same staff of inspectors deals with them all, just as the fruit inspectors largely take care of potato inspection.


Joseph Henry Harris: Do I understand that the
whole of this grant then is strictly for the administration of the act?


William Richard Motherwell: It covers the cost
of maintaining the staff engaged in the outside field work. It is also to provide an inspection service for the administration of the Seed Control, Feeding Stuffs and Fertilizers Acts, and to establish and maintain analytical laboratories for the testing of seeds, feeding stuffs and fertilizers. It is to encourage the production of superior seeds for domestic requirements and export; to encourage the manufacture and general use of a good quality of fertilizer; to develop export markets for seeds and feeding stuffs; to establish and maintain an intelligence service for seeds, feeding stuffs and fertilizers; to maintain the Seed Purchasing Commission. These are some of the activities carried on under this vote. The laboratories referred to are provided for the testing of the germinating properties of the various samples of seeds forwarded by farmers and others from time to time. We have four of these, Calgary, Winnipeg, Ottawa, and Toronto. Here is the
administration cost:
General administration-
Staff-inside service-
Office supplies	 $ 6.000
Publications	 6000
Total	 *12000
Production and markets-
Subventions for seed crop competitions, seed
exhibitions and seed centres	*65 000
Market reporting service	 5000
Development of domestic and export markets for seeds and feeding stuffs	 8,000
Because of the up-to-date nature of the seed control, our seeds in Canada have a very good reputation on foreign markets, and we facilitate and encourage the shipment of them. Our seed is grown in a northern latitude and consequently it has better germinating qualities than seed grown further south. I have several times supplied the southern market with grass seed, and they would buy it because it was grown in a northern latitude, and therefore contained higher germinating properties.

Supply-Seed Control
Laboratory and inspection service-
District No. 1-The Maritime	provinces:		
(a) Inspection salaries.. ..			.. *7,335
(b) Inspection service (trav.	exp.	etc.)..	.. 3,845District No. 2-Quebec-	1922-23	1923-24(a) Laboratory salaries.. ..	1,980	7,500(b) Laboratory service .. ..	1,200	1,800(c) Inspection salaries.. ..	12,150	14,000(d) Inspection service.. ..	8,850	8,500And then it goes on	the	same	way all
through District No. 3 in eastern Ontario.
We have District No. 4, western Ontario, District 5, Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and District No. 6, Alberta and British Columbia. For these purposes the country is divided into six districts, each constituting itself a unit for administrative purposes. I can give figures with respect to the other provinces, but it is really not worth while.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Carried.


William Richard Motherwell: It is about in the same proportion.


Thomas Henry Thompson: I certainly do not want this item carried without having an answer to my question. The hon. member stated that this grant was in connection 'with field crop competition. I asked: What are the terms on which the act is administered in connection with field crop competition, what percentage does the department pay, and what steps are the agricultural societies taking to secure this grant? Does the province of Ontario participate in this grant? If so, to what extent?


William Richard Motherwell: I have no desire to withhold information. I thought my hon. friend was quite satisfied that he had found out something new. These grants are being paid and as a matter of fact have been paid for ten years. I will have much pleasure in giving my hon. friend the details. Possibly I did not hear his question correctly, but I have no desire to avoid the answer. The subventions for 1923 to be paid the provincial Department of Agriculture on account of seed fairs, field crop competitions, and threshed and clean seed competitions are $75 for each seed fair, $50 for each field crop competition, $600 for each provincial seed competition and $200 for each seed crop and clean seed competition. The portion of the subvention to any province is not to exceed $2,000 for each province having not less than 1,000000 acres under crops and $2,000 pro rata per 100,000 of total population. That is a rather involved method of distributing it, but it has worked out satisfactorily. Since 1912-I said ten years and my guess was not very far wrong-provincial departments of agriculture
have been paid subventions sufficient to cover approximately one-half of the total cost of conducting field crop competitions, seed fairs, and exhibitions. Payment of subventions is governed by regulations which have been amended from time to time for the purpose of improving the quality and increasing the quantity of the seed supplies. Several millions of bushels of approved seed have been produced annually as a result of these competitions at seed fairs. This registered seed supply that is being cleaned in Alberta by these seed-cleaning depots, I think they call them, is one of the outgrowths of these seed field competitions and seed fairs. They have taken that matter up and it has become of sufficient importance for the provincial government, I think, to give some encouragement to this cleaning, where the growers of regular seed can ship their seed and get it cleaned as the law requires. That is one of the outcomes of the seed conventions to which I have referred. Taking the distribution by
provinces, the subventions	paid in	1922-23,and the amount available	for 1923-24,	are asfollows:	1922-23	1923-24Prince Edward Island	. $ 706	* 2,000Nova Scotia	. 1,217	2.000New Brunswick	. 2,198	2,376Quebec.. .. ^	. 15,771	16.402Ontario	. 13,857	20,000Manitoba	. 4,000	9,000Saskatchewan	. 6,000	9 000Alberta	. 1,366	7,493British Columbia	. 2,500	2,500
The amount of the distribution in this case is based on the principle that applies in many other cases; for instance, the establishment of illustration farms. It depends on the applications made by the people in the respective provinces and so the offer to participate in this subvention is optional on the part of the people, and hence the variation between the provinces.


Hugh Guthrie: I think there is a little misapprehension on this point arising through a statement which the minister made a moment or two ago. If I understand him correctly when the question was asked by the hon. member for East Hastings (Mr. Thompson) whether this money was paid to the agricultural societies or to the provincial government, I understood the minister to say "directly to the authorized agricultural societies." My hon. friend from Hastings says he is president of such a society and his society has not received its grant. Do I understand now that the money is paid direct to the society or to various provinces for distribution among the societies.

Supply-Seed, Control


William Richard Motherwell: I think the mistake arose in this way: in the early days it was paid to the agricultural society, but since my connection with the department these payments have to some extent changed. I think a change has been made and it is paid directly to the department-


Hugh Guthrie: To the provincial societies?


William Richard Motherwell: These field competitions are administered through the Canadian seed growers associations; part of it goes to the society and the other part goes through the medium of the province which has to give an accounting of it. It did not start in that way, but that is the way it developed as being the more satisfactory.


Donald Sutherland: I believe the minister dealt with the matter of feed stuffs before I came into the House. In answer to a question we obtained the information that the condition of the feed stuffs is becoming more unsatisfactory from year to year. I remember a few years ago the matter had reached such a stage that further protective measures were necessary, and legislation was put through in 1919 dealing with this stuff in such a way that it would be impossible for the millers to continue the practice that had grown up. The following year the act was so amended that it really became inoperative, and since that time, as is well known to all the live stock raisers throughout the country, it is absolutely impossible to purchase good feed because it is not manufactured. The act provided in a very elaborate manner for the purity of certain kinds of feed stuffs, but if you cannot purchase these what is the use of the provision? On the other hand what is known as commercial feed stuffs are practically all adulterated; an immense quantity of screenings are ground up and passed off on the buyers. The millers are more careful now than they were at one time as to the manner in which the feed is mixed; it is mixed much more evenly and adulteration is much harder to detect. I believe the officials of the Department of Agriculture are very desirous of having this matter looked after, but if the statute remains as it is I think it is absolutely impossible for them to see that the millers shall turn out these feeds in their pure state. In the first place, when the millers purchase the wheat, there is so much deducted for seeds and stuff that may be in the grain and for which they do not pay anything. This is separated from the wheat before the wheat is milled, and if it gets back into the bran and shorts it must 
be put there deliberately. Now it is a very easy matter to remedy this, and a year ago I brought it to the attention of the minister. I received an assurance that the matter was engaging his attention and that something would be done, but being very busy at the time I did not press the question. I did not hear the minister's statement on this subject to-night, and I would therefore like to ask now if there is any intention to amend the Feeding Stuffs Act during the present session so as to prevent the continuation of the practice complained of.


William Richard Motherwell: I can recall the
question my hon. friend put last year with respect to the desirability of having pure milled by-products and I expressed sympathy with my hon. friend's view. But we were rushed last year, we could not do everything. As it was, we thought that we did very well for our first session. This year the advisability of having some change has been impressed more and more upon me because of complaints coming in from different quarters, especially with respect to the shorts and the deleterious effect of adulterated feed especially upon pigs. We had a conference the other day with the millers, the consumers and the middle men-those who purchase mill feed- consisting of some eighteen or twenty people. The conference arrived at certain conclusions and I have made certain recommendations to the Seed branch with respect to the amending of this Feeding Stuffs Act. Now, I cannot, at this stage, unduly anticipate what is in that proposed legislation. But I think when I get the consent of my colleagues to bringing it down, and I have not yet had an opportunity of doing that, I can assure my hon. friend that in the amendments a remedy will be found for at least some of the difficulties he has been complaining of. We believe in the purity and standardization of mill products, like bran and shorts, just the same as the flour itself. There is no reason why the public should not get pure commodities, and if they want to do the mixing let them do it themselves. That is all I can say at the present time.


Donald Sutherland: The minister is a practical man and understands this question. Therefore why the millers should be called in in order to have their views embodied in any legislation that may be passed in connection with this matter is a thing which I fail to understand. Knowing something that has transpired during the last few years I am satisfied that the millers are the ones largely responsible for the trouble that prevails to-

Supply-Seed Control
day and for the defects which exist in the present statute. It should be a very simple matter to prevent adulteration, there is absolutely no justification for it, and to have the act remain in its present shape, permitting them to indulge in the practice complained of, is nothing less than a humbug.
Now, I want to point out that this practice has not been a matter of gradual growth as some people may believe. The turning point was reached in December, 1917, when an order in council was passed permitting adulteration to a greater degree than it had been indulged in at any time previously. I will refer anyone who desires to look the matter up to an order in council that was put through on 3rd December, 1917, and which contains section 17 of the Grain Products Act. That section reads:
The presence of presumably vital weed seeds in any form of feeding stuff shall be held to constitute adulteration under the act, when more than 25 seeds per pound, as enumerated in the Seed Control Act of 1911, are present in the feed.
Now the trouble is that the millers are putting in machinery that will devitalize a great deal of this seed and the result is that what the minister has referred to has taken place in many instances. I pointed out, when introducing a bill of a preventive nature, many cases of loss of animals having occurred through this stuff having been fed to them, particularly young pigs. That being
9 p.m. the case the committee can understand the extent of the losses that have been experienced through not getting any benefit from the feed stuffs. Two years ago the millers appeared before the Committee on Agriculture and they were anxious to have a third grade of mill by-products sanctioned, known now as middlings, and what was formerly known as low grade flour. The Agriculture Committee refused to consider the matter and it was absolutely turned down by them, but it has since been sanctioned by regulation and is the practice to-day. The short, simple bill which I introduced in 1919 provided that no adulteration of bran, shorts and middlings should take place. The measure was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and after the very strongest debate, the millers having been heard, a motion was passed to this effect:
Resolved that in view of the serious results from the adulteration of bran and shorts by adding thereto great quantities of weed seeds, both ground and unground annually resulting in the death of many animals and serious injury to the health of others, besides distributing harmful weed seeds throughout the country to the detriment of those who engage in agriculture, this committee would respectfully recommend that immediate action should be taken to deal with this question by passing and putting into effect at the earliest opportunity Bill No. 7, an Act to amend the Adulteration Act.
This act was passed, and it was afterwards amended so that it is virtually of no effect and is now not in the statutes at all. The encouragement of the live stock industry and of agriculture in general in this country is something that must have more attention than it has so far received. I am satisfied that no one thing has done so much to discourage those who are endeavouring to develop the live stock industry as this curse with which they have to contend. They have paid good money for it. Is it any wonder that, under such conditions, you find that the farmers have ceased to raise the hogs that you are endeavouring to encourage them to raise? I can point to scores of well-equipped pens for raising hogs where they do not pretend to raise any at the present time. This is quite a common thing, at least, throughout the older provinces, and this condition of affairs is chiefly due to this trouble. Yet, when complaints are sent in, what do we find? We find the minister tonight acknowledging that these complaints are frequent and serious. Yet the millers are to be consulted and they are going to suggest to the department something that ought to be done in the matter. I can see very easily that that means, if their idea is to be carried out, no remedy is going to be provided for the situation at present existing. To say nothing of the losses sustained through feeding this stuff, the consequence resulting from the distribution of weed seeds throughout the country is another feature that I am not going to touch upon, but it is a very serious one. The weed menace is costing Canada millions and millions of dollars, and steps will have to be taken in the near future to control this difficulty with which we have to contend. The big mills may be perfectly satisfied. It is very difficult to come to any conclusion as to the enormous profits that they must make on this stuff, for which they do not pay anything, because they deduct from the grower of the grain much more than the quantity of the impurities to be found in it. Their contention, when they appeared before the committee of this House, was that they purchased this in the grain and they are justified in disposing of it in that way. This contention of the millers will be found in evidence taken before the Committee on the Cost of Living when the three big milling companies were present. It is absolutely unjustifiable. If they desire to sell this stuff, why not sell it for what it is, namely as screenings? That is the proper way to put it on the market. If
Supply-Seed Control

it has a food value-and it has if it is properly cleaned and taken care of-let them put it on the market in that way instead of mixing it with bran and shorts and having people feed this stuff which, in many instances, does more harm than good. This is something which the minister should deal with promptly instead of entrusting it to the millers, because if he does entrust it to them, the end that is desired will never be attained.


William Richard Motherwell: My hon. friend (Mr. Sutherland) was not present when I dealt with this matter a few moments ago but inasmuch as he has brought up a few new phases of the question, including the personnel of the conference, I wish to say that we are following, with respect to this conference and the amending of this act, just the same practice as we do with the amending of all acts. There is no reason that I can see why the millers should be ostracised in regard to this matter. The Feeding Stuffs Act deals, in deed, with many by-products of the mill. From the standpoint of the producer and of this House, we want to get information that can be secured only from the millers. We do not want to pass legislation with which it is impossible to comply. Take the highly technical and complicated nature of the conveying machinery and all the different machinery for the various separations in the mill. I must admit quite frankly that I am a layman in this respect. I know the difficulties are there; but before legislating, I want to know whether I am making conditions and laws with which it is impossible to comply. That does not mean that the millers are going to have the whole question delegated to them. We are simply using them fairly, as we do all interests that are involved in any business in the country. For instance, last year, we had a conference with regard to the Fruit Act and another with regard to the Potato Act. Every piece of legislation that we bring down is preceded by a conference of all those who are concerned especially with it, and that is the first important step towards the successful administration of an act as well as getting it on the statute book. No particular party, whether it be the wholesaler, retailer, producer or consumer of an article is going to get all his own way. The making of a law constitutes the ironing out and harmonizing of the differences that invariably exist between the various parts of the community with respect to the activities in any particular line. I think my hon. friend, on reflection, will see that that is quite right. I am sure he does not want to leave in the committee or on the country the impression that 
we are falling into the hands of the millers; that we are going to be engulfed by somebody, and that this act will turn out to be in the interest, not of the people who are asking for it, the men who buy shorts, but of producers of feedstuffs. Not at all. We think, in ordinary fairness to ourselves, as this parliament must be responsible for the law, if we are to have a.good workable law, all parties concerned should be around the board for consultation purposes. After that is done, I think I can assure the committee that this is a measure that will be referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Colonization, because it is legislation concerning which we can have a long chat as to its various phases, and after we have put it through that fanning mill, if you like to call it so, it will again come before a committee of this House. Then, if there is any monster or joker in it, we can rely upon my hon. friend to diagnose and identify it and help us to dig it out. I think I can assure my hon. friend that when this bill comes down, he will be pretty well satisfied with it, even though the millers will have had a hand in assisting to arrive at the ironing-out process which is necessary before a conclusion can be reached.


Mr. ROSS (North Simcoe):: At this conference to which the minister refers, and at which the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) and others were present, were breeders of live stock represented?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, two or three very prominent feeders and breeders in the neighbourhood of Brantford, I forget their names at the moment.


John Livingstone Brown: We have spent a good deal of time on this question, and the minister has been dragged back to it three times this evening. It is a matter in which we are all interested, and I find that the minister's views and mine coincide very closely. I think I can assure the hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) that when the bill comes down, there will not be very much difference between him and those who sit in this part of the chamber, and I would suggest that we might let the matter rest now until the bill comes before the House.


Donald Sutherland: The elaborate machinery the minister refers to is used in grinding up the screenings and packing it into the millfeed as evenly as possibly. That is the whole question in which the millers are interested. The minister knows very well that the live stock industry of the country cannot afford to use this stuff that is put into the

Supply-Agricultural Instruction
bran and shorts. There is no use dilly-dallying with a matter that has been before the House and the country so long and which is so unsatisfactory. I venture to say that the officials of the department are just as anxious as I am that this matter should be brought within effective control. I believe the minister has a splendid staff at his disposal to enforce the law and compel the millers to do what is right. There is another question the minister might answer. Have all the screenings which have been purchased by the department been disposed of? I know that there were immense quantities on hand some time ago, for which, I believe, $35 a ton was paid. It remained in the department for a long time. Has it been all disposed of, and who were the largest purchasers of the surplus that remained after the war?


William Richard Motherwell: The surplus has all been disposed of. My hon. friend almost tempts me to go further into the details of the prospective bill, which I should not reveal at this stage; but I can assure him that in future, after that bill goes through, he will be able to get bran and shorts straight without any admixture of any other substance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the provinces of Canada for the purpose of assisting and encouraging agricultural instruction, grants to be made on a proportionate basis, $900,000.
Donald Sutherland: Will the minister explain the decrease of $200,000 in this item?


William Richard Motherwell: In this year expires the ten-year period that was provided for when the original act was passed. Although the average of the grant during that ten years was approximately a million dollars a year, the instalments began with $900,000 and ended, as my hon. friend will see, with $1,100,000. Now, one cannot in these days forecast the requirements and the expenditures of the next decade, but I might point out the coincidence that, as did the previous ten-year period, the present decade starts with a grant of $900,000.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: What was spent last year?


William Richard Motherwell: The entire grant has always been spent. It is allotted to the provinces on the basis of population.


Joseph Henry Harris: Are there going to be any changes in the distributing of this grant?


William Richard Motherwell: That is, in regard to the services for which it is allowed.


Joseph Henry Harris: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: Inasmuch as $900,000 will not pay for quite as many services as $1,100,000, there will necessarily be changes. The provinces will have to supplement the grant or the number of services will have to be reduced. That will be a matter for negotiation between the provinces and the Dominion. Changes, of course, are being constantly made from time to time as new activities spring up, or seem to require encouragement. I presume that the less important services will either be dropped or will have less attention paid them. A great many of these services are new, and I have no doubt that in the course of the past decade some will have indicated a great usefulness while others will have revealed a comparative inutility, so that the less useful will, I take it, be dropped. Some changes will therefore certainly have to be made, subject to negotiation between the two contracting parties as to what services will be continued in view of the reduced amount of the grant.
Mr. HARRIS- Have any of the negotiations between those parties been consummated?


William Richard Motherwell: No, no negotiations have taken place.


John Livingstone Brown: I am sorry that it should have been thought necessary to reduce the grant at all. I do not believe that any work carried on in Canada is of more value to the whole country than the work by means of the money provided under this item. In the report of a committee that is charged with this work in Manitoba it is stated that no single piece of legislation has had a more far-reaching influence than the Agricultural Instruction Act. I know that the work carried on in Manitoba with the assistance of this grant is invaluable. The work of the boys' and girls' clubs, of the women's institutes, and the work that is done in connection with home economics, are of incalculable benefit not only to the people of the country but to all the people of the towns and villages. What is done by the boys' and girls' clubs is valuable beyond any possibility of estimate, and I regret very much that it has been thought necessary to cut down the grant at all. I would rather see it increased.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Is the salary of the Commissioner of Agriculture included in this item?


William Richard Motherwell: No. I sympathise with the views of the hon. member for Lisgar (Mr. Brown) . I have had the duty of administering this act from both1 ends, provincial and federal and I know something of the activities

Supply-Agricultural Instruction
that have been developed under the stimulating effect of this expenditure. I have heard them criticized both favourably and unfavourably, but I feel on the whole that the expenditures have been wisely made for very profitable purposes. I cannot do better than pay a slight tribute to the hon. gentleman who was responsible for their introduction in the first instance, and nothing would please me better than to have the privilege of continuing them for another decade, but we cannot see that far into the future. All I can point out to my hon. friend is that the vote is the same today at the beginning of this new decade as it was at the beginning of the last decade. We have now twelve months to size up the financial horizon and think over the matter, and it gives the provinces too an opportunity to look around and wonder whether they are going to carry on this work in the event of these federal grants being finally dropped. This is not the only federal grant to the provinces, next year another one in respect to roads will be up for consideration. We cannot anticipate what will be done then, but it is quite possible that when the two grants confront us the country will be wanting to know our attitude towards the whole business of federal grants to the provinces.


Joseph Henry Harris: I submit, Sir, that the hon. minister, having journeyed across the Dominion from coast to coast, and having shown in the handling of his estimates, to us baby members at least, that he has a grip of his department and knows whereof he speaks, surely must have some policy respecting the distribution of this particular item. Surely he can give the committee some idea as to how the money is going to be distributed among the provinces.


William Richard Motherwell: I have already told my hon. friend that the money will be distributed in the same way as formerly, but that it is inevitable that $900,000 will not pay for as many services ks $1,100,000.


Joseph Henry Harris: That is just what I want to know-who is going short on the $200,000?


William Richard Motherwell: They will all go a little short.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Will the minister explain on what basis this grant is distributed to the provinces?


William Richard Motherwell: There is first a flat rate distribution of $20,000 to each province. That is to protect the interests of Prince Edward Island, which would have been discriminated against had the distribution been on a straight per capita basis. There is also
IMr. Motherwell.]
$20,000 granted to two veterinary colleges, one at Montreal and the other at Toronto. The balance is distributed on a per capita basis, that is, according to population.


Henry Elvins Spencer: The minister has not answered my question in regard to the salary of the Commissioner of Agriculture. Is that included in this item?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Donald Sutherland: Where does the salary paid the Commissioner of Agriculture come in? I can not find it under the head of Civil Government.


William Richard Motherwell: It was in the previous vote that has just been passed.


Donald Sutherland: In view of the fact that a year ago the minister stated that the Commissioner of Agriculture was working on the Agricultural Instruction Act to determine in what proportion the federal grant should be paid to the various provinces, he will understand the anxiety of my hon. friend to the left to know what was done in that respect. We were told that this "special messenger " of the minister would possibly complete his duties at the end of six months. I think the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Crerar) asked the minister the question a year ago and received that answer. I am surprised that the minister did not inform the committee when the previous item was going through that it included the salary of his "special messenger," as he termed Mr. Duncan Marshall, whom I presume he sent up to my constituency to address political picnics.
I do not think the minister has been very frank with the committee.


George Newcombe Gordon: I must draw the hon. member's attention to the fact that the minister states that the salary of the Commissioner of Agriculture is not included in this item. Consequently he will be out of order if he discussed what should have been raised by him when the preceding vote was before the committee.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, I would rather think that the hon. minister does not want to take a sharp advantage of the members of the committee. It was only this afternoon that you stopped the hon. member who has just resumed his seat (Mr. Sutherland) from continuing discussion of this gentleman's salary, which you pointed out-and quite properly-could not be discussed under the particular item then before the committee. The minister knows very well that hon. gentlemen desire to discuss the matter. There is nothing in the estimates to show from which

source the salary is paid, and I would suggest to the minister that instead of trying to take a technical advantage here he move -as I know he will-that the proper item be opened up on which this salary can be discussed.


William Richard Motherwell: Mr. Chairman, such an appeal I am sure is irresistible. Besides, this is getting too quiet! But I want to assure the committee that I did not try to "put anything over" when they called out "carried". I am not going to stand in the way of discussing any vote.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I was sure the minister would say that.


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall the item carry?


Donald Sutherland: Mr. Chairman, when I was interrupted in my remarks-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Donald Sutherland: -or called to order a few minutes ago, I was endeavouring to ascertain how this item was $200,000 less than a year ago. The minister has informed the committee that this is the last year in which this appropriation will be made. Although it was originally provided for in a lump sum of $10,000,000 for ten years, the appropriation has to be voted from year to year. There was nothing to prevent the minister from providing a sufficient amount under this item to meet the conditions which prevail. We were told a year ago that the payment of this amount in proportion to population would be an unfair procedure. The item is $200,000 less than it was a year ago; the minister now informs the committee that some of these branches of agriculture throughout the various provinces must go short this year. I was wondering if that was the advice tendered to him by his special messenger who, he told us a year ago, was dealing with this question. I cannot think that the excuse offered by the minister is a reasonable one. There are increases of several hundreds of thousands of dollars in other items of his estimates; why this item should be reduced as it has been is something I fail to understand. It will serve only to disorganize the machinery in existence throughout the various provinces dealing with grants heretofore received from the federal government.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Henry Lumley Drayton: - I understood that the minister was going to reopen the previous item.
Supply-Dairying


George Newcombe Gordon: It cannot be reopened without the unanimous consent of the committee.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I understood the minister was going to ask for that consent.


William Richard Motherwell: No, no.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then the appeal has certainly gone unheeded. In fact, it has been refused.


William Richard Motherwell: I responded for myself. I cannot speak for the committee.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the
minister himself will make the motion.


William Richard Motherwell: Oh no, I will not make it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then the hon. gentleman is in exactly the position I said he was in. Hon. members do not know from what vote the salary in question is to be paid. I think it is an unfortunate position, Mr. Chairman.


William Richard Motherwell: Oh, there will be lots of other chances.


Henry Lumley Drayton: When?


William Richard Motherwell: On the budget.


Henry Lumley Drayton: On the budget? The hon. gentleman is keeping up his reputation for being a joker.
Dairying, $230,000.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would ask the minister to let this item stand. A number of members representing Ontario who are very much interested in the matter went home on the evening train. We would appreciate it if the minister would let the item stand for the present.


William Richard Motherwell: This request has
come from two or three sources now. Since my former disposition to relent has not been appreciated, I am going to try it once more: I will concede the request and let this item stand until another sitting.


Donald Sutherland: May I ask whether the matter referred to in the previous item, the one that the minister was willing to have discussed, will also be opened up?


George Newcombe Gordon: That item has been
carried.


Donald Sutherland: I guess the minister is wise in not opening it up.


William Richard Motherwell: I answered eighteen questions about that the other day.
Item stands.



Supply-Agriculture-Salaries
Civil government-agriculture-salaries and contigen-cies, $852,925.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The details as given
on page 77 are not in the form to which we have been accustomed. The number of employees is given, with the salaries, but the names of the officers are not stated. Is that not unusual?


George Perry Graham: I may explain that that
was the former system. It was thought that members would get a better grasp of the number of employees and the salary ranges if the details were given in this way.


Henry Lumley Drayton: But they are
not grouped according to their activities. We do not know what job the particular employees are supposed to hold down.


George Perry Graham: The minister can give
that information very quickly.


William Richard Motherwell: There is an increase of 34 employees in the various branches. As the Minister of Defence has indicated, we have grouped the positions in this way, reverting to a practice that was in vogue in former years. Taking them in the same order as they appear in the Estimates, I may explain that in the case of salaries over $4,000, there is no change in the number of employees. There is, however, a statutory increase of $600.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Will the minister, before he leaves that, give us the information that the Minister of Defence said he could give us? What are the names of the eight gentlemen mentioned in the first item of the details and what jobs do they hold?


William Richard Motherwell: The information I have does not state them consecutively, but I think I can give my hon. friend the information. One of them is Dr. J. H. Grisdale, $5,500; the others are A. L. Jarvis, Assistant Deputy Minister, $4,500; T. K. Doherty, Commissioner International Institute of Agriculture, $4,000; J. A. Ruddick, Dairy and Cold Storage Commissioner, $5,000. That makes four.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: There are three at $5,000.


William Richard Motherwell: Well, they are not classified at $5,000. They are classified at $4,000 and over.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Two at $4,500.


William Richard Motherwell: There is one at $4,500. I will read them over again: Dr. J. H. Grisdale, $5,500; A. L. Jarvis, $4,500; T. K. Doherty, $4,000. That is on the first page.
	*


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is he the Commissioner of the International Institute?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes. Then J. A. Ruddick $5,000.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is the Dairy and Cold Storage Commisisoner.


William Richard Motherwell: Then Mr. A. Gibson, Dominion Entomologist, $4,500. He has reached the maximum range under that classification. Then E. S. Archibald, Live Stock Director, $5,000. He has also reached the maximum range.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Last year he was $4,500.


William Richard Motherwell: Not so indicated here. It indicates here $5,000 for 1922-23 and $5,000 for 1923-24.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is one of the difficulties we have when proper practice is departed from. There is no way of checking the salaries unless we go through the records. There is nothing to show the vote last year. The vote last year was not $5,000 for this gentleman, but only $4,500.


William Richard Motherwell: Well now there will be that difficulty during the first year after a change. After another year we will have two consecutive years to compare, but every time you make a change, you will have that mixup, no matter how good the change may be.


An hon. MEMBER:: Why the change?


William Richard Motherwell: Well this will be better. That is all. This is the method I was familiar with first. I am not responsible, except in a general way, for the change. The innovation I have been discussing has been adopted all through. Here are the various appointments: Deputy minister $5,500; Veterinary Director General $5,040; three at $5,000, being the Director Experimental Farms, Seed Commissioner and Dairy and Cold Storage Commissioner. Then we have two at $4,500, the Dominion Entomologist and the assistant deputy minister.


Henry Lumley Drayton: In connection with that first item, perhaps he can tell us how many years he had to go back to find this system.	.


William Richard Motherwell: I must admit I have not been here very long. I can only go back one year. I do not know.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the Minister of Defence, who came forward to

Supply-Agriculture-Salaries
explain, can tell us how many years he had to go back to find this system.


George Perry Graham: I had to go back to the times of good government.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know. It was secretive government.


George Perry Graham: When things were done properly.


Joseph Henry Harris: Can the Minister of Agriculture tell us whether he thinks this way of paying salaries is better for the country or for the government?


William Richard Motherwell: I am afraid I would not be an authority on this matter. I have tried both ways, but it is some time since I have tried this method. It seems to work all right both ways. I have not been sitting in the audience listening to the other man making the explanation, otherwise I might have been able to tell better.


Mr. LEWIS:: It may be better for the government, but I must say it is not very good for the private member. It does not give us any conception at all whether the department is overmanned or not. We do not know what kind of men have been introduced into this department at all. Previously we were able to make a comparison, and we were able to tell what kind of men had been taken into the service or taken out of it, but under this system we are in the dark, and that seems to be the position in which the government wants to place us.


Donald Sutherland: Have the salaries mentioned in this item reached the maximum or will there be further increases from year to year?


William Richard Motherwell: There has been some increase. There is an aggregate increase in those first eight positions of $600, due to the regularly provided statutory increases. They are all now up to the top salary range, I understand, and that is where they will stand until there is some adjustment in the way of classification by the Civil Service Commission, or some increase in salary, but so long as they remain in that category that is where the salaries will be. They are all at the top.


Donald Sutherland: Before passing from that item I should like to ask if there is any possibility of a change being made in the system. I observe that the deputy minister receives a salary of $5,500 and he has been on the job many years; evidently has reached the maximum, and it is quite evident that very heavy work devolves upon a deputy
minister. It seems quite significant that some of the recent arrivals, whose salaries have evidently been smuggled through in some of the items which have been passed without any comments at all, should receive a higher salary than the deputy minister. I cannot understand this system. I was wondering when I saw what has happened whether this was the new system that is to be developed by reason of the activity of the government yesterday in having referred to a special committee the work of the Civil Service Commission who have control over such matters as these. Is this one of the reasons why the party referred to does not come under the Civil Service Act as these officials do? I think it is a most remarkable thing that the Deputy Minister of Agriculture-after the many years' services which he has rendered and the heavy duties which devolve upon him-should receive less salary than a man who passes his winters at a seaside resort down in Florida, makes trips across the Atlantic, goes around speaking at political picnics, and has a real good time at the public expense. This man, the minister states, is his special messenger.


William Richard Motherwell: I can only guess to whom my hon. friend is referring, but there is no doubt as to whom he has reference when he speaks of the deputy minister. Now, I explained last year, I think it was to the hon. member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Leader) how Dr. Grisdale's salary seems to be less than that of the average deputy minister. Dr. Grisdale receives $5,500 in cash, and occupies a rent free house at the experimental farm,. an arrangement entered into before my time. The salary and emoluments are considered to be equivalent to $6,000. I made that explanation last year and my hon. friend is aware of it. I hope he will recollect it next year, and not make a grievance out of nothing.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: I notice in reading the Estimates of last year that the estimates of the Department of Agriculture occupied three full pages of explanations wherein the names of the officials, the positions they held under the classification, and the salaries paid to them were set forth. Now the only information we get on the same subject is a mere half page, everybody being lumped together, thus affording no chance of distinguishing one official from another or making a comparison. It seems to me that the minister could very readily furnish us with the information as it appeared last year, so that we might be able to make a comparison, and see what difference there is in each case.

Supply-Agriculture-Salaries


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I want to add my protest to that of other members as to the method referred to. If it were the custom to pass these items without asking any questions concerning them I realize that it would be a very advisable method for the minister to follow. But when he is called upon to give those explanations that are necessary in order to enable us to dispose of these votes intelligently it will occupy a great length of time. The information given last year, set out in the manner in which it was, rendered the Estimates much more intelligible to members. As it is now the minister gives us the names of officials and other explanations which go on Hansard. But we have not got that information before us, as we should have, and it is very hard-in fact impossible-to remember all these details when they are not before us in printed form. I must say that I was very much surprised when I turned up the Estimates and found the items set forth in the form in which they appear to-day.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Surely the government have some intelligent reason why this change is made. For years the House has been accustomed to have proper information as to the Civil Service given to it. During the war that information was withheld for a short time owing to the pressure of business and the like, but it was again vouchsafed just as soon as the classification became -sufficiently complete to permit of its being done. Now, the details have disappeared and the House is not in a position to properly consider these items. We are refused information, in so far as these estimates are concerned that we have always got. Surely the government are not here to-day to say that they do not care about this matter one way or the other. Surely they are not here to make a laugh and say that this change goes back to a time when there was proper government. Surely that is not the position of my hon. friends. Surely there is some real reason why this is done, other than a desire to make the passage of the estimates difficult. I suggest the least thing the government can do is to give us some reason for this change. Some one must be responsible for it.


Mr. STEVENS:: I do not think that my hon. friend (Mr. Motherwell) is, perhaps, treating the committee with that courtesy to which it is entitled. If members will turn to items 153, 154, 155 and 157, relating to public works, they will find the information there displayed in accordance with the practice in previous years-that detail of information which has always been looked upon as a great advantage, and which has the effect of facilitating the

passing of estimates. Now if you turn to Civil Government and these votes of the various departments-customs, agriculture, marine and fisheries and so on-you will find that they have been changed to the mysterious and obscure method referred to without any real reason, apparently, being given. There is really no information given whatever. Now there has been some general policy adopted. This does not apply merely to the Department of Agriculture, it extends to several of the other departments so far as I have been able to judge. Perhaps the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) whose courtesy is always unbounded and whose knowledge of the departments is usually fairly complete, can give us a little information on this matter. Apparently it is a policy and method adopted generally by the government, and not simply by one department. As far as I can judge, it is very unsatisfactory and we ought to have some explanation for the change. I would suggest, before the Minister of Finance replies, if he will extend that courtesy to me, that he should give to members, before we pass any more votes of this particular class, the lists of officials as they were printed last year and the other information formerly presented. It would not take very long, it would, I think, be very acceptable to members generally, and might greatly facilitate the passing of the estimates.


William Stevens Fielding: I may say that the object was to present the estimates in a form which, it was thought, would be more acceptable to the House as showing the various grades of salaries. Of course the Estimates as formerly brought down never gave the names of officers. Some hon. gentlemen opposite appear to think that there is a departure in that respect but the Estimates in theit
10 p.m. former shape did not mention the name of any officer; they did mention the rank or the position, and in some departments there would only be a few of the higher officials, the rest being clerks. I am assured by my colleagues who had this matter more in hand that the explanation is the one I have stated. I know the object was to present the Estimates so that at a glance members could ascertain how many officers were getting high salaries and how many were getting small salaries. Whether the change is going to prove more acceptable to members than the former system remains to be seen. If the judgment of the House is that the old system was the better one I am not absolutely determined to insist upon the present arrangement. I repeat, the object was not to conceal anything but simply to enable members to see at a glance how many were high

Supply-Agriculture-Salaries
salaried and how many were low salaried officials.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is it not a matter of importance to know what work a man does when you are considering his salary?


William Stevens Fielding: You will find that a great many, probably the majority of the officials cannot be designated by their work; they take rank as clerks. The higher officials can be designated, such as the deputy minister, the live stock commissioner, or other commissioner, a few cases like that; but you do not designate the work of the majority of civil servants at all-they are clerks and doing the general work of the department. But, of course, the minister must be prepared to state in every case the duties of the office, the salary paid, and if necessary the name of the official whose salary is being voted.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I take it from what the hon. gentleman says that he agrees it is advisable to know what an official is doing before we pay him. If he will agree with me to the extent that we have had a reasonable classification in the past, that ought to be continued.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I would like also to point out to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) that last year we had, not only a description of the position held, but a comparison of the salary with that of the previous year. I remember, if the minister will recall, last year the House, in checking over this list, discovered a number of purchasing agents, I think, two or three in one department, and the result of that was a correction or a promised correction, at least, of an apparent overlapping in the department. All we have now, we are told, is that there is one at so much and three at another salary, without the slightest information or comparison at all. If this was designed-I say this with all courtesy-deliberately to mislead and deceive the committee, I do not know of a better form to follow than this that is now being presented to the committee. On the other hand, I can scarcely conceive of more complete details than we have had for many previous years. In fact for as far back as I have been in this House, namely, fourteen sessions, I do not remember any other system.


William Richard Motherwell: Apparently, this is the way we have it-


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is no answer. That is no explanation.


William Richard Motherwell: If my hon. friend will let me get through my sentence, I was going to say, if the committee is desirous of
getting out the dual system, we can let this matter stand until we do that. We may not come to Civil Government again for several days. I only want to reiterate what the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) has said, namely, that the last thing in our minds, as was suggested by some hon. gentleman, was a desire to smuggle something through. What have we to cover up?


Donald Sutherland: That is what we would like to know.


William Richard Motherwell: We want to give this information in the most concise and intelligent way. It is not easy to get a mass of names and figures in the most presentable manner, and as I have already intimated, I do not know which is the better way. I have tried both of them and they both seemed to work until to-night.


Henry Herbert Stevens: This is not working.


William Richard Motherwell: How would it be if we just try it out and make some specific request for some specific information in order to see if we can get it? I have a number of names with the positions opposite, and my deputy tells me, while he has not the name opposite on this page or alongside, he can turn to each name that is represented by each particular salary. This may take a little while, but not very long.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The trouble is that when the minister gives out the information, we do not have it; it goes on Hansard.


William Richard Motherwell: That is the way with all these things.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Pardon me for interrupting, but I want to make my point clear. I would be the last one to insinuate that the government had anything to conceal; but I must say that we cannot consider this intelligently at all under the present method. The minister gives us the information as to these positions. It will be a wonderful man in this committee who will remember one out of five of them when that is done. The information will be printed on Hansard, but we do not get that until to-morrow. Then, we would have to go to Hansard for the various positions explained by the minister and endeavour to pick them out with the salaries, and that, would be very difficult even with Hansard before us. Moreover, in the meantime, the vote is passed. I hope the minister will accept the suggestion of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens) and have this prepared somewhat the same as last year. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) states that we have never had the names.



C14 COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Agriculture-Salaries
I do not think that is necessary at all/ Last year, the positions were very definitely classified. There were senior clerks and junior clerks. We found that there were statistical clerks in each department, and I remember last year our honoured leader suggested that we had a Bureau of Statistics that could very well deal with all the statistics of the government, and that we should not have a statistical branch in every department as that constituted a duplication of work. We have no way of judging these things from the list as prepared, and I would not attempt to follow the minister's explanations and expect to remember very much when he was done. We do not have the information until we get Hansard to-morrow, and then it is not in such a useful form as compared with the previous method.
William Stevens Fielding: I agree at once that the oommittee should have the information. Whether it has it in the form of the printed Estimates or in another form, is not material. I have no objection to the committee getting information as to every rank, position and salary. There is a change in the method, and I admit it is open to criticism; but there is no desire to suppress information, and I am quite content that all that hon. gentlemen have asked for shall be given, whether in the form of these estimates or in another form I do not suppose is material.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I wonder if the hon. gentleman, whose experience in this House is very long and very valuable, could tell us the reasons for the change from this bid form which appears to be somewhat ancient. The Acting Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) 'told us that this is going back to an old form that was used. I am quite sure that there was a very good reason for the change. I dare say the change is one my hon. friend put in himself; but I would like to know just how far back we have to go for this, because then I am going to find out without much difficulty the real reasons why this very beneficial change was made. As regards information which my hon. friend (Mr. Fielding) tells us we shall have, I would suggest to my hon. friend that that information, if it is to be at all useful, ought to be in the hands of the members for a couple of days before the estimates come up again, so that they may have an opportunity of comparing the votes and making up their minds as to whether the thing is proper or not. In the long run, this will facilitate the passing of the estimates.


William Stevens Fielding: I cannot tell my hon
friend when this practice existed before, if

it did. I can frankly say that it never existed in my day. If it was an old practice, it antedated my day. As to the object, I will again say that I am quite satisfied, in conversation with my colleagues, that the only object in the world was to put these estimates in a form which it was thought would be acceptable to the committee. That may have been a mistake, but that was the only object in the world.


Henry Herbert Stevens: One thing that appears to be certain is that the change was made in the absence of my hon. friend who, I am quite sure, had he been here, would never have consented to it. Moreover, we can never get from this miscellaneous bunch of meaningless figures, any information that will give us an intelligent idea of what the vote is for. The minister (Mr. Motherwell) does not at all times show that degree of patience which he rather boasts of being master of. My hon. friend is a little fond, when we interject a question, in the informality of a committee, of reading us a little lecture or of scolding us a little. I want to tell my hon. friend that if he takes that attitude, it will not get his estimates very far on with very much facility.


William Richard Motherwell: Who is giving the lecture now?


Henry Herbert Stevens: Since the minister has been in this House, last session and this,- he has been treated with kindness and courtesy. Personally, I am desirous of continuing this attitude; but when he intimates that this information is in any degree satisfactory, he is insulting the intelligence of this committee. I want again to request the Minister of Finance, who is leading the committee to-night, and whose department is very largely responsible for the final assembly of the estimates, if he would do this side of the committee at least the courtesy of having brought down, before these Civil Government estimates are up again, simply a reprint of last year. The forms, I venture to say, are in the Printing bureau today. I know something about arranging documents of this kind for printing. I know and I invite the attention of the Minister of Finance to this-it costs a great deal more in time and money to rearrange these estimates in this obscure fashion than to have them reprinted in the fashion of last year. I cannot conceive of any reason whatever for presenting them in this form, if there was a desire to give the information in a clear and frank manner. I will repeat, if the Minister of Finance would agree to bring down these details simply in the form in which we had them last year, this would facilitate very much the passing of these estimates.

Standing Committees


William Richard Motherwell: I do not mind taking my little curtain lecture from my hon. friend, but I think he tried to pick me up before I fell. I started to make a statement and before I could say anything he- interjected that that was no answer. Well, I was taking my breath about that time and was coming to the point that if it was the wish of the committee we could stop and take the matter up on another occasion; and that is interpreted by my hon. friend as being not quite courteous. I do not pretend to be an authority on the proprieties or on the question of what constitutes courtesy, but I do not see anything the matter with the suggestion that we could stop now and bring down later exactly what my hon. friend wants. As a matter of fact we got along nicely all evening so long as we were on strictly agricultural questions. Now, I understand, this is a matter of bookkeeping. I do not claim to be an expert on that subject, but I do know that when the government adopted this system they thought they were improving on the old method. It is possible that we may not have done so; that is a matter of opinion. It is true, as my hon. friend opposite pointed out. that the members of the committee have not this information before them. But all evening I have been reading information from documents which the members of the committee have not before them but which apparently they had no reluctance in accepting as correct.


William Stevens Fielding: My hon. friend from Vancouver (Mr. Stevens) rather put me in the position of blaming somebody else in this matter. I wish to say that this is a matter in which the Finance department is responsible, and I desire to share the responsibility with my colleagues in regard to the whole subject. The- suggestion as to the form the information will take will receive due consideration.	.
Item stands.



VACANCY-MOOSE JAW

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour
to inform the House that I have issued my warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer to make out a new writ of election for the electoral district of Moose Jaw, which is now vacant in consequence of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada, which I tabled yesterday.
On motion of Mr. Fielding the House adjourned at 10.15 p.m.
Monday, February 26, 1923