1923-02-09

NORTHWEST TERRITORIES ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. Sir LOMER GOUIN (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 7, to amend the Northwest Territories Act. He said: The purpose of this proposed legislation is to permit the trial outside of the Northwest Territories of persons charged with crimes committed within those territories, and to provide for such trial by the same court and according to the same procedure as if the trial took place within the said territories. The amendment is of particular importance in view of the necessity which confronts us of bringing to trial next summer a number of Eskimos charged with murders in different parts of the Northwest Territories. These Eskimos are now under guard at Herschell Island where we propose to try them on account of facilities which we find at that place for their confinement and trial. Furthermore, provision has to be made so that the decisions given pursuant to that new and large jurisdiction may be enforced, by execution or otherwise, at the place where they are made outside of the Northwest Territories.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. WILLIAM IRVINE (Calgary East) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 8, to amend the Criminal Code. He said: The purpose of this bill is to abolish the death penalty for all crimes for which it may be imposed under the present criminal code, and to substitute therefor life imprisonment. I may add that the bill I am now introducing is exactly the same measure, in every particular, as the one which was introduced in this House by Mr. Bickerdike on February 9, 1915.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE ICING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, in the Speech which His Excellency the Governor General was pleased to make to both Houses of Parliament at the opening of the session, mention was made of a gift by the Republic of Fi ance 
to the Dominion of Canada of a tract of land on Vimy Ridge. His Excellency referred to this gift in the following words:
The Government of France has graciously offered to the Canadian Government a tract of land of 250 acres on Vimy Ridge, at the site selected for the erection by Canada of a monument commemorating the exploits of Canadian troops in the Great War. This gift has been gratefully accepted, and a bill approving the agreement has been duly introduced in the French Parliament. An appropriate resolution expressing Canada's appreciation of the action of the French Government will be offered for your acceptance.
There would appear to be something peculiarly appropriate and gratifying in the circumstance that His Excellency, whose name and fame are so inseparably associated with the achievements of the Canadian army at Vimy Ridge, should be the one whose privilege it was to announce to the members of our parliament this gift of the Republic of France to the Dominion of Canada.
I have the honour, Mr. Speaker, to move:
That it be resolved by the House of Commons,
That Parliament do approve the acceptance by the Government of Canada of the gift graciously made by the Republic of France of a tract of land 250 acres in extent on Vimy Ridge at the site selected for the erection by Canada, of a monument commemorating the exploits of Canadian soldiers in the Great War and in so doing records its sense of gratitude for and its high appreciation of the motives which prompted France to associate herself with a project so dear to the hearts of the Canadian people.
Hon. members will recall that in the consideration last session of the appropriation for the Battlefields Memorial Commission a general wish was expressed by the leaders of the different parties in this House that if at all possible the commission should acquire a tract of land on Vimy Ridge which would form a suitable environment for the monument to be erected at that place in commemoration of the heroism of Canada's soldiers overseas. It was in pursuance of that wish that you, Mr. Speaker, during the interval since last session, visited France and conducted on behalf of the Battlefields Memorial Commission negotiations with the French government for the acquisition of this tract of land. The fact that we have received as a gift, what we should gladly have acquired by purchase, while due to the generosity of France, which we acknowledge in the fullest measure, is no doubt also due in part to your well-known tact and diplomacy in dealing with international affairs.
I would like to read to the House the text of the agreement with respect to this grant of land. The agreement was drafted on the 5th December, 1922, and concluded as between the French government, represented by Mr. Charles Reibel, Minister of Liberated Regions

Vimy Ridge
on the one part, and the government of Canada, represented by Hon. Rodolphe Lemieux, Speaker of the House of Commons on the other part. It reads:
Whereas the Government of Canada desires to erect on Vimy Ridge (Pas-de-Calais), in the centre of a park which they intend to lay out, and the maintenance of which they will assume, a monument to the memory of the Canadian soldiers who fell on the field of honour in France during the war of 1914-1918, the French Government put at their disposal the necessary land which will remain the property of the French Republic.
Whereas, on the other hand, France desires to associate herself in the tribute which Canada wishes to pay to the victims of the great war, and as moreover, the land concerned, comprised in the red zone, is to be acquired by France in conformity with'section 46 of subsection 7 of the Act of the 17th April 1919.
Article I
The French Government grants, freely and for all time to the Government of Canada, the use and free disr posal of a parcel of land of 100 hectares on Vimy Ridge in the Department of Pas-de-Calais, the boundaries of which are indicated on the plan hereto annexed.
Article II
The Government of Canada pledge themselves to lay out this land into a park and to erect thereon a monument to the memory of the Canadian soldiers fallen on the field of honour in France during the war of 1914-1918.
They moreover pledge themselves to provide for the maintenance of the park and monument, in default of which the French Government would resume the free disposal of the park, except however the land on which the memorial is erected.
Article III
The land granted to the Government of Canada by this agreement will be exempt of all taxes and imposts. The French Government will take thfc responsibility of all difficulties with the borderers, except those arising from damages caused by the personnel or the material belonging to the Government of Canada and kept in France for the maintenance and protection of the park and monument.
Article IV
There shall be obligatorily mentioned on the monument the names of all units of the same class of the Canadian army having fought on Vimy Ridge during the same period of time.
Article V
This Agreement will become effective by the passing, by Parliament, of a bill approving its provisions which the French Government has laid on the Table of the House.	.
In testimony whereof, on the day and year above mentioned, this agreement was drawn in four copies, each copy having the same force and effect as an original by the French Government represented by Charles Reibel, Minister of Liberated Regions, and the Government of Canada represented by Mr. Rodolphe Lemieux, Speaker of the House of Commons of Canada.
It is the purpose of the Battlefields Memorial Commission to erect, in all, eight monuments, three of them in Belgium, the other five in France. Of the eight monuments to be erected, the most important, indeed one of the most imposing and noble monuments in the world, will be the Allward monument to be erected on Vimy Ridge. As mentioned in the agreement I have just read,
this monument will record the names of other units which fought at Vimy Ridge of a like standing with the Canadian army. There is, however, another record to be placed on that monument which will, I imagine, touch even more deeply the hearts of all Canadians. It is the names of some 20,000 Canadians who were numbered among the missing, and for whom there are not individual graves in either France or Belgium. Happily their names will for all time be recorded on this monument to be erected at Vimy.
I need not say anything to the House of the significance of Vimy Ridge. There were many battles fought in the great war; and for many purposes, it would be unwise to seek in any way to draw comparisons between them. This possibly may be said of Vimy which could not be said of the others: that it was at Vimy that the Canadian corps first fought as a unit, composed of men from every part of Canada. It was at Vimy that the Canadian army was welded into an efficient fighting organization, so strong that no opposing armies could resist it; and that Canadian soldiers were able to achieve what no other army had been able to do in the meeting of the enemy at that point. Vimy Ridge stands as one of the world's great altars of sacrifice. As one reflects upon the significance of the Great War, one cannot but feel a resemblance, albeit on a world's scale, between that colossal tragedy and the tragedy of 1900 years ago, when the best life which the world has ever known was sacrificed through the materialism of its day that mankind might enjoy a wider measure of spiritual freedom. In the tragedy of the late war, it was not one life only, it was an appreciable portion of humanity, which was sacrificed for the sake of the larger freedom of mankind. History will look upon the battlegrounds of the Great War as the places of sacrifice. Among the number, no altar will be more conspicuous through the years than that of Vimy Ridge.
There is something which is more deserving of recognition in the gift of the French Republic. It is not so many years ago, as history records time, that Canada was a part of France in the new world, and that, in what was considered enlightened opinion of the day, Canada was referred to as so many acres of snow. To-day, under world conditions as transformed as any the human imagination can well conceive, the Republic of France, in a spirit of gratitude, grants to our Dominion, no longer her possession, not a few acres of land covered with snow, in some
Vimy Ridge

remote and unknown part, but a tract of land, as sacred as any in Europe, consecrated with the blood of human sacrifice of Canada's own sons in the cause of the world's freedom. This is the gift which we to-day as a parliament acknowledge with gratitude to France, and this we do, deeply moved by all that it implies of a close relationship between the British and French people. We recognize in the gift this larger significance, that above and beyond all the changes that time may bring, changes of the past and uncertainties of the present, there is an enduring friendship between the French and the British peoples, which stands for all that is best in the maintenance of human liberty, and the freedom of the world.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to express my warm approval of this resolution. The site of Vimy is, beyond comparison, of the various battlefields of the war, the most closely associated in the hearts of the Canadian people with all that the war involved in story and in sacrifice. I am moved by one regret, that the feelings of this parliament, as embalmed in the resolution, feelings of undoubted gratitude and appreciation, cannot be expressed, rather than by me, by one who like yourself, Mr. Speaker, or many others assembled here, is linked by memories more sacred with all that sacrifice. I stood on Vimy Ridge four years ago, and again in 1921. As an observer, I could see something of the story of turmoil, of blood, of terror, of heroism, in which the sons of this country bore so conspicuous a part, and I know that Canadians returning there in the years to come, will be filled with feelings of gratitude to the nation for whom the boys of this country fought so gallantly and who, in recognition of all that has been accomplished, have given us this historic site. It is not in any way related to the question of overcoming a difficulty of purchase that we recognize the value of this gift; the significance of it all lies in the feelings that prompted the French parliament and the French people. That is what makes the gift infinitely more valuable than would be its acquirement in any other way.
Since the war ended, in the tragedy of the events that have ensued, differences of view, differences that I cannot help but think are intellectual and intellectual alone, have unfortunately, in some degree, parted the pathways of Britain and of France. I think I can say that notwithstanding differences of conclusion as to methods that have arisen, the heart of Britain is to-day in sympathy with France, and if the test were necessary, would be shown to be in sympathy to a 
degree equal to that which prompted her efforts in four years of war.
I believe the action of France in this regard will meet with fitting response throughout the whole of this Dominion, and I hope that years will not measure the time before the heart of Canada will be severed from France. We fought that France might be free; we fought as well that Britain might be free; we fought as well that Canada might be free. In the memory of the common struggle and the common sacrifice, we are linked, and linked forever.


Mr. ROBERT FORKE (Brandon):: Mr. Speaker, I should like, in a few words, to associate myself with the sentiments expressed in this resolution. In these trying days, when troubles surround us on every hand, incidents such as these reveal to us the inherent goodness and kindness of the human heart. I know there is an enduring memorial inscribed in the breasts and hearts of the Canadian people to those splendid men who went overseas and sacrificed so much for us. The passing years will, no doubt, obliterate in some degree the memory of those great gifts bestowed upon the Canadian people, and I rejoice in the fact that there will be erected upon the soil of France a monument to those sons of Canada; and that-lest we forget-that monument will still stand during ages in the future. I also-agree that it is fitting that you yourself, Mr. Speaker, should have had a part in the negotiations in connection with this splendid gift which France has seen fit to make to the Canadian people. I will not add any more than to say that I am sure that once again this day we remember with gratitude the heroism and devotion of those who sacrificed their all for the freedom of the world and for the good of our Canadian land.


Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Marine and. Fisheries) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, Canada, to-day, in the eloquent terms uttered by its Prime Minister, sends forth to France the acknowledgement of its gratitude. The leaders of the other parliamentary parties have associated themselves with these sentiments; perhaps it is befitting that a French voice should join in this unanimous expression of the heartfelt feelings of the Canadian nation. This plot of land that we possess in France has been rendered illustrious and sacred by the heroism of our soldiers, they have written there a page of history that the sons of Canada will always read with pride and emotion. By granting it to us, France wished that it should ever be dedi-

Vimy Ridge
cated and consecrated to the glorious memory of those who came there to fight and die so that she might be free and victorious. It will be a bit of Canadian fatherland in the greater fatherland of France, an everlasting pledge of the sacred union and close friendship which must always subsist between our two countries. Mr. Speaker, it was your acknowledged privilege to negotiate, in the name of Canada, this gratifying concession which was granted to us. On more than one score you were entitled to this honour and you were particularly qualified to make such a request. By granting it, France wished to pay you a personal homage whilst bestowing an honour on our country. I feel fully confident that the monument which will be erected on the historical ridge of Vimy will recall to future generations the great ideal for which our soldiers so valiantly battled. Sixty thousand Canadians had died so as to establish a reign of justice and peace; all fought to prevent any further war and it is our ultimate hope that the civilized nations of the world will respect their sacrifice by not rendering it fruitless and illusory.


Hon. R. J. MANION (Fort William and Rainy River):: Mr. Speaker, I had hoped that perhaps someone much more worthy than myself would say a word in this connection as representing rather the men who were over there than the people of this country. However, as a returned soldier, as one of those who had the honour of being at Vimy Ridge on April 9, 1917,-and let me assure the House that I say this with no thought whatever of self-glorification-I should like to say a word- although without the authority of the returned soldiers in the matter-by way of associating myself and them with the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), the right hon. leader of the Opposition (Mr. Meighen), the leader of the Progressives (Mr. Forke) and the Minister of Marine (Mr. Lapointe), in the acceptance from France of the site for the erection of a monument by this country. I do not think that there has been exaggeration on the part of any of the speakers who have referred to the glorious deeds of the Canadian boys, and I doubt whether any situation could be chosen by the Canadian government, if the choice were left to them, that would be more emblematic of the deeds of the Canadian soldiers than the site which has been offered so generously by the French government to the government of Canada. May I also congratulate you, Sir, on the part you have played in this matter, and express the opinion that you deserve the thanks of this country both as its honourable representative and as one who has made very great personal sacrifices in the promotion of peace and good government in the world. I congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman through whom the French government made, this offer, and I cherish the hope that the erection of this monument may help in some small way to bring about that "parliament of man, the federation of the world," which was so eloquently spoken of by an English poet many years ago.


Hon. W. S. FIELDING (Minister of Finance) :: The spendid gift of the French government, in the negotiation of which you, Mr. Speaker, had such a useful and honourable part, is evidence of the gratitude of the French nation-because I am sure that in this case the gratitude comes not only from the French government but from the people of France as well-for the service which Canada rendered the world in the great war. I rise now only that I may be permitted to mention another incident which illustrates the feeling of the French people. Of course, every Canadian who goes to France now makes if possible a pilgrimage to Vimy, and naturally I did so. And I recall the fact that on the way to Vimy we passed through the town of Cambrai. There the Canadian visitors were met by the mayor and town council of the town who desired to express in a very formal way their recollections of the services rendered by the Canadian soldiers in and about their town, and to give utterance to their gratitude, in order that the Canadian people might learn that the French people were not unmindful of what our soldiers had done. In terms of the warmest commendation they spoke of the service rendered by our men and of the great part they had played in the battles in that stormy region; and then, to mark their feelings in a more tangible way, they brought us a magnificent wreath of flowers that we might use it as expressing their sympathy. It was placed in one of the graveyards, which are too numerous, I am sorry to say, in the Vimy region. I do not know whether this incident was ever recorded in Canada, but it is one of the indications that the part played by the Canadian soldiers in that great drama is fully and gratefully remembered not only by the French government but by the French people as well.


Mr. J. L. BROWN (Lisgar):: There will
be no resolution introduced into this House at any time with which we shall be more proud to associate ourselves than the one which has just been moved. When we remember the circumstances under which the great war broke upon the world; when we remember
Vimy Ridge

the fear that took possession of us for a time: when we remember the call that went forth to all the world to join in the battle for freedom; when we remember that from among ourselves there went out young men who had known nothing about war, it is not surprising that we wondered at that time whether, when the great trial came in actual battle, our young men would prove equal to the demands that would be made upon them. It was but natural that such a thought should enter our minds, for our boys had had no experience of such events as they were soon called upon to participate in. But when the time came and they were actually face to face with the enemy, they proved, Mr. Speaker, as I believe it will be proved again and again in human history, the falsity of that old Satanic cynicism that "all that a man hath will he give for his life." And should such occasion arise again our men would undoubtedly give similar proof that there are things men hold dearer than life when, in the course of their days, they are called upon to make great decisions, not for life, not for * personal honour, nor for glory, but for the cause of God and the cause of right. Our Canadian boys fully met that demand that was made upon them. In all ages men have been pleased to set up stones of commemoration to remind their children of the deeds performed by their forefathers. And for centuries to come there will stand on Vimy Ridge a stone of remembrance to which the French people of future generations will point their children and say:	Here is the place
where men from far over the seas came in order that they might help us preserve not only for France, not only for Europe, but for the whole world, the great benefits which have been won for us and which we enjoy through our civilization of to-day. Again, Mr. Speaker, let me say it is a proud moment in my life to be able to associate myself with this resolution.


Mr. J. G. ROBICHAUD (Gloucester) (Translation) :: Mr. Speaker, I feel that I cannot allow this occasion to pass by without making the voice of the Acadian people heard. If, in the past, the Canadian people had misgivings and underwent sufferings, we, in Acadia, received the crown of martyrdom, and this is the reason why I feel it is my duty to say at least a word in behalf of our dear Acadia.
When the trumpet sounded summoning all the civilized nations of the world to take part in the great war, the Acadians from the Maritime provinces answered the call. In the county of Gloucester, which I have the honour to represent in this House, whole villages

answered the call of the Motherland. For instance, in a village numbering twenty-two young men, twenty had fought overseas while the other two had been found unfit for military service.
Mr. Speaker, it gives me much pleasure to mingle my humble voice with those-far more eloquent-we have just heard in order to second this resolution, and, in the future, when the Acadians together with the other elements of the Canadian population will visit "la belle France", they will find there, as it was so happily expressed by the speaker who preceded me, a diminutive fatherland which they can admire.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING thereupon moved:
That a message be sent to the Senate informing Their Honours that this House has adopted a resolution approving the Government's acceptance of the gift made by the Government of France of a tract of land on \ imy Ridge for the erection of a monument commemorating the exploits of Canadian soldiers in the Great War, and requesting that Their Honours will unite with this House in the approval of the said acceptance by filling up the blanks therein with the words "Senate and"
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. It. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to amend the Cold Storage Act chapter six of the statutes of 1907, and to provide that the Governor in Council may enter into contracts with properly constituted co-operative societies or associations, for the construction, equipment and maintenance in efficient working order of public cold storage warehouses in Canada equipped with mechanical refrigeration, and suitable for the preservation of any food product.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General has been made acquainted with the subject matter of the resolution and recommends it to the consideration of the House.
Motion agreed to, and House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Mr. MOTHERWELL:: The bill to be introduced shortly, based upon this resolution, is an amendment to the Cold Storage Act of 1907 and the amendments thereto. The act provided for certain subsidies to encourage the construction of cold storage plants throughout Canada. During the first few years after its enactment very little advantage was taken of these subsidies. However, as the people become more familiar with the act, and less fearful of cold storage, advantage was takeD

Cold Storage Act
of the opportunities offered by that legislation, and during the war still greater advantage was taken. After the war, in 1919, the government of the day, and, I think, quite correctly, amended the act and made it apply to municipal cold storages only. Before that it applied to all and sundry, but the activity under it began to absorb a good deal of money to pay the subsidies earned. In the meantime the local authorities went ahead with the construction of a cold storage plant at Montreal, and we now have one of the best plants at that harbour to be found on this continent. But that was four years ago, and in the interval no subsidies have been earned under the amendment providing for the encouragement of municipal cold storage plants. It would appear as if municipalities are not anxious to construct cold storage plants even with this encouragement. Only one other municipality has attempted to comply with the act, but up to date it has not got sufficiently far on to earn the first instalment of the subsidy, neither do I know if it ever will be able to reach that point.


Mr. HANSON:: What plant is that?


William Richard Motherwell: At Sydney, Cape Breton. In view of that, Mr. Chairman, I think the time has come when we should amend this act so that it will function. The proposal is to make these subsidies apply to co-operative cold storage plants. This is an age of co-operation, as to the advantages of which, however, there is some difference of opinion. A certain number of municipal cold storage plants had been constructed before the act was amended in 1919. Now, it is proposed to revert, though not entirely, to the old act of 1907, which applied to all kinds of cold storage plants, including those constructed by private enterprise. The proposed amendment will make the act applicable to co-operative cold storage plants, preferably to those of a non-profit-making character that pay out a portion at least of their profits to their patrons in proportion to the business they have brought to their respective plants.


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: Is it intended to
apply to municipal cold storage plants?


William Richard Motherwell: That would be a matter for the committee to consider. Personally I do not think it should; the application to municipal cold storage plants has been given a fair trial, and nobody seems to want it. These municipal plants have not, perhaps, been so successful as to justify our subsidizing them, but I suppose there would not be much objection to retaining that option
in the bill. I do not feel strongly on the question, though. The point is that the Cold Storage Act should be permitted to function some way, preferably in the direction of cooperative activity.


Mr. KENNEDY (Glengarry):: On what basis is it proposed to distribute these subsidies?


William Richard Motherwell: They will be distributed on the basis of the old act-in four annual instalments, at the rate of 30 per cent of the cost of construction.


Mr. SALES:: Do I understand the minister to say that there was no change in the act until' 1919?


William Richard Motherwell: There was an unimportant change in 1909.


Thomas Sales: Was there no suspension of the act until 1919?


William Richard Motherwell: The act was made to apply to municipal cold storages only. It was not a suspension, but it had that effect.


Thomas Sales: The minister is, of course, aware of the conditions in Saskatchewan. I understand that the Saskatchewan Co-operative Creamery undertook work at Saskatoon and at Melville, at considerable expense. They did not get the assistance they expected to get under the act, and they consequently ran into difficulties. Has the minister any information on that subject?


William Richard Motherwell: I think my hon.
friend is not correctly informed. The erection of that cold storage plant was started by a private institution; it was sub-
4 p.m. sequently purchased by the Saskatchewan Co-operative Creamery as a going concern, and they went on with the construction. The government of that day decided that the subsidy should follow the new ownership, and the company received 832,400 on that account. The cubic measurement of the building was 98,832 feet, and the total cost of construction was 8108,000.


Thomas Sales: Can the minister give me the figures for Melville as well?


William Richard Motherwell: It was after the suspension, as my hon. friend calls it, that the Melville cold storage plant was constructed.


Mr. ANDERSON:: This amendment will not interfere with any private persons going into the abattoir or cold storage business as a joint stock company?


William Richard Motherwell: No.
Cold Storage Act


Robert King Anderson: The words are used here, "properly constituted co-operative societies or associations." What is the minister's idea of a properly constituted co-operative society?


William Richard Motherwell: Well, there are differences of opinion as to what constitutes cooperation. Some people take the ground that ordinary joint stock companies with benevolent intention may be looked upon as cooperative, and frequently they are so classed -not without jurisdiction. Strictly speaking, a co-operative organization is one which distributes at least part of its profits. But the intention is to make the definition elastic. If we make a rigid definition in the act we may find that it will not apply to certain enterprises that may be quite worthy. The matter will be determined, therefore, by regulations that are flexible and may be changed from time to time.


Mr. BRISTOL:: Will incorporated companies be shut out by this amendment?


William Richard Motherwell: Joint stock companies?


Edmund James Bristol: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: Not necessarily. That will be a proper subject for consideration by the committee-whether a co-operative concern may be defined as a body organized in the ordinary way under the Companies Act.
Mr: BRISTOL: I think incorporated companies are excluded now.


William Richard Motherwell: Everything is excluded now except municipal plants-though not, of course, in the original act.


Mr. HODGINS:: Are the provinces giving any assistance along this line?


William Richard Motherwell: Not that I know of. Perhaps some of the members from British Columbia would be better able to answer that. I believe that the British Columbia government has assisted the fruit industry by certain loans, but I do not think any subsidies are paid. Hon. Manning Doherty, of Ontario, has it in mind to introduce a bill-if indeed, he has not already done so-providing for provincial assistance to cold storage plants by way of loan, but not, I believe, by way of subsidy.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: If this resolution carries in its present form, how will it be possible in committee to enlarge it to include incorporated companies? It seems to me we should insert the words "or other companies" so that the Committee on Agriculture will have power to enlarge it if they see fit.


William Richard Motherwell: That is a proper question, but the idea is not to tie ourselves down to anything too specific. The explanation now being given is of a general character, and the details can be dealt with either in the Committee on Agriculture, or later in Committee of the Whole. I think it is the custom, as a matter of expediency, to first introduce a resolution that is to be the basis of a bill. As to the details I do not think we should be tied right down hard and fast at this stage. The bill itself is ready, I think.


James Dew Chaplin: I submit, Mr. Chairman,
that if this resolution passes we are absolutely debarred from enlarging the scope of the bill.	_


William Richard Motherwell: That is not my
understanding. I have often wondered why it was necessary to introduce a resolution at all, because you have to go over the same-ground on the second reading, but we have to follow this procedure as a matter of parliamentary practice. However, the passage of the resolution is not supposed to tie us down in the matter of the changing of the bill at a subsequent stage. The second reading of a bill simply expresses the approval of the House on the general principles embodied in the measure. Then you go into committee and the details of the bill are dealt with. That is the procedure as I understand it.


Archie Latimer Hodgins: I would draw attention
to the expense which the proposed legislation will involve if it is taken advantage of all over the country. It has always seemed to me that it is our duty to provide for terminal facilities, but to make provision for co-operative associations all over the country will involve tremendous expense.


Mr. TOLMIE:: The cold storage principle
has rendered valuable service in connection with our range beef production in the West, and is of great utility at the present time in connection with our fruit industry, particularly as regards shipments for a distance where it is necessary to pre-cool the fruit, I would ask the minister to define the kind of company whose business would be of sufficient importance to entitle it to a grant, How many tons output would he consider necessary before such a company could receive aid?


William Richard Motherwell: 
Simon Fraser Tolmie: Will the application of
joint stock companies and municipalities for cold storage be included?


William Richard Motherwell: Personally I do
not think so. At the same time I shall seek the advice and counsel of the committee later on in regard to these details. I may say to the hon. member for Saltcoats (Mr. Sales) that the first cold storage plant taken over by the co-operative creameries in the West was one that was constructed in Regina and operated municipally. It was a magnificent failure, and it was with a great deal of trepidation that the co-operative creameries took it over, because they were afraid that the bad reputation it had earned in the past would follow it under the new ownership. Notwithstanding that, twelve months after they took it over and operated it on a business basis, they made it pay. I would not like to condemn cold storage in all individual cases. As a general rule, however, they have not been successful, and I could not advise, from my knowledge of them, that we should grant subsidies in all such cases, particularly as money is so scarce at the present time.


Mr. SPENCE:: As I view the matter
the municipalities are to be deprived of the right of taking advantage of this grant for cold storage purposes, and it looks as though this assistance was intended to be limited to co-operative societies. That, I think, would be an actual injustice. I claim that the municipality has just the same right as any co-operative organization in this matter. I would like to know specifically from the minister where he intends to establish these cold storages and what existing co-operative societies they are intended to benefit. What is the idea underlying this legislation?


Mr. CARROLL:: Some years ago I interested myself in the matter of cold storage-


David Spence: If my hon. friend will pardon me, I asked the minister where he intended to establish these cold storages and if the co-operative societies sought to be aided are in existence.


William Richard Motherwell: In answer to the hon. member's last question I would say that they are not in existence. The regulations stipulate that the institution must be established before a subsidy can be paid. As to where they are going to be established that is something with which we have nothing to do at all, it rests with those who are going into the enterprise whoever they may be. They can get together and put up an institution of this description, and when they comply with the regulations and the law they will get their subsidy. I think my hon. friend wants to know whether the bill, when passed, will be retroactive, and whether it will apply to institutions of any description? I hope it will not be retroactive because the dear knows where that would lead us. It would not be encouraging anything new at all, it would be subsidizing something already in existence. Consequently the law will apply to new plants, or possibly the extension of old ones. That will give additional accommodation and service to the country. As to including municipal cold storages, in view of the fact that this grant has been held out as a drawing card for four years to the municipalities of Canada to influence them to construct cold storage plants, and has not resulted in one earning a dollar under it, and in view of the doubtful reputation that these institutions have as an economic success, surely we would not be justified in continuing such aid, but we should rather take such moneys as we have at our disposal and develop something else that is more urgently required at the present time-that is, the co-operative institution.


Mr. MORRISON:: During the last four years municipalities have been going through a series of hard times, and have been hearing that word "economy" a little bit in their midsti They are all overtaxed, and the people have been crying for rigid economy, and perhaps that has militated against municipalities taking advantage of this act. I for one would not exclude them from the benefits of the act, but I am not much of an advocate for subsidizing anything. In the past the system has been abused, and the people have had to pay for it. If it was desired to help the cold storage business the government might consider the matter of
Cold Storage Act

tacilitating a good credit system. That would be more advantageous and would not cost the country anything. If those who are engaged in co-operative movements had a good line of credit supplied to them on security, they should be able to get along. With reference to people who are co-operating for their mutual benefit, I do not believe in giving anybody something for nothing. My experience is that it is bad practice. I believe in giving them credit facilities, and if they obtain those facilities and cannot manage their business, I do not know why they should manage it on the public money.


Donald Sutherland: The benefit of cold storage facilities is so great that it seems to me remarkable that greater advantage has not been taken of the opportunities offered. My recollection of the situation as it was in 1919 is that the co-operative companies who had earned the bonus which was given by the government did not afford the facilities to the public that the Cold Storage Act was intended to afford, and it was hoped that by confining it to municipal bodies the general public would have access to the facilities afforded by cold storage. It appears that there has not been very much done along that line during the past few years. I would like to ask the minister: Will those who do not belong to co-operative companies be permitted to use the cold storage plant, provided they pay for it? I would like to know whether the Public are being safeguarded in that respect.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, that is the intention, although I might say that after the subsidies are all paid it will not be an easy matter. It is difficult for the federal authorities to extend jurisdiction over certain activities, and this is one of them. As a rule these institutions are very submissive to federal control as long as any unpaid subsidies are still due them, but after the final payment has been made, I think no method has been discovered of controlling them to the extent some people want. You can control the rates, but just to what extent you can control them and say what amount of space shall be allotted to the public is hard to say. There is some doubt about our constitutional right to so control those institutions. That is a matter that we run up against in the administration of several of our acts-the Grain Act, for instance, and several others. So far as we have jurisdiction, we propose to have control over these institutions.


Robert King Anderson: Has there been any
demand from the co-operative companies for
IMr. Morrisson.J
cold storage plants, and if so where did. it come from?


William Richard Motherwell: On the spur of the moment, the only one I can name-although I can recall discussing it with many farmers
is the Minister of Agriculture for Ontario, Hon. Manning Doherty. People would come and ask what is being done in the matter of cold storage; I would refer them to the act, and on further discussion I would have to admit no money was being spent over it. I have to take the responsibility of asking for money here in parliament, and I do not want to come back here year after year and say that I am not spending the money. The act must be made to function, or we might as well let it lapse. In fact, it has been lapsing. I have personal knowledge that these subsidies in the past have been given to co-operative storages, and in answer to the hon. member from Weyburn (Mr. Morrison) I think if my hon. friend had his money invested in cold storage plants a few years ago, and had to administer the cold storage plant, with the sentiment that existed in the country at that time against cold storage and cold storage produce, he would find he would not get very large return on his investment, and some form of assistance and encouragement in the way of a subsidy would be required to get him to put his money into it at all. That has been my experience. Of late years people have become more familiar with cold storage and not so alarmed about it. I did not care to state any reduction in this resolution, but I intended to raise the question whether so high a rate of subsidy as 30 per cent was required to encourage people to take advantage of the act at this time-possibly 25 per cent would be enough. That would be a fluctuating matter, and I am not committed to it in any way, in fact,
I think it could be argued that if it required 30 per cent of the cost of construction to encourage a man to go into the cold storage business fifteen years ago, it could easily be argued that 25 per cent should be enough now. These are details and this is not exactly the proper time to go into them, but I have no objection, if the hon. members desire, to taking the matter up.


Mr. MILLAR:: What security, if any, is it proposed the government should take?
If one of these co-operative associations should become financially embarrassed and close its doors, what security would the government have for the money advanced?


William Richard Motherwell: It is not a loan but a subsidy, and none of it will have to be paid

Cold Storage Act
till after the building is constructed and the store is open for business. If the company should fail, and cease to give the service, we would not go ahead with the payments. That is one reason why the instalments are divided into four.


John Morrison: I would like to suggest to the minister that, instead of giving a subsidy, he should give a loan. Then he would have control of the service for all time. When these people refuse to give patrons reasonably good service, if they were to get notice that their loan expired, I think it would be a pretty good equalizer for a government that is participating in this building business. You need to have some control over your money invested, and I think the government, as representing the people and putting up the people's money, should have a say in the service, and that would be a leverage for the government.


William Richard Motherwell: I think that is a very proper suggestion.


William F. Carroll: With reference to the control of cold storage warehouses, I think it is time that this government and parliament, if they are giving any sums of money, whether large or small, towards the establishment, maintenance and working of cold storages in this country, should have some control, at least as regards the health of the people. I believe that cold storage has done considerable good for Canada. On the other hand, I fear that people who have taken advantage of the Cold Storage Act of 1907 have not given as much attention as they should to the care of the products put into the cold storage warehouses. Some question has arisen as regards the jurisdiction of this parliament to make regulations governing cold storage. I have in my hand an opinion given by the Deputy Minister of Justice in 1919, in which he expresses grave doubts as to the jurisdiction of this parliament to make general regulations regarding cold storage. On the other hand, he does express an opinion that this government may make regulations regarding the goods that go into cold storage, as affecting the health of the people of Canada. When this bill comes down, I think I shall take the opportunity of moving some amendment which will preserve, to some smail extent at least, the health of the people. There is no doubt in the world that articles of cold storage have been foisted upon the public as being fresh. I do not know whether that is a criminal action or not, but it is absolutely wrong. In the first place, cold storage articles should be so labelled that persons who are using them may know exactly
what they are getting. In the second place, regulations should be made governing the removal of articles from cold storage to an outside wholesale place, for example, because there is no doubt that such a change is calculated to injure the article, if it is meat or any farm product. As I said before, I did not have an opportunity of telling the minister my opinions upon this matter; but I mention to him now that when this bill comes before the House, I shall be prepared with some amendments to the Cold Storage Act of 1907, in addition to the ones which he has brought down in this resolution.
There seems to be some doubt whether or not municipal corporations have a right to take advantage of the act of 1907, and to get the 30 per cent which this and other governments have given to persons going into the cold storage business. As a matter of fact, the Cold Storage Act of 1907 placed no limitation upon people or corporations that decided to take advantage of it. The Governor-in-Council accepted applications from municipal corporations and private corporations. If in the good judgment of the Governor-in-Council, applicants could properly carry on a cold storage business, they gave them 30 per cent of the cost of building and equipment. It may be interesting to note that, prior to the outbreak of the war, a sum amounting to $722,506 was paid to persons and corporations that took advantage of the Cold Storage Act. For one year after the war there was only one applicant, and the government of that day thought it was time they should place a limit upon persons or corporations to whom this advantage should be given. I find Order in Council, P.C. No. 1103 of the year 1919, which recounts various transactions, amounts of money paid, and so on, in connection with cold storage, and one of the closing paragraphs states:
In view of the above, it would appear inadvisable to continue the payment of subsidies, except in the case of warehouses to be erected by municipal or other public governing bodies.
I am not prepared to say what the effect of that order in council is as against a statute; but at least it shows what the policy of the government was at that time. It shows also that the government of the day had particularly in view the matter of extending those privileges of cold storage to municipal corporations or other public governing bodies. I am afraid the matter of administration of cold storage under the act of 1907 has not been exactly what it should be. I take the same stand as the hon. member for Weyburn (Mr. Morrison), that if this government is going to contribute sums of money, large or small.
Cold Storage Act

to help out private individuals, municipal corporations, public bodies or others, for the public good, it should have absolute control over the general working out of that scheme. Unless this government is amply aware of the fact that it has the power to make regulations which will give it control over such bodies, I am afraid I am one of those who will be obliged to vote against the resolution of the Minister of Agriculture. We must not be hampered by laws as to jurisdiction; we must not be hampered in respect to technicalities. I think I know one way of getting over the legal technicality suggested by Mr. New-combe, and that is to introduce a new bill to amend the Cold Storage Act. Instead of making regulations which may or may not have the force of law, this parliament has ample and plenary jurisdiction to pass an amendment to the Cold Storage Act to preserve the rights of this government, this parliament and this country in the matter of cold storage. I would suggest to the minister that he should ask the law officers of his department or the law officers of the Justice department what their opinion is regarding my suggestion, because we, as legislators here, should realize to the full that the time has come when, if we are going to distribute public moneys over this country, we should have a great deal to say as to the purposes for which they are to be expended, and the regulations under which they are to be expended.


William Richard Motherwell: The point brought up by my hon. friend (Mr. Carroll) is a very important one. Shortly after I came down here, I took this matter up with the Deputy Minister of Justice. I had been familiar, in a general way, with the limitations of the federal laws with respect to matters of trade in provinces and similar matters, but I was not sufficiently familiar with them to have any opinion worth while on the subject. In discussing the question of making amendments to the Cold Storage Act, we very soon ran up against the limitation to which the hon. member refers. Since then, on further consultation with the Deputy Minister of Justice, we think we have discovered a solution. I was not intending to discuss it and I do not think I should discuss it here, because the matter is still in a tentative state. I think it will work out. It is along the line of supplementary legislation on the part of the provinces. That is, one way of getting over the difficulty is that to the extent that we have not authority, they, if they are willing, delegate to us that authority. The 
solution is not sufficiently advanced to discuss it any further just now than to say that I have the matter in mind, and I hope, before any cold storage institutions are established and are eligible to draw any subsidies, the solution will be at hand. We shall have to act on faith in the meantime. I think we should get the advantages of these subsidies; I think corporate institutions require to be built, not only in the dairy industry, but even more in the fruit industry, for example, in the Annapolis valley and in British Columbia. If we find that we cannot control these institutions-but I think we can-we can consider some subsequent action to take. I think, after that statement, I may hope for the support of my hon. friend. I recognize the limitations that the law had before, and I can see the absurdity of subsidizing an institution, if after the last instalment is paid, you have not full control. We hope that we have found a solution that will meet the situation; otherwise I would not be unfolding this proposition to the House to-day. As my hon. friend (Mr. Sales) knows, we have had some experience with these matters, and fortunate, too, notwithstanding the limitations. But we were working from the provincial standpoint then; now we are dealing with the matter federally. In reply to my hon. friend from Weyburn (Mr. Morrison), I might explain that when we started to prepare the bill we had the alternative of either a loan or a subsidy. Now, it is not considered quite the thing for a new minister to upset the work of his predecessor to too great an extent at the beginning, and as a compromise with that idea I at first thought of giving assistance in the shape of 15 per cent of a loan and an equal amount by way of subsidy, the loan of course returnable, the subsidy not. However, on more mature consideration I thought it best to re-introduce the matter in the same old way, and as time went on we cotild make any necessary changes. Personally, I do not like the idea of the federal government going into the loaning business; and if we were to give a loan I should have to consult the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding), who I am sure would be obliged to weigh the matter very carefully. On the other hand, the subsidy basis was established away back in 1907, and we thought it would be best just to make the old act begin to function again. That, no doubc, was taking the line of least resistance, but I think that in that direction we may hope for the best results in the immediate future. As time goes on modifications can be introduced. I am ready to modify the act now and accept

Cold Storage Act
my hon. friend's suggestion of half loan and half subsidy, or, if he likes, all loan. But I question very much whether the Minister of Finance would care to take up the loaning proposition, and I do not want to run counter to his views on an important matter like this that devolves so largely on his shoulders. For the present I prefer the subsidy. Government loaning of money, even in the provincial arena, has never appealed strongly to me. I believe that people can get into debt easily enough through the ordinary channels without becoming obligated to their respective governments, with all the objections that are implied in such relationships. And there are a whole lot of objections to governments loaning money to people.


Donald Sutherland: I desire to refer to
a remark made by the hon. member for Cape Breton (Mr. Carroll). In 1914 an order in council was passed safeguarding to a certain extent the rights of the general public. I believe it was the original intention of those who drafted the act to afford the public every access to the cold storage plants that were receiving bonuses from the government; and an order in council to that effect provides that owners of cold storage warehouses with whom contracts have been entered into for the payment of subsidies shall give refrigerator space to the public when such space is available. The minister said he doubted whether control could be exercised over these cold storage warehouses after the subsidy had been earned. But this order in council goes so far as to provide a penalty of $50 in any case where the public are denied cold storage space when spare space is available. So that 1 think the rights of the general public can be safeguarded. As to [DOT] "co-operative associations," I think the word "co-operative" is very misleading as applied to many organizations to-day. As a matter of fact, the great majority of the organizations known as co-operative associations are in effect joint stock companies. I know of some that are nothing else than joint stock companies; and no doubt when the bill is under consideration in committee we shall have a clearer definition of just what co-operative companies are. I merely want to point out, however, that - control has been exercised in the past over the plants that have received a bonus from the government, and evidently the amendment passed in 1919 was intended to make it clear beyond doubt that it was the general public who were being taken care of rather than the joint stock companies, the co-operative associations, or any other organization of that kind.


Mr. THOMPSON:: The minister might explain what a properly constituted co-operative society is. In the past, and particularly during the last two years, we have had some experience with co-operative societies in Ontario. I have in my hand the Trade Bulletin of February 2nd, and I shall quote briefly from it. In this journal, which is described as " a national business newspaper ", there appears the following:
Insufficient business was given as one of the reasons for failure by 200 farmers' buying and selling associations out of a total of 243 organizations which have ceased to function since 1913, a survey by the United States Department of Agriculture shows. Some of the other reasons given were, inefficient management by 148 organizations, insufficient capital by 73, over extension of credit by 35, dishonest management by 29 and concentrated control of the organization in the hands of a few members by 12.
The organizations included creameries and cheese factories, co-operative stores, fruit and vegetable associations, grain elevators, cotton organizations, tobacco organizations and miscellaneous co-operative associations. Of 219 organizations, 70 were creameries and cheese factories having an average life of 7.69 years;
20 were cotton associations with an average of 5.23 years; 37 were co-operative stores with an average life of 4.78 years; 38 were grain elevators with an average life of 4.39 years; 4 were tobacco associations with an average life of 4.25 years; 46 were fruit and vegetable associations with an average life of 3.07 years, and 4 were miscellaneous co-operative associations with an average life of 1.54 years. Of the organizations which failed, 170 were incorporated. Of the associations, 168 had capital stock and 58 organizations had no capital stock.
Until these co-operative societies are on a more stable basis the government I think would do well to be very careful in the spending of money along this line. Speaking for myself, I am opposed to the subsidizing of cold storage companies. The hon. minister stated that the reason for the change in the act of 1919 was the fact that it had ceased to function, that municipalities were not taking advantage of the act. The hon. minister has also stated that there has been no demand from co-operative societies. The government, it seems to me, is too anxious to spend money. We heard a lot yesterday about economy and I think they would be well advised to practise economy. For my part, I am opposed to expenditure along these lines. I am opposed to discriminating against the municipalities in favour of the co-operative societies.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Motherwell thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 9 to amend the Cold Storage Act, 1907.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Live Stock Acts



LIVE STOCK ACTS AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend and consolidate the Acts respecting Live Stock, and to provide for the establishment and regulation of live stock exchanges in connection with stockyards, the making and amending of by-laws, the issuing of licenses for commission merchants, the creation of Exporters' Associations, the regulation and issuing of licenses therefor, the equipment and regulation of stock-yards, the fixing of tariffs of fees therefor, the prescribing of general regulations of stock-yards by the Governor in Council, the requirements for shipping of live stock, the creation of inspectors and the providing for ports of importation; and to provide penalties for violations of the Act.
Motion agreed to and House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
William Richard Motherwell: Mr. Chairman, the bill that is to be introduced, based upon this resolution, is a consolidation of the Live Stock and Produce Act of some years ago and all the amendments thereto. The new features of the bill are important though not numerous.
First, the bill provides for the removal of members of live stock exchanges when they are expelled by their fellow-members. In the past, live stock exchanges, although able to discipline members for misdemeanors, have had no authority to carry their decisions into effect. This provision will give the Department of Agriculture the necessary authority to carnr out the wishes of live stock exchanges in that respect.
The bill also provides for the establishment of an egg-breaking plant to take care of inferior eggs, of which there are always some in Canada. A good many of these eggs in the past have been imported from China for baking purposes. We think now we have sufficient domestic supply of these eggs to satisfy our own requirements if they are taken care of in such a plant, where after being broken they are dried or frozen.
Exporters' associations are also provided for. As soon as the cattle embargo is taken off by the British authorities we expect our present exporters' associations will be supplemented by the organization of others, and by this amendment these institutions are brought within the provisions of the act.
We also propose to supervise imports of live stock and live stock products as to grading and such like to see that they comply with the standards set up under our own grading system.
I think that in a general way outlines the main features of the bill, which, after all, is 
largely a consolidation of the laws that we already have, merely supplementing them by giving additional authority to the department. It is not a money bill.


Donald Sutherland: Do I understand that the words "to provide for the creation of Exporters' Associations" do not apply to the department, or is it the intention of the government to organize such associations?


William Richard Motherwell: It is intended only to supervise the regulations of these associations and by incorporating them in our own regulations thus giving them the authority of law.


Donald Sutherland: The wording of the resolution is "to provide for the creation of Exporters' Associations."


William Richard Motherwell: We have a number of these associations now, but they are more or less disjointed, and we are providing for them to be recognized as legally constituted institutions. We have found a disposition in certain of our live stock yards to challenge our authority over their administration. The purpose of these changes is to make it quite clear that the Department of Agriculture has full jurisdiction over them, and that when any violations of the regulations occur we can give full effect to the law. In a word, our intention is to put the O.K. of parliament on the by-laws and regulations of these organizations and so incorporate them as part of the regulations of the department.


Mr. GARDINER:: Is it proposed to provide against discrimination in the unloading of cars at stockyards throughout Canada? In some cases railway companies have to unload the stock in the yards of competing companies, and I could produce evidence to show that where a railway sends its stock into the yard of a competing company, say after six o'clock at night, and the company owning the yard brings its stock in perhaps in the middle of the night or early in the morning, the company that owns the yard sees to it that its stock is unloaded first. I was wondering whether provision would be made in the bill to do away with that discrimination.


William Richard Motherwell: If this has to do with alleged discrimination on the part of railways, I should think it would have to be taken up in connection with the provisions of' the Railway Act. I will make a note of what my hon. friend says and see whether such a provision can be incorporated in the bill, but I do not think it can.


Robert Gardiner: I suggest that the Minister take the matter up and consider it care-

Fruit and Fruit Containers
fully, because it is very important. He can readily understand that one railway can discriminate very severely against another in this respect, and that is not a very satisfactory condition so far as stock-raising is concerned. I would ask the minister also whether under the provisions of the bill it will be possible for an owner to take his own stock into one of these yards and sell it on his own account if he so desires, after he has paid the necessary tolls and fees. Further, will it be possible for a farmer desiring to buy, say, a carload of stockers, to go into one of these stock-yards and buy from a farmer who may have stock there, without having to consult the commission men?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Donald Sutherland: The minister has stated that some of these exporters' associations are in process of organization in Ontario.


William Richard Motherwell: In eastern Ontario and Montreal.


Donald Sutherland: Will this legislation affect the individual shipper?


William Richard Motherwell: These associations are organized bodies of shippers, having mutual benefit in view, like any other organization.


Donald Sutherland: And they are to be licensed by the department?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Donald Sutherland: They will have to submit to certain regulations?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Donald Sutherland: The individual
shipper will not have to submit to those regulations?


William Richard Motherwell: He will have to
submit to the regulations in connection with this bill. Of course, the provisions with regard to the exporters' associations will not apply to those who do not belong to them.


Donald Sutherland: A year ago we had quite a discussion on the live stock business of this country, and the minister stated that certain persons were employed by
5 p.m. the department who might have to do with the exportation of Canadian live stock. Has it been on the recommendation of some of the persons engaged by the department that these provisions have been enacted?


William Richard Motherwell: As a rule, all these enactments are the result of recommendations made by those who are interested in the
matters concerned, and who know what the rquirements are.


Donald Sutherland: Is provision being
made to prevent the exportation of any particular classes of live stock?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know of any.


Donald Sutherland: About a year ago, I believe it was, great hopes were held out for the building up of an export trade in live stock to South America. Has anything developed along that line?


William Richard Motherwell: No.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: The resolution refers to
provision for ports of importation. I may point out that we already have certain ports through which live stock may enter Canada from foreign countries. These are well defined in connection with the work of the Health of Animals Branch and the operation .of the Animal Contagious Diseases Act. Are these words used here in connection with the working of this bill only?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Motherwell thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 10, to Amend and Consolidate the Acts respecting Live Stock.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



SALE AND INSPECTION OF FRUIT AND FRUIT CONTAINERS

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to regulate the Sale and Inspection of Fruit and Fruit Containers, and to provide for the fixing of grades for fruit in closed packages, and apples, crabapples and pears in boxes; for the marking and repacking of fruits grown in Canada; for the packing and branding of such fruit; for the regulation of dimensions of all packages, barrels and other containers of fruit; for the defining of the powers of inspectors; for the different penalties in consequence of the violations of the Act; and for the procedure to be followed in the enforcement of the Act and of the penalties prescribed.
Motion agreed to and House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
William Richard Motherwell: I may say briefly
that the new provisions of this legislation were asked for last year by the various fruit grower's organizations throughout Canada, but the request came in too late to be opera-



m
Fruit and Fruit Containers
tive during last year's fruit season and so the bill was not brought into force at that time. Now it has been again asked for, and we are bringing in a consolidated bill taking care of all the amendments, numbering some five or six, which have been made since the passage of the original act, known as the Fruit Marks Act, I think in 1901. The proposed bill in its entirety was asked for and agreed to by the different interests involved, including the growers and packers of fruit, the wholesale dealers, and all parties directly concerned in the fruit industry. The principal changes deal with the size of container. It has been found that our berry containers are only about four-fifths of the size of the American containers, and the result is that the surplus of our crop that is shipped to the United States has to be presented on that market in smaller containers than the United States containers, and consequently appears at a disadvantage. The request has also been made for a package of apples containing one-half of a barrel. It is said by those in the trade that many sales could be made of half a barrel when a full barrel could not be sold. It is therefore proposed to make provision for a container equal to the contents of half a barrel. None of these -changes will take place arbitrarily until the year 1924. All material that is now cut awaiting manufacture into containers of the present size may be used in the meantime if so desired.
The bill will provide for a new grading of apples. Our apple growers have found that with apples graded as No. 1 and No. 2 they are regarded as inferior when competing with fruit styled "fancy", and "extra fancy" as it is styled in the United States. Now it is often said there is nothing in a name, but having had something to do with the naming of our grades of wheat under the standards board many years ago, and even quite recently, I know there is something in a name. I know that if an article on the market is given a bad name it is handicapped with a bad getaway. Accordingly it is proposed to make a new grade for some of our fruits, particularly our apples, and also to have new-sized containers so that they will compete favourably on the American market when we ship any of our apples over there.	I think that covers fairly well all
the contemplated new provisions of the bill all of which, as I have already explained, were agreed to by the conference that met in Ottawa last February. The only thing that those attending the conference were not unanimous on at first was with respect to the size of berry boxes, but even in that matter they eventually reconciled their difference,

and unanimously made the recommendations which I have outlined.


John Livingstone Brown: In the proposed legislation is it made any easier for those who buy fruit and find they have been deceived in the grade to secure redress? I know that sometimes when we used to buy apples by the car load and distribute them, co-operatively, we would find they were not up to standard, and it was almost impossible to get any redress, despite the fact that there were regulations in effect.


Mr. CALDWELL:: Were those British
Columbia apples?


John Livingstone Brown: I shall not tell you where they came from.


William Richard Motherwell: I may say, the producers were in strong force at the conference referred to, but I cannot recall whether the consumers as a body were represented. I think they were, I believe I have a list of the representatives here.


John Livingstone Brown: It is the consumers I am thinking of in this respect.


William Richard Motherwell: If my hon. friend will bear with me for a moment I think I have a list here of all those who were present at that conference. I observe that those represented were-the growers' shipping organizations, the wholesale dealers, the barrel manufacturers, the box manufacturers, the basket manufacturers, and others including nurserymen and retailers. I am sorry to admit that the unfortunate consumer does not seem to have been represented. Therefore, if my hon. friend has any representations to make on the consumers' behalf I will be very pleased to take it up in committee. My proposal is that the bill be referred to the Committee on Agriculture where we shall have lots of time to thresh out the contemplated legislation in detail.


James Dew Chaplin: I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture if it is the intention of his department to change the marking of the Canadian package to conform to the marking in use, for example, in the state of Washington, where they have "extra fancy," "fancy" and so on, and to eliminate from our law the provision requiring that the grades be No. 1 and No. 2?


William Richard Motherwell: We propose to make the change in accordance with what the grade may be over there. If the committee decides that to use the names "extra fancy"

Seed Inspection
and "fancy," as in the United States is preferable to our system of grading apples as No. 1 and No. 2, then, of course, the packages will be marked accordingly.


James Dew Chaplin: I repeat my question-* is it the intention to make the grades here the same as the United States grade, "extra fancy," "fancy," "choice" and so on?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, I thought I had made that quite plain.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Motherwell thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 11, to regulate the sale and inspection of fruit and fruit containers.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



SEED INSPECTION

[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to regulate the testing, inspection and sale of seeds, and to provide for the regulation of the sale of clover, grasses, seed grain and fodder seeds, rape, field root and garden vegetable seeds in lots of over one pound, of one pound or less, and of seeds for export when purporting to have been inspected and graded; for the regulation of the importation of seeds; for the fixing of the powers and duties of inspectors, the time limit for complaints, the method of taking official samples, of making official reports and the publication of the same: for the fixing of penalties in connection with the violation. of the act, the liability of certain purchasers, the costs of proceedings, the rights of civil process, and the evidence acceptable in all cases.
Motion agreed to and House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the Chair.
William Richard Motherwell: I should like to make a short explanation. The original Seed Control Act was passed in 1905. It was preceded by two years of considerable educational work and some opposition. When the bill finally did pass-I think my hon. friend the Minister of Finance will recall the circumstance-it caused a great deal of discussion and was a long while going through the House. It was the first and the most advanced act of its kind up to that date. However, it stood the test of time until finally in 1911 it was replaced by a new act embodying certain new features and bringing the legislation up to date. That act of 1911 has not been amended since and it is proposed that its place shall be taken by the bill based on the resolution now before the committee. Hon. members will naturally ask: In what respect does it differ? In 1911, when the last act was passed, it was the most advanced act of this nature. Other countries have however come up to its
13i
provisions, and are now a little in advance of us. That is one argument why we should again take the act of 1911 and make it the basis of a new act. It is rather, significant that the act has continued for this length of time and has never been amended, but instead of being amended from time to time it is now being repealed, and a new act has been framed containing the portions of the old act that were found to be good with such amendments as are deemed necessary.
The old act made the grading of grass and clover seeds obligatory. The new act extends that principle and makes the grading of cereals obligatory when sold in the ordinary way by the dealers, but it does not interfere with trading transactions between farmers. That is distinctly understood. If a farmer goes into the seed grain business and goes into advertising he will have to comply with the act, but with reference to transactions between farmers it does not affect them in any way whatever.
With regard to the grading of clover and grasses, the standards are fixed by statute exactly as the grades of wheat are. Then, with regard to the grading of cereals, in order to take care of the fluctuations in climatic conditions, the grades are fixed by an advisory board from year to year, in the same way as the standards board in the West regulates the standard grades of grain. I think my hon. friends from the West will understand the distinction. I will go more fully into it when the bill is in committee, but it is the same principle that obtains in regard to our commercial grains in the West. The grade of seed clover is fixed by statute and the cereals are regulated by the advisory board in the same manner as the commercial grades are regulated by the standards board. The law also provides for an advisory board which can be referred to from time to time instead of going to parliament for legislation as to details.
There is a departure here which I would like to put before the committee, as it was inserted entirely at the instance of the seedsmen and producers who were here about three weeks ago in conference on this question. Many of the members of the committee will recall at some time or other new varieties of grain being thrown on the market, given fancy names, advertised extensively, and sold at fabulous prices, when they probably had no commercial value whatever. I am sure there is not a farmer in the committee who has not been stung at some time in respect to some of these varieties of grain or grasses, particularly grain, because in order to prevent the exploitation, not only of farm-
Seed Inspection

ers but of others, good business demands that before any new variety of cereals be put on the market, advertised and sold it be tried out as to its merits at some of our experimental farms. Then, if proven to be good, the introducers or originators are permitted to sell it to the public. We have that principle recognized in certain provinces in connection with the floating of joint stock companies and wildcat schemes. These proposals have to go before a local government board in some provinces before they can sell stock, and this resolution is simply carrying out that principle. I can see disadvantage, but I can also see some advantages. There was a wheat called Alaska sold very extensively in the West as being a fabulous producer, running up as high as 100 bushels to the acre. It had its day and passed away. We grow older but I am not sure that we always grow wiser. Somehow the next fellow who comes along will get somebody else. The idea is to provide against a repetition of that and incidentally to keep up the reputation of our seed merchants that are doing a legitimate business. The conference recommended this; it was in the original bill. When the bill comes before the committee I will be glad to have the benefit of the advice of those who are most concerned and I shall leave myself with an open mind as to whether such a provision shall be incorporated in the bill or not. There is one disadvantage. Take a real bona fide plant breeder who is developing a new variety; it may have a rather restraining and discouraging effect on him if he finds he has to put the results of his experiments in the hands of someone else for a year or two before he can place his product on the market. On the other hand if he believed his product was good, it should be a tremendously valuable medium of advertising to him if, after having tried it for two years on an experimental farm, he found that it was a good thing and he could sell it like hotcakes. So the matter has two sides to it, and I will leave it there with the committee at the present time. It is one of those details which I do not think I should mention at this stage, except that I want the committee to think about it between now and the time when we discuss it more fully in committee.
Provision is made in the bill to protect the quality, of our seeds for export so that our reputation abroad will be safeguarded. We want our certificate to be as good as our bond, so that when we say that our seeds are so-and-so and they are accompanied by a certificate, the goods will be found to be the same as the certificate says. The same may be said with regard to a provision respecting IMr. Motherwell.]
imported seeds, to provide that they comply with our standard also. The provisions with respect to the enforcement of the act are practically the same as those in the old act. This is not a bill dealing with money, and therefore it does not require anything further to be said about it in that respect.


John Livingstone Brown: In this measure, as in the old one, I suppose the definition of a commercial dealer will hold. Is it recognized that a farmer becomes a commercial dealer when he advertises that he has certain seeds for sale?


William Richard Motherwell: No. The question of what constituted advertising was discussed for a long time at the conference in my deputy's office. While it would take too long to give the committee all the details which are contained in the bill, a scheme has been worked out that will safeguard the farmers in that respect. The whole question was threshed out thoroughly at that conference. For example, the question of advertising in a farm paper that a farmer had seed for sale as it came from the threshing machine, was discussed. I myself have sold large quantities of grass seed to the seed houses of Brandon and Winnipeg, and that did not in any way infringe upon the provisions of the act.


John Livingstone Brown: That is satisfactory.


William Richard Motherwell: But if you went out to sell seeds, graded and specified by name and also complying with the conditions of the Seed Control Act, then you would have to come under the provisions of, and have to comply with the act, just as the seed merchants have to do, with respect to the provisions dealing with advertising. In other words, if a farmer became a seed merchant, he would have to be a seed merchant.


Mr. LOVIE:: Will there be in this measure a provision to prevent the sale of quack-grass mixed with brome-grass?


William Richard Motherwell: That is a very important question, and I do not know of any act that could provide for such a contingency. Unless the brome-grass is hand-picked and grown on some experimental farm or university farm, I do not think there is on the market any brome-grass that is not more or less mixed with quack-grass. It comes to us from Europe in that way. You may not notice the fact when it arrives; it may take several years before you detect the quack-grass; but it is not very long after you detect it before it becomes a serious menace. It is so like brome-grass that an ordinary observer cannot detect the difference. This legislation

Seed Inspection _
is exactly for the purpose of protecting the quality of seed. Our seed analysts will take the seed under a proper light on a sheet of paper, and by the methods known to them, by segregating the different kinds of seeds, picking out the noxious weeds, such as quack-grass or any other weed seeds, they will leave the residue clean. This measure provides for just so many weed seeds to the pound, but it should not and does not provide for any quack-grass -being there. It is extremely difficult to safeguard commercial seeds that are being put on the market from being contaminated with quack-grass, I have grown brome-grass for thirty years, the first seed coming from Austria. It was ten years, indeed more, after I started growing it, before I saw first signs of quack-grass. I had forgotten what Ontario quack-grass looked like, and I attributed this to some of the native quack-grass which you find so prevalent on the prairies and which are not nearly so harmful as the old-fashioned quack-grass. After a time, it got thicker and I had to go out of the business altogether in order to save my farm from pollution and my customers from charging me with selling noxious weeds in grass seed.


Mr. WOODS:: What safeguard has the farmer as regards the retail merchant? Have retail merchants to label all grades of seeds conspicuously on the bag containing the seeds so that the farmer may know exactly what he is buying?


William Richard Motherwell: The seeds are all graded and named-" Registered, No. 1, 2, 3, 4." There are four grades and the parcels must be so marked. If, upon examination, the contents do not prove to be so, why, you have an action in the usual way in the courts against the seed merchant who supplied you with the seed. The courts are constantly applying for the seed certificates that are given by the Seed branch, as evidence in case of charges in our ordinary courts.


Robert Gardiner: Does the minister contemplate reducing the number of weed seeds to the pound as under the old Seed Control Act?


William Richard Motherwell: I cannot just recall that. That is a detail which I do not have at my finger-tips. But you can understand that, in a whole wagon load, you cannot get seeds absolutely free from weed seeds. You have to stipulate a certain quantity of weed seeds, and I do not know whether that has been reduced in number or not. In 1911, when the act was introduced, it was thought to be a very severe act, and I would imagine,
now that it is twelve years since then, the restrictions have been tightened lip a little more.


Robert Gardiner: I would like to say, for the minister's benefit, that my experience is that Under the Seed Control Act, the number of noxious weed seeds allowed per pound in the average seed is much too high. I have been connected with municipal work in western Canada for something like seven years, in a district where I have had to supply from year to year much seed grass to the settlers of that particular district. I want to impress upon the minister that, it is important that he should look into this question and see to it that the Seed Control Act, as regards the number of noxious weed seeds to the pound, is tightened up much more than it is at the present time.


William Richard Motherwell: I think that is right.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: In the old Seed Control Act I always considered that there was one very great fault. Seed men were allowed to have three No. l's, for instance, three No. 1 Timothy-No. 1 Sun, which had a very small percentage of weed seeds; No. 1 Moon, which would be allowed a larger percentage of weed seeds, and No. 1 Star, which would have a still greater percentage of weed seeds. I have known merchants to be selling No. 1 Star, which was actually a No. 3, or should be, as No. 1. It was the third grade of Timothy; but this was marked on the bag as .No. 1 government standard and was sold in competition with the actual No. 1. Our agricultural society used to buy for its members No. 1 Sun. A local storekeeper would be able to sell No. 3 grade marked No. 1, government standard, and assert it was the same, while as a matter of fact it would be two grades lower in quality. In this new act there should be no misunderstanding in this matter. The grades should be marked 1, 2 and 3; there should not be three grades of No. 1, which would have a misleading effect.


William Richard Motherwell: I think so.


Mr. GOULD:: In western Canada many initial elevators in the spring advertise that they have different kinds of cereals for sale. Will these initial elevators come under the provisions of the act and be regarded as dealers in the sense of this proposed legislation? In my town there is a firm that does an extensive seed business, so extensive, in fact, that the other elevators compete with it. It provides seed grains in quantities of 100, 200,
Vancouver Harbour

300 and 400 bushels. I myself am a patron of this company, and while I am not particularly complaining of the brand of grain I have received from these elevators, knowing it to be more or less a local product, yet I have wondered whether, in the broad sense of the act, the initial elevators throughout the country that make a business of supplying seed to farmers should not come under the provisions of the act as dealers.


William Richard Motherwell: I take it that seed supplied by these elevators is what is called commercial seed. I cannot imagine the seed growing in the district my hon. friend refers to, cleaned with the average machinery that we find in elevators, being such as would come under the provisions of this legislation. If they advertise their seed to be of certain standards and it is not, then they violate the act.


Mr. SENN:: The resolution calls for a regulation of the importation of seed. Is there any provision in the bill that the place of origin shall be stated? The value of the seed depends on where it is grown. Alfalfa seeds grown in southern countries would be of little use to us in Canada because the varieties are not hardy enough, and I think it would be well for the minister to provide in the bill that the place where the seed comes from shall be stated.


William Richard Motherwell: There will dc a provision to that effect. One of the things that gives Canada its good reputation for seed grain is its northern location, and the bill makes provision for that not only with respect to home grown grain but with regard to imports as well.


Oliver Robert Gould: There is a clause with regard to a time limit for complaints. Has the minister in mind any specific time within which complaints shall be registered against any defaulting seed firm?


William Richard Motherwell: There is a time limit, but I do not recall having seen it in the draft. A farmer might not know until after harvest whether he had been sold grain of the wrong grade; and, in fact, in the case of grass seeds, he might not know for a couple of years. This is important and I shall make a note of it.


Mr. STEEDSMAN:: In the cases of vegetable seeds sold in packages of less than a pound, will the weight of the package be indicated on the package itself?


William Richard Motherwell: Seeds, like any
other grain, are sold by weight, and if the oackage does not come up to weight require-
?Mr. Gould.]
ments, of course the usual action will hold. There is no recognized container for seeds except very small parcels. Seeds are usually put up in sacks which are very often marked, although at times the weight is not indicated. The principal thing is the variety and quality of the seed.


James Steedsman: I was referring particularly to seeds sold in packages of less than a pound.


William Richard Motherwell: There is a provision with respect to packages of less than a pound. There is also a provision with regard to garden seeds. I do not know of any law that determines all the things we should know with respect to the seed packages we get from these seed houses, but I shall take a note of this point and look into it.


John Livingstone Brown: The seed houses disclaim any responsibility in regard to seed that does not come true to description. Is that taken into account?


William Richard Motherwell: They must be responsible for the variety.


John Livingstone Brown: But they disclaim this responsibility in their advertisements.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Motherwell thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 12, respecting the testing, inspection and sale of seed.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



VANCOUVER HARBOUR'

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, That it is expedient to provide,-
1.	That the Governor in Council mas', from time to time, advance and pay to the Corporation of the Vancouver Harbour Commissioners, hereinafter called "the Corporation," such sums of money, not exceeding in the whole the sum of five million dollars, as are required to enable the Corporation to carry on the construction of such terminal facilities as are necessary to properly equip the Port of Vancouver.
2.	That during the period of construction of the terminal facilities mentioned in these Resolutions the interest payable on the debentures receivable by the Minister of Finance in exchange for such advances shall be deemed to be money required to construct and to be part of the cost of construction of the said terminal facilities, and such interest may be paid out of the said sum of five million dollars.
3.	That the Corporation shall submit to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries for approval, monthly applications for such advances, with statements showing total expenditure on different items in detail, and upon approval, authority for the payment of the amount applied for may be granted by the Governor in Council.

Standing Committees
4.	That the Corporation shall, upon any advances being made, deposit with the Minister of Finance debentures of the Corporation equal in par value to the advance so made, repayable within twenty-five years from the date of issue, and bearing interest payable half-yearly at the rate of five per centum per annum.
5.	That the principal and interest of any sums advanced under any Act founded on these Resolutions shall be payable by the Corporation out of all its property, assets, tolls, rates, dues, penalties and other sources of revenue and income whatsoever, and shall rank as a charge thereon and have precedence in regard to payment next after the payments provided for in Section 27 of Chapter 54 of the Statutes of 1913.
Mr. L. J. LADNER (Vancouver South):: I would suggest that the hon. minister allow this resolution to stand until Monday. The hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens), who is well informed on this important matter, desires to discuss it, and there are features of it which I think it would be of interest to the House and to the country to have him deal with.


Ernest Lapointe: I am quite willing to
accede to the request of my hon. friend.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Next sitting.
Resolution stands.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As it is a few minutes to six o'clock, Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. We rather expected to take up and dispose of the several government notices of motion on the order paper, but as the last resolution has been postponed, the government orders had better stand over until next week.
Motion agreed to and the House adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
Monday, February 12, 1923