1924-07-10

[Stage Direction]
MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS Mr. H. B. McGIVERIN (Ottawa) presented the eighth report of the select standing committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. W. D. EULER (North Waterloo) presented the fifth and final report of the select standing committee on National Railways and Shipping, as follows:
Your committee to which was referred for consideration and for report to the House, the estimates of the Canadian National Railways and the Canadian Merchant Marine, held fifteen meetings in the course of which it examined sundry witnesses including: Sir Henry Thornton, K.B.E., President and Chairman of the Board; Major Graham A. Bell, C.M.G., Deputy Minister of Railways and Canals; Gerard Ruel, K.C., Vice-President and General Counsel; W. D. Robb, Vice-President in charge of insurance, lands, express, telegraphs, colonization, development, and so forth; C. B. Brown, Chief Engineer, operation department; R. L. Fairbaim, Manager, passenger service bureau; T. H. Cooper, General Auditor, and R.A C. Henry, Director, bureau of economics.
In connection with its consideration of the estimates, your committee made careful examination of the annual report, both of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine and Canadian National Railways. Our conclusions and recommendations with respect to the Merchant Marine have already been reported to the House.
Considerable evidence was adduced in regard to the purchase by the management of the Canadian National Railways ot a property in Paris, from which it appears that the sum expended to April 30, 1924, amounts to about $2,600,000 in Canadian currency. If the property is retained, the remodelling of the building for office purposes is estimated to cost from $400,000 to $700,000 in addition, this amount depending upon the requirements of prospective tenants.
The evidence indicates that the management is of the opinion that adequate quarters in Paris are desirable and that its action in acquiring the property was legal. From the evidence given before the committee, it appears that the price paid was not in excess of its value and that rental values in this section of Paris are increasing.
The evidence further indicates that the management of the Canadian National Railways did not originally propose to make a large capital investment in Paris real estate; therefore, if it can be done advantageously and adequate quarters for the purposes of the Canadian National Railways retained, your committee is of the opinion that this property might be sold, so as to reduce capital investment.
Your committee is of the opinion that the acquisition	or sale	of property for railway purposes,	involving large sums of money, ought not to be possible except by authority of order in council previously obtained.Your committee reviewed, so far as time permitted, the	operating	statements of the	company and,	onthe	evidence	adduced, is of the	opinion that	thecustomary and necessary maintenance of the permanent way, structures and equipment has not been slighted, but	that the general standard	of the company's
physical property has been improved.
In regard to the transport of His Majesty's mails, the	evidence	submitted indicates	that there is	at
present an unequal distribution of mail services between the different railways-in some instances resulting in inferior service to the public. Your committee feels that adequate mail service is of paramount importance in the public interest and should take preference over the interests of any railway. Your committee suggests that the government take steps to review the whole question as to the transport of mails throughout Canada in order that an equitable distribution may be effected.
Item No. 137 of the estimates before the House provides for an amount of $56 000,000 to meet expenditures by the company for the coming year on the following accounts:-
1924-25	1923-24
(a)	Interest on securities notes and other obligations ; also, rentals for
lease of lines	 $18,745,639 58 $22,609,260 34
(b)	Equipment principal
payments, sinking fund-miscellaneous maturing or matured notes and other	obligations secured or unsecured.. ..
(c)	Operating income deficit whenever incurred or ascertained	
(d)	Construction and betterments, including coordination, acquisition of property and purchase	of equipment..
$56,000,000 00	$74,550,000 00
5,867,633 33 1,467,138 48
29,919,588 61
8,507,699 33 10,400,000 00
33,033,040 33
From the evidence given your committee feels that the amounts asked for are necessary for the purposes of the company during the coming year and should be granted.
Your committee suggests that in regard to all matters relating to immigration and colonization the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National Railways be invited to co-operate as closely as possible with each other and with the departments of the government concerned with such matters.
Your committee desires to direct the attention of the government to the apparent unnecessary competition and duplication of services between important centres by the Canadian National and Canadian Pacific railways and to suggest that the railways be invited to consider the whole question with a view to the elimination whenever possible of unnecessary duplication and
[Stage Direction]
National Railways and Shipping
competition, so as to conserve the revenues and resources of both companies while still rendering adequate service to the public.
Your committee is of the opinion that the capital sum upon which interest charges are now computed in making up the annual income statements of the Canadian National Railways is excessive and desires to suggest that the government give early consideration to the feasibility of reducing same.
Your committee desires to direct attention to the following remarks of the president of the Canadian National Railways upon the completion of his examination by the committee:
"It is, in my judgment, quite essential that there should be some vehicle of discussion and communication between the administration of the railway system and the representatives of the shareholders, who are the people of Canada, and those representatives are, of course, members of the Dominion Parliament. Now, all of the discussion we have had, from ray point of view, has been extremely illuminating, has been of great assistance, and I only hope that some method will be provided of enabling the administration to discuss with some suitable body of the House the various questions with respect to which there may be misunderstandings. I hope that something will be done to provide a vehicle of that sort. As far as the members of this committee are concerned, although presumably their duties and responsibilities will end with the report, and the adjournment of the House, still I should like very much to be in a position to discuss from time to time, not only this year, but in subsequent years if I am here, matters which affect the people of Canada, and their railway system, and discuss these matters with the accredited representatives of the people, who are necessarily members of the Dominion Parliament."
Your committee desires to lay on the Table of the House a copy of the evidence and of certain statements requested of attending officials, which have been printed with the evidence. In doing so the committee desires to record its appreciation of the assistance and co-operation of such representatives of the Canadian National Railways and Shipping as appeared before it.
Your committee wishes to point out that it did not commence to function until June 17th, and the review of the estimates and annual statement was necessarily limited.
Your committee begs to recommend that its proceedings, together with the evidence taken, be printed as an appendix to the Journals of the House and that rule 74 be suspended in connection therewith.
All of which is respectfully submitted.
W. D. Euler,
Chairman.
Mr. EULER moved:: That in accordance with the recommendation contained in the fifth report of the select standing committee on National Railways and Shipping, the proceedings of that committee, together with the evidence taken, be printed as an appendix to the Journals of the House, and that rule 74 be suspended in connection therewith.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Fifteenth and sixteenth reports of the select standing committee on Banking and Commerce-Mr. Vien.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. GEORGE P. GRAHAM (Minister of Railways and Canals): I beg to move:
That on and after Saturday, the 12th day of July instant, until the end of the present session, the House shall meet at eleven o'clock in the morning of each day except Sundays, and that in addition to the usual intermission at six o'clock, p.m., there shall be also, an intermission every day from one to three o'clock, p.m., and that the various committees of the House be at liberty to sit during the sessions of the House, and that on Saturdays the procedure and order of business be the same as on Friday.
Mr. W. A. BOYS (South Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, when the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) made this motion yesterday I thought that possibly the importance of the day had been unintentionally overlooked, and that on this being brought to their attention the government would let us have this Saturday free. Many of us, without the slightest thought of the day being taken, have made engagements. We would like to keep them, and I think it is unfortunate that at such Short notice this should be selected as the first day on which to begin morning sittings. I would also remind the leader of the House (Mr Graham) that it is not usual to resort to morning and Saturday sittings until we are in sight of prorogation. Now we may or may not be in sight of it-I think every member knows what I have in mind -when I say that -and I would again suggest that morning sittings be deferred until Monday.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Mr. GRAHAM:: Of course, Mr. Speaker, we are in the hands of the House as to what ought to be done. I thought all the members were very anxious to get home,-


Mr. McBRIDE:: So we are.


George Perry Graham: - and we had arranged for a very short council meeting on Saturday in order that we might not be absent from the House. A\ e thought we were really voicing the sentiments of the vast majority of members that we should meet on Saturday.


William Alves Boys: The Prime Minister stated
yesterday that the House would rise at six o'clock on Saturday, so the sitting would only be about five hours.


George Perry Graham: There is no intentional slight on the day, for we worked hard on the First of July. I know parliament would excuse those members who have made Engagements, and we have tried to arrange the programme so as not to take up any business

Morning and Saturday Sittings
which would embarrass them on account of their absence from the House. But we are in the hands of the House; we will do whatever members say.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Will the leader of the
House say whether or not the government has yet decided to bring down legislation for a vote of money to the Home Bank depositors?


George Perry Graham: The government has that under consideration. I should not like to make any further statement in the absence of the Prime Minister.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Before discussing that
subject we might dispose of the motion before the House.


Arthur Meighen: It is because of something I wish to say on the motion that I asked the question. The government, not yet knowing what its own legislation is to be, not yet knowing whether it is to bring down one of the most important pieces of legislation of the session, and before all legislation is on the order paper, and before we are able to fix the date for prorogation, asks that we sit morning, noon and night every day of the week. Parliament cannot adequately perform its functions in that way. The request is unprecedented. The government that proposes this motion called parliament for March 1, or rather we did not get down to business until that date, the mere formal opening taking place on February 28. This is in very startling contrast with all the promises by my hon. friends opposite some time ago. But, worse than that, it is not right; it is not just to parliament; it is not just to the members, for we cannot perform our functions under circumstances such as these.


Mr. H. C. HOCKEN (West Toronto):: Mr. Speaker, according to the Prime Minister, no business of what he terms a contentious character is to come up on Saturday; it is to be a sitting during which nothing of any importance is to be dealt with. The leader of the House (Mr. Graham) intimated something to the same effect in answer to my hon. friend from South Simcoe (Mr. Boys). Under these circumstances it seems to me we might very well adjourn on Friday night and not sit on Saturday. I do not think the fact that we sat on the First of July is an excuse for sitting on Saturday. I do not think the House should have sat on the First of July; it did so in the face of the protest of my right hon. leader (Mr. Meighen). If the leader of the House undertakes to put that as a precedent or give
that as an excuse for beginning Saturday sessions this week, I do not think he is on very strong ground. It looks very much as though the motion to sit on Saturday was deliberate.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, no.


Mr. JACOBS:: I wish to protest against
sitting on Saturday, on the ground of religious scruples.


George Perry Graham: Surely the hon. member
for West Toronto (Mr. Hocken) is not serious in saying that I would take it upon myself- because I do not speak for anybody else- to have the House sit on his glorious day, the twelfth of July. Why, we would not do a thing to interfere with the happiness of the memory of King William. If there is strenuous objection to meeting on Saturday the government want to be reasonable, but we do want to get through with the session. Every time we try to speed up we are asked to speed backward. We want to meet the wishes of the House, but we want to impress upon the House that it is necessary to speed up if we are not to be here all summer.


Thomas George McBride: 
Mr. THOMAS VIEN (Lotbiniere):: If we were to agree, no matter how much we desired to comply with the wishes of the hon. member, to adjourn for the twelfth of July, we should also have to agree to adjourn on the seventeenth of March and on the twenty-fourth of June.


William Alves Boys: We are asking that we adjourn not on account of its being the twelfth of July, but because it is Saturday and we have not been sitting on Saturday.


Thomas Vien: It is because it is the twelfth
of July, I am sure; if it were not the twelfth of July my hon. friend would surely be willing to sit and expedite the business of the House. It is suggested that in order to be agreeable to my hon. friend we should not sit on Saturday the twelfth of July, that he may be enabled to make some of those speeches which have been referred to on several occasions in the past, and that hon. members may be enabled to pass resolutions which are not very complimentary to members on this side. In those resolutions they were requesting-

Morning and Saturday Sittings


Hewitt Bostock: Order. There is a motion, before the House, and I would appeal to the good sense of hon. members not to introduce subjects which do not bear upon that motion. The question is whether or not the House shall sit on Saturday.


Thomas Vien: Am I in order in speaking on
the motion?


Hewitt Bostock: The hon. member is
surely not in order in referring to resolutions passed on the twelfth of July. That has nothing to do with it.


Thomas Vien: Am I in order in referring to
the question of sitting on Saturday next, which is the twelfth of July? If my hon. friends say that the House should adjourn on the twelfth of July, a thing which I would be agreeable to do were it not that we have reached so late a stage in the session, then would it not also be necessary out of courtesy to our Irish friends to adjourn on the seventeenth of March, and out of courtesy to French Canadians to adjourn on the twenty-fourth of June?


William Alves Boys: So we will, when it is Saturday.


Thomas Vien: And out of courtesy to all
Canadians we should adjourn on the first of July. But if we can best serve our country and discharge the duties of our office by sitting on the seventeenth of March, the twenty-fourth of June and the first of July, I do not see any reason why we should not expedite the work of the House by sitting next Saturday.


George Perry Graham: If I may be permitted, Mr. Speaker, I should be sorry to have the discussion proceed in such a way that we would be cross at each other with regard to the motion now before the House. If the twelfth of July were on Friday I would not submit for a moment to adjourning on the twelfth of July under the circumstances.


William Alves Boys: You would not be asked to.


George Perry Graham: I think possibly I would
not.


Arthur Meighen: You never were.


George Perry Graham: I do not know that I ever sat here on the twelfth of July before.


Arthur Meighen: Oh yes, many a time.


George Perry Graham: Perhaps under all the circumstances we had better make it Monday, if the House is agreeable. There is this about it, I may say in confidence: If any group in the House did not want to let us do business 
on Saturday we could not do much, because they have some marathon talkers over in that comer. I think we had better change that and make the motion read Monday instead of Saturday. That will expedite business.


Hewitt Bostock: By leave of the House the motion is amended to read as follows:
That on and after Monday the 14th day of July instant, until the end of the present session, the House shall meet at eleven o'clock in the morning of each day except Sundays, and that in addition to the usual intermission at six o'clock, p.m., there shall be also, an intermission every day from one to three o'clock, p.m., and that the various committees of the House be at liberty to sit during the sessions of the House, and that on Saturdays the procedure and order of business be the same as on Friday.
Motion as amended, agreed to.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 243 (from the Senate), to incorporate Joliette and Northern Railway Company.-Mr. Denis (Joliette).
Bill No. 244 (from the Senate), for the relief of William Smith Scott.-Mr. Clifford.
Bill No. 245 (from the Senate), for the relief of Rebecca Smolkin Koffler.

Mr. Martell.
Bill No. 246 (from the Senate), for the relief of Earl James Sharpe.-Mr. Jacobs.

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

Mr. NEILL:: 1.	What is the total number of Chinese registered at the close of the period allowed for registration, June 30 last, under the provisions of the Chinese Immigration Act of 1923?
2.	Are there any number of Chinese who have not registered ?
3.	What was the Chinese population of Canada as shown by the last census returns?
4. Since the census was taken, what number of Chinese have (a) entered Canada; (b) left Canada; (c) died in Canada; and (d) been born in Canada?


Hon. Mr. ROBB:: 1.48,331; returns incomplete.
2.	Some will undoubtedly fail to register.
3.	39,587.
4.	(a) 2,817; (ib) 1,124 registered out of Canada and did not return; (c) and (d) According to figures compiled by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics 292 Chinese died in Canada in the calendar year 1921 while the births numbered 295. In the calendar year 1922 there were 306 deaths and 346 births;

Questions
1923 returns not available. The figures for 1921, showing the Chinese population at the time of the census, include the births which took place during the first five months of that year but do not, of course, include the deaths during the same period.


PAYMENTS TO TORONTO GLOBE
Mr. CHAPLIN:: Referring to the question asked as follows, and answered July 4th-
" What amount was paid by the Canadian National Railways to the Globe Newspaper Company for a full page advertisement that appeared in that paper during the month of December, 1923, or the month of January, 1924? and the answer given, viz.: $488.
How many times did the advertisement referred to appear in the Globe newspaper?


George Perry Graham: Once. Edition in question was 14th Annual Financial Survey which appeared Wednesday, January 2, 1924.


James Dew Chaplin: Referring to the question asked as follows and answered July 3rd:
" What amount was paid by the Department of Trade and Commerce to the Globe Newspaper Company, of Toronto, for a full page advertisement that appeared in that paper during the month of December, 1923, or during the month of January, 1924?" and the answer given, $488, reprints, $15.90-
How many times did the advertisement referred to appear in the Globe Newspaper?


George Perry Graham: Once.


BIC-PROPOSED TUNNEL
Mr. DOUCET:: 1.	Hias a petition been presented, signed by the electors in Rimouski County, requesting the government to open a tunnel across the railway line at Bic?
2.	If so, is it the intention to grant the request contained in the petition?


George Perry Graham: A petition was received in December, 1922, from the residents at Bic asking that a new crossing be constructed at a point where an overhead bridge would be possible. The General Manager, Canadian National Railways, Eastern Lines, went into the matter and reported that the traffic over the crossing was light; that the crossing was protected by an electric bell, and under the circumstances the management could not provide an overhead crossing unless the municipality was prepared to assume a proportion of the cost.


PETITE RIVIERE POSTMASTER
Mr. HANSON:: 1.	Who is at present holding the position of postmaster at Petite Riviere, Lunenburg county, Nova Scotia ?
2.	Is it the intention of the government to make any change in the incumbent of this office?
3.	If so, what are the reasons for such change?
4.	Have any charges been laid against the present
postmaster?
5.	If so, is an investigation being held?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	F. H. Jodrey.
2.	Yes.
3.	More convenient site.
4.	No.
5.	Answered by No. 4.


WAINWRIGHT PARK BUFFALO
Mr. HANSON:: . 1. Was a contract given for slaughtering of Buffalo at the Wainwright Park?
2.	Were tenders called for?
3.	If so, from whom were tenders received and what was the amount in each case?
4.	If no tenders were called for, what was the reason for departing from the tender system?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: 1.	Yes.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	The slaughtering of these wild animals is a difficult matter as the killing must be done on the open range. They also require special handling to ensure the meat and the heads and hides being in first-class condition for market. The year preceding, Mr. A. S. Duclos, of Edmonton, carried out an experiment for the Department of the Interior in the slaughter of two hundred and fifty of these animals. Mr. Duclos carried out this work very satisfactorily. He is the only one who has bad experience in slaughtering buffalo on a large scale. He also has several years' packing house experience.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-MAIL CAR DESTROYED
Sir. HENRY DRAYTON:: 1.	Was a storage car containing mail attached to a Canadian National Railway train destroyed by fire, in whole or in part, at or near Mallory town, Ontario, on the night of the 26th or morning of the 27th of February, 1924?
2.	If so, to what extent was the mail in the storage car destroyed or damaged in consequence of the fire?
3.	What became of the mail that was partly destroyed ?
4.	Did the storage car contain any first-class or
letter mail ?	_
5.	If so, was any portion of the first-class mail destroyed or damaged?
6.	What did the storage car mainly contain?
7.	Was an investigation held to determine the origin or cause of the fire?
8.	Did the fire originate in consequence of collision or outward interference of any kind?
[DOT] 9. If an investigation was held, by whom was it conducted ?
10.	Did the Post Office Department officers hold an inquiry? If so, with what result?

Questions

11.	Did the fire originate inside of the car?
12.	What amount of insurance or indemnity has been paid by the Post Office Department on parcels-insured-contained in the car in question?
13.	Have all the claims for indemnity alluded to in preceding paragraph been paid?
14.	If not, why?
15.	Was the full indemnity paid on parcels which were destroyed only in part, i.e., the full value of the parcel as claimed by the sender?
16.	Has the cause of the fire been definitely determined, and if so, what was it?


Hon. Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil) (for the Postmaster General):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Approximately three-fifths of the mail was destroyed or damaged.
3.	Mail matter partly destroyed was sent to destination where possible; the balance was sent to the Dead Letter Office awaiting claim.
4.	No.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	Principally parcel post mail and news matter.
7.	The department understands that inquiry was made by the railway company, but is awaiting official information from the company.
8.	Answered by No. 7.
9.	Answered by No. 7.
10.	The Post Office department has no jurisdiction.
11.	Answered by No. 7.
12.	$579.15 has been paid in actual claims to date.
13.	Yes.
14.	Answered by No. 13.
15.	Indemnity was paid in each case for actual loss sustained. Indemnity was not paid for any portion of mail matter remaining intact.
16.	Answered by No. 7.


STEAMSHIP PETREL
Hon. Mr. STEVENS:: 1.	Did the government call for tenders for the purchase of steamship Petrel, Vancouver, about two years ago ?
2.	If so, was a bid of $12,200 received, was this the highest bid and was same accepted?
3.	Did the government call for tenders in 1923 for the purchase of the said steamship Petrel, was a bid received for $12,515, was this bid accepted or rejected, and if rejected, on what grounds?
4.	Is it the intention of the government to again call for tenders for the purchase of this vessel? If so, when?


Hon. Mr. KING (Kootenay):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes, but the bid was not accepted. '
3.	Yes, tenders were called for in 1923, and a bid of $12,515 was received, but was not
DSir Henry Drayton.]
accepted as the amount was not considered large enough.
4. It is not the present intention to dispose of this tug.


CANTEEN FUNDS
Hon. E. M. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-Establishment (Mr. Beland), I desire to give notice that to-morrow the House will be asked to go into committee on the resolution standing in his name under Government Notices of Motions. I desire to say that His Excellency the Governor General has been advised of the contents of this resolution, and recommends the same to the favourable consideration of the House.


Hewitt Bostock: Shall I dispense with the reading of this resolution?


Arthur Meighen: I do not see much value . in dispensing with everything. We all have to read this anyway.


Hewitt Bostock: The resolution is as
follows:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the distribution of the Canteen Funds by distributing the same as follows:-
(1)	The sum of $20,000 to be held for payment of any outstanding accounts;
(2)	The sum of $100,000 to be paid to a Central Board of three trustees appointed by the Governor in Council, without remuneration, to be used in such amounts and such manner as it may deem best for the maintenance and assistance of an adjustment service and bureau for the benefit of ex-service men and their dependents;
(3)	The sum of $50,000 to be paid to the United Services Fund of Great Britain, and the sum of $50,000 to be paid to the American Red Cross, to be used by them, respectively, in such manner as they deem proper for assistance in specially meritorious cases of ex-members of the Canadian Expeditionary Force who have served in France or England, and their dependents, resident in Great Britain or the United States, as the case may be, and who are in genuine distress;
(4)	The residue of the Canteen Fund to be divided into nine provincial allotments in the proportion indicated by the following percentages:-
Per cent
Alberta	 7.346
British Columbia	and the Yukon.. ..	10.286
Manitoba	 10.702
New Brunswick	 4.203
Nova Scotia	 6.439
Ontario	 41.641
Prince-Edward Island	857
Quebec	 12.718
Saskatchewan	 5.808
100,000
(5) The provincial allotments to be paid to a Provincial Board of Trustees, appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council in each province, without remuneration, empowered to receive and hold the

Canteen Funds
provincial allotment and to ascertain the wishes of those interested and residing in the province concerning the disposition of such allotment and to determine the object to which the allotment should be devoted, and to administer the same for such object or to provide for such administration by others, and to do such other things as may be indicated in the order in council appointing them. The expenses in connection with the trust to be a charge on the allotment.


Hewitt Bostock: Shall I read it in French? Some hon. MEMBERS: Dispense.


Mr. THEODORE GERVAIS (Berthier):: Read it in French. We will maintain our rights.


Hewitt Bostock: 
Mr. DONALD SUTHERLAND (South Oxford) :: I direct the attention of the government to some questions I placed on the ordei paper which were partially answered on April 270J
2.	Two of them related to dismissals for political partisanship, an investigation having been held by Thomas R. Mayberry. The following were among the questions asked:
What investigations have been made by Mr. Mayberry since appointment ?
What remuneration has been paid or promised to Mr. Mayberry?
The reply to the questions contained these statements:
Charges of political partisanship preferred against James T. Shields, Augustus Blackburn and John Waldroff, employees on the Cornwall canal.
Mr. Mayberry has been paid the sum of $188.75.
I was certain that the infoimation contained in these answers was not correct. Accordingly I placed further questions on the order paper asking for information, and the questions were passed as orders for returns. Three of these returns have been brought down, one of them having been tabled to-day. I am satisfied, therefore, that the information given in the answers referred to is not only not correct but it is absolutely misleading. I am referring to this case because it is not the first time this has happened this session in connection with questions which I have placed on the order paper. I should like to know from the government whether they will see to it that these particular questions are answered correctly and that the desired information is brought down.


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Aigenteuil) (Acting Postmaster General):: The information with respect to three of the questions came from the Post Office Department. The other answer had reference to the Department of Railways and Canals.


Donald Sutherland: Three of the investigations dealt with by the returns brought down are not referred to in the answers previously given at all. I repeat, those answers are entirely misleading; in fact they cannot be considered as answers at all. I ask the government whether they will see to it that the correct information is brought down in connection with all these questions.


Mr. STEWART (Argenteuil):: I shall be
very glad to ascertain the facts in connection with the information desired from the Post Office Department. I had assumed that all the information had been brought down as regards that department. The remainder of the information sought for by my hon. friend relates to employees of the Department of Railways and Canals.


Donald Sutherland: The minister's statement does not alter the fact. I asked:
Supply-Finance

What investigations have been made by Mr. Mayberry since appointment?
Now, the appointment was made in January, 1923, and the answers so far given do not relate to the three investigations as to which returns have been tabled by the minister this week. Consequently the answers alluded to must have been absolutely incorrect and misleading.


Charles A. Stewart: Is there any complaint about the information that I have tabled?


Donald Sutherland: None whatever.
What I complain of is that I put these questions at a sufficiently early date in the session to get correct answers, which I have not got. Had correct answers been forthcoming when they were sought it would not have been necessary to move later on for returns on the subject.


ALTERNATIVE VOTE
[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. W. C. GOOD (Brant):: Could the government inform the House as to when they intend to proceed with the alternative vote bill?


George Perry Graham: My answer would have to be, No.


Mr. ARCHAMBAULT:: On the twelfth of July.


DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
[Stage Direction]
The House again in committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the chair.
Offices of the Assistant Receivers General-
Salaries	 $118,000
Contingencies	 15,000
Mr. STEVENS:: This would be a suitable time for me to bring to the attention of the minister the question of an assistant receiver general's office in the city of Vancouver, and I shall occupy but a moment in doing so. The matter has been brought to the attention of the Minister of Finance on many an occasion before, and I will take this opportunity of again renewing the request. The situation as it now rests is, that there is an assistant receiver general in Victoria. I am not offering any criticism of that whatsoever, but I point out that the great bulk of the business, financially and otherwise, is done at the city of Vancouver; whenever the banks, or other parties, have business with the assistant receiver general they must go to Victoria by boat and there transact that business. I cannot give the exact figures, I do not happen to have them under my hand, but I venture 'o say that a very substantial proportion of 
the business emanates from Vancouver on the mainland. Has the minister given consideration to the request made by the banks and others, that an office for a receiver general should be located at Vancouver in order to facilitate the transaction of business?


James Alexander Robb: I may say frankly to my hon. friend that representations such as he has made have been presented to us a number of times, and the department are inclined to agree with those who say the office should be in Vancouver because of the greater volume of business at that city. The question is now under consideration.


Mr. TOLMIE:: Does that mean that the minister proposes to move the office from Victoria?


James Alexander Robb: No. I should not like to get into a controversy between my two genial friends-the one representing Vancouver and the other representing Victoria; I should like to please them both. However, we must endeavour to do business economically. I will look very carefully into the matter in order to see if the office in Victoria has sufficient business to warrant its continuance there. I gather that my hon. friend (Mr. Tolmie) is opposed to removing the office from Victoria. He has very strong support in some of my own political friends who live in that city.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I quite appreciate what the minister says. While I do not object to an office being opened in Vancouver for the convenience mainly of the Vancouver people, the other office has been established in Victoria for many years. Victoria is the capital of the province, and I think an office should be maintained there.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: If this office
is removed to Vancouver, will a government savings bank be established there?


James Alexander Robb: There is a post office savings
bank in Vancouver now.
M;r. MACLEAN (York):	Is there a government savings bank?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, there is, in one of the
cities in British Columbia, I am not sure which one.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Printing Dominion Notes, $475,000.
William Charles Good: Is this the cost of printing
alone, or are any other costs included?


James Alexander Robb: This includes the printing
of ail the notes and stamps for the different departments of government service.

Supply-Finance


William Charles Good: Does it include any more
than the Dominion bills, the paper money?


James Alexander Robb: The government by contract I understand provides for the printing of Dominion notes, the postage stamps, and the different stamps required by the collecting agencies of the government.


William Charles Good: Do I understand that, included in this item are the Dominion notes, the post office stamps and the war revenue stamps?


James Alexander Robb: I think that will come in
another item.


Mr. SPENCER:: Will the minister explain to the committee the reason of the decrease. Is it because the work is being done more cheaply, or because less printing is being done?


James Alexander Robb: Is there a decrease in the
general item?


Henry Elvins Spencer: Forty thousand dollars.


James Alexander Robb: I suppose it is the effect of
economy in the department, and perhaps less printing. This is the estimated cost.


Arthur Meighen: The minister's explanation, when he knows nothing about it, is that it is economy.


James Alexander Robb: Economy is a good reason.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has not
answered whether this includes anything but Dominion notes. There has been a constant increase in this vote for years. It used to run about $200,000, up to $285,000. It became $300,000 in the 1921 estimates. Then it ran up to $515,000, and now it is $475,000. It is still a very large amount over what it was previously, and the heading is for "Printing Dominion notes." It would seem to me very unlikely that anything but Dominion notes is included; but if anything else is included it would be only such smaller paper as the Finance department utilizes, not what the Customs and Excise department uses, and certainly not what the Post Office department utilizes. If so, the heading is a very gross misnomer. Assuming it to be what the minister says it is, the printing of Dominion notes, will the minister .give us some idea of what the cost is, and why we should have to pay half a million dollans a year to get Dominion notes printed? Is there any real competition? If there is not, has the government considered, rather than paying this price-which is nearly twice the amount which was paid for years-the advisability of adopting some plan of doing the work themselves?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend did not hear
me. I did say at first that I thought the Chairman had called the whole item. This particular item under consideration is for Dominion notes only. We will come to the other later. In reference to this item, my hon. friend is correct in his statement that, there has been a gradual increase since the contract was given. It is generally given by tender after competition.


Arthur Meighen: Between whom?


James Alexander Robb: I think there were tenders
from three different companies. The last contract that was given was awarded by the desk mate (Sir Hemy Drayton) of my right hon. friend who was then Finance Minister, and who was held up for an increase, I think, of approximately 14 per cent at that time.


Arthur Meighen: What year was that?


James Alexander Robb: It runs to 1920. The present
contract expires in 1925, and we have recently called for tenders. Not later than this morning I instructed the deputy minister to return the cheques to the tenderers and advise them that the tenders were not sufficiently attractive. It has been represented to us that if we were disposed to offer a longer period than five years, it might induce some houses to come in and erect a plant, and tender at lower figures. There is this to be said for the present contractors-the work has been satisfactory, no government has found fault with it; indeed, you could not have any better work. But it is felt that they have been charging a little more than they should; and it has been represented to them that the government should have a little lower price.


Arthur Meighen: Who are the contractors?


James Alexander Robb: The contractors have been here for many years, and they have been awarded the contracts by different governments. I think the contract was renewed twice by Sir Thomas White, once by the present member for West York, Sir Henry Drayton, and twice by the Finance Minister (Mr. Fielding). They were primarily the American Bank Note Company. I think a year ago they changed their name to the Canadian Bank Note Company, and they are doing business now under that name. The increased cost means additional business. My hon. friend must know that.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: Has the minister any idea what it would cost to erect a plant to do the printing?


James Alexander Robb: I would not like to go into
the details of that because I have not looked
Supply-F inance

into it. Members supporting both parties in this House have questioned the wisdom of establishing a printing plant. At one time we did our printing by contract. We changed the system and now the government does it. I am not going into a controversy on that question this afternoon. I have no opinion as to whether it is cheaper or more expensive to do it ourselves. In addition to the printing there is the macerating plant for the destruction of the bills, and there is the signing and sealing plant; these are included in it. But the principal item in this amount is the printing of the Dominion one-dollar notes, two-dollar notes, five-dollar notes, and the fractions.


Mr. LEWIS:: What is the price of the
printing?


James Alexander Robb: The price is $62 a thousand for dollar notes, $62 for the two dollar notes, $80 for the five dollar notes, and $60 for the fractions.


Arthur John Lewis: What is the total amount of the issue?


James Alexander Robb: I have not got that.


Arthur Meighen: The minister says it is
more. Does that mean that we are issuing more Dominion notes all the time?


James Alexander Robb: There is one reason. The
contractors represent that the increase obtained in 1920 was due to an increased cost of labour. They submitted to me statistics showing the cost of labour as compared with pre-war figures, and in some cases there were advances up to 75 per cent, 100 per cent, and 112 per cent. They claim that the profit has not increased proportionately with the increased cost of labour, but the department does not admit that.


Arthur Meighen: Who are the people
who have tendered?


James Alexander Robb: We had a tender from the
Canadian Bank Note Company, another from a new organization known, I believe, as the Dominion Note Company, and one from the British-American Bank Note Company. The last mentioned company, I believe has relations with a very large house in London, England, who do this sort of work throughout the world.


Arthur Meighen: Does the minister say
that the American company, now called Canadian, has had all the Canadian business since 1896?
Ufr. Robb.]


James Alexander Robb: No, not all; some others have had some of it as well. In 1915 or 1920-I am not sure whether it was in the time of Sir Thomas White or under my hon. friend opposite (Sir Henry Drayton)-they represented that they wanted all or none of the business and since that time they have had it all. That, however, does not include bonds.


Arthur Meighen: Who prints the bonds?


James Alexander Robb: I believe they were printed
by the British-American company and another concern; there were only two companies up to that time.


Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the life of a
bank note?


George Perry Graham: It depends on who has it.


James Alexander Robb: It varies; my hon. friend might get a new bank note this afternoon and before six o'clock it might be destroyed.


An hon. MEMBER:: He might burn it.


James Alexander Robb: I don't think he would do
that.


Henry Elvins Spencer: The point is not at all
as funny as it seems. I understand that these notes, after they have been used a certain time, are destroyed. If that is so, the question is quite pertinent as to whether a bank note is supposed to last one year or more. It is costing the country 6.20 per cent to have them printed and they charge the banks 5 per cent on them, so that the country apparently is running a losing business. Is that correct?


James Alexander Robb: This is a new theory-that a bank note once used is destroyed. I have never heard it advanced before.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Does the minister know
what the life of a bank note is?


James Alexander Robb: I have not that information.


Mr. IRVINE:: For the sake of economy the old bank notes ought to run a couple of years at least.


James Alexander Robb: The hon. gentleman might find fault with a ragged bill.


Hugh Guthrie: What is the cost of printing the various denominations? There is a fluctuation; what does it cost to print bills of $1,000 denomination?


James Alexander Robb: I do not know, but I understand there is a difference.


Hugh Guthrie: Is there a substantial
difference?


James Alexander Robb: I do not think there is.

Supply-Finance


Hugh Guthrie: About 6 cents is charged for one-dollar bills, and if the same ratio were maintained in the case of thousand-dollar bills the printing of this denomination would be a pretty expensive thing.


James Alexander Robb: I think they reduce the cost in proportion; there are not many of us who can afford thousand-dollar bills.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Printing, advertising, Inspection, express, etc., $125,000.
Mr. STEVEN'S: What advertising is done?
James Alexander Robb: This item is to take care of:-
(1)	Express charges on notes, bonds, silver and bronze coin shipped to and from offices of the Assistant Receiver General; also express charges on gold shipments to New York. (2) Printing War Loan Interest Cheques (approximately 1,000,000 per annum are needed for this purpose.) (3) Sundry expenditures of an unforeseen nature.


Arthur Meighen: What is the advertising?


James Alexander Robb: I have nothing separate for
advertising mentioned in my list. I might give some of the express charges that have been paid. In 1910-11 they amounted to $34,721; in 1919-20, $92,406 and in 1922-23, $51,790. Printing and stationery amounted in 1910-11 to $317; in 1919-20 $30,502 and in 1922-23, $17,178. Sundries amounted in 191011 to $3,088, in 1913-14 to $20,185, in 1921-22 $18,163, and in 1922-23 $26,891.


Hugh Guthrie: Was any portion of the vote expended in advertising last year?


James Alexander Robb: I have no record in regard to advertising, but it is possible that there was advertising in connection with the bond issues.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this the vote under which in days gone by expressage on American currency, especially silver, was paid? Since the policy of sending American coinage out of the country has ceased, in eastern Canada at all events, we are about swamped with American silver to the exclusion of our own coinage. It seems to me that where we have an expensive plant in the Mint which is practically idle so far as silver coinage is concerned, and in view of the relatively small cost of shipping that material out of the country and, as I am informed, of the very great profit which there is in the coinage of Canadian silver, the government should reconsider its position with regard to this question. Has the government under consideration the question of shipping American silver out of the
country, especially when it is defaced? This is an important matter and from the standpoint of profit alone it is one that might well engage the attention of the government. I have had conversations with some of the officials of the Mint-I will not mention any names-and am informed that there would be a substantial profit, as there was during the war, in the coinage of our own silver. Has the minister anything to say in this regard?


James Alexander Robb: I take no objection to the
views .presented by my hon. friend, but my observation is that there is much less United States silver in general circulation in this country now than in recent years. Of course, my hon. friend will understand that during the tourist season the large influx of tourists from the United States results in considerable American coinage being put in circulation here, and naturally it will remain in circulation for some days. But generally speaking our own silver is in circulation, and we try to encourage it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is not the case in
eastern Canada. I do not think any effort is made there to ship out American silver. The banks will not ship it out at their own expense; and, from what I have observed in New Brunswick, they simply pay it over their counters. Of course, we are glad to get the money of American tourists, but I do not think it should be allowed to remain in circulation, especially when our own can be coined at a very substantial profit. I do not see so much American silver in circulation in Ottawa as I have observed in eastern Canadian cities. There is no profit in selling American silver coins to the banks; of course, on bills they will pay a premium. I wonder if the government has any idea of the value of American coins in circulation in the Dominion? The cost of shipping them out is not very great as compared with the profit of minting our own silver, and I think it would be greatly to our advantage to have this done.


James Alexander Robb: I will have the matter looked into.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: I can corroborate what my hon. friend (Mr. Hanson) has said. We used to get rid of all American silver for a very small charge. If the minister will look at the returns from the Mint he will see that we are minting very little silver today, and as that is the chief source of profit of the Mint we are really losing a great deal of money. I admit that when the Minister
Supply-Finance

of Finance (Mr. Fielding) terminated the arrangement we had with the banks it looked as if he was saving money, but as a matter of fact the result was directly opposite. We paid a very small percentage to cover the cost of the banks segregating American silver and getting rid of it; they made no profit on the transaction. I find I am fortunate enough to have three quarters in my pocket. I notice one of these is an American coin; that is one in three so far as my experience is concerned. There is a great deal of American coinage in circulation among us now, and it would be well to have it withdrawn and returned to the United States, as there is a substantial profit upon our own silver coinage.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: What are the duties of inspection under this item?


James Alexander Robb: These officers do not seem to be classified as inspectors; they must be senior clerks.


Edward Joseph Garland: I am more interested in their duties. The simple statement that a man inspects something or other does not fulfil my idea of a satisfactory explanation. I do not wish to be in any sense discourteous, but I should like to ascertain what the inspector inspects and how much he is paid.


James Alexander Robb: I will get the information for my hon. friend later on.


Mr. SHAW:: Under this vote is inspection made of the central gold reserve as well as of the Receiver General's office? Is the inspection yearly, or half-yearly, and under Vhat circumstances?


Henry Herbert Stevens: While we are speaking of silver coinage, I wish to call the minister's attention to our nickel recently introduced and to our old silver five-cent piece. In my estimation the latter ought to be withdrawn from circulation. One reason is that slot machines have to be adjusted to the new coinage, but the main reason is the confusion in handling two coins so vastly different. There is this further reason, that far more profit accrues to the country from the issue of the nickel. I agree with my hon. friend from York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) that we should endeavour to withdraw from circulation all American silver and replace it with our own currency.


James Alexander Robb: Last year I think the Minister of Finance stated that it was proposed to gradually do away with the silver five-cent piece. Answering my hon. friend from West Calgary (Mr. Shaw), I regret that I have not [Sir Henry Drayton.3
the deputy beside me, and there is no record before me showing the exact nature of this inspection. I shall be glad to get the information for my hon. friend.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: I should like the minister to
consider the advisability of placing this inspection under the new Inspector General of Banks.


James Alexander Robb: I will take that into consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Commission for payment of interest on public debt, purchase of sinking fund, auditing, $125,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister explain
this increase?


James Alexander Robb: The increase of $25,000 is to
provide for commission to the banks for cashing interest coupons of the renewal loans at three-sixteenths of one per cent. It is estimated that these payments will aggregate $25,-
000.	When the war loans and Victory loans were issued a commission was paid to the banks, including charges for their services in connection with the flotation of the loans and also for cashing coupons until the loan matured, as follows: 1915-1925 war loan, one-quarter of one per cent; 1916-1931 war loan, one-half of one per cent; 1917-1937 war loan, nine-twentieths of one per cent. When the Victory loans matured in 1922 and 1923 the banks demanded payment for their services in connection with Cashing interest coupons of the renewal loans. After negotiation it was agreed that the commission payable should be at the rate of three-sixteenths of one per cent. This work of redemption is carried on at over 4,000 points throughout Canada.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I can understand why the
government should pay one-quarter of one per cent or even one-half of one per cent on the original flotation on the large loan.: during the war, but for the cashing of coupons it does seem to me that the government is paying more than a private individual would pay. While the coupons are payable at par by the banks, the banks make a charge against individuals on the cashing of coupons of provincial bonds or industrial or municipal bonds.


James Alexander Robb: But not of Dominion bonds.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No. But if you have any quantity of coupons you do not have to pay as high a commission as three-sixteenths of one per cent; one-eighth is more than ample. It is true the banks have to insure the coupons in transmission through the mails, but in the large centres a considerable quantity of these coupons would be cashed on their maturity

Supply-Finance
date and the registration fee would be practically the same for a thousand coupons as for a dozen. I think the rate is high; I think the minister could have made a better bargain.
I am satisfied that a private corporation could get this service for one-eighth of one per cent and if it happened to have a paiticularly good pull with the bank the rate might be one-tenth of one per cent. Even one-sixteenth of one per cent would pay the bank well. '


James Alexander Robb: It must be remembered that
many of these amounts come in in small quantities, involving their transmission to the head offices and so on. Apparently the department did not consider the charge unreasonable. That my hon. friend's argument is not far out is shown in the fact that on large amounts the Department of Finance pay one-eighth of one per cent; that is what we pay the Bank of Montreal for handling the business in connection with New York coupons. The Bank of Montreal get one-sixteenth of one per cent on the redemption of bonds, and one-quarter of one per cent for cashing Grand Trunk Pacific coupons.


Richard Burpee Hanson: In my own town, for instance, millions of dollars' worth of these Victory bonds are held, and on the interest maturity dates the banks cash thousands upon thousands of the coupons. There is a very substantial profit in transactions of that character, and it does seem to me that the government could have said to the banks: We will pay you one-eighth of one per cent and no more.


James Alexander Robb: I am impressed with the
views of my hon. friend. I think there is a chance for revision there.


William Irvine: I agree with what the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Hanson) has said about the charges. Part of this vote, I notice, is for purchase of sinking fund. I am interested in knowing from whom we purchase the sinking fund, who does the purchasing, what it is purchased with, and how much we pay for it.


James Alexander Robb: 
James Alexander Robb: That might have been at some other point in Canada.


William Irvine: I do not quite see the meaning of this.


Edward Joseph Garland: I think the idea of the hon. member (Mr. Irvine) is that some of the members here would like to know what is the process of establishing a sinking fund. How is it done? Where are the funds secured, and so on?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend will understand that I have not all the details as to who offer the bonds that are bought up to apply on account of sinking fund.


Henry Lumley Drayton: As I recall it, this service is handled through government agency, the particular agents in this case being usually the Bank of Montreal.


William Irvine: What is the purpose of this sinking fund? Is it to meet interest charges on the national debt?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No; it is the retirement of obligations. Some obligations provide sinking fund requirements. The hon. gentleman will notice that in the accounts there is a charge to sinking funds and there is a credit in connection with sinking funds. We ought to provide regularly for sinking fund payments not only for the purpose of retiring obligations but also to maintain a proper credit in the financial markets of the world. The procedure is usually that of picking out some agency that will purchase these bonds cheaply for the government, the process being the buying of our own obligations at the lowest possible price. The Bank of Montreal were our agents and they were also the agents of Ontario. One of the troubles that is now being dealt with in Ontario is in connection with the very purchase of these funds, it having been shown that while the Bank of Montreal was purchasing at a given rate,
Supply-Finance

acting as agents in the ordinary course of business, bonds were at the same time purchased at a much higher rate for professedly the same purpose. The agent gets a percentage ; I forget what it is, but my recollection is that it is one-eighth. It may be one-sixteenth; it is a sixteenth usually when we are handling large transactions, but I should think from the size of most sinking fund transactions it would be an eighth, because they are not very large as a rule. There are two items in the expense account: first, what we have to pay for our obligations, and secondly, this one-sixteenth or one- eighth, whichever it may be.


Edward Joseph Garland: Am I right in understanding that the government keeps a line of credit with the Bank of Montreal or some other responsible broker just for the purpose of debts alone?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes. It is the cheapest way of paying our debt.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: The purpose of a sinking
fund, as I have always understood it, is the creation of a fund for the purpose of meeting maturing obligations. The government instead of setting aside a definite fund purchases its own obligations; is that it?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: What does it do with them?


Henry Lumley Drayton: They are cancelled. We are reducing the amount right along, and we ought to do it to an amount sufficient to provide for the sinking fund proper. It is cheaper to do it this way because these obligations are bought upon the market, and as a general rule they are bought subject to fairly liberal discount. If the discount is big enough, then, of course, it is more profitable than it is merely to set aside and to hold the cash. That is done now pretty universally.


William Irvine: I am very glad to have the information we have just received. I suppose it would be a fair question to ask the Acting Minister of Finance if, in his opinion, we are reducing our debts by at least as much as we are paying brokerage for the pinking funds?


James Alexander Robb: A statement of the reduction of debt was given in the budget speech.
English bill stamps, postage, et caetera, $3,000.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Why English bill stamps?


James Alexander Robb: These are required in connection with the administration of loans iin London, England. The expense on this account in 1910-1911 was $45,017.80. I suppose the amount fluctuates according to the size and number of loans we have. In 1913-14 the expenditure was $17,031.16. Those were the years just prior to the war, and hon. gentlemen will see how the figures dropped afterwards. The expenditure in 1919-20 was $1,733.01; 1920-21, $2,707. It runs along about the same up to the year ending March 31, 1924, when the expenditure was $2,704.87, so it was almost stationary.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
. " Prov>de for temporary clerical work in connection w.th the transfer and registration of bonds, et cetera, and the flotation of loans, and authority for these purposes to employ a temporary staff, fix their rates of remuneration and otherwise wholly regulate them services, without reference to and notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Service Act-and also to pay additional remuneration to any employee engaged in connection with the flotation and redemption of loans for work done outside of prescribed hours, at such rates as the Treasury Board may approve, $125,000.	y
James Alexander Robb: From this appropriation are
paid the salaries of temporary employees engaged in the transfer and registration of bonds, the flotation of loans, and so forth.


Edward Joseph Garland: I think it
was understood, when a resolution was passing the House some time ago, that there was the possibility of the minister borrowing large sums of money, even to the extent of $300000,000, in the near future. In view of that, what is the reason for the decrease in this item? Does not the minister expect to require the temporary help in the issue of these new bonds?


James Alexander Robb: We are taking authority to
raise $300,000,000, but that is to provide for maturities from now until 1927. We have something maturing next year, and the following year, but this year we have only to provide for the $107,000,000 that matures in November. We will try and get that money at as reasonable a price as possible, and in a way that will involve the smallest possible expense to the department.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is not a fair way of putting it at all. The way of finding out what we are doing in reducing our debt, so far as sinking funds are concerned, is to look at the credit which sinking funds have, and there you have it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Edward Joseph Garland: But the
minister has not explained the reason for the decrease. I am not expressing any disapproval of it; I am very glad to see it, and I hope it will continue.


James Alexander Robb: I think all these things are
very likely based on the experience of the

Supply-Finance
past year. The amount required last year was $115,549.47, and it is estimated that the amount here will be a fair provision to carry on the service this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unforeseen expenses, expenditure thereof to be under order in council, and a detailed statement to be laid before parliament within fifteen days of next session, $75,000.
James Alexander Robb: This is the same amount as last year.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What was spent last year?


James Alexander Robb: Last year, $35,515.62.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is really to provide for unforeseen expenses; it is a contingency. Just so as to straighten the matter out-or was it straightened out?-a moment ago my hon. friend referred to the issue for the reduction of the debt, and I want to point out to him that it had nothing to do with the sinking fund figures. I have just looked up the Public Accounts. During the year we increased our sinking fund by $2,960,275, there is no dispute about that, and that increase is available for the purposes of the debt.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Expenses in connection with the negotiation of treaties, $20,000.
James Alexander Robb: This is the usual vote. There was no expenditure in 1923-24. In the previous year there was an expenditure of $8,264.83.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am afraid my hon. friend is wrong when he says that this is the usual vote; it is an extraordinary one.


James Alexander Robb: What I mean by that is, this item was first included in the estimates in 1922-23. At that time there was a conference on the subject of the cattle embargo, and the expenditure charged against the item was $8,264.83. Last year there was no expenditure.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The fact is that we voted $40,000 in all for this purpose, and in two years only $8,000 has been really spent. I really think the proper thing to do is to drop the item. There is no reason why we should carry unnecessary items and unduly swell the figures of the national expenditure; they are bad enough as it is. What used to be done in connection with this matter was to provide for any expense that might suddenly arise in connection with the negotiation of a treaty, or anything of that kind, by a Governor General's warrant. If it was not done in that way the expenditure could be
met out of the vote for unforeseen expenses which each department has at its disposal. Usually every treaty negotiated has to do with some department, and the necessary expenditure can be met out of the vote for unforeseen expenses. We have already passed a vote of $75,000 to cover unforeseen expenses.
I do not know that any treaties are looming up at the present time. We spent nothing for such a purpose last year. At any rate it is an easy enough matter to take a trip to Washington and come back again if any matters there necessitate attention; it will not cost very much. I really think the wisest thing to do would be to cut out the paper charges, and this is really a paper charge.


James Alexander Robb: I should not like to cut the vote out. We know exactly what we are paying under this head at the present time. I point out that as a result of the expenditure of $8,264.83 in 1922-23 we were able to put through, no later than yesterday, a treaty with Belgium and Luxembourg, countries where the balance of trade is in favour of Canada to the extent of three to one. As my hon. friend says it does not cost much to go down to Washington. Well, it would be worth while to go down to the capital of the United States if we could secure an arrangement.


Mr. HOEY:: Reciprocity?


James Alexander Robb: An arrangement which would enable our cattle and other farm products to circulate more freely in that market. I think there is no evidence of extravagance in connection with this item, and I am of opinion that it should be allowed to go through as it is.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am not saying there was any extravagance in connection with this expenditure.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend is quite right.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Nor am I saying for one moment that we should not negotiate treaties. All I am suggesting is that we should not carry in the estimates an omnibus item which in all probability will not be used and which is unnecessary. In the past we got along very well without it and there never was any difficulty.


Edward Joseph Garland: I think there is some force in the argument of the hon. member for West York. When amounts of this character are placed in the estimates there is always the temptation to spend them.
Supply-Finance

Whether the money is spent or not may depend on whether or not there is an opportunity. If the money is voted the greater the temptation to spend it will be.


James Alexander Robb: The inclination was not very apparent last year.


Edward Joseph Garland: Perhaps the opportunity did not arise, but in future there may be an opportunity. May I ask the minister-I do not want to be unduly harsh in this matter-if he anticipates any demand for this $20,000 next year?


James Alexander Robb: I say frankly to my hon. friend that we are looking anxiously to the results of the election in the United States this fall.


Edward Joseph Garland: Reciprocity?


James Alexander Robb: I did not say that.


Edward Joseph Garland: Why not say it if the hon. member has that idea in mind. I would be glad to think that he has a proposition like that in view.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the National Battlefields Commission-
(a)	For expenses of administration	$ 6,000(b)	For maintenance of the National Battlefields park	
35,000(c)	For maintenance of martello towers.. ..	500(d)	For new works in the park	
5,500
Arthur John Lewis: Would the minister explain
the last item? The others are self-explanatory?


James Alexander Robb: It will be a combined public
comfort and police building.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: What is the rest of the vote for?


James Alexander Robb: I have all the items here:
Salaries	$4,000
Office rent and	taxes	
1,162Commissioner's	travelling expenses	
300Telephone	
60Electric light..	..	.. ,	
12Legal expenses	
225
I think that was to arrange for some deeds or some expropriation of property down there.
Office supplies	
Contingencies	 91
National Battlefields Park-Maintenance-
Labour	$17,500
Police	 4.500
Supervision	 3,300
Electric light	 2d00
Machines	 1 500

I believe that would be lawn mowers and
that sort of thing.
Plants, seeds, fertilizers	$ 800
Fuel	 1,200
Tools and small machines	 300
Snow removal	 800
Insurance	 500
Placing old guns	 600
Contingent	 1,900


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Where are these battlefields?


James Alexander Robb: On the plains of Abraham.


Edward Joseph Garland: Did the
minister read out an item of $4,500 for policing these battlefields?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


Edward Joseph Garland: What is
the extent of that park?


James Alexander Robb: Has my hon. friend never been in Quebec city?


Edward Joseph Garland: Yes, I have been there, but I have never measured the park and my judgment is not sufficiently acute to be able to tell offhand the exact acreage.


James Alexander Robb: The sum of $4,500 would not
represent the payment of very many men on a park of that size.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant in aid of the Canadian General Council of the Boy Scouts Association, $15,000.
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: How is this money
expended?


James Alexander Robb: I imagine it is a grant given to the association and they appropriate it. The Canadian Council of the Boy Scouts Association exists for the purpose of aiding generally the abject of the movement in Canada. The chief scout for Canada is His Excellency Baron Byng of Vimy; Chief Commissioner, Dr. James W. Robertson; Assistant Chief Commissioner, John A. Stiles; Honorary Dominion Secretary, Gerald H. Brown; Honorary Treasurer, D. M. Einnie. This grant has been given since 1914. The first grant was $5,000, and it continued at $5,000 until 1921-22. In 1922-23 it was increased to $15,000.


William Charles Good: I attended the annual meeting of the association in this building this year, and I was very favourably impressed with the work they were carrying on. The grant is justified, so far as I can find out from the meetings.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, $2,500.
Henry Herbert Stevens: Under this item I presume would come the expenses of those who selected the paintings to represent Canada in Great Britain.


James Alexander Robb: No, I do not think so. The
officials are:	President, G. Horne Russell,
Montreal; Vice-President, Henry Sproat, Toronto; Secretary, E. Dyonnett, Montreal; Treasurer, C. W. Simpson, Montreal. The object of the society is to promote interest in fine arts. The members of the society give their services gratuitously. Grants are made to the Toronto exhibition and other large exhibitions. The grant was started in 1910-11 at $2,000; in 1913-14 it was increased to $5,000; in 1917-18 it was reduced to $2,500; in 1921-22 it was again increased to $7,500 and remained there up to and including last year. We are now reducing it to $2,500.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant in aid of the Dominion Council of the Girl Guides, $3,000.
Arthur John Lewis: Last year I spoke in favour
of this item, and I was in favour of increasing the amount. We pay $15,000 to the Boy Scouts, and it seems to me it is just as important the girls should get the same amount of mental and physical training as the boys. It is just as essential for the wellbeing of Canada that the girls should be trained as well as the boys. For this reason I think the vote should be increased in the same ratio.


James Alexander Robb: We will keep that in mind.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the Inter-parliamentary union for peace, $200.
Miss MACPHAIL:: This vote of $200 to
the Inter-pariiamentary union for the encouragement of peace is a very encouraging thing, at a time when we are spending about twelve millions in preparation for war. It is encouraging but it is small. What does it mean? Is it to keep peace between parliaments, or is it to keep the peace of the world?


James Alexander Robb: I think it would cost more
than that to keep the peace of the world. This is a grant to the Inter-parliamentary Union. This amount has been voted annually since 1914. The secretary of the institution is Mr. Charles Lange, and the head of the institution is in Switzerland.


Edward Joseph Garland: What does
it accomplish?
Supply-Finance


Thomas Vien: May I be permitted to add
a word of explanation, as I happen to be the joint secretary of the Canadian group of the Inter-parliamentary Union? This union was organized a. few years ago at the instance of a group of French parliamentarians. It is now composed of parliamentarians of about twenty-eight countries. This group formed national groups for each country. We have the pleasure of having a Canadian group, the president of which this year is the Speaker of the House of Commons. Last year the president of the Canadian group was the Right Hon. Senator Sir George Eulas Foster. These groups meet in conference every year Last year the conference was held at Copenhagen, the year previous it was held at Vienna. At these conferences the parliamentarians of all countries discuss and study questions of interest for all the countries, and try to evolve a plan which would eliminate war for all time. Of course they have a lot of work to do to attain their aims; but I think we have a most commendable object, and this amount which is voted here is paid to the general secretary who is in Geneva, Mr. Lange, who is Secretaire Generale of the Inter-parliamentary Union. It is to contribute to the expenses of the secretariat of the whole union. This year we have had a meeting of the members of the Canadian group, which is composed of senators and members of the House of Commons, and we have a right to appoint delegates to the twenty-second conference which will be held in Berne and Geneva in August next, and six parliamentarians of Canada have already accepted an invitation to attend and represent Canada. We have nine votes and six have been chosen already. If three more members would consent to go to Geneva or Berne in August next, it would be a great pleasure to the union. Needless to say delegates from all countries are obliged to pay their own expenses, but the $200 which is voted is sent as the contribution of the Canadian group, our share of the expenses of the general secretary.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I would like to know whether the Canadian members of the union will be prepared to support a motion to reduce the armament to be maintained in Canada.


Thomas Vien: I think these are questions that are being discussed at the conferences. A question has been put to all groups, to which the Canadian group has submitted answers, in respect to treaties and the right to declare war and to make peace.
Supply-Finance


James Shaver Woodsworth: The hon. member
has not answered my question. If we are going to do anything for peace, it seems to me that we must be active in Canada as well as at the conferences at Berne and elsewhere, and my question was whether the members of the Canadian sction of this union would be prepared to support a motion looking to the reduction of our armaments.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, 110,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
reason for the decrease? If there is anything we want to look after it is an institution for the blind.


James Alexander Robb: This institute was formed by a combination of existing organizations and it operates in close affiliation with local bodies of a similar nature. The total expenditures exceed $200,000 per annum and the grants are received from the federal, provincial and municipal authorities, being augmented by private subscriptions. The first federal grant was made in 1919-20. In that year the Department of Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment made an agreement with the institute whereby an annual grant of $10,000 was to be given in consideration of work done for blind soldiers. This agreement covered a period of five years, expiring with the grant of 1923-24. Since 1921-22 an additional grant of $10,000 for administrative purposes has been provided. The decrease in the vote is explained by the fact that for 1924-25 the Department of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment will pay the institute for services rendered blind ex-soldiers a similar amount. Accordingly the present vote is reduced by $10,000.


Sii HENRY DRAYTON:: The same work will be carried on but provision will be made from some other source.


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the expenses of a Royal Commission to inquire into proposed prohibition or restriction ol the export of pulpwood, $20,000.
Henry Herbert Stevens: I notice a number of
items for this very commission; in the Supplementary Estimates I think there are two. Can the minister give us the complete total of the expenditures to date, together with the full amount to be voted this year?
[f'r. Vien.]


James Alexander Robb: There is a sum in the Supplementary Estimates and also a vote in the same estimates covering Governor General's warrants. I gather from my hon. friend's preliminary canter that he is not altogether sure that we are getting value for the money we are spending.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I have said nothing yet
from which the minister can draw any such inference; I simply asked for facts.


James Alexander Robb: I can asure the hon. gentleman that I am anxious to have the report of the commission and to get them off the paylist. The commissioners were appointed by order in council in August, 1923. The chairman is Mr. Joseph Picard of Quebec; the deputy chairman, Mr. William A. Anstie, of Vancouver; and the commissioners, Messrs. Joseph G. Sutherland, of Clyde River, Nova Scotia, A. B Kerr, Toronto, and R. W. McLellan, Fredericton, New Brunswick. The chairman is paid $35 per day with a living allowance of $15 per day and the other commissioners receive each $25 per day with a living allowance of $15. This is exclusive of transportation. In addition to the $20,000 voted for 1923-24 the Governor General's warrant was issued for $30,000 on January 15, 1924, and the total expenses up to March 31, 1924, amounted to $48,172.51. Hearings of the commission have -been held in various places throughout Canada and witnesses examined. The report is now in course of preparation and I have the assurance of the commission that it is almost complete.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister has overlooked Item No. 480 of the Supplementary Estimates which provides $7,500 for the commission.


James Alexander Robb: I did not overlook it; I have given a list of what has so far been spent.


Edward Joseph Garland: The minister mentioned $48,000 odd as the amount expended, but the actual amount asked for is $57,500.


James Alexander Robb: Yes, but the hon. member
must bear in mind that what I have given is the total expenditure to March 31, 1924, and I must provide for payments from that time on. As I say, however, I hope the report will be submitted very shortly and that the commission will be removed from the pay list.

Supply-Finance


William Irvine: In view of the great need
for economy which has characterized the minister's utterances for some years, and in view also of the comparative uselessness of this commission,-


James Alexander Robb: I do not admit that.


William Irvine: -would the minister be
willing to reduce the remuneration of the gentlemen of this commission to a trade-union wage-that of bricklayers, say?


Henry Herbert Stevens: Why insult the bricklayers?


William Irvine: What does the hon. gentleman mean?


Henry Herbert Stevens: I mean that the suggestion is an insult to the bricklayers, that is all.


William Irvine: Not in so far as the wages are concerned.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What in the name of
common sense did this commission go to New York and Washington for? Why spend the country's money to enable the commission to go upon a jaunt down there?-an expensive commission drawing an allowance and salary amounting to some $170 or $200 a day. The commission goes to New York and Washington to get evidence in regard to the export of pulpwood! What for? Why, the only dispute on the matter was between my hon. friend from Quebec South (Mr. Power) and some other hon. gentlemen opposite who thought that there was a difference of opinion as to whether or not pulpwood should be exported from the province of Quebec. That is really the genesis of this commission, and to spend some $50,000 to $60,000 of the people's money merely to bring about a little peace within the ranks of the government party is really more than anyone can justify.


James Alexander Robb: It was for no such purpose.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The object was very
largely to restore peace within the ranks of the party opposite in which there was a cleavage on this question. And to aggravate the whole situation this commission has travelled down to New York to take evidence, ostensibly for the purpose of reporting upon the advisibility or otherwise of exporting pulpwood from the province of Quebec and other places in this country. That in my opinion is a flagrant waste of public money and I gather from the attitude of the Acting Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) that he was not responsible in any way for this appointment and that he is not particularly enamoured of it. I therefore acquit him of all blame in the matter. I want to place myself on record however as being absolutely opposed to this commission, now, as I was at first. I have criticised and questioned the propriety of the government spending these large amounts on this commission, and I agree with the minister that the best thing to do under the circumstances is to get it off the pay list as early as possible.


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: In spite of our
previous opposition to this commission, I think that in view of what the minister has stated we should have a little charity and forgive the government for having put the country to this expense, seeing that the hon. gentleman is anxious to get the commission out of the way. The minister no doubt wants to get rid of it and avoid any further reference to the subject, so that we may not reflect too much on the value of the commission.


William Irvine: If the minister would undertake to get rid of the commission I would not say more about the matter.


James Alexander Robb: Let us get the report first.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we
should have more than that from the minister. We should have some evidence of a real change of heart, some evidence that in the future the government will function as a government and not as an appointer of commissions. This is an excellent illustration of what the government always does; it is an evidence of how a permanent commission such as we talked about yesterday would function. It is simply another buffer for the government, another agency through which a government with no mind of its own can get one, and the country pays for it. There was a vote last year of $20,000 for this commission. There is a vote of $20,000 in these estimates. There is a vote of $30,000 in the supplementaries for Governor General's warrants, and there is a vote of $7,500 in the supplementaries for the specific purpose, making a total of $77,500.


James Alexander Robb: It does not mean it will all be spent.


Henry Lumley Drayton: But think of
leaving that in front of their noses! We expected this commission to deliver itself during this session of a predestined message written before they ever sat, but they are still going, and we are still leaving the bunch of carrots there.


An hon. MEMBER:: Call them in now.

Supply-Finance


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we
should call them in. The minister would be well advised to strike out this item of $20,000. With the $20,000 of last year and the $37,500 this year he has a total of $57,500, and that is a lot of money to spend in order to find out whether the large American concerns interested in pulpwood object to a proposed policy of looking after Canada. If the minister is sincere in seeing that this commission stops wandering, surely he will strike out this item of $20,000.


James Alexander Robb: No, I would not like to strike out the item. The commissioners were appointed by order in council, after there had been evidence of a considerable division of opinion throughout Canada whether we should have an embargo or not. A man named Barnjum, after he had sold all his own limits, started a campaign to put on an embargo ; then in the press throughout the country there was a campaign for and against an embargo. Representations were made to us by different provinces-Quebec is not the only province interested in the matter; in fact, it is one of the least interested, because a great many of the limits there are taken care of under the Crown Lands Act, and I imagine there is more pulpwood manufactured into paper in Quebec than in any other province. The commission as a whole did not go to New York or Washington. Members of the commission started out for there, but as soon as my attention was directed to it I wired them and they returned to Canada.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I want to compliment the minister on that action. It is one redeeming feature of the whole business. He ought to have a leather medal struck immediately for that a sort of life saving proposition. Did they return?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is another evidence of victory on the part of the minister. There is at least a silken thread running through the fabric of this administration, represented by the honesty and integrity of the Acting Minister of Finance-a remnant at least of respect for the interests of the country. It is the first time this session I have discovered anything that really could be commended. The ordering. of this commission back constitutes an oasis in the desert.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister implies that Mr. Barnjum started this agitation for an embargo after he had sold his own limits. Now I do not know Mr. Barnjum personally-


James Alexander Robb: Neither do I.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I hold no brief for him.
Personally I am opposed to an embargo; I voted that way last year. I am opposed to it for the reasons which I gave in evidence before the commission when it sat at Fredericton. But it is not fair to Mr. Barnjum or to those whom he represents to say that he started this agitation after he had sold his own limits. I challenge the minister's authority to make that statement, and I should like to know what evidence he has to support it. I think Mr. Barnjum has shown the best of good faith in this matter. He may be mistaken; I think from the point of view of the farmers of this country he is mistaken. I am not so sure, however, that he is mistaken from the point of view of a survey of the whole situation. But in justice to Mr. Barnjum the minister ought not to imply that he was actuated by an improper motive; that he started this agitation after selling his own limits. He is a private citizen of this country and is not here to answer the imputation.


James Alexander Robb: He had ample opportunity to go before the commission to give evidence, but he was always dodging the commission.
_ Mr. HANSON:	Other men bigger in the
timber trade than Mr. Barnjum had ample opportunity to go before the commission but did not ^ do so because they considered the commission was a huge joke. I can say unreservedly that some of the biggest timber men in New Brunswick took that view of it. The whole purpose of appointing the commission was to sidestep the responsibility that the government should itself have assumed. That was the feeling among the men -who are probably most interested from a financial standpoint in eastern Canada. I did not feel That way myself. I felt that in justice to my constituents, in justice to the small farmers of the country, having regard to the economic conditions under which they were labouring, the views to which I gave expression should be voiced. I have not heard any dissent from the position I took in that respect. I rise only to protest against the imputation contained in the minister's statement as to Mr. Barnj urn's motives.


Edward Joseph Garland: I am not
particularly concerned with Mr. Barnjum's motives. All I have in view is that the actions of that one man have been sufficiently powerful to cause an expenditure on the part of the country of some $70,000. He is some man! Unless the minister can give some better reasons for continuing this $20,000

Supply-Finance
item it might be dropped. The point taken by the ex-Minister of Finance is well taken;
I do not think we are justified in voting this S20,000.


James Alexander Robb: The justification of it is that
we probably owe a part of it now. I do not say we owe it all, but we owe a part of it.


William Irvine: I still want to press my suggestion of a few moments ago: that if these gentlemen on the commission work eight hours a day and six days a week, and we give each of them $5 a day for their wages and pay them while they were in New York- where they ought not to have been-$2.50 a day for expenses, instead of $15 a day-if we went on that basis, which is reasonable in view of the fact that our working people are getting much less than that for doing the real work of the country, I imagine the $50,000 which the commissioners have already received would more than cover the bill. In view of the further fact that if we allow this item to stand they may continue another year or two in the preparation of their report, I beg to move that the item be struck off. This will perhaps help the minister to reach some definite conclusion as to whether he will take the advice of the ex-Minister of Finance (Sir Henry Drayton).


The CHAIRMAN:: The amendment requires to be in writing.


William Irvine: I will write it out.


Richard Burpee Hanson: While the hon. member
is writing out his amendment I want to make an observation or two. It is true the Pulp-wood Commission has been a long time on the job. It is also true, I think, that certain members of that commission should never have been appointed; but it is an undoubted fact that other members, particularly Mr. McLellan and Mr. Anstie, have done a great deal of valuable work, if only in connection with the collection of statistics. I think I am voicing the opinion of those who have come in contact with these two gentlemen when I say that they knew something about the work to which they were appointed, but I am sorry I cannot say the same with respect to the other members of the commission.


James Alexander Robb: Of course, my hon. friend
probably knows those two gentlemen better than the other members of the commission. Perhaps he does not know the qualifications of their colleagues.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have met them all. I have no doubt that the chairman is a most capable gentleman in his own sphere of use-271
fulness, that he probably knows the tobacco business from A to Z, but what in the world he knew about the timber or the pulpwood business that would qualify him for appointment on this commission is beyond my ken.


Samuel William Jacobs: The hon. gentleman probably thinks he is not a blockhead.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No, he is not.


James Alexander Robb: I am glad my hon. friend is satisfied with two members of the commission. What were their particular qualifications?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. McLellan is a lawyer-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Burpee Hanson: All right, now. All his life he has been connected more or less with the timber business and has been actively engaged in the pulpwood business in a very large way. In addition to that he is secretary of the New Brunswick Lumberman's Association, and I rather venture the guess that he was appointed to the commission because as secretary of that association he could represent in a proper way the New Brunswick interests most vitally concerned in the subject matter of the inquiry. While I do not know what Mr. Anstie's private business is, I am aware that he too is connected with the timber business in the province of British Columbia. These two men brought to their work a very considerable knowledge of the subject into which they were appointed to inquire. But what in the world some of the other members would know about it, it is beyond me. I criticised the appointment of the commission from the standpoint of the fitness of the majority of the personnel, and also from the standpoint of numbers. I do not see why it was necessary to appoint so many commissioners-five-at a cost to the country of several hundred dollars a day. I have reason to believe that when the report is brought down it will be found to be of considerable value, but I would suggest to the minister that he get the report in as soon as possible.


Mr. WHITE:: If this item and the item in the supplementaries are passed and the Governor General's warrant is made use of, how long can this commission carry on without a further vote?


James Alexander Robb: I do not think they can carry on very much longer. We expect them to get through within a few days.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. minister told me that he did not expect the commission to spend the $77,500.

Supply-Finance


James Alexander Robb: No, I do not.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How much does he expect them to spend?


James Alexander Robb: There will be the printing of die report.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The cost of that Till not come out of this $77,500.


James Alexander Robb: Part of it. I have only the
details of expenditure to March 31.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That expenditure was $48,000. Have any more bills been received since?


James Alexander Robb: There will be April, May,
June and July to take into account.


Henry Herbert Stevens: When will the report be made?


James Alexander Robb: I understand that the report
is almost completed. I am bound to say, in fairness to the commissioners, that they have asked for an interview with me-perhaps to present their report-but I have not had time to see them during the last ten days.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Does not the
minister think that $57,500 would be enough? I should think every one else would think so.


James Alexander Robb: Had this $20,000 been sufficient we would not have put a further amount in the Supplementaries.


Henry Elvins Spencer: What part of the cost
of printing will be charged up to this vote?


James Alexander Robb: I have not the details, but I
understand there is an arrangement between the different departments and the Printing bureau.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is not intended to
print the evidence?


James Alexander Robb: No.


Richard Smeaton White: Will the report be out before parliament prorogues?


James Alexander Robb: I hope so.


George Newcombe Gordon: The question is on the amendment moved by Mr. Irvine, that item 362 be reduced to the sum of $10,000.


Mr. POWER:: I rather resent the reflection made by my hon. friend from York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) on the chairman of the commission. It is true that he is not intimately connected with the lumber business, but it seems to me that perhaps that would rather be a reason for qualifying him as chairman of the commission. In my part of the country the lumbermen are divided in opinion on the

subject of an embargo on the exportation of pulpwood, those who hold freehold lots or who are dealers in pulpwood are prejudiced in favour of exportation, while those who happen to be connected with the manufacture of pulpwood or newsprint are equally prejudiced in favour of an embargo. So it would have been extremely difficult to choose an unprejudiced man from among those interested in the lumber trade in the portion of the province from which I come. Mr. Picard is one of the most solid representative business men of the city of Quebec, he has been chairman of the local school board and in that capacity had to do with an annual expenditure of several million dollars, and I know he has been consulted by the provincial government and by the municipal authorities of Quebec on a great many financial problems. I cannot think of any one else in that city, where there are a large number of lumbermen, who would be more competent to preside over an inquiry of this kind, and who would give to the work more of his energy, and whose judgement would be more balanced and more unprejudiced.


William Irvine: Before the amendment is
carried, Mr. Chairman, I wish to explain, that my original intention was to move that the whole item be struck out; but in view of the fact that the minister has explained that already part of the money has actually been expended I do not want to place him in the embarrassing position of being presented with accounts which he has no money to pay. So I thought that if we could take a guess at the amount he wanted, and save $10,000 from the bottom of the abyss to which it is in danger of going if we do not vote for the amendment, it would be generous and perhaps wise to cut the vote in two instead of wiping it all off.
Amended negatived; Yeas, 34; Nays, 54.


Arthur Meighen: I suppose this Pulpwood Commission has now jollied along until we will get no report this session.


James Alexander Robb: I hope to have the report.


Arthur Meighen: Oh, the hope has been expressed almost daily for months.


James Alexander Robb: I agree with my hon. friend
to that extent.


Arthur Meighen: It is perfectly absurd.
The commission was appointed last year with the idea of taking action then, and they have been sitting all through this session, or

Supply-Finance
at least extracting the money from the treasury, and the farce is still kept up; the money is going out, the pulpwood is going out, and the government are doing nothing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Auditor General's office-Salaries, including Auditor General at $10,000 additional to 7-8 Edward VII, chap. 6, $278,460; Contingencies, $90,500.
Henry Herbert Stevens: The minister might give
us a brief statement regarding the reorganization of the Auditor General's office, and just how far it has proceeded.


James Alexander Robb: The Auditor General, as my
hon. friend knows, is Mr. Gonthier, who was a chartered accountant, with a very wide and splendid reputation in the part of the country from which he comes. All the details of the office will be found on page 81. Hon. members will recall that under the Audit Act of last year a Board of Audit was appointed, and this board is working with the Auditor General examining into the different departments, and we hope they will be able to present a report to .parliament next session which will be useful to us. They intimate to us that after the reorganization is complete, if the government accepts the recommendations of the Audit Board, considerable economy may be effected and greater efficiency brought about in the administration of the different departments.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know whether
the minister is really hopeful of the Audit Board doing anything, but I certainly am not hopeful. I consider the whole thing an anomaly. Here is the Auditor General, whose duties are undoubtedly heavy and exceedingly responsible, duties distinctly appertaining to audit, and he, ;a new man, is asked to get two other auditors and assume, in conjunction with them, the duty of reorganizing the Civil Service, and to make recommendations, something for which their training would not give them the least qualification in the world, and something which if it is done is the duty, by statute, of another organization, another organization thoroughly trained, experienced, and paid for out of the treasury for the very purpose. The government duplicates that organization with another body with the Auditor General at the top, a man who, if he does his duty, has no time for any other work at all, a man who, if he had other work, has no qualifications at all. for this task any more than any other auditor in the country; he associates with himself two other men equally disqualified, and they are supposed to be reorganizing the 271 i
Civil Service of Canada, and are going to make a report and make recommendations. They were asked, as a sort of side-stepping performance in connection with the postal clerks' appeal for more wages after the government took off a part of the bonus, to work in co-operation or co-ordination, or something, with the Civil Service Commission. Now the government knows their work there was perfectly worthless. There was not a single thing they said that did not prove to be utter nonsense, not one recommendation they made that the government could accept-not a single one. They were simply a block on the wheel.


George Perry Graham: Their report, in a large
measure, was very much like that of the Civil Service Commission.


Arthur Meighen: I will tell you how it
came to be like it.


George Perry Graham: Speaking from memory,
there were a few grades as to which they were apart, but the two reports were identical as to the great majority of the grades, so it is not fair to say that their report was not of any use.


Arthur Meighen: If the two reports were
absolutely identical, I presume the minister would say the Audit Board would have been very useful. If they had said, "the Civil Service Commission is right," they would have been 100 per cent useful? In so far as they made any comment on the Civil Service Commission's work, that comment proved to be worthless, and naturally it would. How could it be anything else? They never heard witnesses; they never had experience in any similar task; they were strangers to the whole undertaking, and everything they said was negatived by the commission, and not only * negatived, but the commission's reasons were absolutely overwhelming.


Mr. MURDOCK:: The Board of Audit did hear witnesses on both sides, ihe officers of the department and the representatives of the employees, on more than one occasion.


Arthur Meighen: It did not seem to do
them much good.


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend said they
did not hear witnesses.


James Murdock: It did them good to
the extent of suggesting an increase of salary in sixteen different classifications.


Arthur Meighen: An increase which never took effect, an increase which was proven to
Supply-Finance

be illogical by the Civil Service Commission's report, and an increase which the government itself did not grant. The delegation of this duty to the Audit Board was accompanied by a proclamation through the press of the country that this was for the purpose of diminishing the expense of the country, a new attempt at economy. Now the Minister of Labour tries to show the Audit Board was useful because it recommended certain expenses in addition to what the Civil Service Commission recommended, which additional expenditure never took effect.


James Murdock: It could not, on account of your law.


Arthur Meighen: Then why do you not
amend the law? If you do not believe in the law and want some other board instead to make recommendations, or want the government to do it itself, instead of complaining about the law, -whining about it day in and day out, why not manfully come in and recommend a change? I do not hear any answer.


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: Will my right hon. friend support it?


Arthur Meighen: No, because I do not
believe in it. I am not whining about it. The law is all right; I believe in it and support it but hon. gentlemen opposite do not.


James Alexander Robb: No doubt my right hon. friend will recall that at one period he did attempt to amend the law.


Arthur Meighen: And we did amend it.


James Alexander Robb: No, no, my right hon. friend
withdrew the Spinney bill.


Arthur Meighen: No we did not withdraw t the Spinney bill. The Spinney bill went through the House but we took full responsibility for the change.


James Alexander Robb: It did not go through as presented.


Arthur Meighen: It was presented merely in skeleton form, just like the Redistribution bill was, and the details were filled in by a committee and the government accepted those details, put the law through and took the responsibility. Just a few more cases were added to those which the commission had power to recommend being excepted from the Civil Service Act, but very few more. With referrence to those few more though hon. gentlemen opposite raised a howl to high heaven as being a violation of the principle of the act. But immediately they got into
fMr. Meighen.]
office they took steps to see that those cases were multiplied about tenfold-just aboult tenfold. However, this is aside from the question. That was the Spinney bill. Now we have a trained body, which has an organization for the purpose and after we secure it and are paying out the good money of the people of Canada for its maintenance, the government under the plea of economy, bring another body into existence and put at its head a man whose duties if he performs them are as onerous already, certainly as responsible, as those of any man in the service of the country-a man who, if he performs his own duties, can hardly do anything else. And then they bring two other men in who have had no association with the service and no experience of it in the world, and these three men are supposed to be now investigating or re-organizing the Civil Service of Canada. I do not know that anything could be much more absurd. We are just multiplying one body after the other. First of all we have the Audit Board as a court of appeal over the Civil Service Commission. Then the other day we had a new taxation commission, or some such sonorous name is given to it as an excuse to give men a lot of high salaries to do something that certainly we ought to do if it requires to be done at all. And then besides, apparently to check their conduct, there is to be another commission in the Finance department. It is time we quit piling up the super-structure of government, in this way. Instead of providing machinery to add to the cost of government by bringing in new legislation, let us apply ourselves to reducing the cost by doing our duty in this parliament.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: With much that the leader of the opposition has said I find myself in thorough agreement. I did not anticipate last year, when the legislation creating a Board of Audit was before parliament that the government had in -mind some sort of organization which was going to sit in appeal on the Civil Service Commission. It occurs to me that if the Civil Service Commission is not properly functioning, if the act under which it operates is not satisfactory, then certainly one of two courses should be followed-either the Civil Service Commission should be removed, or else the act should be changed in order to make it more effective and more efficient. Now I happened to sit on a committee last year which was engaged in remodelling, if you like, this Civil Service Act. The committee, I think almost unanimously, came to an agreement with regard to several very important amendments. None of these

Supply-Finance
amendments have been given effect to at all, except the one dealing with superannuation. Instead of that we find this Audit Board created; and in going through the estimates and the government's legislation for the session I find numerous provisions-some contained in the very item we are discussing-indicating that the appointments referred to are to be made without reference to the Civil Service Act. This same phrase exempting positions from the operation of the Civil Service Act, this same re-introduction of patronage, is manifest dozens and dozens of times throughout these estimates and in the legislation brought down by the government. I think it is unfortunate that we should be going back to patronage, and in this covert way our steps are certainly being retraced. It is my opinion that the impotence of this Audit Board, so far as regards its influence outside of the Auditor General's department, was certainly very apparent in connection with the post office situation. In that particular case what happened was this, as I understand it: The matter of post office salaries was referred to the Civil Service Commission, the Audit Board and also to the deputy ministers. An attempt was made apparently to have a conference. The Audit Board, for some reason, withdrew, and then after a report on the subject was made to the government by the Civil Service Commissioners and the deputy ministers, and after they had heard representation from all parties, the government referred the report back to the Audit Board. The board called witnesses, heard evidence and discussed the matter all over again, and then finally the report had to go back to the Civil Service Commissioners because they were the only body empowered by law whose report the government could accept; the report of the Audit Board could not be accepted by the government no matter what its nature might be. I think that one incident has indicated the impotence of this particular board. What we should do is to fashion one piece of machinery and make it really effective, make it really function, instead of multiplying the machinery as we are doing not only in this regard but in numerous other cases. I impress upon the government that they should not be retracing their steps in the direction of patronage; that they should make an effort to get real, efficient service and to remove the evils of patronage entirely.


Mr. MARTELL:: Can the hon. member
dispute the fact that under what he terms the iniquitous patronage system we got some 
of the ablest men in the Civil Service, whereas under the present system we got faddists rather than practical men?


Joseph Tweed Shaw: All I can say to my hon. friend is that if what he states is true then accidents do happen.


Lewis Herbert Martell: My hon. friend does
not understand the situation at all. I happen to be one of those who refused to sign the report of the committee last year. I will be very frank in stating this:	I do not care
what party is in, the man who represents the county, knowing the people in the constituency, is well qualified to recommend to the government of the country the proper persons to fill all positions. I will stand by that and will run my election on it. I am in favour oi the patronage system because it is the proper system and the most democratic one.


Arthur Meighen: It is fortunate for the
hon. member that he was not in the House or he would have been called upon by the party whip to take exactly an opposite stand.


Lewis Herbert Martell: I would not have taken
it.


Arthur Meighen: I will not say the hon.
member would have taken it, he might not have, but if he did not he would have shown a good deal more courage than any of his colleagues of that day. I want to make a little reference to the question of salary. I have no exception to take-I do not know in fact much about it-to the qualification of the appointee in this case. Certainly I raise no objection to the gentleman appointed, and I take no exception to his qualifications, but I do deprecate the continual tendency to yield to this demand and that for extraordinary salaries in the service of Canada. It is easy enough to say when you go out into the business world to get the very best man you can select that you ought to pay him proportionately. That is true, but if this course be followed in the case of every appointment in the Civil Service we shall have a scale of salaries in this Dominion that will outclass the richest country in the world if it does not do so to-day; we shall have a scale millions or tens of millions over what we have to-day. I do not say that we are going to run into that, but if we follow this practice we cannot help but run into it; and if we cannot follow the practice we should not commence it. Certainly if we lost to-day, say, the Deputy Minister of Justice and had to get the best lawyer in Canada to take his place we would have to pay him a lot more than the Deputy
Supply-Finance

Minister of Justice now receives. The same would be true in any department of administration. But the fact is that this cannot be done in the public service, this rule really cannot be adopted; we must get some other rule and go by it. And we should follow that other rule in the Auditor General's department the same as in any other department. We have to follow the rule, for example, of promotion, and rarely should that rule be abandoned or deflected in the case of the public service. I do not pretend to any special acquaintance with the personnel of the Auditor General's department but one would think there would have been opportunity there, by the principle of promotion, to fill this office as it has been filled throughout the history of Canada, without establishing these precedents of-I do not know what. I see S10.000 extra salary-$10,000 increase over what it was before. Where is this thing going to end? The government have yielded to importunity since it came into power, notwithstanding the fact that the high cost of living has certainly been no higher. They have yielded to importunity from the deputy ministers until they have lifted the scale there virtually universally to 88,000. They commenced, thinking they could stop, and found that they could not. They commenced in this case, no doubt, thinking they could stop. Why, they have not the moral muscle to stop. The thing will go right on certainly as long as the government is in office. We will have the fancy salaries here, there and everywhere, with the consequent discomfiture of other members of the service, the consequent envy, jealousy and failure to cooperate, and the consequent lack of spirit. All these things are the inevitable harvest of the course the government is pursuing. There must be a stern hand in the service, to prevent the special examples of exalted salaries, and I think the same can be said even in the sphere of our National Railways. We cannot get into that habit. This government will have to call a halt upon that habit. It is true we must have good men, but a government, managing a great service, must follow the principle of promotion far more sedulously than any private company is compelled to do. The service is so very extensive that the very fact that it is a public service, as distinguished from a private service, gives to the other members of the service a right, and a basis of complaint infinitely stronger and infinitely more dangerous than could the same basis be in any private company. Therefore. I say the government is on a very
l Mr. Meighen.1
dangerous road and is yielding very weakly to the temptations that beset the path of every government and that only strong governments can resist.


William Daum Euler: The hon. member refers to
employees of the National Railway. I would say they are not civil servants in the ordinary sense.


Arthur Meighen: I know that.


William Daum Euler: But would the hon. member hold that it would be possible to have an efficient staff in the National Railways and put them on a scale lower than that on. which the services are paid for, we will say, on the Canadian Pacific Railway? Does the hon. member think that would be possible?


Arthur Meighen: I have not gone so
far as to advocate that; but I am disposed to think the scale is higher, when consideration is given to the number of highly salaried posts. I will not say we can follow the same course in the National Railways in every way that we can in the public service. There is a distinction I admit, but we have got to set ourselves against an inevitable tendency to advance not only the members of this House in high office, but the level of salaries in high office even in the National Railways.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Insurance-Salaries, including Superintendent of Insurance, $5,000 additional to salary authorized by 7-8 Edward VII, chap. 69, $70,550.
James Alexander Robb: If hon. members have no objection, we might take this item, the usual vote for Insurance department.


Arthur Meighen: We cannot go on after
six o'clock.


James Alexander Robb: All right.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess


TRADE AND COMMERCE
[Stage Direction]
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Trade and Commerce-Salaries, $434,854.98.
Hon, J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Finance) :	In the absence of my colleague,
the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Low), I will explain these estimates this evening. Hon. gentlemen will observe a considerable reduction in staff and consequently a reduction in the vote.
Henry Herbert Stevens: The services of the
Director of Commercial Intelligence have been lispensed with. What was the reason for the change in the organization and, if it was considered important, on what ground was it made?


James Alexander Robb: The Director of Commercial Intelligence has been transferred to Trinidad.


Mr. OOOTE:: Have the services of the
expert in grain chemistry been dispensed with?


James Alexander Robb: He is being continued in
office until we have the report of the Grain Commission.


George Gibson Coote: The estimate provides for
a gratuity and I thought that possibly this official had been discharged.


James Alexander Robb: That is two months' gratuity
which he has been allowed; but in the Supplementary Estimates provision is made to carry him on until we have received the report of the commission.


George Gibson Coote: This official is Dr. Birchard? Mr. ROBB: Yes.


Mr. DOUCET:: The other evening when
we were discussing Item No. 375, Commercial Intelligence Service, I said I thought the intelligence service was not very satisfactory, at least to those who subscribed to the French version of departmental publications. The minister (Mr. Low) on that occasion replied that the French version cost a good deal more than the English; but in my humble opinion that does not seem reasonable inasmuch as the French publication is always smaller by 8 pages than the English version. However, as the minister is not in his seat to-night I do not wish to burden the acting minister with this particular matter. I have a number of circular letters in regard to various industries in the Dominion and I have followed from time to time the various publications which are issued for the information of the manufacturing and commercial public of the Dominion. In many cases they are being sent out in English only. The other day I tried to get a French translation of the following reports: On the paper products industries in Canada, 1921-22; on the box, basket and crate industry in Canada, 1921-22; on the tobacco manufacturing industry in Canada in 1922; on the furniture industries in Canada for 1921-22; on the June employment situation 1924; on men's furnishing goods industries in Canada for 1922; on pickle, sauce, vinegar and cider
10, 1924
Supply-Trade and Commerce
industry in Canada for 1921-22; on coffee and spice industries in Canada for 1921-22. I find that those reports have not yet been issued in the French language, and there are dozens of other reports that are not yet available to the French commercial public in their language. If it is worth while having our bilingual system, I contend, Mr. Chairman, that every government publication dealing with the trade and commerce of this Dominion should be printed in both languages and circulated throughout the country.
Many of these trade reports are published from time to time in some of our largest daily papers of the province of Quebec, and also in trade journals. When it is considered that these newspapers are willing to give this information for the benefit of their readers, and that their translation of the reports printed in English must entail considerable expense, I submit that even if it did cost a few dollars more per annum to have the various publications I have referred to translated into the French language the work should be undertaken. I think this is of vital importance and should be considered in connection with the French issue of the Commercial Intelligence Bulletin which I brought to the notice of the minister last week. Every publication which emanates from the department in connection with statistice and trade and commerce should be printed in both languages and circulated freely so that the whole population may benefit therefrom. Having brought this matter to the attention of the minister the other evening, and of the acting minister and his deputy minister this evening, as well as to the attention of the whole House, I hope that in future steps will be taken to see that all government periodicals are printed in the two languages.


Mr. STEWART (Leeds) :: Is the salary of M. J. Cullen, Chief Inspector of Immigration, mentioned in this vote?


James Alexander Robb: No.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: He was in this
department?


James Alexander Robb: He was at one time.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Has he been
transferred to another department?


James Alexander Robb: M. J. Cullen is now private
secretary to the Minister of Immigration.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: He is designated chief inspector.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


James Alexander Robb: We will deal with that when we come to the Immigration estimates.


Arthur Meighen: He has been translated
or transfigured into a higher position at a higher salary against the act?


James Alexander Robb: I shall be glad to discuss that with my right hon. friend when we reach the Immigration estimates.


Arthur Meighen: It is just as well to have the fact noticed as we pass.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I should judge that over $30,000 is provided for in this item for mechanical tabulators. How is this innovation working? I am informed that some departments have been urged to use these machines, in fact I have heard of one or two instances where they were used and found to be of no value. They might be of value in tabulating work where interim reports are not required, but where interim reports are required, the task of segrating the statistics in the old way must mean a duplication of expense. I shall be glad to know as to the success or otherwise of this system of tabulation.


James Alexander Robb: The experience of the department is that these mechanical tabulators and other contrivances are a very great benefit not only in enabling us to do work quicker but to do it more economically. The chief of the Bureau of Statistics, Mr. Coats, finds them of very great advantage.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I know that is claimed by the promoters of this new system, but from the information I have been able to gather it is a question whether that claim is sustained by actual experience.


James Alexander Robb: They have tried them out on a cost basis. It is true they are expensive, but they result in economy.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The system may work where you have one continuous and uniform class of statistics to get lip. But in all government departments, especially when parliament is sitting-which runs to four or six months in the year-you are called upon constantly for reports that vary from these regular reports. For instance, if all that was asked for in the case of the customs statistics was the regular reports running along throughout the year on a uniform basis, I daresay this new system would work. But if it is a case of furnishing reports in the middle of the month or at any time, thus breaking into the continuity of the system, then the matter must be dealt with in some other way than l Mr. C. W. Stewart.]
by the mechanical tabulator, with resulting duplication of cost. Will the minister give the committee some evidence that the use of these contrivances has resulted in economy?


James Alexander Robb: If we did not have them we would have to have a much larger staff. I do not know what complaints have come to my hon. friend, but he will recall that when the power loom was first introduced there was objection.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Will the minister tell me of one use to which such machines are put that I could personally inspect with a view to seeing the value of the system? I am referring now to its introduction into a department; I do not want to go down to Vit-toria street where the promoters of the scheme have set some machines up for demonstration purposes.


James Murdock: If the hon. gentleman will come to the Labour department he can see one in operation any day.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Does my hon. friend give me the invitation?


James Murdock: Yes, indeed.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I shall have to take advantage of it and to have a look at this apparatus.


Edward Joseph Garland: What is the work that is done in the Division of Demography?


James Alexander Robb: These are the social and vital statistics of the country, the work being done in co-operation with the provinces.


Edward Joseph Garland: I find in
the estimates the following items:
1	Director, motion picture bureau	$4,2001	motion picture photographer	
2,8801	film editor	
2,7301	artist	2,4001	junior motion picture photographer	
2,280
Leaving out the artist, I find that the total amount expended in salaries in the motion picture department is $12,090. Will the minister give the committee some idea of the work that is being done in this department and whether it is really important work?


James Alexander Robb: This department gathers photographs of scenes in different parts of Canada, and there is a working arrangement with picture houses all over the world1 which pay us for the privilege of exhibiting the pictures. Our revenue from that source is from $10,000 to $15,000 a year. The arrangements are made by our trade agents in the different

Supply-Trade and Commerce
countries. The exhibition of these pictures has the double advantage of showing other countries the products we have to sell and of attracting tourists who will travel over our railways and thus bring a revenue to the country.


Edward Joseph Garland: Is this the
only department undertaking motion picture work?


James Alexander Robb: This department does the work for all the other departments, which pay for the services thus rendered.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Are we to understand that the department has a complete bureau of vital statistics, and if so is that work not largely a duplication of work done by provincial governments? Down in New Brunswick, under a system) lately establlished, we are deluged with vital statistics; every time a man winks it is recorded. Is this not a duplication of work that is properly done by the provinces?


James Alexander Robb: There may have been duplication in the past, but we are gradually getting away from it. The provinces work in conjunction with this central department. This work is urged upon us by many associations throughout Canada, and it is a very valuable work.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If it is done by the provinces why should it be again done here?


James Alexander Robb: We centralize it so that it
goes out in general form and on a uniform basis. We have the records for all the different provinces.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is simply an admission that the work is duplicated here.


James Alexander Robb: It has been in the past, but
we are getting away from that.


Alexandre Joseph Doucet: In respect to the plea I
made with regard to the printing of reports in both languages, which in my opinion should have been an effective plea, is the minister prepared to say that in future all periodicals emanating from the statistical branch of his department will be printed in both languages? The expense would not be so large as to prevent its being done. The public wish to know if they may rely on getting such information in the Franch language as is given out in English.


James Alexander Robb: We are yearly making progress along those lines. I listened to my hon. friend the other night criticising the administration and the issue of the weekly Journal of Commercial Intelligence, and I wondered why my colleague did not think at the time of reminding my hon. friend that it was his government that introduced the Journal of Commercial Intelligence, and we are gradually getting it up to the point where we think the French edition will go out in as perfect a form as the English edition, which has been published for some years. Generally speaking, and I have heard this discussed in council, the policy of the department is, when correspondence is received in French, to reply in French. There is not the slightest desire not to do justice to the French language.
As regards the various reports to which my hon. friend referred, I recall that when I was in that department I found some fault with the Director of Statistics because I believed they were sending out many reports, I am speaking now particularly of reports in English, that people never read. My policy would be to give the people only what they wanted, and what they were prepared to pay for. I would be disposed to put it on a commercial basis, and if people wanted to get a report in English or in French, they should pay something for it. The charge would be very small; of you like, only the cost of production, but I see no good reason why in this country we should load up the mails with these reports and keep a trained staff, when many of them are not read. I understand that in the United States you cannot get a report on anything, practically, without paying for it; it may be only three, five, ten or twenty-five cents, but you have to pay something for it, and I think my hon. friend will agree with me that that is sound business.


Alexandre Joseph Doucet: I quite agree that some of the reports might be eliminated without causing any great inconvenience, and if those which are published were published in both languages, I think that would be just about what this country wants. As to making a charge, I do not wish to criticise unduly, but I brought this matter to the attention of the minister the other evening, and I did not catch his reply as it appeared in Hansard the following morning. I think that when the same charge is made for the French version as for the English version of the Journal of Commercial Intelligence, and the French edition week after week contains eight pages less of material than the English edition, this department is not doing justice to those of the French language who subscribe to that bulletin. If it is thought wise in the interests ' of economy to eliminate some of the reports, no one will quarrel very much with that, but those which are published in the English language should likewise be published in French and be circulated just as freely as the English edition.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


James Alexander Robb: I think my hon. friend is right in that.


Mr. MANION:: I would like to ask which
of the statistical branches in the various departments have now been brought under the Department of Trade and Commerce, 01 have they all now been brought together under one head?


James Alexander Robb: As contemplated by the act of 1918, the statistical branches in the Railway department, Customs department, Forestry branch and I think some other departments, are all supposed to be concentrated in the Department of Trade and Commerce, but some of the customs statistics are not yet being handled in that department.


Robert James Manion: The reason I ask is this: I remember very well that previous to 1918 it was difficult to get statistics from almost any department of the government, whereas at the present time, and since 1918, the bringing together of the various statistical branches has made it very much more simple for a member of parliament or anybody else to get the statistics he wants.


James Alexander Robb: I think it is a most complete
system.


Robert James Manion: I agree, and I wish to say a word in favour of the system, because after all we indulge in a great deal of criticism of the Civil Service in this House at various times. Since these various statistical branches were brought together by Sir George Foster, the service now given is invaluable to hon. members. I remember well that previous to that time, about the beginning of 1918, if one wanted to get statistics from a certain department he would ring up, say, the Mines branch, and perhaps he might get them, but if not he would be referred to some other branch, which in turn would refer him to some other agency. At the present time, on the other hand, one may ring up almost any office in the statistical branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce and get the information he desires, and I just wished to say a word in commendation of the system, which I repeat, we started, but which my hon. friend and his government are carrying on. I think the sooner all these different branches dealing with statistics are brought together under one . head, the better for the country, and the better for members of parliament and the public generally who wish to get statistics of various kinds.


Edward Joseph Garland: I can very well support the viewpoint of my hon. friend

from Fort William and Rainy River. I wish to congratulate the department upon this very excellent publication, this year to year book, but I am afraid their efforts are being handicapped by the inaction of the government in one particular matter at least, and that is the securing of information with regard to emigration from Canada. I understand that we have no really effective methods of checking the numbers and classes of people who leave this country. I think there is an attempt being made by the bureau to do all they can in this regard, but it is handicapped by an apparent unwillingness on the part of the government to give it the necessary facilities for gathering this information. In all other respects I think I can support everything that has been said by my hon. friend (Mr. ManionL I see in the details the position of "Chief, Census of Manufacturers, salary S3,300." What are his duties?


James Alexander Robb: I imagine that his duties are
to compile statistics relating to products and employees, and everything pertaining to manufacturing concerns.


Edward Joseph Garland: It is not
just a census of manufacturers? It is down here as "Census of Manufacturers."


James Alexander Robb: I imagine he will have supervision of everything pertaining to that particular work.


Arthur Meighen: I notice that the chief
of the Intelligence office is out of the salary list here. Would the minister say what has become of him?


James Alexander Robb: My right hon. friend was not
in earlier when I stated that the chief of the Commercial Intelligence has been transferred as trade agent to Trinidad.


Arthur Meighen: What will be his salary
there?


James Alexander Robb: Mr. H. R. Poussette was
appointed trade commissioner in January, 1909, at Durban, South Africa, at $3,000 a year; transferred to Buenos Aires, February 1, 1911; proceeded overseas with the 4th Canadian Mounted Rifles, 1918; appointed director, Commercial Intelligence, July 6, 1920, at $6,000; increased to $6,600, October 1, 1921, and to $7,200, October 1, 1922; salary from March, 1924, $7,200; transferred to class of trade commissioner, grade 3, with salary at minimum of class, $5,040, and living allowance of $800, and residing at Trinidad as from April 1, 1924.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Arthur Meighen: The salary in the estimates for 1921-22 was $6,000. It could not have been raised in October because there was no vote provided.


Mr. SHEARD:: Could the minister tell me something about the item " Chief, Division of Demography "? I do not know what " demography " is. I should like the minister to tell me, and also to state what the duties are, and how many officers there are in the division?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend could not have been in when I gave that information a moment ago. That has reference to the vital statistics.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Although the bouquets were coming thick and fast a few moments ago in regard to the Bureau of Statistics, I recall to mind several complaints I had from business men in my own constituency about the demands that are made upon them from time to time to furnish statistics to the department, and I wish to ask if the department has ever received complaints from business men as to the various demands that are made upon them for statistics-what are said to be useless demands, very aggravating in many respects, and from the standpoint of those who have to prepare them serving no purpose whatever. I have had within a month a letter from a business house in my city enclosing a copy of a letter which the principal had lately written to the chief of the bureau or one of the officials, I have forgotten which, complaining about the time required to be taken up in filling up schedules. I should like to know if there is much objection by business men to the demands made upon them to fill out forms with statistics?


James Alexander Robb: I recall at one time there was very great complaint; I had occasion to complain myself. When I was first connected with the department there were innumerable complaints; but I did not know that there had been any complaints recently. I agree with my hon. friend that there is considerable information asked for that is somewhat annoying to the people who have to fill out the forms. On the other- hand there are hon. gentlemen in this House who expect to get that information, and find fault if they do not receive it. So the poor Dominion statistician is harassed between the two- between honourable gentlemen who desire information and complain if they cannot get it, and people in the country who find fault because they are required to furnish it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It usually happens that in the case of big manufacturing institutions or commercial houses the work of getting out this information is handed to one of the chief executive heads who, more often than not, is one of the most important men in the establishment.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend is quite
right.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I recall one instance where a request for information came to a man who was overseeing a business of millions a year. He could not dig out the information himself so the task was entrusted to a clerk but he had really to oversee the work and as his other duties were very onerous he made vigorous complaints to me. So far as curiosity on the. part of members of this House is concerned I think the department should arrive at a happy medium between satisfying what is merely curiosity on the one hand and meeting a legitimate and necessary desire for information on the other hand.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has so far
forgotten to answer the question I asked him.


James Alexander Robb: Was that the vote for the
Director of Commercial Intelligence?


Arthur Meighen: Yes.


James Alexander Robb: I notice that according to
the details of civil government for 1923 the last year was $7,200.


Arthur Meighen: I know, but what has
puzzled me a little is how the government's opinion of Mr. Poussette seems to have oscillated. At first they did not think he was paid enough, and they raised his salary up to $7,200. Now they seem to think he was paid too much and have reduced the salary to a lower amount than before.


James Alexander Robb: It is not a difference between Mr. Poussette and the government.


Arthur Meighen: I did not say so.


James Alexander Robb: It is a difference of opinion
between Mr. Poussette and the Civil Service Commission combined, and the government. Mr. Poussette was insistent upon being reclassified and reclassified until he got himself up to that salary. I will admit that an order in council was passed approving it but, speaking from memory, I am inclined to think that it was the government of which my right hon. friend was Prime Minister that approved the reclassification.

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Arthur Meighen: No it certainly was not, because the time came-


James Alexander Robb: Yes, but he had worked up,
he had reached his maximum; he went up automatically.


Arthur Meighen: In 1923?


James Alexander Robb: I read the statement a moment ago to my right hon. friend, and I will repeat it. He was appointed Director of Commercial Intelligence on July 6, 1920, at $6,000 per annum which was increased to $6,600 on October 1, 1921, and to $7,200 on October 1, 1922. But my right hon. friend will observe that it was the reclassification that was made October 1, 1921, that brought him up to the maximum of the class.


Arthur Meighen: I do not observe that at all. I observe that the last increase took place almost a year after we were out of office.


James Alexander Robb: Yes, but by virtue of an order in council which my right hon. friend's government had approved the previous year.


Arthur Meighen: Has the minister got the order in council?


James Alexander Robb: If my right hon. friend disputes it I will let the item stand until the order in council is produced.


Arthur Meighen: There is no item here, it has been struck out. The hon. gentleman has got him now in Trinidad. I did not know where he was; I just wondered how the government's opinion had varied as to his qualifications.
I want to make a few remarks on the statistics question, and the minister's reference thereto. I have not heard of the complaints I think it is mostly imaginary on the part of the minster-that statistics cannot be secured, that the details are not sufficient. I have never yet in the course of my own time as a member of parliament sought to get statistics that I could not get from the statistics office.


James Alexander Robb: Just a few moments ago an hon. gentleman across the way complained there were statistics he could not get.


Arthur Meighen: I did not hear the complaint and I never encountered such an experience in my time. I think if he goes to the statistics office he will find that any details within reason, and many a time in my own judgment beyond reason, can be secured there.


James Alexander Robb: I agree with my right hon.
friend.


Arthur Meighen: Why, of course and carefully tabulated too. The statistics are easily available, one never has to wait very long for them. My criticism would be not that the statistics should not all be handled in the statistics branch-I think they should; I cannot see any reason in the world for having a Labour statistics branch still in operation, especially as I was able to Show some few nights ago a letter from a member of that branch writing to a correspondent and wanting to know where he could get certain statistics that were published by him, receiving in reply the information that they were secured from the statistics branch of the department of Trade and Commerce. The Labour man had been trying to get these facts and did not know they were to be secured in the department right across the road, and he found that out from this correspondence in the country. It is an indefensible duplication. I do think there is too much detail demanded of the business man. For example, I have seen questions put to business men- I think I have one of them in front of me- that really are amusing. I have not the authority of the writer to use his letter, but I can give the facts and I will show the letter to the minister.


James Alexander Robb: I quite admit it. I have no dispute with my right hon. friend; I am quite in accord with him.


Arthur Meighen: It is a letter to the Department of Trade and Commerce, dated 4th July and reads:
We are in receipt of your report on the carriage and wagon industry for 1921 and 1922. We have gone over parts of this very carefully, and wish to draw your attention to the following:
Table No. 4-Vehicle supplies, products manufactured, 1921-1922.
Then follows the table, showing the number of hubs, the number of spokes, the number of felloes, the number of rims, the number of axles, the number of bolsters, the number of reaches, the number of poles and tongues, shafts, sleigh runners, sleigh banks, single whiffle trees, double whiffle trees and neck yokes. All these are given, and the number manufactured in Canada for the year 1922-not only the number, but the value. Well now, it passes my comprehension-


Mr. DUFF:: Any ox yokes?


Arthur Meighen: I do not know. The
et csetera is not filled in at the end. What use is it to any human being to know the number of axles or the number of shafts or sleigh runners or sleigh banks that are made in

Supply-Trade and Commerce
the country. After giving these details the following comment is made, which is still more interesting-
You will notice a considerable difference in these figures, and we do not see why this should be.
This firm reported to the department the number of bolsters made by that firm, the number of reaches, and so forth, and the value, and the table is given in the report of this firm and beside it the totals for the whole of Canada, as published by the department, and strange to say in several instances the totals for the whole of Canada are less than the numbers made by this firm. The letter says:
You will notice a considerable difference in these figures and we do not see why this should be. Figures we give you under the heading of " Our report to you " are taken from copy of report we submitted to you, and your report should at least include totals of our figures.
I might cite an example: poles and tongues are given as 7,845, and the total made in the Dominion was 3,865. Very valuable data this certainly must be.


George Perry Graham: That is, if that letter is
right.


Arthur Meighen: If the minister knew
the firm who -wrote the letter he would accept their statement.


James Alexander Robb: Is that not a contradiction
of the statement the hon. member made a minute ago of the value of the statistics we could get?


Arthur Meighen: I say there is too much
detail. When you go there you can get any detail you want, and get it promptly. I never had any difficulty in that respect, but it is over done. It is like giving the number of evolutions of a spider's web.


James Alexander Robb: The hon. member is right,
but he has just proven the statistics are of no value whatever. They are not correct.


Arthur Meighen: That is true. In this
respect I can criticise them harder than I did, but I was sparing the minister.


James Alexander Robb: It is not the minister. I do
not object to it.


Arthur Meighen: I am sorry if I omitted
any just criticism I might have made.


George Perry Graham: Rather unusual for the
hon. gentleman to do that.


William Duff: It is a rare fault.


Arthur Meighen: The letter continues:
Also, it is not reasonable to suppose that out of fifteen manufacturers in the Dominion of Canada, we manufacture all the items of this nature; in fact we know absolutely that we do not. Your report shows that there are fifteen plants of this nature in Canada, made up as follows:	Quebec 2, Ontario 12,
Manitoba 1; whereas there is a plant in operation within one hundred yards of our own plant, manufacturing the same class of stock.
This plant is in Manitoba, but the government report indicates that there is only one plant there. The letter continues:
Under the above circumstances, and owing to the inaccuracy of your report we believe it is a waste of time and money to have this information compiled. It costs us from $100 to $150 per year to compile this information and forward the same to you, and when you get it, you cannot even copy our figures. Also, apparently our opposition do not have to send in their report and they therefore save that hundred or so dollars.
We therefore believe that in future it will be quite in order for us to refuse to make out any more of these reports.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: If this discussion will
produce some relief, to the business men of this country in the preparation of their reports, our time will not have been wasted. There is not a business firm of any size in Canada that has not to engage chartered accountants, or else disarrange their whale organization in order to prepare these reports every year. The mass of detail that is demanded from business men to-day, partly by the provinces and partly by this government, is so enormous as to constitute a heavy tax on the revenues of the business, and as the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) has pointed out, it is not collected or not prepared with such a degree of accuracy as to make it of value to any person. I have had many business men in my city complain to me bitterly, not only about the cost-and that is bad enough, because nobody wants to spend three or four hundred dollars in preparing a list of figures which does not mean anything to them

but about the disorganization of their clerical staff that results. The cost of couTse depends on their business and may run into thousands of dollars. The result is that the staff is disorganized, or the firm have to engage a larger staff of chartered accountants to go all over their business and produce something which is not of any value to anybody. I quite understand and appreciate the outlay in obtaining statistical information. I agree with the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson) that it is a perfectly absurd proposition to have the vital statistics gathered by the provinces and then gathered again by the federal govern-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
ment. If the federal government wants it they can surely get it from the provinces and do not require to prepare statements of their own.


James Alexander Robb: I am told the statistics are
gathered from the provinces.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Then there should not be very much cost about it, and it should not take very much time, but I hope the minister will give attention to the requirements of the business men in regard to these returns to be made to the government, and get the thing down to some reasonable basis, where business will not be taxed, business impeded and business men annoyed. The annoyance is greater than the minister is aware, unless he has had communications from those who have suffered.


James Alexander Robb: I think we are agreed apparently on that.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I take it the minister will take some steps to reduce the number of returns demanded.


James Alexander Robb: We have already done so.


William Duff: Is it not a fact that this
system was in vogue several years ago?


James Alexander Robb: It was in vogue several years
ago, but like all systems it kept growing.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: The annoyance continues, and the demands are increasing. I think they should be diminishing. We should make a reform in that respect; and instead of having more and more to prepare every year, we should have less and less, until the thing got down to some basis that would be reasonable and of some value.


James Alexander Robb: I think my hon. friend is
quite right.
Mr. M.cMASTER:	I should be sorry to
have the item carried with the impression left undispelled thlat this House1 was not thoroughly appreciative of the very great value which the Bureau of Statistics has proved to the members of parliament as well as to the country generally. Every serious member of the House who takes part in the discussions, especially those of an economic or business nature, has been grateful from time to time for the very great assistance afforded by the bureau and the able public servant who presides over it. I should like to see the Dominion statistician given more power of correlating in his department all the different statistics which at present are compiled, because I think there exists an unnecessary dupli-
cation in the gathering of information. In regard to the objections made by representatives of business men as to the trouble which is caused in regard to the making of returns, I think possibly the information is asked for in too great detail. But there is no doubt that it helps the business of the country as a whole to have reports as accurate as possible.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: If a man knew his business he would be sure of it.


Mr. McMASTER:: The reports can be
accurate only if business men will loyally comply with the requests that are made. A client of mine told me once how annoyed he was some years ago when asked to furnish a tabulated statement in regard to the cost of the commodity his company sold. He was the president of a large milk concern and he was very much annoyed when asked by the Board of Commerce to segregate his different costs which made up the price paid by the consumer. He objected at the time but he found afterwards that as a matter of fact it was one of the best things that had happened in his business because, as he put it, they learned how much things were really costing them and, in that way, what economies could be effected.


Arthur Meighen: I do not want anyone to get the impression that I have not confidence in the head of the branch; but apparently errors have crept in as they will creep in in the case of any other branch. There is no better public servant than the head of this particular branch; nevertheless, the tendency exists everywhere, even in the best managed branches, to expand the work, to extend the service, and to multiply the entourage. In this particular case, the practice has resulted undoubtedly in too great a burden; too much in the way of details is required of business men, and a better example could hardly be found than the one I gave direct and authoritatively a little while ago. The minister would I think profitably direct his efforts towards two goals: let him take the statistics out of all other departments and concentrate them in one under Mr. Coats and, in the second place, see to it that even under Mr. Coats there is not too great an ambition to penetrate into every little figment of business and that only such statistics shall be required as are reasonably useful and likely to serve a public purpose.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
Patent and Copyright-salaries-contingencies, 4178, 595.
Henry Lumley Drayton: What was the
revenue of the department last year?


James Alexander Robb: For the year 1923-24 the
revenue was $459,780.27 and the expenditure $227,090.94, leaving a balance of receipts over expenditure of $232,689.33.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Last year we revised the Patent Act, and it might be informative to hear from the minister what the results have been of the changes which were then made.
I want to emphasize what I said then regarding the salary paid the Commissioner of Patents. This is just an indication of what happens when some very deserving officer of a department is increased; in every such case every other civil servant who can by any stretch of the imagination argue that his position is analogous to that of the person who has received an increase comes forward with a claim for similar treatment. Now, it is always regrettable to cite any individual before parliament as receiving an unreasonably high salary, but unfortunately there is no other way of getting matters commented upon and if possible adjusted. We gracefully pass items of this sort because we have some consideration for the feelings of officials, and as a consequence salaries unconsciously mount up. I cannot conceive of the Commissioner of Patents being entitled to a salary of $8,000 a year; I really do not see the justification for it. The Patents branch is of course an important one but it is more or less, in fact a good deal more than less, routine in its business. You have certain technical examiners, officers who are employed for the purpose of examining patents applied for, and so forth; and the commissioner's duties are more or less of a routine character. The minister will recall that when the Patent Act was up for revision last year some of my tolleagues and I criticised the effort on the part of the commissioner to constitute himself a sort of tin god ruling over the whole business of patents. He had eliminated from the act as originally introduced all appeals from his own decision, but fortunately the minister at the time, recognizing the value of our criticisms, took steps to moderate that undue assumption of authority. I say, this is just an indication of the tendency that prevails and the danger which we should constantly guard against when any move is made in the direction of increasing salaries. It would be quite competent for anyone, citing the head of some department, to argue
that if such an official is worth eight thousand dollars he should be worth ten or twelve or fourteen thousand dollars, or whatever sum you choose to name. And that is the way it goes. Only a few years ago we paid deputy ministers four thousand dollars and then we paid them five, and then six thousand; and because of length of service and of their value to the country it was considered that certain deputies should be increased to eight thousand and parliament was induced to make the concession. I remember that when this practice was instituted, the argument was that these positions were of a special character and that the increase applied only to this and the other official. But here we have the Commissioner of Patents, who does not rank at all with these first class deputies, whose services are not of equal value and whose experience is not on a parity with theirs, getting eight thousand dollars while officials whose services are more valuable receive a very much'' smaller salary. This is one of those glaring examples of the way in which an officer, who is by no means entitled to the high salary that is paid him, is pushed into a position that gives him this advantage. It is suggestive of the camel, which, putting its head into the tent, gradually works his body in as well. I wish to voice my objection to this practice. I think the minister would do a splendid service by reducing this salary to at least six thousand dollars or five thousand a year to make it commensurate with the service which is rendered by this official.


James Alexander Robb: I will admit that the deputies in certain departments of the public service should be well paid. Indeed, experience has taught us that when that is not the case they leave the service and get more lucrative positions with private corporations. As to the Commissioner of Patents, I think it was pointed out last year that the increases then made were on the basis of a certain number of years' sendee. My hon. friend will recall that the present Commissioner of Patents was formerly Deputy Minister of Agriculture. He was transferred to this branch-not by this government, but by their predecessors in office- with the rank of deputy minister, and it is in virtue of that rank and of ten years' service that the salary was fixed at the present figure.


Arthur Meighen: The minister has not
strengthened his case. I should like to have a list of deputies who have left the service because their salaries were not high enough.

Supply-Trade and Commerce
Mr. ROBB. A gentleman whom my right hon. friend himself appointed as Deputy Minister of Immigration left the department for a position in another department of the government at a higher salary.


Arthur Meighen: He got it from another
department virtually-the Canadian National Railways. I included in my criticism this afternoon the National Railways too, and I do not retract a word of what I then said. Outside of this instance-and' the .gentleman was only in the office for a year or so, much to the disgust of hon. gentlemen on the opposite side, or some of them-I recall only one deputy minister who left the service.


James Alexander Robb: Another case comes to my
mind-Mr. Butler, who at one time was Deputy Minister of Railways. He secured a position with a private corporation at a much higher salary.


Arthur Meighen: That would be twelve
years ago when the salaries were $5,000.


George Perry Graham: Oh no.


Arthur Meighen: I think sc. They were
certainly not over $6,000.


George Perry Graham: Pardon me; as deputy
minister and chief engineer he received $8,000.
Mr. HOCIvEN: He had two jobs


George Perry Graham: He left the service because I think he was offered twice the salary by a private corporation.


Arthur Meighen: I do not think the Railway department suffered at all because of that dire calamity; the position was not difficult to fill. The only other case I can remember was the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and he returned to the service later on at the same salary. So this peril is pretty much imaginary. If it does occur once or twice, the change is very often a good thing.


George Perry Graham: For the individual.


Arthur Meighen: If a man wants to leave, let him leave: the vacancy can be filled and the service continued as before. It is true that Mr. O'Halloran was Deputy Minister of Agriculture. As such he was discontinued during the period of office of the present hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Crerar) I was a member of the government and take full responsibility. He had the salary of a deputy minister of that time. He certainly was not of my political persuasion, but we never in any case felt like reducing a man in the service. That seems to be a dogma pretty well 
established. Consequently when he was taken from that post he was given another position at the same salary, and a special provision was made that he should have that rank. But what is our astonishment to find that because this was considered the fair thing to do for him, he now uses the rank which he was then allowed to retain to increase his salary to $8,000. Now, the minister knows that while it may be too much to describe the office of Commissioner of Patents as a sinecure, it certainly is not any heavy responsibility requiring great capacity. What is the fact? The very first year of office the government allowed the water to flow over the dyke, and of course the whole dyke was swept away. When they were first going to let in some of the "most important" as they termed it, for an increase of salary they were warned that they would not stop. They did not stop, they were swept over by the current, and now all the deputy ministers are up to $8,000, and in many cases it is a grotesque extravagance to pay any such salary at all. In order that we may be specific, we point to this as an individual instance, but there are others-perhaps not quite so pronounced but almost so.


Robert James Manion: It would appear to me that to a great extent there is overpayment in some cases because of underpayment in others. In other words, it seems to be a recognized system in the service that if one man in a certain position gets a certain salary, another man who has the same title must get exactly the same salary, although his work may not be nearly so important. I think that is one of the greatest mistakes we are making in regard to these salaries. For instance, as the right hon. gentleman has stated, deputy ministers, with one or two exceptions, get practically the same salary. But the Deputy Minister of Railways, for example, who has a very large amount of work in other branches in an advisory capacity, and the Deputy Minister of Public Works, who has a very heavy department, surely are in an entirely different category from the Commissioner of Patents. I do not know the gentleman at all, so there is nothing personal in the citation. Surely no one will claim that he has responsibilities comparable with those of the two deputy ministers whom I have mentioned, and yet, if I recollect correctly, his salary is the same as theirs. I think an effort should be made by the government to pay salaries commensurate with the qualifications required of the men and the responsibilities and difficulties of the work they are engaged in. In the Department of Mines, for example, we have civil

Supply-Trade and Commerce
engineers possessing various degrees and qualifications, and yet in some cases they are paid such low salaries that we have lost many good men to private corporations. That is where an exception should be made. Simply because men come under a certain classification they should not necessarily receive the pay of men in another department similarly classified but not necessarily having had the same technical training; the highly trained technical men should receive salaries commensurate with their qualifications and duties. I think the government should as far as possible change the whole system, and pay good salaries where good salaries are necessary, but not merely according to classification. I believe we have gone quite far enough with the salaries of most officers of the government, except those who have yearly advances coming to them. It should rarely, if ever, be necessary, as we were discussing yesterday, to pay such a salary as $25,000 for a life job. Our high cost of living is to a very large extent due to high taxation, and these high salaries are reflected in our taxation. If it is necessary to lower salaries in order to get back to normal times, the government should not lead in paying high salaries. But we should get away from the present system of paying all men classified in the same way the same salaries. We should pay good salaries in order to get good men in the service of the country, and lower salaries for men of mediocre type performing duties of a more or less routine character.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I deprecate the practice of comparing the salaries of public servants with those of chief executives in business. There is no comparison at all between the duties and responsibilities of, and the requirements made upon, men in private employment and those in the service of the country. Men have left the public service and gone elsewhere to find that the easy conditions under which they had lived in that service were not to be found in the service of private firms. No man in the public service is required to show results; no man can hold a responsible position in private business unless he does show results. Without attempting to derogate from the abilties of any of those who occupy important positions in the public service, I venture to say that not many of them can go out into private employment and get as much money as they are getting to-day.


James Alexander Robb: Is my hon. friend leading up to the argument that a man is of more value in the public service if he does not show results?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: No, not at all. But a man in the public service does not have to show results. He can hold his position and he can get advancement purely on the basis of length of service.


James Alexander Robb: I do not think so.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: It is done over and over again. Because a man has been a long time in the service and can pass some kind of examination that this fool commission of the Civil Service sets, he gets promotion. It rests upon his length of service, not upon the results he is producing. In addition to that he has easier hours. Why, he comes to work at ten o'clock in the morning and goes to play golf at three or four in the afternoon, and the work that is not done to-day can stand until to-morrow.


George Perry Graham: I wish my hon. friend were in one of the departments.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: If a man in private employment did not do work to-day that should be done to-day, he would lose his job, but with the work of the government, what cannot be done to-day may be done to-morrow, or to-morrow, or to-morrow. That makes life in the service very pleasant indeed. Under the old system, if they lived long enough and stayed in the service long enough, they would get a title for doing this kind of thing; but we have dispensed with titles, and now we are trying to make increased salaries take the place of the honours we used to give them. So I say that this practice of comparing what a man gets in the service with what he is assumed to be able to get outside is all bunk, in my judgment. I do not think it can be argued that the service is going to suffer from any such cause as that. I do not know anything about the Commissioner of Patents, but I judge from the work that has to be done in connection with that office that it is largely of a routine character. He goes over what has been patented; he knows a good deal about what has been patented, from his experience; and if he thinks there is some infringement of rights, why, the patent is not issued and that is all there is to it. And I suppose his underlings do most of that. But the cost of the public service should be cut to the extent of millions of dollars instead of unwarranted increases being granted to men holding routine positions such as that of the Commissioner of Patents. There is no initiative required; there is no particular energy required; there are none of the qualities necessary that a man must have to succeed in business or in the outside world. I quite appreciate that officers like the Deputy Min-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
ister of Customs, the Deputy Minister of Railways and the Deputy Minister of Finance are in very heavy departments, but there are many other departments where the deputies have an easier time than most of their staff, and that their salaries should be boosted up to $8,000 a year is an imposition upon the taxpayers of the country.


Edward Joseph Garland: Ten thousand dollars.


Horatio Clarence Hocken: Some of them get $10,000; in this case it is $8,000. The minimum wage for deputy ministers is $8,000, I understand; if it is not, then let us get this man down to the minimum wage, whatever it is. Does he belong to the union, I wonder? If he does he cannot claim any more than the minimum wage. Let us get down to what is reasonable, because the people cannot stand any more taxes. They are being taxed to death. The depression that exists to-day is largely due to the excessive taxing of business. Hon. members from the West complain of the cost of manufactured goods. Let them go into the office of any manufacturer of this country and they will find that what has to be charged to taxation constitutes a very considerable part of the cost of the finished product. If we are going to bring that cost down we ought to begin right here in the public service. We could fill this service three times over with competent men at lower salaries than we are paying to-day. Now, I am not arguing for that; I do not say we should throw all these men out of employment, but I suggest to the leader of the government that he should take a holiday in the matter of appointments to the Civil Service of Canada. If a stenographer is required in one department, take an unnecessary one from some other department. If a clerk is required in one branch, get him from some other where there are now too many.


Charles Gavan Power: What would my hon. friend do with the Civil Service Commission if they did not have any appointments to make?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: My hon. friend knows what I would do with it; he knows what I tried to do with it when my own party was in power. But I say, except for such highly technical men as may be required, let us stop making appointments. Let us give the Civil Service Commission and its staff a holiday for a couple of years. Scarcely a day passes that we do not get a notice from the Civil Service Commission with a list of appointments to be made. They are adding to the service all the time. In fact, they have to add to the service all the time in 
order to justify their existence. If there were no appointments to be made we would be able to cut out three or four hundred thousand dollars that are spent on the Civil Service Commission. But let us declare a holiday for three years and let the deputy ministers or a group of them form a committee and ascertain where employees are available from the different departments to fill vacancies. I know that will be hard on the members of the government party who are looking for comfortable places in which to put their friends. But surely they have the-interests of the country more at heart than the interests of the individual. I assume that, anyway, and if they do that they will be making at least some effort to lessen the burden of taxation that bears upon the people.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Is the hon. member in favour of continuing the Civil Service Commission?


Horatio Clarence Hocken: I thought every member of this House knew that I never was in favour of the Civil Service Commission. I opposed its appointment; I do not believe it is rendering or can render any good service. I do not believe that patronage 'has been abolished. What we did with it was to transfer it, that is all, from one set of persons to another; it still exists and it has been stated in this House that there is a back door to the office of the secretary of the commission by which appointments are filled.


Charles Gavan Power: We will walk with you on the twelfth.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supplementary estimates, 1924-25-Mail subsidies and steamship subventions-Charlottetown and Pictou, steam service between-Further amount required, §17,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: I think the
House should ask the minister for a pretty full explanation as to why any more money should be granted on this particular vote. We had a long, long talk about it before, and we thought we were gettting rid of everything when we passed the other vote. Surely nothing was overlooked then.


James Alexander Robb: This is to provide for an improved) service between Charlottetown and Pictou.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
name of this boat?


James Alexander Robb: The boat that is negotiating
is the steamer Hochelaga, 175 feet long, 27.6 feet wide, 14.8 feet deep, with a net tonnage of 426 and a gross tonnage of 628. She has

Supply-Steamship Services
a capacity for 200 tons of freight, will carry 200 passengers and has a maximum speed of 14 knots. She will carry 12 small or 7 or 8 large automobiles. She is well fitted for passenger traffic and also has accommodation for live stock.


Arthur John Lewis: Who is the owner?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is this the right bower again?


James Alexander Robb: The owner is Mr. Simon.
The details of the arrangement are not yet closed. Mr. Simon is also negotiating for a subsidy from the provincial governments of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Was not a contract entered into last winter between the department and this company? What is the total amount of that contract or arrangement?


James Alexander Robb: It would be a yearly service,
I imagine. Previous to 1921 there was no service on this route for several years. In 1916 the service had been run by the Char-lettetown Steamship Company with the steamer Northumberland, for which they received an annual subsidy of 86,200. This was discontinued, and the Charlottetown people have been asking for the resumption of this service for some time. They claim that the Constance put on in 1921, and the Magdalen in 1922 and 1923, were too small for the traffic.


Henry Herbert Stevens: But the minister has not
answered my question. I have not the details under my hand, but speaking from memory the amount to be paid this company runs into a very large sum. There is 817,000 in this item, and altogether, if I am not mistaken, it runs up close to 850.000. Would the minister give us the total amount to be paid?


James Alexander Robb: I see that vote No. 181 was for 88,000, but the contract has not been renewed yet.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The vote, as I see it in the estimates, is vote 181 for a steam service between Charlottetown and Pictou, $8,000. It was 88,000 last year also. What was the service then given?


James Alexander Robb: That would be the service to which I have just referred, and which was not satisfactory. The Constance was put on in
1921.	and the Magdalen performed the service in 1922 and 1923, but they were altogether 272 i
unfitted for the service. The Magdalen was 134 gross tons, capacity 80 tons freight, and passenger accommodation 60. She is 98 feet long and 21 feet wide.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Queens):: I might explain to the committee that this is not the subsidy to which my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre refers. This subsidy is increased to give a better service between Charlottetown and Pictou. The boat that has been on this service for the past three or four years was a small boat, and it was unable to handle the traffic. It was not fitted for carrying automobiles. During the war the service on this route was discontinued. Previous to that time it was carried on by the Charlottetown Steam Navigation Company with the steamer Northumberland. In 1916, when the car ferry service was put on between Prince Edward Island and the mainland, a different type of service was given, and during the war the traffic was confined wholly to that route. After the war was over, an endeavour was made by our people, and successfully made, to have the government re-establish the steamship service by granting a subsidy. That was done in 1921.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What was paid then?


John Ewen Sinclair: In 1921 it was 82.000. This was increased in 1922 to $8,000, and it has been at that figure during the last two years, but the whole amount was not earned; but $8,000 is the amount that was voted.
Mr. MEIGiHEN: Only $2,000 was voted in
1922.


John Ewen Sinclair: The amount
voted was $8,000 in each year, and the amount earned $7,900 in 1922, and $7,700 in 1923.


Arthur Meighen: I do not know where the minister gets that. I have the estimates here for 1921-1922, and the estimate passed that year was for $2,000. For the previous year 1920-1921 it was passed at the same figure, $2,000; that is vote No. 166 of the estimates for 1921-1922.


John Ewen Sinclair: There were
supplementary estimates.


Arthur Meighen: That cannot be correct, because if one takes the next year, 1922-1923, it is $2,000 again, and the figure for the year before is there given as $2,000, which includes the supplementaries. So the cost of this ser-
Supply-Steamship Services

vice in the years after the war was $2,000. This government raised it to $8,000, and now, persevering in the glorious path of economy, they have raised it to $25,000.


John Ewen Sinclair: If my right
hon. friend is through with his question, I will finish.


Arthur Meighen: I thought the hon. member was through. Will be please explain those estimates.


John Ewen Sinclair: I was just proceeding to explain when my right hon. friend interrupted. The service that was given during the last two years was inadequate, especially in regai d to the automobile and passenger traffic. I was proceeding to say that we had a splendid connection in the car ferry so far as freight and railway passengers are concerned, but the tourist traffic that was built up previous to the war has not been developed since the war on account of that service. If you will refer to the statistics published by the Department of Trade and Commerce and also by the railways, you will see that the accommodation for automobiles via the car ferry is not such as will attract those who are wishing to spend their time sight seeing and touring. It takes three hours to cross, so that six hours is spent going and coming over the same route, but they can cross from Pictou to Charlottetown by the steamer that is on there this year in about the same time without any delays embarking, and that is one of the chief reasons why we want this service re-established this year. The province of Prince Edward Island is the most easterly of the provinces of Canada. The conditions there are such that it is impossible to develop any industries except the basic industries of fishing and agriculture. It is a decided benefit therefore to the people of that province to encourage the tourist traffic, and it is with that object in view that the improved service between Pictou and Charlottetown has been instituted this year. Previous to 1916 many thousands of dollars were invested in summer hotels along the shores of Prince Edward Island. These hotels attracted a fine class of tourists who were in the habit of visiting the province each summer. After the war the character of the tourist traffic changed. To-day it mostly consists of auto-mobilists who only frequent places which they can pleasantly and conveniently reach with their cars. The investment in summer hotels represents a very large amount and our people have been pinched very hard during the past few years. It was mainly at the request of the boards of trade and the Tourists' Associa-

tion of the province that the government has made this effort to establish a better service between Charlottetown and Pictou. The Hochelaga is about double the size of the vessel that was on the service last year. She is capable of carrying twelve automobiles, which can run on board under their own power, and make the trip between the points indicated without discomfort. The possibilities in connection with the development of tourist traffic are increasing each year. It is necessary to do something to help Prince Edward Island which has experienced a decrease during the past year of 4,334 in her population, due to migration to western Canada and elsewhere. It is hoped that the improved service we are discussing will help to restore some of the prosperity which Prince Edward Island enjoyed in past years. My hon. friend (Mr. Robb) has given full details with respect to the character of the new vessel. She will be nicely fitted up and made most suitable for this service. The accommodation on the route between Charlottetown and Pictou has been of such a nature during the past two years that it would almost have been better to have discontinued the service entirely than to have kept it up. It is with a view of trying to re-establish the route and bring back to the people of Prince Edward Island some of the benefits they enjoyed from tourist traffic emanating from different centres of the United States and Canada that the present vote is recommended.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think we
should have a little more explanation of the reason for this expenditure. According to the statement of the previous speaker Prince Edward Island wants to get back her old service; she wants it to be restored to what it formerly was. Prince Edward Island formerly had a service for $2,000 a year.


John Ewen Sinclair: A subsidy of
that amount.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes a subsidy
of $2,000 a year. Well, the subsidy was increased from $2,000 to $8,000, and now we are asked to vote $25,000. The argument is put forward that Prince Edward Island is in a bad plight. I am sorry to hear it, but I do not know that the condition of Prince Edward Island is worse than that of any other part of the country. The minister tells us that Prince Edward Island has experienced a loss of 4,334 in her population, that the very fair and beautiful island has lost that number of people within the last year. But I point out that people have been leaving other parts of Canada also. What is proposed here is a

Supply-Steamship Services
very expensive way of trying to make up for the sins of the government, and the effect of its policies which has re-acted on the country as a whole. What we see here is merely one small manifestation of what has happened since the present government has been in power. Why, it would be far cheaper for the government to commit political hari-kari at once than to go on multiplying subsidies in the way that is being done here. We are told this improved service has been recommended by the boards of trade, but there is not a board of trade anywhere in Canada that would not like to see some money spent in the improvement of local conditions. Surely the minister does not expect us to be satisfied with the explanations so far given in justification of this vote.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend will understand that all the information we have is that tenders were asked for and that this tender was received for the service in question. It is quite true that the subsidy has been materially increased, but as a result of that the service is very much better. No person will dispute that, and everybody who has visited "the garden of the gulf" will admit that in these days of automobiles there are great possibilities for traffic in that part of Canada.


Mr. THURSTON:: Is any increase of
population looked for?


Andrew Ross McMaster: Tourist traffic.


Mr. EVANS:: I feel like protesting against
the increase In this subsidy. It does not add to the productive powers of the Dominion by any means, it is simply for the purpose of catering to pleasure traffic. I cannot help comparing the amounts that are voted year after year for purposes like this in eastern Canada. In the West we are forsaken entirely by the government. We cannot even have railways in the outlying districts for productive purposes.


James Alexander Robb: Why does the hon. member advance that argument, when he knows that the Minister of Railways put through a number of bills for branch lines for the western provinces this year?


John Evans: There is that feature, of course.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What about the ten million dollar benefit under the Crowsnest pass agreement?


John Evans: At the same time I represent a city in which the Dominion government has not erected any public buildings better than
what can be called a shack, and nothing has been spent there for years, while the expenditures down along the St. Lawrence and on the eastern coast are increasing every year. I protest against it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I really do not think we should look upon this as a sectional matter at all. Never mind what province it is in, if it is right to spend the money, let us spend it; and if it is wrong to spend it let us stop the expenditure. We will not get anywhere at all in advancing the cause which after all we all have at heart, namely the cause of the country, if we look at these things in any other way than I have outlined. My hon. friend (Mr. Evans) says nothing has been done for the West. I do not know if as much has been done for the West as ought to have been, but I think pretty nearly as much as we can afford to do has been done. I desire to point out that we have in central Canada 7,200 miles of railway, which gives facilities to by far the greatest bulk of the population of the country. We have in the West 10,000 miles of railway which serves a considerably smaller population. I know very well that there are local reasons-and I have urged them in this House myself-why railway service is more essential in the West than in the East. I have urged it and I have admitted it. I think I have very fully and fairly, in more positions than one, advocated the absolute necessity of the prairie farmer having ample railway accommodation; but there is no question that we have 50 per cent greater mileage in western Canada than we have in central Canada. Then we have the further fact that the central mileage of Canada, the 7,200 miles, is practically carrying the system and paying a deficit of $2,200,000 on western lines. I am not blaming the West for that. We have got to work together, but there is no use in representatives from one section of the country saying, "This expenditure down here in the East is all wrong because we are not getting anything in the West." If we look at the situation seriously and see what the figures are, we will realize that we are all getting something out of it. It is unfair to say this is not right, simply because it happens to be in the East, and it is not wrong simply because it happens to be in the West. I am still asking the minister to give us some real business reason for what is being done. The hon. member I think gave voice to a very good thought in connection with services which the country ought perhaps to pay for in order to help establish the country. Is it a service which will increase the productivity of the country as such, or is it something
Svpplp-Steamship Services

which is only going to help those that are here for amusement? There is a difference between the two. There is the one which is essential1 to the success of the farmer and the industrial worker. There is the other which certainly will not advance their interests one way or the other. Is this in the interest of the great bulk of the community? The great bulk of the ratepayers in Prince Edward Island, for example, are not hotel keepers. Prince Edward Island is a beautiful country. I have stayed there more than once; but I will tell hon. gentlemen that the great investment there is not in the summer hotels my hon. friend speaks of. That is a comparatively small thing. The great interest there is the agricultural interest, and I would like to find out just exactly what service was asked for, what was called for, and what we had before. I would like to know how much more is asked for, for freight and the like? Of course it cannot be for that service because we now have a very excellent car ferry. The island has very good railway facilities. Communication now is kept up perfectly well. I remember when I was down at the island the boat Northumberland used to run across. I should have thought the Northumberland would have been good enough for any service. I thought it was a first class boat. I enjoyed my trip on her very much. Why do we need anything better than the Northumberland?


Mr. LOGAN:: I happen to know something about this service. I know about the poor service under the old arrangement of last year; in fact as the hon. minister from Prince Edward Island (Mr. Sinclair) said, it would be better without any service than to continue that service. I do not want to discuss this matter from a Maritime province standpoint, but surely my friends from the West, particularly the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Evans) should not raise an objection to this small vote for this beautiful island, the gem of the gulf, called the million-acre farm; but unfortunately this little province has lost all its natural production, and many thousands have left, until to-day, if I mistake not, the population is about 10.000 less than when the province joined confederation. They are not asking for any branch line, and it is the only province that is not asking for branch lines.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What about
Ontario? We need branch lines, but we do not ask for them.


Hance James Logan: Ontario has no reason to
complain of branch lines or of any other lines. We have dealt generously with that province in the last twenty years.
ISir Henry Drayton.]


Henry Lumley Drayton: Oh, oh.


Hance James Logan: Ontario which enjoys 1,200
miles of inland waterway without paying a dollar for the operating expenses, should not kick about $25,000 being given to assist the tourist trade in the Maritime provinces. As we all know, Prince Edward Island is not a manufacturing province and will never be a manufacturing province. It is an agricultural province and a resort for tourists. It is the paradise of the tourists. My hon. friend from West York stated that the scenery was beautiful, and the climatic condition most exhilarating. A few years ago a number of capitalists built a splendid summer hotel. I have in view now the hotel built near Charlottetown, I think they call it the Beech Grove Inn, which is a magnificient structure; but unfortunately I am told that within the last few years the owner is very much discouraged on account of the lack of tourists to patronize the hotel. Why? Because tourists to-day travel in automobiles. I saw in a local paper the other day the statement that in twenty days something like 3,000 automobiles crossed the neck of land that joins Nova Scotia to New Brunswick, the large majority of these being American cars. I do not say, Mr. Chairman, that it is our only hope in the Maritime provinces, but it is one of our greatest hopes, and I do not think anyone should object to a small vote to encourage that trade. When people come to the province of Nova Scotia, in order to get to the island they have to go around to the head of the bay, around by Cape Tormentine, and across the western part of the island. This boat that is being provided, as I understand, it, will be a first class boat, and will carry twelve automobiles, so as to permit the tourist to get from Pictou to Prince Edward Island, patronize the hotels, buy the produce of the people and leave money in the island. As this is about the only thing that the island is asking for. it seems to me that we should not be too critical in reference to the question as to whether the vote is so well warranted on general principles or not. It will be of benefit to the island and will assist the people in the tourist trade. After all we do not object in the Maritime provinces just now to getting a little assistance and one of the greatest helps we could get would be some encouragement to the tourist trade.


John Jabez Thurston: I want to emphasize
the importance of encouraging tourist traffic in the Dominion, which I am convinced is one thing we have neglected to quite a marked extent in the past. It is illuminating in

Supply-Steamship Services
glancing through the statistics of the state of Maine to see the important part which the tourist trade has played there; the assessed value of property in the state has considerably increased since they made a bid for the traffic. But we in Ontario feel that the tourist season is well over now, and when you get to the middle of July it is hardly likely that the government can spend to great advantage this year this money which we are voting now. What is the estimated number of tourists which Prince Edvard Island expects to get this summer under this increased vote?


Mr. HAMMELL:: I want to correct the
impression of the 'hon. gentleman that the tourist [DOT] traffic in Ontario is over by the middle of July. The traffic is only now commencing and August is the best month.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What are the
details in connection with the service advertised for?


James Alexander Robb: It is to be a daily service,
excluding Sundays, between Charlottetown and Pictou and return during the season of navigation. The steamer to be employed must be suitable for carriage of passengers, freight and automobiles, with a capacity of not less than 150 tons. No night accommodation is required but there must be a good day accommodation for 200 passengers and the vessel must have a speed of not less than 10 or 12 knots.


Henry Lumley Drayton: When was the
matter advertised, and in what papers?


James Alexander Robb: It would be advertised in the
newspapers of the Maritime provinces.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How many
tenders were received?


James Alexander Robb: Only one.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How was the
service advertised? Usually there are more tenders than one for a service of this kind.


James Alexander Robb: It was advertised in the press and a circular was sent to every steamship owner in the province.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Has the minister the recommendation from the department upon which council adopted the vote?


James Alexander Robb: No. It was the only tender
received and apparently the boat was suitable for the service; in fact, it is a better boat than the advertisement called for. Regarding the inquiry of my hon. friend (Mr. Thurston), I do not know, how many tourists it 'is expected will visit the island but I should say
the number would be considerably greater than in past years because of the generally improved conditions. I take it that they would have to justify the continuance of the service from the experience of this year if it were desired to have the vote renewed next year.


John Jabez Thurston: When will the improved
service begin?


James Alexander Robb: The boat is on the service now but the contract is not signed.


Henry Lumley Drayton: When was the
tender received?


James Alexander Robb: On June 19, 1924.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Was the boat
on the service before then?


James Alexander Robb: No.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Where was it
running before? The Hochelaga is an old boat.


William Duff: This boat, known as the
Hochelaga, orginally belonged to a Russian prince and was afterwards sold to the Canadian government. Three or four years ago she was used as the Governor General's yacht when His Excellency desired to cruise around the Eastern provinces. She was sold to a man in Halifax.


Henry Lumley Drayton: When was that?


William Duff: Just about that time, three
years ago. I know the vessel and I can assure the committee that she is an excellent one, with splendid passenger accommodation. She is quite able to carry automobiles and freight.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who is the owner?


William Duff: John Simon.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Where did she
run last year?


William Duff: She was not then in commission; she did not start until she was put on this service. The boat has been completely overhauled and is in first rate condition.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I have no doubt that a recommendation was made in this case and I should like to know the basis of it, having regard to the service, the terms of the contract, and the necessity for this vote. It may be perfectly all right, but as the custom is to submit a recommendation to council it might be just as well for the committee to know what was advised in this case.
Supply-Steamship Services


James Alexander Robb: I cannot give the details of
the recommendation but the matter was discussed in council and we thought it was worth trying out the service for the island.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not want
to ask anything that took place in council; I have a lively recollection of the Murdock case and I know what difficulties the minister would find himself in if he revealed any of the business of the country. I merely want to know whether this matter came up in the ordinary way, and I think I have a right to know that. Was it supported by the usual papers? If it was, we have not got those papers here. However, for the purposes of calculation, what is the value of the boat?


James Alexander Robb: I have not that information.


William Duff: About $00,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I understood it was $50,-
000.


William Duff: Fifty or sixty thousand. At
any rate she is a splendid boat.


Henry Lumley Drayton: We will assume it is $50,000. What rate is allowed in the contract?


James Alexander Robb: The contract is not signed
yet.


Henry Lumley Drayton: But there will be a contract?


James Alexander Robb: When the vote is passed we
shall deal with that matter. My hon. friend knows that the rates must be approved by the department.	[DOT]


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am getting at something else. The minister knows, as I do, that there are in connection with contracts provisions which often work out in such a way that the subsidy is not earned. It depends on certain conditions. One of the circumstances that has to be taken into consideration is the value of the vessel, as well as the return to the owners.


James Alexander Robb: And the number of trips.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes.


Samuel William Jacobs: There is one question my
hon. friend failed to ask in order to complete his information. He might inquire as to the political affiliations of the owners of the Hochelaga.
Sir HENRY DRA1 TON: I need not ask so superfluous a question.


Samuel William Jacobs: I am curious to know.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. gentleman is not as ingenuous as he seems.


James Alexander Robb: I think he must be a ministerialist.


Mr. GOULD:: Last session when estimates
of this nature were before the House I hurriedly made a calculation of the money returned per capita to people in the Maritime provinces as compared with that returned to those livng in other parts of the Dominion. I rise now to say that some time some member of parliament is going to lay before this House the comparative per capita amounts which are returned to various parts of Canada through the medium of our main and supplementary estimates. As a member representing one of the constituencies in the hinterland, I have for a long time reflected on the injustice of the present system, because I have felt that my people have been simply hewers of wood and drawers of water to provide much of the money spent, not alone by this government but by all governments of this country. Some day a real protest is going to be registered on behalf of those people -I wish now to initiate that protest. I think the time is past when the people are going to stand for the government handing out subsidies for steamship companies and huge sums for wharves, breakwaters and various other public works in the Maritimes and other provinces at the expense of the hinterland. I make that protest not particularly on this item but on the sum total in the main and supplementary estimates. I am speaking on behalf of my people who have advised me upon this point. I reiterate my statement of last session, that some day some one is going to protest and demand remedial legislation. This practice must be discontinued, or else equivalent per capita amounts must be expended in other districts.


James Alexander Robb: Which would my hon. friend
prefer?


Oliver Robert Gould: I have cited to the minister
in a meek manner various places in the hinterland where expenditures might be made to improve conditions for the people-expenditures which have been denied me as their representative in this House. I ask for a fair and equitable distribution of the funds which are collected through the medium of taxation.
I can prove-it is very easy to do so-that the moneys taken from the people are not being distributed equitably throughout the Dominion. I need not at this moment proceed to demonstrate that the people in the

Supply-Steamship Services
hinterland contribute in taxation a sum proportionate to that contributed by the people in other parts of the country. I can assure the minister who challenges-


James Alexander Robb: No, I did not challenge my
hon. friend. I simply want to know if he desires increased expenditure in the West or greater economy in the East.


Oliver Robert Gould: I simply desire an equitable distribution of the moneys collected through the medium of taxation.


Mr. CHISHOLM:: That is impossible
in any country.


Oliver Robert Gould: It seems to be, but I think
the government will eventually realize that the people of my district, who contribute at least a million and a half dollars every year in taxes, do not get any return proportionate to that obtained by their compatriots in other parts of the Dominion.


William Duff: You get more.


Oliver Robert Gould: This may be provoking to
hon. members who have been accustomed to deceive an undue proportion of the public revenues for their constituencies, but I am speaking in all earnestness on behalf of my people. Let hon. gentlemen take their lead pencils and figure out whether I should ask my people to unquestioningly pay their quota 'of taxation year after year without receiving 'a proportionate return for the improvement tof their district. Let the money be distributed equitably. I have, for instance, (pleasure resorts in my country which should have a fair proportion of assistance.


Henry Herbert Stevens: We ought to have a re-
'distribution bill on this.


Oliver Robert Gould: Possibly. Nevertheless I
am exercising my right on behalf of my people who desire and expect a fair return of the moneys which they pay in the form of taxation; they resent, the ignoring of their requests for equitable treatment. I see hon. gentlemen argue from time to time for the expenditure of public moneys in their constituencies; but the same arguments can be advanced on behalf of the people who live in the hinterland. They are not simply hewers of wood and drawers of water for men who argue better than I can-not at all. I claim that at this very moment the district of Assiniboia which I have the honour to represent has not received its fair share of the distribution of public moneys. I make this protest not only in respect to 'the main estimates but also the supple-mentaries.
1 Mr. LOGAN:	When my hon. friend is
making his protestation on behalf of the hinterland, I hope he will not forget the expenditure of over $1,000,000 of the good money of the people of Canada on the briquetting plant at Bienfait. We are discussing a vote of $25,000, and I suppose my hon. friend thinks in millions; but let us not forget that sometimes we live in glass houses.


Oliver Robert Gould: I 'had not in any way forgotten the great undeveloped natural resource in my district, but the briquetting project has proved an absolute success and amply warrants the small expenditure from the national exchequer. I would draw my hon. friend's attention to the fact that we have been paying taxes for an awfully long time, and this expenditure represents a very small proportion of the taxation which my people have contributed. Undoubtedly we have a perfect right to a certain expenditure there. Possibly this and other governments might have devised better methods, with the result that a larger expenditure might have been warranted on this experiment, but I do not for one moment admit that the money spent on the Bienfait plant has been lost, 'and consequently I do not think the hon. gentleman should argue that it has been lost.


Hance James Logan: I am not arguing that the
money is lost, I am only pointing out the inconsistency of my hon. friend's attack on a small expenditure to help the little province of Prince Edward Island, which, incidentally, has paid a great amount in taxation for federal purposes and has received very little in return.


Mr. MacLEAN (Prince):: I think my hon. friend from Assiniboia (Mr. Gould), than whom I am sure there is no fairer minded man in the House, has possibly got the wrong viewpoint on this expenditure, which is not for the sole benefit of Prince Edward Island but for the benefit of the Maritime provinces and the Dominion generally. The hon. gentleman himself may have the pleasure of taking a trip down there and getting some benefit from this small subsidy. Another point that our western friends sometimes lose sight of is the fact that a large amount of money is spent on terminals on both the Atlantic and the Pacific coasts the results of which are a direct benefit to the people of the country in general and especially to the grain producers of the West. Millions of dollars have been spent on terminal elevators especially for the grain trade, and we never object to that. Large amounts are spent on
Supply-Steamship Services

canals over which there is free transport, to say nothing of the millions spent on railways, elevators and terminal facilities. Compared with these large expenditures the small amounts we get in the Maritime provinces are insignificant.


Oliver Robert Gould: Within forty miles of my own home I have quite as good a market as any that has been provided, but being of British stock I have submitted to the enormity of increased taxation in order that these facilities might be provided. I am doing that from a principle of loyalty, and there are hundreds of thousands of people in the West who take the same view. But it does not help their loyalty to find that the per capita expenditure has increased by 50 or 75 or 80 per cent, notwithstanding the sacrifices they are making.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Cheticamp and Port Hawkesbury, calling at intermediate ports, steam service between, $3,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Explain.


James Alexander Robb: Fall fishing at Cheticamp and Eastern Harbour began to be prosecuted a few years ago and was found to be very profitable. Unfortunately the local merchants could not buy the fish, as they had no cold storage or any other way of keeping the fish until spring. They therefore had to look elsewhere for their market. This boat carried 600,000 pounds of fish to cold storage at Port Hawkesbury and 200,000 pounds of bait and supplies to the other ports of call.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
reason for the change since the main estimates were down?


James Alexander Robb: This is to pay for a special service that was commenced on October. 18, 1923 and continued until January 11, 1924.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Why was it not in the main estimates?


James Alexander Robb: The main estimates were
prepared before that date; that is the only reason I can give.


Henry Lumley Drayton: We did not meet until after the whole work was finished, so that cannot be the reason. Why was this old thing dug up? If we can look upon it as an evidence of a shortly coming election, we will say, put it through at once. This service was carried on last autumn and ended last January. The main estimates are down and then for some unknown reason we find this item in the supplementaries. I think we should have some further explanation.


Alexander William Chisholm: Although the season
closed about the middle of January, this service was for the fall and winter fishing. That is, those engaged in the work would continue the fishing until the drift ice prevented them from carrying on their operations. This service was put on in order to assist the fishermen down there who in the fall of the year could not get a market for their fish. As the minister has explained, the local fish buyers would not buy because they had no suitable means of transportation, and this boat went into the service to take bait to the fishermen and carry the product of the fishermen's labour to the market. This fall fishing has only been carried on for the last two years. It was seen that it could be carried on if means of transportation were provided, but previously they did not have the means. The fish merchants did not want to buy the fish and salt them down, so they gave the fishermen to understand that they would not buy after a certain date. I placed the conditions before the minister and asked him if something could not be done to assist these men in order that they might be enabled to sell their fish. As a result of the valuable assistance by this boat, what is practically a new industry has been established down there. So far as the item not being in the main estimates is concerned, I do not think the minister knew at the time the main estimates were in course of preparation whether or not the work was over. Drift ice comes along the coast sometimes early in January and sometimes late in the month When the drift ice is not in evidence the fishing is good, and the later the season the better the fishing, particularly close to the coast line. I am satisfied that if my hon. friend (Sir Henry Drayton) was thoroughly familiar with the circumstances he would endorse this vote without the least hesitation. I may explain that in the case of other boats plying along the coast, when fresh fish are placed in the hold they are close to the engine and that is destructive to them. This boat was particularly suitable in that respect and was able to carry the fish in good condition to the nearest cold storage at Hawkesbury.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
name of this boat and who is the owner?


Alexander William Chisholm: The boat is the Frances Boutilier, Captain Guy Smith of Port Hood.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think this vote
had better go through.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Steamship Services
Grand Manan and the mainland, steam service between-additional amount required, $5,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: I know this service very
well. It is a service that should be subsidized, otherwise a community out in the middle of the bay of Fundy would not have any kind of reasonable accommodation. I have always understood that the subsidy was fairly generous, but I would like some explanation of this additional appropriation.


James Alexander Robb: The service .is four times a
week, June to September inclusive, and three times a week during the remainder of the year. As to the reason of the supplementary estimate, in March 1923, requests were received from the people of Grand Manan for a daily service all the year round. Tenders were called for on April 9th, receivable up to August first, 1923. Four tenders were received as follows:
1.	T, E. Farquhar-SS. Robina, daily service, $29,000 a year for 6 years.
2.	Grand Manan SS. Company-SS. Grand Manan, also a smaller steamer to be built, daily service, $32,500 a year for 5 years.
3.	John Simon-SS. Hochelaga, daily service, $45,000 a year for 5 years.
4.	Grand Manan Steamboat Company, offered to continue the previous service at $20,000 a year. (4 trips a week in summer and 3 in winter).
The government did not find any of the above tenders satisfactory, but agreed with the -Grand Manan Steamboat Company to accept tender No. 4 for six months, April 1 to September 30, to give time for further investigation into the alleged need for a daily service.	The contractors are to be
given notice before July 1st if the government wish to continue the service for a further six months to March 31, 1924.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is the present subvention?


James Alexander Robb: $15,000. This is an additional $5,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not objecting to this vote. There is a good deal of commerce carried on at this important port in the county of Charlotte, and so far as the fishing industry is concerned, this is the most important port on the bay of Fundy. Personally I would like to see the minister give consideration to a daily service for these people. I think it could be done possibly for $20,000 a year, if the service were confined from North Head to the town of St. Andrews, which is not a long run. It will be urged, of course, that there should be one trip a day at least to the city of St. John for the purpose of having merchandise conveyed from the wholesale distributors in St. John to Grand Manan, but I do not think it would be possible to give a daily service if you give a service also from St. John to Grand Manan. Nevertheless, as this is only a temporary arrangement until the 31st of October, I wish that the minister, or whoever is in charge of the department, would look into the question of giving a daily service between North Head and St. Andrews. I believe a very efficient service could be given between those two points. The difference in distance is in favour of St. Andrews, though I am not sure just what the difference is. But it would be possible to maintain a daily service, I think, between Grand Manan and St. John because this service calls at intermediate points like Campobello and Easfport, which causes a detour, and if they had to make that detour they could not give that one trip a day, but they could make these intermediate calls if St. Andrews was the point of embarkation. I am not especially urging this at the moment, but I would like the minister to keep it in mind when he is considering a renewal of the service. The Grand Manan is a good boat, and it gives good service. I do not think any larger boat is required. A boat of the size of the Hochelaga would be quite beyond the requirements of the service.


James Alexander Robb: I have made a note of the
observations of my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Halifax and Bay St. Lawrence, steam service between, $2,400.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Would the minister explain this?


James Alexander Robb: The period of service calls
for three trips in the spring, and three trips in the fall of 1924 with intervals of about 14 days between trips. The ports of call are:
Halifax, St. Peters', Soldiers' Cove, Grand Narrows, Iona. Baddeck. Whyoocomagh, Little Narrows, Nyanza, Boularderie Centre, Boularderie, Marble Mountain, West Bay, Washabuch Centre, Johnson's Harbour, Irish Cove, Big Pond, Kast Bay, Castle Bay, St. Ann's, Murray. Englishtown, Ingonish, North Ingonish, North Gut, McKinnon's Wharf, Neils' Harbour, Aspy Bay, White Point and Bay St. Lawrence.
This service was first put on via the south east coast of Cape Breton, in 1923, when the Bay Queen performed a fortnightly service throughout the season of navigation, making a total of 16 trips, carrying 1,665 tons of freight inwards to Halifax, and 1,325 tons outward from Halifax, or a total of 2.990 tons, for which she was paid $5,000 subsidy. This year the south east coast :s being satis-

Supply-Grain Expert
factorily served by the Arcadia from St. Peter's, and at the request of Halifax and other merchants, the Bay Queen route has been fixed through the Bras d'Or lakes, and thence up the east coast to Bay St. Lawrence.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is there a vote for this service in the main estimates? I think not.


James Alexander Robb: No.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then how does it come up now?


James Alexander Robb: It was proposed to discontinue the service this year, as the South Cape Breton ports are served by the Arcadia from Halifax via St. Peter's, and the northwest coast by the Aspy from Sydney. The Stella Maris, from Halifax, also calls fortn'ghtly at Ingonish and White Point.
Strong protests, however, were received from the Halifax Board of Trade, the Premier of Nova Scotia and many local merchants, against the total discontinuance of this service. The minister, therefore, agreed to grant $400 a trip subsidy for 3 trips in the spring and 3 trips in the fall of the present year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Department of Trade and Commerce-to provide for tihe salary of an expert in grain chemistry, for the balance of the fiscal year, $3,833.34.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Wc had quite a long talk yesterday about the necessity of having expert advisers for the government.
I do not know that this looks quite as bad, but I think we should know something about .t. It looks like a new job.


James Alexander Robb: No. This expert has been in
the service for some years. This vote is to provide the salary for an expert in grain chemistry for the balance of the fiscal year. The full amount may not be expended, and the retention of the chemist's services is contingent upon the report of the royal grain commission.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
annual rate of salary?


James Alexander Robb: It is $4,600.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
expert's name?


James Alexander Robb: Dr. Birchard.


John Evans: May I ask if Dr. Birchard
is to carry this work on?


James Alexander Robb: Until we have the report of
the grain commission. They may recommend that the work be continued or discontinued, but the understanding is that it will be carried on until we receive their report.


John Evans: Where will the office be
established?


James Alexander Robb: It has already been established for some years in Winnipeg.


John Evans: Is it out of the city or in
the usual place?


James Alexander Robb: It is somewhere on Main
street, Winnipeg.


Mr. BROWN:: What has been the actual
situation in that office? Has Dr. Birchard really been at work, or has his work been suspended for the last few months?


James Alexander Robb: I think he has been at work
steadily. There is a feeling, however, that to be of use this office should be nearer that of the chief grain inspector.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Have there been any
complaints as to the ability of Dr. Birchard?


James Alexander Robb: I have never heard of any.


Mr. SALES:: Is there no mention of the
work of Dr. Birchard in the interim report of the grain commission that is in the hands of the government?


James Alexander Robb: I have not read that report,
but I do not think so. I think it deals only with conditions on the Pacific coast.


John Evans: When did Dr. Birchard
furnish his last report, and why is it that we do not get regular reports from that office?


James Alexander Robb: I am told that is one of the
complaints my colleague had against him- that he never was prepared to make a report. He was always so busy investigating that he did not report at all.


John Evans: I asked Dr. Birchard himself and he said he was not allowed to publish those reports. He was prepared to give them out regularly but was forbidden to do so.


James Alexander Robb: By whom? My hon. friend
has made a statement. I should like him to go further and say who objected to him publishing the reports.


John Evans: He told me he was forbidden to do so. I took it that it was by the department.	,


James Alexander Robb: No.


John Livingstone Brown: I have not been closely in
touch with the matter for the last few years, but I know there was very great difficulty some four or five years ago in getting Dr.

Supply-Grain Expert
Birchard's reports at all. Where the fault lay I am not sure, but it was almost impossible for us to secure the reports. We came to the conclusion that there was some attempt to suppress them.


James Alexander Robb: That is news to me. I will
have that feature of the matter looked into.


Arthur Meighen: I should think the government would probably raise his salary if he did not make any report. That seems to suit them in the case of the pul'pwood commission and the grain commission.


Thomas Sales: It does not suit the farmers.


Arthur Meighen: I understand the minister to say they thought of abolishing the office but on second thought decided they had better wait for the report of the grain commission. If this gentleman wants to hold his job I do not think he could ask for better terms than that.


Mr. GARDINER:: Dr. Birchard is continuing the work until such time as the report comes down?


James Alexander Robb: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: Will that report be
discusted in the House before the minister takes any action in the direction of disposing of this gentleman's services?


James Alexander Robb: The report has not yet been
received. I could not make any commitment on that.


Thomas Sales: It is very important in the
interest of the men who grow grain that this work should not be discontinued. I should like to point out that this work is being carried on in the United States on a very extensive scale. Over there they have gone so far as to establish a mill in order to get practical results. The complaint is made in regard to Dr. Birchard's work that the outfit he uses is too small to give really practical commercial results.


Arthur Meighen: Is too small?


Thomas Sales: Yes, his working apparatus
is too small, and that the results obtained are of no practical value. That is the complaint as I understand it. I wish to point out that the quantity of grain, generally speaking, grown in this country at the present time demands that this work should not be curtailed but should rather be enlarged, and that suitable apparatus should be furnished
to this department. Whether it is under the care of this particular gentleman or any other man this work should not be dropped, I also want to enter my protest against any curtailment of it.


Robert Gardiner: Will the minister tell
the committee the total amount that is being spent annually?


James Alexander Robb: No, I have not that information with me, but I can get it for the hon. member if he wishes.


Edward Joseph Garland: I wish to
join my voice with that of the hon. member for Saltcoats (Mr. Sales) in regard to this matter. We have in Canada, as hon. gentlemen know, the finest grain in the world. The grain has a higher gluten content than that grown elsewhere except in some parts of Russia; but generally speaking we have the finest quality of hard milling wheat in the world. An attempt should be made by the government, in my opinion, to properly analyse our wheat and test it for its baking qualities in the production of first class bread -I suppose that is part of the work of this department also-and so let us know the results of these tests. At the present time there is a vast spread between number one and number five, a manipulated spread very largely, and until we can get complete control of our own agency for selling wheat we shall be at the mercy of those who set the spread. I understand from past tests which I have studied carefully, that there is in many cases absolutely no appreciable difference in the quality of bread baked from number one and that, baked from number five. The only difference appeared to be in the quantity of the bran.


Charles Wallace Stewart: I understood the minister to say that it was possible this matter would be finally decided by the department before the House would have an opportunity of considering the report of the commission. Am I wrong in that surmise?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, I did not say anything of the kind.


Charles Wallace Stewart: I am very glad the minister contradicts the statement because I certainly understood him to intimate, in answer to a question, that it was possible that would be done. I would certainly protest against any such action as that. I wish to associate myself with those hon. members who have spoken on the importance of this subject to the grain growers of western Canada. There is very great dissatisfaction with the grading of our grain under the
Supply-Grain Expert

present regulations. Those grades are based upon the physical condition and appearance of the grain, and they are not always accurate. Furthermore, the charges have been made, and certain experiments have seemed to establish those charges, that the inspectors are sometimes prejudiced against the locality from which the grain comes. The opinion has prevailed for some time that the grain grown in northern areas has not been fairly graded as compared with grain grown on the prairie. As a result an experiment was made last year in the province of Saskatchewan. A man who farms extensively in northern Saskatchewan placed his grain in an elevator, and had the operator of that elevator take a fair sample from a single bin which was divided into three portions. He mailed one of these three samples from his own station for grading by the chief inspector. He sent a second one to his neighbour, a few stations further south, and asked him to mail it from there for grading which he did. He sent the third sample to another friend on the open prairies and asked him to mail it from there for grading. The result was that the grain mailed from the prairie was given one grade higher than the grain sent from the northern portions of the province. I am not saying that experiment was conclusive evidence that the grain inspectors are prejudiced against grain from the northern districts; but I do submit that it lends colour to the claim which has been made that such is the case. If it could be established by a branch of the department such as we are discussing here, that grain grown in those districts is lacking in milling value there would be some reason for the grading; but if the grading is simply based on the physical appearance or condition of the grain, on the fact that its colour is somewhat lighter or a reason of that kind, there is absolutely no justice in grading grain grown in the northern sections a grade lower than the grain grown on the prairie. If our inspectors have from experience come to think that grain sent from certain districts is of a better grade than grain coming from other districts it is time we had a different inspection system.


Robert Gardiner: I draw the minister's
attention to a very important fact in regard to our grain grading system. The present system is not satisfactory to the farmers inasmuch as they do not receive the full milling value of their grain. I think it was in the year 1907 when Professor Ladd of North Dakota made experiments such as now are being made at Winnipeg on behalf of the Canadian government, and he demonstrated
very conclusively that some of the lower grades of wheat-that is wheat graded No. 3, No. 4 and sometimes No. 5-were even of better milling value than some samples that graded No. 1.


James Alexander Robb: Is that Professor Snyder's report?


Robert Gardiner: No, Professor Ladd.
It is quite impossible under our present system of grading for farmers to receive the full milling value of their wheat. The value of our wheat is determined to a large extent by the plumpness, colour and so forth of the grain. But that does not always determine the full milling value. I would suggest to the minister that instead of curtailing this department it should be extended, because the time is coming when we are not going to accept the present system of grading, because it does not give us the full value of the produce of our labor.


James Alexander Robb: Hon. members who argue
that the fair milling value of the wheat should be taken into consideration are quite right, but they overlook the fact that each of the large milling companies-and I think there are five or six of them in Canada- has its chemist and expert, and if the farmers want to know the value of wheat in a particular district, all they have to do is to watch the large milling companies starting to bid aginst each other and running up the price of wheat in a particular locality. They are in a position to do that, because they have their own elevators and mills and can take care of it. The best market for the man who grows wheat of high milling value is the Canadian market because the Canadian miller always pays more than the export price. But the man who buys the wheat altogether for export is compelled to put the lower grade wheat in with the higher. There is no other way to take care of it, when it gets to Fort William; so that the more we can increase the production of flour in Canada, the better it is for the grain grower and for the feeder in eastern Canada who requires the by-product. There is also the question which has been debated for many years-and I think the Grain Commission were given special instructions to consider this feature of it-the question of opening up a sample market, so that wheat would be bought on its milling value. Hon. members are quite right when they say there is a difference in the milling value of wheat, but it does not take the large milling companies of Canada very long to discover that

Supply-Grain Expert
when the new crop starts moving in the fall and if you just watch them when they start bidding against each other, a cent here or a cent and a half there, you will know that the wheat which is the subject of this competitive bidding has good milling value.


Thomas Sales: The minister will agree as
to the importance of this branch of the work being carried on?


James Alexander Robb: I think so.
Mr. SALES. Take the case of sprouted wheat-


James Alexander Robb: I am against the hon. member if he starts to argue that sprouted wheat is good wheat.


Thomas Sales: I am not going to argue it is or it is not, because I am not a chemical expert, but it has been proven I think by experiments which have been carried on that wheat slightly sprouted will produce a better loaf than the other wheat. But it does not matter to the farmer who has wheat whether it is slightly sprouted or very much sprouted, it is condemned as sprouted and the price is depreciated accordingly.


James Alexander Robb: Do not encourage the farmers of western Canada to sprout their wheat.


Thomas Sales: The minister knows as well
as I do that they are very sorry to have sprouted wheat, and it is only owing to climatic conditions over which we have no control that we do have sprouted wheat; but he will not deny the fact that there is considerable reduction in the price whether the wheat is slightly sprouted and slightly depreciated, or whether it is sprouted to a greater degree and very much depreciated. There is that wide spread and, according to these experiments carried on by the laboratory, there is not that depreciation which the difference in price would indicate. The millers are only too anxious-and my hon. friend knows it as well as I do-to take advantage of any situation which will give them all the profit they can get. I do not blame them one bit; it is very natural.


James Alexander Robb: Will the hon. member not
be fair to the millers of Canada? I am out of the business now, but I would ask my hon. friend to be fair to them and admit that the Canadian millers pay the highest price for wheat of any buyers in western Canada, that they are always bidding a ilittle more than the other buyers for good w'heat.


Thomas Sales: I do not believe they pay
one cent more than the export market makes them pay.


James Alexander Robb: That is correct.


Thomas Sales: I never believed it in all
my experience. Then to talk about the home market and all the wheat being ground in Canada is all bunkum. The price is all set by the export price which the Liverpool market pays; and if they do choose to take wheat from a certain district in preference to that from another district, it only proves they are skimming the very best of our wheat to the detriment of the rest.


George Gibson Coote: I should like to tell the
minister a little personal experience I had with the Canadian millers, because he said that it was greatly to the advantage of the Canadian farmer that he should have as many mills in Canada as possible. In September of this past year I shipped a carload of wheat to Calgary which was graded No. 1 by the inspector. It was sold by a broker in Calgary to a milling company in Calgary. I had asked them to bill it on to Vancouver, but he told me it would cost a couple of dollars, and he said that I could sell it for as good a price in Calgary. He said, "Better let me sell it here," and I said, "All right." He sold it to the milling company in Calgary. When the car was sold they asked for a survey board to grade the wheat again. The survey board graded it No. 2 and it cost me 2 cents a bushel, because I sold my wheat to a Canadian miller. If it had gone to Vancouver there is absolutely no question that nobody would have asked to have it re-graded or graded by a survey board; so that it cost me S30 on that car. The next car I shipped to Calgary was graded No. 3 although I think it was exactly the same wheat. As far as I know, it was out of the same field. I asked for a survey board to regrade that car, but it had gone to Vancouver. The agent of the elevator company suggested that I let it go to Vancouver and have a sample taken from the car and have it graded there. This was done, and the sample graded No. 2. I went into the office of the inspector at Calgary later on to see the sample, and when I complained of the grade and told him that I thought it was No. 1 wheat he turned1 out on white paper, and pointed out to me a few kernels that were slightly coloured on the end, and said, "You see some of this wheat is not perfect," and I said, "No, and if you get the Canada Grain Act you will find that it
Supply-Grain Expert

does not call for 100 per cent of the kernels to be perfect." He said, "The millers object to this colour on the end." I said to the inspector, "Are the millers setting the standard for our grades, or does the Canada Grain Act set it?" He tried to persuade me that I was very lucky to get No. 2 instead of No. 3 which was given to me in the first instance at Calgary. I talked this question over with a representative of an English milling company who was in Calgary last year. He said that the investigations he had so far made led him to believe that it was advisable for them to establish a mill in Canada. "The Canadian millers," he added, "have a big advantage over us inasmuch as they can buy better wheat for the same money, being on the ground and in a position to pick out the best." This gentleman represented the firm of Spillers, Limited, of England who have since decided to establish a mill in Canada. I want to see as many millers as possible in this country but from personal experience I am not inclined to think that the millers at present are enhancing the price of wheat to the grower in Canada.


James Alexander Robb: I will not dispute the point further than to say that on my hon. friend's own argument there would not seem to be an3'thing wrong in a miller in Calgary asking for a survey of wheat. There were shipped two cars of wheat, one to Calgary graded No. 1. The miller asked for a survey and had it reduced to No. 2. Then the hon. gentleman shipped another car which he thinks was identical with the Calgary wheat and it graded No. 3; it went on to Vancouver and on a survey being asked for it graded No. 2.


George Gibson Coote: I shipped two other cars
which went to Fort William and they both graded No. 1.


James Alexander Robb: I am not arguing about that.


George Gibson Coote: In this case it was the
millers who cut me down to No. 2 and when I complained to the inspector he said that the millers had objected to the wheat in the sample. But according to the act I am not bound to have 100 per cent of the kernels perfect; yet the Canadian millers made complaints to the inspector simply because there were a few kernels that had a slight blight on the end. This is a disease which was quite common throughout my part of the country but it affected only a very few heads; only a very small percentage of the kernels were so affected. But the millers made representations to the inspector and consequently the wheat was graded No. 2; in other words the 
inspector was influenced. I am satisfied that had the millers in England received my wheat just as it left the elevator at my station they would have been glad to get it as No. 1. I showed a sample of it to an English miller and he said that they never get anything as good as that under No. 1 in England.


Henry Elvins Spencer: As stories on the grain trade are being told I think I may be permitted to tell one myself. If I may be pardoned a personal reference, I have relations in England who are in the milling business and some time ago I received a letter informing me that some wheat had been received this year through Vancouver, although in previous years shipments had always been made by way of Atlantic ports. My correspondent said that the peculiar thing was that the wheat which he received this year by way of the Pacific was a good deal better than the samples that he had been receiving from Atlantic ports, and he wondered what the reason was. I wrote to the grain commission in reference to the matter. This wheat had been bought as Manitoba No. 1. In reply to my inquiries the grain commission informed me that no Manitoba No. 1 had been shipped from Manitoba this year. But all Saskatchewan and Alberta wheat is graded on a basis of Manitoba No. 1 when it goes to England. It would therefore seem as though the sample was better by reason of its having gone through the port of Vancouver where there was no opportunity of its being mixed with inferior grain. The inference is that my correspondent received wheat of a poorer quality in the past because it was shipped via Atlantic ports, after having been mixed with inferior grain in transit.


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend is quite right when he suggests that wheat going through the Pacific is better than wheat which is shipped by way of Atlantic ports, and I think we know what the reason is.


Mr. FORKE:: The minister is practically admitting, I take it, that wheat is mixed when it goes over the American route.


James Alexander Robb: That I think is established.


Edward Joseph Garland: Where can hon. members secure reports of the results of experiments carried on in this branch? Are there any reports available for the use of the people who are paying for the upkeep of the service?


James Alexander Robb: Any reports which are in print are obtainable in the department but we have not had any reports recently.

Supply-Grain Trade


Edward Joseph Garland: We ought to have some report because we are anxious to know what has been achieved through the experiments that have been carried on. We have been voting a lot of money and we hope to vote more, but we want to know what results are being obtained.


James Alexander Robb: The report is now in course of preparation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for salary of a clerk from April 1 to September 30, 1924, $650.
Arthur Meighen: Why is this item in the supplementary estimates?


James Alexander Robb: This clerk was to be retired
but it was decided to keep her on for a further six months.


Arthur Meighen: Is she too abiding the
report of the grain commission?


James Alexander Robb: No; her retirement is ah
economy. My hon. friend will see that in the main estimates there is a considerable reduction of staff.


Arthur Meighen: The minister says that
this particular clerk is to be retained; that would seem to be a case of economy abandoned.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Royal Commission to inquire into the Grain Trade-further amount required, $50,000.
Arthur Meighen: Has the minister any
explanation to offer in regard to this item?


James Alexander Robb: When the estimates for 1924-
25 were being prepared it was expected that the duties of the commission would have been completed before the end of the fiscal year 1923-24; hence no provision was made. Late in March, however, the department was advised that the work of the commission could not possibly be completed by March 31, 1924, and the above amount is provided for expenses of the commission in 1924-25 as well as to pay accounts accrued but not paid at March 31, 1924. The accounts unpaid on hand awaiting the passing of these estimates amount to S33,422.25. The department understand^ that the commission has completed its investigations and is now preparing its report.


Henry Herbert Stevens: An investigation was held by the commission at Vancouver and an interim report was laid on the Table the other
day.


James Alexander Robb: Yes, and it was ordered printed.


Henry Herbert Stevens: I had an opportunity
merely to glance through that report but I had not time to study it as I had1 to hand it back. In fact I had to hand it right back to the clerk, but from what I was able to read lit appeared that the fantastic charges which were made against the handling of grain in the port of Vancouver were very largely disproved. I think it is desirable that notice should be taken of that fact.
I think there is a recommendation, however, that the handling of grain at that port should be brought under the grain commission. I take this opportunity of very briefly expressing my views in regard to the matter. I have given a good deal of study to the administration of the Grain Act, and I have been brought *to the conclusion that the whole grain movement ought to be directed under one piece of legislation, namely, the Canada Grain Act. But that act is far from being up to date, and to my mind one advantage that will accrue from this investigation will be the revision of the act at the next session of parliament. It is a very long and very intricate piece of legislation and could not possibly be dealt with this session. Theiefore I would suggest to the minister that no time should be lost in directing the proper officials of the department to prepare a revision of the act. Do not let us open parliament next year and simply refer the act to a special committee to study and make a report on during the session; let us meet parliament with a draft revision and let that go to a committee to put into proper shape. The act is obsolete. A moment ago my hon. friend (Mr. Coote) was referring to the grading of his grain. If grain were graded strictly in accordance with the act a very substantial proportion of the grain of the prairies would have no grade at all. For instance, Marquis wheat does not come within the limitation of names, and there are many other cases showing that the act is absolutely obsolete.
Another suggestion which is made, if I recall the terms of the report correctly, is that the existing elevators shall be handed back to the government for operation by a new board to be elected under the Grain Act. I have no particular objection to the elevators being operated by the grain board, but I do object to bringing into existence a nevT commission for the purpose. I think we ought to be very careful and take no hasty action in regard to that part of the report.
Was an order in council passed actually transferring to the harbour board the title of the elevator referred to?

Supply-Grain Trade


James Alexander Robb: Yes, it was handed over to the harbour board, but t'he board have not yet completed their part of the bargain and paid the government for the elevator.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The actual transfer has
not been completed, although the elevator has been under the harbour board for the past year?


James Alexander Robb: That is a fair interpretation.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Let me say in defence
of the harbour board, that in the operation of No. 1 elevator during the past year Mr. Colin McLean, the manager, certainly demonstrated his ability and handled the business in a very efficient manner. Undoubtedly criticisms can be offered of the manner in which the elevator has been operated, but consideration must be given to the conditions surrounding such operation. Let it be remembered that for the months of December, January, February, and perhaps March, an average of about eight million bushels per month passed through that one elevator. I am told by experienced and well qualified elevator managers that that is a record which perhaps has never been equalled in this or any other country. Hundreds of carloads would be standing in the yard at a time, and Mr. McLean and his associates were forced to deparf from the strict interpretation of the act in handling the grain. They did so under a very excellent precedent which was established during the very short time that I occupied the position of the minister to cope with congestion in Montreal in the fall of 1921, one of the worst that ever occurred in that port. We authorized the management to ignore the strict intepretation regarding warehouse receipts. That is, under this authority, one shipper who had a ship ready to take grain was permitted to load grain in the elevator that belonged to another man, and this grain would be replaced from cars en route. Had that not been done the management would not have been able to handle one-half the grain that was actually dealt with. I merely state this in defence of Mr. McLean against whom charges have been made that I think were unreasonable. ,
Let me turn for a moment to the mixing of grain. This is perhaps one of the most delicate questions, as far as the producer is concerned, that we have to deal with, but it must be faced. Of course, I do not know what the grain commission may report, but whatever their recommendations, those who are preparing a revision of the Grain Act must deal with the mixing of grain. We might fMr. Stevens.]
as well confess that as a matter of fact there is not a public terminal elevator in Canada that has not practised the mixing of grain; but it is absolutely contrary to the provisions and to the intention of the Grain Act. This mixing practice does not work to the advantage of the producer. But what I do think would work to his advantage in any section where there are ample storage facilities would be the establishment of a sample market, for this would enable the producer to get the full value of his grain. I may remind one or two of my hon. friends to my left in regard to the shipping of grain westward this year, that owing to the fact that there were not ample storage facilities it was not possible to create a cash market on the coast last season, but that will be overcome as soon as the physical facilities are supplied. But last year brokers who handled grain through the port of Vancouver made handsome profits in premiums. One shipper told me that on one large shipment of 13,000 or 14,000 tons he cleared $25,000 as a premium. This was No. 1 wheat that weighed 66 pounds to the bushel and brought a premium on the British market of several cents a bushel. The original shipper of that grain had no opportunity of sharing in that premium because no grain could be shipped to the Pacific coast unless the shipper had shipping facilities, cargo space, waiting to take his grain at the Pacific coast. To pursue any other course would mean that the elevator would be full of storage grain and the movement would thus be interfered with. But with the erection there of the No. 2 elevators, the extension of No. 1 and the completion of the large spiller elevator now being built, that will be overcome, in my opinion, and there should be established on the Pacific coast as early as possible a sample market in addition to the cash market which these facilities will bring into existence. If we have a cash market and if there is established there a sample market so that the foreign buyer can buy on sample, I believe that will go a long way toward giving the producer the full value for his product. I know I am not in accord with the opinion of some of my hon. friends to my left who have stuck tenaciously during recent years to the old system of contract grades and have not encouraged the establishment of sample markets. But I believe that the establishment of sample markets at Fort William or Winnipeg and at the Pacific coast, or at Calgary or Edmonton, whichever point is most convenient, would solve a great deal of the difficulty and do away with many

Supj)ly-Grain Trade
of the grievances of the producer in respect to his not getting the full value for his product. The minister this recess ought to instruct his experts to study the question and include provisions to that effect in proper form in the Canada Grain Act, the revision of which must undoubtedly take place next year. There are many other things one might speak of, but these are a few of the subjects which I desire to refer to at this stage based upon the report which was presented a few days ago.


Thomas Sales: I have not had the opportunity of seeing the report. I have tried to get it, but up to the present I have been unable to do so. I agree with my hon. friend (Mr. Stevens) that all grain should come under, the control of the grain commission, I also agree that the legislation is out of date and the revision is long overdue. I would urge upon the government that when they undertake that revision they put nothing in the act which cannot be enforced. A lot of things in the act have gone by common consent; some of them have been held by judgments recently delivered to be ultra vires and unenforceable. With regard to my hon. friend's remarks concerning a sample market, if he urged a sample market for Vancouver I would certainly be in hearty accord with him. The situation there is entirely different from what it is at Fort William or Port Arthur. The British miller may go to Vancouver, purchase the grain on sample, load it in his boat and keep it under his own control until he delivers it to his mill in England. Under these conditions a sample market would be workable. But if the British miller tried to do that same thing through Fort William or Port Arthur and his wheat must go through the transfer elevators at the bay ports or at Montreal, he would not be sure of what he was going to get; the sample market under those conditions would be unworkable. It has been our contention all the time that under the conditions existing at the head of the lakes no sample market would work. Moreover, the question of mixing was always involved in the demand for sample markets; as I have stated before, the demand for sample markets was entirely a cloak under which the mixing privileges were sought to be obtained. I would ask the minister if possible to have the report of the royal grain commission printed and placed in the hands of members during the recess so that we may all be thoroughly acquainted with it before we come down to the session next year. It will be a voluminous 273i
report, I imagine; it will take quite a lot of study and should be in the hands not only of members but of the farmers of the West in order that they may thoroughly discuss it during the winter and make up their minds what changes should be made in that connection.


James Alexander Robb: The printing was ordered by
the House some days ago, and we hope the report will be ready and distributed before the end of the session.


Thomas Sales: That was only the interim
report.


James Alexander Robb: The other will be printed too.


Edward Joseph Garland: Will it not be necessary before prorogation to get the consent of the House to have this final report printed?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, my hon. friend is right
in that.


Edward Joseph Garland: Will the
minister undertake to have that done for us?


James Alexander Robb: I will inquire into the procedure and the legality of putting through such a resolution and will let my hon. friends know.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is a substantial allowance for printing in this department, and in any event, although it might be a stretching of the Governor General's warrant, the matter is sufficiently important to justify such a course. It will take a long time before any one can really get to know what the report means, but undoubtedly it is within the power of the government to have the report printed and distributed. How much have we already voted for this commission and how much has been spent to date?


James Alexander Robb: The amount voted and provided for by Governor General's warrants for 1923-24 was $125,000. The amount expended in 1923-24 was $118,812.01. There are unpaid accounts on hand, awaiting the passage of this estimate, amounting to $33,412.25. That should be added to the $118,000, and the accounts are not all in yet.


George Gibson Coote: Was not there something
voted last year?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, $50,000.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Then it stands this way: We voted $50,000 last year, we are now asked to vote another $50,000, and we have $75,000 covered by Governor General's warrants. That is $175,000. Is that correct?
Supply-Grain Trade


James Alexander Robb: I should think that is correct.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Is there anything else?


James Alexander Robb: That covers it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How is it this commission is so awfully expensive? What is the basis?


James Alexander Robb: The commission would have closed up long ago, had it not been for complaints that came to us from shippers on the prairies as to conditions at Vancouver. That added materially to the cost and length of the inquiry.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How are the counsel paid? Are they paid for every day the commission is still supposed to be functioning, or only for the days it sits?


James Alexander Robb: For the days it sits.
Sir HENR\ DRAYTON: Is my hon. friend really right about that? I cannot see how these figures can be so tremendous in that case. What are lawyers'1 fees to-d'ay, for example? I am afraid they are pretty expensive in this case.


James Alexander Robb: I am sorry I have not that information here but I can send it to my hon. friend to-morrow. If the committee desire further information I can get it and bring it down.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is keeping the commission now?


James Alexander Robb: They are now preparing their report.


Henry Lumley Drayton: How long is that going to take?


James Alexander Robb: It should be closed up any moment now.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think I am fair in saying that from week to week, almost from day to day, during this session, hon. gentlemen, particularly those to my left, have asked the Minister of Trade and Commerce when this report was coming down, and he was always "expecting it shortly". Can we not have anything definite as to when the report will be made?


James Alexander Robb: That is quite true, and the
minister has wired the commission repeatedly for their report. May I repeat, the report would have been before us long ago had it not been for the complaints that came to us from the growers of grain on the prairies as to conditions at Vancouver. That necessitated a considerable delay.
[Sir Henry Drayton. 1


Henry Lumley Drayton: Just as a
matter of general information. I would ask my hon. friend to tell us whether he has not yet come to the conclusion that government by commission is a pretty expensive thing?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, at does seem to be, but
we have had commissions under different governments for years past. I recall that when we were pressed by hon. gentlemen opposite to appoint a commission to investigate the grain trade, I stated-I was then Minister of Trade and Commerce-that there was no trade in Canada that had been investigated by commissions more frequently than the grain trade. But public opinion at that time demanded an investigation.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think, so far
as this particular commission is concerned, the circumstances warranted getting at the facts. I was in favour of it, but it does seem to me there should be some more control exercised by the departments over commissions. There is such a thing as commissions running wild.


James Alexander Robb: They are easier to start than
to stop.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, but there
should be some measure of control. There should be some ultimate amount of money that is available; that would soon stop them I do not know that this is as bad as the pulpwood commission, because these gentlemen have really something to inquire into. The others had not; that was something that could be determined by anybody, simply by sizing up the situation, and looking into the figures and the like. One set of people wanted one thing, and the others another. There was something to be inquired into by the grain commission, I admit that; but my hon. friend will agree with me that this commission has taken up an awful lot of time.


James Alexander Robb: We will agree on that.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It should have
closed up much more quickly, and it has cost the country a lot of money. If we are to have any more commissions, I do hope there will be something done to see that they will finish in a reasonable length of time and at a reasonable cost.


William Irvine: Is this commission still
taking evidence?


James Alexander Robb: No.


William Irvine: When did it cease to take
evidence?

Supply-Grain Trade


James Alexander Robb: I imagine prior to the time
when it prepared the interim report that is now under discussion.


William Irvine: Is there any hold at all on
this commission, or does it just go on as long as it likes and make its report when it wants to? Is the commission on pay now? Are they all drawing their salaries?


James Alexander Robb: I repeat again, the minister has been pressing the commission for their report. I do not know whether the expert officers are on pay, but the commissioners and the secretary, Mr. Deachman, are still on pay.


Robert Gardiner: I have not had the
privilege of looking through the interim report of the royal grain commission, but from the remarks made by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre, one would think that so far as conditions at Vancouver are concerned there was not very much wrong. On the present occasion I shall only say that that is hardly correct, because we have substantial information, to the effect that the situation at Vancouver is anything but what it should be. I trust that the interim report will be available to the members before the vote for an extension of credit to the Vancouver Harbour Commission comes up for consideration; but whether the report is then in the hands of members or not, I think we have information now in our hands that will be of very much interest to the members of the House, and more particularly to the government, who are responsible for placing the present members of the commission in the positions they now hold.
There is one other matter. We have had commissions looking into the grain trade before, but very often, unfortunately, we have not had a full report. Take the Price Waterhouse inquiry. Their report was never printed; it was simply pigeonholed. Before this vote passes, we want the assurance of the minister that when the report of the royal grain commission is finally submitted, it will be printed and put into the hands of members and made available to the people of this country.


James Alexander Robb: The printing of the interim
report has already been ordered, and it is the intention to have the other report printed. My hon. friend possibly was out when we had the discussion, and it was suggested that we should not await the meeting of parliament to have the report printed. As regards
the Price Waterhouse report, I do not know whether my hon. friend received a copy, but I myself arranged for some of his immediate associates to get a copy of it last year.


Thomas Sales: It took us seven years to
get it.


Thomas George McBride: I think when an hon.
member of this House makes a statement about a port like Vancouver, he should substantiate it more than the hon. gentleman who has just taker) his seat has done. He should have some foundation for his statement, and give it to this House.


Robert Gardiner: In reply to the hon.
member for Cariboo, the reason why I did not give further information to-night is because I am awaiting the bringing up of the resolution of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to extend a credit of $5,000,000 to the Vancouver Harbour Commission. I think that would be the proper time for me to lay before this House the information that I have received-information, I think, that will make the House stand aghast.


George Gibson Coote: I am going to ask the minister to allow this item to stand. M.y reason for doing that is the extremely large amount which we are asked to vote for this royal commission. If I have taken down correctly the figures that were given by the ex-Minister of Finance there has already been voted the sum of $175,000 and another $50,000 appears in the supplementary estimates, making $225,000 altogether.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is $175,000
altogether.


George Gibson Coote: I certainly understood the total to be $225,000.


James Alexander Robb: No.


George Gibson Coote: It is apparently $175,000.
Well, we do not know how many days the commission has sat. I am sure it could not have been more than 175 days and if so the cost must have been $1,000 a day. I really cannot understand why all this money has been spent. I think it is due the House that the minister should give us more complete information regarding this amount before he asks us to pass the item.


James Alexander Robb: I have repeatedly to-night
given hon. gentlemen the details of this vote and the amount expended. The expenditure was brought about and the commission appointed because of the demands of hon. gen-
Supply-Grain Trade

tlemen opposite. I resisted those demands and said the commission was not necessary. Now I propose to have this matter tested out to-night and to stand by the vote.


Edward Joseph Garland: The attitude of the minister is not at all fair to the members here or to the House. We are simply asking the minister for information. We want the details of the expenditure; they have not been given. We asked, for example, for the lawyers' fees and the amounts paid to the commissioners, and no information is available. We asked for further details and they are not given. Until that information is available I support the hon. member for Macleod.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I protest at the stand the minister has taken on this question. He is quite correct in saying that the request for the commission to be appointed came from this side of the House. The minister admits that he protested against the appointment of the commission. We are proving to-day that there was great need for its appointment.


James Alexander Robb: Then we must pay for it.


Henry Elvins Spencer: The minister himself will admit when the full report of the commission has been received that the commission should have started to work long before it did. Under the circumstances I think it is very unfair for the minister to hold this threat over the House that he is going to test its sentiment on this vote.


James Alexander Robb: I propose to ask hon. gentlemen whether or not they are going to vote for what they forced the government to undertake, and that was the appointment of this commission. I realize, as hon. gentlemen themselves do that the commission has cost too much but I knew it was going to cost money before it was appointed. That has been the experience with all commissions and there have been many in this country. I regret that I have not the details of the fees paid the lawyers before me, I have not the order in council, but 1 am ready to file it. The absence of that information is no reason why we should tie up this vote.


William Irvine: Perhaps it would be advisable to appoint another commission to investigate this commission and see whether it has been doing its work right.
Mr. 'GARLAND (Bow River): I really think it is due hon. members to have some more satisfactory statement from the minister. I think the minister did not mean what he said;
I Mr. Robb.?
I do not think he quite understood what was being asked for in perfect good faith. All we require are the details of this expenditure. We are quite satisfied to let the item pass if we get the details, we are clearly justified in asking for that information.


James Alexander Robb: There is no objection to my hon. friend getting details. If he will come down to the office we will show him the order in council. There is nothing to hide. The details will be given fully; they have got to be set out in the report of the Auditor General. I do not happen to have all the details here; in fact I do not know that all the accounts have been sent in yet to the department. We cannot give the details of accounts until we receive them.
Mr. CO'OTE: It is a veiy strange procedure to require us to vote the money before we geit the details of the expenditure. How are hon. gentlemen going to vote on this question without information? If the money has been spent illegally or in an outrageously lavish manner must the House vote the money in any event?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend is a reasonable man. How does he expect me to give him the details until the accounts are rendered? How can we pay the accounts until we get the money?


George Gibson Coote: I submit the minister has
given us very little detail as to how any of this money has been spent. So far as I have heard he has not told us how much the commissioners have drawn, how much the lawyers have drawn, how much has been spent for clerical fees or anything else. I would not object at all if the amount was not so large; but I cannot for the life of me understand where the money has gone or what it has been spent for. The minister would claim to be a reasonable man, I ask him to tell this House to-night if he has given us a real idea of what this commission has done to incur an expenditure of $175,000 which, as I suggested a few moments ago, must have been expended at the rate of $1,000 a day.


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: I was one of those who spoke in favour of the appointment of a royal commission. My reason for doing so was [DOT]to restore the confidence of our farmers who bad lost faith in the methods of marketing our wheat. I claim that even if this commission has spent $175,000, if its inquiry has the effect of solving the problems connected with the grain trade and restoring the confidence of our people in the marketing con-

Supply-Grain Trade
ditions of our wheat, it will prove to be the most profitable expenditure ever made in this country. I argued in favour of the appointment of this body on account of the lack of Confidence that existed among our farming community, especially in the province of Manitoba, as to the conditions under which our wheat is marketed. Rightly or wrongly that feeling existed and if the commission [DOT]restores that faith the money expended will [DOT]have been spent to good advantage.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I wonder if I
could make a suggestion to the minister. I realize that 'he cannot have absolutely full details with respect to the commission but there are some details he can give. He can at least give the rate of remuneration to the commissioners and to the lawyers, and some idea as to how much has been spent. We do not want the figures to the last detail, I am *sure that hon. gentlemen who have been Speaking on this matter are not expecting [DOT]that, but we should have such information *as will give ,a reasonable idea as to where the money is going and why the expenditure is so large.


James Alexander Robb: I will be very glad to send
copies of the different orders in council to my hon. friend and to the leader of the other party.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


An hon. MEMBER:: Which one?


Henry Lumley Drayton: Let there be
no invidious distinction.


James Alexander Robb: The chairman of the commission is Mr. Justice Turgeon who receives no pay but gets his expenses. The other members of the commission are Dean Rutherford, Professor McGibbon, and the secretary, Mr. Deachman, of Calgary. It is quite reasonable, as my hon. friend says, that I should state what the commissioners are receiving. I am speaking from memory.


Henry Lumley Drayton: That is good
enough.


James Alexander Robb: It is not fair that I should be asked if a man is receiving $20 a day when he may be getting $15, or $25. I think the rate is $20 or $25 and the usual living allowance. Then they engaged the grain expert. I do not know what the lawyer was paid, but I recall that a lawyer that we were urged by men interested in the grain trade to hire insisted on getting $150 a day, and we did not take him. I am not sure whether we are paying
$50 or $75 a day for the lawyer in charge while he is following the case. I will file all details of what we agreed to pay, but I cannot file what was paid until the accounts are rendered.


Robert Gardiner: Will the minister promise that the full report will be printed when it is brought in?


James Alexander Robb: If it is the wish of the House. My hon. friend from Bow River (Mr. Garland) intimated-and I think he was quite correct-that we had to have the authority of the House to print the report, but I think it was the consensus of opinion of hon. members opposite that we should take the responsibility and have it printed.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Hear, hear.


James Alexander Robb: We will be prepared to take that responsibility and have it printed.


George Gibson Coote: Will the minister be good enough to have a copy of the evidence taken before this commission made available to members of parliament when they come here next session? It would not cost any more. They must have those copies in their possession, and members who would have to study this report, and to study the new act next year should have a copy of the evidence as well as the report of the commission. It does not need to be printed, but it should be in the House and available to members of parliament.


James Alexander Robb: The evidence will be tabled; but let me point out-and I do it in all kindness-the inconsistency of hon. gentlemen who ask us to go to the further expense of printing the mass of evidence which the commission has been taking for months.


Edward Joseph Garland: We are not asking that.


James Alexander Robb: The taking of the evidence
added enormously to the cost of the commission. They had to have a staff of shorthand writers with them all the time, and you do not engage shorthand waiters at ordinary rates. They have a standard rate and we must pay it. Surely we are not going to be asked to assume the responsibility of ordering the printing of this evidence until hon. gentlemen have an opportunity of seeing it when it is tabled. They will then take the responsibility of saying whether it is worth while printing or not.


George Gibson Coote: I was not asking to have it
printed. I was asking to have a copy of the
Supply-Grain Trade

typewritten evidence, which the government must have in its possession, left in the Library, where it would be available to hon. members.


James Alexander Robb: We will be very glad to table anything that is received.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Towards the construction of a grain elevator at Prince Rupert, British Columbia, $150,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Has my hon.
friend determined to build a grain elevator at Prince Rupert at present?


James Alexander Robb: I think so.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Has the minister considered the additional cost to the railways in the first instance, in the lack of boats?


James Alexander Robb: I think it is the railways that have asked for it.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I cannot believe it.


James Alexander Robb: It has been represented to us that it will be a splendid outlet for the grain of northern Alberta.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It is already
established in Hansard, by an answer made this session, that the movement to Prince Rupert entails greatly increased' mileage. Take the common point, Edmonton, my recollection is-and I speak from recollection- that there is an extra mileage of 208 miles which certainly costs something. What is really behind it? The British Columbia election is over.


James Alexander Robb: That-had nothing to do with it.


Mr. STORK:: I might be able to give hon. members information with regard to this elevator. To the best of my recollection, the distance from Edmonton to Prince Rupert is 127 miles greater than from Edmonton to Vancouver, but the terminal rates are exactly the same. The Dominion government has a tremendous capital invested in the National Railways and in the terminals at Prince Rupert. The road was formerly the Grand Trunk Pacific. They have a very large investment there. They have the best grade on the continent of America. The rates are the same from Winnipeg or Edmonton to Prince Rupert as they are from either one of those points to the city of Vancouver. Hon. members will have noticed the tremendous increase in the grain movement through the Pacific port of Vancouver. The bulk of that grain has gone to the Orient. Prince Rupert,

being the northern port, is the logical port of shipment of grain to the Orient. At the present time through the port of Prince Rupert large quantities of lumber are being sent to the Orient. The Canadian Government Merchant Marine makes a trip from Vancouver to Yokohama in 19 days. The same boat can make the trip from Yokohama to Prince Rupert in 16 days. There is every reason in the world why the Canadian National Railways should secure some of this business. They only get a portion of the grain business going into Vancouver. When they develop their own terminal in Prince Rupert they are developing the traffic over their own railway. The rates from Prince Rupert to Liverpool are the same as the rates from Vancouver to Liverpool. We enjoy equal rates to any port in the world, in comparison with the port of Vancouver. I have voiced my opinions in this House before, but I may say that from the standpoint of common sense, logic and good business for our own railways, the proposal to develop the port of Prince Rupert is justified. I am sorry my hon. friend mentioned the British Columbia elections. We had not thought of the elections in connection with the elevator. We have been for three years actively engaged on this work. I have received and presented to the government resolutions from boards of trade from all over northern Alberta and the northern part of British Columbia. We have had three non-partisan delegations consisting of men of all shades of politics down here from that country to urge this project . This is not in any sense of the word a political project. It is purely one of sound economics, and one which will justify itself, if this government decides to erect the elevator there and if this House is good enough to pass the vote.


Henry Lumley Drayton: My hon. friend is not quite right in his facts-at least if he is right the department is wrong.
12 m. I do not know which is right, but I am inclined to think the department is right and he is wrong. At page 3222 of this year's Hansard the question is asked:
What are the railway mileages from Edmonton to (a) Vancouver; (b) Prince Rupert?
The answer is given:
(a) 765.47; (b) 956.90.
The next question is:
What are the railway mileages from Calgary to (a) Vancouver; (b) Prince Rupert?
And we have the answer given in a variety of ways:
2. (a) Via Mirror, Camrose and Terminal Junction, 993.07; via Mirror, Camrose and Tofield, 1,006.22; via Munson Junction, Camrose and Terminal June-

Supply-Grain Elevators
tion, 1,028.50; via Munson Junction, Camrose and Tofield, 1,038.95.	(b) Via Mirror, Camrose and
Terminal Junction, 1,184.40; via Mirror, Camrose and Tofield, 1,197.55; via Munson Junction, Camrose and Terminal Junction, 1,219.83; via Munson Junction, Camrose and Tofield, 1,230.28.
In every instance, taking every possible combination, the mileage is less to Vancouver. It is perfectly plain, when we take the first question in regard to the railway mileages from Edmonton to Vancouver and Prince Rupert, that the difference is almost 200 miles. It is said that the railway management are back of this. All I can say then is that we have for the first time some tangible results from the efforts of Mr. Dawson, one of the railway directors; but no one who was thinking of the general results of the system could urge it. Railway mileages, with costs as they are to-day, are a very serious thing.


Samuel William Jacobs: What about grades?


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is practically no difference whatever in the grades. We have theoretically a .4 per cent grade on the Grand Trunk, and in most instances it is more than theoretical, it is true. In some cases it is not .4. It is a good grade; there is no question about that. There is a first class grade on the Grand Trunk Pacific and also a first-rate grade on the line to Vancouver. The grade there is not quite as good as the grade to Prince Rupert but it is so good that they can run 60 cars in and out of Vancouver on the National line the whole way to the divide.


Mr. LUCAS:: In view of that excellent grade is there any reason why there should be a mountain freight rate?


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. member is getting into another question which would open up an entirely different debate. It has nothing to do with the question under consideration whether it is mountain or prairie or anything else; distance means money and money in this case means extra taxation for the people. Wherever you get extra mileage you must have an extra cost and everyone knows it. On the line out from Vancouver a train of 60 cars can be carried on the National while on the Canadian Pacific they must be broken and made up in smaller units before they can cross the divide. Now, the government might just as well understand what they are doing. If they are going to build an elevator there they must increase the terminals, and the terminals at Prince Rupert were built at great expense. I had occasion to go into the matter in 1916 to ascertain what money had been spent there
and it is unbelievable how much was actually expended in winning a terminal from the rocks and the granite which are encountered at that point. The terminals there cost a vast sum and when you get down the hillside they must be enlarged. When the war was on we needed, or thought we needed at any rate, with transportation difficulties, some more wharfage accommodation. The work was not gone on with simply for the reason that it was so expensive owing to the depth of water. There are beautiful mountains on the shore and the line of mountains is carried right into the water so that you may go out a few feet and have great difficulty in getting bottom at any depth which anyone, actuated by any commercial sense, would think sufficiently reasonable to warrant the building of a dock. The government might as well realize the situation. Some gentlemen opposite think that a dock is not needed, and I daresay they do not want it; I think they could put the elevator well away from the dock for all the use that will be made of it if the railway company has the slightest opportunity of hauling the grain without the expense of the extra 200 miles. Now, is this a time to start this elevator? Is there any real reason for it? Of course, boards of trade will say they want it; but, then, board's of trade want all sorts of things all over the country. Surely, however, this House ought to demand a better rerson than representations of boards of trade before committing itself to a policy of this kind and opening up a new grain port which entails a further movement of almost 200 miles in a district which now runs at a deficit. There should be some real reason for this work apart from the unsatisfactory statement that some boards of trade asked for it. Under present conditions, to suggest the vote is absolutely wrong, and I must ask the minister to let us know what the real reasons are. Here we are going to spend 15,000,000 more money in Vancouver to fit it up for the grain trade, and the minister is right in that direction, because there is going to be a tremendous amount of business at that port and it will be a source of great relief to the prairies from freight rates and the long haul. But let me point out that there is another mileage given. As the hon. member (Mr. Stork) pointed out, there is some movement of grain to the Orient. It is not very big and I wish it were bigger. But there is that movement, and there is no doubt that it is shorter by water from Prince Rupert than from Vancouver. But most of the grain we are shipping out of Vancouver to-day is going through the Panama canal, and the dis-
Supply-Grain Elevators

tances from the western entrance of the canal to Vancouver and to Prince Rupert respectively, are 4,045 and 4,325 nautical miles, and we have to add approximately a third to get the land mileage.


George Perry Graham: I know my hon. friend is not very friendly to the Prince Rupert scheme of the Grand Trunk Pacific, but so long as we oppose every proposition to give the Grand Trunk Pacific traffic, so long will the Grand Trunk Pacific give us a deficit. The Grand Trunk Pacific was not intended to be sawed off at both ends; the original scheme was to have a line of dhips connecting at Prince Rupert with the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Transcontinental; and although conditions have somewhat changed, yet the fact stands, and cannot be controverted, that the route from eastern or from western Canada to the Orient via Prince Rupert is shorter than any other route by a good many miles. If we are to export our grain or other products by the shortest route at the lowest cost, Prince Rupert must be developed and utilized ; there is no question about that. My hon. friend also forgets that there is a vast territory which, when opened up, will be tributary to Prince Rupert and will be many miles closer to Prince Rupert than to Vancouver. The grain shipments from the Peace river country to-day have to go around to Edmonton, which city is of course closer to Vancouver than to Prince Rupert, but when that country is opened up, as it must be, it will be miles closer to Prince Rupert than to Vancouver by way of Edmonton.


George Gibson Coote: If the line is built from the Peace river country to the Grand Trunk Pacific, will it not tap the main line east of
Red Pass junction?


George Perry Graham: That would be giving my hon. friend some information which I have not yet got.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. member is quite right.


George Perry Graham: He may be quite wrong.


Henry Lumley Drayton: If he happens to be right it makes all the difference.


George Perry Graham: I do not know that he is right. But I say again, the Peace river district will be closer to Prince Rupert than to Vancouver by way of Edmonton.


Henry Lumley Drayton: No.


George Perry Graham: I think if my hon. friend hunts up the mileage he will say yes.


Henry Lumley Drayton: It depends on the answer to the question put by my hon.
friend from Macleod (Mr. Coote).


George Perry Graham: My hon. friend wants to find out in advance. No one knows yet where the line will be built into the Peace river country. But there are portions of the western country that will be absolutely tributary to Prince Rupert if the grain is to be shipped to the Orient; there is no question about that. I look forward to the time when Prince Rupert will be a very busy port on the Pacific coast with trade both going to and coming from the Orient, because when the people in the Orient find this route opened up they will ship their goods by Prince Rupert, for it is the shorter line, and we will get the haul all tlhe way down My hon. friend made a remark which absolutely proves my contention respecting the superiority of Prince Rupert over most of our harbours; he gave the depth of water. Other harbours have to be dredged year in and year out; Prince Rupert harbour needs practically no dredging at all, and in that respect is a cheaper harbour to operate than any other in the Dominion. While we are beginning with an elevator in a comparatively small way, yet I look to the time when, as the western country develops, we will not only be using Vancouver but also Prince Rupert for oriental trade.


Henry Lumley Drayton: In the first
instance, whether I am against the Grand Trunk Pacific line or Prince Rupert or anything else has nothing to do with the question. I have not made the Statements that I well could make about the whole subject-


George Perry Graham: And that I well could give a reply to.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not think you could.


George Perry Graham: Quite easily.


Henry Lumley Drayton: However, I
should like to see if we cannot once in a while get something done by this government on its merits, and my personal attitude can have nothing whatever to do with the question one way or the other; I should have thought the hon. Minister of Railways would know that. I am going to take up his last point first. He is perfectly right, there will be no dredging required in Prince Rupert harbour. He can go a little bit further, he can take most harbours along the whole Pacific coast and he will have no dredging to

Supply-Grain Elevators
do. But he will find any number of places where he will be able to build docks without having to pay a prohibitive cost; this he cannot do at Prince Rupert.


Alfred Stork: You are entirely wrong.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I think it will
be found that I am entirely right. If we want to go into this question of cost all we need do is turn up the accounts which were put in by the company itself in connection with the work done and which are all to be found in Professor Swain's report, where full information is given. I am not giving the House any information of my own; those are facts which were established by the company's own figures. His next point is that this is the shortest route. I want to be fair to my hon. friend, but the ridiculousness of his contention is apparent from the claim put forward by the local member himself. He says that via the Panama canal Prince Rupert gets just as good a rate as Vancouver, and yet there is a difference of some 300 nautical miles on that movement against Prince Rupert as compared with Vancouver.


George Perry Graham: Was I discussing traffic
by the Panama canal?


Henry Lumley Drayton: No, my hon.
friend was not.


George Perry Graham: I was particularly discussing oriental traffic.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Of course, it
would be fatal to his argument if he mentioned the Panama at all. He confined himself to the Orient because it was the shorter trip, and I just pointed out that the answer to his argument in connection with the shorter mileage to Prince Rupert from the Orient is to be found in Hansard just a few lines before my hon. friend speaks, where the local member himself says that the rates via Panama to Prince Rupert are just as good as to Vancouver. If the longer route of 300 nautical miles passing by Vancouver and going away north to Prince Rupert is just as good, there canot be very much in the nautical mileage difference between Prince Rupert and Vancouver to the Orient. When we approach things, not in a political sense, but in a business sense, we all know that land mileage is what hurts in transportation. What is crushing trade in Canada to-day? Land transportation costs.


George Perry Graham: And ocean transportation
costs, and lake transportation costs.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Yes, none of
them are very good, but my hon. friend cannot say very much about railway costs. He is not in a position there to say that overcharges are being made. He justifies those costs, and his railway board, because the cost of rail operation is so great, and that is a cost which depends upon the mileage involved in the movement. There is where the real thing is. If the government are determined to put this matter through without any proper consideration, without the reading of one report from an engineer or any one in the trade which will show that any one will be helped, all right. But the question as to where that connection from the Peace river would come in is just the other thing that shows the absurdity of my hon. friend's argument. On paper it is fine, but there is a joint right of way down the pass for both these systems and the chances are very much in favour of that connection being made on that joint right of way. If it is so made, then the movement is still practically 200 miles shorter to Vancouver.


George Gibson Coote: It might be better to wait
until this line is decided on. If the line from Peace river is to tap this line west of Red Pass junction, what the Minister of Railways says would be quite correct: Prince Rupert would be the natural outlet. But if on the other hand the line from Peace river taps this main line east of Red Pass junction, then Vancouver, as the ex-Minister of Finance says, would be much nearer the Peace river country. I presume this elevator is to be built out of the moneys in the elevator account, which the Minister of Trade and Commerce said was the case in connection with the Halifax elevator. Is that correct?


James Alexander Robb: I do not recall having said
that. Indeed, I do not know what my hon. friend refers to as elevator account.


George Gibson Coote: When we were discussing
the revenues which the government had received from the running of elevators and from the handling of the grain trade by the Board of Grain Commissioners I understood him to say that these elevators had all been charged up in this one account; that is, they had been built out of current revenue from the grain trade.


James Alexander Robb: Oh no, surely no minister
said that. The money was advanced to build these elevators. There could not be any revenue until the elevator was built.
Supply-Grain Elevators


George Gibson Coote: We were given to understand that since then he had apparently charged them up to revenue. If this elevator is to be built at the suggestion of the Canadian National Railways, should they not advance the money? It should not be charged up to our elevator account.


George Perry Graham: I suppose the Canadian
Pacific advanced the money to build all the elevators in their case! It is the sarnie thing.


George Gibson Coote: No, but I do not think the ourremit revenue from the elevators should be used for these experiments which are carried on at Halifax and Prince Rupert.


George Perry Graham: You would never build
an elevator if you must know what it is before you start. It is more or less of an experiment, as all business is an experiment.


George Gibson Coote: I would like to know something more about -this elevator before we start it. What is its estimated cost, and what is to be its capacity? I ask that because in connection with the Edmonton elevator there was an amount voted last year, there was an amount in the main estimates this year, and there is now an amount in the supplementary estimates. Before we start these elevators we should know what the total cost is going to be.


James Alexander Robb: You cannot establish costs
until you have an appropriation to enable the engineers to visit the ground and prepare plans.


George Gibson Coote: Does the minister suggest
that $150,000 will be required for that?


James Alexander Robb: No, but we generally make
a liberal appropriation for that purpose. In the case of the Halifax elevator, and also in the case of the Edmonton elevator. $200,000 was voted the first year.


George Gibson Coote: That is why I ask what the total cost is going to be.


James Alexander Robb: If my hon. friend can tell me how to prepare the plans without getting an appropriation to pay for it, I shall be glad to have a suggestion.


Thomas George McBride: A good deal has been said to-night about Vancouver. I think everyone who lives in the West is proud of Vancouver, but Vancouver is not the only place where the sun dhines. There are other places just as deserving of consideration. This House last year voted $50,000 to make surveys in the Peace river country, and neither the minister nor anyone else is in a position yet to 
say where the outlet will be from that country. If that outlet is on the Grand Trunk Pacific, near Prince George, where most of us expect it will be and where we think it should be, it will bring the Peace river country about 200 miles nearer to Prince Rubert than Vancouver. Why should the people who are in there not have the benefit of that haul of 200 miles? I have been through that country and I know there are men in there who have in their granaries the grain for the last three or four years because they cannot get an outlet for it. I think it is only a matter of a short time until this government will see their way clear to give these people an outlet; I know they are working hard in that direction. Over 100 miles of rails are at present piled at Prince George to build a line into the Peace river country; they have been lying there idle for the last five years. Why should this be the case when the people need the railway facilities? We all hope that it will only be a short time when there will be an outlet -from the Peace river country. It has been promised by every government, for the last fifteen years, and if the government does not keep faith with the people how can they expect the people to keep fatoh with them? The surveys have been made and the railway engineers are simply checking over the surveys before they decide where the outlet shall be. I think this elevator is coming to Prince Rupert. Prince Rupert has got very little in the past; Vancouver has got a great deal.
I think the government are using good judgment in the matter.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: I am informed that Sir
Henry Thornton recommended the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert. Am I right?


George Perry Graham: I think that is correct.
Prince Rupert is Canadian National territory, a Canadian National investment, a Canadian National city, and it is natural that the Canadian National would like to see development take place there. It has a large amount of property in the vicinity of Prince Rupert.


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: After observing the way Sir Henry Thornton handled the estimates of the Canadian National Railways before the special committee, I do not think this House should hesitate one minute to build an elevator at Prince Rupert if he is in favour of it. My hon. friend, (Sir Henry Drayton) may not agree with everything I say in this respect, but I think Sir Henry Thornton is one of the far-sighted men in Canada. I have been informed by the hon. member for Skeena

Supply-Grain Elevators
(Mr. Stork) that Sir Henry Thornton is in favour of the building of this elevator, and if Sir Henry Thornton is in favour of it then I am in favour of it.


Mr. KING (Kootenay):: Sir Henry Thornton has spent some time in that northern country. Any one who is familiar with Prince George and has travelled through that country will realize that there is a very large area there which is suitable for mixed farming and which will grow good wheat. They will also realize that there has been a very considerable settlement taking place in that section.
As far as the elevator at Prince Rupert is concerned it would serve a very useful purpose, if it served that country alone. I know whereof I speak because I have travelled over that country, motoring back and forth, and there is a country in there some three hundred odd miles in extent from Fort George west along the Grand Trunk Pacific on both sides of the line, which in itself would be sufficient to warrant this expenditure at Prince Rupert. In the matter of grain shipments to the Orient, possibly hon. members have not been following the grain movement in that direction. Comparing shipments last year with this, you will find that last year there was shipped to the Orient 4,000,000 bushels; this year the latest figures that I have seen show a shipment of 15,000,000 bushels. In the oriental trade alone Canada this year did almost as much business from the western provinces as it did the year before for both the United Kingdom and the Orient, which shows the tremendous opportunities for growth in that direction alone.
In the matter of pier construction, I happened to be in Prince Rupert last year and there I saw a magnificent pier with huge freight sheds, but no business; there was nothing doing. That pier, I am quite satisfied, is capable of serving an elevator such as will be constructed. I have no hesitation, knowing the country of northern British Columbia, and knowing the facilities that can easily be had in the port of Prince Rupert, in recommending to the House this vote of $150,000.


John Livingstone Brown: In regard to the present
shipment of grain over the Canadian National Railway to Vancouver, last winter if I remember rightly, the Canadian National was suffering from a severe handicap in the matter of accommodation for its cars at that port. Is there any possibility of that handicap being overcome? There was a handicap of something like $13 per car that the Canadian National was under at Vancouver.


John Warwick King: The situation will be improved when the other area in the harbour is opened up.


John Livingstone Brown: In this matter of constructing elevators, I think sometimes we go on the wrong principle. I do not like to approve of the idea of building elevators simply because some town thinks it needs one.
I do not approve of building an elevator at Halifax, for instance, simply because Halifax thinks it has a right to share in the grain trade. It is entirely in violation of all economic laws that such a thing should be done. Neither would I be in favour of building an elevator at Prince Rupert simply because Prince Rupert thinks it might benefit by the building of an elevator. I think in handling the grain trade we should try to direct that trade along the lines of least resistance, because if we continue to run in violation of economic laws, we are bound to have that reflected in the end upon those who produce the grain.
I would not, however, like to oppose the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert without further information than I have at present. I am quite prepared to believe that the grain trade in the West will in the end demand an outlet both at Prince Rupert and at Vancouver. The argument advanced that the rates are the same, however, does not make any impression upon my mind, for if the rates are the same it simply means the Canadian National Railways have to carry the grain that much greater distance, and thereby make that much less profit in carrying grain. There might be other considerations that would warrant the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert, and to those considerations I, for my part, woulr^ be prepared to give due weight, but I would like to be assured that it would be for the ultimate benefit, not simply of Prince Rupert, but of the Canadian National system as a whole, and of the property which the Canadian National Railways have in that port. Only on that assurance would I see fit at the present time to support the building of an elevator at Prince Rupert. I believe that the present situation is being adequately met by the service that is being rendered through Vancouver, although it might very well be that ultimately it would be desirable to have the port of Prince Rupert developed.


Mr ROSS (Kingston):: I do not feel like
saying a word either for or against the building of elevators, but not having been in the House all evening I would like to ask the minister if he has given the House any figures, or if he has any figures, as to the
Supply-Grain Elevators

business done at Prince Rupert from the sea. We know there is quite a long pier there; I have seen it. But is the pier going to be made the reason for building an elevator, and when the elevator is built, will that be the reason for building a new railway into the Peace river country, and so on? If the minister has any figures in regard to the business done over this pier at Prince Rupert, I should like to have them.


James Alexander Robb: I have no statistics as to the
grain handled at Prince Rupert, because there is no accommodation there to handle that grain. I think my colleague, the Minister of Public Works, gave the best reason why we should put a small elevator at Prince Rupert, namely that it will enable the settlers along both sides of the railway east of Prince Rupert to ship their grain through that port.


Arthur Edward Ross: I am not very
much impressed by what has been said from the other side of the House, or by what has been said by my hon. friend from Cariboo on this side, because I know that when he gets through a vote for this post office, he would support a lot of money being spent at Prince Rupert. I would like to have some information, not in regard to the grain, because I know that it is not moving yet, but as to what traffic of any kind is being done at that port.


James Alexander Robb: I regret I have not that information for my hon. friend.


Mr. KELLNER:: I would like to support
this vote for an elevator at Prince Rupert. I am inclined to think that you will never kncourage a trade route until you have provided facilities for carrying on the trade that will develop over that route. While we have not any grain trade at the present moment at Prince Rupert, it is only reasonable to suppose that we could not have any until we provide the elevator, for there is no way of carrying it on. I do not know that we would be justified at the present moment in building a large elevator at that port, but this is a very modest request, to say the least and it has been our experience in the past that ordinary ships sailing between ports is our cheapest method of transportation. We have always found that when tramp steamers have found it necessary to come in to take the peak load off, whether it is grain or other freight, the grain rates have gone up, and I believe that if you provide the necessary facilities for carrying the ordinary freight between ports, you will get 
lower rates on grain and other commodities. As far as I am concerned, I am entirely in accord with the proposal for putting in an elevator at Prince Rupert.


Simon Fraser Tolmie: I have listened with a good deal of interest to the discussion of the possibilities of agricultural development in northern British Columbia, and I want to endorse most heartily what has been said in that regard. There is a large area of country up there which will become a considerable wealth producer just as soon as it is properly opened up and has an exit for its products. As far as the oriental trade is concerned1 it has hardly commenced; there are immense possibilities in connection with it. The port of Prince Rupert has a real advantage as far as shipments westward across the Pacific are concerned. We have too very large investments in Prince Rupert. We have a railway built to that port and if we are going to let it remain idle and wait for good times we are never going to get anywhere. I am a thorough believer in the intelligent expenditure of money along such lines as will develop these investments so as to make them profitable instead of having a deficit from year to year. Under these circumstances I will support the building of this elevator.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: I favour the expenditure for this purpose. I think it is highly desirable that there should be a government elevator at Prince Rupert not only because of the natural advantages at that port, but also because it will be some curb, perhaps, on the activities of the Vancouver people who are in charge of the grain handling system there. It is not right that by reason of a monopoly people are able to take advantage of the farmers of western Canada. I do not look for much development along the Prince Rupert line for a great many years, but certainly an elevator at Prince Rupert will greatly advantage the farmers of western Canada and particularly those of the province of Alberta. While speaking on the subject of elevators I think there is another point in the province of Alberta which is in dire need of an elevator and that is the city of Lethbridge. I think the requirements of Lethbridge in that regard should not have been overlooked so long. The member for Lethbridge (Mr. Jelliff) is fully aware of the situation, and I heartily agree with the demand for this elevator which he has presented to parliament for a number of years. With respect to this particular item I think the minister should give us some idea of what he proposes. He say.3 he is going to build a small elevator, bki

Ev.pply-Grain Elevators
surely no business organization would vote $150,000 and afterwards develop their idea of what they proposed to do. Surely the minister can tell us the contemplated total expenditure, the capacity of the proposed elevator, and such other information as will enable us to form some idea as to the nature of the government's proposition. That must be within the knowledge of the minister. It surely does not require $150,000 for the government's architects to draw the necessary plans.


James Alexander Robb: I cannot state the exact cost until the plans have been drawn in their entirety. My hon. friend lives in a country where they build elevators. He knows that elevators are built so that they can be enlarged. I imagine the capacity of this elevator is not to exceed 500,000 bushels. My hon. friend has probably prepared contracts and doubtless knows that the cost of an elevator depends primarily upon the expenditure involved in building the foundations, the cost of getting stone and cement. It is estimated that these elevators can be built at around 40 cents a bushel. That is the yard stick you start out with. But the expenditure depends primarily on the cost of the foundations.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Your foundations should be cheap in that locality.


James Alexander Robb: I imagine so.


Henry Lumley Drayton: There is lots of rock there.


James Alexander Robb: And then there is the cost of stone and cement for the building. We can therefore only give a rough estimate.


Robert Gardiner: Under whose control will this elevator be placed when it is built? Will it be under the Board of Grain Commissioners or some harbour commissioners?


James Alexander Robb: Well, the vote is asked by the department of Trade and Commerce and the Grain Commission are under that department.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The Minister of Railways was asked the question as to whether Sir Henry Thornton had recommended this elevator. He gave us a lot of reasons why he ought to have recommended it but did not state that he had done so. Will my hon. friend kindly state whether he has done so or not?


James Alexander Robb: I am sure that he will after all these arguments.


George Perry Graham: If my hon. friend will read Hansard to-morrow he will see that is one of the first things I said.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I am glad to hear it. I did not catch the statement at the time it was made.


Robert Gardiner: Will the minister undertake to say, before this vote is passed, that this elevator when built will not be under the control of any harbour board or any such body as that?


James Alexander Robb: My hon. friend will not expect me to give an undertaking of that kind. I do not know who is going to administer the department in five, ten or fifteen years from now. I am telling him that the vote is going through in connection with the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Grain Commission are under that department. For the moment therefore, the matter has to do with the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Grain Commission, I cannot give any undertaking for the future.


Robert Gardiner: I appreciate the position^ the minister is in with regard to the future, but I think the government before long will have to adopt a policy of a more or less permanent character in the matter of the control of the government elevators throughout Canada. I think that possibly the building of this elevator may be of some very great advantage to the farmers of western Canada. I do not know that it is quite necessary to put it up at present, but the time is very close when it will be required. The minister and the government, of course, must realize the important fact that the moment this elevator is placed in Prince Rupert the settlers in the Peace river block will demand a railway to get their grain out to that particular point. So if the government propose to go on with the construction of this elevator they must make up their minds to provide railway communication for the people of that section who need such communication very badly.


Oliver Robert Gould: The minister has stated that 40 cents was an approximate price per bushel for the cost of this elevator. I would not for a moment imagine that the minister or the government had consented to the erection of an elevator at Prince Rupert until they were in possession of complete plans and specifications of the plant. Consequently they should know what the estimated cost of a plant in accordance with certain specifications should be at this time. The hon. member (Mr. Shaw) asked that question but I do not think he received a very specific reply. However, the information would be very interesting to hon. members from the West and I should like to stress its importance. While on the subject I wish to inform the minister that
Supply-Grain Elevators

his estimate of 40 cents a bushel is 10 cents a bushel less than the estimated price mentioned in the Price Waterhouse report for the handling of grain, or for the handling of grain at Fort William for that matter. I should like to remind him that between 20 and 30 cents a bushel was the price given on a contract for the erection of elevators at Fort William.


James Alexander Robb: Yes, but that was in a period when labour only cost one-half the amount it does to-day, and when cement was much cheaper. My hon. friend is quite right as respects the conditions of ten or fifteen years ago.


Oliver Robert Gould: The hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Stork) has pointed out the exceptional advantages which the port of Prince Rupert affords, in that there will be deep water right alongside the proposed structure, and there .will be very little necessity for the driving of piles or the construction of works tributary to the harbour as was the case at Fort William and various other Canadian ports. Consequently I would say that 40 cents a bushel should be considered the maximum expenditure necessary at that point, and in all probability the estimate may have to be reduced.


James Alexander Robb: I have never been there so
am not prepared to offer an opinion.


Oliver Robert Gould: I am taking the word of the hon. member for Skeena who has been there. I should like to know what the statement of the surveyor, or those who have drawn the plans, is in connection with this elevator.


James Alexander Robb: If my hon. friend had been
in his seat all the evening listening to the debate he would have heard me make the statement a number of times, not merely once or twice, that we cannot have plans until we get the vote. But the minister surely will have the plans and all the specifications and know what it is going to cost before he gives the contract.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Further amount required for the completion of the government elevator at Edmonton, $420,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: How much
longer does the minister want to sit to-night?


James Alexander Robb: If I could clear up Trade and Commerce, I would be through. This particular item was discussed on the main estimates.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I wanted to
know how late the minister wanted to sit.


James Alexander Robb: I want to pass two or three
items now.


Mr. CALDWELL:: Unfortunately I was
in a committee that sat until after twelve o'clock to-night, and I was not here when the other item came up. I came in during the discussion and did not participate; but I wish to express the opinion of an eastern man who, I confess, does not know very much about the elevator situation in the West.


An hon. MEMBER:: This is not potatoes.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: That is why I got up; it is not potatoes. I see no good reason why we should not build an elevator at terminal points where grain is shipped to other points. On account of the fact that an hon. member interjects potatoes into the discussion, I am going to deal with that situation.


George Newcombe Gordon: The hon. member will be out of order.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: We are voting money
to build storage elevators to store the farmers' grain till they are ready to ship for export. This is not done with regard to our exports. Our internal storages are built by the farmers or shippers themselves with private capital. We require immense storage for our potatoes. The government has provided us with a terminal warehouse-not a terminal elevator-at St. John, at quite a moderate expense. There is no question that it has been of wonderful benefit to the farmers. We did not get it till two years ago. If we are to build storages for the farmers of the West, I think we will have to ask the government to finance the building of our storages for potatoes in the East. The thing is comparable, there is no question about it. Why should we be compelled to finance our storages and at the same time help to build storages for the farmers of the West?


Charles-Philippe Beaubien: I understand the hon.
member wants the government to build a potato warehouse, or a warehouse for supplies produced by the farmers. Is the hon. gentleman aware, according to the information we received from the Minister of Trade and Commerce the other day, that the grain trade is paying for the whole cost of the storage houses or elevators as they might be called, that are built at different points?


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: We will admit that.
Our potato trade is also paying for the terminal facilities provided by the government. We will admit too that we are willing to pay

Supply-Trade and Commerce
for the internal storages for our potatoes, but it is one thing to pay for a service when you get it, in proportion to the service you get, and another to put up the money for the storage before you use it. We have to go and dig up the capital to build our storages internally. On the other hand, we are putting up the capital to build the storage for internal grain elevators which are not at ports of export. We are quite willing to pay for the service we get. However, we have to go out and dig up the money for the storages ourselves, and have to help to raise the capital to build the storage for the farmers of the West.	It may be that at a later
date we will be coming for grants for our storage.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: Will the minister tell us the
total capacity of the elevator at Edmonton, and' the total cost?


James Alexander Robb: Mr. C. P. Howe, engineer,
estimated the cost of the elevator at $1,415,000. The expenditure in 1923-24 amounted to $100,282.19. The expenditure to June 30. 1924, including progress estimate on hand, not yet paid, is $541,025.13, making a total of $641,307.32.
The size of the elevator is not mentioned, but I think that was fully discussed on the main estimates. Hon. members will find it if they refer to the discussion when the main estimates were put through.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To recoup certain New Zealanders for losses sustained as a result of the action of the Canadian trade commissioner in New Zealand, $1,778.80.
James Alexander Robb: The trade commissioner at
Auckland issued five cheques amounting to $1,808 to New Zealanders -who were coming to Canada. He took their sterling and they wanted Canadian money. He said, "I will arrange that," and he gave them his cheque in return for the money, and when his cheque was presented at his bank in Canada, the Dominion Bank, Vancouver, the bank refused payment, the bank claiming that Mr. Beddoe's account was not in funds. We have had a very favourable trade with New Zealand. Mr. Beddoe was retired under the act and had been retired before this transaction was discovered. He is entitled to an annuity, and if he lives long enough we will get the money.


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is the
annuity?


James Alexander Robb: Ten hundred and seventy-five dollars a year, and the department has been advised not to pay anything on account of his annuity until this matter is settled.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: On account of the fact that I am serving on a committee which sits day and night, I had not the opportunity to follow these matters in their proper order. Has there been any provision made by a vote to reopen the trade commissioner's office in Havana, Cuba? If not, will that matter be taken care of this session? I have impressed the matter on the minister strongly, previously.


James Alexander Robb: There is no vote for that, but my hon. friend will notice that it is in the Commercial Intelligence Service, and that there is an amount in the estimates to provide for a thorough survey of the West Indian trade.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Will the minister give us some assurance that this matter, which has been under consideration for I think two years,, will be attended to?


James Alexander Robb: Yes, the matter is being carefully looked into and will be considered.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: Will the office be reopened in Havana, Cuba?


James Alexander Robb: I am not making that admission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amount required to cover investigation West Indies trade, $10,000.
Joseph Tweed Shaw: What are the particulars
about that?


James Alexander Robb: Some days ago this question
was brought up in the House by the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan), and the House seemed to be unanimous. The right hon. leader of the opposition spoke very favourably of the trade generally of the West Indies. Although we have a trade treaty with the West Indian people they, with some reason and justice I admit, claim it has not been fully earned out, as regards the steamer service that they think should be provided, and it is proposed to go very carefully into the question.


Henry Lumley Drayton: Who is going
to spend this $10,000, and how?


James Alexander Robb: It is under the Department
of Trade and Commerce.



Supply-Trade and Commerce


Henry Lumley Drayton: What is going
to be done? Are we going to have a commission going down there, or what is going to be done? I perfectly agree that we should do something, but how are we going to do it?


James Alexander Robb: I think perhaps we will send
some person down to try and negotiate some more favourable arrangement with the West Indian people. Would my hon. friend be willing to go?


Henry Lumley Drayton: It depends on
the time of year.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: What can be done in Havana that cannot be done in Ottawa? What information will be obtained there that is not available here?


James Alexander Robb: Negotiation with the governments of that country.


Joseph Tweed Shaw: The department has representatives down there, and despite the remarks of the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Logan) about some trade agent down there, I find the Department of Trade and Commerce highly commended him on a couple of occasions for being an especially good agent of the department. Why not enlist the services of these agents who are there, get the information and conclude the treaty in that way?


George Perry Graham: You could not conclude
a treaty that way. To get a mutual understanding, members of the respective governments must meet face to face, or at least persons with authority from those governments must discuss matters personally. To my mind everything is propitious for a development of the West Indian trade if we go about it in the right way. When in London I met representatives of the West Indies and I learned that they prefer to trade with us rather than with any other country if proper arrangements can be made. In a measure our treaty arrangements have so far been successful, but the people of the West Indies say that if there is to be a further development of the trade there must be better communications than now exist. It is hoped that through accredited representatives of the respective governments satisfactory arrangements will be made which will be mutually beneficial. At any rate, something should be done to take advantage of the warm feeling which now exists in the West Indies for Canada.


Thomas Wakem Caldwell: At present Cuba is our only potato market. The United States I think has a preference of 12 cents a bag in 	,
duty over Canada; and, as I have already suggested, we might enter into negotiations with Cuba with a view to getting that disability removed. If we made a concession to Cuba in connection with the raw sugar which we import from that country I am sure that they would reciprocate and give us preferential treatment on our potatoes. This trade is important to both countries, because our people pay a great deal more for the raw sugar that they get than that commodity is worth. It would therefore be to our advantage to give Cuba some concession in regard to that commodity and I am sure they would give us reciprocal treatment on our potatoes.


Hance James Logan: I congratulate the government on their determination to inquire into this matter which is of so much importance. In regard to the trade commissioners, I think it must be apparent to hon. gentlemen that the remarks we have heard on this subject are not very practical. It is hard to realize the vast extent of that country down there when it takes 18 days for one commissioner to get to another. I agree with the hon. member (Mr. Caldwell) that the trade with Cuba is important and we should make every effort to come to some arrangement with the government of that country which would be advantageous to both parties. On June 12, I think, I emphasized the importance of taking vigorous steps to develop our trade with the West Indies. The United States increased its sales to the West Indies in 1923 over those of 1922 by $91,000,000 while Canada in the same period increased hers by a little over $600,000.


Edward Joseph Garland: Have the
United States free trade with the West Indies?


Hance James Logan: No; they have with Porto
Rico and with Cuba but they have no arrangements with the rest of the West Indies. Those figures I have given will show the importance of taking steps now to increase our trade in that part of the world. I would suggest to the government that when they send the delegation down there it should be accompanied by the Minister of Marine, the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Finance. The people of the West Indies complain bitterly that no one in authority has ever visited them from this country; they say that we send clerks and persons in an inferior capacity but never any one who can undertake to make authoritative arrangements with them. When this commission or delegation goes down to the West Indies I hope it will not follow the usual trade routes, which would occupy a

Supply-Trade and Commerce
great deal of their time. They should go by one of the ships of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine, say the Canadian Fisher, leaving from Halifax. They might go first to Jamaica and-taking in Nassau, which would be necessary-they could cross the Caribbean Sea and go down to Trinidad and Demerara and thence to Barbados; and on the way back they could call ait Bermuda before coming into Halifax. By so doing they could cover an extensive route in a minimum of time. Naturally I am somewhat enthusiastic over this matter because it is to my mind the most important question we are considering to-day especially from the Standpoint of the Maritime provinces as well as from that of the country at large.


Edward Joseph Garland: Are we to
understand that the purpose of this $10,000 vote is to cover an investigation into trade matters, or to make a trade agreement? Or is it for both purposes?


James Alexander Robb: Both.


Edward Joseph Garland: Is this the total amount that will be expended?


James Alexander Robb: It is the total vote.


Edward Joseph Garland: I do not
think you will be able to do much investigating and making of trade arrangements on $10,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Japanese Relief Fund (Governor General's Warrant of September 14, 1923), $200,000.
James Alexander Robb: This is to cover the Governor General's warrant for the amount spent in Japanese relief at the time of the disaster. The government authorized the expenditure of $200,000 for relief and the first ships to leave on that mission from America went out from Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Expenses of Royal Grain Inquiry Commission (Governor General's warrants of October 9th and December 22nd, 1923, and February 20th, 1924), $75,000.
James Alexander Robb: This is to clear the Governor General's warrant. It has been already discussed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian Exhibition train in Belgium (Governor General's warrant, October 19, 1923), $10,000.
Henry Lumley Drayton: Why was that warrant issued?


James Alexander Robb: On the representations of Senator Beaubien we decided to extend to Belgium the Canadian train which we sent to France.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Graham, the House adjourned at 1.10 a.m. (Friday).
Friday, July 11, 1924