1928-06-01

[Stage Direction]
Eleventh report of the select standing committee on banking and commerce.-Mr. Jacobs.
Fourth report of the select standing committee on industrial and international relations.-Mr. McIntosh.


[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. ,J. DENIS (Joliette) presented the second and final report of the select standing committee on privileges and elections as follows:
Sales Tax
[Stage Direction]
The select standing committee on privileges and elections beg leave to present the following as their second and final report:-
(11 On the 29th of March, 1928, the house adopted the following resolution:
That the interim and final reports respectively of the Hon. Mr. Justice Clarke, commissioner appointed to inquire into the alleged existence of corrupt or illegal practices in the election held in the electoral district of Athabaska, in the province of Alberta, on the 29th of October, 1925, which reports were laid on the table of the house on December 15, 1926, be referred to the select standing committee on privileges and elections.
(2)	Your committee have held ten meetings
and examined several witnesses including the following:	Jules Castonguay, Chief Electoral
Officer; George Gonthier, Auditor General; E. J. Lemaire, Clerk of the Privy Council; W. Stuart Edwards, Deputy Minister of Justice.
(3)	In the course of their deliberations your committee have examined in detail the said reports of Commissioner Clarke and the evidence taken before him.
(4)	Your committee is of the opinion that the cause of corrupt and illegal practices in the election held in the federal constituency of Athabaska in 1925 was the partisanship, ignorance and incompetence of certain election officials and your committee recommend that the Auditor General should submit to the Justice department a full statement of the payments made to the aforesaid officials with a view to instituting proceedings for the recovery of the amounts so paid to such officials if the law provides for such action.
(5)	Your committee is further of the opinion that the Chief Electoral Officer should recommend to the proper authorities that prosecutions should be taken against all violators of the Dominion Elections Act.
(6)	The committee recommend that a special committee of the house should be appointed at the next session of parliament to examine into the evidence and deliberations of this committee this year and to study the Dominion Elections Act 1920 and the amendments thereto, and the Corrupt Practices Inquiries Act, and to suggest to the house such other amendments to the said acts as they may deem advisable, such committee to give special attention to the method of selecting returning officers and the preparation of voters' lists.
(7)	The committee is also of the opinion that under the circumstances the deposit of Charles Henry Gauvreau, one of the candidates at the election of the 29th of October. 1925, in the electoral district of Athabaska, should be refunded.
(8)	Your committee submit herewith for the information of the house their minutes of proceedings and the evidence taken by them.
All of *which is respectively submitted.

[Stage Direction]
Correspondence between the Civil Service Commission and the Postmaster General regarding classification of postal employees. [DOT]-Mr. Rinfret.
Report on the agreements made pursuant to the Old Age Pensions Act, and the moneys of Canada paid to the provinces thereunder. -Mr. Robb.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. B. ADSHEAD (East Calgary):: Mr. Speaker, once more I should like to ask the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) if there is any hope of getting the reply of Canada to the Kellogg invitation to sign a peace treaty laid on the table.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, before the
house adjourns this evening I shall ask permission to lay on the table not only the reply of Canada but the correspondence with reference to the invitation extended by the United States in relation to this matter. The reason our reply has not been given to the house before is that it was felt desirable to arrange for publishing it simultaneously in the United States and Canada. The reply will be published to-morrow morning, but it will first be presented to parliament. .



SALES TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Acting Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask
the Minister of Finance (Mr. Robb) if there has been any change in the attitude of the government with respect to the proposed cancellation of wholesale licenses under the Sales Tax Act. Notice has gone abroad that these licenses are to be cancelled on July 1. An impression prevails that there has been a change in the attitude of the government, and I have received a good many inquiries as to this.


Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, the administration
of the act is under the Department of National Revenue. There has been no change whatever in the attitude of the department in regard to the matter. It is proposed to cancel certain licenses-not all-


Hugh Guthrie: Is there any distinction
made between those which will be cancelled and those which will not be? The hon. minister said that he proposed to cancel certain licenses.


William Daum Euler: This is the principle upon
which certain licenses will be cancelled. Those wholesalers who sell almost exclusively to manufacturers will be allowed to retain their licenses; those who do not sell to any great extent to manufacturers will have their licenses cancelled.

Immigration Act



SALARIES OF PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL OFFICIALS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. G. COOTE (Macleod):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask the Prime Minister whether he will be good enough to table the report recently made to the government by the Civil Service Commission with regard to the salaries of scientific men in the civil service.
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister):	I have not the report in
my possession, but I understand from my colleagues that it will be possible to have it tabled.



APPLICATION OF DUMPING DUTY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. J. GOTT (South Essex):: I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister is now prepared to answer the question that I asked him yesterday.
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister):	I am afraid I have
forgotten my hon. friend's question.


Eccles James Gott: I will ask it again. What
nature of evidence, or statistics or other definite information would be required by the government before action would be taken conducive to the resuscitation and the implementation of the dumping duties on fruits and vegetables that were in force until recently?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There would
have to be sufficient in the way of information to convince the council that a reasonable case had been made.


Eccles James Gott: It can be proved.



NATIONAL THANKSGIVING DAY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni):: May I ask the Prime Minister, in view of the statement made the other day that we are apt to adjourn early to-morrow, whether he could not give half an hour to a consideration of order No. 14 on page 13 of the order paper, which is the resolution standing in the name of the hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Gershaw), to the effect that in the opinion of this house the day to be observed hereafter as National Thanksgiving day shall be Armistice day, November 11. This is a noncontentious motion and would take only a few minutes.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend is asking
for special consideration of a resolution out of its order. Thus far the government has refrained from making such a concession to any hon. member. The resolution in question urges the desirability of having Thanksgiving day observed on the same day as Armistice day, namely, November 11. It so happens that this year each of these days falls on a Sunday, so that so far as this year is concerned there will be no difficulty in giving effect to the purpose of the resolution. Early next session, I hope, there will be an opportunity to consider such a resolution, and possibly at that time the house will pass upon it favourably.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE ACT AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of National Revenue) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 291, to amend the Department of National Revenue Act.
Mr. GARDINER:: Will the minister explain the amendments.


William Daum Euler: The Senate has inserted an
amendment to the effect that the minister shall annually lay before both houses of parliament, within two weeks of the opening of the session, a return giving the names of persons appointed under the act by order in council, also the time for which they are appointed, their salaries, the class of work for which they were appointed, and their previous occupation. I have no objection to the inclusion of this clause in the bill.
Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.



IMMIGRATION ACT AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice, for Mr. Forke) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the Senate to Bill No. 187, to amend the Immigration Act.
Robert Gardiner: Will the minister please explain.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: The Senate has amended the bill by repealing the section which was added in 1919 and replacing it by the section which was in force prior to 1919-that is to say, the section in the act of 1910. This, I think, is satisfactory in so far as it does away with the discrimination against British bom persons who must qualify for Canadian citizenship by five years' residence in Canada. Now
3654	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
all British subjects are on an equal footing whether they are naturalized or were born in Canada, or were born in other parts of the empire and have become residents of Canada.
Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.



DEPARTMENT OF MARINE AND FISHERIES

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Radio service-to provide for the general improvement of reception conditions to licensed broadcast listeners, $190,000.
Hon. P. J. A. CARDIN (Minister of Marine and Fisheries):: When the house rose last
night I was trying to establish that, under the law and regulations as they stand at present, the minister had the authority if he saw fit to cancel a license which had been issued. There is no doubt at all that this power exists and that on certain occasions when the reasons justify his doing so the minister may exercise it. Some hon, gentlemen have contended that there is not very much difference between the cancellation of a license, as the word has been used, and the non-renewal of it. I submit there is a great difference. Cancellation means the confiscation of something which exists; the cancellation of a license may take place in the course of the year for which the license has been issued. The renewal of a license, on the other hand, implies the reviving of something which has ceased to exist. All licenses expire on March 31 and they must be renewed; and they are renewed if the minister and the government are satisfied that they should be. It is quite proper that this power should rest with the minister because it can be invoked effectively and advantageously to reduce the number of broadcasting stations in the country. As we all know, the United States are having considerable difficulty in reducing the number of their broadcasting stations. They have too many stations there, it is admitted, and an effort is being made to reduce the number. The situation is somewhat similar in Canada. Personally I am inclined to think that we have too many broadcasting stations here. The proper way to reduce the number of broadcasting stations would be to make use of the power which is given to the minister to not renew licenses when they expire.


Mr. LADNER:: Was that the reason this license was not renewed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No. That may be considered, in part because it may be advantageous to the department and to- the public at large
IMr. Lapointe.]
to have the opportunity of accommodating other firms or companies which may ask for licenses to broadcast. In fact, up to the present time we have refused almost one hundred applications for broadcasting licenses because we felt that the circumstances did not justify the department in granting those requests. The number of wave lengths at our disposal is not very great, and it is always to the advantage of the general public for us to have a certain number of wave lengths free, which we can grant to important companies or organizations upon application being made by them.
One might say that in not renewing the licenses we may be damaging persons or associations or companies who enjoyed these licenses the previous year. When these people make application for licenses they know that these licenses are good for only one year; they enter into those contracts knowing all the facts of the case and knowing that the licenses granted to them state very clearly that they are issued for only one year. It may be that this period is too short and that we should extend the time in order to give the company o-r association an opportunity to secure some return on tihe expenditure made in putting the station in operation.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Just on that point, does the minister seriously suggest that any company is going to spend $150,000, as I understand this Toronto company did, on the understanding that the license may be cancelled in one year? Is it not the practice in connection with these licenses, as in other matters, to extend the licenses from year to year unless there is good reason for cancelling them? We have not heard those reasons as yet.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Certainly not. People who spend large amounts of money in establishing broadcasting stations certainly expect that their license will be continued for more than one year, but when they make their application and when the license is granted it is apparent, to them from the documents and from the law and regulations that their license can be taken away from them. Supposing the company to which my hon. friend has referred, a big company in Toronto, or elsewhere, spent $150,000 or $200,000 to establish a broadcasting station; let us imagine that there are five, six or seven of these companies throughout the country in that same position, but that during the course of the year it is decided that for the advantage of the general public the number of these licenses should be reduced, even though these companies have made heavy expenditures. They

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
will have tio suffer the loss of their licenses; they have no claim against us; they have no vested right. Otherwise, if the contention of my hon. friend were sound, once a license is issued it would 'have to be renewed after a year and no one could think of refusing that renewal or of cancelling that license.
That is not the practice. I know what my hon. friend has in mind; the department is not supposed to do that without having some good reason, and I am quite ready to admit that fact; that is what I stated last night.
I contend that in this particular case we had reasons strong enough to justify our action. Hon. gentlemen do not agree with that, but it is a matter of judgment; if they do not agree with my decision they are free to have their own view in that regard.


Leon Johnson Ladner: May I ask the minister if he will give us the reasons of the government for taking this action? So far they have not been given, to my knowledge.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I do not see any necessity or any advantage in repeating again and again in this house or elsewhere statements which already have been made. I stated the reasons in my remarks to the house on April 12, and my statement will be found at page 1951 of Hansard. I repeat, those reasons may not be sufficient in the minds of certain members of the house or of certain people outside the house, but that is no reason for saying that I am to be blamed or censured because I have exercised the authority given me by the law and the regulations. My reasons may not be good; the loser in a law suit is not satisfied with the judgment, but he has lost his case just the same. I submit that our reasons were sufficient to justify our action; those reasons have been plainly stated in this house and they are to be found in greater detail in the documents which have been filed. I do not believe the minister who has the responsibility in regard to these matters can occupy a more sound position than to take care first of all of the listeners-in, and to look after the interest of the broadcasting stations after that. After all the public at large, the listeners-in, are to be considered first; the welfare, the benefit and the enjoyment of the mass of the population which is composed of the listeners-in should be considered beifore anything else. In the decision which we made we tried to satisfy the listeners-in, after hearing their representations and their protests.
I regret to say that it has been stated that I may have been induced, in giving that decision, to a<ct as a censor of religious beliefs or creeds. From that one may draw the inference that in dealing with the matters of
my department I am somewhat prejudiced from a religious point of view. I desire to state most emphatically that this is not the case; in dealing with the matters which come under my jurisdiction I try to be fair and just to everyone who has anything to do with tJhe affairs of my department. I may be lacking in many qualifications possessed by others both in and out of this house; I may not be so important as many others, but from the point of view of fairness, honesty, tolerance and sense of justice I have no leaves to take from the book of anyone in or out of this house. I may make mistakes; all men make mistakes, but I try to act with the greatest sense of justice, fairness and honesty towards all those who have dealings with my department, and I very much regret that certain inferences to the contrary may be drawn from remarks which have been made in this house.
The complaints upon which we acted came from three sources, as my hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre said; complaints came from Toronto, from Saskatoon and from Vancouver.
Mr. 'SPENCER: May I ask the minister how many complaints came from Vancouver and Saskatoon?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I could not say offhand, but the number is stated in the papers tabled.


Mr. SPENCER:: Three from the one place and six from the other, I believe.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: My hon. friend may be
right. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre drew atention to a certain number of these complaints taken from the papers tabled, but I say that it was hardly fair to pick out a certain number of letters or complaints which might suit his argument and pass over other complaints which are of a general character. The complaints made are not confined to matters of religious belief, or creed, they are of a general character. One has only to look at the return which has been produced to ascertain that the complaints are of a general character. The complaints which have come from Vancouver, while they may not be numerous, have come from a representative association of people interested in radio broadcasting and in matters connected with that new industry and its development. The complaints received from Vancouver include a resolution adopted by the Greater Vancouver Radio Association, a body of listeners-in, and also one from the Radio Trades Association, representing firms and individuals dealing in radio apparatus. It may be that the complaints are not numerous, but

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
they represent those who are supposed to be most directly interested, because they are listeners in, or are engaged in the business of selling the necessary apparatus.


Mr. LUCAS:: , Has the department received any complaints regarding other broadcasting stations?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes, there are complaints
received all through the year against other stations, but I am free to say that they were more numerous in this particular case


Herbert Bealey Adshead: When complaints are
received, is it not the custom of the department to send an inspector around? You have inspectors in every city-you have one in Calgary-and when complaints are re ceived, do you send an inspector to that particular station to talk the matter over with them, and possibly warn them; did you do that in this case?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I would venture to say it
was done in this case. Complaints have been made, and I think they have been filed in the return, by the inspectors themselves.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Did the association meet the requests of the inspectors?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: As I stated before, inspectors, who had previously favoured the issuing of a license to the International Bible Students Association, took an opposite view last year and said that we should not renew that license. They informed us they had been flooded with protests of all kinds from the population of the cities where they were operating. These letters accused the department of failing to instruct the inspectors to stop certain broadcasting, and to prevent certain people from doing what they were doing; we were accused of not doing what we should do for the protection of the listeners-in.


Mr. KAISER:: Did you notify the association regarding the material being sent out?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The association were perfectly aware of the situation.


Thomas Erlin Kaiser: It appears to me, in handling this matter-I admit the difficulty of it-that when information comes to the government that a broadcasting station is sending out material objectionable to a great many people the government should notify the particular company concerned.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The people who enjoy
broadcasting are more or less in communication with the government all through the

year. I am informed that they are in communication with the officers of the department. There is an instance of that in the case mentioned by the member for South Vancouver (Mr. Ladner), in his remarks on page 3645 of Hansard, as follows:
On the other hand, when the license was cancelled it will be observed that over twenty thousand letters expressing appreciation of the programs were forwarded to the Department of Marine and Fisheries and duly acknowledged.
These letters were forwarded to the Department of Marine and Fisheries in 1927. apparently following the complaints which had come from Toronto. The sending of these letters was apparently to combat the accusations which had been made against those responsible for the broadcasting programs. This shows that these people cannot plead ignorance and say they were not informed. My hon. friend said that 20,000 letters were sent to show that the listeners-in were satisfied with the broadcasting and desirous of keeping the station in operation, and that the criticisms were not justified.


Mr. McGIBBON:: Did the minister warn
these people that if they did not stop broadcasting objectionable matter their license would be cancelled; did he give them any warning at all of the premeditated action of the government?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will frankly say, Mr. Chairman, that I have no recollection of any special warning having been sent to them.


Peter McGibbon: Do you not think you
should have given them notice?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We informed them about
one month before its expiration that the license would not be renewed. I am quite free to confess that I have no remembrance of any special warning having been sent to them before that.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Is that not the custom,
with other broadcasting stations?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will say that we have
never been placed in such an embarrassing position as we have in this case, and in connection with that I would express a wish which is very strong in my mind:	The
sooner I can get rid of this and have it taken out of the department, the better it will be for me. To say that they did not know of the complaints against them is not quite accurate. They knew the situation; they knew that complaints had been made and that we were forced to consider them in the interests of the listeners-in of Canada.

, Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
The hon. member for Vancouver South is quite mistaken when he says that 20,000 letters expressing appreciation of the programs were forwarded to the Department of Marine and Fisheries. Not 20.000 letters, but 5,029 letters in four packages were forwarded by the association to the department. Out of these 5,029 letters, 24 were complaints, and 5,005 were letters of commendation. But here is the interesting part; out of the 5,005 letters of commendation, 4,056 were from people living in the United States of America, and only 949 were from Canada. These were the supposed 20,000 letters forwarded to us in 1927 to answer the complaints which had been made against this association.


Leon Johnson Ladner: I would ask the minister
if there was not a clear and direct expression of opinion in the petitions which have been sent to the extent of 482,000 people?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am coming to that.


Leon Johnson Ladner: I would also ask the
minister if he himself has not received a large number of letters, as most of us have from our constituents, on the subject?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will come to that. Regarding the petitions which have been sent to the Prime Minister, it is stated that they contain about 458,026 names of which only 82,468 are those of persons who claim to be radio listeners.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Owners.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No, radio listeners. But
without saying anything against the people who have signed these petitions and for whom I have the greatest respect, I may say that everyone who has any experience in public life knows how easy it is to have a petition signed in regard to practically everything. Have we not all had in our experience a petition on which certain names would appear and the next morning the same names would appear on a petition asking exactly the contrary of what was asked in the previous one? We have all had that experience and it is not surprising that such a thing has been done. I do not blame people for doing that, but during the last month these people have been broadcasting to all their listeners that they ought to make strong representations that freedom of speech should not be done away with in Canada. I do not blame them in any way and I respect them, but in deciding the matter I have to take the situation as it is and to analyse the facts as they are. These people have had friends of theirs, no doubt acting in good faith, passing through the different communities with petitions and asking
people to sign them. There came to the department afterwards certain letters from people saying that they regretted having signed the petition because they did not know what was the matter and they were not given the full facts of the case. There is one instance of a boy of seven years who, in the absence of his parents, was asked to sign a petition to give back the license to the International Bible Students' Association. Another case was that of a maid who was asked to sign the petition although she said she did not know a single thing about the radio business; yet she was asked to sign the petition. I have numerous letters from people who signed under similar circumstances. I repeat that I do not blame them; they were acting in good faith, but this shows how easy it is to build up a petition and secure signatures. Supposing we sent persons to Toronto, or Vancouver, to ask people in those cities to sign petitions against the International Bible Students' Association. I venture to say we would be in a position to come before the house with a petition bearing at least as many names as the one which has been produced before us.
We are supposed to have received 9,358 letters in the department. The department has issued 267,210 licenses to listeners and the protests that we have received from people holding receiving licenses number 1,658. Out of 267,210 licensed listeners-in, we have received complaints or protests from only 1,658. We have not had time to analyse the petition containing the 458,026 names.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Is the minister not mistaken there? He referred a moment ago to the matter with regard to the 82,468. My information is that these state in their petition that they are owners of radio receiving sets and they make the protest.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The information which has been supplied to me by the officer of the department who has looked into these petitions is that out of 458026 names, 82,468 claim to be radio listeners.


Leon Johnson Ladner: Owners.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Listeners. That is the information I have before me.


Mr. MANION:: May I take the liberty of suggesting-and I do so with all respect to freedom of speech and all the rest of it-that while there are in the house a few who are greatly interested in changing the minister's decision in this matter, I think the vast majority of us are satisfied to let the minister take the responsibility, which he has said he is willing to do, for the action he has taken,
3658	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
and endeavour to get on with the business of the house? The minister has taken straightforwardly and squarely upon his shoulders the responsibility of cutting off these people. I may say-and I say this subject to further study-that from what little I have studied of the situation I rather think the minister is right; but at any rate, irrespective of what I think about the matter, I believe the house at this late stage in the session could be far better occupied than in fighting out a question of this sort. If the minister is willing to take the responsibility, as he has said he is, let him be criticized by those who do not agree with him; but we have spent hours on this question and without meaning to reflect in any way upon any hon. gentlemen who may think differently from me, I wish to offer the suggestion that we would be better occupied in dealing with some of the real business of the house than in carrying on this particular question.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In view of the importance of the subject and the agitation that has been going on, I think it is proper that I should state clearly the position, first, for the government, and second for myself. I do not want to be accused, as I have been most unfairly in certain newspapers and elsewhere, of having been unjust and of having acted at the dictation of persons belonging to the church to which I belong. It is only fair that I be given an opportunity to make my statement and to place the whole facts before the committee. The facts have to a certain extent been presented but only from one side, and I should like to submit some information from our side of the problem in order to enable unprejudiced people to form their opinion. I quite agree with the hon. member for Fort William who has just spoken. This is not a matter which should, from a certain point of view, take the right of way over other business; but the question is so important and it has been given such wide publicity in the press and elsewhere that it is proper that I should answer the criticism advanced by members of the house who have expressed their views, I admit, in good faith, and in a very fair way-a way that I appreciate very much.
With respect to the action which the government has taken in regard to the numerous letters which were sent to the department, we have discovered that a great number of these letters are in the same handwriting, and that the only difference is in the signature. The letter had evidently been prepared in advance by somebody else, and was offered for signature to many people. The action of

the department has been approved in many communications which we have received. Many letters of congratulation and of felicitation have been addressed to the government on account of the action we took, and I may add that, generally speaking, the editorial sections of the newspapers throughout the country have approved of the action of the government in regard to this matter. So I think there is something to be said on my side, in support of the action taken by myself with the approval of the government.
We speak, and we hear very much, about the freedom of the air. I do not hesitate to say that the air is as free as it was before. But the use of the air has never been free, and so far as radio is concerned, the use of the air cannot be free, because if it were open to anyone to use the few channels of communication that we have in the radio service, the result would be chaos. This is a matter which has to be regulated and controlled for otherwise there is no liberty, and no advantage to anyone. If there is no regulation, if everybody is free to go on the air, then his neighbour should have the same privilege, and if they all go on the air together at the same time, using the same system, nobody would enjoy the air because there would be too much interference, and no one would get any benefit at all from radio broadcasting. So there can be no freedom in the use of the air. It has been controlled in all countries of the world. It is being controlled in the United States; it has been controlled and is being controlled in England to-day by the British Broadcast Corporation.
It must be remembered that we cannot appropriate to ourselves a certain number of wave-lengths for our own use. Others might use the same wave-length, and no satisfactory results would be obtained. I read not very long ago in a newspaper that it was very strange that the United States Should be controlling the wave-lengths, the channels of radio communication, and that we had simply to follow their decisions. That is not exactly the case. What would be the situation of Canada if we started to-day fighting with the United States, we operating our stations and they operating theirs? The result would be simply chaos, and no one would get any advantage from the broadcasting stations, and in addition, their strong stations would very easily drown out the stations we have in Canada. This is a matter which has to be adjusted by an understanding between the two countries, and that is the only way to deal with it. I have always understood that my freedom and my liberty stops where my neighbour's begins, and that I cannot invade

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
the path upon which my neighbour is travelling. I have to respect his rights as much as I expect him to respect mine.
Hon. gentlemen who have spoken already have spoken of the freedom of the air, but fredom only for the broadcasting people. I am for the freedom of the air in the interests of the listeners-in, first of all, and I think that no broadcasting station has any right, simply under the phrase "the freedom of the air'' to impose upon me or upon anybody else his convictions or opinions and to force me to listen to them the whole day or the whole night. That is the position.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Why should the
minister rule these people out entirely, and then grant a license, for instance, to Gooder-ham and Worts to broadcast whiskey advertisements.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I have already given my
reasons for that. My hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre may think they are no good; that is his privilege, but I think my reasons are good.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am simply seeking to get at the minister's argument. He says, "My liberty ceases where somebody else's liberty begins," but why rule out entirely one organization, and then issue a license to a whiskey distilling company to publish advertisements of their product?


Robert James Manion: Are Gooderham and Worts permitted to advertise, outside of simply saying that this is their station? Are they permitted to advertise their whiskey?


James Shaver Woodsworth: Is not that sufficient?


Robert James Manion: I understand they are not, and that they are only permitted to say, "This is Gooderham and Worts' station." That is the limit of what they can say regarding whiskey, and they make other things besides whiskey.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No complaint has been
made up to the present time against the new station which has been established by the company just mentioned. It must be remembered, in considering radio problems, that when a broadcasting station is on the air in a city like Ottawa, for example, or even in a city like Winnipeg, it is absolutely impossible for the majority of the receiving sets to avoid geting the local station which is on the air. It takes a very expensive set to be able to cut out one station and tune in on another, and in a city like Ottawa or Winnipeg most of the sets are not capable
of doing that, and if the receiving set is not strong enough to eliminate a program which is going to occupy the whole evening, the owner of the set has the choice of listening to nothing at all, or listening to what is broadcast by that station.


Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):: Would the minister advise me if the International Bible Students' Association is in the same position as the Presbyterian church, for example, in broadcasting a program from a rented station?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They are in the same position as all other organizations or individuals to whom we refuse to issue a broadcasting license. These people can rent a certain period of time from any other station, and broadcast during that time through a station which has a license to broadcast.


Malcolm McLean: It follows, then, that they are in the same position as any other body of people who wish to broadcast from a rented station.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Exactly.


George Gibson Coote: If that is the case, what was the reason for refusing to renew the license of CJYC, who I understand were simply broadcasting programs for the International Bible Students' Association?


Malcolm McLean: The broadcasting station was owned by them.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes. The broadcasting
station to which my hon. friend has just referred is a station which was incorporated under a different name, but the members of the corporation having the license are the International Bible Students' themselves.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Entirely?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Entirely; that is my information.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Was the cancellation due, then, simply to the personnel of the Universal Radio of Canada?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I say frankly to my hon.
friend that this station being under the control of the association with whom we were dealing, we applied the same decision to it as to all the others.


Mr. FANSHIER (Last Mountain):: Does
this station sell time to any other organizations besides the International Bible Students' Association?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed they did.


William Russell Fansher: What
percentage?
3660	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The officer cannot give me the information offhand.


George Gibson Coote: So the reason for the cancellation of CJYC station of the Universal Radio of Canada was the fact that it was really owned by the International Bible Students' Association?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: To a great extent, yes.
Suppose you operate a station through which you give permission to certain people to abuse the broadcasting privileges covered by the license, I think we would have the right to cancel the license.


Mr. HEAPS:: Did the minister notify
Universal Radio that they would have their license cancelled, or that its renewal would not be entertained, unless the Bible Students Association's programs were discontinued? In other words, were they given any warning?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They were given the same notice that we served on the others one month before March 31.


Abraham Albert Heaps: What was that warning?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We advised them that
after March 31 the license would not be renewed.


Abraham Albert Heaps: No reason given?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


James Shaver Woodsworth: In cancelling the
license of the Universal Broadcasting Company did not the minister apply an altogether new principle? For example, take the Bell Telephone Company and the Northern Electric Company; I do not understand that because the subsidiary company does something that is not approved, the allied corporation is thereupon dealt with.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Certain people have said:
Well, we have freedom of the press, we have freedom of writing, and so on. But the same principle cannot be applied to radio broadcasting. If you are not satisfied with a book you are not forced to read it; similarly, if you do not like the way in which a newspaper is conducted you are not forced to read it, and if you are not in sympathy with the objects of a meeting you are not obliged to attend and listen to the speeches. But in view of the fact that radio receiving-sets are not yet so perfected as to enable you to eliminate any station whose broadcasting you do not wish to listen to, you are forced to listen or not use your receiving-set at all.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Does the minister say I must be forced to listen to jazz?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I agree with my hon.
friend that there is a lot of broadcasting of

jazz from the United States that is not worth listening to, and I should be pleased to stop it if I could; but fortunately those stations being at a distance we can eliminate those that we do not like. For instance, no one is forced to listen to jazz programs from Chicago; you can tune in any other station that you may prefer because you are not in the immediate vicinity of the broadcasting; but when you are near the broadcasting point you cannot escape interference. I may say that I have in my home here in Ottawa one of the latest receiving-sets of the Marconi company, but when CNRO is broadcasting I can get nothing else; if, however, I was living twenty miles from Ottawa I could tune out the local station.


Robert Gardiner: Under those circumstances, my hon. friend has to listen to the jazz that comes from the Laurier theatre in Hull.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I notice a certain amount of jazz comes from there, but I may tell my hon. friend that I do not listen to it.


Robert Gardiner: What do you do?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I close my set, and if it is late I go to bed.


George Gibson Coote: Mr. Chairman, I am trying to get from the minister information about the cancellation of the license of CJYC. Has he any protest in his department which justified cancelling that license except that it broadcast the programs of the International Bible Students' Association, which I understand was done under the license of station CKCX. If he thinks he was justified in cancelling the license for station CKCX because it was devoted exclusively to broadcasting the programs of the International Bible Students' Association, it seems to me that that fact affords no justification for the cancellation of the CJYC license.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Our reason was the same
as that which we applied to the other stations. I am asking the director of that branch of the service to ascertain if we did not have complaints against the general programs of the station itself, but I would not be sure about that.


George Gibson Coote: Would the minister cancel
the license of every station if he received complaints as to the programs broadcast? I am sure he gets complaints regarding CNRO, but he has never yet cancelled the license of that station.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I do not hesitate to say
that I would not cancel the license of any station on receipt of a few complaints. As I have said, we have received complaints in

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
regard to other stations, but nothing comparable in volume to the complaints that we received against the station to which my hon. friend refers. I repeat, it is the first time that we have been placed in so embarrassing and difficult a position, particularly for myself.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the acting leader of the opposition (Mr. Guthrie) and others have referred to the allotment of wave lengths in the city of Toronto, and the hon. gentleman in particular complained because a single wave length was not granted to a new station which had been erected in Toronto or its vicinity. He added that we had given preference to the station of the Toronto Star. I may say that that is true. The station to which my hon. friend referred is CKJW. This new station has been built and operated by the Gooder-ham & Worts distillery of Ontario.


George Gibson Coote: Is that a better personnel than the International Bible Students' Association?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I would not pass any judgment on that, but I should be inclined to say not.


Miss MACPHAIL:: If the minister receives half a dozen complaints against that station will he cancel the license?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: If I received complaints I would consider them very seriously and I should probably take action in what I deemed to be in the interests of the general public.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: Perhaps if the Bible
students went into the distillery business the minister would grant them the license.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That would not be a justification.


Mr. DUNNING:: That is about your size.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: When the station of Gooder-ham and Worts was established in Ontario all the department promised the company was that they would be given about two days for broadcasting. As a matter of fact we are giving them three and one-third days. No complaint can therefore be made by the company on the ground that they have not been given the single wave length which has been assigned the Toronto Star. At the very moment they began building their station, and when they asked for a license, they were informed that they could not be given more than two days a week, whereas they are now enjoying, as I say, three and one-third days. It has been said that we excluded this new and important station from the air. We did not exclude them from the air because, as I have said, we have given them more time than they had a right to expect from the department. It is also said-
Mr. W00DSWORTH:	Has the Star any
more time now than they had when the Bible students were operating in Toronto?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Bible students were on a different wave and did not affect the wave upon which the Toronto Star was broadcasting.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Do I understand
that the Toronto Star has no more time now than when the Bible students were operating?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Toronto Star has more to-day than previously because we have given it, for a while, the single wave which the Gooderham and Worts company wanted to have for their broadcasting. The trouble has arisen from the fact that this single wave instead of having been given to the Gooderham and Worts company was given to the Toronto Star. That is the cause of the complaint made by my hon. friend the acting leader of the opposition. The hon. gentleman's contention is that the Toronto Star station is not an important station and that it should not have been given the advantage of a single wave. Well, I am free to admit that the Toronto Star is not a very strong station, but I would point out that a station can always and very easily be improved. Changes are taking place very rapidly in the radio business, and a station which is up-to-date to-day may be obsolete and of no use in two months time. The radio industry and radio science are developing more and more and a station which is not very effective to-day may be improved materially. It is just possible that the station of the Gooderham and Worts company will not be the best station three months from now.


Hugh Guthrie: How much time does the Toronto Star actually use-how many hours a week? I am informed that it uses twenty-eight hours a week, four hours a day. You have given them the whole week.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Toronto Star in using the wave length allotted to them can broadcast every day.


Hugh Guthrie: But they actually use four hours a day or twenty-eight hours a week. That is right, is it not?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The director says that may be the case. As I was saying, the changes that are taking place in the radio business are indeed rapid and extraordinary. Only this morning I read in one of our daily papers that in a country in the north of Europe a coal shovel began to speak one day last week and people were amazed. This coal shovel acted very much like a receiving set and it also broadcast a program of music, following
3662	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
that up with a lesson in the English language. People were very much surprised and they afterwards discovered that what they were getting through the coal shovel, placed against a wall, was a program which was being broadcast by a station not very far away. So you can see that there is always room for development. The fact is that practically anything is possible in the development of the radio science to-day.


Peter McGibbon: Was that a political development?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I would not say that. Now I think I can reasonably draw from the remarks of the acting leader of the opposition and others the inference that giving this privilege to the Toronto Star was an act of politics.


Mr. EVANS:: Was not the department informed that the users in Saskatoon were willing to limit their broadcasting to Sundays only?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes; representations in that regard were made to me not long ago.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Will the minister reconsider the renewing of the license?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The matter can be considered. As regards issuing licenses for a single wave and giving the privilege of broadcasting every day in the week, the Toronto Star is not the only newspaper which has been accorded this treatment. I may be mistaken, but in my opinion it is more proper to grant a broadcasting license to a newspaper than to a distillery or to any other company, and if I had to choose between the two I should say that it was better to give the single wave to the Star.


Hugh Guthrie: The minister must remember that he is the one who gave it to the distillery.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes, I gave it to the distillery; but I did not give-


Hugh Guthrie: If there is anything wrong in giving a license to the distillery the minister must bear the burden.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Certainly, I gave it to the distillery; I am not trying to escape responsibility. But I refused to give to the distillery a license for eveiy day and night in the week; I said that instead of giving that privilege to the distillery I preferred to give it to the Star, which is a newspaper. And a newspaper, .in my judgment-my judgment may be poor on this point-is a better organization for broadcasting in Canada. But we gave the same privilege to two other newspapers which are not Liberal. This privilege is enjoyed

by station CJJC, which is the London Free Press, London, Ont. They have the same privilege as the Toronto Star. And we have also given the same privilege to the station CHNS, which is the station of the Halifax Herald published in the city of Halifax. I cannot be accused of favouring Liberal newspapers in face of this information.
Now, I regret having spoken at such great length. We have made up our minds that a change must be made in the broadcasting situation in Canada. We have reached a point where it is impossible for a member of the government or for the government itself to exercise the discretionary power which is given by the law and by the regulations as they stand to-day, for the very reason that the moment the minister in charge exercises his discretion, the matter becomes a political football and a political issue all over Canada. This is not desirable, although I admit it is the logical consequence of the law and the regulations as they stand to-day. We should change that situation and take radio broadcasting away from the influences of all sorts which are brought to bear by all shades of political parties. This will avoid much trouble for the minister and for the government, and I think will result in greater satisfaction to the public at large.
AVe are not prepared to evolve a scheme at present, because we have not in our possession all the information we will need. We are inclined to follow that plan which has been established and which is operating at present in England; our idea would be to establish a company, the shares of which would be the property of the Canadian government and to appoint special men, who are called governors in England, to look after the issuing of licenses and the regulation of everything else in regard to this important business. In this investigation which I propose to make with the amount I am asking parliament to vote in the supplementary estimates I am going to inquire into all phases of the situation, and I am prepared to say that I will be inclined to ask these people who will look into the situation also to consider the cases which have been mentioned by hon. gentlemen opposite in the course of their criticism. This investigation and this body which I am going to organize will look into these particular cases and at the same time will provide the department with all the information we need in order to come to parliament next session with a bill which will really establish something different from the system which prevails to-day. I repeat the sooner this is done the better it will be for me and the better I will be satisfied.

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio


Mr. GEARY:: Some time ago this matter
of the revision of air channels came to my notice, I think through an editorial in the Toronto Saturday Night, and I put a quetrtion to the minister in regard to certain air channels in the city of Toronto, which he was good enough to answer. The minister has cited instances, including that of the Canadian National Broadcasting station in Ottawa, where other programs are constantly interrupted because of the proximity of these stations. I do not even own a receiving set; I have listened to the blessed things occasionally, although not very cheerfully, but I have heard those who possess receiving sets constantly complain of the very thing the minister complains of in Ottawa, but in these cases directed to a different broadcasting station. In Toronto complaints are constantly directed to the interference of the Toronto Daily Star station CFCA. I only speak from hearsay, of course, because I do not know of my own knowledge.
I do not want to review all that the minister has said, but there are two or three points on which I must touch. Station CKCX is the name of the phantom station of the International Bible Students' Association. A phantom license, of which there are sixteen according to the minister's report as against seventy-four active stations, is one which has its own call letter but which rents time from some other station. If station CKCX, which rents time from someone else, has its license withdrawn, I presume it is taken off the air and cannot broadcast at all through any other medium.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is not the case; they can continue to broadcast but not under the call letters which they had previously.


George Reginald Geary: They must get another call
letter?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No, they do not need any call letters; they can broadcast as many other firms broadcast; they simply say that the program is furnished through the courtesy of so and so.


George Reginald Geary: Very well; station CKCX is not taken off the air by the simple process of cancelling its licenses, since I understand these people are still broadcasting. Station CJYC belongs to a corporation which spent a good deal of money on its plant and which has a physical license, from which it makes money by renting portions of its time. Some of its time is rented to station CKCX; some is rented to other concerns and the rest of the time is used by station CJYC. The minister knows that very well. The International
Bible Students' Association and the corporation known as Universal Radio of Canada are entirely different people; it is a well known principle that corporations are entities, each to itself. A corporation may be composed of five men; these five men may be in partnership in another business, but still as a corporation they have nothing to do with the other partnership in which they are interested. There is no reason for cancelling the license of station CJYC unless it is putting on bad programs or doing business in a way which is not satisfactory to the department or otherwise misbehaving itself, so I suggest to the minister that the cancellation of the license held by station CJYC did not necessarily follow the cancellation of the license issued to the International Bible Students' Association. The license to CJYC might have been retained under rigid supervision, in order to make sure that proper programs were broadcast. I think mo complaint has been made with regard to this station except as to that part of their time rented to the International Bible Students' Association.
Here is the difficulty; station CJYC and station CFRB were the only stations on the 580 kilocycle wave-length. There is another wave-length known as the 840 kilocycle wavelength, which is exclusive, the first mentioned being shared with the United States. On the latter wave-length were stations CFCA, the Toronto Daily Star; CKCL, the Dominion Battery Company and CKNC, the Canadian National Carbon Company. These three stations were dividing the time on that wavelength, each using one-third of the time. The 960 kilocycle wave-length, which is also exclusive, was given for the sole use of station CKGW, the Gooderbam and Worts station. Then what happened? Station CJYC, one of the half owners of the 580 kilocycle wavelength, had its license cancelled; station CFRB, the other half owner, was given the 960 kilocycle wave-length to share with the Gooderham and Worts station. I am not complaining of that, but that left the 580 kilocycle wave-length free.
What was done next? There were three stations on 840 kilocycles, one of them being the Toronto Daily Star. The Daily Star was left there and the other two were taken off that wave-length and given the places of stations CJYC and CFRB, which latter station had been transferred to another wave-length. In other words, the 580 kilocycle wave-length was cleared by means of the cancellation of the license of CJYC and the transfer of CFRB, and the space left was filled by taking the two competitors of the Toronto Star and
3664	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
moving them to the 680 kilocycle wave-length, leaving 840 kilocycles absolutely free to the Toronto Daily Star. I have no doubt that the Toronto Star does use some time on the air, but as .a business .proposition, as a source of wealth, the exclusive use of an exclusive air channel is of great value. This is an extraordinary consequence. I am not blaming the minister personally, but I suggest that strong representations were made to the government which induced them to clear the road, by cancelling station CJYC and transferring station CFRB, in order to leave space for the two competitors of the Toronto Star in another air channel, which would leave the Toronto Star in exclusive possession of an exclusive Canadian air channel. That is what has happened. On the 960 kilocycle wave-length, which is exclusive, Gooderham and Worts had full time, but I understand from the minister that they never expected to get full time, so they were an easy mark to which to transfer anything lying around loose. So they were made to share that air channel with station CFRB, which had to be taken off the 580 kilocycle channel in order to make room for the competitors of the Toronto Daily Star, who were also transferred. In order to make room for the Toronto Star, their competitors in the 840 kilocycle channel were moved out of that channel.	[DOT]
The net result, Mr. Chairman, is that you have CKCL and CKNC moved up to share a certain channel, and the Toronto Star are given the exclusive right to a Canadian channel and CFRB divides a channel which was formerly in the sole possession of Gooderham and Worts. The answer to my question was this: CKCL and CKNC were transferred from the Toronto Star's channel, in order to give each station more time on the air. Was that done? Instead of getting one-third of tlhe time on their previous wave-length, they now get one-half on the 580 kilocycle channel, but that channel is shared with the United States.
The ministers report says that the United States were prepared to consider some increase in the number of shared wave-length, but "shared wave-lengths, while useful, are of limited value since they can be used only by comparatively low-powered stations, and while they serve to round out a national radio system, they cannot take the place of exclusive wave-lengths in the national layout" which the Canadian representatives foresee will be necessary.
When these stations were taken from third time on an exclusive channel and put on half time on a shared channel, I do not see any good ground for saying they were transferred

from that channel, not in order to clear the way for the Toronto Star, but in order to give each station more time on the air. They do get more time on the air, but it is in a limited channel, which, according to the minister's own statement, is of limited value. They get half time on a*station of limited value, in place of third time on a station with an exclusive air channel devoted to Canada and not shared with the United States.
I do not know the conditions which exist regarding the London Free Press or the Halifax Herald. There may not be any competition there for air channels, and the conditions may not be the same. I venture to say that if you examine the conditions applying in Halifax and London you will find they give us no assistance in considering broadcasting in the city of Toronto.
The CFCA station has been complained of. I am informed that the first use it made of its additional afternoon time on the air was to broadcast the Woodbine races, the betting odds and that sort of thing. Whether or not that is particularly fine broadcasting, I do not know. They are not a station, as far as one can learn from radio listeners-in, that would be considered as being of any particular value in competition with others. The bald fact remains that they have been given full possession of an exclusive Canadian channel, and they can use this channel twenty-four hours a day, and seven days a week. The other companies may or may not have got some advantage, but one company was put out of business entirely.
I submit that the judgment of the minister is entirely bad, and it seems to me that the Toronto Star has been able to make such representation as to convince the minister, and convince him wrongly in my humble opinion, that it was entitled to this tremendous consideration which has been given to it. This broadcasting privilege has a market value, and an advertising value as well. I hope this matter is before the minister for his consideration, and I would be glad to hear any remarks he has to make, because I think the facts seem to indicate exactly what I have stated.


John Evans: Seeing that the house and
the country as a whole are still in doubt, I make no apology for discussing this question for a few minutes. I have received some seventy letters from my own constituency protesting against the cancellation of the Bible students' radio license, but I have noit received one complaining against them. One reason for the cancellation stated to us was that the matter broadcasted was propaganda, and of an

Supply-
-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
objectionable character. I have in my hand a Statutory declaration from the association, in which the following appears:
As to the statement of Inspector S. J. Ellis dated November 19th, 1926, "I consider their programs nothing but propaganda and an advertising scheme to get money." This statement is incorrect. The association or its members have never either directly or indirectly solicited funds to pay for the programs or for any other purpose. The association is and was incorporated under letters patent from the Dominion government, as a non-profit association and has remained and will remain such. The sole purpose of the stations is for the entertainment of the public by educational and musical programs, etc.
I also have a letter from R. G. Scott, M.D.,
medical superintendent of the Anna Turnbull hospital at Wakaw, Sask. Dr. Scott is well known in western Canada, and is favourably known, not only to Protestants, but to Roman Catholics as well. I would like to read one paragraph of his letter:
A word as to the Bible Students. I know a lot of them, and the organization has my good wishes. I have been a minister first of the Presbyterian church, and now of the United church, for twenty-eight years. My work has kept me in a district where I have been doing medical work and for a number of years I have not done much preaching. What I want to state is that the Bible Student movement has done a lot of good and is still doing a lot of good. It has made people honest who were not previously honest. It is a live movement, wholesome, and should be encouraged. Many of their conceptions are crude, and preposterous, but these people are thinking as well as they can, and are travelling in the right direction.
Dr. Scott discussed this question with the Catholic priest at Wakaw, who replied in a noncommittal way that their program was much better than nothing. Apparently he did not consider them in error. I think that some highhanded tyranny has been brought to bear against this association. Their programs have covered the subjects of traffic control, advantages of Ontario hydro electric, the Ontario educational system, attractions of Canada for tourists, technical education in Toronto, world news, travelogue, organ recitals by some of the leading Canadian organists, concerts and so on. The Bible student's association is an international one. They have been broadcasting lectures on public ownership, and I believe that is one of the causes for the refusal to renew their license. This session has revealed the fact that the government is absolutely without a policy on this great question; a Liberal government without a Liberal policy. I know some hon. members may think this rather farfetched-


An hon. MEMBER:: Just the usual practice.


John Evans: I did not hear the hon.
gentleman-but let me tell the committee that the great power combine of the North American continent is to-day not only securing radio stations but absolutely buying whole legislatures in certain states of the union to the south of us. In one state it has even the privilege of furnishing the readers for the children in the schools. It is sending out its lecturers to the high schools and universities and it is educating the people in that way. In western Canada we have that great combine and for their underhand purposes they are even seeking the aid of certain city commissioners and others and buying up every available small power plant in cities and towns throughout the west. In face of all that, every reason given by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries for the refusal of this license falls flat. The fact is that in Canada and the United States a capitalistic combine has been formed, and when I look at the number of bills that have come before parliament this session, bills that are calculated to fleece the public and that are in many cases decided in the house practically on party lines, I think I am entitled to this suspicion. There are a number of bills such as Bill No. 152, Bill No. 71, Bill No. 43, Bill No. 56, that more than create suspicion in my mind as to the reason for the refusal of this license. One thing is certain and that is that no logical reason has yet been given for the cancellation. I still believe that the great power trust has taken objection to the lectures given publicly by this association and I want to tell the minister now that the country will not be persuaded by anything he has so far said that this association has not been the victim of high-handed action. I submit to him that there is no British justice in the treatment which this association has received. Further let me state most emphatically that the argument that this association's license has been cancelled because there are too many on the air when a license is given to Gooderham and Worts, Limited; is one that I cannot accept.
I said that the government is a Liberal government without a policy. If I am to judge its policy from its actions, I would say that it was "more booze and less Bible". These are my opinions; surely I am entitled to them and until the government-and the minister does not need to take this to himself personally because he is speaking for the government now and the cabinet is in the house practically every day-takes the

3666	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
country into its confidence and outlines a definite policy of treating all alike, the suspicion we have had will remain with us.


Mr. EDWARDS (Frontenac):: I agree with the minister when he says that you have to discount to a certain extent signatures attached to petitions. It is no doubt true that you cannot exactly estimate the strength of a petition by the number of names appearing under it; but making a liberal discount with regard to the petitions which have been presented by members of the house on behalf of many people throughout Canada, you cannot ignore the fact that tens of thousands of people have expressed to the house an opinion against the action taken by the minister. The minister has been asked repeatedly to give his reasons for cancelling this license and he has referred us to page 1851 of Hansard of April 12. Looking at that I notice the reasons given are contained in a couple of sentences as follows:
The matter being broadcast is generally described by complainants as having become intolerable; the propaganda carried on under the name of Bible talks is said to be unpatriotic and abusive of all our churches. Evidence would appear to show that the tone of the preaching seems to be that all organized churches are corrupt and in alliance with unrighteous forces, that the entire system of society is wrong and that all governments are to be condemned.
If that be the ease, the minister has in that, it seems to me, some justification for the course which he has taken, but how did the minister arrive at that- conclusion? I assume, not by receiving letters of an indefinite character making complaints. I suppose he would have under his hand, in coming to a decision, statements of the character and actual repetitions of the things that were broadcasted. For the minister to be influenced by a letter stating: " I do not like the kind of broadcasting that is going on," does not seem to me to be a very strong position to be taken as justification for the cancellation of the license. But if he has received from various parts of the country different statements which have been broadcast by this association, which are objectionable and which should not be allowed to continue, then perhaps he has some grounds on which to act. If he has that sort of information he has something which neither I nor other members of the house have. I confess I have read in the press some criticisms of this association and the character of their broadcasting, but I have not read in the press any statements alleged to have been made by them, on which I could form an opinion. I have not a radio set myself and I have not had the privilege of listening

in and forming a judgment by hearing what is passed over the air. It seems to me, if the minister has that sort of information under his hand, it should be made available for the members in order that they may form a judgment as to the class of material which this station has been sending out. I should like to see that myself. We are using the air to-day and it will be used more and more as time goes on. There will have to be some control of the class of material which is passed through the air. That, I think, is something there can be no difference of opinion about.
I am not altogether impressed with the word " liberty " as it is used very frequently by people who want what, in my judgnhent, amounts to license. There have been great abuses in the name of liberty. The word " liberty " has probably been more abused than any other word that you can think of. Some people define liberty in a different way from the way in which I would define it. If this society is circulating through the air propaganda which is unpatriotic, which condemns all governments and which tends generally to bring into disrepute everything that we regard as our standards, I for one, would like to see some of the messages which it has sent out in order that I might form a conclusion whether or not there was justification for cutting off the license. It does seem to me, however, in the face of these large numbers of petitions sent in here, that the minister would have been well advised, and it strikes me it would have been a little fairer, when the complaints were coming to him, to nave called the attention of this organization to the fact that he had received numerous complaints, and that they would have to change the character of the stuff they were broadcasting or their license would be cancelled. That he has not done, he says very frankly, and that does not strike me as playing the game quite fairly.
I would like to add this further word. The way it appears to me now, in the light of the great number of persons who have petitioned against this action, is that the attitude and action of the government have been rather strict, having regard to the fact that the bookstalls in this city of Ottawa and all over the province of Ontario are loaded with American literature which cannot be regarded as having anything but a damaging effect on the young people of this Dominion. It seems to me that there is a good deal of laxity in regard to United States literature coming into this country, and in view of this laxity the

Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
action of the government in regard to cancelling this radio license does appear somewhat severe.
I have received, as have other hon. members, a number of letters in regard to the cancellation of this license. I have talked with a good many people who have sets of their own, and I have asked them if they have ever heard anything which struck them as improper being issued by this society, and in not a single instance did anyone tell me that they had heard anything which they thought was objectionable. That is all I have to go on in forming my opinions, in the absence of a definite statement as to the sort of stuff this organization has been broadcasting. If the minister has that information and does not care to place it on Hansard, I should be glad if he would make it available for me and other members of parliament to glance over it, so that we can form our own judgment as to the real character of the matter which has been broadcast, and about which the minister has received some complaints.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Certainly, I will.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I have no desire to prolong the discussion at this stage, because anything I might add would be more or less a repetition of things which have already been said. However, there is one point I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and it grows out of the discussion last night just prior to the adjournment of the house. Just before the moment of adjourning the house at eleven o'clock last night, I had stated that there were complaints in the correspondence brought down for the year 1918 and 1919. The minister said he thought I was mistaken. I went to the trouble to-day to obtain the correspondence tabled, and I find that my statement was correct. Before placing the facts before the house I would like to preface my remarks with an observation or two. On April 16, the house passed the following resolution:
For a copy of all letters, telegrams, and correspondence, pertaining to the cancellation of the radio licenses held by the International Bible Students' Association.
The correspondence asked for in this resolution was brought down on the 7th of May, exactly three weeks after the motion for the production of these papers was passed. At the time this motion was passed by the house it was understood, I believe, and was so stated by the right hon. the Prime Minister, that only correspondence would be produced .hat pertained to the cancellation of these licenses. That is all we wanted, and I believe that that
56103-232*
is all that was asked for. But when the correspondence was produced, this is what I find.
In the first place, there is a letter sent from the Department of Marine and Fisheries, dated the 12th of April, when the motion, I believe, was already on the order paper, practically asking for information against the International Bible students. A letter came back on the 17th day of April. I find also several other letters on this file dated about the same period. In other words, the department cancelled the licenses, and after they had done so, they looked around for evidence to justify them in taking their action. I do not think that is fair; it is not the kind of action we should care to justify in this house.
I look towards the end of this file of correspondence and I find articles reproduced from the American newspapers of about the year 1918. There is one dated March 8, 1918, and these are given, I presume, as a reason for the cancellation of these licenses. It is quite true that there may have been many people in 1917 or 1918 who might have agreed with the action then taken against the Bible students in Toronto or New York, but certainly that is no excuse to be given to this house in the year 1928 for the cancellation of these licenses. I think it is a most unfair thing, and I believe that it is not in keeping with the traditions of this house, when we ask for correspondence pertaining to a certain action, that after the date of asking for the correspondence the department should go around looking for correspondence to table. The only reason I got up this afternoon was to protest against this method of the department, and to protest also against going back for a period of ten years for evidence against this association. In 1918 and 1919 there was no such thing as a radio license granted by the Department of Marine and Fisheries in Canada. I believe it was only in 1920 or 1921 that licenses were first granted by the government. It is unjust to this association that these matters should be brought to the attention of the house, and what is more, I do not think it is becoming the government to go around looking for evidence after a motion is passed by the house. What I mean by that is this. After I had asked on the 16th of April for the tabling of the correspondence pertaining to the cancellation of these licenses, the government go around to the various departments, such as the Post Office department, and to newspaper offices probably, and clip items out of newspapers and paste them in the record, and then table it all to justify their action. That is the protest I wish to make this afternoon.
3668	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The documents which have been produced at the request of my hon. friend are all the documents existing on the file of the department regarding this association. We thought it would be fair to place before the house everything that we had relating to this association. The documents to which my hon. friend has just referred were taken into consideration, I am informed by the officers of the department, when the International Bible students made their first request for a radio license in 1922, which request was refused at the time, and I am told that the request was refused at that time on the strength of the documents to which my bon. friend has just referred. When we brought down the correspondence, we wanted to bring down everything in our possession with regard to the matter.


Abraham Albert Heaps: May I point out that this document is dated April 17, 1928, which is after the license had been cancelled, and consequently the statement of the minister has no bearing on this communication to which I have referred.


Mr. CARMICHAEL:: I have just a few
words to say in respect to the matter that is before the house. The minister has done something which a great many people are condemning him for, and yet perhaps some of those who are condemning him find themselves in the same position as I do myself, of rather feeling that he has done a service to a great many people in the country. I do not wish to discuss at length the religious teaching of the Bible students, but I do wish to point out that a great many people throughout the country share the opinion that their teaching was not wholesome and was not welcome. Our population is made up of various religious sects. I find that 96 per cent of our people belong to religious bodies that certainly do not accept the religious teaching of the International Bible Students; for instance, the Anglicans, the Baptists, the Brethren, the Con-gregationalists, the Evangelical Association, the Friends-known as the Quakers-the Lutherans, the Mennonites, the Methodists, the Plymouth Brethren, the Presbyterians, the Roman Catholics, the Salvation Army, and several others composing approximately 96 per cent, or over eight million of our population. These people in general do not accept the religious teaching of the International Bible Students' Association, because their doctrine is so different from that of the majority of our religious organizations that it is not acceptable to them. Therefore I find myself in the position of commending the minister for the stand he has taken.
[Mr. Heaps.l
The argument has been advanced that his action constitutes interference with liberty of speech. Well, I am not so sure that it does. "Liberty of speech" is a phrase capable of a variety of meanings. We have liberty of speech in some matters, in others we have not. Even in the manner of speaking our thoughts we are restrained to quite an extent-especially in this chamber. Here we are not permitted, for instance, to make any derogatory remarks about the sovereign, or the governor general, or even about the upper chamber.


Mr. JACOBS:: Or even about each other,
much as we should like to.


Archibald M. Carmichael: Quite so. We think a lot more than we say, and under our breath we may muttei; comments that we should not like to appear on Hansard.


Agnes Campbell Macphail: Hear, hear.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Archibald M. Carmichael: While the Bible
students are forbidden to give forth their religious teaching on the air, they still have the medium of the pulpit. They are not restrained in the least from using that channel. Also, they still have the privilege of going into our homes-which, 'by the way, they do very aggressively-and trying to sell their literature; and they still have the privilege, to use a slang phrase, of buttonholing people on the train or in the street, which also they are very aggressive in doing. In short, they are not restrained in these respects from disseminating their views, so I do not feel that any great injustice is done them so far as liberty of speech goes.
There is, though, room for criticism in another particular. I feel the minister is sub-j ect to some degree of criticism because of discrimination. Yesterday we learned that the United Church of Canada has a broadcasting station in Vancouver, and that the Christian and Missionary Alliance has a broadcasting station in Edmonton. I know something of the latter because I was concerned in getting it there. The International Bible Students used to have four broadcasting stations. Now I think there is discrimination in that the licenses for the four stations of the Bible students were cancelled, while these other two religious stations had their licenses renewed. I do not know whether I should suggest how that discrimination might be overcome, but I should like to give forth a thought that was expressed to me last night by a minister of the Gospel in this city-one who, I believe, has charge of the largest congregation locally. He told me that he would favour discontinuing the broadcasting of all

Supply-
-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
religious programs. Now, if the minister had taken that attitude and refused to license the broadcasting station of any religious organization, his position would be unassailable. 1 believe there is something to 'be said in support of the view that the broadcasting of any religious programs should not be permitted. The attitude of this reverend gentleman of course was taken because in his opinion such broadcasting tends to keep people away from church, where he thinks they should attend. So he may be selfish in his opinion.
A point that has not been brought out in this discussion is that the International Bible Students Association have really had a special privilege.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Archibald M. Carmichael: I am not very conversant with their programs other than those broadcast from their Saskatoon station. If my information is correct, they enjoyed a special privilege there in this way: they operated t'heir own station, and in addition they had a certain amount of time for broadcasting from another local station. The Ministerial Association of Saskatoon met together and allotted the time that each denomination would have for broadcasting, leaving the Bible students out of consideration as they had their own stations for their exclusive use. But afterwards the Ministerial Association was approached by the Bible students, who said: Here, we wish for our share of the time with the other religious bodies on your station. And they were legally entitled ito their share, and got it. So they had all their time on their own station, and their share with the other religious bodies of the broadcasting on the joint station.


Charles Avery Dunning: What about freedom of
speech?


Archibald M. Carmichael: They had an excess of freedom of speech-an excess of time. Now that the department has refused to renew the Bible students' license for their station they are on a parity with the other religious organizations in Saskatoon. So instead of their being discriminated against, I feel that their special privileges have been withdrawn and they are now simply put on a par with the other religious bodies, where they should have been from the first.
I was pleased to note the minister's statement that the government proposes to take over the control of radio. I think that is the proper policy to adopt, and I do not think it is necessary to spend very much money or consume a great deal of time in order to arrive at a sound decision. In my opinion the
government should take over radio broadcasting as a public business and direct it in the interests of the whole country.


Mr. BIRD:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make it clear that I hold no brief for the Bible students against the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I do not think it necessary to attribute any ulterior motives to the minister or to the government in this matter. I think his refutation of the charge of ulterior motives was both dignified and convincing, at least so far as I was concerned. I believe that the minister, as he Aimed, had a perfect right to form his opinion on the evidence given. At the same time I think he will concede to others the right to estimate the value of his opinion. Personally I believe that the minister's action was somewhat precipitate; he did not have regard to principles that are traditional and that lie very deep at the root of our most valued and cherished beliefs. This year we are celebrating the third centenary of John Bunyatn. The whole Englishspeaking world is looking back with pride upon the record of tfhat humble English tinker, not because he produced one of England's premier classics, which is the next best seller to the Bible, but because he spent twelve long years in prison to maintain the right of free speech. I say these matters go much deeper than we perceive on the surface, and a good many of us, no matter what our relationship to the Bible students may be, are very intensely interested in the question of free speech, the freedom of religious opinion and the freedom to express that opinion.
It seems to me, from what has been said, that the objections to the Bible students in this phase of their propaganda have come mainly from three classes of the community, to whom I do not think we ought to give undue weight. First of all there are those who are antipathetic to the religious views of the Bible students. It has been said that the Bible students are propagandists; they have been stigmatized with that as though it is something to be condemned. I put it to the house, that to be a propagandist in religious matters is not a thing that bears with it any stigma at all. After all, looking back on the history of religious controversy, it has been the propagandists who have made their mark in the progress of religion, notwithstanding what their religious views have been. I do not agree with the theological beliefs of this sect; they are not beliefs that I can accept. But that is a very secondary matter. At any rate these people, whatever their views are, believe in them enough to go to some trouble to try to disseminate them amongst Cana*
3670	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
dians; and in my view the dissemination of religious beliefs in contemporary life is not by any means overdone. It seems to me that the ideas that are coursing through the minds and hearts of the people are not ideas that are overburdened with religious conceptions of any kind. After all, I admire any people, Mohammedans or Christians or whatnot, who show some zeal in the prosecution and spread of their religious beliefs. And1 many of us know these Bible students personally; they are our neighbours. There is scarcely a town or hamlet in western Canada where some of these people do not reside. They are amongst our best Canadian citizens; they can be classified as the very best of our Canadian citizens. I understand that they do not believe very much in us politicians. Their kingdom is not of this world; therefore they do not lay much stress upon the achievements of worldly institutions. I do- not know whether we can hold that against them or not; a good many of us have become pessimistic about the efficacy of some of our institutions.


Malcolm McLean: Can the hon.
member assure the house whether or not they believe in rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's?


Thomas William Bird: I think that the people who
raise that question ought to be sure that they are rendering unto God the things that are God's. The onus is on the other people, not on the Bible students. I am not holding any brief for the other-worldly conceptions of these people. But they are not the only religious sect that have been other-worldly in their beliefs.
Another set of objections come from people who are very patriotic. They believe that the sect is a menace to the country; that its teachings somewhat blur the lines of nationalism; in other words, that they are not very patriotic, and that during the war they were anti-militaristic. I will not tax the religious knowledge of my fellow members, but I want to ask hon. members, who have any knowledge of religious history, to tell me of any sect which at its best time was not anti-nationalist and anti-militarist. I could wait for the reply with perfect confidence that no satisfactory answer can be given to that question, because it is well known that in the case of religious sects that bear the name Christian-and this sect does-the more sincere they are, the more nearly they get back to the first principles of their belief, the more antipathetic and antagonistic they become to all conceptions of a narrow, Chauvinistic, nationalist spirit and to all ideas of military aggressiveness. You can-

not name one of the great Orthodox churches, let alone this little modem sect, of which this is not true. One remembers that away back in the sixteenth century Sir Thomas More, who, as a faithful Catholic, suffered' for his belief in transubstantiation, was a pacifist, just as these people are to-day-an associate of Henry the VIII who in his younger days was known by his pacifism. And these people were pacifists because they believed that it was the teaching of Jerome and of St. Augustine, and indeed of Paul and of Christ himself. I think therefore that we ought to hesitate before branding a modern sect because it enunciates beliefs of a pacifistic character. I think any sect to-day which has the courage to come out in this materialistic age and enunciate beliefs of a pacifistic kind bears the marks of the true church in a way that some of our more orthodox churches have not borne it in recent -times. I think that is a very far-fetched objection to this sect.


Samuel William Jacobs: I do not claim to be an
authority on religion, but just for the sake of information who was it said:
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword.


Thomas William Bird: A member of my hon.,friend's race said that.


Samuel William Jacobs: Who was it?


Thomas William Bird: 
Mr. WARD:: I have followed this debate with perhaps a good deal of selfish interest, as I have a great many of these people in
3672^	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries-Radio
my constituency. I have received many communications protesting against the action of the Department of Marine and Fisheries. I desire to associate myself with the Iasi speaker .in that I do not accuse the minister of anything ulterior in this matter, but I believe he is a victim of a blunder on the part of the officials in his department; I say that frankly, I do not think the action was wholly warranted; I do not think the reasons given to the house are such as we should be expected to accept. For these reasons I hope that before this vote passes the minister will state to the house that he will have an investigation made, and if there is discrimination he will have it removed. It has been stated by hon. members that there is discrimination, and that belief is not wholly removed from my mind. It will make it very much easier for a lot of us if the minister will make such a statement, and I hope he does so before the vote passes.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Of all the criticism which has been made from both sides of the house with regard to the minister's action I believe the most biting was made by the hon. member for South Toronto (Mr. Geary), when he pointed out that the station CJYC Was cancelled' to make room for others, including OFCA. I should like to know whether the minister can give us an explanation of the action of his department in this respect. Does he question the statement made by the hon. member for South Toronto?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Mr. Chairman, I deny that imputation. The license of the International Bible Students' Association, or of the Universal Radio of Canada, was not cancelled to favour any other station.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Probably I should say
that the license was not renewed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That is not the reason.
There is no connection between what is supposed to be favoritism, according to my hon. friend opposite, and the action taken in this particular case.


Peter McGibbon: Considering the answer given by the minister to my question this afternoon, that he had not warned these people, would he consider regranting their license on condition that they did not broadcast anything of an offensive nature?


Mr. POWER:: You do not look like that in your picture.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I think I answered that
point when I said that no special warning or notice was given before refusing to renew the license. I stated that they were absolutely

familiar with the situation as it existed; they knew of the complaints we had received against them, one of the indications of that being that they sent to the department a certain number of letters.


Peter McGibbon: It is the latter part of my question I am more particularly interested in. Would the minister be willing to grant them a trial license, say for a month?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I can only say that an investigation is to be held into the whole situation, and I am ready to place the case of the Universal Radio station before the commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marine department-river St. Lawrence ship channel-maintenance and operating dredging fleet, $1,895,000.
Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is the annual vote for the dredging of the St. Lawrence channel from Montreal to Father Point. There is an increase of $373,000 to provide for the reconditioning of certain dredges which are getting old, and rebuilding one or two of them.


Robert James Manion: Is the usual annual vote about this size?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: Could you give us some idea as to the progress being made in dredging this channel?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The channel from Montreal to Father Point is 30 feet deep at certain points, and we have to dredge a distance of 34 miles before the program of deepening the channel to 36 feet is completed. We expect that it will take five or six years to complete this work.


George Reginald Geary: Is that below Quebec?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Part is below Quebec and part above.


George Reginald Geary: The channel has not a depth
of 35 feet below Quebec?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Not at all points.


George Reginald Geary: I concluded from the remarks of the member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) that there was nothing to be done there at all.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There is some dredging to be done.


Robert Gardiner: What will be the ultimate cost?

Supply-Marine and Fisheries


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We are spending about
$1,800,000 per year, and there will be the same expenditure for five or six years.


Robert Gardiner: About $10,000,000?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: About that, yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
River St. Lawrence ship channel [DOT]- for construction of one hopper barge, $315,000.
Robert James Manion: Would the minister explain, please?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Department of Railways and Canals being in need of a barge for their work in the Hudson bay, we lent them one, and this is to replace it.


Robert James Manion: Who is constructing the
barge?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It is being done by tender.


Robert James Manion: The lowest tenderer will get the work?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Oh, yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for maintenance and operation of Sorel shipyard, $154,000.
Robert James Manion: Would the minister explain?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This amount is required for the maintenance and operating of the government shipyard in Sorel, where dredges and tugs used in dredging the St. Lawrence are repaired.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for the construction of a regulating and retaining dams in the St. Lawrence river, $1,000,000
Robert James Manion: Will the minister explain
this item?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: A few years ago a commission composed of engineers was placed in charge of the work of studying the problem of regulating the water in the St. Lawrence river from Montreal down to Father Point. This commission, which was composed of Mr. E. E. Haskell, Dean of the College of Civil Engineering, Cornell University; Mr. V. W. Forneret, Superintending Engineer of the St. Lawrence ship channel, and Mr. William J. Stewart, Hvdrographer of the Naval Service, who has died since that time, made a study with a view of raising the water more particularly in the harbour of Montreal. They caime to the conclusion that by the construction of some submerged dams in the St. Lawrence at certain points they could maintain the water at a higher level in the port of Montreal. It was suggested that submerged dams be established, one in lake St. Peter in the vicinity of Three Rivers, another one to unite the islands at the head of lake St. Peter in the vicinity of Sorel, about forty-five miles below Montreal, and a third a few miles below the port of Montreal. These engineers contended that with these submerged dams we could increase the depth of the water in the harbour of Montreal by nearly two feet and assure that depth throughout the year. That is the object of the expenditure.


Robert James Manion: Has the contract been let, and, if so, to whom?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No. Nothing has yet been done.


Robert James Manion: Tenders will be called for in the usual manner?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Robert James Manion: Will this amount of a
million dollars be spent this year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am not sure but we may be placed in a position to give the contract for the whole thing.


Robert James Manion: What will be the total
cost?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In the vicinity of a million dollars.


Robert James Manion: That will cover the whole thing.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: What depth will these
submerged dams be below the water level?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: That depends upon the level of the water at different periods of the year, but generally speaking I think there will be about two or three feet of water above them at low water to avoid any danger from the ice in the spring.	When the ice leaves
the St. Lawrence in the spring the water rises, but in the summer these dams will be submerged and there will be about two feet of water above them.


Robert Gardiner: I presume they will be built on either side of the channel?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They will not be in the
channel in any way. They will be built from the shore to a certain distance towards the centre of the river to create obstructions to the flow of water in order to bring the water back into the port of Montreal. We do not propose to dam the St. Lawrence.


Robert James Manion: In regard to item 217
"River St. Lawrence ship channel-for construction of one hopper barge", the minister

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
gave an answer which seemed a little strange at the time. The minister mentioned the Hudson bay. The item speaks about the river St. Lawrence ship channel.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We lent the barge to the
Department of Railways and Canals.


Robert James Manion: To be used in Hudson
bay?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes. It is already there.


Mr. CANTLEY:: I understand the purpose of these dams is to retard the outflow of the water below Montreal.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Thomas Cantley: Is it intended to build
all three dams simultaneously, or one at a time? If the latter, which dam does the minister propose to build first?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The engineers of the department are working on that problem, but the indication is that they will start in the vicinity of Montreal.


Robert Gardiner: Has the minister information in regard to the experience in other parts of the world on the subject?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will frankly say I have
not that experience, but the engineers who prepared the report have, I think, procured information from other sources. I am sure they inquired about the possibilities or practicabilities of such a scheme. A report has been prepared by the commission. I am not sure that it was not tabled some years ago. I shall be pleased to supply a copy of it to my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lighthouse and coast service - salaries and allowances to lightkeepers, $750,000.
Mr. POULIOT:: I have just a question to ask the minister in connection with Mr. Dube, lighthouse keeper at Brandy Pot. I should like to know if there are different grades for lighthouse keepers and, if so, in what grade he is.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I regret very much that I am not in a position to give the information to my hon. friend at present. I have a great deal of information before me, but unfortunately, as often happens, the information asked for is not at hand. I shall be pleased to supply the information to my hon. friend.


Jean-François Pouliot: Who compose the board
that looks after the grading of lighthouse keepers?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The members of the lighthouse board are the Deputy Minister of Marine and Fisheries, the chief engineer of the

department, the commissioner of lights, the director of pilotage, Mr. Forneret, superintending engineer of the St. Lawrence ship channel,
a representative of the shipping federation, and also a representative of the Dominion Marine Association.


Jean-François Pouliot: What is the quorum?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Generally speaking they are all there when there is a meeting, because practically all are officers of the department. There is, in addition, only the representative of the shipping federation and of the Dominion Marine Association.


Jean-François Pouliot: Do they meet very often?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Requests come in to us for the establishment of lighthouses, and when we have a sufficient number of these representations we call a meeting of the lights house board. There is no stated time for its sittings. The board meets when there are sufficient representations to 'be dealt with.


Jean-François Pouliot: I should like to say a few words on behalf of that lighthouse keeper, whom the Minister of Justice in this house knows very well. Brandy Pot island is not far from Hare island, in the middle of the St. Lawrence river, just in front of Riviere du Loup between the counties of Temiscouata and Charlevoix-iSaguenay. The river is very wide, some twelve to fourteen miles, at that point. This lighthouse is of the utmost importance to oceanic shipping. These vessels take their direction from that (lighthouse when they go up and down the river. I am very well acquainted with the lighthouse keeper, who has been there for several years, and not only does he perform his duties very efficiently, but in addition, he has performed a great deal of other work for the Department of Marine and Fisheries, in that he is a carpenter and has made all the repairs to the lighthouse with his own hands; so I do not think that it 'has cost the Department of Marine and Fisheries or the Department of Public Works very much for repairs to that lighthouse. That -is the first point.
The second point is this, that that light is of the utmost importance to every steamship and -sailing vessel in the -St. Lawrence river. There are some very dangerous reefs on the east side of the -island, and the light is, of course, of the greatest importance. There is another reason why that light is important, -and that is because there is not far from the lighthouse a very good harbour where sailing vessels can take shelter in bad weather.
There is another consideration which I wish to submit to the committee, and that is that

London and Port Burwell Railway
the lighthouse keeper is kept at his station, because of ice, sometimes as late as New Year's, and this year he had to stay there until the middle of January. Then he was taken off by the Montcalm and deft at Sydney, Cape Breton, and had to come on home from there. For these reasons I am asking for an increase of salary for this lighthouse keeper, and that he be put in a class with the other lighthouse keepers occupying important positions and carrying on very important duties. I hope the minister will have a kind word to say.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will see if he can be given more favourable consideration.
Item stands.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Mr. M. F. HEPBURN (West Elgin) moved the third reading of Bill No. 58, to incorporate the London and Port Burwdl Railway Company.
John Wesley Edwards: Mr. Speaker, this bill!1 has been considered on three different occasions by the select standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines; it has been considered in committee of the whole, and I presume the house should be, and probably is, ready to vote on it. I therefore move, seconded by Mr. White (London):
That the question be now put.


Mr. SPEAKER:: It is moved by Mr. Hepburn that Bill No. 58, to incorporate the London and Port Burwell Railway Company, be now read a third time. Mr. Edwards (Frontenac) moves that the question be now put. The question is on the previous question. Those in favour of the previous question will kindly say "aye".


Mr. TAYLOR:: I am in favour of the question being put, Mr. Speaker, but I had a notice on the order paper of an amendment which I was prepared to move on the motion
for the third reading of this bill.


Mr. WHITE (London):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. When a motion is made that the question 'be now put, I understand that it is not debatable.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, you are all wrong.


Hewitt Bostock: The previous question is always debatable, but the hon. member must coniine his remarks strictly to the question.


Peter McGibbon: That is a reversal of your own ruling a few days ago, Mr. Speaker; then you decided it was not debatable.


Hewitt Bostock: I never decided that the previous question was not debatable. On the occasion referred to by the hon. gentleman the question was put, but no debate was had on it.


Peter McGibbon: I do not disagree with your ruling to-night, Mr. Speaker.


Hewitt Bostock: The point was not raised the other day. I put the question that was handed to me, and there was no debate. It seemed to be the desire of the house to proceed to a vote at once.


William Horace Taylor: 'Mr. Speaker, as I was waiting for the motion for third reading of this bill, I feel that the motion of the hon. member for Frontenac-Addington (Mr. Edwards) is quite out of order. I wish to move an amendment, seconded by Mr. Cayley:
That the following words be inserted as clause 4:-
"The capital stock of the company shall be five hundred thousand dollars."


Hewitt Bostock: No amendment can be moved to the previous question.
Some hon. MEMBERS': Question.


Hewitt Bostock: Those in favour of the previous question being now put will kindly say "aye".


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Aye.


Hewitt Bostock: Those opposed will kindly say "nay".


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Nay.


Hewitt Bostock: I believe the nays have it. I declare the motion lost.


William Horace Taylor: Now I desire to move,
seconded by Mr. Cayley, the amendment to this bill according to my notice of motion:
That the following words be inserted in Bill No. 58, respecting the London and Port Burwell Railway Company, as clause 4:

"The capital stock of the company shall be five hundred thousand dollars."


Hewitt Bostock: The house having decided that the question be not now put, the motion for third reading of this bill will go to the foot of the order paper. The next order is-
3676	COMMONS
London and Port Burwell Railway


William Horace Taylor: Mr. Speaker, I submit
that the motion by the bon. member for Frontenac-Addington (Mr. Edwards) was out of order. Do you rule it was in order?


Hewitt Bostock: It was in order.


Charles Avery Dunning: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order, I submit that the hon. member for Norfolk-Elgin (Mr. Taylor) had given notice of an amendment which he intended to move on the motion for the third reading of this bill. My hon. friend from across the way (Mr. Edwards) moved that the question be now put before the hon. member for Norfolk-Elgin had an opportunity of moving the amendment which stands in his name. The motion that the question be now put was defeated. Are we to understand that that has the effect of killing the bill?


Hewitt Bostock: No, it goes to the foot
of the list. This is what Bourinot says at page 326:
If the motion-
That is, that this question be now put.

be carried the Speaker will immediately put the question without further debate.
That is, if the motion of the hon. member for Frontenac had been carried I would have put the question immediately.
But if the previous question be resolved in the negative-
As it was.
-then the Speaker cannot put the main motion, which is consequently superseded. The main motion may, however, be revived on a future day, as the negative of the previous question merely binds the Speaker not to put the main question at that time.


Sir EUGENE FISET:: Mr. Speaker, one
point has been entirely forgotten. When the hon. member for Frontenac moved the previous question, the hon. member for Norfolk-Elgin raised a point of order and asked Your Honour if the motion as put by the hon. member for Frontenac was in order. This you had not decided; you simply called the previous question.


Hewitt Bostock: This is my recollection
of the facts. I rose to read the motion for the third reading, but immediately I saw the hon. member for Frontenac, and he moved the previous question. Then the hon. member for Norfolk-Elgin rose [DOT] and read his amendment which he proposed to move, and I told him that he could not amend the previous question.


John Wesley Edwards: That is
right.


Hewitt Bostock: Then the motion was
put, and it was negatived, and logically the question cannot be now put. The house has so decided. This action does not kill the bill. It is simply superseded and goes to the bottom of the list.


Robert Gardiner: That was some of his
own medicine; he had better take it.


Eugène Fiset: I never moved the previous question on any occasion.


Charles Avery Dunning: Just to elucidate our
future proceedings, Mr. Speaker-if on the next occasion that this bill comes up some hon. gentleman desiring to move the previous question catches your eye, shall we then be again in this position?


Hewitt Bostock: No.


Charles Avery Dunning: The previous questior
can be moved only once?


Hewitt Bostock: It has been defeated.


Charles Avery Dunning: And cannot be moved
again?


Hewitt Bostock: Not at this stage.


Charles Gavan Power: Mr. Speaker, on the next
occasion when this bill comes before the house the previous question may be moved on any amendment that is being proposed.


Hewitt Bostock: There is no previous
question on an amendment.



EDMONTON, DUNVEGAN AND BRITISH COLUMBIA RAILWAY COMPANY

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from May 4, consideration in committee of Bill No. 57, respecting the Edmonton, Dunvegan and British Columbia Railway Company-Mr. Kennedy-Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Mr.   LETELLIER@: Mr. Chairman, I wish
to take this opportunity on the bill sponsored by the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Kennedy), not to oppose any development of railways in British Columbia, but to place on Hansard certain resolutions which I have received. In order that I may do so adequately I shall ask hon. members to bear with me while I express myself in my mother tongue.
(Translation):	Mr. Chairman, I am delighted in being able to address the house on the subject of railways. In no way am I opposed to the expansion of railways, however, the question is sufficiently important for the committee to again discuss the bill submitted to the house, so as to avoid any possible error. If I mention any possible error,

Edmonton, Dunvegan Railway
it is because just recently the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Kennedy) himself stated to this committee that he was not in a position to furnish us with certain information which consequently led to an adjournment of the debate and placed the responsibility on the hon. member for a fair share of the delay which this bill must undergo. The hon. member for Elgin West (Mr. Hep-bum) speaking in the house on May 4 last, stated that this measure should be the object of further study, and my opinion is, that this committee should earnestly take up its study and if necessary refer it back to the select standing committee on railways. The fact that this line is a private enterprise should make us the more cautious. Generally, these companies, after meeting with a certain amount of disappointment, appeal to the government for subsidies, then a few years later when they have squeezed out of the line every possible profit, they cease operations, it is then that the government are forced to operate the railway at their own expense, if they cannot find a responsible company to take the line- over. Here is an example of what I am asserting: in 1925 a railway company in my own riding was operating a line; after obtaining from the government many thousands of dollars and having squeezed out all possible profits from the enterprise, the company ceased operations, and I was obliged to earnestly request the government to take the necessary means to continue operating this line. While on the subject, I wish to thank the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), also the hon. Minister of Railways (Mr. Dunning), and a number of my colleagues, who gave me their strong support at the time. Thanks to the government, expropriation proceedings were taken before the exchequer court and the line was purchased by the Canadian National; a few months later it was resold to the Canadian Pacific which, to-day, is operating the line, and I hope will soon realize very handsome profits. However, there is still a portion of this line which is not operated. I trust that this powerful company so admirably managed, not only in the province I reside in, but throughout the whole country, will find it possible to put into operation that part of the railway so as to link it with the Maine Central, on the United States side. My constituents are anxious to see the whole of this line operated not only for the advantage it may bring to my county, but so that the beautiful province of Quebec may have its due share of railways and compare favourably with other provinces.
Recently, sir, the newspapers of Edmonton, and among these the Edmonton Bulletin, reported that the Hon. Vernon W. Smith, Minister of Railways in the province of Alberta, had expressed his astonishment to hear that this measure, sponsored by the hon. member for Peace River, met with such strong opposition on the part of the eastern members. I wish to convey to the Hon. Mr. Smith the assurance that we are greatly interested in the development and prosperity of that vast region of the Peace River, to which this bill refers. However, I shall take the opportunity which the remarks of the Hon. Mr. Smith afford me, to state that if the people of the Peace River region wish to obtain certain railway development, they should warn their representatives to be more indulgent towards the members on the right, when they bring up measures m the interest of the people not only of the province of Quebec but of the whole Dominion. There is a proverb which says: Give and you shall receive. The hon. member for Peace River was unable to surround himslf with friends who would have been well disposed to reciprocate the help he might have extended in the development of railways in the other provinces.
The people of certain counties in the eastern townships, as well as those of Richelieu, Yamaska and Drummond have for ever so long requested! the construction of a railway. The representatives of these ridings would be very pleased if they could obtain this railway so long expected, and which would be advantageous not only to those counties but to the greater portion of the eastern townships. Instead of receiving their goods by way of Montreal, the manufacturers and the public as a whole would be served by this line. They could forward their goods through the port of Sorel and at less expense if this railway was built. I have received resolutions from various boards of trade appealing to the government in this matter.
A few years ago the member for Matane introduced a bill bearing the No. 24. An Act incorporating the Pabos, Amqui and Edmund-ston, Railway Company, it was given its first reading on March 22, 1920, however this railway was not approved of.
Mr. Chairman, I trust this committee will not refuse to listen for a few moments to the reading of the request lately made by the Board of Trade of Amqui with reference to the Gaspe peninsula:
The Grspe peninsula has reached the turning point is ts history; it is said, that it is on the eve of being rediscovered. And it is not too soon. At the time of the discovery of the new world, European navigators were continously seeking a passage to India and sailed towards

Edmonton, Dunvegan Railway
the west, coming to a stop, after they had found out their mistake, this accounts for the interior of the country being settled before the coast which nevertheless is nearer to the old continent.
No doubt the Gaspe peninsula is rich enough in natural resources and sufficiently picturesque to draw one's attention; but we are living in an epoch when merit is not always acknowledged, and that is why it is sometimes necessary to make a little fuss over a name. The Board of Trade therefore wishes to do its bit.
While the Gaspe boundaries do not extend as far as Montmagny, it is not the less almost a province, six times as large as Prince Edward Island. Experts contend that its territory comprises 70,000,000 cords of pulpwood; engineers find that there is place for the settlement of about fifty parishes; its soil is of the best and well watered; there are sufficient water powers for the needs of the region; fisheries exist which can compare favourably with the finest in the world. Within the last few years mines, of inexhaustible wealth have been discovered. We do not wish to mention its natural beauties, its picturesque landscapes which attract tourists from all parts, as we especially wish to interest business people. Owing to its geographical situation, Gaspd is the part of the country nearest to Europe, by about 300 miles; Gaspe, with railway facilities to Montreal and the western cities by way of Amqui, is nearer by again 300 miles or more, to the large centres than is any other port on this side of the Atlantic, Notwithstanding all these advantages, the Gaspe peninsula up to the present time has been considered of little importance. Means of communication are lacking, its population must depend on its local resources, the young people must seek work elsewhere.
What is the remedy to all these ills? A railway, a line linking Gaspe to Amqui and connecting with the National Railways.
The development of the country, the progress of industry require that ports be build for the export of our products; Halifax and Hudson Bay will not suffice, and there are on the Gaspe coast at least six ports which can be improved, at a low cost, and become winter ports.
We think that our turn has come to be placed on the same footing as the other parts of the country, and we humbly request the governments at Ottawa and Quebec not to forget the Gaspe peninsula, nor always neglect it as it has been the case up to the present time.
The interest of the whole country demands it. ifmqui, February, 1928.
Other resolutions have been presented. I think they are of the utmost importance as this honourable house will shortly ascertain.
We learn through the newspapers that within the last few years the Gaspe people have been asking for the construction of a railway, looked upon as a necessity to insure the future of this vast region, the area of which covers about 12,000 square miles-most of which forming a plateau of very rich arable land covered with timber which cannot be got out by utilizing the rivers, the sub-soil is highly mineralized: lead, zinc, silver, copper and 
gold are to be found, as it has been shown by prospecting and mining operations undertaken within the last ten years. In his 1927 report, Mr. F. J. Alcock, official geologist of the Canadian government expresses himself as follows:	To the geological viewpoint, the
interior of Gaspe offers very attractive prospects. ''The discovery of a number of veins has abundantly shown the richness of these mineral deposits. However, it is difficult to travel in that region; there are very few roads and they are rather in poor condition. The provincial government has already done a great deal for the mining development of that region by assisting in the construction of highways". It is this Gaspe plateau extending in length for 150 miles which we are seeking to open up to settlement, mining and timber development, and, at the same time, further the ends of agriculture. It is with this object in view that we request the immediate construction of a railway through the interior of the Gaspe peninsula. This is requested both in the town of Gaspe and at the other extremity of the peninsula, that is in the upper part of the Matapedia valley. It was also the desire expressed by the member for Matane (Mr. Dionne) when, speaking on the budget in this House, on February 21, 1928, he requested the construction, of that railway which he designated by the name that indicates its lay out, the Gaspe Matapedia Edmundston Railway. We beseech all members to support the request of the hon. member for Matane, a request made to the hon Minister of Railways, also communicated to the cabinet ministers representing that district of Quebec, as well as to members more directly interested in this project. This request was simultaneously made by both the Boards of Trade of Amqui and Sayabec. We estimate that the construction of the Gaspe-Matapedia portion, which is the most pressing one to-day, would cost between seven and eight million dollars. We beseech our colleagues to consider the railway situation of Canada as a whole. Even after receiving the grant of these $8,000,000 for that section of our province there cannot possibly be any fear that we shall have received more than our fair share. Let us, to be more brief and clear, divide the country in four sections and with the help of Canada's official statistics for 1926, let us endeavour to discover what important part each section plays, what is the share of each in railway mileage, what traffic each section supplies to feed these railways, and what would

Edmonton, Dunvegan Railway
be the cost to each to own and operate these 2nd the three Prairie provinces; 3rd Ontario railways. Let us group together: 1st the and 4th Quebec, let us examine the following Maritime and British Columbia provinces; table:
Provinces	Area	Population	Population per cent	Railways	National Wealth407,039	1,604,015	17-35	7,755	$ 2,846,102 535759,116	2,074,600	22-26	16,561	6,846,469,347407,270	3,145,600	33-01	10,908	7,353,397,816700,000	2,361,800	26-87	4,797	5,541,818,967Provinces	Tonnage unloaded	Tonnage loaded	Value subject to taxes	Income and sales taxes9,308,932 11,397,809 34,697,600 1,898,914	11,558,451 21,703,745 21,408,268 12,043,243	$ 121,557,171 145,590,971 466,678,836 267,852,358	s 5,964,211 5,852,054 26,918,542 19,100,212
Provinces	* Customs and Excise	Post Offices	Tonnage per mile		Total taxes
			Unloaded	Loaded	
$ 8,849,616	$ 4,979,664	1,200	1,490	s 19,793,4918,550,489	8,119,211	688	1,310	22,521,75448,738,284	13,067,423	2,264	1,962	88,724,24932,915,354	5,982,415	2,481	2,510	57,997,981
According to the figures stated we can conclude as follows: 1st the Prairie section with a territory slightly larger than that of Quebec and a slightly smaller population has 16,561 miles of railway; 2nd the four maritime provinces with a population more than 30 per cent inferior to that of Quebec, have 7,755 miles, while Quebec's share is but 4,797 miles, which is too little if we consider its size, population and value as a national asset. Yet, Quebec and Ontario, the two oldest provinces of Canada, paid in 1925-1926 $146,722,230, for the	administration	of the
country, railways included, they have both together but 15,707 miles of railway. The other seven provinces pay only $42,215,245 and have 24,316 miles of railway. Note that the amount paid by Ontario is $88,724,249, and that paid by Quebec is $57,997,981.
A fair distribution of railways between the four Canadian sections should take place according to their respective population, that Is in a ratio of 47 miles per 10,000 people; the Maritime and British Columbia provinces would have 7,538 instead of 7,755 miles; the Prairie provinces 10,247 instead of 16,561 miles; Ontario 14,781 instead of 10,908 miles; and Quebec's share would be 11,096 instead of
4,796 miles. Therefore the Maritime section has 217 miles more than its share and the Prairies 6,314 miles; while Ontario would be entitled to 3,873 miles more, and Quebec to also 6,299 more. That was the situation as it existed two years ago. Since then new railways have been under construction, always in the West. The 1928 program includes four important new branches. We do not contend that the west has too many lines, but that Quebec has not enough. If the Quebec members show a sense of generosity in promoting the general welfare of the country and of the west especially, even though they practically control the administration by their numbers, they expect in return the no less generous co-operation of all the members outside of Quebec, when it is a question of carrying out necessary work for the normal progress of their province and the country as a whole. It is an easy matter to show that Quebec suffers from the lack of railway transportation. Its normal expansion in connection with agricultural and industrial progress is greatly impeded by it. The rural population, weary of the isolation caused by the great distances which separate it from transportation lines in order to reach the

Edmonton, Dunvegan Railway
markets where its products are sold, desert the farm for the cities, or else emigrates to the United States where living conditions seem to be easier. We must therefore conclude that we need more railways in Quebec. The most remote parts are those that have the greatest need of them and the Gaspe peninsula especially suffers from this lack of railways; it requests the construction of this railway which will link Gaspe, through its interior, to the Matapedia valley. Practically, this railway will cross almost in a bee line from Gaspe to Sayabec along the heights of the plateau and the heads of rivers. The reasons which seem to point to Sayabec, as the terminus for this first branch line are the following:	the Canadian National Railway has already at Sayabec extensive yards with a capacity for 400 cars, scales to weigh cars, a "Y" to turn the locomotives around and a shunter is in daily use. It is the locality of the Matapedia valley which at present supplies the most traffic to the National railway. There are extensive level grounds for the construction of the necessary shops for a terminus. If later on the traffic needs a further extension to Edmundston, New Brunswick; there is a natural pass at Sayabec on the same level as the present railway that will facilitate the crossing of the mountains which seem to block the way everywhere else.
Considering our position in the Dominion relatively to the other parts of the country, we are perfectly warranted in requesting this 150 miles of railway as part of what is due to us. We feel confident that we can depend upon this spirit of fairness and patriotism which animates all federal members, also upon the zeal of the Quebec members for the population they represent, as well as the impartial devotion of the members of the government in order to insure the construction of the Gaspe railway in a near future.
In closing my remarks, Sir, I wish simply to add that the hon. Minister of Railways is certainly deserving of our congratulations for what he has accomplished in the past, and I feel certain that, as well as the government, he desires the expansion of our railways not only in our beautiful province of Quebec, but equally throughout all the provinces which make up Canada.


Mr. KENNEDY:: I understand that when this bill was up some nights ago doubt was expressed as to who was asking for the legislation. There is am application to the Alberta government for a charter to enable the government to construct a railway to serve a settlement which is about fifteen years old and
[Mr Letellier.]
in which there has been produced in the last two years something like 2 million bushels of wheat. The settlers are farming from fifteen to ninety miles from a railway. I do not intend to ask that the bill be reported; I do not want to see anyone move the previous question. I want to make that explanation, and if anyone wishes to block the bill he is at liberty to do so and to take the responsibility.
iMr. SYLVESTTRE (Translation):	Mr. Chairman, when this bill was under consideration on May 4, last, I was unable to complete the remarks that I wished to make, as the time allotted for private bills had expired. To-night I want to complete them.
Considering that there are quite a number of French-Canadians settled in the region of the Peace River, I am sure that the sponsor of Bill No. 57 (Mr. Kennedy) must be pleased of the interest we display in this measure. Let us first examine clause 2 of the bill. It reads as follows:
The Company way within two years from the date of the passing of this Act commence to construct the lines of railway authorized by section one of this Act, and may within five years of the said date, complete the said lines of railway; and, if within the said periods respectively, the said lines are not commenced or are not completed and put in operation, the powers of construction conferred upon the Company by Parliament, shall cease and be null and void as respects so much thereof as then remains uncompleted.
This company is not in earnest. It asks for very extensive privileges, but practically assumes no responsibilities.
As you have just noted, it is stated at the outset of this clause that the company "may" be granted and as a matter of fact it is granted a delay of two years "to begin the construction of the railway lines" that clause 1 authorizes it to construct.
The reasons given by the hon. member in support of his bill permits us to foresee what certain persons intend to do should this bill be adopted. According to the statements made by the prime minister of Alberta and certain members of his cabinet, we note that the intention of all those who are interested in this project is simply, once the bill is passed, to sell their rights and hand over their charter to the National Railways. It is an open secret that on April 21, last, the prime minister of Alberta (Mr. Brownlee) came to Ottawa, and even went down to Montreal to consult the president of the National railways on the subject. Following this interview, he could not do otherwise than state that he hoped the Edmonton, Dunvegan and British Columbia Railway Company would be purchased by the National railways.

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
On the other hand, if we look up the history of the National Railway Company we can ascertain for ourselves that at various times private companies sold and conceded to this company, their rights, charter and stock, thus imposing on the ratepayere further expenses and taxes.
I shall go one step further, sir. I do not believe that the hon. member for Peace River is himself in earnest with regard to this bill, because in April last when this measure came up before the house, he could not supply the hon. Minister of Railways with information as to some figures. The hon. member should have had a knowledge of all the facts regarding this measure, moreover, this railway is on the south shore of the Peace River, while the majority of settlers are establshed on the northern side of the river. It is therefore seen that this railway will not be of any advantage or benefit, except to a few persons. This committee must not accept this bill nor grant the privileges sought to the detriment of the public's interest; the National railways have many improvements to make to their system, in every province of this Dominion, before ever thinking of purchasing a line which exists but in the minds of its promoters. Usually, when a company obtains a charter to build a railway, it is always cautious, through the medium of its engineers, to select the most adaptable roadway possible for the construction of its line; and when the time comes to sell its rights, if it succeeds, the company purchasing them is forced to pay a much higher price, many times more than what it is worth, because they cannot ignore those who obtained those rights. I believe that, in the present case, the intentions of the company do not differ from those of other companies which have acted likewise. In the past, railway branches where one could find but old ties and twisted rails, were sold a hundred times more than what they were worth. To-day we are loaded with an enormous debt; we have heavy interests to meet, and I am of the opinion that we should not add new taxes to those which already heavily burden the ratepayers.
Mr. Chairman, this question must not be discussed in a light manner; this bill should be returned to the committee on railways to be closely studied.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: Mr. Chairman, I call your attention to the fact that it is nine o'clock.


Mr. DIONNE:: One minute more.


Edward Joseph Garland: No, it is
nine o'clock.
Progress reported.


Hewitt Bostock: The hour for private bills being exhausted the house will revert to committee of supply.



DEPARTMENT OF MARINE AND FISHERIES

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Salaries and allowances to lightkeepers, $750,000.
Jean-François Pouliot: I do not want to delay
the house, but I wish to refer to the case of the keeper of the Brandy Pot lighthouse. The present keeper is in class 7 and I would ask the department to put him in class 5, for the reasons I have already given. I have obtained some information from Mr. Hawken, the acting deputy minister, who tells me that it is hard to do anything more. If it is impossible to promote Mr. Dube, the keeper of this lighthouse, from class 7 to class 5 I will ask the committee to reduce the salary of the acting deputy minister to $1,200 a year, which is the salary being paid the lighthouse keeper at Brandy Pot.
The second point to which I wish to direct the attention of the committee is very simple. There is another lighthouse between Temis-couata county and the Tadoussac river, on Red Islet, which is a small island in the middle of the river. The lighthouse keeper there, and the lighthouse keeper at Notre Dame de Pile Verte, both need sailing vessels, because there are no bridges between these islands and the mainland and they have to carry barrels of gasoline or oil and other things for the lighthouse in addition to articles required for their personal use. I will ask the minister to give instructions that the lighthouse keepers at Red Islet and Notre Dame de Pile Verte be provided with sailing vessels of the ordinary size, such as they formerly had.


Eccles James Gott: What salary does this lighthouse keeper receive now?


Jean-François Pouliot: I spoke about two different things; I mentioned the lighthouse keeper at Brandy Pot and now I ask for sailing vessels for the other two lighthouse keepers.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am not in a position to give a definite answer to my hon. friend now because I am not familiar with the conditions to which he has referred, but I can promise him that I will look into the matter and will do the best I can to meet his requests.



Sxipply-Marine and Fisheries


Alan Webster Neill: I have a matter I want to
bring up under this item; I refer to the holidays of the lighthouse keepers. It appears that a petition was presented to the government about two months ago by the Amalgamated Society of Civil Servants of Canada, which is the largest association of civil servants in Canada, drawing attention to the position of lighthouse keepers in relation to their annual leave. As the matter now stands, a lighthouse keeper taking an annual holiday has to provide and pay for a substitute during this leave of absence, and also has to assume responsibility during that period. I may explain that it is not so easy for a private person to obtain a substitute, and in addition it is very expensive for him to pay the steamer fare to his particular lighthouse. Moreover, he not only has to pay for the substitute but he also must be responsible for any action of that man, who may inadvertently do something to damage the machinery, for which the wretched lighthouse keeper, who is no more responsible than I am, must suffer the penalty, either by paying for the damage or by losing his position.
I will read from a letter which I have received:
For some considerable time lighthouse keepers have considered this an injustice, in view of the fact that other civil servants are not under this disadvantage, but are paid for their leave of absence.
I may state that these lighthouse keepers are civil servants in every sense of the word; they are under the act, and there is no opportunity of side-stepping by saying that they do not come under the act. They are under the act; thfey are appointed by the Civil Service Commission, so they are entitled to the same advantages enjoyed by the other civil servants. This letter goes on to say:
It has also been considered that, were the matter discussed impartially, the justice of the lighthouse keepers' plea for treatment similar to other civil servants could hardly be denied.
They evidently are not familiar with the customs and usages of the House of Commons at Ottawa. We have heard a great deal lately about freedom of speech; there is such a thing, Mr. Chairman, as the rights of the minority, which is sometimes quoted in the same connection. I have an idea that if these people numbered 6,000, as the civil servants do in Ottawa, instead of being scattered throughout the country, their demands would be acceded to, and the justice of their case would have been recognized long ere this. Surely

we are not going to say that the government is actuated by political expediency rather than by justice. These .people have no political pull whatever; they are scattered throughout the country and there are only a few in any one district. I do not suppose there are twenty lighthouses in the district I represent, and probably only about half the keepers would be able to vote because it is impossible for them to leave their lighthouses and travel the long distances necessary to get to the polls. So I do not expect any political or personal advantage from my plea to-night; it is made simply on the merits of the case.
I believe the civil servants at Ottawa have twenty-one days annual leave as holidays-it is provided for by the department-but in addition to that, whether it is a matter of custom or law, they are allowed two weeks' sick leave annually. If they have a casual cold or a headache produced by being out at a dance the night before, they are allowed their sick leave without a doctor's certificate, as long as it does not exceed two weeks in the year. When they have a real sickness, and a doctor's certificate is produced, they are again leniently dealt with. I have no objection to this at all, but I am only drawing a comparison between the life of a civil servant in Ottawa, with all the attendant social advantages, and at least five weeks' leave in the year, and the men out on a barren rock who get three weeks' leave if they supply a substitute and pay his wages and are responsible for anything he may do in that period.
I sometimes think it is a good thing to bring an argument home to ourselves. I wonder how many hon. members of this house would like to be stuck on an isolated light station month in and month out, year in and year out, hardly able to take even the necessary exercise, because there are no facilities for walking, no chance for any kind of amusement, no hobby, no one to associate with but one's wife. I have no desire to belittle the blessings of married life-I dare not do it if I would because though my wife does not read Hansard some busybody would be sure to draw her attention to it-I do not wish to deprecate the blessings of married life at all, but when a dieit is composed entirely of sweetness even it becomes unpalatable in time. I remember hearing a lecture many years ago by the Arctic explorer Nansen. He described how he and his partner had to spend a winter in a remote part of the Arctic region. These men were bound together by the ties of mutual friendship, and you would think they would have been glad to associate with each other, but he told how they would start out in the

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
morning without any conversation; -one would go east and the other west in order to get away from each other's society. They would return in the evening and there would be no conversation at all except that compelled by their joint interest. He said that he was able to laugh at it afterwards, and they remained friends, but the fact of there being such ill-will between them was so unjustified that it apparently made it much worse; they simply hated each other. This is the condition which might arise between a man and his wife when they are placed on a barren rock somewhere off the coast of British Columbia. They have nothing to look at except the wave-tossed sea. It rains there six months in the year, and it can rain more in two' days there than it does here in the whole year. If you think that is a nice prospect to look out at year after year, you are a better judge than I am.
I am emphasizing this case on behalf of the all-year-round permanent men, and not the men who are paid $15 a month to go out and light a light every night. I am speaking for the men who are employed twenty-four hours in the day every day in the year, not the men who attend these petty little lights where they can go out in an hour's time and do everything required. I suggest that these permanent men have a legal claim. I could read the whole adt if necessary to impress it on the committee, but the act provides that civil servants shall have three weeks holidays per year, and it does not say that they shall have to provide out of their own pockets for a substitute, transport him over a hundred miles, and be responsible for his errors.


Mr. BRADY:: I do not wish to delay the house, but I should like to say a few words on behalf of the lighthouse keepers, not only along the British Columbia coast, but along the Atlantic coast as well. I agree with everything the member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) has said here to-night. I wonder how many people in Canada realize the lives that are lived year in and year out by these wonderful, heroic people who are guarding our seacoasts. There are twelve or thirteen lighthouses in the constituency I represent, and I visited five or six of them last year and found conditions prevailing which I am sure will appeal to the minister and to the government as deserving of consideration. These people have no holidays; if they need a holiday they must get a substitute and pay him from their slender salaries. These salaries range from $517.50 minimum to a maximum of $2,940 per year. I consider it an absolute
duty tlhat these people be given at least a fortnight's holiday, and they should not be obliged to pay the substitutes out of their small incomes. I am confident that the people of Canada one and all would be in accord with any move in that direction.
I visited a certain lighthouse where a man and his wife lived, and they told me a story so pathetic and so realistic that it would touch the chord of any heart that was responsive to any appeal to human kindness. Here is the story: Every month or so the feeling of isolation and loneliness played upon them to such an extent that one or the other would get into a deep fit of melancholy. For some three years neither of them could understand the other, and they lived a tragic life until one day it. dawned upon the husband that his wife was not at fault. They agreed upon a compromise whereby when either of them got into one of these melancholy moods, say if the wife refused to get breakfast in the morning and moped around the island rock, the husband would do the work instead. This depression would often last for a week, and then the wife would recover, but a fortnight later the husband might fall into one of these moods. They had tended this lighthouse for six years without any holidays. Surely we are not so hardhearted as to take the attitude that those who hold the frontier, those who endure this isolation, are not entitled to a little consideration. Surely they deserve at least a fortnight's holiday without being obliged to pay for a substitute out of their earnings. I am sure it would meet with the approbation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries and everybody else who listens to the story.


John Evans: I brought this matter to the attention of the Prime Minister some time ago and he promised to look into it particularly in. regard to the lightkeepers of Greenly island. I hold in my hand a petition presented to the minister and the Minister of Finance last year. The rates of salaries for Cape Race and Sand Head are $3,600. Out of that they have to pay four assistants. The United States salary is $8,520 for the same work. For Estevan point, S.L., W.L., Belle Isle, Lennard island, Phchana and Langara the present salary is $2,940 and four assistants have to be paid out of that amount. For Bird rocks, northeast Belle Isle and Pelee passage, the present salary is $2,820 out of which they have to pay three assistants. This is evidence enough to the committee that this class of servants needs looking into. To

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
say nothing of ithe loneliness of their life,
I think we should give them a wage that will at least furnish them with a decent living.


Alan Webster Neill: Just before the minister replies-and I think the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Brady), would like an answer to the question of holiday policy before we go on with the question of pay, which is a totally different matter-I should like to remind the committee that we have a relief officer in the case of telegraph operators. The govern/memt provides a relief officer who goes around to the various scattered telegraph stations. He relieves this man one month and another man the next. He dan work it in at small expense and give satisfaction to the service, because they are always sure of a competent man to do the work.
Mr. GO'TT: The substituting lightkeepers would not be detained long at the lighthouses in the constituency represented by the hon. member for Rosetown.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Some time ago the hon. member for Rosetown brought to the attention of the house the question of some reward being given to the lighthouse keepers of Greenly island for what they did in connection with the Bremen. The three lighthouse keepers are at present receiving a salary of $2,100 per annum. It was evident from the applause that came from the house that they endorsed the idea of giving them some recognition in connection with what they did. Has any action been taken in the matter as a result of what occurred on that occasion?
iMr. CARDIN: Notice has been taken of the representations made but so far nothing has been done. We are considering what we can do in the way of recompense to these people.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: The matter is not
dropped?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No. In reply to the representations made for holidays being given to the lightkeepers, I am ready to say that I sympathize wiitlh the case which has been placed before the committee, but this grant would cost a very large amounlt. If I am not mistaken, the additional expenditure would be in the vicinity of $200,000 a year.


Alan Webster Neill: What for?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Supposing we grant them twenty-one days' holiday, we cannot get a substitute withou/t paying him at least five dollars a day and there is a .certain amount
fMr. Evans.]
of expense if we make him travel all along the coast. This will bring the cost for each lighthouse to at least $125. I do not know at present how many lights we have in that class, but they are numerous and it does not take a large number of lighthouses to increase very materially the amount of the expenditure. I am not saying that with the view of expressing any opposition to the request made.
I am quite ready to look into the matter and to consider it most favourably. But it must be remembered that salaries and allowances to lightkeepers 'have been increased very materially since 1911. For example, in 1911 the total amount that we were paying for salaries and allowances to lightkeepers was $450,000. For 1927-28 the total had reached $700,000, and this year we are asking for $750,000. When the increases were granted to the lightkeepers, they were granted on account of the exceptional situation in which they were placed and all the facts which have been brought out to-night were taken into consideration at that time. For example, take a man who is in class 1 lightkeeper ait Cape Race, Newfoundland. The maximum that he was receiving in 1911 was $2,300, but the maximum in 1927 is $4,700, or more than double.


John Evans: How many helpers does he have to provide for out of that?


Mr CARDIN:: Two.


Alan Webster Neill: For No. 1 class I think the minister will find there are four assistants.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I have not the number of assistants for that particular place, but for Belle Isle, southwest, the maximum in 1911 was $1,900, and at present it is $3,060. Out of that the man has to provide two assistants. The same scale of increases applies in regard to the salaries of all the others. I repeat that I am giving these details not with the view of showing any adverse disposition in regard to the matter but only in order that the committee may become familiar with the circumstances of the case. I still promise I will look into the matter and if there is any possibility of granting the request, I shall be only too pleased to do so.


Alan Webster Neill: I would not like it to go forth that anyone was asking, on a plea of this kind, for an expenditure of $200,000. There must be a very big mistake about that. The total expenditure asked for salaries and allowances for every kind of lightkeeper is $750,000. Many of them would be part time men not

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
requiring holidays. If giving a holiday of three weeks to half of them-it would not be more than half-is going to cost $200,000, that would be equivalent to giving them two days' holiday a week, not twenty-one days a year, because $200,000 is roughly one-third of the total expenditure. They are not asking that they all get it. A lot of these low paid men, getting two or three hundred a year, and working only an hour or two a day, do not require it at all, so it would not be anything like that sum. From the knowledge my friend from Skeena and I have of the west coast, I do not suppose there are over thirty lighthouses on the west coast, and say there is a similar number on the east coast; that would be an expenditure of something like $5,000 as regards the extra pay.
As to increased wages, I do not think that was put exactly according to the facts. While the expenditure has increased in the period stated by the minister from $460,000 to $750,000, that does not mean that the same number of men are getting that extra amount. It means that there has been a large increase in the number of lighthouses and in the number of men employed therein. Canada has not been standing still in the last fifteen years, and as I say, a great part of that increased expenditure is due to an increase in the number of employees. If the minister will look into the matter I think he will find that the No. 1 lighthouses are compelled to keep four assistants, and it is certainly not the case that the commission when allocating the salaries to these men provided that they should not have holidays, or having holidays, that they should pay for a substitute themselves; otherwise it would be so stated in the act or in the order in council, and that has not been done. As the salaries of the whole civil service have grown under the various orders in council and regulations, and so on, so have those of the lighthouse keepers, but they have not grown out of proportion to the increases in the civil service in Ottaw*a. I would submit that this is a ease where really there is no practical way of logically evading the suggestion that these men ought to get the treatment that I have recommended. I accept the minister's statement that he will look into it, and I hope that that will lead to immediate action.


Mr. SHORT:: I am thoroughly in accord with the remarks that have been made by my hon. friend from Comox-Albemi and my hon. friend from Skeena. I think this is one branch of the service that should receive every consideration from the department. I certainly
do not think that these men are overpaid; in fact, they 'are not paid enough. The fact that their salaries have increased since 1911 is no indication that they are being adequately paid to-day. There is not a branch of the civil service where the salaries have not increased very materially, and in some cases more than doubled, since 1911. The cost of living, as everybody knows, has more than doubled since that date, and if there is one branch of the service that needs every consideration and should be well paid for the work it is doing, it is the lighthouse keepers.
I notice that there is a small increase of $10,000. I would ask the minister if that is to cover an increase to the lower paid men. I understand that in the service there are many lighthouses that are not in isolated positions at all, and where the lighthouse tender may live half a mile or a mile away from the light. He goes to the lighthouse at night and fights the fight, and then goes home, and comes back in the morning and puts the light out. Many of these men are paid from sixty to one hundred dollars a year for performing this service three hundred and sixty-five days in the year. That does not pay for the cost of the shoe leather. I know of one case in my constituency where the man walks a mile to light the fight on the end of a breakwater. It is quite an important light, and the man tells me that he gets $60 a year; this was a year or two ago. I think that this class of men should receive some consideration. The minimum pay for that class of lightkeeper should be $100. We have increased the salaries of the small country postmasters from $60 to $100, and I think the minister might very well take into consideration giving a similar increase to these lightkeepers. It would only be in keeping with the increases that are taking place in the Post Office department.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The $10,000 increase is an appropriation for salaries in connection with an additional establishment which we are putting into the service. There is nothing here to provide for an increase in the salaries of the lower-paid lighthouse keepers, but I might say that I am impressed by the argument that has been made by my hon. friend in Tegard to the lower-paid men, and I am quite prepared to look into that question at the same time as the other.
I should like to make a correction. I gave the figure of $200,000 to my hon. friend from Comox-Albemi. It would not be as high as that.

Supply-Marine and Fisheries


Hugh Guthrie: May I say a word in
regard to a formal application made to the minister in a document dated February 10, 1928, which I think very well gets out the claim of the lightkeepers' association for some consideration in the way of increased salary. In the first place, it is pointed out:
That the increase of $10 per month granted last year to keepers from class 1 to 10 inclusively, was gratefully received and appreciated, and was furthermore looked upon as an important item in the welfare of those who were thereby concerned. But as regards keepers from class 1 to 5, who have assistants to pay and board out of their salaries, no provision was made about them, and therefore we confidently hope you will this year be kind enough to recognize and grant an increase of $5 per month for each assistant of same.
That is the first claim they make. I see that the number of assistants in classes 1 to 5 is as follows:
Class 1.. 2. .
3..
4..
5..
No. of assistants .	12
.	2
.	2
.	1
.	1
It is respectfully asked that these assistants be granted an additional $5 per month. These assistant keepers are now paid and boarded by the principal keepers. The next clause in the appeal reads as follows:
The schedule of salaries we are submitting this year on behalf of the "part time" keepers from class 11 to 18 is the same as that submitted every year since 1922, and notwithstanding the many promises made since the above mentioned date, those men are still waiting if something will come, and we again beg leave to call your kind attention to the fact that these "part time" keepers are giving good and appreciable service to navigation, and for which they receive a very poor salary, which is at least 125 per cent less than those paid in other countries. We earnestly hope you will kindly consider our demand favourably and grant those well deserving keepers the schedule we are submitting to you this year.
The minister has the schedule, and I think the increases asked for are very, very modest. The third request reads as follows:
It was resolved, and we hereby humbly submit, that all the keepers of open sea stations who are on duty twelve months in the year are not receiving an adequate remuneration for their services if we consider that in some provinces the stations are closed during the winter months while the former have to bear the coldest months of the year, causing their task to be most trying. We therefore beg to submit that said keepers of open sea stations be given an increase pro rata to their monthly income.
That is on behalf of the lighthouse keepers. There is also an appeal to the minister, although it is addressed to the Minister of

Finance, dated February 10, 1928, from the Canadian Brotherhood of Lightkeepers Association. I will read this appeal, for the sake of brevity:
This is_ an appeal respectfully submitted to your consideration and concerning the lightship captains, as also the captains of the government steamers appointed by order in council, and whose salaries are more than $600 per annum. These civil servants beg leave to state that being willing to pay their contributions such as stipulated in the statutes of the Pension Act, they would deem it a favour if they were granted the privilege of participating in it. One of the most plausible reasons offered as a basic argument favouring such an enactment is found in the fact that both the captains, Leblanc of the White island lightship, and Christensen of the Prince shoal lightship, have retired on their pensions a few years ago, and consequently we see no reason why the others of the class above mentioned should be denied the same privilege of working their way to a similar objective.
Hoping therefore you will be kind enough to give this very important and earnest request all the consideration it deserves,
We beg to remain, hon. Sir,
Yours respectfully,
Thos. M. Wtatt,
President, Father Point, P.Q.
R. W. Lindsay,
General Secretary.
Isle Verte, P.Q.
I have looked over the schedule of wages attached to these requests. In my humble judgment. Mr. Chairman, the increases asked for are very modest indeed, and I sincerely hope the minister will see his way to grant them.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and repairs for lighthouses,
George Gibson Coote: The minister might give an explanation of this rather large vote.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This vote, the same as last year, is for the maintenance and repair of aids to navigation, including lighthouses, buoys, fog alarms and other aids to navigation. It also covers the cost of supplies and the labour and materials for repairs.


George Gibson Coote: How many lighthouses are we keeping up?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: 1,617 lights, 11 lightships, 351 fog alarms-


Harry Bernard Short: Where it is available has the department ever considered the use of hydro-electric power for many of these small lighthouses? In my constituency we have just spent a large sum of money to generate

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
hydro-electric power, and the line passes within a very short distance of several lighthouses. I think electric light would be cheaper and much more satisfactory than the use of oil lamps.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We are already putting that policy into practice in certain places.


Harry Bernard Short: In my constituency there are fifteen or twenty lighthouses, and several of them can be served at a very moderate expense by our hydro-electric power system. I think it is well worth the department's consideration.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: To complete the information I was giving to my hon. friend from Macleod (Mr. Coote): 417 gas and signal buoys; other aids to navigation, 8,430.


George Gibson Coote: How much is spent in the different provinces?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I can give my hon. friend the total number of lightships, fog signals and other aids to navigation for each province: New Brunswick, 1,439; Nova Scotia, 1,504; Prince Edward Island, 2,895; Quebec province, district of Quebec, 861* Montreal district, 1,243; province of Ontario, Prescott district, 701, Parry Sound district, 1,083; Kenora district, 448; Manitoba, 87; British Columbia, Victoria district, 509, Prince Rupert district, 154.


George Gibson Coote: Nothing in Alberta and
Saskatchewan?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Not yet.


George Gibson Coote: How much of this vote was spent last year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: $893,231 up to March 31, 1928.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Is any revenue received from shipowners toward the cost of maintaining these lighthouses?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


George Gibson Coote: Will not the minister be constructing some new lighthouses and aids to navigation this year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The construction of lighthouses comes under the next vote.


George Gibson Coote: I understand that. It is because the minister is asking for $725,000 to take care of further works that I am asking whether this vote will be sufficient for maintenance, it being the same as last year.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Very few of the proposed new lighthouses will be ready before next year.


George Gibson Coote: Did we vote anything last year for the construction of new lighthouses?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I think we did.


George Gibson Coote: The minister has not explained how he will be able to take care of the maintenance of the new lighthouses under this vote.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Most of the lighthouses that we propose to build will not be ready this year. We will have ample time next year to provide for their maintenance.


George Gibson Coote: Last year I think we voted $783,000 for the construction of new lighthouses. Surely some of them must be completed by this time. How is the minister going to provide for their maintenance out of this vote?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We will be able to take care of them. Certainly the men will not lose their wages.


Thomas Cantley: Referring to the suggestion made by the hon. member for Digby (Mr. Short), I would call tihe minister's attention to the fact that Pictou is a point in question. There you have a lighthouse and three range lights all within a short distance of hydro-electric power. In fact, the wires pass practically alongside the range lights and very close to the lighthouse. I suggest that the minister look into the possibilities there.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will, certainly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction of lights and aids to navigation, including regulation of traffic at such places as may be found necessary, $725,000.
George Gibson Coote: Where is this money to be
spent?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: First of all we have a
general account of $80,000 required to pay the wages of foremen, travelling expenses of engineers and foremen, costs of investigations, examinations and reports; purchase of land; purchase of repairs to plant, et cetera; and operation of Prescott lighthouse depot. For buoy service there is $100,000. It is impossible to foresee just what amounts will be required or to estimate the damage or loss that may occur during the next two winters. However, it is not anticipated that anything out of the ordinary will occur and it is expected that the sum of $100,000 will cover these particular
3688	COMMONS
Supply-Marine and Fisheries
requirements. For general repairs and improvements and new works, $255,000 is asked for. This amount is required to carry out new works recommended by the lighthouse board and approved by council, and for the necessary repairs already asked for as well as requirements which will develop before April, 1929. Unfinished works will require $40,000. This is needed for works commenced in the fiscal year but which, owing to various causes, may have to be carried over to next season. For aids to navigation, north channel of the St. Lawrence river, an amount of $250,000 is needed. In connection with these aids to navigation, east of the island of Orleans, range lights consisting of two piers with lighthouses will have to be established. It is estimated that $250,000 will be required to cover the cost.


George Gibson Coote: Will the minister give some particulars of the new works that are being constructed?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The following is a list of
new works, improvements and repairs contemplated for the fiscal year 1928-29:
Nova Scotia-
Pearl island, Combined lighthouse and dwelling.
Isaac harbour, New dwelling.
Eddy point, Fog alarm,
St. Paul island, Derrick and slipway,
Flat point, Moving tower,
Guysborough, Unwatched light on beacon. Guysborough, Light to range with present one. Sable island W.E., Repairs and painting. Prince Edward Island-
Cape Whittle, Light and fog alarm. Charlottetown wf., Repairs west face.
Neguac gully, New dwelling.
Oak point, Moving back light.
Eehourie, M.I., Light tower and shelter shed. New Brunswick-
Long point, Fog horn.
Jemseg, New pole and pier.
Porter point, protection.
Quebec

Quebec, Repairs to wharves.
Anse aux Canard, Range lights.
Agouanish, Range lights.
St. Marguerite, Range lights.
Cannes des Roches, Light on breakwater. Riviere Nouvelle, Light on breakwater, L'Anse a Brilliant, Pole light.
Riviere a Claude, Light.
Bersimis and Outarde bay, Hand horn. Montreal-
Isle Deslaurier, New pier.
Bloody island, Straightening tower.
Yereheres village, Rebuilding front lgt. pier. Lotbiniere, Range lights (red).
Ontario-
Batteau rocks, Fog alarm and light station. Hudson straits, 10 gas lights.
Grosse pointe, New pier.
Lancaster bar, Repairs foundation.

Chantry island, Pointing and whitewashing tower.
Spectacle shoal, New tower.
Spruce shoal, Repairs foundation.
Bronte, New tower.
Gibbons point, day beacons.
Muskoka lakes, 2 lights (red).
Gore bay, Pole light.
Victoria, B.C.-
Amphitrite point, Dwelling and water service.
Cape Cook, Unwatched light.
Shusartie hay, Aga light.
False bay, Small light.
East bay, Small light.
Prince Rupert, B.C.-
Green island, Fog alarm.
Lucy island, Fog alarm.


George Gibson Coote: I must thank the minister for the information given. Is any of this money to be spent in Saskatchewan and Alberta?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No.


George Gibson Coote: Has the minister had a request to provide certain services on lake Athafoaska?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I understand that we are sending somebody there to inquire about the situation. The same remark applies to Great Slave lake.


George Gibson Coote: Would there be any possibility of work being done this year under this vote if the report showed that it was necessary?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We shall take care of any work that is urgent unless it calls for a very, very large expenditure. If it were not too large we could take care of it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and repairs to wharves, $10,000.
Eccles James Gott: This may not be within the purview of the minister's department, but I am informed by some of the lumber dealers in Essex county that they have not yet been privileged to tender on lumber used in repair work on the docks in that county. I do not see why it should be necessary to travel one hundred miles to get a small supply of lumber with Which to make repairs to wharves when this lumber can be purchased close to the point where the repairs are to be made.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I may say that out of that vote we provide for only small repairs costing up to $50. The larger repairs are made by the Department of Public Works.


Robert Gardiner: Then why is this item under this department?

Supply-Marine and Fisheries


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The reason is that once a wharf is completed by the Department of Public Works it reverts to the Department of Marine and Fisheries for administration. We collect the dues on these wharves, and this vote is to provide for small repairs which may be urgently needed. When any serious repairs must be made the work is done by the Department of Public Works.


Eccles James Gott: That is the reason I mentioned it; I thought this came under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works. I hope the minister will take occasion to call this matter to the attention of his colleague, the Minister of Public Works. Recently I sent a letter to a firm in Essex county inquiring whether they had been permitted to tender on lumber used for this purpose, and this is their reply:
Your letter of May 9th to hand. In reply we wish to say that we have never had the opportunity of figuring on any government dock in Essex county.
I hope the Minister of Public Works will take cognizance of this situation and see that the lumber dealers in Essex county, whether Liberal or Conservative, have an opportunity to tender on the lumber used for repairing these wharves.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Amounts required to pay pensions to pilots, $10,500.
Herbert Bealey Adshead: This amount is requested to pay pensions to pilots, and I see that the thirty-five pilots receive only $10,500, which is at the rate of $300 per year. Does the minister think that is enough for a man to live on, or are these pilots expected to apply for old age pension?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is not the only pension received by these pilots; from their own funds, collected by fees, they receive an equal amount of $300. This item is the result of certain negotiations which were made with the pilotage association of Quebec when the department took control of the pilotage in that district. At that time, which was some years ago, one of the considerations was that we should pay a pension of this amount to the pilots who were then in the service. It is a part of the contract which was then made.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: They are retired?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: And they receive a total pension of $600?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: They live on that, and a judge cannot live on a pension of $5,000.


Robert Gardiner: Are the pilots now employed under the superannuation fund?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Allowance to harbour master at Amherstburg, for supervision of lights and buoys on the St. Clair river, the Detroit river and lake Erie, and other services in connection with the light-$600° serv*ee ^or ^le season of navigation, 1928,
Eccles James Gott: My curiosity is rather aroused by this item. I should ask the minister for the information which will show why it is necessary to have one particular item covering the harbour master at Amherstburg, in view of the fact that there are harbour masters in other places from coast to coast.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I will give my hon. triend the information I have before me in this regard. On the Detroit river and lake Erie some seventeen gas buoys and about fifty-eight other buoys, some of them lighted, and ten winter spar buoys are maintained under contract and under the supervision of the harbour master at Amherstburg, and on che St. Clair river there are five gas lights under his direct supervision. Also the business in connection with the Southeast shoal and Bar Point lightships is to some extent looked after by him, and he assists with the business connected with the maintenance of some of the more isolated light stations at the western end of lake Erie. Under the statute a harbour master's remuneration is derived from harbour dues collected, but the dues at Amherstburg are negligible while 'the work and responsibility in connection with the maintenance of aids to navigation are quite considerable. This appropriation is to provide an allowance to the harbour master at Amherstburg for services rendered in this latter connection.


Eccles James Gott: What vote would cover the wages paid to other harbour masters?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: There is no vote, because they are paid by fees which they collect.


Robert Gardiner: Does this particular
hatbour master collect fees in addition to this $600?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I am informed that we have no record of that before us, but it is

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
stated here that he is not collecting very much and that is why we pay him this compensation.


Robert Gardiner: If it is stated there that he does not collect very much, surely the department should know how much he is getting.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No doubt we have that
information somewhere.


Robert Gardiner: It does not seem that $600 is very much for the work this man is supposed to do, and I wondered what amount he collected by way of fees.


Eccles James Gott: I know that if the harbour master at Amherstburg were ipaid by fees he would not draw any salary, but is he the only harbour master in the Dominion who is paid a salary by this government?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes, he is the only one.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marine-meterological	service, including
magnetic observatory, grants of $500 each to Kingston and Montreal observatories, and allowance of $400 to L. F. Gorman, observer at Ottawa, $300,000.
Robert Gardiner: Will the minister explain this item?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This proposed appropriation is to provide for the maintenance of the meteorological service of Canada.


Robert Gardiner: What is the reason for he increase?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The increase over last fiscal year is to provide for an extension of the service to meet the requirements of the air board by way of furnishing immediate data with regard to atmospheric conditions, air currents and so on, in particular districts and along particular routes.


George Gibson Coote: How much was spent last year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: 

Item agreed to.
Steamboat inspection, $142,980.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This vote provides for an expenditure, but the government is practically reimbursed through the fees charged for this inspection and the money is paid into the consolidated revenue fund.


George Gibson Coote: Do you inspect all passenger steamboats in Canada?


Robert Gardiner: Will you give us the
income and expenditures for last year?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They have not been tabulated for last year, but I can give my hon friend an idea from the figures for 1926-27- the income was $135,450.39, and the expenditures amounted to $121,961.


Mr. HARRIS:: Does this vote cover the
inspection of passenger steamships and lifesaving apparatus?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Joseph Henry Harris: How many inspectors are
there on this work?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: About thirty-four in all.


Joseph Henry Harris: How many classes of lifesaving apparatus are there?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: I regret I have not the
regulations here.


Joseph Henry Harris: If I read the reports correctly there is a No. 1 class, No. 2, No. 3, and so on. I am asking particularly with regard to the pleasure boats running on the Toronto-Kingston apd Kingston-Montreal lines. Does the department demand that these passenger boats shall have all No. .1 class life saving equipment, or do they still have considerable of what the department terms No. 2 and No. 3?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Not having the regulations before me, Mr. Chairman, I am not in position to satisfy my hon. friend regarding that. I will be quite ready to give him the information, probably to-morrow.


Joseph Henry Harris: To my mind there is not
sufficient protection on these passenger boats -I am dealing particularly with the Ontario district-for the travelling public, especially during the tourist season when these boats are overcrowded. I suggest to the minister that this inspection should be reviewed and checked up to prevent the occurrence of a tragedy on our lakes in the near future.


Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: What control has
the department over the number of passengers carried on boats?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: According to the regulations, the inspector fixes the number of passengers that the boat can carry.


Arthur Edward Ross: And a certificate to that effect is in the boat. But what

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
control has the department over the boat to see that this is carried out?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The customs collector at
the different ports is supposed to see that the regulations are observed.


Arthur Edward Ross: And that is the
only official?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous-to provide for the salary of Hon. J. C. Patterson, commissioner to investigate titles of Great Britain to lands in the Arctic seas, $2,400.
Robert Gardiner: I would like some information regarding this item.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The Hon. J. C. Patterson was appointed a commissioner to investigate titles of great Britain to lands in the Arctic seas by order in council P.C. 1160, at a salary of $200 per month, payable out of the moneys appropriated for unforeseen expenses. By order in council P.C. 1391 it was provided that Mr. Patterson's salary was to be paid out of moneys appropriated for the Canadian Arctic expedition organized in that year, and later designated as the patrol of northern waters of Canada. No provision being made in the main estimates for the fiscal year 1928-29 for the patrol of northern waters of Canada, some other provision for Mr. Patterson s salary is therefore necessary.


Robert Gardiner: What is .tlhe explanation as to the need for the investigation of these titles?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: He is working up some data and information to ascertain exactly the situation in regard to the lands which are mentioned in the order in council.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: In regard to titles to lands of Great Britain?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Why does Great Britain not look after her own titles?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: These will be Canadian
lands.


George Gibson Coote: The question naturally arises why Canada should investigate the titles of British lands. That is why we are asking the question.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Really they are Canadian.


George Gibson Coote: It might be advisable to correct the item -and say: "titles of Ganad-a ". Now that we are on an equal status with
Great Britain I think we should investigate the titles of our lands and Great Britain might investigate the titles of hers.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


George Gibson Coote: As amended.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil Government-Marine and Fisheries- salaries and contingencies, $614,615.
Robert Gardiner: I must protest against the manner in whi-ch the Chairman (Mr Bouchard) is reading these items. We do not' know where we are and we cannot hear a word he says. I suggest that unless he speaks louder, some other hon. member should take the chair.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: This is item 16, civil government. The details appear o-n page 87.


Hugh Guthrie: The increase of $4,500 is
due just to statutory increases?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Fisheries-salaries and disbursements of fishery officers and guardians, fisheries patrol and fisheries protection service, $950,000.
Mr. SHOR r: This is in connection with fisheries and as this is Friday, it is a good day to_ discuss them. I should like to say just a few words in connection with fisheries.
Mr. McINTOSH:: How many?


Harry Bernard Short: I will not talk too long. I have not a great deal of correspondence to read and I -hope hon. gentlemen will give me the same attention that they did the other rngh-t. If they wish to make any comments I shall be glad to have them and will answer them as best I can.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Make it short.


Mr. SHOR  F@: I will make it very short. Little or nothing has been done by the department of fisheries. I think the minister will agree with me that this is one department that has not received the attention it should receive. Had it received proper attention there would not have been the trouble or the discontent that occurred among the fishermen of the maritime provinces during the past year. When the Duncan report came d-own, one of the recommendations was that a deputy minister of fisheries should be appointed forthwith. When the discussion took place on that report, the Prime Minister, speaking on March 18, 1927, said, as reported in Hansard at page 1334:

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
The commission's recommendation with respect to the appointment of a deputy minister whose duties will be confined to what at present constitutes the fisheries section of the Department of Marine and Fisheries will be carried out.
A year and three months have elapsed since that statement was made to the house and no deputy minister has yet been appointed. Had that appointment been made shortly after the house prorogued last year, there would not have been the discontent that there was among the fishermen of the maritime provinces because they would have felt that something was being done for the industry. Nothing is being done for the industry by the department except to carry out the regulations that appear on the statute book or to put new ones into effect. Many of them which they should have carried out they did not carry out and those which they should not, they did carry out. If there is any department which has been neglected, it is the department of fisheries. I say this with all respect to the minister and the deputy. They are great friends of mine; I know they will take in all kindness everything I say, and I think down in their hearts they will agree with me. Both of them are very busy men. The marine department is a very large department and their time is practically taken up with it, the fisheries being left to other officials who have no power whatever. They must report to the deputy and the minister and, as I said before, they are too much engaged in the other duties of the department to bother about the fisheries.
Our fisheries constitute one of our greatest natural resources and if they were properly developed they would be capable of producing double the amount they do now. Last year the production of fish in this country amounted to about $50,000,000, and if we had a department of fisheries that amount could easily be doubled. The fisheries commission that has recently reported has gone further than the recommendations of the Duncan commission. They recommend that a separate department with a minister and a deputy be established. But I am not going to discuss that report tonight because I understand the Prime Minister has already stated to the house that as the government have not had an opportunity of going thoroughly, into the report, no legislation will be brought down this session in connection with the recommendations contained therein. Therefore the matter is not under discussion, unless the minister can give the committee an idea whether the government are going to change their minds or not. Will any action be
IMr. Short.]
taken in connection with the report this year? I presume not, because the minister does not answer. I presume they are not going to take any action, because one of the recommendations in the report was that no changes whatever should be made in the different seasons for taking lobsters in various sections of the province of Nova Scotia; that that regulation be made statutory so that it could be changed only by consent of parliament. But since the report was brought in a change has been made and an extension has already been given to one section of Nova Scotia. It is either ten or fifteen days, I do not know which. Evidently, therefore, the government do not intend to pay much attention to that report. Had we had a deputy minister appointed last year, we would never have had this trouble in connection with the fishermen in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. That commission has cost this country some $85,000. If that money had been spent in creating a separate department-and it would have carried that department for some time-it never would have been necessary to have a commission, because you would have had men in that fisheries department who knew something about the industry, and they would have brought down some remedies for the ills that exist in that part of the country. But the government decided that they would do nothing in that connection, and the result has been great deal of dissatisfaction and unrest among the fishermen of the maritime provinces, as the house is well aware
We feel also that we are not protected against foreign fish coming into this country Perhaps this house is not aware that we import from the United States nearly one million dollars' worth of fish a year. To be exact, last year we imported $911,000 worth of fish from the United States, practically every dollar's worth of which could have been produced in the maritime provinces. There was $540,000 worth of fresh fidh brought into Canada from the United States. Most of it came in last spring when prices were very low in the United States, and our duty of only one cent a pound is not sufficient protection to keep that fish from coming in, owing to the fact that the express and freight rates are very much lower from Boston and Portland to Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa than the rates from the maritime provinces, the distance being so much less.


Mr. McMILLAN:: Mr. Chairman, I rise
to a point of order. We are not discussing the tariff, I submit.


Harry Bernard Short: We have to bring in the tariff in order to show you what is wrong with our fisheries. I do not think the hon. member

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
has read the report of the commission. When we ship this same fish to tihe United States, we have to pay a duty of two cents a pound. There is no reason why there should be one dollar's worth of fresh fish brought into this country from the United States. The maritime provinces are suffering from lack of markets for their fish. We have been asking this government for the last two years to try to extend our markets for us. Hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of American fish, the same as we produce here, are brought into this country, and no steps have been taken by the government to relieve the situation. W7e also imported into this country from the United States 8108,500 of dried, smoked and pickled fish, every dollar's worth of which could have been produced in the maritime provinces, and would have been if we had had a duty as high as the American duty. We have not been able to export any of our cheap fresh fish to the United States since the Fordney tariff came into effect. If we had a deputy minister who was a practical man, who knew the conditions as they exist in the maritime provinces and elsewhere throughout this country, and the conditions as to markets, we might get some relief. For the last year and a half the Canadian Fisheries Association have been trying to get this government to help them in advertising fish so as to increase our markets in Canada, but last year the government never contributed one dollar towards that advertising campaign. The year before they did contribute $10,000. and the industry had to put up a like amount; but. ten or twenty thousand dollars is not enough to carry on a propaganda of advertising in this country if we are going to increase the sale of our fish, which is one of our great natural products, giving employment to thousands of our Canadian citizens.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: How many carloads of
fish were shipped from Athabaska to Detroit?


Harry Bernard Short: I could not tell you; that
is out of my district. Perhaps my hon. friend from .Skeena could answer that.


Eccles James Gott: The hon. member for Rosetown ought to know.


Harry Bernard Short: It would be in the public
interest to appropriate in these estimates a sufficient amount to carry on an advertising propaganda in this country to increase the sale of fish. Had we had a market for our fish there never would have been any trouble with the fishermen. Our trouble has been lack of markets, and the consequence was the fishermen could not make a living. They felt that they had to make some appeal to the public, which they did, and the government
finally took notice of it and appointed this commission, which has dealt very thoroughly with the situation.
I see an item of $130,000 to assist in the conservation and development of the deep sea fisheries and the demand for fish. Why cannot a sum be taken from that item for advertising purposes, which would be of the greatest benefit to the country? This same item of $130,000 was in the estimates last year, and only $5,920 out of that $130,000 was expended. The department does not even seem to know how to expend the very small appropriation which they do get for the fisheries.
I say, therefore, that they should call in a practical man, a man who knows that business -because they have got the men. They should put in authority a man who knows production, and who knows how fish are sold. Last year they sent two men, Mr. Cowie, of the department, and a Mr. Earle, across to England to look into the question of markets for our fish, but I have not heard a word of what they did. It cost this country several thousands of dollars to send them over there. There is a market for our fish in England, but it is up to the department to develop that market, just as other departments of the government, the Department of Agriculture, for instance, develops markets for the products of the farm. But the department of fisheries has done nothing whatever in that regard. I am told that there is a wonderful prospect for a market for our fresh fish in England. But no single firm can develop that business, and it is therefore up to the government to find a market for our fish, just as it does for other natural products. That is what the Department of Fisheries is for, but absolutely nothing has been done'.
I do not want to be complaining. Mr. Chairman, at all. I just want to bring this matter to the attention of the committee for its consideration. I am not blaming the present minister a bit more than his predecessors. We have never had a practical man in charge of the fisheries department. What would the Department of Agriculture think if a professional man was made Minister of Agriculture? They have never done that, and why should we not have a man who knows the fish game in charge of the Fisheries department that you are going to establish? You want a man who knows the industry, and you have such a man on your side of the house, a man who is capable in every way, a man who has been in the fish business all his life and knows it from start to finish. I want to give a word of caution: when this separate department is created do not put in a clerical man who

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
knows nothing whatever about the business; put in a man who knows the industry, and then you will get some results. I bring this to the attention of the minister in the hope that something will foe done so that we will not next year have the same trouble down in our province that we had last.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: 
Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Mr. Chairman, the government has decided to appeal to the Privy Council. I may reassure my hon. friend on another point. So long as there is an appeal to a higher tribunal the judgment of the lower court is of no effect. Consequently the situation remains as it was, the judgment of the supreme court can have no effect until it is affirmed by the Privy Council, and in the meantime we shall carry on in the usual way. So my hon. friend need not be afraid of the alarming developments to which he has referred.


Alan Webster Neill: I am very glad to hear the
minister express his opinion in this matter, both as a minister and a lawyer. While I would have preferred to see an amendment made to the Fisheries Act-and I think this is the course that ultimately will have to be taken-yet at this late stage of the session the decision announced foy the minister will perhaps be as effective as we could wish.
As to the remarks of my hon. friend from Digby-Annapolis (Mr. Short), of course he was entirely out of order; he was talking on an item that had nothing to do with the subject. It should have been brought up on the civil government estimates. However the hon. member has been allowed to deviate from the straight and narrow path and I may be allowed to do the same for a few minutes. I endorse what he has said as regards the appointment of a deputy minister. We were promised that, if not the year before last, certainly last year. The legislation has been passed and I see no reason why it should not be carried out.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: It will be.


Alan Webster Neill: It would make for efficiency in the service. The Duncan report also recommended it and we in British Columbia are anxious to have the same thing. I would

Supply-Marine and Fisheries
go further, again following the Duncan report, and say that we in British Columbia are in sympathy with the idea of having a commissioner for the east and one ailso for the west-men who would live, respectively, in the maritime provinces and in British Columbia and who would necessarily be familiar with the local conditions of the industry. As my hon. friend has indicated, they would be able to formulate policies ahead, so to speak, of their urgent necessity and not wait until the industry was almost in the ditch. They would foresee trouble and devote themselves to the providing of remedies. Speaking for British Columbia and particularly for the district I represent, I hope that before long we shall see the Department of Fisheries established under the deputy minister.


William Garland McQuarrie: I want to refer to
another matter. Yesterday we listened to the hon. member for Comox-Albemi speaking in regard to the conditions of men employed in the life saving stations in British Columbia. He referred to their pay and also to the fact that they are not under the Civil Service Commission, being thereby deprived of certain privileges which otherwise they would enjoy. There is another Class that comes directly under this item; I refer to the patrol boat employees on the Pacific coast. I have from time to time made representations to the department, and representations have also been made by the Amalgamated Civil Servants' Association of New Westminster in the same connection. These men are very much underpaid, it seems to me, and more than that they have been deprived of certain perquisites which they formerly received. They formerly received food when they were out on their work; they got provisions; and they have been deprived of these. They were not granted any increase of pay when other civil servants received an increase; it was stated that they were not permanent employees. All I can say in that connection is that a great many of these men have been in the employ of the department for upwards of five, ten and fifteen years. To say that they are only temporary employees seems to me rather ridiculous. They are not given any holidays at all; nor are they entitled to any superannuation. They work from seventy to eighty hours a week for five months of the year and during the remaining months the}' work a minimum of forty-four hours per week. I do not think the government is treating the civil servants of this country at all fairly in a great many ways, and this particular class have been very
badly treated. There is no reason whatever in the stand taken by the department, that these men are not entitled to further consideration. Their salaries are most inadequate and I would impress upon the minister the necessity for reveiwing the condition of these men. I would also ask that he do something to give them fair treatment. It was my privilege to bring the matter to the attention of the minister personally, but T am afraid he has not gone into it very carefully, because he cannot defend the stand which the department has taken.


Robert Gardiner: Will the minister explain the increase?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The flat increase of $120 given last year was paid out of the special appropriation; this year it is included here. It amounts to $9,500. This year the annual increases amount to $1,860. Two new boats for the Atlantic coast are required; one for investigational work, $12,000 and one to replace hired boats for the Grand Manan district for which we are paying $600 per year. The new boat will cost about $2,000 and will pay for itself in less than four years. This amounts to $14,000. There are also new boats for the Pacific, one to replace the Swan, built in 1908 and which is worn out; the other takes the place of a boat which was burned last fall. At $6,000 each these amount to $12,000. There is a new engine for another vessel; this amounts to $3,000. This makes up the $40,000 increase.


Robert Gardiner: But I understand there is an increase of $90,000.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: We had a supplementary
voted at the opening of this session for last year amounting to $50,000.


Robert Gardiner: Is there any of this
money spent in the prairie provinces?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: How much?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The expenditure in Manitoba last year was $16,618.96; Saskatchewan, $18,588.66; Alberta, $21,391.73. This is for fishery officers.


Robert Gardiner: What are the duties of these officers?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They are administering the fishery laws and seeing that the regulations are observed.


George Gibson Coote: We often hear complaints about the number of inspectors in the Department of Agriculture, and I was just wonder-

,	Supply-Marine and Fisheries
ing, for the purpose of comparison, how many inspectors are included under this vote.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: In the three prairie provinces there are three district inspectors, fifteen overseers and twenty-four guardians.


George Gibson Coote: What is the duty of an overseer? Does he oversee the inspector?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: No, he sees that the regulations in his district are observed. He has charge of a particular district.


George Gibson Coote: Would the minister just go a little further and tell us what he does in that district? What is the difference between an inspector and an overseer?


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: The inspector is the more important man. There is one inspector for each province, but he cannot see to all the details and supervise all the districts under his control. The men working under him are the overseers, who are given certain districts to look after, and these overseers have under them the guardians, who are supposed to see that the regulations are observed.


George Gibson Coote: Are these guardians full-time men?
Mr. CARDIN. No, they are only seasonal men.


Eccles James Gott: Mr. Chairman, I call your attention to the fact that it is eleven o'clock.


Pierre-Joseph-Arthur Cardin: They are paid only the rate prevailing in that locality.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
Right hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister): With the permission of the house I should like to lay on the table the correspondence relating to the proposal for a multilateral pact for the renunciation of war. This includes the reply of Canada to the invitation of the United States.
Edward Joseph Garland: May I ask the Prime Minister if he will be prepared to provide an opportunity for a brief statement with respect to these papers?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I think my hon. friend will find when he sees the correspondence that it contains about all that can be said in the way of a statement.


Edward Joseph Garland: Does the correspondence contain a statement of government policy in connection with this question?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It contains a statement of the position of the Canadian government.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Saturday, June 2, 1928.