1924-03-28

MESSAGE FROM THE GOVERNOR GENERAL


Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the House that I have received a message from His Excellency the Governor General, signed by his own hand, reading as follows:
I have received with great pleasure the Address you have voted in reply to ray Speech at the opening of Parliament and thank you for it sincerely.
Bynq or Vimy.
Government House, Ottawa.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 22, to amend an Act to incorporate the Burrard Inlet Tunnel and Bridge Company.-Mr. Clark.
Bill No. 23, respecting the Commercial Travellers Mutual Insurance Company-Mr. Ryckman.

Mr. R. B. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present the petition of the Hon. Oswald S. Crocket and 434 others, communicants and adherents of St. Paul's Presbyterian Church, Fredericton, New Brunswick, against the proposed church union bill; also the petition of William A. Shaw, of the Presbyterian Church Mission of New Maryland and Hanwell, York county, New Brunswick, against, the proposed church union.


Mr. MURRAY MacLAREN (St. John City and Counties of St. John and Albert):: I desire to present a petition from members and adherents of St. Andrew's Church, St. John, New Brunswick, asking that the church union bill be not passed.
Export oj Pulpwood



DIVORCE

[Stage Direction]
equality of grounds for relief as

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JOS. T. SHAW (West Calgary): moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 24, respecting divorce.
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Explain.


Mr. SHAW:: The object of the proposed bill is to place the sexes on an equality so far as divorce is concerned. It is in accordance with the resolution which I introduced into the House a short time ago.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



HOME BANK


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, last night in referring to the gentlemen who appeared before the government to present the petition of the depositors of the Home Bank I stated that two hon. members of the House of Commons were present with tljp deputation, namely, the hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Mc-Killop) and the member for Leeds (Mr. H. A. Stewart). The hon. member for Leeds corrected me, and then I said it was the hon. member for West Hamilton (Mr. T. J. Stewart). I was speaking from memory at the time. I have since looked at the record and I find I was in error in saying that it was the hon. member for West Hamilton; it was the hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. St. Pere), who was present with the hon. member for West Elgin. I wish to make that correction.



EXPORT OF PULPWOOD

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to call the attention of the government to a very obvious error in the reply to a question of yesterday, and I would like the government to have the question restored and the correct answer given. The question was by myself, and appears on page 726 of Hansard.
I quote:
Under what authority of what statute did the government pass Order in Council P.C. 1563 of August 14, 1923, guaranteeing to permit for a period of ten years the shipping out of pulpwood from Canada under existing contracts?
The answer was:
Right Hon. Mr. Mackenzie King: Under authority of chapter 46, Statutes of Canada, 1923. 13-14 George V. 
This statute I have before me. It is very simple. The statute simply authorizes the government to prohibit the exportation of pulpwood and was passed on the 30th of June, 1923. It adds pulpwood to the articles permitted to be prohibited under chapter 50, of the statutes of 1906, which statute reads as follows:
The Governor in Council may by regulation prohibit the exportation from Canada of petroleum in its crude or partly manufactured state.
With the addition of last year it will read:
-and pulpwood of the variety, kind, place of origin or having the particulars of identification or ownership or production described in the regulation.
The government will see at once that it merely authorizes the prohibition. It does not authorize any exception.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: In giving the answer
I may say I was guided by the order in council itself. The order in council was drafted by the ex-Minister of Justice, and I assumed that it stated accurately the authority. I will be pleased to lay on the Table of the House a copy of the order in council. I am glad my right hon. friend has brought the matter up if the authority is not correct.


Arthur Meighen: I would ask the Prime
Minister to refer the matter to the Justice department again. I am sure they would never allege there was authority there.
DOMINION LANDS ACT On the Orders of the Day:


Mr. NEIL McTAGGART (Maple Creek):: Is it the intention of the government to introduce legislation at this session of the House amending the Dominion Lands Act with its amendments, and if so, what is the nature of the proposed legislation in this regard?


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior):: We have the matter under
consideration, but at the moment I am unable to say definitely what the amendments will be.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS

[Stage Direction]
BRANCH LINES BILLS On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. M. N. CAMPBELL (Mackenzie):: Is it the intention of the government to refer the various branch lines bills to the select standing committee on Railways and Canals for consideration?
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways): It is not the intention to refer the branch lines bills to the Railway committee.

Penitentiaries Act



INTERNATIONAL DEEP WATERWAYS COMMISSION.

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. JOHN MILLAR (Qu'Appelle):: Does the government deem it necessary it should give consideration to the allegations of some United States newspapers, including the Engineering News-Record of New York, of March 20, that President Coolidge's appointees to the International St. Lawrence Deep Waterways Commission, with few exceptions are strongly in favour of the project?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If I gathered my hon.
friend's question aright it is: Does the government intend to observe that most of the appointees on the National Committee the United States government is appointing are in favour of the deep waterways project, and will this government govern its action accordingly?


John Millar: In effect, does the government consider it its duty to recognize or take cognizance of that fact in any way?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I cannot say,
of course, how accurate the report may be. I cannot say whether it is true or not true, that the American appointees are all in favour of the deep waterways project. I imagine that what my hon. friend wishes to elicit is whether our government in making its nominations to our National Committee intends to appoint only those who are in favour of the project. If that is what he has in mind, I would say to him that the government will endeavour to name as members of the National Committee gentlemen whose judgment will be recognized as independent in a matter of this kind.



INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES INVESTIGATION ACT, 1907, AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. JAMES MURDOCK (Minister of Labour) moved the third reading of Bill No. 7, to amend the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, 1907.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of Bill No. 12, to amend the Penitentiaries Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the House went into committee thereon, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
On section 1-Power of warden and officers to prevent escape and to effect arrest and recapture of escaping convicts.
Mr. LAPOINTE:: I gave the explanation on the first reading of the bill.


Arthur Meighen: Has any concrete case arisen where the power of the warden has been impugned?


Ernest Lapointe: I am informed by the department that some tribunals have expressed a doubt as to the power of the wardens and officers to use the same means in arresting or preventing the escape and effecting the recapture of convicts who were escaping as if the convict had been convicted or was under imprisonment for felony. Practically, under the Criminal Code, the former distinction between a felony and a misdemeanour has been abolished, but still there is a doubt as to whether the same force could be used in arresting a prisoner or preventing his escape, when the offences are not those which were felonies under the former act.


Arthur Meighen: Who would be included ' within the meaning of the term, "officers"?


Ernest Lapointe: The guards.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Where convict to be confined pending determination of his appeal.
Ernest Lapointe: As my right hon. friend knows, there was an amendment made to the Criminal Code last year giving prisoners the right of appeal against their conviction, but no amendment was made to the Penitentiaries Act to say where those prisoners should be kept until'their case was finally disposed of. Of course, the penitentiary is a place of punishment, and is not a proper place for the detention of prisoners whose fate has not been decided, and who are not considered as convicts. The purpose of this section is to provide that they shall be kept in a common gaol until their appeal has been disposed of.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: That is, if there is an appeal. But in cases where there is no appeal?


Ernest Lapointe: There are rules of the various courts that under the act you must determine the period of delay during which the appeal must be made. Until that delay has expired they shall be kept in the common gaol unless before the expiration of the delay they serve notice that they want to appeal, and then they shall be moved to the penitentiary.
Penitentiaries Act


William Garland McQuarrie: The principle of this
legislation seems to be that a man shall not be taken to the penitentiary until after the expiration of the time limited for appeal?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: Whether he takes an
appeal or not?


Ernest Lapointe: Yes. .


William Garland McQuarrie: Provided the person
committed may notify the Crown that he does not intend to appeal?


Ernest Lapointe: Exactly.


William Garland McQuarrie: This seems to me to be a wrong principle to embody in legislation of this kind; that is, it is not necessary to anticipate appeals in all cases. If a man does not wish to go to the penitentiary he can give notice of appeal. In that case, of course, it would be quite proper that he should not be taken to the penitentiary.


Ernest Lapointe: It will not be of any
advantage to the man to act as my hon. friend suggests, because he will be in gaol pending the appeal, and the time in which the appeal may be entered will not count on his sentence. He will have to serve the full period of the sentence if he goes to the penitentiary.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: Sub-section 4 of section 2 reads as follows:
Any period during which a convict is detained in the gaol or other place of confinement pursuant to the authority of this section shall not be computed as time served in the execution of his sentence.
I understand it has been customary in the past to leave such a matter to the discretion of the judge-that is, as to whether time served in the place of confinement prior to the execution of a sentence shall count as part of the prisoner's term.


Ernest Lapointe: The judges will take
that into consideration, after this bill has been passed, just as they have been doing previously. However, my hon. friend will understand this: A prisoner who is awaiting conviction cannot be treated as a man who is serving a sentence-he is not as a matter of fact-and by lodging an appeal he hopes to escape conviction. He is in the position of a man who is awaiting his trial. In the case of the man who has been tried the time during which he is in gaol is not computed in connection with his sentence. The judge, of

course, can impose a lighter sentence if he pleases, but under the law the time of the prisoner's stay in gaol does not form part of his sentence.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister's explanation convinces me that this subsection is not necessary. I would therefore suggest that it be withdrawn, leaving the law as it is at present. The subsection specifically states that the time served in gaol shall not be computed as part of the sentence: the minister is laying down a definite regulation in this bill.


Arthur Meighen: I agree wholly with what the minister says; but suppose the judge on appeal says the sentence shall be reduced from six years to four years? Then the question comes, does the time the prisoner has served count? This law applies and says it does not; he must serve four years in the penitentiary.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution :
That it is expedient to amend the act to amend the Judges Act, chapter fifty-six of the statutes of 1920, section seven, to provide that the salary of the judge of the Territorial Court of the Yukon Territory be increased from seven thousand to nine thousand dollars per annum, but the increase of salary so granted shall not entitle the judge to any increase in the annuity which may be granted him on retirement in excess of six thousand dollars.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Arthur Meighen: Would the minister explain how it is that every resolution we ever have about salaries, or almost any other subject, means an increase in expenditure? I remember strong pressure for years back-


Mr. BELAND:: Especially for judges.


Arthur Meighen: Especially for judges?

I do not know but that that is correct;- and deputy ministers too, especially for those who have pretty good salaries. I do not want to be taking that stand merely arbitrarily on every case, but is it not a fact that the judge of the Yukon district has been drawing $10,000, in reality, as compared with another judge?-that is to say $5,000 denominated salary, and $5,000 as living expenses which, of course, the ordinary judge does not have. Possibly that $5,000 was increased to $7,000, it

Judges' Act-Yukon
must have been, according to this resolution, so that this judge has been drawing $7,000 of late years as salary and $5,000 living expenses. Well, in all conscience, is not that enough?


Ernest Lapointe: There is a living allowance for the judge in the Yukon of $5,000 as my right hon. friend says, and we are going to see that he does not receive that full allowance when he receives this increase. He is getting an increase that puts him on the same level as all the other judges of superior jurisdiction in Canada. He is the only one, out of all the judges of the land, in the High Courts, who does not receive a salary of $9,000. This is just for the purpose of placing him in a position of equality with the others. He has the same standing, he must possess the same qualifications, and he must be there to do the work. Hereafter, instead of receiving $5,000 living allowance he will be paid only $3,000 and will be given the status of the other judges.


Henri Sévérin Béland: After that I withdraw my objection.


Arthur Meighen: I believe in one way it
is just as indefensible as it was before. Is he really not getting $3,000 more than any other judge? He certainly has not the heaviest jurisdiction.


Ernest Lapointe: Well, he was receiving
$5,000 of a living allowance on account of living in the Yukon. After this resolution is passed he will receive only $3,000, and there will be a saving to the country in that respect.


Mr. HOCKEN:: He will not get any more
in future than he has been getting?


Ernest Lapointe: No.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Then what is the sense
of making the change?


Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: I should like to
make the situation clearer to the committee. By the revised statutes of Canada, chapter 138, the salary of the judge of the Yukon territory was fixed at $5,000 a year. By the same act the salaries of the Superior Court judges of Quebec and of the High Court of Justice of Ontario were fixed at $7,000 a year; and those of the judges of the Supreme Courts of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta, and of the Court of the King's Bench of Manitoba, at $6,000 a year. By section 192 of the act it is provided that the judges of any of the above courts, after serving fifteen years, might be retired on an annuity equal to twothirds of their salary at that time. In the case of the judges of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec the amount would be $4,666. The judges of the other provinces would receive $4,000, and the judges of the Yukon territory would be entitled to receive $3,333. By chapter 59 of the Statutes of Canada, 1919, the salaries of the judges of the classes mentioned in the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Alberta, were increased to $7,000. There was no corresponding increase for the judge in the Territorial Court of the Yukon. By chapter 56 of the Statutes of Canada, 1920, the salaries of the judges of the classes I have named-New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan, and including the judges of the High Court division in Ontario and judges of the Supreme Court in Quebec-were all increased to $9,000. The salaries of the judge of the Territorial Court of the Yukon was increased to $7,000. By section 20 of chapter 138 of the Revised Statutes, 1906, it is provided that if one has continued in office as judge of one or more of the said courts for thirty years or upwards he may resign, and the government may grant him an annuity equal to his salary for life. By chapter 56, 1920, under which act the salaries of the judges of the provinces were increased to $9,000, and the salary of the judge of the Territorial Court of the Yukon was increased to $7,000, it is provided by section 13 that the increases of salary granted by that act shall not entitle any judge to any increase in the annuity which may be granted to such judge under the provisions of section 20 to which I have referred, and the effect of this is that the judges of the province, if retiring after thirty years' service, retire at $7,000 per year, while without this resolution now before the House the judge of the Territorial Court of the Yukon would retire at $5,000, and with this resolution he would retire at $6,000 a year. This resolution is doing him partial justice, but I say that it does not put him on an equal footing with judges of his rank throughout Canada. I therefore move that the word "six" be struck out of the resolution and that the word "seven" be substituted therefor; so that when the judge in the Yukon has served thirty years he may be retired on the same terms as his brother judges. After serving thirty years there is no reason why he should not be put on the same footing as the others. It may have been extravagant to increase the salaries of the judges all over Canada as was done in 1919 and 1920, but if you are going to do it, be consistent
Judges' Act-Yukon

and do it for the whole of Canada. I say that the government should not consider granting a judge an annuity of two-thirds of his salary and accepting his resignation now. I do not think there should be any thought of that on the part of the government. I do not know that the judge has it in mind, but, if he has, the government should not stand for it. I am happy to say the judge is in excellent health, and a comparatively young man. The time has not come for his retirement. The judge is there, and the court is necessary for the territory. The community is an isolated one, far removed from any of the provinces. Valuable interests, valuable property and civil rights are involved in actions. It is necessary to have a judge of Supreme Court jurisdiction to preside at the criminal court. The idea that judges might be sent on circuit from British Columbia to take the place of the Yukon judge has been mooted. This would not be practicable nor economical, and it would be most disastrous to the people before the court. I would like to point out that should the government accept the judge's resignation now his retiring allowance would be $6,000, in addition to which it would be necessary to appoint and pay another judge, and there is no reason to suppose it would cost less than the cost at present, which is $12,000 per annum, and instead of costing the country $12,000 it would be costing $18,000 a year to retire the judge and appoint another. In fact it would be costing $23,000 a year because we have now one judge who has been retired for a good many years on a pension of $5,000 a year. There is no need for such increased expenditure. Our present judge is quite competent physically and mentally to discharge the duties of his office, and I for one hope he will be spared for many years, and hope the government will continue him in office.
I say this judge should be entitled to retire at the same amount as the judges of his rank throughout Canada, which is $7,000. The amendment to the resolution will not at this time cost the country a cent more than the resolution as it stands. And in fact the resolution as it stands does not at this time entail any extra expense to the country; it only provides for dealing fairly with the judge when the time comes for his retirement.


Ernest Lapointe: I am glad my hon.
friend has come to my rescue in regard to the mild charge of extravagance laid by my right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen). The hon. member says that 
apparently I am not doing justice to the Yukon Territory by the bill which is before the committee; but I think we are doing full justice to the judge there. Under the Statutes of 1920, to which my hon. friend referred, all the judges who would avail themselves of the increase by the statute would lose the benefit of section 20 which gives them the right to retire after a certain number of years with their full pension. Section 20 of the Judges' Act is repealed, so far as the judges who have accepted the increase given by the Statutes of 1920 are concerned. I think the same principle can be applied today, and the judge of the Yukon Territory whose salary is $9,000 according to the increase which is provided for by the present bill, should not benefit by section 20 of the act, and should be entitled only to two-thirds of his salary when he is superannuated. I really believe that by this bill we are placing the judge of the Yukon in exactly the same position as the other judges whose salaries were increased in 1920.


The CHAIRMAN:: The question is on the amendment. The amendment proposed by the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Black) provides for an increase in the impost, and in my opinion is out of order.


George Black: I do not want to discuss the point of order at any length. I note the way the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) put it, but my intention is not to come to his rescue against any fair criticism that may be offered to this resolution. I merely wish to put the facts fairly before the committee, and let the House understand that in this resolution the only object as far as I can see is to do justice to the judge of the Yukon. And I submit that while the resolution goes part way it does not go far enough. If the amendment is ruled out of order, it has the same fate as any other resolution which is out of order.


George Newcombe Gordon: I declare the resolution moved by the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Black) out of order.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Lapointe thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 25, to amend the Judges' Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.

Supply-Agriculture
Agriculture-experimental farms, $1,400,000.
Edward Joseph Garland: What is
the annual cost of each of the following substations: Fort Smith, Fort Resolution, and Fort Providence, Northwest Territories, and Fort Vermilion, Alberta?


Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture):: It will take only a moment
or two to hunt up those figures, and in the meantime I might perhaps make some explanation with respect to this somewhat substantial reduction in the appropriation for experimental farms. Possibly this reduction will be too large to suit some and too small to suit others; but, speaking generally, I think it is in fair conformity with reductions in the estimates which have resulted in an aggregate reduction of $46,000,000. We hope, however, not to curtail the services to any appreciable extent; but certain activities will have to be dispensed with in order, with this reduction, to take care of the work.
I might refer to the contemplated establishment of a new experimental farm in the northern part of British Columbia. In a sense, there was a commitment to that by the government which preceded this one. I visited that territory myself two years ago, and with certain reservations I would say that the promises of my predecessor were substantiated by myself. We find, however, that that will have to be deferred a little longer. As regards the proposed extension of the Brandon farm which has been flooded very considerably during the past two years, and which should have an extension of territory attached to it on the bench land above the valley at Brandon, we shall have to wait a little while before we make that necessary outlay. These are some of the retrenchments that we shall have to consider in order to carry on these farms without any decrease in efficiency. The figures asked for by my hon. friend from Bow River (Mr. Garland) are
as follows:
Swede Creek, Dawson, Yukon Territory	 $2,020
Fort Smith, Fort Resolution and Fort Providence 690 Fort Vermilion	 5,525


Edward Joseph Garland: I would now ask the minister for justification for the Fort Vermilion farm. It is very far in the north country; it has very little settlement around it, and it costs quite a bit of money.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, it is quite possible that we may have extended our frontier rapidly in many respects as well as in the establishmnet of sub-stations. Our policy used to be that we could not get too far towards the
setting sun, and that was carried out by our pioneer farmers as well. I presume that it was in conformity with that general policy, that this sub-station was opened about fifteen years ago. While possibly we are living in a period of retrenchment, we have not thought it advisable to do anything in the way of abolishing experiments that have been conducted at that sub-station. Whatever my personal views might be with regard to this work, I feel a little loath to begin to tear down any of the work of my predecessors who have been building up those institutions for the last forty years. Yet I hope, where it is shown that they are not required; that the money is either wholly or partially wasted; that there is no possible chance of settlement or of gaining useful information, that change can be brought about if necessary.


Mr. LEWIS:: How does the expenditure at Fort Vermilion this year compare with previous expenditures?


William Richard Motherwell: It will be about the same. I have a note that indicates that wheat has been ripened every year except one at Fort Vermilion, and of course where wheat will ripen, coarse grains will ripen better still. I shall be glad to have any views regarding the desirability of keeping' those northern sub-stations open. The expense is not very heavy. I understand that in that district there are some three or four hundred settlers. I am sure the advantages of that pioneer district will be comparatively limited, and if we do anything to abolish this institution, those settlers may feel that we are deserting them altogether. I understand settlers are still going in there.


Mr. GARDINER:: What value has this station to the settlers?


William Richard Motherwell: Exactly the same information is given by this farm as is given by any other experimental station. Instead of every settler carrying out a line of experiments at his own expense, this sub-station demonstrates just what the locality is adapted for. There is no doubt that we have had pioneer districts established1 in Canada, particularly in the older parts of Ontario and some other places, without the aid of such institutions; but it is equally true that new settlers coming in are materially assisted by these experimental stations.


Robert Gardiner: How far is this substation from a railway?


William Richard Motherwell: About four hundred miles.
Suppl y-A griculture


Robert Gardiner: This station would no doubt induce other settlers to locate in that district and ultimately the cost to the country of the work carried on there would be considerably greater. The place being so far from a railway, does the minister think he is justified in keeping the station open?


William Richard Motherwell: That, of course, is a question that is open to argument. I might say that I myself once went in two hundred miles from a railway, and from my experience I am inclined to be somewhat sympathetic towards these people.


Mr. McMASTER:: The minister forgets that he was self-supporting, whereas this experimental farm is not.


William Richard Motherwell: That, of course, is true. But there are a great many institutions that are not self-supporting which at one time were, and I do not know whether this is to our advantage or not. If we take the ground that these settlers should not have gone in there, and if for that reason we discontinue the work of this station, it will be tantamount to telling these people that so far as we are concerned they will have to get along as best they can. If that is the view hon. gentlemen take, then I shall look into the matter; but for my part I do not think that would be wise.


Robert Gardiner: What income is derived from this particular station?


William Richard Motherwell: The gross income
is practically nil, because there is no market.


Mr. BRETHEN:: Is it a home market for the settlers?


William Richard Motherwell: Perhaps my hon.
friend from New Westminister (Mr. Mc-Quarrie) could answer that question.


Edward Joseph Garland: I do not wish to be unfair to the minister, but, frankly, I think that he might very seriously consider the advisability of suspending all operations at this sub-station. I understand that we are bending all our efforts to the settlement of those parts of Canada that are situated within reasonable distances of our many railways; but there is no prospect of a railway going into this particular locality. It is four hundred miles from a railway and I hope it will be many years before very many people go there, because it will cost the country so much, and without a railway I do not think the expense woul(j_be justified. I am not suggesting that the minister should virtually say to the settlers out there that he throws up the sponge and that no one can 
exist in that part of the country. But it seems to me that the settlers themselves realize far better than the minister does that they cannot make money there; probably they are barely existing.


Mr. MOTHER WELL:: The question is a proper one for discussion. This winter I have discussed the matter fully with my officers, somewhat along the line indicated by my hon. friend, and I was forced to the conclusion that it would be very much like cruelty to deprive the people in that district of the advantages they get from this station. I do not know that we should have too much sentiment in matters of this kind, but, as one who has pioneered in the West, I do not feel just now like taking the institution away from them. In my opinion the policy of development in the West has suggested a reaching out towards the setting sun.


Mr. FORKE:: What is the population?


William Richard Motherwell: There are about three or four hundred in the district. These small communities are getting smaller all the time, because, although new settlers are going in, the old ones are leaving.


Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton):: This district is located three hundred miles down the Peace river from the town of Peace River, and about six hundred and fifty miles north of Edmonton. I understand, as the minister himself has said, that the population is between three and four hundred. An hon. member asks what can be grown in this place. For thirty-six years there has been general farming and I think it was in 1917 that some 3,000 or 4,000 bushels of wheat were shipped to Fort William from this point. If that farm serves no greater purpose than an experimental station for three .	or four hundred settlers I am doubt-
4 p.m. ful whether we can afford the expenditure it entails. I am not familiar with all the circumstances in connection with the establishment of the farm, nor do I know just what work has been done there. I have never been able to get down to the district to look into conditions and so I am not in a position to speak with authority. I feel however that as we have been advocating economy generally, some of us possibly will have to begin at home. I should hate to say, however, that the farm should be discontinued, because I do not know enough about the work it does to take any emphatic stand on the question. There is in that north country, in the Grand Prairie district, another station, the Beaver Lodge farm which serves a very much larger territory, and I understand that

Supply-Agriculture
the cost of that farm is about $10,000 per annum. The great difficulty which the people at Fort Vermilion have to contend against is that of transportation. I think they know pretty well what they can grow and I would very much rather see the money spent in providing them with some sort of transportation. I have been advocating some assistance to a steamboat that would run between Peace river and Fort Vermilion and also up to Fort St. John. There are a number of settlements scattered along between Peace river and Fort Vermilion, such as the Keg river settlement, which are all served by this experimental farm. Speaking generally, the experimental farm business has got far ahead of the practical possibilities of the ordinary farm. While we have a vast territory up there, as large almost as all the rest of Alberta, we have at Edmonton a great provincial government farm under the university. One hundred miles south we have the Lacombe farm, and south of that again the farm at Lethbridge. While the farm at Lethbridge does different work from that of the other two farms, in that it is in the centre of a district that required irrigation, I cannot see and never could see any reason for two farms in the territory between Lacombe and Edmonton when they do exactly the same work under practically the same conditions.


Mr. LUCAS:: Does the minister not think
that the time has come when a different .policy should be adopted in connection with experimental farms? I believe that the different provinces throughout Canada, now that they are all properly organized, are in a better position to conduct experimental work than the Dominion, and some policy should be instituted that would obviate a great deal of the overlapping which now obtains. If this work were left to the provincial governments, aid being given by the Dominion such as was given under the Agricultural Instruction Act and the Dominion devoting its energies entirely to research work, the results would be much more beneficial to the country. We are all familiar with the great benefit that resulted to Canada from the introduction of Marquis wheat by Dr. Saunders. The research work of Canada is being starved to-day through lack of sufficient money to pay adequate salaries in order that capable men may be attracted to it. One thing we in western Canada suffer from to-day is lack of suitable grasses for that country, and if our research institutions could produce a grass that would become native to the western districts as clover is to Ontario, they would render a service of
inestimable value. The minister might well consider the matter of a new policy in connection with experimental farms.


Mr. TOLMIE:: In view of the very large
expenditure to be made on the experimental farm system, $1,400,000, I suggest that the minister give us an outline of the work which is the justification of that expenditure. The work being carried on is a very valuable work indeed, and we would like to know what progress is being made with those farms and what new developments have taken place within the last year or two.


William Richard Motherwell: Replying to the
hon. member (Mr. Lucas) with respect to the advisability of adopting some new and advanced policy in dealing with experimental farms, I might first recite briefly some of the steps taken during the last forty years in connection with the establishment of these farms. During the administration of Sir John A. Macdonald, the first group of farms was established, consisting of the central one here and four branch farms at Nappan, Brandon, Indian Head and Agassiz respectively. For a number of years this was the entire establishment, but under the administration led by Sir Wilfrid Laurier eight additional branch farms were established, and during the regime of the government that preceded the present one a further addition of eight or nine branch farms was made. Since we came into power we have not established any new ones, although we have discussed the possibility of establishing one in northern British Columbia on account of there having been a tacit understanding in regard to it. There is also an experimental station in western Ontario, but it is a tobacco farm, not one of the regular establishments. So that we have at least stopped the expansion of these branch farms, and we are endeavouring to carry out the policy that I enunciated the first session that this government was in power, namely, that before any new farms should be established we would endeavour to put the present ones in good shape and make them a credit to the country. To that extent at least we have met the wishes of my hon. friend, who thinks that possibly there should be a reduction rather than an expansion of these institutions. Now, that is an open question.
. Possibly we have expanded too rapidly in this respect as we have done in many other respects, and we are now considering all along the line just how we may deal with the situation. I believe it is generally thought that we have too many trunk railways throughout Canada. Some people think we have,
Supply-Agriculture

in the West at least, too many agricultural colleges for present needs. But I think the country will grow up to them and that we shall ultimately be able to make use of all these facilities, though just at present the burden of so many educational institutions of this kind is being felt. Some even think that we have too many universities in the West. I would not like to say that; I think the time will come when they will all be required to meet the country's needs. The point is, what are we to do in the meantime? Are we to close these institutions now, or should we get along the best we can until we grow up to the facilities which they provide? My hon. friends will note that in nearly all cases where there is alleged overlapping it is Because provincial institutions have sprung up since the Dominion farms were established. Take the Lacombe farm, for instance; it was started many years before the provincial farm at Edmonton was established, and now you have the two farms comparatively close together- 100 miles or so, which may not be so very close after all. Coming to Saskatchewan, some time after the Rosthern farm was established, the University farm at Saskatoon was instituted, in a very suitable place about 40 miles from Rosthern. I indicated at that time that we hoped in the reasonably near future to transfer the Rosthern farm to some northern part of the province where the people had not the benefit of any such institution. I now find, however that it would cost more to establish a new farm in the north than it would to maintain the present farm where it is; therefore we have so far refrained from taking any action. Coming to the Maritime provinces, one of the first institutions of this kind was established at Nappan, and some time afterward the provincial county farm at Truro was established. We have been endeavouring to co-ordinate the work, to use a rather hackneyed expression, and we have been endeavouring to avoid overlapping. For instance, at Rosthern we would slack off on the work, leaving it to the university, and the same might be done in other cases. We have not, however, done that at Lacombe owing to the fact that there is a reasonable distance between that station and the provincial farm at Edmonton. If hon. gentlemen on any side of the House have a recommendation to make along the line of closing these farms, those in their own constituencies, for instance, I would be very glad to entertain it. I do not say that we would promise to close any but I think we could get along with less. All the farms, however, are doing good work; it has been my privilege to visit nearly all of them. I had been told that some of the farms

in the Maritime provinces were comparatively useless, but on visiting them I found that there were not any better conducted experimental farms in Canada than those in that part of the country, and that the work was under the supervision of four exceedingly good superintendents. I have no doubt that if there were twice as many farms they would all be doing good work, but the point is, have we more than the circumstances warrant and than we have money to maintain at this time? If we have, then what shall we eliminate? Now, I am open to advice.


Arthur Meighen: I do not think in the present nebulous state of the minister's mind we are going to get much change of policy with respect to these sub-stations. I would like to get at the minister's general policy, what principle he is following in relation to these estimates. I notice that in this estimate there is a reduction this year over last of $125,000. Last year in the very same item there was an increase from the year before of $200,000, or taking the agricultural estimates as a whole, while the minister wanted more money last year, an increase, this year he cuts down, and wants $1,269,000 less-an increase all along the line last year and a large diminution this year in agriculture, and according to the Speech from the Throne we are getting better off all the time. How does the minister account for diminishing the agriculture vote this year against an increase last year when, according to his own words, we are in better shape this year than we were last?


William Richard Motherwell: I was coming to
that; one at a time is good fishing. I was answering the question of my hon. friend from Victoria as to what was our policy. I think I enunciated that two years ago. What new policies have we adopted? One was this: With regard to cultural methods, farm practices in the matter of experimentation with new cereals and crop rotations, which, after all is all right, we believed the time had come in the older districts where these farms have been established for at least twenty-five years when the farmers in the neighbourhood had obtained nearly all the information they were likely to get in cultural methods. In new districts that does not apply. The Indian Head farm, for instance, has done magnificent work in the matter of cultural methods for the prairies, but the farmers for miles around that station have already adopted all the modern methods of cultivation on the prairies, and therefore we think less attention should be paid, and less attention is being paid, and this is one change

Supply-Agricult ure
in policy, to cultural methods in the way of experimentation. But more attention is being paid to proper rotations for western Canada, the best rotation of crops including grass; that is something that has not yet been worked out.
In addition, we are paying more attention all the time to live stock. As I have already intimated on former occasions, we are endeavouring to feature live stock, practically all kinds of domestic live stock, at all of these stations. I spoke at one time of trying to establish something in the nature of breeding stations for the purpose of encouraging high-class live stock for breeding purposes. We have already shipped in from the Old Country, during the last year, forty or fifty breeding animals, and we are only deterred from getting more by the embargo against us, which prevents us from getting animals from the United Kingdom at the present time. Those are two features we are developing.
Many hon. members will also recall that the question of shipping chilled beef to the Old Country has been before the people of this country ever since I can remember; but whenever anyone who was endeavouring to improve conditions would suggest that the embargo be taken off cattle or we tried to get the embargo removed he would be met with the objection: What does it matter; we should be sending our cattle across to England in the form of chilled beef. Now we have been reading up and keeping track of experiments by packers and private individuals for a number of years, and finally last year we made a shipment of chilled beef from the Experimental Farm at Ottawa. Some fifty head were killed at Montreal and shipped to the Old Country in the form of chilled beef. We have found in actual practice that it did not pay at all. We lost a very substantial sum as compared with selling them as Stockers or killing them as fats on arrival. The shipment was divided into three equal parts, as nearly similar as we could get them. One part was killed at Montreal and shipped as chilled beef; another part was sent across as stockers, and the other part shipped as fats and killed on arrival. There was not very much difference between the stockers and the fats, but there was a tremendous difference to the disadvantage of those that were killed at Montreal and shipped as chilled. This chilled meat came into direct competition with Argentine frozen meat, and the loss on that chilled
meat, as compared with similar cattle sold as stockers, was $5.62 per one hundred pounds, or over 5| cents a pound.


Mr. SPENCER:: Is it not a recognized
fact in business that it takes a certain time to develop a trade? And is it fair to consider we cannot ship chilled meat from this country when we have made only one trial shipment? Is it not possible, if the trade was worked up and given a reasonable time to develop, that chilled meat could be put on the English market at a profit?


William Richard Motherwell: That is right in a general sense, but similar experiments have been conducted by the Harris abattoir for two consecutive years, and their experience has been practically identical with ours. In conversation some of their representatives took the ground that they had lost enough money already experimenting on behalf of the people of Canada. Furthermore, I have met a number of people who have not very much faith in the packers and who take the ground that the packers were trying to queer this prospective business by making shipments and pretending to lose money on them. To clear that up we made the shipment I have referred to, and we certainly lost money. We would not like to have been doing that business for private individuals, and have had to report a loss of $50 a head, as compared with selling the cattle as stockers.


Mr. KNOX:: Was the loss on the chilled
meat attributable to the extra cost of transportation or the low price at which it was sold on the English market?


William Richard Motherwell: There was a little advantage on transportation; the principal loss was on the beef. We also gained a little on the offal, which was worth more in the Old Country than here. The beef, however, was worth very much less, so when you struck a balance the result was as I have indicated. I have no doubt if we were prepared to stay in the business long enough and lose money enough we might in time be able to break even, but I am not prepared to come before this House and go before my colleagues and ask for an appropriation when I know I am going to lose a lot of money. I might say that on my recommendation this House voted $25,000 last year to continue that experiment.


Mr. BROWN:: Is not this aside from the
experimental farms?


William Richard Motherwell: We assembled at
Ottawa steers from the experimental farms
Supply-Agriculture

at various points and shipped the steers we had on hand, and the shipment gave us such very vivid information from the standpoint of distinct loss that we did not feel like spending the $25,000 that was voted by the House in making further experiments. It would have taken years to have built up that trade, and it is a question whether we would have broken even in the end.


George Arthur Brethen: To get back to the experimental farm, I have listened at different times with a great deal of interest to suggestions of the minister that 'these farms be made breeding depots. In view of the fact that private individuals with Ontario Holstein breeders won the herd prize for ten animals at the International Dairy Show last year in competition with the best in America, and that the Ayrshire breeders of Quebec won a similar prize, that the breeders of Clydesdale horses, beef, Shorthorn cattle and Aberdeen-Angus can go to the Chicago National Show and win in competition with the best in America, the Aberdeen-Angus winner selling for $15,000 there this year, does not the minister think that it would be a very safe principle to leave the breeding of pure-bred cattle to the private breeders of the Dominion. I know, because I sold some cattle to the experimental farms, that these institutions do provide a home market for the breeders; but I believe that the experimental stations, as breeding depots, are very expensive luxuries for the people of this country to support.


William Richard Motherwell: That attitude is
sometimes taken, I appreciate that fact, by the breeders themselves, but I cannot recall a single instance where the breeders have come to the department and complained that the government was competing with them. Here is the way the thing usually works out -I will give an illustration with respect to forestry farms. After the forestry farms were established, the nursery companies were very much alarmed for fear their business would be interfered with. Now, instead of the business of the forestry firms being injured by a free distribution of shrubs and trees it has actually stimulated the demand for nursery stock; instead of hurting the nurserymen the forestry farms actually helped them.
With respect to this particular question I do not believe the average breeder sees any menace in the way of unfair competition with his business. Every time you put a pure bred animal to work-either through horse clubs, cattle associations, or any similar organization

the results from that animal are
fMr. Motherwell.]
so apparent that you will stimulate the demand throughout that particular territory for pure bred stock. The result is that the private breeder is actually benefited by the operation of these farms in my opinion. At any rate that is the way it works out. I know that on the surface the system may appear as competitive and possibly injurious, but because of the educational value of these pure bred stock, the actual demonstration of the value of better stock, the appetite for them is increased with a result that the breeders have larger sales instead of smaller ones. I think that is correct.


Mr. WARNER:: The minister may have
stated but I did not catch his answer. Of what breed were the steers that he sent over, were they all of one breed?


William Richard Motherwell: I can recall that
they were pretty nearly even, the three standard breeds-shorthorn, white face and black; pretty nearly even. There were none of them I imagine - actually pure bred. They were well bred steers of these various breeds.


Daniel Webster Warner: All beef breeds?


William Richard Motherwell: All beef breeds.


Arthur Meighen: If the minister remembers the question I asked him does he feel like making an answer yet?


William Richard Motherwell: In regard to the
policy of the department?


Arthur Meighen: Yes.


William Richard Motherwell: My right hon.
friend has not recognized it although I have been trying to describe it all along.


Arthur Meighen: I confess I did not recognize it.


William Richard Motherwell: I do not think
that is my fault.


Arthur Meighen: I asked the minister
what principle he was following in a year ago coming to the House and asking for a largely increased appropriation.


William Richard Motherwell: That	is last year?


Arthur Meighen: Yes, last year. Last
year in this estimate my hon. friend asked for an increased appropriation of $200,000 over the year before and this year he is asking for $125,000 less. The general estimates of his department also were increased last year, and are decreased this year by $1,269,000. What has impelled the minister to take that course? If

Supply-Agriculture
he is right this year was he not wrong last year; and if he was right last year is he not wrong this year? I am prepared to come back at eight o'clock if the minister would rather think over his answer for a while.


William Richard Motherwell: No, I have given
the answer.


Arthur Meighen: I do not want to sit
here and hear the minister pretend to answer by talking about chilled beef.


William Richard Motherwell: My right lion,
friend has been paying very little attention because I have been explaining the matter ever since I started.


Arthur Meighen: Well, the minister gave
us an harangue about chilled beef and told us about the money he had lost. In the meantime is the minister prepared to abandon everything else he made a failure of as well as the shipping of chilled beef?


William Richard Motherwell: My right hon.
friend does not seem to know the difference between a "failure" and an "experiment." Why. the worst failure often turns out the biggest success; my right hon. friend does not realize that. The very fact that we lost money will be a warning to others not to try it. I have explained the question of there being an increased vote last year. I will take my right hon. friend's statement that it was $200,000. This year we are reducing the vote for experimental farms by $125,000. I explained that we would be able to conduct the farms without any very great loss of efficiency and still save $125,000, but we would have to defer some of the expansion contemplated. We would have to put off the expansion at the Brandon farm that is needed very badly. We would have to cut off some of the frills and flounces, instead of taking care of the lawns and the borders and the boulevards-all of which should be repaired for receiving company. We will have to be less careful, we will have to disregard some of these little features that experimental farms are expected to have. The farms are supposed1 to be in apple pie order and not to get into a careless or slovenly state, but it takes some money to make them look attractive all the time. However some cutting is needed and we have done it without affecting the usefulness of these institutions. In the Maritime provinces some of these farms are very rough. Take the Fredericton farm. I have always endeavoured not to criticize my predecessors in the establishment of these farms and I am not going to do so now except to state that that was a
very expensive farm to clear up. Last year we spent a considerable sum of money, I was there when they were at it. It will give some idea of the kind of soil it was when I state that we have to plough with oxen so rough, stony and stumpy is the ground. It certainly was very expensive land to clear. We will put a stop to the clearing of that land until our revenues are more buoyant. The same may be said of the farm at Kentville.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: What year was that farm established?


William Richard Motherwell: I do not know and I do not care much. The year 1910 I understand from my deputy. An addition of twenty-three acres was made to the Kentville farm a year ago but the land is exceedingly rough and requires some clearing up. We will have to abstain from these improvements in view of our policy of retrenchment at this time.


Arthur Meighen: Why were not the frills, and flounces and boulevards cut out last year?


William Richard Motherwell: I will explain that.


Arthur Meighen: Because the minister has been a party to the statement that we are in better condition this year, that there is greater prosperity in Canada than last year.


William Richard Motherwell: The reason the expenditure is cut out this year is because there is an united effort all along the line to make the budget of this Dominion balance, and we all have to do our share.


Arthur Meighen: Why was it not done last year?


William Richard Motherwell: It seemed so hopeless last year that we did not make the same amount of effort. But as the result of better conditions-better conditions on our railways and all along the line-we are making a supreme effort and everybody has to contribute a quota.


Robert Forke: I think with the experience of the past years the minister is able to make greater advances in the question of economy. I quite sympathize with him in his endeavours to have the leader of the opposition understand agricultural matters.


William Richard Motherwell: It is quite a job.


Robert Forke: It is a long time since he was actively engaged in that line, and he is a little dense. However, I rose for the purpose of asking if the minister would care to express an opinion upon the idea enunciated



SG2 COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Agriculture
by the member for Victoria City (Mr. Tolmie) as to the provinces taking over a little more of the experimental work, and the Dominion devoting more of its attention to researches. Probably the Dominion might make a grant to the provinces, and I think they could expend the money probably more economically than the Dominion.
William Richard Motherwell: I think that is
right, and that is what we are endeavouring to do. Wherever our farms are in too close proximity to provincial farms of the same kind, we are trying to fit into their activities by refraining from doing what they are doing. That is about the extent to which you can do it, unless you abolish the institution altogether.


An hon. MEMBER:: Abolish it.


William Richard Motherwell: I am prepared to
consider that. I am not prepared, however, to take any drastic steps in that direction until I have had an opportunity of discussing the matter with the provinces concerned. The provinces that have been referred to, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan and Alberta have plans of their own. For instance, in Saskatchewan, I know it was the intention of the university at some time to establish a number of sub-stations to the university throughout the province. It has occurred to me that before we do anything in the way of closing any farm we should confer with those authorities, and see if they are prepared to take one or more of these institutions over and administer them. I am disposed to think, from conversations I have had with some of them, that they are not prepared just now, because their revenues are meagre, and they are trying to save money, as we are doing. Strictly speaking, educational work belongs to the provinces. That is quite right, but it has been thought advisable by the Fathers of Confederation that agricultural work should not be entirely set aside for the provinces, but that the Dominion should also participate in the educational work connected with agriculture. In Australia it is not so. There is no federal department of agriculture in Australia; all that work is done by the various states. But those who preceded me in the early days of confederation thought otherwise. I am just following in their footsteps, although I must admit it is very difficult for two governments, provincial and federal, to engage in the same work without having a certain amount of overlapping. We are all doing our very best to avoid it. I am glad to be able to say that there is [Mr. Forke.)	.
splendid co-operative work between the several provinces and the Dominion. There is no jealousy or friction that I know of. Before we started new work we discussed it with them, and I think to a large extent they consulted us as to their work. But I am loath to rip into things too vigorously. We have been administering this department a comparatively short time and I should like to feel my way before beginning to tear down some of the splendid work established by my predecessors in connection with the experimental farms system. At the same time we have too many experimental farms, just as we have too many railways-not branch lines but trunk lines-and too many things in Canada for our sparse population. I am of the personal opinion that we could do with less experimental farms, but they are there and doing useful work. Shall we reduce their activities and concentrate on a smaller number, or shall we dispense with some farms where they conflict with provincial institutions of the same kind that have sprung up in recent years? That is the problem, and I have an open mind on it.


Mr. SALES:: We are not asking the minister to rip into things and tear things down, and so on, but in supporting the proposal made by the hon. member for Victoria, I would ask him to consult with the ministers of agriculture, for instance, of the several provinces, the heads of the agricultural colleges, and such men as Dean Rutherford in Saskatoon, in an earnest endeavour to avoid all duplication and to define the fields which are best administered by the provincial officers and those best administered by the federal officers. The minister mentioned the Rosthem farm. That is 42 miles from Saskatoon. Is there a solitary experiment carried out at Rosthern . which cannot be carried out with less expense at Saskatoon? In looking through the Auditor General's report, I find the Rosthern farm shows a loss of $20,752. Two years ago I raised this very point with my friend the minister. The amount that year was 126,000 I think, and he seems to be still following in the same old footsteps.	I wonder how long the hon.
minister will follow in those footsteps without really attempting to adjust a problem of this kind. I think a saving of $20,000 a year on one station alone is well worth making. Such work as the experimentation in rust, and research along those lines, are proper things for the Dominion government to carry on without doubt, and they can probably be

Supply-Agriculture
carried on better by the Dominion. We all acknowledge the valuable work which is done at the experimental farm at Ottawa. The services of Dr. Saunders in the introduction of the Marquis wheat are very valuable. We have no wish to curtail that kind of thing.
I refer merely to the duplication which I am sure the minister himself will acknowledge exists. I would like him to answer one question, if he will make a note of it, so that he will not forget it when he starts another speech. I refer to the introduction of new live stock from the Old Country, forty head. As one of the hon. members stated, we have been able to. go to Chicago and prove the quality of our cattle and horses, our hogs and so on; has the hon. minister introduced any new breed of cattle, and what was the cost of these cattle brought over?


William Richard Motherwell: I will try to answer the questions of the hon. member in the order in which they were asked. With respect to the Rosthern farm I have already pointed out that the outstanding reason why this farm had not been moved to some northern part of the province where none has ever existed was that it was going to cost more money to do it than it would cost to maintain it for a little while longer in its present position; we are trying to get the value of some of the institutions that are there now. You cannot salvage a farm and get very much out of it, except from the equipment and live stock. We have a fine big silo and some fine buildings there. We have small fruit gardens and nice surroundings, but you cannot salvage those to any extent. You can get some value from them in the next year or two. But to establish a new farm and move the equipment to it would make such a large additional expenditure that I do not know whether I could get it through the House.	,


Thomas Sales: Why not close it and save
$20,000?


William Richard Motherwell: And move the equipment where? If we are going to do it systematically and properly, we should have a place picked out in the northern part of the province where we would have to buy the land and move the outfit.


Edward Joseph Garland: Is the minister waiting for the bon. member to select a farm?


William Richard Motherwell: No, I am waiting until I can come down with sufficient money to pay the expense and get sufficient support in the House.
51i


Mr. COOTE:: How much equipment has 1he minister got which he could move to some other point?
Mr. MOTHERWELL We have all the usual farm equipment, the farm tools and the livestock. That is what we could move, and it is very considerable. Secondhand machinery is nearly as valuable now as new machinery.


George Gibson Coote: Would it be worth $20,000?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes it would be.


Thomas Sales: I do not see where the $20,000 comes in.


William Richard Motherwell: Does the hon. gentleman mean that we would lose $20,000 more there than we would lose elsewhere?


Thomas Sales: I have the Auditor General's report here-


William Richard Motherwell: It costs that to
operate the institution, and of course there is always a loss. Was there ever an experimental farm in the world conducted without a nominal money loss? We do not expect to get revenue in dollars and cents from experimental farms, but we expect to get a better system of agriculture and information of value to be spread over the entire community. I know some people think we should conduct these farms so as to have a profit. If someone will tell me how that is done, perhaps we could apply the system to some of our individual farms these days and make a profit.


Mr. SPENCE:: While not actively engaged in farming, I take a deep interest in the products of the farm. I should like to know whether we are getting value for our money or not. It seems that each and every minister of every department, and every deputy minister as well think they should spend as much mone3r as their predecessors regardless of whether the work is needed or not. I should like the minister to be candid with me in answering questions. I believe he is trying to do the best he can, but 'I want to get his candid views regardless of anybody else in the party. Is not the minister convinced that too much money is being spent on experimental farms?


William Richard Motherwell: No, there is not, if the number of them is to be maintained.


David Spence: Is it a paying proposition
to the country to carry on these experimental farms?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, most decidedly.
Supply-Agriculture


David Spence: I should like to know something about the cost of operating them and the wage bill in connection with them. What would be the annual wage bill on an average farm?


William Richard Motherwell: I will get that. I would guess, offhand, that the cost would be three or four times as much as that of a private farm of the same size.


David Spence: What about the one at
Ottawa?


William Richard Motherwell: That costs more, I presume. That has to be kept constantly in shape for receiving visitors every hour of every day of the week, especially Sundays.


Mr. EVANS:: I think the time has came
when a change of policy should be made with regard to experimental farms. We are top heavy with certain institutions all tending towards agricultural instruction. The old experimental farms did very well in years gone by, and the one at Indian Head served [DOT] the people at Saskatoon in a very efficient manner, It practically solved !the difficulty further north than the real centre of Saskatchewan as the agricultural area now stands. Since then we have established an experimental farm at Saskatoon, one at Rosthern, one at Scott, and I think there is a tremendous overlapping in that line. Yet along other lines of research we have not developed at all. For instance, we know pretty well what we can -raise and the best way to raise it, on all the -old farms in Saskatchewan; but since the farms have grown older, problems have arisen which were not thought of years ago, and I do not think we are keeping pace with those problems. To-day, on the farms of Saskatchewan there is no product raised that can be marketed in a profitable way. Under present conditions, our dairy products, our poultry, cannot be put on the market so as to bring in anything like a price covering the cost of production. I do not think the minister was justified in discontinuing the experiment as regards chilled beef, and I should like to see more of that work carried on and less of the extension of agricultural work in the provinces.


Milton Neil Campbell: Before we get away from this chilled beef question, I should like to say something more about it. It is one of the most important problems that we have to deal with in Canada to-day. I am just a little bit astonished that the minister gave it up after only one experiment. I have in my hand a report issued by some gentlemen who were sent over to the Old Country in 
1921 bv the United Grain Growers. I notice, while they are not particularly optimistic about the prospects for trade with the Old Country at the present time in chilled and frozen meats, they point out that the trade is there, and that we can have it if we will only rise to the occasion. It seems to me that that is what is needed at the present time. They state particularly that the United States packers are able to sell the most of the beef there, because they import it themselvs from the Argentine, Uruguay, and other South American countries, and they maintain selling agencies in the Old Country. It is very difficult, under the rather conservative business methods carried on in the Old Country, for a newcomer to get a foothold. But we must start somewhere, and I think Canadians are not going to admit that they are not just as shrewd business men as the Americans. I do not think they are ready to admit that they cannot go to the Old Country market and hold their own there in the chilled beef industry as well as the Americans. I am going to read an extract from this report regarding the quality of the beef. I have heard it frequently asserted and I have read it in the newspapers that Canada is not able to get in on this trade because she is not able to produce the quality of beef. The report reads: The truth appears to be that if Canadian chilled beef were landed in excellent condition and were to reach the hands of the dealer before being damaged by much handling or softened by the climate it would meet with a good reception on its merits, and possibly sell at a somewhat higher figure than its Argentine competitor.
They point out that there are no particular facilities for handling Canadian meat, and I presume the shipment sent over by the Department of Agriculture last year was not carefully handled. There are no proper facilities for handling the chilled beef and getting it through the ordinary selling channels. I am rather surprised to see the minister give it up and turn it down as if there was no possible chance for trade in the future. The report also points out that it will be necessary to establish a direct service between Canada and the port of London. The report continues:
In quality Canadian chilled beef would have difficulty in steadily maintaining the standard of that from the Argentine. It has the advantage in that it is lighter and also of being at sea for only ten days as compared with twenty-one days.
Anything we might lose in quality-anl I am not prepared to admit that our beef is of any poorer quality than that of the Argentine-we would make up in the shorter time it would be at sea. I have in my hand the accounts relating to trade and naviga-

Supply-Agriculture
tion with the United Kingdom for 1923, and I find very illuminating figures in this report. The importations of chilled meat into the United Kingdom during 1923 totalled 7,667,000 hundredweight of 112 pounds. Of that amount, the Argentine supplied over 7,000,000 hundredweight. As regards frozen meat, importations into the United Kingdom amounted to 5,076,000 hundredweight, of which 2,721,000 hundredweight were supplied by the Argentine republic. When we come to live cattle we find that the amount shipped is very small indeed in comparison with the figures for chilled and frozen beef. I have heard it frequently asserted that the British people will not use chilled or frozen meat; they must have freshly-killed beef. These figures, however, show that an enormous quantity of chilled and frozen meat was consumed in Great Britain last year, and the consumption of this class of meat is steadily on the increase. Now it seems a rather serious thing that we are not getting any of that trade. According to the figures, the importations of chilled and frozen meat are increasing in Great Britain, and I would take it that the rather serious economic conditions which prevail there at the present time are forcing the people to buy cheaper meat. Let us analyze the situation with regard to the shipments of live meat. It takes $47 to-day to deliver a steer at Liverpool from Calgary, and figured out on the basis of the price of dressed beef delivered in Liverpool, that works out at 8 cents per pound. I do not think that the British people can afford to pay that price for meat and I do not think they will continue to buy it. We cannot look for a market for live beef in the United Kingdom, and it seems to me that this is a matter to which the minister should give his very serious attention. We have in Great Britain a High Commissioner who has,
I believe, a staff of two hundred as reported in this morning's paper. A few nights ago we voted over a million dollars to provide offices for these officials, and I notice in the estimates that there is provision for $10,000 for the salary and expenses of an agricultural produce marketing agent in Great Britain. What have we an agent in Great Britain for? What have we a High Commissioner for? If we analyze our sales to the United Kingdom we find that, with the exception of grain, practically everything has dropped off, and this decline is annual. Our butter sales, I think, have dropped from 17,000,000 pounds to about 4,000,000 pounds that being the last figure for the year 1923. The same is true^ *** regard to eggs and most other commodities. That is one respect in which I think governmental supervision is necessary; we need a selling agency to dispose of our products in the Old Country, and I hope the minister will give the matter his most serious consideration.


John Millar: What has been the reduction in connection with the experimental farm at Indian Head? I have lived beside that farm for some twenty years and I have seen it advance from the early stages, which have been very well described here, when it served a useful purpose, until, as the farmers became acquainted with and adopted the cultural methods that were demonstrated by the institution, it gradually lost its usefulness. During the last few years the minister has adopted the method of using the farm for the production of foundation stock, and on this farm to-day there is a very large herd, in fact all that the place will accommodate, of the finest stock. Like an hon. gentleman who spoke on this subject a short time ago,
I am not over optimistic about the success of this undertaking. It would seem to me, since there is the very best stock available throughout the country, that animals might be purchased more cheaply than they could be raised on an experimental farm. However,
I am willing to see the minister get a fair chance to give the thing a reasonable trial. The suggestion has been made, indirectly if not explicitly, that this farm of which I speak should be scrapped. But, as it is one of the older farms, the opinion is held by some that to scrap it would mean a very great loss. Even so, it might be a wise thing to scrap it, if it is never going to be useful again. I am not yet sure, however, that the farm could not be made to serve a useful purpose. I think that if, on the older farms, efforts could be concentrated on experiments of an entirely new character instead of carrying on simply the work that every farmer around is engaged in, considerable results would be achieved. Attention could be devoted to solving the problems of the farmers which the individual cannot solve for himself, For example, experiments might be conducted in connection with the shipping of chilled beef. Then there is the rust problem. Rust has been the source of enormous losses each year, and experiments in the direction of its control would be valuable. I rather think that in the future the minister might be able to introduce experiments along that line which would be well warranted. I admit that at present this particular farm is not giving the results that should warrant the expenditure that is involved in its operation, which expenditure last year amounted to $48,-

S up pi y-A gri culture

000. But I have not yet reached the conclusion that it should be scrapped. If nothing more can be done to enhance its usefulness I may be forced in time to agree with hon. members who advocate its abandonment; but just now I cannot agree that this would be wise.


William Richard Motherwell: Before I refer to the suggestions of my hon. friend (Mr. Millar) I will reply to the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Spence), who asked for the wages that have been paid on the farms. We have not the figures for the past year, but if the hon. member will take a pencil and a piece of paper I will give him the figures for a typical farm, for instance, the one at Brandon. It is divided into branches, such as animal husbandry, field husbandry, and so forth.


David Spence: It would take all day to go over the whole list.


William Richard Motherwell: The wages under the head of animal husbandry were 14,500.


David Spence: I asked a fair question, namely, what was the wage bill?


William Richard Motherwell: I have not the figures for last year; these are 5 p.m. estimates for the coming year.
But the figures all relate to the same farm. If the hon. member wants the figures for last year I will take a memorandum of his request and submit them later.


David Spence: Leave the matter until the next sitting and give us the information en bloc so that we may fully understand it.


William Richard Motherwell: You want it for last year?


David Spence: Yes.
Mr. MOTHERWrELL: For all the experimental farms?


David Spence: No, just for the One I mentioned. I want some information as to the cost of overhead and I suggest that you take the Central Experimental Farm in Ottawa.


William Richard Motherwell: The hon. member wants the wage bill?


David Spence: Aes; I want to know what was paid out. Surely the department can give that information. If I were running a business and could not give the overhead cost I would stop running it.


William Richard Motherwell: These are estimates for the coming year, but I will bring in the information later on which mv hon. friend
Mr. Millar.]
wants. If the hon. member asked for the wage bill of ten years ago he would not expect to have it right off the bat.


David Spence: I hope the minister will not think that I want to embarrass him, but I want to get the information which I think this House is entitled to.


William Richard Motherwell: I will try to get it.


Thomas Sales: The minister has not answered my question yet.


William Richard Motherwell: One at a time. In reference to the remarks of the hon. member (Mr. Campbell), I may say that no one was more surprised at the result of the chilled meat experiment than I was. I am running the risk of offending the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen), who did not like my former efforts; but inasmuch as he is not here it will do him no harm. We shipped these three classes of meats-stores, fats, and chilled beef. The stores netted, on the basis of Saskatchewan prices, 8.58 cents a pound. The fats, killed immediately on arrival in the United Kingdom, netted 6.73 cents, or a little over 1 4/5 cents less than the stores-the same class of cattle, as near as could be humanly classified. The same class killed at Montreal and shipped as chilled beef, of the same weight, 1,200 pounds in round numbers, netted 2.96 cents, a trifle less than 3 cents a pound and a half cent more than the Argentine frozen beef. Of course there is a market in Great Britain for anything that is edible, at some kind of price. We had to enter into competition, as I say, with the Argentine frozen meat, and we got from one-half cent to a cent more for it. But we netted only 2.96 cents per pound at the point of shipment in Saskatchewan. Well, that is disappointing. I am not making a case out against it, but the experiment was made to remove the uncertainty as to whether the packers were telling the truth.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Why was there that big loss? Do the people who are shipping from other countries sell as cheaply as indicated by the minister's figures here?


William Richard Motherwell: The freight rates from Argentine may be cheaper, I do not know, but I do know that they can raise beef cheaper and (that they raise it in larger quantities, in large herds, the way we used to do it in the West twenty years ago. At that time we had the very finest male animals to breed from, but the herds are now cut up into such small groups that the owners cannot afford to keep proper male animals and the result is we have not the quality of stock

that we had twenty or thirty years ago. That is one reason; but the fact remains that this was chilled meat, not fresh meat. It has to be chilled for two or three days on this side before it can be shipped and by the time it gets to the other side it is twelve or fourteen days old. It is in good condition, but it is chilled meat and it does not bring the price of freshly killed meat. If our northern route via the Hudson Bay ever becomes a reality and fulfils the expectations of those who are strong believers in it, it will be a profitable route by which to ship chilled beef, because it is short and cold and will get the meat to its destination in better condition. But there is the actual result, and it was so staggering to me that I did not consider we were justified in spending at this time the additional $25,000 that was voted to continue that experiment.
With regard to the Indian Head farm, I suppose there is not a farm in the whole system that has more good work to its credit than that one. In recent years, however, owing to the number of difficulties to be contended with, the cost of operation has been exceedingly high. One reason for this is the high cost of labour and sometimes the inefficiency of labour. In addition, the shelter belts have been attacked by plant lice. Everybody in the West knows of the plant louse that attacks the box elder, the Red River maple, and so on, and its effect is such that a shelter belt which it has taken twenty-five or thirty years to grow may be destroyed so quickly that you cannot get your spraying appliances to work before the damage is done and the trees are entirely defoliated. That is also the home of brome-grass, which is a very difficult w?eed to eradicate, as it grows among the trees where you cannot get at it. Between the plant lice and the brome-grass the shelter belts are being killed; the trees have had to be cut down and replanted in many instances, and that costs a lot of money. Those who have ever had the contract of keeping a shelter belt in that country in good condition will know something of the almost prohibitive cost involved in connection with the operation of a section farm with a belt nearly all around it, with the fields cut up into patches of ten or fifteen acres having rows or avenues of trees around them. A lot of these trees, we believe, should be taken out. They will not rot like an ordinary tree; they start to grow up again; you have to pull them out and that costs a lot of money. But in spite of that the Indian Head farm is the surest-crop farm of the West; when we want to be certain that we shall have a proper multiplication of any new variety of seed which is developed
Supply-Ayricult ure
at Ottawa we send it to the experimental farm at Indian Head. There is less loss there, less disaster, and fewer setbacks than in any other farm we have. Every farmer has experienced in his own operations another difficulty we have to face and that is the high cost and inefficiency of labour. In addition to that we have to get our chief men through the Civil Service Commission. What with farming by proxy two or three thousand miles away, getting your men through another body, it is no wonder we do not get one hundred per cent efficiency from our labour.
Mr. BEAUBIEN; Is the ordinary labour on the experimental farms hired through the Civil Service Commission?


William Richard Motherwell: No, by the superintendent. I was referring to the higher officials, and that, after all, is the determining factor; the success of a farm depends very largely on the efficiency of the superintendent and his assistants, who are appointed by the commission. I may say to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle that I hope before long to have some change made in the organization and possibly in the personnel of the Indian Head farm that will look to a betterment in that direction. My hon. friend has said that it is not in the best condition, but there have been reasons over which even the superintendent had no control, chiefly the insect ravages to which I have referred.


John Millar: I think the minister took me up wrongly. I do not wish to cast any reflection on the condition of the Indian Head experimental farm. I was simply pointing out that as the years went by the farmers around began to copy from the experimental farm, to work after their methods, and that in that way the farm gradually lost its usefulness.


William Richard Motherwell: I think there is
no doubt about that, and that is the reason they are drifting into the raising of live stock. They have out there 'the best herd of milking shorthorns that we have in our whole system, and also a number of very fine Clydesdale horses. Experiments are also being made with a view to determining a system of rotation of crops. If there is anybody in this chamber who knows of a proper working system of rotation of crops, a three, four or five year rotation, including grass-getting the grass without losing the whole year in seeding it down-and if that system has proved successful in the open prairie, I will look upon him as a public benefactor if he will disclose it to me. In this part of the country you know how the

S upply-A gric ulture

seeding down is done. Maybe your clover is seeded in the spring at this time of the year, but your timothy and other grass seeds will be sown with your grain. In the district of my hon. friend, up in Mackenzie, I think you could seed down with a grain crop for many years, and the same is true of some places in Alberta, but five years out of six, and this is according to the experience of Angus McKay, you have to seed it alone, and that is a mighty expensive undertaking. The result is that experimentation along the line of getting a proper rotation of crops, including grass, is a very important work, and we are conducting that work with the hope of being successful. There are some things we have found out already, what grass and what clovers will catch the easiest with the grain crop. Sweet clover is one of the grasses you can seed with grain with the best chance of success. Rye grass is more likely to be a success in being seeded down with grain than brome grass. These things we have discovered, but we have not yet solved the whole problem of a proper rotation. I do not know if anybody knows the solution, but if they do, we shall be glad to know it, and shall certainly make use of it.


Andrew Knox: There is another point in
connection with some of the experiments carried on at these farms that I would like to mention, and that is in connection with the feeding of cattle. I have had the opportunity of seeing the experiments carried on at Rosthern farm. At the present time they have several pens of steers there feeding.
I see by the Auditor General's report that two years ago they experimented with sixty-six steers. These were bought on the open market at the stockyards. I do not know whether it was at Winnipeg or Prince Albert, but they cost laid down at the farm 82,025.42. They were fed from the beginning of the winter to the end, and the sale of beef at the end realized 85,234.18, considerably more than twice the cost of the steers. Of course, you will understand that the feed was raised on the farm, and there would be considerable cost also in regard to labour; but this is something that I think could be considered, especially at the present time when we are trying to go into the raising of beef more extensively.
While there has been considerable criticism of Rosthern being situated too near to Saskatoon, and I am quite satisfied that a mistake was made in the first place when that location was selected, because the district is very
fMr. Motherwell.]
nearly the same as that surrounding Indian Head, if there is any suggestion of removing the farm, and it should not be closed up entirely, it should be taken further north, because the northern country has nothing in the shape of an experimental farm whatever. I do not think you will find a district equal to that in productiveness in the whole Dominion that has not an experimental farm situated somewhere in it, and if a change is made the farm should be located further north.


Mr. PRITCHARD:: I think we are getting a little away from the text. We are dealing with an item of 81,400,000 for the experimental farms. I have always admired the work of the experimental farms. I think we have a great deal of help from them I live m a county, in Wellington, where perhaps we had the first real test of an experimental farm operating, and I have watched the results, for after all it is by their fruits that we should judge in these things. Last August
I	left my own county and went up to Winnipeg, and when I arrived there about the 10th
II	~ August I could not help but remember what the Solicitor General had said in this House last year. I did not wonder at him making the speech he then made when I saw the conditions around Winnipeg, and I naturally asked myself the question, what are we doing with these experimental farms? I left the county of Wellington in Ontario, where weeds were growing thick all over the country, where cattle were being bred indiscriminately, and where, as one hon. member re marked a little while ago, the cattle were not as good as they were thirty-five years ago in that county-whether that is the fault of the experimental farm or not I do not know, but that condition exists-and when I got to Winnipeg, there right beside the market, from one thousand to fifteen hundred miles nearer the market than the points where you are establishing these experimental farms, I saw land that was dirty with weeds. Now if we cannot get the land that is right close to the market cleaned up and made fit for growing crops, why should we be building railroads two thousand miles away from the market to establish an experimental farm there? In the county of Wellington the land will produce as good crops and as profitable as the fertile plains of the West if it is handled properly, and that land is right at the market. Why is that land allowed to grow dirty and remain idle? I do not like to speak disparagingly of the experimental farms, but we are dealing with this item of $1,400,000 for experimental farms. I remember last session in this House

Supply-Agriculture
when the item came up for the Scribe Hotel in Paris there was a good deal of debate over it, and my opinion was that Sir Henry Thornton is responsible for the management of the roads, and when we come to reckon with him we can deal with that matter. I for one did not know anything about that transaction, whether it was good or bad, but to-day we are dealing with experimental farms, and here is an item of $1,400,000 for that purpose. Cannot we reduce it without hurting anybody?
I believe that is possible. I do not believe in unduly curtailing the work of the experimental farms, but as I suggested to the Minister of Agriculture last year, why not establish a farm and run it and finance it out of their own funds in each county in this country.
I have talked this matter over with professors in agricultural colleges for the last thirty-five years, and they have positively refused to heed my suggestion. They cannot do it, and they will not attempt to do it. If they cannot do it and will not attempt to do it, why not cut out some of the expenditure on experimental farms so far as ordinary farming operations are concerned? I understand that at the Experimental Farm at Ottawa they have a herd of dairy cows, and I would like to know if they are paying. As far as I can gather from the reports of the general farming operations of the experimental farms, these farms have seldom if ever shown a profit. Why not curtail these expenditures if that is true, and if that herd of dairy cows is not profitable, cut it out and go on with other work. If we cut out this item it would be quite a consideration, and I think it is quite possible to do it and the farms still do woik that is really worth while.
As I said before, I do not want to disparage the work the experimental farms are doing, but I do feel as some other hon. members have said, that there is overlapping at the present time, and I feel that if the work of the Dominion experimental farms was turned over to the provinces it would be better. You could give financial aid to the provinces that are not getting their share. I understand there is some complaint on the part of some of the eastern provinces. I feel that by carrying out the suggestion made we can eliminate a great deal of overlapping. There is another item in the estimates lor agriculture which causes more overlapping than is necessary but I will deal with that question some other time. I merely throw out this suggestion, in common with other speakers, so that the Minister of Agriculture when he next brings down his budget to provide for the needs of agriculture may eliminate some of this unprofitable work. If the
work of the experimental farms cannot be made to pay there is no use in carrying it on.
If it can be made profitable then illustrations should be given in different sections of the country so that the farmers may adopt the same methods in their own farming operations. The trouble is that a prejudice against the experimental farms exists in the mind of a certain class of people. So deeply rooted is this prejudice that these people will not even read the literature which the farms send out. I should like to see work of a practical and effective nature, carried on so that the farmers might be educated along really successful lines.
Mr. SALES' I wish to make a few more remarks about the Rosthern farm. The hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Knox) points out the difference between the cost of certain steers and what they were sold at. There have been thirty-six men engaged as labourers at that farm at a cost of $12,784.39-that is for labour alone. In addition we have a superintendent at $3,107.35; an assistant to the superintendent at $2,085.20; a farm foreman at $1,648.25; and & stenographer and bookkeeper-I do not know what for-at $1,410.35. The hon. member for North Wellington (Mr. Pritchard) said that we shall know these farms by the fruits which they produce. I notice that more money was spent for bulbs than for binder twine-binder twine, $69.75. bulbs from Holland, $99.42. I notice also $85 for a No. 19 Buckeye brooder and No. 5 incubator bought from some man at Qu'Ap-pelle. I suppose they had to bring that machine from Qu'Appelle because they could not find one convenient to Rosthern. Just at that point-I do not notice any results from the brooder or the incubator; I cannot find any return for chickens or eggs. Is it any wonder that farms managed like this do not pay? Take the expenditure of $99.42 on bulbs. I like to see flowers and pretty surroundings as much as anybody, but I think it is going too far when we pay out $99 for bulbs and only $69 for binder twine. Is it not possible that the work of the farm at Rosthern can be carried on as well or better at Saskatoon? I would remind the minister of the other question of mine which he has not yet answered, regarding the importation of live stock from the Old Country-what the importation consisted of and what the cost was.


William Richard Motherwell: While the figures
asked for are being assembled let me answer some of the questions of my hon. friend (Mr. Sales). With regard to the purchase of bulbs. I can quite understand that perhaps

Supply-Agriculture

more attention is being paid to horticulture now than was formerly paid. I will tell the committee this: When the question of closing the farm at Rosthern was first mooted two years ago, with the idea of moving it north, a number of very constructive suggestions were made from various quarters with respect to what disposition might be made of the farm. Among others I had suggestions from a gentleman whose name I think I might give. He is quite an active and responsible man and very much interested in horticulture.. I refer to Mr. Chipman, of the Grain Growers' Guide. He has done considerable work up in that country in connection with the dissemination of information in reference to fruits and cereals. His suggestion was that we convert that institution into a fruit farm for the purpose of demonstrating what can be done in the matter of growing fruits in the northern parts of Saskatchewan. We have not yet decided what we shall or shall not do. In the meantime we are discussing what possible use this farm can be put to, or whether we should close it up entirely. My hon. friend should understand that you cannot do these things overnight without incurring considerable loss. Before you close this farm you must have your new one selected. That is a systematic course to pursue.
Now, with regard to live stock. The animals we shipped over were largely hogs and sheep. My deputy tells me there were some cattle, and I will quote a few of the purchases from the record:
Barr, Thos. Monkton, Soot, 1 heifer, $243.33.


Thomas Sales: Shorthorn?


William Richard Motherwell: No, an Ayrshire heifer.
Buttar, Thos. A., Coupar Angus, Scotland, 5
Shropshire rams	}g51 57
Dudgeon, A. M. Dahneney, Scotland, 2 boars and 2 gilts	 462 33
And the list goes on to quite a considerable extent.


Thomas Sales: If the minister would tell me what document he is quoting from I will get a copy of the report myself.


John William Bell: These details are to be found at page A-32 of the Auditor General s Report for 1922-3. One of the primary purposes of getting that shipment over was to introduce some new Tamworth blood among our various herds of Tamworth pigs, especially throughout Ontario and the West. This type is looked upon as an A1 bacon breed. There is a good deal of prejudice against it because 
of its long nose and light shoulders, but these features are not disadvantages but advantages when it comes to raising bacon hogs. In this country there has been so much inbreeding for the want of new blood by importation, that it was thought advisable to get a number of these animals over. We brought over not only hogs, but a number of sheep and cattle as well to replenish the blood of the various herds throughout Canada, surely a most proper expenditure.


William Garland McQuarrie: I should like to follow up the questions asked by the leader of the opposition. That is in regard to the very substantial decrease in the agricultural estimates for yds year as compared with last year. The leader of the opposition pointed out that there had been a decrease of, I think, $1,600,000. In connection with that decrease it seems to me one matter requires consideration, and that is the grant for agricultural education which was $1,000,000 a year, I think, for the last 10 years. I would like to ask the minister to be good enough to enunciate the reasons which prompted the government to discontinue that agricultural educational grant. It seems to me that other things might have been discontinued. I quite agree it is necessary that economy should be practised, but I do not believe this kind of economy should be practised by the government. I may be mistaken, but I am given to understand that the government adopted this policy contrary to the express recommendations of a majority of the members of this House. I am told that letters and telegrams were sent to the minister by practically every member of this House recommending a continuance of that grant, and that similar recommendations were received from all the important public bodies of this country. I think that at this stage of the history of our country we have to consider what is necessary to make it profitable or to make it possible for the people to remain in this country, instead of leaving for the United States or some other place. Much money is being spent by the government in attempting to bring immigrants to Canada. What in the world is the sense of spending money in that connection, unless immigrants are going to stay in Canada when they arrive here? What is the sense of spending hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars, to make Canada a stopping place for people who desire to go to the United States? In that same connection, we cannot expect all the immigrants who come to this country to make a living in the cities, and it would not be desirable that we should endeavour to get them to go into the trades in the cities, many of which are overcrowded

*Shpply-Agricult lire

at the present time. There is in all the cities a certain amount of unemployment, notwithstanding the fact that so many have gone to the States and elsewhere. It is necessary, as I see it, to encourage people to go on the farms, not only to go on the farms, but to show them how they can make a decent living on those farms, and to show them how to farm scientifically; and not only that, but to show them how to sell their products scientifically, and how to go into the right lines of agriculture. I think it was a great mistake for the government to discontinue that grant. I am not speaking now altogether from a provincial standpoint or from the standpoint of the province of British Columbia, because the proportion of the grant which we got was very small indeed, I think only about $60,000 or $70,000 a year. But still, even at that figure, a great deal of good was done. I am looking . at the matter from the standpoint of the whole of the Dominion, and I think that the kind of economy which prompts the government to cut out a grant in aid of agricultural education is the last kind of economy that should be practised. We have heard a great deal about economy, but if the government is going to practise economy, why not start out with matters like the Scribe hotel in Paris, and the purchase of fancy building sites in the city of London and that kind of thing?


William Richard Motherwell: What about the
tower?


William Garland McQuarrie: Why not start on something of that kind?


An hon. MEMBER:: Or the drydock at
Esquimalt.


William Garland McQuarrie: Or on the government buildings at Ottawa. I say the last place we should try to practise economy is the place where that kind of economy is going to retard the advancement of our country. Canada, as a matter of fact, has only been scratched, and the question is, are we going to scratch it in the right way, or not? That is a matter on which the government should instruct the people of this country. The minister to-day recognizes the responsibility of the federal authorities in that connection. He stated quite candidly that the policy of this government, the same as the policy of other governments, was not to ask the provinces to undertake the whole responsibility in this connection. I would like the minister to explain the reasons why the government discontinued this grant in aid of agricultural education.


William Richard Motherwell: Might I suggest
that that question should be better taken up at the end of the estimates, where the elimination of moneys that were in the vote last year takes place? Then it will come in order. I am afraid the Chairman would call us to order if we began discussing that question on the item for experimental farms.
It can be discussed quite properly later on; although there is no vote this year, there is a place where it was voted last year. There is an item there which reads "Amount not required this year", and if my hon. friend does not object we can defer this matter as I suggest, and keep it in its proper place.


William Garland McQuarrie: On some other occasion?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, at some
othet* sitting. It will come up at the very last, "Appropriations not required for 19241925, $951,000". Will that be satisfactory?


William Garland McQuarrie: Yes, if I could have
some previous intimation as to when it would be called.


William Richard Motherwell: If the Chairman
will let us discuss it now I would not object.
I think we have been discussing experimental farms, and I think my hon. friend had a question in connection with that. I think he repeated a question I thought I had already answered

why can we get along this year with $125,000 less than last year? Last year the vote was $200,000 more than the previous year. We had that $200,000 additional last year, and it was for some of the more pressing works that had been neglected during the war period. Having completed the more pressing works, we can relax a little, particularly as the whole Dominion of Canada is demanding economy all along the line. The cut is made in response to a demand to cut down at every point, consistent with reasonable efficiency. We had an increase last year which enabled us to put a lot of the farms on their feet-not entirely, but in some respects-especially in the Maritime provinces. Now that that has been done and the demand for economy has increased in intensity, we respond by saying that we will try to get along with $125,000 less, and we think we can do it by cutting out here and there, as we have intimated during the discussion.


Mr. GOULD:: This is one of the most interesting farmers' institute meetings that I have been at for a long time. The minister has asked for suggestions, and I am sure he is quite satisfied that he has been receiving them, just the same as we are pleased to know that we have all been receiving suggestions. The thought which comes to my mind originated with the fact that, upon looking at recent maps issued by the Department
Supply-Agriculture

of the Interior, I found here and there dotted all over the settled areas, parts of the country marked out as being best adapted for mixed farming, straight grain growing, fruit farming and various other things. That gave me the thought and idea that the provinces might better take hold of the work of experimental farms, almost in toto, with a line of demarcation between provincial and federal work. The provinces themselves might be held responsible for and given control of all activities in connection with stock. We find different breeds of stock in various parts of the country, and the provincial government themselves might better be given authority to engage in that kind of work. That would take away much of the responsibility from* our Central Experimental Farm. I also believe it would give to the provinces themselves more concern in and opportunity of doing the work much better. I would illustrate that in this way, that they are nearer to the work, and we could have quicker action in endeavouring to control individuals who would be responsible for that work. If I might be allowed another word in illustration, I would add the next word in the estimates, "entomology," suggesting that the line of demarcation between the central and provincial farms might be well drawn between these two lines; that at the Central Experimental Farm, where reciprocal work with Europe and other countries could be carried on, our observatories and laboratories could be maintained, but the provinces could have control of live stock, seed, feed and such things as that. Undoubtedly our provincial officers make mistakes at times, and the thought that comes to my mind in that connection is certain advice that we received some years ago in Saskatchewan regarding conservation of moisture. The minister will remember the advice that was tendered to harrow, harrow, harrow until we were satisfied that we had harrowed enough, and then to harrow once more. Many of us followed that dictum, and the result was the majority of our mulch was crowded up on the fences, along the roads and across the prairies. The farmers, however, remedied that. Experiences taught us about as much as the Department of Agriculture. When the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Mc-Quarrie) complains that the grant has been reduced, I would say that we are prepared to accept that reduction quite graciously. We can charge that to the fact that possibly the members of the minister's staff have realized that in the past there have been extravagances in connection with our experimental farms. Proof has been given from this side that such extravagances have occurred.

If this decrease of $125,000 in the first item is an acknowledgement of that, we accept it with all graciousness. I contend that the item can be still further reduced and the same efficiency retained,-indeed, perhaps, with an increase in efficiency. I am sure the minister will accept the advice that has been given in good faith, and will endeavour to see if further reductions cannot be made without any sacrifice of efficiency. I would recommend that he look seriously into the question of having a line of demarcation between the work of the provincial farms and that of the Central Experimental Farm in order to prevent the overlapping which takes place and which has taken place ever since we have had experimental farms, and endeavour in this way to reduce materially the expense of carrying on all educational work ,and other activities in connection with agriculture.


George Arthur Brethen: Is the grant for illustration farms included in the first item? I think there are a hundred or more.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, that comes
under this item. I understand the hon. member to refer to the forty-eight illustration stations. I might reply to the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Gould) by thanking him for his suggestions, because they are really constructive suggestions. To some extent I have been discussing these matters in the past two years with the provincial authorities, but they have been exceedingly shy about taking up any of this work. I am sure the House can understand why. They ask themselves: "As long as the federal government are doing this work pretty well, why should we incur the additional liability?" During the coming recess we expect to have a conference with the respective departments of agriculture of the three provinces which I have already mentioned-Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia

looking to still closer co-operation, the probable elimination of some of the work which we are doing and leaving it to the provinces. Then, possibly as time goes on, something will develop, especially in the West, so that we shall be able to get the location for the new farm and move the Rosthern farm. In Alberta, there is not very much agitation that I know of for moving the Lacombe farm. It is doing pretty good work and it is one hundred miles from Edmonton, where the nearest farm is. At the same time this will altogether depend on another year. Last year I made a statement with regard to the Agricultural Instruction Act; that what we would do with it this year would depend

Supply-Agriculture
entirely upon the financial condition of the country and what we felt we were able to cope with. So we can live only from year to year during these times. I will promise the hon. member for Assiniboia that before anything drastic is contemplated, in fact, whether anything drastic is contemplated or not, we will confer with the respective governments of those provinces with a view to eliminating this overlapping. It is, however, unavoidable that there should be overlapping, and there always will be some as long as the two institutions are in existence.


Neil Haman McTaggart: Will the minister indicate the amount of research work being carried on at experimental farms with respect to arresting the ravages of rust?


William Richard Motherwell: I have to thank my hon. friend for asking that question, because it draws attention to one point at which we co-operate with the provincial authorities more than at any other. We have been doing research work in connection with rust in conjunction with the provincial authorities of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. We have one or two of a staff. We have a Mr. Fraser who has charge of that work at Saskatoon. We get the use of their greenhouses and plots for the purpose of carrying on that work, while we supply the man. We are doing the same work in Manitoba. We have been criticized, though not severely, for not going into that work more strongly and getting facilities of^our own all along the line. That advice sounds good, but if we did do that the chances are that we should be obliged to withdraw from the other, 'because I do not think it would be a good idea to carry on the two concurrently-that is to say, independent work of our own and other research work, with wheats particularly-in conjunction with the provinces. That would be a double system which in my opinion would not be wise. So that up to the present our chief activities in connection with this research work have been in co-operation with the provinces, who have facilities in the way of greenhouses and so on which we have not. We have a small laboratory at Indian Head but it is more or less primitive and cannot be said to do much along that line. We are keeping close tab on similar work done in Dakota and other parts of the United States. More has been discovered regarding rust in the last ten years than was known previously, and a number of varieties of wheat have been found to be almost entirely resistent to all varieties of rust. There is one variety of cereal known as Kota which was developed on the Dakota experimental farm under the supervision of
Professor Bolling and Mr. W. R. Porter, and I see by the Winnipeg newspapers that it is claimed to be 90 per cent resistent. I think that possibly they are a little enthusiastic; I do not believe that we have found a wheat that will entirely resist all the known varieties of rust, and even if we do discover such a wheat there is still a tremendous amount of work to be done, because you have to breed into that variety, in addition to re-sistence, the qualities that give good flour and prolific yield.	Then there is the
question of maturity to be considered, and all that sort of thing. It is obviously, therefore, a matter that requires a great deal of care and attention, and I should be sorry to see an end put to the work that we have been engaged in during past years in cooperation with the universities at Saskatoon and Winnipeg. The matter, I may say is in a tentative state; we have not yet decided on what lines we shall advance, but we must continue in some direction.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. WHITE:: Last year there was a clause in the budget, which afterwards crystallized into an act of parliament, providing for a bounty on hemp with a view to the establishment of a binder twine industry in this country. I was wondering whether the minister could give us any information as to the success of that, or whether the experimental farms were doing anything toward providing information as to the production of hemp.


William Richard Motherwell: Last November
when I was passing through Winnipeg I had some information with regard to a certain company that was endeavouring to organize for the purpose of taking advantage of that bounty. They were on the point of being able to float their bonds, but a number of political changes occurred in the Old Country, the bond market was affected and they could not carry out their purpose. I have recently been told, however, that things look hopeful for the floating of the bonds and the establishment of a hemp industry in the vicinity of Winnipeg under the terms laid down by the bill that was passed last session. These were the factors that influenced the matter; and it was suggested further that the assistance was reduced to such a low point that the conditions were not as attractive as they might be in the matter of securing the necessary money. In the meantime we have continued
Supply-Agricult ure

to grow hemp at the various experimental farms and some retting was done at the Central farm to preserve the continuity of the experiments looking toward the establishment of an industry. In view of the amount of cordage and twine we have to import and the facility with which we can grow raw material, anything we can do to promote that industry certainly deserves our attention.


Richard Smeaton White: Would the minister be disposed to support an increase in the bounty for next year?


William Richard Motherwell: It runs, I think, from year to year.


Richard Smeaton White: On a gradually decreasing scale.


William Richard Motherwell: Yes, gradually decreasing to almost zero. It starts at a cent and a half and reduces by a quarter of a cent until it disappears.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: One of our good friends to the left said during the afternoon that poultry raising did not pay in Saskatchewan.
I presume he included with that poultry products. What is the experience on the experimental farms with regard to whether or not poultry pays in Saskatchewan and elsewhere?


William Richard Motherwell: Poultry has developed into one of the most profitable branches of farming, not only here but in other parts of Canada. During the last two years Saskatchewan has become the second largest shipper of poultry and poultry products in the Dominion, Ontario being first. In the United States the egg crop alone is worth more than the entire wheat crop of that country, showing the wonderful strides being taken in the poultry industry not only here but over the entire continent. Wherever there are facilities for taking care of the flocks, farmers and fanciers have found poultry raising very profitable. In the pioneer days the man who had not a basket of eggs and a tub of butter had very little to rely on, and now there is a good cash market for these products.


Milton Neil Campbell: I do not want to permit the minister to forget this chilled and frozen meat business. I am not entirely surprised that the trial shipment made last summer was not a success. Imagine a new country starting grain growing and trying to put on the European market a trial shipment of grain without up-to-date elevators, without boats properly fitted, without proper

facilities at the other end. I can quite conceive of business of that kind being handled at a distinct loss. When we ship live cattle over to the Old Country there are proper facilities for handling them and for putting them on the market, but as I understand the situation the facilities with regard to chilled and frozen meat are all owned and controlled by United States packers If we sell through them, naturally they are going to see that we do not make anything out of it. This is one of the most serious conditions that we have to face to-day, and I hope the minister will give the matter more attention and not drop it at this juncture. Perhaps he could give*us some information as to this particular shipment; how it was marketed in the Old Country-because I think that is the big problem-to whom it was sold, and whether the shipments were traced right to the actual buyer. I have read that trial shipments of that kind were sold to small dealers who did not have proper facilities for keeping chilled meat. They would lose a large percentage of it and could only handle it if they allowed in the price for considerable loss. If the minister could give us some information along this line I think it would be of interest to the committee.


William Richard Motherwell: In anticipation of this matter creating a great deal of interest we issued a bulletin dealing with this shipment in detail, and I shall be glad to provide my hon. friend with a copy, because it goes into it much more exhaustively than I could.
With regard to the disposition of the meat in the Old Country we disposed of it under the most favourable conditions possible. We went on the ordinary produce exchanges and the butchers from the whole countryside were bidding for that meat in competition with the meat from other countries. We had this meat in the hands of a man who knew the business acting on our behalf to see that we got the last cent for it. I am not surprised that my hon. friend should wonder if every detail was properly looked after, because I must admit I was astonished at the difference in value of these animals when sold alive and as chilled meat. But here is a point that must be apparent to all. When you arrive with chilled meat on the British market it will be from twelve to fourteen days old, and you have to sell it very quickly whether there is a bidder or not, because it is in such a condition you are not able to keep it much longer. You have either to sell it or freeze it, and if you freeze it, it is in exactly the same class as the Argentine meat, and maybe not so good; so you have not the same chance of getting your price

Supply-Ayricult ure
for chilled meat as compared with the animal that is alive. If it is a steer of the proper type and breeding that goes over there, if it goes on the pasture and puts on beef rapidly, the man who buys that animal can keep it and wait for his market. He has more to say in the value of it than one has in the case of chilled beef; because if the market does not suit him, the animal is alive and can be kept, and if it is a proper animal it will get heavier and more valuable if it is kept, whereas with chilled meat you have no choice except to sell it or freeze it.


Milton Neil Campbell: What is the difference between the price per quarter for chilled beef and fresh beef on the British market?


William Richard Motherwell: I have already given those figures, I think. The chilled meat by the quarter brought as close as possible to fourpence halfpenny, and the fresh meat just about twice as much as eightpence.
We have distributed a great many copies of this bulletin, which goes into the minutest possible details. We could have conducted a second shipment; in fact, it was my idea to continue to remain on the market if we had money enough for three or four months to break down the prejudice against chilled meat and demonstrate to the buying public right there, even if we lost a little money, that this was a good article. But you have some contract if you are going to undertake to educate and cultivate the taste of the United Kingdom. They had a taste long before I had, and it is far better and cheaper to try and meet their taste than to undertake to change it in regard to meat or any other product. So I felt, in view of our experience and the experience of the Harris people, who had continued their shipments for two successive years and lost S30,000 per annum in the experiment, that it was hopeless to continue, because we had just repeated their experience. I had not enough money in sight to continue, and we simply did not spend any more money on it, although we had the vote of $25,000 passed last session. We simply experimented with our own cattle, and quit after that experience.


Andrew Knox: Would not the experiment of handling only fifty carcasses be a great deal more expensive than if a much larger shipment had been made?


William Richard Motherwell: As a rule, volume counts, but we got a very favourable rate on this shipment. It was killed in the abattoir of the Canadian Pacific Railway in Montreal, and they gave us very favourable terms on it because they also were interested in the shipment. The shipment cost us just as much
per hundred as if it had been twice as large, and when it went on the market over there it was hung up in one or two exchanges in competition with the meat from other countries and was handled as carefully as possible, because we were naturally desirous of having it make as favourable a showing as possible, and we gave it every opportunity. The three lots were divided so as to make them as nearly uniform as possible in condition and quality. I admit that you could arrive at more definite conclusions if you could continue the shipments over a year; there is no question about that. There will be a certain amount of prejudice that you will be able to remove by the continuity of your shipments of good meat, but it would take a lot of money to do that.
Another feature I might mention is that the better the meat was the more disposed the tradesmen were to pass if off as fresh-killed meat; so there was that difficulty too. Possibly, we could not prove it but some of the best of it was no doubt sold in that way. You know how these things goj the better it is the more tendency there is to palm it off as fresh-killed meat after the tradesmen have got it, but not when they are buying it.
In reply to my hon. friend's question, the meat sold for 4s. 2jd. per stone, or 124 cents per pound, for the hind quarter, and 2s. OJd. per stone for the fore quarter. I was more disappointed possibly than my hon. friend at the result of the shipment. I thought that because of the reduction in freight, and leaving all the offal here, we might make something, but we lost $7 per head on that, and that helped to offset anything we made on the other end.


Milton Neil Campbell: I am not entirely convinced that it is a matter of educating the taste of the United Kingdom, because the figures prove they are consuming enormous quantities of chilled meat to-day. I was glad to hear the minister refer to the possibility of some of this chilled meat having been sold as fresh meat, for that is just what I have heard. I understand that a good deal of the chilled meat was sold in that way. The figures here show that 5,076,000 British hundredweight-of 112 pounds-of chilled meat were imported and consumed in the Old Country in 1923.
I am glad to hear that the minister has issued a bulletin that will give us some information with respect to this shipment, but I am not entirely convinced that it is impossible for us to get some of this trade. I think the matter is worthy of further study, although perhaps not to the extent of wasting any
Supply-Agriculture

considerable amount of money on it. I think we should study the possibilities of this trade very carefully. If they are able to ship large quantities from the Argentine-and they are doing this repeatedly as the figures show-I see no reason why we should not be able to do it in. Canada. If there is anything lacking it probably has to do with facilities. The Argentine has the proper facilities for handling this trade. The large American packers who are making imports into England from the Argentine have their facilities already established and built up, and my opinion is that we must use the same kind of facilities to meet our competitors in that market. I am not sure whether that is correct or not, but it seems to me it is a point well worth looking into.


William Richard Motherwell: If my hon. friend, or any other hon. gentleman would like to try the experiment over again we can carry it out this year with our own cattle, I mean the experimental farm cattle. If my hon. friend would care to discuss the matter further with me I shall be quite willing to hear him. There seems to be a general feeling in favour of repeating this experiment, and we shall be in a position to do so. We shall havb a lot of first class stuff ready for shipment in the course of another month or so. There is a bunch up at Rosthern that I think are exceedingly good, and there are some at the Central farm in the same category. We will make inquiries in the meantime just to see if we slipped a cog anywhere in the last experiment. If there is we shall try not to repeat the mistake. We do not like to lose $50 a steer on these farm steers; it makes a worse showing next year when we are discussing the estimates, and the returns from that particular farm will be that much less. However, since these farms are not there primarily to make a dividend or make money directly, we Should not attach too much importance to that phase of the matter in the interests of the experimental farm. Therefore,
I will consider the advisability of making another shipment, which I am rather disposed to favour.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: In connection with the chilled meat trade between Canada and the Old Country I was in England in 1921 when some private shipments were made from a Toronto abattoir to London. I accompanied the manager of the Toronto abattoir when he went down to Smithfield market for his returns, and heard his conversation with the broker down there who handled his product. At that time fresh killed beef in Great Britain was selling for about twice as much as

frozen beef or chilled beef. The broker explained the small price that he had to pay him for that chilled beef by the statement that he could not be expected to sell that meat for any more than the English butcher would pay for it. It did not make any difference whether the meat came from Canada or the Argentine. If it had been put in cold storage that settled it; it was all treated as chilled or frozen beef and would only sell for the lower price. These experiments were carried on by private enterprise, as we have already said, Sir, and a loss of $36,000 per year was sustained as stated by the minister. While the government's intentions were quite good in this matter if there is any criticism I have to offer it would be that they undertook this venture with the full knowledge that it had failed already in private hands, for after all private enterprise must make the real experiment in any undertakings of the kind. From all I can learn there is no use in our endeavouring to compete with the Argentine under present conditions in the chilled beef market in London, for the reason that with their very mild climate and their low prices for labour they are able to put meat on the market at a profit for a very much lower price than Canadians can.
With regard to the experimental farm system in general, I want to say that having looked into the matter pretty well, and having an opportunity of doing so, I feel, that we have perhaps, one of the very best experimental farm systems in the world. I have heard Old Country people remark on this, visitors who were enthusiastic over what we have here. I have visited farms in Great Britain and I think there is nothing-so far as I was able to discover at least-that would compare with the Central Experimental Farm in Ottawa. If there is one thing wrong with the experimental farm system of Canada it is that the people who should use that system do not do so to anything like a sufficient degree.
With reference to the depots for breeding pure bred stock, so long as you only have the herds that are necessary to carry on your experimental work no reasonable objection can arise. But when it comes to increasing your herds to an unusual degree it produces the competition that is going to be felt by the general breeders of the country. What the minister said about selling a pure bred animal on the frontier and in this way creating an interest in pure bred stock and stimulating a market is doubtless correct. Any pure bred animal going out on the same frontier, whether produced at the experimental

Supply-Agriculture
farms or by a private breeder will have the same effect. In the province of British Columbia we have perhaps one of the most up-to-date establishments to be found anywhere in Canada in the Colony farm. There we find that the government has a good many advantages in the way of advertising. They are able to distribute their information, the information reaches the breeders and the buyers coming into the country, and their natural inclination is to buy from a government farm simply because the purchase will have the government guarantee behind it. With few exceptions the government is able to make a much better display at exhibitions and to sell at a more reasonable price than the breeder. At the same time the system cannot be unduly extended without competing and interfering with the legitimate breeder.


George Arthur Brethen: I quite agree with what has been said by the ex-Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) with respect to breeding depots.
I think only such numbers of stock should be kept on these farms as are necessary for experimental work. I do not agree with the last speaker, however, that the breeders would fear competition from the experimental farms, because we have been given to understand that the labour costs at these farms are three or four times more than they are at the institutions of private breeders. I rather imagine that the experimental farms would suffer from competition with the private breeders.


William Richard Motherwell: There is something in that.


George Arthur Brethen: I believe that these breeding depots would produce at a loss and being desirous of making the best possible expenditure of public money I should not be in favour of using the farms for that purpose. I should like to draw the attention of the minister to another point and that is I believe the animals kept at an experimental farm should be of the types that are popular in the district. For instance, in Quebec there is a certain breed of dairy cattle that are very popular, and it is only proper that the stations in that province should emphasize the importance of that particular breed. If shorthorn cattle are popular in a particular district let the experimental farm concentrate on shorthorn cattle. And so throughout the whole of Canada. I believe that in that way you would have cattle that would be more useful for exhibiting the advantages of breeding, and you would have herds that would be more useful to the community to be served. Furthermore they could produce, not at a loss, but on a basis that would be profitable to the country.


Mr. STEEDSMAN:: In the early part of
his remarks this afternoon, the minister spoke about breeding and distribution stations. I would like to go into a discussion of that matter, but I think, looking at the items further down, that it might properly come under some other head than that of experimental farms. However, it has been touched on and if the minister would prefer that the discussion should go on under this item I am prepared to proceed. If not, I will drop it now and discuss it later.


William Richard Motherwell: This is the proper
item under which to discuss it.


James Steedsman: In view of the remarks of some of my colleagues, I have no doubt they will not agree with what I have to suggest. The hon. minister will remember that last fall, during his visit to the West, he was waited on in the city of Winnipeg by a group of gentlemen interested in developing new industries, particularly in Manitoba. In sections of that province, as the hon. minister is well aware, the people have come to the stage in farming operations where it will be necessary for them to make somewhat of a change. The change which is most highly recommended for those people to adopt is that of dairying. In order to go into that branch of farming they must have dairy cattle. We have no great supply of dairy cattle in western Canada. The people need these cattle now, and some of the gentlemen interested in the development of that industry made it their business to inquire where suitable dairy stock could be secured, and I think it was brought to the attention of the minister, at the meeting to which I refer, that stock of that kind could be secured at very desirable prices in the state of Wisconsin. If I am correctly informed, the minister was asked if he thought it would be desirable to have the duty removed, or the arrangement suspended, so that the duty would not be collected on a certain number of high-class dairy cattle if they were brought into that particular section of the country. I am informed that he looked upon that scheme rather favourably at the time, and agreed to take up the matter when he came back to Ottawa. I understand that he further agreed to send representatives of his department into Wisconsin to inquire into conditions there. Has that been done? If it has, who went, and what was the result? If the result was favourable to reduction in the duty, or the elimination of the duty altogether, those people might get their cattle from the nearest market and the cheapest market from which they could be supplied for that section of the country. I understand

Supply-A griculture

that it has been stated there is a plentiful supply of that class of stock in eastern Canada. My hon. friend will be interested in this statement. However, I am quite sure that, being opposed to protection of any nature, he would not object to the people in Manitoba-especially in the southern part of Manitoba where conditions are such that it is absolutely necessary that some other branch of the agricultural industry must be taken up with grain growing-purchasing their dairy stock in the cheapest market they can find. If the time ever comes when that particular locality becomes a dairy district, I will be an anti-protectionist even to the extent of oleomargarine. I think we should have free trade in that line. In fact, I think the minister knows that it is absolutely necessary that the people in that part of the country should not only procure their dairy stock as cheaply as possible but that they should be permitted to buy wherever they can make the purchase.


Miss MACPHAIL:: The hon. Minister of Agriculture has received a very great deal of advice this afternoon, but I hope that the little bit I have to add to that already given will be patiently borne by him. We have sat all afternoon and all evening until the present hour discussing quite seriously the experimental farms, and yet in the opinion of the average farmer of Canada the experimental farms, if alluded to or thought of, are always mentioned with a sort of righteous contempt. I think that possibly the reason why the average farmer has very little to say for the experimental farm is that the experimental farms have never been made to pay, they have never put in practice the 'lesson they have tried to teach the farmers. It seems that it is easier for them to give advice than to carry their own teachings into practice. The experimental farms have drummed, and drummed, and drummed, on production. But our difficulty now is not a lack of production, but over-production and lack of marketing facilities. The difficulty the farmer experiences is in getting a just proportion of the selling price of his goods. The sellipg price of his goods is not high enough to pay him for producing those goods. I remember a suggestion that, I believe, was made in the House last year,-and I certainly heard the matter talked about outside of the House by the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland)-that the strictly experimental work should come under the Industrial Research department, and the parks and all the beautiful picnic grounds should be under the Parks department, where they naturally belong. I 
would advise the hon. gentleman (Mr. Motherwell) to cut out the frills and the picnics. I never go out to the experimental farm in Ottawa, with all its beauty, without coming home raging angry, I think about the people who pay for that farm, who have not one shrub around their house, who have no bulbs, who have no beauty, who have not much enjoyment in life, because of the foolish things that are imposed upon them by governments, not only of the Dominion but of the provinces, counties and townships. I think, if this work of experimental farms is to go on those farms will have to turn their attention to the science of marketing farm products and not to the producing of more goods. If they would meet, without political bias, the voluntary organizations of farmers, and assist them to market their products efficiently and well, they would be doing a real service to Canada. But no, they will sit back and wait till the farmer himself, loaded down with all his handicaps, has solved his own problem, and then will come along with theories for co-operative marketing. But in this criticism I must remember to praise the federal Department of Agriculture for one thing,-they have begun co-operative marketing of eggs and have assisted the farmers in many places to get an idea of how these things should be done. If they would carry out that idea in other branches of marketing farm products, it would be very much better.
I think that this item has been discussed, not only long enough but too long. We have wasted a lot of money talking about it, and I think the minister has forgotten nfost of what we have said, and he should, if he wishes to retain his faculties. I, therefore, move:
That item No. 40 of the Agricultural Estimates be reduced by $200,000.


William Richard Motherwell: Before the vote is
taken, I should like to answer a question put by the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Steedsman). His recital of the circumstances in connection with the desire to import dairy cattle from the United States is substantially correct. When I was in Manitoba, I met a large deputation in Premier Bracken's office by appointment. This deputation represented the railways, the newspapers, the milk producers and several other parties, and they asked me to use my endeavours, when I came back to Ottawa, to have high-class, grade dairy cattle, permitted to enter Canada the same as pure bred cattle. I naturally was in sympathy with this idea, particularly as I knew that the people of Manitoba were

Supply-Agricult ure
ready to go into dairying and needed this so badly. But I have my limitations, especially as regards a reduction in tariffs when the House is not in session, and nothing could be done that I could see. I made inquiries into the matter, and I found that there was no such thing as a certificate of a grade animal. You have to have some way of indicating whether an animal is pure bred or not and this is done by a certificate. There is no request that, from a personal standpoint, I would have liked more to meet, especially in view of the peculiar situation of Manitoba at this time. I may say that this is a matter which we can deal with, if we like, in the coming budget. Shall we remove the duty from American farm animals, particularly dairy cattle, regardless of what they do with ours? I am hopeful that before very long our cattle will be received very much more favourably in the American market, but I do not know whether that day will be hastened by our giving away our part of the contract by letting American animals in first. I have some misgivings in that regard, although I am not a stickler on it. Sometimes things become so bad that you have to adopt a certain course regardless of what the other fellow does. We have the same suggestion as regards breeding ewes and lambs. The problem is a big one to know what you should do with regard to American grade stock. I might, however, point out that I was quite unable, as the whole cabinet would be unable, to do anything by order in council between sessions, and now that parliament has assembled, there is an embargo against these animals because of the outbreak of the foot-and-mouth disease in the United States. That trouble may disappear, although the disease is beginning to spread very seriously. Under present conditions, however, the problem is not capable of immediate solution.
As regards the question of investigation, I sent a competent man to Wisconsin to inquire, first, into the quality of these cattle. It was represented that you could get animals with a production of from eight to ten thousand pounds a year for a comparatively reasonable amount, running from $100 to $125 a head. My experience in life has taught me that very rarely anybody wants to sell a cow of that character. Although such cows are quite common, at the same time they are much better than the average cow and very few dairymen want to sell them. If you want to buy them, you have to give the man his price, and it is generally a good 52i
price. Our man came back and reported, and, anticipating this discussion, I have his report here. I will summarize it rather than read it. He visited Wisconsin; he visited the herds, and found that freight rates were actually not as good from Wisconsin to Manitoba as from here, because of the reduced rates given by both railways to this class of stock for transportation to the West. As regards the cattle, he found that there were no better buys in Wisconsin than in the older provinces of Canada. I noticed a report by a representative of the Milk Producers' Association-I forget the gentleman's name-who reports the very opposite. He insists that there are better purchases in Wisconsin; that you can get a bettter cow for $100 in Wisconsin than you can here. He does not say anything about freight rates being less favourable there than here. The result is that whichever report you like, you have your choice. In our report there is no desire to represent anything but the actual facts as Mr. Cook found them. He is a man well versed in freight rates and also in cattle, so he was in a good position to size the matter up. His report is too long to read; but let us say that the matter is in doubt inasmuch as our representative and the representative of the Milk Producers' Association report differently.
There is another way of starting dairying, a way that is being taught by an expert that I know of on this continent, particularly when a poor man wants to start. The idea is to begin with such animals as are within reach, of the particular type you want for breeding or milk. Buy those females, then endeavour to get a good male at the head of your herd, and breed up into something better. That may take too long, but at the same time it is not by plunging into something that is expensive that we are going to get on our feet in western Canada. Getting out of one hole to crawl into another very rarely succeeds. In the Winnipeg market, you will find you can buy five dairy type heifers for the same price that you would give for one Ontario or one Wisconsin cow. As regards freight rates, the government pays 75 per cent of the freight rates on these young females or any other live stock into the West; the railways pay 25 per cent; and the hotel bills of the buyers are also paid by the government so that you can go on to the Winnipeg market, the Calgary market, the Prince Albert market, buy an animal and ship it back into the interior without paying one dollar of transportation for the animal or the man. In view of that, I feel very strong-
Supply-A griculture

ly that a man who wants to start dairying can start in that way more cheaply and safely, particularly if a group of farmers organize, take the opportunity of forming a cattle association, and get for that particular district a male that will mate with those heifers. That is the way every experimental farm demonstrates as the most successful. The other way is to buy high-bred, expensive cattle in a southern country, where there are all kinds of modern facilities for housing the animals, where there is either good hay or good ensilage to feed them, and bring them up into a more northern climate and into the average facilities that we have for taking care of them. You will soon convert a ten-thousand-pound cow into a four-thousand-pound cow, and before you know where you are, your investment is reduced by more than 50 per cent. I am not putting this up for the purpose of giving some alternative; but the fact remains that, because of the embargo, we could not import those cattle, even if the duty were removed. We always have the other avenue available in order to start in dairying, and in my estimation those who have made the most pronounced success in dairying have started in that more modest way and have grown up in that business. I see the hon. member for Strathcona (Mr. Warner) who is recognized as an authority on dairying. I have never discussed this phase of the question with him, but I feel satisfied that his general experience running over a great many years will enable him to substantiate what I have said. All the experimental farms that we have, whether you find one at Nappan or at Agassiz, show that the proper way for a man with limited means to raise a dairy herd is to start on a modest scale with the females, as I have described. When the budget comes down I think we shall find that owing to the exigencies of the country's financial situation it will be impossible for every one to have the duties reduced to the extent that he would wish.


John Livingstone Brown: I want to add a few words to what has been said by the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Steedsman) with regard to dairy cattle. The minister referred to the fact that a gentleman had been sent out to make an investigation in Wisconsin in connection with the dairy business, and there is no doubt that the Winnipeg District Milk Producers' Co-operative Association were not by any means satisfied with the disclosures he made in his report. The gentleman referred to by the minister is Mr. Tovell, who,
I may say, is thoroughly well informed on 
all matters appertaining to the dairy business and is therefore competent to carry on the investigational work which he undertook. I am informed that he was sent out by the provincial government, in co-operation, I presume, with the Winnipeg District Milk 1 roducers Association. His report is most emphatic in support of the statement that has been made that large numbers of dairy cows can be purchased in Wisconsin and Minnesota at prices that would make their importation into Manitoba profitable if it were not for the duty. His report takes cognizance of the freight rates. Mr. Tovell also emphasizes the fact that the people of Wisconsin and Minnesota are making a special effort to cater to the trade of producing daily cows, of which large numbers are available. Part of the report includes a map covering a number of counties in which, are marked the number of dairy cows that are available, and in no instance as any county shown with a smaller number than 10,000. I see by the map that in some cases they run as high as 45,000. The minister is of the opinion that the best way to begin dairying is to buy a few heifers at the Winnipeg stock yards. I doubt the wisdom of this suggestion. It is true, perhaps, that you can begin cheaper that way, but I am satisfied that if a man is able at all to begin by buying a few first-class cows which he knows to be good, which have been tested and have a production record, or which have come from cows that have borne such a record, it would be much more satisfactory in the long run. Indeed, I question very much whether there are in the Northwest a sufficient number of dairy cows to produce the young heifers for which there would be an almost immediate demand, and I would urge strongly that the government make a note of these facts. I would seriously suggest that consideration be given to the request that these dairy cows should be admitted free of duty. We are a long way from Ontario, and while we are told that we can get cattle in Ontario and Quebec and also in the Maritime provinces, at the same time, from investigation that has been made, it would seem that, from the prices for which they can foe obtained, together with 9 p.m. the high freight rate and the effect which the long rail jour-Dey has on animals, it is much more desirable to purchase the cows from the nearest point. I think the minister should give further study to the report that has been made by Mr. Tovell. He is very much interested in the dairy business and is a man who is quite competent to form an opinion on ques-

Supply-Agriculture
tions of this kind. Those of us who know him are satisfied that he is very thorough when he undertakes such an investigation as he has carried out in this instance. He conscientiously devotes his abilities to finding out all that can be ascertained about these questions, and altogether I do not know of any man who is better informed on all matters relating to dairying from one end of Canada to the other.
As regards experimental farms in general,
I believe, as the ex-Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Tolmie) said, that we have a good system in Canada, and I believe that they have done splendid work in the past. It may possibly be true that in some cases, such as Indian Head, they seem for a time, I will not say to have outlived their usefulness, but to have reached that stage where it is necessary for them to devote their attention rather to some new phase of agriculture which was not perhaps recognized in the earlier days. I think, however, that we can offer this criticism, which has been urged again and again this afternoon, that there is too much overlapping; so that the Dominion department must institute a better method of co-operation with the provincial departments.
I do not think there is any question on that point. It may be that certain lines of work can best be carried on by the provinces, and others by the Dominion. I had the privilege within the last few months of visiting two of the smaller farms, one in my own constituency, situated at Morden, and I am satisfied, from what I saw there and from what I know of the character of the young man in charge of the station, that the farm is performing a splendid service to the community. There is in my constituency, as the minister is aware, the greatest fruit-growing district in the prairies. True, the work has been to a large extent developed by private enterprise, the late Mr. Stevenson having done splendidly in that direction, and the work is now being continued not only by his sons but, as well, at the experimental station. New varieties of fruit have been developed and there is, I think, every reason to believe that from the work that is being done at that station we shall be able to supply the prairies with varieties of fruit trees which, while they will not constitute a commercial industry in those provinces, will nevertheless to a large degree enable the people of the prairies to supply their own wants. That I think is quite within the realm of possibility, and anyone who has seen what is being done there to-day must have a high appreciation of this particular line of endeavour.


William Richard Motherwell: The late Mr. Stevenson used to produce fruit commercially.


John Livingstone Brown: Yes: I think it should be borne in mind particularly that the district is peculiarly fitted-perhaps it is better fitted than any other part of the prairies-for the production of apples. Some time I am going to follow the example set by the hon. member for Hants (Mr. Martell) and the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride) and bring a sample of Manitoba apples. I also had the privilege of visiting the experimental farm at Summer-land, British Columbia. I am not quite sure that all the lines of work that are being carried on there are advisable; I had some doubts as to the experiments they were making in the feeding of cattle. However, with the small opportunity I had for investigation I would not care to pronounce positively on that point. But I was very much interested in one branch of the work. They had there a pathological laboratory in charge of a young man who seemed to be the ideal type of person for carrying on that work. He is an intense enthusiast and his investigations of diseases affecting fruit, which can be carried on only in the district in which the fruit grows, will be of untold value to fruit growers of British Columbia. We cannot afford to scoff at the work that is being done by the experimental farms. Let us take it for granted that a lot of work is done that perhaps produces no immediate results. Well, plenty of work is done that does not produce any results and that cannot be said directly to pay in dollars and cents. We cannot expect that of work that is necessarily experimental. It is possible that some lines of work might be dropped; just which I would not like to say. The farms have done good service in the past, and while some readjustments may be necessary I believe they will continue to do good work. The minister would do well to take heed of many of the suggestions made this afternoon looking to an improvement of the situation in order to make the institution meet more nearly the needs of the present day, as we are satisfied it did meet the needs in the past. The Brandon "experimental farm has rendered a splendid service to agriculture. It may be in the same position as the Indian Head farm; I rather think it is. And that it will perhaps have to branch out into lines of work which did not seem necessary in the early days. But I should regard it as a disaster if we should unduly handicap the work of those who are carrying on the activities of our experimental farms.	1


Daniel Webster Warner: I have some pretty clear
ideas regarding these experimental farms,
Supply-Agriculture

though they may not coincide with those of some others who have spoken. In the first place, I believe there is altogether too much overlapping in this experimental work. People do not always distinguish, however, between an experimental farm and a demonstration farm. Some of the farms in Alberta were designed to demonstrate how to make fanning pay,-and in that I do not think they have succeeded as well as they might-but the experimental farm is an entirely different thing. We never expect an experimental farm to pay; you might just as well expect a laboratory in a factory to pay. It is impossible to avoid mistakes, but the mistakes that the experimental farms have made have meant more money to me than their successes. That may seem to be a queer statement, but those mistakes prevented me from doing the same thing. I have made a good many mistakes in my operations in farming and I have always found them expensive, but certainly since going to Alberta I have avoided a good many through knowing what the experimental farms have done and tried to do. I do not think the discussion here has been altogether fair; the eagerness for criticism has gone just a little too far. I have been connected with this work long enough to know something about it. I am afraid the idea is going to be held out that our experimental farms have fallen into disgrace. Personally I do not believe that that is the case. I have already admitted that I believe there has been overlapping, and perhaps there have been too many of the farms. It is a question whether we should have an experimental farm at Lacombe when there is another of the same kind at Edmonton; there is not enough variation in the climatic conditions to justify the placing of two farms so close together. But the farm at Lacombe is there, and it has been there a long while. A certain amount of experimental work is also done at the university at Edmonton. That work has been quite useful to me, as it would be to others if they would take the pains to use it. To my knowledge now varieties have been propagated through the work of the experimental farms, with resulting benefit to Canada that would be valued at thousands and even millions of dollars. I do not think that the amount of money expended is anything like as great as the value to the country of some of these experiments. We must have our experimental farms, because they are going to save the farmers a whole lot of money. They may not be carried on in the most economical or perhaps in the most intelligent way in every instance; as I have said before, 
mistakes are bound to be made. I do think that those in charge of the farms might well have assisted in working out a scheme to market the products that they were teaching the people to raise, and the Dominion Department of Agriculture could serve the people well by doing something in that line. The lefeience to chilled beef this afternoon had a bearing on that subject, and I was disappointed to hear the results of the minister's experiments with those shipments. However, when the minister got such a lick as that, and after the experience of the packing plants throughout the country, which had a very similar experience, I do not blame him for being cautious about spending more monev along that line but I would like to see this matter further investigated. I think we could do better than that. We want to learn which is the best way to ship, whether in the form of chilled meat or sending the animals over alive, and I suppose we have tried both ways to find out. That is part of the work that the Dominion Department of Agriculture ought to carry on, and their mistakes will be profitable to us because we will avoid them.
Now a word along another line. I do not know that my feelings are more highly cultivated than others along the line of beautifying our homes and so forth, but I want to tell the members of this House that I do take a whole lot of pride in some efforts I have made to beautify the surroundings of my home with trees and shrubbery, and if it had not been for the guidance of the experimental farms at Lethbridge and Lacombe,
I would have made a great many serious mistakes in planting this shrubbery. The farms have served me very well in that respect, I have heard talk about the Indian Head farm. I do not know much of its value in teaching the people in that neighbourhood how to conduct their operations, it may have outlived its usefulness in some lespects. But I know that the people in our part of the country when they want to beautify their homes go to Indian Head to get. the trees, and they are mighty glad to do it. I erhaps the farm i3 not making money out of the trees they are raising, but you cannot calculate the value of this work in dollars and cents. Go out through that country and look at the beautiful groves of trees that have been planted, and you will appreciate the value of the work that is being done at Indian Head in growing trees. I feel quite warm on this matter. I feel that it is worth talking about. I cannot imagine a young man going on a farm on the prairie and never planting a 'single shrub or tree to

S uppl y-A griculture
beautify his home. It does not take much to do it. I have been through it; I am not talking about something I know nothing about, because I have seen the time when I was building my first home, when I did not have a dollar to buy anything with, but I got it one way or another. I took a lot of pains here and there and I did a whole lot of begging, and I did not have an experimental farm in those days to go to but I beautified my home and left it there for someone else to get the benefit of. I went to Alberta, and there I had the experimental farm to help me, and it was not nearly so expensive for me to do around my home what I had done before I came to Alberta.
As to whether the experimental farms are paying, I do not think they have paid along some lines, but they have paid just as well and perhaps a little better than some experiments that I have made myself. However, I have succeeded in growing fruit trees at my home in Edmonton. I have one tree on which I had over six hundred crabs last year. I do not ever expect to make money out of growing such things as that, but the experimental farm helped me to demonstrate that I could grow crabs in that country. When it comes down to estimating in dollars and cents the value of the work they are doing, the experimental farms are not making money very probably, and we do not need to expect that, but they are helping to make Canada a better place to live in and helping the people on the prairies to have better and nicer homes, and helping us to avoid mistakes along that line. I think the experimental farms have proved a great asset to this country. We want them carried on just as economically as possible, and we do not want any more farms than we actually need. If it would pay to close down some of the farms I am perfectly willing that the minister should do it, but I want the work they are doing to be carried on extensively in the future, in order that the people may get the benefit, and if it is costing us a little money I think it is well worth while.


Arthur Meighen: I listened, because I am interested, to the discussion of the free importation of grade dairy cows. I followed the minister's words as carefully as I could, but I am afraid I was left in the same mist as at the beginning. I want to know what the minister's opinion on the subject is. For a while I thought he was against it, but towards the last he intimated that he really was not against it, but that he was waging a valiant and bloody battle inside the cabinet for it but so far not successfully. What does
the minister think on the subject? Is he in favour of it or against it? I understood he had given a judgment; indeed, I understood that he had given two. The first delegation that waited on him came away quite hopeful, not of a change in the law, but that the minister would get it done by order in council, by a change in the regulations, but subsequently they were notified that it could not be done at all. Will the minister tell us whether it ought to be done or whether it should not? He is Minister of Agriculture and a member of the government, and perhaps he can solve this question.


William Richard Motherwell: I was asked to permit grade dairy cattle in free. I pointed out that I had no authority to do it. I have not discussed this matter in council in full. I have discussed it with the Minister of Customs, but it has not gone any farther than that with regard to taking the duty off at that time, because we found we did not have authority to take it off. It only applied to pure bred animals. The situation now is such that you could not get them in any way if they were free, because of the embargo. If my hon. friend wants to know my personal opinion-


Arthur Meighen: Is there an embargo on cattle from the United States coming into Canada?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes. Art thou a citizen of Canada and knowest not these things?	.


Arthur Meighen: I am afraid my hon. friend's knowledge of the Scriptures is better than his knowledge of Canada. Is there an embargo on all cattle into Canada?


William Richard Motherwell: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: Of course, there is examination, and there may be particular examination on account of the foot-and-mouth disease, but does the minister say there is an absolute embargo?


William Richard Motherwell: Surely. The embargo was put on first against three states because of an outbreak in California, and the two adjoining states were included in the embargo area. About a week afterwards Great Britain put an embargo on the whole of the United States, against not only cattle but hogs and sheep. Consequently, if we wanted to ship to the markets of Great Britain, we had to follow suit with respect to the United States; in other words, we were compelled to put on an embargo against the United States if we wanted to retain a market for our stockers in Great Britain. I regret
Supply-A griculture

very much to report, Mr. Chairman, that the latest news from California indicates that the outbreak is pretty serious, and that it has extended to two additional counties and thousands of additional head of cattle. It is therefore all the more imperative that we should keep that market good and tight until at least sixty days after the expiration of the last outbreak.


Arthur Meighen: How long is it since
the complete embargo was put on American cattle?


William Richard Motherwell: It has been on
about three weeks, speaking roughly.


Arthur Meighen: What was the opinion
of the minister up to three weeks ago to the admission of these animals?


William Richard Motherwell: My opinion was- speaking personally, I cannot speak for the cabinet that I would like to see those animals let in. At the same time I recognize there is another side to the story. I have had representations from the cattle men, the cattle growers in Manitoba vehemently objecting to it and saying "We have cattle to sell." The farmers of Manitoba and Saskatchewan say they have cattle to sell and why open the door to Wisconsin stock. That was the other side of the question. On general principles, however, speaking personally and knowing the need of Manitoba, and notwithstanding the fact that our reports indicate that when you take the freight rate into consideration, there is no better "buy" than at home, the people of that province have been under the impression that they were buying to better advantage when they bought at Wisconsin. If they are able to buy stock to advantage it means that they will go into dairying more quickly and more generally, and that is what was aimed at by the preaching of diversified farming. But if obstacles are placed in the way they say "Oh what is the use," become discouraged, and the end sought to be achieved is frustrated. Taking all things into consideration personally, as a western man, I would like to see them have access to the American market not only for dairy cattle but also for sheep anl lambs because there is considerable demand for both.


Arthur Meighen: What the minister means is access from the American market?


William Richard Motherwell: Perhaps that would be a more correct way to put it but they would need to get into that market too.


Arthur Meighen: The minister admits
the raisers of dairy cattle in Manitoba are strongly against this.
TMr. Motherwell.]


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


William Richard Motherwell: I beg my right hon. friend's pardon.


Arthur Meighen: The minister says those who raise dairy cattle in Manitoba are against it.


William Richard Motherwell: Those who have a
surplus of cattle to sell, yes, because it would be interfering with their market.


Arthur Meighen: I have received some
pretty strong protests from them myself.


Robert Forke: From supporters of the right hon. leader of the opposition.


Arthur Meighen: Some of them are.
There are a great many more of that mind than there were. I will now watch, and I am sure the leader of the Progressives (Mr. Forke) will watch, with interest this battle in the cabinet and we will see what happens to dairy cows when the budget comes down.


Robert Forke: I hesitate to take up any
time by a speech, but I feel in duty bound to say something with respect to experimental farms. I do not wish to cast any reflections on the member for Strathcona (Mr. Warner), but when he was talking about his early struggles it reminded me of a Scotch story that I am going to tell the House. An old gentleman was giving advice to his son who was going forth into the world and he wanted to put the latter right. He said, "My son, mak' money. Mak' it honestly if you can, but mak' money." I do not for a moment imagine that was how the hon. member for Strathcona got along, although doubtless he was hard pressed at the commencement of his career.
In reference to the experimental farms I believe they are doing good, useful work even to-day. In saying that, I perhaps express an opinion that differs from some hon. gentlemen sitting around me. I must confess that my knowledge of these institutions is very largely confined to the Brandon farm, but I should like to acquiesce in the statement of the hon. member for Victoria City (Mr. Tolmie), that the shortcoming which exists lies not so much in the farms themselves as in the fact that the farmers do not take advantage of what these institutions have to offer them. Last summer I visited the experimental farm twice. On both occasions there was a sort of picnic of farmers from the surrounding country. Addresses were given and visitors were conducted all over the farm, inspecting the different plots that were under crop. Now, as hon. members know, last year was one of the years when

Supply-Agriculture
rust inflicted very serious damage on the crops in the West. At Brandon experimental farm there were probably twenty or thirty *different varieties of wheat growing in different plots, and no better lesson as to the right sort of wheat to resist rust could be taught the farmers than was demonstrated at that farm. At the same time, I question if one-twentieth of the farmers know anything about the tests that are taking place. Of course, literature describing these tests is sent out, but I am afraid that literature is so voluminous in character that it defeats its own purpose. If the quantity of literature was less it would doubtless be more widely read.
In regard to the vegetables, and the other farm crops, I think a great deal of advantage can be gained by a visit to the farm at Brandon. The manager of that farm, Mr. McKilligan, is a farmer bora and bred, although of course he got his education at an agricultural college. But he is an enthusiast in his work and I am sure that that farm is up to date. Notwithstanding what the hon. member for Lisgar (Mr. Brown) thought- maybe he did not actually say so-that it was falling behind the times, the Brandon experimental farm is an up-to-date institution and is doing good work. I want to pay a tribute to the superintendent in charge of that farm who is a good, live man and always ready to help the farmers in every way possible. Furthermore the experimental farm in Brandon has done something towards promoting co-operative marketing in eggs and poultry. I do not know whether that action is official, or otherwise, but the superintendent has taken an active part in that work and is a most energetic and praiseworthy individual.
I do not know whether the minister is entitled to all the money he is asking to carry on this work; it may be that he is asking too big a vote altogether. There was a large deputation to-day from all over the Dominion strongly urging economy, and it may be possible for the minister to get along with a little less money than he is asking for. I wanted to put myself on record on this matter. There may be too many experimental farms, but I do know that some of them are doing good work.


Mr. WILSON:: I had not intended saying anything on this topic but the remarks of the hon. member for Southeast drey (Miss Macphail) have brought me to my feet. In her speech to-night, referring to the Central Experimental Farm, she said she never visited that farm but she came back in a raging anger. I may say that I have never returned
from a visit to the experimental farm in that state of mind. I have visited the farm very often and have returned feeling that I had benefited by what I had seen. It would appear from the remarks of the hon. member that she is not very conversant with floriculture or horticulture. Quite a number of my constituents are interested in both and I think we should be ill-advised to vote for the reduction of the vote for experimental farms seeing the attention that is paid there to these branches of work. There may be a certain amount of overlapping but that difficulty can be cured.
I am pleased to see that the minister is putting up a larger green house at the farm and I congratulate him upon it. In such institutions the government can carry on experiments that cannot very well be undertaken by individuals. To these farms the farmers can go and obtain valuable instruction. The hon. member for Southeast Grey may sneer at the experimental farm if she chooses, but that is not the attitude adopted by the farmers in my constituency. If people are sneering, it is because they do not take advantage of what they can get by visiting the farms. Floriculture has grown in the province of Ontario to a large extent, and our horticultural societies to-day are of great benefit. I do not know any person in my constituency who is not a member of the horticultural society. We know it is a great society. It makes more beautiful homes; it makes half your home. We are told about the bulbs and shrubs at the experimental farm, and I may say to the hon. member for Southeast Grey that on application to the farm she can secure some of those without any cost. They are distributed free if you wish them, and one point that some people take exception to is that that free distribution comes in competition with the growers and dealers. But that does not occur to any great extent. My idea is that at the experimental farm we should grow the best of everything. The Department of Agriculture is in a position to buy the best of everything, and any person who visits the farm should have the opportunity of viewing the best of its kind. At some future time I should like to put on record the volume of business done even in the bulb business alone. Any person who visited the gladioli show at Guelph must have had his eyes opened. It was a wonderful show. And if we were to condemn the experimental farm, where would our Marquis wheat be? Not only the Marquis wheat, but to-day I was told, on a visit there-and I think the member for Southeast Grey might go there-that they now have a
Supply-Agriculture

wheat which will perhaps supersede the Marquis and will be a better quality. If any person will go into the horticultural or fiori-cultural branch under Mr. McKee, when the chrysanthemums are in bloom, and see the John R. Booth chrysanthemum, brought into being by Mr. McKee there, and practically adopted by an American, it would be a surprise to him. But these people had to come back and admit that it was a Canadian production, and to-day it is on the market under the name of the John R. Booth. Perhaps people might see the Motherwell geranium or the Tolmie geranium, if they went there. These are all experiments that are bettering conditions in this country, and I think it ill-becomes any person to cast a slur on the experimental farm. I have under my hand here the catalogue of the horticultural wizard of the United States, Burbank. If we had a Burbank in this country, would it not be an advantage to us? We have men who have made developments along the line of floriculture and horticulture, and they should be encouraged, and my only regret is that larger amounts are not placed at the disposal of the farm and the government in order to carry on experiments.
In the fruit line we have had the development of apples. The country is not interested alone in wheat, there are other things in this country besides wheat, as hon. members will know if they visit the Niagara district. It would be a good idea if some of our western friends, who perhaps have not visited that section of the country, would come there and see what is going on. In direct opposition to the hon. member who has spoken tonight, I am a protectionist, and I have a constituent who is preparing now to put out forty acres of potatoes; he has them all sprouted. This time last year his potatoes were in the ground; I expect in another day or so they will be in the ground for this year. They try to get the early varieties in order to compete with-what?	To compete
with the vegetables from the South. And they are handicapped-no question about it. Everything that can be done to improve conditions should be done, and it is the duty of the experimental farm to develop the earliest and best kinds of fruit and vegetables. It is a great advantage to the growers in my district to know that by using the experimental farm either at Ottawa or Guelph they can receive great benefit, the experimenting, being done at the expense of the government.
I do not know if I am making a mistake, because the member for Southeast Grey

started to castigate this House for taking up too much time on this item. Well, it is an item of $1,500,000 and I think the time of the House is well taken up in discussing it, because a great many things have been brought out that will be of benefit to the province of Ontario and the Dominion of Canada. I think the experimental farms should be encouraged. It may be that there are overlappings, but I believe they have done a great work and everything we can do in this House to encourage agriculture, floriculture and horticulture should be done.


George Gibson Coote: I agree with the last speaker that this is a very important item, and I do not know that the time taken this afternoon has been altogether rvasted. It is such an important matter that I think it should be brought to the attention of the House that there are only ten members of the Conservative group which sits to our right present to-night to see that this item is properly discussed. It may not be out of place to bring to your attention, Mr. Chairman, the fact that the hon. member for Burrard (Mr. Clark) is not in his place. I believe he has been called by some of the members the official timekeeper of the House, and I think it might be wise if we would continue the discussion a little longer, as possibly the timekeeper may be here when we take the vote. We have not gained as much information in regard to experimental farms as I think we should have obtained in the length of time we have been discussing this vote. I would like to bring to the attention of the chairman and members of the committee a little item in the Auditor General's report for 1923, which will show how some of the money voted for experimental farms is expended. On page 150 of the Auditor General's report I find the following:
Audit Office, Ottawa,
November 6, 1923.
Sir,-Included in the expenditure charged to experimental farms appropriation for the fiscal year 1922-23,
I find a number of payments made in connection with the entertainment of excursionists, etc.
Starting some years ago with a trifling outlay at Central Farm, Ottawa, this form of expenditure has extended to several of the branch farms, and now aggregates a considerable amount.
During the fiscal year 1922-23, outlay of this nature at Central Farm alone amounted to $1,115.68 and at Cap Rouge, Quebec, farm, to $836.68.
Such expenditure is not, in my opinion, properly chargeable to experimental farms appropriation, and should be incurred only after the special authority of parliament has been obtained therefor.
I would be very much obliged if the hon. minister, before we are asked to vote on this item, would tell us, if he knows, just how much has been expended for the purpose of

Supply-Agriculture
entertaining excursionists. On page 152 of this report I find a letter from the Auditor General to the deputy minister, dated 9th November, 1923, which says:
Included in the expenditure made from live stock appropriation in the fiscal year 1922-23, I find that by cheque No. 42837 the Chateau Laurier, Ottawa, received the sum of $202 covering the cost of a '' banquet on December 1, 1922, for members of the Live Stock branch."
The account is as follows:
70 dinners at $2.50	$175
Rather expensive dinners.


Mr. GRAHAM:: Not as they go now.


George Gibson Coote: Well, for farmers. Then the next item reads:
Cigars and cigarettes	$ ft
Service	 10
I am just a little doubtful what kind of "service" that is. One of my hon. friends suggests that possibly it is liquid service. We ought to have a little more information regarding the expenditures included in this item. I hope the minister, before he asks us to vote on this question, will be good enough to tell us the amount he spent on each experimental farm last year. That will not take very long, and then the members who live near those farms will have some idea, possibly, whether the amount is being wisely expended or not.
I should like to draw the attention of the minister to one fact which has been mentioned here, but not stressed as, I think, it should be. I refer to the efforts of the Experimental Farms branch which, so far as I am aware, have been directed altogether to increasing production, and we have in Canada to-day, in a great many lines of agricultural produce, a surplus of production for the markets we have. Many authorities in the United States say that the American farmer raises too much wheat and that that is the reason why prices are so low. The Secretary of Agriculture in the Harding cabinet recently said:
Reduce the number of farmers, and the ones that are left will get more for their products.
I do not think the Minister of Agriculture whom we have in this cabinet, will agree with that, because last summer I believe he made the proud boast that Canada was now leading the world as a wheat exporter. I do not believe it is necessary for him to carry on experiments to any great extent at the present time for increasing production, particularly of wheat, because I have a little despatch from a Calgary paper which states:
On the provincial government farm at Olds last year they were able to produce 105 bushels of wheat to the acre.
The government statistics this year, I believe, state that the average yield of wheat in Alberta is 28 bushels to the acre, and I do not believe that record can be excelled by any country in the world. What the farmers need-and they do need some help-is some assistance in marketing this product. I want to quote from the Montreal Gazette of May 19 last. This statement was made by Col. Cooper, who was trade commissioner at New York during the war period. In referring to conditions in Canada, he said:
The marketing of our wheat was the crudest part of the whole foreign trade system, forcing our crop on the European market during three months, at a time when that market was flooded with wheat from all over the world, with the natural result of low prices. This meant a great deal for the industrial life of the country, because a poor price for wheat was bound to react on the purchasing price of the whole community.
I want to urge upon the minister that he should use his influence to see that there is returned to the wheat producers of the prairie provinces the amount of money which is now held by this government but which was left in their hands by the old wheat board now to be used for the purpose of assisting the farmers of the West in the formation of their wheat pools. I think he would be doing a much better service to the farmers of the West if he did that than he is in spending money to encourage them to produce more at the present time.
There is another matter which I want to bring to the attention of the minister, but I am not sure whether it is in order at this time or not. If it is not in order the minister can correct me. I have in my hand three different advertisements which were published in nearly all of the papers in Canada last year. I wish, Mr. Chairman, that I had time to read all these advertisements to you, because they are very entertaining. Each one of them winds up with the statement at the bottom in large black letters "Have faith in Canada". I believe these advertisements were accompanied by a little editorial; at least, this editorial was published in many of the papers that published the advertisements in question. One paragraph of this reads:
The farmer must remember that in the last analysis he is infinitely better off than the wage earner of the city.
I want to give the committee just a little idea of the comparison existing between what the farmer receives and what the labourer in the city receives. This is taken from the Farm and Ranch Review of Calgary, and I am sure the minister will consider it an authority. It states:
The following interesting statement bearing on this controversy-
Supply-A griculture


David Spence: What is the spread today?


George Gibson Coote: I am sorry I have not the
figures.


David Spence: These statements are misleading.


George Gibson Coote: I have been quoting an
article in the Grain Growers' Guide and the figures I have given are for 1922.

Supply-A griculture


David Spence: You can buy the best
bacon to-day for 25 cents, so that there cannot be a spread of 30 cents between the prices of the hog and the bacon.


George Gibson Coote: I have bought several
pounds of bacon since coming to Ottawa and for the cheapest I have paid 35 cents and for the best 45 cents. If the hon. member can get it for 25 cents in Ottawa he might tell us where it can be procured at that price.


David Spence: I hope hon. members will
not take that seriously. I am in the foodstuffs line and I can assure the hon. member that he can buy first-class bacon at 30 cents a pound for the back, and 20 cents a pound belly. What is the use of an hon. member trying to make parliament believe he is paying 35 and 40 cents?


George Gibson Coote: I am stating a fact.


David Spence: Your statements are all misleading.


George Gibson Coote: The House can believe the statement of the hon. member if it prefers, but I challenge him to go to the Canadian Packing Company's store on Elgin Street and get bacon for less than I have stated. If he goes there he will find that the price is as I have mentioned unless they give him a cheaper rate than they give me.


David Spence: I will bet you a thousand
dollars.


George Newcombe Gordon: The hon. member is
out of order.


George Gibson Coote: I have to make my living
by raising wheat and hogs and I have not a thousand dollars to accept the hon. member's wager.


Mr. MARTELL:: Borrow the indemnity of the hon. member for Southeast Grey.


George Gibson Coote: I think that possibly my
hon. friend is under a misapprehension; I have been referring to smoked bacon. However, I suppose the hon. gentleman will immediately rise and tell me that it costs a lot to smoke bacon.


David Spence: I will not pay any attention to you at all.


George Gibson Coote: I am highly honoured. I
want to draw the attention of hon. members to certain figures published in the Agricultural Gazette for the months of January and February 1924. My hon. friend need not take my word for this; he can consult the Agricultural Gazette. At page 67 the statistics appear in regard to the Canadian meat industry. I find that the number of plants in 1921 was 84, the capital invested being $58,500,000, the number of employees 9,928, salaries and so forth, $13,500,000-I will not go through the whole list because it might weary the House. However, the cost value of the animals slaughtered was $86,500,000 as compared with a sales value of $153,000,000. In other words, the value of these animals while passing through the packing houses increases from $86,500,000 to $153,000,000.


George Newcombe Gordon: I regret having to call the hon. member to order, but I fear I shall have to rule his present discussion irrelevant. The facts which the hon. member is submitting would be in order under the item " Health of Animals," but at the
10 p.m. present stage I am afraid they are not germane to the item under consideration.


George Gibson Coote: When we come to the proper item I shall be glad to give the facts to the minister. We have spent millions of dollars for the purpose of increasing agricultural production, we have spent very little in an endeavour to find a market for what is produced, and that is one reason why the farmers are in their present unhappy condition. The minister might very well spend a larger percentage of the money which I know he will spend-because we cannot stop him from spending it-in endeavouring to help the farmers find a profitable market for their produce, instead of indiscriminately producing more and more.
Amendment (Miss Macphail) negatived.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I was going to ask the minister if he would answer the questions put by the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) a few minutes ago with regard to the cost of the farms individually and the cost of advertising.


William Richard Motherwell: The hon. member for Macleod discussed the matter in a fair and friendly way, but evidently he was labouring under a misapprehension with regard to the practice in connection with excursions to experimental farms. I only regret that there are not more excursions so that the people might see at first hand what is going on there. One of my hon. friend's confreres from Alberta-I do not want to disclose his name unless I am asked for it-came to me and asked that the excursions to the experimental farm at Scott should be restored because of the benefit that had resulted from them in the past. So you see how difficult it is to please everyone. My hon. friend thinks there

Supply-Agriculture

should not be any expense connected with these excursions. Well, for many years there [DOT] was a college at Guelph where the people gathered in thousands; indeed, I believe it is the practice yet, and a small expense was incurred for the purpose of giving a lunch to those who visited the farm.


Robert Forke: They only gave us hot water at Brandon.


William Richard Motherwell: It was very modest, I know; many a time has my wrist been tired out cutting sandwiches on occasions of that kind. But the people went away just as happy as if they had got the two- or three-dollar lunch spoken of in connection with another matter.
My hon. friend referred also, as did the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland), to the advertisements. Yes, my department is responsible for those, and I wrote some of them myself. We practically advertise for tenders in every case but I do not recall offhand whether we did so in this case or not. The advertising agencies are supposed to have expert display advertisers, but so far as most of this material is concerned we have to supply it ourselves. Let me tell my hon. friend quite candidly why we engaged in that advertising campaign. In this House and elsewhere there was a disposition a year ago to indulge in a whole lot of dreary talk about our country; the dirges that were sung were to me distressing. They may have been justified; I shall not enter into that-they may be justified yet to some extent. But is it discreet; is it wise? Why depress the morale of the rest of the people who want to make the best of the circumstances during these trying times? So, the primary purpose of these advertisements was to buoy up the morale of the people of Canada, particularly the agriculturists, who needed it, in all conscience, at that time. We may not have done it in the best way, but that was our purpose. The wording of the advertisement may not have been such as to satisfy my hon. friend, but his is the first adverse criticism I have heard, and I have received a good many compliments regarding it. I shall be very glad to have any suggestions as to just how this should be done if my hon. friends think they can improve upon it. I do not pretend to know it all, and I never expect to, but I did feel that at that time there was need for buoyant advertising in order to promote the prospects of a better day in agriculture and a better day all round for Canada.
When the threshing began in the fall I noticed a statement in the press that a gentleman in the West by the name of Mr. Coote

had threshed 72 bushels to the acre. I do not know whether it is the same gentleman who represents the constituency of Macleod in this House: if it is I am sure he cannot have very much complaint against the threshing returns in the constituency that he represents and on his own particular farm. If it is the member for Macleod I want to congratulate him on what is almost a record outturn of wheat. The premier of the province told me that his output was 62 bushels. I am not going to take the ground that this advertisement had anything to do with that, but what with these two circumstances my hon. friend should be buoyed up considerably in the hope of a betterment in agriculture.
The question of bacon hogs was referred to by my hon. friend; that will come up again under the live stock vote. I think he suggested that I should take the packers in hand and educate them a little. Well, I think we have done that, and they are paying on the basis of quality to the extent that they never did before. We cannot afford to pay inspectors to go all around the country wherever hogs are sold and bought, but we locate them at the packing plants. I want to give my predecessor the credit that is coming to him in connection with our present grading system. I think it is one of the most advanced systems of grading hogs on th's continent; in fact, it is the only system of its kind. It was evolved through the joint efforts of the Department of Agriculture of that day-in the fall of 1921, I think it was,- the provincial departments of agriculture and all the breeding associations throughout Canada. In their joint wisdom they should surely work out something good, and they did. The regulations are capable of amendment; indeed, we have recently made some amendments in the light of past years' experience. It is not perfect, but it is an experiment in the direction of encouraging the breeding of better bacon hogs and bringing about payment on the basis of quality, without which you cannot get quality. You must pay a man for the trouble he goes to in producing a better bacon hog, otherwise he cannot be expected to do it.


Robert Forke: Is there any way of checking up the big plants and comparing what goes out with what goes in? Is there any danger that more No. 1 bacon may come out of the big plant than went in?


William Richard Motherwell: Possibly that is
right: it is a good idea, I think, to get one phase of it going and then, when you have that, to take up the other phase. We did think of starting a system of grading bacon

Supply-Agriculture
so that just what my hon. friend speaks of could be checked up; so that the quality of bacon would be so increased that when it went on the British market it would command a sufficiently higher price to warrant the packers in reflecting their price back to the man who raised the hog. We have not got that far, because it takes just that much more staff, and at this time we are restricting rather than expanding the staff. That, however, would be one of the next steps to be taken.


Robert Forke: A system which goes half way is a failure. It would be different if it went the whole way; if it were graded in and graded out it would probably be all right. But wdien a man has five or six hogs that he thinks are all graded No. 1, and they come out graded all the way from No. 1 to No. 4 and No. 5, it does not make him feel very happy. If they are graded in they should be graded out also.	*


William Richard Motherwell: While we have not taken the step in the direction indicated by my hon. friend, we have a man working on this, so that when we do take a step it will be in the right direction. It is an entirely new thing;.we have no precedent to guide us; we are, so to speak, making history in the matter of grading hogs alive. It is difficult, and unless it is accompanied by what my hon. friend suggests, it is not going to be entirely satisfactory, but as I say we are working on it.
The hon. member for Macleod raised a whole lot of interesting questions with regard to marketing and other matters, some of them a little out of order, but I might be excused for dealing with the question of marketing now in case I should forget it on some other occasion. We have now three or four branches that devote considerable attention to the marketing of various farm products-the Live Stock branch, the Fruit branch, and the Dairy branch. You will find further down in the estimates an item for a special representative in Great Britain to look after the marketing of farm products there.


George Perry Graham: I was going to suggest that as we have worked pretty hard and have had some late nights this week, not without interest, if hon. gentlemen could see their way clear to pass this item I would move that we adjourn.


George Gibson Coote: There is one little matter I would like cleared up before the House adjourns. For the enlightenment of the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Spence) I would like to quote from the Montreal Star of today's date, under the heading of Wholesale Prices: Bacon, Windsor boneless, 39 cents per
pound; breakfast, 26-29 cents per pound. You will note, Mr Chairman, that these are wholesale prices.
While I am on my feet I would like to thank the Minister of Agriculture for the kindly reference which he made to myself and to the good crop which I was fortunate enough to have. I want to say in all modesty that the crop was not due in any very great degree to my efforts but to a kindly Providence sending the right amount of rain at the right time.
I want also to say a word for the district in which I live. I am quite satisfied that I live in one of the best districts in Canada so far as production is concerned.


Mr. CARROLL:: So say we all.


George Gibson Coote: We are not afraid to compare our production with the production of any district in Canada, I do not care where it is, even if it is in Nova Scotia. We can produce more wheat to the acre than possibly most districts in Canada, We can produce as good wheat as is produced anywhere in the world. Alberta this year won the championship of the world for wheat and for oats. One hon. member suggests that I call your attention to the fact that the number of Conservatives in the Chamber at the moment has dwindled to eight. If I might be permitted, I would like to draw that fact to the attention of the press representative for the Ottawa Journal. The hon. member for Parkdale says that they will soon be all out. Well, I wish them God-speed.
Now, Sir, Alberta can produce the best wheat and the best oats in the world. She has in years past produced the best rye and the best barley in the world. She has won a good many championships with her cattle. She has this year taken the premier honours so far as butter is concerned. And I think the Minister of Agriculture will agree with me in that. But in spite of all these facts the Calgary Herald, which I am sure hon. gentlemen will agree is not supposed to be a pessimistic journal, had a statement last fall in big headlines that between six and seven million acres of land were to leave the farmers' hands this year because of unpaid taxes. Now that land is not sold until the taxes are two years old, will any hon. member tell me just what is the matter with Alberta when she can produce the best crops in the world, as good cattle and as good butter as can be produced anywhere in the world, and yet these Alberta farmers cannot pay their taxes? Between six and seven million acres of land is more acreage than we had in wheat last
Supply-Agriculture

year, our total production of wheat being 167,000,000 bushels.
As to being optimistic, which the minister has mentioned, it is said in one of the editorials which accompanied this article that some farmer in Alberta had written to Ottawa, last spring saying that it had started to rain in Alberta and the farmers were very optimistic, and that if optimism could pay their debts they would all be out of debt this year. So far as I am concerned I am not a pessimist; I would wish to be like Major Strange, the world prize wheat grower who described himself as a sane optimist, but that same Major Strange at a banquet given in his honour by the Edmonton Board of Trade said that "that man's name should be writ large in gold who could name one article the farmer in Alberta was to-day producing that could be sold at a profit." If there is one duty the Minister of Agriculture should perform it is to endeavour to right such a condition as that.


Henry Elvins Spencer: 
Mr. JELLIFF:: It has been asked to-night how much money was spent on each experimental farm. If I remember aright something like $47,000 was spent on the Lethbridge experimental farm in my district last year, and I want to say that I do not believe there is any way in which such a sum could be expended to better advantage. My only regret is that this amount was not doubled. I do not think we should underestimate the immense value of the work that these experimental farms are doing. I have occasionally visited the experimental farm at Lethbridge, and I know that it has been throughout its career of immense value to the district in which I live. I believe it has a greater and more valuable work still before it.
On my recent visit there I noticed experiments that were being conducted along the line of poultry and egg production, and I am sorry that the ho'n. member for Victoria City (Mr. Tolmie) is not in his seat to hear these statements. Mr. Fairfield, of the Lethbridge experimental farm, has been taking a great interest in the matter of poultry and egg production, especially in the testing of high grade breeds of fowl. He has a special flock of Barred Rocks, from which he has derived hens that have produced at the rate of 323 eggs per year. Where you can produce a hen that will lay an egg every day in the year, except Sundays and even sometimes on Sundays, you are going some, The value of that is beyond computation. The ordinary farm fowl is doing well if she lays from 100 to 125 eggs per year. Therefore a fowl that will lay 323 eggs in the course of twelve months multiplies your yearly production by three. It wall be seen that when you have accomplished such a result as that you have achieved something of immense benefit to the farm wives of this country. In that experiment alone enough revenue has been contributed to defray more than one year's expense of conducting that experimental farm.
Now take other lines of work. It was only a few years ago that we were afflicted with a plague of grasshoppers in the West, and immense damage was being done all over that country. The Dominion experimental farm sent out to us Professor Strickland who had studied fully the methods of exterminating the pest. As a result of his labours a stop was put to the ravages of the grasshoppers in the course of two or three years, and millions of dollars were saved to the farmers of western Canada. You cannot get away from the value of experiments of that kind.

Home Bank
Then take the crop, referred to by my hon. friend the member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) a few minutes ago which yielded 76 bushels of wheat to the acre. That was Marquis wheat which was developed as a result of tests in the experimental farms of this country. Thus we have had results of the most valuable kinds in breeding different varieties of wheat, and in raising the standard of live stock and other products of the farm, results that are greatly increasing the production and wealth of this country. I do not think we can afford to cut one dollar from the appropriation for the maintenance of these experimental farms. I am fully in favour of that appropriation and shall vote for it very heartily. There may be some substations in isolated districts that could very properly be dispensed with, but action along that line can well be left to the good judgment of the Minister of Agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Graham the House adjourned at 10.30 p.m.
Monday, March 31, 1924