1923-03-05

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved:: That the name of R. M. Johnson be taken from the list of members comprising the standing committee on Agriculture and Colonization and the name of O. R. Gould be inserted in lieu thereof; and that the name of R. M. Johnson be taken from the list of members comprising the standing committee on the Library of Parliament, and the name of H. H. Stevens inserted in lieu thereof; and that the name of T. W. Caldwell be taken from the list of members comprising the special committee on the Redistribution Bill and the name of L. W. Humphrey be inserted in lieu thereof; and that a message be sent to the Senate to acquaint
Questions

their Honours that the name of Mr. Johnson has been taken from the list of members comprising the committee on the Library of Parliament, and that of Mr. Stevens inserted in lieu thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Report of the Civil Service Commission on the administration of the Public Service Act, as provided by section 7 of that act.

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

[Stage Direction]
. Mr. HARRIS:
L What is the total amount of advances made by the government to the Montreal Harbour Commissioners by way of loan or otherwise?
2.	What is the total amount of interest paid to the government by the Montreal Harbour Commissioners in respect of such assistance?
3.	What is the rate of interest paid by the Harbour Commission to the government?
4.	What rate does the government pay on the money which it borrows to provide such loans to the commission?
Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 
THE DAVIDSON REPORT
Mr. SPENCER:: * L Is it the intention of the government to publish the report of the Davidson Commission?
2.	If not: for what reason?
3.	Did the report show that excessive profits had been made in war orders?
4.	If so, what firms or individuals were implicated?


Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	The Report of the Honourable Sir Charles Davidson, as a commissioner to investigate sales of small arms ammunition was published in 1917.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	The report speaks for itself.
4.	Answered by No. 3.


SAFEGUARDS TO NAVIGATION
Mr. SIMPSON:: 1.	Was the Government Steamer Lambton lost last spring with all on board while attempting to place the lightkeepers in their respective stations on the north shore of Lake Superior for the season's operations?
IMr. Mackenzie King. I
2.	Was the tug Reliance wrecked last autumn while attempting to remove these lightkeepers from their stations at the close of the season's operations?
3.	Has the government or the Minister of Marine and Fisheries received resolutions from the Sault Ste-Marie city council board of trade, or other public bodies, recommending certain safeguards to navigation on Lake Superior?
4.	Is it the intention of the government to adopt any of the suggestions mentioned in these resolutions?


Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No.
3.	Yes.
4.	They are at present receiving consideration.


D.S.C.R. HOSPITALS
Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: 1.	What was the cost of maintenance per patient per day in each of the D.S.C.R. hospitals in Canada for the years 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the strength of the headquarters of the D.S.C.R. for year ending 1921, and year ending 1922?


Right Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment.
Statement showing average cost per patient per day in each of the D.S.C.R. hospitals in Canada for the fiscal year ended March 31st, 1922, and for the period of nine months, ended December 31st, 1922.
Average	Average
cost per	cost per
patient per patient per
	day,12	day, 9
	months	months
Institution	ending	endingGeneral Treatment	March	Decemberand Mental Hospitals	31st, 1922	31st, 1922Ste. Annes, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, P.Q	$3 07	$3 04Camp Hill, Halifax, N.S	2 98	3 83Lancaster, St. John, N.B	2 97	3 09*Sydenham, Kingston, Ont...	3 42	3 53Christie St., Toronto, Ont. ..	3 41	3 64Euclid Hall, Toronto, Ont..	7 51	7 85Brant Hospital, Burlington, Ont	2 72	3 40Westminster, London, Ont. ..	2 89	2 63Deer Lodge, Winnipeg, Man.	2 28	2 38Strathcona, Edmonton, Alta.	3 27	2 70Col. Belcher, Calgary	3 50	3 31Sunnyside, Calgary, Alta...	3 75	ClosedShaughnessy, Vancouver, B.C.	3 34	3 62Averages	3 16	3 27Tuberculosis Sanatoria Jordan Memorial, River Glade, N.B	4 19	4 30Laurentian, Ste. Agathe des Monts, P.Q	3 65	3 76Mowat, Kingston, Ont	4 81	3 19Central Alberta, Keith, Alta.	4 34	3 50Averages	4 16	3 62
^Closed January 1923.
2.	The stall strength of the headquarters of the D.S.C.R. on the 31st of December, 1921, was 1,078, and on the 31st of December, 1922. 805.

Questions


CREOSOTED COMMODITIES-DUTIES
Mr. CLARK:: What duties, if any, are payable on the following commodities: (a) Creosoted piling; (b) Creosoted railway ties; (c) Creosoted constructional timbers; (d) Creosoted lumber; (e) Creosoted planks; (f) Creosoted cross arms; (g) Creosote?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 
PROVINCIAL HIGHWAY-LINCOLN COUNTY
Mr. CHAPLIN:: 1.	How many miles of the provincial highway between Hamilton and Queenston are in the county of Lincoln?	_
2.	What has been the total cost of this road, within the county of Lincoln, up to the 31st December, 1922?
3.	What further amount will be required to complete it?
4.	What amount has been paid by the Dominion government for this roadway, within the county of Lincoln, up to the period mentioned?
5.	What is the approximate amount yet to be provided by the Dominion government to complete the road?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	26-2 miles.
2.	Inspection by federal engineer shows total cost within the county of Lincoln to 15th
June, 1922, for federal aid purposes to have been $492,729.
3.	For federal aid purposes, $171,000 (estimated).
4.	$194,091.24, up to December 31, 1921; accounts for 1922 expenditures have not yet been supplied by the Ontario department.
5.	Estimated amount to be provided by the
Dominion on account of the road in Lincoln county is $71,400.	,


ACCREDITED HERDS-RICHMOND
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many herds of cattle have come in under the present accredited system in the county of Richmond?
2.	What are the names of the farmers who had their herds tested, and what are their addresses?
3.	How many cattle were destroyed under the accredited herd system in the said county?
4.	How many were pure-bred and how many were grades?
5.	What was the total amount of money paid for the pure-bred and what was the total amount paid for the grades?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	15.
2.	Burrill Bros., Gore; J. L. Cayouette, Bromptonville; H. W. and O. A. Fowler, Kingsbury; R. W. Frank, Kingsbury; G. W. Goodenough & Son, Danville; E- G. Fletcher, Richmond; C. G. Hall, Danville; W. H. Healy & Sons, Richmond; McMorine Bros., Richmond; A. McKay, Upper Melbourne; G. Blais !k P. Poirier, Bromptonville; Richmond Jerseys, Richmond; C. Therrien, St. Francois Xavier; E. W. Tobin, Bromptonville; A. Ponton, Bromptonville.
3.	1920 to February 28, 1923, 183.
4.	Pure breds, 145; grades, 38.
5.	Pure breds, $21,556.66; grades, $2,116.66.


ACCREDITED HERDS-WOLFE
Mr. TOBIN:: 1.	How many herds of cattle have come in under the present accredited system of herding in the county of Wolfe?
2.	What are the names of the farmers who have had their herds tested, and what are their addresses?
3.	How many cattle were destroyed under the accredited herd system in the said county?
4.	How many were pure-bred and how many were grades ?
5.	What was the total amount of money paid for the pure-bred and what was the total amount paid for the grades?


Hon. Mr. MOTHERWELL:: 1.	One.
2.	J. H. Crepeau, St. Camille.
3.	None.
4 and 5. Answered by No. 3.
Questions


SOLDIER SETTLEMENT SCHEME
Mr. COOTE:: 1.	What were the amounts due to the Dominion government in each province, in the year 1922, under the Soldier Settlement scheme ?
2.	What amounts have been paid to the Dominion government, in each province, to date?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	British Columbia, $449,500.77; Alberta, $871,794.62; Saskatchewan, $786,790.26; Manitoba, $485,080.15; Ontario, $232,531.62; Quebec, $59,626.79; Maritime Provinces, $131,140.68.
2.	British Columbia, $204,330.68; Alberta, $301,939.42; Saskatchewan, $481,626.74; Manitoba, $218,008.04; Ontario, $188,178.93; Quebec, $24,149.13; Maritime provinces, $81,421.46.


GOVERNMENT PURCHASES IN TORONTO
Mr. SPENCER:: 1.	Has the government or the Railway department had any correspondence with the Imperial Bank with a view to purchasing the northwest corner of King and Yonge streets, Toronto?
2.	Did the government give the Imperial Bank any notice of intention to expropriate, or wish to acquire the property prior to filing notice of expropriation?
3.	If purchase is intended, what price is being offered?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 
Mr. KNOX:: 1.	What were the fixed charges in 1922 on the Canadian Northern, the Grand Trunk Pacific, and the Grand Trunk railway, in each case?
2.	How much, in each case, was due to the public, and how much to the government?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: The details which form the reply to this question are not yet complete. I hope to bring them down in a few days in the railway statement, and if my hon. friend would drop the question he will get a reply when I bring down the statement. Question dropped.
QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS [DOT]


TAX COLLECTIONS AND EXPENSES
Mr. BLACK (Huron):: 1.	What was the total cost of collecting the customs and excise taxes for the years 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922?
2.	What was the total amount of rental paid for offices used in connection with the said work daring the above mentioned years?

3.	What would the total amount of interest amount to on money invested in buildings owned by the government and used in connection with the collection of said taxes during the above stated years?
4.	What is the total amount of salaries paid in connection with the said collections during the years mentioned ?
5.	What is the total amount of all other expenses incidental to the collecting of customs and excise taxes during the said years?
6.	What was the total amount of customs and excise taxes collected during the years 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922?


CIVIL SERVICE APPOINTMENTS
Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: 1.	How many temporary employees were made permanent by the Civil Service Commission, between March 15, 1921, and the day the late government resigned?
2.	How many of the above mentioned employees passed the civil service examination ?
3.	How many of the said employees cannot write and were unable to sign their names, but simply affixed a cross to the form of oath required by the act?


PRODUCTS AND EXPORTS
Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: 1.	What quantity and value of each of the following commodities have been exported from Canada during the past year, and what amount of duty was payable (or collected) on each (a) Agricultural machinery or farm equipments (b) Meats (c) Animal grease, oils, or fats; (d) Milk and milk products; (e) Cattle, calf and sheep skins, green or salted; (f) Wool; (g) Eggs; (h);Apples, green; (i) Potatoes; (j) Fish and fishery products?
2.	What quantity and value of each of the above commodities have been produced in Canada during the past year?


QUEBEC ROADS
Mr. PREVOST:: 1.	What plans for roads were submitted by the Quebec government, for the approval of the Dominion government, by virtue of the Highways Act?
2.	What plans were approved?
3.	What sums were paid by the Dominion government towards these approved roads?


GOVERNMENT RAILWAYS-DOCTORS
[Stage Direction]
Mr. d'ANJOU:
1.	How many doctors are employed by the government railways, whether the I.C.R., C.N.R., of the G.T.R., in the province of Quebec?
2.	What are their names and addresses?
3.	What salaries do they receive?
4.	On whose recommendation were these appointments made?
5.	Are they allowed to take part in politics, either provincial or federal ?

Mr. PARENT:: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the government and any firm or party pertaining to the occupancy of Arctic Islands, and northern Quebec, by various expeditions in those regions, including a copy of reports on results of said expeditions.

Labour Strikes
Also copy of all contracts, if any, entered into between the government and any firm or party granting privileges on said territory.


CANADIAN PACIFIC-QUEBEC TERMINALS
Georges Parent: For a copy of all contracts entered into between Canadian Pacific Railway and the Transcontinental Commission or the government, concerning the price and conditions for the use by Canadian National or Transcontinental Railway of Canadian Pacific Railway terminals and station at the city of Quebec.


OTTAWA RIVER WATER STORAGE
Georges Parent: For a copy of all agreements entered into between the government and any party relating to maintenance and operation of water storage dams on Ottawa river and tributaries, surveys in connection therewith and settlement of land damages.


TECHNICAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICIALS
Mr. MARTELL:: For a return showing the various technical and professional officials appointed to the Civil Service of Canada during the years from September, 1911, to December, 1922, both years inclusive, with a statement showing the salaries of each official, the qualification of each official and the method employed by the Civil Service Commission to select each said technical and professional official; also a detailed statement naming the examiners in each case and the office to which the party selected was appointed.


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE-EMPLOYEES
Mr. BOUCHARD:: For a return showing the names, occupations, salaries, bonus included, and address of all inside and outside employees of the Department of Agriculture.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-ORDERS IN COUNCIL
Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: For a copy of all orders in council passed since the first day of January, 1922, in any way relating to the Canadian National Railways or any railway now forming part of the National System.


GRAND TRUNK-UNITED STATES TERMINALS
Henry Lumley Drayton: For a copy of the agreements made between the Grand Trunk Railway or any company affiliated therewith, relating to terminal facilities or grade crossing eliminations in the cities of Chicago and Detroit in the United States of America, executed since the 31st day of December, 1922.


ORDER IN COUNCIL P.C. 223
Mr. SUTHERLAND:: For a copy of Order in Council P.C. 223 of February 7th, 1922.


NEW BRUNSWICK EXPORT WAREHOUSES
Mr. CALDWELL:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams and other documents, exchanged between the government, or any department or official thereof, and the government of New Brunswick, or any department or official thereof, with regard to the establishing of liquor export warehouses, or other export warehouses in the province of New Brunswick, within the last two years.


LABOUR STRIKES IN 1922
Hon.   S@: For a copy of all papers, correspondence, letters, documents and other writings relating to the strikes of workers in shipping, railway and other crafts in 1922 and also for copy of the opinion of the Department of Justice given in relation to the conduct of either employers or employees affected by such strikes.
He said: This is the matter that was discussed between the Minister of Labour (Mr. Murdock) and myself the last time the motion was called. Owing to the fact that he told me that this would be a very long job, and as I did not want to give any unnecessary work, I suggested-and no doubt the minister has had an opportunity of reading over my statement in Hansard-that the matter should be contracted. Unrevised Hansard reads, at page 514:
For a copy of all papers, correspondence, letters, documents and other writings relating to the strikes-
That means, not only strikes, but contemplated strikes where the department has been called upon to take action.
-of workers in shipping, railway and other crafts in 1922 and also for copy of the opinion of the Department of Justice given in relation to the conduct of either employers or employees affected by such strikes.
All communications of whatsoever sort exchanged between the departments of government or any member of any department of government with any persons or companies respecting the Sydney coal strike of last winter. All communications made to or received by any department of the government and by the railways in connection with the shop trades' controversy of last summer, and concerning the Alberta coal strike in the fall of 1922.
It was also asked at the time that the correspondence between the Department of Labour and Mr. John L. Lewis should be brought down. That has since been supplied on another return, so that that part of the original motion may be struck out.


Hon. JAMES MURDOCK (Minister of Labour):: I think the hon. member for West York (Sir Henry Drayton) has two motions confused. In the one under discussion there is no reference to any correspondence with Mr. Lewis, but there was in another one, the return for which has been prepared for my hon. friend.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I enlarged it; I did not know that that had been covered.


James Murdock: I have written a couple of letters to my hon. friend asking just what is desired. I intimated that there were no strikes in the shipping or railways of the country. He then struck out the words, "and other crafts," and this made the order immaterial; there was nothing then to give to my hon. friend. If he would place on the order
Forest Protection

paper what is desired, we would be only too glad to endeavour to secure it for him.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That was placed before my hon. friend on February 21, at page 514 of Hansard. My hon. friend is quite right; I dropped all reference to the question of correspondence between Mr. Lewis and the department.


James Murdock: I am still in doubt, and I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that you would rule that something concrete should be placed before the Labour department, so that we would know what the hon. gentleman desires, and we would then be only too glad and anxious to get it for him.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is on Hansard. It is immaterial to me whether I re-draft the motion and submit it to you, Sir, or my hon. friend, or -whether the motion goes through on the understanding of what I read from Hansard of February 21, at page 514.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I point out that as the motion asks for correspondence relating to certain matters "and other crafts," that request would include practically Ml the correspondence in the Department of Labour on the subject of strikes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, but we got past that point. The Prime Minister was not listening to what I said. I pointed out that, as appears in Hansard of February 21, I had so changed the wording of the motion as materially to cut it down. If the Minister of Labour (Mr. Murdock) has any difficulty in gathering the purport of that amended motion I will re-draft it.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I would advise the hon. member to re-draft his motion. The motion is dropped.


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, I think it had better stand.
Motion stands.


MATT C. BECKETT
Hon. Mr. STEVENS (for Mr. Duncan) moved:: For a copy of all papers, correspondence, and writings of any kind, relating to the appointment of, and discontinuance from office of, Matt C. Beckett, of Owen Sound, Ont.


Jacques Bureau: A question to the same effect appeared on the order paper some time ago and was answered. Three letters which were exchanged were produced.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I was under the impression that this resolution was passed before, but it is still on the order paper.


Jacques Bureau: I thought I brought down the answer.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Mr. Woodsworth:
That, in the opinion of this House, it is in the public interest that the present Royal Canadian Mounted Police force be disbanded and that there be organized (a) a federal police force for the protection of government buildings and other federal property, (b) a Northwest Mounted Police force whose activities would be confined to unorganized territories.
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: I have just had a communication from the Minister of Justice (Sir Lomer Gouin) intimating his inability to be present to-day and asking to have this motion stand. If I may have an assurance from the Prime Minister that we shall have an opportunity to discuss it on another occasion I shall be glad to comply with the minister's request.
Motion stands.


FOREST PROTECTION
Mr. PIUS MICHAUD (Restigouche and Madawaska) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, it is desirable for the purpose of the preservation of our great forest wealth that the government of Canada should co-operate with the governments of the several provinces.
He said:	Mr. Speaker, I have taken a
special interest in the Canadian Forestry Association for many years, and have also read carefully all forestry reports published by that asociation and by the Forestry branch of the Department of Interior. I beg to congratulate and to thank the personnel of these two bodies for their splendid work. They have taken great pains to secure information on this important subject and I am more than thankful to them for the facts which I have been enabled to obtain in connection therewith. We are told that a country without a forest is like a man without a heart. We have forests in this country, the estimated value of which is over two billion dollars, an amount sufficient to pay our present national debt. In 1922, there were over 4,000 forest fires in Canada, and Mr. Robson Black, secretary of the Canadian Forestry Association, has stated that these fires destroyed more lumber than all our forest industries or our own lumbermen could consume in many years of operation. Further, he states that the timber limits destroyed last year would cover a space between Halifax and Winnipeg a mile in width. I have here a report published in one of the Ottawa newspapers of a meeting held

Forest Protection
recently in this city. At this meeting Mr. W. H. Shapley, who presided, made some remarks in connection with our forest industries. He is reported thus:
Time and money was spent to prevent disease and loss	in agriculture,	laws were	enacted	to	prevent
workingmen being injured, and capable men were doing research work in many departments, but little or no attention was paid to means of preventing fire loss.
Mr. Shapley stated that the annual fire loss in the Dominion was a disgrace to its citizens. Complaints were	being made of	the burden	of taxation,	yet fewwere	disturbed over	an annual	fire loss	of	45 millions and many valuable lives.Responsibility for	conditions	as they	were could
not be placed upon the fire fighting organizations maintained in this country. The fundamental error was that too great stress was placed on the extinguishing of fires and too little emphasis placed on the necessity of safeguarding the hazards from which fire originate.
There is not a province in the Dominion which has not its timber limits and I know that the government of each province desires the heartiest co-operation in order to preserve its natural wealth. I was very much interested in an article published recently on this subject, in its bearing on the province of New Brunswick. I would quote the following:
The annual agricultural and forest crops of New Brunswick comprise about 85 per cent of the total value of all products produced. The forests cover about 70 per cent of the total area of the province, and the total value of the forest products produced averages about $35,000,000. Agricultural products in 1922 were valued at $42,965,000. These two great industries, lumbering and farming, combine to keep
New Brunswick stable	There are thirtyfour acres of forest land for every man, woman and child in the province, while cultivated farming land under field crops aggregates two and one-half acres per capita.
The rural population is much greater than the total in towns and cities. Farming communities in fertile valleys and on rich uplands are surrounded by forests. During the long winter months when the prairie farmer the potato planter and the fruit grower are more or less idle, the New Brunswick farmer is busily engaged cutting logs either in the timber limits of the lumber companies or on his own wood-lot getting out logs, latlnvood, pulpwood or cordwood. Did you ever meet a man from rural New Brunswick who did not know how to use an axe? It is estimated that 10,00 men are employed in the lumber woods this winter.	More than $2,000,000 will be paid out in
wages and board before the annual cut of fifteen million logs will be safely skidded on the bank of the streams.	The forest payroll of the long winter
months keeps the farm on a stable footing in that period between harvesting and sowing. If the reader doubts this statement, let him ask any of the merchants in the rural districts about conditions during the 1921-22 season when the depression in the lumber industry was at the lowest level, and there was little or no work in the woods. The same condition would arise and exist for a century if these same forest trees were burned.
The flames that destroyed many homes, wrecked business and caused the death of many men were contributed to to a greater or less extent by the carelessness of lumber men, campers and others who frequent our for-52
ests. In this connection allow me to repeat the words of a United States forestry commissioner. In a report recently submitted to Congress-which, by the way, was read at a meeting of our Forestry Association held in Ottawa-concerning the damage to American forests, it is declared:
When the iorests fail the lumber business, one of the greatest industries of the country will disappear. Suffering among all building trades will follow; mining will become vastly more expensive. The price of coal, iron and other minerals will rise. When this occurs the railways will be directly affected and the cost of transportation will increase. In brief, when forests commence to fail every man, woman, and child in the United States will feel the pinch. Through past misuse forests are undoubtedly failing.
There is a lesson for Canada here. Experts have readily admitted that Canadian forests constitute one of the world's greatest reserves of timber. That they should be ruthlessly wasted by fire and other agencies is tragic and unnecessary.
While it is true that the government has done much to protect the forests, there is very much that yet remains to be done. The population of the consuming area tributary to our forests has increased fivefold during the past half century, but its wood consumption, has increased tenfold or more. The natural resources of Canada are the envy of the world. To squander these resources is nothing less than criminal.
On reliable information it seems that about 150,000,000 cords of wood, or fifty years' supply, were destroyed by insects in the last ten years in the province of Quebec. In the same province 800,000 acres were burned over in 1921, and only a little over 1,000 acres were planted. And still millions of trees were exported from eastern Canada to the United States in the same year. The Boston Herald, in connection with this great destruction, says: What adds to the pity is that most of the timber destroyed by our woodland fires is so young as to belong to generations not old enough to protect it.
So far, I believe, the provinces of Quebec and New Brunswick have the most practical laws to protect their forest reserves. I have in my possession the Forest Act of the province of New Brunswick. This was passed in 1918 and has been amended from time to time since. I must admit that in New Brunswick we have copied to a certain extent legislation enacted by the province of Quebec. Let me acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, that the province of Quebec with its great forest reserves has given an excellent example to all the other provinces of how to take care of this natural Wealth.
Reports, based on comprehensive surveys, have been published by the Commission of

Forest Protection

Conservation in regard to the forests of Nova Scotia and British Columbia and an inventory of the Ontario forests commenced by that Commission is being completed by the Forestry Branch of the Department of the Interior. The Forestry branch has I am informed examined a very considerable area of the forest land in the prairie provinces and the forest services of Quebec and New Brunswick are collecting data as to the forest resources in their respective provinces, but the information available is still far from complete.
On the basis of what knowledge I have, however, an attempt has been made to arrive at a tentative estimate of the remaining timber supplies in the Dominion. It must be admitted that this estimate is largely a matter of opinion and is subject to revision as new data is secured. It would appear that including all classes of timber, saw material, pulp-wood, ties, poles, fuel, etc., accessible and inaccessible, the total stand may be approximately as follows:
Softwood	Hardwood	Totalmillion ft.	million ft.	million ft.B.M.	B.M.	B.M.Eastern provinces.	300,000	100,000	400,000Prairie provinces.	140,000	85,000	225,000British Calumbia.	360,000	1,800	361,800800,000	186,800	986,500Note.-Hardwood	includes poplar and cottonwood as	
well as woods generally known as "hardwoods."
It is estimated that of this about 560 billion feet is of saw timber size.
Of the species which are used for the manufacture of pulp, there is estimated to be 850 million cords of spruce, balsam and western hemlock and 490 million cords of jack pine, lodgepole pine, eastern hemlock, poplar and cottonwood; a total of 1,340 million cords. About 650 million cords of this is in eastern Canada. Included in the pulpwood estimate is 500 million cords which is also saw material and will doubtless be used to a very considerable extent as lumber.
Accessibility is a most important factor in considering forest resources. It is difficult, however, to estimate the extent to which these resources may become commercially valuable since accessibility depends on changing conditions such as transportation facilities, methods of exploitation, market standards, price of products and cutting regulations. Under present conditions it is doubtful that more than one-half of the saw material and one-third of the pulpwood, exclusive of the prairie provinces, can be considered commercially accessible.
The average annual cut is now approximately as follows:

Million feet.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Mr. Speaker, I feel that this is a subject which has not sufficiently impressed the people of the country generally; there are only a few men in Canada who realize its importance. We have one man in the Maritime provinces who is so strongly impressed with the necessity of protecting our forests that he is spending a large amount of money in a personal campaign to educate the public in this connection. Last summer he offered a prize of $5,000 for the best essay on the destruction of the spruce bud moth. Our government in New Brunswick has a very good system of. fire protection: lookout stations are established on nearly all the high mountains of the province; these are connected by telephone with headquarters in the centres of population so that forest fires may be detected in their early stages and dealt with before they spread. In that respect we are carrying on good work, but that work was started about thirty years too late. I am firmly convinced that more lumber has been .destroyed by fire in New Brunswick than has ever been cut by the woodsman's axe. The destruction of the lumber is not the only consideration; the potential value of the land for the growing of trees has' practically disappeared, due to the burning of the soil. Where the lumbermen cut over they take the larger trees; the smaller growth trees then grow more rapidly, and a crop of logs can be harvested every ten years if the cutting is judiciously done. On the other hand, spruce land which is burned over is hardly ever of any further use for the growing of trees, and that is one reason why forest fires are such a serious menace to the lumber industry.
It is also a' fact that if our forest areas become depleted there will be less moisture throughout the land. I do not need to emphasize that point so far as our friends from the prairies are concerned; where there are no forests there is little or no moisture. In eastern Canada the depletion of our forests is becoming a serious menace from this point of view; our streams are drying up;

Forest Protection

we have less moisture-less rainfall in summer and less snow in winter. Our crops are therefore in danger if we allow this depletion to continue.
The gentleman who offered the $5,000 prize for the best essay on the preservation of our forests has also offered prizes to provincial governments and private individuals for the best reforestation work in the eastern provinces, and in the carrying on of this campaign he has paid out large sums from his own private purse. I do not know what the federal government is doing at present in connection with the destruction of our forests by the spruce bud moth, but I think the Department of Agriculture could very well take under consideration the expending of some money in research work to find out if there is any possible way of combating this very destructive pest. I do not wish to detain the House at any length, but I could not let this opportunity pass without trying to impress on the House and the government the necessity of some work along this line.


Hon. C. A. STEWART (Minister of the Interior):: I think we all agree that the forest is one of the most important sources of wealth that Canada possesses. Let me say at the outset that I am entirely in accord with the resolution. It would be a considerable impetus to the Forestry Branch of the Department of Interior to have the co-operation of the provincial authorities in the preservation of the forest wealth of the country. Anyone travelling through Canada this year could not help but be struck with the very great destruction which has resulted through forest fires. The destruction by the moth is a serious menace to the forests of eastern Canada, but probably fire is the greatest enemy we have to contend with to-day in our forests. If we were to organize from one end of Canada to the other a staff of officials who could prevent the serious destruction annually by forest fires, I do not think it would be necessary for either of my friends to make a speech urging the preservation of the forests of Canada.
I find on investigation in the Forestry branch that we are giving some attention to reforestation, but it appears to me that the thing on which we should be united, and upon which we should spend our greatest effort, both at the moment and for a considerable time to come until this menace is overcome to a very large degree, is preventing the spread of forest' fires. That is one thing we can unite upon, and that is one reason I am glad that this resolution has been introduced. Most of the provinces of Canada control their own' forests, and intervention on our part is 
more or less a matter of sufferance. I have only to say that, so far as the Department of the Interior is concerned, the Forestry branch will welcome any suggestion by which we can work in harmony with the various provinces of Canada for the preservation of the forest wealth of this country.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: I am not so particularly concerned about the fate of this resolution. It is a colourless, meaningless production, dealing with an important subject but in so gingerly a way that the passing of it means nothing at all. The subject, though, is of consequence and of pressing consequence. It becomes more pressing every year and I venture to say that its imperious character has not been realized by the people of Canada, and I fear I must say has not been realized by the government of Canada.
Co-operation is a word that covers a multitude of sins in these days, or rather, covers a multitude of omissions; but what is in mind when we advocate co-operation? The subject demands action; it demands a broad big policy and the inauguration of that policy now. Consequently, we should not pass lightly over a resolution of this kind without taking the occasion to press home to the government the imperative demand that such a policy be evolved.
I did not expect this discussion to be precipitated to-day. I am not prepared with the figures and the data I would like to be armed with, but I can, I think, recall enough facts to show the serious character of the position we are in, and as I do so, I am not attributing the position we are in to anyone in particular. I am not saying that governments have failed to keep up with public opinion on the question. I am saying, though, that public opinion has failed to keep up with the increasing importance of the subject from year to year, and that consequently parliament has not been alive to that importance itself. I lived for some years under the impression which I think now was a delusion, that the rate of depletion of our forest areas was not greater than the rate of accretion, that is to say, that the production from year to year was overtaking the damage by fire, the damage by disease, and, as well, the reduction by the lumber cut. I do not think there is a question of doubt that that is not only not the case, but that it is so very far from being the truth that we are rapidly approaching the end of our lumber resources.
Mr. Bamum, the gentleman who no doubt is referred to bv the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell), has produced an array of statistics and a weight of argument

Forest Protection
that it seems to me is bound to impress anyone who reads fully his production. At all events, let me say this: I have seen no answer whatever to the case Air. Bamjum presented. I have seen nothing, indeed, which detracts from the force of his contention that we are within a short time, and not a fraction of a century, but a matter of a very few years at the present rate of depletion and of cut, of the end of our forest resources. Nor have I seen his contention answered that the preservation of our forests as they are to-day, and in the extent they are to-day is vital not only to the supply of timber for our country, but vital as well to getting the real value of our agricultural and other resources in this Dominion. Our rainfall and the distribution of that rainfall is affected by the distribution of our forests, and when our forests are gone the result seems to be inevitable, that the great body of our rainfall gets off the land without adding that nutriment to the soil that comes from keeping the rainfall for a certain time within the soil itself.
There are many other consequences that follow such depletion. The contention is advanced by Mr. Bamjum that the United States of America is within a few ye^rs, indeed, less than a dozen at the present rate of consumption, of the end of its forest resources, and that Cahada, unless some policy designed to conserve those resources is adopted, is not far from that proximity to the end itself. There has been, of course we all admit, a frightful devastation by fire. There has been an almost equal devastation by the bud-worm and other destroyers of our trees. There has been also, of course, a very considerable depletion by the methods of lumber men. These are going on together, and by present means I venture to say that it is impossible to apply any adequate check. We do, of course, what we can to check the spread of fires in the western provinces -where the forests are under the control of the Dominion of Canada, but though we multiply our service to that end and add to our Forestry branch of the Interior department, and though I believe we have very expert and faithful officials, it is none the less true that as our machinery has expanded, the forest fires have expanded in almost equal degree. Coming to the other provinces we cannot apply our machinery there; we cannot apply our regulations. We suffer from that even in the west. We cannot apply them for the reason that the jurisdiction is under the provinces themselves. Consequently, the difficulties that surround the subject are many and great. They would seem indeed almost insurmountable, and I venture such suggestions as I wish to make with very considerable diffidence. But because I believe that discussion is worthless unless we come to grips with some specific idea that is worth discussion and worthy of consideration with a view of getting to some goal, I advance one. We might place the prohibition of a heavy export duty upon our pulpwood. I know there are objections to that; there are objections to every policy. In the provinces there is prohibition upon the export of pulpwood cut on provincial lands. That obtains in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, the two larger provinces of Canada. I think it obtains in other provinces as well. I know of no reason why, if that is good sound and defensible policy in relation to timber owned by the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, it would not be a reason equally effective against the exportation of pulpwood from other provinces of Canada. That it would perhaps be met by retaliatory legislation on the part of the United States is an argument which is often advanced. It is a subject that one does not care to discuss until he has viewed it from every angle, but from such study as I have been able to give I am not at all convinced that we are subject to retaliatory legislation that would put us in a position in which we would suffer as much as we are sure to suffer by the continued free exports of pulpwood. That is the suggestion that I commend to the government for its consideration.
Now, to meet another difficulty, and a bigger one, I make this suggestion: it is impossible for any province to adopt legislation looking to the safe cutting of our timber, to the clearing of the land with a view to preventing the spread of fire following the cutting of the timber, unless other provinces do the same. For example, if the province of Quebec were to consider adopting the slash clearing policy, and the province of Ontario did not follow in the same line of policy, then the lumberman of Quebec would be put at a disadvantage with his competitor that would probably be fatal to his business; consequently it follows that whatever is done of any importance to the lumber industry in this regard in one province must be accompanied by a like course in another province, or it becomes impracticable in the province that considers its adoption. Then, how can the Dominion parliament meet the situation with a view to the adoption, say of the slash clearing policy in all the provinces of Canada, because, unless we are going to insist, at whatever cost, on the clearing of the slash after the timber is felled, we simply pave the way,
Forest Protection

we feed the flames, and make all our difficulties in the way of preventing and overcoming forest fires in the future. Well, there are two or three ways in which that can be done-[DOT] two or three, at all events, worth trying. The provinces might be brought together and we might perhaps agree with the government? of those provinces to recommend to their several legislatures the adoption of uniform regulations in this regard. I question if that would succeed. It might succeed and it might not, but if everything should fail it would be at least possible for this Dominion, and in my judgment it would be not only constitutionally practical but would be justified by the stern necessity, to make the failure to clear slash in the public interest an offence by Dominion legislation, and to make it compulsory upon all private operators in timber and on our timber land. If that were done, then unquestionably it should be followed by operators upon public lands in the various provinces.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The hon. member lefers to the burning of slash?


Arthur Meighen: Yes, I refer to that.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Does the hon. member realize that our spruce in eastern Canada grows from a tree the size of your arm to trees of very large size, and it is impossible to burn the slash without killing the small growth?


Arthur Meighen: No, I do not think it is impossible, without killing the small growth. I know it grows in that way. If the slash is killed by fire wherever it lies, necessarily that would ensue, but it would be quite possible to have regulations that would provide for the gathering or the accumulation of slash, and then provide that it would be got out of the way in some manner, and I presume, of course, by fire, and thereby take away the main cause of the spread of forest fires in future. I for one can see no way in the world in which we can ensure ourselves against the spread of these large forest fires that are devastating the great wealth of the country unless we take away the fuel of these flames. It is this fuel that causes the flames to spread. It is that which starts them going, and though it be a matter of expense, the extent of that expense is already pretty well known. That it does cost something to accumulate and to bum this slash without at the same time destroying the young growth is now pretty well established but it is far better that that cost be borne, and added, indeed, to the cost of our lumber-for there is where it is going to come-than that we
(Mr. Meighen.]
now should not only mortgage prosperity to pursue blindly and prodigally a policy that is going to leave the country depleted of not only one of its great sources of its wealth, but of one of those sources that is vital to the other sources, without which the main source at all events is of very little value, to our land.


Mr. MURRAY MacLAREN (St. John City and Counties of St. John and Albert):: It is a matter of general agreement that our forest lands are becoming unduly and greatly depleted. There are three causes for the depletion of our forests-fire, insect diseases, end overcutting. All are important factors. They may vary somewhat in degree, but they are all formidable and large factors in the depletion. The depletion of our forests is a serious matter for the country's welfare, not only on account of the enormous wealth that is being lost, but because the replacement of the forests requires so many years. It is appreciated now-and I do not think we need take an absolutely dark view as regards our forest lands in this respect-that general knowledge is now being diffused throughout the land regarding the serious conditions that exist, and what steps should be taken to prevent it. That of itself is something. It has not reached the point where action is being taken to nearly the extent that it should be taken. It is becoming recognized now that the condition of our forests is somewhat similar to the condition of health in the human being-that there is such a thing as forest health and such a thing as forest disease, and that when forest disease occurs our forests suffer to a very great extent. What causes forest disease? There are two principal causes. One is fire and the other is overcutting. Fire destroys a large portion of the forest and the soil; it lowers the health of the region and encourages, just as is the case in human diseases-the onset and growth of insect disease. In the same way over-cutting encourages plant disease. If forests are overcut,, the land dries, the trees die, the high state of health of the forest depreciates, and this allows the onset of insect and lower animal life disease. These are matters of importance for our people to know, so that the problem may be dealt with, with a reasonable hope of success.
What can be done to solve this great and serious economic problem in Canada? I should be disposed to attach a good deal more value to the word "co-operation" than I have so far heard mentioned. And why? Forest lands are the property of the provinces, and the federal government has a Department of Agriculture. This, then, must largely be a

Forest Protection
matter of co-operation between the provincial governments and the federal government, and much could be gained by a series of conferences between the federal government, especially its Department of Agriculture, and the local governments. To what effect? So that they would agree and lay down certain standards-what measures should be adopted for the prevention of fire? How should we deal with the removal- of slash? To what extent should we attempt to keep our forests clean? How should we deal with insect diseases? It has been mentioned that we must look to the federal Department of Agriculture for more assistance, because they have the entomologists who are carrying on this work. The federal government might help us still further in the matter of plant pathology, in view of the fact that forest diseases are so destructive to our forest life at the present time. We have now reached the point where our forests have suffered so severly that we must have recourse to those measures, and we must preserve our forests and keep them cleaner. We might well turn our eyes towards the condition of forests in France; and if we follow the example of French forestry, where everything is carried out so completely as regards care, cutting, fire protection and removal of slash, this will be very much to our advantage. I quite recognize that this is a matter of process of time. When Canada was a new country, forests were regarded, and we regard them still somewhat, as something to be used without any sense of discrimination or limitation. That time has gone. We must now accustom ourselves to caring for our forests as is being done at the present day in France where the forests are older, the problem larger and greater care required.


Mr. E. A. LAPIERRE (Nipissing):: Mr. Speaker, I believe the federal government should at once take measures to co-operate at least with the Ontario and Quebec governments on account of conditions which at present exist in the northern country. The discovery of gold in Rouyn township, which largely adjoins the boundary of the province of Ontario, has caused a tremendous rush of propectors into that section of northern Ontario. Within the last six or eight months, some twelve or fifteen hundred mining claims have been recorded in the township of Rouyn and adjoining townships. During the coming summer, in conformity with regulations imposed by Ontario and regulations imposed by Quebec, a certain amount of development work will have to be done upon those mining claims. Any of us who are familiar with conditions in Cobalt or in the Porcupine country, knows what happens after prospectors have gone into the bush. The slash may not be as great as that produced by lumbering; but as soon as prospecting and development work starts on a large scale, in a timber country, the same conditions are created that slash creates in a lumbering country. The section of the north country in which these mining claims have been recorded adjoins the largest and most valuable standing pulpwood there is on the North American continent, and in its present location and owing to its density, should a fire, such as the one we had in Porcupine in 1916, start in the slash that will be created in the township of Rouyn and in the district of Kirkland Lake, there will be a repetition of the great conflagration that took place in the Porcupine district and one which will cause Canada one of its greatest losses in its pulp-wood wealth. These conditions are being created; we are having to-day a repetition of what took place in the Porcupine country, and nothing less than immediate co-operation between the federal government and the governments of Ontario and Quebec will prevent a serious conflagration in the pulpwood limits of northern Ontario and Quebec.


Mr. W. G. McQUARRIE:: Mr. Speaker, coming as I do from one of the greatest lumber manufacturing centres in Canada, I feel that I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without saying a few words in commendation of the spirit which prompted the mover of this resolution in bringing this matter before the House. We do not spend enough time in discussing our natural resources, in endeavouring to plan ways by which those resources may be conserved and made use of to best advantage for the people. The Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) has quite properly stated that one of the greatest dangers to our timber is fire. I know that is true in* British Columbia. Fire has taken an immense toll of our timber and our trees, and I am afraid it is a very difficult problem to determine the best method of protecting our trees against fire. In this connection, I might mention that in Vancouver there is an air station which is maintained, I think, by the Dominion government. A very splendid work has been done by that station in patrolling the forests of British Columbia. There is an extensive territory to be covered and it is impossible in any other way properly to patrol the forests of that province. Where fires have got under way in the forests of British Columbia it is almost impossible to put them out, and what we
Forest Protection

have to do if possible is to prevent them from getting a start. That is what these men are doing. I think they have accomplished a great deal of good and I should be very sorry indeed to hear that there was any proposal to do away with this air station. I have heard it suggested that in the execution of a policy of economy, this service was going to be dispensed with or curtailed. That, I think, would be a mistake. There is no doubt about the importance of our practising economy, but it would be false economy to dispense with, or even to curtail, the air patrol which has done such splendid work in connection with the forests of British Columbia. We must realize that it has taken many hundreds of years to produce the trees that are now standing out there on the Pacific coast. I am told that some of these trees have been a thousand years growing. Now, if a tree of that kind should be destroyed by fire, and if we have to wait another thousand years-


Jacques Bureau: We will not wait.


William Garland McQuarrie: -until another one grows, it can be seen what a hopeless outlook there is if some effective means are not taken to prevent fires. I have listened with a great deal of interest to what the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) has said in reference to the burning of slashings. I am afraid, however, that in British Columbia that would be a great undertaking. It would be a considerable problem to dispose of the limbs that come from one of these giant timbers; I do not know that it would be practicable in our part of the country.


Mr. KING (Kootenay):: I would inform the hon. member that it is not only practicable but it is being' done to-day in British Columbia.
Mr. <(VfcQUARRIE: To some extent.


John Warwick King: Very largely.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: Should not the province have the right to compel the man who cuts timber on Crown lands to clean up the slashings? He should be made to clean up these slashings at the end of each season and to prove that he has done so. His business is a profitable one and therefore he ought to be made to clean up.


William Garland McQuarrie: I accept the assurance of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. King) as to the practicability of this proposal. Of soiirse, if it can be carried out it is something that certainly should be done. I thought, how-[DOT]evet, that it presented a rather big problem.
tMr. McQuarrie.]
I think we should make every effort possible to conserve our timber wealth because it is one of the greatest assets we have. In my district we are to-day shipping lumber to a great many parts of the world. The business is almost wholly an export one, and if it had not been for the timber industry in British Columbia during the last few years I am afraid that province would not be in the satisfactory position it* occupies to-day. We are doing a world trade in lumber, and as I see it, we have only just started; there is a great future ahead of us. Our timber seems to be unlimited in extent. But unless we take every precaution to protect it from the ravages of fire, I fear it will be sadly depleted. I am very strongly in favour of bringing such matters to the attention of the House and I commend the action of the hon. member (Mr. Michaud) in moving his resolution.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) :: I have been very much pleased to notice from several quarters in the House the commendation of the good work that Mr. Frank Barnjum is doing in educating the Canadian people on this very important subject. Mr. Barnjum is a Canadian who spent some years in the United States, prosperous years I am glad to know, and has now returned to Canada filled with splendid enthusiasm and prepared to do whatever is possible for the promotion of every Canadian industry. He feels a deep interest in this subject because he has been associated with the business for a long time. Everything that he proposes in the way of forest conservation, every movement that can be made for the better protection of the forests from fires, everything that can be done in the way of tree planting, and all that Mr. Barnjum desires in the interests of our forests, will, I am sure, have the heartiest sympathy of the House and the public generally. My right hon. friend the leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) said he had had a revelation in regard to the alleged endless valuable forests of Canada. I had a somewhat similar experience. I am reminded that very many years ago, travelling in Nova Scotia in the southern portion of the province,
I had the pleasure of meeting an old Scotsman who was engaged in the lumber business. He had carried on operations in Sweden, Norway, I think, Newfoundland and then in Nova Scotia, and he seemed to have a grievance. Meeting a minister he naturally wanted to air his grievance. He said he had a great complaint to make, because we were charging him a duty on seeds. I said I did not think that the duty on seeds was very high and I did not think that his grievance could be very

Forest Protection
grave. I asked him what kind of seeds they were. Spruce seeds, he said. As we looked out of the window of the train we saw a thick spruce forest. "What are you talking about spruce trees for?" I asked him. " Why, there is any quantity of spruce trees in the province." In his broadest Scotch he said: "Mr. Fielding,
I give you warning that if there is not a policy of tree planting in Nova Scotia and in this country generally, and in America, within twenty-five years there will be a timber famine in Canada and on the American continent." Well, ten or twelve years passed, and very much of what the old gentleman predicted had come true. At that time he was planting trees. My right hon. friend was substantially, though not technically, correct in his reference to the provincial regulations; and he apparently suggested that what was good enough for Quebec and Ontario was good enough for ' the other provinces. He rather assumed that there was a prohibition on the export of wood in these provinces. That is not technically correct, although in the main it is. Neither the province of Ontario nor the province of Quebec has the power to prohibit the export of wood or to impose an export duty. But in Ontario and Quebec the provincial governments are owners of timber lands. They lease timber lands to people desiring to operate them; and any landlord who has any land to lease can impose any condition he desires on the lessee. So that the fact is that in the province of Quebec and in the province of Ontario the export of wood is largely, though not absolutely, prohibited in its raw state. But it is not correct to assume that this prohibition is general, because one of the difficulties is in relation to private lands. My good friend Mr. Barnjum is enthusiastic in all these movements and he goes further than any one who has spoken on this subject. He attaches great importance to the entire prohibition of the export of wood. Perhaps a high export duty might serve the same purpose, but he insists that the export of wood should not be allowed at all. It so happens that there are lands in Quebec that are not owned by the government but by private persons, and no prohibition	can be	applied	to _ them.
On private lands the'man who can raise pulp-wood thinks he has the same right to handle it as the man who raises any other crop. We heard a good deal on that question years ago in the course of a tariff investigation. At that time the owners of private lands complained very bitterly against any prohibition or restriction being put upon the export of their wood, and they stated that this would be equivalent to placing them at the mercy
of a few home manufacturers. I am not adopting one view or the other, I am merely repeating the objections urged on that occa. sion.
My right hon. friend mentioned retaliation by the United States, and that means a great deal. I am very much impressed myself by the letters Mr. Bamjum has written, and I know he has educated a great many people on the importance of this subject. I must admit that I have at times entertained a considerable measure of sympathy with his proposal that we should absolutely prohibit export, but there are grave difficulties in the way, and anyone who comes from forest districts, notably those in the province of Quebec, where timber areas are in private hands, will see at once that the prohibition or restriction of export would probably create a good deal of ill-feeling. My sympathies go largely to Mr. Barnjum, and perhaps in a little while we shall be able to find a solution of the problem. Meanwhile I think my hon. friend from New Brunswick (Mr. Michaud) has done good service in raising this discussion to-day.


Mr. D. W. WARNER (Strathcona):: Mr. Speaker, most of this discussion has been confined to districts where lumbering operations have been in progress, and there the slash is no doubt a menace. But I have travelled hundreds of miles through forests in which no cutting has ever been done, and there I found the marks of fire. I saw now and again lying on the ground the tranks of trees three feet in diameter, which is pretty big for spruce, and I do not believe anything but fire has destroyed what must at one time have been very heavy forest growth. On the edge of these forests one can see where settlers have cut down trees, but as the greater portion of the area belongs to the Dominion government, comparatively little interference has taken place.
I think the resolution is appropriate in calling for co-operation between the Dominion government and the governments of the several provinces to ensure protection of our forest reserves against fire. At one time I was under the, impression that Canada had unlimited forest wealth, but since going through various forest areas I have come to the conclusion that there is a limit in this respect unless we stop the ravages of fire.
As to placing an embargo on the export of forest products, I do not see that that would help at all in the part of the country to which I am referring, because it has never been possible, so far, to do any cutting there on a commercial scale. But those forest areas are
Canadian Magazines

worth protecting, and we should educate the people on the importance of co-operating in this national work. No doubt considerable damage has been caused by insects, but I am not well enough acquainted with the actual conditions to speak definitely on this point. It is my opinion, however, that in the wilder lands to which I am referring very little damage has been caused by the depredations of insects; most of it is attributable to fire.
I think this resolution will have a good effect by impressing on the people the need of fire protection if we are to preserve our forest wealth. I agree with my hon. friend from British Columbia (Mr. McQuarrie) that the aeroplane is the best means of patrolling our forests, for it affords better observation and enables fires to be reported very shortly after they break out, and that is the time we must get after them and control them. Therefore I think the air service is indispensable in taking care of most of our forests outside the settled areas.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. H. C. HOCKEN (West Toronto) moved:: That, in the opinion of thia House, it is desirable that measures should be adopted to encourage the publication of Canadian magazines and periodicals. .
He said: Mr. Speaker, my purpose in presenting this resolution is to bring to the attention of the House the very grievous state of an important industry-one which is not only an industry in the ordinary sense of the word, but is a factor in the education of our peoples as well as an important agent in the development of our national life.
We talk of the publishing industry as we would of any other manufacturing industry, but, Mr. Speaker, it is something more than that. The periodical press of a country is an educational institution, and in every country where there has been created and developed a good periodical press, there you will find the national ideals more firmly established and the unity of the people brought about in the most satisfactory. manner.
We have a very difficult country in which to establish national unity: we have many racial problems and we have also the problems of geography. In addition to the two chief racial groups, there are in western Canada a great many colonies of people who still cherish the ideals of their native countries and seek to perpetuate their old national customs. Unless we can bring these people

into harmony with the rest of the country we will never establish that national unity which is so desirable. And I maintain, Sir, that one of the most, if not the most, effective agency is the publication of magazines and periodicals with a nation-wide circulation.
In addition to these racial impediments that afflict our country, there are geographical difficulties to overcome in establishing our national ideals and in promoting the harmony of the people. There are the differences of material interests between the Maritime provinces, and Quebec and Ontario; and still further differences of material interests between the Maritime provinces and the western provinces. To make the sentiment of one province known to another becomes a great national service and a great national duty which we should use every available agency to promote.
The diversity of material interests between the Far East and the Far West, in the absence of some means of communication that will bring them closer together, is one of the reasons why there has been so much misunderstanding between their respective inhabitants. I believe that notwithstanding anything that has been said in the West or in the East, there exists in every province a keen desire to assist every other province in achieving that degree of prosperity for which it strives. There is more Canadian spirit in the Dominion, I think, than most of us realize, but it is necessary that it should be made coherent and that it should be understood in the different sections of the country. We all know how proud the East is of the West, of its great productiveness and of the virility of its people; and we know that the West, notwithstanding that you do not hear very much of it on the platform or in the press, has more admiration for the enterprise of the East than perhaps is apparent to those who look upon the matter superficially. But to many it is hard to discover a way for the East and the West to co-operate in national policies to the advantage of both the grand divisions of the country.
It is unavoidable, Sir, in a country with so large an area as ours, embracing, as it does, three thousand miles of territory, that what is closest to us bulks most largely, the result being that local interests in the different sections have more prominence in the minds of the people than the national interests. To this must be attributed any provincial jealousies that may exist. I think it is the duty of government, by just and equitable laws, to convince the people in all sections that their welfare is the deep concern of the

Canadian Magazines
administration. I think it can be said that that duty has been had in mind by every government we have had in Canada. Errors in judgment have been committed; there have been errors of policy on trade questions, on transportation questions and on many other matters, but it has always been the intention of the governments of Canada to serve the interests of the whole people. This parliament must view public questions in a broader way than they are looked at in many of the provinces where local interests bulk so largely. If, therefore, we are to bring the people together it is imperative that all the agencies available to secure this end should be employed to the fullest measure.
Now, among the agencies to promote national ideals and advance national unity, I think the press is the most effective. In my judgment the daily press cannot perform this work. It suffers from two disabilities. First, the daily press is partisan; secondly, its circulation is local, or at the widest, provincial. The editors of daily papers must cater to their respective constituencies; what affects parts of the country remote from the place of publication is treated very lightly or in some cases gets no attention at all, thus local feeling is stimulated and national considerations are overlooked. I am not attempting, Sir, to discredit or belittle the daily press. He would be a very injudicious person who would attempt to do that, because we know the mighty place it occupies in this or any other democracy. But I am trying to point out that the exigencies of the business of running a daily newspaper make it pretty nearly impossible for that newspaper to take the national as opposed to the local or provincial viewpoint on many questions. There is, therefore, in my opinion, a definite and very important field for magazines and periodicals. I am not insensible of the fact that these might show bias or partisanship, but the success of a publisher would depend upon the absence of such bias or partisanship; he must first consider the requirements from the business standpoint, and the danger of bias and partisanship is likely to be very slight. If, then, there is to be an independent press to express the sentiment of all Canada, it must be found in the periodical press and the magazines of the country. Canadian periodicals, which are all too few in number and have circulations all too small, have the ability to interpret the sentiment of one province to the other-the sentiment of the Maritime provinces to British Columbia, to Alberta, Saskatchewan or Ontario, and the sentiment of those provinces, then, to the
East. No daily newspaper can do that; no daily newspaper has a circulation covering the different provinces. This service, therefore, can be rendered only by a virile, profitable and successful magazine press. To bring the East and the West together for their mutual understanding on great national issues would be a patriotic service of no small moment, but it can be performed only by publications having, as I say, a nation-wide circulation. Only by such publications can we ever hope to develop Canadian national ideals, to create a market for the productions of Canadian writers, and provide for those opportunities to use their talents for the dissemination of Canadian literature throughout the whole Dominion. That is a legitimate field for the efforts of publishers.
Nothing more surely conduces to national pride than a national literature. I think it can be said that Canada to-day cannot claim to have a national literature in the shape of a periodical press such as prevails in the Mother Country and in the republic to the south. There is no young country in the world which has so much material for good writers, so much romance mixed with its history, as this .Dominion of Canada. The discovery of the country; the work of the early pioneers who hewed out their homes from the dense forest; the intrepidity of the officers and servants of the Hudson's Bay Company; the wonderful exploits of the Northwest Mounted Police- these are just a few of the things which writers could discuss for the entertainment and benefit of Canada and for the development of our national literature.
The trouble to-day, Sir, is that Canada is being Americanized by the periodicals of the United States-a process which is proceeding much more rapidly than is realized by the average citizen who does not give a great deal of study to the question. If it were the best class of American magazines that had the largest circulation in this country there would not be so much ground for complaint, but such magazines as Harper's, Scribner's and others of the same class have comparatively limited, indeed, extremely limited, circulation in this country, while those like the Red Book, Snappy Stories and that kind of stuff-


Jacques Bureau: Snappy Stories has been banned.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: It does not circulate any more in Canada?


Jacques Bureau: It ought not to.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I agree with the Minister
of Customs (Mr. Bureau). There are other

Canadian Magazines
magazines that may have not so "snappy" a name but have stores .that are just as "snappy" as those that appear in Snappy Stories. I hope my hon. friend will ban that new magazine which I will refer to in a moment.
The adolescent mind of Canada is being trained by a long catalogue of frothy and frequently anti-British and often suggestive writing that should be discouraged. I am glad to hear from the Minister of Customs that he is banning this kind of stuff as he discovers it. This kind of literature is specially favoured in being introduced into this country, and that is the bone of contention that I am endeavouring to present. I do not think that we should continue to allow the mental pabulum of the youth of this country to be the Yellow Kid and Mr. Jiggs and other stuff sent out by the Hearst Syndicate. How can we hope to nourish the intellectuality of our young men and young women by suck puerility as we see in the syndicated stuff and in the magazine and other periodical publications that fill the news stands of this country.
I was interested the other day in reading a pamphlet on Canadian Literature of French Expression by Jules Tremblay, and in it I find this which I would like to present to the House as the opinion of an author of some prominence in this part of the country. Referring to the Americanization of this country through the periodical press, he says:
All our provinces hold certain things in common. One, considered dangerous, is the peaceful; an<l steady intrusion of Americanism through the stage, the wireless, the moving picture shows, the phonograph, the magazine, certain newspaper services, and the book. American ideas permeate our minds to-day. No reason there were to complain, did we borrow from our neighbours their qualities with their goods. But people, as a rule, rather borrow defects, faults, and vices, or indispensable things from other races. Our idiosyncracies are adjudged too slow, and must be replaced by fashions of speech, dress, dancing, and thoughtless libertism in matters of religion. . . . Do you not think that this easy going penetration will never promote the best kind of nationalism in Canada? I bear no preconceived hostility against Americans. I have lived long enough with them to know their real worth. But we do not import too much of their worth. The brand of accessions that comes from them to us is a source of alarm for Canadian unity. Segregation is in the air, not far from the Rockies; it is potential only, just now, but may very soon become actual, if we do not find a strong counterpart; and that counterpart is Canadianism opposed to Americanism. We must shape our own destinies for ourselves, and not for outsiders. Unless we act with a purpose, we are of small account in the process of change. In twenty-five years, we may be Canadians in name and Americans in fact, a fact which may politically evolve a few decades later.
Evolution is constant. Canada will be transformed, with the rest of the world. The surviving nations will be those where the people will have kept faith with their own traditions; and these traditions are best maintained by literature, by national literature.

I entirely agree with Mr. Tremblay, and I quote his words as those of a man who has given a great deal of thought to this particular subjept.
Before going on I would like to quote a paragraph taken from the Ottawa Citizen of February 24. Referring to the address given by Colonel R. H. Webb at the Carnegie Library, it says:
He said that one or two United States firms alone were selling upwards of $38,000,000 worth of American books in Canada. [DOT]
I know that the copyright law has a great deal to do with that, but I think it is fair to say that the taste that is being developed in Canada by these American periodicals is also largely to blame for that tremendously large importation of American books. What I venture to say is that w;e should make an effort to give every reasonable encouragement to the men who are willing to risk their means and devote their business ability to providing a substitute for this overwhelming mass oi American literature that is coming into this country. At least, we should be willing to remove the handicaps, the unfair competition under which the publishers of our magazines and periodicals labour at the present time.
I happen to know of many men who at different times have endeavoured to establish Canadian national- publications. I have watched them organize their forces, launch their enterprises and carry them on until they had sunk perhaps one or two or three hundred thousand dollars, and then be forced to suspend publication. That has been the experience of the great majority of those who have ever attempted to organize a Canadian periodical press. They have almost all met with disaster. There is only one publication in Canada to-day that has a circulation of 75,000. There never was but one that had a circulation of over 100,000, and that one.
1 understand, has recently suspended publication. So that it is not that Canadians have lacked the enterprise. It is not altogether the fact that they have neglected what may bf called the duty of trying to develop a Canadian literature through the periodical press, because many of them have tried, have used up all their resources, and finally have had to desist.
The extent to which American magazines come into Canada is not generally understood, nor is the very rapid increase that is taking place in that importation. People in the ordinary course of their business see the bookstalls filled with flashy covers, but they do not take the time, perhaps they have not got the time, to get the facts as to the

Canadian Magazines
-quantity of this material that is coming in or as to its character. It may surprise some members of this House to know that for every Canadian periodical sold in this country there are four American publications sold; that is to say, that by reason of the handicaps under v.'hich this particular industry is suffering Canadian publishers are able to secure only twenty per cent of their home market. There is no other industry operating in this country that could possibly exist under conditions of that kind, or that could even -get capital to start under such conditions, and the situation for the Canadian publisher is getting worse every year. I have a memorandum prepared by the Canadian National Newspaper and Periodical Association, and it presents a few figures which 1 think it would be well to put on Hansard. In 1912 the total value of the magazines coming into this country was $831,000 and in 1922 the value was $3,122,000. In ten years the volume of American periodicals coming into Canada increased from $831,000 to over $3,000,000. That will indicate the rapidity of the growth that has taken place in the last ten years, and the conditions are so favourable to American publishers and so difficult for Canadian publishers that this increase is likely to continue in proportion as our population grows. Owing to the conditions under which the business in foreign publications is carried on in Canada there has been a growth in ten years from $800,000 to over $3,000,000.
Now, Sir, the meretricious charcter of most of those publications is something that should give the people of this country concern, especially those who are interested in the moral welfare of the people, particularly the young people. They are devoted almost entirely to . fiction of a most sensationally suggestive and generally demoralizing character-about as demoralizing in some cases as publishers dare print. I noticed recently in an Ottawa paper the advertisement of a new magazine called, The True Story Magazine. Here it is. Hon. members may have noticed the advertisements. It has been printed all the way across Canada, and it is a pretty fair sample of the kind of stuff the American publishers are sending in for the young people of this country. I see here the statement " Has every man and woman a soul mate?" Perhaps we ought to have a sole mate, but not this kind of soul mate. This advertisement sets out this kind of stuff as an inducement for the young people of this country to buy the paper. One of the stories they print is headed " Whose Daughter ", and it goes on to give a brief description of the story. It says:
Suppose your own sister turned out to be "the other woman." Suppose your husband frankly told of his love for her, and showed a revulsion to yourself to whom he was married; suppose a love child was born to your, sister, your husband its father, and during the birth your sister died. Would you adopt the child and bring it up?
And so on. Is that the kind of stuff to be allowed to come into the Dominion of Canada under specially favourable conditions? This is a new magazine. Perhaps the Minister of Customs (Mr. Bureau) when he reads some of these stories may ban this magazine, but I submit, Mr. Speaker, that a class of literature such as this should be prevented from coming in, and that steps should be taken to encourage a wholesome literature such as Canadian publishers will produce if they have an opportunity and a fair chance of making ends meet.
I am going to give the House some reasons why Canadian publishers are unable to compete. In the first place the raw materials of the Canadian publisher are taxed, and that leaves him at a very serious disadvantage with his competitor in the United States. He has to pay in Canada for white paper a price equivalent to the United States price plus the duty.


Arthur Meighen: Will the hon. member explain why it is we have to import the white
magazine paper from the United States, when we are large exporters of white paper?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: We do not have to import the white paper, but white paper is sold in the United States at 25 per cent less than in Canada. It is sold at an advance greater than 25 per cent, because you pay for Canadian paper exactly what you would pay for paper bought in the United States, plus the duty and plus the freight.


Arthur Meighen: I am informed-and the hon. member will know whether my information is correct or not-that the character of paper that goes into magazines is not manufactured here, that it is an American manufacture and that the quantity that is used here would not warrant the manufacture in this country. Newsprint is another paper ' altogether and of course we manufacture that.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: The information given to the hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) is not correct. There are a good many book paper mills in this country doing quite an extensive business. There is a mill at Georgetown and mills at other places. Book paper of all grades is manufactured in Canada, but it is sold in the United States for 25 per cent less than in Canada. The same is
Canadian Magazines

true of engravings, inks and other raw materials that go into the production of magazines. There is protection for the papermaker, the inkmaker and the engraver, and everybody else that produces anything that goes into the magazine, excepting printing presses, and there is no duty on them because they are not made in Canada. If that were the only handicap it would be bad enough, but there are other factors more serious than that. So far as the Canadian circulation is concerned, the American publisher has an enormous advantage. In his own country he sells anywhere from	50,000 to	2,000,000 copies
of an issue, it may be a weekly or it may be a monthly. What he sells in the United States pays all the cost of overhead, typesetting, proof-reading, making of plates, engraving and everything. These charges amount, I should say, to about 80 per cent of the total cost of producing a magazine, and they are all met by the domestic circulation. So that all the cost the publisher has to meet for his Canadian circulation is that of Iris white paper and press work, and the freight charges incurred in sending the product to Canada. Once a magazine is prepared for the press the cost of running off a few extra thousand copies for Canada is only a very small proportion of the total expense. He dumps into Canada his excess circulation, and thereby makes it impossible for the Canadian publishers to establish Canadian periodicals. Besides that, many of these publications that are coming in are unfit for young people to read. The Canadian publisher has to meet all this competition.
Let me for a moment put the matter in this way. Take the cost of writing, editing, type-setting, for a circulation, we will say, of
50.000	in Canada and compare that with similar cost for a publication in the United States with a circulation of 50,000 in Canada, and you will see how much greater the overhead is of any publisher who is trying to do business in Canada. As I said before, I know of only one Canadian publication that ever reached a circulation of 100,000, and that publication reached that circulation by methods of puzzles and guesses and that kind of thing. That was not a healthy, normal circulation; but even that publication has gone out of business; it has recently ceased publishing. Any Canadian publisher who is able to secure
50.000	circulation is regarded as a very successful man, but there are scores of American publications selling in Canada 50,000 copies, all the cost of which to the publisher is the white paper, the press work and the freight. I contend that conditions which make it possible for foreign publishers to secure a

wider circulation in Canada of their publications than can be gained by their Canadian competitors call for amendment. Under present conditions, a Canadian publisher would be at an advantage if he put up a plant in Buffalo or Detroit. He would get his paper at nearly 30 per cent less, and he would have the advantage of a certain circulation in the United States. In fact, I know of one publisher in my own city who, a few years ago, seriously considered moving his printing plant to Buffalo. If he had, perhaps he would be in business yet. He did not take that step, and he is now one of the "has-beens"; he is one of those who have had, during the last few years, to suspend publication.


Mr. GOOD:: What would be the effect of the abolition of the duty on these book papers?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Not very much. I think conditions call for greater amendment than that. Twenty-five per cent reduction on the paper would be something, because paper is a big item in periodical publications; but the biggest item is the writing and, of course, that would not be affected. Something more than that is necessary if Canadian publishers are ever going to be able to establish Canadian publications.
Present conditions are unfair to employees as well as to employers. I know of one publisher in this country who circulates about
75,000	magazines, who pays in wages $125,000 a year. If the 1,183,000 copies of American publications that come in here every month were produced by the workmen of the Dominion, there would be fifteen times as much paid in wages in this industry in Canada. If American publishers were put on a fair basis of competition with Canadian publishers, many of the former might find it profitable to print in Canada, and that would add to the volume of work for Canadian workmen. Our friends in the United States take very good care to guard their American workmen when the question is one of publication of books or anything under the Copyright Act. Nobody can get a copyright for a book in the United States until the type is set up and the book produced in the United States. If we followed that plan and required books and magazines to be set up in this country, of course that would be prohibition. I am not arguing for that; I do not think we need go that far; but I want to point out that there is a real market in Canada for periodical literature, as is proved by the fact that 15,000,000 copies of American magazines are sold annually in this country. If we could secure half the volume of that trade, it would mean a large expen-

Canadian Magazines
diture of money in wages as well as making the industry somewhat profitable for those who engage in it. I have questioned some men who are in this line of business, and they estimate that, with proper encouragement, there would be a potential extension of this business to, at least, $10,000,000 a year; that is, this would be an industry expending $10,000,000 a year in Canada. I am giving that only as an estimate; but undoubtedly the industry would be very greatly expanded if it were possible to continue on any reasonable basis of profit.
All kinds of magazines are coming into Canada; but as the present leader of the Progressives (Mr. Forke) said last year, prime objection is to be taken to American Sunday School publications that come in. I have no objection to the morality of their teachings, but these papers are edited for American children. All their illustrations are drawn from the lives of the great men of the republic. All their heroes and heroines are Americans. The whole atmosphere of those papers is that of the United States. We should remember that these papers are perused by very young children. At the beginning of their lives, they are taught American ideas instead of Canadian ideas, and this prepares them, as they grow a little older, to take up with those meretricious American magazines that come in so freely, and to make them the chief source of their mental exercise. Are we not perpetuating conditions that are calculated to Americanise our Dominion and to prevent the development of a strong Canadian sentiment, when we begin with little children going to Sunday school, and follow that up with Snappy Pictures, and True Stories and the rest of it as the children grow to young manhood and young womanhood, until they are fed on that kind of stuff and nothing else and rarely read good books that are available. Their taste is vitiated; they are unable to value and appreciate good literature.
I am not proposing that a subsidy should be granted to magazines. At the present time this government grants an annual subsidy of $50,000 a year to the daily press to assist them in carrying on a news-gathering service. That has been paid, I think, for at least three or four years. Therefore, even if the periodical press asked for a subsidy, it would have a good precedent for doing so. I think that money spent on the daily press is well spent; but if it is good policy to give substantial financial assistance to the daily press, would it not be equally sound policy to remove the handicaps from which our periodical press suffers?
To my mind, having in view the value of developing a national literature and building up strong Canadian sentiment, the case for the periodical press is stronger than that for the daily press.
I should like to submit to the House another aspect of this question, and while it may be thought that I am straining the case a little.
I do not think I am. What effect have these American publications on the movement of population? How far do they account for the emigration of so many of our people to the United States? What part do they play in making it hard for us to keep our young people here? There is nothing we want in this country more than population; the government spends large sums of money in order to get people here, and yet our population increases much more slowly than it should. I think we may trace this directly to the large emigration to the United States. We bring people in, they live here for a short time, and then drift across the line. They would not go there unless they felt that the opportunities there were better. And how do they get that idea? I do not think they get it from the daily press of the country in the particular localities in which they live. My contention is that they get it from the reading of American periodicals. The United States is pictured to them as a land of greater opportunity. Not deliberately perhaps, but none the less actively, those periodicals carry on a propaganda which finally convinces thousands of our best young people, the most enterprising and virile, that while they may get a living in Canada they would do very much better in the United States. When that kind of thing is read week after week and month after month by young men and women it is bound to have its effect.
There is no counter-irritant, so to speak. No publications are put into their hands to show them that there - are counter attractions in Canada, because it is impossible for our publishers to compete in the volume of reading matter provided or the number of copies distributed. We can have no complaint to make if our young people slip across the line believing they can meet with better opportunities in the United States. We know as a fact that they can have no better opportunity there than in Canada, but the Canadian opportunities are not set out in the same striking and attractive way. That is what should be done in this country, and any agency that can and will do that should have the favourable consideration of the government. In fact, we need a little Canadian propaganda; at any rate we need fair statements as to the pos-

Forest Protection

sibility of achieving success in our country. The Consul General of the United States in his report says:
To a large extent the Canadian reader of magazines depends upon those published in the United States, The advertisements in these magazines are perused with considerable advantage to the advertiser, as they keep before the public numerous lines of American merchandise.
I want to refer for a moment or two to the unfairness to the Canadian manufacturer in American magazines being able to present the claims of his competitors so freely and extensively in a medium from which he is excluded. All this publicity which the American magazines afford in Canada to the extent of
1,183,000	copies a month is denied to the Canadian manufacturer because it is absolutely beyond his reach to get it. Space in these magazines is sold on a basis of the total circulation, which runs to hundreds of thousands and in some cases to millions of each issue. Ninety per cent of that being in the United States and ten per cent in Canada, manifestly the Canadian manufacturer cannot get his announcements published in these magazines; he has to pay for two millions of circulation in order to reach 100,000 readers. There is one magazine in the United States which circulates in this country to the extent of 95,000 odd and its advertising charges are $7,000 a page. If the Canadian manufacturer tried to get into that magazine he would have to pay $7,000 a page for a circulation of 100,000,-some thing so preposterous that no one would consider it for a moment. But all his competitors in the United States advertise their goods in this country to 100.000 readers and it costs them nothing more than what they pay for their American circulation. In other words, this i3 excess circulation dumped into Canada after the American edition of the magazine is printed.
I do not know whether I.am able to impress my hon. friends sufficiently with this aspect of the question. There are many articles of merchandise which could not be sold at all without large and extensive advertising; many depend entirely on advertising. And when we maintain a condition of affairs in this country that prevents our manufacturers from presenting their goods to the public of Canada on equal terms with foreign manufacturers I think we are depriving them of something that they ought to have; we are setting up conditions about which they have a right to complain. In this way our own manufacturers are more seriously handicapped than I can describe in their own home market. They have it invaded under conditions with

which they cannot compete, and this reacts on their employees, lessening the volume of output and thus effecting an increased cost of what is produced. If a man produces a magazine in this country and his circulation is only 50,000 he has to charge twice as much for the magazine as he would if he sold
150,000	copies. All his overhead costs have to be covered by the 50,000, and if he had three times that sum his overhead cost would be only one-third as much per copy. That is a very serious side of this question.
I have had put into my hand a considerable list of resolutions passed by various bodies in this country advocating that some action be taken to encourage Canadian magazines. I have a number of them here, and while I will not take up the time of the House reading them all, perhaps one or two might be worth while considering. For example, here is one passed by the Toronto Women's Liberal Association.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Hear, hear.


George Perry Graham: That is an influential body.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: This resolution reads:
Whereas the number and circulation of periodicals publishing immoral and indecent reading matter is rapidly on the increase:
Be it resolved that the Toronto Women's Liberal Association do strongly urge the appointment of a national censor board to inspect all printed matter in circulation in Canada, and that copies be sent to the Minister of Customs, the Postmaster General and the Finance Minister, enclosing samples of objectionable literature.
Here is a resolution by the Canadian
Authors' Association:
Whereas, the Canadian market is now flooded with magazines, chiefly from the United States, which do not inculcate Canadian sentiment and nationality; and
Whereas the large amount of advertising matter in many of those magazines is detrimental to Canadian industry; and
Whereas this condition prevents the foundation of Canadian magazines, the growth of those which now exist, and thus restricts the market in Canada to the detriment of the interests of Canadian writers;
Be it resolved, that the Canadian-Authors Association go on record in favour of a duty to be levied on the advertising matter in magazines imported into Canada and this meeting directs that copies of this resolution be sent to the secretary of the Canadian National Newspapers and Periodicals Association, to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and to the Minister of Finance.
Similar resolutions have been passed by the Imperial Order of the Daughters of the Empire, the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, the Association of Canadian Clubs, and a great many other organizations. For example, the Brantford Chamber of Commerce has passed a very strong resolution. So, Sir, this question has been discussed in those circles which are interested in the permanence and prosperity of our periodical press.

Canadian Magazines
May I point out another thing? I think an examination of the facts will demonstrate that the great majority of the best writers of fiction in the English language began their work of authorship on the periodical press. Authors like Dickens, Thackeray, and others first had their productions published in the magazines of the day. The magazine press provides a vehicle for the development of literary talent, and no other medium so good can be found. It provides a means for the young man or young woman having literary talent to develop that talent under the very best conditions.
Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I want to make a constructive suggestion. Perhaps it has already been placed before the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), but I would like to present it to the House. I would suggest that a tariff be put upon the advertising sections of American magazines. That is a perfectly logical proposal in view of the present tariff. If any one desires to circulate in this country printing matter for advertising purposes produced in the United States he must pay an import duty of fifteen cents a pound; if he is importing white paper he pays a duty of 25 per cent. Here are magazines of from 150 to 180 pages, of which probably more than three-quarters are advertising matter, but because there is a modicum of stories mixed up with these advertisements the latter are not subject to any tariff whatever. All that is necessary to give our Canadian magazine publishers a reasonable opportunity for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is that the tariff now applied to advertising matter when it comes in loose or in a solid book be applied to the advertising portions of these magazines.
The figures which I am about to quote illuminate the situation very much, although they cover only four publications. These figures, I may add, are prepared by the Canadian National Newspaper and Periodical Association. If a duty of fifteen cents per pound were placed on the advertising space in the Saturday Evening Post, the Ladies' Home Journal, the American Magazine and Good Housekeeping, it would amount altogether to $644,760 a year. The Saturday Evening Post would pay on each issue $7,540. And why should it not? It contains nearly two hundred pages, of which about one hundred and fifty are devoted entirely to the advertising of American goods-advertising space that our Canadian manufacturers cannot use at all- and comes into this country to the destruction of our magazine industry. The Ladies' Home Journal would pay over $16,000 odd on every
issue because of the tremendous volume of its advertising. I submit that my proposal is a very fair one and I hope that the Minister of Finance will give it consideration when preparing his budget.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: What postal rates do these magazines pay coming into Canada?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: They come in largely by freight. But the Saturday Evening Post enjoys our postal privileges, and I think about a dozen other magazines as well. The Saturday Evening Post has no more right to our postal privileges than any other magazine published in the United States. Although it violates all the regulations of the Post Office Department, it gets those privileges. Undoubtedly it should not come in here under postal rates at all. However, I am not striking at one publication, I am trying rather to get at the principle involved. I would suggest to my hon. friend the Minister of Finance that he consider this question from the three or four standpoints I have tried to present: First, from the standpoint of the necessity of developing Canadian sentiment, the wisdom of providing some agency by which	the
aspirations of one part of Canada may be communicated to the other, and to try to make it possible by fair conditions for national publications to circulate all over Canada-throughout the Maritime provinces, Quebec, Ontario, the prairies and British Columbia. I believe there is enough enterprise and ability among Canadian business men to establish this industry if given a fair chance; but they have not got a fair chance under present conditions.
I would like my hon. friend to consider the question, too, from the standpoint of the manufacturers. I am not speaking for them alone, but when the enterprise of a Canadian manufacturer becomes successful it means a great deal for the men employed, for no manufacturer can succeed without hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of our men, being able to earn good wages and to maintain happy homes. In the interests of the men who are employed in those industries I would ask the Minister of Finance to consider the imposition of such a duty as I have suggested. In view of the fact that the great volume of these American magazines entering Canada consists of advertising matter, I hope my hon. friend will deal with it as he would deal with any other matter entering Canada for advertising purposes.


William Charles Good: I understand that a good many of these trashy magazines contain very little

Canadian Magazines

advertising. How would my hon. friend's suggestion meet the case these present?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: My hon. friend has heard the Minister of Customs tell us that he has banned some of these magazines. I think that is the proper way to deal with meretricious or suggestive stuff. It has been proposed' in some quarters that instead of a tax on advertising matter there should be a tax of ten cents a pound on the whole magazine. I would be quite as willing to accept that a_s the other, but of course.it is for the government to decide whether or not a tariff duty should be imposed, and if so, what form it should take. But if it is desirable to keep out the class of magazine the hon. member for Brant (Mr. Good) refers to, then a tax of ten cents a pound oil the whole magazine would be the proper way to deal with the matter.


Mr. E. W. ROBINSON (Kings, N.S.):: I do not intend to say anything in regard to the financial points that have been brought up by the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken), but I would point out that there is need for exercising care in the matter of banning literature from the country. We all agree that literature which is obscene or low in its tendency should be banned; I believe the law already covers that. But the hon. gentleman read a resolution that had been sent to him or obtained by him from some Liberal association of Toronto, and I was verw sorry to notice in that resolution the word "censor" was used. If I remember rightly, the question of censoring literature was dealt with some two hundred years ago or more by John Milton in his Speech for the Liberty of unlicensed Printing; if hon. members will read that they will find the question fairly well dealt with.
There are a number of things that I believe should be kept out of the country, but we must be very careful before we put any hindrance upon the free entrance of books; he will need to be an able person who makes a decision in respect to which the life or death of a book is at stake. The danger of attempting to shut out magazines is that in keeping out the poor ones you may keep out also the good ones, in attempting to eliminate the tares you may at the same time destroy the wheat. I doubt whether the adoption of the procedure advocated by the hon. gentleman would ever produce a Canadian literature. We cannot produce a Canadian literature simply by taking steps to provide cheap paper, or by imposing a duty on magazines or anything of that kind.

The hon. member spoke about the magazines failing, about their ceasing publication. The question arises, why? The people buy certain magazines, and I believe that if we had the kind of magazine we should have, it would be bought, and the question would not be asked whether it was Canadian or American. In other words, if we deliver the goods we shall be able to get the price. If these magazines have failed, it is because, as the hon. member said, some of them started a puzzle department or adopted a plan of giving away an automobile for every new subscriber, and so on. That would put any magazine out of business.
I wish to quote from an article I read in the paper the other day in which reference is made to an address delivered in this city by Sir Henry Newbolt. It says:
"You do not build a great literature like a building of brick and stone that can be bought with money; you can only get it when a nation cannot rest satisfied until it does secure it," Sir Henry Newbolt is reported to have said in his lecture in Ottawa. In this pronouncement, there is a challenge both to Canadian readers and to Canadian writers. Is the nation displaying any restlessness in the interests of a great literature?
I wish to call the hon. gentleman's attention to that question. Does he find any universal demand for a Canadian literature?
Not sufficient to interrupt the stream of normal life. But the public is not indifferent. It is reading more to-day, and better. Yet it refuses to buy Canadian literature if better literature comes from outside, and in every department of letters, with one or two special exceptions, better literature is coming from outside.
That, I think, is from an Ottawa newspaper.


Arthur Meighen: Is the hon. gentleman not aware that many of the best Canadian writers, because of the lack of a market for their product here-the lack of any channel for its distribution-went to the United States, contributed to United States magazines and became American citizens, and that that literature now comes to us through those American sources?


Ernest William Robinson: Certainly, I am well aware of that. I am aware also that some of them have gone to England-Sir Gilbert Parker, for instance. We can name a number of our writers who have gone to England and who have contributed to English magazines. But as I understand it, Mr. Speaker, the question is, can we produce a great Canadian literature by banning other literature? Is that the way it has ever been done before? Go back to the ways of Shakespeare and Milton and other great English writers; did their contributions to literature come about by the shutting out of literary works from other

Canadian Magazines
countries? Shall we ever become a literary people simply by keeping out of our country the magazines, and so on, that might be an example to us in our writing? The mere fact that our writers had to go to the United States and to England would indicate that they were able to get their articles published in a better class of magazine. If we produce a better magazine in Canada it will be purchased in Canada and read in Canada; then we shall have an important medium for the publication of articles written by our own writers. I do not believe a Canadian literature can be created by taxing the advertising in certain magazines. I do not believe we can bring about the publication of good Canadian magazines simply by shutting out those from other countries. What we have to do is to encourage the reading of good literature; that is the best way to induce good writing. I do not believe we have in Canada to-day what may be called a Canadian literature pure and simple. We have to create a demand for good books. Why is so much of this cheap stuff from the United States sold in Canada? Because there is a demand for it. Are we to create a demand for something better simply by shutting that out? It cannot be done in that way. We heard our friends the Progressives lectured the other day for introducing moral measures, for trying to put us in a good moral position.
I merely wish to enter a protest against the taking of any action that would prevent reading matter that would be of benefit to our people, from entering our country, I care not where it comes from. Moreover, I am afraid that when you introduce the thin end of the wedge, when you give authority to certain men to decide what magazines shall come in and what shall not, you are putting a power in their hands that they should not possess.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I may point out to my hon. friend that I did not propose banning any newspaper. I did not propose to tax any reading matter; I did not propose to keep it out. I proposed simply that the tariff now on advertising matter should be applied to the advertising matter in magazines.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Mr. Speaker, I find myself in
agreement with the mover of the resolution, the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken), in regard to the questionable character of a great many of the American magazines that come into Canada, and I was very much pleased to hear the Minister of Customs (Mr. Bureau) make the statement that he was banning certain of these magazines.
53J
I have very great respect for the views of the hon. member for Kings (Mr. Robinson), but I believe we should ban a great many of the publications that are at present coming into this country from the United States. However, I do not find myself in such general agreement with my hon. friend from West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) as to the remedy. In fact, I would take the opposite course, and in that respect I am very pleased to find that I have been able to convert the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) to my view as to part of the remedy at least. Instead of putting a duty on the magazines coming in I would take the duty off the print paper coming in. It is hot that to which I hope to convert the hon. leader of the Opposition at the present time, but I was very much interested to hear him state in a previous debate this afternoon that he would like to see the exportation of pulpwood prohibited, or a large export duty put on it. That is what I have advocated every session since I have been in this House, and I remember very well that when I proposed it two years ago the present leader of the Opposition, who was then leading the government, had quite a good laugh at my expense. I am pleased, however, to observe that I am converting him to my view.


Mr. JACOBS:: Is that a good free trade
measure?


Arthur Meighen: That is why I laughed.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I think it would help
to remedy the present situation with regard to Canadian magazines. The publisher of one of the best Canadian magazines told me less than two weeks ago that he could buy his paper in the United States, pay the duty on it and the extra cent-and-a-half sales tax on the imported article, and still get his paper cheaper than he could buy it in Canada.


George Perry Graham: What kind of paper was it?


Mr. MACLEAN (Halifax):: Magazine
paper, I suppose.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: The same quality of paper he would buy in Canada. That was the statement he made. While for a time to prohibit the exportation of pulpwood would work a seeming hardship on our producers of pulpwood, really it would have a healthy effect on the manufacture of paper in this country. We have practically a monopoly of the spruce wood of North America, and the United States must have our pulp. If they cannot get the raw pulp they are getting now free of duty they would establish pulp and

Canadian Magazines
paper mills in Canada, and it would mean the development of possibly one of the largest industries Canada could hope to secure.


Jacques Bureau: They are doing that right along.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I would like to show what is happening to our natural resources, in view of the discussion we have had this afternoon as to the depletion of our forests. I have here a prospectus issued by the Oxford Paper Company of Rumford Falls, Maine, dated June 1, 1922.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Mr. Speaker, when the House rose at six o'cock, I was endeavouring to show some reasons why the Canadian publishers cannot compete with the American publishers in the publication of magazines, and in order to do this I wish to quote from a prospectus issued by the Oxford Paper Company, Rumford, Maine, in June 1922. They were issuing this prospectus for the purpose of selling $3,000,000 worth of stock to develop the pulp and paper industry in the United States, and I want to give the House what they quoted as the large or important part of their assets. The prospectus starts out with this statement:
The company has been a successful manufacturer of paper for more than twenty years. It owns and operates large plants at Rumford, Maine, manufacturing book paper, coated paper, soda pulp, sulphite pulp and electrolytic bleach. It also owns all the capital stock of Rumford Falls Power Company, which owns and operates the entire electric and hydraulic development at Rumford, including a modem hydro-electric plant with a present installed capacity of 31,000 horse power. An ample supply of electric power and water for the company's present and future needs is thus assured. It also controls a large acreage of spruce and fir timber at various places in Canada, sufficient for 100 years' supply at the company's present rate of consumption.
It enumerates the different holdings which they have in Canada and says:
The company's available supply of pulpwood is ample. It holds under lease from the Crown the right to cut and remove pulpwood and all forest growth from a tract of about 1,015 square miles (approximately 650,000 acres) in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia. This lease runs for a long term of years in twenty year renewable period, the last maturing June 19, 1998, at an annual rental of $6,000. This rental is a fixed sum, regardless of the amount of wood cut from these lands. These holdings are virgin forests and contain, according to conservative estimates by experts, at least 6,000,000 cords of high grade pulpwood sufficient to supply Oxford Paper Company for more than 100 years at its present rate of consumption of spruce and fir.

In addition, the company owns the right for 12 years to cut spruce and fir from a track of 55,000 acres in Canada, near the city of Quebec, and also has the right to cut spruce and fir from 125,000 acres additional Crown lands in Canada.
The company has a further large available supply of spruce and fir and pulp through its one-half ownership of Nashwaak Pulp and Paper Company, Limited, which owns in New Brunswick a pulp mill and owns or controls about 359,000 acres of land containing about 1,000,000 cords of spruce and fir timber.
This is the reason I say that I believe the federal government, if they do not prohibit the exportation of pulpwood entirely, should at least put a very high export duty on it. Before the House rose at six o'clock when I suggested this export duty or prohibition of exports, I think I heard the Minister of Customs (Mr. Bureau) make the remark that it was immoral. Well, Mr. Speaker, if it is immoral to conserve the supply of raw material in Canada for one of the most important industries in Canada, to say nothing ,of the vast importance of the forest growth of this country, in order to protect even plant life in Canada, it is certainly more immoral to allow that raw material to go out free and then to charge a 25 per cent duty on the finished product when it is imported.


Jacques Bureau: I do not want to be misquoted. I said I considered the principle of an export duty as immoral, and I do.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I am pleased that I did not misquote the hon. member, and I still contend that if it is immoral to conserve our natural products in Canada by any method we see fit, it is much more immoral to allow them to go out of the country free, and then charge a high import duty on the finished article which our people must buy. I said that I found myself in general agreement with the mover of this resolution as to the quality of the publications coming into this country from the United States, but I find myself at very great variance with him as to the remedy. My remedy would be to remove the duty, not only from the paper which enters into Canadian magazines, but from the printer's ink, printer's type, if they are not already exempt, and every other item of tariff that enters into the expense of making Canadian magazines. It is very important that we should have Canadian magazines. I do not wish to cover all the ground covered by the mover of the resolution; he did it much better than I could. I think we will all agree with him that American magazines which come into this country, not only contain literature of a very low type which tends to lower the morals of our people, but, as he so well put it, advertise American products, boost the United States as a country and, I think, are

Canadian Magazines
a large factor in inducing our young people to migrate to the United States.


Mr. JOHN EVANS (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, I find myself very largely in agreement with the sentiment contained in this resolution, but I am not in agreement with the proposed remedy. Anything which tends to create a national feeling is very much to be desired, but it takes more than sentiment to create national unity. The mover of this resolution (Mr. Hocken) wants, I believe, a duty of some 10 cents per pound placed on Canadian magazines. My opinion is that we have too much protection of this kind already in this country on everything. If we want national unity, this whole country must be put on an equal basis as regards opportunity. Many Canadian magazines and periodicals that are now facing ruin, if that be true-and I believe to some extent it is-or who find it hard to live and prosper-have advocated protection so much that their own pyramid is at last tumbling down on their heads. The protection they have so long advocated has at last made the cost of living and the cost of production so much out of line, so high, that their productions are altogether out of line as to cost with that of those with whom they have to compete.
It is said that nearly 2,500,000 pounds of United States' magazines were carried a year ago by the Canadian mails, and that fact is used by magazine publishers as an argument for more protection. To me, it conveys the fact that there is in Canada a wide reading public, and did we follow a just economic system, that 2,500,000 pounds could be very largely supplied by our own countrymen. Only to-day I received a letter from the Canadian National Newspaper and Periodical Association in which they state that Canadian magazine publishers have to pay from 25 to 40 per cent more for their material than United States publishers, and this, in spite of the fact that a very large percentage of pulp used in the manufacture of book paper in the United States is the product of Canadian forests. So, we are in this country at this time in the position of supplying the United States with the material from our natural resources and paying duty on the finished article from that product. The magazine publishers' association really admit the fact that they are paying from 25 to 40 per cent more for the material because of this trade penalty which we have placed on that product. Were it not for this, it seems to me that they would be well able to compete against all comers.
Senator Willis, of Ohio, is reported by the New York Herald to have stated at a recent
dinner of the American Paper and Pulp Association that Canada can produce mechanical pulp 23 per cent lower and chemical pulp 19 per cent lower than these can be produced in the United States. Why, then, should Canadian publishers have to pay from 25 to 40 per cent higher prices for their supplies of book and half-tone paper? We are in the position of having the raw material; but owing to this short-sighted policy of trade restriction by a protective tariff, we have driven the cost of production so high that we cannot make the use we should of our own natural resources. The Woman's Century and the Canadian Courier were forced out of existence by high production costs, with very heavy loss, I believe, in one case. I would be in favour of giving these people relief by the removal of the duty altogether from book print, and I would move that this motion be amended by adding thereto the following words:
placing on the free list all material used in the production of Canadian magazines and newspapers.
Mr. JOHN A. MacKELVIE (Yale): Mr. Speaker, I find myself very heartily in accord with every word advanced by the mover of this resolution (Mr. Hocken); nor, since he took his seat, have I heard from other members who have spoken on the subject anything that has changed my viewpoint in the slightest. An hon. member across the way objected strongly to the idea of censorship of any kind, calling in support of his contention the somewhat celebrated pamphlet by Milton on the freedom of the press. I do not know that that is particularly germane to the subject under dischssion, but something can be said for censorship. It may be remembered that not many years following the utterance of Milton, a vast revulsion took place in England at the time of the Restoration, and the literature of that age which found expression through the drama, while sparkling in many instances with wit and humour, was so lewd in its nature as to lead up before many years to a strict censorship which barred it from the stage. I suppose most of us in this House have reached such years and, I hope, such maturity of judgment, as not to be particularly affected by reading such things. Many of us probably have enjoyed the wit of Congreve, Fletcher, Marlowe and other dramatists; but we would not care to place them for indiscriminate distribution amongst the young people of the land. Those of us who can take enjoyment in Boccaccio would not care to hanfl over the Decameron to the school boys and girls of the country. So something can, after all, be said for censorship which
Canadiar, Magazines

we also cany on in a very sensible manner in conection with our moving picture shows.
But the argument advanced by the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) presents a new phase of the question. I do not suppose that it is necessary, for me to inform the members of this House that I am a firm believer in the policy of protection as applied to our industries; and here I find myself more consistent in the support of such views than the hon. member for Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) can claim for his position. While he has frequently enlightened the House as to his ideas regarding trade, and has fulminated against anything in the way of restriction in this country, now that he finds himself particularly interested in an industry that is of great importance to the district from which *he comes, he is quite willing to throw aside his principles and advocate that an export- duty be placed on pulpwood. It all depends on whose ox is gored; that is the attitude of a great many hon. gentlemen in this House.
Referring, however, to the resolution moved by the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken), I think he so admirably covered all the ground that it is hardly necessary for me to enlarge on any of his arguments. But I may remark that if ever there was a time in the history of our national life when it was important that some factor should be encouraged and cherished which would have the effect of bringing about a unification of Canadian sentiment and of making conditions better known to our people both east and west, that time is the present. And I think no more important factor could call for support than that of developing to as large an extent as possible a real Canadian literature embodied in weekly or monthly publications.
The remedy suggested by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans) is that in order to give protection to this industry another industry which was built up at the expenditure of a great deal of capital in Canada should be sacrificed. He would remove the duty from paper irrespective of the damage which that would do to our paper mills in this country, giving no consideration to the numbers who would thereby be thrown out of employment, and regardless of the death blow such an action would bring to a rapidly growing and very important business. But the remedy which he proposes does not in fact secure the relief which those seek who are supporting the resolution. It is rather astonishing that members outside a particular line of business, who cannot be expected to have

any technical knowledge of that business, should suggest some remedy which those who are personally interested in the business are sure would be of no effect. It is not a reduction in the duty on paper that is asked for by the resolution. If the supporters of the resolution needed that form of relief they would no doubt request it. On the contrary, they have a specific remedy which they desire to advance in behalf of their position, and that remedy has been well set forth in the resolution.
Now, Sir, I do not intend to speak at any length on the subject, but I cannot help observing that there was some force in one of the arguments submitted by the mover of the resolution in regard to the question of emigration from Canada. We have heard a good deal about immigration this session, and I expect we shall hear a great deal more befor'e the session closes. In this connection I would read a brief extract from an article which appeared recently in the Financial Post bearing on this subject.
Westerners are beginning to worry about the effect that articles in United * States magazines are having upon Canadian emigration. In western Canada where crops and prices are temporarily unsatisfactory and have created some discontent, the articles in these United States publications play up incessantly and inaccurately the doings of Americans and the attractions of United States life. The natural result is that readers want to go where they think life is more enjoyable and they are going in thousands. Many of them are native born Canadians and Old Country people. Letters show they are not finding the happiness they expected.
The rosy picture placed before the readers of scores of these magazines has had its effect in this direction, I have no doubt; and it is rather a hopeless situation in which Canadian publications find themselves. Glancing through nearly every month a number of these American publications, I find in some of the best of them much to interest and amuse me and, occasionally, some information that is not easily accessible in any other form. But I will say that except as regards those of the very highest type, the average publication from the other side which is displayed on the news stands of this country does not at all compare in literary merit to the average Canadian publication. I am convinced that given a fair show and a free field, and allowed to develop as it should, it would not be long before a real Canadian literature could be built up. As pointed out by the mover of the resolution, there is no method better calculated to develop and foster a literature than serial publications in magazine form. That has been found to be the case in other countries and it will be the case in Canada. I am convinced that the elimination from our

Canadian Magazines
news stands and general circulation of a lot of the more trashy publications which are sold in such large quantities, and the substitution therefor of Canadian magazines of the type we now have, would be of inestimable benefit to the citizens of Canada. The cheaper magazines of American publication are incomparably inferior to the best of ours and will not average up even to the lowest standard of publication we produce in this country. I am not dwelling on the salacious aspects of the literature provided by many of those publications, because I admit that a great many of them are tolerably free from that imputation. Some of them, however, which are among the most widely circulated and pretentious of American magazines are full of literature of a very, insidious and debasing type. I have great pleasure in supporting the resolution.


Mr. A. J. LEWIS (Swift Current):: I have a great deal of sympathy with the majority of statements which have been made during this debate this afternoon and evening. I can very well understand that it is desirable that we should have a Canadian literature. But it is a far greater problem to say how we are going to get the Canadian people to read it. I think it would be a mistake to place a ban on any literature that is coming to this country, because the moment you do so you shut out to that extent the light from the people who desire it. It may be that the great mass of the Canadian people have not been prepared to receive the literature that we as a people would like them to read. But even if the supposed remedy were placed on the statute books, whereby we placed ten cents of a duty on every magazine coming into Canada from the United States, if the Canadian people wanted that magazine they would pay that extra ten cents. In other words, they would get it in spite of anything we might do in the way of taxation.
I fully appreciate, Mr. Speaker, that our literature is of great educational value, and that the kind of literature we read will to a large extent mould our public life. For that reason I would be very glad if our people would read Canadian literature. But at the present time many American magazines have a large circulation in this country, and the greater proportion of them are of value to our people. I do not need to mention any particular magazine, but I do not think it will be disputed that some of these American magazines are almost indispensable to us at the present time. Whether we in Canada, even if we had the opportunity, would be able to produce such magazines is open to question.
I have looked at this problem from a good many standpoints, and if the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans) is in order I shall support it, because I do believe it is a step in the right direction. I do not altogether agree with the argument advanced by the hon. member who preceded me (Mr. MacKelvie) that it would be a death blow to other industries if the tariff were removed from the materials that enter into the manufacture of Canadian magazines, because they are produced from our own natural resources. It does seem to me that our manufacturers of pulp and paper, having their raw materials right at hand, should be able to compete with our American friends who have to buy their raw material from us. For that reason I think the argument of the hon. member for Saskatoon is well founded.
I do not altogether agree with the criticism directed against the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton (Mr. Caldwell) by the last speaker, namely, that he was inconsistent in advocating an export duty to preserve our Canadian forests. It does seem to me, whether we be free trade people or not, when we find Canadian business men devastating our natural resources and despoiling our forests for the sake of gain, and thus denying to posterity its rights that the hon. member for Victoria and Carleton was taking a fair view of the situation in advocating an export duty on pulpwood. Such a duty would at least be killing two birds with the one stone: it would assist our revenue on the one hand, and on the other hand it would also help to preserve this national resource.
Now, I can hardly see the connection between emigration and foreign literature. It must be admitted that although American magazines colour our national life to a large extent, yet we derive certain advantages from their perusal. But that reading matter in the shape of Snappy Stories has such a decisive influence upon the lives of some of our people as to impel them to cross over to the American side is more than I am willing to admit. The only reason why people emigrate to another country is that economic conditions practically force them to go where they can make a good living. Therefore I do not believe that merely by imposing a tariff upon American magazines we shall be able to stop the flow of emigration from this country to the United States.
I would like to see Canadian publishers build up a large magazine industry that would offset the sale of American magazines in this country. But we cannot ignore the grave disadvantage which they are labouring under at
Canadian Magazines

the present time. At best they must find their circulation among a population of only nine million, and this limited output renders it impossible for them to pay the high prices for articles and stories that American publishers offer to successful authors. As a result we find that many Canadian authors go to the United States, attracted by the higher remuneration which they can command there. To a large extent we benefit by getting better magazines from the American side. Of course, on the other hand, there is a great deal of trash coming into this country from the United States, much of morbid suggestiveness. But at the same time many people in Canada delight in that kind of reading. Why, it is sold on our trains. You cannot go on a railway journey without a news agent coming along and putting the latest number of Spicy Stories in your hand. And I admit that sometimes after a hard day's work in parliament or somewhere else, when you are tired and weary, a spicy story is all right.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Arthur John Lewis: I am speaking out quite
frankly.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Arthur John Lewis: But I do not believe the reading of this trash is good for our youth. When ' we consider the cosmopolitan character of some parts of our population, people not even with British or French traditions, the circulation of these trashy magazines is not conducive to inculcating in them ideals of Canadian citizenship. Consequently I was delighted this afternoon to hear that the hon. Minister of Customs (Mr. Bureau) is willing to ban any reading matter that drops too low in the moral scale.
I hope that if this House sees fit to adopt the amendment which was moved by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans), it will put our Canadian publishers on the right road to success, and I trust that our great educationalists and others who have the benefit of the public at heart will see to it that in our schools, our collegiates and our universities our youth are trained to read good literature. We cannot legislate our young men and women to read the classics, but we can train them in the home and so mould their literary taste that they will be able to sift the chaff from the wheat and read the solid achievements of literature. It is only by cultivating a taste for good reading and building up a Canadian literature that the people of Canada will themselves be able to discriminate between what is good and what is worthless in litera-
TMr. Lewis.]
ture and select what they feel is best suited to nurture Canadian ideals.


Hon. R. J. MANION (Fort William and Rainy River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to associate myself in a general way with the resolution of the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken). I fear the discussion this afternoon has wandered a good deal from the resolution, and therefore I shall ask the House to consider its exact terms.
That, in tho opinion of this House, it is desirable that measures should be adopted to encourage the publication of Canadian magazines and periodicals.
That resolution, it seems to me, should appeal to every member of this House, irrespective of party or creed. I regret-and I say this quite sincerely-that more hon. gentlemen representing the province of Quebec have not supported it. There is a very fine French Canadian literature of which the French Canadian people are naturally very proud, and I must say I had expected to see a number of hon. gentlemen from Quebec very quickly support the resolution. I regret also that hon. members to my left have made it a question of tariff. I do not think that the tariff enters very much into it. The main objection raised by the publishers of this country is that the American periodicals, being supported by a much larger population, are more attractive, probably, so far as general appearance goes; that they have a larger circulation and consequently a larger income, and on the whole can turn out a more attractive publication, and that they, are pushing out of the market in Canada the admirable Canadian magazines of which we have quite a number. That would appear to be the general opinion of the publishers as set forth in the literature which they have sent to hon. members of the House.
I agree with other speakers that to ban literature is, generally speaking, not the best way to keep it out of the country, though it may succeed to a certain extent. I remember well travelling in Germany on one occasion and almost everywhere on the doors of cars over the entrance to buildings, and so on, the word "verboten" appeared. They were "verboten" to do this and "verboten" to do that, until one got very tired of looking al that German word. I do not think we should in this country follow that line of thought. I am not one of those who believe that we can legislate ourselves into heaven, or legislate the people of this country into heaven. Probably we would have a better chance to succeed hereafter if we faced at least some of the trials which beset us rather than attempt to wipe them all out. I do not think

Canadian Magazines
you can strengthen a child's back, for example, by putting a corset on it from its babyhood; and that is what is too often attempted in legislation. So that I do not believe in banning literature, generally speaking, though I have no quarrel with what has already been done in that respect; some of the literature excluded was spicy, to use the expression of my hon. friend who preceded me (Mr. Lewis), and might well be refused admission to this country. 1 noticed that Victor Margueritte o! France, was the other day expelled from the Legion of Honour for writing a book which was a little too spicy, and I understand that over a quarter of a million copies of the book in question have already been sold in France ; so that it is usually one of the best methods of advertising literature to say that it should not be read. There is enough of old Adam in practically every member of this House-possibly with some exceptions-to induce him to read any of these books. I am sure that if the Library should get a copy of Marguerittes's "La Gar?onne," the rush on the part of hon. members to read it would be so great that it would be necessary to have duplicate copies.
It has been pointed .out here to-day that the value of the American periodicals coming into this country in 1922 was something like $3,000,000. That is quite an importation, particularly when we are endeavouring, or should be endeavouring, to lessen our importations from the United States, if from no other reason than that we would prefer to have our exchange on a basis of par. The following are the six magazines having the highest circulation of the American magazines which come here. They are not given in their order, but these are the pre-eminent ones:	Pictorial
Review, Cosmopolitan, Ladies' Home Journal, Red Book, Delineator, Saturday Evening Post. I should like to ask hon. members of this House this question: If through some catastrophe any or all of these six happened to fail to reach this country during the next year or so, would there be any real damage done to the people?


Samuel William Jacobs: You could always read the Orange Sentinel.


Robert James Manion: I always read it?


Samuel William Jacobs: You could always read that instead.


Robert James Manion: My hon. friend himself always reads high class literature, so I am sure he would read the Orange Sentinel.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: It is good literature, anyway.


Robert James Manion: I do not know that I could always agree with that to the same extent as I do with the resolution of my hon. friend. However, I did not get up to discuss the Orange Sentinel; it does not come into this resolution, I understand. I was going on to say that I myself enjoy reading these magazines on occasions, and I am sure many hon. members do the same thing. But if any of them, through some accident, failed to come here, I doubt whether there would be any permanent harm done to the people of this country. It is true there are very good magazines published in the United States, and if some measures are taken to keep out of this country or to limit the circulation here of American magazines, some exceptions could easily be worked out to permit magazines of the higher type to come in without difficulty.
I wish to offer four main grounds upon which I think the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) might give serious heed to the representations of the hon. member for West Toronto in this connection. In the first place, practically all the magazines that the hon. member for West Toronto is aiming at are luxuries. If, therefore, some extra tax were put upon them it would simply be a method of taxing luxuries. Even my hon. friends to my left, who interject free trade into all these questions that come up in the House- even they, I imagine, who know by now, or ought to know, unless they are much more dense than I think they are, that they are not going to get free trade-


John Evans: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman if he is not aware that the Magazine Publishers' Association itself has made a tariff question out of this matter? One of the grievances they lay down is that all of the materials that go into and are used in the manufacture of Canadian periodicals are protected by a tariff resulting in the Canadian publisher paying from 25 to 40 per cent more for his raw materials than the United States publisher.


Robert James Manion: I am not trying to voice the opinions of the Canadian publishers; I am simply giving my own. But even so, that is only one of the reasons which the Canadian publishers give. I think they submit in their literature that the important reason why their magazines are not read as widely as they should be is that the American magazines have such a large circulation in this country. I was going on to say that even the veriest free trader among my hon. friends to my left would take the attitude of taxing luxuries, and the Minister of Finance, if he
Canadian Magazines

puts any tax upon these American periodicals, will be taxing luxuries.


Samuel William Jacobs: Why?


Robert James Manion: Because they are luxuries.


Samuel William Jacobs: Literature is a luxury?


Robert James Manion: Most of the literature of which we are speaking is entirely a luxury.


Samuel William Jacobs: That is, the spicy part.


Robert James Manion: Some of it, I should say, is an injurious luxury. In the second place, my hon. friend, the Minister of Finance, would be raising revenue. The figures given by the publishers' association show that the revenue resulting from a tax of 10 cents per pound on American magazines or of 15 cents per pound on advertising would result in a revenue of a million dollars or more-and I do not suppose there is anybody who knows better than the Minister of Finance that revenue is a very important thing. In the third place, it would aid Canadian literature, and I think it is the desire of every member of this House to do that if at all possible. Finally, it would help to build up a Canadian national spirit, something which I think we lack. Unfortunately, due to the immensity of our land, due to its various sections having different interests, our national spirit has not been developed as it should have been; to too great an extent we speak from the point of view of the sections that we represent. But this would appear to me to be one of the questions upon which we can speak as Canadian citizens without quarrelling from the standpoint of party or even of section, and we should endeavour to build up a greater Canadian national spirit in this country. All that is asked by the member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) and by the publishers is that some of the handicaps be removed. I do not care very much just how the Minister of Finance should happen to go about it, to put Canadian publications on the same level of marketability as the American publications. There is no doubt we have publications in this country, magazines which stand very high as reading matter. I will name only two of the best known; they are the Canadian Magazine and MacLean's, both of which have a pretty fair circulation in this country, and both of which furnish high-class reading matter.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: The hon. member spoke of promoting French-Canadian literature and was surprised that nobody on this side spoke in favour of the resolution. In what way would the adoption of this resolution help

French-Canadian literature? Does my hon. friend think that the exclusion from this country of French literature or the imposition of a heavy tax on it would help French-Canadian literature?


Robert James Manion: The question gets us back to the sectionalism of which I spoke a moment ago.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Hear, hear.


Ernest Lapointe: Not at all. In what
way?


Robert James Manion: I do not say that this would distinctly aid French-Canadian literature, but if it would, that would be one more reason why the resolution should be adopted. The reason it may not help French-Canadian literature is that there is practically no French literature published in the United States. My hon. frend should be the first, and would be the first I am sure, to endeavour to build up Canadian literature even if it is not French-Canadian literature.


Ernest Lapointe: Hear, hear. But my hon. friend spoke of French-Canadian literature being built up through this resolution and expressed surprise that we were not supporting it. I simply asked how it was going to help French-Canadian literature.


Robert James Manion: I might point out to my hon. friend that there are a number of French Canadians who fairly often contribute to the English-speaking literature of this country, and in that way it would help French-Canadian literature.


Ernest Lapointe: French-Canadian literature in English.


Robert James Manion: My hon. friend should have no objection to that.


Ernest Lapointe: No, but that would be Canadian literature, not French-Canadian literature.


Robert James Manion: I hope my hon. friend always makes it straight Canadian literature, and straight Canadian questions when he discusses them throughout the country. When I mentioned French-Canadian literature I certainly did not mean to offend my hon. friend, but simply to take the attitude of boosting the French-Canadians as well as the other Canadians in this country. My hon. friend will agree with me that to a French-Canadian, Canadian means French-Canadian, and the others are English-Can-adians. I have read something of the people of Quebec and I know something of them.

Canadian Magazines


Ernest Lapointe: I am quite willing to
accept my friend as a Canadian.


Robert James Manion: Well, I am quite willing to accept my hon. friend as a Canadian also, so far as that goes. I do not think either one of us deserves any credit for accepting the other as such. Mr. Speaker, I did not mean to enter into any controversy with my hon. friend. I wish to say in closing that I think the Minister of Finance will be doing a favour to the people of this country, will be doing a favour not only to Canadian literature, but also to Canadian literature of the province of Quebec, if I may change my phraseology, by doing something to foster the building up of the literature which we have in this country to-day by endeavouring to implement the resolution proposed.


Hon. CHARLES MARCIL (Bonaventure):: As an old newspaper man I may be allowed to say a few words on this subject. I am old enough to remember when the newspapers published in Canada had not been converted into omnibuses for the carrying of advertising. The old-time newspaper, which was a very small publication in its way, contained some editorials, a little news, and very little advertising. The difficulty with the modern newspaper of to-day is that it is so bulky and, to many readers so uninteresting. I have been ashamed of myself often in the railway stations at Montreal and elsewhere to see these huge masses of American newspapers coming into the country and flooding the English provinces more especially, for the reason that they are English publications-we are not threatened very much in that respect in the province of Quebec, except in the cities-and I have wondered whether it was because we had nothing worth reading in Canada or because American publication's contained a kind of literature which was not produced here.
In the United States, as elsewhere, there are many things worthy of the country in the way of books, magazines and newspapers of the highest order. It is so in England, in France and in Canada, but I am prepared to say, Mr. Speaker, that there are publications in the United States which should never be allowed into Canada. Whether this is a matter for the customs, for the post office or for the Minister of Finance, certainly some of these publications should be barred from the country if for no other reason than the moral reason and because they are antiCanadian and anti-British. We boast in the province of Quebec, and I know it is not an idle dream, to be very British, British to the core. We and those who came before us have proved it, and are ready to prove it again.
Glancing over the Hansard of some years ago I notice that when you,' Mr. Speaker, had the honour of being Postmaster General you gave the British magazines a preference in this country to offset this flood of American publications, and I notice that from 1908 to 1912, to judge by poundage only, according to post office regulations, the number of British publications coming to Canada had increased from 2,000,000 pounds to 5,500,000 pounds. This was a great advantage to the Britisher coming to Canada because he was able to get his own publications, his home newspaper and his home magazines out here, and it was brought about through what the Liberal party had done some years before in bringing about the penny postage. That stands to-day to the credit of the eminent Postmaster General who was successful in that undertaking. It is unfortunate, for some reason or other that I am not prepared to discuss now, that arrangement fell through. Sir George Foster in the course of the debate claimed that this arrangement with the British post office was not continued because the British post office did not carry its share of the burden, that the rate of postage had been reduced from eight to two cents a pound in England, and that Canada carried the whole cost across the ocean. At all events the arrangement fell through, and that is why not such 51 large number of British publications are read in Canada to-day as was the case then. I hope if such an arrangement can be revived at any time by the Postmaster General, that it will be done, because if I judge the sentiments of the Canadian people we intend to remain British in this country. We intend to make of Canada the leading nation in the Empire if we can do so, and for that reason we want to seek our information at the fountain source and to get from England-I mention England, but the arrangement would also be extended to France of course-publications which are hardly equalled and most certainly are not surpassed by anything in the United States of America.
We have every reason to remain on friendly terms with the United States. Our lot has been cast alongside theirs, and we will continue to be on friendly terms, I hope, as long as we continue to exist as a separate nation, and that I hope will be for many years to come. But I think the Minister of Finance would be well advised-and it is fortunate that in this present case the Minister of Finance is a veteran newspaper man who is in a position to judge of the situation,-to avail himself of any means of increasing the revenue of Canada through the mass of American literature which comes in here
Canadian Magazines

in the shape of newspapers, magazines or otherwise.
These are not essential to the Canadian reading public. I am not in favour of buying the literature of any country if it is obscene, or immoral, or contrary to public policy. But when I pick up a magazine with 20 or 30 pages of reading matter and 50 or 60 pages of advertising-which advertising is used in a way detrimental to the manufacturers and business men of this country-I do not see why Canada should not obtain some revenue out of the advertising. When we are taxed to the limit to-day, in all classes of society, federally, provincially and municipally, we should find some means of increasing our revenue by taxing in some shape or form this method of advertising American goods in Canada through the medium of American newspapers or American magazines.
I am speaking more especially of the city of Montreal at pre^nt. We have now in Montreal English and French newspapers, well illustrated, issued on Saturday, which compare very favourably with the publications brought in from the United States. The advantage of circulation of the Canadian newspapers is that they assist in creating a national spirit, and we are all prepared to admit that if Canada is to continue to live it must be united. Canadians must come to understand each other better and cease to be divided by provincial lines. Those who came before us may have divided this country for the purpose of administration on provincial lines,' but surely the day is not far distant when a Canadian will realize that the whole of Canada is his country and that he is not peculiarly a citizen of any one province. This national spirit can best be created, fostered and encouraged by publications in Canada which are filled with Canadian ideas and Canadian ideals, and its interests can be built up by circulation of its own as well as by publications from the Mother Country. In this country the Canadians have the advantage of two mother lands. We have what is called the Mother Land and also what has been called our stepmother land. However, from the literature of France and from the literature of England, Scotland and Ireland, Canadians can draw from abroad all the inspiration that is necessary. We must build up Canadian sentiment. The most powerful instrument to-day in modern times is no doubt the newspaper press. The newspaper to-day is the most powerful instrument in civilization for good or for evil.
If a way can be found of preventing the flooding of this country by that which is not

helpful, by that which is damaging to it, by that which is permeating the whole body politic of Canada and creating imperceptibly in the younger and rising generation ideas which we should not encourage, I hope the veteran Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), will find it, with the assistance of the Postmaster General (Mr. Murphy). Whatever change is brought about, not simply the means proposed in the amendment of the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans), but by all other means, either through the post office regulations, or by some variation of the tariff, I know that the Minister of Finance will feel it his duty to encourage the effort that is now being made to give to the Canadian people the intellectual food so necessary in the formation of a virile national sentiment, and nothing, I consider, is more important to the people than the newspaper they read day by day. It was said by an old philosopher in olden times, and I think the Minister of Finance repeated the quotation some few days ago-
I care not who makes the laws of the country, if I but write its songs.
If you can succeed in placing in every Canadian home a Canadian newspaper, bound up with with Canadian ideals, striving through its every effort to make Canada what we want Canada to become, you will be giving that house and that family the most valuable of all assistance. Some years ago there was published in the city of Montreal-and it is still published under another name-a newspaper called the Montreal Witness. We did not always share its views, but it was an honest paper, and whenever one entered the house where the Witness was to be seen we knew what the sentiments of that family were. I wish it were the case now with every newspaper and periodical published in Canada. But surely", as between the two, there should be no hesitation, and I know that if the Minister of Finance can do so he will try, in a friendly way and not in a hostile spirit, wherever an American publication appears, to give an equal chance to a Canadian publication, and if he succeeds the benefit to this country will be very great.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I should like to support the amendment of .the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans). It seems to be the only way of accomplishing the end which the resolution calls for. As for the resolution itself, while I will be very heartily in favour of it in the form in which it stands as an encouragement to the publication of Canadian magazines and the development of Canadian literature, I

Canadian Magazines
would hesitate to vote for it because of the interpretation which has been placed on it by the mover (Mr. Hocken) and those who have supported it. If a vote in favour of this resolution simply means that we are going to place a sort of a duty on magazines coming in from outside, it seems to me we are moving in the wrong direction. It is all very well, perhaps, for us to object to certain classes of American magazines. We have some literature that is below par in the United States and we mast confess that we have some literature in Canada that is below par. There is certain literature that does not tend to foster a unified Canadian life. I think we all agree that we want to develop in this country that literature that does foster unity. We want to do everything in our power to develop a high type Canadian literature, but you cannot do that simply by putting a ban, or an embargo or a duty, upon literature coming from other countries.
We heard some strong words here the other day directed against paternalism. I wonder if we are going to submit to the paternalism that will indicate to us just what we should read.
I am rather surprised that the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) should seek to enact a new sort of Index Expurgatorius-a Canadian Index-that will decide for the Canadian people exactly what type of literature they should read. It would seem rather as if, instead of banning ideals from the other side of the line, we should welcome them, yes, welcome ideals from whatever source they may come. We must recognize that just south of the line there is a great population of over
100,000,000 people, people speaking the same language that we do, people who have a much longer history than the English speaking peoples of Canada, people who have had time to develop a very considerable literature, people who have a certain class that is more or less free to do writing, people who have the same old English backgrounds, and to a large extent the same British institutions that we have in Canada, people who to a considerable degree have the same social ideals that we have and, I would say, people with whom, whether we like this or not, the future of Canada at least socially is inevitably bound up. With these hundred million people to the south of us, we must surely look for a development of literature that is well worth while. Presumably from a hundred million people, there are likely to come more writers than from eight or nine million people. Presumably from a hundred million people there are likely to come men who will give us ideals that are
not simply the commercial ideals of which we are afraid, but ideals along all lines which we might well welcome in this country and use to our advantage. Think of the long list of high class, worth-while magazines which are now being published in the United States and which we could ill afford to do without. Why should these be put beyond the reach of the poorer people of this country? If we are to ban literature because it comes from the United States or some other place outside of Canada, shall we then proceed to ban painting or art or music that comes from outside of Canada? I should like to protest against a narrow parochialism that has more or less developed in this country. Rather, if we are going to build dp a unified Canadian sentiment and make life worth while in this country, we ought to welcome the highest and best in literature, art and music that comes to us from the United States and from all parts of Europe.
Mention has been made of our immigrant people. This thing I know, that if we are going to unite all our immigrant people into a new Canadian type, we shall have to be more hospitable to new ideals and ideas than we have been in the past.
I submit that the only practical solution has been put forward by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans). We cannot put an embargo on ideas; we cannot by taxation stimulate ideas or literature. The most we can do is to make it possible for men to express themselves, to cut down the cost incident to men expressing themselves. I would vote heartily for the resolution, if it meant that this House was extending in some other way by some other method an interest in Canadian literature. I rather regret that we have interpreted the British North America Act a little too narrowly and that this Canadian parliament has had so little to do with Canadian educational affairs. I would rather like to think that this parliament might subsidize, if you will, the various provincial governments in making more adequate provision for education. We are told that two or three or four or five and, perhaps, in this province six per cent of our people get through the high schools. If the education of the people of Canada remains that of the public schools, perhaps, even that of the lower grades of the public schools, we cannot very well hope for an appreciation of the highest and best in literature. I trust that this House will pass nothing that will make it more difficult for people to obtain information from the United States or from any other part of the world.


Mr. ROBERT FORKE (Brandon):: Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to take up much of the

Canadian Magazines

time of this House. All that I intended saying has been so well said by the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil) that I feel it almost needless for me to say any more. I could very well have supported this resolution. I had not the privilege of hearing the mover (Mr. Hocken) deliver his address to the House. I gathered, however, that it was the mover of the resolution who introduced the question of a tariff in connection with this matter. I would like to say only this-and I say it good naturedly-I do not see why members to the right of me love so much to lecture hon. members who sit in this part of the House.


Robert James Manion: We are only returning some of your own medicine.


Robert Forke: I suppose they are doing it kindly for our good and perhaps we shall be benefited by it to some extent.


Mr. HOEY:: Ultimately.


Robert Forke: Ultimately. I have no doubt we have some parochialism in this part of the House, but, perhaps, parochialism may also be found in other parts of the House. I am not saying this in an ill-natured manner, but many hon. members have a tendency to tell us what they think about us and what we ought to do on all kinds of subjects.
I had intended giving the quotation which the hon. member for Bonaventure gave a little while ago of the philosopher who said:
I care not who makes the laws of the country, if I but write its songs.
I well believe the truth of that saying, that the literature of a country has certainly a great deal to do with the life and welfare of the nation which reads that literature.
As regards press censorship and censoring newspapers and periodicals that come from the United States, I have very much doubt whether that can be done. It has always been very dangerous when any set of men have undertaken to say what a people should or should not read. I certainly agree with the sentiment that nothing anti-British or antiCanadian should be allowed to come into this country, if we can possibly prevent its coming, and anything that can be done in that direction would, I am sure, receive my hearty support.
One thing that struck me during this debate was the remark that has been made so often that Canada is such a small country,-a country with only 9,000,000 people,-that it cannot expect to have any great literature.
I wonder if those who make such statements

have taken into account the fact that the grandest literature that the world has yet known was written by the natives of small countries. England was a very small country as regards population when Shakespeare wrote his immortal plays. Dante was not a native of the Empire of Germany, but of a very small state; and I hope hon. members will not think I am too bold in mentioning the fact that my own native country gave birth to Robert Burns. Much as we may regret the fact, it is not because we are a small nation, a small people, that no great writer of literature has yet appeared. I think he is coming. He will come some day, perhaps, under very humble circumstances and from a place where we never looked for him, not from learning, not from wealth; but from native ability and genius will come the great literature of Canada.
I have nothing to say against American magazines. I want to mention just this as I go along-it has nothing to do with the argument-as regards reading trashy stuff, perhaps the House will excuse my egotistical way of talking when I say I do not think I have read much trashy stuff for a number of years; but after being in this House and listening to speeches I felt an inclination to buy something trashy and perhaps spicy and read it, by way of change, as a setoff to the many speeches we have been listening to, my own included. I have nothing to say against American literature. I agree with the sentiments expressed by the member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil). If we could get some British publications we should have the very best reading and we could delve into the deeps of the best literature and find something worth while. It may not be uninteresting for me to remark that this very day at lunch I was discussing with my desk mate (Mr. Hoey) certain articles in Hibbert's Journal, a magazine of the highest class. I mention this merely to let hon. members know that sometimes Progressives do read what is worth while.
Let me say a few words in regard to our national spirit. I remember well when I came to this country forty years ago that it struck me as rather strange to hear people coming into the province of Manitoba always speaking of particular provinces, Quebec, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and so on. The words "Canada" and "Canadian" did not seem to be in use at all. I have noticed during recent years, however, and more so since the Great War, a striking growth in the Canadian national spirit; and, whatever may be said in the House sometimes in the course of debate,

Canadian Magazines
I believe that there is undoubtedly a Canadian national spirit among our people from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Whatever may be our differences, and although we may perhaps speak from a sectional point of view at times because our material interests lie in that direction, I do not think we are forgetting our birthright as Canadian citizens. All of us, I think, are willing to subscribe to a Canadian citizenship. I trust that in the years to come that feeling will grow and that our children will rise up with that pride in their nationality that they should feel.
I do not like introducing personal affairs into a debate, but as most hon. gentlemen know, I was not born a Canadian citizen. This fact notwithstanding, I am always proud to hear my children affirm their Canadian citizenship, although perhaps they are as ready to declare that their father is Scotch. I do not hear any one of them, however, say he is Scotch; they are Canadians all. So that one generation does the trick, so to speak, and there is no danger of any of our young people forgetting that they are Canadians.
I might say a word or two also in regard to our foreign population. I think sometimes we speak too disparagingly of those people who come from other countries and make their home in Canada. I had occasion while doing some public work in Winnipeg once to come into very close communication with a lady who superintended the children's hospital in the northern part of Winnipeg, and she said that the Canadian people in that city had a great deal to learn from the foreign population in the art of music and the entertainment that could be derived from that pleasurable source. The people who have a taste and a tafent for .music are well worth while and will in time make really good citizens.
Let me say once again that I have nothing to say against the United States. I believe that the future welfare of the world is to a very large extent bound up in the future of this North American continent. We find today in Europe trouble and distress, sorrow, hatred and envy everywhere. I do not suppose that the people over there are any better or any worse than we are. But we are placed in that position to-day that we can give a lead to the rest of the world, and I believe that this can be brought about by a perfect unity between the great nation to the south of us and our own Canadian people. I do not want it to be thought for a moment that I have anything but the most kindly feeling for the people of the United States. It seems to me that every effort should be made to develop that Canadian national spirit of which I have spoken. If the mover of the resolution-had been content to introduce it as it stands on the order paper I do not think I should have had any hesitation in supporting it. In regard to its bearing on the tariff I find that the Canadian Authors' Association makes this statement:
Canadian magazine and periodical publishers must pay duty on considerable equipment which they bring in from the United States and which is not made in Canada.
At least the mover of the amendment is willing that they should get that advantage by removing all restrictions on any materials they require for carrying on their business in Canada. I have no doubt that Canada can produce just as good magazines as are published in the United States, and I can realize, too, that they are working under very great difficulties. My sympathies are all with the publishers of Canadian magazines, and I only wish that something could be done to render their business profitable and enable them to produce magazines that would be read by the Canadian people. It has already been said that you cannot legislate people into reading good literature. I admit the truth of that dictum. Nearly everyone will pass through the stage of reading light and easily read literature until he acquires a taste for something better; and once having acquired that taste he will never go back to the trashy stuff. Once a man has got to know what is worth while in life and has learnt the secret of true living it is not likely that he will spend his time in the pursuit of what is unworthy. I have been wondering in these days when reading current literature why it is that we never get to-day the literature that is likely to last through the coming years. The best selling novels are read to-day, and to-morrow are forgotten and pass away. Why is it that today you find the novels of Sir Walter Scott and Charles Dickens still standing their ground and read by countless hundreds and thousands? There must be some reason. I do not know what the explanation is, but such is the fact. Everybody will agree that no matter how popular a novel may be to-day, in five years it will almost be forgotten. We are getting no literature that will live through the ages. It seems almost a bold thing to say, but it appears to me that the world has become so materialistic, and is looking so much to the almighty dollar, that we are not getting the literature that we should expect. It seems perhaps a little bold on my part to criticize literature, but I am stating honestly the view I have.
Reference has been made to the Montreal Witness, which I believe to be one of the most

Canadian Magazines

honest papers we have in the Dominion of Canada. I am not going to say anything about the Orange Sentinel. I get it all the time through the kindness of my hon. friend (Mr. Hocken), for I have a fair idea from whom it comes. I read it and enjoy it and I hope I am benefited by it. At the same time I might say a word in regard to the Witness. It has been in my household for the last thirty years and I am ready to make the statement that I have been greatly benefited thereby, because I know that, although I may not agree with what it says in all its editorials, it at least says what it .thinks and believes to be true. Now, I could support either the resolution or the amendment; it seems to me it does not make very much difference. But I think perhaps it is best to accept the amendment. The hon. member for Bonaventure took the wisest view when he suggested that the government use every endeavour to give Canadian publications all the advantage that could possibly be afforded and to encourage the reading of good Canadian literature.


Mr. T. G. McBRIDE (Cariboo):: Mr. Speaker, it was not my intention to participate in this debate, but it seems to me one phase of the subject has not been touched on yet. Before I left the West I attended a meeting of business men who were consulting one another as to how they could reduce the cost of living, and, among other things discussed, they spoke of the cost of advertising. One Vancouver business firm stated that their advertising cost them as high as 7 per cent of their turnover. Another firm stated that they could not afford to reduce their advertising so long as American journals were circulating on the Canadian side and carrying so much advertising. The manager of this firm, which sold boots and shoes, said that the advertising in these American journals had a great effect on the Canadian people, inducing them to buy the goods thus advertised. Now, if there is anything Canada wants particularly at the present time it is a reduced cost of living, and if a tariff on these American magazines will reduce the cost of living in this country, then I say it is the duty of this government to impose such a duty as will keep them out.


William Stevens Fielding: The resolution of the hon. member
for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) is brief and quite simple. It expresses-shall I say-a pious hope, perhaps he will prefer if I say a patriotic hope, that we may all be able to encourage Canadian magazines and periodi-

cals. That is a sentiment which we can all subscribe to, and I want to vote for the resolution. But the moment we undertake to define the method by which this condition is to be brought about, we shall probably be divided in opinion, as the discussion has already shown. For the resolution itself I think we might all vote; I am sorry the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans) has not given us a chance to vote for it as it stood on the Order Paper. True, it is very general, it may even be said to be very vague in its terms, but a resolution of this type, even though it be not specific, yet serves a good purpose in opening up such a general discussion as we have had this afternoon.
As I say, I am sorry the hon. member for Saskatoon has interposed his amendment. I regret to say that I am obliged to vote against it, and I hope the House will not adopt it. If free trade were part of our general tariff policy his amendment would be all right. But it is rather broad in its scope. He is going to place upon the free list quite a lot of things -paper, type, ink, presses, folders and a large list of goods now dutiable to a greater or less extent. Well now, the desire to relieve the press of some of its burdens is one that may appeal to our sympathies, but if you place those articles on the free list you may do very great injustice in other quarters. For example, take the item of paper. Without discussing whether or not paper should be protected, there is a duty on paper. If you strike that duty off you are putting the paper manufacturers of the country under an unexpected competition, and they will be able to say justly, " While you are having free trade in the thing we make, you are leaving us subject to duties on many of the things we use in our production." If you are going to strike out a very few items in the tariff which stand alone, it will be found in most cases that each item has some relation near or remote to some other item. Therefore if you make all the items covered by the amendment free, you are imposing a very unfair condition on the paper makers, the type makers and all the other manufacturers concerned.
I am sorry the amendment is made part of the resolution. The latter is based on a sentiment which I rather like, but I do not want to do any injustice even to the protected paper maker. I think the duties in the tariff to-day in relation to the press are not ungenerous, and I do not think the press has much reason to complain. At all events, while I would have pleasure in voting for the resolution of my hon. friend from West Tor-

o unuiiiuu ivi uyuzints
onto (Mr. Hocken) for, I repeat, it expresses an encouraging sentiment, I do not think the House ought to accept the amendment of my hon. friend from Saskatoon.
Right hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition): I was about to speak before the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) rose in the hope that I might in some way influence his view. I have not very often been successful in that undertaking; probably I would not have been to-night.
I will ask the House to bear with me a very few minutes while I state with conciseness why I shall support the resolution in its original form and vote against the amendment. In the first place, let me say very frankly that I shall vote for the resolution in its original form, not because it is a mere expression of pious or patriotic hope. I shall vote for it because the mover (Mr.- Hocken) embodies in his resolution, and in the excellent speech he made in its support, specific, definite, understandable means by which the encouragement looked for in the resolution is to be given. I do not see much value in academic discussions urging the government to find some way of doing something good, unless we have something proposed by means of which that goal is to be reached.
The mover of the resolution has proposed one of two ways. He proposes a ten cents per pound duty on imported magazines, or a fifteen cents per pound duty on the advertising matter contained in such magazines. In my judgment one of those methods or a similar method is feasible. I do not wish to get off into the safety channel of the term "similar method" at all; I believe either of those methods is the right method and will bring the desired result, and I do not think that any other suggestion made in this debate will bring it about. I* venture to offer my reasons for that conclusion.
In the first place, I do not regard this as a question of encouraging good literature or bad literature, looked at from a moral standpoint. I do not say that that is not an important question. I believe it is. I do believe that the government has a duty in the way of discouraging, indeed banning, bad literature from a moral standpoint; but the way to do that is to ban it, and the government now has the power. That power has been exercised under previous governments; I have no reason to say that it is not being exercised under this government; but if it is not being exercised it ought to be exercised. If we admit the principle that all literature should be submitted to everybody for perusal, and simply let that policy take its effect, it
will carry us to lengths which, if described, no hon. member would be prepared to go.
The only extent to which the quality of the literature to be encouraged enters into this question is this: By a policy of encouraging Canadian literature by the means suggested would we be likely to get better literature from the moral standpoint; or from the Canadian standpoint? I think we would be likely to get better literature from both. I think it would be better from the moral standpoint for the simple reason that in a country like Canada of a sparse highly rural population, the general average of literature that will appeal to the people will probably be better than in a great cosmopolitan nation of the immensity of the United States. I think that may be concluded without assuming to ourselves any superior moral attributes. That we will get a more Canadian literature goes without question ,and therein is the principal subject that we have to discuss.
Then, the question comes: Is it better to have in this Dominion a thriving periodical monthly magazine industry, or is it not? Secondly, if it is, can it be done under present conditions? Can it be done without some of the means suggested by the mover of this resolution? Now I address myself to those questions.
I first of all want to affirm and press home to the government with all the emphasis in my power that this class of Canadian industry is as important as any other class of industry in this Dominion; that it is not only important that we do have a Canadian monthly periodical publication, but that it is so important that the necessity of any other single industry pales into insignificance compared to it. Now, why is it so important? Well, in the first place I believe the foundation as a propagator of opinions in a country to-day is the periodical literature. I believe that in the United States, in Great Britain, as well as in other countries, the editorial writer today does not occupy the same sphere of influence relatively that he did in years gone by; in the United States particularly and in England to a lesser degree his place has been taken by the magazine writer, by the contributor to the periodical literature of the countiy. There is disseminated in the most thorough and most forcible way, and in a manner that causes them to take root in the minds of people, principles of public policy, and public thinking, and these things take their flow from the writers in the periodical press rather than from the editorial writer as in days gone by I do not minimize the influence of editorial writing in the Canadian newspaper, but I do

Canadian Magazines

believe that the influence of the magazine writer has grown immensely in comparison. Very well; the magazine, then, the periodical paper, is of importance in any country. It is of especial importance in our own country, and I proceed to give the reasons why I think so.
We are peculiarly situated in this Dominion. We are as yet a small country. If we were a small country, though, as England was a small country in the days of Shakespeare, then the reasons that make it necessary for us to adopt special means would not be present; but we are not a small country in that sense at all. England in the time of Shakespeare was the' only English speaking country in the world. England had no competition, had no inflow of outside literature occupying the time and attention of her people. England had one language and one alone; the other countries around had their languages, consequently what market there was for the writings of Shakespeare, on the stage and in the printed paper, was virtually reserved for him and for his contemporaries.


Robert Forke: May I ask the right hon. gentleman a question? He does not imagine that we have a Shakespeare in Canada today who is silent because of the great nation to the south?


Arthur Meighen: 
William Charles Good: What is the duty on magazines entering the United States? I ask for information.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know, but for
the purposes of my argument we can assume it is nothing at all. Why would our magazines be bought in the United States? Our magazines catering to Canadian circulation naturally are concerned with subjects of peculiar interest to Canada. American magazines are concerned with subjects of peculiar interest to the United States. Consequently, American magazines for that reason would have a tremendous advantage over ours in their own country, and, of course, they carry American advertisements too. There is every reason in the world why they would have that advantage. The same case prevails here as prevails everywhere else. The Americans can attain to a tremendously larger area of business and, as a consequence, unless we are given some advantage in the Canadian market the American is in a position to swamp the Canadian market and keep out of business his Canadian competitor in the magazine business almost altogether. Why is it after all these years that we have so few Canadian magazines? It has simply been because the advantage of the American competitor has been such, year after year, that he has invaded the Canadian domain, got his advertising over here, his literature over here, and made his sales over here. He has invaded more and more as time went on, and now we have less and less Canadian periodical literature and more and more American periodical literature. Before I leave the duty question, let me say this. The hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) said that there was a duty on pulp coming from the United States, and, as I understood him that pulp had to go-first from Canadian mills to the United States, then be re-exported to this country, and that after being shipped to the United States it could be bought more cheaply than it could be bought from the Canadian manufacturer. What I say is this: If the Canadian manufacturer is discriminating against the Canadian consumer, there is a remedy in the hands of the government, and the government should not hesitate a day to put that remedy into effect. Of course, there are differences that could legitimately be taken into account, in the quantity purchased, for instance. If large purchases are made, probably a smaller purchase price might be justified; but for smaller purchases, if the American is given the advantage at all, the government has power under the law to take the duty off and the government ought to bring the Canadian manufacturer to terms by just that method. There
Canadian Magazines

i3 no excuse for discriminating against the Canadian consumer. I am not saying on my icsponsibility that that is being done. I can hardly believe that it is. I can hardly understand how it can be the fact. But it is the duty of the government to ascertain if it is the fact, and if there is discrimination, then the government should apply the remedy. Because there is abuse which it is in the power of the government to remedy under the law of the land, that is no reason why the principle itself should be removed.
Very well. Because of wholly dissimilar conditions there is no possibility of the Canadian magazine thriving as compared with the American magazine unless there is an advantage given in this country to the Canadian publisher. Why is it of extraordinary importance that this be done? It is for two reasons: First of all, magazine publishing is an industry the same as any other. It is entitled in my judgment to be treated the same as any other industry: it is entitled to the same advantage as any other industry in this country, the advantage in the home market over that enjoyed by its competitor in another country, for the sake of the men employed in the industry and in allied industries. In a word, in order that we may have it as an industry, it has the same claim as any other industry.
But that is not the major reason. There is a reason that appertains to this industry that has no relation to other industries at all. The magazine industry is one that contributes to the building up of Canadian spirit and Canadian national sentiment, and why should we apply our protective system to the manufacturer of cart wheels and screws and nails and Ford cars, and not apply it to the production of periodical literature in this country, is more than I can understand-and as I make that statement I make no particular attack or indictment against any government in particular. It seems to me that the reasons that apply to periodical monthly or weekly literature are powerful one hundredfold over those that apply to any other industry whatever.


Robert Alexander Hoey: I think the hon. member is perfectly logical in the position he takes. Why has not this protection been extended to this industry before?


Arthur Meighen: I do not think I can give an adequate answer, but I will say this. I am not making this as an attack, as I stated before, on any party or any government. Under the late government the sale price of paper was entirely controlled until the courts declared that we had not power to exercise
fMr. Meighen.]
that control. That control existed for years, and I am pretty sure I am right in saying that under that control an advantage 10 p.m. was given to the Canadian consumer.
As a consequence, there would be an advantage there. Of that I speak with some diffidence, but if it will be helpful in any way to the hon. member I will be prepared for the sake of argument to admit that the late government should have given an advantage to Canadian periodical publications and did not. I am inclined to think though that through the greater period of its existence it did. I was emphasizing the importance of giving something in the way of fair treatment at least, and you must give the advantage in the Canadian market if you are going to give fair treatment to Canadian periodical literature. What is going to be the result-yes, what to-day is the result of the consumption of American publications in this country in the degree that they are being consumed now? Why, by the character of the literature of the country, by the spirit that animates that literature the whole mind of the nation is nourished and supported. What is going to be the consequence if the child in Canada reads the publications of Atlanta, Georgia, reads the publications of New York, reads all these literary productions that are inspired by American spirit and American sentiment, and makes that the mental nourishment of his life? If that is all right, if that is necessary on this alleged free trade or free literature principle, it would necessarily be right that they should also have free access to our schools. Why not let them also on the same principle provide the literature for the children of our schools, make our readers, sell them on a commercial basis? That is aD extreme illustration.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.


Arthur Meighen: But only by that can
one make oneself clear to some hon. gentlemen. In a word, if government is to exercise no control whatever over literature, it follows that we must let the American publisher right into the schoolroom and let him there feed the mind of the young on just as free a basis as would the Canadian writer and publisher.
Now what I want to urge upon the government is this: we should make certain that the young writer of this country, whose thoughts are Canadian and British, gets an avenue for his energies and a reward for his efforts in this Canada of ours. We have too many of them across the line. I can name them on the fingers of my hand now. I know men who went through college with me who

Canadian Magazines
to-day are eminent in literary work, and I do not think I know one who is not a citizen of the United States. These men get access to these widely circulating American publications that can pay far more than any little struggling magazine in this country can pay. Put the Canadian magazine in a position where it will get the same circulation	as that now enjoyed in Canada
by the American magazine, give it the body of that circulation, and then it will be able to offer inducements to the young aspiring Canadian writer; there will be something to keep him in his own Dominion and the mind of the Canadian people will be fed on literature produced in Canada and animated by the spirit and aspirations of this country. Surely that is of vital importance to us.
There is one thing I know that will meet with the approval of hon. members to my left. On this question of the British preference I am ready to go the whole extent of their 50 per cent,-yes, I will double that preference. I am willing to make the preference to British magazines 100 per cent, and I will tell hon. members why. This is a British country, and I cannot speak in too high terms of the excellent speech in support of the resolution made by the hon. member for Bon-aventure (Mr. Marcil) and of the good British sentiments that he expressed. He made as sound an argument for protection, without mentioning the word " protection " of course as I have ever heard in this House. There is no reason at all why we need protect Canadian literature against British literature. The more British literature circulates here the better. It will never circulate to the serious detriment of Canadian publications. It has too far to come and is too old when it reaches us. The difficulty will be, and is to-day, that we do not get enough of good British magazine literature in this Dominion, and Britain has excellent literature of this character in her publications. The difficulty is we do not get enough of it. We should have no prohibition or discouragement whatever of that literature, and should not interfere with the access of that character of literature to Canada. The prohibition of the Atlantic itself is quite sufficient, because literature, even periodical monthly literature, that is a few weeks old is usually too old for very wide consumption. However, having regard to the necessity for the spread of British thought and British spirit through this country, we are not going to get too much of it, though we put no ban on it, though we place no duty on it and though we have no obstacle at all in the way of it reaching Canada.
What we need to do is to give the Canadian competitor here a chance against the man who really to-day is destroying his business and preventing its success for years, and who is stifling the production of Canadian literature, and we need to do that now. How can that be done? I think I have shown it cannot be done by the method suggested by the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans). That would lead us to extremes to which we cannot go, and if we went to those extremes we would be just where we commenced, and we would not have achieved any of the objects whatsoever. It is all right to pass a fine resolution about encouraging literature, but let us be practical. How are you going to encourage it? Those engaged in the business have devised this plan. They say "Put a duty of 15 per cent upon the advertising contained in the magazines, or 15 cents a pound or 10 cents a pound upon the magazines themselves". Of the two I am disposed to favour the first, for this reason, advertising matter is now taxed, provided only that it does not come within the folds of the magazine. If it comes by itself, it is taxed, but if you put some spicy story with it and call it a magazine, it is not taxed at all. That does not appear to me to be reasonable. It seems to me it should be taxed in whatever form it comes, and by taxing the advertising matter you also do away with some of the advantage that the American advertiser has as against the Canadian advertiser- an advantage very well determined by the hon. member for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken). In other words, you achieve two very important objects by a duty in that form. You do not achieve either of those objects so directly by a duty upon the magazine itself. Therefore, I am disposed to favour the proposition that we place a reasonably fair duty on the advertising matter contained in American periodical literature, that we do it without delay, and that we seek to attain the goal by this method, and if this method fail, then if we consider the goal high enough and desirable enough to attain we will resort to other methods to reach it.


Mr. ANDREW McMASTER (Brome):: I did not intend to take part in this very interesting debate, but the speech of the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen) to which we have all listened with very great interest, has led me to make a few observations, perhaps, in a sense somewhat opposed to those which he has addressed to the House. Apparently the literature of this country has to be encouraged by a protective tariff. Has not the result to the industrial life of this country of a protective tariff taught the

Canadian Magazines

right hon. leader of the Opposition how futile that method is? We have had in this country, for the last 50 years or thereabouts, a protective tariff, and in most lines of industry or manufacture, the protected manufacturers ask, not for less protection but more protection, and I take it if literature is to be protected by a tariff of 10 or 20 per cent, in a few years the authors and journalists will come before the House and say "Our genius does not afford us a livelihood, and unless we have the protection of a 40 or 50 per cent tax on literature we will have to go out of business".
I was somewhat pleased and interested in hearing the historical allusion of the right hon. leader of the Opposition. Shakespeare was one who wrote for a comparatively small audience. The people who lived close by spoke different languages, and that is where his success lies. Might I point out to my right hon. friend that if ever there was a man who borrowed from contemporary literature in his day, or from literature which shortly before had been prevalent in other countries, it was the same divine William Shakespeare. Take his plays Romeo and Juliet, the Two Gentlemen of Verona. Did he not get his plots from Italy? When he wrote his immortal Hamlet, was it not from Denmark that he drew the theme of his drama? I would recommend my hon. friend to turn from Shakespeare to the other great contemporary, or almost contemporary, John Milton, and there he will learn that literature, that the intelligence of a nation and that the creation of a human soul are not propagated or helped by the commercial 10 per cent or 20 per cent, but that if there is anything under which genius flourishes it is liberty and the air of freedom, and not a protective tariff or adventitious aids of that sort.
How is a nation developed? My hon. friend is anxious to have a Canadian spirit in this country. I am anxious too, but perhaps we would proceed by different methods in endeavouring to arrive at the desired result. I do say that we could arouse a Canadian spirit in this country first of all by teaching the boys and the girls and the men and the women of Canada that we should be Canadians first and all the time; that this country is the country to which we owe our first allegiance and that there is in the world no other country which has a greater claim over us than this country in which we live; in which our children have been bom and in which we hope to lay our bones when we pass to the other side.
jMr. McMaster.]
May I point out to the leader of the Opposition and to all those who agree with him, that to expect to keep out American magazine literature in this country by a 10 per cent or a 15 per cent tariff on advertising matter is just about as likely to succeed as Mrs. Partington when she tried to keep away the waves that were coming on the advancing tide. The leader of the Opposition, if he really believes in his theory, is the modern King Canute who sat by the seaside and told the waves not to advance any further. This magazine business is not on a commercial basis at all. It is the advertising that pays for those magazines.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Is that not commercial?


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is literature.


Andrew Ross McMaster: No, it is not iiterature. We have been talking about literature so much that it might be as well if we had a definition of literature. There are books for the moment and books for all time, and books for all time compose literature and the other things are not literature. What makes the American magazine circulate so much in Canada is the fact that the Canadian people like to read the stories which are in those magazines and one reason why the stories are good is because there is a great deal of advertising in those magazines and the publishers are able to pay very large sums of money for those stories and to command the best writers. I do not think, whether we like to do this or not, any ten or fifteen per cent tariff will affect that situation. If Canada is to have a great magazine literature and if Canadian literary genius is to be developed, it is not going to be developed in that way. Of that I am quite positive. But there is one suggestion I have as to the development of a Canadian national spirit and as to the growth of Canadian periodical literature. It is this, that our papers should not appeal only to one class or one section or one province in the country. How splendid it would be, for instance, if that journal, conducted by a distinguished member of this House, printed one page in French! How it might add to its circulation in provinces other than Ontario and what a help it might be to the development of a true Canadian patriotic sentiment that would cut right across the division of races and provinces and even all ecclesiastical differences, I will not call that religion!
What about this amendment? I am extremely sympathetic with the idea of the amendment; but I am afraid that when we go to reform the tariff, we shall not be able to reform it fairly or reasonably by picking

Canadian Magazines
85a
out just a few things of this sort in a discussion of this kind. The tariff will have to be amended; I believe the imperative interests of this country demand that it should be reduced; but it should be reduced, it seems to me only after a careful examination of the whole field, and I am inclined to the opinion that although I am deeply sympathetic with this amendment, it is not the proper way to go about this business.
Let me say just this to those who, after seeing shoes taxed and stockings taxed and clothes taxed and hats taxed, now propose to tax even the magazine which we take to while away a pleasant hour-you may make a logical argument from the protectionist point of view for taxing the people of Canada in order to encourage the native production of magazines, but there is one thing which should remain untaxed and that is the free flow of ideas into a country. That is something that we should not tax even if we are protectionists. May I say this, that any industry that cannot stand on its own feet in a country is commercially not an asset, but a liability to that country, because the producers of a country who are carrying the burden, have to carry just so much larger a burden. The danger in Canada-and it is a very real danger, is though the friends sitting in the left hand corner of the chamber, do not seem to realize it-that if you impose this burden of maintaining a non-economic industry and that burden of encouraging and producing and forcing into economic life another non-economic industry, you may make the burden too heavy for the industries which are really economic. That is a real danger to this country. There was a cartoon which someone told me about the other day. The German goose was being held by a French soldier and the French soldier was pressing its neck and saying: "Lay, confound you, lay." But that is the position in which the natural producers of this country are more and more getting into with the burden which the non-economic industries of this country are placing upon them. They are getting into a position of saying: "We won't lay."


Henry Lumley Drayton: It would be
very interesting if the hon. gentleman would tell us, why he says: "more and more " every day.


Andrew Ross McMaster: I would say that "Every day, in every way, our protectionists are getting greedier and greedier." We have had an interesting speech from the leader of the Opposition. Every journalist, every magazine writer, who hopes for better things under a
protectionist tariff, every magazine proprietor who sees great profits flowing in when 10 per cent is put on his competitor from the United States will no doubt echo and spread over the Dominion what the right hon. gentleman has said. But after all, it is founded upon a fallacy and when I hear-because I was not in this House years ago-the echoes of the speeches, those strong low tariff speeches, that the leader of the Opposition made for lower taxes on implements of production coming into this country, I have a sort of sneaking feeling that in his heart he agrees more with me than he does with himself.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Mr. Speaker, just a few words before we vote.
I think the remarks that were made by the leader of the Agrarian party (Mr. Forke) as to the dullness of speeches in this House have had the effect of brightening up this particular debate. Certainly, since he spoke, there has been a little more pep in it than there was in the earlier part of the day.
Let me express my grafification at, and deep appreciation of, the temper of the speech delivered by the hon. member for Bonaventure (Mr. Marcil). He is an old newspaper man; he knows a good deal about the publishing business, something about which I think the hon. member for Brome (Mr. McMaster) is about as ignorant as he is of trade questions. The hon. member for Bonaventure was speaking out of experience and of course he was speaking wisely, and I am sure his contribution to the debate has been very valuable. The hon. member for Brome (Mr. McMaster) tries to be facetious at my expense. Well, Sir, I do not think that need bother anyone; it certainly does not perturb me. Any man who stands up in this House and tries to discount the genius of William Shakespeare cannot, I think, be taken seriously by anyone. It is pretty late in the day to charge Shakespeare with plagiarism or anything of that kind. I am not asking for the removal" of duties; that removal would not provide the remedy required in this case. I cited the fact that the publishers have to pay duty on raw materials; but I pointed out to the House the injustice under which they labour in having no protection themselves. None of them, as far as I know, asked for the removal of the duties on paper, ink, or anything else. But, Sir, they think that they ought to have protection from the competition, which is unfair, from the other side of the line. The American publication that comes here is dumped on this market and it seems to me it should come under the dumping
Canadian Magazines

clause of the tariff as clearly as any other manufactured goods that might be brought here. American magazines are sold in this country at less than the price of the paper and press work would amount to if they were printed here; and how it is expected that Canadian publishers can compete with that is beyond my comprehension.
I do not wish to go over anything that has been already said, but we have got to this point: the free importation of American periodicals means the forced exportation of the brains of authors and the talents of artists of this country. That is what it amounts to. Any man who makes a mark as a writer here does not stay here to serve a Canadian magazine. We cannot expect him to. Can we expect a man who has talent to write an article for which he can get $1,000 in the United States and sell it here for $100 or $200? And the same thing applies to artists as well as to writers. Any person in the magazine industry, whether a writer, an artist, an engraver or a business man, as soon as he demonstrates his capacity in his particular line, is taken over the border by reason of the enormous circulations and revenues which the American publications enjoy. It is only about a year and a half ago that the man who was editing the most largely circulated paper in this country was taken off that paper, by a salary tWice as large to go to Philadelphia. I am speaking not of a writer particularly, but an editor; and there is a marked distinction. And that applies to every man on a Canadian magazine. Just in proportion to the ability that Canadians display is the speed with which [DOT] they go over the line and assist in producing magazines that come into this country and make it impossible for Canadian publishers to compete. If there is any industry in this country that should be protected it is the one that will teach the people to be Canadians and will try to interpret one province to another, using the talents of Canadians to develop Canadian ideals and a Canadian sentiment from one end of the country to the other.
Amendment negatived.
Main motion agreed to.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: For a copy of all correspondence, papers, writings, documents, telegrams, etc., connected with, leading to, or in any way relating to the withdrawal of professional work for the Inland Revenue Department, formerly performed by Mr. F. G. Thompson, barrister, at Winnipeg.
[Mr. Hocken.l


MR. H. P. BLACKWOOD, WINNIPEG
George Black: For a copy of all correspondence, papers, writings, documents, telegrams, etc., connected with, leading to, or in any way relating to the withdrawal of professional work for the Inland Revenue Department, formerly performed by Mr. H. P. Blackwood, barrister, at Winnipeg.


INLAND REVENUE DEPARTMENT-TRANSFERENCE OF LEGAL WORK
George Black: For a copy of all correspondence, papers, writings, documents, telegrams, etc., connected with, leading to, or in .any way relating to the withdrawal of professional work for the Inland Revenue Department, formerly performed by Charles Blake, barrister, at Brandon, and a returned soldier, and the turning of same over to Mr. Clement, of that city.



PETER. THIBEAU'S MAIL CONTRACT

Mr. HANSON:: For a copy of all correspondence, papers, writings, and other documents, relating to the cancellation of the contract of Peter Thibeau for the carrying of mail from Thibeauville to Sporting Mountain Station, Nova Scotia.



CIVIL SERVICE DISMISSALS

Richard Burpee Hanson: For a return showing the number of dismissals of officers or employees of the government, and all others appointed at any time by the government of Canada (in cases where the position vacated, or required to be vacated, has been filled by another, or is intended to be filled by another), from the 1st day of January, 1922, until the passing of this order, and showing also the position vacated or requested to be vacated, and the names of the persons so dismissed, or whose resignations were so requested and the reason in each case for such dismissal or request for resignation, and' the name of the person now occupying the position thus vacated, also showing in each case whether an investigation into charges made against the person dismissed or requested to resign was made, and by whom.



CANADIAN TRADE COMMISSIONERS

Mr.   PUTMAN@for Mr. Archambault: For a return showing the names of all the commercial agents or trade commissioners representing the Canadian government abroad, showing their address, the date of their respective appointment, and their respective salaries.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Mr. J. FRED JOHNSTON (Last Mountain) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House a special committee of eleven members be appointed to inquire jointly w'ith Mr. Speaker into the advisability of adopting a rule of the House which will provide that an amendment to an amendment be allowed on the motion that the Speaker leave the Chair for tie House to resolve itself into committee of supply or ways and means; with power to send for persons, papers and records, and to report from time to time.

Standing Committees


William Stevens Fielding: Mr. Speaker, I want to suggest to the hon. gentleman who has moved this resolution that it is a very important departure from old parliamentary practice, and I do not think it should be adopted hurriedly. The matter might at a later day be referred to the committee on rules and be considered in connection with other rules, but I would ask my hon. friend not to press his resolution to-night. This is an old established practice of parliament, and although there may be reasons for a change, I do not think the practice should be changed without much more deliberation than we are able to give it to-night.


John Frederick Johnston: Mr. Speaker, that is just the reason we
are moving for a special committee. We understand it to be a matter of some importance, and therefore we thought it best to move in this way. Of course, if it will meet with the wishes of the leader of the House at the moment (Mr. Fielding) that the resolution should stand for the time being, I defer to his request.


William Stevens Fielding: Thank you.


Hewitt Bostock: Stands.



HALIBUT FISHERIES TREATY WITH UNITED STATES

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: Before public Bills and Orders are called, I observe that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Lapointe) is back from his trip to Washington. I hope by this time the ways of secret diplomacy have been arrested and that we may know the purpose of the trip and what results were accomplished.


William Stevens Fielding: Yes. The hon. Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Lapointe) is not in his place, but the request of the right hon. gentleman is quite reasonable, and I hope at the next session we will be able to give him some information on the subject. At all events the Minister of Marine and Fisheries will be consulted in the meantime.



IMMIGRATION ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the Order, for resuming the debate on the motion of Mr. Neill for the second reading of Bill No. 6, respecting Immigration:
Henry Herbert Stevens: Mr. Speaker, when this debate was on before
the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) advised the House that he would bring down a bill dealing with a kindred subject, and it was then tacitly understood that this matter should stand until that bill had received some consideration.


Hewitt Bostock: Stands.
On motion of Mr. Fielding, the House adjourned at 10.35 p.m.
Tuesday, March 6, 1923