1929-05-29

[Stage Direction]
Second report of the joint committee of both houses on the printing of parliament. -Mr. Girouard.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. FRANK S. CAHILL (Pontiac):	In
order that the railway committee may be able to meet to-morrow, it will be necessary, Mr. Speaker, for me to ask the unanimous consent of the house to move:
Thia/t the select standing on railways,, canals and telegraph lines be permitted to sit while the house is sitting.
The motion is seconded by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr.Neill).
Mr. SPEAKER:: By leave of the house.


Mr. BENNETT:: May I ask the hon. gentleman how many bills are yet to be considered?


Mr. CAHILL:: There are two bills; one,
I understand, is to asist in legislation of the New Brunswick legislature and the other is known as the Jacobs bill, having reference to return tickets.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. LUCIEN CANNON (Solicitor General) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 313, to amend the Dominion Elections Act.
Mr. GUTHRIE:: Explain.


Mr. CANNON:: I intended giving a full
explanation of the bill on the second reading. On the first reading-
Questions


Hewitt Bostock: Carried. Mr. Cannon
moves that said bill be read the first time.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Hewitt Bostock: When shall said bill be
read the second time?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Now.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Next sitting.


Hewitt Bostock: The objection is well
taken. Next sitting.



PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 281, respecting The Royal Architectural Institute of Canada.-Mr. Smith (Stormont).

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

Miss MACPHAIL:: 1.	How many inmates were transferred from Portsmouth to Stony Mountain penitentiary in 1928?
2.	How long were the inmates kept at Stony Mountain ?
3.	Why was the transfer made?
4.	How many inmates were transferred from Portsmouth to Prince Albert penitentiary in 1928?
5.	How long were the inmates kept at Prince Albert ?
6.	Why were they transferred to Prince Albert ?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	1 from Kingston penitentiary to Stony Mountain penitentiary.
2.	This inmate is still in Manitoba penitentiary.
3.	For disciplinary reasons.
4.	None.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	Answered by No. 4.


DOCTOR A. G. FRASER
Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: 1.	Has Dr. A. G. Fraser been appointed as dentist at Westminster hospital, London?
2.	If so, is it a part time or- full time appointment ?
3.	What salary and allowance is he being paid?
4.	Who was his predecessor?
5.	Was his predecessor dismissed? If so, why?
6.	Was his predecessor's appointment part time or full time?
7.	What salary and allowance was he paid?
1 Mr. Cannon.]
8.	Has Dr. Fraser been employed in the income taxation office in London?
9.	If so, during what time and at what salary?
10.	Has Dr. Fraser been employed in the weights and measures department at London?
11.	If so, during what time and at what salary?
12.	In what other government offices, if any, has Dr. Fraser been employed?
13.	Who recommended his employment as dental officer at Westminster hospital?
14.	Is Dr. Fraser a relative of the present Minister of Public Works?


Mr. RINFRET:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Full time.
3.	$2,400.
4.	Dr. K. Berry.
5.	Retired, as duties require full time man.
6.	Part time.
7.	$2,400.
8.	No record of employment at any time with any branch of the income tax division.
9.	Answered by No. 8.
10.	Yes.
11.	Temporary appointment as inspector of weights and measures from August 2, 1927, to January 23, 1928, at a salary of $1,500 per annum. From September 1, to November 30, 1927, Dr. Fraser was paid by the Department of Soldiers' Civil Reestablishment, and he was given vocational training in the weights and measures inspection office in London.
On January 24, 1928, after the above training, and examination by the Civil Service Commission, he received a permanent appointment as inspector of weights and measures at $1,500 per annum. On April 1, 1929, his salary was increased to $1,560, and he continued to occupy this position at that rate of salary until May 14, 1929, when he resigned.
12.	No other department.
13.	Dr. Fraser first made application in June, 1920. He was informed that as soon as an opening presented itself the Department would avail! itself of his services.
14.	No.


TRUSTEES IN BANKRUPTCY, ONTARIO
Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: 1.	Who are the authorized trustees in bankruptcy for the province of Ontario?
2.	Is there any supervision over them for the protection of bankrupts and creditors?
3.	If so, what is the process?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: *
1.	The creditors at their first meeting may choose any person, except the official receiver, as authorized trustee.
2.	Yes.

Supreme Court Act
3.	The trustee is subject to the supervision of the court and is required to deposit with the court a bond of an approved guarantee company in connection with each estate, satisfactory to the court, conditioned for the proper administration of the estate.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. GOTT:: For a copy of all correspondence, requests, telegrams, recommendations or other documents relating to dredging operations at the Brunner Mond wharf, Essex county, Ontario.


REAR BIG POND POST OFFICE
Mr. MACDONALD (Richmond-West Cape Breton):: For a copy of all correspondence and other documents relating to the closing of Rear Big Pond post office.


SUPREME COURT ACT AMENDMENT
[Stage Direction]
Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of Bill No. 312, to amend the Supreme Court Act.
Mr. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrence-St. George):: Mr. Speaker, I understand that this
bill was framed for the purpose of obviating a difficulty which might arise upon the retirement of Mr. Justice Mignault which is to take place on September 30 next, under the provisions of an act which was passed by this house a few sessions ago, making retirement compulsory at the age of 75 years. I wish simply to express my personal opinion that despite the general grounds presented to the house when the act for compulsory retirement was passed, probably no man on the supreme court bench of Canada is better qualified, physically and intellectually, to perform the functions of his office than is Mr. Justice Mignault. Personally, I think it is a public misfortune that his compulsory retirement is necessary at this time, and I desire to give expression to a view which I have heard expressed in the province of which I have the honour to be one of the representatives, to this effect: In case a judge has been appointed for life it is a serious breach of contract when that judge is compelled to retire at an age and at a time when he is thoroughly equipped, physically and intellectually, for the performance of his judicial duties, and especially in view of the fact that his compulsory retirement necessitates his taking a pension which is very considerably less than the salary which would otherwise be paid to him under his contract with the state. I am simply giving expression to a view which I think is generally
prevalent among the legal fraternity in my province, that in Mr. Justice Mignault's case there should be some exceptional consideration given by the government to the fact that he is retired by an act of parliament which is in apparent breach of his contract with the state, and he is thereby compelled to accept a pension which is much less than he would otherwise have received, and at a time when he is physically and intellectually competent to perform his judicial duties.


Ernest Lapointe: Of course, this bill is
general in its character and does not apply to any special case. With regard to the act passed two years ago, parliament in its wisdom thought it well to fix an age limit so far as federal courts were concerned. If the hon. member was aware of the representations which are coming to the Department of Justice at the present time concerning the other courts in Canada, perhaps he would admit that the provision is a sound one. However, I fully concur in the tribute which he has paid to the particular gentleman he has referred to.
This bill covers not only the case of a judge who has retired after having reached the age of 75, but of a judge who has resigned. Section 27 of the act reads:
Any judge who has heard the case and is absent at the delivery of judgment, may hand his opinion in writing to any judge present at the delivery of judgment, to be read or announced in open court, and then to be left with the registrar or reporter of the court.
The purpose of this bill is to allow a judge who has resigned his office, or who has been retired after having reached the age of 75, to be considered absent, within the meaning of this section, for a period of six months, so that he can give his opinion to any judge who may be present when the judgment is delivered.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I propose to call
attention to one point made by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Cahan), and direct the attention of the house to the fact that when the legislation was passed which compelled the retirement of a judge of the supreme court at the age of 75, the Minister of Justice was good enough to say that he would consider the matter before the event happened which would necessitate the retirement of the judge in question, especially as it affected his compensation. That judge undoubtedly has a contract with the state which entitles him to receive a salary for life or until such time as he resigns. New legislation has been enacted which limits
Supreme Court Act

his employment by the state merely because he has attained a given age without regard given to any consideration which he may urge. I think the government would be well advised to consider whether or not, in all cases of this kind where a contract has thus been amended, the judge should receive full salary. There are half a dozen cases which will be affected because I think there have been only two appointments made since the legislation in question was enacted. Undoubtedly one of the terms of these contracts governing new appointments is that they are subject to retirement at the age of 75 with the consequent pension which they will draw by reason of the services rendered up to the time of retirement. It may seem rather strange that attention should be directed to the matter in this way, but when a servant of the state, whether judicial or otherwise, has a contract with the state and we impose a new term in that contract, I think we must have regard to the terms and conditions under which the original contract was made. Although it may seem out of the ordinary that a judge should draw full salary when he is retired compulsorily, nevertheless, good faith and good morals, in my judgment, impose upon us that obligation and it is an obligation which we should not lightly disregard. I pointed that fact out to the minister when the other bill was under consideration, and when he speaks of parliament in its wisdom adopting that bill it must always be remembered that the wisdom of parliament consists of the majority of parliament. I do not believe that the Canadian people would approve of our departing from the general principle that the government must as in times past have respect for the sanctity of a contract made between a servant and the crown when 'he entered the employment of the state.


Mr. PETER McGIBBON (Muskoka-On-tario):: I had a resolution upon the order paper two years ago compelling the retirement of all judges, but the Minister of Justice rather forestalled me, and promised at that time that he would take the matter up with the provinces. I would like to ask the minister if he ever did that.


Ernest Lapointe: If I am allowed to
answer my hon. friend, I may say that the matter was called to the attention of the interprovincial federal conference last year. Though several of the provincial representatives were in favour of some such change as that suggested by my friend some of the 
provinces were not ready to acquiesce in the demand, and of course, we cannot do anything as far as the high courts of the provinces are concerned without changing the British North America Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Johnston in the chair.
Chinese immigration-salaries and contingencies, $70,000.
Richard Bedford Bennett: I was going to ask my
hon. friend for a statement on one matter. It will be observed that in the reports issued from time to time by the department certain newcomers are within what is known as the "preferred class," and others marked as "other countries." I can find nothing in the statute that warrants this distinction being made, and I gathered from what the minister said the other day that it was an arbitrary division. I am quite certain that there are settlers of a type within the class coming from other countries who have quite as much claim to be within the preferred class as those that are there now, and if the minister will give us some explanation to be placed upon Hansard it will help to answer many questions that are received, and at the same time, I think, settle a problem of some difficulty in the minds of many people.


Hon. ROBERT FORKE (Minister of Immigration and Colonization):: There has been made a rather arbitrary division of countries on the continent of Europe from which immigrants may come. , I will mention the first class of countries in Europe. The regulations governing the entry to Canada of European immigrants may be summarized as follows:
Northern European countries: Prance, Belgium, Holland, Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Germany.
Immigrants from the above countries are eligible for entry to Canada provided that they
(a)	are in possession of valid passports;
(b)	can pass medical inspection; and
(e) can maintain themselves until employment is secured.
That deals with countries of northern Europe. Then the other European countries covered by the railway agreement are as fol-

Supply-Immigration
lows:-Austria, Hungary, Poland, Roumania, Lithuania, Esthonia, Latvia, Bulgaria, Jugoslavia, Czechoslovakia. The only immigrants who are admitted from the countries covered by the railway agreement are:
(a)	Farmers;
(b)	Farm labourers who have a reasonable assurance of employment on the land;
(c)	Houseworkers;
(d)	The wife or child under 18 years of age of any person legally admitted to and resident in Canada who is in a position to receive and care foT his dependents.
(e)	Persons who satisfy the minister that their labour or service is required in Canada.
I do not know whether I should attempt to read ihe railway agreement or not. It is quite a lengthy document. Perhaps I can summarize it in a few words.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is satisfactory to
me.
An lion. MEMBER: Are you putting it on Hansard?
Mr. FORIiE: I can put it on Hansard.


Mr. CHAPLIN:: Was that agreement authorized by regulation of the department, or by order in council?


Robert Forke: By regulation of the department; it is an agreement between the Department of Immigration and the railway companies.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Approved by order in
council, I think.


Robert Forke: Probably it was. I think
it was entered into in 1922. It was during the time that Mr. Robb was the Minister of Immigration. It was felt some move should be made to stimulate immigration, and this agreement was entered into between the Department of Immigration and the railway companies with that end in view. The purpose of the agreement was to encourage the movement of agriculturists, agricultural workers and domestic servants. They were to be healthy people of the labouring class, fit to care for themselves when they came to this country.


James Dew Chaplin: Who determined the
countries that were to be preferred or nonpreferred?


Robert Forke: The Department of Immigration.


James Dew Chaplin: And was that approved
by order in council?


Robert Forke: I think it was. Of course,
that was in 1922.


James Dew Chaplin: Will the minister be sure on that point, and let us have a copy of the order in council?


Robert Forke: The whole agreement is
here. I will put it on Hansard if necessary. I do not desire to waste the time of the house.


James Dew Chaplin: I am not wasting the time of the house.


Robert Forke: That was carried on quite
successfully until-


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: It is simply impossible to hear at this end of the house.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:: There is so
much conversation going on in the house that it is almost impossible to hear the minister at this distance.


Robert Forke: This was carried on quite
satisfactorily until the spring of 1927, when perhaps the transportation companies got a little too enthusiastic and recruited a very large number of immigrants. It was a late spring. The snow lay long on the ground in western Canada, and there were quite a large number of immigrants arriving in Canada for whom there were no work for several months. I was absent in Europe at the time, but the cabinet issued an order stopping immigration for the time being. There was no complaint from the railway companies. Some hardship was experienced, however, by the people in Europe who had been recruited and were ready to sail when that order was issued. It was, however, better for them to stay in their own country than to come over to Canada and wait here for weeks until employment could be found for them.
After that I had a meeting with the colonization departments of the railway companies and discussed the whole situation. I had inserted in the railway agreement a clause to which they were quite agreeable to subscribe, providing that at any time should the Minister of Immigration think sufficient numbers were arriving in Canada, he could, after giving notice, ask the railway companies to stop bringing in immigrants. As most of the members are aware, we had a meeting, I think last fall or in any case, during the winter, to discuss the whole immigration problem. After discussing the matter with the colonization departments of the railways, I came to the conclusion that if they were to bring out the same number of farm labourers they brought out the previous year, we would have a surplus. They asked me at that time the percentage I would like to have
Supply-Immigration

come, and stated they would be quite satisfied. After investigation and after consulting with the provincial governments, I came to the conclusion that about 30 per cent of the number of single farm labourers who came from Europe last year would be sufficient to meet the needs of the country this year. Later on, there came from the transportation companies some protests, but they were not serious. The two presidents signed a letter which was published in the newspapers, condemning my action.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister thinks that was not very serious?


Robert Forke: I think subsequent events have provided that I was in the right, and I did not feel very much hurt about what the presidents did, nor do I think they felt badly about what I did. No harm was done to anybody in regard to that.
There was no thought in the mind of the department that one country was preferred before another, but the railway companies, were not recruiting in northern Europe. Anyone coming 'rom the first list of countries I have mentioned in northern Europe, came upon their own; no recruiting was being done there, and in this respect the so-called nonpreferred countries were perhaps in a superior position because recruiting was really being carried on in them for immigrants. I think I have made that plain. I will repeat: I have no idea of inferior or superior people. The people from Austria or Czechoslovakia are just as good as any others, and it was not with any idea of inferiority or superiority that these regulations were framed.


Mr. McQUARRIE:: Has the minister ever considered landing by ship on the Pacific coast immigrants who intend to live in British Columbia, instead of, as is done at present, landing them at Atlantic ports and taking them by rail across the continent? I am told that there are running from northern Europe lines of ships which would be prepared to go in for this class of business. These ships would be of the tramp class, freighters, but provision coidd be made for carrying passengers as the ships usually come out fairly light. Then the ships would be available for transporting our products from the Pacific coast back to the old country. I am informed that proposals of that kind have been made to boards of trade, and so on. I do not know whether the matter has ever been put before the minister or not, but I would suggest to him that it is worthy of consideration. I am speaking about immigrants who intend to

go to British Columbia and the western part of Canada who might more easily approach their destination via the Pacific than via the Atlantic.


Robert Forke: The transportation of immigrants from the continent of Europe is entirety in the hands of the two transportation companies who recruit those immigrants from those countries I have mentioned, commonly called the non-preferred countries. The Department of Immigration takes no part whatever in regard to ocean passages or railway rates. I have never thought of the matter in the way in which the hon. member presents it. I do not know whether it would come under the jurisdiction of the department to say how immigrants should come. I will, however, keep the matter in mind.


William Garland McQuarrie: I was referring to what might be called the preferred class, although I do not know exactly the definition of that class. I was referring to the people of northern Europe. It seems to me that the department should be interested in a matter of that kind. If it is possible to arrange a cheaper and more convenient passage for people who come to this country, the minister should be interested; he should not leave it entirety to the transportation companies. There is too much of the transportation companies running the immigration to this country. I should like to see the department taking an intelligent interest in the matter and certainty the proposition that I have put forward should come within the scope of the department. The minister can sit back and say:	I do not know anything
about it; that is not a matter for me; it is a matter for the transportation companies. But that is not good enough, and I would suggest to him that he should realty look into the matter.


Robert Forke: I shall be glad to look into
it, but when an immigrant is leaving the old country or northern Europe, he buys his own ticket and arranges for his own transportation. I am quite willing to answer any questions. I do not want to be discourteous and I promised the leader of the opposition yesterday I would give him the information I have given, but I would remind the house that we are dealing with the estimates for Chinese immigration. I do not want to be discourteous in connection with any question that is asked.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister a moment
ago referred to the fact that he had reduced the number of farm employees or people that

Supply-I mmigration
were going into farming to 30 per cent. In respect to the agreement with the transportation companies, is there anything reduced to writing? Is there anything in it beyond what the minister has stated?


Robert Forke: We have it in letters exchanged between the presidents of the two railway companies and myself whereby an agreement was reached.


James Dew Chaplin: Has that been reduced
to an agreement, or is it merely an understanding?


Robert Forke: I think the president of
either of the railways has confidence in the minister.


James Dew Chaplin: I do not care about the
presidents; I am speaking now as a member of parliament, and I want to know something about this agreement.


Robert Forke: The presidents of the railways have my letter stating my terms, and I have their letters stating theirs. That is in addition to the original agreement, which is signed by the heads of the colonization departments of the two railways.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister tells the
committee that he practically washes his hands of a certain affair. The minister says: Why, the transportation companies have everything to do with this.


Robert Forke: I did not say so.


James Dew Chaplin: Well, Hansard will show
what the minister said.


Robert Forke: Well, we shall see.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister said in
effect that he had nothing to do with the matter; that it was being looked' after by the transportation companies, and that the people bought their tickets and came to this country on their own.


James Shaver Woodsworth: On this question
of trusting so much to the railways-


Robert Forke: I want to appeal to the.
committee. I have had about two days of this discussion and have got the estimates passed. We are now dealing with Chinese immigration. If the committee wants to discuss the other estimates all over again, that is all right.


James Dew Chaplin: The minister is to blame for this. He brought the matter up.


Robert Forke: I did so in response to a
question asked by the leader of the opposition yesterday. As a matter of courtesy I was quite willing and ready to give him the information.


James Dew Chaplin: Surely the understanding
was that we would be able to discuss the matter.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I want to refer
to one matter, if I may, now that the discussion has gone this far. I want to quote a paragraph from the Free Press of January 11, 1929:
The defect in the arrangement arose from the fact that a double interest entered into the activities of the railways. There was the permanent interest of Canada, which was genera! and remote; and there was the immediate and special interest of getting third-class passengers for the ships that were owned or controlled by the railways. There was thus an obvious incentive to employ up-to-date methods of salesmanship with the eye concentrated pretty much upon the early payment of passage money. This was supposed to be guarded against by regulations, which put upon the railways the obligation of placing these immigrants and looking after them for a period of time. There is a good deal of evidence available that, although things have been better the last year, the railways put an interpretation upon these obligations which did not interefere to any serious extent with the business of selling tickets. To drop an immigrant down in a district where there was a reasonable presumption that his services would be in demand, or to place him in employment, temporary in character, were regarded as filling, roughly, the requirements of the agreement.
I would say that the railways have not only a very immediate interest, twofold in character, that of generally extending the welfare of Canada and, incidentally, of increasing their own dividends and secondly, of being able to sell tickets, but they have a third interest, and that is that very often the railways have used the immigration agencies to supply them with cheap labour for their own construction work. It does seem to me that corporations which are thus so vitally interested ought not to be allowed any special consideration.
The minister speaks of recruiting immigrants. That is the very thing to which many of us object-recruiting immigrants, bringing them in here for certain purposes.


Robert Forke: I rise to a point of order,
Mr. Chairman. I should not have to go over all my estimates again. This vote has been passed, but if the committee consents I am willing to hear the hon. gentleman.


John Frederick Johnston: Strictly speaking, the
hon. gentleman is not in order.
Supply-Immigration


James Shaver Woodsworth: I suggested that
as the discussion, had gone so far there was a point that I wished to add, but if the minister refuses to permit me-


Robert Forke: I would point out, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member was not in his place when this matter was being discussed, and why should I hare to go over the whole thing again because he happens to come in this morning?


James Shaver Woodsworth: I was in my place when the matter was being discussed. The question was raised, and I wanted to emphasize one particular point in connection with it, but if the minister declines to permit this, I shall have to take another opportunity.


Robert Forke: It is for the committee to decide.


Peter McGibbon: The minister promised
me some information. I do not suppose that we are precluded from discussion simply because the item has been passed.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I wanted to point out that we talk about recruiting immigrants, and it does seem to me that we are often oblivious to the welfare of the people who are already here. I would like to see some greater coordination between the Department of Labour and the Department of Immigration. In fact, so far as I am concerned, it seems to me that if we need immigrants the Department of Immigration should be made part of the Department of Labour so that we would bring in men only as they are actually needed, and only in so far as their coming will not interfere with the welfare of the people already here.
The minister says that he does not discriminate against any particular class, but that he encouraged immigration from northern Europe. I would suggest that whether they come from southeastern Europe or northern Europe, or from England itself, very often their coming here decidedly interferes with the welfare of the people who are already resident in Canada.
I want to trespass on the patience of the house to read a paragraph or so from a letter that I received a little while ago from a labour man which is typical of scores of letters that I have received in the past.


Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: I rise to a point of order, Mr. Chairman. The hon. gentleman wants to speak for another forty minutes on an item that has already been passed'. He takes up a good deal of the time of the
[The Chairman.]
house as it is, and even asks his colleagues to appear for him in the house when he cannot appear himself. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that you give your ruling on the point of order now.


Mr. MacLAREN:: I wish to support the
objection just taken by my hon. friend opposite. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre said that he wanted to ask a question, and then-


James Shaver Woodsworth: No, I said nothing about asking a question.


Murray MacLaren: He now proposes to
read letters. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that he is entirely out of order.


John Frederick Johnston: I ruled a few moments ago that the remarks of the hon. gentleman did not pertain to the item now before the committee. The item my hon. friend is discussing was passed yesterday, and his remarks are not relevant to the item now under discussion.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I understood that
the minister gave permission. I ask the minister if he will permit me to go on.


John Frederick Johnston: I would point out that the committee has to be considered, not the minister alone. If the committee decides to hear the hon. gentleman, very well.


Peter McGibbon: Can the minister now
give me the information that he promised yesterday?


Robert Forke: I have the address of the
Toronto hostel here.


Peter McGibbon: The minister promised
to give me the objections that had come from provincial governments and different societies against the admission of Barnardo- children.


Robert Forke: That information is being
prepared, and I will see that my hon. friend gets it as soon as it is ready.


Peter McGibbon: I say again, Mr. Chairman, that it is discourteous to this house for the minister to come here and not know the ABC of his department. We have to wait days and days for information that he ought ' to be able to give offhand.


Mr. NEILL:: I should like to ask why this vote that we are supposed to be discussing, and relating to Chinese immigration, has been increased. The increase is $5,000 only, but the amount was pretty high to begin with, and it was increased last year also. I would point out that about five years ago we passed an act practically excluding all Chinese immi-

Supply-Immigration
gration, and the only Chinese immigration allowed' now is of transients, people who are coming here temporarily, such as nurses, missionaries and so forth. Very few of them come in and they can stay under their permit for only a few months. I do not suppose that on an average more than sixty or seventy enter in a year. Moreover, if my memory serves me, that immigration is limited to only two ports in Canada. Consequently the handling of this Chinese immigration is very simple, and one would suppose that the cost would not be much. Yet we find here a vote for $70,000 for Chinese immigration, or something like $1,000 for each temporary immigrant admitted. I would like to know the reason for the increase in this vote, and whether we should not rather be moving in the opposite direction and be decreasing the expenditure.


Robert Forke: Salary increases account for
a part of the increase. I will read the different items, and the hon. gentleman can draw his own conclusions. This amount is required to provide for the salaries and expenses of the officers and employees engaged in connection with Chinese immigration and the administration of the Opium and Narcotic Drugs Act. The salaries amount to $41,485. The other items are:
(2)	Travelling expenses of officers doing Chinese investigation work and inspection of boats carrying Chinese crew; expenses of prosecution and deportation of Chinese other than those dealt with under the O-pium and Narcotics Drug Act, printing and stationery; uniforms; telegrams; telephones, cablegrams, etc.. $12,800.
(3)	Hong Kong office contingencies, $4,200.
Living expenses of D. F. Warren. $2,000;
office rent, $1,500; travelling expenses, $200; printing and stationery, $150; cables, postage, light, $250; miscellaneous office expenses, $100- total, $4,200.
(4)	Expenses under the Opium and Narcotics Drug Act, including legal and deportation expenses, etc., $11,515.
Total Chinese immigration salaries and expenses, $70,000.
For fiscal year 1927-1928 the expenses were: Chinese immigration expenses proper, $50,781.54; Opium and Narcotics Drug Act expenses, $10.456.43-total $61,237.97.
_ The net expenses for the 8 months ended November 30, 1928, are:-
Chinese immigration salaries and contingencies. $38,923.76; Opium and Narcotics Drug Act, $7.710.07-total $46,633.83.
Estimated Chinese immigration expenditure for 1929-1930 based on the eight months of the fiscal year 1928-1929 ended November 30, 1928 -$69,950.


Alan Webster Neill: May I interrupt the minister. That is as good an answer as I could receive;
a lot of money is spent in enforcing the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act. This, of course, is a most worthy cause, but why mix it up with Chinese immigration?


Robert Forke: Because the immigration
authorities automatically take charge of anyone convicted under that act. The moment he is convicted he comes under the control of the department and we may have to fight the case in court.
I have here a lengthy statement with regard to .the operations of the Chinese Immigration Act and perhaps I had better read it. I think the hon. member for Fraser Valley-


Mr. FRASER:: Cariboo.


Robert Forke: Cariboo, rather-wanted this information:
Section 5, subsection (c), of the Chinese Immigration Act provides for the landing in Canada of only two classes of immigrants of Chinese origin or descent, namely, merchants and students. Such immigrants must be in possession of valid passports issued by the government of China and endorsed by a Canadian immigration officer at the place where passport was granted or at the port of embarkation. Thus the law makes it necessary for this department to have a representative in China to investigate applications for these two classes and to grant or refuse the visa called for by the section in question.
Officials Employed at Hong Kong.
Name-Position-Salary-
Mr. D. F. Warren- Commissioner of Immi-gation for Canada.-$4,200 per annum, plus $2,000 living allowance.
Miss R. Juidah-Stenographer-$3,120 Max. (About $1,560 Gold at present rate of exchange.)
Li Kam Hi-Messenger-$660 Max. per annum. (About $330. Gold.)
Duties of Hong Kong Official.
1.	To investigate all applications for visas made in accordance with subsection (e) of section 5 of the Chinese Immigration Act.
In the case of merchants this necessitates investigation of the firm in China to which applicant belongs to establish if applicant has sufficient capital investment and is connected with class of business such as would warrant classifying him as merchant within meaning of the act. (Merchant means a person devoting his undivided attention to mercantile pursuits, who has $2,500 gold or more invested in a business dealing exclusively in goods grown, produced or manufactured in China, or in exporting to China goods grown, produced or manufactured in Canada, and who has conducted such business for a period of at least three years. Restaurant keepers, laundry owners, rooming-house proprietors are not considered merchants.)
In the cases of students, our officer investigates their educational status and financial standing in order to establish if qualified to enter a Canadian university and if sufficient
Supply-Immigration

funds are forthcoming to permit studying in such university without working in Canada during period of study.
2.	To check up vessels arriving from Canadian ports and identify Chinese deports for the purpose of establishing that they have really left Canada.
3.	To examine Chinese persons returning to Canada under outward registration (sections 23 and 24) for the purpose of establishing that after registration persons actually left Canada, and, further, are returning within the two year period as limited by statute.
4.	Passing on doubtful cases of other nationalities referred to the office by consular and other officials and by transportation companies.
Note.-Duties referred to in Nos. 2 and 3 are precautionary measures performed by our office owing to the fact that he is at Hong Kong, and are considered further safeguards in the general operation of the law.
Effect of having officer at Hong Kong.
1.	Prevents all inadmissible cases coming forward to Canadian ports of entry with re- ' sultant costly investigations, examinations and attempts to secure landing by court proceedings.
2.	Additional protection against fraud in returning registered Chinese.
3.	Lessening of number of applications at Pacific Coast ports of other nationals not admissible under Immigration regulations.
Registration (Section 18 Chinese Immigration Act, 1923).
The law required every person of Chinese origin or descent in Canada to register within twelve months after June 30th, 1923, and further provided that persons who were absent from Canada during this period and who had the right to return undeT the law might be registered on their return.
Number of registrations to date total approximately-55,706. (1921 census 39,587 Chinese) . Of this number 48,305 were males, 1,302 females and 6,099 children under 18 years of age, distributed as follows:-
British Columbia.. .
Alberta	
Saskatchewan	
Manitoba	
Ontario	
Quebec	
New Brunswick.. ..
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island Not specified	
31,116
4,657
3,961
2,146
9,377
3,753
404
3
55,706
Result of Registration.
1.	Establishing actual number of Chinese in Canada.
2.	Establishing number illegally in Canada, So far 36 actual eases discovered where deportation effected; several other cases under investigation. Will probably be more when records completed.
3.	The location of 624 Chinese who secured entry as merchants previous to amending of the old Chinese aot in 1921 and who on investigation were found not to be of the merchant class. Head tax of $500.00 each was collected in these cases under authority of Section 27 of the Chinese Immigration Act; revenue in this connection $312,000.00.
[Mr. Forked
Revenue Collected under Chinese Immigration Act, during Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 1929.
Fees collected for registrations under
C.I.9A	$	616 00
Fees collected for registrations under
C.I.9	
10,344	00Fees for substitutional certificates..	1,275	00Visa fees collected	at	Hong	Kong..	60	00Administrative	fines	(Sec.	19)..	..	3,000	00Administrative	fines	(Sec.	21)..	..	5.000	00Administrative	fines	(Sec.	31)..	..	2,000	00Taxes collected-under Sec.	27..	..	6,500	00Bonds estreated	
2,000	00Total revenue	$30,795 00
Chinese Immigration to Canada-Fiscal Year 1928-29.
Immigrants admitted Under Section 5
Non immigrants admitted. (Students coming to attend universities) Section 5 (c) (2)	 3
Admission under Section 9 (Minister's Permit).
Admitted Checked out
Actors	29	11Amahs	4	3Consul, Eleve	1	Consul's servant .. ..	1	Dentist	1	Distiller	1	Editor	1	iFarmer	1	1Librarian	1	Merchant	1	Merchant's family ..	, 1	iMinors	6	Missionaries	2	Professor	1	iProfessor's family ..	, 4	4Students	, 4	4Tourists	, 1	60	26
The actors, amahs, servants to tourists and teachers were all admitted under either cash or guarantee companies' bonds of from $500.00 to $1,000.00 each.
Chinese Crews of British Empire Steel Corporation vessels.
At the present time there are 65 Chinese employed as members of the crews of vessels of the British Empire Steel Corporation under their $128,000.00 bond.


James Dew Chaplin: How long has this office
been open at Hong Kong?


Robert Forke: Since 1923.


James Dew Chaplin: Since we have restricted
immigration what is the sense of going to the expense of opening an office at Hong Kong? The minister intimated that the reason was to make it easier for us to prevent undesirables from entering this country, but if that is true why pick on Hong Kong? There are other cities such as Canton, Amoy and Shanghai which are just as large and from which just as many people come. This is just another case of extravagance.

Supply-Immigration


Robert Forke: I think that is the onlyplace from which they can sail.


James Dew Chaplin: You might as well cut it out altogether.


Mr. BLACK (Halifax):: May I ask how
much money was spent for immigration in Nova Scotia during the last year?


Robert Forke: I will be glad to supply
my hon. friend with that information. Those items were passed yesterday and I have left all my papers at the office. However, I will be glad to obtain that information for the hon. gentleman.


William Anderson Black: I would remind
the minister that Nova Scotia is a farming country, and we would be delighted to have a number of families located on the farms in the province, which farms can be purchased for less than the cost of the buildings. Has anyone been sent by the department to look into that situation and ascertain what could be done to place people on those farms?


Robert Forke: I am glad1 to inform the hon. member that the department has made a complete survey of the whole province, and the chances of settlement there are very good. We are now in negotiation with the Nova Scotia government with regard to a scheme similar to that in force in New Brunswick; negotiations are now in process and I think everything is moving favourably.


William Anderson Black: I am glad to get
that information. May I have a copy of the report?


Robert Forke: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: I would like to ask the
minister a question in regard to Chinese immigration. The other day I made a few remarks in regard to the immigration question generally, and when I referred to this very situation the minister justified the expenditure for the Hong Kong office by virtue of the fact that he collected a certain amount in fees for visas. I understood the minister to say a moment ago that he collected only about $30 in fees of this kind. Am I correct?


Robert Forke: No, we collected S60, but
if the hon. member will allow me to say so, I do not think that was the reason I gave. The act compels us to have an office there for that purpose.


John Anderson Fraser: I understood the minister
to say that only $30 was collected by way of visa fees in Hong Kong.


Robert Forke: No, we collected $60,


John Anderson Fraser: That is the total of all the fees collected there?


Robert Forke: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: You collect other fees at
the Hong Kong office, do you not?


Robert Forke: No, I do not think anything more is collected there.


John Anderson Fraser: Then let me ask a general question. How much money does the Department of Immigration collect during the year? How much revenue do you turn in yearly?


Robert Forke: I just gave those figures
not five minutes ago; $30,795.


John Anderson Fraser: You have responsible officials who collect that revenue, and I would like to ask the minister if the government is protected with regard to the funds collected by these officials, by means of guarantee bonds. Are your officials bonded?


Robert Forke: My deputy informs me that they are all bonded.


John Anderson Fraser: Under what system?


Robert Forke: The bonds of the guarantee companies; those are the only bonds we take.


John Anderson Fraser: Do you know how much
money you pay in a year for that purpose?


Robert Forke: I cannot say exactly, but
my deputy informs me that it is a very small sum.


John Anderson Fraser: Some time ago I put a
question on the order paper in this connection, and I would like to read that question and answer as the basis for another question:
How much of the consolidated revenue has been paid by each of the departments of the government as premiums on security bonds of its employees, in contravention of the Public Officers Act, R.S., chapter 164, section 5?
The answer from the Department of Immigration and Colonization is as follows:
This department has paid $1,963.75 on account of guarantee bonds for its employees since the organization of the department on April 1, 1918.
What puzzles me is this:	Under what
authority do you pay for these bonds?


Robert Forke: I do not know whether there is anything in the act to prevent us from doing so if we wish. I cannot give the exact authority under which these payments are made but I do not think it is against any provision of the act.

Supply-Immigration


John Anderson Fraser: Very well. To continue,
I will read from the Auditor General's report for the year ending March 31, 1928. At the bottom of page XIII I find the following:
Bonding of Government Officials
The Public Officers Act (R.S., chapter 164):
(1)	Designates the classes of officials required to furnish security bonds (section 5);
(2)	Authorize the governor general in council to direct that, in cases where the policy of a guarantee company is accepted, the amount of the premium be deducted from the salary of the official (section 29);
Is that the practice in your department? Do you deduct the premium from the salary of the official?


Robert Forke: No, I do not think so.


John Anderson Fraser: The report continues:
(3)	Authorizes the governor general in council to make regulations for the establishment and maintenance of a fund derived from contributions by the officers concerned (section 30).
Is there any such fund in your department?


Robert Forke: No, but I think I might
answer all these questions by saying that I think we have authority under the Immigration Act to pay all expenses incurred in the administration of the act, so I do not think there is anything to prevent us from paying the premiums on these bonds if we wish to do so.


John Anderson Fraser: I am a little puzzled as to the whole procedure. I want the minister to understand that my criticism is not specially directed to his department; I have the same criticism to offer in connection with perhaps a dozen of the departments, but I want to find out from the minister just what procedure has been adopted. As far as I am concerned I am very doubtful as to whether there is any statutory authority for these payments. At any rate, the report proceeds:
From the last two sections referred to, it seems a reasonable inference that the cost of the bonds should be borne by the officials and not by the government. With but a few exceptions, however, the premiums are paid from pubic moneys and, so fiar as I have been able to determine, only in the case of one branch of the service is any part of the premiums repaid by the officials. In the cases of two departments there is parliamentary authority for paying the premiums from public moneys, in some departments the payments have been authorized by the governor in council, but in a number of departments they appear to be made merely on departmental authority. Under the authority of the Post Office Act a guarantee fund, such as is contemplated by section 30 of the Public Officers Act, has been maintained in that department for a number of years and has accumulated to such ian extent that no contributions by officials have been required since April 1, 1919.
[Mr. Forked
That system has been inaugurated in the Post Office Department and now that fund takes care of all the premiums. The last paragraph dealing with this matter is as follows:
On _ account of the lack of uniformity in the practice and in the application of the above provisions of the act, I would suggest that consideration be given to the advisability of an amendment which would dispel any doubts as to the interpretation of these sections by stating definitely whether these payments should be made from public moneys or should be borne by the bonded officials.
I would like to ask the minister what consideration he has given to that recommendation?


Mr. ROBB:: Before my colleague answers
I might just say, respecting the quotation read by the hon. gentleman as to the Post Office Department meeting these payments from a fund, that the Poet Office Department does nothing of the kind; that fund is used at times by the Post Office Department to pay into the treasury the amount of any losses. My opinion is that it would be much better for the service if the fund were used to pay the premiums on guarantee bonds.


John Anderson Fraser: I am very glad to hear
that expression of opinion by the Minister of Finance. My object in calling the attention of the department to this matter was to see if some improvement could not be made, because as far as I can see there is no coordination between the different departments with regard to this matter. I understand, then, from the Minister of Finance that in his opinion guarantee bonds should be issued for all officials of the service. Is that correct?


James Alexander Robb: In my judgment, when officials of the service are guaranteed by a guarantee company we should pay the premium, and if officiate occupy responsible positions they should be guaranteed by such companies. Then if they go wrong they will have to deal with the guarantee company and not with political friend's who will lobby the minister and try to get them out of their difficulty.


Mr. OHAPLTN:: Why should they not pay their own premiums?


James Alexander Robb: I am not raising that issue at all.


John Anderson Fraser: That is one of the issues. The Minister of Finance has given us certain information; perhaps he would tell us what is done in connection with his own officials.

Supply-I mmigra lion


James Alexander Robb: I am not sure; I know they are bonded by a guarantee company but I am not sure how the premiums are paid.


John Anderson Fraser: I would suggest to the Minister of Finance that he secure that information before his estimates come up, because I will probably put the same questions to him.


James Alexander Robb: I anticipated that and I am preparing for it.


John Anderson Fraser: Then let me read the second question which I placed on the order paper:
Does the government propose at the present session of parliament to amend chapter 164, section 5, of the revised statutes, as indicated by the Auditor General in his 1927-8 report, volume 1, on page XIV?
The reply from each department is the same, " No information." Now I would like to ask the minister whether he has given any consideration whatever to the recommendation of the Auditor General, and what he proposes to do.


Robert Forke: This has been a custom in the department for years, and I will admit that I have paid no particular attention to this recommendation. I still think that under section 80 of the Immigration Act we have authority to pay this money if we desire to do so. I may be wrong, but that is my opinion.


John Anderson Fraser: Will the minister give me an answer to my question with regard to his statutory authority for making these payments? I will not press it now, but the minister might get me that information.


Robert Forke: Yes, I will be glad to get it.


John Anderson Fraser: We might consider all the departments when the estimates of the Minister of Finance are up.


Mr. CHURCH:: The province of British Columbia is not the only province which suffers from this Chinese immigration. To me the immigration policy of this government is a Chinese puzzle; as a matter of fact they have no immigration policy. We are only spending a little more than we did 30 years ago on this problem. In every city and town in Ontario the police commissions are having trouble with these people, who are taking the bread and butter out of the mouths of the women and girls of Ontario by doing domestic work. In Toronto the police commission have had trouble with the Chinese population all the time, particularly in connection with their restaurants. The minister talks about bonding them, but that does not mean a thing; a 78594-188J
bond will not check them up. What about the middlemen, the people who bring them here? Where do they come in? Conditions in Vancouver are such as to create a veritable Asiatic peril and it is a wonder the people do not rebel against such economic conditions resulting from the activities of so many orientals. In this vote the government provides $60,000 for salaries and contingencies in connection with Chinese immigration, but look at the next item; only $4,000 is provided for the relief of poor, distressed Canadians driven out of their own country by the immigration pblicy of the government. If the minister is equally good as Minister of Immigration and as Minister of Emigration, he will be very successful because he, by reason of the government policy, has driven out of this country 700,000 of our own people to seek work in the United States.
At a meeting held at Kingston of the general synod of the Church of England in Canada, representing all dioceses in this country, a resolution was passed dealing with this particular matter and with the immigration policy generally, and urging British immigration now being discriminated against. This government spends $400,000,000 yearly to maintain this country but they can find only $3,500,000 to spend on one of the greatest problems we have to face. Last night some hon. gentlemen wanted to reduce one of these votes by a million dollars; some western members say we have enough immigration; they are free traders with regard to industry in the east but protectionists when agriculture and their own home affairs are concerned.
I wish to protest against this item of $60,000 for salaries and contingencies in connection with Chinese immigration. I venture to say that hundreds of thousands of dollars of the taxpayers' money is spent through the police departments of the country in checking up these people, and I know that in Toronto they take the bread and butter out of the mouths of our own poor women and girls. In the richer districts of Toronto, Hamilton and Winnipeg I have seen people engage Chinese to do their domestic work rather than pay a Canadian girl or woman a living wage. I say there should be a closed season for Chinese immigration for a period of five or ten years, or until such time as we may think it advisable to admit them again and give the British-born a chance.
Further, I desire to protest against the ianguage used by one of the western members of this house in referring to a bishop of the Church of England. Let me say that Bishop Lloyd fought with the Queen's
Supply-Immigration

Own at Cut Knife in 1885, and did a great deal to save that great western country for the British Empire. He is not here to defend himself and We do not know whether or not the words quoted really came from him. When the Anglican synod of Canada met at Kingston two years ago they protested against the present policy of discrimination against British born immigrants. It brings to my mind the description by the poet William Cowper, when referring to the great fire of 1666 in the city of London he deplored the undue proportion of Europeans in the population of England. He declared that London was over-run with Europeans, and had become the common sewer of Paris and of Rome and had sucked in the dregs of all corrupted states.
We do not want that in Canada. A solution should be sought by the government for this great problem, but we will never be able to solve it while we have a free trader as commissioner of immigration. The first cornerstone of an immigration policy is to keep the people we have now and to provide work-provide an economic trade policy that will give jobs to British born immigrants: The government does not do that.
Seven hundred thousand of our men have gone to the United States and the government only provides $4,000 for the relief of distressed Canadians outside of Canada, while they ask us to vote $70,000 for Chinese immigration, an increase of $5,000 over last year. The minister's policy is nothing else but a Chinese puzzle; it has been one which retards immigration rather than encourages it. It is no wonder that- the British born in this country are beginning to wonder whether Canada is going to continue to be a British and a white man's country. Mr. Bruce in Australia is regulating this European and Asiatic immigration; he is going to make that country a white man's country. We are spending to-day on immigration $3,500,000, which is a million more than was spent in 1896, but we have not solved this problem of immigration and colonization. We might just as well close up the shop if the present policy is to be continued.
St. Catharines, Barrie, Belleville, Hamilton and other Canadian cities and towns are filled with Chinese labour and with Chinese restaurants. In some way these orientals have been able to get into Canada and to obtain licenses and they are forcing the white man's restaurant out of business. The women are being driven out of laundering, housekeeping, domestic work and the restaurant business, and their places are being taken by
(Mr. Church.]
Chinese labour. The government should declare a closed season and say that they will stop Chinese immigration for the next five or ten years or until such time as British immigration is brought up to a point more in keeping with the policy and traditions of a British dominion. The people of this country are beginning to wonder whether our country will continue to be British or whether it will soon be under the control of these Asiatics and Europeans. Time will tell. The economic policy of the government is driving Canadians to the States to look for jobs while the government brings in European and Asiatic immigrants to take their place.


Mr. BARBER:: Mr. Chairman, I am very
pleased to see that this oriental question has come home to some of the people in eastern Canada. For years those of us from British Columbia have kept this matter before the house and before the people of this country. On June 8 of last year, when this same item was under consideration, the Prime Minister made an announcement concerning Japanese immigration, and I think I am quite in order when I refer to that matter.
This Japanese problem is one of the greatest we have in British Columbia, and it is growing year by year. During the Easter recess I visited my district and attended- a meeting of the benry-growers, and I was impressed very much with the results of the policy of the present administration along the lines of restricting Japanese immigration. That meeting was made up of 200 growers and close to 50 per cent of that number were Japanese, and an interpreter was necessary to interpret the resolutions and other business which came before the meeting. The people of our province are up in arms against this invasion by orientals.


An hon. MEMBER:: Why do they employ them ?


Harry James Barber: One man told me at that
meeting that he would like to have a photograph of the gathering to be sent to the Prime Minister. Last year I brought to the attention of the house a few figures concerning Japanese immigration. Those figures were as follows:
1923		 369
1924		 448
1925		 501
1926		 441
1927		 475
There has been a gradual increase year by year.

Supply-Immigration


Robert Forke: Did the hon. member say
that there were 497 Chinese immigrants who came into this country?


Harry James Barber: Japanese.


Robert Forke: I think the hon. member
is mistaken.


Harry James Barber: It was 475 in 1927.


Robert Forke: There is an agreement between the Japanese, the British and the Canadian government limiting the immigration to 150 per year.


Harry James Barber: I beg to differ with the
minister. When the Prime Minister made his announcement last year he said that that agreement would not go into effect until September 1, 1928. I have received the following figures from the bureau of statistics, showing the number which came in during the calendar years:
1927. . 187 males; 324 females; total, 511
1928. . 218 males; 317 females; total, 535
These Japanese are permitted to enter the country under another classification, that of returning Canadians. In two years, 2,223 Japanese have entered this country in that way. During the fiscal year of 1926-27 there were 888 males and 312 females, a total of 1,200; and in 1927-28, there were 766 males and 257 females, a total of 1,023. We, in the province of British Columbia, are of the opinion that there is a great leakage through this particular channel. We would urge the minister to check up this matter and we believe that he will find that some of these Japanese return to Japan and others come back on their papers.
The Prime Minister said last year that an agreement had been entered into, through diplomatic channels, to take effect on September, 1, 1928, which would limit the immigration to 150 per year, and that the so-called picture bride would be barred. I have the immigrations by months for 1928, and I will give them for the last four months of the year, which would be the months after this agreement came into effect. These figures are as follows:
September	 24
October	 21
November	 43
December	 12
I have not been able to obtain the figures beyond December of 1928. During the four months, 100 have come in, and there are still eight months to run. We shall watch with interest the new arrangement which the Prime Minister has told1 us he has made. I just
wish to draw to the attention of the minister and the committee the manner in which this problem is being handled. The committee will now begin to realize that it is one of the most serious problems which face us in many districts in British Columbia.


Mr. SPENCER:: Only last night I inquired as to the number of Japanese allowed into Canada, but at that time the minister refused to give the information, saying that he did not think he had a right to give it. Just a moment ago he gave to the hon. member for Fraser Valley the very information for which I was asking. Why did he change his mind?


Robert Forke: I have had time to think
the matter over. I was not aware that the Prime Minister had used the figure when he spoke, and I did not want to be the first to give out the agreement until I felt I was justified in doing so.


Henry Elvins Spencer: The number now is 150
a year?


Robert Forke: Yes.


Mr. GARDINER:: I should like to ask the minister a question with regard to the portion of this appropriation spent for the suppression of the narcotic drugs traffic. Does his department take charge of this altogether, or is is divided between the Department of Health and the Department of Immigration?


Robert Forke: The prosecutions under the Narcotic Drugs Act come under the Department of Health, and then when a man is convicted he comes under the Department of Immigration when we deal with him in regard to deportation.


Robert Gardiner: It is only in relation
to that one matter that the department spends any money under this item in connection with the traffic in narcotic drugs?


Robert Forke: Yes.


Mr. SPENCE:: This is one of the items
to which I seriously object. I see no reason whatever for an increase in an item of this kind, seeing that Canada is not desirous of getting Chinese immigrants. Nevertheless it is proposed to increase this item by $5,000. My idea is that it would be more in keeping with the immigration policy that should be adopted by this government to reduce the. item by $5,000. The minister a little while ago was talking about the class of people he would allow to come into Canada.
Supply-Immigra tion


Robert Forke: Will my hon. friend allow
me? This is a preventive service. An increase may be right or wrong, but 'the service is to prevent the Chinese from coming in. It may not function, but it is a preventive service.


James Houston Spence: Does the minister, deep in his heart, think he is justified in asking for an increase of $5,000 in this item? No one in this government ever thinks of reducing an item. Every year it is an increase in each of the departments. The less business the government does, the more money it wants. If a merchant were to do business in that way, he would not remain long in business and neither should the government. A few minutes ago the minister was speaking of the classes of individuals admitted. Does he consider a man running a Chinese laundry as a merchant?


Robert Forke: No. When I read my statement I said so explicitly.


James Houston Spence: I did not catch that. We have now only 55,000 Chinese in the whole of Canada, and yet we are proposing to spend $70,000 in administration. Is the whole thing worth it?


Robert Forke: This is to keep them out.


James Houston Spence: Well, for heaven's sake
adopt some policy that will keep them out, and not waste the country's money. I could advocate some ways of doing this which might be more crude than that adopted, but these Chinese should be kept out, and the whole immigration policy should be changed. I do not wish to criticize the minister, because I have great faith in his integrity of purpose, but he is certainly not capable of controlling the situation and the government behind him is to be blamed more than he, because this is the policy of the government and not his. The minister can keep on saying:	This has
been done for years. But if it is wrong, it is up to the minister to change the situation. The whole world has been revolutionized since the war. Why not revolutionize the department and get assistance in this regard from the other ministers of the crown? I have heard the lamest excuses put forward in the house. I have been in business for many years; I have sat on boards and councils, and I have never seen a more unbusinesslike administration than this one. You can compare it with nothing but a town or county council. The absolute nonsense that is talked across the floor of this house is disgusting to many of us.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
IMr. Spence.]
Relief of distressed Canadians outside of Canada, $4,000.
Mr. ROBINSON:: I should like to say to
the minister that I am in full accord with the suggestion made by the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Chaplin) that the immigration office at Detroit should be moved to Windsor. It is only three short blocks from the Detroit ferry dock, and many people who wish to settle in Canada think they are compelled to come to Windsor to meet officials there in order to make arrangements for settling in Canada. I have had them calling at my house; and have received letters stating their intention to move to Canada in order to go into farming, and I have to refer them to the Detroit office. I feel it would be a good move on the part of the department to change the office to Windsor. The minister has promised to give the matter consideration and I trust the result will be that the offioe will be moved. When speaking last night in connection with immigration at the Walkerville and Windsor ferry docks the minister stated that he would have an examination and a report made. My opinion is that the reports which come from the officials themselves give only one side of the question. If the officials who are sent down to Windsor to make the investigation andl report, would consult with the chamber of commerce, service clubs and the real estate board, they would get at the actual facts of the situation, and I am sure this would be of assistance to the department.


Robert Forke: I will make every investigation; I think I shall slip down there some day in order to watch the proceedings and see just how things are operated.


Sidney Cecil Robinson: I wish the minister
would. We would give him a hearty welcome.


Mr. HEAPS:: What are the regulations of
the Department of Immigration in connection with the importation of men who come to this country under contract from other countries and who displace labour here? I ask this question because the item relates to relief of distressed Canadians outside of Canada. As a result of contract labour from other countries displacing our own, there are a number of distressed Canadians in Canada and I should like to see something done for them. For instance, there are those whom the Rapid Grip Company and other companies have displaced. Has this to db with the Department of Immigration or the Department of Labour? Who is responsible in a case of this kind?

Supply-Immigration


Robert Forke: My deputy informs me that the whole of this appropriation is scarcely ever spent. There is only a very small portion of it spent. This is to provide for assistance to bona fide Canadians who may happen to be stranded away from Canada or who may be in need of temporary financial help. Most of the oases occur in the British Isles and the expenses are under the control of the Director of European Emigration, London. In cases involving payment of transportation to Canada, for which we obtain a specially reduced rate, an undertaking of repayment is obtained from the person assisted, which repayment the department endeavours to collect from him upon his return to Canada, or from his parents or relatives if he happens to be unable to refund the money himself. The net expenditure for the fiscal year 1927-28, was $1,379.36, and the collections during that year amounted to $753.46, so that it is really an infinitesimal sum.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I realize the purpose of this
vote and I am trying to relate it to the contract labour that is brought into the Dominion, and which displaces men bom in this country, and who in consequence of this imported labour find themselves in a distressed Condition. What are the regulations in connection with contract labour that is brought into this country for no other purpose than to displace men who are already in a job? Is this matter connected with the Department of Immigration or with the Department of Health?


Robert Forke: That is opening up a wide
question into which I cannot go at the present time. We are not supplying any money for that purpose.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I have in mind the case of
Rapid Grip Limited, of Toronto. In that particular case men were brought in from the United States or from Germany and other continental countries to take the place of the men in Toronto who were working for that concern. I know that the Department of Labour was in negotiation with that company for quite a long time. Who is responsible for allowing these men to come in to take the place of men who are already employed in this country?


Robert Forke: The department is quite
willing to assist immigrants who are temporarily' in distress and are unable to take care of themselves, but if a man becomes a mendicant it is a case for deportation.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Is there any way of protecting the men who are employed in this country against this imported contract labour?


Robert Forke: There is an Alien Labour
Act which is applicable to the United States, but its enforcement does not come under my department. All that can be done, as far as I know, is to apply that act.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I think this matter
should be discussed when the labour estimates are under discussion. I have some inquiries to make with respect to it. I think my hon. friend from North Winnipeg will agree that this is a matter that comes under the Department of Labour.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I just wanted to find out
whether it came under the Department of Immigration or under the Department of Labour.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Buildings at St. John, N.B., $8,900.
Mr. ROSS (Kingston):: Five or six questions were asked in the house recently in regard to the question of conductresses, who are supposed to be nurses, and the answer given was that the appointments had not been made. Have they been made since?


Robert Forke: Appointments have been
made in two or three districts but not in all.


Arthur Edward Ross: The positions were advertised and the qualifications called for graduate nurses. Will the minister give the names of those who have been appointed, and state whether they are graduate nurses?


Robert Forke: I shall be glad to get the
names. They have to be graduate nurses, and the appointments are made by the Civil Service Commission.


Peter McGibbon: Same old story-no information.


Arthur Edward Ross: As the matter is
related to this vote, I would ask that it stand until we get that information.


Robert Forke: It has nothing to do with
this vote.


Arthur Edward Ross: These conductresses work in these buildings at St. John.


Robert Forke: This amount is required to
make the last payment on a contract with the Canadian Pacific Railway.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is from buildings like this that these conductresses work. Will the minister say that that is not so?
Supply-Immigration


Robert Forke: This is an obligation that
we have to meet.


Arthur Edward Ross: I have nothing to
do with that. But the work of the conductresses has to do with the immigration building.


Robert Forke: I will supply that information.


Arthur Edward Ross: When?


Robert Forke: Immediately.


Robert Gardiner: Would the minister give the details of this expenditure?


Robert Forke: The details are as follows:
Under an agreement entered between the Department of Immigration and Colonization and the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, the department is bearing one-half the cost of construction and maintenance of the following buildings necessary for the proper handling of immigrants arriving at the port of St. John West:-*
Baggage shed, our share, $88,048.28; detention quarters, our share, $55,748.68 ($5,748.68 extras totally paid by department); waiting room, our share, $20,419.11-total cost to department, $164,216.07; extras already totally paid by department, $5,748.68-$158,467.39.
This sum of $158,467.39 is payable in ten yearly instalments, plus interest at the rate of 5J per cent on outstanding balances at end of each year.
Summary of amounts required for the fiscal year 1929-1930-
Waiting room, Vio share, $2,041.91 (10th instalment) ; interest on outstanding balance Jan. 1st to Dec. 31st, 1929, $112.30-$2,154.21.
Immigration quarters, Ho share, $5,000 (10th instalment); interest on outstanding balance Jan. 1st to Dec. 31, 1929, $275-$5,275-total, $7,429.21.
Provision for our share of repairs, $1,470.79 -total $8,900.
The above amount of $8,900 is to cover the last instalment that has to be paid in connection with these buildings.


Robert Gardiner: When was this contract entered into?


Robert Forke: Ten years ago.


Robert Gardiner: The first item is to
provide a baggage shed at a cost of $88,000. Is that not really a transportation matter and not connected with the Department of Immigration at all?


Robert Forke: The buildings were put up
under agreement between the Department of Immigration and the Canadian Pacific Railway. The agreement was entered into ten years ago, nine payments have been made, and this is the last. It is difficult for me to give offhand all the details of a contract that was entered into ten years ago.


Robert Gardiner: It appears to me that
this parliament should have no responsibility for making payments in connection with baggage sheds and so forth, which are really a matter for the railways. Now that the agreement has been entered into, I suppose that we must meet our obligations, but I trust that the department will not enter into any such arrangement in the future, because this is simply assisting the railway company to provide part of the railway properties.


Peter McGibbon: I am sorry the Prime
Minister is not in his seat, but in his absence I would call the attention of the Minister of Justice to the terrible exhibition we have had in conducting the estimates of this department through the house during the last two or three days. It is the worst exhibition of incompetence that we have had in this house.


Ernest Lapointe: My hon. friend takes a
pessimistic view.


Arthur Edward Ross: How is it that
some of these buildings are built out of appropriations of departments other than the Department of Public Works? Why does this not come under the Department of Publio Works?


Robert Forke: This contract was entered
into in 1919. The hon. member cannot expect me-


Arthur Edward Ross: I certainly would.
Why should not the minister be able to give the information?


Robert Forke: I can if I am given time.
I have already promised the hon. member that I will give full information.


Arthur Edward Ross: No, you started
out by saying, why should the hon. member ask me about what happened in 1919? Why should not the minister know? It comes under his department.


Robert Gardiner: I would suggest that
the item stand until the information is brought down.


Lucien Cannon: The information has been promised.


John Frederick Johnston: Shall the item carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is not carried.


Peter McGibbon: The Solicitor General is not going to put it over the house like that.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Lucien Cannon: I was saying that the minister was willing to give the explanation and was ready to do so.
Mr. MeGIBBON:	For the last three or
four days we have had these assurances of willingness to give the information, but we can get practically no information. We would like to know whether we are going to get it this year or not. The minister has been in charge of this department some years; surely when he comes here with his estimates, with his deputy beside him, we ought to be able to get some information.


Arthur Edward Ross: I was promised an
explanation by the minister and I insist on it.


Robert Forke: I will get all the information I possibly can.


Arthur Edward Ross: I want it.


Robert Forke: I will let you have the information.


Ernest Lapointe: There will be supplementary estimates, I am told', in relation to the Immigration department, and I suggest that when they are before the committee my hon. friend will get the explanation he asks for. He might let this item go through in the meantime.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Oare of patients and medical examination of pensioners, $2,600,000.
Hon. J. H. KING (Minister of Pensions and National Health):: Mr. Chairman, on two
former occasions when we were in committee I asked that vote 232 be called. The discussion in each case has centred around the health section. I would therefore suggest that we call vote 244, and that we complete the discussion on the section of health, and proceed to items under that section.
Item stands.
The administration of the acts respecting food and drugs, opium and narcotic drugs and proprietary or patent medicines, including the laboratory of hygiene, $150,000.


Mr. KING (Kootenay):: In the few remarks I made the other night I endeavoured to show the field of activity that was designed for this department, not only by the constitution but by the act that brought the department into being. Some of our friends opposite
have suggested that services which are now being rendered by the health department had previously been and could now be carried on by other departments of government. There is no doubt that that is true, but those who were responsible for the amalgamation of those services must have realized that there was a necessity for closer application on the part of those who were qualified to deal with them.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.


John Warwick King: I was indicating, Mr. Chairman, that under the old organization where the Department of Immigration controlled the medical inspection service that service was not efficiently performed, with the result that we introduced into Canada trachoma, which has spread as far west as among the Indians of British Columbia. We also found that our asylums were being filled with mentally deficient people; the hospitals were being filled; the charitable in-situtions were crowded by incompentents. Since the Department of Health has taken over that work I think I can say with certainty that conditions have very greatly improved, and this is due to the thorough inspection carried on. It is suggested thait the quarantine service could be oarried on under the Department of Immigration. As a matter of fact, that service at one time came under the Department of Agriculture, and we know from history that during that period many epidemics did originate from the quarantine stations. I am pleased to say that since the Health department has been in control of this service not one case has got through.
Regulations in relation to foods and drugs were formerly under the Department of Trade and Commerce, but since they have been placed under the Health department a considerable amount of research work has been done and the elimination of impurities from foods and drugs has been effected in great measure. The benefit which has resulted to the public from the health standpoint is inestimable. When it is realized to-day that scientific methods are followed in the preparation of foods, and that there has been a great evolution in this matter of refrigeration and in relation to the preserves that go into foods, many vegetable colourings being discarded and aniline dyes substituted for them, many of which dyes are poisonous, one can readily

Supply-Pensions and National Health
understand that a considerable amount of research and investigation is necessary in order properly to supervise the preparation of these products.


Richard Bedford Bennett: With respect to pure
food products, does the minister handle that branch of the public service?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is what the minister is speaking of just now?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Perhaps the minister recalls the criticisms made by the producers of maple sugar and maple syrup in the province of Quebec as to what was done in the adulteration of some of their products. I understood that the government had taken action in this matter and also with respect to butter. Perhaps the minister, without interfering with the sequence of his remarks, will offer some observations in that regard.


John Warwick King: We have a Maple Products Act whereby the Department of Health is empowered to take samples from the shelves, just as is done in connection with ordinary food products, and have these samples brought to the laboratories to be tested for purity. A pure maple product is required; that is the standard. A great deal of work has been done in this direction and some prosecutions have been entered into. There has been some complaint from the sugar producing districts in Quebec to the effect that the service has not been as efficient as it ought to be. I would point cut that the laboratory work in connection with maple products is one that requires probably the greatest degree of care, inasmuch as it is very easy to add cane and other sugars to these particular products, and the adulteration is very difficult of detection. The eld lead standard had been in vogue, but in practice it was found difficult to apply. In some districts that standard would run as high as 9 per cent, while in others and at other seasons, it might be as low as 1.5. That standard, therefore, is not altogether reliable, especially in view of the fact that there is a great variation in the districts in which the commodity is produced. It is true we have not as large an inspection service as we should like to have. If we had more inspectors we could bring more products in to be tested. Among the producers themselves there is a desire to turn out a pure product. 
The trouble comes after the producer has sold his product to the manufacturer; it is then that the adulteration occurs. We have, however, been successful in checking adulteration. I know of one firm's products having been taken from the shelf-one of the largest firms in Canada-and it was a good lesson to them. There has been a suggestion that the administration of the act might be better conducted under the Department of Agriculture, and that is under consideration.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Why?


John Warwick King: Well, some of
those who made representations on the question thought that the Department of Agriculture was a little closer to the producer than the Health department and that consequently it could exercise greater control over the product at its source. I find, however, that in all probability the product is not very much disturbed at its source; it is after it leaves the point of production that adulteration takes place.


Sir GEORGE PERLEY:: Perhaps it is easier for that department to get more inspectors.


John Warwick King: I do not know about that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They have 1,300 now.


John Warwick King: I fancy cooperation would produce a better service. The control of culinary and drinking water on the great lakes has been taken up by the department.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Has it touched Ottawa
yet?


John Warwick King: We have no jurisdiction in Ottawa, unfortunately, but on the great lakes and international waterways we have that jurisdiction and our service has been of considerable importance. For instance, typhoid fever was at one time a very common disease on ships on the great lakes;
I am pleased to say that last year there were only four cases of typhoid which were reported in that service. In the administration of the Proprietary and Patent Medicines Act, which was formerly under the Department of Trade and Commerce, there were sold at one time 60,000 preparations of this character; the number has been reduced to
6,000.	Many exaggerated and misleading claims have been disposed of and the public has been spared a good deal of money. It was never the intention of the Department of Health to merge the activities of the

Supply-Pensions and National Health
province iato a distinct unit, as has been suggested. But in cooperation with the provinces, through the Dominion Council of Health, we have been able to do work which I think has been quite effective.
The establishment of a research laboratory is desirable and I have no doubt that when the time is opportune such a laboratory will be established in Canada. But as I said the other night, the securing of a personnel for such a laboratory is more important than the expenditure of money in buildings and equipment. The government is not unwilling to provide money for the establishment of a laboratory of this character, but at present it would seem that the duties of the department in connection with the administration of the Food and Drugs Act occupy t'he present laboratory staff to the full, and the establishment of a research laboratory would mean the appointment of a staff of very considerable size with quarters of its own, together with a considerable outlay for equipment of a very expensive kind.
It was suggested to the committee that more money was being expended in connection with the health of animals than was spent in connection with the health of human beings. If my hon. friends would take into consideration the large sums of money spent by the provincial governments and the municipalities, together with the amount spent by the Dominion government in this regard, they would get a total expenditure of many millions of dollars. I have said, and I do not think it can be contradicted, that the Canadian people are making just as much progress in health matters as is being made by other countries throughout the world. We are fortunate, I think, in having, as deputy minister of the department a gentleman well known to health authorities not only in Canada but throughout the world as having exceptional knowledge of public health matters; I refer to Doctor Amyot.
The complaint has been made that the report of the department is too brief. That may be so, but a short study of the report does not give an accurate idea of the activities carried on or the amp unt of work done during the year. For instance, at page 10 Of the report it will be noticed that 416 samples of narcotic drugs were analysed during the year. One might write a book on the work done by the police under the supervision of the department in seizing 416 samples of these drugs and in the prosecutions which followed. In that regard I think we might say that in Canada the organization which controls the use of narcotic drugs is as efficient as any similar organization to be found anywhere in the world. The work last year was exceptionally well done, and we secured many convictions in the courts. I believe that to-day in New Westminster penitentiary there are over 60 people who have been sentenced to terms of from five to seven years for trafficking in these drugs, and the same situation prevails in Winnipeg, Toronto and Montreal.
At page 33 of the report we find that patent medicines for cancer, diphtheria, diabetes, typhoid fever and other diseases are no longer permitted to be sold. That statement takes only a few lines, but it means that the public will be exploited no longer; it is a bald statement of fact. On page 39 we find that the total number of cases of typhoid on the great lakes during 1926 was only four. That is a brief statement also, but it means a great deal to those who know the character of that disease as it formerly existed on the great lakes before this service was undertaken. On page 47 of the report it will be noted that during the year 5,217 sailors were treated at Canadian ports. That statement means more than it indicates in words, but we can say that sailors coming to our shores receive treatment equal to if not better than that given by any other country in the world. That service is well organized in the larger ports of Canada, where we have officers under salary. In the smaller ports the customs officers act as our agents and where medical assistance is required it is furnished by local physicians either under fees or on a small salary basis.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is particularly so
with regard to the quarantine stations, is it not?


John Warwick King: 
Richard Bedford Bennett: The minister did not do anything about the infection of the oyster beds in Prince EdHvard Island?


John Warwick King: We made an investigation some two or three years ago, when the epidemic came over here from the United States. Our officers were brought in at that time.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That was the typhoid
epidemic?


John Warwick King: Yes, and at that time I think we made a health survey in Prince Edward Island as well.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I was referring to the
parasite which destroyed the oyster beds.


John Warwick King: We had nothing
to do with that.
As I said, this laboratory tests the serums and vaccines and biological products. It is estimated that $10,000 of the $15,000 increase will foe required to carry on the increased inspection service at Montreal and Toronto; for the provision of scientific apparatus urgently needed to cope with the demands of advancement in food and drug work and to make replacements of certain laboratory apparatus which, in the course of time, has become either worn out or obsolete. An additional $5,000 will be required for investigations and prosecutions in connection with the traffic in narcotics. The amount voted in 1928-29 was $135,000, of which $134,956.39 was spent.


Peter McGibbon: I think the minister's
statement has furnished additional proof, if any were necessary, for the statement I made the other evening that there is no originality and no initiative in this Department of Health, and there has been none since it was formed. Of course, if the minister is going to take credit for the work done by the provincial governments and the municipalities and for the preventive work of the mounted police he can make a very plausible statement, but 
when you get down to the real facts the minister has not been able to tell us of anything new which has been contributed by his department in order to preserve or improve the health of the people of this country. I have listened to the minister veiy carefully in my desire to secure some information or facts which would justify the existence of this department, but I have heard nothing of the kind. The minister has stated that he is going to hand back to the Department of Agriculture some of the work he took away from it-


John Warwick King: I did not say that.


Peter McGibbon: -evidently with the idea that the Department of Agriculture can do it better than the Department of Health. I can see no other reason.


John Warwick King: I do not propose to let my hon. friend put words into my mouth which I have not used. He can make his own statement but he cannot make a statement for me.


Peter McGibbon: I am in the judgment of the house if that is not a reasonable deduction to be taken from what the minister has said.


John Warwick King: Not at all.


Peter McGibbon: I stand to be corrected if the minister can produce any evidence to the contrary. But I say again that as far as doing anything to preserve or improve the national health of Canada, we have yet to learn of the first thing which this government has done. It is true that they have been inspecting some foods, some proprietary medicines and doing other routine work which was done in the past I think just as efficiently as it is being done to-day-in fact, I am credibly informed that it is being done by the same staff. If that be true, what right has the minister to assume that this work was neglected in the past?-because that is the only deduction we can draw from his remarks. That, I say, is about all the department has been doing.
There are many ^ays in which this government could improve the public health. Last Thursday night I referred to the great wastage of life and pointed out that in practically every instance the government had done nothing to improve conditions. The government might assist in the establishment of whole time county health offices. I think I am correctly informed when I say that the minister has absolutely refused to consider that proposition; he hides himself behind the

Supply-Pensions and National Health
British North America Act and states that the department is restricted to doing certain things. I have in my hand a letter given to me by the hon. member for West Kootenay (Mr. Esling) in which the statement is made that the minister refused absolutely to take that matter into consideration. It is undoubtedly within the power of the department to assist in the establishment of full time county medical health offices.
The minister has referred to what his department has done as regards quarantine, but I would direct his attention to the epidemics of rabies which occurred in the province of Ontario. I am not blaming the minister for that, because I know that matter comes under the Department of Agriculture, but it must be remembered that the disease entered this country from the United States; that it has caused the provincial government a great deal of alarm and has necessitated the expenditure of a considerable amount of money.
The minister referred also to the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act and to the number of convictions which had been made under that act during the past year. I asked the government the following question:
How many persons were convicted last year for illegally selling any of the following drugs; opium, morphia, cocaine, or any of their derivatives?
If the minister's statement is correct, the answer which I received to that question must be wrong. According to the answer I received from the Deputy Minister of Health there were only 61 convictions in the whole Dominion of Canada, and I find that ten of that number were professional men of one kind or another. I aMo asked for the estimated number of drug addicts in Canada, and the answer was given as 8,000. If the statements made by the minister are correct, then I ask him: Where are those 8,000 adicts obtaining their drugs? The minister tells us that there has been a great diminution in the importation and sale of these drugs, but I find that there are still 8,000 people, according to the estimate made by his department, still using them, and only 61 convictions were made during the last twelve months.


John Warwick King: We do not prosecute the addicts.


Peter McGibbon: I would like to direct the attention of the house to some of the methods used by this department in dealing with this drug evil. I received a letter from a medical man in my district, who I believe is just as innocent of dealing in these drugs
as any hon. member in this house. If the name is necessary I will give it, but I do not think it is called for at the present time. He wrote as follows:
In regard to the conviction against me for breach of the Narcotic Act, I will give you the particulars as concisely as possible. Some time in August, 1926, Fraser called at my office and asked how much he owed me. He had broken into my office on three occasions, the last time being about three years before. He had done considerable damage, and stolen what morphia and syringes I had on hand, and some cash, and a sweater, possibly more. I asked him if his conscience was troubling him. He said that he was in very had shape at that time. He paid me $20 and I said that would do although it did not nearly cover me. He was dressed very neatly and I hardly knew him, as he changed so much in appearance. I asked him how hie was getting along and he said that after he was arrested in Gravenhurst he had been in an institution and had cut down to one-quarter the amount he had previously taken, and that he bad been out a year and had reduced to about one-fifth and was gradually reducing the amount. I gave him some good advice and warned Mm to be very careful, etc. He got up to go and then asked if I could spare him a few tablets. I replied that I did not know how many I had hut would look. I gave him about 20 tablets, gr. I each. The point is that I did not know the act, and did not think I was in error any more than if I dispensed a bottle of stomach mixture. I had never read the act, or ever received a copy of it. I considered I was giving medicine which I knew he required, and thought that I had a license to dispense. He came back on three more occasions, and I gave him tablets each time.
Some time in January, 1927, Miller a mounted police, came in and served me with the summons. I immediately called up T. N. Phelan, my solicitor in Toronto, and he was the first to inform me that I had committed a breach of the Narcotic Act, and advised me to settle if given the minimum fine of $200, and have the other charges withdrawn. This was done, and I paid $257.50.
I later had to appear before the council and nearly had a two months' suspension for infamous and disgraceful conduct, but got off with a severe reprimand.
I could not understand why the government sent a spotter down here to get me, unless I was using more morphia than the average physician. I bad never had an addict in for years before and only used it in the practice. No doubt you know that I have a good obstetric practice, and as a routine I left six morphine tablets after each case for after-pains, with instructions to burn the tablets that they did not use.
I think that is all that it is necessary for me to read1.
I am credibly informed that this is the common practice of the department, to send around their sleuths to try to catch the medical men who are ignorant of this act, bring them into the police court and have them fined. No one wants to pay a fine if he does not feel that he should pay it. An-
Supply-

-Pensions and National Health
other point is that once a physician is fined on a charge of that nature he is almost automatically barred from the practice of medicine; that is the serious part of it. I would ask the minister if this practice, which has been fairly general in the past, has been discontinued?


John Warwick King: The hon. member was informed over a year ago that the department did not employ the type of investigator which is referred to in that letter. That incident happened back in 1926. The investigations to-day are conducted by the mounted police; the department does not send people in to pry upon the doctors.


Peter McGibbon: What do they do?


John Warwick King: When information comes to the department that some member of the medical profession is selling drugs, we make careful inquiries and if it is found that the statements are true, the man is investigated. If trafficking is discovered, he is brought into court, usually on a summary conviction if it is his first offence. If it is found that there has been regular trafficking and if he is what is known as a drug trafficker, he may be proceeded- against under indictment. That is the practice of the department and it will not be relinquished. But no medical man need get himself into trouble if he will comply with the act.


Peter McGibbon: The minister cannot put up a straw man merely for the purpose of knocking it down. I was not referring to the trafficker.


John Warwick King: Neither was I.
I was referring to the case -the hon. member mentioned, and the question he asked as to the procedure. I have given him the procedure now in vogue in the department. The hon. member for Kingston brought up a case and he had the idea that the department had proceeded hurriedly and without proper knowledge with regard to the matter.


Arthur Edward Ross: Is the minister referring to the case I brought up?


John Warwick King: Yes. We received information from Kingston that a certain medical man was supplying narcotics. That information, coming to the department, was investigated and the investigation brought forth a report.


Peter McGibbon: Is the minister referring to the case I mentioned?


John Warwick King: No. The report
was not satisfactory to the department, but 
later on the officer of the mounted1 police went into that doctor's office and bargained for narcotic drugs. "He found in the office supplies done up and addressed to parties in Ottawa for sale. Those packages were opened and drugs sold from them. That was the story. Our friends cannot complain if medical men get themselves into positions of that kind, but the department are not and have not been for the last two years, employing any addicts in their service.


Arthur Edward Ross: There is no question as to the fact that the medical man was selling drugs, but it was found out that he was an irresponsible medical man who never should have been allowed to practise. When the time came, if attention bad not -been drawn to that fact, I am satisfied the -department would have proceeded against him with the usual prosecution instead of having him confined where he is now or where he was sent afterwards. The man was irresponsible; he should never have -been allowed to practise, but he was practising and he did not know what he was doing because he was under the influence of drags all the time. Surely the mounted policeman should have become acquainted with the type of medical man with whom he was dealing and said: This is not a case for prosecution; it is one for putting him in an institution; he is an addict himself.


John Warwick King: I do not see how my hon. friend can take that stand. Our business was to check this man's traffic in narcotic drags. He had his own connections in Kingston and if it was known there that he was irresponsible and a fit subject for an institution, that surely is the duty of the local people. We did not intervene on that ground; we found that he was trafficking and trafficking for profit.


Arthur Edward Ross: Does the minister
say that he would defend the prosecution of the man? Application was made a dozen times for his confinement in an institution.


John Warwick King: We dealt with
the facts only as we found them.


Arthur Edward Ross: But I would expect common sense to be used in connection with the prosecution. A mounted policeman should be a very good judge. This man has been in gaol -and detained in different institutions. It is not fair to say: We are going to prosecute him. I quite admit perhaps the department had no knowledge of that, but it certainly changed the prosecution- after the matter was drawn to its attention, and I will give the minister credit for that.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Warwick King: We stayed the
prosecution.


Peter McGibbon: I just want to make it
clear that the case we are now dealing with is not the one to which I referred.


John Warwick King: No.


Peter McGibbon: I am prepared to give
the minister all possible assistance in the house as well as out of it to prosecute criminals who are trafficking in these drugs, but he must exercise ordinary precautions not to stigmatize men whose reputations are clear. This is not the only case I have in my riding and in every case where they have been convicted, they have been convicted through ignorance of the law. I have had complaints from many parts of the province, and I am informed that the same course of action is still being pursued. I would be glad to have the minister's testimony that it is not.


Mr. HOWDEN:: The hon. member for
Muskoka-Ontario contends that the individual whose case he stated, was hardly used by the department. I cannot see this. Ignorance of the law, we are told, is no excuse, and certainly for the last twenty-five years I have understood thoroughly that it is against the law to give morphine to an addict.


Arthur Edward Ross: Coming back to
the statement made by the minister and for information only, I should like the minister to tell us now what work was undertaken by his department to prevent or lessen typhoid on the great lakes?


John Warwick King: We have required the owners of ships on the great lakes to furnish a separate water supply for culinary and drinking purposes. Formerly they took the water from the lake; now it comes from certified sources of supply. The tanks are inspected from time to time and samples of water taken. These samples are examined with the assistance of the laboratories of the provincial government; if things are not found to be in proper shape on the ship the owners are notified, and until repairs are made the ship does not sail. The water supply is being very carefully ohecked especially on the great lakes and on some of the western lakes. I have under my hand a chart giving the number of cases of typhoid as follows:
Number
Y ear	of cases
1923		 50
1924		 30
1925		 7
1926		 4
This shows a gradual decline since this system was inaugurated.


Arthur Edward Ross: Of course the work of inspection there is largely provincial.


John Warwick King: No, entirely under our direction.


Arthur Edward Ross: The water supply
must be protected. I will come to that point a little later on. In regard to the food question, we are quite in sympathy with anything that will make for pure food, but last year I took up with the minister the question of sausages. The colouring substance which is and has been for years used to give the sausage a slight tint which makes it what it really is, has been acknowledged by the minister, his chemists and his department, to be non-in jurious.	Then what is the idea of
worrying the manufacturers of the sausage for using that colouring? Could some common sense not be used and the department say: This is not an injurious substance? On the other hand, if you are going to forbid its use, why permit its sale in shops and so forth? The department can say that the butcher, the manufacturer of sausages, is aware of this; that ignorance of the law is no excuse. But the butcher's trade is handed down from father to son and these men would like to know, because they have asked me, whether some change could not be made so that they could manufacture the sausages. The department is welcome to take care of the meats. This is not a preservative of meat. The minister admits that it is not, that it is simply used for colouring, and that it is used in connection with a cheap food entering into the dietary of a great many people. If there is any argument in favour of continuing the prosecutions for the use of colouring matter, I would like to know what it is.


John Warwick King: The department are of the opinion that if the people desire to eat sausage meat, they should have a pure product. It is welll-known that in the better abattoirs and better shops, where meat is properly taken care of and there is proper refrigeration and care in handling, meat can be kept fresh and will make sausages that will stand up. This product that my hon. friend speaks of, sodium hyposulphate, if sprinkled on meat that is going bad, will hold it; there is no question about that; but in this country, where we have an excellent supply of meat and good refrigeration, I do not think we need a product that my hon. friend, for instance, would not want to eat in his sausage. That is the advice and the information which the department gives me
2974	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
and so far as I am concerned, it sounds good to me. 1 do not think it 'is well to try to freshen up with a product of this kind meats that are undergoing early putrefaction.
Mr. RQS|j3 (Kingston): Let us settle this matter. Surely the minister knows as well as I do that it is not a preservative; it is used only for tafble purposes, for colouring or tinting. Now if the department rules that that is a meat preservative I will withdraw any objection that I have, or if the deputy says it is a meat preservative I wii withdraw my objections; but I say that it is not, and the chemical reports that have been issued by the department support my contention.


John Warwick King: It will freshen meat and give it a better colour.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is tinting, I admit that; but it is non-injurious and is not a preservative. I am not going to stand up for the defence of any injurious or poisonous meat or for any product that will preserve such meat. But I think the minister and his department should take a stand on this question, and if they will rule that it is a preservative and has a chemical action, well and good; I will withdraw all my objections.


John Warwick King: As far as the use of small quantities of this product such as is customary in the trade is concerned, I would not say that it is a preservative, but it does freshen and brighten meat.


Arthur Edward Ross: The minister admits, then, that its only action is the tinting.
I have a few remarks to make, Mr. Chairman, on the general question. The minister defends the position in which his department is to-day on the ground that it has no authority. Its only authority is to deal with things that are perhaps secondary to public health. I differ from the minister, and I would point out where he gets his authority to step in and take action such as has not been taken by his department in the past. The minister quoted from the act:
Cooperation with the provincial, territorial and other health authorities with a view to the coordination of the efforts proposed or made for preserving and improving the public health.
I contend that the word " preserving " gives him all the authority he requires to step in and preserve the public health of this Dominion. In connection with the Montreal typhoid epidemic, the minister had all the authority he needed to step in and say that the epidemic was a menace to the general health of the Dominion. I believe that he has sufficient

authority under the act to protect one part of Canada from another part in which there is an epidemic.
I think perhaps the minister has done a little work in gathering up some little pieces and putting them together, but it it a patchwork quilt, and that is about all it is. There are other things that he should take in. I see no reason why the health of the Indians, for instance, which is a federal matter, should not come under his department. In fact, in connection with the whole health work of this Dominion, federal and provincial, there is duplication and overlapping, with a little bit being done by this department and a little bit by another department, and a little bit by the provincial authorities, and with no special authority over the whole. I think the minister should gather up all these things and put them together. The minister said that his department does a certain amount of national research work, but there again there is duplication because the provinces and the National Research Council are also working on that. The federal Department of Health may also take up the work and do a little bit more. While you are preparing yo-ur laboratories, you could turn many problems you have over to the research council, and I hope that they will be rather more practical problems than those engaging the attention of the council to-day, because judging by the report of the council they are not engaged on problems that are of any practical importance at all.
The minister and the department have a big field before them if they will only go into it and assert their rights. The minister may differ, but I believe that the preservation of the public health, not the preservation of the health of the man in Ontario or Quebec, but the whole national health, comes under the jurisdiction of the minister, and when any part of the country becomes a menace to other parts I contend that the minister has the authority to step in. A typhoid epidemic, for instance, has no limits. A man in Ottawa or Kingston or any other city may catch the typhoid germs and in two weeks he is down with typhoid, and he becomes a menace not only to his own city but to every part of this country through which he travels. The disease spreads all the faster because of the ease of communication, and you may next hear of the disease in Winnipeg shortly after the man in Ottawa or Kingston contracted it. The minister has read of the spread of sleeping sickness, which began in a small community of 350,000 people in central Africa. If the diseases had been confined to that little community, it would not prevail all over the world to-day. I contend that

Supply-Pensions and National Health
the minister has the authority under the act to conserve the health of any part of this Dominion, and wherever he sees a menace he can step in. He stepped in in connection with the water supply of boats on the great lakes. There is no question in my mind that that was a provincial matter, because the water supply is obtained only in the ports, and any city supplying impure water would be responsible. When you realize that fifteen million people, equal to the population of five or. six great cities travel on the great lakes, you can realize the great field that is open to the minister, and I am glad that he has gone into it. If he is going to take credit for that, he can also step in in connection with other provincial matters. He could certainly see that water is made fit for the travelling public. I think every province would unite with the minister if he would take a strong stand. There is a great opportunity awaiting the department, and the minister should gather up all this health work that is going on here and there and bring it under his department, and make the department one big, strong, health department. He has the authority to do so under the act.


John Warwick King: In reply to my
hon. friend who seemed to question my statement in regard to the number of convictions in the province of British Columbia, there were 67 convictions in that province in the year 1928-29, according to a return that has been given to me, and throughout the whole of Canada 189 federal convictions and 173 provincial.
In regard to what my hon. friend from Kingston City has just said in regard to epidemics in the larger cities, like the epidemic in Montreal a few years ago, the Department of Health acted only in an advisory capacity at that time. We did support the provincial health board after they were compelled to go in and take charge. Although they went in without authority, it was their duty to go in, and they got the necessary authority at the next session of the legislature. During the epidemic we had the opportunity of using the power that is in us. When the country districts were under quarantine and their milk was not being accepted on the American market, we were able as a national department so to arrange matters that the quarantine was lifted. They had the quarantine continued in the city of Montreal for some months, and it was only when the Department of Health at Washington were assured by the Canadian Department of Health that the things that should be done in Montreal had been done, that the 78591-189
quarantine in Montreal was lifted. Where our field existed we went in and helped to organize a health department. I do not think, however, that it would have been acceptable to the city of Montreal for us to *have gone in in any other capacity.


Arthur Edward Ross: When you discover the source and then delay taking action, that is criminal. If you have not in your Health department men who can discover the source in a few days, then some other department should be allowed to deal with the matter.


John Warwick King: We have.


Arthur Edward Ross: That is where I
find fault, where a delay is occasioned by the department. For the sake of the health of the rest of the country they should say: "If you cannot find it we can, and we will send you a man who will do it."


John Warwick King: We are ready to do that.


Murray MacLaren: Will the minister make
a statement to the committee regarding leprosy in the Dominion, informing us as to the number of cases, the increase or diminution of the disease, and any other matter in that connection that would be of interest to the committee.


John Warwick King: That comes under our quarantine vote. We have two stations in Canada, one at Williams Head on the Pacific, and one at Tracadie, New Brunswick.


Murray MacLaren: It is mentioned under
health.


John Warwick King: Yes, under the
vote on quarantine. We have eight cases, I think at Tracadie, and some ten or twelve at Williams Head. I am informed the cases at Tracadie, with the exception of two, are probably non-active to-day.


Murray MacLaren: Where is the Williams Head station?


John Warwick King: Victoria, B.C.


Murray MacLaren: Is there not one near
Grosse He, Quebec?


John Warwick King: No. There are
just the two, all cases are confined in these institutions.


Murray MacLaren: How does the number
compare to-day with say ten years ago?


John Warwick King: The number is
gradually decreasing. In 1899 there were twenty-five cases; in 1916 there were fifteen cases.

2976	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Murray MacLaren: Where?


John Warwick King: That is the number of cases in Canada.


Murray MacLaren: The total number?
Mr.	KING	(Kootenay):	Yes,	and	to-day
I find there are ten.


Murray MacLaren: I may be mistaken, but I was informed last year-not in the house- that there were cases of leprosy on the island of Grosse He, near Quebec.
Mr.	KING	(Kootenay):	No.Mr.	MacLAREN:	That	is not	correct?Mr.	KING	(Kootenay):	No.


Murray MacLaren: Will the minister inform us who the medical officer is at Tracadie, and what his salary is?


John Warwick King: Doctor Langis. His salary is S3,360.


Murray MacLaren: Is there any research
work or scientific investigation regarding the treatment and the nature of leprosy at Tracadie at the present time?


John Warwick King: We are not doing any research work at Tracadie, but we are using the latest treatment. Some research work, I think, is being done at Williams Head, where the cases are more active.


Murray MacLaren: Who is carrying on the research work there?


John Warwick King: Doctor Brown, the chief officer there.


Peter McGibbon: I would like to clean up this matter regarding the accuracy of our records with respect to convictions under the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act. The record that I have here is for the same year, I think, as the minister gave, and indicates that his figures are about more than three times the amount given to me. I would like to know whether or not the records we get from this department are reliable.


John Warwick King: The information that I have here, given in answer to a question by our late friend the former member for Frontenac-Addington, shows a total of 343 cases dealt with. That, I think, coincides pretty well with what I have given my hon. friend here.


Peter McGibbon: That does not answer my question at all. The minister simply repeats what he said before. I have a re-

turn here for the year ended September 30, 1928. The question is, "How many persons were convicted for illegally selling any of the following drugs: opium, morphia, cocaine, or any of their derivatives?" The answer is 61. The minister gets it up in the hundreds. This return is signed by the deputy minister.


John Warwick King: When was that return made?


Peter McGibbon: It was made this session.	.


John Warwick King: What date?


Peter McGibbon: February 26.


Mr. MALONEY:: Does the ministers' three hundred odd cases mean convictions?


John Warwick King: It is rather strange that there should be two questions. I am reading the return as taken from Hansard on February 27th, and it shows a total of 343 cases in 1928.


Peter McGibbon: The point I am making is that we cannot rely upon the information we get from this department.


John Warwick King: I have not the statement to which my hon. friend is referring.


Peter McGibbon: I will.send it over if the minister doubts my word.


John Warwick King: I am very glad to have inquiry made, but there is surely something wrong.


Peter McGibbon: That is the same difficulty we had this morning in connection with the Department of Immigration.


John Warwick King: No; my hon.
friend should not complain, because we are trying to give him information.


Peter McGibbon: Will the minister be good enough to give us the convictions by provinces?


John Warwick King: The federal convictions were Nova Scotia, 1; Quebec, 83; Ontario, 15; Manitoba, 5; Saskatchewan, 7; Alberta, 11; British Columbia, 67; making a total of 189. The municipal convictions were:	New Brunswick, 3; Quebec, 30; Ontario, 53; Manitoba, 18; Saskatchewan, 1; Alberta, 2; British Columbia, 66; making a total of 173. The grand total therefore is 362.


Peter McGibbon: In comparison with the
number of addicts, does the minister consider that the percentage of convictions is high enough?

Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Warwick King: The 8,000 addicts have nothing to do with these convictions.


Peter McGibbon: But they must be getting their supply somewhere.


John Warwick King: Generally speaking we have had a good year. We have caught some large traffickers and with the cooperation of the municipal police we have also secured? many of the smaller ones. These have 'been apprehended and taken to court.


Peter McGibbon: It is nice for the minister to take credit for what the municipalities are doing.


John Warwick King: I am willing to
give credit where it is due, which my hon. friend is not prepared to do.


Robert Gardiner: The hon. member for
Kingston (Mr. Ross) entered a strong protest against the sentence meted out to one of the medical profession who had been convicted of supplying narcotics to addicts. From What the hon. member said it would appear that this doctor was irresponsible. Does the minister find many cases of irresponsibility among the professional men?


John Warwick King: Yes, some of them are irresponsible.


Robert Gardiner: Can you give accurate
information?


John Warwick King: No, I should say
that a medical man who has become a trafficker is not fit to be at large.


Robert Gardiner: What is the position of the patients of these irresponsible medical men? Do not these patients deserve some protection? What is the department doing to weed out irresponsible doctors?


John Warwick King: Some of my hon. friends are complaining because we are arresting these men and putting them in jail. Wherever we find indications that there are such men we proceed against them. Of course, each province has its own register of medical men and -action can ibe taken against irresponsible doctors and their names struck off the roll.


Robert Gardiner: Has the minister any
information as to what the various colleges of physicians and surgeons are doing with respect to irresponsible men?


John Warwick King: From time to time they have occasion to deal with conditions existing within their respective provinces and when warranted they take the license from a man and prevent him from practising.
78594-189-4


Robert Gardiner: Does the department
take active steps to see that the public is protected against such doctors?
Mr. KING. (Kootenay): As far as we can, yes.


Robert Gardiner: What action do you
take? Give us some information.


John Warwick King: The Department of Health does not proceed against the ordinary practitioner for malpractice; that is not the function of the department. If my hon. friend should suffer from malpractice on the part of a doctor he could proceed against him; that would be his duty. If a doctor has been convicted of malpractice it is then a matter for the College of Physicians and Surgeons in his particular province to deal with him. And they do deal with such men from time to time. Surely my hon. friend does ndt suggest that the Department of Health should inquire into the capacity or incapacity of members of the profession and take proceedings. This is well regulated to-day under the various laws of the provinces and it is not a field which it was intended that this department should enter into.


Robert Gardiner: I asked the minister
whether he had found many irresponsible medical men and the answer he gave would indicate to me that he had and that the colleges of physicians and surgeons in the various provinces are not looking after their business. I submit that the minister's department has some responsibility in this regard.


John Warwick King: My hon. friend is wrong when he says there are many irresponsible men.


Robert Gardiner: I merely took your
answer.


John Warwick King: I never stated
anything of the kind. I am glad to say that there are not many irresponsible medical men. I do say that when a medical man gets to the stage where he is trafficking in narcotics he should not be allowed to practise; and he is not, because he is prosecuted.


Robert Gardiner: Under this item is provision made for the testing of proprietary medicines?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Robert Gardiner: Is that merely for
purity or for efficacy and purity as well?


John Warwick King: Both.
2978	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Arthur Edward Ross: What action did the minister and his department take after his attention had been drawn to the fact that this man who was being prosecuted was an irresponsible practitioner? Did the minister report him to the register of the medical council of the province, or what did he do?
I am referring to the Kingston case.


John Warwick King: I do not know just what was done. We proceeded against this individual, and while preparations were being made to have him arraigned in court a further inquiry was made, probably at the instance of the College of Physicians and Surgeons or of some of his friends. The result was ' that he was committed to _ an institution and we withdrew the prosecution. As regards referring these cases to the college, it is not necessary; the cases are known through the newspapers and the courts. The profession is aware of these cases.


Arthur Edward Ross: That is hardly a good enough procedure for the minister to follow. When this case arose I pointed out that a grave injustice was being done an irresponsible person. Had the minister, after his attention had been directed to the matter, looked into it carefully, he would have found that this mounted policeman did not even bother his head; all you had to do was to look at the man to know that there was irresponsibility there. The minister would then have applied to the registrar of the medical council of Ontario to take action. It was when I wrote concerning the case and called attention to what would happen that certain friends, realizing that the man would be prosecuted, took action. I pointed out at that time the injustice of prosecuting such a man. That man might have sold the drug to children or to anyone else, because he was irresponsible. He was not the type the minister would get after for purposes of prosecution. It is quite true that he took money, but, as I say, he was not responsible at the time; and it seems to me that there should have been, as the act provides, cooperation between the federal department and the provincial authorities in the interests of public health.


John Warwick King: The chief officer tells me that after conviction the department does notify the College of Physicians and Surgeons.


Arthur Edward Ross: But why prosecute an irresponsible man?


John Warwick King: My hon. friend
is hardly fair.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is easy to say
"Here is a man selling drugs for money,' and so on, but I am sure that if the minister knew the case as well as I do he would not support the prosecution. The federal department easily could have cooperated with the province of Ontario in order to get that man out of the practice o>f medicine.


John Warwick King: It is our business to get him out of the .practice of trafficking in drugs.


Arthur Edward Ross: Am I to understand that to be the position of the department? I should have expeleted a medical man to be more compassionate in the case of a fellow practitioner than to have him sent to gaol and publicly punished and then, when he came out, have the whole thing repeated. I do not think that is cooperation far the public good.


Mr. KAISER:: Perhaps I might be permitted to complete the remarks I made the other evening, which unfortunately I wa3 not able to finish at the .time. I want to emphasize the fact that the .public health workers and public health authorities of Canada disagree absolutely with the attitude of the government and the Minister of Health in regard to the jurisdiction of the Dominion in this important question. In order that I may present the authentic attitude of the public health officers I desire to read part of a speelch which was made at one of their meetings here in Ottawa:
In 1849, probably because the return of cholera, legislation was enacted by the parliament of Canada 'to establish a "Central Board of Health" and further regulations were passed in 1866.	.
Four of the provinces entered confederation in 1867 and others at later dates. The basis for confederation was the British North America Act which definitely set dowm the matters hereafter to be within the jurisdiction of the provinces. The subjects not mentioned came under the control of the Dominion parliament. As health is not mentioned .at all in the act, it -would seem that the control of health matters should have remained wdthin the jurisdiction of the Dominion.
I think the reason for Dominion jurisdiction should ibe plain to the minister, if he has ever pftid any attention to the requirements of national health. In connection with any other question on which joint action of the provinces is neicessary that then becomes a Dominion matter. Can anyone tell me when there ever was an epidemic which came just to the borders of Ontario or any other province and then stopped? Surely, with

Supply-Pensions and National Health
this in mind, it cannot be argued that the question of helalth is not a matter for Dominion jurisdiction.
A great deal has been said with regard to the efforts put forth by the various provinces and municipalities in Canada in (connection with the matter of health, and I would dike to place upon Hansard exactly what is being done by these provinces and municipalities, as follows:
Provincial Municipal
Alberta.	. .	.
British Columbia Manitoba. .	.
Nova Scotia. . New Brunswick Ontario. . .' . Quebec.... Saskatchewan .

That gives an aggregate expenditure by the provinces and the municipalities of $4,563,068.50, which, added to the expenditure of the Department of Health, makes a grand total of $5,454,5(29.32 for public health work. The addition of the sums spent by voluntary societies probably would bring this expenditure to over six million dollars. In other words, we spent about 54 cents per head in . connection with public health as compared with an expenditure of about $2.55 per head, which, as I pointed out the other night, is neleessary in order to carry on anything like efficient (public health service.
In this connection I would like to read also an editorial from the Canadian Public Health Journal with regard to the question of creating health units in various parts of the Dominion. As I mentioned the other night, we are the only country claiming to be civilized that has not resorted to this method of grappling with the question of national health. The editorial states:
One cannot but feel that, in view of the proven fact that organization of the county health unit type wall definitely save life, a determined effort should be miade to make such organization possible for the whole of Canada. The relative poverty of any section of the country should be no reason why that section should be neglected. After all we are all Canadians whatever province we live in, and surely the duty of the Dominion government is to see that in every part of Canada the most valuable of our assets-human life-is oared for.
Dominion subsidy of the provinces on condition that the provinces and municipalities do their part is the only solution of the problem. The Canadian Public Health Association has no hesitation in urging every member of parliament to give vigorous support to such a project in the full belief that the Dominion-wide scheme which should result would pay heavy dividends in the lives and health of citizens saved for Canada.
There are so many things which could be done by the Department of Health that it
would undoubtedly weary the house and perhaps even the minister, if that were possible, to enumerate them. But I want to ask the minister whether his department has joined in the world-wide effort now being made to grapple with the disease of canoer. We know that in Canada this terrible scourge is spreading rapidly, as is the case in all other civilize! countries, and we should endeavour to do something to mitigate its effects. There is not sufficient radium in Canada even to take care of the patients able to pay the tremendous fee charged, let alone to take care of the afflicted poor people of this country in order that they might have some ho.pe of relief and of stopping the onrush of this disease.
The old practitioners in Canada can remember the terrific feeling they bad when in other days they stood beside the bedsides of children suffering from diphtheria and who died by the hundreds and thousands. We remember when antitoxin was discovered and marvelled at the results obtained. The most gratifying moment I ever had as a practitioner or as a man interested in the public health of this country was when the provincial board of health, of which I was a member, was enabled to give the people of Ontario this wonderful remedy free of charge and thus enable the poor children of our province to have access to relief from the terrible scourge of diphtheria. Old medical practitioners will tell you that up to the time this antitoxin was discovered they never knew of a case of laryngeal diphtheria being cured. From the date of its discovery many are able to say that they have never seen a case which has been fatal.
The Dominion government should step in and lend its aid to some of these progressive movements and offer a service to the poor people of our country at cost or better. When I think of what could be done and when I see how little has been, done by this department, when I look at the words "Minister of National Health" there is only one picture that comes to my mind, and that is: a golden breast plate on a basswood coffin,


Mr. WHITE (London):: Could the minister give us some information as to the prevalence of cancer in this country; whether it is on the increase or decrease?


John Warwick King: I am satisfied
that it is on the increase; I have not the figures (here but there is no doubt that this disease is increasing.


John Franklin White: What is being
done by the department to fight this terrible disease?
2980	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Warwick King: The department
has not undertaken any investigation of that character. Investigations are being carried on in the universities of the world and by obheT organizations, but I am sorry to state that up to date very little progress has been made in the effort to find a cure.


John Franklin White: I have some figures, compiled by a specialist in the treatment of cancer in this city, and which deal with the prevalence of cancer and the mortality rate. I have not checked these figures but I assume they are correct. This specialist states that in 1906 the mortality rate per 1,000 in the city of Ottawa due to cancer was 69.5; twenty years later, in 1926, that rate had risen to 115. In 1906, the mortality rate from tuberculosis was 156, and in 1926 it had decreased' to 71.2. These figures show that while the mortality from tuberculosis has decreased 54 per cent, the mortality from cancer has increased 66.33 per cent.
It seems to me that the Department of Public Health might very well consider conducting a program of education so that the people of this country would be advised as to what steps to take in these oases. The educational work with relation to tubercular treatment started about twenty years ago, and the above figures show the degree of success that has attended that movement. It seems to me that cancer could be handled in the same way. I agree with the 'hon. member for Ontario (Mr. Kaiser) when he says that we should have a supply of radium, but there is another phase of the matter which should be considered. In certain cases radium can be used to excess with resultant harm rather than good, but in view of the fact that the ravages of this disease are increasing so rapidly it seems to me that the Department of Public Health should pay some attention to this matter.


Peter McGibbon: How much of this
amount of $150,000 is for salaries?


John Warwick King: Salaries, $83,575.


Peter McGibbon: What does the balance
represent?


John Warwick King: Travelling expenses, $5,500; printing and stationery, $4,000; scientific apparatus and chemical supplies, $14,500; legal expenses, $30,500; sundry expenses, $11,925; making a total of $150,000.


Peter McGibbon: Will the minister give
us some details of that $30,000 for legal expenses?


John Warwick King: Those expenses
are incurred through proceedings taken under the Food and Drugs Act and under the Narcotics Act. I do not think I have the details before me of the information which the hon. member would like to have as to who received these fees. I think there was a return brought down a week or two ago giving the information for previous years.


Peter McGibbon: We are having a repetition of our experience this morning; when we desire information we cannot get it. In
every case we receive the answer that a return is going to be brought down some time, probably next year or the year after. The outstanding feature of the last few days in connection with the estimates for every department, has been that we are unable to obtain any information. Does the department retain any solicitors?


John Warwick King: No.


Peter McGibbon: Is it not the duty of
the Solicitor General to handle some of these
oases?


John Warwick King: The department
pays the expenses involved in the prosecu-. tions, although the Department of Justice taxes the costs. I have a report here for the legal expenses for 1927-28, if the hon. member is interested in that. The payments were as
follows:
P. Monette, Montreal	$11,215 82
Phelan and Richardson, Toronto.. ..	1,295 70
Wood, Hogg and Bird, Vancouver.. 1,951 10 Accounts under $1,000	 6,401 24
There are many prosecutions, and it runs into a good deal of money.


Peter McGibbon: What department
employed those lawyers?


John Warwick King: The Justice
department.


Peter McGibbon: And has not the minister or his department anything to say about that?


John Warwick King: We apply to the Department of Justice for the services of a lawyer. We have been doing work with their cooperation and seeking to get a firm of lawyers who will specialize on the work in the larger centres. That is being done in Montreal, Toronto, AVinnipeg and Vancouver. We think we get better results in that way.


Peter McGibbon: Are all those firms on
the patronage list?


John Warwick King: I do not know
anything about a list?

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Hugh Guthrie: What is the name of the firm in Toronto?


John Warwick King: Phelan and
Richardson.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I should like to draw the minister's attention to many requests which members have had with regard to full-time health units and the suggestion which has been made that the Department of Health should help these units throughout Canada, providing the money that has so far been provided by the Rockefeller Foundation. I have listened with a great deal of pleasure to very excellent speeches which have been delivered by several hon. members on this side of the house who happen to belong to the medical profession. Assistance to these health units was advocated by one of them the other night, but I do not think the minister gave any reply in regard to the matter. This seems to be an excellent opportunity for the Department of Health of the Dominion to step in and do some really constructive work. There is not the slightest doubt that although these health units have only started in a small way in Quebec and British Columbia-and I understand an effort is being made to start some in Alberta-nothing would do more for the public health than a properly organized effort in this respect supplemented by help from the Dominion. Without taking up further time of the committee, I should like the minister to make a statement as to his opinion in regard to this suggestion and whether or not some help may be expected in the near future.


John Warwick King: With the idea of
the establishment of health units in Canada the department is thoroughly in accord. We think it is an excellent measure, but to date the government have not considered that they should provide a portion of the money required to develop these units. It has seemed to us that if this policy is to become general throughout Canada and to be applied in various counties or districts, which would form units, it should remain, as it is to-day, under provincial control. That is the system which has been followed largely in the United States, where the conditions are very similar to our own, the only variation being in the devastated areas in the Mississippi district where the federal government stepped in and contributed. Outside of that the matter is left to the municipal or state authorities.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Did the Rockefeller Foundation not give a great deal of help in the United States?


John Warwick King: Yes, in the United States, and also in Quebec. That is a field which they have undertaken and in which they are doing very good work.


Henry Elvins Spencer: As Canadians we cannot
very well expect to receive help continually from an outside association.


John Warwick King: I think the Rockefeller Foundation are doing in that regard what they are doing in very many other fields with the tremendous funds at their disposal. It is true that they have come into Canada at times and subsidized various experimental institutions and health organizations. I think the work carried on by the mental hygiene council here is being subsidized very largely by the Rockefeller people. These health units are made up of counties or districts where the population would run from 20,000 to 30,000 and the annual cost is estimated at from $10,000 to $15,000. Under the system, a fulltime medical officer is stationed at a point within the district. He has a staff of nurses, assistants, clerks and so forth; he carries on a campaign of education, and is at hand to control epidemics. No doubt that plan is working well, not only in the United States but in some of the provinces and in other countries. So far the Dominion government has not considered the matter of giving grants from the federal treasury to these health units.


Henry Elvins Spencer: I take it for granted that the government has not closed the door on the possibility of a grant being made.


John Warwick King: No; it is being
considered.


Mr. COTNAM:: I should like to get a
definite statement from the Minister of National Health with regard to his attitude on the question of establishing local health units, and whether his department intends to cooperate with the municipalities and the provinces in this matter.


John Warwick King: I have just said
no; it has not been so decided at present.


Ira Delbert Cotnam: It seems to me that the
Department of National Health functions for the purpose of not functioning. It is very difficult to understand why we have a department of national health. I should like to know exactly what the functions of the department are. In what way is the department contributing to the general health of the Dominion of Canada? There can be no question in the mind of anyone in this country to-day that the greatest question of all is the preservation of our national health, and the federal Department of National Health is simply
2982	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
juggling with the question in order to avoid spending a little money to help the provinces in their work of maintaining the public health. The time has come when there should be a little more cooperation. This is not a political question; it is a great national question

the preservation of the health and happiness of the people of Canada.
The hon. member for Ontario a few moments ago spoke about the use of radium. Is it the intention of the minister or of his department to nationalize the supply of radium in- the Dominion? This is one of the live questions in the country to-day as regards the public health. The supply of radium in most of the cities is owned by private individuals, and as everyone is aware, radium is a very expensive metal and the treatment is also costly. At the present time radium is owned only in small quantities by medical men in various cities. I think the statement was made a short time ago that some eight private physicians in Toronto and the Toronto General hospital own all the radium in that city. Radium to-day has become one of the outstanding necessities in the treatment of the great plague of cancer which is abroad throughout the land. Practically every medical man in Canada who has had any experience in treating malignants, knows that there is no question that malignancy at the present time is greatly on the increase, not only in this country but throughout the world. Any method which even promises something of hope to those poor people who suffer from cancerous diseases, anything that will offer them any hope of life or relief from pain, should be supported by the Minister of National Health. In Sweden at the present time they have nationalized the supply of radium, and the government, and the Department of National Health should nationalize our supply so that in convenient places they could have establishments with adequate supplies of radium where these sufferers could be sent. People who cannot afford the treatment should not be deprived of the right to have it if it is going to lengthen their lives or relieve them from suffering. If that radium were supplied by the government and placed in accessible localities with men skilled in its use, this would be indeed a great boon for the poor people of the Dominion. There are many people in this country who are wealthy enough to procure .treatment in places where radium is obtainable in sufficient quantities, but unfortunately many men own radium in such small quantities that- it is not adequate to relieve the trouble it is intended to relieve,

and so I would impress on the minister the necessity of coordinating the work of his department with that of the provincial departments and considering seriously the necessity of establishing medical health offices in counties throughout the Dominion to cooperate with the provincial departments of health. I would also urge upon him the extreme necessity for nationalizing the supply of radium in this country, and considering in what way he can best cooperate with the .provinces in order to relieve the suffering of people in this country who are afflicted with cancer and at the present time are not able to get the radium treatment.


John Franklin White: Would the minister make a statement as to the treatment of cancer .and the activities of the department in that regard?


John Warwick King: I have said that we were not dealing in. any way with the treatment of cancer.


John Franklin White: Is not that within the functions of the department?


John Warwick King: We have not done so up to the present time.


Ira Delbert Cotnam: I feel very keenly on this subject. I do not think it is the business of the national health department to shuffle all the responsibility and all the work on to the provinces and the municipal health authorities. I would like a definite statement from the minister as to what is to be the attitude of the government and of the department in this matter, whether they are going to back up the provinces and .the municipalities in the conservation of the general health of the Dominion. It is a shame that in this country we are spending more on our live stock than we are spending to conserve the health of the people. I believe that the minister should look into this matter very, very carefully and give his decision to the house. Let us know just exactly what the department is doing or whether it has done anything at all towards mitigating the terrible scourge of cancer.


John Warwick King: I have been very
frank. I have told my hon. friend that the dfeipartment has made no study of cancer, that that work is going on in various universities and laboratories throughout the world. It is now the subject of a great deal of research. I do not wish to repeat what I have said in this house on a number of occasions, but up< to the present time our laboratory work has been devoted to maintaining the

Supply-Pensions and National Health
purity of our food products, maintaining the standards of drugs and medicines that are required, and protecting the public in relation to the proprietary medicines which heretofore were on the market.
There is nothing in the estimates for health units. I informed my hon. friend a few moments ago that we were thoroughly in sympathy with the health unit idea, but that it did not seem opportune or advisable for the department to supplement what the provinces are doing because it is generally understood that the more decentralized health matters are, the better. What we are doing through our committee on public health has been to bring together and synchronize the various activities that are provincial or interprovincial in character, but I do not believe that the people of this country ot that this government or the department are desirous of going into the provinces and trying to supersede or override the provincial health authorities. I can understand my hon. friend and many people desiring that from the treasury of this country there should be money paid to the provinces, but we have been told by those who are in charge of the provincial governments that unless these grants can be made continuous we had better not come in, because it would only involve the provinces in expenditures which they are not ready to undertake. At the interprovincial conference it was decided that it was desirable that the Dominion government should keep within its own field and the provincial governments within theirs, and that if the subsidies granted under the confederation agreement are found to be insufficient for the present needs of the provinces, the matter of increasing those subsidies should be considered. It is well understood in this house that that matter is being given consideration by the government. If the subsidies to the provincial governments are increased, and if they wish to develop health units out of the increased revenues, that is their business, and I have no doubt that they will do it without desiring some outside authority to supervise them.


Ira Delbert Cotnam: The minister says that his department is in sympathy with the health unit movement. It is only natural to suppose that the minister of health would be in sympathy with health matters throughout the Dominion, but the people are looking not so much for sympathy as for assistance. Sympathy may go a long way, but it does not accomplish much. I think the minister is not taking a proper stand with regard to the matter. It is the business of his department to cooperate with the provincial authorities
and coordinate the work of his department with that of the provincial department of health in every possible way even to the extent of making grants or using money for research work with a view to mitigating suffering and increasing the general health of this Dominion.


John Power Howden: I do not propose to answer at all for the Minister of National Health. I quite agree with the hon. member for North Renfrew that the rural health depot is a very desirable movement, and I would certainly like to see the federal health department make grants if possible, towards that movement. However, as we have heard on frequent occasions, it is the desire of the provinces, as far as we can understand, that grants be made at one time to cover everything, and since this is a provincial matter, doubtless in that way sufficient allowance will be made for the provinces to indulge in the rural health depots.
Just a word with regard to radium, Mr. Chairman. The radium treatment for cancer is by no means final and definite. If this government supplied a sufficient amount of radium to meet the needs of all the cities and all the surgeons throughout Canada it would cost millions of dollars, if not billions. Many years ago they used to try and cure cancer by burning it out with plasters of zinc sulphate. This was very often in the hands of quacks. Then came the time when we endeavoured to cure cancer by cutting it out, and if we got at it early enough and cut wide enough we were sometimes able to cure it for a few years. And now we have radium and X-ray, but the treatment is by no means definite and conclusive. If we had arrived at the stage where we were certain of there being a cure for cancer, I would say yes, by all means, let the federal government, the provincial governments, and any other government buy radium for the citizens of Canada. But we are not past the experimentation stage yet, and I think it would be decidedly unwise and quite unjustifiable for the federal government to spend a large amount of money in a supply of radium.


Ira Delbert Cotnam: Mr. Chairman, I cannot agree with the honourable gentleman in that statement with regard to radium, for this reason: He says that because we cannot cure all cases of cancer, and because it is not a sure cure the federal government should not spend any large amount of money on radium. In the history of medicine, had we all accepted that dictum from the beginning we never would have arrived anywhere. We would not
2984	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
today Ibe curing diphtheria with diphtheria antitoxin. Radium to-day is accepted as a treatment for cancer which in probably 30 or 40 per cent of the cases is as efficient as surgery; it is much less painful and it is just as sure, and if we can relieve 35 or 40 per cent of the malignant cases that people are suffering from to-day I think we should do everything possible, not spending as the hon. gentleman suggested possibly billions of dollars for radium, because that amount is not necessary, but probably one million dollars which would provide sufficient radium to alleviate a great deal of suffering and sickness, and in many cases prevent the death of people who are afflicted with cancer to-day. I do not think any private individual in this country can afford to own so much radium. Many of the men who are using it to-day are using it in such small quantities that it is not doing the work it is intended to do, and furthermore, many of them have not the experience or training necessary for the proper administration of it in connection with malignant diseases. I am asking that the government do something to assist in obtaining a national supply of radium, even if it only helps to control the scourge, and that they provide men who are skilled in the use of radium, in order to make the best use of that agent which is recognized to-day as one of the most efficient means of treating certain types of cancer.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pollution of inland waters, $16,000.
Arthur Edward Ross: Will the Minister
explain what is being done on this?


John Warwick King: This appropriation is being expended in maintaining the purity of the water of the inland lakes that is used for culinary and drinking purposes by the shipping of those lakes. There are employed a chief sanitary engineer at a salary of $3,780; an assistant engineer for western Canada at $2,820 a year, and a junior engineer at $1,800 a year. That is a salary list of $8,400. Travelling expenses and miscellaneous $7,600. This work not only relates to the purity of water on the great lakes, but also drinking and culinary water on international and interprovincial trains.


Mr. CARMICHAEL:: I would like to ask the minister if there is anything being done through his department to prevent the pollution of water in rivers in western Canada? I recall being asked the question in my own constituency. Quite a number of people are

required to use water from the South Saskatchewan river, and they stated that the ' water is polluted in many cases by refuse being thrown in, or in various ways it is polluted upstream, and they are obliged to use that water for drinking and cooking purposes because they cannot get well water.


John Warwick King: Our activities are confined to international waters such as the great lakes. The pollution of the riverp of the province would come under provincial control. It is true that where information is brought to us that pollution does take place we call attention to it and direct the authorities to take action, but it is under local control.


Archibald M. Carmichael: In the case I refer
to the river runs through two or three provinces. Suppose, for instance, the pollution takes place in the province west of Saskatchewan, what authority would Saskatchewan have to take action?


John Warwick King: I think we have
authority there and would act in conjunction with the province.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marine hospitals, including burial expenses of destitute deceased mariners and grants to institutions assisting sailors, $240,000.
Peter McGibbon: Will the minister tell
us how many patients they have had in these hospitals in the past year?


John Warwick King: Some five thousand odd. I think I gave the committee a few minutes ago the number treated in these hospitals. This is an expenditure for the treatment of sick and distressed mariners, who come to our shores as well as those employed on Canadian ships. We operate two marine hospitals, one at Sydney and one at Lunenburg, Nova Scotia. At other ports provision is made as far as possible for treatment of sick sailors, in the various local hospitals. Where there is no marine or designated hospital provision is made for their treatment at private residences. This fund is derived from the shipping that comes to our ports. Two cents a ton is charged for one voyage up to three, that is a ship coming into the port of Montreal would be taxed two cents on her tonnage which would go to this fund. This fund has been in existence since confederation, and the expenditure is very little less than the revenue obtained. Last year we collected $220,048 and expended $189,969.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Peter McGibbon: Are these patients all
treated free?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Peter McGibbon: Is the same treatment
accorded to Canadian sailors in other ports?


John Warwick King: Similar arrangements are made.


Peter McGibbon: If this fund is nearly
self-supporting why does the minister ask for such a large grant?	*


John Warwick King: It is paid into
the consolidated revenue, and we ask each year for a vote of this character.


Peter McGibbon: It is not necessary.


John Warwick King: We do not use
the money that is collected. It is paid into consolidated revenue.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Can the minister give
us the number of destitute mariners that have had to be buried on this side?


John Warwick King: I am informed
comparatively few, probably two, or three, or four, depending on circumstances.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Quarantine-salaries and contingencies of organized districts; public health in other districts; Traeadie and Bentinck island lazaret-toes, leprosy generally and Public Works Health Act, $210,000.
John Anderson Fraser: I see this refers to salaries. What amount of revenue does the Department of Health collect?


John Warwick King: The revenue collected in the department amounts to $287,759.48. That is made up as follows: from the Food and Drug Act, $11,193.55; from opium and narcotic drugs, $7,078.50; patent medicines, $7,140.75; sick mariners' dues, $223,283.46; casual revenue, $39,063.22. That will be found on page 77 of the report.


John Anderson Fraser: Let me ask the minister
if the officials who are responsible for the collection of that revenue are bonded.


John Warwick King: Some of them
are, yes.


John Anderson Fraser: I suppose the minister is familiar with the requirements of the aot with regard to public officers. Under section 12 he is required to register these bonds with the Secretary of State. Have these officials been properly registered?


John Warwick King: Yes.


John Anderson Fraser: I have the report here and the minister's officials do not appear therein. What is the explanation?


John Warwick King: The sick mariners' fees are collected by the Department of National Revenue in conjunction with our department, and that is a large item. These are bonds in connection with those officers.


John Anderson Fraser: Do I understand from the minister that the officer who collects these fees for his department is an official of the Department of National Revenue and not of his department ?


John Warwick King: They are agents for our department in the collection of these fees. They are shown under the Department of National Revenue.


Robert Gardiner: What is meant by "salaries and contingencies in organized districts"? What districts have been organized?
Mr. KING' (Kootenay): The organized districts are those where there are quarantine stations, as at Victoria, Halifax, Sydney, St. John and Grosse He in Quebec.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration medical inspection, $300,000.
Robert Gardiner: The minister might give us an outline of this.


John Warwick King: This appropriation is to cover the cost of medical examination of immigrants before embarkation 'and on arrival at Canadian ports, in accordance with section 5 of the Immigration Act, Which stipulates that persons who belong to prohibited classes, physically, mentally or socially undesirable, shall not be permitted to settle in Canada. It also covers the cost of operating the detention hospitals at ocean ports where immigrants who require medical attention .are kept. The increase is due to additional provisions made for more efficient medical examination overseas. It is estimated that the roster doctors now being appointed-there are about 450 British men now in that service-will examine about 25,000 prospective immigrants on a fee basis. The average cost will be about $2 each, but it is expected that the British treasury will refund 50 per cent of the fees paid. That is an arrangement entered into last year. Medical officers are also transferred temporarily from Quebec to other stations in the winter and are paid an allowance of $100 a month during that period. Under this vote salaries and living allowances overseas amount to $189,022.50; travelling expenses, $56,500; maintenance of detained persons, including furnishings for an addition to the Savard Park hospital, Quebec,
2986	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
now under construction, $14,000; roster doctors' fees, $25,000; miscellaneous, printing and stationery, $15,477.50. We have overseas 24 doctors. These were located within the last year more in the centres of the population, the work in the rural parts of Great Britain being done 'largely by what are known as roster doctors. We have our -own roster and make our own selection of British doctors, and, as I have said, there are some 450 of these acting for us this year. On the continent we have men stationed at points of embarkation, namely, Riga, Danzig, Hamburg, Rotterdam and Baris. We meet the people as they come in and they are examined. In Great Britain the service is more extensive.


Mr. LUCAS:: How many doctors are there in Great Britain?


John Warwick King: There are 21.


Robert Gardiner: Canadian doctors?


John Warwick King: Yes.


William Thomas Lucas: Are these stationed or do they travel about?


John Warwick King: They are stationed at the larger centres and they travel within that area.


Peter McGibbon: In view of that fact, how does the minister explain the enormous sum of $56,000 for travelling expenses?
Mr. KING' (Kootenay): Although these men are confined to the centres they will from time to time visit rural districts, keeping in touch with the roster doctors on the staff.


Peter McGibbon: It seems to me that $56,000 for travelling .expenses out of a total of $300,000 is out of all proportion. They must be taking a good many Cook's tours.


John Warwick King: No. There is a large sum spent every year in the transfer of officers from Quebec to St. John and Halifax during the winter, and back again in the spring. Experience has also shown us, in regard to the work on the continent, that with the rush of applicants coming in it is necessary to send men from the offices of Great Britain to various points on the continent to facilitate matters.


Peter McGibbon: Surely the department must be badly organized when 25 per cent of the total expenditure is taken up in travelling expenses.


Mr LUCAS:: Is it the intention of the department to retain the Canadian doctors in Great Britain now that they have appointed roster doctors there?


John Warwick King: There must be a number of Canadian doctors -in Great Britain to supervise the work, yes.	*


Robert Gardiner: What are the salaries .paid?


John Warwick King: The grade 3
medical officer, who is the chief officer, receives $5,250; grade 2, $4,590. and grade 1, $3,810.


William Thomas Lucas: I was under the impression that, according to the recommendations made last year,' after the appointment of roster doctors the department would gradually withdraw the Canadian doctors with the exception of a few at certain points. Apparently, however, they are all still there.


John Warwick King: We .are withdrawing some of them.


William Thomas Lucas: If I remember rightly, the number was originally 15; now it is 21.


John Warwick King: No; we had as many as 25 in Great Britain at one time. There have been two or three retirements and resignations but we are not increasing the number; on the contrary, we hope to reduce it.


William Thomas Lucas: Does the minister think it is necessary for these doctors to be paid travelling expenses amounting to $56,000?


John Warwick King: They must do a great deal of travelling.


William Thomas Lucas: That seems a very large expenditure.


John Warwick King: There is a good deal of travelling back and forth, and that includes the travelling expenses of our service here as well.


Robert Gardiner: Are they paid any living allowance over and above their salaries?


John Warwick King: Yes; $75 per month to grade 3 officers; $60 per month to grade 2 officers and $55 to grade 1 officers. That allowance is paid overseas only.


Robert Gardiner: How are these grades determined?


John Warwick King: By the Civil Service Commission.


Robert Gardiner: Upon examination?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Sidney Cecil Robinson: Would the minister tell us how much is paid the roster doctors and how much is paid the Canadian doctors?


John Warwick King: The roster doctor works on a fee basis, averaging about $2 for

29S7
Supply-Pensions and National Health
each examination. It is estimated that approximately 25,000 immigrants will be examined on a fee basis and, as I said before, 50 per cent of this amount will be paid by the British government.


Arthur Edward Ross: In view of the fact that immigration is to be curtailed and in fact restricted entirely to agricultural labourers and domestic servants, will the minister say why it is now necessary to maintain this inspection and, in fact, increase the item by $100,000?


John Warwick King: The immigration has not been curtailed as yet; it is larger than ever this year. If the immigration falls off and the service is not necessary, of course this amount will be reduced next year.


Arthur Edward Ross: But my point is that in spite of these inspectors in the old country we are in the unfortunate position of returning from 200 to 300 people each year, even after they have been inspected. Does the minister think that is a very good report; does he think it is fair to these people to be sent back after they have been passed by our selected inspectors overseas?


John Warwick King: I think it can be shown that there has been a falling off in the deportations because of physical unfitness since this service went into operation.


Arthur Edward Ross: Has the minister any figures showing that falling off?


John Warwick King: Yes. In 1927-28 there were 104 rejections on medical grounds and last year there were only 81. Many of the deportations are not made on medical grounds but come about because of the inability of the immigrant to make good. He may have some slight physical defect which would not bar him from Canada; if he fails to get along he magnifies his trouble and blames it for his failure, and to-day the municipalities are very insistent that these people who cannot take care of themselves shall be sent back. I think that largely accounts for many deportations.


Arthur Edward Ross: Evidently the
minister misunderstood my question; I am not referring to deportations but to rejections at our ocean ports. According to page 39 of the report of the Department of Immigration for 1926-27, 539 immigrants were rejected after being accepted in the old country. The following year there was a reduction, but that reduction only applied to Great
Britain and Italy. The minister has pointed out that in one year we had 104 rejections, and in the other year 81; I take that to mean rejections made on the other side.


John Warwick King: No, those rejections were made at ports of arrival.


Arthur Edward Ross: Then again there is a tremendous difference between the figures of the Department of Health and those of the Department of Immigration. If the rejections numbered only 81 I do not think there would be a great deal of trouble, but here are two official reports. Which are we to believe? We are given what we believe to be official figures with regard to rejections at ocean ports, but the figures of the Department of Health are quite different. According to the figures of the Department of Immigration in one year there were over 500 rejections and in the other year over 300, yet the minister has told us that there were only 81 rejections in the one year and 104 in the other.


John Warwick King: I am giving the figures for the year just closed.


Arthur Edward Ross: I have no figures for the year just closed, but I think we have here sufficient evidence of the fact that there is a good deal of unfairness and injustice done these people. I quite understand that according to the law final acceptance is made on this side, but it does seem strange that after an expenditure of $200,000 we should reject 300 people after they reach this country.


John Warwick King: They were not all rejected because of physical unfitness.


Arthur Edward Ross: We do not know the reasons for their rejection, but I do not think criminality, for instance, would arise in the short period of the voyage. Will the minister give me the reason for these rejections?


John Warwick King: Rejections are
made in some cases for lack of funds, for immorality, for criminality, for misrepresentation and for many other reasons.


Arthur Edward Ross: The minister mentioned immorality. Does he mean that in some cases immorality has occurred after the immigrant has left the other side and before he reaches Canada?


John Warwick King: Possibly, but these matters are handled by the immigration authorities. In some cases immigrants may be in Canada for a month or so before they are sent back.
2988	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


Arthur Edward Ross: That may be so with regard to deportations but it would not apply to rejections at ocean ports.


John Warwick King: There are many reasons for rejection.


Arthur Edward Ross: Where would you get the evidence of criminality or immorality after the man left the other side?


John Warwick King: That tendency
might reveal itself on the trip over, through theft and so on.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is more serious than I thought. Instead of having a medical inspection perhaps it would be better thoroughly to inspect the individual before he
leaves.


John Warwick King: Inquiries are made.


Arthur Edward Ross: Has the minister
seen the list of deportations? In view of the pronouncement which has been made that immigration will be lessened, instead of increasing this vote it should be decreased.


John Warwick King: There has been no lessening in immigration; in fact it is greater from Great Britain this year than it was last year.


Arthur Edward Ross: If there was coordination between the departments the Minister of Immigration would advise that he was going to lessen his work and the expenditure could be reduced in that regard.


John Warwick King: There will be that coordination, undoubtedly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.	'
Venereal diseases, $100,000.
Robert Gardiner: Could we have some information as to the progress which is being made along these lines?


John Warwick King: This is a service in which the provincial governments cooperate with the federal government. There are some 56 clinics in operation throughout the various provinces which provide free treatment of venereal diseases. Laboratory facilities are also provided for diagnoses, and in addition there are subsidiary Clinics in the hospitals and institutions where treatment is given. The patients in remote districts are treated through an arrangement with the local physicians. This 
grant is divided according to the population of the provinces, and the expenditures for 1927-28 were as follows:
Nova Scotia	 $ 5,790 00
New Brunswick	
4,287	22Quebec	
26,098	47Ontario	
32,425	93Manitoba	
6,743	67Saskatchewan	
8*372	80Alberta	
6*504	21British Columbia	5,798 23Printing and stationery	
2,837	58
Under the arrangements with the provincial governments they are to spend a like amount of money.


Peter McGibbon: This seems to be "a
vicious principle" which is followed in the latter part of the minister's estimates, but which cannot be followed in the first part of the estimates.


John Warwick King: This arrangement originated shortly after or during the latter part of the war, when it was represented that there would be the necessity of establishing clinics. At one time the amount voted was $200,000. There is no doubt that the establishment of these laboratories and clinics throughout Canada has done a great deal of good and the work being done in the various provinces by certain public health bodies has been very helpful. This is particularly true of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, which provinces have been very active in the matter of controlling these venereal diseases.


Robert Gardiner: Has the minister any information as to whether or not this control is becoming more efficient?


John Warwick King: I could not say
that we have succeeded in controlling infection from venereal diseases, but where early care and treatment has been given the results have been very satisfying. Human nature has not changed very much.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Is there any compulsory registration? While I am on my feet may I ask whether the department keeps any statistics based on reports received from the different hospitals, which would show whether or not the disease is increasing?


John Warwick King: Every case is recorded and registered; reports are received each month from the clinics.


Henry Elvins Spencer: How about those who do not attend the clinics?

Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Warwick King: If we do not get in touch with them we have no report, but every case which comes in contact with the clinics is reported on.


Henry Elvins Spencer: Do the medical associations report to the department?


John Warwick King: The medical men do, not the associations.


John Power Howden: The provincial health laws require that all these cases be reported as soon as they are discovered.


Mr. GERSHAW:: Mr. Chairman, I agree with the minister's statement that considerable good is being done through the work of his department, not only in the way of actual treatment but through the literature which is being broadcast throughout the country. The department publish a great number of booklets dealing with the care of infants, the care of mothers, and subjects of that nature, and these are circulated and may be obtained by anyone who is interested. I believe they are doing a great deal of good. Like other members of the house, I have received quite a few petitions from different organizations throughout the province of Alberta urging me to use my influence with the department to have assistance given in establishing health units, and I am glad to hear the minister say that the door is still open. I hope his department will be able to help the provincial organizations in the establishment of these units in the different provinces, more especially in the more remote districts. We had a very interesting discussion this afternoon on cancer, but I hope that that discussion will not give the people of this country the impression that that disease can be cured by radium treatment. If that should happen I am afraid it will only bring further disappointment to many sufferers. As we know, radium will cure some cancers, if they are in an accessible position and if treated early, but in other cases the results obtained are not as satisfactory as we would like them to be. The hon. member knows that a great deal of research work is being done by the Rockefeller Foundation and like institutions and should the department undertake similar work it would be duplicating What they are doing in this connection. But I do not think the people suffering from this disease should be allowed to get the impression that radium will eliminate their trouble.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pensions and National Health-care of patients and medical examination of pensioners, $2,600,000.
Arthur Edward Ross: On the suspension of this item tiwo evenings ago I asked the minister for certain information. I think it was in regard to the number of patients by provinces and the amount of money spent.


John Warwick King: I think my hon. friend inquired regarding the reorganization of the departments of health and soldiers' civil re-establishment. These departments were amalgamated by an enactment of last year. The deputy minister of health became the deputy minister of the new department, which is now termed the Department of Pensions and National Health. The functions and activities of the former department of health have continued to be administered as a separate entity. For some time the fusion of these two departments will be somewhat difficult. There will be maintained for some years the section dealing with soldiers' affairs and the section dealing with health as we have been discussing it this afternoon. But it is possible to bring about fusion in certain instances. In Vancouver we have the Shaugh-nessy hospital where we have been looking after the veterans. Vancouver being one of our large seaports, it will be possible to treat a certain type of injured mariner or a mariner requiring surgical aid in Shaughnessy hospital through the staff employed under what is now known as the pension section. From year to year I have no doubt that as conditions develop there will be a union of the two services.
Prior to reorganization we had what might be considered dual control. That is, in the head office the director of medical services was responsible to the deputy minister, whereas in the field the medical officer was responsible to the director of medical services and the administration was responsible to the director of administration. We have made these services directly responsible to the deputy minister.
Possibly the most important item of the reorganization has been the consummation of an agreement with the Board of Pension Commissioners whereby the board have been provided with the necessary staff, medical, clerical and stenographic, both at head office and in the districts. This will enable the Board of Pension Commissioners to control the persons required to prepare the data necessary to accompany applications for pensions to t'he point where the board are able to adjudicate on

Supply-Pensions and National Health
tihe question of entitlement to pensions and to assess, in eases of injury or disease, the degree of disability present. This staff at present is lent to the pension board and consists of about 100 employees. With this service coming within the purview of the Civil Service Commission, it will then become attached to the Board of Pension Commissioners.
The Department of Pensions and National Health has continued to give effect to the ruling of the Board of Pension Commissioners in the matter of payment of pensions authorized by the board and in the matter of maintaining the necessary statistics and records for such payments. The department also continues to care for what may be termed the auxiliary services, such as the custody of files, which must of necessity be used by the board and the department; the issuance of transportation to men called in for examination for pensions; the medical examination of all men for admittance to hospitals. The above arrangement has been made after consultation with the Board of Pension Commissioners and with their concurrence. In addition to the above, many changes have been made in the method of handling the internal work of the department. Practically all the recommendations of the Scott report have been carried out.
I think my hon. friend asked for a comparison in regard .to the staff. The total number employed by the department on January 31, 1929, amounted to 1,973 persons, including 100 lent to the Board of Pension Commissioners, and in March, 1928, the number employed was 1,969. This would indicate a slight increase, but that is accounted for by the fact that whereas on March 31, 1927, we had 48,027 disability pensioners, on March 31, 1928, there were 50,635 and on March 31, 1929, there were 54,620. This means that there is an additional number of pensioners receiving benefits under the Pension Act and under the treatment and hospitalization that is given to that Class. In addition, .the reopening of the Returned Soldiers' Insurance Act has necessitated the addition of some ten or twelve officials to take care of new applications and to issue policies, and again some of our medical officers, who heretofore have been on a fee basis, have been placed on a part-time salary basis, .thus saving the department considerable sums of money, besides being more satisfactory.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Did the minister state how the sum of $250,000 was spent that was given for indigent cases?


John Warwick King: I -will come to that. The total number of soldier patients admitted to treatment during the fiscal year 1928-29 was 8,890 as compared with 8,191 in the fiscal year 1927-28. I have indicated that there is a very considerable increase in the number of disabled men who are receiving pensions for disability and injury, these additional cases being obviously entitled to treatment of their pensionable disability when need arises. My hon. friend the other evening asked in regard to sheltered employment. The care of this class, a problem of the department to which a great deal of thought is given, is causing much worry to the department, Many of these veterans are getting old and are probably suffering from disease incidental to old age. The department is sometimes criticized for the unfortunate position in which these individuals find themselves. Usuallj' they are unable to secure adequate employment, they are too old to be satisfactorily trained in new trades, and are unwilling to be placed in a category where they have to request assistance from the department in the way of unemployment relief. If they are married they do not want to be separated from their families, and they do not want to go into the hospitals or other institutions where they can receive treatment and care. Many of these cases are pensioners who do not require hospital treatment for injury or disease received on service, but rather what is called veterans' care or domiciliary care. Under the recommendations of last year we are taking care of many of these cases. Just here I might explain that when the public works estimates were under consideration the leader of the opposition asked in regard to the construction of a hospital in Winnipeg for the care of the soldiers in that district, and it seemed to be his impression that this hospital was being built and made a standard hospital. That is not the case. As a matter of fact for a period of years we have rented quarters where the convalescent cases or cases requiring veterans' care could be looked after. We have now built in Winnipeg a hospital of 250 beds to which that type of case will go. The active cases requiring surgical or medical treatment will continue to go to the general hospitals in that city.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Arthur Edward Ross: Is this an attempt
to take care of the inactive cases?


John Warwick King: Yes, largely.


Arthur Edward Ross: Are they of the old class?


John Warwick King: Largely.


Arthur Edward Ross: Is this the first move to provide a sort of home for these inactive
cases?


John Warwick King: I imagine that
eventually it will become that. There is a number of cases in every locality where nothing can be done for the patient in the way of medical or surgical treatment. He requires some place where he can be taken care of. Winnipeg is the only place between the great lakes and Calgary where we have a government institution of that kind.
In the case of the individual who is having difficulty in securing employment in industry, we in cooperation with the various employment bureaus throughout Canada have been selecting these cases. Where they cannot learn a trade, they may be able to perform some operation in the manufacture of some article, and we are trying to place them with various industrial establishments where they can do work of that nature. Some are being taken care of in that way. Unfortunately there are some who are unemployable, and who will have to have something in the way of institutional treatment or care.
My bon. friend also asked in regard to staff terminations. The figures are as follows:
1927-28. . 1U2ST929
Staff Terminations
N.S.&
H.O. P.E.I. N.B. Que. Ont. 22	11	3	37	8033	11	7	33	105Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Total 6	6	18	18316	3	8	10	226


Arthur Edward Ross: In regard to those patients, the number this year is 8,890. When Mr. Melville came to me I asked him if it would be as easy to give the figures by provinces and for two years, this year and last. I just wanted to see what increase had taken place.


John Warwick King: On March 31,
1929, the figures were as follows:

	-4-S G O)		CO JO	
District	Genera Treatm	Mental	o t-4 a>
rO H	TotalA-Montreal district .	. 90	275	27	392


Arthur Edward Ross: What lare the figures for the year before?


John Warwick King: Those are not
shown by districts.


Arthur Edward Ross: Mr. Melville said
that he would have a table prepared covering the two years, this year and last.


John Warwick King: I will get that for the convenience of my hon. friend. The
proportions do not change much from year to year. We handled more cases last year by six or seven hundred. To continue:
__ CD
d g
District	S
G <D



B-Halifax district .. 117 C-Ottawa district ..	81
D-1Toronto district.. 297 F-London district .. 138 G-Winnipeg district. 206 II-Regina district ..	40
I-Calgary district .. 163 J-Vancouver district. 161 K-St. John, N.B. dis-triet	 53
a
<<
5
427
82
98
"fa

o
.a

13
76
25
46
198
388
315
229
84
I shall foe glad to give my hon. friend a copy of that.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is just to see how this keeps up and where the increases are. Where is the increase of 700 generally made up, in what type of cases?


John Warwick King: It is made up of the increased number of pensioners as compared with a year or two ago, and the fact that we are treating more people for nonpensionable disabilities. There have been

2992	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
quite a number of that type coming in since last winter. And then again there has been the soldier who is not able to get into institutions for care and treatment who has come to us to receive care and attention in our institutions. Under the veterans' care there were 115 of that type in our hospitals.


Arthur Edward Ross: And this is the first year that this type comes under the recommendation made that the department should not turn away the veteran.


John Warwick King: Exactly.


Arthur Edward Ross: I wanted to study this matter to find out just where the increase was, and until I get the information I am not prepared to make the remark I desire to make. Where are the mental cases cared for?


John Warwick King: Those in the
Quebec area at Ste. Anne's hospital; at Halifax in the provincial mental institution, and the same in New Brunswick; in Ontario at London, in the departmental hospital, Westminster; in Manitoba we use the provincial institution; the same in Alberta, and the same in British Columbia.


Arthur Edward Ross: Is there still an inspector of hospitals in connection with these cases? It formerly was Dr. MeCoomb; is he still in the employ of the department?


John Warwick King: No.


Arthur Edward Ross: Is there any
inspection made or care taken of these cases? Is there any special relation between them and the department after they are confined to those provincial institutions?


John Warwick King: Doctor Cathcart is the chief psychiatrist in the department. He is at the present time making a survey of those institutions in western Canada. Last year he made a very comprehensive survey in eastern Canada.


Arthur Edward Ross: Would the minister state where the tubercular cases are treated?


John Warwick King: In Nova Scotia at Kentville; that is a provincial institution. In the Toronto district, at the Mountain sanatorium at Hamilton, the Calydor sanatorium at Gravenhurst, the Byron sanatorium at London; in Manitoba at Ninette sanatorium. That is a private organization. In Saskatchewan at Fort Qu'Appelle; in Alberta at Robertson, and in British Columbia at Tranquille, 	^ '
near Kamloops; in New Brunswick at the River Glade sanatorium, and also the St. John county hospital.


Arthur Edward Ross: There are some
cases treated in general hospitals.	.


John Warwick King: We have some in our own hospitals.


Arthur Edward Ross: What is the wish of the ex-servicemen with regard to treatment in general hospitals?


John Warwick King: It varies. When I was in British Columbia last year I found men there who would have been better off at Kamloops, but they asked to come back to Vancouver. They preferred to be in the tubercular ward there. I do not think there is any prejudice one way or the other.


Arthur Edward Ross: It is really a condition that belongs to the case.


John Warwick King: I think so.


Arthur Edward Ross: Just a word or two in regard to the reorganization. It looks as if the minister's reorganization has been to transfer 100 medical men from under the old soldier's re-establishment department to the pension board.


John Warwick King: My hon. friend
said 100 medical men; that is not so. A staff of 100 has been transferred. That is an important part of the reorganization, but not all, because that established a relationship between the pension board and the department which I am afraid did not exist before.


Arthur Edward Ross: Then what was
known as the "D.M.S." is now known as what?


John Warwick King: Director of Medical Services.


Arthur Edward Ross: He is still the D. M.S.?


John Warwick King: Yes. He is responsible to the deputy.


Arthur Edward Ross: The only difference then is that these medical men, and the staff connected with them, are transferred directly from the soldiers' re-establishment department to the pension board.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.

Supply-Pensions and National Health
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
M.r. ROSS (Kingston):	I understood the
minister to say that the members of the staff who had retired in the two years he gave numbered 183 in 1927-28 and 226 in 192829. Is that correct?


John Warwick King: That is correct.


Arthur Edward Ross: Following that up, will the minister now give me the number added to the department during those two years.


John Warwick King: I gave the number of retirements for 1928-29; I will now give the number of appointments per district:
1927-28 1928-29
Staff appointments at headquarters	
36	44Prince Edward Island	
5	12New Brunswick	
3	3Quebec	
24	38Ontario	
69	91Manitoba	
9	12Saskatchewan	
4	1Alberta	
4	16British Columbia	
7	18
This makes a total for 1927-28 of 161, and 1928-29, 235.


Peter McGibbon: What is the necessity
for so many appointments?


John Warwick King: In 1928-29 there
were 129 resignations; 15 retired on account of ill health; there were 30 surplus; 16 were unsatisfactory; there were 4 eases of misconduct; there were 21 doing temporary dirty; and there were 10 deceased.


Peter McGibbon: How many resignations
were asked for?


John Warwick King: I do not know
of any asked for, although there may have been some.


Arthur Edward Ross: 'How many of
these were civil service appointments?


John Warwick King: Not very many.


Arthur Edward Ross: None?


John Warwick King: Not very many.
Mr. ROSS' (Kingston); Would it be one per cent?


John Warwick King: Lees than that.


Arthur Edward Ross: Will the minister
now give us the names of the medical officers appointed last year? First, I should like to have those appointed at headquarters and
secondly those added to the different units- that is, full time appointments. Beginning with headquarters, what medical officers were appointed in the last twelve months?


John Warwick King: At headquarters
there was the Director of Medical Services, Doctor Millar, and Doctor Davies is doing temporary work in connection with insurance. If my memory serves me, those are all at headquarters, except that Doctor Burke of Toronto entered the service three weeks ago and is now at Ste. Anne.


Peter McGibbon: Whom did they replace?


John Warwick King: Doctor Millar
replaced Doctor Arnold, the former medical director. Doctor Davies is merely a temporary appointee, working under the extended insurance act.


Arthur Edward Ross: The minister is
not prepared to answer.


John Warwick King: Yes, I think so.


Arthur Edward Ross: I would as soon
have the list of officers appointed in the last twelve months.


John Warwick King: Of course, in the field appointments have been made of men who are -doing work on a fee basis from week to week. I have not that information at the moment. There are men resigning or dropping out and others being appointed. They are not permanent; they are on a fee basis and their services are obtained from time to time. I have not that information here, but it can be secured and I will see that my hon. friend gets it.


Arthur Edward Ross: Now I am going
to sum up my opinion of what has been brought out during the course of our investigation into these matters. Under this item there are two or three points to be considered. First there is the reorganization, and in making a criticism at this time I must say that one has to forget personal feelings. We all have a kindly feeling for the Minister of Pensions, but as members of parliament it is our duty to investigate the conduct of public affairs, to draw conclusions and if possible to make sensible or reasonable criticisms which at the same time should be constructive. When this department was reorganized one year ago we were led to believe that with the dismissal of the assistant deputy minister and several other officials some really constructive work would be ac-
2994	*	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
complished and there would be a reduction in the cost of conducting this work, but what do we find? There has been no reduction at all but rather an increase in every way. I should like this committee to consider for a few moments what has happened. In order to do so you must take your bluebook together with the estimates for the last two years, and that will give you an idea of what has really been accomplished in the way of reorganization.
I find that this department has 'been reorganized to this extent:	There has been
dropped an assistant deputy minister whose salary was $4,860; in his place there has been added a chief executive officer whose salary is $4,920. There has been dropped in this reorganization one pathologist and bacteriologist whose salary was $2,820, and there has been added one assistant chemist at a salary of $2,940. There has been dropped one senior clerk at a salary of $3,480, and there has been added one chief clerk at a salary of $3,480. There have been dropped two accountants at salaries of $2,720 and there has been added so far one clerk at a salary of $2,100. In all, the reorganization of this Department of Pensions has resulted in the staff remaining fixed at 93, and there has been an increase in expenditure of $80,000. The total increase in this department has now cost this country $344,000, and that is the result of this reorganization.
Then this item provides for the care of patients. Let us again look up the estimates for two years, and we will find what has been done. In 1927 we were asked to vote $2,075,167 for the care of patients; in 1928 we voted $2,092,339 for this purpose, and this year we are asked to vote $2,600,000. We have no objection to everything being done for these men who have suffered and who to-day are in ill health as a result of the war, but look at the other side of the picture. In order to look after these returned men, whose care cost us $2,075,000 in 1927, we expended $2,713,000; that is, it cost us $2,713,000 for officials and so on in order to provide for these patients for whose care we voted $2,075,000. In 1928 we voted $2,092,000 for the returned men, but it cost us $2,688,384 to expend that sum, and this year we are asked to vote $2,600,0(K>
for the returned men and $2,900,000 for administration. In these days when we believe it possible to reduce staffs and give better treatment and better care with a smaller expenditure, the cost of administration in this department is increasing by leaps and bounds.
How is that increase explained, Mr. Chairman? I can explain it in one or two ways,

and first we might look at the report having reference to the hospitals. At Christie Street hospital, Toronto, there are 370 patients; to care for those patients we have a staff of 36 medical officers, practically one for every ten patients, and hospital staff of 198, one for every two patients; at Ste. Anne's hospital there are 398 patients, with 13 doctors and a staff of 193; at Westminster hospital there are 480 patients, with 14 doctors and a staff of 202, It does seem that, having undertaken this reorganization, the minister might have been expected to come to parliament this year and say, "We have reduced expenditures in the way of administration; we have been able to do better work and better .results have been obtained for less money," but what do we find? The minister says that two years ago they released 183 members of their staff, and last year 226 were dropped. One would say it was good work to reduce the staff of the department to that extent, but what has happened? To-day the minister comes to parliament with figures which show that while the Staff numbered 1,969 a year ago, it now numbers 1,971. Instead of a reduction we have an increase all along the line, and this is the supposed result of the reorganization. I have that criticism to make of the two matters which come under this * one item, reorganization and the care of patients. I think that criticism is fair and is one which this house should consider, especially the minister and his department. Surely it is not necessary at this late date for the minister to say that he requires $2,900,000 in order to. give the returned men some $2,600,000 in the way of hospital assistance, allowances and so on. I will have further criticisms and further questions in regard to the other items, but that is my criticism of this one. It is based on the minister's own figures and on the figures given in the bluebook of his department, and is my interpretation of what has been accomplished by the minister in the way of reorganization and the care of patients.


John Warwick King: If the hon. member had waited probably he would not have fallen into the error under which he seems to be labouring. It is true that there has been an increase of $150,000 in the vote this year; it is also true that we show an increase in staff, but for the year 1928-29 the salary vote is $211,056 as against $277,208, showing a saving of some $60,000, although there has been an increase in the staff. That increase is brought about by the temporary employment of some 10 or 12 people in the insurance

Supply-Pensions and National Health
department, and by the fact that we have transferred some of the medical men from a fee basis to a part time basis.
I would like to explain to the house just how the increase of $150,000 is made up. It is estimated that it will cost $200,000 to take care of the free treatment of indigent pensioners, that is, pensioners who, under the act as it originally existed previous to last year, were not entitled to treatment except for their pensionable disability. Then we have an amount necessitated by the legislation of last year, being the amount of pensions in excess of compensation rates previously received by men undergoing treatment by the department, the payment of which pensions is now suspended in accordance with the Pension Act, section 29, amended in 1928. This totals $100,000, making a total increase of $300,000 in this vote. Then we have a decrease of $145,000 brought about by transferring the wages of operatives employed in the orthopaedic and surgical appliances factories and depots which were previously paid through this appropriation, to the salary vote. This decrease leaves a total increase of $155,000, due to the amendments which were passed last year.
The hon. member indicated that our staff was too great at Christie street hospital, and that the cost of running the hospital was too high. I would like to give a comparative statement of the costs per patient in civic hospitals as compared with our hospitals. The civic hospital costs are as follows:
Per day
50 to 100 bed hospital	
$3	45100 to 200 bed hospital	
3	21200 bo 300 bed hospital	
3	47300 to 400 bed hospital	
3	58Over 400 bed hospital	
3	69Average cost	
3	45
The cost per patient in our hospitals are as follows:
Per day
Camp Hill hospital	
$2	58Lancaster hospital	
2	87St. Annes hospital	
2	75Christie Street hospital	
3	43Westminster hospital	
2	16Deer Lodge hospital	
1	72Col. Belcher hospital	
2	62Shaughnessy hospital	
2	86Average cost	
268
The hon. member says that our staff is too large considering the number of patients. It is true that we are well staffed in our hospitals, but we must be. There must be a change of nurses every eight hours; changes of orderlies are necessary, and we have a general service which is peculiar and necessary to a hospital such as Christie street. In
Christie street hospital I think we have as well equipped and as well managed a hospital as any institution in Canada or the United States. I do not think it is necessary to go further into the matter of the staff, other than to say it is in line with the organizations in other hospitals. It is not fair to say that there are so many attendants for each patient, because we have not only the medical staff, but the clerical staff, the nursing staff, the orderlies, the engineers, and the electricians, just like any other hospital.
As far as the expenditures are concerned, we are operating to-day at a lesser cost than any other hospital in Canada, and we include the medical services rendered, an item which is not ordinarily taken into account in the cost of running a civilian hospital.


Arthur Edward Ross: Is that the answer?


John Warwick King: I think it is a pretty effective answer.


Arthur Edward Ross: Does the minister think that it is fair to make a comparison between a general hospital and a hospital which has no overhead charges or anything of the kind?


John Warwick King: We include our doctors' services, which is not taken into account in a civilian hospital. We do not count our rentals or the full maintenance or upkeep, as that part is taken care of by the Public Works department.


Arthur Edward Ross: In other words, it is no basis of comparison and is no answer to my criticism.


John Warwick King: It is a complete answer.


Arthur Edward Ross: I think the minister sees my point.


John Warwick King: The one offsets the other.


Arthur Edward Ross: The minister is
not taking into account the overhead costs, the repairs or upkeep of the buildings; they all come under the Public Works department and the estimates of that department will show an amount of hundlreds of thousands of dollars for that purpose. My criticism that there has been n<o serious reorganization still stands; in other words, there is no reduction whatever. The minister has picked up in one body, as in a ibag, a staff of 100 with its medical officers, and transferred them from the director of medical service of his department to the department of pensions.
2996	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
That is the reorganization which has been made. In other words, he has taken a medical man who was under a senior medical man and placed him uncter a senior administrative officer with no medical man at the head. When we come to the items concerned, I shall have some criticisms and suggestions to offer with regal'd to other medical officers.


Mr. SPEAKMAN:: There are two angles
from which one may approach the subject involved in the item under discussion. Both, I think, are legitimate features; both must be kept in mind, and both are important. One is that from which it has been dealt with by the hon. member for Kingston, who has carefully studied the administrative cost of the method and the results of the reorganization, and has madle a very close analysis of the matter from that point of view. I shall not go into that at all, because the other angle from which I wish to approach the subject, together with this one, practically covers the whole question.
The particular feature to which I wish to refer is the service given or the service which may be necessary. On that point I want to speak for a moment in regard to perhaps the most important question that was before the house and the committee last year in connection with the subject of our returned men. I refer to the problem, which we attempted to face and the importance of which we realized, of the men who, not pensionable or carrying very small pensions, find themselves now broken down under what is sometimes called "burning out," sometimes called premature old age, but all, in the opinion of most of us, the result of their experiences overseas.
I am bringing the question up with a dual purpose, the first being that the country-I need not say parliament, because parliament always has the matter in mind-may not forget those things which happened ten years ago. The public memory is short and the vision of things that are passed is veTy apt to die away. From two points of view it would, to my mind, be very unfortunate if we forget this. The first is, of course, the debt we owe to the men themselves; the second is that, as time goes on and the tangible results of the war fade out, a new generation arises that has not had the experience through either itself or its friends of what war means. If the memory of these things is allowed to die, one of the greatest possible bars against a future waT has been broken down. That is one reason why I should like to keep this subject before the people of tlie country. The other is the

matter of the debt we owe. We believe this premature old age or "burning out" is definitely one of the phases of the war which has passed. I think, too, it is one of the phases that we must face more and more seriously as time, goes on, and one of the phases in which we shall have the sympathetic' interest and assistance of the whole country. In reference to that, and as illustrating my point, namely, that the country as a whole is prepared t'o accept the problem and deal generously and faiiily with it, may I read a very short resolution that was passed by one of our farmer organizations? This resolution was passed unanimously by the United Farmers of Alberta at their annual convention last January, a convention of, I presume, as representative a body of taxpayers a3 will be found in Canada. The resolution reads:
Whereas, it is generally recognized by medical men that soldiers who have suffered the hardships of active service are more susceptible to numerous ailments and diseases by reason of such service;
Therefore be it resolved, that wre petition the Dominion government to enact legislation granting free medical attention and hospital treatment to all men who served in the Canadian forces overseas during the great war.
This question was brought before the committee last year and was definitely dealt with by them. Their inquiry took the form of a recommendation which again formed part of their report. The preface to the recommendation enumerated the different methods which we are employing to meet the situation, all the different organizations that are trying to deal with these problem cases and care for these men. Then the committee's report stated it as their firm conviction, not only that the problem existed, but that before very long any government in power must take cognizance of it and be prepared to bring down a definite policy to meet it.
As I listened to the minister this afternoon, I noted, with some pleasure, that a number of the minor recommendations were gradually being put into force; that the basis of hospitalization, as given without cost, was being widened and now includes to a large degree the small pension class, those who, pensioned for war disability, stilll have not a pension which enables them to live. The Teason is that a man might have only 20 or 25 per cent or less pensionable disability due entirely to war service, but he might, in addition to that, have other disabilities which, although not attributable to war service, taken in conjunction with the first render him unable to support himself. To that extent the report is met, but the definite part of the

Supply-Pensions and National Health
report was this: that the government was asked, through all its various agencies, by way of commission or otherwise, to investigate the question, to see what had been and could be done to meet the problem, and to ascertain, if it thought wise, the methods employed in other countries than our own in meeting the same question. The report concluded with the emphatic statement that, this information 'having been obtained by the government, it must then be prepared to come forward with some fairly definite policy to meet the situation.	,
That was the report of the committee, and those are the observations which I have to make-a summing up of facts of which I think everyone is cognizant, a summing up of the opinions of the committee as found in their report of last year. Based on that, I am going to ask the minister to go a little further in informing us as to the extent to which the government followed up that preliminary inquiry' and as to the result so far as it may be a guide in the formation of a policy which may meet the situation.
Before taking my seat I should like to say one personal word, not in connection with myself, but in connection with the minister. I am not going to discuss at this moment the question of administrative ability, or the results, either from the administrative or from the economic point of view of the reorganization of the department. But I am going to say this, and I think all in this house, whether they are critical or not, can say the same: Forgetting these other things, we are glad to have a minister who at least takes a sympathetic view of this question, and who did I believe give to the committee all possible assistance, both personally and through his department. I would ask the minister to trace the steps that were taken to conform with the report of the committee last year.


John Warwick King: The committee
last year made a recommendation as to treatment:
That provision be made for free hospitalization without pay and allowances in respect of non-service disabilities for all pensioners who are unable to provide the same at their own expense.
That recommendation has been acted upon, to the advantage I think of those who have not the wherewithal to pay for the treatment which they would ordinarily secure at their own cost.
We have the problem of what to do with the man who is getting old and burning out. He cannot find employment and he has his difficulties. He has a small pension. Under the
legislation that existed previous to last year he would not be entitled to treatment except for his pensionable condition. To-day that case is provided for. As far as the accommodation available within our own institutions and within contract hospitals is concerned, we have gone as far as the American people if not further, because they provide that they will take care of the soldier who is in distress, and who has not. the means to provide for his own care and treatment only so far as the accommodation in- their military hospitals will permit. They do not go into the contract hospitals except in the possessions outside of the United States.
I made a statement this afternoon in regard to some of those cases where the men are disabled and are growing old. The officers of the department in conjunction with different-organizations in the larger centres are trying to find some form of employment for these cases in addition to what is given in the vet-craft shops that are maintained by the department in the larger centres throughout Canada. I stated that if it was found, after study of the individual case, that a man owing to age or disability, could not be trained to follow some occupation, he might yet be able to carry on some particular operation in an industry, and in that case he would be trained by the department to do that particular job, and we would seek employment for him in that industry. During the time of his vocational training the department would subsidize and maintain him. If he was able to learn that one operation and could fill a place in that industry doing the thing he had been trained to do, he would become self-supporting and earn a decent livelihood. That work has been going on for some time. As time advances, these cases become more difficult because the men are growing older and they have suffered from the fant that they have not been able to have the employment which they certainly would like to have had. The results in our vetcraft shops last year were rather encouraging. We took in 169 new men, and 132 were discharged, the total number on strength being 296. It is the object in these shops to train a- man, and afterwards to find him employment outside the shop, keeping the personnel of the shops moving on from time to time. Last year I think we were more successful than previously in bringing in some who had been outside and in finding places for those who had been trained within. I might add that we have a departmental committee which is collecting data in regard to this type of case. That information is being
2998	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
assembled in the department. This year it is proposed to have competent officers go into the various centres and study the problem there and see what is being done, and within the next year or two I am in hopes that it will be possible to evolve a policy that can be followed.
We are now some years away from the war. As was stated by the committee which did such excellent work last year, and by the House of Commons, our problems are not settled yet. For some time yet, before they are completely settled, they will require consideration from year to year. I mentioned this afternoon the new building that was being constructed in Winnipeg with a view to providing a place where a certain type of case, if it does not require active hospital treatment, could be sent to be cared for under conditions that are more pleasant and probably better and less expensive than in a general hospital.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The Minister of
Public Works gave the house to understand that the Winnipeg General Hospital had served notice that the soldier patients had to leave. I think the superintendent of the Winnipeg General Hospital states that that is not correct. Would the minister be good enough to explain the situation?


John Warwick King: I had an opportunity last year to meet the superintendent of the Winnipeg General and the authorities of the St. Boniface hospital. It was indicated to us that they could not increase our accommodation within their building; in fact, they needed to build additions to take care of the civilian population, and they could give us no further bed space. We had previously had control of Deer Lodge, an old wooden building, where we were taking care of some seventy or eighty cases, convalescents and cases of that type. We decided that within that very large area extending from Port Arthur to Regina and even further west we required some place that could be used for the care of convalescents and for veterans' care, and that is what this institution will be used for. That is a step which I think will be taken in other parts of Canada. It is true that we have some buildings that could be utilized, and they are being kept in shape in case it should be necessary at a later date to utilize them; but no such building existed in Winnipeg to take care of the type of case that I am speaking of. As regards those who are suffering from active illness or require active medical or surgical treatment, they will go to the general hospitals in the city of Winnipeg.

I was going on to explain that we have in Canada a medical service provided through various organizations-in the railway service of Canada, in the great mines, and in the lumber camps. Many pensioners are working in those occupations. There is no reason why this parliament should assume treatment of men who are already protected, and they will be excluded from the proposals that I have just outlined. We also have excluded the infectious case, the case of tuberculosis, the case of insanity, and the case of venereal disease. Insanity is a charge upon the province, and it is taken care of. For tubercular cases provincial sanat'oriums have been provided. As I have already stated, in the matter of industry where medical services and surgical arrangements have been made, they are taken care of.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Are any grants
being mlade to provincial tubercular institutions for veterans who are being cared for by them?


John Warwick King: If they are suffering from tuberculosis due to war service, we pay for that. If they are suffering from insanity due to war service, we pay for that. But in the field the case is not pensionable, tuberculosis for instance, becomes a provincial charge just as it is for any civilian; and in regard to infectious diseases, the same. I hope that I have covered that sufficiently.


Alfred Speakman: I am glad indeed to see that there is a movement in that direction. I will admit that- it is a pretty slow movement, but still it is there-


The CHAIRMAN (Sir Eugene Fiset):: Order. The hon. member for South Renfrew (Mr. Maloney) had the floor.


Martin James Maloney: Mr. Chairman, I really do not wish to intrude on the hon. member for Red Deer, because I agree entirely with many of the sentiments which he has expressed, as I do with those of the Minister of Pensions and National Health. He has referred to the case of the tubercular patients, also those who happen to become insane. Of course both, if thie result of war service, are entitled to care and treatment at the expense of the people of Canada. I would like to remind this house of the fact that more than
500,000	men left Canada during the war to do service in Europe in defence of what we believed to be right and justice. Before these men left Canada they were promised aid of every kind should they return. A great many did not return. The great bulk, of course, did, many of them maimed for

Supply-Pensions and. National Health
life. Those who came back diseased as the result of their service are receiving the care and attention of the government of this country, but it has been my fortune as a practising physician to come in contact with a number of men who for four years served their country faithfully and well overseas. These men to-day are suffering from tuberculosis. They received their discharge as medically fit; many of them, anxious to get out of the service, afraid to bring to the attention of the medical officer their relal physical condition, were allowed to go as medically fit. Others who may have been looked upon as medically fit at the time of their discharge are to-day, through the exposures to which they were subjected during the war-although the result of those exposures may not have been patent to the medical officers when they received their discharge-suffering from tuberculosis, insanity, or other diseases. I will say this for tlhe Minister of Pensions and National Health that in respect to any case that I have brought to his attention, he 'has been, as my hon. friend from Red Deer has said, most sympathetic, and in one or tiwo instances be has insisted on these tubercular patients particularly receiving one or two months sanatorium care. That appears to be the extent to which he may go by virtue of his position as the head of this department. What I would like to suggest to the Minister of Health and Pensions is this, that before the next session of this parliament he endeavour to have an amendment to the Pensions Act prepared which would give him authority, or give parliament authority, to alow those who served overseas and who are to-day suffering from tuberculosis, cancer, or some other terrible diseases-even though they were discharged as medically fit-to be admitted to a government institution, so that they may be cared for. As representatives of the people and as citizens of Canada it is our duty to help these men who were prepared to sacrifice their very lives in the defence of Canada and the empire.


Air. ADSHEAD:: I want to corroborate
what has been said by the hon. member for Red Deer and the hon. member for South Renfrew. During the last year I have had occasion to deal with returned soldiers' problems, and if there is one thing that I have met with that could be likened to a stone wall it is this answer: 'This is a postdischarge disability and not attributable to war service." It has seemed to me that unless a soldier could directly prove, as in a
court of law, that the particular disease from which he was suffering was due to war service, there could be no recognition of his case. I do not think the minister needs an amendment to the act. What I do think is necessary, however, is more sympathetic attention from the medical officers who examine these men. I have two particular cases in mind. There was a man-he is not in my constituency, so I am not looking for a vote -who, when he came out of the war was discharged as A-l. He was anxious, like many others, to get back to his farm and to his family. He never went to hospital or to the medical authorities. He said there was nothing wrong with him except that he had had a slight wound in his back, and he never asked for a pension. But in later years he found that this wound in his back was giving him trouble. He went to the hospital or to the medical authorities in Calgary, and they admitted that he had a slight wound in his back which was affecting him slightly. He was awarded a small pension. We have been trying for some time to get something more for that man We are simply told, "We cannot prove that his trouble is due to war service." They say, "We know his blood pressure is going up, we know his pulse is away beyond normal and that he is dying, but we cannot prove that his trouble is due to war service." After an infinite amount of trouble the man was taken to private doctors who found what the medical authorities ought to have found. He was one of those men who would hardly open his mouth to say anything for a pension; he would rather suffer and die. He was dragged out from under a wagon on his farm in an unconscious condition before he had even applied for a pension. When the private doctors took him in hand what did they find? They found that this man was suffering from a shrapnel wound in his back which was lessening the amount of expansion of his lungs, and that on several occasions he had been badly gassed. But these facts were not reported to the medical authorities, and the army medical men did not seem to have questioned the man to find out. It took two private doctors to do it. That is one case, and it is one of insanity. We are told that the trouble cannot be proved to be due to war sendee, but I contend that you cannot prove it to be due to anything else. To-day that man is in the asylum while his wife and children are trying to get along on the farm as best they can. The minister should instruct the medical authorities to be somewhat more sympathetic in their consideration of these cases and to examine such a man as

Sup-ply-Pensions and National Health
this with the same close attention as they would any of their own patients. Let them make the examination with the object in view of attributing the trouble to war service rather than to undertake the examination with the determination to prove that the man's condition is due to something else. These examiners sometimes make the statement, which fills one's heart with bitterness-"It is not on your sheet; your trouble must be due to some post-war cause."


Mr. ARTHURS:: There is one suggestion
I have to offer to the minister. Is it not possible for his doctors to suit their golfing hours to the convenience of men to be examined, particularly in urgent cases? I know of one man who was sent to Toronto for examination for supposed tuberculosis. This man was a pensioner. He was in Toronto for some thirteen days and he informs me that all the examination he received was a cursory one when the doctor-not the ordinary doctor, because I must give the department credit where it is due; this man was filling a vacancy -came in after golfing and examined him along with a number of other men. This man had travelled 200 miles or so and was superficially examined and then sent home. He was taken back, it is true, and examined, but a proper examination should have been made in the first instance. I submit to the minister that the golfing hours of the doctors at Christie street should not interfere with their professional duties.


John Warwick King: We have my hon. friend's statement and will check it up; we will look into the matter.


Peter McGibbon: I take this occasion
to voice an objection which I have received personally from a number of patients at Christie street hospital. This is not hearsay; these men have themselves informed me of the facts. After going through major operations they were denied the comforts of a private ward and instead were wheeled out to the public ward and left there to recuperate, to the discomfort both of themselves and of other patients. This is actual fact and I think it is an absolute disgrace to this country that after men have fought for its liberty and have suffered to the extent of becoming inmates of one of its hospitals they should be made to undergo treatment of this sort, being placed in what is equivalent to association with pauper patients in public hospitals. Is the minister aware that this is the fact?


John Warwick King: I am very doubtful. I am satisfied that we have an excellent 
staff of men at Christie street, associated with whom are the best men in the city of Toronto. I am very sorry to hear my hon. friend make this charge. I shall certainly have inquiries made and if our soldier patients are not receiving the attention which they should have, the matter will be looked into. Let me say, however, that I have been attached to the department now since 1926, and while it is true that occasionally there are complaints from individuals or their friends, I know of no organization in Canada or in any other country, carrying on work of a similar character, which receives as few complaints as we get at headquarters from the various hospitals. Generally speaking, the men themselves who are treated in the hospitals appreciate the type of surgeons and medical men employed', and I do not think it helps matters for my hon. friend to make such a statement. With regard to the joke about golfing surgeons, that also wii be looked into. I understand that these men have definite hours and the patients are being moved through the hospitals more rapidly than before.


James Arthurs: Too rapidly.


John Warwick King: No, not too
rapidly. They are receiving treatment and are being moved to their advantage.


Peter McGibbon: The minister is skilful;
he is answering an objection I did not raise. I am not complaining about the doctors; I am protesting against the treatment which patients receive after operations in the hospitals. And this comes to me not from one but from many patients. On inquiry I have found that the practice to which I have referred is common. There are always exceptions, of course, but this practice is not exceptional. I hope the minister will see that it is remedied.


Arthur Edward Ross: Now that the minister is in a sympathetic mood I will make certain representations to him. He says he does not think these things happen. Well, I will put up some cases I know of as having actually occurred. He knows as well as I do that there are good men and bad men in the service; he knows that there are careless and indifferent men. He has in Ottawa a man who did not see service but who nevertheless says that any married man who went overseas was a damned fool for having done so. Now how much sympathy can you get from such a man? Here is another case:	A
certain man for two years was described as a lead-swinger. He was sent to Christie street

Supply-Pensions and National Health
hospital and at my special request he was operated on there and found to have a fractured spine, three vertebrae being tubercular -a most serious condition. Yet, as I say, that man for two years had been called a lead-swinger by medical examiners in the service. Just two or three weeks ago an employee in this department died suddenly. That man was on service with me. When he was examined in the city of Ottawa he was told that his trouble was his wife. What can you say when such things as these take place? What will be the feeling of the examiner in such cases as these who finds, for example, that the patient whom he has been describing as a lead-swinger, on going to the hospital is found to be in a most dangerous condition, having to have three vertebrae removed? What sort of heart has the man who examines a patient and dismisses him with some silly diagnosis?	.


John Warwick King: No doubt silly
diagnoses are made.


Arthur Edward Ross: The minister has
now a newly appointed medical officer in Toronto. I did not wish to refer to this, but this matter having been brought up I feel it my duty to mention it. This man is Doctor Smirle Lawson. A man told me distinctly that this doctor was sent to examine him and he saw in the place a picture of Sir Henry Drayton. The doctor asked, " Is that man a friend of yours?"-pointing to the picture. The patient replied, yes. Then there is nothing the matter with you, said the doctor. I contend, Mr. Chairman, that when anything like this can happen such a man has no right to be examining our returned soldiers. Sir Henry Thornton, for example, has instilled the proper spirit and morale into the employees of his department, and I think that might be done in this case as well. If the minister will simply say, " I will not stand for such examinations" he will see that proper care is given these returned men. I have here a written report on an Ottawa man which was sent me the other day, and I would like the minister and the members of the committee to listen to it:
Physically he is of the asthenic build, tall and spare, with fair muscular development, however, with the exception that in the lower abdominal region of 'both sides there is a muscular laxity which might easily be corrected by proper exercise	
Imagine that; a man who was old enough to enlist eighteen years ago is now told that there is a laxity in the lower part of the abdomen which could be benefited by proper
exercise, and the report says there is no doubt that this laxity contributed originally to the hernia which occurred during the war.
There are some stigmata present: The ears Stick out prominently in the lower half, the upper beinig directed inwards close to the skull. He wears strong glasses corrected for both astigmatism and myopia, which he had changed not over six months ago. The selero-corneal margin is not an exact circle, but is irregularly ovoid in shape in both eyes. The whites of the eyeis are bluish in colour, suggesting a deficiency in the sclerotic coat, an infantile relic. There is considerable scoliosis in the lower thoracic region with convexity towards the left. In accordance with the curve of the spine the lower part of the left chest posteriorly appears to be small.
Now, Mr. Chairman, a man is sent up complaining of certain symptoms following an operation for hernia which was produced in the war, and against that are put up conditions which might have gone against his enlistment but which do not enter into the question now. He has now returned, with these infantile relics which are mentioned; he has given four years of good service; he lost one brother in the war, another brother is a chronic invalid in Christie Street hospital and he is not getting a pension. I hold that that kind of an examination is absolutely unnecessary. I think it is not right that a man who complains of pain following an operation which was occasioned by the war should he told that he is asthenic, that he is not physically well developed and that he has astigmatism, which he had before enlistment and in spite of which he served four years overseas. In other words, it looks to me as though this man is 'being framed with all the stigmata and so on which possibly could be brought up against him in order to prevent him from getting his due. Either the man has a condition which was occasioned by the operation necessitated by the war or he has not such a condition. I did not intend to refer to these matters, but the minister said he doubted whether this sort of thing went on, and I thought this a good way to show him. I realize that the minister has good and bad men in the service; he has negligent men, with some of whom I have had to deal, and there is only one thing to do. Whether the man is a political friend or opponent he should be told that the first duty of this country is fair treatment to the returned men regardless of politics.


Martin James Maloney: Whether the difficulty lies in the angle at which the ear appears to hang; whether it is due to laxity in the lower abdominal regions or whether it is due to tuberculosis, insanity or any other disease, I would like to ask the minister this question:
3002	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
If we have another session of this parliament would he be prepared at that time to introduce an amendment to the present act giving to himself or some other body authority to bring these people under the law and give them the aid to which they are entitled?


John Warwick King: The matter is being considered, and some advance has been made this year.


Martin James Maloney: Will the minister consider that point?


John Warwick King: My hon. friend knows that is now under consideration, and considerable advance 'has been made this year.


Peter McGibbon: Would the minister be good enough to tell us how many patients received treatment under the regulations recommended by the pension committee last year, and what was the cost of extending medical aid to indigent soldiers for disabilities not due to the war?


John Warwick King: There have been 600 or more cases in and out during the year, increasing our hospital days by about 200,000.


Peter McGibbon: And what is the cost?


John Warwick King: We estimate that under this vote it will cost some $200,000.


Peter McGibbon: Were any such applicants refused?


John Warwick King: No, I do not think any were refused if it was shown that they were in need and could not afford treatment.


Peter McGibbon: How was it ascertained whether they were in need?


John Warwick King: Under the recommendation of the committee last year.


Peter McGibbon: The minister says these treatments were given if it could be shown that the men were in need, and I would like to know what proof they must furnish as to their being in need?


John Warwick King: Inquiries are made in each case. I know of one case which was brought to my attention this year in which it was suggested that the hospital bill of a certain returned soldier should be paid by the government. Upon investigation it was found that this man had a good position and that he was unmarried and living with his parents, who were well to do, so we did not consider that the bill should be paid by the department, since the condition, which was acute, was not pensionable. The recom-

mendation of the committee last year was very plain; they suggested that provision should be made for free hospitalization for non-service disability for all pensioners unable to provide such treatment at their own expense. That has been carried out to quite an extent this year, and in all some 600 patients have received treatment.
Mr. MicGIBBON: The minister contradicted himself; in answer to my first question he said that no applications had been refused, but he has just told us of one which was refused.


John Warwick King: I said that no application was refused which was within the restrictions imposed by the committee last year, and having regard to the conditions I mentioned a few moments ago.


Peter McGibbon: I think the minister mentioned the limitations later, but I am quite willing to accept his statement. Here is the point: Is the evidence of a medical man who might examine one of these patients sufficient to meet the requirements of the department?


John Warwick King: No.


Mr. POWER:: A medical man oannot say whether or not a person is destitute, any more than anyone else.


Peter McGibbon: I am simply asking for information. Who is the final authority?


John Warwick King: The superintendent of the hospital where the application is made will ascertain the facts through the channels at his disposal, and he decides.


Peter McGibbon: Is his decision final?


John Warwick King: Not necessarily.


Peter McGibbon: Where would the appeal lie then-to the minister?


John Warwick King: No.
Mr. (McGIBBON: Where to ?
Mr. KING Kootenay): It would probably come to headquarters. There are also appeals made to the minister, and that will always be the- 'case.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is what he is there for.
Mr. MicGIBBON:	I am not objecting to
that; I would rather go to the minister than follow down the military routine.


John Warwick King: That would be
very difficult.

Supply-Pensions and National Health
Mr. M'cGIBBON:	I just wanted to know
what procedure to recommend to these people when they come to me.


John Warwick King: Have them apply to the medical superintendent of the local hospital.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Chairman, I have
listened with a great deal of interest to the discussion with respect to the matter now under consideration. Could not something be done which would swing the evidence required to determine whether a condition Was post-war or war a little more to the side of the person affected? I have experienced the greatest difficulty in reconciling my judgment to the judgment of the authorities as to whether or not a present condition was post-waT or war. I do not think any court of law would require evidence to be offered on behalf of the plaintiff in a negligence action such as is required by the department in these oases. During the last twelve months the department has applied a much severer test in these cases than is required to render a defendant liable for negligence.


John Warwick King: I do not think
the hon. member really means the department; is he not referring to pensions?


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is what I am
speaking about at the moment. Last year the chairman of the -committee, in -discussing this matter, made it abundantly clear that the very sincere efforts, of the committee would be expended towards making the discretion so elastic that the injured soldier woiil'd receive the benefit of any doubt that might exist, and if there was any doubt as to post-war or war causation, the benefit of that doubt would be given in favour of war causation.


Charles Gavan Power: May I explain?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have just o-ne word
more to offer. I have bad a large number of cases of that kind brought to my attention, but I do not desire to make any -further observations about them for -the simple reason that this matter has been dealt with so fully by my colleagues that it is -unnecessary for me to -make any further comments.
The second matter I desire to comment on is the de-lay. I know of cases which have been kept under consideration not for one year, but for two years or more, and then suddenly the man is told that his condition is attributable to war causation. A considerable -period of time has intervened between
the moment the man beoame unable to earn anything and should have h-ad attention, and the time he is told that he will receive attention. It is not to-o much to say to that man, "We will give you that -ba-ck pension."


Charles Gavan Power: The statute restricts -the
period of retroaction to six months, and the committee felt tihiat it should not go beyond that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is only a question of the application. The law is all right, it is the administration of iit which is at fault. I do not think we could have a better illustration placed upon Hansard than that given by the hon. member -for Kingston (Mr. Ross). I think the house will agree, and I do not think the medical members of the -house will think it an unfair -criticism, when I say that that case offers the strongest possible illustration i-n connection with this -matter. I put this proposition to the minister:	Why should
these men, sometimes without friends and stranded, have to run the gamut of the pension board and the -appeal board? They may be told to obtain some additional evidence, and they are pu't to the necessity of collecting that evidence. I -think the committee must -have intended something better than that.	_
The minister answered a question put by the hon. m-ember for Muiskoka (Mr. Mc-Gibbon) as to -how a -man who is suffering is to obtain hospitalization. I put this case to the minister, and this is n-ot an, imaginary case, it is a real one:	A man finds himself
in serious financial straits. He is physically unable to work; he is suffering from an illness and he goes to a military hospital and applies for free hospitalization. They say to him, "We -cannot take y-ou in." Between the time of application and the time of admission I have known of -cases where the man was well-nigh dead by the time he reached the hospital. There is not one member of the house who does not know what that means. I do not think -parliament meant that at all. An- ex-service man i-n a condition such as I described who applies to a hospital should be taken in at once, and the inquiries can be -made. He -would then be -receiving immediate treatment an-d wo-ul-d be better a-bl-e to get along. There have been cases where admission was finally granted and the poor man was not alive at all. That is a condition, which the minister can remedy. All he has to do is to say to his medical men, "If a man apparently in indigent circumstances comes to you and applies for hospital treatment, take him in and then make th-e inquiries." It is
3004	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
a sad reflection upon this country to see these men, as I have seen them, I am sorry to say, dependent upon the generous treatment of their fellow men and the kindness of those to whom their condition appeals. They are forced to rely upon the kindness of their friends to place them in a hospital or a private institution or some place where they can get enough to eat and receive decent care and attention which will keep them out of pain.
Those are the two matters I wished to comment upon; the granting of relief in the form of pensions, and making it a little more speedy and easy to obtain hospitalization.


Charles Gavan Power: Mr. Chairman, I heartily
agree with the last portion of the remarks of the hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett), and the minister tells me that he is also heartily in accord. It would seem to be a serious ground for complaint that applicants should be obliged to wait until their cases are investigated before,they can obtain the treatment which they need so badly. I think the minister should give the strongest possible instructions to his medical superintendents and others to see to it that they act first and investigate afterwards.
I think the next point is a more serious one and will 'be more difficult to settle.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It is more difficult, yes.


Charles Gavan Power: The matter of the onus of proof, that is really what it amounts to. This was seriously considered last year by the committee. It has been said very often in this house and throughout the country that if a man was accepted for the army then the onus of proof should be upon the government in refusing him a pension.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Does not the hon. member agree with that?


Charles Gavan Power: No, I do not, and I will
explain whj'. That point of view was presented very clearly to the committee by the soldiers' organizations. One class of patients was mentioned, I think it was the amputation cases, which seemed to be more deserving of consideration than any other class, but the committee refused to place the burden of proof upon the shoulders of the government. The committee felt that if it was the government's duty to make evidence against a pensioner, if I may put it in that way-and I think my hon. friends will follow me-and if an applicant for pension should at once be granted it unless the government could show that the man was not entitled to it, we would be face to face with an almost impossible situation in this country.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That was not the case I meant; that is the extreme case.


Charles Gavan Power: That is the extreme case.
There is perhaps a great difference between that case and the ordinary ones which we have every day where a returned soldier makes application for pension and the board turns him down on the ground that there is nothing in his war record, in the medical evidence or in his medical history sheet to show that the disability was due to service. But let me put the matter in this way to the committee. The statute provides that pensions shall be awarded to persons who suffer from disability or disease incurred on active service or due to service in the forces of His Majesty.


Peter McGibbon: Or for aggravation.


Charles Gavan Power: I am leaving out for the
moment the question of aggravation, because that is more complicated. Before almost any court evidence would have to be adduced that the disability or disease was incurred on service or due to service. The Board of Pension Commissioners, I am informed-and this was shown quite clearly to the committee last year-allowed, in order to connect the disability with the service, evidence to be made which might not be allowed in any court of law. For instance, we were told by the chairman of the Board of Pension Commissioners, the chief medical officer and other members of the board that they would permit a comrade of the soldier to appear before the commissioners and say: "Well, at such and such a date I have a recollection that Bill Jones told me that he had severe pains in his chest," evidence dating back eight or ten years, circumstantial evidence-


Richard Bedford Bennett: As to appendicitis.


Charles Gavan Power: Evidence of appendicitis, of pneumonia. I know a number of cases were cited by the members of the Board of Pension Commissioners wherein they stated that they had accepted evidence which, to my mind, would not have been accepted in a court of law. On the other hand, the chairman of the Board of Pension Commissioners says: "If you tell us that the onus must be on us to disprove the claim, then I must state quite frankly to the committee that it will be impossible, in the vast majority of cases, for me to find any such evidence, because we have not at our disposal, nor do we think the country should have at its disposal the machinery to go seeking evidence contrary to that made by a soldier before the board." That, perhaps, would commend itself to the committee generally.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Richard Bedford Bennett: That was not the case I was making. I said that they required too strict proof to relate the condition to the service. Do I make the matter clear to my hon. friend? If there is an action for negligence, my hon. friend knows that, before you can succeed, you must prove that the damages suffered are related to the cause alleged. My difficulty has been that they are too strict in their requirements as to the relation of the condition to the service rendered. It is not a question of onus of proof at all.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps they are too strict in asking for evidence showing the relation of the disability to the service. The committee refused to allow any presumption.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Is there not a strong legal presumption that necessarily arises from the fact that the government examined a man and found him sane and whole before it enlisted his services?


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend from Ri-mouski suggests to me that there is the certificate of discharge and the medical evidence given on discharge, but it never entered into the minds of any committee that the medical evidence and certificate of discharge should be taken as valid proof of any obligation which the state might, have to the soldier or as to the condition of his health.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I am speaking of the medical examination on his enlistment.	.


Charles Gavan Power: I think my hon. friend
makes a very good point; that is, there should be a presumption that the man was in good health at the time he enlisted. I am sorry to say that the conditions surrounding the enlistment and the acceptance of our soldiers when they went overseas were such that we can rely very little on the medical evidence given at that time.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The man should not
suffer for that reason. He went away and served the state on the strength of that certificate as to his health.


Charles Gavan Power: I do not think the theory laid down by the hon. gentleman has as yet been sufficiently explained to any committee which has dealt with the matter to permit them to accept that generally as a rule of conduct, nor, do I think the pension authorities, generally speaking, will accept it. There have been cases known where a man with a wooden leg was accepted for services overseas.	.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: That must be facetious.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That is a fact.


Charles Gavan Power: There was the case of a man with a glass eye. In order to cover such cases we put specifically in the act a clause referring to those disabilities. We said that a man might not claim pension on the ground of some disability which might have been obvious before he enlisted.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I am asking this simply because I think my hon. friend is thoroughly informed as chairman of the committee.


Charles Gavan Power: He has forgotten by this time.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: He is not an expert surgeon or physician and therefore he may satisfy the curiosity which I have as to the basis of some of the decisions which have been rendered. Assume that you give some weight to the legal presumption that a man, who was examined and who enlisted upon that examination, was sane and sound at the time of his enlistment. Supposing, on the other hand, you give some weight to the fact that we must acknowledge from actual experience that men came through and received their discharge under conditions which made it impossible to ascertain their exact condition at the date of discharge. I have come into contact with hundreds of these men who have come to me and, although I am no expert, although I know nothing about medicine, nothing even about my own ills, I am convinced, from coming into contact with men whom I knew at the time they enlisted whom I knew at the time they were discharged and whom I have known since, that it was impossible at the time at which they obtained their discharge for the ordinary physician to form any idea as to whether they were not then liable to develop serious mental and nervous diseases. Four out of five men whom I know, who came through the war, came through with disabilities which did not fully appear until after they had obtained their discharge. I do not wish to make personal references, but I have come into contact day by day with men who went through the war. and it Wats only the exceptional mian who came through without serious physical or mental deterioration as a result of the war. I am sure that many of them have since shown physical disabilities, unknown at the time of their discharge, which ought by some process of reasoning to be referred back to their experiences during the war.


Charles Gavan Power: My hon. friend 'has probably had experience in drafting legislation. Had we at the very beginning of our career in pension legislation said, "We are going to name a board of pension commissioners, and to this
3006	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
board we will give absolute discretion in the awarding of pensions," I personally am of the opinion that we would have done a very good thing. Instead, however, we have built up pension legislation, and on every occasion when this legislation was revised, it was revised to bring in one particular set of oases, and in opening the door wider to include that particular set of cases, we probably allowed in hundreds of other cases that were not as deserving as they might have been. On many occasions it has been the judgment of this house that we should surround the discretion of the pension board with certain safeguards. I can remember arguing on both sides of that question myself, arguing one year that the board should have discretion, and then the next year, 'after it had badly exercised that discretion, arguing that we should take it away from them.


Peter McGibbon: That was after you crossed the floor.


Charles Gavan Power: No, from both sides of the house. I never defended the board.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I can bear witness that the hon. gentleman has always acted with fairness and impartiality.


Charles Gavan Power: Thank you, sir. It is extremely difficult to legislate for these oases which my hon. friend from St. Lawrence-St. George and I believe deserve a pension, that is of men who ten years after the war are beginning to feel the strain of the war, who at the time they left the army were just as healthy, or appeared to be, as when they joined, but who on account of the strain of those four years are beginning to feel they are not the men they might have been had they not gone through it.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: More seriously broken than that.


Charles Gavan Power: I am taking the lighter cases, but I will go further and take the ease of the man who when he returned was apparently in perfect health but has since broken down mentally and' is now in a mental institution. We cannot prove that this man's mental disease is due to his war service. If we take the premises of my hon. friend from St. Lawrence-St. George we could say he was sane when he went over; we know the difficulties he had to meet, and we should therefore assume that those difficulties had some effect on his mental equilibrium. I am quite willing to agree with my hon. friend, but let him remember that bringing in these cases will go a long way to increasing our pension bill, and not. only that, it will lead to the bringing in 
of persons who do not deserve to receive support and assistance from the state. After all, every man who put on a uniform is not entitled to a pension. Some of them came back better off than when they went over. Let us be frank. We can have every sympathy and pay every respect-


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: You mean better off physically.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, better off physically; I will say that. The open air life and the hardships probably did many of them good. I am not stating as a general proposition that the war was a good thing for a man instead of his daily dozen; not at all; but I do say that the exercise that he got, the physical training and the setting-up exercises in the open air did help a great many men to a healthier standard. But that has taken me away from my argument.
Either we must say to the board, "You have discretion to award a pension to every man who was a soldier; now use your, discretion," or else we must surround the board with certain safeguards. If we are going to surround it with certain safeguards we must make the soldier prove the relationship between his service and his disability. If we say that he is not obliged to prove this, then we leave the door open. I agree with the leader of the opposition and the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George that the members of the pension board might allow the natural inference which the man in the street would draw to nave a greater sway over their opinion and their appreciation of the disability which is brought before them.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The irresistible inference.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, but it is extremely
difficult for anyone to draft legislation which will include in it an inference.


Richard Bedford Bennett: It cannot be done.


Charles Gavan Power: The whole matter then lies in the kindness of heart, if I may so put it, of the persons who are appointed to administer the act.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Or rather in their judgment.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Is not the difficulty that the irresistable inference which we say should foUow is too often measured by purely technical and professional evidence rather than by those standards which the average man uses in a jury negligence case?

Supply-Pensions and National Health


Charles Gavan Power: Absolutely. We are in entire agreement, but I do not know how to get over that difficulty.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Is not the judgment of
the pension board based on the report of the examining medical board, and ought not the doctor who examines the returned soldier to help him connect his disability with his war service?


Charles Gavan Power: I quite agree.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: If the medical authorities at the first examination would help him to connect his disability with his war service he would get a better show than he now does, when he tries to establish that years after the war.


Charles Gavan Power: I quite agree, but it must
not be forgotten that this parliament has also set up certain assistance to the soldiers through the appointment of official soldier advisers in the different districts, and the official soldier adviser, after some experience in handling these cases, while he perhaps does not know all the technical details of every disease, does knew as much about the subject as the ordinary lawyer would who was presenting the case, and he knows what evidence he should produce in order to obtain a judgment in favour of his client. Resides, and I say this advisedly, I have had a large number of pension oases in which there were some involved' technical medical points; I have submitted them within the last year or so to the service bureau of the Canadian Legion, and I find that the unprofessional staff, men who are not doctors or lawyers, connected with the Canadian Legion understand far better than any doctor or any lawyer with whom I have ever conversed just what evidence should be submitted to the board in order to win the case. I am saying that without in any way wishing to appeal to the legion. It is simply a matter of practical experience. These men, having worked at this for a number of years, know their job probably better than the ordinary physician or lawyer.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: And know the psychology
of the judges.


Charles Gavan Power: Yes, I had1 forgotten that.
Perhaps I had better not say it.
Mr. MoGIBBON: With a great deal of what the hon. member for Quebec South has said I agree. He will recall that on the pension committee last year it was suggested by some of us, and confirmed by the Board 78594-191
of Pension Commissioners, that a great deal of this trouble resulted through the soldiers' cases not being properly prepared. A suggestion was made which I think would have overcome a great deal of this difficulty had the committee adopted it, namely, that these men be allowed to employ their own solicitor or some competent person to prepare their case. To my mind, after sitting on a number of these committees, that has been the whole crux of the trouble. Take a man away back in the country; he is probably not sufficiently educated, does not know the law or does not know the procedure to follow, and he has no one to advise him. I remember distinctly asking some members of the committee if they did not think that is where the great trouble lay and their reply was in the affirmative. I am going to suggest to the minister that he take that into consideration; that these men making application for pensions have the privilege of employing their own solicitor alt a stated fee, which need not be very much, so that their case will be properly prepared before it is presented to the board.


Charles Gavan Power: I remember very well that before the committee last year the member for Muskoka (Mir. McGibbon) urged with considerable eloquence the proposition which he has just placed before this committee, but the other members of the committee did not see fit to agree with him. The argument against my hon. friend was that the members of the committee did not consider that we should create in this country a class of pension lawyers. We fear that by inserting in the act provision for the payment of fees to any solicitor who wished to take on the case of a returned soldier we might create such a class of lawyer, and I am informed that in the United States this class has not raised the standard of the bar, the standard of any person. That is why the members of the committee did nolt favourably consider that recommendation.
Mr. MoGLBBON: Yes, but I think they made a mistake.


Charles Gavan Power: We may have.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There are just two questions that I would like to ask arising out Of the discussion. Does the minister think it is a fair thing that a soldiers' adviser should be a Liberal politician who seeks votes and is a member of the legislature? I regard that as a crying scandal. I am not mentioning any names at all, but here is a man who is a soldiers' adviser; he is a member of the

3008	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
local legislature; he is a Liberal candidate. Is that fair and right and just? I leave that to the minister. The second point is this: the minister said, "we accept evidence that would not be accepted in a court of law," which is quite true. Does the minister think the recommendation of a minister to the medical branch of the pension department, under personal cover, is sufficient reason for the favourable consideration of a case?


John Warwick King: Soldiers' advisers are appointed on the recommendation Of the various soldiers' organizations. I think my hon. friend has reference to one individual who took part in a recent provincial election but who retired from the position of soldiers' adviser.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He has been appointed
again.


John Warwick King: After the election he was reinstated in his position at the request of the executive of the soldiers' organization in that province. I do not know that there would be anything very harmful in that. He is well thought of by the soldiers' organization and has been doing very good work.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Before the minister leaves that, what does he think of that same gentleman actively participating in a Dominion election on behalf of his party? That is the point I am desirous of making.


John Warwick King: They are not civil servants.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Exactly. That means
that the federal government is paying for a soldiers' adviser to assist them in getting votes at the election. Is that fair?


John Warwick King: Some of the
soldiers' advisers assist the other party too.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The point is this-and
the minister does not seem to realize it-is it fair and just to the soldiers who may desire to vote the other way to find themselves in the position where they are relying upon the assistance of a soldiers' adviser who is telling them their duty is to vote for the government? This is a concrete case. I am not mentioning names, for reasons that are obvious.


John Warwick King: I think it is very bad practice, but it applies to both parties.


Richard Bedford Bennett: There is no such case as the one I have mentioned.


John Warwick King: Not as being a
candidate for election.


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, and resigning and
coming back when the federal election is on. I am sure the minister will agree that human nature is being put to too great a test when we ask a man whose case is just in the balance to decide whether he will yield to the importunities of his adviser who says: vote for Doctor King; don't vote for his opponent or vote against the government. This gentleman conducted a political meeting in a particular locality that I will not mention at the moment. It is the principle that I am contending for. It is too much to ask human nature to resist the temptation to please the one who can assist him.


John Warwick King: I think it is bad practice myself.


Mr. ESLING:: Mr. Chairman, the recent
speaker, I think it was the member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) referred to the soldiers' adviser and said he could very well be of assistance to a man who was applying for a pension or for hospital treatment. Before dealing with that I would like to ask the minister if a pensioner or an exserviceman in straitened circumstances who is suffering and requires hospital treatment can have access to a local hospital.


John Warwick King: Yes.


William Kemble Esling: On whose recommendation?


John Warwick King: In practically every locality we have a local representative of the department. If he finds a pensioner eligible for treatment he can place him in the hospital,, advising the medical representative of that district, and that advice comes through to headquarters.


William Kemble Esling: When you speak about the
local representative, is he the local medical examiner?


John Warwick King: No.


William Kemble Esling: Well, the local medicaL
officer.


John Warwick King: Yes.


William Kemble Esling: It is not necessary for him
to appeal to provincial headquarters or to the-head of the provincial unit?


John Warwick King: He must report
to provincial headquarters.


William Kemble Esling: Yes, but can this local representative of your department put that man in the hospital for treatment without charge?


John Warwick King: Yes, if it is an
urgent case and he can show it was necessary to put him in the hospital.

Supply-Pensions and National Health


William Kemble Esling: Supposing this soldier is
suffering and is in straitened circumstances. He has a family and is unable to employ a physician, and has not the proper facilities at home for care; is he permitted to have treatment at a local hospital other than one of the hospitals connected with the department?


John Warwick King: My hon. friend
knows that we are dealing with some 500,000 or 600,000 men who went overseas, and there must be some rules and regulations made to apply. I think we made it very evident that on the recommendations of the committee of last year provision has been made for the treatment of pensioners with non-pensionable conditions. In case a man is taken suddenly ill, and the case is urgent, he can go to the local doctor, and if the case is as the hon. member says it is it will be taken care of, there is no doubt about it. But I will assure him of this: there will be a thorough inquiry and the man who recommends that case for hospital treatment will be held responsible for his diagnosis.


William Kemble Esling: I have no intention of being captious at all. I merely want to ask the minister if the recommendation of a local physician knowing the case-I am talking about small communities, not of our large centres where there are departmental hospitals -would be accepted for the free treatment of a returned man, whether he be a pensioner or not, if he is in straitened circumstances? I am bringing this to the attention of the minister for the reason that it is a request from one of the local legion, and now is a good time to have a clear and perfect understanding of the matter, because by the time a man goes through a lot of formality and correspondence and communication very often his condition becomes worse than it would be if he were given immediate care.


John Warwick King: We have men in
the field who receive a fee for attendance. There is a regular fee arranged between him and the department. He is not a regular salaried officer. There are many of these men scattered throughout the Dominion, available in a-li small communities. Now to give the right ad libitum to an officer to receive into his office, or to go to the applicant's home, or to place in a hospital any applicant he sees fit would involve the country in a tremendous bill of costs. We must have rules and regulations. If a case is urgent and the man dan prove this to the department the officer can certainly admit the case. But we could not have on the staff an officer who would adopt this practice indiscriminately. We have oases coming before us from time to 78594-191 i
time where it is represented that great urgency exists, and we have found out that there is so such urgency. We have allso known it to be represented that a man had not the means to take care of himself and we have discovered the fact to foe otherwise. All the facts are taken into consideration by the officer in charge, who knows the local conditions, but you cannot run wild in these matters; as I say, there must be rules and regulations. I am safe in saying that we have gone further than most other Countries in this regard, in that we are to-day giving pensioners treatment for non-pensionable disability, and we are adding greatly to the number of patients who are beiing admitted to hospital. As regards the representations made by my hon. friend, I 'have stated that if the case is one of urgency and the local officer can so show to the head of the department he is entitled to take that patient in.


William Kemble Esling: Must the local medical
officer necessarily go to the head of the department? I do not want to be captious, but is it not within the discretion of the local officer to send a man to a hospital which is not departmental? The minister knows that there are no departmental hospitals in the interior. May I ask him whether there is one in his district?


John Warwick King: No. In regard to thr pensioner coming in for treatment-the pensioner who has a non-pensionable condition -we require him to go to the departmental hospital. That has been the practice in the. United States, and the man is admitted only when there is room for him, the pensioner of course having first consideration in the matter of accommodation.


William Kemble Esling: But the department a!
hospital may be a considerable distance away. Where, for instance, is the departmental hospital nearest to the minister's own community?


John Warwick King: We have in the district representatives-


William Kemble Esling: But I am speaking of the
departmental hospital.


John Warwick King: -who report to the head of the department. If the local medical officer can prove that a man requires immediate treatment his recommendation will be accepted.


William Kemble Esling: I do not seem to be able to get my case to the minister. I want to know whether the local medical officer has the dis-

Supply-Pensions and National Health
cretion to place a man in a hospital, other than a departmental hospital, without communicating with the nearest departmental official.


John Warwick King: What type of
case?


William Kemble Esling: Any type of case where a man is ill, or has a disability, or is in straitened circumstances. It would cost him a considerable sum to go to the nearest departmental hospital.
.Mr. KING (Kootenay): We should expect a man to go to the departmental hospital or to a hospital with which we had a contract.


William Kemble Esling: Well, where is the departmental hospital nearest to the minister's own community of Cranbrook?


John Warwick King: In Vancouver.


William Kemble Esling: And it costs $25 to get there and $25 to return; that is the ordinary fare without travelling expenses. Moreover, considerable delay is involved. Would it not be more expeditious, and would it not be to the advantage of the man himself, to have him placed in a local hospital?


John Warwick King: In all probability that would be the practice.


William Kemble Esling: If the medical officer saw
that the man was in straitened circumstances and was ill, surely that ought to be done. Will the minister not concur in the suggestion that there should be some local discretion among the medical examiners employed by the department? Are these local medical examiners permanent, and are they paid a salary, or do they receive fees.


John Warwick King: Some act on fees and some receive a salary.


William Kemble Esling: 
John Warwick King: Now I know my hon. friend wants to be fair.


William Kemble Esling: Yes, I do.


John Warwick King: May I point out to him that the question of eligibility for treatment under the act is with the pensions board. Last year we extended the recommendation of the committee and we are to-d'ay giving treatment to pensioners for non-pensionable disability. It is true, as my hon. friend says, 'that the people who live in the large centres have an advantage. That applies to everyday life; there are advantages accruing to life in the larger communities; there are larger hospitals and more and better experienced men. Obviously, therefore, the smaller community is at a disadvantage in this regard. The man who enters a civilian hospital to-day with a nonpensionable disability is, under the law of the country, a liability to the civil population if he cannot take care of himself, be the hospital provincial or municipal. The committee last year recognized that in certain cases it was desirable that, even though the condition was not pensionable, the pensioner should receive treatment. The department is trying to use its judgment in dealing fairly with this type of man, although we do not wish to load uip the hospitals with cases which are not entitled to be there. At the same time, with respect to those who have not the means to take care of themselves, we wish to do all we possibly can for the returned men. In my own experience I know that sometimes in the interior, when a man is in great need and requires to be taken to a hospital for treatment, the municipal authorities will say, " We will help this man out. His ticket to Vancouver will codt $25; we will send him there and he will get beltter treatment than he could get in our local institution." We are following the course of the American people in that regard. We have increased very materially this year the number of patients in our hospitals, and I suppose it will show a further increase next year. I know that service is provided, and while there is the difficulty which my hon. friend has suggested I can tell him that in a case of that kind, where hospital treatment is urgently needed,

Supply-Pensions and National Health
it will be within the power of our local officers to admit those cases and then show the department that a mistake has nlot been made and that the case is one which properly should be treated.
Mr. ESiLING: I was not speaking of peoiple who are able to pay; as the minister said, we do not want to load up these hospitals with people of that kind. I Was referring to the man who is in Straitened circumstances.
Now let me proceed to the question of the soldiers' advisers, of whom the hon. member for Quebec South spoke. I believe the services of these men would be invaluable in the local communities if their services were available, but unfortunately they do not seem to be available. I want to ask the minister if he does not consider that ex-service men would be much better off if the soldiers' adviser were made a full time. employee.


Charles Gavan Power: Perhaps I might answer that question, since the matter was considered by the committee last year. As a matter of fact the official soldiers' adviser is a part time man, but he receives a monthly salary; in my mind I had the adviser confused with a man working on a free basis. That is to say, the soldiers' adviser may occupy himself in some other business; if he is a lawyer he may take other clients and so on, but it was clearly shown, for example, that the representative of the department in Winnipeg who, if I may say so, is a very brilliant man, had no time for any outside work.
However, to come to the question asked by my hon. friend, I am not prepared to say that the official soldiers' advisers throughout Canada are the best men that could be found, but I am prepared to say that in every case of which I have knowledge, at any rate up to last year, they were appointed on the recommendation of different soldier organizations. With reference to the question of making them permanent officers of the department, if that is done my hon. friend will find immediately that they lose their status with the returned men, who at once begin to think that these men are paid to turn them down. I think that has been the experience throughout the history of this department. The moment an officer became permanently attached to the department the soldier thought, "This man is in the department and it is his job to turn me down; the government has hired a lawyer to prevent me from putting my case through." I do not make that statement in any derogatory way with reference to the returned soldiers, but I am sure that
will be the feeling throughout the country if these are made full time positions, and that was the conclusion to which the committee came last year.


William Kemble Esling: When I make that suggestion I am voicing the sentiments of local branches of the Canadian Legion in my constituency. Many of them have sent in resolutions to the provincial convention at Chilliwack, strongly urging that the soldiers' advisers be given full time positions. Their attitude is that it is not necessary for all soldiers' advisers to be doctors or lawyers.


Charles Gavan Power: As a matter of fact it is not necessary, and in most oases it is not so.


William Kemble Esling: The soldiers want a man
with a practical knowledge of the problems and troubles of the returned man, and as the hon. member for Quebec South said a short time ago, such men can be of great help to the returned soldiers. Some of these advisers receive $3,000 per year together with travelling expenses, and I want to say that there are many very capable returned men who are familiar with the problems facing the returned soldier and who would be very glad to get such a job. Resolutions from the Nelson, Trail and other branches of the Canadian Legion are very strongly in favour of soldiers' advisers being appointed on full time, and these resolutions are being presented to the provincial convention at Chilliwack. There is only one full time soldiers' adviser; he is a barrister and receives a salary of $4,100 yearly; others who are on part time receive from $1,200 to $1,800, and in some cases up to $3,000.
Naturally we must speak on these matters from our local Standpoints; I am not very much concerned with the conditions in Quebec or in Ontario, but I am concerned with the conditions in West Kootenay and if I am compelled to bring politics into the matter I will have to do so. All these local branches of the Canadian Legion, of which there are about twelve in my district, are unanimous in this opinion. Here we have a soldiers' adviser who receives $3,000 a year and another $1,000 for travelling and office expenses, and it must be remembered that he is not limited to that $1,000. In the amendment which was introduced last session provision was made that the soldiers' adviser should visit the various portions of his district whenever the minister so instructed him, so I say he is not limited in the amount of his travelling expenses. The local branches in my district feel that a soldiers' adviser would
3012	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
better serve the men. if he made regular, periodical trips to these local branches and met with the members. He might visit them on their regular meeting nights and listen to their troubles, and in that way he would do a great service. For instance, here is the case of a man who went overseas; he was physically fit, a wholesome, upright young fellow, and while he was overseas he received shrapnel wounds in both legs. He was in the hospital in England for some six months, and when he returned to Canada he went into a broker's office in Winnipeg. There he sat down to his work and did not use his legs very much; consequently he did not feel the effects of his wounds at that time. However, some two years later he returned to his little farm in West Kootenay and as soon as he started to follow the plough or the harrow his heels gave way and he was practically incapacitated. It- was up to that young man to prove that this disability was due to war service, but as yet he has not secured a physician who will certify to the pensions board that such is the case. So there are two points to be considered: Are you going to take the decision of the physician or are you to accept the conclusion that this disability resulted from those shrapnel wounds?
Here is another case in which the soldiers' advisers might have been of great assistance. This man stated that he received a questionnaire from the department with regard to the revaluation of his land, but it was so complicated that he simply threw it aside and did not make application. In that case a soldiers' adviser would have been of material assistance.
Now I want to take the case to which the leader of the opposition referred. In five years time I think this soldiers' adviser has been in my district only once, except when he was there on political business. He was there in the early part of January, apparently as soldiers' adviser. He paid one visit in August, 1924; he was there twice in October, 1925; once in April, 1926; and again in October, 1927, and on each and every occasion he appeared on the public platform compaign-ing for my opponent. I do not think a man who is in receipt of a salary of 13,000 a year and is allowed his travelling expenses should be carrying on such practices. Does the minister really approve of these soldiers' advisers taking part in political campaigns when they are in receipt of a salary from the federal government?


John Warwick King: I gave an answer to a similar question asked by the leader of the opposition a few moments ago. I think

it is a bad practice for people in receipt of government salaries to engage in active politics. But it must be remembered that these men are not appointees of the government.


Richard Bedford Bennett: That makes it much
worse.


John Warwick King: They are appointed upon the recommendation of the soldiers' executive in their district, and are not considered as being civil servants under the rules and regulations of the Civil Service Act.


William Kemble Esling: But the final appointment
comes from the minister?


John Warwick King: Oh yes, the minister has to make the appointment, but it is made on the recommendation of the soldiers' organizations.
In regard to the resolutions which the hon. member has spoken of, undoubtedly these will be submitted to the central organization and when passed upon by that body they most likely will come to the department and later on be presented to parliament for consideration. I do not think that much can be gained by discussing resolutions of that character, when they must go to the central soldiers' organization to be passed upon.


William Kemble Esling: Would the minister not agree with the suggestion that it might be well to provide, at the next session of parliament, that these men be made full time employees? When the minister provided that they should receive their travelling expenses I do not suppose he intended them to make political trips. I am in receipt of a letter from the Canadian Legion at Trail, which goes to show that there is a considerable political complexion upon this matter. The letter, in part, states:
-the matter of the so-called soldiers' adviser certainly needs some attention. This gentleman recently made a trip through this district-[DOT]
That was the first official trip to Trail since he was appointed in 1924. The letter continues :
-and, as far as I can ascertain, this was the first appearance of the adviser since his appointment.
Having wired his intention of visiting us he duly arrived and was met by our president (H. P. Kingwell, Esq.,). Following a few minutes of general conversation the adviser left Mr. Kingwell, promising to meet him again at 3 p.m., when it was the intention of Mr. King-v-eill to introduce the adviser to several of our pensioners whose claims -were not receiving the attention they merited.
At 4.30 p.m. the adviser telephoned to the effect that he was detained. During his stay in fact in Trail he only spent about half an hour on actual business and then left for Grand Forks.

Supply-Pensions and National Health
When a man is paid a salary of $3,000 per year and also receives his travelling expenses to visit these different branches of the legion, I cannot imagine the minister approving of such a hurried visit as the one mentioned in the letter. The legion had cases which they wanted to present to him but they had no opportunity of doing so.


Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: Mr. Chairman, I suggest that the hon. member for Quebec South, who has given the committee such valuable information in regard to this department, use his good offices and influence with the minister in an endeavour to speed up the soldiers' adviser at Vancouver and have him do a little' actual work on behalf of the returned soldiers instead of using his time in political activities. If he would handle some of that work it would save the rest of us a good deal of trouble; we have to do certain work for the returned soldiers which he is paid to do.


John Warwick King: I shall be very glad to look into that matter.


George Black: Is it not a fact that the soldiers' adviser at Vancouver tendered his resignation some months ago?


John Warwick King: Yes.


Mr. CLARK:: Will the minister give us the particulars of that resignation?


John Warwick King: It was just preceding or during the election when he accepted an office under the local government and we were advised of his resignation. After the election the matter was brought to my attention by an executive officer of the legion and it was recommended that he be reappointed, and this was done.


John Arthur Clark: Is it not a fact that it was ipractically voting day before that resignation was tendered to the minister? Can the minister give us the date of the resignation?


John Warwick King: I was away at the time.


William Kemble Esling: Perhaps I can answer the hon. member, because I happen to have a little information regarding that matter. The adviser received a salary of $3,000 per year and also his travelling expenses. In 1928, apparently in July, as that was the date of the election, $23.45 was paid to Mr. Bruce Boyd. That amount represents the salary for three days, based upon an annual salary of $3,000.
Mr. KING1 (Kootenay): Mr. Boyd did the work; he was the law partner of the adviser and he did the work and was paid for that.


John Arthur Clark: Can the minister give us the actual date of the resignation?


John Warwick King: I have not the information before me at the moment, but I shall be glad to get it and give it to my hon. friend.


John Arthur Clark: Does not the minister think that these soldiers' advisers should ibe considered in the same light as any other civil servant and be obliged to refrain from political partisanship?


John Warwick King: I think it would be just as well, yes.


Mr. PRICE:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister a question regarding the treatment of returned men, and why it is necessary to send these men long distances when the work can be done right at home. The minister claims that he is practising economy, but I wish to call his attention to the fact that in the city of Moncton we have a returned man, named John R. Leaman. This man was taking pneumothorax treatments. He was being sent to the sanatorium at River Glade and the department was paying his expenses. For a time he had a pass on the Canadian National Railway, but at the present time the department goes to the expense of sending this man to River Glade and then carrying him into the sanatorium, a distance of four .miles from the station, or a total distance of about twenty miles. This work could be carried on just as well in the city of Moncton at the Hotel Dieu, as Doctor Landry is a specialist in this line. I might mention that Doctor Landry was giving this man special treatments on the advice of the doctor in charge of the sanatorium at River Glade, but payment of that bill has been refused. I would like to know why it is necessary that the department should go to the extra expense of sending this man to the Jordan sanatorium at River Glade, when the work could be done at an up to date hospital, second to none in Canada, by Dr. Landry, who is an expert in pneumothorax treatments.


John Warwick King: I cannot reply to my hon. friend in regard to the particular case to which he has referred. There are many cases coming before the department; but, generally speaking, in the matter of treating cases of that character, we prefer to have them sent to a sanatorium. As I explained a little while ago, there is in New Brunswick the River Gladte sanatorium and the St. John county hospital, which are the ones used.


Otto Baird Price: The department claims to be acting along the lines of economy.
3014	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health


John Warwick King: No, what is best in the interests of the soldier.


Otto Baird Price: That is no answer at all. This doctor is a very capable man and I would ask the minister to look into the matter.


John Warwick King: I will.


Mr. ANDERSON (Halton):: I wish to
direct the attention of the minister to a case I have brought before the department, and which has also been brought to his attention, as well as that of the Prime Minister, by the soldier himself. This is the case of a man who was gassed in France in 1918 and, while he was sent home as being physically fit, the question of gassing at the front was admitted by the department. He applied for pension in 1920 and carried on until 1922 without any result. I want to read to the minister the description he gives of the symptoms he experienced while in France and which he has felt ever since, although he has not been able to secure the consideration which he thinks he should have had. Prior to 1924 he tried without success to get his case properly before the Board of Pension Commissioners in order to secure a pension. In that year I took the case up for him and presented it to the federal appeal board, which at that time decided that he had a pensionable disability. This is the affidavit which he presented to the federal appeal board:
In May or June 1918 was gassed and was sent out to the horseldnes. I was taking treatment when out there. I was only able to walk 100 yards and in October was gassed again and was sent to the hospital and from there to convalescent camp. All the time I -was there I was taking treatment for the same thing which I have now-
These are the symptoms to which I would ask the minister to listen:
-* pain in my left side and I am short of wind and am not able to do my day's work. I also take headaches and have sore eyes in the morning. When armistice was signed we were all sent back to our battalions without an examination. I was taking treatment when I left convalescent camp. I did not get a medical board before I left the army. I got examined by one doctor and I have been suffering from this trouble ever since I got gassed in May or June 1918. I was all right when I enlisted and have been taking treatment from Dr. Grey, Dr. McNiven and Dr. Nelson since I left the araiy.
I want to direct the attention of the minister to the fact that this man gives an almost exact description of chronic gas poisoning as is given by Major General Sir William MacFherson in his record of the medical services in the war, and I am going to read the symptoms detailed in his work.


Charles Gavan Power: Was this man's application
turned down by the Board of Pension Commissioners?


Robert King Anderson: Yes.


Charles Gavan Power: Does the horn. gentleman
expect the minister to overrule the decision of the board?


Robert King Anderson: I am not
asking for that. I will come to that point if the hon. member for Quebec South will have just a little patience. This is an extract of the evidence that was submitted to the Board of Pension Commissioners in this man's case:
Gassing has been admitted by the military authorities. Also in October, 1920, Dr. Anglin diagnosed bronchitis due to gas poisoning. In August, 1920, Dr. Richards states that stereoscopic plates show fibrosis of the lung. On November 4, 1922, he was examined by Dr. Elliott who ascribed his condition to gas poisoning and estimated his disability at 35 pet' cent minus 10. Dr. Seaton also estimated his disability at 25 per cent. Dr. Leonard Murray on May 23, 1923, diagnosed a mitral insufficiency and Dr. Elliott again on May 23. 1925, diagnosed his condition as chronic gas poisoning and reaffirmed his statement that the man's disability was about 35 per cent.
Dootor Elliott in 1925 diagnosed the man's condition the same as he did before, namely, gas poisoning with a disability of 35 per cent. In 1924, after the Board of Pension Commissioners had refused to accept him as a disability case, the matter was taken up before one of the members of the federal appeal board, who decided in favour of the soldier, that be was suffering from a disability received on service. That decision of the federal appeal board was contested by the Board of Pension Commissioners, who appealed the case to a quorum of the federal appeal board. The quorum of the board decided again in favour of the soldier, stating that he had a disability due to service. The point is that the man having tried for a number of years before the Board of Pension Commissioners to get a pension, after the federal appeal board gave the decision and after the appeal was decided in his favour, they granted him a 20 per cent disability and paid him on that basis. After he had received that pension of 20 per cent for a short time, I hardly know how long, the Board of Pension Commissioners had him reexamined' and reduced his .pension to 10 per cent. At that time I took his case up with the Board of Pension Commissioners and had him reexamined. I also secured from his

Supply-Pensions and National Health
employer a statement with regard to his condition and the number of days he had lost. This is what the employer said:
The above has shown us a letter from you ashing him to obtain from his employer the amount of time he has lost through disabilities.
He has lost a total of 201 hours during the year 1925.
We would like to go further and state that this man is married with two children, and is of an ambitious type. Since coming from overseas, he has been unable to do manual labour where any physical exertion was needed, and even on the work he is doing, at times is plainly working on his nerve. We have known this man as an employee for several years, both before and since the war, and his ambition to keep going in spite of his disabilities has earned our admiration.
These are the points in connection with this case. He undoubtedly is suffering from chronic gas poisoning. Let me read the symptoms as described in Major General Sir William MacFherson's book in regard to the medical services in the war, published in 1923. He says at page 402:
Commonest feature-prolonged inability for severe muscular effort or even moderate exercise. associated with taehy cardia and rapid shallow breathing.
The men's wind was gone and to some extent their nerves.
This is exactly what this man said. Among the other effects are giddiness on standing, headaches, and general vascular instability. This man complained of dizziness.
It was closely allied to disordered action of the heart.
Mild bronchitis in about 15 per cent of all cases.
The only part of this man's disability for which he is receiving a pension is chronic bronchitis due to gas poisoning. Among the other symptoms of gas poisoning I quote:
Disordered heart action-irritable heart, precordial pain, exhaustion, dyspnoea, persistent taehy cardia after exercise, in one-third of total.
Spasmodic nocturnal "asthena" either alone or in conjunction with irritable heart in less than a third.
Exercise caused intense headache, giddiness and slow pulse (abnormally).
Thirty-five per cent of the above cases after three months' treatment persisted and were sent home for prolonged treatment, One group was composed of those who had not (apparently been gravely gassed. I quote again:
Condition supposed to be due to thickening of pulmonary epilhelium and bronehilitis obliterans.
Causing deficient oxygenation of the blood similar to that found at high altitudes.
Every medical man who has examined this soldier stated that he has the symptoms of chronic gas poisoning, but they have not
stated that he is suffering from chronic gas poisoning. Doctor Murray said that he had fibrosis of the lung, which follows the description given by Major General MacPherson- shortness of breath; those are exactly the words that Major General MacPherson uses. The man is admitted to be suffering from chronic bronchitis, which is found in almost thirty-five per cent of the gas poisoning cases, and yet the pension board will recognize only one symptom of gas poisoning, refusing to accept the other symptoms of gas poisoning as due to service, and those other symptoms are those of which the man complains most and which keep him from doing his work properly. Why the board and the department-


John Warwick King: Not the department.


Robert King Anderson: Has the department ever taken it up with the board?


John Warwick King: We have referred the case to the board, I presume, with whatever arguments my hon. friend presented. We do not advise the board as to their judgments.


Robert King Anderson: Here is a
case where for three or four years the board absolutely refused to acknowledge that the man had any disability whatever.


John Warwick King: I am very sorry
to hear that.


Robert King Anderson: After the man had got the decision of the appeal board the pension board absolutely refused to accept any symptom of gas poisoning except chronic bronchitis, although the other symptoms are present showing that the man is suffering from chronic gas poisoning. I would ask the minister to take this case up with the board and see if they cannot 'be influenced to give to this man better consideration than he has so far received. I might add that I have this case before the board now. I asked to have this man brought before a board in the city of Toronto to consider whether his other symptoms could not be regarded as establishing chronic gas poisoning, so that he could be given consideration for that disability. He had been receiving free treatment for chronic bronchitis, but not for the symptoms of chronic gas poisoning.


John Warwick King: I shall be glad
to bring the case to the attention of the board with the remarks which my hon. friend has made.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
3016	COMMONS
Supply-Pensions and National Health
Unemployment relief, $250,000.
Mr, CAMPBELL:	How has this money
been spent?
John Warwick King: This expenditure
is made by the board to those who are pensioners for disabilities incurred while on service, to those who have received a final payment by agreement, and to former members of His Majesty's forces, provided, however, that the disabled members of the imperial forces arriving in Canada not subsequent to December, 1924. Assistance is provided in winter where investigation indicates that distress would be occasioned if help were not forthcoming. Help is given to single men at the rate of $30 per month; man and wife, S45, man and wife and one child, $57; man and wife and two or more children, $67. Assistance is granted in kind in the form of orders on the local grocers, coal dealers, bakers, and so forth.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: How much was spent
last year?


John Warwick King: The amount spent was $378,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Operating expense and working capital, $300,-
000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is the reason for
this increase of $10,000?


John Warwick King: Contingent expenses of the board which heretofore were paid out of a separate vote granted to the commissioners are included in this appropriation. In other words, we have taken in $10,000 that was formerly paid out of their vote.


Henry Elvins Spencer: What is working capital
in a case of this kind?


John Warwick King: Office supplies and expenses, telephone and telegraph, travelling expenses, stationery, motor transport, advertising, transportation of staff, and so forth. The expenditure last year was $271,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Employers' liability compensation, $75,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: How does this come under this department instead of the Department of Labour?


John Warwick King: The vote is used for this purpose: Where a pensioner seeking employment goes to an employer, and the employer says, "You are disabled; you are a bad risk in my mill; I shall probably have to pay a compensation fee," the government

assumes the payment of the compensation awarded by a Workmen's Compensation Board in the case of injury to the pensioner of 25 per cent and upwards who gets employment under those conditions. It is a very good provision and has been in operation for some years. The amount spent last year was about $20,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Sheltered employment, $175,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: What is sheltered employment?


John Warwick King: These are the
veteraft shops in Halifax, Toronto, Montreal, Winnipeg, Vancouver and Victoria.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Federal appeal board, $130,000.
William Kemble Esling: To whom does the federal appeal board report, or does it make a report?


John Warwick King: They make a report to the Minister of Justice.


William Kemble Esling: Has it been brought down yet?


John Warwick King: I do not know.


William Kemble Esling: Is it in printed form?


John Warwick King: I think so.


William Kemble Esling: In the report of the Department of Pensions and National Health naturally you look for some details with regard to the appeal board, bult it ds impossible to find any.


John Warwick King: I shall be glad to get my friend a copy of the report.


William Kemble Esling: It is not even indexed. The only reference either in the estimates or in this report is that the amount is $130,000.


John Warwick King: I will make inquiry and leit my hon. friend have the report.


William Kemble Esling: Is one printed each year?


John Warwick King: I think so but I cannot say for certain. I believe it was tabled early in the session.


William Kemble Esling: I asked the minister the same question last year, and he was not able to give any information. It is the most natural thing in the world to read the report of the Pensions department in an endeavour to ascertain what the board is doing, but it is impossbile to find anything about it in the report.


John Warwick King: I shall be glad to give my hon. friend the information.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Reports oj Committees

[Stage Direction]
National revenue, salaries, $745,840; contingencies, $50,000.
Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of National Revenue):: I would ask that the item stand, Mr. Chairman.
Item stands.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
[Stage Direction]
National defence-salaries, $764,875; contingencies, $70,000.
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: I would ask that the item stand.
Item stands.


PENSIONS AND NATIONAL HEALTH
[Stage Direction]
Grant to last post fund, $20,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: How many soldiers have been buried under this fund in the last year?


John Warwick King: In Alberta, 19; ia British Columbia, 24; in Manitoba, 15; in New Brunswick, 3; in Nova Scotia, 3; in Ontario, 43; in Prince Edward Island, none; in Quebec, 40; and in Saskatchewan, 17, a total of 164.


Herbert Bealey Adshead: Does that include headstones for indigent soldiers? In 1928-29 -there does nolt appear to be anything but I know there was a considerable amount paid out of the grant.


John Warwick King: Yes, we supplement the amount required to carry on this work in each province. We are carrying in the estimates this year $20,000.


Henry Elvins Spencer: It does seem an extraordinary thing that eleven years after the war, in a neiw country like this with all its potential wealth, we should have to bury such a large number of soldiers at the expense of the state. [DOT]


John Warwick King: It is done in conjunction with the organization that is looking after it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Pensions-European war and active militia, $42,000,000.
Henry Elvins Spencer: Is the increase due to the recommendation of the soldiers' committee?


John Warwick King: Yes, $1,600,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, May 30, 1929