1924-04-10

UNITED CHURCH OF CANADA


[Stage Direction]
Mr. GEORGE PARENT (Quebec West) presented the first report of the SelectStanding Committee on Standing Orders as follows:
In accordance with the order of reference of Your Honourable House of the 27th of March, 1924, your Committee have had under consideration a petition signed,-
On behalf of the Presbyterian Church in Canada, by Alfred Gandier, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada;
On behalf of the Methodist Church by S. D. Chown, General Superintendent, The Methodist Church;
On behalf of the Congregational Union of Canada, by J. Lambert Alexander, Chairman, The Congregational Union of Canada;
praying for the passing of an act to incorporate them under the name of The United Church of Canada; also the fourth report of the Examiner of Petitions in reference thereto.
Your committee, after hearing counsel for both sides, were able to satisfactorily determine that the notices were published in twenty-seven newspapers in the various provinces of Canada, as well as in the church papers of the three denominations affected; and as evidence was submitted to the effect that copies of the proposed bill have been distributed to every Presbyterian minister and elder.in Canada, your committee are of the opinion that the requirements of the rules of the House have been complied with, and find that the notices as published have been sufficient.
Your committee have also considered the petitions contesting the authority of the Moderator of the Presbyterian Church to bind the said Presbyterian Church in Canada, and have come to the conclusion that the questions involved in said petitions should be taken up and considered by any committee to which the bill may be referred in due course.
All which is respectfully submitted.
Chairman.
Mr. PARENT moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.
Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: I beg to present a

Questions
petition from the Cardinal Presbyterian Church against Church union.
Mr. ROBERT FORKE (Brandon) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 47, incorporating The United Church of Canada.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	What was the total amount paid by or on account of the Canadian National Railways for and in connection with the Hotel Scribe, Paris?
2. Was the said amount paid out of the cash receipts of the National Railways? If not, how was the purchase financed and at what rate of interest?
3.	What is the name of the company now nominally owning the Hotel Scribe and who are the directors7
4.	What is the total amount of taxes paid or payable in respect of the said hotel for the year 1923?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: I have asked a
good many times that this question stand. The difficulty is in getting from Paris the information which has been asked for. It has been cabled for.
Question stands.


OCEAN FACILITIES AT HALIFAX
Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: 1.	Is it the intention of the Government to provide additional facilities at Halifax for the greatly increased immigration business at that port?
2.	Does the government intend to complete the ocean terminals at Halifax as originally planned or otherwise without further delay?


Hon. Mr. COPP (for the Minister of Immigration) :: In reference to Question No. 1 I may say that the government will endeavour as far as possible to provide the facilities found necessary to take care of the immigration business at the port of Halifax. Respecting Question No. 2, the matter is under the consideration of the government at the present time.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-DIVISIONS
Mr. KENNEDY (Edmonton):: 1.	What are the limits of the Atlantic, Central and Western divisions of the Canadian National Railways?
2.	What were the revenues and expenditures on each of these divisions for the year 1923 and the months of January and February, 1924?
3.	What were the revenues and expenditures of the Grand Trunk Railway for the year 1923 and the months of January and February, 1924?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Atlantic Region:	East of Riviere du
Loup and Monk, Que. (including Riviere du Loup Terminal) but not including Monk Terminal.)
Central Region: Comprising all lines and facilities between Riviere du Loup and Monk, Que., on the east, and Detroit, Port Huron, Current and Armstrong on the west (including Monk, Que., Terminal, and line to Portland, Me.)
Western Region: Comprising all lines and facilities west of Current and Armstrong (including Duluth, Winnipeg and Pacific Railway Company.)
2.	Railway Operating Revenues and Expenses year ended December 31, 1923.
Atlantic	Central	WesternRegion	Region	Region
Railway Operating Revenues.$22,480,035 13 $127,900,113 91 $72,074,784 28 Railway Operating Expenses. 27,702,180 78 109,212,503 69 74,095,493 78
Month of January, 1924
Atlantic	Central	WesternRegion	Region	Region
Railway Operating
Revenues ..	.. $1,555,833 85 $8,565,820 51 $5,865,070 64
Railway Operating
Expenses	 1,958,199 20 7,971,687 52 6,024,863 91
Month of February, 1924
Atlantic	Central	WesternRegion	Region	Region
Railway Operating
Revenues ..	.. $1,490,361 90 $9,141,719 90 $4,586,797 20
Railway Operating
Expenses	 1,960,170 62 8,404,441 76 5,572,642 86
3.	Grand Trunk Canadian Lines:
Railway Operating Revenues and Expenses for the year ended December 31st, 1923: Railway Operating Revenues.. $83,978,730.57 Railway Operating Expenses.. 67,112,470.32
Note.-The Railway Operating Revenues and Expenses of the Grand Trunk Canadian Lines, for the months of January and- February 1924 are not yet available.


CRUDE OIL BOUNTIES
Mr. FANSHER:: 1.	What was the amount of bounty paid to producers of crude oil in Canada for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1924?
2.	What was the amount of bounty paid to producers of crude oil in each of the provinces for the year ending March 31, 1924?
3.	What are the names of the producers whose wells are located in the constituency of East Lambton, and what amount of bounty did each producer receive for the year ending March 31, 1924?
Questions


Hon. Mr. LOW:: 1.	$79,809.54.
2.	Ontario	 $76,120.95
New Brunswick	 3,648.24
Alberta	 40.35
Total	 $79,809.54
3.	See statement attached, which covers the period from April 1st, 1923, to February 29th, 1924. Statistics for March are not available yet. The attached statement covers the constituency of East Lambton only.
East Lambton Producers of Crude Petroleum and Bounty Paid thereon for period from April 1st, 1923, to February 29th, 1924:
Bounty
Producers.	Received.
Thos. Montgomery		.. $ 00
John McPhedran		.. 8 28
D. McDougall		.. 93 19
W. Rainsberry		.. 306 29
R. Kettle		.. 205 51
T. Loxton		.. 177 28
J. Josh		.. 00
H. Elliott		.. 13 50
F. Strangway		.. 11 88
A. McDougall		.. 180 84
A. Rawson		.. 401 35
J. E. Armstrong		.. 2,225 08
K. Houston Est		.. 448 49
P. J. Watt		.. 494 32
F. E. J. Devereaux		.. 135 50
F. G. Hamlin		.. 386 23
Wm. Bradley		
R. Bradley		.. 139 22
W. G. Carleton		.. 253 52
C. Yerkes		.. 229 39
J. Baker		.. 30 25
T. Portsmouth		
M. Collins		.. 00
W. Gillespie		.. 57 16
Crotty & Elliot		.. 491 45
Edward Estate		.. 18 02
L. Stevenson 		
J. Kerr Est		
C. Barrett		.. 636 01
Geo. Morris	'.	
Canada Crude Oil Prod		.. 2,181 75
J. Baker		
W. C. Jackson		.. 46 00
Elgine Dennis		.. 259 41
William George		.. 175 71
Jackson & Morningstar		.. 170 31
G. S. Porter		
T. B. Brydges		
R. Byers & Son		
Anderson Bros. & Thompson ..	.. 1.274 72
Wm. Woodward		
G. A. McGillivray		

Bounty
Producers-Con.	Received.
Chas. Dennis	
481	88J. Hillis & Son	
691	47E. Mott	
170	05Mott & Mitchell	
814	37J. Anderson	
837	56Wallen & Wallen	
364	92J. Warwick	
794	02J. Fowler	
00Carman & Fairbank	
4,805	06Robertson & Fuller	
97	59Richard McGaffery	
27	03E.	P. Rowe	
231	72Jos. Metcalfe	
148	85Thos. Braybrook	
64	51J. Goudy	
292	27J. Cann	
119	31J. Atkinson	
134	87F.	Maw	
00J. A. McAlpine	
12	76J. Rawson	
00T. B. Brydges	
31	41D.	A. Holmes	
82	73Abe Telsey, Trustee	
2,688	24Mutual Oil Prod. Co	
1,817	40T. A. Brock	
807	55B. W. Schumacher	
1,202	33J. Dempsey	
40	00Mrs. W. Sanson	
63	99F. McDonald	
168	00E.	M. Parks	
686	37J.	E. Kelly	
738	53Thos. Johnston	
408	12A. C. Darling	
164	61T. Walsh	
56	37K.	Elliott	
66	84J. Coulter	
44	94Ross. Kerr	
664	52F.	Edward	
1,592	60Geo. Drope	
29	29Can. Oil Prod. & Ref. Co	
3,657	61F.	Howlett	
478	23Ontario Lands & Oil Co	
3.469	92Corp. Town of Petrolia	
281	82Col. Lucas	
51	64Allied Gas & Oil Co	
300	25Peter Hunter	
85	13G.	E. James	
530	10S.	B. Fuller	
120	24E. O. Brydges	
16	08Sproule Bros	
418	03L.	Morningstar	
545	20John Woodward & Son	
23	05John Woodward	
219	64Croker Parks Oil Co	
1,200	10J. Lewis	
405	59Geo. Donald	
540	94D. Jewell	
513	77Sproule & Johnston	
241	77
Questions
Bounty
Producers-Con.	Received.
J. Wallen Estate	
169	41A. C. Wallen	
235	51Fairbank Estate	
6,337	08Walker Oil & Gas Co	
4,383	71P. V. Taylor & Co	
425	45Bothwell Oil Co	
2,104	90Hillcrest Oil Co	
144	43A. George	
60


TORONTO VIADUCT
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Have any reports or recommendations or letters been received from the President of the Canadian National Railways in reference to the Toronto viaduct which the Canadian National Railways are obligated to help build as per viaduct agreement, 1913?
2.	In view of the priority of this National Railway Contract (1913), what is the policy of the government in the matter and the reason why the contract is not being carried out, and when will a decision be come to in the matter, and what action will be taken?
3.	Will the share of the National Railways for this work be recommended by the government to parliament during the present session?


George Perry Graham: In answer to Question No. 1, yes. In reply to Questions 2 and 3, the matter is under consideration.


BRITISH EMPIRE LUMBER COMPANY
Hon. Mr. BAXTER:: 1.	Did the Montreal Harbour Commissioners purchase lumber from the British Empire Lumber Company?
2.	If so, how much have they purchased since January 1, 1922?
3.	What kind of lumber was purchased and at what prices?
4.	Who are the officers and the directors of the British Empire Lumber Company ?
5.	Is not a brother of Dr. W. L. McDougall, president of the Montreal Harbour Board, a member of this company ?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	The Harbour Commissioners of Montreal advise the department that they have purchased no lumber from the British Empire Lumber Company.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
4.	The department has no information.
5.	The department has no information.


JASPER LODGE MANAGEMENT
Mr. STEWART (Leeds):: 1.	Who was the manager of Jasper Lodge in 1923. and on whose recommendation and by whom was he appointed ?
2.	What previous hotel experience had he and where?
3.	What.salary was he paid and what expenses were allowed him in addition to living quarters?
4.	What were the earnings of the said Lodge and the expenses of operation thereof during the year 1923?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	Capt. T. G. Forshaw. He had previously been known to the president and on consultation with the Manager of hotels was appointed by him to supervise hotel and building operations generally at Jasper Park.
2.	He had no specific hotel experience, but was generally familiar with the duties to which he was assigned.
3.	$1,000 for the season of 1923 until the Lodge closed; then $400 per month until March 1st, when he resigned from the service. During latter period he was in charge of various alterations and construction work in connection with additions and improvements preparatory to opening of 1924 season. Total salary thus received $3,000. He received in all $241.20 for travelling expenses.
4.	Operating revenue, $76,761.85; operating expenses, $77,371.29.


CHICOUTIMI AND SAGUENAY
[Stage Direction]
MR. SAVARD:
1.	What is the population of the northern coast of the St. Lawrence river, between Tadoussac and Labrador ?
2.	What are the means of communication of that part of the county of Chicoutimi and Saguenay with the other parts of the country from 1st November to 1st May?
3.	What distance is Tadoussac from the railway?
Hon. Mr. COPP:: 1.	13,060 according to the Census of 1921.
2.	There is at present a subsidized gasoline boat service between Tadoussac and St. Catherines Bay, from December 6th, 1923, to May 15th, 1924. Two round trips a day, except Sundays, are made, carrying mails, passengers and freight. The contractor is Mr. E. O. Bouliane of Tadoussac, P.Q.
3.	The nearest railway to Tadoussac is the Canadian National on the south shore of the St. Lawrence, about 20 miles distant.


WILLIAM ARENBURG
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	When was William Arenburg appointed as fishery overseer or fishery inspector in the province of Nova Scotia and what is his salary?
2.	What are the duties of said William Arenburg?
3.	Is the government aware that he was sixty-five years of age or over when appointed to this position?
4.	Were there any returned soldiers applicants for the said position and why was not preference given to them?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1. He was employed as a temporary or seasonal inspector of fish curing and packing, from June 12th, 1922 to November 30th, 1922, and again from July 30th, 1923, to November 30th, 1923, at a salary rate of $1,260 per
annum.
Questions

2.	To enforce the provisions of the Fish Inspection Act.
3.	His age was given as sixty-three.
4.	The Civil Service Commission authorized local selection. Due regard was given to the appointment of a returned soldier, but Arenburg's experience was considered as most fitting for the position.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-OPERATIONS AFFILIATED COMPANIES
Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: What were the results of the operations of the Canadian National System and affiliated companies in 1923 in (a) Atlantic Region; (b) Central Region; (c) Grand Trunk Western Lines (in United States); and (d) Western' Region?


George Perry Graham: -	Atlantic Region	Central Region inc. G. T. New England Lines	Grand Trunk Western Lines	Western Region inc. Duluth Winnipeg and Pacific	TotalS cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.Railway Operating Rev-	22,480,035 13 27,702,180 78	127,900,113 91 109,212,503 69	32,471,522 74 23,679,714 70	72,074,784 26 74,095,493 78	254,926,456 04 234,689,892 95Railway Operating Expenses	
Net Revenue or (Loss) from Railway Operations (Def.)		5,222,145 65	18,687,610 22	8,791,808 04	(Def). 2,020,709 52	20,236,563 09


EDMONTON GRAIN ELEVATOR
Hon. Mr. MANION:: 1.	Have tenders been received for the new grain elevator at Edmonton ?
2.	If so, what parties tendered and what was the total of each tender?
3.	To whom is the contract being awarded?


Hon. Mr. LOW:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Carter-Halls-Aldinger Co. Ltd., Winnipeg, Man., $1,297,729; Northern Construction Co., Montreal, $1,349,000; Barnett-McQueen Co. Ltd., Fort William, Ont., $1,398,000; Macdonald Engineering Co., Toronto, $1,411,000; E. G. M. Cape Co. Ltd., Montreal, $1,419,000; Poole Construction Co, Regina, Sask, $1,443,000; Fegles Construction Co, Fort William, $1,456,000.
3.	Carter-Halls-Aldinger Company, Limited, Winnipeg, Man.


PORT JOLI-SABLE ROAD
Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: 1.	What is the total expenditure to date on the Port Joli-Sable Road, Nova Scotia, reported to the Dominion government by the government of Nova Scotia?
2.	What is the total amount of expenditure in respect to which the Dominion government paid forty per cent as federal aid?
3.	What is the total amount of federal aid to date paid to the Nova Scotia government on account of said road ?
4.	Is the Nova Scotia government claiming any additional payment? If so, what amount?
5.	Is it the intention of the Dominion government to make any additional payment? If so, what amount?
6.	Is the matter a closed transaction as far as the Dominion government is concerned ?

7.	Por what reasons did the Dominion government refuse to pay the government of Nova Scotia forty per cent of the total expenditure made on said road by the government of Nova Scotia?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	$185,942.96 as stated by province.
2.	$123,759.28.
3.	$49,503.71.
4.	No information.
5.	Final payment certificate has been issued by engineer.
6.	Yes.
7.	Payment of federal subsidy restricted to provisions of Canada Highways Act and regulations.


ST MARGARET'S BAY ROAD
Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: 1.	What is the total expenditure to date on the St. Margaret's Bay Road, Nova Scotia, reported to the Dominion government by the government of Nova Scotia ?
2.	What is the total amount of expenditure in respect to which the Dominion government paid forty per cent as federal aid ?
3.	What is the total amount of federal aid to date paid to the Nova Scotia government on account of said road ?
4.	Is the Nova Scotia government claiming any additional payment? If so, what amount?
5.	Is it the intention of the Dominion government to make any additional payment? If so, what amount?
6.	Is the matter a closed transaction as far as the Dominion government is concerned ?
7.	For what reasons did the Dominion government refuse to pay the government of Nova Scotia forty per cent of the total expenditure made on "said road by the government of Nova Scotia?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1. $484,853.89 as stated by province.

Questions as Orders
2.	$340,228.72.
3.	$136,091.49.
4.	No information.
5.	No.
6.	Yes.
7.	Payment of federal subsidy restricted to
provisions of Canada Highways Act and regulations.	-


GOVERNMENT AUTOMOBILES
Mr. MAYBEE:: 1.	How many passenger automobiles have been purchased by the government in each of the years 1922, 1923, 1924?
2.	What make of car was purchased and the cost in each case ?
3.	How many are kept in the city of Ottawa?
4.	What was the cost of upkeep in 1923 of such cars in the city of Ottawa?
5.	What was the cost of upkeep in 1923 of such cars outside the city of Ottawa?


Mr. CHAPLIN:: 1.	How many motor cars have been purchased by the government for the use of ministers since January 1, 1922?
2.	What are their makes and models, and what was the cost of each car?
3.	Who enjoys the sole use of each of these cars?
4.	From whom were these cars purchased?
5.	How many cars bought prior to January 1, 1922, are still in use, and by whom in each case?
6.	If new cars were purchased within the period mentioned, what disposal was made of old cars, and what did they bring in each case when sold?


Mr. BENOIT:: 1.	What amount did the government spend in the purchase of automobiles for use of the different departments, at Ottawa, for the years 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 respectively?
2.	To what departments were these automobiles assigned during said years?
3.	What was the cost to Canada during the said respective years for (a) the wages of chauffeurs for said departmental automobiles; (b) the uniforms and gloves of chauffeurs; (c) the upkeep and repairs of said automobiles; (d) the purchase of gasoline, oil, tires, etc. ?
4.	Did the automobile service give satisfaction to those using them?


Right Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: The foregoing questions, deal with the same subject. I should like to suggest that the three questions be combined and stand as an order for a return.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: In reference to the question, standing in my name, the Minister of Railways and I have arranged that it shall stand in the meantime.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The question
my hon. friend refers' to relates to contracts for railway ties. This is a different subject altogether.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. MAYBEE:: 1.	How many passenger automobiles have been purchased by the government in each of the years 1922, 1923, 1924?
2.	What make of car was purchased and the cost in each sase?
3.	How many are kept in the city of Ottawa?
4.	What was the cost of upkeep in 1923 of such cars in the city of Ottawa?
5.	What was the cost of upkeep in 1923 of such cars outside the city of Ottawa?


Mr. CHAPLIN:: 1.	How many motor cars have been purchased by the government for the use of ministers since January 1, 1922?
2.	What are their makes and models, and what was the cost of each car?
3.	Who enjoys the sole use of each of these cars?
4.	From whom were these cars purchased?
5.	How many cars bought prior to January 1, 1922, are still in use, and by whom in each case?
6.	If new cars were purchased within the period mentioned, what disposal was made of old cars, and what did they bring in each case when sold?


Mr. BENOIT:: 1.	What amount did the government spend in the purchase of automobiles for use of the different departments, at Ottawa, for the years 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 respectively?
2.	To what departments were these automobiles assigned during said years?
3.	What was the cost to Canada during the said respective years for (a) the wages of chauffeurs for said departmental automobiles; (b) the uniforms and gloves of chauffeurs; (c) the upkeep and repairs of said automobiles; (d) the purchase of gasoline, oil, tires, etc.?
4.	Did the automobile service give satisfaction to those using them?


GRANTS TO EXHIBITIONS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What are the total revenues of the government from the city of Toronto, including the Canadian National Railways, for the past three years, from (a) Post Office; (b) Customs and Excise; (c) Income Tax; (d) Sales Tax; (e) other federal revenues than the above; (f) the revenues of Canadian National Railways ( Toronto ) ?
2.	What have been the grants to the Canadian National Exhibition and the Royal Agricultural Winter Fair for the past four years?
3.	What sums have been spent within and without Canada on Fall Fairs and Exhibitions for the past four years, and for this year?



MIGRANTS FROM CANADA TO UNITED STATES

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the day.
Mr. W. D. EULER (North Waterloo):: I desire to bring to the attention of the government a news item which appeared in the Manitoba Free Press some days ago which reads:
The Budget-Mr. Robb

Washington, March 27.-The new Immigration bill was reported to the Senate this afternoon, and will be given the right-of-way next week. The chief item of interest to Canada is the restriction upon immigrants from Canada not born in the Dominion. No quota barrier is erected against native-born Canadians, but other immigrants from Canada will be treated as though coming from the land of their birth. Thus, a Canadian citizen born in England would be refused admission if the British quota were exhausted.
Senator Colt, Republican, Rhode Island, chairman of the senate immigration committee, interviewed by the Free Press this evening, said: "The underlying principle in the bill is restriction of immigration from all countries except our sister nations on this continent. We find, however, that European immigrants evade the quota provision of the Immigration Act by colonizing in contiguous countries, notably Cuba, and then come into the United States as citizens of such country. To stop this we provided all immigrants shall be treated as coming from their native land. We had no complaint about Canada, but the provision is general, and, of course, applies to Canadian citizens not born on this continent."
I desire to ask the government if they have any information which they can give to the House as to whether this discrimination against naturalized citizens is to be carried on.


Hon. J. A. ROBB (Minister of Immigration and Colonization):: Until my hon. friend (Mr. Euler) brought this matter to our attention, I had not had any notice of it. I shall look into the matter to which it refers, and make a reply in a day or two.



REDISTRIBUTION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the day.
Mr. McQUARRIE:: Might I be permitted to ask whether it is the intention of the government to have a meeting of the Redistribution committee before the Easter adjournment? As a member of that committee I must protest against the unnecessary delay in getting down to business.


Hon. E. M. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence):: For the information of my hon. friend, I desire to say that a meeting of the committee will be called for the first of the week.



RURAL CREDITS

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):: A little more than three weeks ago a question was asked of the government by a member of this part of the House to ascertain when the government would place on the Table of the House the report of the commission on Rural Credits. Up to this date there has been no intimation as to whether the government had that report or when it would lay it on the
[Mr Euler.]
Table. As this matter is one of vital importance to western Canada, and a solution must be reached this year, I would ask the government when we may expect that report and when the House will have it before them.


James Alexander Robb: Professor Tory, who is
entrusted with investigating this matter, has not yet reported. As soon as he reports to the government we will be in a position to answer the question.



THE BUDGET


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J, A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) moved:
That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair for the House to go into committee of Ways and Means.
Mr. SPEAKER:: I do not wish to be
critical, but, according to Rule 17C, on Thursdays and Fridays when the Order of the Day is called for the House to go into committee of supply or of ways and means, Mr. Speaker shall leave the chair without putting any question. I suppose if I were to take the letter of the law, I would have to leave the chair, and the budget speech would be delivered in the committee of the whole House. I think I am living up to the traditions of the House by putting the question and proceeding as we have always proceeded before this rule came into force.


James Alexander Robb: Mr. Speaker, in presenting the annual financial statement to parliament, I cannot refrain from expressing what I know to be the unanimous feeling of this House, our profound regret that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fielding) is unable to be present to-day to deliver it himself. Last year that right hon. gentleman delivered his seventeenth budget speech, a record, I believe, unequalled by any other Minister of Finance within the Empire. When, upon the assumption of office by the present administration, the right hon. gentleman returned to his former post as Minister of Finance, it was at a critical period in the history of Canada. I am sure that the House will agree with me when I say that since then the Right Hon. W. S. Fielding has discharged his important and onerous duties with that ability, integrity and courage always characteristic of him during his long and distinguished career. Hon. gentlemen of all

The Budget-Mr. Robb
parties in this House will, I know, join with me in wishing him a speedy recovery from his present illness and an early return to his public duties.
Fiscal Year 1922-23-Revenue
The Public Accounts for 1922-23 were submitted to parliament during this present session. The consolidated revenues or ordinary receipts obtained during that year were $394,614,900, an increase of $12,662,513.01 over the previous year.
Other receipts, amounting to $8,479,310.30, which included $8,199,333.31 received from the Imperial government to cover exchange on repayments in London to the Dominion of Canada from July, 1920, to August 2, 1921, brought the gross revenue to $403,094,210.30.
Expenditure 1922-23
The expenditure side shows $332,293,732.09 for ordinary expenses. Capital, demobliza-tion and other charges amounted to $18,314,814.63, thus making the total disbursements for that year $350,608,546.72.
The surplus of revenue over total disbursements left $52,485,663.58 available for railways, Canadian Government Merchant Marine and other obligations amounting to $84,126,730.59. Of this amount $77,862,348.23 was required for railways and $5,979,856.08 for the Canadian Government Merchant Marine. The outcome of the year resulted in an increase of $31,641,067.01 to the public debt.
Fiscal Year 1923-24
Coming now to the year 1923-24 which has just closed, I might say that some time will elapse before all the returns for that year will come to hand and allow of definite results being determined. We can, however, make a fairly close estimate which should not differ materially from the actual figures when the books are closed.
Estimated Revenue 1923-24
By adding to the actual revenue received by the Department of Finance, up to and including 31st March last, the estimated amount of revenue yet to come, the accounts for that year, when finally closed, will show a total revenue of about $396,000,000, being an increase of $1,500,000 over the revenue of 1922-23.
The estimated revenue from customs duties will be $121,800,000, aj^ increase of $3,700,000 over the previous year. From excise duties we expect $38,200,000, an increase of about $2,500,000. The estimated revenue from excise taxes will be $121,000,000, an increase of about $14,500,000. From income taxes we estimate $53,750,000, a decrease of about $6,000,000 as compared with the previous year. From delayed business profits taxes we will receive some $4,650,000, a decrease of $8,381,000. We estimate a revenue from interest on investments of $11,700,000, being a decrease of about $4,700,000, which is accounted for by the reduction in 1922 of some $56,000,000 in the indebtedness of the Imperial government to Canada.
Estimated Expenditure 1923-24
Turning now to expenditures, it is estimated that when all accounts are closed, the expenditure for the year on ordinary account will be $328,250,000, a decrease as compared with the previous year of $4,000,000.
Estimated Surplus of Ordinary Revenue over
Ordinary Expenditure, 1923-24
Taking the estimated revenue for the year ended March 31, 1924, as $396,000,000, and the estimated expenditure chargeable to Consolidated Fund as $328,250,000, there will be a surplus of revenue over the ordinary expenditure of $67,750,000, available for capital, special and other obligations.
Capital Expenditures, 1923-24
Capital expenditure for public works, including Marine department, will amount tc $3,865,000, and capital expenditure for Railways and Canals, $8,305,000, making a total capital expenditure of $12,170,000, an increase of $2,362,000 over the previous year.
Special Expenditures, 1923-24
Special expenditures will amount to $8,390,000, of which $740,000 will be required for
demobilization accounts, and $7,650,000 for discount and cost of loan flotations.
Railway Loans
Parliament at its last session authorised $74,550,000 for loans to the Canadian National Railway Company, to be made by way of cash, or by way of guarantee, or partly one way and partly the other. These alternative provisions for meeting railway obligations as

The Budget-Mr. Robb

voted by parliament were first authorised during the session of 1921.
In July, 1921, $25,000,1)00 was raised by way of guarantee for Canadian Northern railway purposes; and in September, 1921, a further amount of $25,000,000 was raised by way of guarantee for purposes of the Grand Trunk Railway Company, making in all $50,000,000 by way of guarantee chargeable against the loan vote for 1921-22. During the fiscal year 1922-23, the government was in a position to meet the railway requirements by way of loans in cash. During the fiscal year just ended, $24,550,000 was paid to the railways by way of cash. We received $768,336 as a refund against the amount advanced in 192122 for purchase of rails.
The vote for the fiscal year was charged with $24,550,000, and the balance of $50,000,000 was raised in February last by way of guarantee and held by the Minister of Finance in a trust account, payments being made from time to time as necessity arose.
I may say that when loans are made by way of cash, under the arrangements made by the former Minister of Finance, they are treated as non-active assets and are, therefore, not taken into account when determining the net public debt. Moneys raised by way of guarantee, which places the government in the position of an endorser, do not presently affect the public debt in any way, as they are indirect obligations.
The action taken by the former Minister of Finance in treating cash loans to the Canadian National Railways as non-active assets is, I think, a very proper procedure, especially when such loans are for the purpose of meeting deficits whenever incurred, and interest charges.
Where moneys are required for construction purposes to better equip the railways for increased earning powers, there is no question that such obligations might be considered as proper capital charges, and, if necessary, be met by way of guaranteeing the issue of railway securities.
The railway issue of February last, guaranteed by the Minister of Finance, was to meet capital charges. A substantial balance is still held in trust by the minister and will be available for the railways for such purposes during the year 1924-25.
Since 1920 the following railway bond issues have been guaranteed by the Minister of Finance under special statutory authority, quite 
apart from the amounts provided in the annual votes of parliament for railway purposes:
October, 1920-Grand Trunk Railway Company	 $25,000,000
December, 1920-Canadian Northern Railway
Company	 25,000,000
March, 1922-Canadian Northern Railway
Company	 H 000.000
August, 1923-Canadian National Railway Company-Serial Equipment Issue	 22,500,000
The $22,500,000 issue of 1923 is the first equipment issue carrying the government's guarantee. The bonds are secured on the equipment purchased and, in addition, guaranteed under the Guarantee Act of 1923. This was done so as to make the security more attractive to investors and secure the highest price. Previous equipment issues were obligations of the company, specifically secured by the equipment, but without any government guarantee.
Public Debt
Turning now to the public debt. On March 31, 1923, our net public debt stood at $2,453,776,868.74. Our estimated ordinary revenue for the year just closed is $396,000,000. Our estimated ordinary expenditures of $328,-
250,000,	and capital expenditures $12,170,000; special expenditures $8,390,000; railway loans $23,781,664; Canadian Government Merchant Marine loans $1,500,000, and loans to Quebec Harbour Commission, which are treated as a non-active asset, $500,000, together with an amount of $621,987 carried on the books of the department for Victoria Shipowners, Limited, which it is proposed to treat as a non-active asset in the place of an active asset as heretofore make the total charges $375,213,651. Our surplus of ordinary revenue over these expenditures will therefore be $20,786,349 to be applied towards the reduction of the national debt as it stood on March 31, 1923. To this must be added $1,317,000, being the amount of sundry outstanding indebtedness cancelled during the past year, and a further amount of $8,305,760.37 received in settlement of an adjustment of acknowledged book debts between the Imperial and the Dominion governments. These two amounts, totalling $9,622,760.37, together with the $20,788,349 surplus of revenue over total expenditures, reduce our net public debt as of March 31, 1923, by the amount of $30,409,109.37.
On March 28 last an adjustment of acknowledged book debts between the Imperial and the Dominion governments was effected. The Imperial government as shown by the books of the Department of Finance, were indebted to us in the amount of $66,779,597.42. On the other hand, the Imperial gov-

The Budget-Mr. Robb
ernment held our bonds to an amount of $67,207,351.17, of which $2,000,000 were 3i per cent bonds maturing 1925-28, and $65,207,351.17 were 4i per cent bonds maturing 1925-45, the bonds being part of an issue made by Canada to the Imperial government in 1916. Negotiations were undertaken and settlement made by offsetting bonds issued to the Imperial government against their indebtedness to Canada. The unmatured bond issues were taken at the rate of 92.91 for the 3i per cent issue and 87.48 for the 4jt per cent issue. A settlement was effected on a 5i per cent basis, being the rate of interest Canada is paying on her outstanding Victory loans from which the moneys were obtained for advances to the Imperial government. The value of the bonds at these rates was $58,901,590.80, being $8,305,760.37 under their face value.
Refunding Loan
On November 1, 1923, the 5i per cent five-year bonds of the 1918 Victory loan issue amounting to $172,459,650 matured. In September last tenders were asked for an issue of a five per cent refunding loan. The highest bid, from a Canadian syndicate, was accepted, namely, $53,000,000 five-year bonds at 96.75 and accrued interest and $147,000,000 twenty-year bonds at 96 and accrued interest. Arrangements were made with the syndicate to give to holders of the maturing bonds the privilege of converting their holdings into bonds of the refunding issue. The price to the public was 99 for the five-year bonds and 98.25 for the twenty-year bonds. The maturity date of the refunding loan is October 15, 1928, for the five-year bonds, and October 15, 1943, for the twenty-year bonds. It was stipulated that the syndicate should associate with themselves the recognized bond dealers in Canada. All commissions to banks and brokers, advertising expenses and all other charges usually included in flotation expenses, were borne by the syndicate. Holders of the matured bonds took advantage of the offer to the extent of $59,388,200, leaving a balance of $113,071,450 to be redeemed in cash.
Fiscal Year 1924-25
I come now to the fiscal year 1924-25. Estimates of revenue for the year upon which we have just entered cannot be made with any degree of accuracy. The revenue we would receive on the present basis of taxation would be materially affected by reductions in taxes which, in view of the most satisfactory outcome of the year just closed, it is proposed to submit to parliament. It is hoped, however, to offset any considerable reduction in the revenue by a most rigid economy in ex-78*
penditures. The estimates now before the House show a very substantial reduction as compared with the estimates of last year. We shall no doubt have supplementaries, but rigid economy will be exercised in their preparation; and in this the government hopes for and expects co-operation from all sections of Canada.
Canadian Trade-Merchandise Only
I desire, Mr. Speaker, to place on record tabulated statements illustrating the development of Canadian trade. For comparison I have taken the year immediately preceding the war, then the years 1922 and 1923, and eleven months ended February, 1924. With the permission of the House I will place these statements on Hansard.
Trade with the United Kingdom
Fiscal Year	Imports for Total Excess of
ended 31st	Consumption	Exports	Exports
March	over
Imports
1914	$132,070,406 $222,322,292 $ 90,251,886
1922	
117,135,343	300,363,193	183,227,8501923	
141,330,143	379,918,526	238,588,383
Eleven Months
ended Feb., 1924
(unrevised).. ..	138,224,868	332,276,770	194,051,902
Trade with the British Empire
Including the United Kingdom
Fiscal Year	Imports for	Total	Excess ofended 31st March	Consumption	Exports	Exports over Imports1914	$154,526,846	$246,032,121	$ 91,505,2751922	149.109,253	347,450,451	198.341,1981923	179,638,805	440,993,115	261,354,310Eleven Months ended Feb.. 1924	(unrevised).. ..	178,619,198	408,714,744	230,095,546Trade with United States	Fiscal Year	Imports for	Total	Excess ofended 31st March	Consumption	Exports	Imports over Exports1914	$396,302,138	$176,948,299	$219,353,8391922	515,958,196	304,104,177	211,854,0191923	540,989,738	380,347,721	160,642,017Eleven Months ended Feb., 1924	(unrevised).. ..	540.461,296	397,369,390	143,091,906Trade	with all Foreign Countries	Fiscal Year	Imports for	Total	Excess ofended 31st March	Consumption	Exports	Imports over Exports1914	$464,667,152	$209,405,103	$255,262,0491922	598,695,079	406,476,558	192,218,5211923	622,940,439	504,302,722	118,637,717Eleven Months ended Feb., 1924	(unrevised).. ..	627.794.090	556,223,251	71,570,839
The Budget-Mr. Robh

Total trade with all Countries
Fiscal Year Imports for Total Excess of ended 31st	Consumption Exports Imports
March	over
Exports
1914	$619,193,998 $455,437,224 $163,756,774
Excess of Exports over Imports
Customs tariff changes, and reductions under the Special War Revenue Act. These resolutions will show a substantial reduction in taxation. For purposes of brevity and clearness I shall place the proposed changes in groups according to the classes affected.
Customs Tariff and Consumption or Sales Tax Reductions
1922	
747,804,332	753.927,009	6,122,6771923	
802,579,244	945,295,837	142,716,593
Eleven Months
ended Feb., 1924
(unrevised)..	..	806,413,288	964,937,995	158,524,707
It will be observed that these statements show:
1.	Canadian trade with the United Kingdom;
2.	Canadian trade with the British Empire, including the United Kingdom;
3.	Canadian trade with the United States;
4.	Canadian trade with all foreign countries; and
5.	A summary of total Canadian trade with all countries.
This brief statement showing the steady growth of Canadian trade with the nations of the world must be gratifying to Canadians.
During the fiscal year ended March 31, 1914-four months before the outbreak of the Great War-Canada had a total foreign trade of $1,074,631,222, with an excess of imports over exports of $163,756,774. To that extent the balance of trade was against Canada. The fiscal year ended March, 1922, shows a total foreign trade of $1,501,731,341. The difference between exports and imports~was only $6,122,677, but the balance was favourable to Canada. In the fiscal year ended March, 1923, we had a total foreign trade of $1,747,875,081, with a favourable balance of $142,716,593 over imports. In other words, Canadian foreign trade had increased 60 per cent over that of 1914, an unfavourable trade balance of $163,756,774 had been converted into a favourable balance of $142,716,593.
Returns for the eleven months ended February, 1924, indicate continued healthy growth of Canadian foreign trade. Already both imports and exports exceed those of 1923, and the balance of trade favourable to Canada on eleven months' business is $158,524,707. Statistics indicate that each succeeding year Canadians are increasing the percentage of products marketed in the finished or semifinished condition, thus providing more labour for our own people and higher class freight for Canadian railways.
We now come to the resolutions which I am about to submit to the House proposing

Items
Mowing machines, harvesters, binders, reapers	 7*	free
Cultivators, harrows, horse-rakes, seed drills manure spreaders, and
weeders	10	free
Ploughs, threshing machines and complete
parts thereof	10	5
Farm or field rollers, post hole diggers, hay loaders, stumping machines, grain crushers, potato-diggers, hay tedders and other agricultural implements 10	5
Farm wagons	10	5Fertilizers	
5	freeAxes, scythes, sickles or reaping hooks, hay or straw knives, edging knives, hoes, rakes and pronged	forks..	15	10Shovels and spades.	..20	10
Farming Industry
Preferential Tariff General Tariff Old Proposed Old Proposed rate rate
rate
rate
12*	7*
15	10
17*
10
free
22*	20
32*	20
It is proposed to remove the sales tax from all the foregoing items grouped under the heading of Farming Industry and also from binder twine. Fertilizers are already exempt.
Materials for Agricultural Implements
It is proposed to give to manufacturers of agricultural implements "free entry" on pig iron, bar iron and bar steel when used in the manufacture of mowers, binders and reapers, in lieu of a drawback of 99 per cent. The "free entry" is also extended to these raw materials when used in the manufacture of cultivators, harrows, horse-rakes, seed-drills, manure spreaders and weeders. Materials which enter into the cost of the aforementioned items and other implements on which the duty is to be reduced will be entitled to entry at 7i per cent under all tariffs.
It is proposed to grant a drawback of 99 per cent on materials and parts of implements on hand imported prior to this date which will have entered into the cost of all agricultural implements on which the duty is to be reduced. It is also proposed to exempt from the sales' tax all the articles and materials to be used in the manufacture of these

agricultural implements, as well as goods consumed in the process of manufacture.
Fruit Growing Industry
	Preferential Tariff		General Tariff
Old	Proposed	Old ProposedItems	rate	rate	rate rateSpraying machines, fruit	or vegetable	grading	machines,	pruning	15 10hooks, pruning	shears. 10	5	
It is proposed to remove the sales tax from the foregoing items and also from nicotine sulphate and spraying preparations.
Poultry Industry
Preferential Tariff General Tariff Old Proposed Old Proposed Items	rate rate rate rate
Incubators for hatching eggs, brooders for
rearing young fowl.. 10	5	15	10
We propose removing the sales tax from these items as well as from poultry feed.
Dairying Industry
Preferential Tariff General Tariff
Old	Proposed	Old	ProposedItems	rate	rate	rate	rateMilking machines,	cen-	trifugal machines	for	testing blitter	fat,	15	10milk or cream..	.. 10	5	
The sales tax is to be removed from the foregoing items and also from cream separators and parts thereof, and extract of rennet.
Mining and Quarrying Industry
Items	rate
Rock drills, percussion coal cutters, coal augers, stamp mills, ore and rock crushers, and rotary and coal
drills	15
Coal-washing machinery, coke-making machinery, and machinery and apparatus for use exclusively in the distillation or recovery of products from coal tar or gas	20
Preferential Tariff Old Proposed
rate
General Tariff Old Proposed rate rate
27*
7*	30
and from 7*	27*
12*
12*
It is proposed to remove the sales tax from the foregoing items grouped under the heading of mining and quarrying. In addition the sales tax is to be removed from mining cars and other similar appliances [DOT]used for mining or quarrying, and from explosives.
The Budget-Mr. Robb
Lumbering Industry
Preferential Tariff	General	TariffOld	Proposed	Old Proposed	Items	rate	rate	rate	rateSaw-mill machinery.. ..	15	10	25	20Logging machinery which	includes logging cars,	blocks and	tackle,	yarders and	pratic-	ally all machinery used	exclusively for	logging	operations.. ..	15	10	30	20and	and	20	27*	Logging wagons.	174	5	25	10
The sales tax is also to be removed from the foregoing items pertaining to the lumbering industry.
Fishing Industry
All marline for the fisheries is to be made free of customs duty; heretofore only barked marline has been free.
We propose that the sales tax on rubber boots shall be reduced from 6 per cent to 2J per cent. Rubber boots, as hon. gentlemen know, are used extensively in the fishing industry.
Barked marline for the fisheries is already exempt from sales tax, and, as a result of the change we are proposing, all marline for the fisheries will become exempt from the sales tax.
Breadstuffs and Provisions
It is proposed to remove the sales tax from the following articles:
Cereal foods, macaroni and vermicelli, sago and rice.
Meats, salted or smoked.
The sales tax is being reduced from 6 per cent to 2i per cent on biscuits, canned vegetables, canned fruits, jams and preserves.
Boots and Shoes, including rubber footwear
We propose to reduce the sales tax from 6 per cent to 2i per cent.
The sales tax will be removed from milk foods.
Materials Consumed in Process
Woollen, and many other manufacturing establishments will benefit by a proposed clause which will provide that materials, consumed in process of manufacture or production, which enter directly into the cost of goods subject to the consumption or sales tax, will be exempt from the sales tax.
Well-drilling machinery and apparatus
The sales tax is to be removed.
Crutches are being made free of both customs and sales tax.

Tariff
Items
449
450a
453b
453c
460b
field rollers, post hole diggers, snaths, machines, milking machine attachment fugal machines for testing butter fat, cream; stumping machines, and othei tural implements, n.o.p., and complete articles specified in this tariff item.
milk
straw knives, edging knives, hoes, rakes, n.o.p. and pronged forks	
for the same. Lawn mowers..
thereof, for logging purposes exclusively, 're crushers, rock crushers, stamp mills, ro percussion coal cutters, coal augers, rol
476a
502b
506a
533b
663
663b
operations	
-lachinery and apparatus for use exclusively in washing coal; machinery and apparatus for use exclusively in producing coke and gas; machinery and apparatus for use exclusively in the distillation oi recovery of products from coal tar or gas; and integral parts of all machinery or apparatus merated in this item not to include motive pi nor tanks for gas	
facture of phonograph motor springs when im ported by manufacturers of phonograph motor springs for use exclusively in the manufacture of
such articles in their own factories	
Bicycle rim strips of maple not further manufactured
than bent to shape and jointed	
Crutches or specially constructed staffs for a cripple Linters of short fibres of cotton, bleached, when imported by manufacturers of blotting paper to be used in their own factories for the manufacture
of blotting paper	
Farm wagons, logging wagons, and complete parts
thereof	
Fertilizers, compounded or manufactured, n.o.p....
Articles which enter into the cost of the manufacture of fertilizers, when imported for use exclusively
in the manufacture of fertilizers	
Fish hooks, for deep-sea or lake fishing, not smaller in size than number 2-0; bank, cod, pollock and mackerel fish lines; and mackerel, herring, salmon seal, seine, mullet, net and trawl twine in hanks or coil, barked or not,-in variety of sizes and threads-including gilling thread in balls, and head ropes for fishing nets; marline, and net nor-sels of cotton, hemp, or flax; and fishing nets or seines, and manila rope, not exceeding one and one-half inches in circumference, when used exclusively for the fisheries, not to include hooks, lines, nets or ropes commonly used for sportsmen's purposes	
British Preferential Tariff	Inter- mediate Tariff	1 General Tariffi- r i, , r t f 5 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.r 10 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.1 10 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.20 p.c.	30 p.c.	32$ p.c.10 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.10 p.c.	15 p.c.	20 p.c.71 p.c.	10 p.c.	121 P-c-Free	Free	Free10 p.c.	121 P-c-	15 p.c.Free	Free	Free71 p.c.	10 p.c.	12$ p.c.5 p.c.	10 p.c.	10 p.c.Free.	Free	FreeFree	Free	FreeFree	Free	Free

The Budget-Mr. Robb
4.	Resolved, That Schedule B to The Customs Tariff, 1907, as amended by chapter nineteen of the Statutes of 1922 and chapter forty-two of the Statutes of 1923, be further amended by striking thereout items 1002, 1026, 1027, 1031, 1036, the enumeration of
goods, and the rate of drawback to the said items, and to provide that the following items, enumerations and rates of drawback of Customs duties be inserted in said Schedule B:
Tariff Items	Goods
1026	Materials, including all parts, imported
	prior to eleventh day of April, 1924	
	
1031	Artificial silk tops and waste or artificial
	fibre silk, artificial silk yarns or fila-
	ments, enumerated in tariff items 583a
	and 5S3aa.
1036	Bar iron or steel, rolled, whether in coils
	or bars, one and one-eighth of an inch in
	diameter and over.
1038	Materials, including all parts	
1039	Materials, including all parts not finished
1040	Bags, boxes and barrels	
	
	
When Subject to Drawback	Portion of Duty (Not including Special Duty or Dumping Duty) Payable as Drawback
When enteringinto the cost of goods enumerated in tariff items 445, 446, 446b, 447b, 448 and 591, before the first day of July, 1927	99 p.c.
When used by manufacturers of malleable iron castings or steel shafting for use exclusively in the manufacture of such articles for use in the manufacture of goods enumerated in tariff items 445, 446, 446b, 447b, 448 and 591		80 p.c.
When further manufactured before the first day of January, 1925-	60 p.c.
W5 * 7hen used in the manufacture of goods enumerated in tariff item 410 		99 p.c.
Wrhen used in the manufacture of goods enumerated in tariff item 544a 		99 p.c.
When used in the manufacture of goods enumerated in tariff items 447 and 448b		30 p.c.
When imported by producers of salt, for use in covering salt produced in Canada		60 p.c.
W7hen used in the manufacture of bags, boxes and barrels, when such bags, boxes and barrels are used in covering salt produced in	60 p.c.
Canada		
5.	Resolved, That any enactment founded on the foregoing resolutions shall be deemed to have come into force on the eleventh day of April, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-four, and to have applied to all goods mentioned in the foregoing resolutions imported or taken out of warehouse for consumption on and after that day, and to have applied to goods previously imported for which no entry for consumption was made before that day.
Special War Revenue Act
1. Resolved, that it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend The Special War Revenue Act, 1915, and amending acts, by providing that the rate of the consumption or sales tax imposed by section nineteen BBB of the said act shall be reduced from six per cent to five per cent.
2. Resolved, That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend The Special War Revenue Act, 1915, and amending acts, by providing that the following goods shall be exempt from the consumption or sales tax imposed by section nineteen BBB of the said act, that is to say:-books enumerated in Customs Tariff items 173 and 175; printed text-books authorized by the Department of Education of any province in Canada; goods enumerated in Customs Tariff items 45, 46, 209b, 219a, 352a. 410, 410a, 445, 445a, 445b, 446, 446b, 447b, 448, 449, 4o0, 453b, 453c, 460, 460a. 460b, 461, 461a, 466, 466a, 469 including goods enumerated in this item of a class or kind made
iu Canada, 506a, 544, 591, 591a, 663b, 666, 667, 696; insulin; extract of rennet; poultry feed; ice cream; sago; rice, cleaned; macaroni and vermicelli; meats, salted or smoked; carbolic or heavy oil, to be used only in creosoting timber; cream separators and parts thereof; cars and other similar appliances for use exclusively at a mine or a quarry for mining or quarrying; articles and materials to be used exclusively in the manufacture of goods enumerated in Customs Tariff items 219a, 410, 410a, 445, 445a, 445b, 446, 446b, 447b, 448, 449, 450, 453b, 453c, 460, 460a, 460b, 461, 461a, 466, 466a, 469 including goods enumerated in this item of a class or kind made in Canada, 506a, 591, 591a, 663, 666, 667, 696; articles and materials to be used exclusively in the manufacture of cars and other similar appliances for use exclusively at a mine or a quarry for mining or quarrying; articles and materials to be used exclusively in the manufacture of cream separators and parts thereof; materials, not to include plant equipment, consumed in process of manufacture or production, which enter directly into the cost of goods subject to the consumption or sales tax, manufactured or produced by a licensed manufacturer or producer; materials, not to include plant equipment, consumed in process of manufacture or production, which enter directly into the cost of goods enumerated in Customs Tariff items 410, 410a, 445, 445a, 445b, 446, 446b, 447b, 448 , 449 , 450 , 453b, 453c, 460, 460a, 460b, 461, 461a, 466, 466a, 469 including goods enumerated in this item of a class or kind made in Canada, 506a, 544, 591, 591a, 663,
The Budget-Sir

Henry Drayton
663b, 666, 667, 696; and by providing that on the following goods there shall be imposed, levied and collected only fifty per cent of the said consumption or sales tax, that is to say:-boots and shoes, including rubber footwear; biscuits of all kinds; goods enumerated in Customs Tariff items 86, 105, and 106.
3. Resolved, That it is expedient to amend The Special War Revenue Act, 1915, and amending Acts, as follows, that is to say:-
(a) By repealing subsection three of section nineteen BBB of the said Act and substituting therefor a new subsection three providing that if at any time it appears to the Minister of Customs and Excise that payment of the consumption or sales tax is being evaded by a licensed manufacturer or producer or licensed wholesaler or jobber the Minister may require that the consumption or sales tax shall be imposed, levied and collected on any material specified by the Minister, sold to any licensed manufacturer or producer or licensed wholesaler or jobber or to any class of licensed manufacturers or producers or licensed wholesalers or jobbers specified by the Minister, at the time of sale of such material when produced or manufactured in Canada, or at the time of entry for consumption by such licensed manufacturer or producer or licensed wholesaler or jobber when such material is imported, subject to deduction thereafter on submission by the licensed manufacturer or producer or licensed wholesaler or jobber of proof that such material has been used in the manufacture of an article which is subject to the consumption or sales tax and on which the said tax has been paid.
(b)	By repealing subsection five of said section nineteen BBB.
(c)	By striking out subsection six of said section nineteen BBB and substituting therefor the following:- "(6) Subject to the provisions of subsection three
of this section, every manufacturer or producer shall take out an annual license for the purpose aforesaid, and the Minister may prescribe a fee therefor, not exceeding two dollars, and the penalty for neglect shall be a sum not exceeding one thousand dollars. Provided that the Minister may direct that any class of small manufacturer or producer selling his product exclusively by retail shall be exempt from payment of consumption or sales tax on goods manufactured or produced by him and persons so exempted shall not be given a license. Such exemption may be withdrawn by the Minister."
4. Resolved, That any enactment founded on the foregoing resolutions numbers one and two shall be deemed to have come into force on the eleventh day of April, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-four, and to have applied to all goods mentioned in the foregoing resolutions imported or taken out of warehouse for consumption on and after that day, and to have applied to goods previously imported for which no entry for consumption was made before that day; and that any enactment founded on the foregoing resolution number three shall come into force on the first day of July, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-four.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I rise, Mr. Speaker to move the adjournment of the debate, but before doing so I desire to make one or two observations. In the first place I want to congratulate the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) on the very pleasing and friendly way in which he has discharged the duties which devolved upon him. He has been frank and I think he has made the best of an impossible job.


Mr. BUREAU:: The job and the man are all right.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I say that my hon. friend the Acting Minister of Finance has been frank. He has pointed out to us that in connection with a good many 'of the better showings that can be made, the activities of past years must be taken into consideration; he has been frank in showing that out of a debt reduction of $30,000,000 no less than $10,000,000 is due to the previous administration. He is frank also in pointing out that the surplus claimed is obtained by the elimination of obligations which we are now entering into, but absolutely real in view of the value of the investment and I call upon the Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) for a corroboration of this-railway obligations to the extent of $/2,500,000, which we will finallv pay.
W hile my hon. friend has been brief in his statement, he has given us a lot of material which I think should be carefully considered, and I propose to move the adjournment of the debate, to which I think there is no objection, until Monday next, there being comparatively few members in attendance as a rule on Friday. Before submitting the motion I wish to point out one or two things that we on this side conceive should be looked into in connection with these budget propositions. The first thing that we look upon as essential in a budget at the present time is something which will enure to the benefit of Canada as a country rather than to the advantage of other nations; something which every patriotic Canadian will look upon as extremely necessary; something which would go far to stop the exodus of Canadian workingmen to the United States; something which will tend to change the present policy which however conceived will have for its inevitable result the expansion of the United States rather than the building up of Canada. That is one of the matters we shall give special attention to when studying these questions.
We also regard as essential the restoration of the purchasing power of the Canadian people as a whole. That is something which is of importance not only to the farming community but to every industry in the Dominion. We are wondering what is being done by this budget to check the exodus, and the admitted exodus, of 181,000 capable and educated Canadians, who paid their head tax and entered the United States. This startling disclosure is made by official returns. These men left Canada for the purpose of finding that work which was denied them in their own

The Budget-Sir Henry Drayton
country, that work which was denied them in the land of their birth. Now, we should like to find a policy adopted which would restore these 181,000 good Canadians to their native land and enable it to benefit from the resumption of their activities in the Dominion. Many of these men left Canada as a result of the closing down of our woollen factories. Many of them earned a livelihood of $29 a week; in mere labouring work others earned $23 a week. Reducing the amount lost to the low average earnings per capita of $1,000 a year one can see at a glance the great loss in the purchasing power of the Canadian home market on which at any rate the majority of our farmers depend. We have removed from that market a purchasing power of no less than $181,000,000, and we would expect something to be done in connection with the present budget to remedy that serious loss. We would further expect something to be done to help the Canadian farmer who to-day is shut out by an absolute barrier from his natural market to the south. Certainly the least we might expect is that something would be done to help him in his own market. Thus we would expect that the producer of cheese in Canada would have something done for him when we remember that the sales of American cheese in this Dominion have increased 86 per cent, while his own market has been cut in two. We would expect that something would be done for the great basic industry of agriculture, and especially for mixed farming the development of which my hon. friend the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) preaches so sedulously. We would expect something which would change the situation which permits American eggs to the amount of $2,416,000 to be sold in Canada, whereas the sale of Canadian eggs in the adjoining republic amounted to the small sum of only $49,000. We would also expect something to be done to help the vegetable grower of Canada whose market is encroached upon to a serious extent by products from the United States.
I do not know that we should expect impossibilities to be done by this budget,. That would be to restore to the industrial worker everywhere the confidence which he placed in the professions of faith of hon. gentlemen opposite in the Fielding-Laurier tariff which he desired. And at the same time the faith of the grain growers of the West that the Liberal platform of 1919 was seriously meant. Hon. gentlemen opposite have before them the task of reconciling these rival claims. We are going to consider the whole fiscal policy having regard to the doctrine preached by the Finance Minister (Mr. Fielding) last year that there
should be stability in tariff but stability looking to the expansion of all matters Canadian.
We have not the budget hefore us yet, but I want to make just one statement to the minister which is perhaps an answer to much that he has said in connection with traffic over our railways and the like, and that is simply this. There was a time when our railways in western territory were good assets, but we have got a return to-day by the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Graham) showing how the earnings of the National system are made up. The hon. Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) talks about the great increase of industrial and agricultural activity that his measure will produce. Why, we have never had a bigger or better year, so far as volume is concerned, than the present year; and yet the whole earnings of all the western territories, the prairie provinces and British Columbia, for the last year amount to $72,000,000 and the operating expenses amount to $74,000,000; so that as a result, with the movement of the greatest crops we have ever had, we still have a railway deficit in actual operation in western Canada this yeai of $2,020,000. On the other hand, in Ontario and Quebec, in the central region of industry, the National Railways earn $127,900,000, with operating expenses of $109,212,000, a credit of $18,687,000. I hope a study of these resolutions that have been brought down will not result is this: That defenceless industrial Canada is further shackled, and that a complete Americanization of many lines of industry is made certain; that the exodus this year of 181,000 good working Canadians is to be indefinitely and permanently increased. We hope a study of these resolutions will not disclose these rasults. We fear it will, but we hope not. 1 beg to move the adjournment of the debate till next Monday.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: In reference to the
motion my hon. friend has just made, as I intimated last night, it was the hope and expectation of the government that the debate would proceed this afternoon and continue until concluded. If, however, my hon. friend wishes a little longer time to prepare his speech, there will be no objection to the adjournment; I should have thought, however, that an adjournment until tomorrow would have been sufficient. My hon. friend has expressed a desire to have the debate adjourned until Monday, and if that is his wish of course we will accede to it. I would like to have an understanding with my hon. friend's leader as to what we may be per-
CJV.R.-Branch Lines

mitted to take up on Friday. If we accommodate my hon. friend's party, I hope he will extend a like accommodation to us. We would like to take up the Labour estimates on Friday, among other things, but there is a technical rule which would prevent us going into supply on Friday on the Labour estimates without the consent of the House. If the House is agreeable and will give us consent, we are quite agreeable to the adjournment.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think my right hon. friend is mistaken as to the object of the adjournment. It is not to prepare a speech; that is an easy matter and could be done at once. It is to find out, in view of the resolutions, whether in fact they are as bad as they appear, or whether some of them can be supported.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am glad my hon. friend has given the reason which he has mentioned, just now; when he asked for the adjournment it was because so few members would be present on Friday. I do not think that is a very good reason, and the one he has just urged is equally bad. However, we are prepared to go on with the railway resolutions, and continue them, but we would like to take up Labour estimates to-morrow.


Arthur Meighen: Hitherto, with all budget speeches, the desire of the opposition to have the debate adjourned until the following week, if the budget speech was delivered either on the last or the second last day of the week, has been acceded to without conditions. I am surprised that an attempt has been made to imply conditions now. I, for one, will submit to no conditions. If the government refuse the adjournment till Monday they will take the responsibility.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My right hon. friend has taken his characteristic attitude. I made the request, owing to a difficulty which arises in respect to a technical rule, in the hope that the right hon. leader of the opposition might help to expedite the business of the House by permitting us to take up the Labour estimates to-morrow. However, I have no desire to imitate the pettiness of my right hon. friend, and am ready to accede to the hon. member's request.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned. CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS



BILLS PROPOSED TO AUTHORIZE THE CONSTRUCTION OF BRANCH LINES

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House 
go into committee to consider the following proposed resolutions:

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Turtleford, in a generally southeasterly direction, to a point at or near Hafford, in the province of Saskatchewan; mileage already graded, 23 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 102 miles; estimated cost, $2,313,000.
He said: The other day an hon. gentleman on the other side of the House asked me if it was the intention of the government to submit these bills to the Railway committee. I think the answer given was that it was not the intention to do so. Several hon. members have suggested that we would be expediting matters by placing the Canadian National Railways to a certain extent at least in the same position as a private company, in the matter of appearing before the Railway committee.
I have considered the matter carefully, but I am not sure what will be gained by it. Government measures are not usually submitted to a committee; but if this would expedite business at all, I would have no objection provided that, first, I would be allowed to take up those bills that have had a first reading, give them a second reading and submit them to the Railway committee. This much would have to be understood, in fairness to the opposition, of course, that opportunity would have to be given on the second reading of some of these bills to discuss the principle involved as to the three-year programme. I imagine the Railway committee might not want to deal with that entirely, although they would discuss it. Therefore, if this is agreeable to the House, I might be permitted to move these other bills a second reading and then move that they be referred to the Railway committee. I will do so as the first order of business and let the Railway committee deal with them.
Henry Lumley Drayton: I appreciate
the fact that they cannot be referred to the Railway committee until they have received second reading; but if the hon. gentleman says that they will go to the Railway committee, that will save a great deal of time in this House. We would have liked to help him in that regard last year. We have already consented to some of them, and if my hon. friend will make a note of them on his agenda, perhaps I can help him this afternoon.
Order No. 12 is a resolution covering a proposed branch line from near Kelvington at mile 114 on the Canadian Northern railway, in a westerly direction, to a point in township 37, range 13, west of the second meridian,

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
in the province of Saskatchewan. That is a line with which I am familiar and which ought to be built. I think it should have been built last year. We are quite ready to facilitate my hon. friend in eveiy way in getting that on to the Senate.
The next resolution, Order No. 13, covers a proposed branch line from Prince Albert to near Paddockwood in the province of Saskatchewan. The same remarks apply to that. We were always in favour of that line.
The next one, Order No. 14, covers a proposed line from Eyre in the province of Saskatchewan to Acadia Valley in the province of Alberta. The same remarks apply to that.
The next one, Order No. 15, covers a proposed line from Eston in a southeasterly direction to White Bear in the province of Saskatchewan. The same remarks apply to that. Then resolution, Order No. 17, covers a proposed line from St. Paul, in a southeasterly direction to a point in or near township 57, range 6, west of the fourth meridian in the province of Alberta. We have no objection to that. That is as much as I can give my hon. friend in the meantime, but it will give him a bit of work.


George Perry Graham: These are resolutions; we
will get them through and give the bills their first readings.
Resolution read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 48, respecting the construction of a Canadian National railway line from Turtleford to near Hafford in the province of Saskatchewan.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
Mr. GRAHAM moved that resolutions, Orders Nos 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17 be taken up concurrently.


Mr. STEWART (Humboldt):: I would
ask the minister to leave resolution, Order No. 12, out of those which he has enumerated.


Hewitt Bostock: It is understood that
Order No. 12 is left out.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolutions:

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure i'o provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Dunblane on the Canadian
Northern railway, in a generally southeasterly direction, to Mawer on the Grand Trunk Pacific railway in the province of Saskatchewan; estimated mileage including existing grading, 42 miles; estimated cost, $2,767,000.

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure io provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from the end of steel near Kel-vington at Mile 114 on the Canadian Northern railway, in a westerly direction, to a point in township 37, range 13, west of the 2nd meridian, in the province of Saskatchewan; mileage already graded, 4 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 13 miles; estimated cost, $290,000

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure i'o provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Prince Albert, in a northeasterly direction, to near Paddockwood, in the province of Saskatchewan; mileage already graded, 17 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 23 miles; estimated cost, $406,000.

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure i'o provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Eyre, in the province of Saskatchewan, in a generally southwesterly direction, to Acadia Valley, in the province of Alberta; mileage already graded, 42 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 25 miles; estimated cost, $463,000.

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure i'o provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Eston, in a southeasterly direction, to White Bear in the province of Saskatchewan; mileage already graded, 35 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 35 miles; estimated cost, $649,000.

[Stage Direction]
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure i'o provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Radville, in a southerly and then westerly direction, to Fife Lake in the province of Saskatchewan; estimated mileage including existing grading, 115 miles; estimated cost, $3,706,000.
St. PAUL SOUTHEASTERLY
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from St. Paul, in a southeasterly direction to a point in or near township 57, range 6, west of the 4th meridian in the province of Alberta; estimated mileage including existing grading, 21 miles; estimated cost, $525,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Henry Lumley Drayton: I think my hon. friend ought to read what the directors say about each one and let it go, so that we may have a prima facie case on it.


George Perry Graham: The memorandum in regard to the line from Dunblane to Mawer is as follows:
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

Dunblane-Mawer, Mile 0-42-	Cost
Grade now ahead of track-nil.
Proposed in 1924-42 miles grade; 28 miles
track	7	$ 928,000
Proposed in 1925-14 miles track	 1,839,000

It is proposed in 1924 to do all the grading on the 42 miles between Dunblane and Mawer and lay the track to the South Saskatchewan river; also complete in that year, if possible, the substructure for the bridge across the river. In 1925 it is proposed to complete the trackwork and the superstructure of the bridge.
The main purpose of this line is to join the system of existing lines west of Dunblane to the G.T.P. Riverhurst branch at Mawer, in order to bring that area into more direct communication with the Moose Jaw-Regina district. The work will involve a large bridge across the South Saskatchewan river near Elbow, but it is justified by the improved routings to Moose Jaw and Regina from the west. It is estimated to make a saving of $131,000 per year on train miles saved. It is also estimated that this line should produce considerable grain and some other in and outbound freight, consisting of live stock, coal, lumber and merchandise. A certain amount of road haul will be saved to the farmers on their grain. The local business off this line, being mainly grain will all have a long haul and thus tend to feed the main lines of the system. The real justification of this line is the short routing of traffic.
Note.-Includes bridge over South Saskatchewan river purpose is to link up lines.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: I do not rise to oppose the resolution but I just want to bring certain facts to the attention of the minister. There is a survey running from the Elbow at the crossing of the Saskatchewan river to a point at or near Chamberlin on the Canadian National line, and it has always been understood by the people in the district traversed by this survey that when the line crossed the river from Dunblane it would follow the survey I have mentioned. These people are situated in a peculiar country lying between two valleys. Their towns are located on the Canadian Pacific line, between Moose Jaw and Outlook, on the one hand, and on the Canadian National line on the other. Going west to the Canadian Pacific line they have to cross the Qu'Appelle valley, and to the east, going to the Canadian National line, they are obliged to cross the Squaw valley; and the nature of these valleys is such that these people must use four horses in order to market a two-horse load of grain. I have received many letters and telegrams with respect to this matter protesting against this line going from Dunblane crossing the river at Elbow and then going to Mawer if the intention is to reduce the chances of the inhabitants of this district of getting a line which will serve their requirements. I bring this matter to the attention of the minister so that he may place it before the railway board, because these people in their present 
circumstances are justly entitled to a railway through that district. Xf a railway went through the district it would provide considerable business for the Canadian National Railways which they are not enjoying to-day; and by reason of the character of that part of the country which I have mentioned it is of sufficient importance that the minister take a note of what I am saying and submit these representations to the board.
Mr. GRAHAM; I shall be glad to do that. I may point out however that when these bills go before the committee some members of the board will be present.


Mr. LEWIS:: Does the minister know
whether a crossing has been found on the Saskatchewan south of the Elbow suitable for a bridge? I understand that 42 miles of grading has already been built this year, and if the engineers have not found a crossing near the Elbow it seems to me a waste of time going on with the grading until this difficulty has been definitely disposed of. Before coming to Ottawa I understood that certain engineers had been on the river but that no definite information was available at that time. It will be remembered that some years ago the Canadian Pacific Railway endeavoured to find a crossing at the Elbow, but without success. Before I proceed I should like the minister to tell us whether this matter has been definitely settled.


George Perry Graham: One of the objects I have in mind in agreeing to send these bills to the Railway committee is that we may have the engineers present to answer all these questions which are so technical and the details of which I have no possibility of knowing. With the engineers in attendance on the committee hon. members will be able to learn at first hand from them, as well as from the officers of the board, whatever they may wish to know. My object in sending the bills to the committee, which is not really necessary, is to give hon. members an opportunity to ask questions and to obtain desired information.
Mr. LEWIS; If the matter is to go before the Railway committee, and if the engineers will be present to answer questions, then I would rather defer anything I may have to say until that time; and if there is anything further that I wish to point out afterwards I can say it on the floor of the House.


George Perry Graham: I thought that the motion did not apply to the resolution in regard to the line from Kelvington West. But I understand that the hon. member for Humboldt (Mr. Stewart) wishes to discuss it.

CJ\7.R.-Branch Lines


Charles Wallace Stewart: The objection I have to this line is that it does not wholly serve the purposes for which our Canadian National branch lines are supposed to be built. The minister himself agrees with me in this statement and I have observed also that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) takes the same view in statements he has made previously in this regard. In the building of these lines and in their location there should be taken into consideration not only the interests of the railways themselves but the desirability of serving the people who are already in the districts where railways are to be built. In order that I may state my objection clearly to this branch line as projected I shall explain the conditions that exist in that particular district. In 1904 or thereabouts the Canadian Northern built its main line from Winnipeg to Edmonton, cutting through the province of Saskatchewan, and about a year later there was built from that line a branch from Dauphin to the city of Prince Albert which, after swinging northward from Dauphin for about a hundred miles, then paralleled the existing line half way across the province of Saskatchewan. There was already at that time a line from Saskatoon to Prince Albert which later was acquired by the Canadian Northern Railway, thus enclosing a sort of rectangle. In this rectangle there was enclosed an area, roughly speaking, of 150 miles by 60 or 70 in width. That of course, it will be admitted, is too large a territory to be served by two lines, one on the south and the other on the north. Later on the Canadian Northern started to build a line cutting through that territory, but as this area was at that time sparsely settled, and as that company already encircled the territory with their own lines, very slow progress was made, and they did not reach Kelv-ington until about two years ago. For many years previous to that much of this territory had been settled very thickly. It is a good district. At the time the original railway was built, about 1904 or 1905, it was considerably wooded; but owing to the inroads of fires and the use of the wood by settlers the forest districts have been greatly reduced and much good land has been brought under cultivation; in fact the whole territory may be said to be fairly well settled to-day. The other line which was started by the Canadian Northern, and eventually became the Canadian National line from Swan River to Kel-vington-or what was always known as the Thunder Hill extension-did not break this territory into two by any means. It ran practically parallel to the Winnipeg-Edmon-ton line of the Canadian National Railway,
and about twenty miles from it, leaving a territory north of that line to the Dauphin-Prince Albert line averaging from sixty to seventy miles in width. As I have already stated, this territory has become settled and cultivated, and a vast amount of grain is taken out annually. At the same time the country to the northward has become a heavy producing area, and there are millions of bushels of grain to be drawn out of there every year. This line in its original form, as presented last year, was shown as a cutoff from the Swan River-Prince Albert line across to Kelvington. It would have served the territory and would have been very advantageous to the settlers who went in there many years ago anticipating railroad accommodation.
When the Soldier Settlement Board was re-establishing the soldiers who were placed under its care, this very choice land no doubt appealed to its officials as being admirably suited for such settlement, and a very large soldier settlement was located in the area around Kelvington and immediately north-Perigord, Nobleville, Pre Ste. Marie, Bjorkdale and Speddington. The soldiers took up their land with the definite understanding that a branch of the Canadian National Railways, which had been projected before that time, would be built to serve them. They have broken up perhaps more than half of their land. I was in there last fall and was surprised at the way in which they had advanced themselves, being so distant from railway facilities. They have good land and have made themselves homes there. Now this resolution would carry the branch in a westerly direction to connect with a branch of the Canadian Pacific, and would not serve those settlers.
The fact is that last year the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, realizing that they had an advantage when the Canadian National board was not allowed to build, constructed their line from a point south running generally northerly through this district, but without serving the areas that I have mentioned where the soldier settlers are located. The Canadian Pacific had a definite objective to the north, and naturally they wanted to reach it by the shortest route. To do so they built through very rough territory [DOT]-scrub land and forest area-about fifteen miles away from the soldier settlement. In order to reach the Canadian Pacific line these soldier settlers will have to build fifteen or twenty miles of road.
I maintain, Mr. Chairman, that it is not good policy in this case to build thirteen miles of railway to reach a Canadian Pacific
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

branch line and then secure running rights over it, as I understand the intention to be. I submit it would be far better to build this branch through the soldier settlement, for in doing so it would not be necessary to closely parallel the Canadian Pacific. The resolution itself shows that the route is thirteen miles away from the Canadian Pacific, and it would not be necessary to build closer to the competing line to reach the northern branch toward which this line was projected last year. By turning north from Kelvington rather than westerly, as the resolution calls for, I am quite certain that a route could be found through the territory in which the soldiers are settled. Not only would it then serve these settlers, but it would also serve the purpose intended last year-at least, one of the arguments offered in support of the line at that time was that it would make the necessary cut-off for the Prince Albert and Melfort country. There is an enormous quantity of grain being produced in that country to-day, and the Dauphin-Prince Albert line is not capable of carrying the freight trains necessary to take that grain out. One of the engineers told me last year that in his estimation it would cost as much to put that road into shape for such traffic as it would to build this cut-off, for heavier steel would would have to be laid and the whole road practically re-constructed, with the exception of the grade.
I know the argument will be advanced that by connecting with the Canadian Pacific branch, as the Canadian Pacific intend eventually to cross the Prince Albert branch, running rights can be secured over it and accommodation afforded in that way. But I submit that this is not good policy, and that where settlement is in dire need of railway service, and where eventually the Canadian National will have to build their line to afford adequate service, it is false economy at this time to build thirteen miles to reach'* the Canadian Pacific, when that mileage would be one-fifth of the whole construction required to reach their own line to the northward, and would in itself be that much closer to the soldier settlement when built.
The freight from this territory is not merely prospective; it is there to offer at the present time. Two years ago when the Thunder Hill branch of the Canadian National, of which this project is an extension, reached Kelvington, about 750,000 bushels of grain was carried out the first fall after steel was laid down. Kelvington is only twenty-five miles south of these soldier settlements, and there will be immense quantities of grain to be taken out if this line is carried through.

Let me show the other side of the argument as it affects those people. I am quite safe in saying that on an average they are fifteen miles away from the Canadian Pacific which is projected but not yet built, and they will have to build through the very worst kind of country, intersected by lakes and creeks, and the Barrier river and the Red Deer river will have to be bridged. It will make it almost prohibitive for these new municipalities to undertake such expensive road construction.
I know that the privileges that a private member has in amending a resolution such as this are somewhat limited, and it is much against my will that I would move to amend it at all. The building of thirteen miles into this territory would be of very little help, but I want to point out-and this statement was made by a Canadian National engineer who went over the territory during the last four or five months-that along the line of the route I have intimated it should follow, and the one that it was originally intended to follow, there are 666 farmers established. If this line is extended westwardly in the direction that this resolution proposes it should go, a good number of those 666 farmers will not be there this time next year. They will give up all hope of getting railway facilities if they are to have no railroad any closer to them than the Canadian Pacific branch, which is under construction but not yet completed, and which, as I have pointed out, is almost inaccessible to them. If this 13 miles of line is built in a northerly direction it will at least have the effect of holding these people to their land and their homes; they will go on, I have no doubt, working as they have done for years past in the expectation that they will eventually get relief so far as railway facilities are concerned. With these considerations in mind, therefore, I beg to move, seconded by the member for Mackenzie (Mr. Campbell), that resolution No. 12 be amended by striking out the words "in a westerly direction, to a point in township 37, range 13, west of . the 2nd meridian," and substituting therefor the words "in a northerly direction, east of Nut Lake."


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend will understand that that might increase the expenditure, because it changes the route.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Is the minister prepared to say that it would increase the expenditure?


George Perry Graham: No, I am not an engineer. These are matters to discuss in committee with the engineers. If it is decided by the committee, after hearing all the evidence, that

C.N.R-Branch Lines
this resolution is not correct, a new one could be introduced later. It would be useless to pass a motion, even if it were in order, saying where this road should go, because parliament will not take action with respect to the building of roads unless the Canadian National board approves of them, unless it announces distinctly that a certain proposed road is for the benefit of the community. I think my hon friend would be well advised not to press his motion, but to appear before the committee, if he is not a member of it, and discuss the matter.


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: I admit that my hon. friend (Mr. Stewart, Humboldt) is perhaps more familiar with the circumstances there than anyone else in the committee. However, his proposal, I think, would involve two things: first, the abandonment of the four males already graded west of Kelvington, and, second, the fact that there would not be any connection, with the Canadian Pacific at all. It will simply be a case of paralleling the Canadian Pacific for a distance of 13 miles. The objective of the board of directors is to connect this line at Kelvington with the Canadian Pacific running north to Tisdale, following the same route that the Canadian National proposed to follow last year.


Charles Wallace Stewart: I do not
think it would be necessary to abandon the four miles of grade. Those four miles run in a general direction northerly from Kelvington, not westerly.


William Richard Motherwell: Is it more westerly than northerly?


Charles Wallace Stewart: No, I think it is more northerly. It would not be necessary under the amendment to parallel the Canadian Pacific for 13 miles as the Minister of Agriculture suggests. I have left the matter wide open for investigation by Canadian National engineers, who may find a route, if they can, more than that distance from the Canadian Pacific. They would still be serving these settlements if the line were 20 or 25 miles from the Canadian Pacific. I would be wholly favourable to getting as far from the Canadian Pacific as possible, keeping in view the serving of the districts I have mentioned.


Mr. KNOX:: I know the territory to which the hon. member for Humboldt (Mr. Stewart) has been referring and I know the need for service there. I have been through that district and I know that the people are looking forward to some railway connection. This proposal looked to them as the only possible way that they could get the necessary rail-79
way facilities, and when it became known that it was intended to link up with the Canadian Pacific, their hopes certainly received a great setback. Not only would that 13 miles be further north, but it would be the beginning of a line that would extend up through the districts of Bjorkdale and Speddington.
It would connect with the line from Winnipeg to Prince Albert, and if it were continued on it would enter a very thickly settled district to the north of that line. I mentioned that district a few days ago when speaking on the extension from Ridgedale. It is a district that seems to have been overlooked, and I am sorry that that should be so. Whether the amendment is allowed to stand or not, I think it is only right, that we should put ourselves on record as knowing the conditions there and knowing the location.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: I wish to associate myself with what has been said by the
5 p.m. hon. member for Humboldt (Mr. Stewart regarding the necessity for railway facilities for the settlers in this district. If anything were necessary to prove the productiveness of that section it is proved by the fact that almost immediately after the defeat of the Branch Lines Bill in the Senate last year the Canadian Pacific built through almost the same territory that the bill had intended to cover. The hon. member for St-Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Marler) complained about the building of railways through sparsely settled districts, and I agree with him. But when settlerrs are already in a certain district, placed there, as they were in most cases, by agents of the Dominion government, the Soldier Settlement Board, there is a distinct obligation on the part of the government to provide them with the necessary facilities. A few evenings ago we had a discussion in this House regarding a vote of $600,000 for the completion of the tower on this building. It seems to me that an attempt was made on that occasion to put those who were opposing that vote in a false position by raising the question of the memorial, chamber which is to be provided in the tower. I submit that the best memorial we could erect to our dead soldiers would be to look after the living. These men who have gone in there, who were located there by the Soldier Settlement Board, are in such a position that they must lose everything, they must give up and leave, if they are not provided with proper transportation facilities.
Regarding the whole question of branch lines and the adverse comments we have heard in this House, it seems to me that

C.N.R.-Branch Lines

many hon. members who have spoken on the subject have not been fair to western Canada. A few years ago when a railway company came before parliament and asked for a charter to build a branch line or an extension of a main line it was considered a distinct favour to them to grant them a charter. Now, Sir, we have hon. members complaining that railway construction is being authorized, it looks as if some hon. members were viewing railway construction from a different angle altogether. Some hon. members from eastern Canada, particularly the hon. member for Joliette (Mr. Denis) and one of the Toronto members, tried to make it appear that the construction of these branch lines was a direct bonus to western Canada. Sir, I can hardly permit their statements to go unchallenged and I would therefore take the liberty of quoting a few figures to show how unfounded they are. The hon. member for Joliette, who I regret is not in his seat, made this rather significant statement:
These lines by the very nature of things must come out of the moneys of the country and must increase the deficits, and the province of Quebec is paying for them.
I submit that is not a very fair statement to make. About $225,000,000 of the public money of this country has been spent on the canal system the use of which is granted free of charge to vessels traversing those waters. Then, many millions of dollars have been spent on our rivers and harbours. This expenditure also is a direct bonus to the people who use these facilities. They are of very little benefit to the people of western Canada. Again, in reference to the railways I maintain that we in the West have been paying an unfair proportion of the railway charges in the past. The hon. members to whom I have referred seem to argue that the greatest amount of the railway deficits has accrued in western Canada. The actual facts demonstrate that in good crop years, when we have a bountiful harvest in western Canada, the earnings of the railways show a remarkable increase and a corresponding decrease in deficits. By referring to the decision of the Board of Railway Commissioners in the western rates ease we find an admission on the part. of the commissioners that discrimination existed in freight rates against western Canada; They admitted frankly that western Canada was being charged a higher freight rate than eastern Canada and they justified it on the grounds that in eastern Canada there was competition of American roads and the water competition on the lakes. I should like to quote a few figures in sub-

stantiation of this statement; they are taken from statements placed before the Railway Commission by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. Dealing with the five-year period from 1907 to 1911 the Canadian Pacific show an operating ratio-that is the amount spent that was necessary to earn a dollar-in eastern Canada, that is east of Fort William, of 72 cents, on the prairie section of 56 cents, and on the western section, that is British Columbia, 60 cents. The net earnings for this period were: In the western section-that is the prairies and British Columbia, $91,500,000, and in the eastern section, $43,500,000. That is, after deducting all operating expenses, the western roads showed $48,000,000 more profit than the eastern section. For the five-year period from 1912 to 1916 the eastern section shows an operating revenue of $226,500,000, and the western section $356,500,000. The operating ratio for this period in the eastern section was 73.3, for the prairie section 54.5, and for the western section 57 cents. The net earnings for the same period were-in the eastern section $60,000,000, and in the western section $152,500,000. Then we have the period from 1916 to 1920. During that period the operating ratio in the eastern section was 80-95, and in the western section 67-30. For the year 1921 the operating revenue on the eastern section was $85,500,000, and on the western section $101,900,000, The operating ratio for that year in the eastern section was 77-21, and in the western section 70-54. The net earnings on the eastern section amounted to $11,000,000, and on the western section to $30,000,000.
Now, Sir, if we summarize the figures for this whole period we find that in the fifteen years from 1907 to 1921 the net earnings in the western section of the Canadian Pacific Railway were $405,000,000, and in the eastern section $177,000,000. These figures almost prove the contention sometimes made "that the western section has paid for the Canadian Pacific but the country does not own it." I may say that in these quotations the western figures include also the British Columbia section. This is unfair to the prairie provinces because the cost of operating is much higher in the British Columbia section than it is in the prairies.
The charge has frequently been made that grain was carried at a much lower rate than other commodities, and the attempt has even been made to prove that a bonus was granted to the western farmers in the matter of the handling of grain. Now, Sir, if we analyse the earnings for the different months we find that the railways have always made the great-

C.N.R___Branch Lines
est profit during the months in which the grain was being handled. For instance, we find that in the year 1920 the operating ratio on the Canadian Pacific Railway during the month of August was 80.23, that is it cost 80.23 to earn a dollar. In the month of October when the heavy movement of grain was on it cost them only 56.46 to earn a dollar; and in the month of November of the same year the operating ratio was only 66.32. In the year 1921 the operating ratio in the month of October was only 55.02 cents. In the month of November, 1921, the net revenue on the eastern section was only $4,403, and the operating ratio 99.23. Now, Sir, in the same month the net revenue on the western section was $5,048,000. In the month of December, 1921, the eastern section showed a net revenue of $566,000, and the western section a net revenue of $3,170,000. The year 1920 showed an operating ratio of 84.70 on the Canadian Pacific Railway, but in 1921 it had dropped to 82.28, and in 1922 it had fallen to 80.55.
Now, Sir, when the Crowsnest pass rate agreement was being considered by the special Railway committee of this House the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company made the prediction that if the Crowsnest rates were permitted to go into effect his company would be unable to pay its fixed charges and dividends. And yet after the Canadian Pacific had handled the most of that crop at the beginning of the new year we find the president of the company sending a message to his men in which he said:
The new year opens under auspices more favourable than any since the conclusion of the war.
This was in strange contrast with the pessimistic prediction in which he indulged when the rate question was being considered by the Railway committee. I should like hon. members to note that in the year 1922, the year in which the Crowsnest rates came into effect, the operating ratio of the Canadian Pacific dropped from 82.28 to 80.55. Analysing the amounts of grain handled in previous years we find that a low operating ratio was coincident with large crops. The Canadian Pacific Railway Company handled 4,349,000 tons of grain in 1920 and in that year their operating ratio was 84.70. In 1921, they handled 4,812,000 tons and the operating ratio was 82.28. In the year 1922 they handled 6,888,000 tons of grain and the operating ratio dropped to 80.55.	'


The CHAIRMAN:: I should like to draw attention to the fact that I think the discussion is too general in its character and that it does not deal with the amendment before the House on resolution No. 12.
79i


Milton Neil Campbell: I was merely answering criticisms made previously under the same heading. However, if that is the ruling of the chair I will bow to it.


George Newcombe Gordon: It is my impression the hon. member is getting away from the resolution.


Milton Neil Campbell: I will be through in a few minutes if the chairman will permit me to finish my remarks. The Canadian National Railways had an operating deficit of about $36,000,000 in 1920 but it has been improving steadily ever since. If we analyse the figures for the amount of grain handled, it seems to me this improvement is coincident with the increase in the amount oi grain handled by the road. In 1920 the figure was 7,653,000 tons. In 1921 it was 10,233,000 and in 1922 it was 11,229,000 tons. While the figures are not available in tons for 1923 the cars handled show an increase of almost 25 per cent over those of 1922.


George Newcombe Gordon: It strikes me the amendment is out of order. I will give my reasons for this view if any hon. gentleman desires to speak as to that point.


Mr. EVANS:: I wish to say a word in support of the amendment. I know something of the country and the way the railway is going. It has already run pretty well into the survey of the Canadian Pacific Railway going in that direction, and I would say, even for the sake of service and for the sake of revenue as well, it would be reasonable to run the line in a northerly direction from the point where it is graded at present. I would say, in the interests of revenue and service for those who have to settle in that part of the country, which is so much in need of a railway-


George Newcombe Gordon: With regard to the
amendment, the practice is altogether against moving an amendment to preliminary resolutions preceding money bills. These resolutions have the recommendation of the Crown, and the recommendation of the Crown is signified. They are preliminary to the bill being introduced and referred to the committee, where any hon. member may move amendments which do not increase the impost or amount to be expended. In view of these resolutions and the variation proposed involving the construction of the new branch line which this amendment would really authorize, I think the amendment is out of order. Rule No. 77 reads:
If any motion be made in the House for any public aid or charge upon the people, the consideration and debate thereof may not be presently entered upon,

C.N.R-Branch Lines
but shall be adjourned till such further day as the House thinks fit to appoint; and then it shall be referred to a committee of the whole House before any resolution or vote of the House do pass thereupon.
Then I refer to May, page 457:
In like manner, after the question has been proposed on an amendment, and it has appeared that the amendment would vary the incidence of taxation, or increase the charge upon the consolidated fund, the Speaker has declined to put the question.
I feel that I should follow that rule. The ground is that an amendment to a resolution is varying the incidence of taxation and may increase the amount of expenditure. The hon. member is not prevented from moving during various stages of the bill, or when the bill goes into committee, any amendments he desires, with those limitations. I feel that this amendment at this time is out of order.


Henry Lumley Drayton: In regard to the line from Prince Albert to Paddockwood, I think we should have the explanatory note.


George Perry Graham: The memorandum reads
as follows:
Prince Albert N.E., Mile 0-23.	. Cost.
Grade now ahead of track-17 miles.
Proposed in 1924-6 miles grade; 23 miles track	$406,000
It is proposed in 1924 to add 6 miles to the grading already done and lay the track on this 23 miles, taking the line to near the town of Paddockwood, and there leaving it for a time.
The first work done on this branch was in the year 1920, when a grading contract was let and by the end of the season 1921 about 17 miles of this work was completed, and since that time no other work has been done on this branch.
The line runs through a mixed farming district with [DOT]considerable timber and small poplar with a small percentage of jack-pine. For the first four or five jniles out of Prince Albert the soil is light and not .suitable for agricultural development. There is considerable settlement on the line beyond this point and in the neighbourhood of Paddockwood and beyond there is a settlement of returned soldiers.
The justification for building this line is to make good the $169,000 already spent and earning nothing, and the fact that it is estimated that 420,000 bushels of grain per year will be taken off this line, besides 230 cars in and out of live stock, lumber, wood and merchandise.
It is estimated that an average haul of 16 miles would be saved to the farmers by building this line, and computing this saving as being worth three-quarters of a cent per bushel per mile hauled, on 

the*"420^600 bushels of grain referred to it would make an annual saving to the farmers of $50,400 for hauling grain alone.
The railway business obtained from this line will be all of a long haul character and therefore furnish considerable business to other lines of the system.


Andrew Knox: I wish to say a word with
regard to this line. It has been looked forward to for a great many years by the people who went in there and it is on behalf of the returned men that I wish to speak because
[The Chairman. [
they went in there on the distinct understanding that this line was as good as built. An arrangement was made whereby the lands that were open for homesteading at that time could not be taken up by civilians. They were reserved for returned soldiers, and they looked upon it as just the same as if the railway were in existence. The returned men went in very largely on the understanding that they would get immediate railway service. That has been withheld, and it has been a very sad disappointment to these returned men, and very discouraging to them. In fact, Sir, I am sorry to say some saw fit to pull out because they did not get the railway last year. However, I think they see a ray of hope at the present time and their courage is returning accordingly. I wish to say that there is every justification for the building of this line, even without this argument, which I think is a very strong one. Last year when it was understood before they got the set back that the branch lines were to be built, arrangements were made for the building of elevators on this line, and I feel sure that it will eventually be a heavy producing country.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon.
gentleman missed a great opportunity last year of having it built. He wanted to consider it, not on its merits, but with a whole lot of junk, and he got the usual result. We have always been in favour of it and are in favour of it now.


William Richard Motherwell: If the hon. member wants it built this year there should be no difficulty.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is what I
say.


George Perry Graham: In regard to the line
from Eyre to Acadia Valley, the memorandum I have reads as follows:
Cost
Acadia Valley, Mile 0-42
Grade now ahead of track-42 miles
Proposed in 1926-25 miles track....$463,000
It is proposed in 1926 to lay 25 miles of track on the existing grade, at a cost of $463,000, thus completing the line to Acadia Valley, 25 miles out of Eyre, and there leaving the track for some years. The grading on this line was started in 1919, and was not completed until 1921.
The line starts in the province of Saskatchewan off the Alsask southeast branch at Eyre, and after running approximately 12 miles westerly, passes into the province of Alberta.
This branch runs through a good grain growing district a greater part of its length, and most of the land is taken up and was settled. This area, however, is subject to dry seasons and the effect of hot winds in the summer, but in seasons of sufficient precipitation during the growing season gives big yields per acre.

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
The justification for this line is that $434,000 ($305,000 up to Mile 25.0) has already been expended on the grading, which is earning nothing, and that it is estimated that 600,000 bushels of grain on the average each year will be shipped off this line, besides 140 cars of freight in and out, consisting of live stock, coal, lumber and merchandise. About eight miles on the average would be saved farmers in road haul, and if computed to be worth three-quarters of a cent per bushel, per mile hauled, on the 600.000 bushels, would mean an annual saving to the farmers or $36,000. All the business off this line would be of a long-haul character, thus furnishing other lines with considerable business.


Mr. CARMICHAEL:: This line is in my constituency as well as the line represented in the next resolution. I understand the desire of the minister is to get these resolutions in bill form or, at least, to get them before the Railway committee as soon as possible, where they may be discussed in every detail. I am nor on the Railway committee, and I have an idea that the representative of the district where the railway is to be built has information that it is important to place before that committee. I have received petitions from ratepayers, municipal councils and grain growers' associations in connection with these two proposed lines.


George Newcombe Gordon: On application to the committee for leave to be heard, the hon. member or any other member representing a constituency or area through which it is proposed that these lines shall run, may be heard. The committee will be open for any person or member to appear before it in order to make his representations.


Archibald M. Carmichael: If we could have the assurance from the minister that a representative interested in this proposed line will be advised when the committee meets and that evidence will be taken from him, I would be prepared to remain silent at this time and give my evidence before the committee. I would not, however, wish these resolutions to slip through the Railway committee before I had an opportunity of giving the committee the facts which I have.


George Perry Graham: Notices of meetings of the Railway committee and other committees are always in the Votes and Proceedings, so that every member has notice every day as to the committees. Bourinot, of course, makes it very clear that every member of the House has a right to appear before any of the committees. and I can assure my hon. friend that the chairman of the committee, the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Cahill), will be glad to give him an opportunity to be heard when this bill is before the committee.


Mr. BOYS:: I cannot quite agree with what the minister says, although I wish it were so. I had an experience in a committee where I wanted to be heard. The chairman of that committee took the matter up and he, I think, correctly decided that a member of the House had not a right to appear before that committee without making application and receiving permission of the committee to be heard. At the same time,, there is no doubt that any member who wants to be heard can make a request, and he will be heard, but he does not have that as a matter of right.


George Perry Graham: I have been on the Railway committee for many years and any person who wanted to be heard, so far as I can remember, was always heard. The Assistant Clerk has pointed out at page 27 of Beau-chesne, this rule:
Members of the Commons may be present during the proceedings of their committees, and the committee has no power of itself to exclude any member at any stage of its proceedings, but may obtain special power from the House for that purpose.
I suppose, strictly speaking, a member who is not a member of the committee may be ruled out as not having a right to address it without permission, but that permission is always given.


William Alves Boys: I do not say that he could not be present in the committee. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Motherwell) will recall the incident to which I have reference. In the agricultural committee two years ago when this point came up, the chairman looked into the matter and I had to admit, when I looked into it, that he was perfectly, right. Anybody may be present in the room, but he cannot address the committee without permission, and of course, he cannot vote.
Mr. GRAHAM. I think it has been generally the practice that any member is allowed to make his representations, and I think I can assure my hon. friend that that will be the case.
The memorandum I have on the proposed line from Eston to White Bear is as follows:
Eston S.E., Mile 0-35.	Cost
Grade now ahead of track-36 miles Proposed in 1926-35 miles track	$649,000
It is proposed in 1926 to lay the track on the 35 miles of grading which was started in 1919 and completed in 1921, at an estimated cost of $649,000, and there to leave the line for at least a year or two.
This branch runs through a good agricultural district with a considerable percentage of the land cultivated. Like other areas in this district, it is subject to short crops in dry seasons, but in seasons of sufficient precipitation will produce a heavy yield of wheat per acre.
The justification for completing this line is that about $274,500, or more than one-quarter of the money
C .N.R.-Branch Lines

necessary to complete it, has already been expended and is earning nothing; also that it is estimated, when completed, this line should ship on the average 1,000,000 bushels of grain per year, besides 175 cars of in and out-bound freight of live stock, coal, lumber and merchandise. With this line completed the farmers would save on the average 10 miles road haul, and computing this as worth to i'hem three-quarters of a cent per bushel, per mile hauled, on the 1,000,000 bushels estimated to come off this branch, there would be saved to the farmers each year $75,000 on grain alone. The freight business off this line being all of a long-haul character, will furnish other lines of the system with considerable business.
The memorandum which I have on the proposed line from St. Paul in the province of Alberta southeasterly is as follows:
St. Paul E.. Mile 0-21.	Cost
Proposed in 1924-nil
Proposed in 1925-21 miles grade	$180,000
Proposed in 1926-21 miles track; 21 miles
ballast	 345,000

Nothing is proposed to be done in the year 1924, but in 1925, it would be the intention to grade 21 miles at an estimated cost of $180,000 and in 1926 to finish this 21 miles with track and ballast at an estimated cost of $345,000.
There is considerable settlement development east of the present end of the line, now at St. Paul, and for the distance proposed there is a good country sus-. ceptible of considerable grain growing and mixed farming.
The justification for construction of this line lies in the fact that it is estimated that when the 21 miles as proposed is built, it' would produce annually 630,000 bushels of grain besides giving in and outbound 185 cars of freight, consisting of live stock, coal, lumber and merchandise, all of which being of particularly long-haul character, would contribute considerably, to other lines of the system.
It is figured that on an average 14 miles road haul would be saved to the farmers by this line, and applied to the 630,000 bushels of grain, expected and taken at three-quarters of a cent per bushel, per mile hauled, would mean an annual saving to the farmers of $66,150 for grain hauled alone.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know that the resolution covering the proposed line from Radville to Fife Lake is in quite the same position as the others. This is an old, old line, I think, that has been under discussion for a long time. I think the real discussion is amongst the settlers themselves n that district. There were three parties and it is very difficult to find out what is the right location for it. Perhaps it could be carried down to Bengough without very much difficulty, and you would have to go there anyway. It is a very expensive country, however, when you get past Bengough, and I do not think that you would be pleasing everybody.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps we had better let the matter stand.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think the
resolution is one that should be left over.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps hon. members
may want to discuss it.


Mr. MORRISON:: I think it is important
that the resolution should be discussed. While there has been some question as to the eastern terminus of the branch, it is of considerable importance in a way in that it affects the Canadian National Railways in a respect in which many of the other branch lines do not. It is estimated that this branch will cost $3,700,000 for 115 miles. To-day there are millions of bushels of grain being hauled across the international boundary line and marketed at United States points, and that 'entire business is lost to Canada. We hear much talk to-day about patronising home industries, but here is a place where the business of thousands of our people, who to all intents and purposes are American citizens, is lost to Canada. They have produced in that country between three million and four million bushels of grain this year and the bulk of it is going via an American route. It is not as though it were taking trade away from some other Canadian road if we build this branch such as the Canadian Pacific Railway. It is taking it from an American road, and I say that it is sound national economy to build this line immediately. That country has been settled for about fifteen years, many of the inhabitants having gone in there on the strength of the promise, implied at least, that a road would be built soon. They are a very fine class of settlers and their great want to-day is a railway. At the present time there are many farmers who are not working their land over 25 per cent capacity and they cannot afford to develop a greater area than they have under cultivation, while they have to haul grain distances ranging between 25 and 45 miles. The people are simply stalling, waiting for a railroad; indeed, many of them are not working the land at all, but are just letting it lie idle. They are so far from any railway that, of course, there is not much encumbrance against them, for the reason that they could not borrow money. But they are an industrious class of people and if they were assured that a line would be built soon they would immediately get busy and would produce wealth whereby the country would be richer. The Dominion of Canada would be enriched, not by the net amount, but by the gross wealth produced by these people. While I do not want to differ from the engineers in regard to the route, no doubt we should be largely guided by them as to where it should go. The latest proposal is that it

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
should run 20 miles south of Radville and then westerly about 10 to 15 miles north of the boundary. I am anxious to see this work undertaken at the earliest possible moment in the interests not only of the settlers themselves but of the country at large.


William Richard Motherwell: We might as well
deal with this matter now if the minister (Mr. Graham) is agreeable. I have had some correspondence and telegrams on this subject and I had an invitation to go and examine the country last fall. I did so and I think that my hon. friend (Mr. Morrison) has described the situation pretty much as it is. I have here a telegram with respect to the route from the Hon. C. M. Hamilton, Minister of Agriculture for Saskatchewan, and an ex-director of the Canadian National Railways. Mr. Hamilton is familiar with the whole question and he knows the territory concerned quite well. His telegram, addressed to myself, reads:
Construction during present year at least one hundred and twenty-five miles Radville-Fife lake proposed branch Canadian National Railways urgent. Absolutely impossible haul wheat and other farm produce thirty-five to fifty miles. Settlers almost discouraged; numbers have left territory, others holding on hoping for relief. Proposed extension from Bengough-Fife lake serves only small portion of territory and leaves district so divided it cannot possibly have adequate railway accommodation for many years.
Unless one is fairly familiar with the territory he will not appreciate the significance of the statement I have just quoted. The road from Bengough to Fife Lake does not serve the entire territory; whereas the proposed line serves about twice the area, and fully 80 per cent of the particular district that would have been served by the other line. The proposed route is very much preferable because it serves the entire country parallel to the international boundary for a distance of 115 miles and not only takes care of the freight and the tonnage generally of the settlers along that line but prevents their transference across the boundary into the United States. This emigration has been going on in that part of the country for some eight or ten years and conditions have become so bad in some districts that the settlers have largely left. The territory is a splendid one, and while it is true that a small portion of it for about 15 miles east and west is rough and undulating, and therefore adapted mainly^ to grazing, the country on the whole, particularly in the west, is one of the finest plains that one could wish to look upon. If this line is gone on with it does not deprive the people west of Bengough of the hope that some day the Bengough line will be extended to Willow Bunch. That may not be done to-morrow, but there is no reason why at some subsequent time, when railway bills are being again introduced into the House, steps may not be taken to have that line built. In the meantime, I would point out that the Radville line passes through a territory in which many of the settlers have been tried as by fire and are still carrying on despite the discouragement which they have experienced. Many of them are growing from five thousand to ten thousand bushels of wheat in addition to flax and coarse grains, besides raising cattle and other produce. This line is urgently required and my only regret is that some of it will not be constructed this year. The Premier of Saskatchewan is anxious to see the road built, as is everyone else who is familiar with the circumstances; and as all persons will be reasonably well supplied it is important that the work should be proceeded with. If this is done, then later on, when settlement and tonnage both increase, the road from Bengough to Willow Bunch might be undertaken. Meanwhile the people have got together and discussed the whole situation. Provincial members and local councils have formed what is known as a railway committee and they have threshed the question out from every possible angle. I have a communication from Mr. George Spence, one of the representatives of the south country, in which he gives me a summary of the con-elusions arrived at, which is in the direction I have indicated, the important point being that the line from Radville to Fife Lake should be constructed as the best solution for the trouble that has existed for so many years. I was not through that country in the early years but I was there last year and I am familiar with the entire district. I was familiar with the work that was undertaken under the provincial guarantees and as I was in the Saskatchewan government at that time I know of the deadlock that occurred. I am glad to inform the House that that deadlock seems now to be capable of solution by means of this particular line, and as nearly as is humanly possible this line will meet the most urgent requirements of the people, whereas the other one would not. I have no hesitation, from my own personal knowledge of the situation and from the representations that I have received from public men and municipal councils, in saying that the line in question will serve a very large proportion of territory which has been in dire need of railway accommodation for many years, so much so, that sick at heart, many of them have already left. I
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

have correspondence from many who went to the United States telling me that they are ready to come back just as soon as this line is constructed.


Mr. HOPKINS:: Mr. Chairman, on account of certain natural barriers no one road would be capable of serving the whole area between the present Canadian Pacific line and the international boundary, a distance of about forty miles. Therefore for some years there has been a dispute amongst the settlers as to the location of a branch line. An understanding has been reached between the Canadian National authorities and the Canadian Pacific under which this area is treated as Canadian National territory. Last year a line was proposed from Bengough to Fife Lake, but the bill was killed in the Senate, as we know, I was never in that country until last fall. Leaving the railway I drove forty miles to the international border. In the course of the afternoon I met over two hundred teams loaded with grain, on their way to the railroad. I spoke to some of the drivers and found they had come all the way up to fifty miles, and that it took them from two to four days to make the round trip. They told me the country was splendid and that their crops ran from twenty-five to forty bushels to the acre. As I got nearer to the boundary line I found the people were too far away from our railways to ship their grain and had to take it over to the American railway lines. I understand that a million and a half bushels of Canadian wheat from this section goes over the Amercian railways in the average year, making a profit for this line and adding to the trade and commerce of the neighbouring republic.
I was surprised at the state of development. I expected to see all the characteristics of a pioneer country, but I found every evidence of well-established settlement. We judge a country by the condition of the farms and buildings. I saw well cultivated farms, well constructed buildings and, above all, fine schools. I went into three or four of the schools along the border and spoke to the teachers and pupils, and I found they were up to date in their educational methods. I talked to boys and girls ranging from ten to fourteen years of age, and they told me they had never seen a store nor a town of any kind, the parents not being able to give them a trip of eighty or ninety miles to the nearest urban centre. I sent a message by the children to the parents that I only hoped the children would live long enough to get some of the railroad advantages which their fathers and mothers had been deprived of all these years.

Now, this railway is in a different position from the other branches which we have been discussing. Hon. members have said, "We must scrutinize every dollar of expenditure at this particular time in the history of Canada." And rightly so. It is the duty of parliament to scrutinize every expenditure. But I am going to give the committee an agreeable surprise-this money does not have to be expended by the federal parliament; it has been already provided. That is one of the particular reasons why I got on my feet; the other is to give you the best authority for the building of this branch that we have in the province of Saskatchewan. I will show hon. members where the money is coming from, I am about to quote from the Regina Standard of a recent date, and I may say that the bill referred to has since become law. This is the quotation:
Authority for the provincial treasury to release certain money for the construction of Canadian National branch lines is sought in an Act which was given second reading in the legislature last night.
Premier Dunning intimated to the house that subject to agreement being reached with the Canadian National authorities the government had a preference for the money being used towards the construction of a portion at least of the Bengough extension in the south-
That is the territory we are speaking of.
-and the Turtleford-Hafford branch in the north of the province.
" We regard those two as being the most needed in the province at present," he said, " but it may not be possible to work out an agreement with the railway company and my remarks on this matter must not be taken as definite promise that these lines will be built."
Premier Dunning explained that years ago when the province guaranteed the bonds of the railway companies the system in operation was that the railway companies had authority to sell bonds guaranteed by the province, but they had no authority to use the proceeds which were deposited in a bank to the credit of the provincial treasurer. Then as the railways were constructed the money was to be released by the provincial treasurer at rates per mile set out in the original Act.
The Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern ceased operating as separate entities some time ago and during his experience as provincial treasurer for the last eight years it had been impossible to release the money. A sum of $1,202,825.24 had been standing to the credit of the treasury in connection with this fund for a number of years. Repeated efforts had been made by the companies to obtain release of the money but the treasury had been unable to satisfy itself that the railways had been built. The province had not lost anything as the bank interest on the money had been paid to the railway company and it had paid the interest on the bonds.
There is no question that a large part of the money for the building of this road can be secured from the provincial government.
I have just one further word to say on behalf of the people in that south country. I have no axe to grind because there is not one

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
chance in a thousand that I will ever represent those people again-the Redistribution Bill will look after that. They are a loyal energetic and resourceful people; if they were not they would not have endured so many disadvantages and hardships all these years. But "hope deferred maketh the heart sick," and if the people of Canada want to retain in their midst some of the best settlers they have to-day, something must be done very quickly to secure them the railroad accommodation which they are entitled to, for their patience has almost ceased to be a virtue.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Mr. Chairman, in view of the moving statement by my hon. friend from Moose Jaw (Mr. Hopkins) perhaps the resolution can go through, subject to this understanding, that some facts be furnished about the branch line. There is no question that some railways ought to be built in this section, and I am not opposing proper railway construction there. In fact I have already agreed to a great deal. I hope the next time we agree to these things we shall not be told that we are dealing with a Conservative constituency and that that is the reason for the agreement. Of course it does not make any difference anyway; we know the source from which it comes and we appreciate it accordingly. But we should have a business statement in connection with this railway. The route should be very carefully chosen. It is a long line, and from the information we have it is apparent that it cannot be built at the price set down, $3,000,000 odd. A very careful survey of costs should therefore be made. As the whole matter will subsquently be gone into and these phases of it can be considered again, I have no objection to the resolutions being reported.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in.. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 49, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Dunblane and Mawer in the province of Saskatchewan.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 50, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from near Kelvington, in the province of Saskatchewan, westerly 13 miles.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 51, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Prince Albert to near Paddockwood in the province of Saskatchewan.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 52, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Eyre, in the province of Saskatchewan, and Acadia Valley, in the province of Alberta.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 53, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Eston and White Bear in the province of Saskatchewan.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 54, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Rad-ville and Fife Lake in the province of Saskatchewan.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Mr. Graham moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 55, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from St. Paul, in the province of Alberta, southeasterly 21 miles.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times and referred to the select standing committee on Railways, Canals and Telegraph Lines.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion of Mr. Graham the following bills for the construction of branch line railways were read a second time and referred to the select standing committee on Railways and Canals and Telegraph Lines.
Bill No. 26, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Kingsclear and the St. Croix River, in the province of New Brunswick.
Bill No. 30, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between
C.N.R___Branch Lines
[Stage Direction]
Rousseau and Laurent, in the province of Quebec.
Bill No. 31, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Grande Fresniere and Rinfret Junction, in the province of Quebec.
Bill No. 32, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Sunnvbrae and Guysborough, in the province of Nova Scotia.
Bill No. 33, respecting the construction of Canadian National Railway lines, Kamloops-ICelowna Division, province of British Columbia.
Bill No. 34, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line to Cow-ichan Bay, on Vancouver Island.
Bill No. 35, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line to Mile 100 on Vancouver Island.
Bill No. 40, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line to Mile 41 of the Melfort Branch near Nipawin in the province of Saskatchewan.
Bill No. 41, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Peebles southerly in the province of Saskatchewan.
Bill No. 42, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line extending the Gravelbourg Branch to Neidpath, in the province of Saskatchewan.
Bill No. 43, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line extending the Ste. Rose du Lac Branch to Rorketon in the province of Manitoba.
Bill No. 44, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line between Hanna and Warden, in the province of Alberta.
Bill No. 45, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Loverna westerly in the province of Alberta.
Bill No. 46, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Lloyd-minster, in the province of Saskatchewan, northwesterly 45 miles.
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock. SUPPLY
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR The House in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Dominion Lands and Parks-Amount required to pay the fees of the Board of Examiners for D.L.S. of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and for 
travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent of rooms and furniture, etc. (the fees of Messrs. E. Deville, Harry B. Parry and W. M. Tobey, members of the board, and J. A. Cote, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $2,000.
Mr. STEVENS:: Will the minister give us a little information regarding this item?
Hon. CHARLES A. STEWART (Minister of the Interior): The Board of Examiners for Dominion land surveyors is organised under the provision of section 9 of the Dominion Land Surveys Act. It consists of the Surveyor General and of two Dominion topographical surveyors. The present members are Dr. Deville, Harry B. Parry, and W. M. Tobey. Dr. Klotz was a member of the board, but he is deceased and there has been an appointment since.
The regular annual meeting of the board is in February. Another meeting is usually held in May for the convenience of students in engineering who have just graduated at the university. There are four different examinations, viz:- the examination for admission as an articled pupil, the full and the limited examination for admission as land surveyor and the examination for certificate as Dominion topographical surveyor. The questions for each examination are prepared by the members of the board and the answers of the candidates are read and marked by these three members. The questions being mostly mathematical and scientific, all the possible solutions of each problem have to be worked out by the examiners. The preparation and reading of the papers involve a large amount of work. The surveyor general, Dr. Klotz and W. M. Tobey had no time to spare during office hours, so that most of the work for the board had to be done at night.
The fee for the members of the board and of their substitutes is fixed by the Dominion Land Surveys Act at $7.50 per day. The fee of the secretary and of the sub-examiners is fixed at $5 per day.
The amount asked is to cover the fees of the members of the board or their substitutes, the fees of the sub-examiners and secretary, the printing of the questions, blank forms, etc., stationery, rent of rooms and furniture for holding examinations, and the travelling expenses of the examiners who are not permanent officials of the inside service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Protection of timber, tree culture, inspection and management of forest reserves, surveys of forest resources and research in forestry and forest products, etc., $1,150,000:
Henry Herbert Stevens: Under this item, I presume the veiy important question of reforestation and conservation of our forests generally

Supply-Interior
would properly come. I personally do not purpose discussing the question at length, but I should like the minister to give to the committee some idea of what has been done within the knowledge of and actually by the officials of this department towards proper conservation. I feel a little alarmed at the very rapid depletion of our forests. In many districts these forests are being cut and manufactured into timber, without any effort whatever being made at reforestation; nor, so far as I am able to see, is very much being done in the way of intelligent conservation of the forests that we have. Losses by fire and so on are really appalling. It is true that our forest wealth is extensive; that we are inclined to look on the supply as illimitable; but, as a matter of fact, I think most students of the subject agree that exhaustion of our forest wealth is really well within sight. Whether the government is doing anything at all in the matter would be of interest to the committee, and if the minister could give us some information along that line, it would be of value.


Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: I should be glad to devote a few minutes to this question of forestry, and the time of the committee might be well spent in discussing it. It is one of the most important questions with which we have to deal in the Department of the Interior. Perhaps I can bring the matter home to members of the committee much better by a statement in round figures of the quantity of timber that is manufactured in Canada annually. All the cordwood, the piles, the ties, and all other timber, including pulp-wood, manufactured and unmanufactured, amount annually in Canada to almost twelve billion feet. And the next startling statement I have to make is this, that we destroy about one billion feet more annually than we manufacture. I make that statement in order to bring as forcibly as possible to the attention of the committee the terrific waste which is going on in connection with the forest wealth of Canada.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: Who owns all
this timber?


Charles A. Stewart: Some of it is privately owned and the rest is owned by the Dominion and the provinces.


William Findlay Maclean: Do the private
owners contribute anything to protection?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, the
leaseholders contribute to forest protection, a part of the tax imposed upon their leases being used for this purpose. I simply want to state in round figures the loss that we
suffer annually in our forests so that, as I hope, the committee as well as the people of Canada will realize the seriousness of this menace to one of the most important resources which the Canadian people own today.


Mr. ARTHURS:: How much of this timber is under the control of the Dominion and how much belongs to each of the various provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: I am afraid I cannot give that information. This matter has some reference to the subject of conservation and I shall have something to say about it later on.


Mr. LUCAS:: The minister has referred to certain forest losses. Are these losses all due to fires?


Charles A. Stewart: well as the Dominion land block in the northern portion of that province; and over that particular area we exercise a special control. We have not been so unfortunate with respect to fire as they have been in some of the provinces in which the various governments control their own timber; but in any case we must take more drastic steps to prevent destruction by fire from any cause. With that end in view I have sought by way of convention to bring together the forestry officials of the various provinces and those of the federal government. We have had some very interesting discussions at our recent convention. Just prior to the opening of parliament we had a gathering at which all the provinces were represented and we discussed these subjects for five or six days, trying to co-ordinate our views and to learn from one another *what efforts we have been putting forth for the suppression of fire, for the purpose of adopting more stringent and more effective measures' for fire control. At the very outset it would take an army of men adequately to control the fire situation. True, we have fire ranging forces in all the provinces. They are employed by the federal government for a period of six months in the prairies, and they patrol the forests for the purpose of keeping down and preventing fires. We have been fairly successful in that respect and I believe that year by year we are making more headway. We propose to utilize in this service the flying corps of the Department of National Defence. An aeroplane will cover very much more territory than a man in a canoe, and the vision is much more extended, as one may readily understand, than would be the case with a tower or the ordinary patrol through the waterways in the forests. We hope in this way to accomplish much better results than have been obtained in the past. If we can detect a fire in the incipient stages we can put it out with the help of one or two men, whereas, if it has been burning for a week, it requires perhaps two or three hundred. We have adopted more radical measures in all the provinces, and this has been the result of our convention. We have discussed various methods and considered the efficiency of power pumps particularly, and each province will now display renewed interest in fire suppression work. I dwell upon this point because I think it is the most important gnd the one in regard to which we should make the greatest strides towards securing a proper solution.
I was pleased to note the other day that the province of Ontario had purchased ten or twelve aeroplanes which they intend to use in the northern part of the province this year.

And the province of Quebec, I think, will do the same. Our flying will of course be confined largely to the three prairie provinces and to some extent in British Columbia. In order that we might place the matter before the public with a greater degree of force, if that is possible, this convention suggested the adoption of what will be known as fire prevention week beginning with the 27th day of this month. All the provinces are joining and we are spending $5,000 in propaganda, writing to all the banks and all the newspapers in an endeavour to interest them in the matter, so that we may get the seriousness of the whole thing impressed upon the people in a more vivid way than ever before, and emphasize the necessity for everyone to exercise due care throughout the season in which the fire hazard prevails. I hope that it will cut the destruction by fire in half within at least two years, and that in three or four years the loss will be reduced to the absolute minimum. I do not believe we shall ever be able to remove the fire hazard entirely, for even in our cities and towns there is a very heavy annual loss by fire notwithstanding the very efficient firefighting appliances in use. The amazing feature is that the appalling loss both in our fo'ests and our urban centres is very largely the result of carelessness. If we could only educate the people to be careful in this regard we would accomplish a very great deal in preventing fire losses everywhere. We are dependent to a great extent on our educational propaganda. We are asking for an increased amount for inspectional work in the western provinces. There, of course, the forests are strictly the property of the federal government. But I do not lay very much stress on this circumstance because I realize that our forest wealth is of vital importance to the whole Dominion. The number of men employed in labouring work alone in connection with the manufacture of forest products is very large, and the capital invested runs into many millions of dollars. Our aim should be to replenish annually a little more than we cut off our timber lands. That is what I am asking the Forestry branch-of the Department of the Interior to attempt, and I think every forestry man in the employ of the provinces is anxious to accomplish the same end.


Mr. MACLEAN:: (York): Do you mean depletion both from cutting and from destruction by fire?


Charles A. Stewart: I mean we should aim to reproduce, if you will, the same

Supply-Interior
amount of timber as is manufactured each year, so that we may have this perpetual source of wealth for the people.


Arthur John Lewis: To what extent is reforestation taking place? The statement has been published that the amount of timber reproduced in this way would last our mills just six days.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, but I do not pin my faith entirely on tree-planting. What struck our visitors from all the Dominions and Great Britain when they attended our forestry convention was that owing to climatic and soil conditions in Canada reproduction goes on without the necessity of our incurring the expense of tree-planting to any considerable extent. Indeed, I think I am safe in asserting that if we increased our annual cut to more than fifteen billion feet, by the prevention of fire losses there would be reproduced by nature an*equivalent amount each year. But I think our forest wealth is so important that we should not stop at eliminating the fire hazard,-every destructive influence should receive our very earnest attention.


Arthur John Lewis: Is there any danger from fire to young trees if all slash and rubbish are removed?


Charles A. Stewart: Of course,
one could speak all evening about forestry methods. Therein lies part of our difficulty to-day and the reason why we must have a uniform system of logging regulations. Each of the provinces is in competition in the timber market, and if you place restrictions upon logging in one province that do not apply in the other provinces, there is of course a benefit to the loggers who are free from restrictions. So if we are to have any success in our attempts to reduce the fire hazard to a minimum there must be co-ordination in this direction and the provinces must co-operate with the Dominion.


Arthur Meighen: Has the minister come to any definite arrangements as to uniform slashing and other regulations?


Charles A. Stewart: We have
made considerable headway in that direction. There is a difficulty in the province of British Columbia, where licenses have been granted under certain terms. But there is the greatest amount of interest in evidence by the forestry officials themselves to reach a uniform basis with respect to uniform regulations to reduce the fire hazard due from logging operations.


Arthur Meighen: Outside of interest, what actually has been agreed upon?


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend well knows that the slash disposal regulations of the Department of the Interior are much more rigorous than those in vogue in the provinces. The provincial authorities have expressed their willingness to adopt our regulations; the only exception is British Columbia. There the Forestry department have doubts as to whether or not slash disposal could be taken care of on account of the very large amount that accumulates as the result of logging operations in the province. They say it would be very expensive to deal with it.


Arthur Meighen: Have any of the provinces actually adopted those regulations? If so, are the regulations applicable to leaseholders now in operation and contracts now under way, or merely to future leaseholders and future contracts?


Charles A. Stewart: That practical difficulty exists with respect to present leaseholders. But the regulations are to be embodied, I think almost without exception, in all new leases.


Arthur Meighen: That will not get us very far.


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend will understand that we cannot drive; we can only encourage and coax.


Arthur Meighen: We cannot drive in the provincial domain; but undoubtedly the provinces would have power to make the new regulations apply to existing leases, and unless the minister succeeds in inducing them to do so he will not get very far.


Charles A. Stewart: These
changes cannot be made in a day. I confess it is slow work getting the public to understand the value of our forest resources and how rapidly we are depleting them. But a very strong interest is in evidence among all forestry officials who have had to do with the conservation of our forest wealth. If we can arouse our provinces to action, I think they would make proper logging methods retroactive in so far as leaseholders are concerned. At least, that is my hope.


Mr. WARNER:: With regard to the disposal of the tops and the refuse after logging in Alberta, I do not know the facts, but I think there is a feeling that the department in asking the loggers to dispose of that material are holding the leaseholders responsible for any fire that may occur. Is there any more responsibility on those holding leases than upon persons who travel through the woods?
Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: The leaseholders have to pay half the cost if a fire occurs. But what they are complaining about is not that so much as the provisions with respect to the disposal of slash, in comparison with those applicable to operators in any one of the provinces. But if we are somewhat arbitrary in dealing with the people operating on Crown lands, we are setting an example which the other provinces might follow.


Mr. BROWN:: What has been the experience as to the practicability of the method the minister has been describing? Has it actually been possible to carry it out?


Charles A. Stewart: Oh yes;
you can carry out any regulation, although you may have a little difficulty in doing so. We have to enforce that.


Mr. BROWTN:: The disposal of that slash
is one of the most difficult problems we have.


Charles A. Stewart: Slash, of
course, is responsible for a great fire hazard. The forest wealth of Canada is so important -and I think in the future we will realize this-that if we forced them to cut up every top and burn it, even green, it would be worth while. It might be expensive, but it would be in the interests of the preservation of our forest wealth. That is my candid opinion in the matter. I have absolutely no sympathy with any attempt to avoid the regulations with respect to slash disposal.


William Findlay Maclean: Can you not
make the leaseholder take that view as well as the government? Could he be made to see that it is in his interests to operate with due regard to the maintenance of the timber wealth?


James Arthurs: How does the government dispose of the timber on burned over areas which have not been previously under lease?


Charles A. Stewart: If it is in the prairie provinces, where we control, we immediately put the burned area up for sale and the timber is salvaged.


James Arthurs: Is it not true that in many cases or in all cases the timber on burned over areas is sold at a very small proportion of the price which it would bring if it were green?


Charles A. Stewart: One half the dues under permit is what we have to sell it for.	.


James Arthurs: The stumpage also is
lower?


Charles A. Stewart: Oh, yes.


James Arthurs: Does the minister not consider that in many cases there is a very strong incentive in that to set out fires?


Charles A. Stewart: We have a suspicion that that happens once in a while, particularly where there is an area of, say two or three sections, a small area that can be conveniently burned. But we have pretty rigid regulations, and although we may not catch every offender it is getting more difficult all the time to do that sort of thing.


James Arthurs: Has the department any fire marshal or other official who investigates these fires and ascertains the cause?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, every case is followed up.


James Arthurs: I suppose if there is a suspicion with regard to a certain party he would not get the benefit of the reduction?


Charles A. Stewart: Well, we try to get conviction if we can catch him, that is all.


William Alves Boys: Would the minister give us some idea of the terms of the leases? Are they issued for a term of years with conditions which obtain throughout that term, or has the department the right to vary the conditions from year to year? I am not quite as familiar with the West as I am with Ontario. Do these leases merely cover the railway belt, or what part? In British Columbia I suppose they are confined to the railway belt.


Charles A. Stewart: As to the timber over which the Dominion government have control, there is provision for cancellation at the end of each year if it is desired.


William Alves Boys: That is exactly as it is in
Ontario. The regulations, then, are absolutely in the hands of the department?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, we can make any changes we desire, any
9 p.m. regulations from time to time.


William Alves Boys: Then what was said to my
leader a moment ago would hardly be correct.
I understood the minister to say you could not drive, you could not force; as I understand it, these leases are issued with the right to cancellation at the end of any year, so that in issuing new licenses you can impose your own terms.

Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: What I spoke of in reply to the leader of the opposition was the leases in the provinces, not the timber controlled by the federal government. The federal government have regulations for the disposal of slash which would make it extremely difficult for many of the old leaseholders. As my hon. friend knows, in Ontario, in Quebec, and in British Columbia outside the railway belt, the provincial governments themselves own and control the natural resources and make their own regulations. The difficulty that arises there is that in many cases the provisions of the lease cover the period during which the timber is cut off, and I presume that it would be difficult to change these definite provisions- But in all the new leases rigid control is provided for, and there is provision whereby changes may be made from time to time.


William Alves Boys: Will the minister tell me something of the terms of leases affecting lands under the control of the department?


Charles A. Stewart: I have
just mentioned that.


William Alves Boys: I thought you were discussing the provincial rules.


Charles A. Stewart: I was at the outset, but I pointed out that we reserved the right to change the regulations at any time as to Dominion lands.


Mr. BAXTER:: The stumpage charged by
the Dominion may vary, I suppose from year to year? The right is reserved under the lease to charge whatever the current rate of stumpage may be?


Charles A. Stewart: Oh, yes.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: Then in what way is the
holder of an old license placed at a disadvantage compared with the man who gets a license to-day? As I understand the system, it is simply that permission is given to cut on a certain area, payment to be made at the current rate of stumpage for whatever is taken off. I do not see where there is any greater burden one way or the other, whether the lease is old or new- I followed with particular attention the evidence taken before the commission on pulpwood in New Brunswick and partly in Nova Scotia. While the pulp-wood commission was supposed to have one chief object in view, they deal with many kindred matters and I think a perusal of the evidence would be well worth while so far as suggestions are concerned. I took the opportunity to prepare for the commission and hand to them an abstract of the laws
of New Brunswick particularly directed to fire prevention. We have there not only the general law, but in some localities there is power to make more stringent regulations. What the minister says is absolutely correct, that if you have an area with very stringent regulations they will not be enforced because otherwise the producer in that section is put at a very distinct disadvantage when he has to bear the cost of carrying on fire protection as against some other area where the regulations are not so strictly enforced or where they do not exist. The comparison may not only be between provinces, but between sections of the same province. In a few words what I should like to say to the minister is this:	That while I have every possible sympathy with him in his idea as to regulation, yet I rather fear that we are, perhaps, scarcely getting at it from the right angle. You can have plentiful regulation, and I feel that is the position we are in in the province of New Brunswick, where our regulations are stiffer than they have been probably for a century, and yet our forests have been more devastated of recent years than they have been for a very long time previously. The trouble is that our regulations remain on the paper where they are printed and it is difficult -and I know it is a tremendous subject-to get the regulations enforced. The minister is going to experience that difficulty and so is everybody else who is engaged in forest protection. The employment of aeroplanes is useful so far as the detection of fires is concerned but it is only a palliative. After the fire has started I grant the aeroplane can discover it, and I am going to discountenance in any way the use of the aeroplane, but the trouble is that that fire has started. In some cases it starts through natural agencies like a stroke of lightning, but ordinarily it starts through human influence. That means campers, or picnickers, or hunters, or careless people engaged in forest operations. Now it is very difficult to get at the campers, the picnickers and the hunters. We have regulations in New Brunswick whereby you can get at the hunter but you cannot possibly track him. You cannot control the operator without the necessity of imposing a tremendous burden on him in carrying out stringent regulations, a burden so heavy that he cannot compete with people who do not have to face those regulations. I have sympathy with the minister in trying to work up what I might call a Dominion standard and trying to get it accepted, but the Dominion standard alone without a punch behind it will not be of very much value. Our
Supply-Interior

people have to realize that laws must be enforced and that is one of the difficulties at the present time-that laws are considered to be something made to be placarded, to be read, everything except to be obeyed in the spirit as well as in the letter. That is the greatest trouble I believe with our forest protection. It is all very well to talk about reforestation. I agree with the minister we do not need it in most localities, the thing is to save the existing forests. And always bear in mind when we talk about reproduction of the forest that it is being reproduced in areas that are largely outside of the reach of the present generation, at great distances from water communication and from rail communication; the affected portion of the forest we are dealing with is in a comparatively limited area, and the timber is disappearing with tremendous rapidity. Now, the question arises, is the country prepared to save what it has? In order to do it there must be Dominion-wide effort and we must have absolute enforcement of the law. It will increase the price of raw material, but there is such a demand in the country to-day for our wood products that the purchasers can and must afford to pay the price that is necessary in order to preserve the heritage of the people of the Dominion. We are not losing wood alone. Everybody must notice from time to time the reports of devastation caused by wind, storm and rain, and all that kind of thing, which has a direct, immediate effect on forest waste that it will take more than one generation to restore.
Mr. RYCIvMAN:	Would the minister
kindly tell us what portion of last year's vote was expended for the province of Ontario?


Charles A. Stewart: We do not spend any money in Ontario except $20,000 on research work. Each of the provinces assumes the responsibility of caring for its own resource. The main reason we discuss this in the provinces at all is for the purpose of propaganda, in the hope that we will- be able to encourage people to take a greater interest in this resource.


Arthur John Lewis: Is this money all spent in the three prairie provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: And British Columbia.


Mr. LEW  IS@: Have you any figures to
illustrate the extent of the devastation from fire that takes place in the three prairie pro-fMr. Baxter.]
vinces and British Columbia? I understood from an article to which the minister's name was signed that the annual loss was about $15,000,000.


James Arthurs: What was the approximate amount of timber cut upon crown lands last year?


William Garland McQuarrie: Would the minister
give details of this particular item? I do not think we have had them yet.


Charles A. Stewart: The details asked by my hon. friend are as follows:
Head Office	 $45,000
Publicity	 5,000
Save-the-forest-week	 5.000
Emergency fire fund	 25,000
Surveys and research	 45,000
Forest Products Laboratories-
(a)	Montreal	
103,000(b)	Vancouver	
22.500Tree planting	
74,500
Forest reserves and fire ranging-
Manitoba	 170,000
Saskatchewan	 220 000
Alberta and British Columbia	 435.000


William Garland McQuarrie: Can the minister give
the revenue by provinces?
Mr. STEW'ART (Argenteuil):	The forest
reserves gave us a revenue last year of $143,000, but that does not take into account the receipts from the timber licenses because that is only from the lands set aside by the federal government as forest reserves. All the timber leases and licenses are in a separate account. I will try and get the figures.


James Arthurs: Has the hon. minister
the number of feet cut upon the forest reserves and the number of licenses?


Charles A. Stewart: The figures
are:
Sawn timber board feet measure.. .. 20.932,000
Props estimated at	 1*667,300	pieces
Lagging (cords)	 795
bagging board feet	 410,880
Telephone poles	 2,790
The total amounts to $66,374. That is the amount of dues collected and is confined to forest reserves.
Mr. ARTHURS' Do the licensees pay 8ny sums towards fire protection?


Charles A. Stewart: Timber dues for 1922-23 on license cuts amounted to S825 -COO.


Mr. CALDWELL:: Does that include the
stumpage?

Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Total revenue.


Charles A. Stewart: That was
the total revenue.


Henry Herbert Stevens: One piece of timber is
sold under auction, and tenders are received. Does that item include what is received under the method of sale of disposition of timber?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, it is
included in the year in which the money is paid over. It is the bonus my hon. friend has reference to paid for the privilege of doing the work.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is included in the
fees.


Arthur John Lewis: In view of the statement
made by the hon. member for St. John and Albert (Mr. Baxter), in regard to the fires and their control, could the minister tell us whether there was any noticeable improvement in the prairie provinces and British Columbia where the lands are under federal legislation?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, there
is a very marked improvement. We had little loss last year. As my hon. friend knows, conditions make some difference. If we have a year of heavy rainfall the hazard is not so great. That being the case, last year naturally it was reduced almost to a minimum, but the average goes to show that we are not allowing the fires to get away. They are small in character, and do not cause the damage they did formerly.


William Garland McQuarrie: Can the minister allocate the appropriation to the different provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: I do not
know that we can do that. That, of course, would apply in British Columbia for example, just to the railway belt.


Arthur Meighen: I am satisfied with the
minister's words, is so far as they evidence an interest in the subject and a realization of its imminent importance, indeed a realization of the peril we are under at the present time. I cannot say that I am very much encouraged by the relation of practical achievements, much less by the disclosure of practical plans of improvement. He tells us that they purpose using the aeroplanes of the Defence forces. Well, I do not know that there is very much to be hoped for there. I do not know just the extent of the air service that is being maintained. If it is.gradually going 80
out of existence, as is the case with other services, it will not be of very much value lo the forests or anything else. I would like to have some idea of the plan by which we are going to effect a radical improvement in the survey and general supervision of our forests; that is to say, what further use is to be made of the aeroplanes, what further use is to be made of the telephone, or what steps are being taken to counteract the bud worm and other pests and diseases? I think the minister's figures as to the loss by fire are low indeed relatively to the loss by nature and while he hopes, without revealing to the House any comprehensive scheme or plan for taking the situation in hand, to reduce our fire loss by half in two years, he is actually confronted with the fact that the loss is increasing every year right under his eyes, and pretty much under the exact policy he is following now.


Charles A. Stewart: Not in the
area the federal government controls.


Arthur Meighen: Was the loss last year
less than the year before?


Charles A. Stewart: We had few fires there.


Arthur Meighen: Perhaps not in that area, but in the whole of Canada it was greater. Our losses were colossal in eastern Canada.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: It may be the minister
was fortunate last year, and it may be that the results were a testimony of the efficiency of the system we had. I fear myself it is more a testimony to good luck. What steps is the minister taking to prevent settlement in districts that should not be open to settlement?


Charles A. Stewart: That was
settled last year by the Forests Act.


Arthur Meighen: And settlers are not
going in?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


Arthur Meighen: Outside of those areas,
are steps being taken to discourage, or even to prohibit, settlement in districts where the harm the settler will do will be greater than the benefit to himself or the country? I think that settlement is one of the major causes of our forest devastation. Furthermore, as the minister said, in respect of one or two of the railway ventures we are entering into, the danger from fire by the penetration of those roads is greater than the possible hope of benefit. I have in mind the

Supply-Interior

Guysborough line for example. It runs through considerable timber, and I fancy from what I have heard it will likely burn down more timber than will be compensated for by all the good it will ever do. I hear someone laughing. I fancy he knows the circumstances. Information about that is coming to hand all the time, but I do not want to drift into a discussion on that subject. But in respect to prairie lines, in mapping out the direction, especially of the northern lines, has the subject been taken into account? We have lost by the penetration of railways, some of them unnecessary, to the extent of hundreds of millions. We have lost timber worth more than the railways of this country are worth	or ever will be worth.
The way timber has been destroyed by the penetration of more or less useful railways is simply a crime. In all these respects, not only a comprehensive, but a determined, persistent policy must be maintained. I do not think the reproduction is going to take care of our fire losses or our cut by any means unless a tremendous improvement is effected. I was criticised because in a speech this session 1 said that we were engaged to-day in the depletion of our irreplaceable losses, virtually selling our estate, that is in respect of our timber, and that when it was gone, it would take generations to replace it. An hon. member said that that was an exaggeration. An exaggeration! It is an understatement. I have talked with as good experts as we have in the countiy. I know that the time required for trees to grow varies, and the exact time for any class at any certain point is not even then very closely determined. The engineers of our larger companies differ in that regard; but I have never heard any of them put at under fifty years, the time for even the most rapidly growing trees to come to any sort of maturity. Some of them very much longer, double the time. Therefore, when one places at a generation the time required to replace the whole that we destroy, he is making a very modest statement of the truth, so that the attention we have given to the subject is altogether too little in proportion to its consequences.
I know the minister's difficulties; they are largely those difficulties that grow out of our federal constitution, and consequently to overcome them, not only co-operation by convention and by word of our provinces must be maintained, but actual results in the way of uniform regulations and uniform schemes of protection must be arrived at and pursued. It is the last few years that have brought this home to us as never hefore. We have developed all through the last decade or so

quite a considerable fire-fighting force in the federal service, but it is in the last three or four years that we have found ourselves face to face with a very critical position. I do not think those who take the gloomiest view of the near approach of our forest destitution are very far out. All the minister can do to bring the facts home to the people of Canada, he ought to do, and any moneys carefully spent to that end, or rather moneys wisely spent to that end, for wisdom is better than even care there, will be amply repaid to the people of the Dominion. We have to bring home not only the inportance of this matter to every person who cares for his country, but the wisdom to the individual of taking care of it to save himself. What I mean is this: I think we need a few very drastic punishments in this country for fire starting. I do not know of any better way to bring the necessity home to some people than that way, or, indeed,	any way except that	way.	Wehave not	had it.	We have	had	aleniency on the part of courts, and we have had	a general	laxity on	the	partof public opinion with the consequence that just what	an offence	in respect	of forest
destruction really means has never been brought home to the reckless and semicriminal. That is essential, and I think the minister can help in that regard. He ought sometimes to be represented at trials that we may have in our country to endeavour to impress our courts with what this thing really means and what the people and government of Canada consider to be a matter of importance.


Charles A. Stewart: That is what the forestry officials complain of in all the provinces.


Arthur Meighen: I think the forestry
officials have ample ground of complaint; but nevertheless let the minister persevere in seeking to obtain this uniformity of regulations, and not only persevere in this, but hasten it by every means in his power. Then I will vote for any appropriation essential to extend the telephone system, the aeroplane system and aeroplane supervision in such a way that the necessary fire-fighting force can be carried to the scene of an incipient fire in time to get it out of the way before devastation ensues. I do not know that we are going to get very far by providing by aeroplane merely for location. We have to go beyond that and provide by aeroplane for crushing the fire itself. It seems to me that a great deal is to be hoped for by means of this new instrument. I should like to know just what the minister purposes to do with those planes,

Supply-I nterior
how far he is provided with them, if he has any scheme of co-operation with the provinces worked out for the use of those planes, and if so, on what basis, also what he is doing in respect of budworm and other insect destruction.


Charles A. Stewart: We have no budworm in our reserves.


Arthur Meighen: We did not have it; I am glad to hear that we do not have it in our timber; but nevertheless, it is a national problem. We have to take an interest even though the immediate responsibility is in the provinces.


Charles A. Stewart: The budworm is one of the problems that I intend to have the Research Council take hold of very actively. The Department of Agriculture have been lending assistance. We have nothing of that kind to contend with within the forest areas of the federal government. I have nothing to add to what my right hon. friend has stated; I agree with every word he has spoken. Apparently, the judiciary are loath to inflict penalities of any sort upon offenders of this character. I am convinced, if we can stir up public opinion, if we can get public opinion aroused to the terrible devastation that is going on at their doors, we shall have gone a very considerable distance in reducing fire hazards. But there is almost a criminal neglect on the part of the public with respect to this matter. As a matter of fact, in our forest reserves, it is almost necessary to send a fire ranger after any party that goes through for fear fires are neglected and incipient fires start as a result of carelessness on the part of campers. I think that is the experience at every one of the forest departments of provincial governments- Perhaps my right hon. friend is right in saying that the rainfall assisted us very materially last year, but I need only instance the year before last when we had such a tremendous loss in British Columbia. We did not suffer a very severe loss; we had innumerable small fires in the railway belt, but not to the same extent, and we are year by year strengthening up our patrol system. The aeroplane would be of immense value to us in locating fires at the start, particularly when those aeroplanes are equipped with a pump so that a man or two can drop down on a lake and put out a fire when it is at such a stage that one or two men can handle it, whereas in two or three days, perhaps 400 would be required to deal with it. In that way money is being well spent on research.
80i


William Garland McQuarrie: I do not suppose the
minister means to suggest that there is a tendency on the part of the courts to let offenders off. I presume the difficulty is that the necessary proof is not produced on the trials and consequently there is nothing for the courts to do but to discharge the accused.
I should like to ask the minister if he is suggesting that the courts are too lenient in cases where prosecutions are had for starting fires and that kind of thing.


Charles A. Stewart: I think the difficulty is that neither the courts nor the public recognize the enormity of an offence of this calibre. It is not looked upon as a very serious thing to have let a fire get out of hand, and although it may do considerable damage, the fact is that there has been more or less laxity in the past in dealing with these cases. We have hardly appreciated yet the distinction between setting fires to clear needed land-which was a very desirable thing in the early days-and the habit of letting fires get away through carelessness, thus causing so much damage.


William Garland McQuarrie: Does the minister
suggest that the courts are allowing these people to go because they do not appreciate the seriousness of the offence?


Charles A. Stewart: No, I do not suggest that.


William Garland McQuarrie: Then I suppose the minister has reference to the penalties inflicted.


Charles A. Stewart: If an individual is found guilty the court scarcely ever imposes the maximum fine, and that perhaps is the great difficulty. As I say, it is not regarded as a very serious crime to have let a fire get out of hand and destroy valuable timber. However, I suppose it is merely a state of mind.


William Garland McQuarrie: The minister apparently finds that the courts are imposing inadequate fines. If that is the case the matter may be rather serious. Has the minister taken any of these cases into consideration, or have any representations been made to any of the judges, or those responsible for enforcing the laws, in connection with that particular matter?


Charles A. Stewart: (Argenteuil): Of course, it is not our business to interfere with the prerogatives of the provincial courts or with the provincial forestry officers. We can only take action in regard to {he areas over which we have control ourselves. I am not com-
Supply-Interior

plaining of the courts any more than I am complaining of the indifference which has been shown by the public generally. As I say, it is simply a state of mind; the public does not realize the enormity of this particular offemce.


William Garland McQuarrie: The minister might tell us how many convictions were obtained during the last year and how many prosecutions were made. Has he made any investigation in regard to the air machines that are available through the Department of Defence for the work of patrolling the forests? Is it a fact that the air service at the present time is made up pretty much of a lot of junk and antiquated machines which to say the least, are not very satisfactory and probably are very unsafe to those who operate them? I am told that a man who goes out in one of these machines to-day is very lucky if he comes back alive and that the aeroplanes we have, generally speaking, would not be used in any civilized country. It is said that they are away behind the times and that this Dominion has not kept pace with other countries in her air service. Now, if these machines are valuable for forest patrol and protection work as I am firmly convinced they are, I think we should have more and better aeroplanes. We should try to improve the standard of our machines and increase their numbers; because, if we are not to think about machines from the point of view of war service, we must nevertheless realize that they are exceedingly useful in this department of the public service. I think it is a great shame that Canada should compel any man in the air force to use a machine which is not properly equipped. What is the programme for the year? Is it intended to purchase any new machines and to improve those which we already have?


Charles A. Stewart: My hon.
friend I presume, is anxious for this information.


William Garland McQuarrie: Yes.


Charles A. Stewart: There will be seven machines in Manitoba and four in Alberta.


William Garland McQuarrie: New ones?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes. A short time ago, Major General Sir W. R. Sefton Brancker, the controller of the Air Service of Great Britain, was here in consultation with the Department of National Defence. I cannot, of course, give the details of the matter because it is not in my department. I fMr. C. A. Stewart.]
can, however, say that a thorough discussion was held and a decision was come to as to the kind of machine which is better adapted to this particular service than any that has heretofore been in use. These machines will be in operation this year in these localities.


William Garland McQuarrie: Four?


Charles A. Stewart: No. Eleven.


Mr. SPEAK  MAN@: I am glad of this discussion and I believe it is well worth while, because I think with the minister that a developed public opinion is the most effective safeguard against fires, and I am speaking from some personal experience which I have had in a forest reserve in my own district, the Rocky Mountain House Reserve. I have noted there in the last few years a very marked change in public sentiment, so that to-day it is looked upon by the people of the district as rather a heinous crime to let fires go. With the growth of this sentiment I have observed a diminution in fires, and I think that the more the importance of the matter is emphasized the better.
Under this item I want to call the attention of the minister to the situation in that forest reserve. I intended bringing it up last year under the public works votes, but I was ruled out of order. There is, in that reserve about 20 miles within the boundary, a mining town known as Nordegg with a population of 1,500. It is related to the Brazeau collieries, one of the big steam coal collieries, and it lies about 180 miles west of Red Deer. From Red Deer to Hol-berg, 40 miles east of Nordegg, there is a provincial road, but from Holberg to Nordegg there is no road at all. In other words, there is a stretch of some 40 mlies which is provided with neither road nor telephone, and the only communication the people have with the outside world is by train three times a week. You can realize what an inconvenience this is to a town of 1,500, a great many of whom are married men. There is no possible communication by road unless one goes by pack horse, if one understands how to use it. The difficulty is that 20 miles of the 40 are under provincial jurisdiction, the other 20 being within the province of the Dominion. The province itself certainly would not undertake road construction through a federal reserve and these people have petitioned time and again to have a road built. They have generally petitioned the provincial government, under a misapprehension as to the peculiar situation that exists in connection with this divided jurisdiction. There is opportunity

Supply-Interior
for a great deal of business to be done; and apart from the inconvenience and the discomfort which necessarily attach to life under these conditions, these people have no means of leaving home except by train. There is a very good mixed farming country not very far east from Nordegg, and the people grow enough fresh vegetables and produce sufficient butter, milk and so forth to supply the needs of the town. They could be taken in and delivered very conveniently by car or truck. A road through there would help the people of Nordegg and the farmers in the surrounding country, and would build up business generally. While I realize that the engineering problem may be difficult and expensive as Nordegg lies in the foothills, at the same time I think it would be advisable for the minister to discuss the matter with his colleagues, because other departments may be involved in such road construction, and to confer with the provincial authorities with a view to arriving at some working arrangement under which this forty-mile stretch of road might be constructed. I believe it can be done; but if not, I would ask him to at least consider the granting of permission to the people there to build a telephone line and so enable them to have telephone connection with the outside world. As I understand the regulations, telephone lines are not allowed in the forest reserves except for the use of the forestry officials, and the railways will not permit telephone wires to be strung on their poles except for official use. The result is that the people of Nordegg. although only forty miles from telephone service, are as absolutely cut off from it as if they were in the South Sea islands. I would ask the minister to take these two matters under consideration to see if some relief cannot be afforded these people.


William Alves Boys: The minister stated that the
courts do not impose the maximum penalties. I suggest that he prescribe a minimum. For instance, with respect to the theft of automobiles, the law was amended and now a judge has no option but to impose a year's imprisonment on offenders. Prescribe a minimum fine, and the court will have no alternative but to impose it. Perhaps my hon. friend would get relief in that way.


Charles A. Stewart: It is worth
considering.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to Canadian Forestry Association, $4,000.
Mr. COOTE:: Would the minister inform
us how many trees are supplied from the Indian Head farm branch?


Charles A. Stewart: In reply to my hon. friend from Red Deer (Mr. Speak-man), there is no restriction with respect to telephone lines. I am perfectly willing to discuss with the provincial authorities the building of the road referred to.


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall the item carry?
Carried.
For surveys and investigations of water and power resources, including the Dominion Hydrometric Survey; for the reclamation of lands by irrigation and drainage and for the administration of the Acts in connection therewith, etc., $547,000.	[DOT]


William Garland McQuarrie: I understood the
minister was giving some information with respect to the item of $4,000. The minister was on his feet.


Charles A. Stewart: I will give
it if the vote is passed.


George Newcombe Gordon: The minister was
not on his feet when the item was called "carried". Is the grant to the Canadian Forestry Association declared open?


Charles A. Stewart: No,	that
comes under another item.


George Newcombe Gordon: We are on the item
for surveys and investigation of water and power resources.


William Garland McQuarrie: The minister was on
his feet when the item was called "carried". I think he was about to answer an inquiry by the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote).


George Newcombe Gordon: It is said that there
was an inquiry from the hon. member for-Macleod in regard to the grant to the: Canadian Forestry Association.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, I was going to give my hon. friend the information he asked for. From the Indian Head farm there were distributed 2,464,530 trees, and from the Sutherland farm 2,636,150 trees. The $4,000 to the Forestry Association is the ordinary grant given annually. It was somewhat larger last year. We felt that we had to undertake omr propaganda work much more vigorously. We have asked for an increased grant to carry on the very same work practically as that maintained by the Lumbermen's Association. We are reaching the schools and all other quarters with our propaganda.


William Garland McQuarrie: As I see it the item
is the same this year as last-$4,000.


Charles A. Stewart: I beg my hon. friend's pardon. The year before it was $8,000; we cut it last year to $4,000.
Supply-Interior


Mr. KENNEDY (West Edmonton):: What research work is being carried on in connection with forest products?


George Newcombe Gordon: That is the next item.


Arthur John Lewis: In view of the fact that the Dominion owns the natural resources in the three prairie provinces, and this item applies to the whole Dominion, especially the latter part of it, will the minister inform the committee if the work is restricted to the provinces where we own the natural resources?


Charles A. Stewart: Which vote? Mr. LEWIS: The $547,000 vote.


George Newcombe Gordon: Shall this vote carry, grant to Canadian Forestry Association, $4,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
For surveys and investigations of water and power resources, including the Dominion Hydrometric Survey; for the reclamation of lands by irrigation and drainage and for the administration of the acts in connection therewith, etc., $457,000.
William Garland McQuarrie: Will the minister give the details?


George Newcombe Gordon: The member for Swift Current (Mr. Lewis) was making an inquiry.


Arthur John Lewis: I was asking with regard to the reclamation of land by irrigation and drainage. Does this take place in all the provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: The water power and irrigation and reclamation services have been combined and placed under Mr. J. B. Challies as chief. For 1924-25 it is estimated that for surveys and investigations of water and power resources we shall require $330,000; for irrigation $173,000; for reclamation $52,000, or a total of $550,000. In British Columbia for surveys and investigations of water and power resources and for administration of water powers, for the fiscal year we shall require $47,000, in the Yukon $2,000, in Alberta $50,000, in Saskatchewan $32,000, in Manitoba $34,000, in Ontario $53,000, in Quebec $20,000, in New Brunswick $8,000, in Nova Scotia $11,000, in Prince Edward Island $1,000; and for fuel power investigations $10,000, and for flooded land contouring, $9,000.


Charles Wallace Stewart: What
amount was expended in Saskatchewan last year on the Waterhen lake drainage project; what disposal has been made of the land already reclaimed in that connection, and what prospects has the department of disposing of the remainder of the lands?


Charles A. Stewart: It is not
our purpose to try to dispose of it at once, [Mr. C. A. Stew*rt.l
because there is a very heavy investment there on account of the drainage. The area is not thoroughly dried1 and we have it under lease for a few years in order that the sun may get in its work, when we hope we shall recover a much larger amount from the sale of the lands than would be possible at this time.


Charles Wallace Stewart: Have you
the terms of the lease there?


Charles A. Stewart: No, but
speaking from memory, I think they are on the same terms as those on which the grazing leases are issued.


William Alves Boys: I notice there is a decrease
of $104,000 in this item. Is that due to the completion of certain works, the reclamation of lands and irrigation, and does it mean that expenditure incurred in that connection last year will not be required: this year?


Charles A. Stewart: In both
services I thought it advisable to cut down very materially. Perhaps I might recite briefly the arrangement with the western provinces with respect to irrigation. When the right hon. leader of the opposition was Minister of the Interior an arrangement was entered into between particularly the province of Alberta and the Department of the Interior whereby the initial surveys should be made to ascertain whether water was available, what was the character of the land, and whether irrigation would be feasible. That was done, and at that point it was agreed that the expenditure on the part of the federal government should cease. The hydrometric surveys, of course, must be continued over a period of years; therefore that work is still going on. There is a large area north of the Red Deer river upon which recent surveys have been made and upon which more may be required, because that project runs into Saskatchewan. But generally speaking, the survey work for irrigation purposes is practically completed so far as the federal government is	concerned. Some small
amounts will be necessary to finish, but they will be largely in respect to applications for small areas throughout the province where it is supposed that there is a sufficient volume of water to carry on irrigation. That accounts for a very considerable reduction in the expenditure. The reclamation ser-
10 p.m. vice is much in the same position.
The	Waterhen lake project,
spoken of by my hon. friend (Mr. Stewart, Humboldt), was a project entered into by the federal government some years ago to

Supply-I nlerior
drain an area in Saskatchewan. In this case the cost has been within the amount originally estimated. In Manitoba surveys were made on the Carrot river with a view to reclaiming lands there, and also in a considerable number of areas in northern Alberta. I think that in western Canada until the first class agricultural lands are settled on there is not much necessity for surveys or for work being commenced on these drainage projects. To my mind that can very well wait until some time in the future when land is required much more than it is at the present day. Of course some of these projects are being carried on by private enterprise, but I am speaking now of the reclamation activities of the Dominion government.


William Alves Boys: Could the minister place an
amount on the reduction to which he has referred?


Charles A. Stewart: On irrigation it is $27,000, and on reclamation $77,000. These are the direct reductions.
to pronounce, some of them are practically French. Here they are: Ottawa, Coulonge. Black, North, Rouge, Lievre, Gatineau, St. iMaurice, Manouan, St. Francis, Batiscan, Peribonka, Mistassini, Shipshaw, Ashuapmu-chuan, Metabetchouan, Saguenay, Escoumains, Assomption. Chicoutimi, Bayonne, Du Loup, Yamachiche.Maskinonge, Portneuf, Sault au Cochon, Sault au Mouton, Ste- Anne de la Perack, Jacques Cartier, Montmorency, Ber-simis, Laval, Outardes, Manicouagan, Mani-tou, St. Jean, Chateauguay, St. Louis, St. Marguerite, Mars, Valin, Gouffre, Malbaie. On all these rivers the amounts spent amounted to less than $20,000. I should like to know what work was performed on these streams in 1923.


The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Vien):: Shall the
item carry?


William Garland McQuarrie: No, Mr. Chairman, I
am still waiting for an answer to my question. Then I have some other questions to which I should like an answer.


Charles Wallace Stewart: When I was speaking about the Waterhen project I asked the minister how much was expended last year, and I should like to know also what the total cost has been to date.


Charles A. Stewart: I have not
the exact figures, but it was less than $10,000 last year. It would be about $150,000 all told.


Mr. PARENT:: In what parts of the province of Quebec was the $20,000 expended that the minister referred to?	.


Charles A. Stewart: That was
for hydrometric work on various streams in the province of Quebec. That work will be continued for a considerable number of years yet.


Georges Parent: Could the minister specify the particular places, and on what particular water powers this expenditure was made?


Charles A. Stewart: I have the
list here and the names are all in French. Rather than attempt to read it I will hand it to my hon. friend.


William Garland McQuarrie: What is the area of
the lands which have been reclaimed, the cost of the reclamation, and the estimated value of the reclaimed lands?


Charles A. Stewart: Only one
drainage project has been completed, the Waterhen. In the case of the others, the work done is mostly survey work.


Georges Parent: I want to give the committee a list of the names that were so hard


Charles A. Stewart: In reply to my hon. friend from Quebec West (Mr. Parent)
I may say that these measurement stations do not cost a great deal of money. Once the measurement apparatus is installed it is largely a case of watching and taking the records. The records in all these rivers will be available. They will have to be kept for a period of ten years or more before they will be of very much value to establish the complete power units that will be available-It seems a small amount of money for a large amount of work but still that work is very valuable.


Georges Parent: I also wished to find out
whether the men who are making these measurements were nominated by the Civil Service Commission.


Charles A. Stewart: 
William Garland McQuarrie: What is the estimated value?
Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: That will
complete it.


William Garland McQuarrie: I asked the minister
what was the estimated value of the land.


Charles A. Stewart: It is a verj' difficult thing to say. In those somewhat northern latitudes the areas drained will be a little longer in drying out and becoming valuable. They will ultimately become valuable as agricultural lands but at the moment, as my hon. friend will understand, they are not of very much value from the agricultural standpoint. That will take some years, and in the meantime we have leased these lands under the provisions of the ranching leases, hoping that when they do dry out they will be at least of the same value or perhaps more value, than the agricultural lands surrounding them which I should say would be worth $20 and $35 per acre.


William Garland McQuarrie: Are we getting any
rental now?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, we
have been getting a rental of 2 cents an acre.


William Garland McQuarrie: Would the minister
inform the committee as to what information has been obtained, or what results secured, by the surveys which have been made. I have left the reclamations and am now dealing with the surveys which have been made. Has the minister any summary giving the result of these surveys and the value received by the country therefor?


Charles A. Stewart: The following projects have been investigated and completely surveyed by engineers of the Reclamation Service and are in readiness for construction as soon as the time is considered opportune for such development:
Estimated
Project-Province-Area.	Cost
Kimiwan lake, Alberta, 10,000 acres	 $ 87,000
Winagami, Alberta, 13,000	acres	 120.000
Sounding lake, Alberta, 7,000 acres	 79,000
Rocky Mountain House, Alberta, 25,000 acres. 160,000
Flat lake, Alberta, 11,000 acres	 101,000
Lanes lake, Alberta, 3,500	acres	 28,000
Majeau lake, Alberta, 5,000 acres	 32.000
Magloi-e lake, Alberta, 3,000 acres	 10,000
Manawan lake, Alberta, 10,000 acres		72.000
Cygnet lake, Alberta. 36,00	acres	
30,000Athabaska district, Alberta,	49,000	acres..	..	195*000Ponass lake, Saskatchewan,	42,000	acres..	..	300,000Moose range, Saskatchewan, 130,000 acres. .!	315^000
In addition to the above the Carrot river triangle, comprising about 800,000 acres of mostly muskeg, west of The Pas, Manitoba, has been thoroughly investigated and surveyed. The surveys were just completed at the end of the last field season.
[Mr. C. A. Stewart.J


William Garland McQuarrie: What has been the
total cost of the surveys?


Thomas Vien: Shall the item carry?


William Garland McQuarrie: No, Mr. Chairman, I am waiting for an answer to my question.


Charles A. Stewart: What information does my hon. friend want?


William Garland McQuarrie: The total amount expended in making these surveys.


Charles A. Stewart: I do not
know that we could give that.


William Garland McQuarrie: \ou should have that information.


Charles A. Stewart: No, that is impossible because a survey party may take two or three of these surveys in one season.


William Garland McQuarrie: I am not confining
the request to one year. I want the total amount that has been spent in making these surveys. Surely that can be given.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, that
can be given. Here are the amounts for the past three years:
	
1922-23	 170,612.52


William Garland McQuarrie: Is that the total cost in each year?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: Now, what is the estimated value of these lands when reclaimed?


Charles A. Stewart: We have no estimate on it.


William Garland McQuarrie: It seems to me, as a business proposition, that when we are spending all this money making these surveys the minister or the department should have some idea as to what is to be obtained for the country in the way of value. Surely there must be some estimate as to what the lands will be worth after they are reclaimed.


Charles A. Stewart: I may say that if the estimate did not exceed ten or twelve dollars an acre the survey would not be prosecuted. That would be definitely ascertained before surveys would be made. But those lands, when thoroughly drained, may be worth twenty or twenty-five dollars an acre, but in the case of lands under the bed of a lake it would be useless to begin draining. In such a case no work is done.


William Garland McQuarrie: That is what I am
asking. If there is an estimate, then what is it? If there is no estimate, then why not?

Supply-Interior
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD : I have just told the hon. member that if the area to be drained is not worth ten dollars an acre the surveys are not prosecuted. So that we have an estimate before the survey; and if it is estimated that it will be worth more than ten dollars an acre, then the land would be worth eventually something more than three million dollars all told.


William Garland McQuarrie: Then there must be some estimate in each case.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD:	My hon.
friend can take that from what I say that the estimate must be more than ten dollars an acre on these lands.


William Garland McQuarrie: It might be guesswork. It is either guesswork or we have something to go on. If we are simply spending money here on this work with our eyes shut, it would seem to be a very unbusinesslike proceeding. I do not think this or any other government would be likely to do that. I do not think the minister would authorize that kind of work without knowing something about it. I am suggesting to him that in each case there must have been an estimate obtained before any work was done. If that is so, then where are these estimates, and is it possible to have them brought down?
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD : No, it is left to the chief of the party to make an investigation of the character of the soil under the proposed area. If the soil is not of a sandy character and the chief of party deems it wise to make a complete investigation and survey, he will first ascertain the character of the soil. If the soil is sandy, of course nothing further will be done, but if it is of a character that will lend itself to agriculture, then the investigation is made and the cost ascertained. I have given my hon. friend what the low minimum value would be, namely, ten dollars an acre, but in all probability, when the land is thoroughly drained and dried, the surrounding land would be worth twenty or twenty-five dollars an acre.


William Garland McQuarrie: Do you start survey
parties out without any previous information?
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD:	Well, we
always have a request for the work to be done either by municipalities or by some people in the locality who are interested and who are desirous of knowing whether or not the project is a feasible one, so far as drainage is concerned,


William Garland McQuarrie: Then those requests I presume would be in writing.	.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD: In some cases, yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: I suppose they can be brought down.	.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD: Yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: How much is proposed to spend this year on that kind of work?
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD: Nothing.


William Garland McQuarrie: The minister is not
spending any money on survey work; so that this item is not properly described, as I understand it.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD : Oh, yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: There is an item of
$547,000 for surveys and investigations of water and power resources, including the Dominion hydrometric survey for the reclamation of lands by irrigation and drainage and for the administration of the acts in connection therewith. There are no surveys to be made as I understand it.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD: Not of that character.


William Garland McQuarrie: No surveys of any
kind under this item.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD:	No.


William Garland McQuarrie: Then what reclamation work is to be done.
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD:	That is
what we have been talking about.


William Garland McQuarrie: What is to be done?
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD : Nothing of this character is to be done.


William Garland McQuarrie: We have got away
from that now. We have come to the reclamation feature of the work, and I am asking the minister what is to be done in the way of reclamation this year. I think that is a fair question.


Mr. FAFARD:: Is it not a fact that the
hydrometric surveys on the St. Maurice and Manouan rivers are made by the provincial authorities?
Mr. STEWART (ArgenteuiD : All the work on the dams and that sort of thing is done by the Quebec government. We are not doing any work in conflict with the Quebec government. We have an agreement with them and work in conjunction with them.


Joseph-Fernand Fafard: There are many waterpowers on the St. Maurice river in the province of Quebec.
Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: Yes. It
would be pretty costly work for the federal government to attend to all that.


William Alves Boys: HaVe any lands been reclaimed, or is it all in the experimental stage?


Charles A. Stewart: The Water- hen work is the only one the federal government has engaged in and carried to completion.
.Mr. BOYS:	And do the results warrant
the expenditure in that connection?


Charles A. Stewart: That remains to be seen. I do not think at the moment the land could be sold. No one would be willing to purchase the land on account of its character, because it is sour at the present moment. When water has lain for generations on land it leaves the surface in an unsatisfactory state for agriculture, and it will take some years to dry it. I meant to see it last year but I have never been able to see it. My information is that when a few years have passed and the ditches have been kept open and the drainage properly attended to, it will be first-class agricultural land.


William Alves Boys: The cost of keeping the drains open would be very great, judging from the conditions in the district where I live. I have in my hand the estimates for 1920, and I notice that the amount voted for that year was $224,000. I also have the estimates for 1922, and I observe that the item had increased that year to $367,000. We now have the item in this year at $547,000.


Charles A. Stewart: There are two services joined together. There is the Water Power branch that was created some years ago. As a matter of fact, the Reclamation service, owing to the reason that [DOT] I gave to my hon. friend, is being amalgamated with the Water Power branch. The main work of this branch now is stream measurement and investigation for power purposes throughout the whole of Canada. That was carried on under Mr. Challies. Mr. Drake was in charge of the Reclamation service; he is out of the service at the moment and the two services are combined under the_ one chief, Mr. Challies. The reason for the apparent increase is that the two services are amalgamated.


William Alves Boys: When did the amalgamation
take place?


Charles A. Stewart: It began last year.
[Mr. Fafard.J


William Alves Boys: Take the previous year. I
am not in a position to criticize the item. The water-power investigation I deem to be of the greatest importance to the country, and I would commend any reasonable expenditure for carrying on that investigation. But the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie) has raised a point. We want to find out whether or not the expenditure being incurred is bringing returns and whether the country is warranted in continuing it. That seems to me the vital point as regards drainage work. If it is going to take years for these lands to dry out and to get rid of the sourness so as to become valuable, and if these drains have to be kept open in the meantime, I should be inclined to think that, in the end, they would cost more than they were worth, even though they sold at the same value as surrounding land that had been properly drained in the past.	.


Charles A. Stewart: I would
not like to venture my opinion, but I never was an enthusiast about drainage. When I was in the Alberta legislature, I set my face rigidly against it, except, perhaps, for the purpose of draining a road allowance. We have millions of acres of first class land there still unsettled, and until those lands are all absorbed, I think it is premature to do this work. I thought, however, that we were, in duty bound-I	am now speaking of the
period when we took office-to finish up the survey work in connection with irrigation. We are spending a little on that this year but the work is practically completed. It is not my intention to spend any money on reclamation projects at all, much less to think of attempting, under the control of the Dominion government, to drain the lands. I give my hon. friend every assurance on that ground, but this department will now develop mainly into a department for investigations into power, which, my hon. friend will agree with me, is most important in Ontario and Quebec, as well as in the other provinces of Canada. Reliable data on that score is most important, because no one can anticipate how rapid the development will be of our power resources. They have developed very rapidly in the past, and I hope that rapid development will continue in the future. We shall be able to furnish very reliable data to investors who propose to go in and develop the water-powers that are found throughout Canada. We are doing not only hydrometric work, but making power measurements as well.

Supply-Interior


Andrew Knox: Is the work on Waterhen
lake not completed?


Charles A. Stewart: There are
some lateral ditches yet to be constructed. Outside of that it is completed.


Andrew Knox: The reclaimed lands have
been rented, I understand.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Andrew Knox: Are those lands liable for
taxation by rural municipalities?


Charles A. Stewart: I would
say, offhand, no, except as regards leased lands for school purposes, if I am right. I have forgotten at the moment.


Andrew Knox: Would parties who leased
the lands not be liable for taxation in some way?


Charles A. Stewart: The lease
is identical with a grazing lease, so every tax that applies to a grazing lease will be applicable to that lease.
Mr. STEWART (Humboldt). As regards the Moose range reclamation project in Carrot river triangle, has this government given up that project entirely, or was it only partially taken over by the Saskatchewan government ?


Charles A. Stewart: Only the
investigation was done by the federal government.


Charles Wallace Stewart: The minister has no intention of carrying it any further then?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


Mr. LEADER:: I notice in the Auditor General's report before me, F. H. Peters, field superintendent, drawing a salary of $4,500. Is he the gentleman whom we had under review the other night?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.
Mr. LEADER': Has the minister any more information to give to the committee regarding that?


Charles A. Stewart: The information which I gave my hon. friend the other night was correct. Payments of living allowance ceased to Mr. Peters on the 1st October, 1923. I have investigated that and found it to be correct.


Harry Leader: Is it the minister's intention to ask Mr. Peters for a refund of the living allowance from the time his family was moved to Ottawa until the last day he was drawing it?


Charles A. Stewart: I could not do that, because the payments were made quite legitimately under regulations, but I may say for the information of my hon. friend that that system will not be continued in any other case.


William Garland McQuarrie: As I understand the matter, all the words in this item after the semi-colon should be struck out, because this item does not include any surveys for le-clamation or drainage purposes or any reclamation by drainage. Should the words:
For the reclamation of lands by irrigation and drainage and for the administration of the acts in connection therewith, etc.
not be struck out?


Charles A. Stewart: Not at all.
I have given my hon. friend the amount necessary to supervise some of these unfinished projects. We have in our hands some of these projects that it is necessary to complete. We are not undertaking any new surveys of any sort in connection with reclamation, nor are we going to enter upon any further investigation. With regard to irrigation, we have a considerable amount of work yet to complete, that is investigations of small areas, and when that is completed, our staff at Calgary will be cut down. The work is in process of being largely discontinued.


William Garland McQuarrie: That is what I have been trying to ascertain all the time. What is the minister going to spend this year on that particular feature of this work? The minister might also give us the details of that expenditure.


Charles A. Stewart: The following is a statement of the reclamation service. Irrigation Division-
Permanent	office	staff,	Calgary.. $53,460	(A)Permanent	field	staff,	Calgary... 36,105	(B)Permanent	office	staff,	Ottawa... 14,430	(C)
Irrigation Administration (exclusive of salaries)-
Field inspection and surveys-
Experimental and demonstration work 33,400 (D)
General Expenses (office and Staff, Calgary)-
Office expenses, telephone;
Telegrams, postage, garage:
Operation of one motor car:
Repairs to transport:
Contingencies	 14,900 (E)
Expenses (office, Ottawa)-
Printing:
.Office supplies:
Contingencies	 20,705 (F)

Supply-Interior


William Garland McQuarrie: That total is for irrigation work that has to be done and not for surveys. The surveys, I take it, have all been completed.


Charles A. Stewart: It is for the administration of the act.


William Garland McQuarrie: This year you will spend $173,000 on this work and may not get any value for it at all.


Charles A. Stewart: I referred
my hon. friend to the arrangement that had been entered into with the federal government with respect to this work and I told him that it was drawing to a close rapidly and that we were endeavouring to have it all completed. As my hon. friend will observe, we have a reduction of $104,000 in this item this year and I hope shortly to wipe it out altogether. But there are a few of these investigations to be carried on in order to complete the work, and naturally of course there is some engineering work to be done before the data is completed.


William Garland McQuarrie: Is there an arrangement with the provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: There was
with Alberta.


William Garland McQuarrie: What was it, and how much more work has to be done?


Charles A. Stewart: If my hon. friend will consult Hansard he will find that [ gave him the details to-night.


William Garland McQuarrie: Is there an arrangement in writing?


Charles A. Stewart: There was no agreement in writing but an arrangement was made between Alberta and the Department of the Interior.


William Garland McQuarrie: Under that arrangement how much more shall we have to spend?


Charles A. Stewart: We shall
have to spend half as much next year as we are spending this year before the work is completed.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is port of the vote
devoted to surveys and investigational work in connection with power on the rivers in those provinces which control their own natural resources?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Do the provinces pay
the federal government anything for the surveys that are made?


Charles A. Stewart: No.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Has any work of this
description been done in New Brunswick?


Charles A. Stewart: We have an arrangement with every province, Quebec being the last with which we have come to an agreement.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Has any survey been
made at Grand Palls in New Brunswick in the last two years?


Charles A. Stewart: We have been asked to investigate the possibilities of power development by the tide in the bay of Fundy.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: That would be at the reversible falls in St. Johnj but I am referring to inland waters two hundred miles from the mouth of the river at a place called Grand Falls. The province of New Brunswick proposes developing that power in the near future and I was wondering whether the department had been asked to inquire into the possibilities at that point and what the results were.


Charles A. Stewart: We have
not made any investigation but we are making stream measurements on that river.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What method does the department follow? Does it indiscriminately measure certain rivers, or does it do so upon the request of the province?


Charles A. Stewart: We have an arrangement with the power commission of New Brunswick and whatever work is done in the way of measurements is carried on by virtue of that arrangement.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Is it done at their
request?


Charles A. Stewart: I should
think it would not be done unless they requested it.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: 
Charles A. Stewart: That is rather a difficult question to answer because this work is done co-operatively between the two staffs, and we have no definite allocation of work except in so far as there is an arrangement between the staffs working on these projects.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Judging from the work
done in those provinces that control their own natural resources, what value has been

Supply-Interior
placed upon that work by the Dominion from the standpoint of its reliability? Further' has any development taken place- or have any surveys been made independently of those carried on by the provinces themselves?


Charles A. Stewart: I do not
see how any development could take place in connection with stream measurement, because, as I have pointed out half a dozen times, it is a matter of considerable years of careful measurements before definite data can be obtained. The following is a letter from Mr. P. J. Veniot, the Premier of New Brunswick, with respect to this matter:
The question of providing funds for carrying on the co-operative stream measurement and water power investigations of the Maritime provinces under the direction of the Water Power branch of your department, is no doubt now under consideration. I am aware that particular attention is being given to the necessity for rigid economy in federal matters this year, but in so far as this province is concerned.
I desire to impress upon you the desirability to have this work continued along the same lines and to the same extent as it is at present being carried on. Unless this work is carried on as heretofore, some other arrangement must be made, as it is essential to the hydro electric development, which we are now carrying on in this province and I feel convinced that it will be admitted without question, that in the interests of real economy for the country as a whole, the development of hydro electric energy is a necessity which it i* found to be economically possible. It is obvious that stream measurement work and water power investigations can be carried on more economically under the present co-operative arrangement than if our province attempted to set up a separate organization of its own. There is also the advantage that records of information of this nature obtained by your department are co-ordinted as to the accuracy and form with similar ncords throughout other parts of Canada. Engineers and official people interested in the hydro development are familiar with the methods of your department and they accept your records more readily and quickly than if they were obtained by organizations not so well known to them. This province highly appreciates the efforts made by your department in the past. You are no doubt aware that during the past few years this province has carried on hydro electric development up to the present time to a total investment of $3,500,000. We are now embarking upon the development of what is known as the Grand Falls proposition, which will ensure for this province cheap power and light and cost in the vicinity of $7,000,000. The data connected with the power already developed, as well as with the power now contemplated, would not have been possible without the assistance made available by the co-operative arrangements under discussion. I am sure that, informed as you are, in relation to this whole matter, you will be satisfied that a continuance of the present small expenditure in this province by your department is justified and that you will have no difficulty in persuading your colleagues to the same opinion.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Has the department
made any surveys on the Musquash development in New Brunswick which is being undertaken by the provincial government?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, there
was co-operation as to data.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Does the survey include the amount of horse-power that might be developed at any given point on the river, or is it more in the nature of ascertaining the volume of continuous flow?


Charles A. Stewart: It is more
to establish the dependable volume of flow. Then estimates can be made of the probable horse-power to be developed.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: What was the report
on the streams that form the Musquash development? It was questioned whether the volume of water would justify such development.


Charles A. Stewart: I think it
would be better if the engineer in charge sent the hon. member a full report of our investigation.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: It would save time.


William Alves Boys: What investigation of hydropower development is going on in Ontario? There is evidence of possible shortage of power there, and therefore it is very important, that the provincial authorities should know what developments may be available.


Charles A. Stewart: Measurements are being taken on all the rivers in Ontario which may be capable of developing power.


William Alves Boys: The minister says that
measurements are being taken on "all the rivers.'' I presume investigations have been completed on many. But I was wondering what new ventures are in sight. For instance, I presume we have full knowledge now as to the total possible development on the Niagara, and in my own locality on the Severn river. But what other work is being carried on in this connection at the present time?


Charles A. Stewart: Measurements have been going on for only five years. As I have said repeatedly, that is not a sufficient time within which to provide definite data on which to base dependable flow, as the records vary very considerably. In ten or twelve years the dependable flow can be pietty well established, and this, after all, is the information which engineers seek in connection with development work.


William Alves Boys: Apart from storage, I suppose
the flow at low water is what is important. But I have not the slightest desire to get into a discussion upon the scientific features. I was merely wondering in what parts of Ontario this work was being carried on at the present time. Are these hydrometric tests being made now in Ontario?
Supply-Interior


Charles A. Stewart: On every
river in Ontario where there is a possibility of power development, but the tests have been carried on for a period of only five years. Ontario and Quebec are developing most rapidly in this connection. We have been working in conjunction with the Ontario government for the past five years. Of course at Niagara, for example, records have been kept for many years; in the northern portion of the province this is not so.


William Alves Boys: Take the minister's own county -which is also mine-there is only one development, that on the Severn river. I take it for granted that the possible power development there is well known now, and that consequently investigations are at an end. Are the present investigations all being conducted in northern Ontario?


Charles A. Stewart: I will hand
my hon. friend the list.


William Alves Boys: Is it so extensive?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, it
covers about twenty. I will pass it over to my hon. friend.


Mr. MICHAUD :: A few years ago the International Waterways Commission was formed and one of its members was appointed from New Brunswick. That commission made a report, one copy of which was sent to the authorities in the state of Maine and the other to the Department of the Interior here. I have on several occasions tried to get this report, but so far I have not succeeded. The Grand Falls waterpower is one of the largest in the Maritime provinces, and I am happy to say that it is about to be developed. In order to obtain authority for this purpose the provincial government must get permission from the Minister of the Interior, and also from the state of Maine.


Charles A. Stewart: Is it an international river?


Pius Michaud: Yes. The falls are about two miles below the state of Maine, but as it is an international river naturally the waters are protected by both countries. I should like to get a copy of the report I have referred to. I may add that encouragement by the Dominion government in the development of this power would be welcomed by the people of New Brunswick.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: In this connection, do the surveys of the department include the possibility of maintaining the flow of the river by adequate storage dams at the point

of development? With respect to the question put by the hon. member for Restigouche and Madawaska (Mr. Michaud), I understand it is necessary to get authority from the state of Maine or from the American government to build storage dams on the St. John river north of Grand Falls in the United States. Will it be the duty of the Dominion government or of the provincial government to secure such authority? In other words, has the provincial government power to negotiate with a neighbouring country for storage rights? We must ajso secure similar rights from the province of Quebec. The St. John river is the international boundary from a point about two miles north of Grand Falls almost to its source; but where the actual development will take place is entirely within the Dominion.


Charles A. Stewart: If it is international water, an agreement of course, would have to be executed between the two federal governments. So far as provincial storage is concerned there is no reason why the two provinces could not work that out by agreement.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I presume, then, that any storage needed in the state of Maine would have to be the subject of negotiation through the federal governments?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: In that case I would like to urge on the minister the necessity of cooperation. Our provincial government propose, I believe, to go ahead and develop this power. It is one of the hopes of the future of New Brunswick that we should have cheap power to manufacture our pulpwood and our hardwood timber, which cannot be floated down the rivers and which is too heavy to ship by rail in the raw state; indeed, it should not be shipped out of the country in the raw state anyway. We have immense resources of hardwood timber that can and will be manufactured if we can get cheap power. That particular power site is the best in New Brunswick, possibly the second best in Canada, next only to Niagara. But it is an international waterway, and we must get storage rights in Maine as well as in Quebec in order to maintain a flow in the river, because at low water there is not a sufficient flow to permit the continuous production of power. It is a mighty river in freshet time, and there are great lakes available that can be dammed so as to hold immense quantities of water which can be used to feed the river in times of drought. I would urge upon the minister the necessity of co-operating with our government in the matter.

Supply-Interior


Arthur Bliss Copp: The present purpose of the provincial government is to develop a certain amount of power at Grand Falls, and that can be done without any international negotiation at all.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: That is, in the initial stages.


Arthur Bliss Copp: Yes. Speaking from memory,
I believe about 40,000 horse power can be developed without any interference with either the state of Maine or the province of Quebec. If it is found desirable to go further by the building of higher dams or the storing of more water for flowage purposes, it will then be necessary to make arrangements with the state of Maine and the province of Quebec. The matter is being investigated by the provincial authorities through the Hydro-
11 p.m. Electric Commission there, and it has been taken up, I understand, with the Minister of the Interior as . regards measurements, requirements, and so on. But I feel that no difficulty of the kind suggested can possibly arise in connection with the present development at Grand Falls.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: I thoroughly agree with my hon. friend, but I feel that it would not be advisable for the provincial government to proceed even in the initial stages of the development without the assurance that they can get these storage nights, because the ultimate aim is to develop much more power than can be developed from the natural run of water and from the storage facilities available in New Brunswick alone. If the initial development takes place without the understanding that we can .get this water storage if we need it, there might come a time when, in order to further our project or to prevent its development from being heldup, we would have to make concessions that we would not wish to make. I am sure however that the federal department will cooperate with the province of New Brunswick in any effort along this line.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Would the minister be good enough to tell the committee briefly the exact position of the application with respect to power development from the Spray lakes in Banff National Park and whether or not he is considering its rejection in the interests of the preservation of the national parks-that is, free from industrial interference, and so on? That I think is the policy in the great national parks of the United States, and I know is the policy approved by a great many people who have given close study to the matter of the preservation of our national parks in their natural state. It is a very important question
and one that really should be discussed at length. I merely hint at these things; the minister will recognize at once what I refer to. Without delaying the committee with tiresome details, I would just like to put my question in that way.


Charles A. Stewart: The situation at the moment is that there is before the department an application on behalf of the Calgary Power Company, who get their power from the Kananaskis falls on the Bow river. We have been carrying on hydrometric measurements on the Bow river, though we have somewhat delayed the work; however, that is somewhat apart from my hon. friend's question. There is no doubt that the Calgary Power Company will require additional power; indeed, their supply will have to be more than doubled if they are to meet the demands made upon them by the municipality of Calgary. They have made application for the Spray lakes basin as a storage reservoir. The park superintendent and park authorities are very much opposed to the development of this power within the park.
I have a perfectly open mind upon it. I went to the park to see the place for myself and to get first-hand information with regard to the situation. As my hon. friend knows, we have a very large area appropriated for park purposes at Banff. There are several hundred miles of roadway through that area, and all kinds of scenery. The road leading up to Mount Assiniboia, which would pass this development, is not one of the most scenic roads one couldi find though the valley in the vicinity of Mount Assiniboia is undoubtedly one of the sights of Banff park. I am not prepared to say that this development would mar the appearance of the park to any considerable degree, but I have a great deal of sympathy with the idea that these areas should be preserved as playgrounds for the people, and anything that would impair their beauty or their interest I would feel like opposing. As I say, I do not think the development would interfere very materially with the park as such, in view of the fact that it comprises so many hundreds of thousands of acres and is characterized by such varied scenery. Since the application of the Calgary Power Company was received the province of Alberta has become interested in power development and they also have made a formal application for this storage basin. We have given them the same answer that we gave the power company; that we do not want to enter hastily into an agreement. The effect of the development on the
Supply-Interior

park, on its scenic beauty, and its effect also in the way of precedent for the future, are things which w'ould have to be given very careful consideration. The Alberta government wish to verify the statement of our engineers and of the engineers of the power company as to the volume to be stored and the value of the storage basin for power purposes, and they intend to make an independent investigation on their own behalf. Of course, if the province wishes to enter into a hydro project, and if it is believed desirable to grant the request of anyone in this regard, the province would be given the preference. But though I cannot say that I think the scenery would be very much disturbed, the question of establishing a precedent is one which requires very careful consideration before a privilege of this kind is granted to anyone.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I would like to make a request of the minister. I have no particular right to do so, except that I am intensely interested in the general question of the preservation of the national parks. I would ask that nothing be done in this matter within the coming year so that ample opportunity may be given for pondering the question, for its consideration not only by the minister's department but by the public, who, after all, are really more affected than even the government itself. I gather from the minister's remarks that the power company still have some units that they can develop on the Bow river site, so that there is no need for great haste at this time.


Charles A. Stewart: And plenty
of coal.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Exactly. Having these things in mind I think it would be a very fine thing if the government would declare that for a period of a year nothing will be done, and then in the interim let public opinion adjust itself and familiarize itself with all the circumstances. I think we would all be in a better position to judge of the merits of the case at the end of another year. On the other hand, I may say this, that even if there is a desire on the part of the government to come to an ultimate decision on it in the near future, personally I would hesitate before agreeing to this item without the privilege of discussing it at great length and threshing the whole matter out. That I do not wish to do at the moment, and I think if the minister could give the assurance asked it would be the happiest way out of the difficulty at the present time.


Charles A. Stewart: I think I
can give my hon. friend at once that assurance. I am not in any hurry to deal with this particular question because I think it is of such importance.


John Livingstone Brown: I should like to support the request of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Stevens). It is a matter in which I feel intensely interested. It is important that these national parks should be preserved for the public. Shortly before coming to Ottawa I was waited upon by some of my constituents who felt very strongly upon this subject. I think a policy should be pursued as would preserve these places of natural beauty as much as possible for the use of the people unimpaired, and I am quite satisfied that the public generally would very strongly resent the idea that these parks should be alienated from public use to serve the purposes of a commercial company.


John Evans: I should like to inform the minister that the whole Alpine Club of Canada is watching this application with jealous eyes. They believe there should be no interference with the Spray river park such as would detract in any way from the attractive and pleasureable features which make these national parks so desirable as playgrounds for the people. I think the government should formulate a policy respecting the national parks so that no unfortunate precedent would be created for the future.


Mr. SHAW:: The granting of water
power privileges on Spray lakes is, of course, a very important matter. The minister says that he does not want to establish a precedent. As a matter of fact a precedent has already been established because the Calgary Power Company	hold water power
privileges within the park area right at this moment. However, I do think this parliament should take definite steps to formulate a policy so far as the parks are concerned and determine finally whether it is the intention to allow industrial development within the park area. I think the matter should be carefully considered and then, in the light of the action that parliament takes, it will be time enough to determine what industrial development should be allowed. There is a further thing in connection with this particular matter. I do not believe that any private company should be given power privileges within the park. I think that whatever rights are going to be granted for industrial purposes should be granted to the provincial government or should be conducted under some system of government

Supply-Interior
ownership or government control. For after all while it is quite true as the minister has said, that the particular area around the Spray lakes is not now of much scenic value -except perhaps in the case of the lakes themselves and the Spray river falls-still if they were allowed to come under private control there can be no doubt that those interests would be primarily concerned in getting their money out of the project and getting it as rapidly as possible; whereas if the development were under government control the government would also be interested in maintaining the park value of the area involved in which the power privileges exist. I trust that the minister will not be hasty in granting the request of the Calgary Power Company. Under any circumstances I do not think it should be granted, but if the province feels that this is an enterprise which might profitably be undertaken without in any way imperilling that area as a park asset, then on that matter I will have an open mind; but certainly I would not support the application of the Calgary Power Company under any circumstances.


Charles Wallace Stewart: There is
one other matter I should like to call to the attention of the minister before we pass this item. He has made a statement this evening in regard to his general attitude or policy on reclamation projects, to the effect that he does not believe it is a good policy at this time to reclaim lands for their intrinsic value for agricultural purposes. In so far as that statement goes I am wholly in accord with the minister, but I want to point out the fact to the minister that there are large districts in western Canada where drainage projects have to be instituted if the land is to be properly settled. In these areas drainage projects have to be instituted and carried out before school districts can be established and roads built. Very often these projects are beyond the scope of the new municipalities within which they must be undertaken. In the province of Saskatchewan I am aware that the provincial government has made arrangements to take over enterprises of this kind, place them on a sound financial basis, and carry them to completion, making the land pay for the work put upon it when it has been reclaimed. However, it is a fact, and it can well be understood why this is the case, that these lands that have to be reclaimed are very largely lands that are still vested in the Crown, or that being in need of drainage have not been taken up by the settlers entering the country. Now, rightly or wrongly the opinion prevails in 81
many of the districts where this drainage has to be carried out that the regulations of the Department of the Interior constitute a hindrance and make it very difficult for these schemes to be carried out by the provincial department of highways which has charge of them. The statement of the minister as to his being wholly against reclamation projects would perhaps lend additional colour to the complaints that are made. Therefore I think it would be only fair for him to state the policy of his department in that regard, and make it plain as to whether his department is endeavouring to do what it can to render easier the carrying out of these projects where they are absolutely necessary, or whether the departmental officials are placing all the hindrances they can in the way of permitting Crown lands to be included in reolamatictn projects.


Charles A. Stewart: No, the
situation is quite the reverse. All these Crown lands that are found within a drainage area in which a province or municipality is desirous of establishing a reclamation scheme are sold at a dollar an acre-preferably to the province, I think altogether to the province because they take them in charge and they are to be sold under the same regulations as the school lands. However, every acre of Crown land that is found within one of these drainage areas can be had for the benefit of the area at a dollar an acre. Then, of course, provincial drainage laws affect the scheme. There can be no opposition on the part of the federal government. What I want to make clear is, that so far as the federal government is concerned I would not venture into the Water-hen project or anything of that character. That is what I want to make clear.


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: May I ask the
minister, in regard to these measurements, if the results of the investigations are printed.


Charles A. Stewart: I can furnish my hon. friend with the flowage on each river.


Arthur Edward Ross: The Madawaska
and the Sydenham are the only two rivers I am interested in.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: In connection with the matter of reducing the staff, so far as dismissals have been necessary, is any priority given to returned soldiers? I understand that sometime ago the hon. Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) indicated that it would be the attitude of the government, so far as possible,

Supply-Interior

to see that returned soldiers were retained in employment if dismissals became necessary owing to reduction of staff. Does that same practice apply to the Water Power branch?


Charles A. Stewart: In the staff reduction which is going on, the practice my hon. friend refers to applies to a returned soldier, if he has the minimum qualifications. The returned soldier is given the preference, unless there is some very grave reason why it cannot be done.


William Garland McQuarrie: Would the minister inform the House as to what the government's *programme in British Columbia is for the coming year under this item?


Charles A. Stewart: I will be
glad to give my hon. friend this same information in regard to the rivers in British Columbia.


William Garland McQuarrie: Under this vote?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: You are going to measure the rivers set out in this list?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


William Garland McQuarrie: Is there anything else on your programme?


Charles A. Stewart: No. These rivers are provincial.


William Garland McQuarrie: I am asking what the programme is, and the minister hands me a list with the names of a lot of rivers, and that is the programme. Now that is not the programme, because other expenditures are to be made in British Columbia. I would like to ask the minister what that programme is.


Alfred Edgar MacLean: I am glad to see the reduction of $104,000 in this vote. I brought the matter' as forcibly as I could to the attention of the House last year, and I stated that it was beyond the understanding of a great many people in the eastern provinces that those large amounts should be spent on irrigation, measurement of streams, geodetic surveys, boundary line surveys and so on. That expenditure is increasing every year. Now some of them, my hon. friend says, are good things. Well, some of them are. I understand from my hon. friends on the other side of the House that irrigation has been very beneficial. What we in the eastern provinces sometimes complain of is the development of water powers by this government or by any federal government. I think it is the province of any company that wishes to take up the matter to develop these 
water powers. Any company that would go into an enterprise of that kind should make their, own surveys, I think. I am glad that we have a reduction of this item, and I am pleased to hear from the minister that in the course of a few years it will be wiped out.
Som hon. MEMBERS: Carried.


William Garland McQuarrie: I understand the minister is getting information.


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot
give my hon. friend any more information than I gave to my hon. friend from Simcoe (Mr. Boys). This work involves the measurement of the rivers to ascertain flowage, in some cases for irrigation purposes, as the hon. member well knows, because the investigation is a varied one. In some cases it may be for drainage, but in most cases for the development of power, to establish definitely what power we can develop on these rivers, and in order that, if development is necessary-and in most cases it is at least projected-you may have definite data. This work is not so many dollars spent on a certain river. I cannot give that detail. But there are $47,000 all told in this vote to be spent, I think, in British Columbia for the purpose of getting data for the power people in your provincial government, the same as in any other province.


William Garland McQuarrie: That is absolutely
not an answer to the question, and this document which the minister sent over does not answer the question; on the contrary it is something altogether different, and it so states. The heading is:
Rivers covering which studies have been made of power possibilities.
That does not answer my question at all.


Charles A. Stewart: May I tell
the hon- gentleman again-and I hope this time he will remember-that it does not involve measurements for one year, or two-years, or three years, or four years, or five years, or six years, or seven years, or eight years, or nine years, or ten years, or eleven years, or twelve years; but it is a continued study that must be earned on, if you are to have reliable data for the purposes for which the measurement is being made. Have I made it clear to my hon. friend?


William Garland McQuarrie: I should say not. 1
am sorry the minister finds it necessary to lose his temper.


Charles A. Stewart: The minister has not lost his temper.

Supply-Interior


William Garland McQuarrie: Well he gives a very
good imitation of a man who has lost his temper. I do not think that I, or any hon. member in this group, have asked one question that was not a reasonable question, and one to which we were not entitled to an answer. I for one do not propose to allow these estimates to be railroaded through this House.


George Newcombe Gordon: Order.


William Garland McQuarrie: I did not suggest they had been railroaded through. I think my question is a fair one and I am not endeavouring to obstruct. There is no reason why I should obstruct, but I asked what the government programme was in British Columbia for the coming year under this item, and what do I get? I receive a list of names of rivers on which studies have been made. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that is not an answer to the question at all.


George Newcombe Gordon: The hon. minister declares he has given certain information, and he is not required to repeat that information.


William Garland McQuarrie: I do not suggest that
the hon. minister is required to repeat the information. I do not want him to repeat it, because he has not answered the question. I am now asking for an answer to the question, and if the minister feels tired and cannot understand a question when it is asked, we can allow this item to stand over till another time.


Charles A. Stewart: Would the
statement, that the definition at the top is misleading answer my hon. friend; that it is not merely for past measurements that he has the group of rivers, but for past, present and future measurements, the future covering, at the moment, only this year.


William Garland McQuarrie: I will try again in
another way. How much of this item of $547,000 is to be spent in British Columbia?


Charles A. Stewart: 


William Garland McQuarrie: How is that $47,000
going to be spent, with the details?


Georges Parent: By handing the money
to those who are entitled to it.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I do not think the minister has treated the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. McQuarrie) quite right. There is a fairness in the request, whatever may be said of any other question asked to-night. The request is for some details, which are usually given immediately, as to what is the intention in the disbursement of 81i
this $47,000. "Let me point this out to the minister. I had no intention of bringing it to his notice, but I do not think it is fair for hon. members to call "carried" when an hon. member is asking questions, and it is not a way to facilitate the passage of items.


Georges Parent: It has been done in the
past.


Henry Herbert Stevens: A statute was passed in
1913, I think, whereby the water-powers in British Columbia or in the railway belt were turned over to the British Columbia government for administration. That creates a situation in British Columbia unique and entirely different from that obtaining in every other province. While the federal government owns or controls the water-powers in the railway belt, it parted with that control under the statute to the province of British Columbia. If I re 3all correctly, British Columbia maintains a water-power department, or it did a few years ago, doing very much the same work as this department is doing. It is interesting to us to know just what this $47,000 of federal money is to be applied to. Is it duplicating expenditures by the province? Is it a necessary expenditure? Is it possible to dispense with this expenditure by the federal government, and under the statute to allow the provincial government to do this class of work? As a matter of fact, $47,000 may not be very much to some hon. gentlemen who are calling "carried" and such like, but it is a sum worthy of consideration. This is a good time to pause and examine. The request of my hon. friend is for some information how the money is to be expended.


Charles A. Stewart: In the first place, in order to answer my hon. friend as to co-operation, what he has said is perfectly correct. British Columbia, like the other provinces in Canada with which we are working in co-operation, is in control of its water-powers, and as to how far it is developing them, I have not the information.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is not what I refer to. I mean the relinquishment of Dominion control of water-porvers in the railway belt to the provincial government^ That was by a special act.


Charles A. Stewart: I quite
understand that; but this work, as my hon. friend well knows, is not confined to the railway belt; it covers the whole of the province. As in the case of the other province, I read a letter from Premier Veniot, perhaps a letter from Hon. T. D. Patullo,
Supply-Interior

Minister of Lands in British Columbia, would be of interest in order to give further information to my hon. friend. This letter reads:
The subject of stream measurements is of such far reaching importance in the provinces where hydro -power is capable of being developed or irrigation practised, as both are in this province, that I am constrained to venture some remarks on the national aspects of the question.
No resource of the country-not even agricultural or mineral lands-demands more careful investigation than the streams from which the water is derived for the development of power, for irrigation and for city water supply. While the physical aspects of agricultural and mining lands may be regarded as supremely stable the great water resources show daily, monthly and annual variations that require careful records extending over many years to demonstrate the quantities that may be depended on from any single source.
To secure uniformity of measurement, computation and tabulation and to provide reliability in comparison of streams throughout the Dominion it is equally necessary that the data be collected and published by the central authority.
If it is a matter of national importance-and it cannot be questioned-that agricultural experimental stations be established and other agricultural data be gathered and that geological surveys and investigations be made by the federal government, it is surely of equal national importance that a resource from which three and a quarter million horse-power are already developed and from which hundreds of thousands of acres of land are irrigated receive generous national support.
So far as this province is concerned it may be pointed out that its industrial life depends to a very large extent upon water power, and the agricultural resources of the whole interior of the province are dependent upon irrigation from its streams.
Handicapped to some extent by the lack of hydrometric data, the province, realizing the vital importance of stream measurement and gauge readings, was obliged to initiate the work some years ago. Apart altogether from any consideration of the national aspect of the question already referred to, the fact that many of its great streams and lakes were wholly or partly within the railway belt laid upon the Dominion the specific duty of investigating them. Accordingly it was arranged that the portion of the work which the province of necessity began was handed over to the federal organisation, the province making an annual money contribution for the service in lieu of direct expenditure.
In the efforts now being made for the reduction of national expenditures I trust that you will not permit of any change that will allow so necessary a service to be curtailed.
That is the view that the minister who is in charge of this work has of the question.
I think in fairness to British Columbia, it has a right to receive the same treatment as the other provinces of Canada are receiving in this respect, and I wish to assure my hon. friend that none of this work is undertaken unless there is a direct arrangement with the provincial authorities so that no overlapping in expenditure is going on.
I cannot give more definite data as to where work is being carried on than on the list which I passed over to my hon. friend, that is that we are making measurements on these 
streams for the very purpose mentioned by the minister, in order that reliable data may be had for development purposes.


William Garland McQuarrie: According to the list, that work is done.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, I do
not know how many years we have been doing that, but most of this work has been under way for only five years. I do not know exactly how long because the minister intimates that the British Columbia government have been carrying on this work. Perhaps there. are some streams on which the data is complete, that is, on which accurate, reliable measurements have been kept for a period of twelve years. In that case there would be little or no need of continuing; but my hon. friend will agree that there is a great deal of work in British Columbia upon which the measurements have not been carried on for that period and upon which we are still continuing that work.
Further, my hon. friend knows that a good deal of controversy has been going on between the federal government, the provincial government and the Indians with respect to allocation of reserves, and measurement work has to be done there, in order that data may be available because, while it is not part of the settlement, because the settlement is largely that of land, work is being carried on there as well, that would be embodied rather fully in the report which I handed to my hon. friend, giving the rivers on which the work is being carried on, because the work is confined to those.


William Garland McQuarrie: To make my position perfectly clear, I want to assure the minister that I am not objecting to the expenditures in British Columbia or in any other province. I am simply endeavouring to do my duty in trying to get information as to how the money is to be spent. I am accepting the minister's statement to the effect that the work is going to be continued this coming year under an arrangement which has been or will be made with the province.


Charles A. Stewart: This is a continuous arrangement with the province and does not end in any particular year. There is a standing agreement between the province and the federal .government for cooperation in this work, but my hon. friend should understand that reliable data of this character cannot be obtained under ten or twelve years. Perhaps there are some streams in regard to which the work is complete, but the great majority of them are probably

Capital Punishment
only half finished and measurements will have to go on for another period of years before reliable data will be completely secured.


William Garland McQuarrie: How many years has this work been going on?


Charles A. Stewart: The agreement was executed on August 19, 1913.


William Garland McQuarrie: That is to say, eleven years. How many years longer has it to run?


Charles A. Stewart: As long as both parties are agreeable to its continuance.


William Garland McQuarrie: So that there is an arrangement under which the work is to be continued, and it is proposed to continue it this year. An arrangement, in other words, has been made or will be made as to all the work and that work will be confined to the rivers which were set out in the statement that the minister sent over to me. I think it is a commendable thing that the Dominion and the provinces should co-operate in such an important matter and I am not objecting to the arrangement. I hope the minister will not think that I am trying to harass him tonight or to obstruct his estimates.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King the House adjourned at 11.40 p.m.
Friday, April 11, 1924