1926-01-25

ALBERTA COAL-TRANSPORTATION

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct the attention of the government to a telegram from the west which 1 received to-day? It is as follows:
Whereas there are hundreds of men, women and children in the coal fields of Alberta on the verge of starvation due to lack of employment; and whereas this can be remedied by the Dominion government granting a freight rate of seven ($7) dollars per ton from Alberta to Ontario; therefore be it resolved that we demand immediate action to this end from the Dominion government in order that the acute situation which is growing more serious every day may be alleviated. We, representing the United Mine Workers of America, respectfully request that you use your power and influence to the furthering of the above resolution. This is a matter of urgent necessity. A
copy of this resolution to be sent to the parliamentary leaders for them to take action.
May I ask if the government 'is in receipt of a similar telegram and if so, what action it proposes to take?


Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Leader of the House):: I received a similar telegram this
morning and I will send it over to my friend the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) in order that he may deal with the matter immediately.


Edward Joseph Garland: I trust, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of the Interior will give us the information I asked for. What is the intention of the government I'-this matter?


Hon. CHARLES STEWART (West Edmonton, Minister of the Interior):: I have
already spoken on this question. There may be a serious emergency so far as the miners of Alberta are concerned, but at the moment there is no emergency at this end. However, this government stands ready to co-operate in any movement of this sort. To say that this government should instruct the railways to reduce their rate fto $7 a ton is to suggest something which is beyond the power of the government, in the first place. There has been a movement of 5,000 of the 25,000 tons w'hich were to be moved at that rate. This movement was delayed until at least ten days ago, but may be completed now. We in Ontario are watching the situation very carefully and, needless to say, so far as I am concerned, I stand ready and willing to move all the coal which can be sold in the province of Ontario coming from the coal fields of Alberta, and the same applies to eastern Canada. I presume this matter will be discussed at some considerable length, and I may say for the information of the House and the hon. member that I have received a telegram from the coal operators of Alberta stating that they could send down 100,000 tons of coal at once. We have continuously put them in touch with any possible market in which they could sell this coal.


Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Would the minister
answer me a question? If it is beyond the power of the government, as he says, to enforce a fixed - rate on coal, how is it that it was within the power of the government to first suspend and then re-enact a fixed rate on wheat?


Charles A. Stewart: I
think my hon. friend must have misunderstood me. Parliament has full authority to
3S2
Locarno Treaty

do anything it likes in connection with rates, but I question whether the government has authority to fix rates.


Arthur Meighen: The government can do it the same as in the other case, if it wants to, by initiating legislation.


Charles A. Stewart: Quite true; I am not denying that for a moment, but in the present case action has to be taken at once.


Edward Joseph Garland: I am
encouraged by the attitude of the minister to ask another question. Will the government consider introducing the statutory legislation for a revision of the rates as indicated?


Charles A. Stewart: As
one member of the government only, I cannot answer that question.


Edward Joseph Garland: I did not
ask that the question be settled, but that it be given consideration.


Charles A. Stewart: Oh yes, but, of course, I cannot announce on behalf of the government that we will fix a rate. That is a matter that would have to be discussed by the government.



STEAMSHIP SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. PIERRE F. CASGRAIN (Charlevoix-Saguenay):	I would like to ask a question
of the government. In to-day's Montreal Gazette I see an item headed, "Service to north shore; regular steamship trips being agitated for," and it goes on to say that negotiations are now going on between the provincial and federal governments with a view to improving the means of communication between the north and south shores of the river St. Lawrence, and that if the negotiations are successful the north shore will no longer be an isolated point, and the ports of Franklin, Godbout, Pentecost River, Shelter Bay, Clarke City and Seven Islands will be afforded winter facilities of a biweekly service. As this is a very important matter to my constituency and that part of the country, I would ask the government if any arrangement has been made with the provincial government.
Hon. J. A. ROBB (Acting Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I have no knowledge of the matter brought up by my hon. friend from Charlevoix-Saguenay, although I know
{Mr. C. A. Stewart.]
that my hon. friend himself has made certain representations regarding the service along that route, but my recollection is that it does not cover the crossing. However, I can assure him I will have the matter looked into.



RAILWAY RATES ON EXPLOSIVES

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Mr. THOMAS HAY (Springfield):: I should like to ask a question of the Acting Minister of Railways, regarding a telegram I have received from D. V. Reddin, secretary of the Manitoba branch, of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, reading as follows:
Have wired secretary Board of Railway Commissioners as follows: "Understand revision railway rates on explosives ordered by board, by order 425, dated November 13th, reducing rates, but that they not yet been put into force. Imperative to interest of mining industry, which requires all possible assistance, particularly in west, that these be put in force at once. Why is publication delayed?
Can you do anything to assist ua?
As the northern part of the constituency I have the honour to represent is deeply interested in mining development, I would ask the government if anything can be done regarding putting this order into force.


Ernest Lapointe: An order was issued by the Board
of Railway Commissioners on January 22. It reads:
The board orders Shat the time within which the requirements of the said general order No. 425, as to amendments to tariffs on high explosives be put into effect be, and it is hereby, extended until the evening of Wednesday, February 3, 1920.



LOCARNO TREATY

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Arthur Meighen: Might I ask the acting
leader of the government if the government intends to introduce any resolution or legislation respecting the treaty of Locarno.


Ernest Lapointe: This matter will come before parliament in due course. As my right hon. friend knows, under the treaty the dominions are not bound until after their respective governments have accepted it or signified their willingness to come under it; so, as it is now, we are not bound by that treaty. I can assure my right hon. friend that no step will be taken by the government before parliament has been consulted in the matter.


Arthur Meighen: As the minister began
his remarks with the assertion that the matter will come before parliament, the only
3S3

Chicago Drainage Canal
logical inference is that the government intends to introduce some legislation respecting the treaty.


Ernest Lapointe: I am sure that even if the government did not introduce the matter to parliament,- some member would, because we have already'been told that it would be done. Our intentions certainly is to have the matter discussed in parliament.


Arthur Meighen: Can the minister say in what form it will be brought to parliament?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not know as yet. After all, so long as nothing is done, we are not bound by the treaty. If the government thought that we should accept the provisions and the engagements of that treaty, steps should be taken in parliament, but if not, I think parliament will have to discuss the matter just the same, but in what form has not been decided yet..


Arthur Meighen: Has the government made up its mind on the subject, as to whether to ask parliament for approval or not?


Ernest Lapointe: The mind of the government is fairly made up.


Arthur Meighen: What is the position of the government's mind on the subject?


Ernest Lapointe: It will be known in due course.


Arthur Meighen: I presume "due course" means when there is a government-when the shattered wreck is reconstructed. May I now ask the government when parliament may expect, if not to-day, a statement as to what the intention is as regards the personnel of the government?


Ernest Lapointe: The two statements of my right hon. friend are not in accord. He says there is no government, and then immediately wants to know about the personnel of that government which has no existence. Parliament, as a result of the conditions resulting from the general elections, was summoned at an early date for the very purpose of deciding who, under the conditions as they existed, should carry on the government. That question has been submitted to parliament, and parliament, on the 14th of January, gave its decision. That is only a few days ago. If the decision had been in favour of my right hon. friend, he may be sure that we would have been fair enough to give him enough time to organize his government, elect his ministers, and meet parliament afterwards. My right hon. friend knows as well as I do the conditions which existed as a result of the
elections, and which made the summoning of parliament necessary. As I have said, parliament gave its decision on the 14th of January, and the leader of the government is now actually qualifying for a seat in parliament, and it is my hope that in the very near future he will be resuming his duties here as leader of the government. Surely he is entitled to a little consideration on the part of my right hon. friend, just as my right hon. friend would have been entitled to some consideration if the decision had been in his favour. When the leader of the government comes back, which will be in the very near future, he ought to be given an opportunity to reorganize his government, and then all the information will be given to my right hon. friend. Meanwhile, the government is carrying on, and those departments which have no titular heads at the present time are being administered by other members of the government. I may assure my right hon. friend that public business is not suffering.


Arthur Meighen: Am I to infer from this rather voluminous speech that we can expect nothing in the way of information as to what the intention is as respects the personnel of the government until the Prime Minister is in his seat?


Ernest Lapointe: I do not think it is fair on the part of my right hon. friend to expect that before the ri^ht hon. gentleman is in his seat.


Arthur Meighen: It may not be fair to expect it from him, but the country expects to know what the intentions are as regards the government.


Ernest Lapointe: I rise to a point of order.


Arthur Meighen: If the man referred to as "the right hon. gentleman" had been in that office, he would not 'have met the House until we had a government.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Arthur Meighen: I am through now.



CHICAGO DRAINAGE CANAL


Charles A. Stewart: In reply to a question by the
hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Manion) with respect to the Chicago drainage canal, I thought it well to make a statement to the House seeing that the matter is of great importance and is causing a good deal of discussion. I may say that departmentally we have been watching it with a great deat
Chicago Drainage Canal

of care, trying to place Canada's position very clearly before the American government, and keeping in touch with the attempt to divert water that is of material benefit to the people of Canada. With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I propose to read this statement:
The government has continued to keep in close touch with all matters having to do with the diversion of water from lake Michigan by the Chicago sanitary district, in order that the Canadian interests in this matter may continue to be adequately safeguarded. In view of the abnormally low water conditions which have prevailed during the past season in the Great Lakes system, this close attention has been additionally necessary.
In reviewing the recent developments with respect to the Chicago diversion matter, I might first refer to the decision of the Supreme Court of United States, on the fifth day of January, 1925, whereby an injunction which had been earlier issued by the Supreme Court was confirmed, restraining the Chicago sanitary district from withdrawing water through the sanitary canal in excess of the amount of 4,167 second feet, which had been authorized by the permit of the Secretary of War then in force, dated June 30, 1910.


Mr. BRISTOL:: Will the Minister permit
me a question?	.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.


Edmund James Bristol: It seems to me it is absolutely clear as a matter of law that the United States has not any right to take the water of the Great Lakes and divert it into another watershed, or if it do do that, it should send it back into the lake from which it came. I know of no law which permits that, and I ask the Minister of Justice if he thinks you can divert water from a watershed belonging to one person to a watershed belonging to another person without the consent of the person who owns it. We do not seem to have taken that position with the United States at all.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order. There can be no
discussion at this stage of the proceedings, certainly not while the minister is giving a statement for which he was asked.


Edmund James Bristol: I am not attacking the
government.


Charles A. Stewart: I am very glad to answer my hon. friend in that respect. We are in the fortunate position that no government in Canada has ever attempted to divert one foot of water from the Great Lakes.


Edmund James Bristol: Quite so. Let me repeat
that I was not attacking the government at all.


Charles A. Stewart: To
continue with the statement:
The judgment was, however, subject to any new permit which the Secretary of War might issue. This

judgment recognized, for the first time, that the diversion affects and was contrary to Canadian rights under the Boundary Waters treaty of 1909
Subsequently, on the 3rd of March, 1925, the United States Secretary of War issued a new permit to the Chicago sanitary district authorizing the diversion of an amount of water expressed as not to exceed an annual average of 8,500 second feet, through the main and auxiliary channels of the sanitary district. The object of the United States Secretary of War in issuing the permit of the 3rd of March was to legalize, under United States law, insofar as a permit of the Secretary of War could legalize it, the withdrawal of a sufficient amount of water to protect the health of the inhabitants of the sanitary district, while at the same time incorporating in the terms of the permit provision for a progressive curtailment of the total waters diverted from the Great Lakes, by calling upon the Chicago sanitary district and the municipality of Chicago to instal sewage disposal works and to meter the domestic water supply.
While the foregoing outlines the general objectives of the Secretary of War's permit, it was, unfortunately possible to place various interpretations upon the amount of water which could be diverted under its terms. This uncertainty arose from the phraseology of the permit itself, and from the physical conditions obtaining in respect to the actual diversion. The municipality of Chicago, as distinct from the sanitary district, has been pumping a total of some 1,200 cubic feet per second from Lake Michigan and diverting the same into the sanitary canal, thus increasing its flow. The construction of the canal had furthermore resulted in the reversal of the flow of the Chicago and Callumet rivers, and there was room for doubt as to whether or not the flows of these two rivers, amounting to an annual average of some 1,300 cubic feet per second, were included in the 8,500 cubic feet per second mentioned in the permit. In brief, there was doubt as to whether, under the terms of the permit, the withdrawal from lake Michigan could be limited to 8,500 second feet or whether it might be increased to 11,000 second feet.
With the objective of securing from the United States government a specific interpretation of the terms and conditions of the permit, which was being variously interpreted by the public, this government has exchanged notes with the government of the United States, as a result of which a definite and clear-cut definition has 'been placed upon the permit which will tend to prevent future misunderstandings as to its scope. The government hopes to be ablle, with the concurrence of the United States government, to table this correspondence at an early date.
It might be mentioned that according to the reports of the United States engineers, upon which the permit of March 3rd was issued, it appears to be their expectation that as a result of the conditions which the permit imposes of the Sanitary district of Chicago and upon the municipality of Chicago, the withdrawal from the Great Lakes may be reduced from its present total of 9.700 cubic feet per second to 6,700 cubic feet per second by the end of 1929 and to 4,167 cubic feet per second by 1935.
It might be pointed out, however, that we have no definite assurance that the curtailment provided for in the permit will be actuailly effected, since such curtailment is dependent upon the sanitary district of Chicago and the municipality of Chicago concurring in and fulfilling all provisions and conditions imposed in the permit. It is our intention to follow closely the progress which is made in the construction work necessary to enable the proposed curtailment being realized.
A further development in the Chicago diversion question, and one which this government is closely follow-

Chico,go Drainage Canal
ing, is a second suit now being heard by the Supreme Court of the United States. In this suit, four complainant states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, and Pennsylvania have raised the question of their riparian rights in the Great Lakes and as to whether the United States Secretary of War has any power to issue permits for the diversion of water from lake Michigan. It is also understood that the state of Michigan will at a later stage in the proceedings file a new suit in sympathy with that of the above mentioned four complainant states and take the further stand that even congress has no power to authorize the diversion of water from the Great Lakes system. It is further understood that the state of New York is in sympathy with the position taken iby the five above named states and will seek permission to present argument in support of it views thereon. The whole question of the 'legality, under United States law, of aill diversions made to date is, therefore, in dispute.
This government is following this case as it proceeds step by step, and is keeping directly in touch with the hearings. The first hearing took place on January 4th last, when little was accomplished other than clearing the decks for the next hearing which is set for March 8th next.
A further and recent development in connection with this Chicago matter was the great protest meeting held at Detroit on January 14th and 15th last, by the Great Lakes Harbours Association, at which delegates were present from aill the lake-bordering cities in the United States and from quite a large number of Canadian municipalities. The purpose of this meeting was to register an emphatic protest against the continued diversion of water from the Great Lakes by the Chicago sanitary district. As this government was in communication with the United States government on the question, it had no delegates in attendance at this meeting. Nevertheless close contact was maintained with it during its organization and its proceedings were closely and sympathetically followed.
One further development in connection with this matter should be mentioned. I refer to a bill which is now before the United States Senate, supported by the Mississippi Valley Association, an association which has an extensive organization in the central and Mississippi states, and whose objective is the betterment of the transportation facilities of the Mississippi and connected waterways. This bill, amongst other things, provides for the construction of a nine-foot navigable channel in the Illinois and Mississippi rivers, based upon the diversion from lake Michigan through the sanitary district canal of an amount of water not to exceed 10,000 cubic feet per second. It is not unreasonable to assume that this bill is receiving the fullest measure of support by those Chicago interests which so actively contend for the maintenance of the existing diversions through the Chicago sanitary canal.
This government is fully alive to the menace of the provisions of this bill to the navigation, power and other interests in the Great Lakes and St-Lawrence river and its registering with the United States government, a vigorous protest against its passage in so far as it contemplates the withdrawal of water from the Great Lakes.


Mr. MANION:: The minister savs the government is in touch with all these proceedings and is registering. Does he mean the government has registered or will register?
Mr' STEWART (West Edmonton):	We
have registered right along.


Robert James Manion: A protest had in the past been Sent forward?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.
As soon as the government can obtain the permission of the American government I will place all the correspondence on the table.
Mr.-BRISTOL:	Have the government of
Canada and the government of Great Britain ever consented to any diversion at Chicago?


Charles A. Stewart: Not to my knowledge.


Edmund James Bristol: Do the government of
Canada and the government of Great Britain own half the Great Lakes?


Charles A. Stewart: I think they do.


Edmund James Bristol: On what principle do the government thiink thatl the government of the United States or the city of Chicago have a right to take half our property and run it down into another river? I say they have no earthly right to do that. No consent was given. Have the government of Canada started yet to claim damages from the United States in respect to illegal diversion?


Hewitt Bostock: Order. I wish to remind the hon. gentleman that while all these questions are allowed on the orders of the day being called, yet no argument is permitted to take place.


Edmund James Bristol: I am not arguing now. I am asking a question.


Hewitt Bostock: Bourinot states as follows: It is a practice, sanctioned by usage but not by any positive rule, for members in both houses of the Canadian parliament to make personal explanations or asik questions of the government when the orders of the day are called. They make them in reference to an inaccurate report of their speeches in the official record, or in the newspapers; or in denial of certain charges made against them in the public prints (i); or in reference to certain remarks which had been misunderstood on a previous occasion, and which they had not before had an opportunity of explaining; or in respect to delay in obtaining returns or to the incompleteness or inaccuracy of certain returns brought down under the order of the house. But these remarks are not allowable on the ground of privilege, unless the conduct of a member as such is attacked, and in that case a motion should be formally proposed O'). Questions have been asked, when the orders are called relative to the state of public business, or other matters of public interest (k). But no discussion should be allowed when a minister has replied to a question, nor after a member has made his personal explanation (1).
In case of ministerial changes, explanations are generally allowed to be made in both houses when orders of the day are called by the speaker (r). When the premier or member leading the government in the house ha3 made such explanations, it is usual to permit the leader of the opposition to make some remark on points arising out of the former speech.


Arthur Meighen: Hear, hear.

Chicago Drainage Canal


Hewitt Bostock: The extract continues:
In fant, considerable latitude is allowed by the courtesy of the house on such occasions in the Canadian Commons.
When the question of ministerial changes arises a debate may ensue between the leader of the opposition and the leader of the government, but in all other matters on the orders of the day the question must be direct and to the point and must not be argumentative. I am saying this in the interest of the proper carrying on of the business [DOT] of the House.


Mr. A. U. G. BURY (East Edmonton):: I desire to ask another question in connection with the withdrawal of water from the Great Lakes. Will the minister give us the assurance that the government has made as vigorous a protest against the action of the United States in this regard as have several of the states of the union? I understood from the minister's answer that the other American states which were interested in this movement had protested that the government of the United States had no right to countenance or authorize any such steal of water. I wanted to know if the government had made the same kind of protest or whether it had adopted, by its parleys with the American government, the position that there was a certain right to withdraw water from the lakes.


Charles A. Stewart: So
far as the protests to congress or the United States government are concerned, I think they have been quite as voluminous or as pointed as the protests received from any of the states affected.


Arthur Meighen: And quite as futile.


Charles A. Stewart: My
hon. friend's interjection is hardly warranted.


Arthur Meighen: With no result.


Charles A. Stewart: Does my hon. friend expect a fight of this character to be settled by a protest from the Canadian government carried to an unlimited degree? It has not arrived at that stage yet. The protest mentioned in the memorandum I have just read is the entry of a suit in the Supreme Court of the United States, we could scarcely get an opportunity of going before the Supreme Court of the United States with respect to a great international matter of this kind.


Sir HENRY DRAYTON:: We should be
standing on our rights as a nation.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.
[Mr. Speaker.)



COAL SHORTAGE

[Stage Direction]
On the Orders of the Day:
Ambrose Upton Gledstanes Bury: I desire to ask the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) one or two questions. One is in connection with his answer to the question concerning the coal situation. I have in my hand a communication from a large coal dealer carrying on operations in Barrie, Orillia, Midland and Chatham, in which he states that if the Alberta coal is not let loose during the coming week, Ontario is going to suffer from a fuel famine, the like of which has never been known before. Would the minister advise me how far this statement represents the facts of the case and whether it is his intention to leave the question of grappling with the coal situation in Ontario until the last moment.


Charles A. Stewart: We
have in Ontario a fuel commissioner in the person of Mr. Ellis. We work closely with Mr. Ellis. I made inquiries before coming into the House whether or not we had any communication with Mr. Ellis recently complaining about a fuel shortage, and I find we have no communication from him. Not only that, but we are in receipt of a communication from a coal dealer of Toronto, a Mr. McGill, I think, one of the large dealers, who says that the situation is not abnormal. Undoubtedly there are points in the province of Ontario at which there is apparently going to be a shortage, but so far we have not, except in a few cases, received reports from those localities. We will have them within a short time.



NOVA SCOTIA COAL MINERS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. L. W. JOHNSTONE (Cape Breton North-Victoria) asked leave under rule 39 to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite' matter of urgent public importance, namely, to call the attention of the House and the government to the acute distress existing among the coal miners of Nova Scotia, many of whom are actually on the verge of starvation.
Hewitt Bostock: This motion comes under rule 39. In my judgment it appears to be a matter of urgent public importance, but I would be reinforced in my judgment if twenty members would rise.
The Clerk Assistant having stated that more than twenty members had risen.


Hewitt Bostock: If leave is given, the hon. gentleman may proceed.

Nova Scotia Miners


Mr. JOHNSTONE (Cape Breton):: Mr. Speaker, I would not take up the time of the House to ask for an adjournment, were it not to discuss a subject of such vital importance that it is worthy of consideration by every lion, member. I wish to state the facts in regard to the closing down of our coal mines in Cape Breton. In the town of Sydney Mines we have three collieries, Princess No. 1, Jubilee, and a mile further on, the Florence. On the southern side of the island there are other mines where the coal miners are in a destitute condition. The mines on the northern side are the three mines of which I have spoken. Princess No. 1 colliery in Sydney Mines has been classed as one of the best coal mines in Nova Scotia, and is in fact, second to none in Canada. During the last two years the coal trade has not been good and the miners have not had steady work. They were thus not able to make enough money to pay off the debts which they incurred during the previous winter and especially last year when we had a long strike lasting six months, and the men returned to work at a very low wage at which they continued working until the present time. About Monday, the 11th January, or some day in that neighbourhood, No. 1 pit was closed down until the opening of navigation without any notice having been given. That threw 900 to 1,000 men out of employment,, and those men who were thus thrown out of employment had really nothing to exist on. As I said before, they had not made sufficient money during the summer months to cover what they had lost during the last strike. Neither could they conscientiously ask the five or six merchants in that town to supply them with food, because those merchants had not recovered from the shock which they had received during the period of non-work and were not in a position to furnish any more credit. The provincial government were called upon for assistance and gave some by way of bonds to the southern section of the island. They endeavoured to get an agreement between the company and the men on the northern side in order to keep the Princess pit going, but they did not succeed. Petitions and deputations came into the provincial government at Halifax. They called upon us to see if we could aid them in the matter, and we had several letters and petitions from our own men. I might read this telegram which I received from the secretary of the United Mine Workers local in our town:	.
Princess colliery closed down until opening of navigation. Over nine hundred men unemployed. Evident distress one week from date. Can government arrange 14011-25$
for market to have this colliery operated. Ask government to have this matter given serious consideration.
.	Charles Morriss,
Secretary Princess Local.
In view of that, in company with an hon. member from my county, I went to Montreal and interviewed the British Empire Steel Corporation and also the government in the Canadian National Railway offices. After the interview which we had with Besco, they said that they were overstocked with coal. They had over i50,000 tons of coal stocked in Montreal; their markets were overstocked and they could not see their way clear to give an order. After some persuasion we got them to promise us an order for 15,000 or 16,000 tons of coal to be mined at the pit and shipped directly to Montreal. In that way they said that they could possibly get clear of it in the Montreal market. They gave that concession, although they were overstocked with coal; but they did so with one proviso, namely, that we should get the government to give them the same freight rate between Sydney and Montreal as they had from Alberta to Ontario, this being a reduction in the rate then in existence, and in that way they said we could relieve the distress and starvation in our community. Cn the Saturday we interviewed Mr. Martin, traffic manager in Montreal, who seemed to sympathize with us. He said that he would interview Sir Henry Thornton on Monday and ask him for the concession. On Monday we received a telegram from Mr. Martin stating that the government could not see their way clear to grant the concession.


Mr. MACDONALD (Antigonish-Guysbor-ough):: My hon. friend surely means, not
the government, but Sir Henry Thornton.


An hon. MEMBER:: Synonymous terms.


Lewis Wilkieson Johnstone: Sir
Henry Thornton is president of the National Railways. We had an interview with the deputy minister at Ottawa last Wednesday, I think, and he promised that he would give us all his support with Sir Henry Thornton who was having an interview the next day with the Minister of Railways. At any rate, we received a message from him that evening stating that they could not see their way clear to grant this small concession. We thought then that this was final and we therefore decided to appeal to this House to see what might be done. We have a thousand people down there who are in destitute circumstances. We can get orders for enough coal to last two and a half months until the opening of navigation and that coal will pro-
Nova Scotia Miners

vide work two or two and a half days a week. It is not very much but it will keep the men from starvation, and all we want is this concession from the Railway department. We do not want it as a record wage, and as a matter of fact we informed Mr. Martin that we would not advance it as a precedent in any contracts that they might make. We simply want to meet the emergency that exists at present. I cannot see myself why the concession was not granted. When assistance is given by outsiders it seems to me that the Railway department might very well make us this concession to assist us in providing for our destitute.
We have to-day a town of 8,000; we have public buildings and we have churches and school-houses, all depending upon this colliery. It will be seen therefore how important it is that the colliery should be kept going. Our teachers have not been paid for the last three months; our financial condition is precarious, and1 our taxes are unpaid. And this because we have no money in the town. This is the state of affairs that exists there to-day. We have forwarded petitions to the government and deputations have waited upon them, and I do hope that something will 'be done to improve conditions. We have a class of working men who are second to none in Canada and these men do not want charity; they want work and they should have it. They are willing to work at less than rate wages provided they can only keep their families. They are not beggars by any means, for no working man in Cape Breton can fairly be so regarded. All these men want is fair play; they want to be treated like human beings and not like slaves.
Some hon. members may be inclined to regard this matter lightly, but I can assure the House that there are hundreds of men and women in my section of the country who are anxiously waiting to see what action the government will take to bring relief to the town. I am simply asking for the province of Nova Scotia one of those rights which she has been denied-the province by the sea that has produced such men as Tupper, Uniacke, Howe, Fielding and Thompson, who in their day took an active part in all legislation passed in this House in the interests of Nova Scotia. I urge this hon. House to take the matter into serious consideration from an unprejudiced and unbiassed standpoint. The working men in Chpe Breton labour in the pit from eight to ten hours a day and the condition in which they find themselves to-day is one that should appeal to the sympathy of all parties in this

House. I cannot see where there is any room for partisanship in the matter.
Some hon. members have spoken about prosperity; and as a matter of fact nearly every hon. member during the past week has hud something to say in this regard. Well, personally I cannot see how Canada can be prosperous if in any one part of the Dominion there exists such a deplorable condition ol things as prevails to-day in Nova Scotia. I think that hon. members from all parts of the country should unite in an effort to remedy this state of affairs if we are sincere in our desire to see Canada as a whole prosperous and happy. I was rather amused the other day at the remarks of the hon. member for Queens (Mr. Jenkins) in reference to the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Smith). After declaring that conditions were not so very bad in Cumberland county the member for Queens went on to say.
That statement recalled to my mind the fact that not long ago we had in Nova Scotia a Liberal government which had been in .power a long time, and the cry was raised in certain sections of the Maritime provinces that if that government were only overturned a greater measure of prosperity would result.
I want the hon. member to understand that the provincial government in Halifax has not yet had a session, having been in power only six or seven months, and it would take much longer than six or seven months for any Conservative government to undo all the evil that has accumulated under some forty years of Liberal administration. The hon. member said also that he had visited the steel works in Sydney and found them in a satisfactory condition, and he declared that the hon. member for Cumberland must have been looking at things through blue glasses to paint the picture he did. Well, it seems to me that my hon. friend from Queens must have used very powerful magnifying glasses on his visit of inspection for I can tell him that where there should be 3,000 men at work there are only 1,200. I do not want to delay the House any longer and I shall therefore bring my remarks to a close with an urgent appeal to the government to give this matter the most serious consideration with a view to alleviating the suffering that is now being endured in that part of the country.
Mr. ISAAC D. MACDOUGALL (Inverness): Like my colleague from Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. Johnstone), I have absolutely no apology to offer for seconding the motion to adjourn the House for the purpose of considering the present subject of very urgent public importance. When we have thousands of honest workmen idle, in any part of the

Nova Scotia Miners
Dominion, who have families dependent upon them, unable to obtain bread, we are faced with a .matter of the gravest public concern, a matter that should commend itself to the serious consideration of every member of this House. In order that hon. members may have some insight into the distressing situation that prevails just now in the coal fields of Nova Scotia, I desire to read a memorandum addressed to me and to several other Nova Scotia members from the citizens' committee of the town of Glace Bay. I have no doubt that hon. gentlemen opposite will take a great deal of stock in this memorandum when I tell them that the man who signs it as secretary of the citizens' committee was the standard bearer of the Liberal party in Cape Breton Centre on October 29. This is what he says: Dear SiT:
As secretary of the citizens' committee of the town of Glace Bay, which committee was appointed at a recent meeting of that town for the purpose of doing what they could to help relieve unemployment condition, and the distress which exist here as a result of idle time at collieries 2 and 4, I have been asked to forward to you a copy of the enclosed resolution, and to ask you to kindly take the matter up with other sitting members from Cape Breton. Conditions here are very bad and there seems to be no immediate prospect of betterment.
The Dominion Coal Company and the Canadian National Railways have not as yet concluded arrangements respecting the Canadian National Railways' coal order, and untU Nos. 2 and 4 receive that order, conditions here are bound to continue in a state of distress. All the relief money that the town can possibly vote under the circumstances, has been expended. Your kind attention to this matter will be appreciated by the citizens' committqp.
Yours truly,
L. D. Currie.
This is a copy of the memorandum sent by the citizens' committee:
The coal mines of Glace Bay are virtually idle, and coal mining is our only means of livelihood. The mines at Caledonia and New Aberdeen within our town are averaging about six days' work a month. These miners worked sixty-eight days in 1925. The average earnings of the miners for the entire year was $272. In nearly every case the miner represents a family of from five to ten persons. And a population of about 12,000 people are dependent on these two collieries for a living. Because of a slump in the coal sales and the importation of foreign coal, the colliery outputs have diminished almost to the disappearing point. Unfortunate labour disputes between operators and workers aggravated the situation. Deplorable food riots and lootings were caused.
The town finances are gone. There is no money available for relief. There is no food credit from the merchants. They are up against nearly four years of accumulated bad debts. Four months of winter intervene before navigation opens and coal mining resumes. In the interval this population must be fed. They want work. To make work somebody must buy coal, order coal ahead for the spring delivery to keep the pits going. Almost every cent the Cape Breton miner earned was spent in Canada for Canadian food, clothing and necessaries. We ask Canadians to reciprocate by buying Cape Breton coal. We want the big
buyers to keep their orders for soft coal in Canada, and send them in now for banked coal.
We must work or starve. This is a national crisis and no words are strong enough to put the need of a speedy solution emphatically before the whole people of Canada. They must buy our coal. They must give us immediate orders and this committee representing the whole 'community, and composed of the elected mayor and the elected town councillors and twenty-five representative men appointed by a meeting of the rate-payers is appealing to the federal and local government, to our big railways and business concerns to come to our aid.
We want work! To get work coal must be bought. We bought your goods when we had the money. We don't want to be paupers. We have a product that you use. Keep your money in Canada. Buy our coal and help us to live. And do it now. The need is immediate. Thousands will have to have doles again on Wednesday of this week. We feel it is the imperative duty of our government to take prompt action in this unprecedented crisis. The report of the royal commission is concluded. It recommends many splendid points to make the future of the industry happy and successful. The suggested coking plants are feasible, but they cannot function for at least three years. The order from the Canadian National Railways secured for us by Premier Rhodes' is a splendid contribution to tide over some of the winter. It means about twenty-four days' work. We will need one hundred days' work to carry us to spring. We ask Canada to get behind us and help. It is a national crisis and an order for another 300.000 tons of banked coal would feed the Cape Breton miners this winter.
Citizens' Committee, town of Glace Bay.
Now, Mr. Speaker, as I understand it, there are two distinct points arising in the discussion tri-day. In relation to the Cape Breton North-Victoria constituency, represented by mv hon. colleague (Mr. Johnstone), we have there the mines of Sydney Mines, and they have been idle for some time. One has been closed, altogether; the other two have been working about one day h week, and I understand that they are both closed now. These mines give employment to about 2,000 workmen, and practically the whole population of the town of Sydney Mines, consisting of about 8,000 people, depends upon these mines for a living. The other day the hon. member for Cape Breton. North-Victoria and my hon. friend for Pictou (Mr. Cantley) were interviewing representatives of the British Empire Steel Corporation in Montreal. In order to provide some employment for the people of Sydney Mines, the representatives of that company agreed to take 6,000 tons of Sydney Mines coal per month, provided that they received a rate from the Canadian National Railways equivalent to that which I understand was granted last year to the province of Alberta. In proportion to that rate, the rate from Sydney Mines to Montreal would be about S3 a ton. We have taken the matter up with the Canadian National Railways, and Sir Henry Thornton turned' the proposition down flat. I do not know whether
Nova Scotia Miners

Sir Henry Thornton, placed as he is in a position where 'he has a meal ticket worth about $65,000 a year, can adequately sympathize with miners who have no employment of any kind, and with their families who have no meal tickets at all. But Sir, it seems to me that in order to prevent these people from starving, the Canadian National Railways should make this concession. We only ask it for a period of three months, until navigation opens and we can ship by water, and I think every hon. member who has sympathy for starving women and children, whose breadwinners cannot find employment, should give this matter not only his earnest consideration but all possible support.
In regard to the Glace Bay section we have there about 12,000 people almost destitute. They are trying to get an order for banked coal from the Canadian National Railways. Some time ago Sir Henry Thornton announced thiait the railways would take 120,000 tons of banked coal from the British Empire Steel Corporation. Possibly some hon. members may have later information, but until Saturday last negotiations had not been concluded in regard to that contract. The pits at Nos. 2 and 4 collieries have been idle; the men have [DOT]been without work, and their families are in very dire and destitute circumstances. We want to impress upon this House the absolute necessity of the Canadian National Railways coming to the assistance of the people by giving a substantial order for coal, that employment may be provided for those miners.
During the last few years, Mr. Speaker, the miners of Nova Scotia have received perhaps more advertising through the Canadian press than any other class of workers in the world. Some newspapers were depicting the miners as Bolshevists and law-breakers, but I want to say that I myself belonged to their labour organizations. I have associated with these men in their union halls; I have represented them on their committees, and I say in all sincerity that you have no finer body of workmen in the world than the Nova Scotia miners. They possess a spirit of independence; they do not want doles; they do not look for charity; they are willing and prepared to work, but at the present time a barrier is erected between them and their work, and between their families and their bread. Last year the British Empire Steel Corporation did not provide very much employment. As a matter of fact, that company, unfortunately, has followed for a number of years the practice of attempting to depress almost every year the miners' wages, and last year, in order to prepare the miners for another reduction fMr. Macdougall.]
of wages, in order to put them in a position where they would not be able to fight back, the British Empire Steel Corporation closed the majority of the mines, threw the miners out of work, and then cut off credit at the company's stores, so that the miners could not provide a living for their families. The result was that dire destitution prevailed in the colliery towns of Nova Scotia. The miners appealed, I think, to this very government, the government led by the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, but their appeal was not granted. There was nothing that could be given to the miners, although in our generosity we had, I believe, previously given support to the Belgians when they sought relief, but there was nothing for the destitute within our own gates. The miners were forced into a state of desperation. They saw their wives and helpless little ones starving to death before their very eyes, and the result was they took to looting, and to breaking the law of the land. This government then acted very promptly, and sent trainload after trainload of soldiers down to the Cape Breton mining area, in order to make those miners be good and stop breaking the law. That experiment cost the people of Canada thousands and thousands of dollars. We do not wish to see a recurrence of that down in Nova Scotia; we want to prevent it. The miners themselves do not want it, because they are a law-abiding people. They want work; they want an opportunity to dig coal, and if they get that opportunity they will work and be able to support their families, and will not be looking for public charity, and will have no intention in the world of violating the law of this land.
Mr. Speaker, I hope that every member of this House will give careful consideration to this matter. I make a special appeal to the members of the Progressive party and to the members of the Labour group in this House, because, if I understand anything about those two movements, they are supposed to be movements of the common people; their politics is the politics of the poor, and I therefore ask the members of these two groups to give their sympathy and their support to this claim which is now being made on behalf of the miners of Nova Scotia. I need not remind them that they have the power in then-hands, if they choose to use it. We need not go outside of this House to know that the hon. gentlemen who sit opposite are to-day eating out of the hands of the members of the Progressive party.


Mr. FINLAY MacDONALD (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, might I be allowed to
add just a few words to the remarks of the

Nova Scotia Miners
hon. member for Inverness (Mr. Macdougall). and of the hon. member for Cane Breton North-Vietoria (Mr. Johnstone). I represent the constituency where these southern mines are located, and I have just returned from a visit to them. Last Thursday night I met the relief committee, and I do not think I can picture to this House the actual state of destitution that exists to-dav in the town of Glace Bay. As you are aware, Mr. Speaker, the towns in our province of Nova Scotia must look after their poor: under our Poor law they must provide relief for all who come to them asking for relief. Unfortunately, the mining towns, and especially the town of Glace Bay, have long since exhausted their financial resources, and the town of Glace Bay is now hopelessly in debt. It cannot borrow any more money. Lately, when this destitution first appeared, they did secure $8,000 by having the government of Nova Scotia endorse their bonds, but last Thursday night that $8,COO was gone, and the $2,000 that had been made over from a previous relief fund was also exhausted, and on that particular night there were seventy-five families that applied to the town hall of Glace Bay for relief and had to be refused. Such is the condition
there.	,
For my part, I firmly believe that this House, and every member of it, sympathizes deeply with those men. The auestion that, occurs to me is simply a practical one: What can this House do to relieve that immediate distress? Every part of this Dominion, I understand, has its own individual problems. W'e have ours in the Maritime provinces, and no doubt hon. gentlemen of this House will be more or less bothered, and perhaps bored, with the story of Maritime rights and wrongs before the session is very far advanced. However, it does appear to me that this is one of the problems we have to face. We expect and believe that we shall receive the assistance and sympathy of every other province in the Dominion of Canada, just as when we come to consider their problems, as we shall have to before the session is very far advanced, we are prepared to consider them sympathetically. The problem in this case, while local, has probably far-reaching effects, inasmuch as there is discontent throughout the Maritime provinces, and particularly in the province of Nova Scotia. We are not satisfied with conditions down there. We are not satisfied with the progress we are making, and have made, and we are demanding certain things that we believe we are rightly entitled to.
I would like to suggest something practical; something that we can do for those men.
Some ten days or so ago Sir Henry Thornton announced that he was prepared to give Besco an order for 120,000 tons of coal, but since that time apparently nothing has been done. These two corporations have been simply playing with the question, and in the meantime the miners and their wives and families have been facing starvation, and have taken to looting. I would ask any hon. gentleman of this House if he is prepared to see his wife and family starve. He is not. Of course, the law of the land forbids looting, but there are certain laws that are reallv above the law of the land. I can only repeat what my hon. friend from Inverness (Mr. Macdougall) has said, that the miners of Cape Breton are as honest, as sane, and as manly a class of men as are to be found on the face of the earth. There is only one practical solution for such a problem as this, and that is the miners must be given work; and to give them work, coal must be produced and sold somewhere. The immediate local market, of course, is exhausted, but there is a market available in Montreal. One of the complaints we make down in our province is that the old Intercolonial railway was taken from us, and that the railway rates are now so high as to practically prohibit the shipment of goods from and to the Maritime provinces. I would suggest that the practical solution of the question is this: there ought to be such a reduction in the coal rates from Sydney to Montreal as will enable coal to be placed on the market of the latter city. The British Empire Steel Corporation, according to its statement, is anxious to ship !by the Canadian National Railway, and the railway management is anxious to get the coal at as low a rate as possible.
There is one feature of the discussion this afternoon that I think merits attention. It is the fact pointed out by the hon. minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald, Antigonish-Guysborough) that Sir Henry Thornton is not a member of the government. That is true, but after all, in the last analysis, this government owns the railway and should exercise such control that in time of local or national crisis it could direct Sir Henry Thornton to do what should be done in order to relieve distress in any part of the country. It appears to me, after all, that this is more or less a question of ordinary business common sense. We allow things to go on down there, we allow such conditions as have been pointed out to gradually grow until they reach the stage where a strike occurs and the soldiers are called out, with a resultant cost to the country much greater than would have
Xova Scotia Miners

been the ease had a sufficient subvention of reduction in rates been granted originally to overcome any such difficulty as exists at the present time.
I have nothing further to add, I do not feel it is necessary to detain the House any longer. I would merely suggest in conclusion that the practical solution of the difficulty lies in fixing such rates on the Intercolonial railway as will secure for this coal an outside market.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: L have no fault to find with my hon. friend from Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. Johnstone) for bringing this matter to the attention of the House. I do remind him, however, although not with any feeling, that the usual procedure, as a matter of courtesy, adopted in questions of this kind is to let the members of the government know in advance the purport of the resolution which is to be discussed. My hon. friend, probably owing to this being his first session here, was not aware of that practice.


Henry Lumley Drayton: The hon. gentleman was following the precedent set by the government when it introduced its first motion.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I hope my hon. friend from West
York will not regard this as the practice to be followed hereafter.


Henry Lumley Drayton: I do not think it ought to be. However, the government was -wrong in doing what it did.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: As I say, I have not much complaint to make with regard to the resolution, introduced or with the remarks in support of it except perhaps the statement of the hon. member for Inverness (Mr. Macdougall) who intimated that the government had sent troops down to Cape Breton last year to influence the strike situation. I want to remind my hon. friend that no troops can be sent by the federal government to any point in Canada except on the request of the attorney general of the particular province where the difficulty arises. It was the then' Attorney General of Nova Scotia who asked for the troops in this particular case, and it is the province of Nova Scotia which must 'bear the cost not the Dominion as a whole. This is in accordance with the provisions of the law as it has *obtained for the last three years.
Apart from these two instances to which I have called attention, let us look at the situation very frankly. There are five counties in Nova Scotia that produce coal, beginning
IMr. MacDonald.]
with Cumberland which is closer to central Canada than the rest. Then you find in succession Pictou, Inverness, South Cape Breton and North Cape Breton. North and South [DOT]Cape Breton are the counties which are farthest away from central Canada. The constituency of my hon. friend who moved this resolution is the farthest removed from the city of Montreal. The consequence has been that coal has never been hauled by railway from Cape Breton for consumption in central Canada. Coal has only been hauled from the county of York-Sunbury, from Cumberland, from Pictou, and occasionally from Inverness, but never in my knowledge or recollection from the counties of North and South Cape Breton. How has that coal been sold in the past? Both the Nova Scotia Steel Company and the Dominion Coal Company have always banked the coal in the winter time and taken it by steamer in summer via the river St. Lawrence to Quebec and Montreal, the reason being that water transportation was from 50 to 75 cents a ton cheaper, and at such a cheap rate the coal companies were able to make some money out of it. The trouble to-day is simply that the British Empire Steel Corporation will not do what their -predecessors did in the past, bank their coal in winter time-thus keeping the men employed-and transport it to Montreal in the summer time.


Arthur Meighen: Why?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Because the management choose to
take that course.


Finlay MacDonald: With respect to the banking of coal, if the practice has been such as the Minister describes, why was it stopped?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I am not in the confidence of the
British Empire Steel Corporation. The hon. gentleman's friends in the local government of Nova Scotia are closer to them.


Mr. HANSON:: Is it within the knowledge of the minister that the Canadian National Railways has altered its policy and refuses to take banked coal?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I am coming to that.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The government must know about that.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I am coming to that. I merely want to make clear to the House that coal has

Xova Scotia Miners
never been hauled from North or South Cape Breton to Montreal as a business proposition. They have always banked their coal in winter time.


Lewis Wilkieson Johnstone: May I tell the minister that the
reason the ooal companies are not banking their coal at the present time is because the markets and the consumers db not want banked coal?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: If my hon. friend will only wait and
not interrupt me I will come to that point. My hon. friend from Inverness states that last year the company did not bank its coal and asked me why. I do not know. There is no reason that I know of why the same course of business could not have been carried on that had been pursued up to that time. Unfortunately a strike occurred there ladt year and there was a change of government in the province. The provincial government appointed a commission of inquiry and that commission reported about ten days ago. Strange to say, in its report it recommended that not only should there be no increase but that the wages should go back to where they were before the change was made last year.


Arthur Meighen: Was the coal not banked last year?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: I understand not and perhaps the
strike was the reason.


Mr. MACLEAN (York):: What company?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: The British Empire Steel Corporation. Let us come to the situation this year. In the counties of Cumberland and Pictou, and so far as I know, Inverness, the work is going on fairly steadily, but the work has ceased to a very great extent according to the Statement of my hon. friend. What did the government have to do with this matter? The right hon. gentleman who leads the government received a telegram on January 15 from the secretary of the citizen's committee, of the town of Glace Bay, which reads as follows:
Unemployment situation in Glace Bay most acute and 1,500 families have been fed by dole from town funds. These funds now exhausted and further relief urgent. Respectfully ask your government provide relief fund and also urge upon Sir Henry Thornton need for coal orders from C.N.R. Telegram also forwarded Mr. Meighen.
The matter being referred to me for consideration in the illness of the Prime Minister, 1 wired on January 18, to the secretary of the citizens' committee, Glace Bay, as follows:
Referring to your telegram to the Prime Minister of January 15, our information has been that the situation was being dealt with by municipal and provincial authorities. We shall be glad to have fuller and more complete information as to the exact conditions.
I saw in the press of Nova Scotia that a delegation from Glace Bay had gone to see Premier Rhodes and that he had agreed to guarantee the bonds of the town of Glace Bay as being the contribution which the provincial government was prepared to make. That is the local situation. I also saw the statement that a delegation had gone from Sydney Mines to see Premier Rhodes and did not get any satisfaction or assistance from him, but so far as I am advised no communication has been received by this government from Sydney Mines, with regard to the conditions there. This is the first occasion the matter was called to the attention of the government. What was done in the matter? Sir Henrv Thornton was here on Friday, and, as representing the province, I saw Sir Henry, and, seeing in the press that he had had a communication from Premier Rhodes in regard to the subject, I said to him, " Have you had any difficulty in taking banked coal from this company, so as to enable the men to work down there as they did in previous years?" He said, " I have looked into the situation and [DOT] wrote Premier Rhodes this morning stating that we are prepared to take 120,000 tons of coal to be banked during the winter, from the British Empire Steel Company, that coal to be transported in the spring to Montreal ". I said to him. " Has that arrangement been made?" He said, " We have written to the British Empire Steel Company, and have advised Premier Rhodes to that effect."
Now on this basis of 120,000 tons to be banked, which is sold in advance to the Canadian National Railways, the British Empire Steel Company are as a matter of fact refusing to go on as they did in previous years. If they proceeded as in previous years it would obviate the necessity of having this matter considered by parliament. Hon. members will all agree with me that if the practice under which Cape Breton trade has always proceeded and prospered for twenty-five years, had been continued this year, that would have been much better than asking Sir Henry Thornton to haul coal from the furthermost points at which it has had to be hauled to Montreal. Why should not the coal miners of Cumberland and Pictou countv. who have been working perhaps three days a week only, desire to have their coal hauled first, because it would be necessarily hauled at a lower rate?
Nova Scotia Miners

That is the situation so far as it contributes to any conditions which might arise there.
Now here is the situation. Everybody in the House knows that in individual cases of difficulty, it is the primary duty of the municipal authorities to deal with the matter. If it gets beyond the municipal authorities then it is for the provincial authorities. Apparently up to date Premier Rhodes has not thought it necessary to do anything beyond guaranteeing the bonds of the town. They have reached a situation down there where the bonds are not worth being guaranteed.
This government recognizes that in a case of urgent necessity we would deal with the matter where we saw the provincial authorities had taken steps which were inadequate and where they realized the situation to be beyond their power to deal wdth. That is only a natural proposition.
I do submit that if Sir Henry Thornton orders, as he has intimated he has ordered in advance, 120,COO tons of banked coal from the British Empire Steel Corporation, there is no reason why these mines should not be operating, and there is no reason why these mines should not be operated, and there is no reason why the British Empire Steel Corporation should not go on and bank other coal, and thus be in a position to sell to the business interests in Montreal as their predecessors have done in past years, and keep their workmen who are high class men in every way at work steadily.


Mr. THOMAS CANTLEY (Pictou):: I ask hon. members of the House to be indulgent to me, in view of my lack of experience in speaking before this hon. Chamber. I was very much interested in the attempt made by my hon. friend the Minister of National Defence to explain away a situation which practically does not exist. He asks what the government has to do with the matter, and refers to the proposal put before the country by Sir Henry Thornton to take 120,000 tons of banked coal from the Cape Breton colliery. I ask him, why 'he should not? The railways have always done it since coal has been shipped to the St. Lawrence market.


Finlay MacDonald: That is w'hat I said.


Thomas Cantley: Pardon me. The House only last year learned that the officers of the Canadian National Railways first refused to take banked coal. Coal has been coming up from Cape Breton and Pictou for many years. I can very well remember this, and until last year I did not know of a single case (Mr. E. M. MardonaUl.]
in which banked coal was refused. Last year the officers of the railway went down to Montreal and rejected the cargoes of two steamers of about eight or ten thousand tons. That was the first occasion so far as I know on which this point was raised. Sir ILcnrv Thornton makes a gesture and says, "I will accept and give you an order for 120,000 tons of coal". That is on his terms and at his price. I am informed that at the present time the people who sell the coal have not been able to reach any understanding with the officers of the railway in regard to the price to be paid for that or any other coal to be delivered during the present year. It is all very well for my hon. friend to say that Sir Henry Thornton is ready to take 120,000 tons of banked coal, but up to the hour we came into this House, so far as I can learn, no arrangement has been made. I have asked the representative of the Besco corporation here and he says that so far as he knows no arrangement has been concluded with regard to this question of the order for next year. One hundred and twenty thousand tons is 20 per cent of the consumption of the Canadian National Railways bought in Cape Breton. That is about the proportion of coal which has been banked and delivered annually to the railway in the St. Lawrence region during recent years. There was banked at Glace Bay and the other banking stations in Cape Breton during the past year quantities as high as 180,000. 200,000 and 220,000 tons.
Now I notice that this same question was before the House last year, on the 24th February, practically eleven months ago, and the member who sat on the opposite side as Minister of Labour made the remark that coal had never been banked at Sydney Mines, and that there were no facilities for banking it. I 'happened to be the general manager of Scotia Colleries for about twenty years, and we unfortunately had to bank coal and did bank it over a long series of years, to the extent of forty or fifty thousand tons dr more. Nobody wants to bank coal if they can avoid it, because for every ton of coal put on the bank somebody has to lose fifty cents. Hon. members can understand that under those conditions no company wants to bank coal if it can avoid doing so. If winter employment is to be found for the miners of Cape Breton, it is essential that practically all the coal that is mined between the close and the opening of navigation be banked. On the mainland we are more fortunate because a large proportion of the coal mined there during the winter is consumed during the winter, being sent off by rail to various

Nova Scotia Miners
sections of the Maritime provinces and farchei west. The Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald) is almost correct when he says that little or no coal is shipped from Cape Breton by rail during the winter months. I would not say that none is shipped, but in a general way comparatively little is shipped by rail. Why? Simply because we knew in the past we could ship our banked coal during the summer in the ordinary way mixed with freslh run-of-mine. Prior to this great importation from abroad to show us how to run our railways, every mine was able to ship run-of-mine with a proportion of banked coal. Why the change? His statement that he is now prepared to accept 120,000 tons of banked coal is no gratuity offered to the people of the Maritime provinces. Why did he say that? The only reason I know of is this:	Last year, as we all know, there was
a plethora of coal in the markets of this continent at all events, and he thought he saw an opportunity to take advantage of that situation. That, of course, is quite permissible. But when there arises a condition of affairs such as exists in Cape Breton to-day, where hundreds of men and thousands of their dependents are hungry, that is not the time to put the screws on and say:	We will not
accept anything but fresh-mined coal. The solution that is proposed is so simple that I am surprised a man of the astuteness of Sir Henry Thornton has not at once said:	Yes.
of course I will do it. What is the solution? He has been asked to take from the southern area of Cape Breton what he always took before, namely, his proportion of fresh-mined coal and his proportion of banked coal. He is asked to do nothing more than his predecessors did for forty years.
As regards Cape Breton North, all that was asked of him by my good friend the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. Johnstone) was that he should give a rate equivalent to the rate from Alberta to Toronto, which figures out at about 35 mills per ton mile. The mileage is 086 miles, so that this amounts to about $3.25 as against the regular rate of $4.50. He was asked to do that only in regard to 15,000 tons of coal, 6,000 tons a month during the two and a half months between now and April. What does this amount to? Supposing he lost a dollar a ton on it-and I do not admit he will lose a dollar-it would amount to only $15,000. What is that to a railway that has a deficit of $60,000,000? I cannot understand the way in which he deals with the whole proposal because the amount involved is so small.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Do I understand that a rate of the
same kind was also asked from Stellarton and from Springhill?


Thomas Cantley: I know of no rate being asked for except on the quantity that I refer to: 6,000 tons a month for the next two and a half months. I do not admit the railway cannot haul that coal for that money, for this reason: They are hauling hundreds of cars down to Cape Breton which are coming back light. Those cars have to be hauled back in any case. This amounts to only four carloads a day hauled over the railway from Sydney Mines to Montreal at a rate of $3.25 a ton. Further, Mr. Speaker, if there were a loss, the government could easily have provided for it. There was in the estimates of 1024-25 an item of $200,000 covering assistance towards the shipment of coal from the Maritime and western provinces, and only about $50,000 was expended. The balance lapsed on the 31st March, 1025, and it was not revoted. If I am correct in my understanding of the situation, that amount was available by Governor General's warrant as being an unexpended part of a vote, and it could have been devoted to making up any shortage, if there were a shortage, in the cost of moving that coal.
As regards the character of the men who are working in the collieries of Cape Breton, and particularly those of North Cape Breton, Sydney Mines, I had the proud privilege of being their general manager for twenty years, and there is no finer body of men in this country, either ,in the houses of parliament or amongst workers on the farms, in the mines or anywhere else. We have men there who, on occasions of danger following explosions and fires, have exhibited heroism unexcelled by any other men in any country, at any time, or in any war. These men deserve some consideration from this House. Are we going to balk on a question as small as the pittance represented by the loss, if there be any loss, in hauling this coal for $3.25 a ton? At any rate, this loss will not exceed a few thousand dollars. The House and the country should take this matter into consideration and deal with it promptly and effectively.


Mr. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrenee-St. George):: Mr. Speaker, I certainly cannot be
accused of having any undue affection for the British Empire Steel Corporation or any of its predecessors. My history on the coal question for the past thirty years would belie any such insinuation as that. But I do think, if the right hon. leader of the government were
Nova Scotia Miners

in his. seat to-day, he might properly be reminded of the policy which he enunciated in 1921 to the people of Nova Scotia and upon which he received the support of so many constituencies in that province. Someone suggests the "solid sixteen." Speaking at Amherst, the capital of one of the coal counties, namely, Cumberland, on October 4, before an audience estimated at five or six thousand people, the right hon. gentleman first repudiated his free trade policy and then announced the policy of his government with respect to coal and the transportation of coal to the markets of the upper provinces. He said:
Free trade is not the policy of the Liberal party. If it were, I would oppose it, because I believe it would bring disaster to our industries and remove from the fanners the home market which is practically the only market that they have left. Free trade may be all right for the wealthy grain growers of the west, whose wheat goes to the foreign markets and who do not have to worry about selling their products at home, but it would mean paralysis in the Maritime provinces.
Then the right hon. gentleman proceeded:
I am a firm believer in the establishment of a national coal policy for Canada. No country, especially a country with cold winters, which depends on a foreign nation for its fuel, can claim to be independent of that nation.
Then he proceeded to announce his policy.
Every pound of coal purchased by the government should be mined by Canadian miners and transported over government railways to the points of consumption. Coal required by other consumers in Canada should be carried at cost.
That was the policy which the right hon. gentleman announced and upon which he received the solid support of the constituencies of Nova Scotia in 1921. I think, Mr. Speaker, the difficulties with regard to coal in Nova Scotia would have been satisfactorily settled before now if the right hon. gentleman had put that policy into force during the last five years. To this I would simply add that so long as Canada is dependent upon the coal miners of the United States for its fuel supply, just so long must Canada bend the knee to the United States whenever they make, as they have made, unjust demands of the people and the government of this county. And until we secure in Canada an adequate fuel supply independent of the United States, Canada's political, economic and financial independence of the United States cannot be fully assured.


Robert James Manion: For two or three years in this House we have been listening to the discussion of this question and it appears to me that each year the matter is becoming more acute. I admit that I do not know very much about conditions in the coal mines of Nova Scotia but I do 
know this that any man who sits in this House and follows the discussions which we have been hearing for the past two or three years, particularly of the deplorable conditions which prevail down in that part of the country, must if he has any red blood in his veins feel a great sympathy for those people. Nobody can hear the tale of sorrow which we have heard in regard to the people in these afflicted sections of Nova Scotia without being impressed with the necessity for action on the part of the government to bring about some solution of the question. Not only today have we heard the question of the difficulties among the coal miners of Nova Scotia debated, and debated so ably by hon. gentlemen on this side of the House; but we have heard it in relation to other parts of the country than Nova Scotia. We have heard the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) read to this House a telegram indicating the unfortunate state of affairs among the coal miners of the province of Alberta. The fact is that the coal miners at both extremes of the country are in a bad way, and what is overwhelmingly obvious is that we require some sort of policy in Canada which will put an end to these deplorable conditions by making it possible for us to use Canadian coal hauled on Canadian railways rather than American coal transported on American boats. Anyone who has followed the trend of affairs in Canada during the past two or three years must have been struck with one significant fact. A Liberal government had been in power in the province of Nova Scotia for some forty years and during the last year of that lengthy regime a very serious coal strike occurred in the province. That Liberal government went out of office and left that strike in progress, a strike that had lasted for something over five months. And right after the Liberal party was defeated in the province and Mr. Rhodes was returned to power the Conservative government elected in the province succeeded in settling the strike within three weeks.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Robert James Manion: I do not know why my
hon. friends laugh; the facts are as I state them. No one can deny that the strike was settled within three weeks of the return to power of the Conservative party of Nova Scotia, and the only interim of quiet we have had in the troublous conditions that have existed in Nova Scotia has been during the short time since the Hon. Mr. Rhodes has been in power. It is true that he has not settled the whole question but we must re-

Nova Scotia Miners
member that the matter is one that affects the Dominion at large. But he did settle the strike after he had been three weeks in power whereas the Liberal party after forty years of administration went out of office leaving the strike absolutely untouched. The only thing they attempted to do was to invite the troops of this Dominion to go and fight with the miners of Nova Scotia.
Why should we have so serious a coal problem in this country to-day when we have the second largest coal deposits in the world? What we need is a Canadian policy to handle Canadian coal for the Canadian consumers. That is what we need. But how can we get a policy of any kind when we have not even the suggestion of a government?


An hon. MEMBER:: Why do they not
resign?


Robert James Manion: They should have resigned long ago and allowed a government to come in that would have had the courage to introduce a sound policy.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: We should have resigned to let you
in.


Robert James Manion: So far as that goes we
could not be worse than my hon. friend's government. The party opposite has been in office for four years and of all the poor governments in the history of the world that administration has been the worst. I ask again, how are we to expect a policy of any kind when we have not a government nor even a head that represents one?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: You are getting mad now.


Robert James Manion: Not a bit; I am not mad
but just emphatic. And I shall be more emphatic still before I am through. My r>ght hon. leader (Mr. Meighen) on his passage through the west outlined in his speeches the policy which he would put into force in the event of his being returned to power. He said that if he got into power he would bring in a policy which would utilize the great deposits of Canadian ..coal.
Some hon. MI?MBERS:	Oh, oh.


Robert James Manion: My hon. friends laugh.
But what was the attitude of their leader when he stood on the platform in the city of Fort William? What did he tell the people there? He said that if the Right Hon. Mr. Meighen got into power it would only mean an increase in the price of coal in Canada and he advocated leaving the coal question alone. That is the attitude he took; he objected to
any Canadian policy to bring Canadian coal to the consumer in this country. Here we have to-day a government with a Prime Minister who has no seat in the House; and we have no Minister of Railways, no Minister of Trade and Commerce, no Minister of Labour and no Minister of Immigration. All the gentlemen bolding these portfolios were defeated and that is why we have a government that is unable to bring forward a policy of any kind on any question that calls for *action.	.


Edward Joseph Garland: Does the
hon. member advocate a duty on coal and if so what rate of duty?


Robert James Manion: I am not going to outline any policy this afternoon but I will tell the bon. member 'this. If he had stood by the principles of democracy which he preaches so very much he would have voted for the largest group in the House, the group that had1 received the largest number of votes from the people by some 200,000 and he would have put into power a government that would have been courageous enough to bring down a real policy.


Edward Joseph Garland: I simply
asked the question for information. What was the policy advocated by my hon. friend's leader?


Robert James Manion: The leader of the opposition will explain his own policy.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Robert James Manion: Hon. gentlemen opposite
may see fit to laugh, and that has been their *whole attitude during the past three years wherever the interests of the Nova Scotia miners have been concerned. The miners who with their families are starving down there have the satisfaction of knowing that whenever their affairs are discussed in this House hon. members laugh. They get nothing more than a laugh at any time.


Mr. EVANS:: I rise to a question of
privilege; I absolutely deny that statement.


Robert James Manion: Deny what?


John Evans: That the Progressives laugh
at the miners of Nova Scotia.


Robert James Manion: I was not referring to the Progressives at all; I was speaking of the government so-called.
Mr. STEWART (West Edmonton)I do not wish to enter into a controversy with my hon. friend but I think he ought to retract that statement that the government has ever laughed at the sufferings of anyone.
Nova Scotia Miners


Robert James Manion: There is nothing that I
need retract. I made the statement that the miners of Nova Scotia have never got anything more than laughter when their condition has been discussed. Certainly they got no relief.
Mr. 'STEWART (West Edmonton): It is of course my hon. friend's privilege to press his point but I must take issue with him.


Robert James Manion: Will the minister tell us
what the government has done to relieve the miners.


Charles A. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, I am not discussing that. I am asking my hon. friend to retract his statement that this government has laughed at the distress of the miners.


Robert James Manion: I have stated that and I will repeat my statement: All the miners received was a laugh. There has been nothing done for the miners of Nova Scotia by this government, and they make no proposal now to do anything. They return with the same old cry and begin saying that the municipality has the first responsibility, and the province the second responsibility. They take this same old attitude of passing the buck instead of coming forward with some sort of policy in order to attempt to relieve conditions which exist in this country. How can you expect anything else, when we are in the humiliating position of having a prime minister-so-called-in this country to-day, and instead of occupying a seat in this House-


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: He will be here next week.


Robert James Manion: Perhaps he will. We have him going round the country hunting for a seat. He cannot even get a seat in the province of his birth, but must leave that great province and go away out west.


Charles A. Stewart: My hon. friend seems to be speaking with some heat. He does not ordinarily get so heated But he will admit that other prime ministers have done the same thing.


Robert James Manion: But we have never before had the spectacle of a prime minister leading a government occupying the floor of this House, and himself without a seat. Not only himself, but with nine ministers beaten, every minister who ran in this great province of Ontario wiped out; every minister whom I mentioned defeated, the portfolios vacant at the present time or filled temporarily by some other minister. That is the state of affairs, and as a result not only is the coal business 
of this country unstable but every other business and industry in Canada is unstablp. What we need in this country is, first, a government ; second, a government with a head; and third, a government with courage enough to bring forward some sort of policy which will settle this perennial question.
This government has had four years in which to settle this question; it has come up every year in this House, and I repeat that they have done nothing. The only thing they have done is to pass the buck. It is time for the government to resign; it is time for the government to recognize the democratic principle that the majority of the people should rule. Let us have a government which will have the courage to at least bring forward a policy and stand by it.


Mr. G. B. NICHOLSON (East Algoma):: 
Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Will my hon. friend permit me a question? WThy does not this company go on mining this 120,000 tons of coal and bank it?


George Brecken Nicholson: My hon. friend for
Pictou (Mr. Cantley) stated a few moments ago that prior to the importation of Sir Henry Thornton from the United States, the Canadian National Railways purchased banked coal, and the mining company was able to bank the coal during the winter months and sell it in the summer.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: Sir Henry Thornton is willing to do
that now.


Thomas Cantley: What about the price?


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: In regard to the price, my hon. friend for Pictou knows that the price of coal is never fixed until April or May, and any company would be foolish to buy coal three months in advance of fixed prices.


Thomas Cantley: I do not know anything
of the kind, and neither does my hon. friend I do know, however, that Sir Henry Thornton could make a contract for coal to-morrow if he wanted to. An attempt has been made during the past two weeks to have such a contract made, but without success. My hon. friend might assist.


George Brecken Nicholson: The question the hon. minister asked me was why the coal company did not continue to bank coal. It is impossible for me to go into details in connection with the management of the coal mines of Nova Scotia, since I live in northern Ontario, but we heard statements this afternoon to the effect that the practice of the coal company was to do that very thing, shipping the banked coal during the summer season mixed proportionately with freshly mined coal, until the present management of the Canadian National Railways refused to accept coal of that character.


Mr. EULER:: Will my hon. friend permit
me a question? The hon. member made the statement that the Canadian National Railways should be expected to buy this coal. As a matter of principle and as a matter of information I would like to ask him whether he thinks the Canadian National Railways have a special duty in this connection because of the fact that they are owned by the people of Canada and are thus distinct from any other railway company, such as the Canadian Pacific Railway, for example.


George Brecken Nicholson: I have no hesitation
in saying to my hon. friend that the Canadian National Railways have an absolute responsibility, and they have the matter entirely in their own hands. Without losing one single dollar, they can buy all the coal as suggested here this afternoon, and make it possible for these miners to go on working, as they ask to be permitted to do.


William Daum Euler: Perhaps I did not catch my hon. friend's answer correctly. Does he say that the Canadian National Railways have a special responsibility because of the fact they are the property of the Canadian people?


George Brecken Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, they
have a special responsibility, for the reason that they control the one railway in Canada tapping this coal mining area, the railway which was projected into that country for the very purpose of carrying coal from these mines. I will even go further, Sir. Without attempting to go into details, I say that if the Canadian National Railways will adopt the same policy as their competitor has adopted, these people will be given relief.


William Daum Euler: Would the same thing
apply in western Canada, where the Canadian Pacific Railway enters the western coal fields?


George Brecken Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, let me
again say that I did not intend to enter the wide range of discussion which the questions of my hon. friend open up, but if you will visit the terminals of the two great railways in western Canada you will find that the competitor of the Canadian National Railways is now following a policy which gives the miners of Alberta continuous work; for they bring the coal to their terminals and store it there. They do not wait until a locomotive is actually there to buy the coal, but they purchase ahead for it, and the Canadian National Railways could do exactly the same thing. It is the duty of this House to say to the government-if there is such a
Nova Scotia Miners

thing; if there is a medium through which this House can communicate with the Canadian National Railways-that we expect them as representing the Canadian people to take steps to make it possible for these miners to go to work.


Mr. O. B. PRICE (Westmorland):: Mr. Speaker, it was not my intention to enter into this discussion with regard to the coal areas of Nova Scotia and the carrying by the Canadian National railway of a portion of the coal produced there. But I wish briefly to point out to hon. members that the people of the Maritime provinces are under no obligation to the rest of Canada for any favours in connection with the supplying of coal for the Canadian National railways; for any expenditure which is made on that account has already been well provided for by the people of the Maritime provinces themselves.
The Canadian National railways have cost this country upwards of two billions of dollars. Of this huge expenditure the people of the Maritime provinces contributed $478,000,000. Of that amount $131,300,000 has been spent on railways and canals, so that the Maritime provinces have contributed $347,000,000 more than they have received. Do you not think, then, that the Maritime provinces are entitled to consideration? What occurs across the line to the south? Whenever any industry in the United States is suffering, the railways there will go fifty-fifty in order to help them out, but since this country has been over-ruled and the railways of the country run by Sir Henry Thornton, the Maritime provinces have been forgotten; they have been practically backed off the map altogether. Should we be kept out in the cold, or should we be given the opportunity, even if it does cost fifty cents or one dollar a ton more to ship coal from the Cape Breton areas, to produce the coal that is within our own borders? This parliament can vote $5,000,000 for the Home Bank depositors; you can buy hotels in Paris, and Union club buildings in London; you can spend money on golf links; while down in the Maritime provinces the people in suburban districts even cannot get a fair show in train service. Furthermore, freight rates have been raised so high that shippers within a radius of fifteen miles cannot ship their lumber into the centres like the city of Monoton, as they have previously done, and to-day they are labouring under the difficulty of hauling the material which goes into the construction of

barrels and other wood work into the centres by horse and sled.
I also wish to point out briefly that there has been spent in this country upwards of $211,000,000 on canals, and of that amount the Maritime provinces have contributed $26,000,000, while only $1,000,000 has been expended in their territory. We also contributed $3,000,000 towards the construction of the Quebec bridge, which cost $20,000,000. Is there nothing else the Canadian National Railways can take from us? Is there nothing else they want? Have we a government to-day that is willing to say to Sir Henry Thornton:	You have to provide for the
people of this country, and in such emergencies as the present one down in Cape Breton, with the people suffering and starvation staring them in the face-and they have had plenty of that, Mr. Speaker-you must give these people a chance-give them ah order that will keep them going for six months. We are supposed to be a free people; then let the government of this country stand behind the people: let them rise up and protect our natural products.
There is another matter which bears largely on the coal situation, but into which I shall not go in detail at this time. We are importing from the United States not only enormous quantities of coal, but large quantities of other products that come in with the coal. The iron and steel imported into our markets from the United States in November last were as follows:
Canada, 68,828 tons; Japan, 16.610; Cuba, 6.975; Colombia, 9,303; China, 6,975; Mexico, 5,859; the United Kingdom, 5,111; Argentina, 5,038; the Dutch East Indies, 4,755; British India, 4,674; the Philippine Islands, 3,913; Venezuela, 3,670.
I have mentioned only a few of (these imports, to show you how the Maritime provinces have suffered. We have the coal and steel and other products right at our own doors, ready to enter into the construction of the products which we formerly made. We should have the opportunity to manufacture these products in our own country, and until .this government wakes up to the fact that we must protect our natural resources, our pulpwood, our coal mining and' our other industries, Canadian business is going to keep sliding over into the United States. Millions of our dollars are crossing the line and going into the pockets of workingmen over there, skilled workers, railway employees and others, which should be going into the pockets of our own Canadian people. So far as the particular question before us is concerned, instead of importing coal from the United States let the

Nova Scotia Miners
government of this country have a heart; let them view the situation as it would appeal to them if they were residents of Cape Breton. Let them tell Sir Henry Thornton-surely he is no bigger than the government of the country-


An hon. MEMBER:: Oh, he is.


Otto Baird Price: -surely he is at present
supposed to be exercising his powers without interference from this government. In a matter of national importance like this it is up to the government to give an order to the coal mines of Cape Breton in order that our coal miners may get work and that our people may get a small share of what they have more than paid for.
Mr. A. de WITT FOSTER (Hants-Kings):
I did not intend on this occasion to offer any remarks, the subject having been so well covered by the hon. members who have spoken. But the seriousness of the situation, it seems to me, ought to commend itself to every member of this House, whether he comes from the east, the central portion of Canada, or the far west. As has been pointed out, this question is more or less of a perennial, and some lead or direction should be given by the government in the way of a policy which* will have the effect of settling the matter so that it will not be continually coming before the House. Any condition in Canada, no matter in what part of the country it exists, which is productive of starvation and hunger and all their accompanying miseries, ought to be dealt with in a statesmanlike manner; there should be no attempt at playing petty politics as between the government of a province and the government of the Dominion.	[DOT]
The facts in this matter have been placed before the House; it is in possession of all the necessary information. What is the House going to do? What can it do? The suggestion has been advanced that Sir Henry Thornton, president of the Canadian National Railways should be communicated with. I may say to you, Mr. Speaker, from a rather intimate knowledge of events in the past, that he would lend a ready ear to suggestions coming from hon. gentlemen opposite. In making suggestions to Sir Henry Thornton, hon. gentlemen opposite would not be invoking a new rule, nor would the president himself be adopting an innovation if he listened to suggestions from my hon. friends. In saying this I wish to be clearly understood that I am not insinuating that the head of the National Railways listens to improper suggestions from 14011-26
hon. gentlemen opposite; I am merely pointing out that it is within his power to do so. It is also within the power of the government of the day-or such of it as we now have- to cease passing the buck to the National Railways, the British Empire Steel Corporation, and the provincial government of Nova Scotia, and give a lead which will tend to bring about a settlement of this important matter.
Now what are the facts with regard to Nova Scotia? This question is one of the most important which has been beiore the electors of that province during the past twenty-dive or thirty years. It was the question upon which the local government largely depended for support during the greater portion of its forty-three years of existence prior to the change last June. But what happened? The situation got out of hand so far as the government of the late premier, Mr. E. H. Armstrong, was concerned. It got out of hand so far as the Minister of Labour in the late government was concerned; and the two governments, the federal and the provincial, were unable to do anything that tended to alleviate the unfavourable conditions in the coal mining area. However, one of the very important planks in the platform of Premier Rhodes, at the time he was leading the opposition, was that if his party were returned to power he would immediately take steps to examine to the fullest extent into all the various problems affecting the mines and the miners. Mr. Rhodes redeemed that promise immediately he became premier; notwithstanding his strenuous labours during the campaign, the very moment he succeeded1 to the premiership he bent all his energies and directed all his efforts towards a settlement of the difficulties which had proved too great for solution at the hands of t'he government which had preceded him, or at the hands of hon. gentlemen opposite. Mr. Rhodes appointed a royal commission to investigate this problem, and I have never heard it suggested by anyone that there ever was a better commission than the one w'hich he selected. I need not point out that the chairman was a very prominent Englishman, an'd that the other two *members were the president of St. Francis Xavier University, Dr. MacPherson. one of the very ablest men in Nova Scotia, and Major Hume Cronyn, an extremely competent gentleman from Ontario. The commission made an inquiry and reported their findings a few days ago. They certainly have been the means of creating far better relations between the company and the men. So far so good. We are now reasonably on the way to

Nova Scotia Miners

a permanent solution, a step has been taken in the path of progress. But it is true that there is a problem calling for immediate consideration, arising out of the lack of employment and the conditions which obtained last winter when a motion identical with this was introduced and debated here. Human life is at stake. There is humanity to be considered on the one hand as against politics on the other. I appeal to hon. gentlemen, regardless of their political leanings, not to endeavour to play petty politics in this matter, but to see if something cannot be done immediately which will settle the problem for all time. I appeal to those qualities of heart and mind exemplified] by the only representative of the better half of our people in this House, the hon. member for Southeast Grey (Miss MaePhai'l), and I say if there ever was a time when hon. members to my left should stand by their professions in regard to the amelioration of the lot of humanity, it is now. Here is an opportunity for them to sit down and discuss the question with the government if they will; and I will not object if they sit as closely to them as they see fit on this particular occasion, because something needs to be done, and that, immediately. I appeal to them to give this matter due consideration, and to give a lead to a government which does not seem to be any better able now to take the lead than it was when the late Minister of Labour addressed the House ten or twelve months ago, on the occasion of a discussion of the same topic. I believe hon. members to my left are sufficiently studious-I have listened to the speeches of some of them and have spoken with others privately, and I believe there are many able men among them; perhaps they are all able- and here is a chance for them to give the government some idea of what progressive legislation means and how to bring about a settlement of a very important problem. In making that suggestion I do not mean to suggest that recourse should be had to the shifting of obligation or responsibility upon someone else. I believe that every hon. member, regardless of party, feels deep down in his heart that this is a matter which merits and should receive his closest attention.
Hon. gentlemen may hesitate to adopt my suggestion because it would be establishing a precedent. Well, they were very anxious the other day to establish a new precedent in this House, and why should they hesitate now if it is a precedent that stands in the way? I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that no precedents should prevent an individual, anv party or any government from taking action

on behalf of the people of this country. No precedents should prevent a free people from saving themselves from starvation. From the point of view of the constituency which I represent, this coal question is in a sense miles removed, so that I cannot be accused in addressing this House of desiring to make political capital out of it. But conscious of my own responsibility as a member of this House-and I am sure that feeling is shared by all hon. members-I say that this debate ought not to close until the government has given some indication, either through the hon. gentleman who leads the House or through some other responsible minister, that the justifiable and altogether moderate demands or suggestions that have been made will be accepted; and that a definite course will be immediately outlined, ini order thait relief may be afforded as soon as possible.
I have under my hand the speeches made by the previous member for South Cape Breton, who is not now in this House. My personal relations with him were very friendly, but I do not find any great fault with his not being here. As a matter of fact, I rather congratulate the present hon. member for South Cape Breton on his being here- and I am very sincere in saving so. But if hon. members desire to tou*h upon the features of this matter which bear upon the question of protection, I refer them to a speech delivered here on the 24th of February, 1925, wherein the hon. member at that time pointed out that even with all the millions it had spent since it undertook the reorganization and development of those areas. Besco found itself unable to compete with the coal brought in from the United States, and that was the reaso.n why they had to close down their mines. We have not said that that was the reason. It has not been necessary to do so; Besco has said it, I have no brief for the British Empire Steel Corporation: I do not know any of those who manage it nor have I had any business relations with them. I speak of them only as employers of labour and as developers of the great coal area down there. But they come forward in this particular case and1 exhibit what? A desire to do nothing? No, a desire on the other hand to meet the Canadian National Railways half way in this particular matter. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that a way can be found of having the company and the railway get together, and I ask the hon. member for Antigonish-Guysborough (Mr. Macdonald) in no political spirit whatsoever, to use his great offices to that end. Should he subsequently go to

Nova Scotia Miners
a constituency in Nova Scotia other than Antigonish-Guysborough I promise I would not use that against him on the hustings in his county. I know that his mind and his heart are with his native province, and I give him some credit for that-I only wish I could give him more. But in this case he has an opportunity at least to start along the good way, and perhaps it will be the only opportunity he will have for a long time.
I leave the matter with the House, in the feeling that the House will deal with it along lines that are constructive, and. above all. along lines that are progressive, in finding a remedy.


Mr. A. A. HEAPS (North Winnipeg):: I am extremely grateful to the hon. members who moved and seconded this resolution and thus brought to the attention of the House a matter that it is really worth while considering. I had hoped this afternoon, when the two hon. members brought this urgent and important matter to the attention of the House, that we might have been spared' some of the discussion which has been carried on for the past hour or so. We have been appealed to in different ways, and this matter has been used as a kind of political issue; if the hon. members who have spoken on the subject had not interjected so much politics into it I would have been a little more pleased. When it comes to a question of Maritime rights, and particularly in regard to the miners who today find themselves in this unfortunate position, I will say that I yield to no one, that I am second to none in standing for the rights of the miners of Nova Scotia. In that regard I may be classified as a Maritime righter to the same extent as anyone who may have been elected on that particular ticket. ^1 have a very strong recollection of the sufferings of ,fhe miners of Nova Scotia last year. I remember when they went out on strike we in the west received a message asking for our support, and I, who live in the west, proba'blj' two thousand miles from the scene of the trouble, became chairman of the committee which actually went through the city of Winnipeg and surrounding districts and helped to raise $20,000 to relieve the distress among the miners of Nova Scotia.


An hon. MEMBER:: Thank you.


Abraham Albert Heaps: In addition to that, the
women of Winnipeg collected about twelve tons of clothing. They worked on that clothing, repaired and cleaned it and sent it down in first class shape to the miners of Nova Scotia who were suffering on account of the strike.
14011-26J
Assuming that the reduction of freight rates, which has been suggested by hon. members opposite, were brought into effect, one of the first questions that arises in my mind is, would that relieve the situation? I am heartily, in accord with the hon. member who sits opposite me when he says that if it is merely a question whether or not the Canadian National Railways can bring down their freight rates, it should be done. If these rates can be brought down, I say there should be no difficulty in doing so, and giving the miners the opportunity of mining that coal which might be used on the railways of Canada. I am not well versed in the question of freight rates; I do not know as much about them as I know about other phases of the situation. The freight rates problem is not peculiar to the Maritime provinces; it affects the people as far west as Winnipeg. I am told, and I believe it to be absolutely correct, that you can take .freight from the city of Liverpool, England, and ship it via the Panama canal to Vancouver and thence as far east as Brandon, 120 miles west of Winnipeg, at a lower rate than you can ship direct from Liverpool to Winnipeg. There is something radically wrong with a freight rate structure that permits inequalities of that kind to exist; consequently the question of the whole of our rate structure is more than a question of carrying coal from Sydney to Montreal. On the other hand, if it can be done, I shall be the first one to advocate the reducing of rates between those two cities. We ought to use all the Canadian coal we possibly can. I do not believe we ought to ship any coal into this Dominion when we can supply coal from our own mines. I remember away back in 1918, before this question had become as important as it is, I was one of a committee of three representing the city of Winnipeg who went to the mines ,of Alberta to see if they could supply the Winnipeg market. Prior to 1918 practically all the coal that came into the Manitoba market was United States coal. I made an investigation in probably a very humble way; /but I found that Canadian coal could be used for the Canadian market and I made a recommendation along those line^. To-day the Alberta coal mines have practically a monopoly in* the markets of Manitoba. If we can develop the coal mines of this country, it ought to be done. But when we are told that the developing of our Canadian coal mines would do away with the question of unemployment, I must take issue with my hon. friends on both sides of the House. Even to-day, favourable ,as I am to the proposal that the Canadian National Railways should give orders to the
Nova Scotia Miners

.mines of Nova Scotia, that would not do away with the problem of unemployment in that province. The problem will still exist, although it may not exist in its present aggravated form.
Another phase of the question that I want to deal with was raised by the seconder of the motion. I was pleased indeed to find that the miners of Nova Scotia had at least one of their own ranks in the House, but he is sitting on the wrong side of this chamber if he hopes to get redress for them. If he wishes to accomplish anything for them he must come over and sit in this little group of which I am one representative in the House of Commons. He stated, as one of the arguments by way of condemnation of the Liberal party in this House-and I condemn them just as much as he does

that they sent troops down to Nova [DOT]Scotia last year. Anyone who sends troops into a place like Nova Scotia, where the men are out on strike to fight for decent living conditions, will always have my condemnation. But I have not forgotten how in 1919 his own leader sent troops into the city of Winnipeg. I have not forgotten how those troops shot down men, women and children on the streets of that city, and before he starts looking over to this side of the House and condemning others, he had better look to his own leader.


Mr. MACDOUGALL:: Will the hon. member give any instance since confederation when troops were sent to the province of Nova Scotia by a Conservative government, and any instance where we ever had a strike in the coal fields of Nova Scotia under a Conservative government?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am thankful to say that I am not conversant with the politics of Nova Scotia, consequently I cannot deal with what happened under a Conservative government or any other government in that province. What I do know is that the Conservative leader in this House sent troops into Winnipeg in 1919.
Mr MioQUARRIE: Would the hon. member suggest that they were not needed?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I certainly do. They were sent there for provocative purposes and nothing else.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: That is not so.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I happened to be there, and I know, whereas the hon. gentleman was not there.


William Garland McQuarrie: The hon. gentleman is wrong.


Abraham Albert Heaps: If the hon. gentleman has
any question to ask and will ask it in the

manner customary in this House, I shall be glad to answer it, but I have no desire to enter into any conversations across the floor. I have in my hand a copy of a paper published in Halifax called the Halifax Herald. I do not know its politics. All I know is that it says:
The Herald is devoted to public service, with fair and unbiased news stories.
So anything published in this paper, I presume, will be true. This article is dated December 28 and states:
Replying to charges that conditions at these two collieries were not better than they had been in the past, Attorney General John C. Douglas declared he would call a meeting of the government to-morrow to discuss the matter, when he would propose a solution of the trouble. He advocated procuring a coal contract from the Canadian National! Railways through the federal government, which would enable the corporation to carry on banking operations throughout the winter, the local government, if necessary, to bear the expense.
This comes from Halifax, and I have heard nothing further about the Conservative government in that city taking any action in regard to the coal situation. I am coming to the conclusion that a good deal of the trouble lies nearer to Halifax than to the city of Ottawa. Might I quote now from something that was stated in this House on February 24, 1925? I presume the gentleman who made this statement did so with full ' authority. Mr. Kyte was formerly a member of this House, although I do not know for what constituency he stood.
M'r. CHAPLIN (Lincoln):	He is at home
now.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I do not object to his sitting at home. Mr. Kyte said:
Knowing the conditions in Sydney at the present time I accept the statement attributed to Mr. McLurg in this despatch; there is no doubt or question about it. But my right hon. friend and his friends will doubt it, and I question whether they will be very highly elated when they find that the statement made here is true. The question of unemployment, therefore, is about settled so far as Sydne3r and Glace Bay are concerned. If this despatch is true, and I believe it is; if the steel plant will soon be working on a basis of one hundred per cent production, then there will be employment for every steel worker in the city of Sydney and for every coal miner in the county of Cape Breton.
Within twelve months of this statement being made by one of the former representatives of Cape Breton, we are again faced with the situation that there is more trouble in that area. We were told in this Statement that if at that time the question could only be settled-and we were assured it was-there would be no further unemployment amongst the steel workers or coal miners of Cape

Nova Scotia Miners
Breton. What do we find? We find that to-day there is the same acute problem in Cape Breton as there was a vear ago. and I am satisfied that so long as the British Empire Steel Corporation remains in Nova Scotia the same situation will exist there.
Last summer, when the question of relief was so acute, I received a letter from a lady in the mining area of Nova Scotia, and perhaps it is worth while giving the substance of that communication. She said:
Before Besco came into Nova Scotia we did not know what poverty or trouble was in this particular area; but since Besco has come in, we have always had trouble in this particular district.
That seems to sum up the situation fairly well. Since the British Empire Steel Corporation became organized it has always been a question of a fight either between the government and Besco or between Besco and the men who are in its employ. There was a time not very long ago when Besco threatened the citv of Sydney, telling the people of that city that if they, Besco, could not get their way they would allow grass to grow in the streets of Sydney. Any corporation which has the power to threaten a city like Sydney should not be allowed to continue in business). If they can make such threats to a city and! then come here and make further threats as they have done for quite a time, then I say that it is time there was a policy not only on the part of this government but on the part of the government of Nova Scotia as well. The question is, therefore, is Besco going to rule Nova Beotia, or are the common people of Nova Scotia going to rule?
At six o'clock the House took recess.
After Recess
The House resumed at eight o'clock.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Mr. Speaker, in opening my
remarks I mentioned that I was extremely grateful to the hon. gentleman opposite for having introduced this particular question this afternoon. I was glad to notice also that the co-operation of the group to which I belong was sought. I think I would have been far more satisfied, however, if the hon. gentleman who introduced this question had given those interested some notice of his intention to do so. It so happens that this afternoon the ieader of the group to which I belong is out of the city. He knows far more about this question than I do; he has studied it from every angle and could have dealt with it in a more able manner than I possibly could. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre
(Mr. Woodsworth) and -the late member for East Calgary. Mr. Irvine, introduced this question into this House on many occasions. As a new member I am very glad to see that there are several other members now in this House who are taking up the cudgels on behalf,
I hope, of the miners of Nova Scotia. I say miners advisedly, because in the discussion this afternoon, if I heard correctly, one of the hon. members opposite said he represented Besco. To me that appears rather a frank admission *and a rather unusual statement to make in this House.


Mr. MACDONALD (Richmond-West Cape Breton):: Might I ask the hon. member for
North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps) who on this side of the House made that statement?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I think it was one of the
hon. gentlemen sitting over there. I do not know his name or the constituency he represents, but I do not think there is any doubt that the statement was made.


Arthur Meighen: That statement was not
made, as the hon. member himself knows.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Some hon. members near me say tlie statement was made; others say it wa.j not made. If such a statement was not made I will be the first to withdraw my -remarks.


John Alexander (1883-1945) Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I was in the House-


Hewitt Bostock: Unless it is a question of privilege there is no reason why any hon. member should interrupt the hon. member who has the floor.


John Alexander (1883-1945) Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask-


Hewitt Bostock: When an hon. member has the floor no interruptions Should take place without his permission.


Arthur Meighen: Mr. Speaker, I submit
that it is a question of privilege.


Hewitt Bostock: If it is a question of
privilege the right hon. gentleman must raise it as such.


Arthur Meighen: I do raise it. The hon. member has said that a member of this House, of the party to the left of the Speaker, stated that he was here representing Besco. No member has a right to- represent a company in this House, and no member does. The hon. member has no right to ascribe that language to any member of this House, and especially has he not the right when his assertion is untrue.
Nova Scotia Miners


Abraham Albert Heaps: I think the right hon. leader of the opposition has stated more than a question of privilege; he also made an assertion which I do not believe is true. With respect to the statement I made, there are members about me who heard that Statement made this afternoon.


Robert James Manion: May I ask my hon. friend to name the member?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I think it was the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Cantley).


Thomas Cantley: Mr. Speaker, I made no such assertion. Anyone who knows me and who knows the province of Nova Scotia must be aware that I have been opposing Besco since Besco came into being.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am very glad to hear the
statement of the hon. gentleman, and I accept it. I hope he will continue to oppose Besco, as I do. I am also extremely glad to notice the awakened interest of hon. gentlemen opposite in the conditions of the workers of this Dominion. I hope that interest will grow in all parts of the House. I am always extremely anxious to have these questions aired.
* I listened to a rather peculiar piece of arithmetic this afternoon from one hon. gentleman opposite. He stated that about $400,000,000 had been contributed by the Maritime provinces to the loss on the Canadian National railways, and because of that loss he claimed the Maritime provinces were now entitled to some kind of consideration. If that is correct, and we are to go on that assumption, then I think every part of the Dominion can expect something from the Canadian National railways, and if every part of Canada should ask something on that particular score, I wonder what would be the end of the Canadian National railways. That peculiar kind of arithmetic reminds me of a little story which it may not be out of place to give the House. A boy in the city of London was selling newspapers, and he became desperately hungry. Not knowing how to appease his hunger, a rather peculiar idea struck him. He met a kindly looking old gentleman and asked him to give him sixpence, He said to the old gentleman, "If you will give me sixpence, I will show you how to make ninepence qut of it." The kindly old gentleman took him at his word and gave him sixpence. The boy then went over to a bakeshop, bought himself a threepenny loaf of bread, and came back with threepence in his hand, which he gave back to the kindly old gentleman. The old gentleman asked the boy, "How do you make ninepence out of

sixpence?" "It is very simple," said the boy, "You have got threepence, I have a threepenny loaf; that is sixpence; and the baker has threepence, that is ninepence." That is how some hon. gentlemen opposite are dealing with the loss on the Canadian National railways-trying to stretch it a good deal further than perhaps it ought to go.
There is one other phase which perhaps has not been touched upon by hon. members representing Nova Scotia in this House, and that is the question of evolution in industry at the present time. I think we all must realize that the same problems now confronting Nova Scotia are confronting the mining areas in practically all parts of the world, and that the troubles of Nova Scotia are no different from the troubles of the miners in the United States and in Great Britain. What do we find? In Great Britain a royal commission has been appointed to inquire into the mining industry. We find the same thing at least being mooted to the south of the line, where the miners have been on strike many, many months.
The conditions in Nova Scotia may be due to various causes. They may be due to the fact that to-day less coal is being consumed in the Dominion of Canada. In the city I come from, coal for cooking purposes has almost become a thing of the past; electricity is taking its place. Even here in Ottawa oil is taking the place of coal, to a great extent, for heating purposes. When we find this change taking place in industry I think we ought to recognize the facts and deal with the problem, not purely in a partisan spirit, but as a national problem, in a national way; and one of the things I regret in the House this afternoon is that while this question was introduced as one affecting the poverty-stricken areas of Nova Scotia, it resolved itself subsequently into the question whether hon. gentlemen to my left had any right to sit on the government benches. The misery of the miners in Nova Scotia or poverty in any part of Canada should not be used in that way at all, because wherever human suffering prevails the issues are far more grave than the mere question of whether the Liberals or the Tories should sit on the government benches.
One of the speakers this afternoon referred to the over-stocked markets. If the markets are over-stocked to-day, say in Montreal or some other part of Canada, how will a reduction of freight rates bring about immediate relief to the miners of Nova Scotia. Even if you transport the coal for nothing, if there is no market for it it cannot be sold. So the

Nova Scotia Miners
question lies deeper than the mere question of freight rates as between certain cities of the east, or as between certain other parts of the country.
We have had sitting in Nova Scotia a commission that reported recently. If that commission was going to solve the problem of the coal miners in Nova Scotia, I should indeed feel very happy, but somehow or other, from the very brief opportunity I have had of perusing the report of that commission, I find nothing in it to give me any hope that at any time in the near future the problems of Nova Scotia are going to be solved. Why? The basic facts in connection with tihe mining situation in Nova Scotia have been overlooked by that very commission. The question of a decent minimum standard of livelihood for the miners is something that was not properly dealt with by the commission, and so long as the miners can work only two or three days a week, so long as they have not the right to a decent minimum living standard, you are going to have trouble in Nova Scotia or in any other part of the Dominion where the same conditions prevail. The question arises:	Can
those miners in Nova Scotia attain to that standard of living to which every human being is entitled? I very much doubt whether they can, under the conditions as they exist there. What do I find in the report of that commission? They claim there should be a revision of wages every six months, and what is to be the basis upon which wages are going to be paid? The basis upon which' wages are to be paid is the ability of the industry to pay wages. Now if you go to some manufacturers land ask them what ability they have to pay wages, some will tell you they cannot afford to pay wages at all. We in the Labour movement claim that wages must be a first charge on industry, irrespective of profits. That is something which the commissioners in the Nova Scotia inquiry entirely overlooked; they looked to profits first, and to wages second.
Thinking over the discussion here this afternoon, I have been trying to arrive at its real objective. Has it been the question of alleviating the condition of the miners in Nova Scotia? If that is the question, I am heartily in accord1 with the motion made to adjourn the House; in fact, Mr. Speaker, I rose in my place and voted in favour of adjourning the House to discuss that particular question. But what do I find in the afternoon's discussion? The man whose name has been most prominently mentioned all
afternoon is Sir Henry Thornton. Why does the name of the manager of the Canadian National Railways loom so large in this discussion, when we are dealing with the poverty of the miners of Nova Scotia? I am just wondering, Mr. Speaker, whether the poverty of the miners of Nova Scotia is not being used as a smoke screen from behind which to attack Sir Henry Thornton. So far as Sir Henry Thornton and his management of the railway is concerned, instead of being attacked by hon. members in this House he ought to have their full support in trying to bring the railway into a condition where, instead of it being a liability, it will be an asset to the Dominion of Canada. I am rather interested in that particular phase of this situation. I am not interested in Sir Henry Thornton as an individual; I have never seen him and should not know him if I did see him; but I am interested in the fact that the people of Canada to-day have got a railway, and they have got it not because they wanted to own it but because of the failure and blunders of the managements of these various roads under private ownership. For that reason they Came into the hands of the government, and the government, or in other words the nation, found itself with a liability. It should be the duty of this House to try to convert that liability, as I said a moment ago, into an asset. Sir Henry Thornton and the employees of the Canadian National Railway cannot feel that they have the confidence of the people if the management of the system is to be subject to attacks at all times in this House. I have seen, Mr. Speaker, similar oases before. An exact parallel is the condition as it exists between the Canadian National and the Canadian Pacific. The greatest trouble with Sir Henry Thornton to-day, in the opinion of some people, is that he has become too strong a competitor for the Canadian Pacific; and if instead of achieving a considerable measure of success in the position he now occupies he had allowed the road to go from bad to worse, then not one word would have been heard in this House about Sir Henry Thornton, not one word such as has been uttered here during the past few days. Why should Sir Henry Thornton's name be brought into this discussion? I think that one who manages a public utility should be given a free hand. If he committed blunders or mistakes in the management of that utility it should be the first duty of this House to get rid of him. Now the question arises: is Sir Henry Thornton making a success of
Nova Scotia Miners

the position he occupies, or is ihe a failure? If hon. gentlemen opposite think that Sir Henry Thornton is not filling satisfactorily the position to which he was appointed, then let them come in an honest and straightforward manner and ask for his dismissal. It would be far better to do that than to make flank attacks from time to time upon him.
When it comes to a question of sympathy with the miners of Nova Scotia, for those men who are suffering so much to-day, I yield to no one. I am prepared to sit down and discuss the situation with any one, no matter in what quarter of the chamber he may sit, in order to try to arrive at a satisfactory solution of this problem. If it is a question of reducing freight rates, let us have a reduction ; if there is something wrong with the attitude of the corporation that owns the mines, let us know it; but let us stop following a pettifogging attitude such as so many hon. members opposite have adopted in discussing this particular question,-for example such as " that we on this side had 200,000 more votes at the last election than hon. gentlemen on the other side." What has that got to do with the situation? If my hon. friend opposite who dealt with that aspect of the situation wanted to be logical, he should send a cable over to the Conservative government in Great Britain telling them that they have got no right to occupy the treasury benches because they too to-day represent a minority of the votes cast in the Mother Country.


Robert James Manion: They do not do anything of the sort at the present time.
M'r. HEAPS: I think my hon. friend is wrong.


Robert James Manion: Give us the figures, then.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I will in a minute. The combined vote cast for the Liberal and Labour groups in the House was 600,000 more than that cast for the Conservative party.
ML MANION: They had more votes than any other group in the House, which is not true of the present government.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I hope my hon. friend will not shift his position; I am prepared to deal with that question. I made the statement that the Conservative party in Great Britain do not represent a majority of the votes cast.


Robert James Manion: The Conservative party
here does.


Abraham Albert Heaps: They certainly do not; they represent more votes than the Liberal party, that is all.


Hewitt Bostock: I must ask hon. gentlemen not to interrupt. I would also point out that the motion before the House comes under rule 39. It relates to a condition of acute distress in Nova Scotia and nothing else.
ML. HEAPS: There appears to be some distress among hon. gentlemen on either side, but it is not akin to the distress which the miners in Nova Scotia are suffering-it is in the nature of political distress.


Robert James Manion: Is the hon. gentleman defending the miners of Nova Scotia, or is he defending this government?


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am not defending the government. The question we are discussing is the prevailing poverty in Nova Scotia, and the hon. gentleman who departed most from the consideration of that particular aspect of it was the hon. member who has just asked me a question. I do not think I have departed very much from the real issue; but if I have not adhered to it as closely as I should, I as a new member would have expected older members of the House to set me a better example. I should not have wandered at all from the merits of the question had I not been led into following the ramifications of some hon. members opposite.
Now, how can a remedy be found for the relief of the men who are suffering in Nova Scotia? I want to say as one of the Labour group that if a proper remedy can be shown me, whether it is to be found in a reduction of freight rates or along other lines, I am prepared to sit down and discuss the matter and to try to arrive at some basis whereby the mining industry of Canada will be placed on a solid and permanent foundation.
Some hon. members opposite are anxious to know what the policy of the government is on this particular question. I am anxious to learn that, and I am also desirous of knowing what hon. gentlemen opposite have to propose. I have been trying to find that out this afternoon. Let me say that I am neither a defender of the Conservatives nor a defender of the Liberals. I am a defender, however, of Labour, and I am one who criticizes most severely the conditions that we find today in Nova Scotia. For that the Liberals are just as much to blame as the Conservatives. No political party should come here and try to make political capital out of such a situation; all hon. members should unite in endeavouring to find a means of relief. As to the members of the Labour party, it would have been only a matter of simple courtesy to notify us that this matter was to come up this after-

Nova Scotia Miners
noon, but we had not the slightest inkling of it. Personally, I was taken completely by surprise. At the same time I was agreeably surprised that this question was raised this afternoon by hon. gentlemen representing that part of the Maritime provinces affected.
Now, Mr. Speaker, if hon. gentlemen opposite are interested in the figures of the popular vote in Great Britain, I have them here. They are contained in a work called the Constitutional Year Book, published by the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations of Great Britain. This is the authority I was relying on when I quoted the figures to hon. gentlemen opposite a few minutes ago. The figures of the exact vote cast for the Conservatives are 8,040,835; the vote for the Liberal and Labour parties combined was 8,600,123, yet the Conservative party have a two to one membership in the British House.
I dco not wish to detain the House at greater length. My colleague (Mr. Woodsworth) will soon be here and possibly he will be able to shed a great deal more light on the question than manj^ other hon. members who have spoken this afternoon. When he does speak I think he will be able to tell the House something about Besco and the miners of Nova Scotia. My own knowledge of the situation is very slight indeed. In conclusion let me say that if any hon. member has anything to offer which will tend to solve this problem I shall accord to him the fullest co-operation and the fullest support.
Miss AGNES C. MacPHAIL (Southeast Grey): I desire to extend1 to the members from the Maritime provinces, particularly those members from the coal areas, my very sincere congratulations upon the fact that they are at least interested in the problems of the miners of Nova Scotia. I think I can quite honestly say that that is an improvement over the attitude of the late members from the colliery districts, who, when conditions were much worse than they are now claimed in this House that there was nothing wrong with the condition of the miners in that district. It might be worth while to point out that one, and possibly two, of the late members are now dispensing justice, I suppose in a fair and impartial manner. May I say to members from the Maritime provinces that they missed an opportunity of being gracious-in fact an opportunity they should not have missed: that of recalling to this House that four years ago the people who championed the cause of the miners of Nova Scotia were the Labour members in this
House, and it was then not such an easy task as it is to-day. I quite remember that the first big debate I heard in this House was when Mr. Irvine moved the adjournment of the House, as has been done to-day, to discuss the conditions of the miners in Nova Scotia. We all know, I think, the history of the corporation in question. The member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworthl has seen to it, I think, that this House dhould understand something of the formation of the company briefly called Besco, the British Empire Steel Corporation. At the time the adjournment was moved in 1922, the company was asking the men to take a wage cut of 37i per cent, as I recall clearly. It seemed to me at the time a very stiff reduction to ask them to accept at one time. Besco was formed by the merging of twenty-four companies with a capital of $83,000,000, forming one company with a capital of $102,000,000. They have a very resounding name, the British Empire Steel Corporation. They capitalize patriotism in their name. I think the organization of the company has always been unsound. I think it is based purely on profit. There are only two places to get the profit, either out of the consumer or out of the miner. Since there are more consumers and they make more noise, the company takes all it can get out of the miners, but what it cannot get out out of the miners it skilfully takes from the [DOT] consumer.
For my part I take a great deal of personal satisfaction in the debate to-day. I should like to draw the attention of the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Duff) to the facts brought out. In the former debate he thought I was not telling the truth about conditions as they existed' there. It seems to me, from what I saw when I was there and from what I have read of the conditions, that the company was unsound; that it was a company exceedingly favoured by governments, pot only federal but provincial, not only (Liberal but Conservative-all sorts and shades of government. It was given subsidies, it was given bonuses and it was given tariff protection. It was given concessions of all sorts, and when the enraged and sullen miners attacked the property of the company it was given military protection. It seems this cor-iupt company-I think we can call it corrupt because of its corrupt foundation-proceeded then to corrupt governments. I do not know whether it came this far, but in the east that is not only a conjecture but a proven fact; and the miners were not in a fair field. It ,was not easy for them to get the things they wanted in a perfectly honest and correct
Nova Scotia Miners

way. Their constituencies, when they sought for representatives for themselves, were gerrymandered out of all recognition. The company forced the wages of the men below the subsistence level. When the miners got desperate and rebelled, the law, also corrupted by the company through the government, imposed some very severe sentences. These men were sent to gaol. They came out embittered, and were possibly the worst influence in the colliery towns. When I came back from Nova Scotia last year I said that if I lived in Glace Bay and had no way of getting away from .those conditions I would have been as "red" as anyone I saw there. I meant that. I do not wonder that these people have no respect for justice and think there is no justice in the law. How can you have such respect when you know those who have been recently elevated to the bench? The miners simply are sullen and for the time beaten, but if the same tactics are continued the trouble is there and will bubble up again.
I am willing to do almost anything to relieve the conditions in Nova Scotia. If it Is d'esired to vote a sum of money to tide the people over, or if a lower rate on coal, a statutory rate, is wanted, or almost anything you can mention that is the decent sort of thing to do, I am agreeable. But I do not-want hon. members to imagine that I think that will relieve the trouble, because it will not. I certainly did not like the attack on Sir Henry Thornton this afternoon; I really think it was cheap. Perhaps I should not say that, but it sounds like that to me. I was astounded that the gracious member for Fort William (Mr. Manion), who is always so sweet and charming-


Robert James Manion: Does my hon. friend mean to say that I attacked Sir Henry Thornton? I never mentioned his name.


Miss MacPHAIL:: No, I am sorry. I do
not mean to say that you attacked him. I mean to say you looked very angry, not in .the least like yourself.
But referring again to the attack that was made so often on Sir Henry Thornton, and all in the name of the miners of Nova Scotia too, it looked to me as though there might be people who were afraid that this enterprise, this public ownership concern called the National Railways, was really going to be successful, and the dream that private capital has undoubtedly had that they would one day control all the railways in Canada wa3 apt to fade into thin air. I wonder, and I suggest to the government-maybe I had better add, as it seems to be customary, if

there- is a government-that the same chance be given to the miners who cannot get work in the mines and who have not been getting steady work for a long time-to go on the land in Canada as is given to immigrants outside of Canada. Also I would say that one of the evils that I saw when I was in the east was that the British Empire Steel Corporation is a sort of little immigration bureau, and that immigrants come in there to bring down the .wages of the workers when there is only a little work to go round among a great many people. I do not think that should be permitted to continue. It seems to me the government ought to have some control. Let the government's immigration policy be the only immigration policy, and do not let all the waterlogged concerns in this country run a private immigration concern of their own.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Can the hon. member tell
us what the government's immigration policy is?


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am no more posted
on the government's policy than my hon. friend; so that possibly he knows what it is. I only know what I hear in the corridors and read in the newspapers.


Charles A. Stewart: If the hon. member will content himself for a few days he will find out all about it.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: I am going to tell the
House the steps we will have to take before we reach a permanent solution of what is to me too big a problem, and what I think is almost too big for the members of the House. Still these are the only suggestions I can think of to offer to hon. members. I think the labour men, the miners, should be given every opportunity to organize, and that the almost contemptuous propaganda that has been circulated against class organization in this country should cease. The miners have just as much right to organize and to work aggressively for better living conditions as have the manufacturers or bankers or farmers or any other class group. The government, the Liberals, or the Conservatives, should they be the government, should keep their hands off gerrymandering. It is not fit for decent hands in any case, and the miners have a perfect right to representation as such in this House. I am pleased indeed with the representation which they have secured. It is better than they had, and I will go one step further and say that when they represent themselves the situation will be still better.
The co-operative societies that have been started in the colliery towns are an excellent thing. After all, co-operation is not a matter

Nova Scotia Miners
of dollars and cents; co-operation is a philosophy of life, but it is one which the British Empire Steel Corporation does not understand. Before there is a real settlement there will have to be a complete reorganization of the British Empire Steel Corporation, and the man whose name should be dragged on the floor of this House is McLurg, not Sir Henry Thornton. If there is a man in Canada for whom I have absolutely no respect, that man is McLurg. Evidently the thing he wants out of the company is profits and profits only. The thing I want out of any company, whether it be a steel or coal or steamship company, or all three combined, is the happiness of those who work in that industry. There will have to be a reorganization, and finally-this may not be for another hundred years-any such huge industry must be organized on a straight co-operative basis, so that when people in the industry want to work and make that industry a success, they will benefit by their efforts to work and to get markets. At present there is no encouragement for the men, as anyone who views the situation can easily see. I am sorry I have nothing more constructive to offer to the House, but at least I believe the things I have said, and I will not bore the House longer.


Mr. W. W. KENNEDY (Winnipeg South Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I cannot claim the
privilege of entering the lists in this discussion bearing the colours of a Maritime righter. I was going to say that because of the special question in issue this was to me a matter of some regret; but when I remember the traditional ability with which men from the Maritime provinces have represented the needs of their constituencies it would be presumption on my part to suggest that they need any additional help.
The matter now before the House is not one which should be tinged in any way by politics or discussions that savour of politics. Surely the need of men and women, honest Canadian citizens in distress, has an appeal higher than politics, and I believe it is on a higher plane than party politics or party discussion that it will be received in general by members from every comer of this House. Although not coming from the Maritimes, so that this matter has for me no special local significance, may I say that I shall always cherish the ambition that so long as it shall be my privilege to occupy a seat in this House, an appeal such as this coming from whatever corner of the country it may, will find in me a ready champion and a sincere friend.
What is the matter before the House? What is the subject at issue? The picture has been ably drawn by the mover and the seconder of this resolution. It is a picture of men, women and children, honest hardworking people in Nova Scotia, in acute distress who appeal to the representatives of Canada sitting in this House for relief, and for relief in what way? Is it relief in kind? Is it relief in money? Is it relief by doles? No; it is a happy change from that form of relief? It is the call of workingmen asking not for doles, but for work, that thereby they may earn the necessary money with which to buy food for their wives and families. That is an appeal which, I believe, will find a ready response from all corners of this House.
I have had no more opportunity to consider this matter than other hon. members. The hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps) camplained that he was taken by surprise. I cannot help wondering what he would have told us had he been prepared.
The question after all, is not involved. It is simply this, that many thousands of men, women and children in the coal areas of Nova Scotia are in dire want and distress. There are some twenty thousand, I am told. The fact that they are in such need is vouched for and stressed by representatives from that province, and we can take their statements as being correct. They say these people want work; that they seek relief through work. To my mind the only thing for this House to consider is: First,, should they be given relief; second, is this House in a position to give them relief, and if so, shall we do it?
Do they need relief? This question need not be prolonged. Can they be given relief? It has been suggested by the mover and seconder of this resolution that certain concerns have been interviewed and they have stated that they will, at considerable inconvenience to themselves, order extra stores of coal which they do not presently need, upon the condition that the Canadian National Railways will reduce its rates from the coal fields to Montreal to an extent in parity with the rates obtaining from Alberta to the central provinces; that the result of this will be to furnish work to those miners and tide them over this difficulty. If that is all that stands in the way, will any hon. gentleman sitting either to the right or ,to the left of Mr. Speaker deny such relief? I sincerely hope not.
During this discussion there has been talk of the principles of the Liberal party, of the principles of the Conservative party, of the principles of the Progressive party; but as to what those principles are I do not intend to enter into any discussion except to say this:
Nova Scotia Miners

The present question is not one of principles or policies of any of the parties; it is the practical question of people in distress asking for relief and desirous of knowing whether we are able to give it?
Although I am a new member here, I suggest to hon. members that the rank and file of the common people of this country from east to west are more concerned with the immediate solution of problems such as this than with the policies ox platforms of any particular party, whatever party it may be. If *hon. members will approach this matter on that broad plane, forgetting all party differences, forgetting whatever of political kudos they may lose in this discussion in a party way, they will gain, many-fold in the hearts and minds of the common people of this Dominion. Let us give these people relief.


Hon. J. H. KING (East Kootenay, Minister of Public Works):: When the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. Johnstone) introduced this motion to-day one would naturally have thought that the debate that would ensue would be confined strictly to the subject matter brought up for discussion. The hon. member drew to the attention of the House the condition at prese.it existing in Nova Scotia in and around the mines at Sydney, and that would seem to be fairly the extent to which the debate should have gone. We have wandered far afield however, and it seems to me that a good deal of extraneous discussion has taken place. For the time being I shall deal with the situation just as I see it and as in my opinion it affects the miners and the population generally of those places that are suffering reverses just now from unfair or unreasonable conditions in the Sydney district. My good friend from Fort William (Mr. Manion) did not hesitate to-day to advise the House of the great success of the present Premier of Nova Scotia in settling the strike in the mining region of Sydney last year within three weeks of his being returned to power. Well, if Premier Rhodes succeeded in such a marked degree in smoothing things out; if the conditions are as stated by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy) and by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Cahan); and if all that is required to improve the state of affairs in Nova Scotia is the transportation of 6,000 tons of coal per month for two and a half months to the city of Montreal, recouping the Canadian National Railways for any losses they might incur in carrying the coal-why should not the legislature of Nova Scotia take some steps to deal with the question? Is it not primarily 
the duty of the municipality or municipalities concerned? And if it is beyond the means of the municipality to take any effective action why should not the government of Nova Scotia make some effort to have this 15,000 tons of coal transported to the markets of Montreal? It would have been better, I think, if hon. gentlemen had discussed this question in relation to the amendment to the Address in reply to the Speech from the Throne; they might have considered the subject in the ordinary course in that debate. But instead on this occasion, for a purpose which I am yet to understand, parliament has been thrown into a discussion which so far as I can see has been of no great profit either to the members of the House themselves or to the miners of Nova Scotia.
To-day the hon. member for Fort William declared that this government-if, as he said, there was a government-had no policy. May I ask the hon. gentleman to tell us what has been the policy of governments in Canada in this regard for a number of years? We have had a certain duty on coal affording a moderate protection for this Canadian product, and the only change in policy which has been introduced in years was the undertaking by this government last year to equalize the difference between the duties on slack and lump coal. The government at that time was severely criticized and we were told that in making the duty on slack coal equal to the duty on lump we were seriously interfering with industrial development in the central provinces of Canada. During the last election the leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) on his tour through western Canada advocated policies that would appeal to the people in the districts in which he happened to be speaking. When in Alberta he told the people in the mining districts there that if returned to power he would place a duty on coal and would also take from the treasury whatever sum was necessary to transport Alberta coal into Ontario and the central provinces. Is that the policy of hon. gentlemen opposite? If it is, what will be the result? It will require a duty of $2 or $2.50 a ton to make it possible to carry that coal from Alberta to the central provinces and that sum will have to be added at once to the cost of manufacturing; and having added that extra cost to manufacturing you must increase the duties on manufactured products in Canada. When dealing with the matter in Alberta my right hon. friend seemed to be interested only in the particular community in which he chanced to be speaking at the time. If he had crossed the mountains into what is known as the Crowsnest.

Nova Scotia Miners
coal field, one of the oldest and best coal areas in that part of the Dominion, probably better developed than any other area outside Vancouver island, the leader of the opposition would hardly have advocated the same thing, for if he had preached that doctrine there the people of that district would have told him that his policy would close the collieries in the Crowsnest. And why? Because of the coal produced in the Crowsnest region almost ninety per cent goes to the United States. And the House will understand that under the Eordney tariff the moment any country increases the duty on coal coming from the United States the American duty automatically goes into effect against that country, the same rate being imposed.
Now under existing conditions, is this the time to discuss this question in relation to the miners of Sydney? I do not think it is. ^If the government of Nova Scotia should indicate to the government at Ottawa their inability to arrange for the transportation of
15,000	tons of coal from Sydney to Montreal I am satisfied that this government would be glad to take into consideration some means of assisting that province in its difficulty. But no such overtures have been made. Why not be fair in the matter? Why should weestablsh a very dangerous precedent and provide in the present situation for the Canadian National Railways to carry this coal from Sydney to Montreal at a loss? If we did so there is no reason why some other industry which is struggling, as we understand many are struggling to-day, should not come to the government and ask that the Canadian National Railways be directed to carry its particular products below cost or at cost. If that is to be the treatment meted out to the Canadian Naional Railways, if that is the desire of hon. members either from the Maritime provinces or from Ontario or Quebec or elsewhere, then the Lord help the Canadian National Railways. Some other solution must be found. I do not think the debate this afternoon should have gone very wide of the actual points at issue; I think it might well have been confined to the immediate relief required for that district. I believe this question could have been discussed in the minister's office with better results so far as the mining population is concerned than this discussion in the House will produce. However, it is not for me to say that the discussion should not have taken place. I will say this-and I think I say it fairly-that the discussion this afternoon has been entirely beyond the bounds of the motion. I do not see any great good to be
gained by prolonging this discussion which must eventually come up on the resolution of the right hon. leader of the opposition.


Arthur Meighen: The Minister of Public Works (Mr. King, Kootenay) has a very poor opinion of the discussion which has so far taken place. I am not sure whether or not his opinion applies to the entire debate, including his own address; but if there may have been cause for criticism on the ground that some of the remarks have been rather far from the real point at issue, that criticism will fall equally on the minister and all other members who have taken part. I think before proceeding to a very brief discussion of what is before the House I would be justified in making some comment on words which have fallen rather recklessly from the lips of the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps).
1 was not in the House when he opened his address, and it was during my absence that the following words which I have since secured were spoken. Referring to an hon. member on this side of the chamber, he said:
I have not forgotten how in 1919 his own leader-
Referring to myself.
-sent troops into the city of Winnipeg. I have not forgotten how those troops shot down men, women and children on the streets of that city, and before he starts looking over to this side of the House and condemning others, he had better look to his own leader.
The hon. member has early entered into the service of the Liberal party, and appears to have all the necessary qualifications to distinguish himself in that company. He has a blindness to fact-I had almost said to truth-and a want of logic that will make him doubtless a boon companion of hon. gentlemen opposite. His utterance in this House that he has not forgotten how the leader of this party in 1919 sent troops into Winnipeg, which troops shot down men, women and children on the streets, is one which, for malignity and utter disregard of truth would, I think, be without precedent in the history of this House. In the first place, I say-and challenge contradiction from the records- that the government of that time, of which I was a member but not the leader, did not send one single troop from anywhere into Winnipeg. I say further that no request was made to send outside troops into Winnipeg, and that the government, as regards troops from outside in relation to that disturbance, took no action whatsoever. In this regard I was once contradicted. I challenge contradiction now. I have investigated the facts again-
Nova Scotia Miners


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: May I ask a question? Under whose authority did the troops act?


Arthur Meighen: We are speaking first of sending troops in. That was the assertion of the colleague of my hon. friend. No troops whatever were sent into the province of Manitoba, neither cavalry, infantry nor any others.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May I ask again, under whose authority did the troops act, and under whose authority did the mounted police act?
Mr. ME1GHEN: I will come to that in a moment, but I think it would be wise in the first place to set right the errors made by the colleague of my hon. friend. What the government had to do under the law of that day was to respond, if it deemed there was need, to any demand of the municipality for assistance from the militia. The government took no part whatsoever; the government of Canada, none at all. There were troops in Winnipeg at that time; there were some troops of the garrison battalion, the 10th, a very few who were iust enlisted or who had been enlisted and were not yet demobilized. There were also some few of the depot squadron of the Fort Garry Horse. But because of the disturbance at that time, there was a force of approximately 3,000 voluntarily enlisted citizens of that city.


James Shaver Woodsworth: May I ask under whose direction that voluntary force was mobilized?


Arthur Meighen: There was no mobilization. They enlisted voluntarily for the protection of their own city. Does my hon. friend object to people doing that if they deem it necessary?


James Shaver Woodsworth: May I ask my
right hon. friend if he will deny that they enlisted under the urgent solicitation of officers directly responsible to this government?


Arthur Meighen: I do not know on whose solicitation they enlisted; I do not think they reeded any. They enlisted because they felt that the need was there. I think I have now passed the point of discussion in so far as the assertion goes that troops were sent in by the government. They were not. Nor were any troops called out by the government. The troops were called out by the mayor of Winnipeg, and that only once. The situation was taken care of by the civil force, the mounted police. The troops to which I have referred were called out by the mayor 
of that city, who deemed the disturbance of sufficient magnitude and the peril so imminent as to warrant his action, but the troops so called out never fired a shot and only stood in readiness to support the civil power should that power prove unequal to the occasion.
I do not stop to make any comment on the unfortunate occurrences of that time, but I will say that a situation which arises because of the most unusal occurrences of 1919 is wholly different from a situation arising solely because men are hungTy and starving for want of work. Civil power must in all cases be supported. Law and order must, under all circumstances be obeyed and sustained, and I will never find fault with any government, however much I may be opposed to it, which in order to preserve what is essential to the community-law and order-resorts if absolutely necessary to military support. Needless to say, all other remedies should first be exhausted and all other efforts made. Nothing should be left undone to avoid the necessity of calling upon military power, and that applies whether the initiative is in the hands of the provincial government, the federal government, or the municipality. That rule was scrupulously and thoroughly observed from first to last in the disturbances of 1919.
Now I want to say just a few words with respect to the purpose of the motion and the discussion. Most of us, I think, knew before the debate arose that a serious condition exists in two constituencies of the province of Nova Scotia, South Cape Breton and Cape Breton North-Victoria; that because of failure of coal orders there is no work, and has been none for a long time, for large numbers of men who, with their families and dependents, aggregate anywhere from ten to fifteen thousand people; that those people are now on the verge of starvation; indeed, that to save themselves and their families from that fate they have had to resort to force to secure food. It appears as well that the municipality has exhausted all its resources. There seems to be no question of responsibility undischarged by any municipality. It appears also that the province has come to the assistance of the miners to this degree at least, that it has guaranteed the bonds of the municipality, which bonds otherwise would be valueless, and is to that extent, I believe some eight thousand dollars, responsible to the bondholders; that these means of assistance only go to the extent of relief anyway, and that relief in the way of alms, of food, and of money, is not even a sound temporary solution of the question, and is very far from

Nova Scotia Miners
being anything in the way of a permanent remedy for the evil. It is clear that all that can be called an appropriate and a final remedy is the supplying of work, and so far as the debate has proceeded it would seem there is no hope of work being supplied' during the present season save on the basis of orders from the Canadian National Railways.
Mention has been made of an order said to have been given by the head of the Canadian National Railways for 120,000 tons, applicable to the south district, the Glace Bay district. This is the remedy asked for by those who appeal to us now, that this order be a -eality; and apparently, if given, this will solve the question so far as Glace Bay is concerned. As respects the north district, all that is asked or expected, at the present at least, and probably all for this season, is that steps be taken which will make it possible for the company known as the Besco to ship six thousand tons per month for two and a half months, and that those steps be limited to a provision of $3.25 per ton by way of freight charges for the 15,000 tons to be transported.
Now speaking of the first, the 120,000 ton order for South Cape Breton, I cannot say that I know all the circumstances, but so far as brought out yet, there has really been no order at all. An order under which the control of price is still in the hands of the purchaser amounts to no order whatever. If I give an order and say nothing as to price, but reserve to myself the right to fix it later, I do not give any order. That is an order that no business man and no company could act upon. Now whether or not an order should be given I do not know; whether or not it is in the interest of the company that it should be given I do not know; but it would appear there is not very much margin between the line of wisdom in giving the order and the line of folly. What I mean is this:	Apparently there is not very much
difference between the price at which it would pay the company to give the order, and the price at which Besco is willing to sell. I want, though, before I refer to that matter further, to come to this other case in the north riding, where it is asked that the railway company fix a rate of $325 per ton for transport from North Cape Breton to Montreal. It appears that the coal can be transported in summer at $1.50 by water and $4.50 by rail, and the company claim, and claim wrongfully, according to many members of this House-


Charles A. Stewart: Is my hon. friend not quoting the water rate too high?


Arthur Meighen: I understand it is $1.50.


Charles A. Stewart: I
think it is 75 cents.


Edward Mortimer Macdonald: One dollar.


Arthur Meighen: We will say one dollar; it makes my argument so much the stronger. The company claim that at $3.25 for transport by rail they would be losing money. It is contended against that that such is not the case, and emphasis is placed on the fact that cars at this season of the year go down at least to St. John in large numbers filled, and come back empty; that many more, carrying not grain but other commodities, run into the province of Nova Scotia in all its parts filled, and come back empty, and that only four cars per day would be required to take care of the amount of coal which would aggregate six thousand tons per month. Well, which is right no one but a railway man can say. I do not argue that it is the duty of the government to take the management by the scruff of the neck and say to them: You must transport coal at such a rate per ton. I never argued that in office, nor will I argue it in opposition, but I do say this: that when the difference is small, when it amounts to only a small proportion of the amount large numbers of wage-earners would get as a reward of their toil, then it is certainly the duty of the government to see whether it is "nough or not.


Mr. KING (Kootenay):: Which government?


Arthur Meighen: This government.


John Warwick King: Why?


Arthur Meighen: For the simple reason
that the question is undoubtedly beyond the compass of the provincial authorities. Do hon. members opposite suggest that in Nova Scotia, where you have some twenty thousand men engaged in the production of coal, the distress there due to non-production is of dimensions within the compass of the provincial government? It has never proven so in the last twenty years; it was not so in the time of the late government; it is not now. The way to relieve the situation is in some way to make up the margin between the cost of transport in winter time and the price demanded. That was done in years gone by.


John Warwick King: The 15,000 tons-
Nova Scotia Miners


Arthur Meighen: That applies only to the
15,000	tons. The province has done something in that respect already. Let me carry the minister's mind back. Questions have been hurled across the floor: What would you do? What is your policy? The Minister of Public Works (Mr. King) devotes some minutes to a discussion of our policy, and a misrepresentation of it, by the way. I want to carry the minister's mind back a few years, when a corresponding situation did arise. I think it was in the year 1919; it might have been 1920, but I am very close to the time. Then, in order to relieve the situation in Nova Scotia-where a Liberal government was in power, and when if we had wanted to play politics we could have loaded the blame on the Liberal government in the way hon. gentlemen opposite are trying to do as respects the Conservative government-we did not take that course; we knew the only way to bring relief was to meet the problem of transportation. While we did not take the directorate by the neck and say to them: You must transport coal at a price fixed by us, we did say: You transport the coal at the lowest price possible, and the difference between that and the amount necessary to enable the coal to be bought we will make up. And we did make it up to the extent of many scores of thousands of dollars. By that comparatively modest contribution we kept those districts from hunger, and we prevented such a situation as has presented itself too frequently during the regime of the present administration.
Now, as I see it, this goes to the kernel of the whole policy of this country as respects coal, and other commodities as well of the same character and within the same category as coal. We are never going to solve the coal problem of Canada by standing timidly by and shiveringly asserting: We dare not put on a little more duty; we dare not put up a little of the freight; we dare not do anything for fear the United States will raise the big club against us.
I will not say, I have never said, that you can all at once adopt any means by which Nova Scotia coal on the one hand and Alberta coal on the other will be carried right into the very centre of this country and supply the whole need of Canada at once. I only know two lines on which we can proceed to widen the area, widen the circulation, of the consumption both for Alberta and for Nova Scotia. On neither of these lines has the government the courage to proceed. We must assist transportation; we must assist as

well by stronger protection for the basic industries of the country; and we can only do that, as everybody well knows, as part of a great general policy applicable to the whole production of the country. And it is because this government is tied and hamstrung in respect of general policies that it cannot meet the situation in respect to coal. What has the government proposed to-day? You say my policy is subvention. Is your policy starvation? The government sits helpless and silent. The Minister of Public Works says it is not the time to bring it up. May I ask when would be the time? When the men are in their graves?


John Warwick King: Not the general
discussion. As to a discussion of the matter of handling the situation at Sydney, this is quite a proper time to deal with it, but it is not so with the general discussion.


Arthur Meighen: Oh, well, I am in entire agreement, but we are not wasting any time in pressing the general phase of the situation on the ministers. We have been pressing it for four years, and if we use a little time today it may save a little more time later. Along the lines I have indicated, a permanent solution can be found. I know of no other line. I know as well that a country in the condition in which we are cannot proceed very fa^t along either line. Something must be done to revive and give new life to industry in Canada before we can get very far anyway; but the last thing in the world to do is to sit down and shake in fear of another country. We have reserves - that will make us quite secure. Give the Canadian producer the Canadian market, strengthen his hold upon that, and it will be better for him than all the markets hon. gentlemen can get anywhere else.
I hope it will not be said that the doctrine we preach has not been at least tried and practised. Why even the members of the government looked in this direction. They looked but they contented themselves with looking. They committed themselves to the practice, but having committed themselves they were afraid to put it into practice. I think they will put it in practice yet, that is if their lingering life sustains them long enough. I know they will put nothing else in practice. They will come to this just as they have come to our point of view on many subjects upon which they formerly opposed us. You will not hear any such objection to this as they made in the last campaign, that it was a bartering policy. You will not hear them saying that in a few years any more than you hear them now denouncing the principle of pro-

Nova Scotia Miners
tection. The hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Garland) will support them, and I do n-ot doubt the hon. member for North Winnipeg (Mr. Heaps) will support them too. They will all come behind the government when the government comes to the only solution that is worthy really of permanent consideration and acceptance in this House.


Mr. FORKE:: I should like to ask the
leader of the opposition a question. I do not ask it in any argumentative spirit, but simply in order to obtain information. I am not going to make a speech, but I have listened .to arguments put forward in the hope of hearing a solution of this problem. Has my right hon. friend the leader of the opposition advanced the remarks he has made as a solution of the whole economic difficulty in Cape Breton? It seems to me that what my right hon. friend has said may be a palliative for the present position, but I cannot see that it contains any permanent solution of the matter.


Arthur Meighen: I will answer the
question, and am very glad of the chance to do so. No, it is not the whole solution of the matter. Besides assisting transport you have got to put industry in this country on a stable and permanent basis. The existence of every industry you wreck within many hundreds of miles of these coal pits means added work to the coal miners. I may say before I sit down that I was very sorry indeed to see the applause from the hon. member for Brandon (Mr. Forlce) when the hon. member for North Winnipeg made those grave misstatements with respect to the strike in Winnipeg.


Robert Forke: The right hon. gentleman
was not in the House.


Arthur Meighen: I was in the House right afterwards in time to see my hon. friend applaud, and I was in time to see him congratulate the member for North Winnipeg as he went out of the chamber.


Robert Forke: My right hon. friend was not in the House then.


Arthur Meighen: I saw enough of that.


Charles A. Stewart: Once again we are discussing the difficulties of the Nova Scotia situation with respect to the coal mining industry in that province. We thought, indeed we fondly hoped, Mr. Speaker, that the steps that were being taken by the new government of that province to reconcile the company and the employees would have settled the problem. 1 agree with the remarks of a 14011-27
good many of the speakers this afternoon that this is a veiy difficult problem to settle; and I want to congratulate my right hon. friend (Mr. Meighen) upon the moderation with which he approached the consideration of the question this evening.
The coal problem of this country is rather a serious one. We have been talking about a national policy for coal, and coal is just as important to the people of the central region of Canada as bread-I think I made that statement once before. I know of no way that you can transport coal from the far east or the far west without increasing the price of that commodity in central Canada.
I have been devoting a good deal of attention to this matter for the past three or four years, and I am willing to accept the statement of hon. gentlemen opposite that perhaps the government have exhibited some hesitancy in coming to a conclusion upon this matter. We voted a subvention for the purpose of transporting coal from Nova Scotia westward. It was used to a very limited' degree-at a time when there was an ample market for the commodity, at a time when the miners were not on strike, but were busily engaged in the industry-perhaps because the aid was not sufficient. The limit was fifty cents per ton, and a very small amount of the subvention was required for the transportation of the fuel at that time. However, I am not going to deal with that phase of the subject; I am going to confine my remarks entirely to the resolution moved by the hon. member (Mr. Johnstone) in which he states that an extremely grave situation is prevalent in the coal mining area of Cape Breton and Glace Bay, and1 that the miners are unable to obtain employment.
Well, Mr. Speaker, does it not occur to hon. members here that if you have a strike lasting over the period this one has lasted, the market formerly occupied by the products of these particular mines is liable to be filled? No one can find fault with the Canadian National Railways for taking the precaution to get a supply of coal in the event of the strike continuing, and1 to some extent the Cape Breton market in that, direction is curtailed for the time being. More than that, owing to the rapid1 utilization of water-power, the invasion of the coal market by electricity and oil burning devices both on land and at sea, the consumption in Canada has been reduced by nearly 25,000,000 tons of coal. The market is a declining one and that is very largely responsible for our difficulty in finding purchasers for coal. More than that; I have before me a statement showing the importations into Nova Scotia last year from the

Nova Scotia Miners

United States which totalled 212,387 tons. No doubt the increase in importation was due to the strike.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Does that include the
anthracite?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes,
that is the total.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And the bituminous?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes.
Into Nova Scotia imports were 178,000 tons bituminous and 33,000 tons of anthracite. Into New Brunswick the total was 45,000 tons of anthracite. I am giving round figures of anthracite from the United States. Then there were 163,000 tons of bituminous, making a total of 209,000 tons; from Great Britain
29,000	tons of anthracite and 5,103 tons of bituminous.
'Mr. EDWARDS (Frontenac-Addington): What is the figure for Prince Edward Island from the United States?


Charles A. Stewart: I will *give the whole imports for 1925. They are: ,4,624 tons of anthracite, 9,208 tons of bituminous, making a total of 13,832 tons from the United States. From Great Britain we had 507 tons of anthracite and 13,436 tons of .bituminous, making a total of 13,943 tons from Great Britain.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Between what years did that total reduction in the gross consumption of Canadian coal take place?


Charles A. Stewart: During the last seven years, practically. I am not quoting definite figures, but the amounts are approximately correct. I want to show that there is undoubtedly, owing to the strike conditions that prevailed in Nova Scotia, a much larger quantity imported. I notice that for the past two years the quantities of imports into the Maritime provinces have gone up. If conditions had been normal the consumption would have been much the same as it was in 1923, when only 5,566 tons were imported into Prince Edward Island, none from Great Britain. In 1923, 79,000 tons came into Nova Scotia and 133,398 into New Brunswick. Therefore I am assuming that the increased importation of coal into the Maritime provinces was largely due to the strike conditions, and that is adding to our difficulties at the moment.
MR. HANSON: Has the minister investigated to ascertain whether American bituminous coal is not being landed in the Maritime province ports at a price less than the cost of production in the Maritime provinces; in
fMr. C. A. Stewart.]
Other words, that American coal is being dumped into the Maritime provinces?


Charles A. Stewart: We
are now keeping very closely in touch with that situation all along the boundary. Frankly we did not do so two years ago. That matter was brought to our attention with regard to the importations, but I do not think that that condition prevails to-day or has prevailed during this year. Of course my hon. friend must bear in mind that the prevailing cost of coal in the United States has been very low, about one-half of that prevalent in the Nova Scotia field. That being the case, it is not to be wondered at that when the cessation of the strike took place in Nova Scotia a serious condition arose with respect to markets. Let us be fair, because I for one do not pretend for a single moment to play politics with this question; I think it is too serious for that. When this matter was brought to the attention of Sir Henry Thornton by the Premier of Nova Scotia he at once issued an order for the purchase of 120,000 tons of coal to be banked for delivery by water transportation in the spring, and I wish to give due credit to Premier Rhodes for his attempt to settle this vexed question. Of course it is not a new thing to order a supply of coal to be banked, to be shipped when the price is fixed, but I ascertained from the deputy minister since the House rose at six o'clock that the order stands for 120,000 tons of bituminous coal. No change has been made in the method of ordering the coal. The railways are guaranteeing to take it. I have not been in the coal mining area, although I have been closely identified with the coal question for the past two years; but I am informed that that is the method that has always been followed, and when the price is fixed, that price prevails for the output of the mine that is banked for the use of the railways. So that it is nothing new; it is just the old method of ordering the coal. Premier Rhodes lost no time, I am informed, in conveying this offer to the company.
Now in so far as the movement of the 15,000 tons is concerned, and the request that the railways move it with a reduction in the rates, I agree entirely with my hon. friend. I think he has taken the proper position. We have a rate-governing body in Canada to whom the question of rates is referred. That body is sitting to-day, dealing with the construction of a new freight structure covering the whole of Canada. Under the department over which I preside there is what is known as a fuel board. After all, we have not been dealing with an acute fuel situation, because

[DOT]	419
Nova Scotia Miners
these matters are managed by the fuel controllers in the various provinces who were appointed-and let me give my hon, friend due credit-during his regime, the work being carried out under the chairmanship of Mr. Magrath. That same body is active in another direction. We have been investigating a substitute fuel for the anthracite in the hope of materially assisting the consumers We have met with some success, but we are still watching the general situation, and since this discussion has arisen we have received word from the Ontario Fuel Controller, Mr. Ellis, who points out that with few exceptions-and I have his report before me-the situation is not serious in Ontario, but that it may become so if severe weather conditions continue for any considerable period of time. True, there are districts in Ontario where they have not been getting their complete fuel supply. We were notified of that two months ago, but they have got along up to the present. As a matter of fact on the 1st ol December, 1925, Ontario had a fuel supply to carry it through the winter, with the exception of some 800,000 tons which would entirely meet the requirements of that province. Some coal has been coming in since. I mention these figures to show that the fuel situation in Ontario has not reached a very acute stage. More than that, there are sufficient supplies in Montreal to meet the needs there for a considerable time, and no complaint is offered in that territory. I merely mention these things to point out to the House that the government have been keeping a careful watch on the situation, realizing that if the anthracite supply of the United States is shut off it may create in Canada a rather serious situation.
I say, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the government that if the situation is as serious as has been represented-and I have no doubt it is, because I think my hon. friends are trying to place the situation fairly and squarely before us-this government will do everything it can to assist in bringing to a consummation that order by Sir Henry Thornton, to make it definite and clear and to do so at once.


Arthur Meighen: Hear, hear.


Charles A. Stewart: It is the desire of the government to bring about a thorough understanding between the provincial government, the mining companies and the railways, and if any misunderstanding exists, to do their best to have it cleared up at once. I wish it to be distinctly, understood that we in no way desire to interfere with the running 14011-27J
of the railway. That is one thing that we have endeavoured to leave entirely to Sir Henry Thornton and his board. I do not think the government of the day are finding any fault with the operation of the Canadian National under the management of Sir Henry Thornton. But if the people are in distress, the government stands ready to supplement action that should and must be taken by the local government.
With respect to the movement of the
15,000	tons of coal, for the past week I have been discussing with members of the government what we might do in connection with the situation in the west as well as in the east, because I view them from exactly the same standpoint. I am instructed to say that where the situation becomes acute, we are prepared as a government to recommend to the House that we step in and take our fair share of the responsibility, financial or otherwise, in assisting to alleviate a difficult situation of that kind. We stand willing and ready to do that for the movement of the 15,000 tons. As I pointed out a few minutes ago, this is not new for us; we have done it before and we are ready to do it again, ready to meet emergencies of this kind, whether they be in the coal fields or elsewhere in this Dominion where people find themselves in distress and difficulty. But I want to make it clear that we shall do so in conjunction with the government of the province affected. That is the situation in a nutshell. I am prepared to-night to get into communication with the government of Nova Scotia-that is the medium through which the railway and the government have been acting-and to make the offer that we are ready and willing to assist. This quantity of coal seems so small as not to provide relief at all; but if it will do what hon. gentlemen opposite say it will, to relieve a serious situation, I am interested in the movement of this quantity. But it appears to me that the important thing for that community is to have arrangements completed for the sale and banking of the 120,000 tons so as to give real relief to the community by way of work.
Only a few weeks ago I had a request from Alberta to make an exchange of lands in order that the Minister of Public Works of that province might put the unemployed1 of Edmonton and other centres to work cutting brush. We did not hesitate for a single moment. That exchange was offered and I hope, if unemployment existed there, it has been met, by providing relief by way of employment rather than by way of doles. The

Xova Scotia Miners
$8,000 guarantee by the government of Nova Scotia is not a very large amount to be expended by any provincial government for relief but would be very much better expended in giving assistance by way of rate subventions and providing work for the unemployed rather than handing out doles. That will be our policy.
With respect to the general policy, this government does not propose to increase duties on coal or any other commodity. This government will, within a few days, name a commission whose duty it will be to investigate every industry in this Dominion and to prepare a report in order that we may know definitely where we stand with respect to any of those industries.
May I say in reply to my right hon. friend that no hon. member would be prouder than he, had he been successful on the 29th of October, and no one would be declaiming more loudly in this House about the prosperity that had thereby come to Canada than my right hon. friend would be to-night?


Arthur Meighen: In the coal fields?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes,
and in every other industry in Canada.


Arthur Meighen: I could hardly do that.
M'r. STEWART (West Edmonton): I know my right hon. friend. I know he would have been taking a great deal of credit for the changed conditions in Canada. I do not recollect a time when there was not a difficulty in some part of Canada and in sofcne part of the United States, that hon. gentlemen opposite did not proclaim that the United States was happy, contented and prosperous, forsooth, because of a high tariff, and I know my right hon. friend would be declaiming in the same pronounced way about the prosperity that had come to Canada. Are we not entitled in some respects to say the same thing? We are not worried about the situation in Canada despite the criticism of hon. gentlemen opposite. We are do-ing very well and we shall continue to do very well.


An hon. MEMBER:: Get your cabinet.


Charles A. Stewart: The
cabinet will be here in due course if hon. gentlemen will just have patience. This impatience of hon. gentlemen opposite with respect to running the affairs of this country is remarkable. AVe shall have a cabinet in due course and we shall be able to carry on.
Mr. MElGHElN: In due course!


Charles A. Stewart: I have Stated what the practical solution is that the
tMr. C. A. Stewart.]
government to-day are offering with respect to a situation that now exists in Nova Scotia. We will get into communication with Premier Rhodes to-night and I hope a satisfactory answer will be received from him. May I say to our western friends that we will do exactly the same thing with respect to the movement of coal from the west? We had $25,000 voted at the last session of parliament for the specific purpose of guaranteeing the railway company against any loss that may have accrued over $7 a ton for a test movement of coal from Alberta eastward. The whole matter of rate structure, as I pointed out a few minutes ago, is before the railway board, and they are dealing with it. The whole matter might very well be threshed out before that board. As regards the fuel board, I have 'asked for a hearing for that board, and I propose to send them before the railway board to point out the situation as we see it with respect to the acute fuel area in central Canada and the possibility of obtaining supplies both east and west. But this is an emergency, and the government are readv to step in and assist, as they will in an emergency of any sort.


Finlay MacDonald: May I make a suggestion to the minister?


Hewitt Bostock: The hon. gentleman has already spoken. I understand he wishes to put a question to the hon. member. He may do so by leave of the House.


Finlay MacDonald: The suggestion is this: that in placing the order for the 120,000 tons the government should see to it that the 120,000 tons are going to be mined. I am now in receipt of advice that a part of this quantity of 120,000 tons has already been taken from a dump that is at present on the steel company's property. I should like to have the order for the
120.000	tons devoted in its entirety for the production of wrork in the mining area.


Charles A. Stewart: I cannot speak with any authority about what is mined. My understanding from the Deputy Minister of Railways, who, by the way is a director of the National railways, and who was present when the correspondence passed from the hands of Sir Henry Thornton, was that it would be 120,000 tons to be mined and placed in bank that the railways would take next year as soon as navigation opened. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected.


John Alexander (1883-1945) Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, for the infor-

. Nova Scotia Miners
mation of the House I will read this telegram just received from one of the citizens of Glace Bay:
Banked coal order from Thornton to relieve distress, allocated 20,000 goes to mainland-
That is, the mainland of Nova Scotia and not the distressed area.
-where there is no distress. 66,000 to be taken from bank already at steel works, Sydney-
That coal is already banked at Sydney and will give no employment to anyone working there.
-where it was put down before order was given. 33,000 to come from Caledonia and New Aberdeen. Latter gets a total of 4 days' work from to-day. To April 10 over a thousand families must live on 4 days' net earnings for 58 days. Caledonia gets 2 days' work a week. Relief order does not mean one extra dollar to distress; district committee does not know if Besco or railway is to blame. Ask you to question latter.
I suppose that means to question the Railway department.
Situation getting worse daily.
This is signed Stuart McCawley, one of the citizens' committee.


Charles A. Stewart: I can only say that according to my understanding of the matter the order for the 120,000 tons would go to the area where acute suffering exists. I did not understand that it was for the other mines which are shipping and running, although of course on short time. There would seem therefore to be a great deal of misunderstanding about the whole matter, but I can assure the House that we will attempt to get to the bottom of it. I have the Deputy Minister of Railways working on the matter and he is in communication with Sir Henry Thornton. Unfortunately Sir Henry is on the train but as soon as we locate him we shall try to get definite information. I do believe however that the statement which has just been made is incorrect.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I was not present when this
discussion was initiated and I did not hear the exact words of my colleague (Mr. Heaps) and some of the other hon. gentlemen who have spoken on the subject, but I should like to refer briefly to several matters that have already been touched upon. First of all let me say that I am rather grateful to the hon. gentleman who introduced the motion for having again brought up the matter of the coal miners in Cape Breton. Hon. members will recall that on several occasions it has been my privilege to introduce this question in the House, when I have urged that far more definite action be taken than has been
done by this government. I was very glad indeed to hear the statement made by the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart, West Edmonton) a few minutes ago; it seems to me to indicate a decidedly changed attitude on the part of the government towards this question. I welcome that change. I do not know the reason for it nor do I think that it is for me to inquire as to that reason. It is sufficient for me to learn that the government intends at any rate to do something; it may mean that we may get some definite action. When we introduced this subject a year ago on February 24, the government absolutely refused to act in the matter. Accepting the advice of one of the local members, Mr. Kyte, they shelved the whole matter. I should like to read to the House on this occasion an interesting statement made by that gentleman at that time. That statement is rather illuminating at a distance of twelve months. Referring to certain despatches in which Mr. McLurg was credited with certain statements, Mr. Kyte said:	,
Knowing the conditions in Sydney at the present time I accept the statement attributed to Mr. McLurg in this despatch; there is no doubt or question about it. But my right hon. friend and his friends will doubt it, and I question whether they will be very highly elated when they find that the statement made here is true. The question of unemployment, therefore, is about settled so far as Sydney and Glace Bay are concerned. If this despatch is true, and I believe it is; if the steel plant will soon be working on a basis of one hundred per cent production, then there will be employment for every steel worker in the city of Sydney and for every coal miner in the county of Cape Breton. That is the happiest solution of our difficulty, and I think the hon. member for Centre Winnipeg might very well allow the matter to drop with the assurance given in this despatch that unemployment will cease entirely and that the plant wi be working full time by the sixteenth of March.
That statement appears at page 488 of Hansard of 1925. Now instead of the unemployment having ceased we find the situation jusl as acute as it was a year ago and the general condition even more unsatisfactory.
If I may do so, I should like for a moment to refer to some discussion that arose with regard to directorships. I understand that there was some question as to whether the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Cantley) was a director of Besco. I notice according to Poor's 1925 that there are several subsidiary companies in which the hon. member's name occurs. In the Nova Scotia Steel & Coal Company, controlled by the British Empire Steel Corporation, Limited, we find that the board of directors-


Hewitt Bostock: Order. The hon. member was not in the House a moment ago when this very point was raised. The statement
ATova Scotia Miners

was made that the hon. member for Pictou was one of the directors of the British Empire Steel Corporation and that statement was denied. I understand that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) is questioning that denial on the part of the hon. member for Pictou.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker; I am simply reading a list of the directors of certain companies which are subsidiary to the British Empire Steel Corporation. In the Nova Scotia Steel & Coal Company, which is controlled by the British Empire Steel Corporation, the board of directors consists of the following gentlemen: ,1. W. Allison, Hector Mclnnes, Halifax, N.S.; Thos. Cantley, New Glasgow, N.S.; W. D. Ross, Toronto, Ont.; F. W. Ross, Quebec; R.
M.	Wolvin, Hon. J. P. B. Casgrain, C. P. Beaubien, L. C. Webster, Montreal; Sir Newton J. Moore, London, Eng.; Sir A. Trevor Dawson, London; Geo. F. Downs, R. F. Hoyt, New York; J. E. McLurg, Sydney, N.S. I notice further that in the Acadia Coal Company, Limited, controlled by the Nova Scotia Steel & Coal Company, Limited, the directors are: J. W. Allison, Hector Mclnnes, Halifax,
N.	S.; Thos. Cantley, New Glasgow, N.S.; W. D. Ross, Toronto; F. W. Ross, Quebec; R. M. Wolvin, Hon. J. P. B. Casgrain, C. P. Beaubien, L. C. Webster, Montreal; Sir Newton J. Moore, London, Eng.; Sir A. Trevor Dawson, London; George F. Downs, R. F. Hoyt, New York; J. E. McLurg, Sydney. And in the Eastern Car Company, Limited, also controlled by the Nova Scotia Steel & Coal Company, Limited, the directors are: J. W. Allison, Hector Mclnnes, Halifax, Nova Scotia; Thomas Cantley, New Glasgow, Nova Scotia; W. D. Ross, Toronto, Ontario; F. W. Ross, Quebec; R. M. Wolvin, Hon. J. P. B. Casgrain, C. P. Beaubien, L. C. Webster, Montreal; Sir Newton J. Moore, London, England; Sir A. Trevor Dawson, London; George F. Downs, R. F. Hoyt, New York; J. E. McLurg, Sydney, Nova Scotia.
It seemed to me that perhaps it might be wise to have that information before the House. I am not prepared to say just what the relationships are which exist between the subsidiary companies and Besco, nor do I know just the attitude taken by some of the directors with reference to the policies of the company.


Thomas Cantley: Would the hon. gentleman like to have the information now?


Hewitt Bostock: The hon. gentleman has already spoken.


Thomas Cantley: I thought possibly the hon. gentleman wanted the information, and I could give it to him. Might I speak on a question of privilege?


Hewitt Bostock: On a question of privilege, yes.


Thomas Cantley: Mr. Speaker, there seems to be some misapprehension, and I take it that the hon. gentleman who has just spoken really desires information. When the British Empire Steel Corporation was formed, it embraced in the province of Nova Scotia, the Dominion Coal Company, the Dominion Steel Company, the Scotia Company-or the Nova Scotia Steel and Coal Company, to give its full name

and two subsidiaries of the last named company, the Acadia Coal Company and the Eastern Car Company. I have been a director of the Scotia Company for twenty-five years and I am proud of it; I have been associated with it for forty years. I never became a director of Besco. I am not now, and never intend to be. The reason these corporations are kept in existence is that there are underlying securities of all three corporations which could not be wiped off except by paying a premium, and to get sufficient money to replace the securities, the bonds and debentures would have meant a cost of $2,000,000 or $3,000,000 at least.
For that reason Besco has continued the independent corporate existence of these different companies. I have remained on the board partially because I wanted to have an opportunity of watching what our friends the Besco were doing with these corporations in which I have had a vital interest for a long time. Beyond that I have no interest whatever in them, and as I said before I have no connection with the Besco corporation as such. I have been asked to join the Besco board on several occasions, and have declined. I hope I have made myself perfectly clear.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I think, Mr. Speaker, that whether or not the hon. gentleman was in order, it helps to clarify the situation to have this statement before us. I would also like to refer very briefly to the statement made by the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Meighen) with regard to what my colleague said respecting the situation in 1919 in Winnipeg. It may be true that no troops were taken into Winnipeg from outside, although a very large number of troops returning from the Old Land came in at that time. It is true, however, that troops were there; it is true that they were called out; it is true that the Royal Canadian

Nova Scotia Miners
Mounted Police, acting under the direct control of the Dominion government, were there; it is true that the officers were very active at that time in enlisting citizens and in generally carrying forward operations: it is true that there was shooting on the streets. There were two deaths and about one hundred casualties. It is true that an agent of the then government-


Arthur Meighen: Does the hon. gentleman mean to say that the militia were shooting on the streets?


James Shaver Woodsworth: No.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. member should
make that clear.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I think it is clear.
I think the words used by my colleague were to the effect that people were shot on the streets. I did not hear the words, but I understand that that is what was said and I want to make that clear. Men were shot on the streets by members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who -were, as I understand it, under the direction of the government. It is quite true that there may be some distinction, that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police may be said to be a civil force and may not be called troops. These fine distinctions are sometimes not very clearly recognized. Generally the police force were spoken of as a troop, and I have no doubt that it was in that sense my colleague used the term. Further than that if was true that a member of that government, the Hon. Gideon Robertson, was at that time in Winnipeg with very considerable authority. It is true that an agent from the Department of Justice, Mr. A. J. Andrews, appeared to have a great deal of authority at that time. In fact, he and Hon. Gideon Robertson practically established themselves as dictators in the Royal Alexandra Hotel. These things are true. Further than that, it is true that if it had not been for the interference of the Dominion government at that time the provincial government was very close to a settlement of that strike. It is clear that there was a distinct invasion by the federal authorities of the provincial jurisdiction even although a weak provincial government permitted it. It is true, further, that at that time legislation was rushed through this House in the course of a very short time -which had the effect of taking away from BritiSh-bom citizens the right of trial by jury.


Arthur Meighen: Will the hon. gentleman permit me? Did not the provincial government prosecute, immediately subsequent to
the settlement of the strike, certain of the offenders?


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes, and the gentlemen acting in the carrying forward of that prosecution were legal gentlemen appointed by the federal government, with their service* paid for by the Dominion.


Arthur Meighen: The hon. gentleman is
entirely mistaken. This government did enter prosecutions for offences against the Criminal Code, and the sections under which the charges were laid had been in effect for decades. We appointed our own counsel to carry on these prosecutions, all of which succeeded with the exception of one. The provincial government carried on certain prosecutions itself, and appointed its own counsel. I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) should be most familiar with these prosecutions because, if I am not mistaken, he was one of those prosecuted by the provincial government.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am familiar with this question; I know it very well. I am not worrying -about my own case, because I was arrested and charged and the government had not sufficient evidence to go on with the case and it was withdrawn.


Arthur Meighen: We did not arrest the hon. gentleman.
Mr.WOODSWORTH: The man responsible for the arrest was Mr. A. J. Andrews, who was acting under instructions from the Department of Justice.


Arthur Meighen: Not at all. The provincial government alone had to do with my hon. friend.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I would say further that when we tried to get very definite evidence with regard to certain proceedings we found documents missing from the files in the department here. In extenuation of my colleague having introduced this question of the ti-oops, I may say that he also was one of the men arrested at that time,-arrested under this law that was rushed through, which provided for the deportation of British-born subjects. My colleague happened to be bom in Great Britain, and the conspiracy-for I can call it nothing else-was to deport a number of those men at that time without trial. The law was passed to deal with men who could not be reached under existing legislation, and I should like to say here that although that law was put on the statute book by the government of my right hon. friend now on
Nova Scotia Miners

the other side of the House, it has been kept on the statute book by this government during its term of office.


Hewitt Bostock: Might I remind hon. members generally who take part in this debate that the acute distress is supposed to be in Cape Breton.


James Shaver Woodsworth: 
Arthur Meighen: That is not quite right. What I said was this: An order is not an order if the control of the price remains in the hands of the purchaser.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Then we will put
it that way; an order is not an order if the control of the price remains in the hands of the purchaser. That seems to be a fair thing in bargaining, but I would like to suggest that that is not always carried out when it comes to other relations. For example, I note in the report of the commission brought down recently that there is a provision for revision of the wage scale at intervals of six months, based on the coal company's ability to pay. This is entirely in the hands of the employers, and over that the employees have no control whatever. I say that if we are going to accept the rule laid down by the leader of the opposition-I am not questioning it at the moment-we should go a great deal further

and recognize that the report, of that commission is absolutely one-sided in its character and will not solve the situation. Again, the rule was laid down by the leader of the opposition that law and order must under any circumstances be maintained. If that is true -and again, I am not questioning it-I urge that the rule is worked in a very one-sided way. A year ago we called attention to the serious condition of the people in Nova Scotia; we called attention to their rights, and the government refused to recognize any responsibility to deal with those rights. If law and order should be maintained, it should be maintained when people are in distress and are not receiving adequate justice; but action is not taken at such a time; it is delayed until such time as there is some danger to property.
The commission has reported-a commission appointed by the Nova Scotia government- but I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that the report of that commission gets us a very little way towards a solution. There are some minor recommendations of value, but the report of the commission does not at all touch the deep, underlying difficulties which confront us in Nova Scotia. I have already mentioned the recommendation that wages be revised, not in accordance with the cost of living but merely in accordance with the earnings of the company, which is a different matter altogether. Nothing whatever is said in the report about the capitalization of the company. I presume that the dividends are to be a first charge. We know nothing about that as far as the report has come to us through the press.
Further than that, I think we ought to recognize that of much greater importance to the miners of Nova Scotia than wages is regularity of employment. We were told a year ago that if the price of coal could be raised a little, the miners would be assured of regular employment, and yet there is absolutely nothing in the report of the commission, and nothing in the present situation in Nova Scotia, to indicate that the miners are going to receive any more regular employment in the future than they have had in the past, and one of the first things that happened after the report was handed in was the dismissal of a large number of coal miners. That is the situation we face at- the present time, and what I would urge is this: that since the government, through the Minister of the Interior, has to-night frankly conceded the principle that the government has certain duties in this regard-and I am glad we have had no more nonsense about the British North America Act-I do hope the govern-

Nova Scotia Miners
ment will go a little bit further. I would like to see what we have asked for again and again, that this government appoint a commission-even though the ink of the report of the provincial commission is hardly dry-which will not limit itself to certain matters with regard to tihe miners but will go into the whole question as to the finances of Besco. That is what needs to be investigated. If, as a good many men, even hon. members of this House, have confessed to me, the coal mining industry of Cape Breton is not capable of being carried on at a profit, we ought to know it. If Besco is so over-capitalized that we cannot possibly hope it will pay dividends on its capital, we ought to know it. If the business can be carried on profitably only by continual subsidies from this government, in one form or another, we ought to know it. I urge that the sooner an independent board investigates the whole question, not merely minor questions affecting wage scales and that kind of thing, but the underlying, economic questions, the better it will be for all concerned.
One other word and I am done. If such an investigation would prove, or failing such an investigation the events prove, that there is to be continued trouble between the operators and the miners; if there are to be continual appeals for help to this government, then I would suggest we ought to come to the point of seriously considering whether those coal properties ought not to be brought under public control. If we are to subsidize the industry by increased duties or by giving contracts to the Canadian National railway, and perhaps dragging the Canadian National railway into deeper debt-if we must do these things let the government itself own and control the mines. If it should be urged that they are under provincial control, I would say there can be an arrangement as between the two governments, federal and provincial, but surely under the existing circumstances, with appeals continually coming in to this government-appeals for troops, appeals for relief and help of various kinds-it is very necessary that a great corporation of this kind should be thoroughly investigated and the industry placed upon a permanent basis.


Mr. CAHILL:: Does my hon. friend contend that this government should interfere m a controversy in a province without consulting the government of that province? Should this government grant assistance to any party to a controversy in a province without first consulting the government of that province?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I would not say
that. There may be certain courtesies owing to the province; the province may have certain rights, but I would say that a year ago the province was not asserting its rights to refuse any relief from the Dominion government.


Frank S. Cahill: Are they doing anything
now?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I could not say
what they are doing at the present time.


Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest):: Mr. Speaker, for the past five sessions the situation in Nova Scotia as between the coal miners and the mine owners has been brought to the attention of parliament, in the debates with regard to a national coal supply which took place on motions I put on the order paper. It is not a new condition of affairs by any. means. We know the cause and the effect, and all we need to do is to apply the remedy. For the past five sessions the condition of the unfortunate workers in the mines of Nova Scotia, particularly in the mines at Cape Breton, has been brought up by me in parliament, and all that is necessary is to apply the remedy. The remedy is a national coal supply, one that will place an embargo on American coal and will utilize our resources in Nova Scotia and in Alberta in order to meet the Canadian demand. I do not know any province of Canada that is suffering more to-day than the province of Nova Scotia. If you wish to see monuments of the folly of a free trade policy in this country just look around you and see what free trade has done in the matter of our coal resources in the east and in the west.
It has been said by some members of the government to-night that this resolution raises the question of the British North America Act under which the treatment of this situation is a provincial affair. We have heard that argument before; it always acta as a hindrance to the settlement of any practical problem. When the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woods-worth) introduced the question of unemployment last year we heard the same objection: this parliament had no concern with the matter of unemployment and distress in the mines, it was a question for the province to deal with. I maintain that it is not a provincial matter; it is a question for the Dominion government to deal with. During the session before last, when the very same question w'as brought forward, the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria, Mr. Kelly, w'as put up to move the adjournment
Nova Scotia Miners

of the debate on my coal resolution. At that time the opportunity was taken to bring to the attention of parliament the necessity of a national coal policy and the conditions of the workers in the mines, as well as the status of the mine owners and the state of chaos in the coal industry which had resulted from the policy hitherto pursued. One would have thought that the Liberal members from Nova Scotia would have gladly supported a motion calling for the application of a national policy with respect to coal throughout the country. We spend annually in this country 156 million dollars on coal from Pennsylvania, a large part of which expenditure should go to Nova Scotia. If this money were spent on Canadian coal the mine owners of Nova Scotia would obtain better rates, the coal miners would secure steady work under improved conditions, and we should not see that condition of distress which exists in Nova Scotia to-day. We pointed out these facts in the debate on the resolution already referred to, but the government succeeded in getting the question shelved.
The situation has become greatly aggravated with the passage of time. The sum of nearly six hundred million dollars has been spent on the National Transcontinental railway. Speaking in support of this project in the city of Halifax. Mr. Fielding, the former Liberal Minister of Finance, told the people of the Maritime provinces that if they voted for subsidies for that railway it would solve their coal problem and enable Maritime province coal to be transported to the central portions of Canada. Coming down from Toronto to-day I saw on the Canadian National railway between Belleville and Shan-nonville 156 cars of American coal.	This
coal might just as well have been obtained in the Maritime provinces. The people of Ontario do not want a pound of American coal. They want Canadian coal, either from Alberta or from Nova Scotia or Wales. We are willing to pay for it, but we cannot get it. Canadian coal is of far better quality than the inferior slack imported from Pennsylvania.
On a former occasion when this matter was brought up in the House a committee was appointed to consider the question in all its varied aspects. The committee made a report to parliament containing various recommendations, but those recommendations were never acted upon. The people of Ontario sympathize very deeply with the plight of the people in the splendid province of Nova Scotia. If there is one province which more than any other is anxious to see Nova Scotia

reap the benefits which it should reap from confederation, it is Ontario; and if there ever
was a time when Canada should put in force and enjoy all the benefits of a national coal policy, it is now. Why should the Canadian National fritter away money on radios, golf courses, and various frills and fads? The people are tired of such expenditures. My suggestion to Sir Henry Thornton is that instead of wasting time and money in these directions he should devote himself to the question of solving the problem of how to supply people in central Canada with coal from the Maritime provinces and Alberta. The National Railways are able to quote cheap passenger rates to the people of St. Louis and Chicago, but you get no such rates when it comes to travelling from Toronto to Halifax or from Toronto to Winnipeg. There is no equality of treatment in such a railway policy as that. Where is the railway commission that it does not bring Sir Henry Thornton to time and compel the granting of fair, just and equitable rates for the transportation of coal from Cape Breton and from western Canada to central points in the Dominion?
Let me repeat my position: I would adopt as the solution of this problem a national coal policy, and in the next place I would impose an embargo on coal from the United States. In the third place I would grant such subsidies or bonuses in the interest of the coal mines of Nova Scotia as the situation calls for. Why cannot Sir Henry Thornton and the Canadian National Railways and the railway commission of their own volition solve the coal problem and look into the condition of the workers in the Cape Breton mines? The federal government has absolute power because a national emergency exists and certainly parliament has power over the National railways. During the summer months the vessels of the Canadian Government Merchant Marine could have been employed in transporting coal at reasonable rates instead of being tied up and allowed to rust at tlieir docks. As the hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Mullins) asked, why could not these vessels have been used in moving Nova Scotia coal? Then the mines could have been kept open and tlhe workers given ample employment. The existing emergency is not a local one; it is a national one, and that being the ease the federal government is fully empowered to act in the matter. I contend that a national emergency has been made out by those who have spoken in support of this resolution to-day, and the government should act without delay. The people of Ontario are

Nova Scotia Miners
clamouring for Nova Scotia coal. There is a scarcity of fuel, and it is no exaggeration to say that in the large centres of population the people are lined up outside the offices of the coal dealers waiting to get their orders filled. I say that I am in favour of a national coal supply by which every pound of coal used in Canada would be mined and coked under the British flag, whether from Wales, Nova Scotia or Alberta. Such a policy would open up the Nova Scotia mines, give more work, better labour conditions and better pay, and a double night shift would be necessary to take care of the increase of work. The Canadian railways and merchant marine should be utilized to aid in a proper solution of this problem.
I may say that we had a similar state of affairs in Ontario to that which exists in Nova Scotia, as set out in the resolution. In the old days when the question of white coal was brought up Sir Adam Beck endeavoured to solve the question and met with reverses. The solution of the problem is in the principle of protection, which alone can establish the foundation of economic unity among the provinces of Canada. I represent a constituency and come from a city that is not exclusively concerned with Toronto or the interests of Ontario. I am and have been since the late Sir James Whitney and the late Sir Adam Beck started us on our way, a hydro Conservative. Hydro Conservatives fought for public rights and believe in public ownership. Hydro Conservatives helped the late Sir James Whitney and the late Sir Adam Beck to extend the principles of the National Policy so as to serve not the classes but all the masses with the wealth of Niagara water-powers and other water-powers. The hydro Conservatives of Ontario refused to leave Niagara water-powers and other water-powers at the mercy of the theories cropping from the out-of-date free trade writings of the late Adam Smith. We prefer the protectionist principles of the late Adam Beck. Adam Beck was the greatest protectionist leader in Canadian history. Adam Beck's hydro policy is a protectionist policy. If you want to see a monument to the wisdom of protection, look around you at what protection has done with the water-powers of Ontario.
The late Sir James Whitney and the late Sir Adam Beck introduced into Ontario the white coal proposition. They believed in public ownership and I recommend this policy to the people of the Maritime provinces to solve this problem. If you want to see a monument to the folly of free trade, look around you and see what free trade has
done to the coal resources and other resources
of Nova Scotia.
I urge the protectionist policy for the coal interests of the Maritime provinces. I sympathize with the people of those provinces, because contracts and subsides secured for the National Transcontinental railway have been considered as scraps of paper by Sir Henry Thornton and the National Railways and the railway commission. If Sir Henry Thornton would rise to the occasion and buy his coal and operate his railway with coal from Cape Breton instead of getting his coal from the American coal barons, Canada would greatly benefit. If he is the great business man he is supposed to be he could help solve this problem by giving better freight rates and assist in bringing about a national coal supply. When I bring my bill to-morrow before the House I will show hon. members how it can be done. Sir Henry Thornton is quoting favourable passenger rates to Chicago and as far west as Nebraska, and the people of Toronto are paying double those rates for travelling one-third of the distance. The same condition exists with respect to freight rates. The National railway is being Americanized.
I say there is unjust, unfair and undue discrimination regarding coal rates.
Coal is not a luxury, it is a necessity. The people of central Canada need it in order to live, so I say that coal should be carried on the same basis as grain. Why should our grain be shipped at cheap rates through United States channels in order to build up grain elevators in United States cities? These American concerns have their headquarters in Winnipeg, in Buffalo and in New York. Here we have the spectacle of the head of the National Railways sidetracking Nova Scotia to build up an all-American coal supply. During the months of February, March, June, July and August thousands of empty freight cars are standing at the head of the lakes and elsewhere throughout the length and breadth of the National Railway system from the head of the lakes to the Maritime provinces. These cars should be loaded with coal from the mines of Cape Breton and Alberta and sent through the country. There is no use talking about distress. It is of no avail when a man wants a loaf of bread to give him a stone. We should find the relief and apply a remedy-not a temporary remedy by giving out doles as they are doing in England, but a remedy that would solve the coal question for all time to come. What did Stanley Baldwin do with the mines in England and Wales and the northern part of England? He introduced a subsidy and bonus plan, on account of the distress in England and the
Nova Scotia Miners

unfortunate condition the coal industry got into, not only in England but all over the world. The mover of this resolution has shown that a national emergency exists, and it has been created by the policy which has been adopted in this country of depending on an alien coal supply. There is no use raising a discussion as to who owns the mines. The remedy I propose is a subsidy for the National Railways and the utilization of the merchant marine, which has been very largely scrapped.
Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are provinces with great natural resources. We should endeavour to develop these resources, get away from the teachings of Adam Smith, and apply t'he teachings of the National Policy. For almost fifty years the public resources of Nova Scotia were administered according to the teachings of Adam Smith, as these teachings were interpreted by corporationist Liberals in Halifax with headquarters in Montreal. These free trade Liberals tried to make Nova Scotia rich by the free trade principle of encouraging private ownership to grab all water power and coal deposits and every other public resource in sight.
Our job to-day is not to speculate as to the causes of the present state and condition of Nova Scotia or any other province. We should labour to deliver every Canadian province from the effect of past mistakes and to try to avoid a duplication of these mistakes in our own time. This parliament should never rest until Nova Scotia gets a share and a big share of the $186,000,000 that Canada sends to the United States for American coal every year. The Cornwall canal is 45 miles long, and has only to be deepened from its present depth of 14 feet to a depth of 26 feet when ships loaded with Nova Scotia coal can steam from Sydney to Toronto and through the Welland canal to the upper lakes without breaking bulk.
The natural market for many of the products of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick is the British islands, of course there are con-tinentalists who believe that Canadians can get rich trading with their competitors on this continent rather than selling products to their customers in the British Empire. The products of the field and fisheries of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia should be properly developed and marketed in the markets of the world. I urge that an emergency has been made out. The House voted thousands of dollars for miners in other parts of the world, voted money to relieve distress in Japan and distress caused by earthquakes and other disasters in different parts of the world. Surely the government can vote some money
[Mr. Church.1
to relieve the situation disclosed by the mover of the resolution, and appoint somebody to administer the fund. The House admitted the principle of the resolution when they voted money for relief in other cases.
Let the government solve this problem by bringing down a national coal railway bill, and let us stir up Sir Henry Thornton to take action. Let us follow Stanley Baldwin and apply his principle of the subsidy to the province of Nova Scotia. In that way some relief will be afforded and the Maritime provinces will come into their own.


Hewitt Bostock: Is it the pleasure of the House that the hon. member have leave to withdraw his motion?
Motion withdrawn.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Ernest Lapointe: Does the hon. member
for Halifax (Mr. Quinn) wish ,to go on with the debate?


Arthur Meighen: There will be some
question as to the order of the proceedings tomorrow if the adjournment of the House is moved before the debate on the Address is resumed.


Hewitt Bostock: There must be an intermediate proceeding before the motion for the adjournment of the House.



GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH ADDRESS IN REPLY

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from Friday, January 22, consideration of the motion of Mr. J. C. Elliott for an Address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his Speech at the opening of the session, and the proposed amendment thereto of Right Hon. Arthur Meighen.
Mr. F. P. QUINN (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker,
I beg leave to move the adjournment of the debate.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.
On motion of Mr. Lapointe the House adjourned at 10.45 p.m.
Tuesday, January 26, 1926