1924-04-03

UNITED CHURCH OF CANADA

Mr. J. D. CHAPLIN (Lincoln):: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present the petition of Rev. George H. Smith, D.D., of St. Catharines, in the county of Lincoln, against the petition praying for the incorporation of the United Church of Canada, on the ground that the said petition is not in conformity with the standing orders of this House.



SELECT STANDING COMMITTEES


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved:: .That the name of Mr. R. Milne be taken from the list of members comprising the standing committee on Banking and Commerce and that the name of Mr. J. Steedsman be inserted in lieu thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 29, to amend the Criminal Code (Printer's liability).
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.

Questions


Mr. NEILL:: The object of this legislation is to provide that any paper, or pamphlet, or circular, printed and intended for publication and distribution, shall contain on it the name and address of the publisher. The object of this is to facilitate the identification of the publisher of any circular, or pamphlet, or article, of that character. It is becoming increasingly frequent now that we find pamphlets circulated, containing, as this explanation states, "false, defamatory and libellous statements," sometimes seditious statements, which are intended for circulation in an anonymous way. This will check that. I may say that the legislation follows that in Britain going as far back as the year 1839 and revised since then.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. QUESTIONS
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.) .



PORT NELSON HARBOUR FACILITIES

Mr. EVANS:: 1.	Have any steps been taken, or men despatched, during the year 1923 to Port Nelson for the purpose of destroying, or impairing, or affecting in any way, the work already done there in preparation for establishing port and harbour facilities?
2.	If so, how many men were sent, what was done, and what was the reason for so doing?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.



D.S.C.R. AND PENSIONS-MONTREAL STAFF

Hon. Mr. MANION:: 1.	How many medical practitioners, including surgeons and specialists, are employed by the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment and Pensions in Montreal ?
2.	What are their names and salaries.
3.	How many other employees are there in Montreal of these departments ?
4.	What are the total salaries of these other employees ?


Hon. Mr. BELAND:: 1. 12.
2.	Name.	Position.	Salary.
Brannen, Dr. J. P-, Unit Medical Director	$4,800
Brown, Dr. E. R.,	Aurist.	(P.T.)	..	..	2,400Byers, Dr. J. R.,	Chest	Clinic.	(P.T.)	3,000
Charland, Dr. L. C., Pensions Examiner 4,000 Gowdey, Dr. W. C., Medical Officer.
(P.T.)	 1,800
Keenan, Dr. C. B., Consultant in Surgery. (P.T.)	 2,700
Peters, Dr. E. A., Consultant in Medicine. (P.T.)	 2,700
Pirie, Dr. A. H., X-Ray Specialist. (P. rp ^	  2,400
Ranger, Dr.	L.	E., Medical	Officer.	..	3,600
Rivet, Dr. A. N., Medical Officer. (P.
>p)		 1,800
Robertson, Dr. E. A., Pensions Examiner	 4,000
Ruddick,	Dr.	W. W.,	Medical	Officer	4,000
Total	$37,200
3.	97; which includes dental staff; nurses, orderlies; laboratory technicians; X-ray technicians, etc., as well as clerical and administrative staff.
4.	$124,832.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-ROLLING STOCK

Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: 1.	How many cars and locomotives have been ordered in the United States for the Canadian National Railway system since January 1st, 1922?
2.	How many of these have been built?
3.	How many cars and locomotives were built in Canada for the United States railways, in Canada or elsewhere, since Janunary 1st, 1922?


Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:: 1.	For lines in the United States:
24 engines for Central Vermont railway. 51 engines for Grand Trunk western lines. 20 cars for Central Vermont railway.
1,227 cars for Grand Trunk western.
2.	All except 15 locomotives for Grand Trunk western lines.
3.	So far as Canadian National Railways are concerned, none.
As to other railways, no information.
PULPWOOD COMMISSION Hon. Mr. STEVENS:
1.	Has the royal commission on pulpwood completed its hearings?
2.	Was the commission authorized to make investigations in New York?
3.	What investigations has the commission been making in New York?
4.	When does the government expect its report?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.	The commission has taken evidence in all parts of Canada and it is not expected that further public hearings will be necessary.
2.	The commission was instructed to make a complete inquiry and was expected to exercise its own discretion in doing so.
3.	The chairman, deputy chairman and secretary went to New York informally to consult with informed men on statistics and other matters relevant to the inquiry, and to check up some opinions expressed during the inquiry.
4.	Before the end of the session.
Questions



QUEBEC HARBOUR COMMISSION

Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Referring to question No. 11, answered March 27, 1924, with respect to advances to the Quebec Harbour Commission, what loans or advances have been made to said commission by the government prior to 1912?
2.	Have any moneys been borrowed by or advanced to said commission by any person, corporation or bank, by way of overdraft or otherwise, under the guarantee or promise of the guarantee of the government of Canada or any department thereof?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 

PHYSICIANS, D.S.C.R.-OTTAWA

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1. Does the lumber of medical doctors stated to be eighteen in reply to a question on March 26, 1924, as to how many medical doctors in Ottawa are in the employ of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment, include those employed by the Board of
Pension Commissioners and the Federal Appeal Board?
2.	If not, how many medical doctors are employed in those branches of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishement, including the commissioners and members of the Appeal Board?


Hon. Mr. BELAND:: 1.	No.
2.	The Board of Pension Commissioners and the Federal Appeal Board are not branches of the Department of Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment, nor are they subject to control by the department. The information asked for is as follows:-
(a)	The Board of Pension Commissioners is composed of three commissioners of whom two are medical doctors. The board has nine medical advisers in its employ.
(b)	The Federal Appeal Board is composed of five commissioners of whom two are medical doctors. This board has two medical advisers.
COLD EXPORTS AND IMPORTS Hon. Mr. MANION:
1.	What was the value of gold exports from Canada during each of past- ten years?
2.	To what countries were such exports made?
3.	What was the value of gold imports into Canada in past ten years?
4.	From what countries was this gold imported?


Hon. Mr. BUREAU:: 1 and 2.
Exports, Fiscal Years 1914 to 1923
Item and Country	1914	1915	1916	1917	1918jold Coin:-	8	$	8	8	8United Kingdom	45	3,700	Bermuda	Hong Kong	40	1,057 109,996 43,800	Newfoundland	
Alaska	24,330	285,841	108	209,118 42,183China	4,000	40.89C	6,270 17,778United States	22,177,197	27,939,047	102,310,473	46,186,011	345,000 1,257,138Total	22,221,147	28,234,973	102,318,281	46,381,754	1,877,4871919	1920	1921	1922	1923United Kingdom	$	*	$	$	8Bermuda	Newfoundland	34,485 14,600	300,568	102,422	Alaska	
China	' British India	500	United States	
Trinidad	23,444 137,298	24,576,683	9,336,003	5,027,.313	25,6oi,170Total	210,087	24,937,309	9,438,425	5,027,813	25,001,170

Questions
Exports, Fiscal Years 1914 to 1923-Concluded
Item and Country
Gold bearing quartz, dust, nuggets and bullion directly derived from mining or smelting operations:-
United Kingdom	
Hong Kong	
Newfoundland	
Alaska	
China	
France	
Germany	
United States	
Total.
United Kingdom.
Hong Kong	
Newfoundland....
Alaska	
China	
France	
Germany	
United States__
Total.
3,381
1915
105,324
13,372,634
13,376,735
50
6,831
15,296,864
15,409,019
8,200
23,989,909
23,989,909
1917
195,434
19,475,592
3,785
13,684,514
19,671,026
195
7,367
582,478
9,201,983	5,377,603
9,202,033
5,975,648
2,500
3'036'084
3,038,779
2,534,429
2,534,755
13,688,700
5,449,469
5,449,466
Item and Country	1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923*Gold Bullion, n.o.p.:- United States	
Venezuela	$ 148,752,755	$ 206,062,376 250,000	S' 39,841,697	S 23,856,862	S 24,290,846	$ 18,082,533	S 1,761,415Total	148,752,755	206,312,376	39,841,697	23,856,862	24,290,846	18,082,533	1,761,415
Included in gold bearing quartz, etc., up to 1917. 3 and 4.
Imports, Fiscal Years 1914 to 1923
Item and Country	1914	1915	1916	1917	1918Coins, British, Canadian and foreign gold coin:- United Kingdom	$ 267	S 2,612	S 2,606,025 2,360,333 465	$ 20,348	$ 500350
794	590	
	500 828				
Newfoundland			2,360	1,169 973,333		
	8,700				
					
			390		
					
					
, . United States	13,649,197	117,050,052	26,195,399	8,632,425	9,914,911Total	13,659,492	117,055,024	32,137,908	8,653,363| 9,915,761	
Questions

Imports, Fiscal Years 1914 to 1923-Concluded
Item and Country	*1919	1920	1921	1922	2923Coins, British, Canadian and foreign gold	$	$	S	$coin-Concluded.	8,222	1,119	3,643	7,389Australia	1,662118	British West Indies	205	Hong Kong	2,000New Zealand	14,878 160	9,280 300	
Hawaii						
					15,228
			3,400 6,084,636	215 3,858,593	
		4,335,447			25,541,141
					
		4,343,874	6,104,193	3,872,149	25,567,420
					
No records for 1919. Records for other war years incomplete owing to war conditions.
Item and Country	1914	1915	1916	1917	1918Gold bullion in bars, blocks, ingots, drops, sheets or plates, unmanufactured:-	$ 203	$ 7	$ 98,409	S 14,646,131	$ 31 68,142 100Hong Kong	Newfoundland	New Zealand	Alaska	4,000	3,549	22,053 85 1,617,772	622 3,686,432	834,756	14,424,816	1,306,287
838,959	14,428,372	1,738,319	18,333,185	1,374,560
					
*1919	1920	1921	1922	1923United Kingdom	S 45,023,815	$	$ 3,884	?6,155Hong Kong	Newfoundland	New Zealand	26,387	Alaska	France	525 1,087,670	353 911,860	227 881,4291,095,805	Total	46,119,620	1,114,582	916,097	887,811
No records for 1919. Records for other war years incomplete owing to war conditions.



MR. LEMELIN

Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	Has Mr. Lemelin, lighthouse-keeper at St. Frangois He d'Orleans, been dismissed, and if so, when?
2.	Why was he dismissed?
3.	Was political partisanship given as the reason, and if so, who made the allegation, and was an investigation held to ascertain the truth?
4.	If an investigation was held, who held it, when was it held, and what was the verdict?


Hon. Mr. CARDIN:: 1.	Yes. Order in council dated 22nd December, 1923.

2.	On ground of political partisanship.
3.	Yes. Mr. H. E. Lavigueur, M.P., stated from personal knowledge that Mr. Lemelin was engaged in political partisanship. No investigation was necessary. .
4.	See answer to No. 3.



T. GEORGE MACKENZIE, MEXICAN CAPTIVE

Mr. CHURCH:: I.	Is the government aware that a British subject, a Canadian domiciled in Canada, namely T. George MacKenzie, general manager of the Compania Company, has been taken prisoner by the provisional government of Mexico, and held, it is said, for ransom?

Questions
2.	If so, will the government endeavour to secure his release by negotiations or otherwise, and what has, or is being, done?
3. Has the government communicated with His Majesty's government of Great Britain on the subject?


Right Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	The government is aware that Mr. T. G. Mackenzie has been taken prisoner by bandits in Mexico (Villistas) and held for ransom.
2.	The government has caused the attention of H. M. Ambassador at Washington to be called to this matter, and His Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Mexico was asked to take steps for Mr. Mackenzie's immediate release and protection. The Charge d'Affaires took the matter up with the government of Mexico and was assured that "no effort will be spared to recover Mr. Mackenzie". Reports have been received from time to time from the Charge d'Affaires at Mexico, but Mr. Mackenzie has not as yet been released, although he is said to be well and making himself popular with his captors.
3.	His Majesty's government has been informed of the capture of Mr. Mackenzie through His Majesty's Ambassador at Washington



CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION-BUILDINGS OCCUPIED

Mr. BOURASSA:: 1.	What was the total floor space occupied by the Civil Service Commission in Trafalgar Building during years 1917, 1918, 1919 and 1920, inclusive?
2.	How much rent was paid annually for each of those years ?
3.	What was the total floor space occupied by the Civil Service Commission in Hunter Building during years 1920, 1921, 1922, 1923 and 1924, inclusive?
4.	How much was the occupied space valued in annual rental for each year?
5.	How much floor space was occupied by the Civil Service Commission in Bank Street Chambers?
6.	For what purpose??
7.	During what years?
8.	What was the total floor space occupied each year and how much rent was paid for each year?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1 and 2.
Rental for
Trafalgar Building-Floor space, calendar year
Year 1917, 3,843 square feet		$3,777 28
Year 1918,	varied from	3,843square feet to 4,846 square feet. 4,169 43 Year 1919,	4,846 square	feet,(vacated October 31/19)	
3,634 00
(for 10 months)
Year 1920, None 3 and 4.
Estimated
Hunter Building-Floor space. rental Calendar year 1920, 13,849 square feet	 $14,195 65
Calendar year 1921, varied from 13,849	square	feet	to	21,655square feet	
20,531	58Calendar year 1922, varied from 21,655	square	feet	to	20,011square feet	
21,106	05Calendar year 1923, varied from 20,011	square	feet	to	22,193square feet	
21,870	62Calendar year 1924, to March 31st 22,393 square feet	
5,651	02
(3 mos.)
5.	3,423 square feet.
6.	Space in Bank street Chambers was required owing to lack of accommodation in offices occupied by the commission.
7.	From June 10th, 1920 to November 30th, 1921.
8.
1920, 3,423 square feet, rental	_
June 10 to December, 31	 $1,236 08
1921, 3,423 square feet, rental,
January 1st to November 30.	2,039 54



$3,275 62 BANFF POWER PLANT

Mr. McQUARRIE:: 1.	What has been the cost to date of the installation of the electric power plant at Banff?
2.	What is the estimated cost to complete this plant?
3.	How much power is to be developed?
4.	How much of this power is sold, and what is the revenue therefrom?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	Up to February 29 last, the cost of the installation- of the new electric generating plant at Banff was $184,619.01.
2.	$21,000 from February 29 last.
3.	The present installation provides for an initial development of 960 horse-power, and an eventual development of 1,440 horsepower.
4.	Approximately two hundred horsepower is sold at the present time, with a monthly revenue averaging $2,600, and an estimated yearly revenue of $31,200.00.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURN


Mr. ANDERSON:: 1.	What are the names of the officials in the Department of Health in Ottawa and what are their respective salaries?
2.	How many persons were in the employ of the said department, inside and outside service, during the fiscal years 1921-22, 1922-23, 1923-24?



BRITISH COLUMBIA LIQUOR TRADE

[Stage Direction]
On the question:

[Stage Direction]
C.N ./?.-Branch Lines
Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	What amount of liquor has been imported into British Columbia during the calendar years 1922 and 1923?
2.	What amount of liquor remained in bond and later released for export?
3.	What amount of liquor was released for local consumption ?
4.	What amount of revenue was secured for liquor released for local consumption?
5.	What amount of gross revenue was received from liquor in bond, and what is the total refund under the regulations controlling liquors in bond during the said years?


Mr. STEVENS:: I had the courtesy of a
conversation with officers of the Customs Department, and they point out certain impossibilities in this question. I have a change to suggest, and then, with the permission of the House, I wish to ask that it pass as an order for return. I would suggest that the word "imported" in the first line should be changed to "brought;" that in the last question, after the word "revenue," the words "or security" be inserted and that after the word "refund," the words "or release" be inserted. With these changes, if the question could pass as an order for return, I have no doubt it could be dealt with.



TREATY OF PEACE WITH TURKEY


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
William Lyon Mackenzie King: (Prime Minister): Yesterday my right hon. friend the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) asked me, in the course of the remarks I made on the subject of the Treaty of Peace with Turkey, whether there was a reply to a despatch I had referred to, of December 31, 1922. I answered that there was not. I regret to say that I was mistaken in that regard; the fact that there was such a reply escaped my attention in looking over the files I had before me. That reply was to the effect that the British government acquiesced in the view that the plenipotentiaries who negotiated the treaty should be the parties to sign it. I will see that the despatch is submitted to my right hon. friend with the other papers.
THE BUDGET On the Orders of the Day:


Sir HENRY DRAYTON (West York):: Can the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) tell us when the budget is likely to be brought down?


Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance):: May I remind my hon. friend,
who himself had more than once the re-

sponsibility of bringing down the budget, that the financial year has only ended this week, and he knows that the officers of the department should have at least a little time to check up accounts.


Sir HENRY DRAA  TON@: I am not complaining; I merely want to know. I see that the newspaper reports say that it may be brought down any time.


James Alexander Robb: I will let my hon. friend
know a couple of days in advance.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think the
House should have longer notice than that.



CHIEF INSPECTOR OF FISHERIES, VANCOUVER

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. LADNER:: Is the government seriously entertaining the proposal to abolish the office of Chief Inspector of Fisheries at Vancouver? If so, has it consulted all parties concerned?


Mr. CARDIN:: The matter is under consideration.



PACIFIC HALIBUT FISHERY

[Stage Direction]
Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved the third reading of Bill No. 21, to amend the Northern Pacific Halibut Fishery Protection Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National railway line from Rousseau, on the Canadian Northern Quebec railway, to Laurent, on the Quebec and Lake St. John railway, in the province of Quebec; estimated mileage including existing grading, 17 miles; estimated cost, $1,000,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.

Mr. GRAHAM:: I desire to lay on the
Table a communication from Sir Henry Thornton.


Mr. MEIGHEN:: In regard to any particular line, or all?


George Perry Graham: It covers in a general way,
I think, everything.

C.N.R.-Branch Lines


Arthur Meighen: Not too general, I hope.


George Perry Graham: It is a communication from the president of the Canadian National Railways; I did not write it. The statement is as follows:
Rousseau-Laurent cut-off, mile 0-17 Cost
Proposed in 1925-17 miles grade.... $ 719,500
Proposed in 1926-17 miles track and ballast 280,500

It is proposed in 1925 to grade the 17 miles this line involves, at an estimated cost of $719,500, and in 1926 to complete it with track and ballast, etc., at a further cost of $280,500.
The purpose of this line is the first and most important step in the grade reductions of the route from Lake St. John country south. The present grades on part of this route are too steep for economical operation. On the engine division between Lake Edward and Garneau Jet. they are 2 per cent in each direction, and between Rousseau and Laurent is the worst section of this engine run. The proposed cut-off will have .5 per cent grades in each direction and will avoid a rise of 200 feet in each direction.
The business from this line to Montreal and points beyond is steadily increasing, and very large engineering enterprises are now under way in the Lake St. John district, for hydro-electric and the paper industry development. If the expenditures now being made there are justified, it means the business to and from this district must be increased by several times the present quantity. Our line without improvement is not in shape to cope with much more business, and without grade reduction would soon come to the limit of its capacity. Another phase of the matter is that with the present freight rates and costs, it is not possible on bulk tonnage to get sufficient tonnage behind a locomotive to pay direct out of pocket expenses while operating over the present grades. This means that increased business instead of helping us only puts us further in the hole, whereas, if we reduce the grades, we can look forward to increased tonnage eventually contributing to our net profits, in an increasing ratio.
There are further grade revisions necessary to make this line a .5/10 per cent gradient route. Taking all of them into account it has been shown that, with increased business the operating saving will pay a handsome return on the amount involved. Awaiting confirmation of expected increases in business, no work is proposed till 1925. when it is anticipated this work will be badly required.
Note.-Revision of Line to Lake St. John.
I think it will be well if I read to the committee the letter I have received from Sir Henry Thornton:
Canadian National Railways
Office of the Chairman and President.
Montreal, Que. April 2nd, 1924.
Hon. Geo P. Graham, M.P..
Minister of Railways and Canals,
Ottawa.
Dear Sir,
With respect to the branch line programme of the Canadian National Railways, I desire to place before you the policy which go\-erned the company in its recommendation, and the specific reasons and other data for the construction of each line.
In the preparation of the branch line programme, the following factors were given due weight:
(1)	The money already spent and the work already done on each line, where such conditions existed;
(2)	The strategic, economic and traffic value of each branch;
(3)	The measure of relief afforded to farmers through shortening the road haul on grain and other products;
(4)	A regard for the presumable aggregate sum which the finances of the Dominion would permit to be devoted to such a purpose.
After having given proper weight to the factors above mentioned, the programme which has already been submitted to you was prepared and, in addition, it was suggested that the programme, should, if adopted, be spread over a period of three years, the authority remaining alive until August 31, 1927. The objective sought in extending the life of the vote for three years was to provide that continuity of construction which is essential for economy and to enable the engineering and construction department of the railway, as well as contractors, to lay out their work in the most effective fashion. The practice is well recognized by private railways under whose administration sums, when voted by the shareholders, remain in the hands of the executive until the work is completed or authority rescinded. There would seem to exist an analogy between the shareholders of a private company in their relation to the executive, and the parliament of the Dominion of Canada in its relation to the Canadian National Railway system, which would justify such a policy if the experiences of private undertakings are of value.
Varying prices of labour and material, adverse climatic conditions and the difficulty of securing labour during the period of harvest render it imperative that an early start should be made each year if construction work is to be prosecuted with speed and economy and this, it is submitted, will not result if each branch line is to be subjected to an annual vote.
Appertaining to the Canadian National's branch line	programme, for which	you	are submittingenabling bills to parliament, appended hereto are statements with reference to each line which set out the purpose and justification for each. While it is true	that all	of these lines	may	not be	entirelyjustified from	the present railway	economic	standpoint, particularly if viewed from their first few years' operations, broader grounds must be considered when preparing a svstem of feeders for a railway of the magnitude of that which has been entrusted to the present administration of the National Railways.The first problem that arises from examination of the Canadian National Railways system is to ascertain the main and underlying cause of the deficits, and	it is at	once apparent	that,	although	certain
economies of operation and co-ordination of the various units comprising the system may materially improve the " net " position, the basic cause is found in the fact that the mileage is much too great for the traffic. The apparent answer to the necessity for more business is more people and a further development of those resources which nature has provided with a generous hand. This end can only be speedily attained by the immigration of both settlers and capital and my various officers and myself, realizing this need, have consistently endeavoured to promote both. No confidence can exist in those who lack faith in themselves. My survey of this Dominion gives me unlimited confidence in its ultimate destiny without which there could be no faith in the final success of the national lines.
Therefore we are looking to develop this vast country, at present but too sparsely settled, and asking people to emigrate and join us in this development. But what do we find? Certain sections of the country are losing the very population we are so anxious to augment. Why are these sections being depopulated? Chiefly through a lack of railway facilities, particularly on the prairies, and the question naturally arises, " Is not the settler, who has manfully demonstrated his ability to bring products from the soil, worth many times the untried immigrant? If we are to bring people into the country we
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

should certainly not allow them to meet others who are departing in a discouraged frame of mind. Therefore, not only are branch lines necessary to develop the country and provide reasonable facilities for the immigrant, but also to retain that part of our population which has so courageously planted itself on the land.
It is not likely that the Canadian National Raliways will suffer materially from a financial view, for three or four or perhaps five years if the branch line programme herein contemplated is abandoned, but it is inevitable, that should such a thing come about, at the expiration of a period of years the system will find itself robbed of all further opportunity for reasonable development. Strategic territories will have been seized by other transportation interests, and the railway will dry up at its roots. I can think of no more effective way to eventually bring about the ruin of the Canadian National Railway system than a refusal to embark upon and consistently maintain a branch line programme. No railway can stand still, and success can only be achieved by keeping abreast of the times in the fulfilment of transportation responsibility. This is even more important in a growing and rapidly developing country.
I particularly desire to make it clear that the recommendations herein contained are based not only on present day conditions but also have regard for the probable volume of traffic which would result from the settlement of the country in years to come.
I therefore endorse the programme which has been submitted to you as representing, after full consideration of all facts and factors, that minimum which is essential to the needs of the communities served by the Canadian National Railways, and the system itself.
Yours faithfully,
H. W. Thornton.
President.
There is a note at the bottom in reference to the "Grande Fresniere Mile 0-12," which intimates that an arrangement may possibly be made with the Canadian Pacific Railway which would obviate the necessity of building this line.	.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Which line is
that?


George Perry Graham: The Huberdeau branch. That is in Quebec. If this arrangement is effected, this construction would not be necessary.


Sir HENRY DRAA  TON@: Before reading
the letter of Sir Henry Thornton describing the situation, the minister read a statement dealing with this particular line. Is that a statement of Sir Henry Thornton?


George Perry Graham: This is the statement prepared by the officials of the Canadian National Railway, and in this letter the statements accompanying each bill are endorsed by the president.


Henry Lumley Drayton: So that is the
statement referred to by the president in his letter?


George Perry Graham: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Will the minister let us know which way this grade is? Is it 
in connection with the traffic north or the traffic south?


George Perry Graham: I imagine that it is the
traffic south to a large extent. The advantage of this proposal is that it will give a five-tenths grade in each direction.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If this grade is with the bulk of the traffic and not against it, it will make a difference. I would like to know the fact in regard to that.


George Perry Graham: The grade is against the
bulk of the traffic, as I understand it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then that grade is a lifting grade in the southerly movement?


George Perry Graham: I imagine there is a grade both ways probably. The memorandum
says-
"And will avoid a rise of 200 feet in each direction."


Henry Lumley Drayton: I understand.
Will the minister give the House the particulars as to the movement?


George Perry Graham: I have not them.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we
should have the weight of movement, so that we can see what will result from this arrangement. We should have the class of traffic and the direction in which it moves. Then we should also get the information as to other grades upon the same line, when they occur and what the grade is, for example, on the movement from Chicoutimi to the point of intersection. We should have the same information from the western terminus of the branch, and also the grade from Chicoutimi south. It may be that this is merely a minor grade connection, and we are committing ourselves to a whole lot of other expenditures in order to reduce this line to a grade of five-eighths.


George Perry Graham: I think I read in this
statement-I do not see it at the moment- that if we reduce the grades we could look forward to large increased tonnage per train.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then wo should have the full information.


George Perry Graham: Well, this is all the grade that it will be necessary to remove by this expenditure. I have not the information my hon. friend wants, but I could get it for him when we are in committee on the bill. I can get all the engineering information.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. minister will see the necessity of having the information.

C.N.R.-Branch Lines


George Perry Graham: I think it is right we
should have it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Not only should we have the information as to class of traffic and the receipts from the line, but we should also have information as to the points between which it moves in each direction, so that we can properly consider the whole question.


George Perry Graham: Yes.


Arthur Meighen: Has the minister copies
of an individual agreement as to each line?


George Perry Graham: I put it on Hansard as
we go along.


Arthur Meighen: We do not get that
for analysis until the next day. It is the memoranda that count.


George Perry Graham: They are the explanation.


Arthur Meighen: They are the only
thing which can give us a basis for our individual judgment. This letter is virtually a Canadian Club speech; it does not furnish any matter upon which one can give an independent judgment.


George Perry Graham: It is written to Canadians.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 30, respecting the construction of a Canadian National railway line between Rousseau and Laurent, in the province of Quebec.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



GRANDE FRESNIERE-RINFRET

[Stage Direction]
Mr. GRAHAM moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National line from Grande Fresniere to Rinfret Junction, in the province of Quebec; estimated mileage including existing grading, 12 miles; estimated cost, $357,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Arthur Meighen: This is the line referred
to in the foot-note of Sir Henry Thornton's letter?


George Perry Graham: I think I was in error
in making that explanation a moment ago. I did not have the letter in my hand, and I was wrong in applying it to the resolution just passed. I think it applies to this one.


Arthur Meighen: It refers to this one.
As I understand it, this is a road that runs out and connects with a line of the Canadian National; then it runs out still further, and it is that further part which it is contemplated to sell to the Canadian Pacific, in which event the construction of this line would be an economic waste. Of course the amount, relative to the rest, is not very large. I see that the name of the hon. member for St. James (Mr. Rinfret) is to be immortalized; I would not object to that.


Mr. ETHIER:: I understand from the
memorandum from Sir Henry Thornton, which was read to the committee, that there have been negotiations between the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National in regard to that branch line. What was the nature and the result of those negotiations?


George Perry Graham: I do not know what the
nature of the negotiations is; of course they have not been made public. But Sir Henry Thornton says that negotiations have taken place for the acquisition by the Canadian Pacific of a certain mileage, which, if it takes place will render the construction of this mileage unnecessary.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What are the
minister's views as to the disposition of railway properties? Is that in the hands of the board, or does this parliament have something to say about it?


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend has asked quite a large question. I think that up to the present the companj' has been disposing of properties-possibly the old Grand Trunk, not the Canadian National. I know that the old Grand Trunk since I became minister sold a number of properties, concerning which the government was not consulted. I say that subject to correction, because the question has been rather sprung on me.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think my
hon. friend is quite right.


Mr. HANSON:: What about surplus lands, for instance, in connection with Canadian Government Railways? Does this company dispose of these lands without consulting the government?


George Perry Graham: Oh, no; that could not
be done. Those are government railways; the railways making up the Canadian National system, or part of it, are still company railways.


Arthur Meighen: The government railway
is only committed for management to the Canadian National Board; it does not belong

C. A . II.-Bra nch Lines
to the company. But in relation to the other properties which belong to the Canadian National Railway Company, I think the time has come when a line should be drawn to differentiate the authority of the board and the authority of parliament in that respect. I am free to say it is a phase of the whole problem which has not yet been solved. In fact, no phase of it has been solved in the last two years and three months.


George Perry Graham: There were many phases left to be solved by us.


Arthur Meighen: There are two or three left, but the great mass of the railway problem of Canada, in my judgment, is solved so far as policy goes. There is no question that it should not be within the power of the Canadian National Railway directorate to dispose of large capital assets of that company without even the authority of the government, to say nothing of the authority of parliament. I am aware, as is the minister, that it has been done, involving very large amounts. I do not know what authority of the government was given, but I know that the authority of parliament was not sought. If this be continued we might wake up some morning to find that we had no national railways at all. It seems to me that the government owes it to the House to examine carefully tlhe legislation in that regard and to make a recommendation to parliament as to policy. I do not make these remarks with any special reference to this line; I make them with respect to the general policy of the country's greatest asset.


George Perry Graham: This question of the disposition of property was up last year, I think, in the form of a question or return, and at that time I had a good many particulars before me. But I wholly agree with the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) that as shareholders we should not dispose of our property without at least the Governor in Council giving his consent, under some amendment to the statute-either that or the authority of parliament being obtained. As my right hon. friend says, the problem is of such great magnitude that it is possible we might find some of our property disposed of which as a government or as parliament we would not think of selling. I have made a note of that and will have it looked into, and if necessary, bring down legislation this year to cover that point.


Mr. PREVOST (Translation):: It is astonishing, Mr. Chairman, that the branch line, which is mentioned in this resolution, 
has not been built before this. I confess that I have not a full knowledge of all the details regarding the various lines mentioned in the twenty-six resolutions that the Minister of Railways has submitted to this House. It is only right to await the explanations of the minister and1 the information which will be supplied by the members of this House who are familiar with the advantages, utility and even the necessity of these various branch lines.
You will allow me, Mr. Chairman, to make a few remarks on the line just referred to and upon which I can speak with some knowledge, as it is situated within the region in which I reside. The present resolution states: "that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a branch line of the Canadian National Railway between Grande Fresniere and Rinfret Junction, in the province of Quebec." The estimated cost would be $357,000.
Thirty miles to the north of Montreal, that is from St. Jerome-in the county of Terrebonne-at Arundel, in the county of Argen-teuil-'a state railway-the Canadian National serves a very rich region of mountains, valleys and plateaus, a region, to say the least, delightful both as regards its picturesque aspect and its natural resources. A large and laborious population of settlers, farmers and trading people inhabit that district and numerous tourists, whose number is ever increasing, meet in this region. Unfortunately, between Montreal, the metropolis of Canada, and those beautiful parts, there is, in the government railway system, a solution of continuity. No direct communication exists by the government railways, between this region and Montreal. Nevertheless, the Canadian National Railway between Montreal and Ottawa, passes at a distance of only twelve miles to the south of its northern route, and it is the building of those twelve miles that we ask this House to authorize.
I shall not take advantage of the occasion to discuss the state ownership of railways, to consider whether the principle is good or bad, whether its application is beneficial or not. I shall neither take advantage of the occasion to try and establish that it is responsible for the financial conditions of our railways, which has so heavily burdened our national budget. I accept the situation as it exists. The government of Canada is the owner of railways of which some lines are continuously showing deficits, deficits that must be met by means of taxes levied on the people. Other lines are assets or may

C.NjR.-Branch Lines
easily become so. Must the government for the sake of economy which I shall call, penny wise and pound foolish, persist in operating at a loss, unprofitable lines and they are such because they are unfinished or not complete? Should the government refuse to make certain outlays which would turn to assets those deplorable deficits? Would that be a fair test of state ownership, which is one of the principal planks of this government's programme?
The branch line of the Canadian National which is under discussion, is not showing deficits, and, I think, there is very little dbubt, I even feel absolutely certain, that this line would yield substantial profits if the said project was earned out.
A railway company either independent or owned by the state, first looks after its own interests. This is natural and reasonable. It is undeniable that it would be in the interest of the Canadian National Railways to own the line under discussion. Indeed, a line which would connect directly with Montreal-the commercial distributing centre of our country -must necessarily be useful and profitable to the metropolis; a line which would connect Montreal with the northern region that I mentioned just now, could but be beneficial to the metropolis, to this northern region and the National Railways themselves. Such a line, even if it did not exist, at present in the Laurentian hills, should be constructed; however, it does exist; it exists in an unfinished state. This line, shortly, will be necessary to link the metropolis to the Transcontinental which passes to the north of that part of the country.
A few years ago the boards of trade and chambers of commerce of our principal towns sent petitions and delegates to the Dominion government to request the construction of this branch line between the metropolis and the Transcontinental. The line which at present exists-and which belongs to the state-extends already for a distance of one hundred miles to the north and in the direction of the Transcontinental. This is for the future; but for the immediate present, it is certain that the construction of the twelve miles under discussion would result in increasing the traffic considerably and raise the revenue accruing from all passengers, travellers and tourists.
A transportation company must not only consider its private interests, it must also look after the interests of the public, this is why legislators enact laws which govern transportation companies. It is also the reason that the government appoint commissions to watch 62
over the service given by transportation companies, in order that the public interest be constantly and always safeguarded. This regard for the general interest, for the public welfare must especially be in evidence, I think, when it is the state itself which supervises the means of communication and transport. In constructing the said line, the government would be performing a worthy act for the public welfare, since it would be bringing nearer the city of Montreal to a rich region visited by thousands of travellers and tourists who ask for more rapid means of transportation. Colonization, farming, lumber and mining industries are very prosperous in this district. All traffic originating in those parts can only reach Montreal after a long journey. Thanks to the proposed fine, the journey between the north country and Montreal would be reduced by 45 miles, which would be an enormous gain not only as to the time saved, but also as to the lower rates which would prevail on transportation. Over and above the advantages which this line offers as regards traffic, and of which trade and industries would largely benefit, there is another that is certainly not to be neglected and this concerns thousands of tourists.
When the same question was considered by the House last year, I described the incomparable charms of this part of the Laurentian hills. The beautiful scenery of this region, the sports and outings which one may enjoy in such healthy and restful surroundings, entice more and more the lovers of nature. And that, notwithstanding the inconveniences of the present system. In fact, those who wish to reach this region are obliged to take the Canadian Pacific trains, from Montreal to St. Jerome, at a place called Montford Junction, and then change to the Canadian National. Notwithstanding these inconveniences, thousands of travellers and tourists, each week, journey to this region, and the government railway, owing to the prevailing conditions, is thereby deprived of a very large revenue.
In spite of what the Minister of Railways stated just now, I cannot believe that the board of management of the National Railways, the government or this House can approve of the sale of this line to the Canadian Pacific Railway. I cannot believe that the government would deprive itself of a paying and profitable line to keep only unprofitable lines which would, each year, further encumber our national budget. I protest, Sir, against the false notion that the government railways cannot and must not exist where the Canadian Pacific Railway desires no competitor. Why should the state forsake its rights and make way to the Canadian

C.N.R.-Branch Lines

Pacific Railway when a national railway is considered an excellent undertaking and it is in the public interest to keep it up? Far be it from my thoughts to deprecate the importance and national usefulness of the Canadian Pacific Railway, but I deny the truth of the assertion which seems to have become the pass word of some people, and which is summed up in this idea: No competition against the Canadian Pacific Railway! Private interest must make way to the general welfare, this applies to railways as well as to other questions.
Some hon. MEMBERS (Translation): Hear, hear.


Jules-Édouard Prévost: The best
argument which can be brought out to show that this line is a paying proposition, and should remain the property of the government, is that the Canadian Pacific Railway considers it sufficiently remunerative to purchase it.
I cannot think of any reason which might militate against the construction of the twelve miles which is under consideration in this resolution. The cost of this branch line would be in the nature of an investment rather than of an expense, for the day when the Laurentian railway will directly connect with Montreal, we shall witness both a large increase in its freight and the growth of its revenues a hundredfold, owing to its passenger traffic, both ordinary travellers and tourists.
Furthermore, the government will be providing a numerous population, with a useful public service and will besides have in operation one of the most important lines of the National Railways, since it places the metropolis in communication with one of our most beautiful and rich regions, and, it will, some day, be the connecting link so much sought for which will unite the metropolis with the Transcontinental that passes to the north of that part of our country.


Joseph Arthur Calixte Éthier: I can but concur, Mr. Chairman, in the remarks made by the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Pre-voA). We are neighbours, and as such, we have always been on very good terms. I intend to continue so, and, in the present circumstances, it is a pleasure for me to support his views. I have no intention of enlarging on the magnificent description that he gave us of the region which the Montfort railway crosses. I shall be content with pointing out to the House a district that he did not mention and through which must pass this twelve
[Mr Prevost.]
mile line of railway, from Grande Fresniere to St. Jerome.
This project, Sir, is not a new idea and even before it was thought of building the branch lines, which are under discussion in the resolutions before the House, the preceding governments had understood the necessity of connecting the main line of the Canadian Northern, from Ottawa to Montreal, with the Ottawa to Quebec line. This project will be realized by the construction of this twelve-mile line, of which eleven miles happen to be in the county of Two Mountains,-which I have the honour to represent 

and one mile is in the county of Terrebonne. Thus this railway will connect with the Montfort line, which is already constructed over a distance of thirty miles, as far as Huberdeau, and which it is proposed to extend, by another resolution, to St. Remy of Amherst, for a distance of two miles. I may add, by the way, that the province of Quebec's share is only twenty-nine miles of the proposed railway construction of 965 miles that this House is asked to approve.
I have already mentioned that this project is not a new one and that the late government deemed it proper and necessary to carry out this railway branch line. The government's engineers had made the survey. A number of locations were considered some years ago, and it was decided that the plans prepared by the engineers of the late government should be approved, and eventually they were accepted by the Railway Commission. The land was expropriated. 'The farmers were paid according to the value of the strip of land needed. Therefore, the only thing to do now is to build. All is ready. The necessary preliminaries to the construction of a railway line have been completed and the project is approved and declared urgent, useful and necessary.
What is, Sir, exactly, this twelve mile region? The main line of the Canadian Northern, between Ottawa and Montreal, crosses, at Hawkesbury, into the county of Argenteuil, and continues to Montreal, passing through the county of Two Mountains, the Grand Fresniere, St. Eustache and Isle Jesus. From the Grand Fresniere to St. Jerome, the distance is twelve miles. There is, at present, no possible means of transportation for freight and passenger traffic in this region situated to the north, on the Ottawa and Quebec line which passes through St. Philip of Argenteuil, Lachute, and continues to St. Canute, in the county of Two Mountains, and thence to St. Jerome, Joliette and Quebec. The traffic of St. Philip of Argen-

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
teuil, Lachute, St Canute, and the whole northern line, from Montfort to Grand Mine, must necessarily, to reach Montreal* pass through Joliette, which means a journey of about seventy-four miles more, than if the proposed line was constructed. We are, therefore losing the whole traffic of that region, and, what is more, we are being deprived of the traffic between St. Jerome and Grande Fresniere, of St Canute, St Monique, St Augustin and that of a large part of St. Eustache. If this branch line is built, we shall be connected with the main line of the Canadian Northern, from Montreal to Ottawa, and between the latter line and the main line of the Canadian National from Ottawa to Quebec, so that all traffic jvhich comes from the north, instead of being carried by the Canadian Pacific Railway, will necessarily be transported by the Canadian National Railway from St. Jerome to Grande Fresniere.
Since the outset of this debate, there seems to be a tendency, among certain groups, to raise the question of economy and there are protests of extravagance heard. All members of this House favour economy, but this economy must be justified and to the purpose. Economy can be practised everywhere, even where there are deficits. The directors and the president of the board of management of the National Railways have deemed it their duty to suggest and recommend to the hon. Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) and to the government the construction of this branch line. Have not the directors and President of the Canadian National Railways assumed the responsibility to reduce the deficits and increase the revenues?
Well, if we wish to reduce the deficits, we must create the necessary and natural outlets for the traffic by which the Canadian National may profit; and if the railway line of the Canadian National between Montreal and Ottawa does not possess the necessary branch lines to make it pay, we shall always have deficits. The present branch line is the source of the largest revenues of the Canadian National, in the province of Quebec. The extension of this line to Grande Fresniere will still increase its revenues, and thereby, decrease its deficits for that part of the country.
As the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Prevost) stated, negotiations are actually being carried on between the Canadian National and the Canadian Pacific Railways; a request on the part of the latter company for the purchase of said railway is officially before the Railway Commission and there seems to be a willingness to carry out the sale.
62i
I think it is in the public interest and for the national welfare as well as in the interest of the county of Two Mountains, that this branch line be constructed. It would pass through very prosperous farming communities in my county. The latter is not a mining district, neither is it an industrial centre, but it is the most essentially farming county of the province of Quebec. This branch line would be passing through, over a distance of eleven miles, a rich, fertile agricultural region which is at a distance from any Canadian Pacific railway station. We would then have a railway line not only very useful to traffic and trade but also to tourists.
The railway between St. Eustache and Montreal is a better paying line, during the summer, owing to the great number of tourists, than the one between Montreal and Ottawa. Let us build this branch line from Grande Fresniere to Rinfret Junction and we shall soon have a considerable increase in traffic and influx of tourists. The branch line which the Canadian Pacific Railway built from St. Jerome to Mont Laurier- first, to Nominingue, thence to Mont Laurier-shows the necessity of developing that northern part of our province. The same benefit will accrue to the Canadian Northern, and even more so, because this northern region is richer in minerals, lumber and farming, than the part which has been opened up, thanks to the efforts of Cure Labelle. It is that northern part of the country which will be the most profitable to the Canadian National. That is why I am not astonished to hear that the Canadian Pacific Railway 'wants to purchase this branch line. It would give them full control over that part of the province, and they are well aware that such a control would be most profitable. Why then should not our country, the Canadian National and the counties interested, be themselves benefited thereby? I had no intention, Sir, of broaching this subject. I am generally content with listening and weighing what my hon. colleagues have to propose to the House or the government; but regarding this question, I deemed it my duty to clearly bring out the facts as they exist, and this, without hesitation. We protest against this proposed sale of that line to the Canadian Pacific Railway. We are glad to have the Canadian Pacific Railway. The latter plays an important part, which no one will deny, wherever its line runs, however, since the .'Canadian Pacific Railway comes into competition with the Canadian National, I do not see why, the moment this line is profitable, we should not take advantage of it. I disapprove of
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

any settlement which may be agreed upon by the Railway Commission. Proposals have been made to this commission-I am officially informed. What is the nature of these proposals? I have no knowledge. I hope that as a result of the question which I put to the hon. Minister of Railways, a copy of the correspondence and documents relating to this proposed transaction will be brought down in the House. After giving the question full consideration, I have come to the conclusion that it would be in the interest of this region of the country and of the Canadian National, to build this branch line.


Mr. FORTIER (Labelle) (Translation):: Mr. Chairman, I fully concur with the remarks which have just been made by the hon. members for Terrebonne (Mr. Prevost), and Laval-Two Mountains (Mr. Ethier). The twelve miles which it is proposed to build are, it is true, in the counties of Terrebonne and Two Mountains, nevertheless-I feel certain-very appreciable advantages would result for the county of Labelle. Indeed, it is a question of adding to the National Railways a branch line partly situated in the county of Terrebonne and partly in that of Labelle. The said branch line-it is known, owing to the resolution which appears further, in the Votes and Proceedings of the House-will be extended for a distance of two miles, from a place called China Clay to the village of St. Remy of Amherst. The advantages which would accrue from the construction of these two miles, in the county of Labelle, would lose a great deal of their value, if we had not-by the resolution which is at present under consideration by the House-the assurance that the Montfort Railway, that is, the line from St. Jerome to Huberdeau, will be connected to the National Railway system, so that the traffic which will be handled in the county of Labelle, along this line, may be in touch with the metropolis of Canada.
I think, Sir, that it would be bad policy for the government to sell this branch line to the Canadian Pacific Railway. I have nothing to say against the latter, for it has built, in my district, an extensive railway line, which reaches the settlement situated to the northwest of Montreal, at Mont Laurier The Canadian Pacific Railway Company has greatly contributed to the settling of this northern region of the province of Quebec. The population of Labelle county has still need of this company to further extend its line twenty-seven miles, from Mont Laurier to St. Anne du Lac. I think that it is important for the National Railways to hold 
on to the present branch line. The Canadian Pacific line, from Montreal to Mont Laurier, has been a paying proposition, and the branch line under discussion will equally be a paying proposition. The line which we intend to finish is not a new one. We are not asking the Minister of Railways or this House to build a new branch line, but simply to complete one which has been in existence for the last forty years, in a settlement where farming, lumber and mining industries thrive. Therefore, the Canadian National line which will extend from Montreal to St Remy of Amherst will certainly be one of the most paying propositions of the National Railways. For a long time past the people in my district have been appealing to the government. Our appeal has been endorsed by the business men of the metropolis. The Boards of Trade of Montreal have often urged this project through resolutions and have requested the minister to complete this line, by the construction of the twelve miles from St Eustache to St Jerome, and by the building of two other miles from China Clay to St Remy of Amherst. On the other hand, I think, the government would be making a great mistake in selling this branch line. For the last ten years the government has been asked to construct a branch line to connect Montreal with the Transcontinental. Charters have been granted and work has been done, such as locating etc. The North Railway was incorporated about ten years ago, and their rights were acquired by the Dominion government with the object-I state again-of constructing this branch line which would link up the metropolis of Canada to the Grand Trunk Pacific. There is no doubt that it is an important question. I think that the members for the city of Montreal would gladly welcome the realization of this project, for the construction of this branch line might result in bringing about later on the building of this other line. I feel certain that these same members are at heart with us when we request the completion of the present branch line because, once finished, it will be a step forward in the direction of the country drained by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. It is the most direct and the most suitable for the purpose of connecting Montreal with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway. If the government were to deprive themselves of this railway, in a few years, when this second project will be submitted to them, when the city of Montreal and the western provinces will insist on linking up the Grand Trunk Pacific railway to Montreal, we will find it impossible to carry out the construction of a branch line to connect the Grand

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
Trunk Pacific railway with the National railways. For this reason, I think, the government should hold on to this branch line, but complete it, as I am sure it is their intention. Heretofore, the matter has only been broached between the Canadian Pacific Railway and the representatives of the National Railways. I hope that the hon. Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham), advised as he has been by my hon. colleagues from Terrebonne and from Two Mountains, and by my humble self, will not go to the extent of closing any arrangement which may at present be under way. I would rather think that he will be on his guard and will preserve this branch line which I believe to be one of the most important of our national system.


George Perry Graham: I have listened to what
the three hon. gentlemen who have just spoken have had to say, and I gather that they are absolutely and irretrievably opposed to disposing of this branch line, or any part of it, to anybody. The arguments they have advanced are very strong, and I think they have not overdrawn the possibilities of the country. I will see that the three speeches are placed in the hands of the Canadian National management with instructions to digest them, talk the matter over, and see whether or not an error has been made in entering into these negotiations.


Arthur Meighen: Would the minister
also see that they reach the hands of the hon. member for Laprairie and Napierville (Mr. Lanctot). I notice he is always out of the House when these pro-national railway speeches are made and I would not like him to miss them. While I am on my feet may I ask that the minister put oil Hansard Sir Henry Thornton's reasons specially applicable to the building of this line.


George Perry Graham: I shall do so with
pleasure. Here is what is proposed, and the justification for it:
Grande Fresniere, Mile 0-12	Cost
Proposed in 1924-12 miles grade; 12 miles t^ek	 $357,000
It is proposed in 1924 to grade 12 miles and lay track on it at a cost of {357,000, thus completing this line between Grande Fresniere and Rinfret Junction. The purpose of this line is to shorten the route from the Huberdeau branch and St. Jerome into Montreal. The right of way for this line has already been secured, but no further work has been done on it.
The Huberdeau branch runs into the J.aurcntian mountains and gives communication to a district which has become one of the important summer tourist and cottage resorts out of Montreal.
The justification for this line lies in the direct passenger connection it will give and also the shortening of the routes for freight by about 34 miles, which
will mean considerable economy in operation on present business, besides attracting further business by the better service it will give.


Arthur Meighen: If it will help any in
giving better memoranda. I would make this comment: Whatever may be the merits of this line the memorandum which the minister has read does not make out a business case for building it. I do not say that a business case cannot be made out, but the memorandum does not do it. Such a memorandum should disclose what saving is going to be effected by the construction of this line; how much freight there is at present, how much more is expected, what the profits on that traffic will be, and the relation the saving will bear to the interest charge on the investment. The memorandum gives expression to certain intentions and hopes that are entertained, but it does not put this proposition on a basis that is at all a business basis.


George Perry Graham: The traffic which has
been carried on this line can be given to the House; it will be merely guess work to say what the traffic will be in the future. On the strength of the present traffic an estimate may be made of the saving. It is expected there will be more traffic, otherwise the line would not be constructed. In my experience I have found that forecasts as to future traffic and the profits therefrom are merely estimates and sometimes not very close estimates.


Arthur Meighen: We have not any here
at all.


George Perry Graham: The board of management expects there will be an increase of traffic, and, perhaps a reduction in the rate on the traffic now carried.


Henry Lumley Drayton: As a matter
of fact I would have thought that this was a case where Sir Henry Thornton could have said something tangible and definite in the memorandum. I should have .said there was much more merit in the present proposition than in any other so far considered by us. There is no question but that the district is not properly served at the present time. So far as regards the question of sale to the Canadian Pacific railway I am not sufficiently posted to pronounce an opinion one way or the other. However, I do say this to the minister:	If anything can be done. to
avoid senseless and stupid duplications of service and of railways it ought to be done, not only in this particular district but everywhere else.
C.N.R.-Branch Lines


Mr. BRISTOL:: If you were seeking to
obtain advances in the money market for enterprises of this character you would have to show, in a very definite way, before you could borrow, what the probable traffic and the financial returns would be.


George Perry Graham: There is a good deal of truth in that, if we look at it from one angle; but there devolve upon the Canadian National lines, duties, whether we like this or not, that private companies do not always have to assume. As I said the other afternoon in the House, private companies are altogether at liberty to select their own territory, and to build only those lines in which they will have an immediate profit. I do not say that that is being done; but I say that there are many lines that ought to be constructed with the two-fold object: One in the future-not at present-to give the Canadian National Railways a traffic that belongs to it through a branch-line system, and the other to give service to the people. Notwithstanding what my hon. friend has said, I submit that what is known as a government-owned railway, although under the name of a company, has on it, or the people think it has on it, obligations that are not imposed on a private company. But, turn to the other side. Many private companies are very careful, notwithstanding the fact that present construction will not yield a revenue, to see that they hang on to territory that rightly belongs to them, by the building of branch lines, feeling confident as business men that, in years to come, they will get a return for the present outlay, because if it was not made, the territory might go to some other line. I think I am free to say that very few branch lines that are constructed give immediately a definite return, but if they are not constructed, the trunk line might as well close up.
There is another thing that is not connected with this, but I wish to bring it to my hon. friend's attention.	The Grand
Trunk Pacific, if it lacks anything, lacks branch lines. That is one of the difficulties which we had in connection with the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway Company during the time of its construction. I am glad to hear the ex-Minister of Finance	(Sir Henry
Drayton) say that he feels confident this will be a paying line.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I did not say
that. I said that it was a line that had far more merit in it than many of the others. The district is not properly served.


George Perry Graham: In a degree. I agree
with him in that I think this line will bring

in a return at once, but it is through an older settled territory, and it is merely cutting off, as I understand the matter, certain undue distances in the transportation of the products of the people in that vicinity.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is one
thing that my hon. friend has said that, I think, ought to be challenged at the earliest possible minute. He states that on this system are imposed certain obligations to which private companies are not subject. I am very sorry to hear my hon. friend make that statement. It is the sort of thing we thought we had got rid of and that my hon. friends across the aisle always think they have got rid of. If there be a difference between a private corporation and this corporation that is supposed to be handling this tremendous undertaking as a business concern in trust for all the people, the only real difference, the only possible distinction that can exist is that political motives, political interests and matters of expediency are to be considered, when they would not be considered by proper, decent business men to whom a trust had been confided. I am sorry that my hon. friend says that there is a difference. He endeavours to strengthen his position by saying that lines often have to be built in order to secure territory. I would have thought it would be comparatively easy to-day to save wasting the money of the taxpayers of this country, simply for the purpose of doing something which is said by the minister not to pay, which is said by him will yield no return, will have to be carried for some time without recompense, just in order to prevent somebody else from losing money.


George Perry Graham: I said that private companies did that.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I would have thought that, not only the country, but the Canadian Pacific itself, had seen by this time the folly of senseless duplications and fighting for territory. Surely this House is not going to be asked to vote untold millions for the construction of branch lines simply to shut out the Canadian Pacific. The Minister of Railways can easily see that an arrangement is made that territories are held for both these systems. He can see to it that the follies of the past are some day to stop; that duplication will cease, not only of services, but of lines, and that there will be some chance for this property to become an earning property. He cannot possibly make it an earning property if the policy he proclaims is followed. If my hon. friend will take hold of this matter with both these

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
managements for the purpose of cutting out, in the first instance, any question of rivalry in building lines that neither can afford under the excuse of holding a territory here or a territory there, and if he will also take up with them the matter of duplication of services which really add nothing whatever to the travelling and shipping facilities of the people, I am confident that something can be done very much more to the advantage of overburdened taxpayers than building railways to beat out the Jones'.


Mr. MARLER:: On account of this line
being in the province of Quebec and in the vicinity of Montreal, I do not want this resolution to pass without my saying a few words relative thereto. This line is, as I understand the matter, for the purpose of connecting up the present line of the Canadian National at Grande Fresniere to Rinfret Junction, so that there will be a connection from the Tunnel station in Montreal directly into Laurentides. That is the object of the line. The Canadian Pacific running from Place Viger station practically parallels the line at Montfort. The two lines at Montfort, I should imagine are not more than half a mile apart.


Joseph Arthur Calixte Éthier: At St. Jerome.


Herbert Meredith Marler: I was saying that the distance between the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National at Montfort Junction is very small.


Joseph Arthur Calixte Éthier: Montfort is about twenty-five miles ahead and to the northwest, but at St. Jerome, the lines are parallel for about two or three miles. The Canadian National goes northwest and the Canadian Pacific goes right through to the north.


Herbert Meredith Marler: I quite understand that at the particular point the hon. member speaks about they are close together, and they could be joined up without difficulty. There could be a joint service out of Place Viger station, thus obviating the necessity of building this line at all. It may be perfectly true that the building of this line may give the Canadian National traffic. Many hundreds of people would go from the Tunnel terminal instead of the Place Viger station into this beautiful territory. I admit all that, but the only effect this will have is to take so much traffic from the Canadian Pacific and give it to the Canadian National. If we approach the question of building these branch lines with this object, I have no doubt for a moment that many of these branch lines are justified. I do not approach the question with that object in view at all. When the country is served properly by one railway, one is enough particularly when traffic arrangements can be made-and
they undoubtedly can be made-and if they cannot be made, we can pass laws in this parliament to ensure that they are made. If the Canadian Pacific will not make a joint arrangement, we can pass a law to make it do so. So far as I can see, this means simply taking traffic from one line and giving it to another line. As I said at the beginning, I did not want it to be supposed that because this line is in the province of Quebec and serves the city of Montreal, to a certain extent, I would therefore be in favour of it. In fact I oppose it.


Mr. LANCTOT:: I was informed a few
moments ago that the leader of the opposition, (Mr. Meighen) wanted to know where I was, as I did not happen to be in the chamber.
I was called to the door for a few minutes but, as the right hon. gentleman will see, I am back again. I suppose he would like to know where I stand in relation to branch lines. I will tell him, because I am always willing to satisfy the hon. gentleman on questions relating to the railways. The leader of the opposition is the person who was instrumental in this country becoming the owners of nearly all the railways in Canada, and as I did not support him at that time I do not intend to endorse any of his views to-day. I have been asked on many occasions by my right hon. friend whether I had increased or reduced my price in this matter. During the campaign of 1921, it is true, in my county I told my constituents that I was ready to sell out the whole thing for a dollar. But when I so stated I included in that offer the outstanding guarantee by this government in connection with our purchase of all the railways in Canada, and that was more than a dollar. I understand that we have to meet certain liabilities in connection with the purchase of the Canadian Northern and the Grand Trunk and all other lines. This country still owes a considerable sum on the railways. I believe that some $167,000,000 has been paid already on the Transcontinental line, and the Intercolonial railway has also been paid for. But the purchase of the Grand Trunk and the Canadian Northern still involves a heavy liability on the country. So that when I embraced all these liabilities in the offer I made, of one dollar for the whole thing, I think I was making rather a good bargain in the interests of the country. In my opinion the country would be better off if it could dispose of the railways. As regards branch lines, I do not intend to say anything, because it seems to me that the three parties are apparently willing to support public ownership of railways at the present time. I differ from them all.
C.N.R.-Branch Lines


An hon, MEMBER:: There is a fourth
party.


Roch Lanctôt: A fourth, and a fifth
if you like, if I am the only man who is prepared to oppose this policy.


Arthur Meighen: I feel a great deal better now that I have heard the last word from the hon. member (Mr. Lanctot). What I was anxious about was that the speeches that had just been delivered should be placed before' him for consideration, knowing how long and ardently he has desired to sell the National railway for a dollar, or a song, or anything. I wonder what he thinks of his colleagues from Quebec who are protesting against selling even a mile. Even in order to save a further expenditure of some hundreds of thousands of dollars they would not think of selling a small branch to the Canadian Pacific Railway. However, the hon. gentleman is frank enough to come and tell us that he stands solidly in his opposition to public ownership even if he has to form a sixth party.


Roch Lanctôt: Yes, and even if I have to stand alone.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 31 respecting the construction of a Canadian National railway line between Grande Fres-niere and Rinfret Junction, in the province of Quebec.
. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



SUNNYBRAE-GUYSBORO

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from Sunnybrae to Guysboro, in the province of Nova Scotia; estimated mileage including existing grading, 67 miles; estimated cost, $3,500,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
George Perry Graham: This proposal has a somewhat lengthy history. I will read the memo-radum placed in my hands by the Canadian National Railways:
Sunnybrae. Mile 0-67	Cost
Proposed in 1924-nil	$
Proposed in 1925-67 miles grade	 2,300,000
Proposed in 1926-67 miles track	 1,200,000

In 1924 no actual work of construction is proposed, but final surveys will be run and in 1925, it is the intention to do the grading on the 67 miles from Sunnybrae to Guysboro at a cost of $2,300,000, and 
in 1926 to lay the track and complete the line to Guysboro at a cost that year of $1,200,000.
The purpose of the line is to open up the local territory for lumber industry and provide better facilities for agricultural products as well as give direct communication to Guysboro for its fishing and allied products. On part of the route there is considerable agricultural development, and quite extensive hardwood forests which the railway will make it possible to develop.
The original intention of the survey for this line had in view a low grade line with the idea of making it the main line. The results of the surveys indicated that to obtain this character of line it would be very costly, and on account of the fact that the present main line could not be abandoned, and would have to be maintained and operated, it could not be shown that such a line, with its excessive cost of construction would be justified. The present intention is to construct a line to open up the local territory and build it to cheaper standards of construction, but keep in view the eventual use of it for an alternative main line at any time this would be warranted. Therefore, the line will be located so that eventually a low grade could be obtained, but employ steeper grades for the immediate construction.
It has been estimated that there are 250 million feet of hardwood and 200 million feet of softwood available to the line, and also some possibilities in gold and iron mining which have not been developed, possibly due to lack of transportation facilities.
The justification for this line is that it will serve a section of the country that has been in long need of railway communication in order to give it a real chance for development and to put the town of Guysboro in direct rail communication with the Canadian National System.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is that from Sir Henry Thornton?


George Perry Graham: It is from the board.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Referred to in
Sir Henry Thornton's letter.


George Perry Graham: Now perhaps the House
will bear with me while I give a little history of this matter. I think all the governments of which my hon. friend and myself have been members have had this railway problem before them. I have a memorandum here taken from Hansard giving a little history of it. On August 12, 1911, the Department of Railways called for tenders, by public advertisement, for a branch line of railway from Guysborough to Sunnybrae -through Country Harbour Cross Roads, with an extension from Country Harbour Cross Roads to deep water of Country Harbour.
Tenders were to be received by September 15, and, on September 30, the Minister of Railways recommended to council the acceptance of the tender of the Nova Scotia Construction Company, Limited, of Sydney, at $1,057,122. The order in council adopting this recommendation bears date October 2,
1911.
Change of government was effected on or about October 10, 1911, and, on February 10,
1912,	an order in council was passed containing the following paragraph:

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
No formal contract has been made or prepared and it is now considered desirable to abandon the project of constructing this branch line at present, and to cancel such contract as may have been created by the above-mentioned acceptance of the company's tender.
The supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1916, contained the following item in vote No. 465, Railways and Canals, chargeable to capital, Intercolonial railway:
"Branch line from Sunnybrae to Mul-grave, $1,000,000."
This was in consequence of a statement by Mr. Cochrane, as Minister of Railways, to parliament, on March 25, 1915,-Hansard page 1468:
The line is to run from Sunnybrae, and down to the ferry there, with a branch up to Guysborough. It is not definitely settled yet to which point it will go, or whether it will go to Guysborough and Country Harbour. When the supplementary estimates come down there will be an appropriation for starting the work.
Subsequently the Minister of Railways brought down a plan of the proposed Guysborough branch and a memorandum which is to be found in Hansard, page 1700, March 29, 1915, reads as follows:
Re Guysborough subdivision-Intercolonial railway
The proposed railway extends from Sunnybrae to Mulgrave by way of Guysborough. Preliminary surveys have been made which indicate that the railway can be built on a maximum grade of five-tenths per cent westbound.
The details of the surveyed routes, is from Sunnybrae to lake Eden, thence down the East river St. Mary to post near Country Harbour Cross Roads, thence east along the valley of the Salmon river to Guysborough harbour, along the shores of Chedabucto bay and straits of Canso to Mulgrave.
The line is about eighty-eight miles in length. The distance from Truro to Mulgrave by way of Guysborough is 137 miles. The distance from Truro to Mulgrave by the present line is 122.3. The distance from Sunnybrae to Guysborough is sixty-five miles.
The object of the proposed railway is first to give transportation facilities to the central portion of Guysborough county and the port of Guysborough, and second to construct that railway with such grades as to make it the economical route for heavy traffic to and from Cape Breton over which it will be possible to haul practically double the amount of tonnage that can be hauled by the same power over the present line, which provides a great economy in operating expenses although the distance is increased about fifteen miles.


Henry Lumley Drayton: These remarks
would not apply to this line.


George Perry Graham: Well, a good portion of it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That was the
line to Mulgrave to reduce grades.


George Perry Graham: Let me put this on Hansard. This is what happened. This is dated March 25, 1915, and I read the following discussion from Hansard:
Mr. Sinclair: The Country Harbour branch was a part of the route as originally projected, and I want to ask the minister if he includes it in the present proposal. It is not in the mileage given.
Mr. Cochrane: Ultimately, yes, because the plan shows both places.
Mr. Sinclair: Is it on the plan?
Mr. Cochrane: Yes.
Mr. Sinclair: But you are not proposing to build it now ?
Mr. Cochrane: Not until later on. I think the
other road is the more important. The million dollars that I told my hon. friend would be included in the supplementary estimates will not be expended on that portion of the road at this time.
Mr. Sinclair: When does the minister propose to build the Country Harbour branch?
Mr. Cochrane: As soon as we can. I brought the map to show the hon. gentleman the whole scheme that is proposed.
Mr. Sinclair:	It will be a great disappointment to
the people on that part of the coast of Nova Scotia when they learn that the Country Harbour branch is dropped out of the proposal.
Mr. Cochrane. It is not dropped out of the proposal. I brought the map and the hon. gentleman can see that the road goes to both places, but I do not want to mislead him by saying that we are going to start on the branch to Country Harbour this year.
Mr. Sinclair:	I quite understand that. The point
I made is that while it is on the map it is not included in the minister's present proposal.
Mr. Cochrane: It certainly is a part of the proposal. The scheme as laid out includes branches from Sunnybrae to Country Harbour and Guysborough.
Out of the vote mentioned $22,000 was expended in surveys, and in the following year $978,000 was voted in the Intercolonial railway estimates of 1916-17, as found on page 52 of the estimates of that year. Then at page 2,767 of Hansard, April 11, 1916, Mr. Graham asked as to the condition of the line for which this money was being voted, and Dr. Reid who was Acting Minister of Railways in the absence of Mr. Cochrane through illness, replied as follows:
The length of this line is 93.18 miles. The object of the proposed railway is, first, to give transportation facilities to the central portion of Guysborough county and to open up and develop this portion of the country; and, second, to construct the line with .6 grade eastbound and westbound that will serve as a low grade route for the traffic from the Sydneys, Cape Breton and Newfoundland. By building the railway on the grade mentioned this traffic, which consists largely of steel products, can be handled more economically than over the present route. During the present year location surveys and plans have been completed but no construction work has been started. The amount voted in 1915-16 was $1,000,000, and the estimated expenditure out of that amount was $22,000, leaving to be revoted the amount of the present vote, $978,000.
Mr. Sinclair: When does the minister intend to build this railway?
Mr. Reid: Just as soon as financial conditions will admit of it, it is the intention of the government to build this line.
I might say in short that that is the history of the line. It was in the programme for Nova Scotia which was started in 1910 or
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

1911, but this line was dropped after 1911 with several of the others, and only one item in the programme was proceeded with, if I remember correctly. That is the history of this proposal, and I submit it to the House for favourable consideration.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am going to ask my hon. friend to take particular care to let us have all the correspondence in connection with this line and all the reports the department now has. I am quite convinced that, if he will read them through, he will never ask the House to give it any further consideration. As the minister says, this is an old line. It is old although never built. It is old in the sense of the consideration that has been given it by politicians practically since confederation. I do not think there has ever been a local election fought in Nova Scotia, that this line has not been used one way or the other for the purpose of getting votes. There was a time when the local government undertook to build it, and ran through an election on the claim that they were going to build it. I forget whether that was once or twice. It happened at least once, and the local government being returned, of course did not build it. No one would ever build it. The only possible reason for building the line down there would be that referred to in Hansard of 1916 by the then Minister of Railways, the Hon. Mr. Cochrane. It was conclusively proved that the present main line had very bad grades; and if there were any way of helping those grades something would be gained. The whole idea was to help those grades. The Hon. Dr. Reid was concerned in it and, following as best I could what the minister said, I think he made exactly the same point, that the grades were bad and it would be a great thing if we could get better grades. That is not the present proposition. Even if that had been the present proposition, it is something which the country to-day unless we have all taken leave of our senses would never go into. It never would think of it for one minute. What would be thought of opening up a line of railway which will do nothing to overcome the admitted difficulties in connection with the main line grades? I have not the slightest hesitation in saying that there is no justification whatever for the building of this line, apart from political purposes.


Mr. MACDONALD (Pictou):: Is my hon. friend not aware that, in addition to the record of his own party and of ministers of railways between 1911 and 1917, the Can-

adain National Railway board, when presided over by Mr. Hanna, recommended the construction of this road?


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend is entirely misinformed. Mr. Hanna's board turned down the proposal.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I make the statement on the faith of communications to the public press made by Cdlonel Thomas Cantley, my opponent in Pictou county in the last election, who was a member of the board over which Mr. Hanna presided. I think his authority is as good as my hon. friend's.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am quite content to take it that way, but my very strong recollection is that at the time that matter was discussed, and it was discussed more than once, Mr. Hanna took the strongest possible grounds against the proposal. At any rate, if he did not, he ought to have done so.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: They are
all wrong but you.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend is pleased to be facetious.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: No, you
are.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend knows very well that if this line is built it will never pay.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I know
nothing of the sort.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then I do not think my hon. friend has studied the question.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I know
more about it than you do.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Of course it
is a thing that comes up in connection with the exigencies of Nova Scotia politics frorr time to time.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Not at all


Henry Lumley Drayton: When the loca government down there gets tired of thi. football; when it wins some elections by it and then refuses to go on and build the line, we have it transferred here just at the right time, just before the Dominion election-[DOT]


George Perry Graham: Oh no-a long way off.


Henry Lumley Drayton: 
Mr. McISAAC:: The hon. gentleman speaks about what has happened in Nova Scotia in reference to this proposed road, and he has said several times that the building of this road was promised by the local government. He shows a lack of knowledge of the political history of Nova Scotia when he forgets that the Hanna board of which Colonel Cantley was a member and which was functioning during the regime of the government of which my hon. friend was a member, recommended the construction of this road. But to-day my hon. friend denies that, and says that the question has been made a political football.


Henry Lumley Drayton: No one denied
it.


Colin Francis McIsaac: My hon. friend denies
that the Hanna board made that recommendation.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I never said
anything of the kind. I was speaking of Mr. Hanna.


Colin Francis McIsaac: That is what he said
first, when the hon. member for Pictou corrected him. He says this h3s been made a political football in Nova Scotia for many years. Well, if it has, the game has been played by both sides, Conservative as well as Liberal, and one of the chief men at the bat was Sir Robert Borden. In 1910 both political parties in this House agreed that branch railways should be con-
5 p.m. structed in non-railway counties in Nova Scotia. The following resolution was passed in that year:
That, in the opinion of this House, the time has arrived in the commercial and industrial development
of the province of Nova Scotia when the Intercolonial Railway of Canada should be. extended into the nonrailway counties of the eastern section of that province.
That resolution was agreed to both by the Conservative party, led by Sir Robert Borden at the time, and by the Liberal party. Then Sir Robert Borden made a speech in the House; it is reported at page 1182 of Hansard of 1910. I ask my hon. friend to pay attention to this; it is not the statement of a Liberal who is making a political football of the matter. Sir Robert Borden said on that occasion :
I passed along the shore of the county of Halifax to the county of Guysborough last summer. I travelled altogether about 500 miles through districts not served by railways at all, and where railway development would mean a great deal to the people and lead to considerable development in that little province. I can tell the Minister of Railways-
The present Minister of Railways (Mr. Graham) was Minister of Railways at that time also.
-a great many things I saw, I could speak of a great many districts where railway facilities might mean a great deal to the people, and might lead to very great progress and advancement in that little province. I saw, in the county of Guysborough, just across the line from the county of Halifax-
Represented by himself.
-one of the most splendid harbours that can be found anywhere in the wwld-Country harbour. This harbour stretches back ten miles from its mouth, with water close up to the shore everywhere from forty -five to sixty feet in depth, landlocked twice, and with a splendid roadstead outside, where, in almost any weather, ships can ride in safety-and have ridden in safety without going inside. And in what condition did I find the place? Not more than a dozen families are living around that harbour. There was no railway development, no opportunity for commerce, and the fishermen had gone to the adjoining Isaac's harbour or Fishermen's harbour, for the reason that these smaller harbours would subserve their purposes better than this magnificent Country harbour of which I have spoken. All along that shore are opportunities of development. The people of Halifax county, as well as those of Guysborough county, and those of other counties in the province of Nova Scotia to wdiich allusion has"* been made, have, it seems to me, fairly good reason to complain that their interests in respect of railway development have not been properly attended to in the past.
Then he concludes:
This is no time for hesitation and vacillation. Make up your mind-and I hope you have made it up in the direction I have indicated; then, give to the Intercolonial the branches, feeders, extensions which would be given if it were owned by any of the great railway corporations.
Now, that was in 1910.


George Perry Graham: That was directed to
myself, was it not?


Colin Francis McIsaac: Yes, directed to yourself
as Minister of Railways by Sir Robert Borden.
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

The hon. member for West York, (Sir Henry Drayton) who was not then in the House but vho since pretends to have learned a great leal about the political history of Nova Scotia, did not know what had happened.
Before I conclude I want to put on Hansard the letter from Colonel Cantley, so that hon. members may have the facts before them and so that the hon. member for West York will have some knowledge of the matter; for he shows a great lack of knowledge in connection with this railway. This proposal is entirely different from the others which were discussed to-day and the other day. The proposed road does not parallel any existing road. It does not interfere with the Canadian Pacific railway at all, because there is no Canadian Pacific railway in the county of Guysborough, nor any other railway. That county extending from the eastern part of Halifax county to the strait of Canso, about 150 miles long and from 20 to 75 miles in width, is without any railway except where the Canadian National touches the extreme northeastern end of the county at the strait of Canso. It is the second or third largest county in the province of Nova Scotia. The area of the county of Guysborough itself is something like 2,000 square miles. It has magnificent lumber areas. It has been estimated that there is between forty and fifty million dollars worth of lumber in Guysborough county to-day, which cannot be taken out on account of the lack of railway facilities, and on the Sunnybrae branch, between the county of Guysborough and the Intercolonial railway, in Pictou county, it is estimated that there is from four to five times that value in timber, which cannot be taken out without this road.
The fresh fish industry also cannot be developed unless there is quick transportation. Along that coast of 150 miles lies one of the greatest fishing grounds anywhere in the world, but it is entirely impossible to have a development of the fresh fish industry without quick transportation. To'show you how this fish industry can be developed. In 1895 the federal government, and I think the provincial government of Nova Scotia, subsidized a small boat to run daily between Canso in the eastern end of Guysborough county, and Mulgrave, a distance of 27 miles. This daily steamer was put on for the purpose of testing what could be done in the shipment of fresh fish, and I will show you what the result has been. In 1895 the number of tons of fresh fish shipped was 790, and the ex-pressage paid 14,805;	1896, 900 tons, expressage paid, $6,460. I will not give the 
figures for every year, but in 1905 the number of tons had increased to 2,201, and the expressage paid to $23,000; in 1917, 11,831 tons of fresh fish were shipped from Canso alone, and the expressage paid was $110,483. I have not the figures up to the present time, but I know that they show an increase year by year over the figures I have given and I am quite safe in saying that to-day at least 20,000 tons of fresh fish are shipped from Canso alone to the Intercolonial railway, and considering the increase in freight rates I am quite sure that the expressage paid would be over $200,000. I am only citing that as an illustration of what might be done in developing the fresh fish trade of Guysborough county if we had a railway passing through it from Sunnybrae to Guysborough and later on to the strait of Canso. When that road is built it will shorten the distance between the prairie provinces by 75 to 100 miles; that is the short line from Oxford Junction down to Sunnybrae and Country Harbour would shorten the distance by at least 75 to 100 miles. As Sir Robert Borden said, and as is admitted by everybody, Guysborough has the finest and best harbour in the world, Country Harbour.
I am going to read a letter written by Colonel Thomas Cantley to the Montreal Gazette, appearing in its issue of March 12 last, and I will ask the House to bear with me patiently, because I do not take up much of its time. Colonel Cantley was the Conservative candidate for the county of Pictou at the last general election; he was also a member of the Hanna National Railway Board up to the time he resigned; so we can have no better authority on this question; I think he will satisfy even the hon. member for Toronto and any other doubting Thomas on the other side of the House. This letter was written after a survey had been made of this line, and after Colonel Cantley had travelled with the engineer over every foot of the proposed line from Sunnybrae to Guysborough and Mulgrave. He says:
A Needed Branch Line To the Editor of The Gazette:
Sir,-In your issue of February 20th last is an article entitled "C.N.R. Branch Lines will be introduced."
With a portion of the article I have no particular concern, but when you there state that "the Guysboro road was especially condemned, having been rejected by every government for thirty years. It would cost $7,000,000, and there would be an annual deficit of not less than $500,000," I must protest. The statement that the construction of the road was rejected by every government for thirty years is in direct conflict with the facts.
If you will consult parliamentary history you will learn that the Laurier government in 1910-11 called for tenders for the construction of the Guysboro road, after which a, contract for the construction of a con-

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
siderable portion of the line was entered into, and held the contractor's deposit, which accompanied the tender. Subsequent to the change of government in 1911 the incoming Minister of Railways, Hon. Frank Cochrane, after keeping the contractors and the people of Guysboro in suspense for about a year, finally cancelled the contract for construction and returned the contractor's deposit. At about the same time the minister entered into a contract for the construction of seventy miles of railway in the county of Halifax, from Dartmouth to Stewart, the county of Halifax being then represented by the Premier, the Right Hon. Sir Robert Borden. This road was designed to give railway advantages to the fertile valley of Musquodoboit, but the road built stopped short of reaching a most important section of the valley and really ended nowhere.
Later the Guysboro railway project had the attention of the Board of Directors of the Canadian National Railway when, during 1919-1920, the president instructed the chief engineer to investigate the matter thoroughly and report. In pursuance of these instructions the engineer personally spent some time in the district and travelled with the writer over the whole course of the projected route. Some possible changes in alignment were then suggested and these later were thoroughly gone over by survey parties when the further data secured resulted in the adoption of some changes in location. After a full and exhaustive report had been put before the board as to the cost of the road, the gradients and the economies to be expected from its construction, the board, on the advice of the chairman, resolved to proceed with the construction of the road, and recommended that a contract be given for the building of the first section of twenty-five miles eastward from Sunnybrae, and that the work be immediately proceeded with.	
The decision of the board was vetoed on the ground of financial stringency by the then treasury board of the cabinet. From these facts it is established that the Guysboro railway was not condemned by every government, but on the other hand had the support and direct approval of the Laurier government, and later also of the C.N.R. President and Board of Directors after the engineers of the board had given the matter the fullest consideration.
As to the matter of the necessity for and policy governing the construction of branch lines connecting with the C.N.R. in the West, a good deal of sound argument can be submitted. While all the branch lines projected, most of which were undertaken by the Canadian Northern management, but not completed, are not of equal importance to the successful operation of the C.N.R., some of them are doubtless necessary as feeders and the delay in their completion has adversely affected earning power of the C.N.R. Most of the settlers in the country which they should serve settled there on the clearly-stated undertaking by the Canadian Northern management that the branches would be at once begun and pushed to completion, which promise was not effectively carried out.
But it is not the western branch lines which particularly interest me, but the Sunnybrae railway, and the general treatment of the province of Nova Scotia as regards railway construction, and the unfair treatment accorded this province in view of its contribution to the general railway expenditure of Canada, and our proportion of the enormous commitments due to the taking over of the Canadian Northern, Grand Trunk Pacific and Grand Trunk Railways, none of the mileage of which lie within or are of any direct material benefit to the province of Nova Scotia.
The importance of the proposed so-called Guysboro railway is due to two facts, in some respects quite distinctly different, while the road from Sunnybrae
to Guysboro will be of distinct advantage to the latter point, and the southeastern coast of Nova Scotia generally, Guysboro county particularly, which has today not a single mile of railway. The continuance of the road beyond Guysboro to Mulgrave, thus permitting of the diverting of the traffic now passing over the New Glasgow to Mulgrave line, and the saving to be effected thereby, is the real, important factor, which abundantly warrants the building of the line, as is well known, to all intimately associated with that portion of the C.N.R. between New Glasgow and Mulgrave.
It is a matter of common knowledge that derailments have, caused and are still causing grave anxiety to the operating management and the travelling public. Accidents have been numerous owing to the gradient and alignment of the road. The grades in places amount to nearly two per cent, and are such that drivers must rush down a hill to acquire momentum to carry them over the next crest. The bottom of most of the grades are reverse curves, with their tendency toward derailment. Train wreckage with destruction of rolling stock and damage to goods has for years been heavy on the section.
For years there has been an average monthly deficit of over $50,000 on operating due to adverse physical conditions, as exemplified by the fact that a locomotive which will haul four thousand tons on the prairie sections of the C.N.R. will with difficulty handle less than one-quarter of that tonnage between Mulgrave and New Glasgow. For quite ten years a continuous and effective effort has been made by the engineering department of the eastern division to obtain a better alignment of this important eighty-mile section. Numerous engineering parties examined the whole extent of the road and, after the best trial line diversions were worked out, these departing from the present alignment at some fourteen different points, and giving an increase in the length of the road of sixteen miles, the proposed diversion still offered at best a gradient of 1.68 per cent.
In view of this result the expenditure of any considerable sum in changing the existing alignment was unanimously considered unwarranted, and it was proven beyond dispute that the only real cure for the difficulty, so far as heavy freight was concerned, was to abandon the New Glasgow-Mulgrave section for all through traffic, and extend the New Glasgow-Sunneybrae line through Guysboro to Mulgrave, where a first-class alignment could be obtained with grades not exceeding .06 going easterly and .05 coming westerly from Cape Breton-the alignment and grades on the proposed line being equal to those of the best divisions of the C.N.R. system. The length of the extension Sunnybrae to Guysboro and on to Mulgrave road would be ninety-three miles.
The engineers' estimate of the total cost at present prices, inclusive of right of way, land damages, railway stations, water tanks, sidings, telegraph and telephone system, and all other accessories whatsoever for $8,556,000, or $82,000 per mile.
The engineer data, including profile, position of bridges, sidings, water tanks, and every construction detail of that character, is complete and on file in the railway offices, Moncton. The yardage of all cuttings, fills, cost of bridges, etc., has been calculated, and the plans and data are so complete that contracts for the construction of any section of the whole line could be given by the railway management at any time such was ordered.
As to the necessity for improvement in the existing through traffic facilities, passing over the New Glasgow-Mulgrave section of the railway, it may be pointed out that the great traffic producer for the C.N.R. system in the Maritime provinces is the coal, iron and steel trade of Cape Breton and Pictou county, while all the
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

raw material for the New Glasgow mills and forges must pass over this New Glasgow-Mulgrave section- the present grades of which are up to and exceeding, in some cases, two per cent. All trains leaving Mulgrave must have the aid of pusher engine for some miles westward.
If the traffic is diverted at Mulgrave over the proposed Guysboro-Mulgrave-Sunneybrae railway to the junction of the latter at Ferrona, New Glasgow, Pictou county, and assuming the traffic as eight trains of five hundred tons and four trains of one thousand tons daily, handling, say, sixteen thousand tons on this new line, with a .06 grade instead of the present New Glasgow-Mul-grave two per cent, and over grade, and using the capitalization values laid down by the American Railway Engineers' Association Committee, the result of the comparison using Ferrona Junction as a common point, would be a capitalization of $9,540,000. The new lines have been estimated to cost $8,500,000, therefore, it would be cheaper to build and operate by an amount of roughly $1,000,000.
Further comparison is made by assuming a considerable increase in tonnage over that at present carried which in vew of all the factors involved, and the advantages flowing out of better railway conditions, and the development in Eastern Nova Scotia, which would seem warranted, shows the new line as giving a capitalization of say $14,307,000 saving over operations of the present New Glasgow-Mulgrave line, so that with a capital expenditure of $8,500,000 for the new line, there would be a saving equal to the capitalized value of $5,800,000, to build and operate the new line.
Other calculations have been made taking New Glasgow as the common point, while still others provide for the 'routing of the traffic across Pictou Harbour, thence to a point on the C.N.R. at or between Amherst or Moncton, throughout which a continuous grade of about one-half per cent, could be secured, resulting in some saving in mileage, and the enormous advantage of a gradient of practically .05 as against the climb-ng of two mountain ranges. Gordon Summit and the Folleigh, with elevations of 566 and 612 feet, respectively, over tide water at New Glasgow.
So far we have dealt only with advantages to the railway from lower cost of transportation. The possibilities of traffic on the proposed new section of line are good, the resources are agriculture, lumber and fishing. The forest resources of Guysboro are among the most valuable in the province of Nova Scotia. Fifteen years ago these were valued at $20,000,000, which valuation would be nearly doubled at the present time. The value of the timber contiguous to the Guysboro line between Sunneybrae and the Guysboro -Pictou county line would many times exceed that agure. In this section lumber is now being transported by teams for distances of up to fifteen miles to railway.
With the railway passing through Country Harbor and Guysboro, the fresh fish industry could be centralized, and an extensive trade carried on. Were an efficient daily fresh fish service inaugurated from Guysboro and Country Harbor over the proposed road through to Montreal, there is no doubt that within a very short time of its inauguration, sufficient traffic would be offered to warrant a daily express fish service of twelve to fifteen cars, which could run through to Montreal as a solid, Maritime fish express.
These, sir, are some of the facts bearing on the necessity for and the desirability of proceeding at once with the so-called Guysboro road scheme, which the February 20th article states was especially condemned, having been rejected by every government for thirty years, which statement I know from your well-known public spirit and sense of fairness, you will now abandon with the amende honorable.
Thos Cantley.
New Glasgow, N.S., March 8, 1924.

My hon. friend (Sir Henry Drayton) must have read the article in the Gazette to which this letter is a reply. Under the circumstances I do not think it is necessary for me to say anything. further. If the necessity for this road has not been proven by the explanation of the Minister of Railways and the few remarks made by myself, surely the statement of Colonel Cantley will convince any person here of the merits of this enterprise and the necessity for its being carried to completion.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am quite
willing to admit at once that I never read the letter; but after having heard it read, I find I am entirely right in my statement. The whole argument in that letter is to get rid of the old grade, to get a new line. It is a line to Mulgrave. This is a line to the sea. I am afraid there is nothing to take back. I am quite content to leave this whole matter in the hands of the minister if he will ask Mr. Hanna if he ever recommended such a line and if he is in favour of it today.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: 
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: My hon. friend disputes the accuracy of the statement that the board presided over by Mr. Hanna had recommended the construction of a railway from Sunnybrae through the county of Guysborough-


Henry Lumley Drayton: To Mulgrave.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Not necessarily to Mulgrave. My hon. friend had better read the letter of his friend, Colonel Cantley and find out if he does not speak of railway construction having been adopted by the board of which he was a member, and the only reason why it was not adopted by the government led by the right hon. gentleman who now leads the opposition (Mr. Meighen), was the decision that was come to by the treasury board of the cabinet. That was the reason. I do not know why my hon. friend should take this position of antagonism to a project which has so many merits and which ought to be constructed in the interest of the Canadian National Railways and of the country. We in Nova Scotia occupy a very peculiar position, in
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

that it was uttered or written by Sir Henry Thornton. It dodged details at every turn. I want simply the details. Put them on record, and let us have something to try out the capacity of the board. Then we can vote with at least some semblance of intelligence. If we proceed on the present path we vote simply on the romance of Hansard.


Richard Burpee Hanson: One sympathizes with a
county the size of Guysborough, on account of the fact that it has no railway communication, but I think that we cannot afford to spend the large sum of three and a half million dollars on the mere question of sentiment, strong as sentiment may be. I should like to call the attention of the committee to a statement made by the Minister of National Defence to the effect that the road was not proceeded with in 1916 because of the financial condition of the country, and I should like to put this question to my hon. friend: Does he, or do the members on the Treasury benches, consider for a moment, that the financial condition of this country is comparably as good as it was in 1916? Does he think that a burden that was too great in 1916 is a small burden to-day? I do not think the taxpayers of the country consider that it is. It seems to me that the hon. gentleman himself gives the best reason ^hy this vote should not be given in this year of grace 1924, when he says that the burden was too great in 1916; and I think it follows, as night follows day, that everybody will agree the burden is too great today, if you are viewing the matter from the standpoint of national economics and national burdens. What is said in favour of this resolution? My hon. colleague from fet. John and Albert (Mr. Baxter) has, I think, with a great deal of force exposed the fallacy of the argument which has been used m support of the proposal, but he has not given all the local conditions. It is true that the people living in the interior of the country are without railway communication, but he forgot to tell the committee that the people who live along the coast line of that county-and I venture to say that the great mass of population in that county live along the coast line-are for the most part- served, and fairly well served, with a subsidized steamship service which this government and the country help to pay for and maintain.
The fishing industry has been referred to, and I say that the strongest argument that can be used in support of this line is that the fishing industry can be developed and well served by the establishment of a steam-
TMr. Baxter.]
ship service to and from Canso and along this coast.
Something has been said with respect to the great timber resources of that country. I happen to know a little about the timber resources of that country. A company in which I am interested owns in fee simple a very considerable portion of the area covered with timber. I say to hon. members of this House that, in so far as soft-wood lumber is concerned, I doubt if any of that lumber, except for the purely local market, will ever be moved by rail. You have only to go to a good-sized atlas and observe the fact that that portion of the province of Nova Scotia, and in fact I might say all portions of Nova Scotia, are very well watered, that there are numerous drivable and floatable streams, and that the timber will inevitably be brought to tidewater by the floating process, and there manufactured and shipped by water, either to the markets of Great Britain; or to the New England states. These are the only two markets that are available, and I happen to know that this very property to which I refer was always operated in that way in the hands of previous owners, and will be operated in the future by the present owners in exactly the same way. It is the only commercially profitable way in which to handle a timber limit like this. Then my hon. friend speaks of the immense quantity of hardwood lumber. Does my hon. friend know that the day has not arrived, so far as eastern Canada is concerned, when it is commercially profitable to manufacture and sell hardwood lumber?
People have tried it. Men well experienced in the lumber manufacturing business have tried it, and I say there is absolutely nothing in the hon. minister's contention that this is desirable from the standpoint of the lumber industry. The most important argument in favour of this vote is from the standpoint of the fisheries. That is the strong argument, and I advise my hon. friends on the opposite side who are anxious to see the vote go through to stick to that as the test. It has more merit than the argument in regard to the timber business. I do not know that the country is specially concerned with what transpired in 1911, or even in 1915 or 1916, to which reference has been made, but I would like this committee and the country to understand that the proposal before parliament to-day is an entirely different one from that before parliament in 1911, or even 1916, as I understand the present resolution and the resolution of 1916. The former resolution had merits from t"he standpoint of the betterment of the line of railway, and it is a

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
like to base any action upon any representations that he might have made. But I assume that Colonel Cantley was, and probably he was, more reliable than my hon. friend; I assume that his letter is correct. I heard it read but I could not distinguish the words and so I do not know what the contents were.
I was present during the reading of it, and while I do not know just what it stated, I am assuming that it was correct. But I challenge the building of this or any other railway upon any statement, however convinced the writer may be, unless that writer is in a position in which he is responsible to the people of Canada for the conduct of their railway business. My hon. friends who quote Colonel Cantley to-day took good care that he did not remain to give advice in regard to the railways. They did not trust him.


Mr. COPP:: He resigned.


Mr. BAXTER:: Well, it is to be hoped that some other members of the board will resign for a similar laudable purpose.


George Perry Graham: He resigned and got out, and the Minister of National Defence kept him out.


Richard Burpee Hanson: He did resign; for once
the Secretary of State is right.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: Assuming that the things
in Colonel Cantley's letter are correct, he alone cannot be the depository of that information. It must be known to others; it must be a matter of absolute record with the Railway Board; it must be known to Sir Henry Thornton or be under his control. And what I think the people of Canada want to-day with reference to each and every one of these votes is not a swapping of passages from Hansard, is not a reference to people who are not in this House, is not a reference to people who are not the controlling board of the railways, but rather a statement in detail of the cost and the anticipated revenue which will come from the expenditure of public money. We are surely down to the day of business in the matter of our railways, regardless of the political fortunes of any party. I am not going to draw the line even there, however, and say that I would not support an expenditure for a branch line which on the face of it would be a non-paying or an actually losing proposition. I can see, in regard to many of these resolutions, which I shall not debate seriatim, that there are some in connection with which, certain moneys having been already expended, it would be far more wasteful to discontinue operations and so destroy what already exists, when'the spending of a comparatively small amount would complete 63
the work. Then there are other cases, more particularly in the West, where it would be bad policy not to reach out and help to develop the country so as to retain the people who are already there and bring in others to promote the general prosperity. That will be good business, looking to the future. But it should not be a matter of my judgment based upon a bundle of assertions made from all sides of the House; it should be a matter of judgment based upon responsible reports from the responsible people whom the country has put in charge of the railways. And that information up to the present time is absolutely lacking.
The hon. member (Mr. Carroll) read what seemed to be an interesting statement although I could catch only a few words occasionally on this side of the House. I thought I caught some reference to the amount of steel that would be handled. That is precisely the sort of information I want to see in Sir Henry Thornton's report; I should like to have an estimate of the number of tons of steel that will in all probability be transported by such a line, the revenue that will be derived, the cost of transporting, and all contrasted with the existing line. Let us have information of that character. Is that an unreasonable request? We cannot check up the truth or accuracy of that information, but this House and the country can, if the railway board is in existence after the building of the railways. And at that time, if we find that there has been a blunder, we can turn the responsible person out of office. We are more likely to get real information from actual railway men than we are from any number of politicians who during a series of years have been burdening Hansard with hopes, desires, requests and prayers. That is what I want to get down to. I would not for two minutes take the word of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald) as to the need of the road, the cost of it, or its probable earnings; not that I charge the hon. gentleman with deliberately misrepresenting things, but because I would not believe that he would have in his possession information as accurate and reliable as could be obtained from the railways. Some one will say: He might go out and get it from the railway. Very well, if he does that, it will be ail right, in all probability, to let the railway bring the information here. All that I heard to-day was a perfectly nebulous address, such as might have been made before a sewing circle, with reference to the need of the branch lines in Canada. The only thing that distinguishes it from a sewing circle address is the fact

C.N.R.-Branch Lines

taken out. The forest conditions in that part of the country are far more vast and extensive than are to be found in the interior of New Brunswick. As regard the fishing industry to which the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough (Mr. Mclsaac) has referred so ably, I know of no part of eastern Canada where natural Conditions are so generously provided as in that territory.
The question is whether this proposition, ratified and approved by all men of all political parties in our province who know the situation at first hand, shall be approved or not. We have the recommendations of Sir Henry Thornton and of the previous Canadian National board; we have the ratification of both political parties and of all governments since 1910 in this House. If any difficulty is to be found with a project of that kind, then I would like to know what proposition can be submitted to this committee with confidence by this government.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I have just one difficulty
in trying to make up my mind at all about this subject. We have been treated this afternoon to the reading, in a somewhat low tone of voice by the Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Graham), of some ancient excerpts from Hansard.


George Perry Graham: Not a low tone of voice.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: Well, with loud noises
round about. I just heard the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald) say that this House should pay great reverence to the railway opinion of Sir Robert Borden and Colonel Thomas Cantley.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: And both
railway boards.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I will come to that; it is
the important part of the matter, but I want to be allowed to browse along the pathway for a while before I reach the point. I will get there before I am through, and in my judgment no one has done so this afternoon who has advocated the measure.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Do not be
so certain that you will get there.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: I am neither opposing nor supporting this proposal, but I want to take a few minutes to show how, in my opinion, these things ought to be approached. The National Railway Board has been constituted with the idea of standing entirely outside of politics and managing the railways, if they can be so managed, as a business proposition,

utterly, absolutely and entirely divorced from political interference. I wonder whether there is any dissent in this chamber to that view.


George Perry Graham: The leader of the Progressive party dissented the other day.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: If that view is accepted,
why in the world should we be appealed to in address after1 address to take this or the other recommendation because forsooth some gentleman who is referred to, simply because of his politics, has advocated it at some time in the past or more tolerably near the present day? What difference in the world does it make to me whether Sir Robert Borden, coming from Nova Scotia, would have liked, at some time before the war when money was more plentiful, to see a road built in some part of his own province? Had I been in the House at that time I too should have wanted a road built in my province, and I should have felt that the country in those days could afford to be liberal and might almost undertake experiments in the matter of railways. But I do not feel so to-day; and with all respect for the statements of Sir Robert Borden, I think that the gentlemen who so freely quote him should give him credit, if he were here, for having a different outlook upon the financial situation of the country from that which he had so many years ago when he advocated this and perhaps other expenditures. I am not against the building of this road, and I am distinctly not for it; I am merely trying to reach a principle which I think should underlie the construction of all these lines. First of all, let us discard the musty Hansards. If you build a line and it does not turn out according to expectation, the question seems to be, can you hang Hansard somewhere? What is the sense of it? Can you reach the men who are reported therein and punish them in any way for what might have been mistakes? And sometimes they were not mistakes, because most of those who spoke were simply putting forward the things they desired to see done and were not perhaps over careful about the evidence that lay behind. We are referred to Colonel Cantley. Colonel Cantley seems to have almost annoyed the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald) by opposing him as a candidate.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I was glad
he did.


John Babington Macaulay Baxter: Then it is a case of joy.
But if Colonel Cantley was no more reliable in the addresses he made with regard to the railway than the Minister of National Defence was in regard to the promises he made in that election, then I am afraid I should not

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
this sense, that we are the one province of the Dominion that has only one line of railway-


Richard Burpee Hanson: No. The Canadian
Pacific.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: If my hon. friend will permit me, one line of railway through which our exports can be sent out of the province and through which we can bring imports in. There is a line of railway running through the Annapolis valley, beginning at Halifax and ending at Yarmouth, belonging to the Canadian Pacific. When I say that the Canadian National is the only line of railway in the province, I mean that it is the only line of railway which runs from our province into any other province of the Dominion, because the connections the Canadian Pacific have are by boat with the United States and the city of St. John. So, for continuous transportation in railway cars, we have to depend wholly and solely on the Canadian National, and for railway construction we must depend upon it. The situation here is nothing more or less than the completion and extension of a project adopted in 1911, when the estimate of the then Minister of Railways, who is the present minister, was passed through the House of Commons with the unanimous consent of all political parties, and with the decided approval of Sir Robert Borden who was then leader of the opposition. This step was taken that the line of railway running from Ferrona to Sunnybrae was purchased from the Nova Scotia Steel Company. Hence it is that the Word "Sunnybrae" has come into the discussion of these questions, by virtue of the fact that in the carrying out of the policy of construction, this line of railway, eleven miles iong, was purchased. The government of Sir Robert Borden, through Mr. Cochrane, as was mentioned by my colleague the Minister of Railways, made in 1915 and 1916 elaborate surveys of the whole situation there, and the statement was made by Mr. Cochrane in 1916 that it was the intention of the government to proceed with the construction of this particular piece of road. The financial situation which arose on account of the prolongation of the war alone prevented the completion of the scheme which all parties supported in 1910 and 1911. When the Canadian National Railways had come in, in 1919, under the act of that year, the project was taken up and dealt with by Mr. Hanna and his board, Colonel Cantley surely ought to be the best person to give evidence on that subject, and I would recommend that the hon. member for West York (Sir Henry Drayton) should peruse
carefully the statement of his political friend, Colonel Cantley, who was my opponent in the last election. After he has done so, if he has any sense of fairness, I am sure he will withdraw the statements that he has been making by way of opposition to this project. The fact that Sir Robert Borden, Colonel Cantley and Mr. Cochrane, in all this period, were in favour of this proposition removes any possible suggestion of the political ideas that my hon. friend puts forward in regard to it. The line of railway up to Sunnybrae was originally built for the purpose of carrying iron ore which was smelted in the first iron furnace to be erected in this Dominion at a place called Ferrona on the line of the Intercolonial. Later on the Nova Scotia Steel Company obtained possession by purchase of vast iron areas in Belle Isle, Newfoundland, from which ore could be obtained very cheaply, being really a steam shovel proposition. Hence, they stopped using the ore which was found along this railway. Not merely the possibilities, but the probabilities and certainties as to the extent of iron and other minerals in that part of the country have been proved by the fact that this iron was obtained from ore found in the immediate vicinity of Sunnybrae. The agricultural possibilities of that country have been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. The conditions of men who farm in the east river St. Mary and the west river St. Mary cannot be surpassed in any part of Canada.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is the east river St.
Mary settled agriculturally? Is it not a forest above tide water?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The east
river St. Mary begins at the Atlantic in Gu.vsborough county, runs through the county of Guysborough, comes to the constituency which I represent and runs to a lake called Eden lake. The district in that vicinity is so splendidly situated from an agricultural standpoint that it is called the Garden of Eden, and it is known as the Garden of Eden to-day.	.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is a great hunting
district.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: No. my hon. friend should come down there. If he comes, he will find beautiful homes, fine farms, splendid production agriculturally. Across the lake he will find immense forests of hardwood timber which is not to be had to-day in many parts of Canada, as well as softwood timber, which, in view of the fact that they are twenty-five miles from a railway, cannot be


.N.R.-Branch Lines
well-known fact that in eastern Nova Scotia the grades of the Canadian Government railways, now the Canadian National lines, are extremely heavy and it was intended not only to serve a local purpose, such as outlined to-day, but it was intended-and I venture to say that this was the main purpose of the vote, whether it was political or not does not matter-to improve the main line, to serve the industries and to provide a direct connection between the Canadian West, Montreal and Great Britain. The local connection was merely incidental. But that is not this proposal at all. This proposal is to build a branch line from a little village called Sunny-brae to the small town of Guysborough, a town which I venture to say has not a population of a thousand people. And yet we are asked to vote $3,500,000 without a word from the traffic experts of this railway. Now, it is not fair to parliament to ask members to vote this amount of money for the extension of the present branch line, unless we have it down on the basis of dollars and cents. No one has stated in this House that this line would pay, even in the dim, distant future. No one has given us an estimate in dollars and cents of any proposed earnings. No one has given us a statement of what the cost of operation may be compared with the capital expenditure. I do think that before the government or the National Railways ask parliament to vote a large sum of money like this, they should take parliament into their confidence, so that we shall know whether this is a business proposition or whether it is a proposition to assist a community that has been declining for years, if that be the case, or whether it is simply on the basis of giving service to a community that has not had service. Everybody will agree that this county has not had railway service, but there has been a reason for it-it would never pay, and nobody ever thought it would. Any construction of lines there would simply be a detriment and a liability to the national ' lines rather than an asset. Will the minister say that a single one of the present branch lines in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia would to-day be justified on the basis of their being an asset to the National Railways?


George Perry Graham: They were taken over,
though, by the late government.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is no answer, although it is the argument that is always used-"you did this" or "you did that." That is no justification for my hon. friend's government. In New Brunswick the management to-day are endeavouring to institute 63V
a system of electric operation by motor cars in order to keep down the tremendous deficits on these branch lines. Yet we are told that the management are asking for a capital expenditure of three and a half million dollars to add to the already enormous toll that these branch lines are taking out of the system. There is no doubt about that;
I have one in my county, a little line of six miles that serves a much more prosperous community, I venture to say, than even the Garden of" Eden in my hon. friend's constituency. It is known as the York and Carleton railway and runs through the parish of Stanley. It cost $24,000 a year to run that branch line under present conditions, and the revenues never exceed $9,000. The management, therefore are quite justified in taking steps to decrease that drain on the earnings of the national lines. I venture to say that this proposal will simply be an exaggerated case of the York and Carleton railway. I do suggest to the minister that before he goes further with this resolution he obtain from the traffic department of the railway a frank statement of the possibilities; then let us try to look upon this matter from the point of view of business, not of politics, from the point of view of pure reason, not of expediency. Then let us ask ourselves the further question: If this road was not * justified in 1916 because of the financial condition of the country, is it justified today?
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. LEWIS:: I wish to gain just a little information in regard to the resolution before us, and especially with respect to the expenditure of $3,500,000. We heard a statement read this afternoon that the line when it shall be completed, that is, if an extra thirty miles were to be added to it, would cost in the neighbourhood of $8,500,000, but I understood this would mean the line completed, with stations, sidings, and so forth. In this resolution we have the sum of only 83,500,000, which is to cover the work for 67 miles, whereas the $8,500,000 would complete the work on say 93.8 miles, as given by one hon. member opposite. I would like to know if this $3,500,000 is the total cost in the first place of the railway with stations included.
I have also made a slight comparison between the cost of this line and other lines, and I find that this line is costing $52,000
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

per mile, whereas on the western prairies the average cost is about $32,000 per mile, and I was wondering whether this greater amount was due to more difficult territory that the railway would run through. I should be glad to hear from the minister on that point.
I am not standing on my feet to ask these questions with the idea of opposing this line. I have made a very careful study of that part of Nova Scotia so far as it is possible to make a study of it from maps and the various statistics that are given to the House. I have a great deal of sympathy with that part of Nova Scotia, because I can readily understand there is a large part of that province which has no railway whatever, and for that reason it does seem to me that a railway may be needed. We heard from the speech that was quoted from a paper this afternoon that Sir Robert Borden had travelled over a vast stretch of territory in that part of the country, almost 500 miles without a railway. Now as far as I am able to judge from the statistics that have been given and the information we have in regard to this line, it will not be altogether satisfactory to the people it is intended to serve, because it will not reach the greater part of them. I find that at the present time the Canadian National railway runs from Glasgow to Port Mulgrave, and this proposed line is going to run from Sunnybrae to Guydborough, a distance of 67 miles. I have endeavoured to judge the distances from the map, and as far as I can see at no point is this proposed railway more than 15 or 20 miles distant from that other line. It practically parallels it all the way through.


Mr. CARROLL:: My hon. friend has made a study of this particular railway would he tell the committee how far it is from Port .ivuugrave to Guysborough, the terminus of this railway?


Arthur John Lewis: I was taking it straight across whereas these two points are diagonally across.


William F. Carroll: The hon. member has
made a statement that is misleading.


Arthur John Lewis: I said that as far as the line runs parallel it is about 20 miles distant.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: More than that.


Arthur John Lewis: What I say is that from Sunnybrae to the coast line immediately to the east it would be fifty miles, and there would still be a territory of 50 miles with no railway. That fifty miles is gradually reduced until at the end of the railway it is about 20 miles. I am not trying to oppose this line at all, but if 
service is the thing that is to be rendered it does seem to me that it would be wise to run a branch from Musquodoboit, where there is a line at the present time, up as far as Guysborough, and then have a branch line from Sunnybrae into the main line, from Musquodoboit to Guysborough. I think that would serve the people better.
We have been asking for various statistics in regard to the mineral and other wealth in the territory covered by this proposed line. In the mineral map, to the southeast, this country, so far as minerals are concerned, is apparently called the gold territory. In the immediate vicinity of Sunnybrae I find that there are iron deposits, but after you get past Sunnybrae I do not find any iron deposits at all.
One statement that has been made is that this railway would assist to a great extent the fishing interests. So far as that is concerned, I think it would be very difficult to interest the fishing industry in a railway which at one end is approximately fifty miles from the coast line and at the other end twenty miles. That would hardly seem to assist them in any great measure, and I was wondering whether at some future time parliament would be asked for a further grant of money to continue the Canadian National from Musquodoboit right up to a point near Sunnybrae, to provide that , territory with the railway facilities that are needed. I find that southeast of the railway there is a stretch of country where there are hardly any inhabitants, and so I immediately looked up the map in regard to density of population, and found that Sunnybrae and the territory within a radius of probably seven miles is fairly thickly populated, but immediately you leave the county of Pictou and pass on to Guysborough the railway runs through a territoiy that averages from four to ten people to the square mile.
I am not opposing this railway but we do know that a branch of the Canadian National or of any other railway can only pay by , service, and I was wondering whether the minister would consider that this line would pay in the direction in which he is taking it, and whether it would not be of greater service to the people if it were immediately to the southeast. As I said before, it does seem to me that the people in the immediate vicinity of where this line is to be projected are being taken care of by the railway to the northeast, that is the line from New Glasgow to Mulgrave, whereas the inhabitants of the southeast part have no railway at all. For that reason I should like the minister to give us a little information in regard to that part of the

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
country-how they expect it to be served, and what will be the amount of revenue necessary to make the line pay.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: My hon.
friend, of course, labours under the same disadvantage, in speaking about the location of a line of railway in the province of Nova Scotia, that other members suffer from when considering the location of railway lines in Saskatchewan and Alberta when they have not visited the territory in question. Very little idea of the true situation can be got at any time by simply looking at a map, such as a railway map. In this case one may easily be led into some misapprehension by depending altogether on a map. The fact is that the province of Nova Scotia is really an island. Its connection with the mainland is by a narrow piece of land well known as the Tantramar marsh. The distance across is about twenty miles. The existing line of railway follows the north coast of Nova Scotia, in immediate proximity to the straits of Northumberland. Sunnybrae is the terminus of a line of railway which was purchased in 1911 by the then government as the beginning of a scheme of extension, not in the same direction as the existing line of railway but at an angle of about forty-five degrees, running in an easterly and southerly direction away from the other railway altogether. I want to say that this proposition stands in very much the same position as do a great many of the enterprises in the west that are provided for in these various resolutions. Railways were started before the war and progressed to a certain extent. Some of them were graded, in some cases a large portion of the line was laid, a great many of them were in various stages of construction. This particular railway was in exactly that position. It had been inaugurated and agreed upon by all the responsible people at the time. A line of railway eleven miles long was purchased leading to Sunnybrae, the direction in which this line was to go. There are valuable forests and fisheries in the territory adjacent to the line. In the same district are splendid farming lands; I do not think there is any one in eastern Nova Scotia but will admit that there are no finer farming sections or more comfortable homes and better conditions than are to be found there.
There is one phase of the matter which has not been mentioned, and I have sent for the report of the Commissioner of Mines of Nova Scotia in order to justify my statement. For years large quantities of low grade gold ores have been found at various places in the southern portions of the counties of
Guysboro and Halifax. These were referred to by Sir Robert Borden when he was Prime Minister and when the opening up of this section was previously discussed. A very large quantity of gold has been taken out from time to time, but as the discoveries were made at inaccessible points far removed from a railway, it was found almost impossible to bring in suitable machinery to treat the low grade ores, or make it financially satisfactory for people to exploit them. The reports of geologists and of mining experts are to the effect that if facilities were provided so that machinery could be brought in to treat these ores in a proper way a large return would undoubtedly be derived from them. There is no question but that these low grade ores exist. The only problem is how to treat them and extract the gold contents in a manner commercially profitable. This statement, in brief, explains the situation. The agricultural, mining, fishing and lumbering resources are there awaiting development, and there will be satisfactory returns once this development is under way. The proposed railway runs away from the existing lines. As I said it is almost at an angle of forty-five degrees, perhaps thirty-five degrees, to it, and the farther you get from Sunnybrae the farther you get away from that existing line, and you cover districts where to-day the people are forty and fifty miles distant from a railway and cannot get their products out to market except by motor -which has only been in vogue for the last few years-or by horse and wagon.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Would the minister be good enough to state why it is the vote is being asked this year if it is not being proposed to do any grading until next year? I understood from his preliminary statement nothing was to be done this year?


George Perry Graham: That brings out very important points in reference to a three years' programme. People in districts not served by railways are very uneasy. In some parts of Canada the settlers have no railway transportation yet, although they moved into those districts believing that in a very short time transportation facilities would be provided. I need not go over the list but there are many places of this kind. Now when people come to other lands they do not lack courage but they become discouraged when they expect, year after year, to find a railway running past their door and their expectations are not realized. In some instances grading of lines has been done for a great many miles, and if that were not an indication that the people might expect a railway in a
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

reasonable length of time, then there is nothing on which such an expectation could be founded. In this particular instance the line was surveyed a few years ago. Public men took an interest in it, and members on both sides of the House pledged their support to the building of the line. The people have been expecting it to be built for some time just as other people in districts throughout the West have been living for some years on the same expectation. Now these people are not anxious to move out, they would rather stay in Canada; but if no transportation is provided they will be compelled to leave the country. I believe, from the facts within my knowledge, that the psychology of telling people in a district that they will have railway transportation in a certain number of years will have a marked effect in bringing to an end the emigration of our people to other lands. A promise in an estimate

I say it advisedly-is not any good for the present condition of affairs; but if parliament in its wisdom sees fit to embalm in a statute the pledge that although these lines may not be built this year, there will be material advancement with them in the course of three years, that will inspire the people with fresh courage to stand- by their guns and keep their homes in this Dominion. I believe the psychology of laying out a programme for three years will have a marked effect upon the feelings of the people of the Dominion. In laying out a stated programme the Canadian National line will be in exactly the same position as a private company. A private company lays out, and presents its programme sometimes five years ahead, yet possibly railway communication will not be provided for for years to come. But they have an ap-"rotation which is sot recalled and Vi'h,nh is used until it is exhausted. In this three-year programme, the Canadian National is asking to be placed only on the same footing with the same opportunity of extending its branch lines as a private company is placed by its directors and shareholders. But above and beyond that, the fact that we say, by legislation, that the court of parliament is prepared to construct these branch lines, will prevent hundreds, if not thousands, of Canadians from moving out of the country.


Arthur Meighen: The minister is well known throughout the country as a master of humour and very good humour, but he seldom tries to disguise it as he did to-night under a serious mien. He affects to tell this committee that we are suffering from emigration; that men are getting discouraged and moving out; 
that they cannot be restrained from going by an estimate in the Appropriation Act to build a railway, but that if you put it into another act, a branch line bill, why, they will stay.


George Perry Graham: I did not say that. At least, that is not what I intended to say. My right hon. friend is not quite giving my meaning to the committee. It would be impossible for any person to put through this House at this session an estimate for all those lines, but it is possible to make a pledge in a statute that this amount will be spread and expended over a period of three years.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know whether the minister thinks he has improved the situation. I will repeat what I said.


George Perry Graham: It does not need improving.


Arthur Meighen: It needs it badly. The minister wants to convey to the committee the impression that this is to be a pledge that these roads will be built in three years. He knows it will be nothing of the sort, not a whit more of a pledge than an appropriation in the Appropriation Act.


George Perry Graham: All this amount would not be put in an appropriation for one year.


Arthur Meighen: The minister can put in the amount to be spent in one year.


George Perry Graham: My right hon. friend knows he would fight it twice as hard as he fights the branch line bill.


Arthur Meighen: The minister says that if you vote all the money you need for 1924, that will not do, because that is not embalming it; you get it embalmed when you put it in a branch line bill. There is not a whit more security a or 3, settlor in 3. bra.ncli line bill tiia.ii in an appropriation act, nor is there as much. In an appropriation act, the money is voted on the theory and the principle that it is to be spent that year. We are asked this year to vote money that the government does not intend to spend at all, because the fact of our doing so will keep settlers in this district, but if we voted money to build the road this year they would run. Such is the theory of the Minister of Railways.


George Perry Graham: I am sorry, but I did not express any such theory. That is the theory my right hon. friend is expressing, not mine.


Arthur Meighen: That is precisely what the minister says, in effect.


George Perry Graham: Not in effect.


Arthur Meighen: And in exact effect.

C.N.R.-Branch Lines


George Perry Graham: Not at all.


Arthur Meighen: Because when he tries to give out that there is a pledge in the bill, there is no pledge at all. From now to the end of the session, you can pass ten bills a day of this character, and that is not a pledge to anybody that a mile or a foot of road will be built. The minister is not going to spend a dollar in this district this year, as I understand the matter. Why is he before parliament this year? Is he afraid that the Canadian Pacific might get in and pre-empt this territory?


George Perry Graham: I am not speaking for the Canadian Pacific. Possibly my right hon. friend is. I am speaking for the Canadian National.


Arthur Meighen: I did not insinuate that the minister was speaking for the Canadian Pacific, and I should like to know why he insinuates that I am.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend suggested that I was trying to keep the Canadian Pacific out of Guysborough.


Arthur Meighen: That is mentioned in the letter of Sir Henry Thornton. He says that one of the things that has governed them has been the consideration that we should take territory that might be taken by others. There is only one other person that might take it. This is a special case. The minister does not intend to spend any money at all this year, so one would naturally assume that that was the application. The minister knows there is no chance whatever of spending this money, so why is he before parliament this year with a request for authority which he does not propose to exercise, and that next year can be given just as well as now?


George Perry Graham: For the same reason,
possibly-I will not say the same reason because I do not know what his reason was- that my right hon. friend put through a highways bill, paying so much each year. The amount due the year following was not to be paid the first year at all, yet he put the amount in the bill for ten years in advance. He objects to a railway programme of three years, but he made a highway programme for ten years without one dollar of it ever going into the estimates, except for salaries of officers at Ottawa.


An hon. MEMBER:: Five years.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps it was. My recollection was ten years. His reason was the same as ours in this. In order that the people might know that they were going to get
the highways, he spread the amount over a period of ten years, so that there would be no question. If he had had to have so much one year and so much the next, he would have put it in the estimates. The same thing applies to the appropriation for agricultural instruction. If his theory is good in this case, it would have been good for him to put in the estimates the amount, intended for the year for agricultural instruction. But did he do that? No, he brought in a bill and not an item was put in the estimates in any year for that expenditure. Further than that, some years ago I had the honour of introducing a bill in this House for the removal of level crossings in Canada, railway construction in that sense. Parliament unanimously spread it over a term of years, voting a certain amount each year on which the Board of Railway Commissioners could draw for the government's share of eliminating level crossings. If my hon. friend's theory is right tonight, then I should have gone to the Railway Commission and said: How many crossings are you going to order eliminated this year and we will put in an estimate? Now, apparently that was not the proper thing to do. In 1919, my right hon. friend had that bill renewed for a term of years, and it is in the statute books to-day. The same is the case with subsidies granted to railways other than our own. Subsidies are spread over a term of years, the amounts to be paid to companies when their certificates of construction are received. Why should we not use our own line of railway as fairly as we have used other lines of railway, when we gave them subsidies? If my hon. friend wants to take the attitude of being opposed to the Canadian National, he has a perfect right to do so, but he has no right to do so under an assumed belief.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has got
quite heated and delivered a rather rapid and eloquent oration. The only difficulty is that it is not correct. I have not had time to go through all the estimates, but I have managed to get to one even though he has travelled very fast. He stated that we passed an agricultural act without a word of placing anything in the estimates. We put through an act, but we put an amount in the estimates every year.


George Perry Graham: Paid by statute. It was
under the authority of the Agricultural Instruction Act.


Arthur Meighen: No, under the estimate.
I have the 1923-24 estimate which reads:
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

Grant to the provinces of Canada for the purpose of assisting and encouraging agricultural instruction, grants to be made on a proportionate basis. 1923-24 $900,000; 1922-23, $1,100,000.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend need not think he can get away with that. That is after the appropriation ran out under the statute.


Arthur Meighen: It is the year before it ran out. Both years are in the estimates.


George Perry Graham: He read them both.


Arthur Meighen: Both are in the estimates. One was for the year 1923-24, $900,000; the other for the year 1922-23, $1,100,000, voted every year and debated on the floor.


George Perry Graham: I should like to see it.


Arthur Meighen: I will send it across.


George Perry Graham: I know about this one.


Arthur Meighen: The minister does not
want to see it now.


George Perry Graham: Oh, I know about this
one.


Arthur Meighen: I have no objection
to a bill going through in respect of any line that is essential, and the minister knows that. The minister does not need to insinuate to the House that I am an enemy of the National Railways; he could not get a soul in Canada, however innocent or partisan, to believe that.


George Perry Graham: A good many people
believe it now.


Arthur Meighen: 
George Perry Graham: Not at all.


Thomas Langton Church: these matters should first of all be referred to an impartial tribunal free from party politics, the Railway Commission of this country, for a report in relation to the whole matter. They recommended further that the National Railway system be brought directly under the control of the Railway Commission so that the commission will fix rates not only for the privately owned roads but for the publicly owned roads.
They also advised that no subsidies or guarantees for any kind of branch lines should be recommended to parliament before there was an exhaustive survey of the whole question from the engineering standpoint, the financial standpoint, the railway standpoint and the traffic standpoint. These were their recommendations. Why have they been ignored during the past two or three sessions of parliament? What is the Railway Commission for? You might as well abolish it if you are going to bring down bills for branch lines for this or that constituency in this haphazard manner. The Railway Commission has on its staff traffic experts at a cost of thousands of dollars. They have on their board freight experts. These men know all about the county of Pictou and Guysborough and all the rest of the counties getting branch lines and they know whether a road from one county into another, a distance of some six or seven miles, at a cost of $57,000 a mile is necessary. They can answer all these questions. My opinion is that these bills should never be passed by this House until they have been reported upon by the experts of the Railway Commission or before they have been referred to the standing committee on Railways and Canals. We might just as well give up trying to balance the budget, or look for any change in our expenditure, if we are going to add to the capital charges on the Canadian National as we would be doing if we passed this bill tonight. The earnings cannot justify it, and we have to go into the market for $28,000,000 of capital and borrow the money. When we consider the past commitments of the Canadian National it is folly to think of this expenditure and add to the system many miles of road that will not be able to meet the fixed charges, to say nothing of the operating charges. The hon .member for St. Lawrence-St, George (Mr. Marler) said $2,000,000,000 had been spent on railways and he seemed to charge it to public ownership but public ownership is not responsible for the situation of the Canadian National Railways. Public ownership did not build the Canadian Northern railway or the Grand Trunk, or the Grand Trunk Pacific, which is

responsible to-day for the large bulk of the $2,000,000,000 account referred to yesterday by the hon. gentleman. In the province of Ontario to-day they are suffering just as much as any other province for the lack of railways and rolling stock. It was said that $400,000,000 was spent in the last three years by the National Railway for rolling stock. V ery little of that went into the province of Ontario. On week-ends and holidays it is almost impossible to get cars for the railway. The Grand Trunk in Ontario was built by private parties and operated under private ownership, and it was in that province they made nearly all their money. It was a success until the Grand Trunk Pacific came into existence. They took $122,000,000 credit out of the old Grand Trunk in Ontario and $22,000,000 in cash, and invested it in the Grand Trunk Pacific in the II est, and what is the result? Ontario as a result of the Grand Trunk Railway becoming bankrupt is suffering more than any other province for the lack of transportation. Is this the time to build branch lines, Mr. Chairman? We are in a period of high costs for labour and material and high charges for money. Are the New York Central, the Michigan Central and the Pennsylvania Railway system going holus bolus into the building of branch lines here and there, as is proposed in Canada? No. An embargo has been placed upon these heavy expenditures by the Interstate Commerce Commission. I do not believe that the construction of many branch lines would appeal to the advocates of pubilc ownership in this province.


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: Does the hon. member think the interest rate on money is so high that the government should not construct the St. Lawrence waterway?


Thomas Langton Church: The sale of power alone will pay for that work and it is not proposed to go on with that until the financial situation permits. Is this period of high prices a proper time to go into these expenditures for railways? I read a report of an eminent engineer giving a survey of the capital expense of the various railway systems throughout the world, and almost without exception the directors of many large railway corporations have refused, and their boards of directors and their shareholders have refused, to vote money for any extensive capital expenditure. In the province of Ontario branch lines of the same description as these twenty-six proposed branch lines are built entirely by the province, and many of these Ontario lines connect with the Canadian Pacific and the Grand Trunk railways. I venture to say that

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
if this matter were referred to the Railway Commission the experts of the commission would say that many of these branch lines are not works for the general advantage of Canada, but merely provincial railways for the benefit of the province. In the province of Ontario they built a great railway system, the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario, which tapped the Cobalt district and other rich mining districts of New Ontario. Who built that particular system of railways in New Ontario? Was it this parliament? No, the province of Ontario did it itself. Ontario applied to this parliament for a subsidy for the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario but did not get it. Now it is proposed to extend the Temiskaming and Northern 'Ontario railway up to James bay, a purely federal matter, yet Ontario will have to do this itself.
Now, look what happened in Manitoba and Saskatchewan in the case of the Hudson Bay railway, a similar road to the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario. The Hudson Bay railway is being built not by the province but entirely by the people of Canada as a federal railway.
There should not be one law for Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and another for Ontario. There should not be one federal railway law for New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and another law for Ontario. The Railway Acts calls for equality of treatment, and there should be no unjust or undue discrimination between provinces and localities in railway matters whether it be with reference to branch lines or anything else. The report before us gives us -very little information. The economy cry is being raised now. I hope after the branch line bills we will hear no more about economy this session. We have here twenty or thirty millions proposed for branch lines. The Progressives are for the branch lines. When is an economy not an economy? When it's progressive.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: Is the hon. member in favour of building the viaduct at Toronto at a cost of $15,000,000?


Thomas Langton Church: Yes, I am in favour of
building a viaduct at Toronto, and I will tell the hon. member why his estimate is wrong. They have a contract for the building of the viaduct in Toronto. In fact, I was just coming to that when the hon. gentleman interrupted me. The city of Toronto through its harbour board has expended $21,000,000 of the taxpayers' money on the basis of a contract made by this railway, yet they have money to throw away on such things as a skyscraper at King and Yonge streets, a nonessential, the Scribe hotel, and so on. They can do things like that, but they cannot carry out a contract made in 1913, with a city which has always kept faith with this government.
I want to say to the hon. member that the government could not spend so much post office money in his riding were it not for the fact that out of the $29,000,000 collected from all post offices in Canada, $6,000,000 comes from Toronto.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: I may inform the hon. member that we really have no post office building; we have but a shack that is used for that purpose.


Thomas Langton Church: If you have not a post
office then you will get a branch railway for the asking .and if you do not get a branch railway it will not be Sir Henry Thornton's fault. Of $259,000,000 collected from the customs throughout Canada $60,000,000 of it or 24 per cent comes from Toronto. Yet we cannot get a post office there; we cannot get a customs house, not even a shack; we cannot get proper pay for our postal officials; we cannot get a viaduct which this government through the Grand Trunk Railway contracted to build. We cannot get anything for the citizens of Toronto. The government only pays one-third the cost of the viaduct, $8,000.000 or $9,000,000, and the receipts at Toronto will pay for it -ten fold.
Now, is this the time to build this system of railways? I say, no; it will be no loss if we wait for one, two or three years until industrial conditions readjust themselves, until the money market is better and the Canadian National Railways are given a chance to balance better their budget. They are behind sixty or seventy millions at the present time, and that deficit has to be put into the tax rate of this country. That is the cause of the sales tax and income tax; that is why we are still paying war taxes to help railways and we are going to build these branch lines out of war taxes. The people have a heavy burden of debt, and if there is not some retrenchment in the public expenditure, industry and manufacturing will be driven out of Canada.
To the hon. member who spoke a moment ago I may say that there is only one city I know of in Canada that has balanced its budget, and that is the city of Toronto. Of $112,000,000 collected in Toronto only $1,000,000 went back to the city, so that the budget is balanced by the $111,000,000. That 8111,000,000 would probably take care of some of the branch lines. One of the things condemned by the Drayton-Acworth report was the useless duplication and waste in connection
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

with railway construction in this country, the growth of railway mileage exceeding by ten to one the growth of the population. The report suggested that there should be a stay in the building of railways for many years to come.
Another question that may be asked is whether these bills are in order. Ordinarily bills are brought down and read in the House the first, second and third times. The rules provide that before a bill is introduced there must be on the reverse side of the bill a proper explanation of its purposes and the details of the proposal involved, but that is not done in this case. I think this is a matter that should be looked into .
The National Railways system has 22,000 miles of single track now; the resolution proposes to build another thousand miles. You have a merchant marine; what do they do? They are sitting in with the railways in the matter of rates; are they going to sit in with these branch lines in the same way?
I suppose they will keep the charges up there as well, and no doubt the Railway Commission will not be heard from in that case either. As a friend of public ownership I am afraid that public ownership will not be given a chance if the construction of branch lines is to go on as proposed

twenty-nine millions now, twenty-five or
9 p.m. twenty-six -millions next year-why, branch lines will sooner or later with their deficits act as the hangman for the National Railways. During the last three years $400,000,000 has been spent on rolling stock and equipment for the National Railways, and in view of that fact it seems to me that they should have made a better showing. I think they would have made just as good a showing if the present president of the National Railways had never been born. Furthermore, I do not know of any position in the British Empire to-day that cannot be filled by a native Briton. We have an official in Toronto a Briton, Mr. H. H. Couzens, head of the Toronto Transportation Commission, who is leaving that city to-morrow to take a position with a railway company at St. Paul at $50,000 a year. We have Canadian engineers, such as Mr. F. A. Gaby and Mr. Acres, who built the Chippewa canal. There is nothing the British born cannot accomplish in big public undertakings.
No one individual is responsible for any showing that may be made by the National Railways. The government gave the president every support, but with the large expenditure on rolling stock, the improved busi-
ness conditions and the carrying out of policies inaugurated by the old board we find that the credit is not all attributable to the president of the system.
I am not saying that Nova Scotia does not need some of these branch line facilities, but I would point out that in the counties of Ontario and Durham there has been an absolute waste of public money in connection with Canadian National Railways. Between Toronto and Cobourg there are four railway lines, the old Grand Trunk, with double track, running from Toronto to Port Hope and Cobourg; the Canadian Pacific, the old Canadian Northern, and the Toronto Eastern *-four railways where there is not enough business for one with [DOT] a double track. Yet they are going to squander money on continuing with the old Toronto Eastern, a road that in my opinion should never have become a steam radial. That policy of the Canadian National board has been condemned by the Globe newspaper, The Port Hope Guide and other Liberal organs in the Toronto district. Tf this branch line programme is a sample of the recommendations of the Canadian National directors, the sooner Canada gets a brand) new board of directors the better. This legislation is brought down in a haphazard manner, without proper information and without any consideration of how the construction of these branch lines will affect transportation costs throughout Canada. If this is the way we are to proceed then we. .shall wait in vain for reduced taxation, the statement to be announced in the budget-statement of the Acting Finance Minister.


George Perry Graham: I am not going to reply to my hon. friend- (Mr. Church) as he has two resolutions on the order paper that he was discussing, except to say that men who, like a good many of us, have all the railways they can use, and more too, and who can reach the railway station in five minutes from their door, and by street car, should not lecture people who have not a railway within thirty or forty miles.
My right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen) questioned my statement about the Aid to Agriculture Act. I was absolutely right, and the estimate in his hand showed that I was right.


Mr. GAUVREAU:: Caught him again. *


George Perry Graham: I am going to take the statute of 1919; that cannot be blamed on the present government. Hon. gentlemen know that when money is voted by statute it only appears in the estimates as a record, and is not voted upon in the House at all;

C.N.R.-Branch Lines
everybody knows that. Let me take the statute of 1919: Arts and Agriculture-Authorized by Statute, then comes a list of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and all the provinces, and at the bottom under the heading of "summary" this: To be voted, 83,648,000; Authorized by statute, 81,100,000.
I am going to follow that up to 1920, where the same thing appeared. To be voted, $3,903,000; Authorized by statute, 81,100,000 -absolutely as I said. I am going to go further and take 1921: To be voted, $4,502,139.50; Authorized by statute, $1,100,000. There it is every year, and I am going to point out why, for this is the act passed by my right hon. friend's government.
I will not read the preamble-yes I will, because it adds point:
Whereas it is desirable that encouragement be given to agriculture in all the provinces of Canada, and whereas great and permanent benefit will result through education, instruction and demonstration carried on along lines well devised and of a continuous nature;
Note that, "of a continuous nature":
Therefore His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as fallows:
1.	This Act may be cited as the Agricultural instruction Act.
2.	In this act, and in any regulations made hereunder, "Minister" means the Minister of Agriculture; "province" or "provinces" shall not extend to or include the Northwest territories or the Yukon territory.
Then comes section 3, and this is the milk in the cocoanut:
3.	For the purpose of aiding and advancing the farming industry by instruction in agriculture, and for the purposes authorized by this act, the following sums, aggregating ten million dollars, shall be appropriated and paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada during each fiscal year for the period of ten years beginning with the year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and fourteen, namely:
During the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and fourteen, the sum of seven hundred thousand dollars;
During the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and fifteen, the sum of eight hundred thousand dollars;
During the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and sixteen, the sum of nine hundred thousand dollars;
During the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and seventeen, the sum of one million dollars;
During the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, the sum of one million one hundred thousand dollars; and the like sum of one million one hundred thousand dollars during each of the succeeding fiscal years until the expiration of the fiscal year ending the thirty-first day of March, one thousand nine hundred and twenty three; provided that any portion of any of the above sums which may remain unearned or unpaid at the expiration of any of the said fiscal years previous to the last shall be carried forward and remain available according to its apportionment for the purposes of this act during any one or more of the succeeding years.
That is the statute, and the estimates were based on that statute, and were not placed in the estimates during these years for the purposes of discussion, and they were not discussed, because it was not necessary. They are there designated "authorized by statute." The other item is to be voted, and of course everything can be discussed in supply, because there is an item in the estimates for the application of the act, and under that vote everything can be discussed every year, just as it can be under the Railway Acts that I am now bringing in.
I come now to the year 1923, where the same thing occurs again. To be voted, $4,984,500; authorized by statute, $1,100,000. That amount was not voted, but was authorized by statute.
Now I am coming to the estimate that my right hon. friend read, and I am going to refer to the House for their judgment. He read the estimate 1923-1924:
"Grant to the provinces of Canada for the purpose of assisting and encouraging agricultural instruction, grants to be made on a proportional basis." True, but the act had run out, and the money had to be voted or the farmers would not have got the money that year, it not being payable by statute any longer, and the government not having given the farmers notice voted another sum one year after the expiration of the statute. I want to point this out because although my veracity may not appear to be much to my right hon. friend, it means a great deal to me. In the estimates of 1923-1924 my right hon. friend left this little item out in the reading. Before Item 51, which I have just read, appears a star, and this is what comes after the star: "Grant to the provinces of Canada for the purposes of assisting and encouraging agricultural instruction, grants to be made on proportionate basis." Then follows the note to which the star refers, as follows: "Note: The amount shown for 1922-23 was authorized by statute."


Arthur Meighen: Well, I think I can be just as frank with the House as my hon. friend. The statement that he has made, all to the effect that I had denied that these votes were authorized by statute, is beside the point. I stated distinctly they were authorized by statute. I stated distinctly, the programme contemplated by statute and provided by statute, running in each case for those years. I stated that the item appearing in the estimates was voted each year, and I did that on the authority of the only estimate I had before me, which read just as the minister has said.
C.N.R.-Branch Lines


George Perry Graham: But you did not read the note at the bottom.	-


Arthur Meighen: I did not note the footnote at the bottom, "authorized by statute" which would be an indication that it was not voted. But I want to draw to the attention of my hon. friend that while these amounts were not voted each year, except last year when the amount was voted, what I had before me indicated that all were voted, and I said so. While they were not voted, they appear in the estimates as stated by my hon. friend, and they appear as well at the bottom of the Agriculture estimates, so the House had before it in voting the money for Agriculture the exact amount that was passing by statute to the provinces; and there is this very great difference, the House debated it every year as well. I want to know, is the Minister of Railways going this year to bring down in the Supplementary Estimates-he could not be expected to in the Main Estimates because the bills will not be through-the amount expected to be expended this year? Will it appear there as was always the case under the Agricultural Instruction Act? I venture to say he will not and I want to draw his attention to this very marked difference: In respect of the Highways Act and the Agricultural Instruction Act the money was spent under the direct supervision of other governments responsible to other parliaments; in this case there is nothing of the kind. There is no supervision by this House at all or by any other House in Canada, once this bill passes the people have absolutely no further control. The minister asks the House now to vote the money for a period of years. In a case of that sort parliament every year ought to control and every year ought to vote the money. And under the old government in every such case parliament did. Never under the old government was there a dollar voted for the National Railways-although the money is now spent by a corporation and having been placed in their hands is no longer subject to our review-never was a dollar voted for those railways by guarantee, or by a straight loan, or by a grant, or anything else, which was not voted annually in the estimates. And this government has no excuse at all in this case for departing from that precedent. All this is done by a government that was going to restore the control of parliament that had been filched away, so it claimed, by the late administration. It is the old story "Those who talk the loudest mean the least. Those who talk the loudest, now destroy that which they so loudly professed.


George Perry Graham: The apology is accepted.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps my hon. friend will give us some information as to how he proposes to finance this line, whether he proposes to bring votes down in the regular way and keep a thorough control of these funds?


George Perry Graham: Will my hon. friend pardon me, I did not catch his question.
Sir HEIN R^ DRAYTON: I was asking the minister, through the Chairman, how it was proposed to finance this line. I notice the work is not going to be done in one year, it is being extended over a series of years. So we shall have history repeating itself, and the real work will not be commenced until an election is due. Now, if this work is not to be done in one year, is parliament to have the usual control, is the appropriation for this work going to be included in the usual vote for all these lines?


George Perry Graham: The same thing will be done as in the case of other votes by statute: Theie will be a full explanation given every year as to the amount of money to be expended during that year, and the amount of money expended the year previous. So that parliament will have absolute control to discuss the outlay from one end of the expenditure to the other.


Arthur Meighen: May I ask the minister what he means by "control to discuss"?


George Perry Graham: Mostly what I said.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then, Mr. Chairs man, I also want to ask my hon. friend if it is not possible to provide us with maps which we can read without difficulty. The maps supplied to us are very small; I confess I cannot read anything on the map I have. It is therefore quite impossible to properly ascertain the position of these lines. Is it not possib'e when we are dealing with sums running into the millions of dollars to know what we are doing? No one can tell what we are doing from this small map. The other day when these discussions started I asked for a map and I think a good map should be provided without delay. I am now going to ask my hon, friend, does he himself know at what distance from the shore this line will be constructed for the major part of its length? Nobody here knows. Then does he know, for examp'e, the distance there will be between this line and the existing railway to the north? Can he tell us that?

C.N.R.-Branch Lines


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: They run in entirely different directions.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then the map I have must be wrong, because it shows they will be parallel. That is one of the conditions we complain about; we do not know what information we are getting. The minister says the information on this map is wrong. All we can do is take this map and from it the railways seem to be running in a parallel direction. Now the minister says that is not correct, that they will not parallel each other.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: (Pictou):	One line
runs from northeast of the province proper, and the other runs to the southeast corner of the province.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I would invite my hon. friend to look at the map. It is a pretty small map but it shows the railways as running in a parallel direction. I will show this to the Chairman so that he can see what I say is correct. The Chairman objects; I do not know where we are going to land unless somebody will take a look at it. If my hon. friend will look at the map he will find I am correct in my statement. Perhaps the Minister of Justice will glance at the map and see whether it does not show that the two lines parallel each other.


George Perry Graham: I brought over some maps but I suppose they have all disappeared. I will ask my deputy to provide some better maps before we get through these bills. I think, probably, we shall have some other maps to-morrow.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the idea of the minister? Will this vote stand until we have a map to see whether this railway is running east or west, or north or south, or where, or whether the Minister of Defence or the map is right?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: This map is on too small a scale entirely. I quite agree we ought to have a much better map in the case of each one of these propositions.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the
Minister of Defence will go further and acknowledge that on this map the lines apparently are parallel?
Mr.* M AC DO N ALD (Pictou):	I know the
locality as every hon. gentleman from the province of Nova Scotia knows it and, as I say, the present line of railway skirts the northern coast of our province and finishes at Mulgrave so far as the province proper is concerned at what is practically the northeast corner of Nova Scotia. The new line
of railway projected will run to the southeast corner of the province. That is the situation, and as I have already stated instead of the new line paralleling the other it will run at an angle of between thirty-five and forty-five degrees from the existing railway.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am not quarreling with my hon. friend's superior knowledge of geography. I simply ask him if the railways, according to this map do not parallel each other?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The scale of this map is too small.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Do not the lines run parallel?	[DOT]


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: No I will
not say that. What is the scale of that map?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I cannot find
out. Perhaps the minister can tell us to what scale the map is drawn. Does not the Minister of Railways know what the scale is?


George Perry Graham: I do not. I have told
my hon. friend that I shall order better maps.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is certain information we ought to have in connection with fish shipments. We desire to know what the business situation is. The hon. member for the county (Mr. Mclsaac) has advanced a point-and I think it is a good one if it is well founded-in connection with fish shipments. I am going to ask my hon. friend if he can tell me the distance between the terminus of this line and the next point at which fish shipments are now being collected?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The one is at the head of the bay and the other is at the mouth.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What will be the mileage, what is the distance? Before this matter comes up again one thing that seems to be really material can be ascertained; we can find out just what the distances will be in connection with this railway. Perhaps my hon. friend will let us have that information.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then there is
another thing, we ought to have information as to the number of points where fresh fish is now picked up on the coast?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: It is brought by small steamers to Canso and Mulgrave.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Before getting
to that I was asking a question as to railway points. I observe that right along from
C.N.R.-Branch Lines

Chester in the east to Yarmouth in the west we have a line skirting the coast pretty well. Now I take it the government has information as to what points fresh fish is loaded on that railway, which skirts the sea as it does, and how many cars are loaded at the different points. There is another thing which we should also consider in connection with this matter. There is a line of boats; in fact, there is more than one line of boats; there is a boat service which is now subsidized and which is supposed to be looking after this fish business. I think the government ought to have and to bring down information as to the amount of subsidies paid. It is quite obvious that there might be a saving by passing this bill and striking out the subsidy.


George Perry Graham: I shall have a note made of the requests which my hon. friend has made and see that we get that information down. Before we ask that the bill be considered, I will try to get everything possible.


Mr. CLARK:: Will the amounts to be paid under these bills and the amounts to be spent each year be put in the estimates every year?


George Perry Graham: We have been discussing that for about an hour They will appear just as other amounts that are voted by statute, just as in the case of the other acts which I have cited, not for discussion, but for record.


John Arthur Clark: In the estimates?


George Perry Graham: I think so. I am not sure about that until I discuss with the auditors the best methods. We are only beating around the bush. Parliament will have all the information necessary as regards the expenditure of this or any vote.


Mr. BOYS:: The minister says that they will not be subject to discussion because they will be authorized by statute. What chance have we for discussion?


George Perry Graham: The same chance as was the case in connection with the highways bill.


William Alves Boys: That is a tu quoque argument. Get away from that.


George Perry Graham: Last year the highways were discussed for half a day and there were no estimates at all.
^ Mr. MEIGHEN: The highways?


George Perry Graham: The salaries were in for the officers, but the grant to highways was by statute. Yet we discussed everything in connection with the highways, under the amount of money for the railways of Canada, a portion 
of which goes to the salaries of the staff. Under that every act of that board came under the purview of this parliament for full discussion.


William Alves Boys: That is not the point. The point I am raising is: Are we going to have an opportunity to discuss these appropriations in future years?


George Perry Graham: Surely.


William Alves Boys: Under what item shall we have that opportunity? The minister has said that the items will appear in the estimates, as authorized by statute, but not for discussion. If he means that, what chance shall we have for discussion?


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend is taking me literally. I said that items that are authorized by statute are not discussable as regards those particular items per se, if he will allow me to use that language of his. But, as a matter of fact, under the heading of Railway Estimates, everything that the railway board does or intends to do can be fully discussed. That will include these.


William Alves Boys: I appreciate that that will be the case in a general way, but we would have no control of the expenditure, once this goes through. That is the vital point.


Arthur Meighen: I want to draw the minister's attention to this very great difference. When you vote money to be spent year after year, especially under the supervision of another parliament, you place a limit on the amount that is to be spent, so that we know every year there cannot be more than a certain amount spent. The minister never can know that under this bill and he will have no way of knowing it. I do not know how he is even to get anything in the estimates to look at. How is he going to know? No limit is set upon the expenditure. They may spend the whole amount in one year, and if the bill is like what it' was last year, they can spend twice as much, because the bill last year had no fixed, definite or final limitation. The bill may be different this year, but they can spend the whole thing in one year in any case.


George Perry Graham: No.


Arthur Meighen: That may not be
physically possible, but there is no parliamentary restraint. That is wholly different from a policy that contemplates a fixed maximum each year, especially when the matter is something that is controlled by another parliament. You could not get a more distinct case of absolutely putting out of the control of parliament what parliament

C.N.R. Branch Lines
is here to do. That is what parliament is here for. I have not had time yet to look the matter up, but my recollection is-and the minister's ought to be better than mine, because he was in the House earlier-that in the case of his own Transcontinental and Grand Trunk Pacific, though the construction was contemplated in the first place over a long term of years, the money was voted every year. I ask the minister if I am not right. What in the world is there to hinder building a little branch line here or a branch line there in the same way, when they built a railway the whole way across Canada, and through northern Canada at that? Was the money not voted every year for those two railways?


George Perry Graham: There are two very distinct differences, one being that the Transcontinental was constructed under a statute making it a continuous work. It was authorized by a statute in 1903, if I remember correctly.


Arthur Meighen: I am quite prepared
that that be done now. Let the minister come down each year for his money as he did in the Transcontinental case.


George Perry Graham: Will my right hon. friend allow me to continue? In a work like the Transcontinental, when the labour was largely brought in for the purpose and continued in operation, not interfering at all or being interfered with as labour is at the present time 'by farming operations, conditions were altogether different from what they are at present. Under present conditions, as I have been told time and again by some of our agricultural friends, the moment farming operations begin, a good deal of the labour leaves the railway and goes to the farm. That was not the case at all with the Transcontinental. The work was continuous year by year, a great work, with men brought in for that distinct purpose. 1 do not think it is a proper comparison to place, side by side, a large number of short lines, with small contractors dodging from one to another, with a great work 1,800 miles long that had to be continuous and with plenty of labour that could be had at all times on the line.


Arthur Meighen: I only rise to say that
for the life of me I do not see the point.


George Perry Graham: I am sorry.


Arthur Meighen: I suppose the government, in introducing the bills for the Transcontinental and the Grank Trunk Pacific, decided that they would have to vote the 64
money each year in the Estimates, and tin-reason they did that was because the labouring men would not be available for farming in the summer, presumably on account of the railway being so far to the north. I cannot express the point very well, because there is not a clear point to express.


George Perry Graham: I appreciate that.


Arthur Meighen: I appreciate it too, and
to be honest about the matter, the whole committee does. There is no point in what the minister says. What is the use of telling this committee that he has to have a bill, for fear the railway men will leave the road to go on the farm? I do not object to his bill. I did not do so last year. All we asked the minister was to subjoin a clause providing that the money should be voted each year in the estimates just as it has been done for all railway construction work, and as it has been invariably done in connection with the Canadian National Railways. The government is on the wrong track in the matter, and it would have been far better to get right wlien it had the opportunity.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 32, respecting the construction of a Canadian National railway line between Sunnybrae and Guysborough in the province of Nova Scotia.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



DUCKS-ARMSTRONG

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from near Duck's, a point about 12.5 miles east of Kamloops, to Armstrong, and from Vernon to Kelowna, with a branch from near Vernon to Lumby, in the province of British Columbia; mileage already graded, 101 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 105 miles; estimated cost $2,236,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
George Perry Graham: Before I read the memorandum in reference to this resolution I might explain that this is one of the lines in connection with which about $5,000,000 has been expended in grading. The following is
the memorandum:
Kelowna and Lumby Branches-	Cost
Grade now ahead of track-101 miles-
Proposed in 1924-4 miles grade; 57 miles
track and ballast	 $1,246,000
Proposed in 1925-48 miles track and ballast.. 990,000



$2,236,000 REVISED EDITION

[Stage Direction]
C.N.K. Branch Lines
[Stage Direction]
The Kelowna branch constitutes a line from Kamloops Jet. passing through Kamloops and running through Armstrong and Vernon down to Kelowna, a distance of 117.5 miles, with another branch from Vernon through to Lumby a distance of 15 miles. That part of the line from Kamloops Junction to Kamloops, a distance of about 3 miles, is in operation and is used by the main transcontinental trains for connection to the town of Kamloops. Rather than duplicate the C.P.R. line it was contemplated to obtain running rights over the main line of the C.P.R. from between Kamloops and Ducks, a distance of about 12.5 miles, and also running rights from them between Armstrong and Vernon over their Okanagan branch, about the same distance, and this then left about 104.5 to construct. '
In 1919 a contract was let for the grading of this line and grading was completed by the end of the season 1920, with the exception of a few small gaps amounting to about 4 miles. Practically all the ties required for the line have been produced locally and are now located at various points on the line.
It is proposed in 1924 to finish these gaps in the grade, lay the track and complete the line into Armstrong, and also to arrange for running rights referred to, with the C.P.R. In 1925, the line will be completed to Kelowna, and the branch to Lumby finished.
From Campbell Creek to the beginning of Grande Prairie, about Mile 35, the line runs through a broken hilly country with considerable scattered timber and grazing land, on which some cattle ranging is now done, and as this part of the line gets up to an elevation of 2,275 feet, it is not suitable for much actual farming, and will be confined to grazing and hay raising to feed stock.
The Grande Prairie valley is a flat bottom about J mile wide and probably ten miles long, which is fairly well developed at the present time, but when further developed should be capable of giving a fair amount of business resulting from mixed farming. At Falklands, near the foot of this valley, there is a very large and good deposit of gypsum which, if a market could be found for it, should eventually give considerable traffic.
After the end of Grande Prairie, into Armstrong, the line goes through a broken hilly country, which is'only suitable for ranching and has little development on it at present.
In the district of Armstrong, which produces largely hay, oats, celery and garden products, and fruit, considerable traffic would be expected.
Vernon is the centre of a considerable area of fruit growing land (mainly apples) and the valley of Long Lake, and the valley up toward Lumby are at present tributary to Vernon.
From Vernon to Kelowna the line follows a valley parallel to and about four miles distant from Okanagan lake. From about 13 or 14 miles from Vernon, at the head of Long lake, through to Kelowna, this valley is quite extensively developed in orchards, and is susceptible of considerable more development as further water for irrigation is procured and put on the land Our lme runs down the centre of this development and would shorten the wagon haul for the producer in this district;
The firat eight mUes of the Lumby branch goes through a highly developed orchard district, and at this point reaches the limit of fruit growing. From there on to Lumby there is considerable development by way of mixed fanning and cattle ranging, besides some development further in from there.
The business from their line will be mostly to the Pacific coast, or the prairies, so will give the main line considerable traffic, mostly of a long haul character.
there has already been expended about $5,364,000 on these branches on the right of way, grading and 
fencing, which are nearly completed. It is estimated it will require $2,236,000 to complete them. It is computed that although the business from these lines will not clear sufficient to pay all the fixed charges when the amount now spent is included, it will nearly do so, which means it will give a very good return on the money now asked for to complete the line.
Note:-
.Kelowna. Assumes that running rights over C.P.R. wil be used between Kamloops and Campbell Creek and also Armstrong to Vernon, total of 24 miles ' Lumby.-Lumby must have track laid in order to reach ties for Kelowna piece.
Henry Lumley Drayton: We are glad to have more adequate particulars in reference to this resolution than we have received bo far.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know what the laughter is about unless hon. gentlemen think that it is impossible to take seriously anything the minister says. I still think that the particulars he has just given are more ample than he has given so far in other cases. Will hon. gentlemen dispute that fact? If not, why the laughter? It is a good thing to have these particulars and the House is entitled to them. But they are far less necessary in the case of a line which manifestly must be gone on with and which should have been gone on with last year. We have 101 miles now graded ahead of track and 4 miles of grade proposed for 1924.


Mr. JACOBS:: One reason would be, that this is in British Columbia.


Arthur Meighen: We took our stand on
roads that ran through counties represented by members of the other group in this House.


Samuel William Jacobs: We are talking about provinces.


Arthur Meighen: We are represented here by counties. The hon. gentleman has not much to say for himself, even in his seat. This line is mostly built. It has had millions spent on it for some time now. I am acquainted with the whole district. I have been through it, and know the traffic in it, but that is no reason for saying we should not have the fullest information. It seems strange that, in respect of lines 'where the most of the money has been spent and most of the work done, we get more information than we receive about other new ventures, something that has never happened in parliament before.


Herbert Meredith Marler: I do not see the slightest
justification for this line in comparison with the other. My right hon. friend says that because the line is being graded-and the minister agrees with him-and several million

C.N.R. Branch Lines
dollars of money have been put into this graded line, that we should immediately put further money into that line and make it a profitless railway. Did my hon. friend listen to the report which was read by the Minister of Railways and Canals? Did he see any great hope in that report of that line ever paying? Did he hear the report about the hilly country it ran through? When the Guys-borough line was discussed the question came up in regard to boat service. This is for the fruit service. There is a boat service from Penticton at one end, where there is an outlet, and then there is a branch line running from Sicamous to Vernon at the other end. There are boats running all the time, and there is no justification for putting money into this line. There is just as good boat service in that district as there is in Nova Scotia. I may say there is very little to recommend the Nova Scotia line at least.


Arthur Meighen: Has the hon. member
the least idea of the population along the line?
Mr. M'ARLER: I do not think that enters into consideration.


Arthur Meighen: What are railways for?


Herbert Meredith Marler: Why this great anxiety
about this particular line? Why should there not be criticism with regard to this particular line? We have been hearing criticism about other lines.


Henry Lumley Drayton: None about
Huberdeau.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Pardon me, I criticized it myself to-day.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. gentleman
did, but we did not.


Herbert Meredith Marler: I am very much surprised that they did not, because it was very unnecessary also.


Arthur Meighen: We treat these lines on
their merits.


Herbert Meredith Marler: My hon. friend is mistaken about the Huberdeau line and about this line. There is service on that lake every day in the year from one end of the year to the other.


John Arthur Clark: Every day of the year?


Herbert Meredith Marler: So I am informed.


John Arthur Clark: Did the hon. gentleman
criticize the Guysborough line to-day?


Herbert Meredith Marler: No. I would like to
criticize it very much now but I thought
there was enough criticism coming from the other side of the House, and I thought I would let my hon. friends do my work. In this particular case they are not criticizing this line, but I am criticizing it, and I say there is no justification for it at all.


Samuel William Jacobs: Does this line parallel the
Canadian Pacific railway?


Herbert Meredith Marler: No, it does not parallel
the Canadian Pacific. The Canadian Pacific serves this district sufficiently. I am glad the hon. member for George Etienne Car- . tier reminded me' of that point. It brings out the very point the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) expressed several times in this debate, I commend him for it. He stated time and again that where the Canadian Pacific Railway served a certain district there was no necessity to construct other lines. The Canadian Pacific Railway serves this district at one end of the lake and by a spur line it is served at the other end of the lake. There is a boat service at the other end of the lake, and during the fruit season the service is carried on and they have an admirable outlet. There is no justification for this line more than there is for the Guysborough line.


Mr. McBRIDE:: I do not think the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Marler) knows the circumstances out in British Columbia quite as well as he would like to represent to this House or would make this House believe he does. In the first place, he says there is service on that lake every day in the year. There is nothing of the kind. I have known that lake to be frozen up.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Will the hon. gentleman forgive me for interrupting? I think he is quite right in that respect. I should have stated there was a service on the lake at the necessary times in the year. I am obliged for the correction in that respect.


Thomas George McBride: Not at all. There is a number of cold storage buildings in that valley and the fruit requires to be moved out at all seasons of the year. And not only that, this line does not parallel the Canadian Pacific railway. It branches off the main line seventy-two miles west of Sicamous, where the Canadian Pacific branch starts. It runs through a splendid valley. The Grand Prairie is a much larger valley than some people imagine. I know that country well, and it runs down through the Okanagan district. The Canadian Pacific runs to Vernon, but this line runs down to Kelowna, much further than the Canadian Pacific railway.
CJV.R. Branch Lines


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: How far is it from Kelowna to the station on the Crownest or the Kettle valley?


Thomas George McBride: It must be quite a distance. I do not know that line. It is not in the same district at all. There is a gypsum deposit on this line at Grand Prairie and the mill is built to manufacture this gypsum. That mill has been there for years, and will itself contribute a large amount of traffic to this line. I think I am safe in saying that there are at the present time about five cars of gypsum per day coming into Vancouver. That mostly comes from Winnipeg. If this line were built, that traffic would all be diverted to Grand Prairie as the freight would be much less. As has already been said, about $5,500,000 has been spent on the line. The right of way is there and the ties are there:	They are deteriorating as the
years go by and I would be safe in saying that it would be one of the best paying branches of the Canadian National Railways west of the Rocky mountains. Last year there were over 6,000 cars of apples taken out of the Okanagan, besides other farm produce. If this line is built the Canadian National will have half of that, in fact they will have more than half of this freight, and the only men 1 have ever heard criticise this extension are gentlemen who are either employed by or working for the Canadian Pacific Railway-


Herbert Meredith Marler: Is the hon. gentleman making any innuendo or slight suggestion in that respect? Let him speak out if he is.


Thomas George McBride: The hon. gentleman from St. Lawrence-St. George does not need to take it to himself if it does not fit him.


Mr. MacKELVIE:: It is not necessary for me to say very much more than the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride) has stated to the committee. I have spoken on several occasions regarding the necessity of this branch. Two or three weeks ago I dwelt on it to some extent in my remarks on the Speech from the Throne. My. hon. friend from St. Lawrence-St. George takes exception to this statement and shows a very incomplete knowledge of the situation in that country. He bases his principal objection on the fact that on the Okanagan lake the Canadian Pacific runs a boat which provides transportation facilities for the fruit growers of that district. He does not take into consideration the contour of that country. He does not understand that between Vernon and Kelowna, a distance of thirty-five miles, there is a 
section which produces perhaps 60 per cent of the apples grown in that section. The fruit growers are subjected to a yearly charge of between $300,000 and $400,000 in truckage and drayage for the hauling of their fruit to points either on the lake or at the railway at Vernon. It was estimated in a board of trade brief which was prepared on. this subject a few years ago that the total loss to the farmers of the district traversed by this line in hauling charges was not less than $500,000 a year. This is a thickly populated district. It is a country of small farms, the average fruit farm consisting of ten or twenty acres. It takes upr wards of fifty acres of prairie land to produce a car of grain, but this country will fill a car with produce from the orchards or with vegetables from an area of less than two acres, so that a very largp traffic is to be expected from this district. Many of these orchards have not yet reached anything like maturity and in a few years their production will be doubled. Out of that valley last year went Over 10,000 cars of freight;
I do not know what the incoming freight represented. But a very large revenue indeed may be expected for the national lines when this great feeder is built.


Herbert Meredith Marler: If this would be obviously such a paying line w'hy was it not built in there long before this?


John Armstrong MacKelvie: That is a question the
hon. member will have to ask the government. The line has been graded for several years and undoubiedly w'ould have been completed had not the war intervened. It was always regarded by the Canadian National authorities as a paying proposition. I venture to say that Sir Henry Thornton is as anxious as any member of this House to see it completed, and completed at an early day so that the Canadian National may, if possible, get a share of the outgoing traffic this year. The report read by the minister mentions the hilly nature of the country, but that refers only to a very small portion of it, lying between Ducks and Grand Prairie. The Grand Prairie district is a country where mixed farming has been carried on successfully for many years, and once transportation facilities are afforded it will double or treble its output. The gypsum deposit referred to by the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride) is acknowledged to be the largest and purest deposit of the kind on the continent. It is in the possession to-day of a Winnipeg company who are only too

C.N.R. Branch Lines
anxious to exploit it if they are given, the necessary transportation facilities. The hon. member for South Oxford (Mr. Sutherland) startled the House the other night by stating the tonnage obtained from a single acre in his constituency. Of course when the hon.
gentleman mentioned that it 10 p.m. came from limestone it cleared up some doubts that might have existed in the minds of hon. members. From these gypsum deposits alone I have no doubt that an output equal to the figure my hon. friend mentioned may be expected within a brief period once the railway goes in there. From Vernon south to Kelowna this line traverses the very cream of the fruit growing district of British Columbia. New orchards are being planted every day. The orchard owners of that country have been subjected to a series of bad years and they have not been able to dispose profitably of their fruit. This year also I am afraid they will suffer very heavy loss, and anything that will help them in the way of giving them better facilities is surely something to which this House should give serious consideration. The district running east of Vernon which is tapped by this spur of fifteen miles, runs through a section which contains the famous Coldstream ranch, where there is one of the best orchards in Canada. Further on it reaches the town of Lumby, which is situated in perhaps the best dairying and mixed farming section of that part of country. Back of Lumby lies a tremendous area of timber land and a great traffic is now being worked up there in ties and telephone poles. The line from Lumby to Vernon will be kept busy for a large, portion of the year transporting wood products alone. I have had prepared and presented to me an estimate by the board of trade of that country in which the belief is expressed that once the line is completed, traffic amounting to a million dollars will flow over it the first year. This line can certainly be regarded as one which is capable of financial development. I sincerely believe that in the course of a very few years it will be found to be one of the best feeders of traffic for the Canadian National and that it will pay for itself handsomely.


John Arthur Clark: How far is Lumby from the lake and from the nearest railway station?


John Armstrong MacKelvie: Lumby is fifteen miles
from the nearest- railway station and it is four miles further to the lake.


Herbert Meredith Marler: It is the same old story
-discussing these estimated costs about projected lines. As soon as a line is proposed for Nova Scotia those from that province say it is essential. Perhaps it is and perhaps it is not. It is the same thing when we come to British Columbia. The line is said to be essential. Perhaps it is and perhaps it is not.


Mr. POWER:: Who should know whether
or not it is essential, the people from the province concerned, or somebody else?


Herbert Meredith Marler: We should know whether it is wise or whether it is not wise to spend this money, and with the information that is before us it is utterly impossible to determine whether it is wise or not. That is the whole question.


Charles Gavan Power: The hon. gentleman seems
to have some objection to the people from the provinces concerned stating that the roads are essential. He claims that they are not essential and he states himself that he does not know whether they are or not.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Certainly I do. I know
very little about these roads. I think the information should be put before this House so that hon. members can determine, on the information of competent engineers, whether the proposed lines are necessary or not.


Mr. CASGRAIN:: Does the hon. member
say that the engineers of the Canadian National are not competent?


Herbert Meredith Marler: The engineers of the
Canadian National Railways do not appear before this House, nor does Sir Henry Thornton-no one appears before this House. We have nothing but the shortest possible reports on these subjects, and we sit down here and vote millions of which we are trustees, nothing more nor less.


Charles Gavan Power: The right hon. leader of
the opposition, a friend of my hon. friend from Montreal, states that he is quite satisfied with the information brought down in this particular case.


Arthur Meighen: No, I did not say that.


Herbert Meredith Marler: It is not material to me
whether the leader of the opposition is satisfied or not. The fact that he is satisfied is no indication that I am satisfied.


Samuel William Jacobs: It is a good Conservative
county through which this line passes.

C.N.H. Branch Lines


Herbert Meredith Marler: If hon. gentlemen will not treat this matter seriously, I assure them that the country will treat it seriously. Hon. members will be held accountable for voting in this committee or in the House later on for expenditures of this kind without having before them the necessary information. It is not a question of dealing with any particular province or any particular part of the country; every one of these lines has to be considered on its merits. I am not saying that this line in British Columbia is not a proper line or that the line in Guysborough is not a proper one, but I do say that we have not the information before us to judge properly of this thing. The matter should be put before us in a more intelligent way. We should have maps before us; we should have the engineers before us and the board of management. The board of management have made mistakes in the past; we know of the mistakes they have made, and we want to judge for ourselves whether or not they are making a mistake now. I am not pointing particularly to this British Columbia line or to any other line, but I say we are proceeding in a very light hearted manner in voting millions in this House the way we are doing now.


Arthur Meighen: I sympathize almost
entirely- with what the hon. member says.
I have never expressed any satisfaction with the data brought down, but I have said that it is a lot more ample in this case than in cases where it was needed much more.


Charles Gavan Power: Even the smallest amount of praise from the right hon. gentleman immediately sends us into the heaven of expectation. We are so pleased with that little amount that we think he is praising us extremely.


Arthur Meighen: I cannot really define the satisfaction I take from exalting my hon. friend even into the first heaven. Certainly the data laid before the House should be such as prima facie would show that this will be a paying line and will serve a large section of the population struggling now to be served.
In this case I happen to know the district.
In this case I have peculiar information. I do not assume I know it nearly as well as the hon. member behind me (Mr. Mac-Kelvie) or the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride), but I know it fairly well and have known it for some years. From what general knowledge I have of it, it would appear to me to be a line that would certainly pay the railway, and a line

undoubtedly the lack of which is causing very great suffering and hardship. But I am in full accord with what the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George has said: We ought to have a prima facie case on the authority of the president in this as in every other case, for hon. members who are not so well acquainted with the different territories through which these lines are to run, in order that all may give their votes in an intelligent and conscientious way. But we must be reasonable; we cannot have Sir Henry Thornton or his engineers before this House. There will come a time later on, after the bills are brought down, when the suggestions of the hon. member in that regard will be more appropriate than at this time. I do not think we ought to find fault with any of the bills in that regard, nor have I done so; but I do demand, in this case as in every other, on behalf of other hon. members as well as on behalf of myself that we should have the certificate of Sir Henry Thornton that it is his judgment that the road should be built, and not only his certificate, but the basic facts beneath the certificate to enable us to form an independent judgment of our own.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Do I understand that my hon. friend is satisfied with a mitten certificate?


Arthur Meighen: No, I want the basic
facts beneath the certificate, the business facts to enable us to form an independent judgment of our own. I do not think we ought to take the judgment of anybody; I do not see how we can. If we are ready to take it, what are we here for? We might just as well let the president and board of directors do what they wish. We have to form an independent judgment of our own, and I am wholly in accord with what the hon. member says, that we should have the facts before us to enable us to do so. But I do not think we can have them before us in great detail and subject them to crossexamination in Committee of the Whole. A time later on may come for that, but we . should have in outline such facts as, if proven correct on examination, would warrant the road being finished.


Mr. HUMPHREY:: I would like to endorse thoroughly the remarks made by the hon. member for Cariboo and the hon. member for Yale. I am fully conversant with the characteristics of the part of the country through which this branch line will run, and although this particular branch line does not touch my own district, I know the conditions there very well, and- I can give full support to the hon. member for Cariboo and

C.N.R. Branch Lines
the hon. member for Yale in endorsing this proposed line.
There is one feature, however, that has not been brought out by the two previous speakers. This branch line, which I believe to be a sound business proposition, has been in the minds of the people of this district, which includes a considerable area, for many years. With the completion of this line to the point named, Lumby, transportation will be provided for a class of settlers who have been in there for a good many years, and a class that has not been mentioned by the two previous speakers from British Columbia. This line will provide transportation facilities for the settlers who have gone into what is called the Fire Valley district; In the last five years the province of British Columbia has built a highway or wagon road from a point called Edgewood, on the Arrow lakes, to Vernon in the Okanagan district. The settlers in the Fire Valley district went there a good many years ago, and the characteristics of the country are such that they have had no means of transportation. They have not had a wagon road in or out; they have had only a trail for many years. This particular district that I speak of is a strip of country something like a valley, seventy miles long, settled from one end to the other. Many mining properties have been developed there, but their further development is waiting upon transportation facilities. The only transportation they have had in the last ten or twenty years has been a boat service on the Arrow lakes. That service has filled certain requirements, but it has only touched one point, Edgewood. In the past few years the government have taken it upon themselves to complete a wagon road from Edge-wood through this valley into the Okanagan district, and that road will be completed this year. That wagon road has been their only means of transportation in and out. With the completion of this branch line to Lumpy and the completion of this wagon road which the British Columbia government is building, there will be a connecting link giving access to the settlers, and providing the transportation facilities that are necessary for the mining properties to develop. The development in this particular district will have an influence on the future development of the province, and the building of this line will in every way fulfil a longfelt want. In my own humble opinion it will only be a very short time before this branch line will be a revenue producer and be paying for itself.


Mr. FORKE:: Mr. Chairman, I rise only for the purpose of taking exception to the
statement made by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, that we are voting these millions of dollars light-heartedly.


Herbert Meredith Marler: I think we are.


Robert Forke: The hon. member is entitled to his opinion. I am not finding any fault with him, but he seems to object to my repeating his words. I am protesting against his statement that we are voting this money light-heartedly, and I think I have a perfect right to make that protest.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Certainly.


Robert Forke: I can assure the hon. member that none of the members in this part of the House is doing so. It is very difficult for a member not familiar with the local circumstances to form an accurate judgment as to the value of any particular road that is proposed. I quite agree with the hon. member who said that we can only listen to those who are familiar with these different districts. I have listened very carefully to the criticisms that have been made by different members, and to the arguments that have been advanced by those supporting these railways, also to the statements of the minister, and had I thought that I could add anything to the discussion I certainly would not have kept quiet. I am trying, as I suppose every hon. member is doing, to form just as accurate a judgment as I possibly can as to these proposed lines, whether they should be built or not, but I cannot help but think in listening to some of the criticisms that they are not always put forward for the purpose of eliciting the facts. Sometimes they seem to have other motives behind them. Perhaps I have no right to make any statement of that kind, but it struck me that that might sometimes be the case.
A lot of money is proposed to be spent upon these branch lines, and it is a serious matter. The country is in a very critical position financially, and I do not want to see one dollar spent any more than does the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, unless it can be shown to be in the best interests of this country. I do not think it is any use anyone getting tip and repeating that phrase time and again. We had the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Church) making an eloquent speech to-night about the necessity for saving money, and then immediately afterwards he began to justify spending millions and millions in Toronto. Those millions may be perfectly legitimately spent in Toronto but it is no use for the defenders of that expenditure to criticize others who advocate spending money in some other locality. I have nothing
C.N.R. Branch Lines

further to add. I do not intend to take part in the discussion unless I can contribute something of value. I simply rose for the purpose of saying that we are quite serious in advocating that no money should be expended unless that expenditure is absolutely needed.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Just one word. I wish
to make my position abundantly clear to this committee, particularly to the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. McBride). It is not a question as to whether a line is being built in Nova Scotia, or in New Brunswick or in Quebec, or any other province whatsoever. I was not directing criticism to lines in British Columbia any more than I am directing criticism to lines in any other province. I stated on Tuesday that where a line is essential and vital then, and only then, should we spend money, and to that extent I am prepared to give my support. That I repeat again in the House to-night. My right hon. friend, the leader of the opposition, has told us that he knew this country and no doubt the member for Yale (Mr. MacKelvie) knows this country; the other members from British Columbia are equally well informed. I do not doubt that for a single moment. But I have not favoured lines in Quebec, I think those lines are certainly not necessary in so far as my own personal knowledge goes, but what I say, what I urge upon the government, is that when the time arrives-if the time does arrive-that we should have llrst-hand information from the necessary engineers and the necessary officers of the Canadian National railways; that we shall meet these gentlemen face to face, question them on the subject, find out for ourselves at first hand the necessity for these lines, whether they are to serve the population, and whether or not they should be built. That is the information I am going to urge, when the proper time comes, should be submitted in some manner or form before these bills go through.


Mr. MALCOLM:: I have to disagree with the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George. He is not basing the construction of this line upon a business basis. He seems to argue that the only line that should be built is one that is essentia] ahd vital, and he assumes that because the Okanagan valley is somewhat served by the Canadian Pacific railway the territory should be left entirely to that system.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Not at all, I made no such statement. My hon. friend is misquoting me entirely.


James Malcolm: If I err at all it is in
misinterpreting my hon. friend.


Herbert Meredith Marler: Do not misinterpret me
then.


James Malcolm: As custodians of the
National system we have a perfect right to spend money from a business point of view to build branches that will serve as feeders to the National system. As an Ontario man who has some knowledge, by having travelled through that portion of British Columbia, of the possibilities of the Okanagan valley, I am neither strongly for this enterprise nor prejudiced against it. I treat it .purely as a business proposition. This territory, as I know and as has been so well said by the members for the district, is considerably west of the line of rail and water served by the Canadian Pacific Railway. The proposed line will furnish transportation facilities to the more easterly portion of the Okanagan territory, and from a purely business standpoint I believe the National Railway system is perfectly wise in constructing this branch. It will not only serve the agricultural and fruit growing interests but will open up a promising mineral country besides. It is absolutely a good business proposition. Having said this, however,
I must express my disappointment that a resolution has not been introduced providing for what would be one of the best lines from a business point of view, that could be constructed in the Dominion. That is a line from Grande Prairie to the National railway at Brule, which will open up a fine coal area and serve to promote settlement in the Peace river valley, I am not at all opposed to building such lines as business propositions. I do not think that as custodians of the National Railway system we should confine ourselves to lines that are absolutely essential.
I think we could assist the management of the National lines in providing feeders which will furnish business to the main system.


George Perry Graham: I should like to take up a minute or two in replying to some things that have been said. The government has been criticized to-day for not giving greater or more detailed information. I will make the assertion that there never was any more information given the House concerning the construction of branch lines than has been given to-day. There never was previously, so far as I can ascertain, a statement signed by the head of the Canadian National Railway system placed on the Table. But I want to go further. There is nothing to hide. We want to give parliament every information possible. Now the reason there is more detailed information available in the case of this line is that people have been all through

the country and know all about its possibilities. Talk about estimating traffic on projected lines! Why it can only be a sort of educated guess, and perhaps not very much of a guess at that. In such a matter no one can guess with any certainty. One hon. gentleman spoke of the information given to the shareholders of a private company, like the shareholders of the Canadian Pacific Railway, in regard to branch line projects, and said it was far more detailed than any information that has been disclosed here. Very weffi I will read the information the Canadian Pacific Railway shareholders receive. I have the report here. I am not criticizing it at all, but I am pointing out that we as shareholders of the Canadian National Railway system are far more critical than the shareholders of private companies because the latter trust their directors. Here is a quotation from the annual report of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1923:
10. During the past year a moderate programme of branch line construction in the western provinces was proceeded with, 231 miles of line being graded and 347 miles of track laid on lines the construction of which you had previously authorised. Your directors are of the opinion that some further extensions should be built during the present year in order _ to supply much needed railway facilities to farmers in the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. All the branches have been carefully located in good territory and should develop considerable additional traffic. Your authority will be asked for proceeding with the construction of the following lines and for the issue and sale of a sufficient amount of consolidated debenture stock to meet the expenditure, namely:-
Then the report goes on to enumerate 249 miles of proposed railway construction. I have given more information as to each one of these branch lines than is to be found in the report of this private company concerning these projected 249 miles.


Mr. MILLAR:: I do not want to discuss the construction of branch lines in districts that I do not know anything about. But when we come to discuss resolution No. 14 I shall be prepared to do so because it proposes to construct a branch line in the constituency which I represent. But so much has been said as to what these branch lines should earn that I feel justified in quoting a paragraph from a report on The Wheat Situation, by Henry C. Wallace, Secretary of Agriculture in the United States. I think the quotation has a direct bearing on the matters we are now discussing. The extract in question reads as follows:
It is recognized that some railroads depend largely upon wheat for revenue. It seems evident, however, that in the long run such roads may profit by carrying wheat in a period of depression at little or no profit
C.N.R. Branch Lines
in order that agriculture may be maintained as a source of revenue in periods of prosperity. Low freight rates have aided in the settlement and development of a large part of the wheat growing regions. Low rates may be as necessary to maintain this development through periods of depression as they were to secure the settlement and development.


Henry Lumley Drayton: In answer to my hon. friend the minister I hope he is not going to take it for granted that because he has not already constructed lines in_ every instance he should not give proper information. I submit to him that you can learn just as much when you are running survey lines through a particular section of country as you can from the trackmen placed on dump. Traffic returns are not got from railway dumps. The real reason why we have full particulars in the present instance is that the matter seems to have been properly canvassed. There is one thing for which I would commend my hon. friend in this particular report. He has a- plain statement of the management that, as regards the new money that is to be put into this venture, it will be a profitable investment.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr., Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 33, respecting the construction of Canadian National Railway lines, _ Kamloops-Ivelowna division, province of British Columbia.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



COWICHAN BAY-VANCOUVER ISLAND

[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line from a point at mile 58.3 near Deerholme on the Vancouver island main line of the Canadian Northern Pacific railway, in a generally easterly direction to Cowichan bay, in the province of British Columbia; estimated mileage includng existing gradng 8 miles; estimated cost, $358,000.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair:
George Perry Graham: The memorandum which I have in regard to this branch line reads:
Cowichan bay, Mile 0-8-
Proposed in 1924-8 miles grade	 $230,000
Proposed in 1925-8 miles track	 128,000

In 1924 it is the intention to do the grading and bridging on the 8 miies at a cost of $230,000, and in 1925 to lay the track on it and complete it at a cost for that year of $128,000.
The purpose of this line is to make a short routing to tide-water for timber and its products from Van-
C.N.R. Branch Lines

couver island line. This would shorten the route 52 miles as against the haul to tidewater at Victoria. Besides shortening the route it would make a possible location for dumping of logs at tidewater, as there is not suitable location at Victoria for this purpose.
The construction of this line will make possible the hauling of logs off the Vancouver island line, which at present has a length which is prohibitive.
There are a large number of timber owners who stand ready to go into a big development of timber and its products as soon as this line is completed.


Henry Lumley Drayton: This is a matter about which I do not know very much, and I am going to ask my hon. friend to give us a few more particulars. I take it from what he has just said that he is going to build a logging railway.


George Perry Graham: It is from an existing railway to tidewater.


Henry Lumley Drayton: From the explanation, there is no other object. Is that right?


George Perry Graham: I would like to get what my hon. friend means in distinguishing a logging railway from another.


Henry Lumley Drayton: These logging railways are put in by the different logging concerns interested in the matter and they are not put in by the system. I have a distinct knowledge of logging railways. I have had to do some work in connection with them in British Columbia. Will my hon. friend look into this and let us have the information? If there is nothing more to be said of the matter than what he has read, it would appear that this is merely a logging railway and the county should not be put to that expense. How many miles of line are already constructed in connection with this bit of railway?


George Perry Graham: About fifty-eight, I think.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is this the line on which we now have the motor car service?


George Perry Graham: I have not that information.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not know how the situation stands now, but we used to have only a motor car service on one of these lines, at any rate. There was not enough business to run a train. Does the minister know anything about that?


George Perry Graham: The object of this bill is to get connection between the line and tidewater. I will try to get some more information, but it seems to me that there would be a great development of the timber-carrying trade. To haul the timber to Victoria to get to tidewater, as the memorandum states, the mileage is altogether too great; but if this short branch of eight miles were constructed, it

would enable the timber to be carried on this railway and it would induce a development in that trade to get to tidewater by a very few miles' hauling.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What lumber is carried now on the railway? All of the lumber is not fifty-eight miles from tidewater.


Mr. CAHILL:: How can lumber be carried on a railroad that is not built?


Henry Lumley Drayton: I was not referring to the extension; J was referring to the existing fifty-eight miles of track, as the hon. member knows. I am asking again what lumber is carried on that existing fifty-eight miles of track?


George Perry Graham: Just this explanation which my hon. friend did not get. I would imagine the haulage to Victoria was very great. The memorandum reads:
The construction of this line will make possible the hauling of logs off the Vancouver island line, which at present has a length which is prohibitive.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is all the lumber at the far end of the line?


George Perry Graham: I could not say that.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the minister, when he comes back, will be kind enough to have a little information as to this line of fifty-eight miles, what the service is, whether the truth is, as my recollection goes, that you have only a motor car service on it, or whether a good deal of business is done, because we have no information now.


Thomas George McBride: I might say from what I know of the timber on Vancouver island that I would not be at all surprised, if this line were built, if enough revenue were received from it to pay for the building of it in the first twelve months after it is completed.
Sir HENRY DRAYTON; Is this a logging line, or what?


Thomas George McBride: It is not only a timber country but there is a large agricultural district behind it as well.


Mr. DICKIE:: I am thoroughly familiar
with all the conditions relating to this particular line and I can inform the committee that it is one that is entirely justifiable. There is no motor service in this locality; what the hon. member (Sir Henry Drayton) is referring to is another line going into Sidney. Logs are already hauled on the line in question, 55 miles into Victoria and the railway is losing money on every carload of logs it carries. In the first place the line was badly conceived. The project was undertaken at the time that

C.N.R. Branch Lines
Mackenzie and Mann came to the British Columbia government for assistance for the line from Yellow Head pass to Vancouver. The people of Vancouver island and particularly of Victoria thought that if money was to be granted to these people some consideration should be shown Vancouver island, and the government of Sir Richard McBride, behind whom were all the people of the island, said to Mackenzie and Mann that they would have to build the island section or the government would not guarantee the bonds of the mainland section. Sir William Mackenzie however objected strongly but finally he gave way and this line was projected from Victoria to the Alberni canal, the district represented by my hon. friend (Mr. Neill). I do not know how much was expended on it, but it runs for some 50 or 60 miles and is more or less graded through to Alberni canal. It was'a mistake in the first instance to have started the line from Victoria; it should have been started from Cowichan bay. Had they built the line from Cowichan bay to Cowichan lake this 8 miles would have carried the line to Cowichan lake, with the additional assistance asked for in a subsequent resolution, and they would have had the best paying line in Canada. The Canadian Pacific Railway with splendid business sense, while we were dallying with the matter and had not enough money to complete the line to Cowichan lake, ran a line from their main line into Cowichan lake, a distance of 20 miles. I am safe in saying that that 20 miles is the best paying piece of line in the whole Canadian Pacific system. There are logging trains every hour of the day. This 8 mile spur which connects with the Canadian Northern system is not a competitor of the Canadian Pacific Railway, because it opens up an immense body of timber long before it gets into the country where the Canadian Pacific Railway operates on the slope of the mountainside across the river. This line, with the spur, and with the line that is asked for in the next resolution, will pay the interest on the sinking fund on the total amount of money expended on the road. Forty or fifty miles of that road should never have been built. There is little traffic originating on it for fully forty miles. I know the conditions in this part of the country perhaps better than the engineers who have so strongly recommended the line proposed in this and the following resolution and I think it is fully justified. It runs through a dense forest until it gets to Alberni canal, a distance of 50 or 60 miles. Any one familiar with the forests of British Columbia knows what. I mean when I say that the forests in this locality are dense; a cut of two hun-died thousand feet per acre is not unusual.
Now, I rather hesitate to say anything in support of the resolution for fear that I shall arouse the criticism of the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, but there is no question whatever that this proposed line is absolutely necessary. There is no railway more justified than this, and it seems to me that the information that has been given by the engineers is quite adequate. Three members in this House, all hon. gentlemen, who know the conditions in the West, get up and say that a line-the Vernon line-is amply justified and is necessary, and still there seemed doubt in the matter. What more information do hon. gentlemen want than has been submitted? I am only one member advocating this but I know that what I say cannot be contradicted. Only a trivial amount is involved in comparison with what is spent on other lines and I do not think that there should be any objection whatever to the bill.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 34, respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line to Cowichan bay, on Vancouver island.



MILE 100, VANCOUVER ISLAND

[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
Hon. G. P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways) moved that the House go into committee to consider the following proposed resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the construction of a Canadian National Railway line, being an extension of the Vancouver island main line of the Canadian Northern Pacific railway from mile 74 to mile 100, in the province of British Columbia; mileage already graded, 55 miles; estimated mileage including existing grading, 26 miles; estimated cost, $348,300.
Motion agreed to and the House went into committee, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
George Perry Graham: I insist on putting on Hansard the estimates and explanations in connection with these resolutions so that hon. gentlemen will have the information before them. The memorandum from the Canadian National Railways in regard to this resolution is as follows:
Vancouver island, Mile 74-100-	Cost
Grade now ahead of track, 55 miles-
Proposed in 1924,-9 miles track and ballast.. $155,000 Proposed in 1925,-17 miles track and ballast.. 193300

It is proposed in 1924 to lay 9 miles of track from the foot of Cowichan lake to Cottonwood, and repair 17 further miles of grade, at an estimated cost of $155,000. In 1925 to lay the track from Cottonwood, Mile 83, to Mile 100, at a cost of $193,300 for the year.
Prior to 1914 the grade on this line had been opened
C.N.R. Branch Lines

up to Mile 135.7 and had been completed continuously to Mile 109, with certain patches incomplete from there to Mile 135.7.	[DOT]	,	,
By 1921 the bridges and track had been completed to Mile 74.0, at the foot of the Cowichan lake, and subsequently nothing further has been done on this
The character of the country for the first 16 or 17 miles out of Victoria is partly agricultural and partly timber area of a light and scattered character of fir timber, of which a good deal has already been logged off. From Mile 20.0 to Mile 50.0 is fully timbered country, but the timber is not as thick nor as heavy as further ahead on the line. From Mile 50.0 through to the Alberni canal the line runs through an exceptionally heavy stand of timber on which, up to the present, there has been practically no development, except along the Cowichan lake where considerable logging operations have been and are going on during the working seasons. The only business of any consequence that can be expected from this line for a great many years to come will be timber and its products until the timber has been cleared and the stumps taken up to permit of agricultural development.
The justification for construction of this line is to handle the timber and its products. As the haul from Cowichan lake on the line to Victoria is 74 miles over a line of 1.5 per cent grades and 12 degrees curves, rates that would pay the railway would be excessive. To shorten this distance an alternative has been looked for and found by the proposed construction of what is known as the Cowichan bay cut-off, which would be a branch 10 miles in length from a point on the line about 124 miles south of the foot of Cowichan lake-


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is the last one you dealt with.


George Perry Graham: This line in connection with the other will complete the line to tidewater-
-Mile 62.0 to tidewater at Cowichan bay, thus reducing the haul from the foot of Cowichan lake to tidewater from 74.5 miles to 22.5 miles. This cut-off being constructed will warrant the extension of the main line to Mile 100.0 which would tap an area of exceedingly fine timber and bring it within reasonable Tail haul to tidewater and should produce a big traffic.
SIR HENRY DRAYTON: Will the hon. gentleman show us the situation on the map?


George Perry Graham: The maps are gone.


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, I have the map here.


George Perry Graham: I will try to get a better map. These are not very good.


Henry Lumley Drayton: This is not a
map at all. There is a red line which shows you think of doing something.


George Perry Graham: It shows where the roads are going to run.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is simply
an advertising map without scale or anything. If the hon. minister thinks he can build railways on that kind of a map, it is

a queer proposition. I asked for information in connection with the other line. I suppose we can hope to get that information. I want similar information to that which I got about the former line.


George Perry Graham: I think the hon. gentleman behind my hon. friend gave the information in detail beyond anything I could secure for him.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Perhaps the
hon. gentleman behind me knows a little more about the country than the engineers reporting, judging from the character of the reports we have, as he has gone into it more carefully, but we have a right to get it from the engineers, and I am going to ask my hon. friend to bring down particulars in connection with this matter as well as the other matter. The particulars will show what is being done, and we will have information, I presume, in connection with the logging area that is now being cleared. There will be no difficulty in getting pretty accurate information assuming these reports are correct, because, following the hon. minister as best I could, it seemed to me that what he read indicates that the whole of this destroyed area was once a forest, that you have a certain amount of it now cleared, and that you have the clearing back to such a point that it is no longer profitable to haul from where the timber now stands to the end. Is that right?


George Perry Graham: I would imagine so.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is your information different from that?


George Perry Graham: No.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I can assume
that is correct. If that is correct we will know what timber was hauled by that line from that area which is now exhausted, and we ought to be put in a position to know whether the National Railway system would be justified in making this investment or not, and of course my hon. friend will not forget the map.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Graham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 35 respecting the construction of a Canadian National Railway line to Mile 100 on Vancouver island.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie King, the House adjourned at 10.45 p.m.
End of Yol. I.